Teams

Salt Lake Tennis-Murray/Culver

2024 Fall Indoor League-Saturday · 3.0M

18 players · average NTRP 3.15 / UTAH

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2024-12-07vs Ogden-Porter/JexWon 30
W#1 DoublesMax Wasilewski / Nate Moore vs Bradley Madsen / Kirk Amidan7-6, 5-5
W#2 DoublesTrent Denos / Jack Pendergast vs Bryce Jex / Frederick Partey4-6, 4-2, 1-0
W#3 DoublesEddie Fung / Sameer Bhadouria vs Robb Wright / Jeff Beckstead3-6, 5-1, 1-0
2024-11-23vs Cottonwood Club-Bryson/AricoWon 21
W#1 DoublesDali Licul / Sean Picou vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesMatthew Lee / Tom King vs James Hales / Nic Bryson6-3, 6-2
L#3 DoublesBryan Keith / Benjamin Miller vs Shawn Hazen / Ryan Sargent0-6, 2-6
2024-11-16vs Salt Lake Tennis-Follette/HansenWon 20
W#2 DoublesMatthew Coleman / Jack Pendergast vs Simeon Thomas / Rick Cromar7-5, 5-3
W#3 DoublesCameron Fuhriman / Scott Fuhriman vs Ethan Lee / Hamza Qadeer6-0, 6-1
2024-11-09vs TAOU-HiggsWon 30
W#1 DoublesDan Murray / Max Wasilewski vs Eric Christensen / Rex Jameson6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesDali Licul / STEVE MATSEN vs Wayne Day / David Hadley6-2, 6-0
W#3 DoublesEddie Fung / Sameer Bhadouria vs Brentio Starks / Suleman Iqbal6-2, 6-1
2024-11-02vs Sports Mall-Nelson/IsazaLost 02
L#1 DoublesDali Licul / Max Wasilewski vs Brant Barney / Darren Nelson6-4, 2-4, 0-1
L#3 DoublesCameron Fuhriman / Scott Fuhriman vs Alex Velez / Jason Struletz2-6, 6-2, 0-1
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 standings10 teams · 3.0M
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Salt Lake Tennis-Smith5113510109
2Salt Lake Tennis-Murray/Culver41123892
3Sports Mall-Nelson/Isaza4212614122
4Ogden-Porter/Jex4210817130
5Sports Mall-Pacheco/Law329613109
6Liberty Park Tennis-Visser329616128
7Cottonwood Club-Bryson/Arico2471123161
8Salt Lake Tennis-Follette/Hansen134818125
9Liberty Park Tennis-Balch1551327182
10TAOU-Higgs0501530180

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 13 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.

3.15
Kris Denos
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.08
Dali Licul
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.06
Max Wasilewski
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.03
Carl Culver
published 3.5
3.02
Jack Pendergast
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
3.00
Scott Fuhriman
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.98
Cameron Fuhriman
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.96
Dan Murray
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.90
Tom King
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.83
Sameer Bhadouria
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.83
Nate Moore
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.81
Eddie Fung
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.78
STEVE MATSEN
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Benjamin Miller
published 3
Bryan Keith
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Matthew Coleman
published
Sean Picou
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Trent Denos
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.

Nate Moore + Max Wasilewski5160% games+11.9% vs expected
Carl Culver + STEVE MATSEN3248% games+4.9% vs expected
STEVE MATSEN + Max Wasilewski5167% games+4.8% vs expected
Scott Fuhriman + Cameron Fuhriman291354% games+3.3% vs expected
Sameer Bhadouria + Eddie Fung17661% games+2.8% vs expected
Dan Murray + Kris Denos6551% games+1.7% vs expected
STEVE MATSEN + Eddie Fung2345% games−10.9% vs expected
Carl Culver + Dali Licul6060% gamesnot 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.

3.5
Kris Denos
82W–60L career · 3 lines in 2024
13%87%<1%
3.15
3.5
Dali Licul
64W–37L career · 3 lines in 2024
27%73%<1%
3.08
Max Wasilewski
24W–9L career · 3 lines in 2024
32%68%<1%
3.06
3.5
Carl Culver
51W–41L career · type A · no lines in 2024
40%60%<1%
3.03
3
Jack Pendergast
36W–23L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%44%56%
3.02
3
Scott Fuhriman
68W–34L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%50%50%
3.00
3
Cameron Fuhriman
49W–26L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%55%45%
2.98
3
Dan Murray
109W–127L career · 3 lines in 2024
<1%62%38%
2.96
Tom King
24W–10L career · 1 line in 2024
<1%77%23%
2.90
3
Sameer Bhadouria
94W–74L career · 2 lines in 2024
1%89%10%
2.83
Nate Moore
16W–14L career · 1 line in 2024
1%90%10%
2.83
3
Eddie Fung
68W–75L career · 2 lines in 2024
1%92%7%
2.81
STEVE MATSEN
43W–34L career · 1 line in 2024
2%94%4%
2.78
3
Benjamin Miller
1W–9L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Bryan Keith
1W–2L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
Matthew Coleman
8W–1L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Sean Picou
25W–22L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
Trent Denos
8W–5L career · 1 line in 2024
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.