Teams

CACM GOLD

2026 USTA MIXED 18 & OVER - DEN · MIXED 8.0 - 18 & OVER

13 players · average NTRP 4.00 / COLORADO

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 →
Schedule7 played
2026-05-17vs CACM REDWon 20
W#1 DoublesChad Picard / Eden Parker vs Craig Claxton / Jaylyn Bunning6-4, 6-4
W#2 DoublesZachary Hustad / Angie Sanders vs Adam Huff / Natalie Hirschfeld6-4, 6-1
2026-05-10vs WP-C REDWon 21
L#1 DoublesZachary Hustad / Julie Boes vs Ian Craighead / Megan Gunden1-6, 0-6
W#2 DoublesW Hancock / Eden Parker vs Tim Fitz / Kelly Fitz7-6, 6-2
W#3 DoublesLissa Moon / Mustafa Neemuchwala vs Chad Whitmer / Audrey Hamilton6-3, 6-0
2026-05-03vs DTC NAVYWon 21
W#1 DoublesLissa Moon / Mustafa Neemuchwala vs Chrysie Ready / JD Ready6-3, 6-7, 1-0
W#2 DoublesSarah Jensik / W Hancock vs Migdalia Morillo Rettig / Andrew Rettig - (DQ)*2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#3 DoublesTaka Muraji / Gabriela Parker vs Kevin Prometheus Trotsky / Rachel Heise1-6, 7-5, 0-1
2026-04-26vs WP BLUEWon 21
W#1 DoublesW Hancock / Sarah Jensik vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesLissa Moon / Mustafa Neemuchwala vs Kim Chen / Bret Chen3-6, 6-1, 1-0
L#3 DoublesGabriela Parker / Taka Muraji vs Valentina Gomez Madani / Cyrus Gidfar2-6, 3-6
2026-04-19vs CP BLUELost 03
L#1 DoublesAngie Sanders / Michael Sanders vs Diego Rosso / Amanda Meier3-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesLissa Moon / Mustafa Neemuchwala vs Taryn Fleming / Martin Wong6-2, 5-7, 0-1
L#3 DoublesW Hancock / Lauren Flynn vs Claire Collins / Yah Pisutpongpan4-6, 5-7
2026-04-12vs GPTC YELLOWLost 12
W#1 DoublesChad Picard / Eden Parker vs Claire Ehrlich / Tyler McFarland6-1, 6-4
L#2 DoublesMichael Sanders / Angie Sanders vs Nimesh Shrestha / Rachel Stemerman3-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#3 DoublesJulie Boes / Zachary Hustad vs Jose Amador / Lani Reichardt5-7, 6-2, 0-1
2026-04-05vs CM BLUEWon 21
W#1 DoublesMustafa Neemuchwala / Lissa Moon vs Craig Ricketts / Kathleen Heerdt6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesW Hancock / Lauren Flynn vs Alec Smith / Mary Vivo3-6, 7-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesZachary Hustad / Julie Boes vs Steven Tamez / Michelle Eidson6-7, 1-6
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 standings5 teams · MIXED 8.0 - 18 & OVER
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1LAC ORANGE5114412155
2CACM GOLD52111023179
3JCC PURPLE43101126193
4HRCA-N NAVY3310818161
5NJ BRONZE34101123190

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 3.73 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.

4.34
Chad Picard
usually #1 Doubles 86%, also #2 Doubles 14% · published 4.5
4.18
W Hancock
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 4.5
4.04
Gabriela Parker
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.98
Mustafa Neemuchwala
usually #3 Doubles 38%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published
3.79
Bob Lees
published 4
3.76
Lissa Moon
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.69
Zachary Hustad
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 4
3.64
Julie Boes
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.56
Lauren Flynn
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.50
Eden Parker
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.43
Michael Sanders
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.33
Sarah Jensik
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
3.27
Taka Muraji
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
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.

Eden Parker + Chad Picard5158% games+7.3% vs expected
Mustafa Neemuchwala + Lissa Moon7259% games+3.2% vs expected
Sarah Jensik + Zachary Hustad404 matchesnot enough data
Lissa Moon + Chad Picard224 matchesnot enough data
Taka Muraji + Lauren Flynn123 matchesnot enough data
Julie Boes + Zachary Hustad033 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.

4.5
Chad Picard
35W–18L career · 7 lines in 2026
1%87%13%
4.34
4.5
W Hancock
44W–59L career · 5 lines in 2026
10%89%1%
4.18
4.5
Gabriela Parker
19W–20L career · 2 lines in 2026
39%61%<1%
4.04
Mustafa Neemuchwala
33W–15L career · 8 lines in 2026
<1%57%43%
3.98
4
Bob Lees
21W–45L career · no lines in 2026
2%91%7%
3.79
Lissa Moon
32W–26L career · 8 lines in 2026
3%92%4%
3.76
4
Zachary Hustad
68W–34L career · 7 lines in 2026
9%90%1%
3.69
Julie Boes
31W–34L career · 3 lines in 2026
16%83%<1%
3.64
Lauren Flynn
27W–9L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%34%66%
3.56
3.5
Eden Parker
125W–58L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%51%49%
3.50
Michael Sanders
0W–10L career · 2 lines in 2026
69%31%<1%
3.43
3.5
Sarah Jensik
128W–88L career · 7 lines in 2026
1%88%11%
3.33
3.5
Taka Muraji
15W–18L career · type M · 4 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.27

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.