Teams

Wasatch Hills-Cheng

2025 Winter League-Saturday · 4.5M Saturday

17 players · average NTRP 4.39 / UTAH

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-03-10vs Eccles Tennis Center-BublikLost 12
L#1 DoublesLong Le / Curtis Sampson vs David Novom / Dylan Wilde7-6, 1-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesBrady Rasmussen / Patrick Sheehan vs Kyle Kugler / John Collins4-6, 5-6
W#3 DoublesTakayuki Suzuki / Camdin Nelson vs Ben Schenck / Dheven Duenwald6-4, 6-3
2025-03-01vs Ivory Ridge-BecksteadWon 21
W#1 DoublesPatrick Sheehan / Remi Barron vs Chris Beckstead / Chris Bleak6-4, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesCamdin Nelson / Brian Schulz vs Austin Beckstead / Glen Zobell4-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#3 DoublesLester Cheng / Brady Rasmussen vs Jeff Peterson / Nate Goates3-6, 5-2, 0-1
2025-02-22vs Sunpro-EllisLost 12
L#1 DoublesLong Le / Kingsley Hoang vs Royce Plowman / Isaac Smith7-6, 1-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesDon Pettigrew / Craig Rogowski vs Michael Lundberg / Timothy Nefdt3-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesBrady Rasmussen / Patrick Sheehan vs Kael Bybee / Levi Garnett6-4, 6-1
2025-02-08vs Eccles Tennis Center-BublikSplit 11
L#1 DoublesMichael Topp / Brian Schulz vs Jason Nielsen / Kyle Kugler4-6, 5-6
W#3 DoublesCurtis Sampson / Trinh Tran vs Jamel Cash / Dylan Wilde7-6, 6-4
2025-02-01vs Ivory Ridge-BecksteadSplit 11
L#1 DoublesLong Le / Lester Cheng vs Austin Beckstead / Jason Herrud4-6, 7-5, 0-1
W#2 DoublesBrady Rasmussen / Camdin Nelson vs Nate Goates / Scott Flemming6-2, 7-6
2025-01-25vs Sunpro-EllisLost 12
L#1 DoublesAdam Levenstein / Patrick Sheehan vs Mckay Luu / Eliott Moreno1-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesCurtis Sampson / Brian Schulz vs Isaac Smith / Timothy Nefdt6-3, 1-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesLester Cheng / Andrew McQuarrie vs John Hunter / Kerry Perez2-6, 6-7
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 4.5M Saturday 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 4.04 estimated across 14 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.

4.27
Craig Rogowski
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.26
Brian Schulz
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.21
Camdin Nelson
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.18
Don Pettigrew
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.17
Patrick Sheehan
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
4.14
Curtis Sampson
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.14
Long Le
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.05
Adam Levenstein
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.92
Takayuki Suzuki
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.91
Trinh Tran
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.89
Brady Rasmussen
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 30% · published 4
3.88
Lester Cheng
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
3.84
Andrew McQuarrie
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.75
Remi Barron
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
Jamie Fletcher
published
Kingsley Hoang
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Michael Topp
usually #1 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.

Adam Levenstein + Don Pettigrew4160% games+8.3% vs expected
Curtis Sampson + Brian Schulz3253% games+5.7% vs expected
Patrick Sheehan + Adam Levenstein3549% games+3.9% vs expected
Brady Rasmussen + Curtis Sampson15461% games+2.9% vs expected
Michael Topp + Brian Schulz4549% games−3.5% vs expected
Lester Cheng + Curtis Sampson1537% games−6.3% vs expected
Don Pettigrew + Lester Cheng3844% games−7.5% vs expected
Adam Levenstein + Lester Cheng4345% 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.

4.5
Craig Rogowski
25W–23L career · 1 line in 2025
3%92%5%
4.27
4.5
Brian Schulz
90W–49L career · 3 lines in 2025
3%92%5%
4.26
4.5
Camdin Nelson
36W–27L career · 3 lines in 2025
7%91%2%
4.21
4.5
Don Pettigrew
77W–77L career · 1 line in 2025
9%89%1%
4.18
Patrick Sheehan
76W–82L career · 4 lines in 2025
12%87%1%
4.17
4.5
Curtis Sampson
155W–79L career · 3 lines in 2025
16%84%1%
4.14
Long Le
95W–89L career · 3 lines in 2025
17%83%<1%
4.14
4.5
Adam Levenstein
71W–57L career · 1 line in 2025
35%65%<1%
4.05
Takayuki Suzuki
19W–24L career · 6 lines in 2025
71%29%<1%
3.92
Trinh Tran
59W–39L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%73%27%
3.91
4
Brady Rasmussen
110W–87L career · 10 lines in 2025
<1%79%21%
3.89
4.5
Lester Cheng
55W–68L career · 3 lines in 2025
80%20%<1%
3.88
4
Andrew McQuarrie
13W–24L career · 1 line in 2025
1%86%13%
3.84
Remi Barron
83W–44L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%4%96%
3.75
Jamie Fletcher
3W–6L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Kingsley Hoang
4W–8L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Michael Topp
23W–25L career · 1 line in 2025
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.