Teams

Walnut Creek TC 18AM4.5B

2024 ADULT 18&Over · Men's 4.5

23 players · average NTRP 4.31 / NO. CALIFORNIA

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 →

Flight standings for Men's 4.5 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 3.97 estimated across 19 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.

4.42
Nico Grishkoff
published
4.25
Debashis Panda
published 4.5
Cameron Larner
published 4.5
Chris Bown
published 4.5
4.21
Stephen Flynn
published
4.16
Bryant Ung
published 4.5
4.14
Joseph Barnes
published
4.12
Michael Attiyeh
published
4.09
Nathan Gong
published
4.07
Nicholas Greenwald
published
4.06
Andrew Oliver
published 4.5
3.99
Sanjay Backliwal
published
3.94
Jonathan Maze
published
3.93
Dan Gullion
published 4
3.91
Jeffrey Magidson
published
3.79
Kamal Mistry
published
3.75
Mark Chase
published
3.71
Manish Singh
published
3.66
Paul Lizama
published
3.64
Cesar Hernandez
published 4
3.53
Christopher Lau
published 4
Mason J Marangella
published
Matthew Matrisian
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.

Jonathan Maze + Stephen Flynn404 matchesnot enough data
Stephen Flynn + Debashis Panda314 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.

Nico Grishkoff
4W–2L career · no lines in 2024
<1%72%28%
4.42
4.5
Debashis Panda
5W–6L career · no lines in 2024
3%93%4%
4.25
4.5
Cameron Larner
2W–3L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
4.5
Chris Bown
2W–2L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Stephen Flynn
29W–12L career · no lines in 2024
6%92%2%
4.21
4.5
Bryant Ung
0W–4L career · no lines in 2024
13%86%1%
4.16
Joseph Barnes
2W–5L career · no lines in 2024
15%84%1%
4.14
Michael Attiyeh
9W–22L career · no lines in 2024
20%80%<1%
4.12
Nathan Gong
11W–12L career · no lines in 2024
26%73%<1%
4.09
Nicholas Greenwald
2W–2L career · no lines in 2024
31%69%<1%
4.07
4.5
Andrew Oliver
1W–4L career · type A · no lines in 2024
34%66%<1%
4.06
Sanjay Backliwal
12W–32L career · no lines in 2024
54%46%<1%
3.99
Jonathan Maze
13W–4L career · no lines in 2024
66%34%<1%
3.94
4
Dan Gullion
37W–27L career · no lines in 2024
<1%69%31%
3.93
Jeffrey Magidson
11W–3L career · no lines in 2024
<1%74%26%
3.91
Kamal Mistry
3W–4L career · no lines in 2024
2%92%6%
3.79
Mark Chase
1W–5L career · no lines in 2024
96%4%<1%
3.75
Manish Singh
17W–15L career · no lines in 2024
7%91%2%
3.71
Paul Lizama
3W–15L career · no lines in 2024
13%87%1%
3.66
4
Cesar Hernandez
2W–19L career · no lines in 2024
16%83%<1%
3.64
4
Christopher Lau
10W–14L career · no lines in 2024
42%58%<1%
3.53
Mason J Marangella
2W–1L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Matthew Matrisian
0W–1L career · no lines 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.