Teams

Iranshad/Lieber

2023 Montgomery Mixed 18 & Over Winter · Montgomery Mixed 18 & Over 10.0

14 players · average NTRP 4.70 / MARYLAND

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2023-03-30vs ChromkovaLost 01
L#1 DoublesReginald Tull / Elizabeth Larson vs Gregory Rabinovich / Inese Williamson2-6, 5-7
2023-03-25Lost 01
L#1 DoublesReginald Tull / Elizabeth Larson vs Hayan Marouf / Angel Batkins4-6, 1-6
2023-02-23Lost 01
L#2 DoublesReginald Tull / Kelley Regan vs Austin Blake / Angel Batkins2-6, 2-6
2023-02-16vs ChromkovaLost 01
L#3 DoublesReginald Tull / Kelley Regan vs Gregory Rabinovich / Ekaterina Potapova6-3, 1-6, 0-1
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 Montgomery Mixed 18 & Over 10.0 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 4.37 estimated across 11 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.

Elizabeth Larson
published 5
4.68
Heather Herman
published 5
4.65
Bartol Letica
published 5
4.58
Christen Harsha
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 22% · published 5
4.51
Kelley Regan
published
4.38
Jenna Hagood
published
4.26
Ryan Cinoman
usually #2 Doubles 55%, also #3 Doubles 27% · published 4.5
4.25
Reginald Tull
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.22
Leila Lam
published
4.21
Hillary Kuker
published 4.5
4.17
Byron Levy
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 4.5
4.11
Chris Downs
published 4.5
Patrick Hughes
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.

Byron Levy + Christen Harsha134 matchesnot enough data
Patrick Hughes + Jenna Hagood404 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.

5
Elizabeth Larson
4W–7L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
5
Heather Herman
14W–7L career · no lines in 2023
8%91%1%
4.68
5
Bartol Letica
13W–6L career · no lines in 2023
12%88%<1%
4.65
5
Christen Harsha
482W–135L career · 9 lines in 2023
28%72%<1%
4.58
Kelley Regan
19W–15L career · no lines in 2023
<1%45%55%
4.51
Jenna Hagood
45W–9L career · no lines in 2023
<1%81%19%
4.38
4.5
Ryan Cinoman
125W–85L career · 11 lines in 2023
2%94%3%
4.26
4.5
Elizabeth Vermillion
12W–15L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
4.5
Reginald Tull
170W–99L career · 4 lines in 2023
3%95%3%
4.25
Leila Lam
21W–5L career · no lines in 2023
5%94%1%
4.22
4.5
Hillary Kuker
7W–3L career · type A · no lines in 2023
6%93%1%
4.21
4.5
Byron Levy
145W–119L career · 10 lines in 2023
10%90%1%
4.17
4.5
Chris Downs
4W–8L career · no lines in 2023
19%81%<1%
4.11
Patrick Hughes
6W–1L career · no lines in 2023
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.