Teams

4WESS-BROWN 25 COED SINGLES SEM

2022 SEM FALL TEAM SINGLES · CO-ED 2.5 SINGLES SEM

6 players · average NTRP 3.00 / 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 →
Schedule6 played
2022-11-18vs 8WESS-MORAN 25 COED SINGLES SEMWon 30
W#1 SinglesAlexander Rossi vs Hugo Moran6-0, 6-0
W#2 SinglesNina Brown vs Ann Silski6-1, 7-5
W#3 SinglesNicholas Treklis vs Priya Kikani6-3, 6-1
W#1 SinglesAlexander Rossi vs Moutamn Sadoun6-1, 6-0
W#2 SinglesRobert Berry vs Devin Bosch6-0, 6-3
W#3 SinglesNina Brown vs Eddie Abinoja6-2, 6-2
2022-11-06vs 2LIB-INOUE 25 COED SINGLES SEMWon 20
W#1 SinglesRobert Berry vs Stephanie Burke6-2, 6-0
W#2 SinglesELISA CARRARO vs Elizabeth Gonzalez6-3, 6-0
W#1 SinglesSirlei Mendes vs Christina Stickney6-3, 5-5
W#2 SinglesNicholas Treklis vs Kevin Hickey7-6, 3-0
W#3 SinglesNina Brown vs N/A6-0, 6-0
L#1 SinglesAlexander Rossi vs Robert Kubis1-6, 6-2, 0-1
W#2 SinglesRobert Berry vs Jana Andringa6-1, 6-1
W#3 SinglesSirlei Mendes vs Deana Smith6-0, 6-4
L#1 SinglesNina Brown vs Christian Ibanez4-6, 3-6
W#2 SinglesSirlei Mendes vs Dina Hurnevich6-4, 2-3
W#3 SinglesNicholas Treklis vs Rodolfo Limas6-1, 6-2
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 standings7 teams · CO-ED 2.5 SINGLES SEM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
14WESS-BROWN 25 COED SINGLES SEM60153786
25WESS-SCHEPPER 25 COED SINGLES SEM51135996
36FAC-CHERVENAK 25 COED SINGLES SEM328715110
42LIB-INOUE 25 COED SINGLES SEM3310815124
58WESS-MORAN 25 COED SINGLES SEM1451020137
67WESS-STICKNEY 25 COED SINGLES SEM1541426172
71CHIP-ANDRINGA 25 COED SINGLES SEM1551327179

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 2.96 estimated across 3 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.

3.18
Robert Berry
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
2.88
Nina Brown
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 3
2.82
ELISA CARRARO
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3
Alexander Rossi
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3
Nicholas Treklis
usually #3 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
Sirlei Mendes
usually #3 Singles 33%, also #1 Singles 33% · 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.

ELISA CARRARO + Nina Brown123 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.

Robert Berry
43W–37L career · 3 lines in 2022
8%91%1%
3.18
3
Nina Brown
146W–135L career · 4 lines in 2022
<1%83%17%
2.88
3
ELISA CARRARO
106W–46L career · 1 line in 2022
1%91%8%
2.82
3
Alexander Rossi
15W–31L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Nicholas Treklis
15W–9L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Sirlei Mendes
16W–19L career · 3 lines in 2022
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.