Teams

Canon - Lawn and Tennis

2024 Sandhills Adult 18 & over · 4.5 Adult Men

10 players · average NTRP 4.42 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2024-05-18Won 20
W#1 DoublesBrett Eckles / Wes Watson vs Brian Gibson / Sam Roach6-1, 6-2
W#3 DoublesJonathan Canon / Michael Trebuhov vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2024-05-04vs Sandhills TeamWon 20
W#1 DoublesJoshua Berns / Ryan Sayko vs Sherwood Blackwood / Steve Saye6-3, 6-3
W#2 DoublesJonathan Canon / Andrew Perdue vs DOHYUN KIM / Berry Bullock6-1, 6-0
2024-04-28Won 10
W#1 DoublesJonathan Canon / Andrew Borgstrom vs Sam Roach / Brian Gibson7-5, 6-2
2024-04-27vs Sandhills TeamWon 20
W#1 DoublesWes Watson / Brett Eckles vs Sam Roach / Brian Gibson6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesRyan Sayko / Joshua Berns vs Steve Saye / Sherwood Blackwood6-2, 6-2
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 4.5 Adult Men 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 4.30 estimated across 8 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.

4.53
Ronald Orban
published
4.44
Andrew Perdue
published 4.5
4.43
Brett Eckles
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.31
Sean Hammer
published
4.29
Jonathan Canon
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.28
Wes Watson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.14
Ryan Sayko
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
3.96
Benjamin Fortich
published 4
Michael Trebuhov
published
Steve Musgrove
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.

Brett Eckles + Andrew Perdue5254% games+4.2% vs expected
Ryan Sayko + Wes Watson2549% gamesnot enough data
Jonathan Canon + Wes Watson2448% gamesnot enough data
Ryan Sayko + Jonathan Canon134 matchesnot enough data
Benjamin Fortich + Jonathan Canon213 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.

Ronald Orban
108W–21L career · no lines in 2024
<1%43%57%
4.53
4.5
Andrew Perdue
33W–11L career · no lines in 2024
<1%67%33%
4.44
4.5
Brett Eckles
223W–95L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%69%31%
4.43
Sean Hammer
2W–1L career · no lines in 2024
1%90%9%
4.31
4.5
Jonathan Canon
102W–70L career · 3 lines in 2024
2%92%6%
4.29
4.5
Wes Watson
154W–128L career · 2 lines in 2024
2%92%6%
4.28
4.5
Ryan Sayko
78W–106L career · 2 lines in 2024
16%83%<1%
4.14
4
Benjamin Fortich
75W–25L career · type A · no lines in 2024
<1%61%39%
3.96
Michael Trebuhov
2W–0L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Steve Musgrove
2W–0L 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.