Teams

Hunters Green - M. Warren

2022 Hillsborough Adult 18 & Over ESL - Men · 3.5 Adult 18 & Over - Men

12 players · average NTRP 3.50 / REGION_3

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 →
Schedule5 played
2021-11-18vs Hills/DinhSplit 11
W#1 SinglesMichael Dasilva vs N/A6-0, 6-0
L#2 DoublesDoug Angelone / Patrick Rairigh vs Derek DeBrocke / Joseph Harrington4-6, 4-6
2021-10-09vs HCC - M. GibsonSplit 11
L#1 DoublesPatrick Rairigh / Doug Angelone vs Emilio Silva / Fabricio Freire4-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesMichael Dasilva / Matthew Warren vs Mark Gibson / Emad Sultanem6-1, 6-0
W#2 DoublesMichael Dasilva / Matthew Warren vs Max Collazo / John Figlewski6-1, 6-2
2021-09-18vs SVB - T. Vande BergWon 10
W#2 DoublesMichael Dasilva / Matthew Warren vs William Dunne / Daniel Shields6-3, 6-3
2021-09-11Split 11
L#1 SinglesMichael Dasilva vs Lakshmana Prasad Rajendran1-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesDoug Angelone / Patrick Rairigh vs Henry Hatton / John Kelly6-3, 5-7, 1-0
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 Adult 18 & Over - Men 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 3.13 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.

3.68
Eddie Collins
published 4
3.35
Doug Angelone
published 3.5
3.23
Ken Kranick
published
3.15
Jim Johnson
published
3.15
Patrick Rairigh
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.07
David Mardo
published 3.5
3.03
Philip Kalafut
published
2.94
2.93
Randall Smith
published
2.82
Gregg Sturdevant
published 3
Kirk Davis
published
Michael Dasilva
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Singles 40% · 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.

Philip Kalafut + Ken Kranick134 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
Eddie Collins
8W–13L career · no lines in 2022
9%91%1%
3.68
3.5
Doug Angelone
9W–3L career · no lines in 2022
<1%87%12%
3.35
Ken Kranick
11W–7L career · no lines in 2022
4%94%2%
3.23
Jim Johnson
7W–6L career · no lines in 2022
13%87%<1%
3.15
Patrick Rairigh
108W–103L career · 6 lines in 2022
13%87%<1%
3.15
3.5
David Mardo
5W–2L career · no lines in 2022
30%70%<1%
3.07
Philip Kalafut
8W–9L career · no lines in 2022
41%59%<1%
3.03
Manoj Krishna Kumar Unni
8W–11L career · no lines in 2022
<1%67%32%
2.94
Randall Smith
15W–11L career · no lines in 2022
<1%71%28%
2.93
3
Gregg Sturdevant
6W–5L career · no lines in 2022
1%91%8%
2.82
Kirk Davis
1W–5L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Michael Dasilva
81W–66L career · 5 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.