Teams

Shahane - Keswick

2025 Charlottesville Singles · Charlottesville Singles 4.5 Men

6 players · average NTRP 4.00 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2025-10-27vs Harmon - Spin DoctorsLost 12
L#1 SinglesScott Bohmke vs Damian Doyle3-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#2 SinglesAmit Shahane vs Aaron Streit3-6, 3-2
W#3 SinglesJay Reeves vs David Harmon7-6, 6-0
2025-10-13vs Dellimore - ACAC AcesLost 12
W#1 SinglesJay Reeves vs Chris Stambaugh6-3, 6-2
L#2 SinglesAmit Shahane vs JOSEPH MATHERS6-7, 0-6
L#3 SinglesGreg Benham vs Harris Haynie4-6, 2-6
2025-10-09vs Harmon - Spin DoctorsLost 12
W#1 SinglesScott Bohmke vs Mark Illgner3-6, 7-6, 1-0
L#2 SinglesJay Reeves vs Thomas Jackson2-6, 2-6
L#3 SinglesSean Mullins vs Damian Doyle1-6, 2-6
2025-10-06vs Schartz - BHSC WarhogsLost 02
L#1 SinglesJohn McNeil vs Reid Phillips1-6, 0-6
L#2 SinglesGreg Benham vs Brandon Schartz0-6, 1-6
2025-10-03vs Dellimore - ACAC AcesLost 03
L#1 SinglesJohn McNeil vs Ruoyu Zhang3-6, 5-7
L#2 SinglesAmit Shahane vs Jonathan Proffitt0-6, 5-7
L#3 SinglesGreg Benham vs Chike Dellimore1-6, 6-4, 0-1
2025-09-24vs Schartz - BHSC WarhogsLost 03
L#1 SinglesJohn McNeil vs Todd Sechser2-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#2 SinglesAmit Shahane vs Robert Cueva4-6, 1-6
L#3 SinglesSean Mullins vs Cristian Ferrer1-6, 1-6
2025-09-13vs Dellimore - ACAC AcesSplit 11
W#1 SinglesJohn McNeil vs Ruoyu Zhang6-2, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 SinglesGreg Benham vs JOSEPH MATHERS4-6, 2-6
2025-09-04vs Harmon - Spin DoctorsLost 12
L#1 SinglesAmit Shahane vs Mark Illgner4-6, 4-6
W#2 SinglesJay Reeves vs Thomas Jackson6-4, 6-3
L#3 SinglesGreg Benham vs Damian Doyle2-6, 1-6
2025-08-25vs Schartz - BHSC WarhogsWon 21
W#1 SinglesJohn McNeil vs Andrew Juge6-1, 6-3
W#2 SinglesScott Bohmke vs Robert Cueva6-1, 6-2
L#3 SinglesGreg Benham vs Cristian Ferrer0-6, 3-6
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 Charlottesville Singles 4.5 Men 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 3.86 estimated across 2 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.

4.14
Jay Reeves
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published
Amit Shahane
usually #2 Singles 80%, also #1 Singles 20% · published 4
3.59
Greg Benham
usually #3 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
John McNeil
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
Scott Bohmke
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
Sean Mullins
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
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.

Jay Reeves
5W–3L career · 4 lines in 2025
16%84%1%
4.14
4
Amit Shahane
1W–8L career · 5 lines in 2025
not enough data
Greg Benham
4W–9L career · 6 lines in 2025
26%74%<1%
3.59
John McNeil
5W–3L career · 5 lines in 2025
not enough data
Scott Bohmke
2W–2L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Sean Mullins
0W–2L career · 2 lines in 2025
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.