Teams

TAPAS

2025 Tri-Level Men · 4.0, 3.5, 3.0

8 players · average NTRP 4.25 / NEW JERSEY REGION

View scouting list →
Schedule10 played
2025-04-12vs No ShenanigansLost 02
L#1 DoublesBong Kim / Youngsok Kim vs Kyle Eng / Jeff Silverman1-6, 7-5, 0-1
L#2 DoublesInyoung Jang / Bruce Joo vs Clint Tomlinson / Ryan Pienciak3-6, 6-4, 1-0
2025-04-05vs Tri-HackersWon 10
W#2 DoublesYoungsok Kim / Solomon Ji vs Robert Clauss / Peter Ortiz6-2, 7-5
2025-03-29vs NJ: Tri-BangersLost 01
L#2 DoublesBruce Joo / Inyoung Jang vs Richard Liu / Urvish Barot2-6, 6-3, 0-1
2025-03-22vs Net AssetsWon 10
W#2 DoublesBruce Joo / Youngsok Kim vs Rajesh Gill / Jay Kapur6-2, 6-3
2025-03-15vs Full Metal RacquetsWon 20
W#1 DoublesBong Kim / Kevin Shin vs James Balthis / Matthew Bunch6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesBruce Joo / Solomon Ji vs John Yoon Kim / Edgar Cala6-3, 6-4
2025-03-08vs Full Metal RacquetsWon 20
W#1 DoublesKevin Shin / Bong Kim vs Jim Serrano / Giancarlo Serrano6-0, 6-2
W#2 DoublesYoungsok Kim / Inyoung Jang vs John Yoon Kim / Kishore Chandrasekharan6-2, 6-3
2025-03-01vs NJ: Tri-BangersWon 10
W#2 DoublesBruce Joo / Youngsok Kim vs Peter Ortiz / Unni Nair6-4, 6-4
2025-02-22vs Net AssetsWon 20
W#1 DoublesBong Kim / Hoon Lee vs George Sheffey / Siva Kakaraparthi6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesInyoung Jang / Solomon Ji vs Dave Baggenstoss / Nirav Vasa6-1, 6-1
2025-02-08vs NJ: Tri-BangersWon 10
W#2 DoublesInyoung Jang / Youngsok Kim vs Kevin Irani / Richard Liu7-6, 6-4
2025-02-01vs No ShenanigansWon 20
W#1 DoublesBong Kim / Hoon Lee vs Jeff Silverman / Bobby Kim6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesBruce Joo / Solomon Ji vs Clint Tomlinson / Leonard Charles3-6, 7-5, 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 standings4 teams · 4.0, 3.5, 3.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1TAPAS912739172
2WTF Tri73171332265
3Tri-Hards64171329257
4Tri-Hackers0942346299

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 3.56 estimated across 2 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.

Bong Kim
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.65
Kevin Shin
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
3.48
Bruce Joo
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
Hoon Lee
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Inyoung Jang
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Jay Song
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Solomon Ji
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Youngsok Kim
usually #2 Doubles 83%, also #1 Doubles 17% · 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.

4.5
Bong Kim
15W–6L career · 5 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kevin Shin
21W–10L career · 10 lines in 2025
14%85%1%
3.65
4
Bruce Joo
15W–13L career · 6 lines in 2025
57%43%<1%
3.48
Hoon Lee
17W–4L career · 6 lines in 2025
not enough data
Inyoung Jang
13W–4L career · 5 lines in 2025
not enough data
Jay Song
21W–3L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Solomon Ji
14W–3L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Youngsok Kim
10W–5L career · 6 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.