Teams

Hi-Tri Team

2025 Tri Level League · M 4.0

8 players · average NTRP 4.30 / UTAH

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2025-10-19vs UT/ROA/TRILEVEL/M4.0/4.5/5.0Split 11
L#1 DoublesBrian Schmeer / Leif Thulin vs Irving Stone / Alec Tzeng6-7, 3-6
W#3 DoublesJordan Fong / Matthew McDonald vs JJ Amaya / Remi Barron7-6, 6-1
2025-10-18vs UT/ROA/TRILEVEL/M4.0/4.5/5.0Lost 03
L#1 DoublesAndrew Loos / Brian Schmeer vs Alec Tzeng / Isilio Noguera4-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesCarlos Pardo-Munoz / Jordan Fong vs Tony Lew / Trinh Tran2-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesSteven Vorasane / Matthew McDonald vs Benjamin Jagolinzer / Remi Barron1-6, 1-6
2025-10-18vs Bublik/ToleafoaLost 12
L#1 DoublesBrian Schmeer / Andrew Loos vs Jerome Jourdon / Chad Toleafoa2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesDon Tran / Carlos Pardo-Munoz vs Greg Maxwell / Matthew Jensen1-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesMatthew McDonald / Jordan Fong vs Kerry Perez / Scott Hatter6-4, 4-6, 1-0
2025-10-17vs Bublik/ToleafoaLost 12
L#1 DoublesAndrew Loos / Brian Schmeer vs Chad Toleafoa / Ruslan Goussiatnikov6-3, 1-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesDon Tran / Carlos Pardo-Munoz vs Matthew Jensen / Greg Maxwell5-7, 1-6
W#3 DoublesSteven Vorasane / Jordan Fong vs Kerry Perez / Rob Acevedo6-4, 2-6, 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 standings3 teams · M 4.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1UT/ROA/TRILEVEL/M4.0/4.5/5.040102583
2Bublik/Toleafoa225715105
3Hi-Tri Team043920135

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 3.88 estimated across 8 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.

4.21
Brian Schmeer
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.18
Carlos Pardo-Munoz
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.93
Leif Thulin
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.93
Don Tran
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.84
Andrew Loos
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.76
Steven Vorasane
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.63
Jordan Fong
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.56
Matthew McDonald
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Matthew McDonald + Jordan Fong4355% games+11.7% vs expected
Steven Vorasane + Jordan Fong4450% games+5.4% vs expected
Andrew Loos + Brian Schmeer033 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
Brian Schmeer
6W–20L career · type A · 4 lines in 2025
7%91%2%
4.21
4.5
Carlos Pardo-Munoz
25W–8L career · 3 lines in 2025
10%89%1%
4.18
Leif Thulin
20W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%69%31%
3.93
4
Don Tran
76W–24L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%70%30%
3.93
4.5
Andrew Loos
4W–13L career · 3 lines in 2025
87%13%<1%
3.84
4
Steven Vorasane
35W–53L career · 2 lines in 2025
3%93%4%
3.76
Jordan Fong
28W–36L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%17%83%
3.63
Matthew McDonald
30W–23L career · 3 lines in 2025
33%67%<1%
3.56

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.