Teams

FAC-Kagan 18s 4.5M F3

2026 bSEM ADULT 18 & OVER NIGHT MEN · 4.5 MEN WED PM SEM

10 players · average NTRP 4.30 / S.E. MICHIGAN

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2026-07-22vs NAC-West 18s 4.5M F3Won 30
W#1 DoublesMacKinley McNalley / Jonathan Rhind vs Jake Lachowicz / Jack Callaghan3-6, 6-1, 1-0
W#1 SinglesJohn Greenwood vs Jooho Lee7-5, 6-4
W#2 SinglesDavid Kagan vs Mateo Ponton6-0, 6-3
2026-07-15vs EAST-Kean 18s 4.5M F3Lost 04
L#1 DoublesNicholas Payne / MacKinley McNalley vs Jason Chen / Connor Stafford4-6, 3-6
L#1 SinglesDavid Kagan vs Will Seymour1-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesTrenton Townsend vs Sebastian Courtright0-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesFrank Salzeider / Matthew Cracchiolo vs Jason Go / Louis Wyre2-6, 1-6
2026-07-08vs BHC-Uhlar 18s 4.5M F3Won 32
W#1 DoublesMacKinley McNalley / Jonathan Rhind vs Brian Wayne / Xiaoqiang Li3-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#1 SinglesJohn Greenwood vs Lucas Kello6-3, 6-4
L#2 DoublesShalin Shah / Trenton Townsend vs Miles Uhlar / Spencer Seneker0-6, 1-6
L#2 SinglesDavid Kagan vs Matthew Birchmeier4-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesMatthew Cracchiolo / Frank Salzeider vs John Newman / Charlie Grace6-4, 6-4
2026-06-24vs SCWB-Kurosawa 18s 4.5M F3Won 20
W#1 DoublesMacKinley McNalley / Jonathan Rhind vs Jonathan Martin / Nan Jiang6-4, 6-2
W#1 SinglesJohn Greenwood vs Ben Friedman6-3, 6-1
2026-06-17vs NAC-West 18s 4.5M F3Won 31
W#1 DoublesMacKinley McNalley / Jonathan Rhind vs William Bell / Jake Lachowicz6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesNicolas Petrucci / Shalin Shah vs Andrew Laskowski / Scott Terry6-1, 7-6
L#2 SinglesDavid Kagan vs Jordan Parrish6-4, 1-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesJohn Hughes / Frank Salzeider vs Michael Craig / Jack Callaghan6-4, 7-5
2026-06-10vs EAST-Kean 18s 4.5M F3Split 22
W#1 SinglesJohn Greenwood vs Jason Chen4-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesKavon Rahmani / Frank Salzeider vs Matthew Prigorac / Louis Wyre3-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#2 SinglesDavid Kagan vs Peter Wagner2-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesMacKinley McNalley / Jonathan Rhind vs Brian Kean / Julian Olejnik6-2, 6-0
2026-06-03vs BHC-Uhlar 18s 4.5M F3Lost 14
L#1 DoublesDavid Kagan / Shalin Shah vs George Hamaty / Brian Wayne1-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesJohn Greenwood vs Lucas Kello4-6, 7-5, 0-1
L#2 DoublesMatthew Cracchiolo / Kavon Rahmani vs John Newman / Charlie Grace3-6, 5-7
L#2 SinglesTrenton Townsend vs Matthew Birchmeier1-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesMacKinley McNalley / Jonathan Rhind vs Jack Parks / Sam Brockhaus6-4, 6-4
2026-05-20vs SCWB-Kurosawa 18s 4.5M F3Won 32
W#1 DoublesNicholas Payne / MacKinley McNalley vs Yu Wang / Nan Jiang6-3, 6-1
L#1 SinglesJohn Greenwood vs Trey Keating6-2, 5-7, 0-1
W#2 DoublesShalin Shah / Trenton Townsend vs Tsuyoshi Kurosawa / Ryo Murakami6-3, 7-5
L#2 SinglesDavid Kagan vs Cheng Gong2-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesMatthew Cracchiolo / Kavon Rahmani vs Takuma Yamaguchi / Jonathan Martin6-3, 6-1
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 4.5 MEN WED PM SEM 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 4.09 estimated across 8 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.

4.28
MacKinley McNalley
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
4.27
John Greenwood
usually #1 Singles 88%, also #1 Doubles 13% · published
4.21
David Kagan
usually #2 Singles 71%, also #1 Singles 14% · published 4.5
4.06
Jonathan Rhind
usually #1 Doubles 46%, also #2 Doubles 23% · published 4
4.06
Max Lukey
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
4.01
Matthew Cracchiolo
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
3.96
Trenton Townsend
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 4.5
3.88
Frank Salzeider
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4
Nicholas Payne
published
Nicolas Petrucci
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
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.

Jonathan Rhind + MacKinley McNalley10260% games+8.0% vs expected
Jonathan Rhind + Matthew Cracchiolo3644% games−11.2% vs expected
Frank Salzeider + Matthew Cracchiolo5156% gamesnot 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.

MacKinley McNalley
12W–5L career · 8 lines in 2026
1%94%5%
4.28
John Greenwood
10W–11L career · 8 lines in 2026
2%94%4%
4.27
4.5
David Kagan
8W–22L career · 7 lines in 2026
5%94%1%
4.21
4
Jonathan Rhind
33W–27L career · type A · 13 lines in 2026
<1%32%68%
4.06
Max Lukey
9W–9L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%33%67%
4.06
4.5
Matthew Cracchiolo
47W–63L career · 4 lines in 2026
46%54%<1%
4.01
4.5
Trenton Townsend
51W–115L career · 4 lines in 2026
63%37%<1%
3.96
4
Frank Salzeider
11W–9L career · 12 lines in 2026
<1%82%18%
3.88
Nicholas Payne
9W–11L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Nicolas Petrucci
10W–5L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data

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.