← Teams

MAC-Aguilar

2022 Adult 18 & Over · 4.5 Men

6 players · average NTRP 4.25 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.83 estimated across 6 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.

4.02
Mike Easton
usually #1 Singles 63%, also #2 Singles 25% · published 4.5
3.96
Christopher Haddon
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 4.5
3.93
Rodrigo Aguilar
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published 4.5
3.84
Alex Young
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 4
3.63
James Ringelberg
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 4
3.57
Thomas Turnbull
usually #2 Doubles 31%, also #1 Doubles 31% · published 4
Results11 ties
2022-06-25Won 1–0
W#2 DoublesDavid White / Rodrigo Aguilar vs Kim Larson / David Juhn6-3
2022-06-24Lost 0–2
L#1 DoublesChresten Gram / Rodrigo Aguilar vs Jim Stewart / Mark Villegas7-5, 7-5
L#3 DoublesChristopher Haddon / David White vs Robert Schefter / Wally Morrison6-4, 6-3
2022-06-24Lost 0–1
L#2 DoublesDavid White / Christopher Haddon vs Wolf Yeigh / Robert Matthews4-6, 6-2, 1-0
2022-03-27Won 3–0
W#2 DoublesRodrigo Aguilar / Josiah Whitman vs Albert Hensley / Andrew Scholer6-1, 6-0
W#2 SinglesMike Easton vs Aaron McClintock6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesDavid White / Christopher Haddon vs Kevin Oloughlin / Timothy FORSYTH6-1, 6-1
2022-03-26Won 2–1
L#2 DoublesDavid White / Christopher Haddon vs Rusty Williams / Jeffrey Hunt6-4, 6-1
W#2 SinglesMike Easton vs Honorato Wenceslao6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesRodrigo Aguilar / Josiah Whitman vs Adam Buchwald / Paul Heath6-4, 6-4
2022-03-19Lost 1–2
W#1 DoublesRodrigo Aguilar / Carson Hall vs Renato Bernasconi Zuccari / Michael Cheng3-6, 6-1, 1-0
L#1 SinglesMike Easton vs Levi Huddleston1-6, 7-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesAlex Young / Thomas Turnbull vs Butch Dela Cruz / Steve Vanderploeg6-3, 6-3
2022-02-27Lost 1–2
L#1 SinglesMike Easton vs Christopher Lewis6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesRodrigo Aguilar / David White vs Toby Krauel / Daniel Burns6-4, 7-6
L#3 DoublesThomas Turnbull / James Ringelberg vs John Bard / Darrell Hawkins6-2, 6-0
2022-02-05Lost 0–4
L#1 DoublesRodrigo Aguilar / Mike Easton vs James Feeney / Thomas McGirk6-1, 7-5
L#1 SinglesAlex Young vs Kasi Muthu6-2, 7-6
L#2 DoublesJames Ringelberg / Thomas Turnbull vs Carlos Andres Gomez Jimenez / Elijah Nelson6-3, 6-1
L#3 DoublesChristopher Haddon / Daniel Tseng vs Matthew Condit / Keve Shoemaker6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2022-01-22Lost 0–2
L#1 SinglesMike Easton vs Michael Bates6-4, 6-2
L#3 DoublesChristopher Haddon / James Ringelberg vs Paul Heath / Adam Buchwald6-1, 2-6, 1-0
2022-01-15Lost 1–2
L#1 DoublesChristopher Haddon / Joseph Remington vs Arthur Kowitch / Todd DeNeffe6-3, 6-0
W#1 SinglesMike Easton vs Jeff Harvey6-4, 6-2
L#2 DoublesAlex Young / Thomas Turnbull vs Stewart Bartlett / Eugene Jung6-1, 6-2
2022-01-09Split 1–1
L#1 SinglesMike Easton vs Alex Martin6-3, 6-4
W#2 DoublesDavid White / Alex Young vs Jonathan Quon / Andrew Scholer6-2, 4-6, 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.
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.

4.5
Mike Easton
52W–45L career
16%84%0%
4.02
4.5
Christopher Haddon
39W–77L career
25%75%0%
3.96
4.5
Rodrigo Aguilar
37W–36L career
38%62%0%
3.93
4
Alex Young
42W–22L career
0%96%3%
3.84
4
James Ringelberg
73W–77L career
8%92%0%
3.63
4
Thomas Turnbull
86W–92L career
16%84%0%
3.57

Three percentages are the year-end projection — chance of moving down, staying, moving up — and the number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. 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.