Teams

MSIL A18&O 4.0M Scaggs-Champaign

2026 MSIL Adult 18 & Over -MSIL East League · East MSIL A18&O 4.0M

12 players · average NTRP 4.00 / MID-SOUTH ILLINOIS

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 →
Schedule2 played
2026-06-29vs MSIL A18&O 4.0M Castro-ChampaignWon 21
W#1 DoublesKurt Wisthuff / Thomas R Scaggs vs Lijian Zhang / Sendhil Kumaran6-0, 6-2
W#1 SinglesLino Jo vs Elijah Leffelman6-1, 6-1
L#2 DoublesVinny Mangina / Aitor Togay vs Collin Carlier / Yongkyu An1-6, 5-7
2026-05-11vs MSIL A18&O 4.0M Castro-ChampaignWon 30
W#1 DoublesLino Jo / Angad Mehta vs Collin Carlier / Patrick Hammie7-6, 6-4
W#2 DoublesVinny Mangina / Timothy Latronico vs Sean Miller / Wyatt Martin6-3, 7-5
W#2 SinglesJihwab Ryu vs Vinod Ramakrishnan6-1, 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 East MSIL A18&O 4.0M 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 3.78 estimated across 10 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.

3.90
Teri Scaggs
published 4
3.89
Chris Sarol
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 4
3.87
Andrew Scaggs
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.80
Jihwab Ryu
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
3.80
Timothy Latronico
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.77
Lino Jo
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published
3.76
Christopher Sisson
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.76
Thomas Scaggs
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.69
Angad Mehta
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.58
Vinny Mangina
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Kurt Wisthuff
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Thomas R Scaggs
usually #1 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.

Andrew Scaggs + Thomas Scaggs14267% games+1.3% vs expected
Chris Sarol + Christopher Sisson123 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
Teri Scaggs
129W–55L career · no lines in 2026
<1%78%22%
3.90
4
Chris Sarol
109W–28L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%80%20%
3.89
4
Andrew Scaggs
31W–10L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%84%16%
3.87
Jihwab Ryu
15W–5L career · 1 line in 2026
1%93%6%
3.80
Timothy Latronico
42W–20L career · 1 line in 2026
1%93%6%
3.80
Lino Jo
30W–12L career · 2 lines in 2026
2%94%4%
3.77
4
Christopher Sisson
44W–25L career · 3 lines in 2026
2%94%3%
3.76
4
Thomas Scaggs
54W–16L career · 6 lines in 2026
2%94%3%
3.76
4
Angad Mehta
50W–18L career · 1 line in 2026
7%92%1%
3.69
Vinny Mangina
5W–9L career · 2 lines in 2026
26%74%<1%
3.58
Kurt Wisthuff
10W–0L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Thomas R Scaggs
18W–4L career · 1 line in 2026
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.