Teams

VVS Stars

Adult 40 & Over Spring · 3.5 Men - Central Day NJD

13 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NEW JERSEY

View scouting list →
Schedule1 played
2022-05-15vs CENTRAL 1/Jersey AcesLost 04
L#1 DoublesEdmund Lee / Prasad Pola vs Chandra Rayavarapu / Shiv Kore4-6, 3-6
L#1 SinglesMukul Goyal vs Sreedhar Boyineni6-7, 3-6
L#2 DoublesVijay Shanmugam / Nirenjan Thangaraju vs Chitta Sahoo / Venkat Tamavada0-6, 5-7
L#3 DoublesMani Ponnusamy / RAJ MADUGULA vs Srinivas Chunduru / Subra Minnal4-6, 3-6
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 3.5 Men - Central Day NJD 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 3.16 estimated across 7 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.

3.49
Edmund Lee
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.43
Prasad Pola
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.14
Krish Shanmuga
published
3.12
Mukul Goyal
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.08
RAJ MADUGULA
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.05
2.78
Venkatesan Padyachi
published
Mani Ponnusamy
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Nirenjan Thangaraju
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Thajul Rahuman
published
Vijay Shanmugam
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.

Vijayendran Thangaraju + Krish Shanmuga4453% games+8.6% vs expected
Nirenjan Thangaraju + Vijayendran Thangaraju1840% games+1.5% vs expected
Nirenjan Thangaraju + Vijay Shanmugam1542% games+0.8% vs expected
Venkatesan Padyachi + Krish Shanmuga5947% gamesnot enough data
Vijayendran Thangaraju + Vijay Shanmugam0536% gamesnot enough data
Venkatesan Padyachi + Vijayendran Thangaraju134 matchesnot enough data
Krish Shanmuga + Edmund Lee314 matchesnot enough data
Prasad Pola + Vijayendran Thangaraju213 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.

3.5
Edmund Lee
33W–19L career · 1 line in 2022
<1%53%47%
3.49
Prasad Pola
12W–30L career · 1 line in 2022
71%29%<1%
3.43
3.5
Balamurugen Sathiyanaaraayanan
18W–30L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Krish Shanmuga
35W–67L career · no lines in 2022
14%85%<1%
3.14
Mukul Goyal
16W–25L career · 1 line in 2022
17%83%<1%
3.12
RAJ MADUGULA
15W–29L career · 1 line in 2022
26%74%<1%
3.08
Vijayendran Thangaraju
43W–83L career · no lines in 2022
34%66%<1%
3.05
Venkatesan Padyachi
36W–71L career · no lines in 2022
2%94%4%
2.78
Mani Ponnusamy
22W–37L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Nirenjan Thangaraju
12W–38L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Srinivasarao Duggineni
11W–11L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Thajul Rahuman
10W–13L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Vijay Shanmugam
6W–19L career · 1 line 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.