Teams

Nagel

Adult 18 & Over League · Adult 18 & Over 3.5M

5 players · average NTRP 3.50 / TEXAS

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2026-05-12Lost 01
L#2 DoublesDustin Hayden / Neil Granath vs Will Lightfoot / Walter Reed3-6, 6-7
2026-05-05vs RossLost 02
L#1 DoublesEric Nagel / Zack Burnes vs Ryan King / CODY CAULEY4-6, 7-5, 0-1
L#3 DoublesNeil Granath / Wesley Pullig vs Cecil Ross / Tommy LaFon6-7, 4-6
2026-04-28Lost 02
L#1 DoublesDustin Hayden / Ryan Barnes vs Matthew Counts / David Reyes0-6, 0-6
L#1 SinglesEric Nagel vs Alvin Smith2-6, 6-4, 0-1
2026-04-14vs WetzWon 21
L#1 DoublesDustin Hayden / Ryan Barnes vs Oscar Rodriguez / Edward Welch3-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#2 DoublesBeau Theimer / David Wagner vs Adrian Barnes / Mike Hooper6-3, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 SinglesEric Nagel vs Brint Harmon6-0, 6-1
2026-04-07Lost 02
L#2 DoublesZack Burnes / Neil Granath vs John Aldape / Adam Rodgers0-6, 2-6
L#2 SinglesDustin Hayden vs Ollie Murr6-4, 5-7, 0-1
2026-04-02vs RossWon 21
W#1 DoublesDustin Hayden / Ryan Barnes vs Shon Jones / CODY CAULEY6-3, 3-6, 1-0
L#1 SinglesEric Nagel vs Mason Brooks2-6, 5-7
W#2 DoublesNeil Granath / David Wagner vs Drew Wallace / Tommy LaFon7-5, 6-2
2026-03-24Won 30
W#1 DoublesDustin Hayden / Ryan Barnes vs Kent Nally / Jon Cauthorn4-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesDavid Wagner / Neil Granath vs Jacob Halsell / Daniel Sosa6-3, 6-3
W#2 SinglesEric Nagel vs ANTHONY PATINO6-3, 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 Adult 18 & Over 3.5M 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 3.40 estimated across 5 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.

3.56
Ryan Barnes
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.52
Beau Theimer
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.44
Dustin Hayden
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published
3.26
Eric Nagel
usually #2 Singles 40%, also #1 Singles 40% · published
3.21
Neil Granath
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #3 Doubles 20% · 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.

Ryan Barnes + Dustin Hayden8555% games−3.3% vs expected
Eric Nagel + Neil Granath3256% gamesnot enough data
Neil Granath + Dustin Hayden3258% gamesnot enough data
Eric Nagel + Dustin Hayden134 matchesnot enough data
Ryan Barnes + Beau Theimer224 matchesnot enough data
Neil Granath + Beau Theimer213 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.

Ryan Barnes
33W–25L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%33%67%
3.56
3.5
Beau Theimer
41W–14L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%44%56%
3.52
Dustin Hayden
35W–25L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%66%34%
3.44
Eric Nagel
37W–41L career · 5 lines in 2026
3%93%4%
3.26
Neil Granath
19W–29L career · 5 lines in 2026
7%91%2%
3.21

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.