Teams

Sandman

Adult 18 & Over Spring · 5.0 Men Central

9 players · average NTRP 4.50 / NEW JERSEY

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2026-07-24vs No Strings AttachedWon 10
W#1 DoublesDon Kim / Spencer Clark vs Rajiv Ragu / Dennis Barlotta6-2, 7-6
2026-07-18vs NJD/KanetkarLost 12
L#1 DoublesSpencer Clark / Don Kim vs Noah Lilienthal / Tim Stierle1-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesKarthik Iyer vs Ashwin Kanetkar2-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesQasim Khan / DAISUKE SUZUKI vs Jayat Kanetkar / Sadhista Linga7-6, 7-6
2026-06-20vs NJD/KanetkarSplit 11
L#1 DoublesDon Kim / Spencer Clark vs Ashwin Kanetkar / Eshan Kanetkar6-4, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesRobert Khalev / DAISUKE SUZUKI vs Viraj Degaonkar / Jayat Kanetkar6-2, 1-6, 1-0
2026-05-30vs NJD/KanetkarLost 02
L#1 DoublesSpencer Clark / Don Kim vs Eshan Kanetkar / Tim Stierle1-6, 2-6
L#1 SinglesDAISUKE SUZUKI vs Ashwin Kanetkar1-6, 2-6
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 5.0 Men Central 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 4.32 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.

4.72
Spencer Clark
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.50
Travis Sandman
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #1 Singles 29% · published
4.35
DAISUKE SUZUKI
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 4.5
4.31
Neil Mirchandani
usually #2 Doubles 63%, also #2 Singles 13% · published
4.09
Robert Khalev
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #2 Singles 29% · published
3.98
Tyler Neal
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
Don Kim
published
Karthik Iyer
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
Qasim Khan
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.

Qasim Khan + Don Kim4165% games+14.4% vs expected
Tyler Neal + Neil Mirchandani4259% games+8.4% vs expected
Qasim Khan + Neil Mirchandani123 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.

Spencer Clark
3W–6L career · 4 lines in 2026
no projection at this level
4.72
Travis Sandman
10W–1L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%50%50%
4.50
4.5
DAISUKE SUZUKI
7W–6L career · type S · 3 lines in 2026
1%85%15%
4.35
Neil Mirchandani
69W–16L career · 8 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
4.31
Robert Khalev
71W–39L career · 7 lines in 2026
27%73%<1%
4.09
Tyler Neal
45W–27L career · 5 lines in 2026
56%44%<1%
3.98
Don Kim
53W–25L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Karthik Iyer
0W–1L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Qasim Khan
33W–12L career · 1 line 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.