Teams

WI Combo Travel 7.5 M Team 2 Hammond

2023 WI Combo · WI Combo 7.5 Men

8 players · average NTRP 3.75 / WISCONSIN

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
W#3 DoublesIan Sewell / Jeffrey Saeger vs Jacques Verbauwhede / Jeff Wangard6-2, 7-5
W#3 DoublesJeffrey Saeger / Ian Sewell vs Dylan Meyer / Joseph Liegel7-6, 6-4
W#1 DoublesChristopher Jumes / Ian Sewell vs Lucas Mullen / Andy Taylor6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesJoshua Sweere / Ian Sewell vs Dylan Meyer / Nathan Tunks6-4, 6-4
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 standings3 teams · WI Combo 7.5 Men
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1WI Combo Travel 7.5 M Team 2 Hammond3193777
2WI Combo Travel 7.5 M LaCrosse Lobbers31841083
3WI Combo Travel 7.5 M Team 3 Blended0411123142

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 3.47 estimated across 4 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.

Ian Sewell
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.74
Jeffrey Saeger
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.65
Christopher Jumes
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.27
David Gahagan
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 36% · published 3.5
Brian Spaeth
published 3.5
3.23
Todd Hammond
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 30% · published
Joshua Sweere
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Nathan Barash
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 39% · 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.

Ian Sewell + Jeffrey Saeger11260% games+6.9% vs expected
David Gahagan + Todd Hammond2549% games−1.7% vs expected
Brian Spaeth + Todd Hammond1539% gamesnot enough data
Jeffrey Saeger + Todd Hammond3259% gamesnot enough data
David Gahagan + Brian Spaeth033 matchesnot enough data
David Gahagan + Christopher Jumes123 matchesnot enough data
Nathan Barash + Ian Sewell123 matchesnot enough data
Nathan Barash + Jeffrey Saeger213 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
Ian Sewell
32W–30L career · 4 lines in 2023
not enough data
Jeffrey Saeger
48W–40L career · 2 lines in 2023
3%94%2%
3.74
4
Christopher Jumes
28W–25L career · 8 lines in 2023
12%88%<1%
3.65
3.5
David Gahagan
75W–57L career · 14 lines in 2023
2%94%4%
3.27
3.5
Brian Spaeth
14W–37L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Todd Hammond
54W–101L career · 10 lines in 2023
4%94%2%
3.23
Joshua Sweere
6W–15L career · 1 line in 2023
not enough data
Nathan Barash
114W–68L career · 26 lines in 2023
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.