Teams

Fleming TC - Fanning

2025 CSRATA USTA Adult 18 & Over - Spring '25 · Men 4.0

12 players · average NTRP 4.00 / GEORGIA

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 →
Schedule6 played
2025-03-15vs Fleming TC - MundyLost 13
L#1 DoublesSteve Fanning / Brandon Tinker vs Michael Harden / Lonnie White4-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#1 SinglesMark Blakeman vs James Rosema6-7, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesChris Neal / Kevin Owens vs Tony Mundy / Wenceslao Lara5-7, 3-6
L#3 DoublesSterling Hamilton / Ryan Kho vs Jack Smolarek / Richard Reagin4-6, 1-6
2025-03-14vs CCRC - NarendranSplit 22
L#1 DoublesChris Neal / Joshua Foss vs Thad Adams / Benjamin Holmes3-6, 3-6
W#1 SinglesBrandon Tinker vs Donald Benza6-3, 7-5
L#2 DoublesRakesh Baman / Ryan Kho vs Tommy Norris / Thomas Mallon1-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesDarren Meadows / Kevin Owens vs Nikhil Narendran / Gagan Batra6-2, 6-3
2025-02-22vs Fleming TC - MundyLost 14
W#1 DoublesBrandon Tinker / Steve Fanning vs James Rosema / Lonnie White6-3, 7-5
L#1 SinglesBrant Williams vs Wenceslao Lara0-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesJoshua Foss / Jered Freed vs Christopher Eckert / Ashley Wood6-7, 4-6
L#2 SinglesMark Blakeman vs Jack Smolarek2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesChris Neal / Ryan Kho vs Richard Reagin / Maurice Pieters1-6, 2-6
2025-02-15vs CCRC - NarendranSplit 22
L#1 DoublesChris Neal / Jered Freed vs Benjamin Holmes / Thad Adams4-6, 1-6
L#2 DoublesDarren Meadows / Kevin Owens vs Donald Benza / Nikhil Narendran6-4, 3-6, 0-1
W#2 SinglesBrandon Tinker vs Tilak Dhakal6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesRakesh Baman / Steve Fanning vs Thomas Mallon / Gagan Batra6-2, 6-3
2025-02-01vs Fleming TC - MundyLost 05
L#1 DoublesChris Neal / Joshua Foss vs Richard Reagin / Jorge Salazar2-6, 7-6, 0-1
L#1 SinglesBrandon Tinker vs Wenceslao Lara6-2, 0-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesSteve Fanning / Brant Williams vs David Fulton / Ashley Wood3-6, 2-6
L#2 SinglesJacob Burr vs Jack Smolarek2-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesRyan Kho / Sterling Hamilton vs Tony Mundy / James Rosema0-6, 1-6
2025-01-25vs CCRC - NarendranLost 23
W#1 DoublesBrandon Tinker / Rakesh Baman vs Nikhil Narendran / Tommy Norris6-1, 6-1
L#1 SinglesJacob Burr vs Vishal Marneni2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesBrant Williams / Ryan Kho vs Benjamin Holmes / Thad Adams0-6, 0-6
L#2 SinglesSteve Fanning vs Yash Behal3-6, 7-5, 0-1
W#3 DoublesChris Neal / Mark Blakeman vs Trevor Adkins / Gagan Batra6-1, 7-5
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 standings3 teams · Men 4.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Fleming TC - Mundy5020516176
2CCRC - Narendran32111430201
3Fleming TC - Fanning0682245308

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 3.61 estimated across 9 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.

4.01
Brandon Tinker
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 4
3.83
Rakesh Baman
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Jacob Burr
usually #1 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 50% · published 4
3.75
Jered Freed
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.64
Steve Fanning
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
3.54
Darren Meadows
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.50
Sterling Hamilton
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
3.46
Mark Blakeman
usually #1 Singles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.43
Brant Williams
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 4
3.31
Ryan Kho
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
Joshua Foss
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Kevin Owens
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · 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.

Brandon Tinker + Sterling Hamilton9058% games+4.6% vs expected
Brandon Tinker + Steve Fanning4454% games+3.0% vs expected
Brant Williams + Rakesh Baman314 matchesnot enough data
Darren Meadows + Rakesh Baman123 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
Brandon Tinker
31W–8L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%45%55%
4.01
Rakesh Baman
15W–18L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%90%10%
3.83
4
Jacob Burr
0W–2L career · type S · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Jered Freed
16W–16L career · 2 lines in 2025
3%95%2%
3.75
Steve Fanning
16W–27L career · 5 lines in 2025
14%86%<1%
3.64
4
Darren Meadows
12W–17L career · 2 lines in 2025
36%64%<1%
3.54
Sterling Hamilton
35W–15L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%52%48%
3.50
Mark Blakeman
20W–13L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%61%39%
3.46
4
Brant Williams
7W–21L career · 3 lines in 2025
70%30%<1%
3.43
Ryan Kho
0W–9L career · 5 lines in 2025
93%7%<1%
3.31
Joshua Foss
2W–5L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kevin Owens
3W–3L career · 3 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.