Teams

Low Tri M IRCD Kepner

Late Summer USTA Central Indiana Tri-Level · CIN Indy Men's Tri-Level 3.0

8 players · average NTRP 3.50 / CENTRAL INDIANA

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 →
Schedule3 played
2026-08-20vs Low Tri M IRCD CopelandLost 12
L#1 DoublesSteven Brown / Keith Pringle vs Adam Herstig / Stephen Short2-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesAlan Gnani / Chad Kepner vs Michael Taylor / Jared Ruxer1-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesThomas Jean / Travis Kepner vs Brian Mosby / Aaron Kremer6-4, 1-6, 1-0
2026-08-13vs Low Tri M MTC LandisLost 03
L#1 DoublesMichael Broderick / Keith Pringle vs Toby Gaynor / Sean Warner1-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesChad Kepner / Jarred Meeks vs Dennis Seipel / Jonathan Swift6-7, 2-6
L#3 DoublesThu Han Aung / Travis Kepner vs Chris Delp / Carl Hayes6-7, 2-6
2026-08-06vs Low Tri M WIRC WinnWon 20
W#1 DoublesKeith Pringle / Steven Brown vs Joshua Ruse / Jordan Winn6-1, 0-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesThomas Jean / Travis Kepner vs Jake Hudson / Trent Miller6-4, 6-4
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 standings4 teams · CIN Indy Men's Tri-Level 3.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Low Tri M IRCD Copeland2051338
2Low Tri M MTC Landis1142449
3Low Tri M IRCD Kepner1124965
4Low Tri M WIRC Winn02151054

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 2.86 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.

3.39
Keith Pringle
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
2.76
Travis Kepner
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.76
Thu Han Aung
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.76
Chad Kepner
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
2.74
Thomas Jean
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.73
Jarred Meeks
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Michael Broderick
published
Mike Hiemenz
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.

Chad Kepner + Travis Kepner41637% games−0.2% vs expected
Thomas Jean + Travis Kepner314 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.

Keith Pringle
6W–8L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.39
Travis Kepner
19W–37L career · 3 lines in 2026
3%92%4%
2.76
Thu Han Aung
38W–56L career · 1 line in 2026
3%93%4%
2.76
3.5
Chad Kepner
20W–69L career · 2 lines in 2026
96%4%<1%
2.76
Thomas Jean
8W–15L career · 2 lines in 2026
4%93%3%
2.74
Jarred Meeks
6W–26L career · 1 line in 2026
5%92%2%
2.73
Michael Broderick
2W–4L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Mike Hiemenz
6W–5L career · no 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.