Teams

Proctor 40 - 30 Tri 18

2026 Tri-Level 18 and Over · 4.0,3.5,3.0 Men

13 players · average NTRP 3.50 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2026-07-12vs Baker 40 - 30 Tri 18Lost 12
W#1 DoublesMichael Vanderploeg / Neil Matson vs Kenny Coffey / Samuel Stone3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#2 DoublesJason Seale / Kip Potter vs Travis Gundolff / Eugene McNutt7-6, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJohn Irle / Chris Mukadam vs Eugene Acupan / Keelan Lawyer1-6, 0-6
2026-06-26vs Lamar 40 -30 Tri 18Lost 12
L#1 DoublesAndrew Plankenhorn / Frank Roberts vs Gregory Edwards / Chuck Lamar3-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesMichael Gibson / Kip Potter vs Jeff Griffis / David Stisher6-4, 2-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJason Seale / Chris Mukadam vs Kevin Stone / Dewayne Maze4-6, 5-7
2026-06-20vs Baker 40 - 30 Tri 18Lost 12
L#1 DoublesMichael Vanderploeg / Chuck Potter vs Tucker Fleming / Kenny Coffey7-6, 2-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesAndrew Plankenhorn / Neil Matson vs Perry Baker / Andrew Devine6-3, 6-7, 1-0
L#3 DoublesChristopher Proctor / John Irle vs Zach Ingrum / Timothy Nave3-6, 4-6
2026-06-15vs Lamar 40 -30 Tri 18Split 11
W#2 DoublesMichael Gibson / Frank Roberts vs Josh Wisener / RAUNAQ BAJAJ6-4, 0-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesChris Mukadam / John Irle vs David Stisher / Vince Smith1-6, 0-6
2026-06-06vs Lamar 40 -30 Tri 18Won 21
W#1 DoublesMichael Vanderploeg / Brady Mann vs Gregory Edwards / Hudson Hatfield6-2, 6-4
W#2 DoublesChristopher Proctor / Rishi Patel vs Ben Donahue / Jamie Burroughs4-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJoseph Montgomery / Chris Mukadam vs Dewayne Maze / Vince Smith6-3, 3-6, 0-1
2026-05-30vs Baker 40 - 30 Tri 18Split 11
W#1 DoublesMichael Vanderploeg / Brady Mann vs Samuel Stone / Kenny Coffey6-3, 6-1
L#3 DoublesJohn Irle / Chris Mukadam vs Joshua Zona / Timothy Nave3-6, 4-6
2026-05-11vs Lamar 40 -30 Tri 18Won 21
W#1 DoublesBrady Mann / Michael Vanderploeg vs Gregory Edwards / Ronald Hull Jr6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesNeil Matson / Frank Roberts vs Chuck Lamar / Jeb Williamson6-0, 6-1
L#3 DoublesJohn Irle / Christopher Proctor vs David Stisher / Vince Smith1-6, 3-6
2026-05-08vs Baker 40 - 30 Tri 18Won 21
L#1 DoublesMichael Gibson / Michael Vanderploeg vs Kenny Coffey / Samuel Stone2-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesChristopher Proctor / Kip Potter vs Andrew Devine / Travis Gundolff6-4, 6-1
W#3 DoublesJason Seale / Joseph Montgomery vs Zach Ingrum / Timothy Nave6-3, 1-6, 1-0
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 standings3 teams · 4.0,3.5,3.0 Men
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Baker 40 - 30 Tri 1844131124202
2Lamar 40 -30 Tri 1844111328212
3Proctor 40 - 30 Tri 1844121230222

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 3.27 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.

3.96
Brady Mann
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.78
Michael Vanderploeg
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.57
Neil Matson
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.53
Chuck Potter
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.41
Andrew Plankenhorn
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.19
Kip Potter
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.18
Jason Seale
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.17
Rishi Patel
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.08
Frank Roberts
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.08
Joseph Montgomery
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.08
Christopher Proctor
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.94
John Irle
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.59
Chris Mukadam
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Frank Roberts + Neil Matson2354% gamesnot enough data
Kip Potter + Jason Seale033 matchesnot enough data
Michael Vanderploeg + Neil Matson213 matchesnot enough data
Michael Vanderploeg + Brady Mann303 matchesnot enough data
Jason Seale + Joseph Montgomery303 matchesnot enough data
John Irle + Chris Mukadam033 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.

4
Brady Mann
14W–3L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%60%40%
3.96
Michael Vanderploeg
50W–47L career · 6 lines in 2026
2%92%6%
3.78
Neil Matson
93W–56L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%31%69%
3.57
4
Chuck Potter
26W–21L career · 1 line in 2026
42%58%<1%
3.53
3.5
Andrew Plankenhorn
46W–103L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%75%25%
3.41
Kip Potter
14W–16L career · 3 lines in 2026
8%90%1%
3.19
Jason Seale
10W–18L career · 3 lines in 2026
9%89%1%
3.18
Rishi Patel
23W–5L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%12%88%
3.17
Frank Roberts
23W–48L career · 3 lines in 2026
27%73%<1%
3.08
Joseph Montgomery
22W–10L career · 2 lines in 2026
29%71%<1%
3.08
3
Christopher Proctor
47W–43L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%29%71%
3.08
John Irle
8W–28L career · 5 lines in 2026
>99%<1%<1%
2.94
3
Chris Mukadam
0W–8L career · type S · 5 lines in 2026
27%73%<1%
2.59

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.