Teams

Angry Aceholes

2026 OKCTri-Level 18 & Over · Men

13 players · average NTRP 3.80 / OKLAHOMA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2026-08-13vs Moore WoodyWon 10
W#1 DoublesTravis Weedn / Hunter Antonisse vs Rip Royse / Ted Moore3-6, 7-6, 1-0
2026-08-11vs Team BeastWon 10
W#1 DoublesJonathan Eichman / Travis Weedn vs Percy Young / Christoph Schmidt-Warnecke6-4, 7-5
2026-08-07vs Moore WoodyLost 01
L#1 DoublesJonathan Eichman / Evan Boyer vs Nate Woody / Ted Moore6-3, 0-6, 0-1
2026-08-04vs Team BeastWon 10
W#1 DoublesHunter Antonisse / Evan Boyer vs Nirmal Choradia / Morgan Leibowitz3-6, 6-4, 1-0
2026-07-29vs MontgomeryWon 10
W#3 DoublesAndrew Smith / Dylan Calderwood vs Gustavo Hernandez / Tyler DuBose6-4, 6-4
2026-07-14vs Dream Team Mid TriSplit 11
W#1 DoublesJonathan Eichman / Evan Boyer vs Robert Kielty / Aaron Degrafenread7-6, 6-2
L#3 DoublesAndrew Smith / Dylan Calderwood vs David Ellis / Curtis Colby3-6, 6-3, 0-1
2026-07-09vs MontgomeryWon 10
W#1 DoublesTravis Weedn / Mark Partridge vs Harrison Hightower / Branden Montgomery4-6, 6-1, 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.
Flight standings7 teams · Men
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Angry Aceholes5115310125
2Tennis Uncs and Hunks5111719155
3REAL BALL BUSTERS3310820160
4Pseudoscience339922168
5Da Gooses2481023175
6Inglourious Backhands1541431190
7Daniels/McEnroe0641429192

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 3.76 estimated across 12 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.

4.23
Travis Weedn
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.10
Mark Partridge
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.94
Hunter Antonisse
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.89
Dar Patel
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 4
3.86
Jonathan Eichman
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.85
Evan Boyer
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.70
Benjamin Truong
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.69
Ben Dixon
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.63
Phillip Baker
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.51
Eleazar Morales
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
3.48
Brad Jimeson
usually #3 Doubles 63%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published 3.5
3.29
Corbin Paxton
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published 3.5
Dylan Calderwood
usually #3 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.

Corbin Paxton + Brad Jimeson8072% games+13.6% vs expected
Ben Dixon + Dar Patel3746% games+3.2% vs expected
Travis Weedn + Mark Partridge7654% games−0.9% vs expected
Dar Patel + Phillip Baker4161% games−1.3% vs expected
Ben Dixon + Benjamin Truong314 matchesnot enough data
Eleazar Morales + Benjamin Truong224 matchesnot enough data
Eleazar Morales + Dar Patel404 matchesnot enough data
Hunter Antonisse + Mark Partridge134 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.

Travis Weedn
40W–14L career · 3 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
4.23
Mark Partridge
9W–12L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%24%76%
4.10
Hunter Antonisse
15W–26L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%68%32%
3.94
4
Dar Patel
102W–68L career · 8 lines in 2026
<1%78%21%
3.89
Jonathan Eichman
11W–2L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%83%17%
3.86
Evan Boyer
8W–1L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%85%14%
3.85
4
Benjamin Truong
27W–8L career · 6 lines in 2026
8%91%2%
3.70
4
Ben Dixon
57W–61L career · 8 lines in 2026
9%90%1%
3.69
Phillip Baker
85W–18L career · 9 lines in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.63
Eleazar Morales
27W–24L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.51
3.5
Brad Jimeson
45W–29L career · 8 lines in 2026
<1%56%43%
3.48
3.5
Corbin Paxton
35W–4L career · 7 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
3.29
Dylan Calderwood
1W–1L career · 2 lines in 2026
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.