2DCD-MILLER AD18&O 35M MO SEM F1
2023 SEM ADULT 18 & OVER NIGHT MEN · 3.5 MEN MON PM SEM
17 players · average NTRP 3.50 / 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.
Schedule9 played
i
Flight standings21 teams · 3.5 MEN MON PM SEM
| Team | W | L | Sets lost | Games lost |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13VTC-inside-CROUSON AD18&O 35M MO SEM F2 | 7 | 1 | 25 | 289 |
| 23EAST-STUDDERS AD18&O 35M MO SEM F4 | 7 | 1 | 31 | 310 |
| 32LIB-KORNFELD AD18&O 35M MO SEM F3 | 7 | 1 | 34 | 304 |
| 45DET-XU AD18&O 35M MO SEM F1 | 7 | 2 | 41 | 340 |
| 56MONY-GLENN AD18&O 35M MO SEM F2 | 6 | 2 | 22 | 270 |
| 63RCAA-DIBA AD18&O 35M MO SEM F3 | 6 | 2 | 35 | 354 |
| 71TROY-SINGH AD18&O 35M MO SEM F1 | 6 | 3 | 36 | 342 |
| 85PEACH-SELLERS AD18&O 35M MO SEM F4 | 5 | 3 | 37 | 332 |
| 96PEACH-HOMBREBUENO AD18&O 35M MO SEM F4 | 5 | 3 | 38 | 336 |
| 101LIB-STPIERRE AD18&O 35M MO SEM F2 | 5 | 3 | 43 | 378 |
| 114RO-ALOUSI AD18&O 35M MO SEM F1 | 5 | 4 | 41 | 396 |
| 125NAC-UNO AD18&O 35M MO SEM F3 | 4 | 4 | 45 | 354 |
| 134CHIP-RAJARETHINAM AD18&O 35M MO SEM F3 | 3 | 5 | 40 | 356 |
| 143DEER-BURNETT AD18&O 35M MO SEM F1 | 3 | 6 | 63 | 440 |
| 152DCD-MILLER AD18&O 35M MO SEM F1 | 2 | 3 | 35 | 250 |
| 162PH-TOUMA AD18&O 35M MO SEM F4 | 2 | 6 | 58 | 404 |
| 176BRC-CHU AD18&O 35M MO SEM F1 | 2 | 7 | 73 | 482 |
| 182BART-WASHABAUGH AD18&O 35M MO SEM F2 | 1 | 7 | 59 | 400 |
| 194EAST-MITCHELL AD18&O 35M MO SEM F4 | 1 | 7 | 67 | 439 |
| 204HV-ENRIGHT AD18&O 35M MO SEM F2 | 1 | 7 | 69 | 441 |
| 211AAREC-KAISER-pio AD18&O 35M MO SEM F3 | 0 | 8 | 71 | 445 |
Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.
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 3.23 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.
Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.
| Marcus Whitelaw + Mike Supancich | 1–4 | 48% games | +6.7% vs expected |
| Lucas McCoy + Russell McCoy | 19–7 | 61% games | +6.1% vs expected |
| Marcus Whitelaw + Paul Volk | 6–2 | 56% games | +3.5% vs expected |
| Marcus Whitelaw + Kevin Nolan | 3–5 | 44% games | −9.0% vs expected |
| Jeff Miller + Marcus Whitelaw | 3–2 | 51% games | not enough data |
| Robert Bloink + Glen Hackman | 4–1 | 52% games | not enough data |
| Dylan Bole + Thomas Chick | 2–1 | 3 matches | not enough data |
| Dylan Bole + Glen Hackman | 0–3 | 3 matches | not enough data |
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.
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.