Teams

SGV Queens of the Court- Jones-Arroyo Seco/SU4

2025 Adult Division - 18 & Over San Gabriel Valley · SGV - Women 3.0

13 players · average NTRP 3.00 / SO.CALIFORNIA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2025-06-29vs SGV Dare Doubles-Flores-WN/SU2Lost 01
L#3 DoublesEliza Llobrera / Annie Xu vs Chris Helberg / Christine Pedroza1-6, 2-6
L#1 DoublesChristina Buckley / Eliza Llobrera vs Keum Ko / Sun Kim2-6, 1-6
W#1 DoublesEliza Llobrera / Susan Biales vs Austen Rachlis / Tiffany Sin7-6, 6-2
2025-06-01vs SGV Arcadia Aces-Li-Arcadia-Sa3/5Won 10
W#1 DoublesMay Low / Eliza Llobrera vs Miki Makiko Shimizu / Mylinh Crew5-7, 3-2, 1-0
L#1 DoublesAndrea Fruits / May Low vs Kimberly Albright / Vanessa Kettering3-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesAnnie Xu / Eliza Llobrera vs Kathy Ochoa / Efe Oghoghome6-4, 6-1
W#1 SinglesMay Low vs Andrea Wong7-6
A tie can be incomplete. Tell us if someone is missing.
i
Grouped by tie — one fixture, several lines. A line shows only when a player on it is someone we have indexed, so an early-season tie for a newly-added team can look short. This also means the line count here will not match the header, which counts individual player appearances.

Flight standings for SGV - Women 3.0 have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

ScoutingWhere each opponent usually plays

Signed-in extra: whether this captain plays strict strength order or mixes it up, from every doubles line they have put out. Create a free account to see it.

Roster averages 2.83 estimated across 13 rated players. No lineup is published in advance, so the column below is where each player has actually been used — a captain's habits are the best available forecast. Sign in and claim your record to see who you have played.

3.21
Li Feng
published
3.00
Trecia Mendoza
published
2.98
Debra Sudo
published 3
2.96
DARCELIA WILSON
published 3
2.91
May Low
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 3
2.91
Andrea Fruits
published 3
2.77
Teryl Murphy
published
2.77
Eliza Llobrera
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.73
Susan Biales
published
2.72
Sharon Spangler
published
2.67
Irene Zaragoza
published
2.64
2.49
Annie Xu
published 3
Established pairs

Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.

DARCELIA WILSON + Trecia Mendoza9264% games+6.8% vs expected
Sharon Spangler + Eliza Llobrera1539% games−13.2% vs expected
Sharon Spangler + Andrea Fruits224 matchesnot enough data
Roster

Ordered by our estimated dynamic rating, which is why two players at the same published level are not tied — a published 4.0 says nothing about where inside the band someone sits. Lines played in this team’s season are shown beside each name.

Li Feng
8W–2L career · no lines in 2025
6%92%2%
3.21
Trecia Mendoza
13W–5L career · no lines in 2025
<1%49%51%
3.00
3
Debra Sudo
17W–11L career · no lines in 2025
<1%57%43%
2.98
3
DARCELIA WILSON
12W–7L career · no lines in 2025
<1%61%38%
2.96
3
May Low
28W–22L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%74%26%
2.91
3
Andrea Fruits
15W–13L career · no lines in 2025
<1%75%25%
2.91
Teryl Murphy
4W–2L career · no lines in 2025
3%92%5%
2.77
3
Eliza Llobrera
121W–89L career · 5 lines in 2025
3%92%5%
2.77
Susan Biales
7W–3L career · no lines in 2025
5%92%3%
2.73
Sharon Spangler
8W–16L career · no lines in 2025
5%92%2%
2.72
Irene Zaragoza
4W–2L career · no lines in 2025
12%87%1%
2.67
3
Christina Buckley
1W–6L career · no lines in 2025
16%84%1%
2.64
3
Annie Xu
2W–3L career · no lines in 2025
54%46%<1%
2.49

Three percentages are where each player stands right now: the chance they are below their band, inside it, or above it, on the way they are playing this season. The number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. This is today rather than a forecast of December, because a forecast has to assume future matches and cannot know whether someone will even be offered them. Percentages are blank where a player has too few matches this season, or at a level where the model does not yet beat a base-rate guess; the estimate is a weaker claim than a probability and survives where those do not.

Not affiliated with or endorsed by the USTA. Ratings labelled as published are USTA year-end figures; anything we describe as an estimate is ours, not USTA’s. Match data is from USTA TennisLink.