Teams

Hoover Met - Swaminathan Tri Level 2026 Swaminathan

2026 B'ham Tri-Level Weeknight - 18 & Over M · W

11 players · average NTRP 3.50 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2026-06-17vs PTCC - TaylorLost 02
L#1 DoublesSam Wasko / Shawn Bradley vs Andrew Schilder / Robert Moody6-4, 5-7, 0-1
L#2 DoublesJonathan Simpson / Graham Minor vs Jason Garner / Tyler Powell7-5, 2-6, 0-1
2026-06-10vs MBY - Cottrell 18+ TrilevelLost 01
L#1 DoublesDavid Bradford / Shawn Bradley vs Adam Cohn / Walker Messer3-6, 4-6
2026-06-03vs Old Overton - CoxLost 01
L#3 DoublesPhilip Y / Brandon Galya vs Brady Hughes / Chris Balzli2-6, 4-6
2026-05-27vs BH - IngramLost 02
L#1 DoublesDavid Bradford / Cristian Mendez vs Blanton Reed / Kevin Carden1-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesSid Swaminathan / Graham Minor vs Lobo Tran / Alex Miller5-7, 7-6, 0-1
2026-05-20vs Inverness CC - BodeLost 02
L#1 DoublesCristian Mendez / Graham Minor vs Gustavo Nieves / Steve Prokop6-1, 4-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesTai Smith / Brandon Galya vs John Lacy / Alex Zuehlke3-6, 5-7
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 W 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 3.17 estimated across 11 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.

3.76
Shawn Bradley
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.76
David Bradford
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.54
Graham Minor
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.31
Cristian Mendez
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.04
Randall Robbins
published
2.99
Sid Swaminathan
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.97
Tai Smith
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.96
Jonathan Walsky
published
2.93
Philip Y
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.89
Brandon Galya
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.73
Jonathan Simpson
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.

David Bradford + Shawn Bradley123 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.

Shawn Bradley
15W–24L career · 2 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.76
4
David Bradford
35W–28L career · 2 lines in 2026
3%93%4%
3.76
Graham Minor
56W–42L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%39%61%
3.54
3.5
Cristian Mendez
24W–10L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%90%8%
3.31
Randall Robbins
34W–24L career · no lines in 2026
<1%38%62%
3.04
Sid Swaminathan
22W–39L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%53%47%
2.99
Tai Smith
8W–9L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%59%41%
2.97
Jonathan Walsky
16W–16L career · no lines in 2026
<1%62%38%
2.96
Philip Y
8W–5L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%70%30%
2.93
3
Brandon Galya
12W–13L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%77%22%
2.89
Jonathan Simpson
12W–42L career · 1 line in 2026
0%5%95%
2.73

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.