Teams

F 4.0S/8.0D NC Paulino

2023 NEOTA Fusion · NEOTA 4.0S

19 players · average NTRP 3.93 / NORTHEASTERN OHIO

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 →
Schedule
Flight standings9 teams · NEOTA 4.0S
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1F 4.0S/8.0D NC Paulino80301028280
2F 4.0S/8.0D PM Perkins62221840326
3F 4.0S/8.0D LT Kim53251537310
4F 4.0S/8.0D GR Burnett44162457417
5F 4.0S/8.0D MV2 Miklowski35202043342
6F 4.0S/8.0D MV1 Mercuri35192148354
7F 4.0S/8.0D TP Schaffner35182250373
8F 4.0S/8.0D MM Bruckner35162452377
9F 4.0S/8.0D WE McClure17142656382

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 3.75 estimated across 13 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
Curtis Wagner
published 4.5
4.16
Michelle Dalton
published
4.00
John Dilyard
published
3.82
Kay McHolm
published
3.81
Molly White
published
3.81
Hallie Adcock
published 4
Jaimie Crumbley
published 4
3.73
Chad Vogelgesang
published 4
3.67
Trina Kelley
published
3.67
Brian Hass
published 4
3.65
Todd Kolarik
published
3.46
Rex Degler
published
3.38
Allan Lynch
published 3.5
3.37
Ashley Bullach
published 3.5
Joelle Reese
published
Mel Paulino
published
Rachel Harris
published
Scott Fletcher
published
Thomas Horwood
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.

Chad Vogelgesang + Todd Kolarik171550% games+0.8% vs expected
Molly White + Trina Kelley6357% gamesnot enough data
Curtis Wagner + Rex Degler7072% gamesnot enough data
Molly White + Kay McHolm2349% gamesnot enough data
Molly White + Joelle Reese3252% gamesnot enough data
Chad Vogelgesang + Curtis Wagner303 matchesnot enough data
Chad Vogelgesang + Allan Lynch213 matchesnot enough data
Mel Paulino + Thomas Horwood033 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
Curtis Wagner
65W–17L career · no lines in 2023
5%93%1%
4.21
Michelle Dalton
84W–46L career · no lines in 2023
10%89%<1%
4.16
John Dilyard
79W–74L career · no lines in 2023
<1%50%50%
4.00
Kay McHolm
124W–45L career · no lines in 2023
1%91%8%
3.82
Molly White
107W–59L career · no lines in 2023
1%92%8%
3.81
4
Hallie Adcock
16W–24L career · type A · no lines in 2023
1%92%7%
3.81
4
Jaimie Crumbley
53W–14L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
4
Chad Vogelgesang
114W–61L career · no lines in 2023
4%94%2%
3.73
Trina Kelley
32W–32L career · no lines in 2023
9%90%1%
3.67
4
Brian Hass
102W–60L career · no lines in 2023
9%90%1%
3.67
Todd Kolarik
67W–61L career · no lines in 2023
13%87%<1%
3.65
Rex Degler
157W–85L career · no lines in 2023
<1%63%37%
3.46
3.5
Allan Lynch
76W–29L career · no lines in 2023
<1%82%18%
3.38
3.5
Ashley Bullach
134W–88L career · no lines in 2023
<1%84%15%
3.37
Joelle Reese
16W–18L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Mel Paulino
33W–52L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Rachel Harris
5W–6L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Scott Fletcher
57W–25L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Thomas Horwood
13W–43L 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.