Teams

1FAC-MAHMOOD Winter 4.0 men singles sem f2

2022 SEM TEAM SINGLES - WINTER · 2022 MEN 4.0 WINTER SINGLES SEM

5 players · average NTRP 4.25 / S.E. MICHIGAN

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 →
Schedule8 played
W#1 SinglesBranden Clements vs Surya Prakash Manepalli3-6, 5-1
W#2 SinglesDaniel Carlson vs Praveen Kumar Konada6-4, 2-2
W#3 SinglesJohan Mahmood vs David Jianjiang Xu6-4, 1-0
L#1 SinglesBranden Clements vs Jeffrey Seilkop3-6, 6-3, 0-1
W#2 SinglesDaniel Carlson vs Steven Arens6-2, 7-5
W#3 SinglesJohn Patry vs Benjamin Schmitter4-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#1 SinglesBranden Clements vs David Klungle6-0, 6-3
W#2 SinglesDaniel Carlson vs Robert Cupples6-2, 6-3
L#1 SinglesDaniel Carlson vs Jordan Paterra3-6, 6-0, 0-1
L#3 SinglesJohn Patry vs Matthew Kaminski5-7, 4-3
W#1 SinglesBranden Clements vs David Klungle6-4, 5-1
W#2 SinglesDaniel Carlson vs HAN UL LEE6-2, 6-3
L#1 SinglesBranden Clements vs Jingkang Wang2-6, 6-5
W#3 SinglesJohan Mahmood vs Jordan Paterra6-1, 2-6
W#1 SinglesDaniel Carlson vs Dotun Ajao7-5, 2-3
L#2 SinglesYonghao Sun vs Praveen Kumar Konada7-6, 0-2
W#3 SinglesJohan Mahmood vs WON YONG HWANG6-1, 6-0
W#1 SinglesBranden Clements vs Alex Polonsky7-5
L#2 SinglesYonghao Sun vs Jeffrey Seilkop4-6, 3-4
W#3 SinglesJohn Patry vs Steven Arens6-7, 3-1
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 standings8 teams · 2022 MEN 4.0 WINTER SINGLES SEM
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
11FAC-MAHMOOD Winter 4.0 men singles sem f26216818170
23BEV-ROSEN Winter 4.0 men singles sem f26215921187
33CHIP-DOUGLASS Winter 4.0 men singles sem f15115313121
44BLOOM-MANEPALLI Winter 4.0 men singles sem f253111323189
54HV-CLARKE Winter 4.0 men singles sem f13371123150
62PEACH-CUPPLES Winter 4.0 men singles sem f226111331226
71LIB-LEE Winter 4.0 men singles sem f11551326181
85DEER-ARENS Winter 4.0 men singles sem f21771734237

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 3.88 estimated across 2 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.

Daniel Carlson
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 4.5
3.93
Branden Clements
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
3.83
Johan Mahmood
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
John Patry
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
Yonghao Sun
usually #2 Singles 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.

Johan Mahmood + Daniel Carlson404 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.

4.5
Daniel Carlson
23W–16L career · 6 lines in 2022
not enough data
4
Branden Clements
54W–24L career · 6 lines in 2022
<1%71%29%
3.93
Johan Mahmood
124W–56L career · 3 lines in 2022
91%9%<1%
3.83
John Patry
20W–43L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Yonghao Sun
58W–16L career · 2 lines in 2022
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.