Teams

7 MTC Cousineau

2025 Richmond Tri-Level Mixed · Richmond Tri-Level Mixed 4.0, 3.5, 3.0

14 players · average NTRP 3.20 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2025-11-06vs 8 Westwood HauseLost 02
L#2 DoublesAmanda Mayhew / Matt Brukasz vs Stephanie Murtaugh / Patrick Murtaugh2-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesAmanda Phillips / James Costello vs Michael Flynn / Amanda Buchanan2-6, 6-3, 0-1
2025-10-16vs 5 Adkins WoodlakeWon 10
W#2 DoublesJohn Kim / Julie Kratzer vs Cindy Birnbaum / Ron Birnbaum6-3, 6-0
2025-10-09vs 3 Herm Yablonski/LinesWon 10
W#1 DoublesJulie Kratzer / Ross Overstreet vs Kathleen Crotty / Daniel Sadusky6-1, 1-6, 1-0
2025-10-02vs 8 Westwood HauseWon 10
W#2 DoublesJohn Kim / Julie Kratzer vs Chris Gilman / Liza Hause6-1, 6-3
2025-09-25vs 6 Avalon GhitaLost 01
L#2 DoublesJohn Kim / Julie Kratzer vs Gabriel Ghita / Gabriela Ghita3-6, 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 Richmond Tri-Level Mixed 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 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 3.34 estimated across 13 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.

3.79
Fahim Rahman
published 4
3.71
Jennifer Shaffer
published
3.69
Leigh Ann Barker
published
3.68
Julie Kratzer
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.53
Ross Overstreet
published
3.39
Michael Cousineau
published
3.38
Rafael Garrido
published
3.31
Rebecca Lowe
published
3.21
Amanda Mayhew
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.06
Amanda Phillips
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
3.04
Matt Brukasz
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.94
James Costello
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.70
Dana Chenevert
published 2.5
Olena Turner
published
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
Fahim Rahman
7W–1L career · no lines in 2025
1%94%5%
3.79
Jennifer Shaffer
19W–14L career · no lines in 2025
5%94%1%
3.71
Leigh Ann Barker
7W–14L career · no lines in 2025
7%92%1%
3.69
Julie Kratzer
59W–41L career · 4 lines in 2025
9%91%1%
3.68
Ross Overstreet
12W–11L career · no lines in 2025
42%58%<1%
3.53
Michael Cousineau
13W–18L career · no lines in 2025
<1%80%20%
3.39
Rafael Garrido
11W–7L career · no lines in 2025
<1%81%18%
3.38
Rebecca Lowe
23W–14L career · no lines in 2025
1%92%7%
3.31
3.5
Amanda Mayhew
10W–18L career · 1 line in 2025
5%93%1%
3.21
3
Amanda Phillips
25W–10L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%32%68%
3.06
Matt Brukasz
3W–11L career · 1 line in 2025
38%62%<1%
3.04
3
James Costello
6W–16L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%68%32%
2.94
2.5
Dana Chenevert
15W–22L career · no lines in 2025
0%6%94%
2.70
Olena Turner
0W–1L career · no lines in 2025
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.