Teams

SGV Noobies A-Han-San Marino HS/SU10

2026 Winter Team Singles · SGV - Men 4.0

9 players · average NTRP 4.00 / SO.CALIFORNIA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
L#1 SinglesDastan Mazhetayev vs Michael Pang3-6, 2-6
W#2 SinglesAlexander Pham vs Lam Bui6-2, 6-4
W#3 SinglesStephen Kim vs Jordan Tatang4-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#1 SinglesManuel Almazan vs Hans Yu6-1, 6-2
L#2 SinglesAlexander Pham vs Kevin Yang7-6, 3-6, 0-1
L#3 SinglesJeffrey Kwok vs Brandon Lee5-7, 1-6
2026-02-15vs SGV Busy Beavers-Wang-Cal Tech/SA2Lost 12
W#1 SinglesManuel Almazan vs Steinway Huang3-6, 6-0, 1-0
L#2 SinglesAbraam Guirguis vs Yuxi Huang7-6, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 SinglesJeffrey Kwok vs Steven Lin3-6, 6-4, 0-1
2026-02-01vs SGV Triforces-D.Li-WN/SU10Lost 12
W#1 SinglesManuel Almazan vs Anthony Tsao6-0, 5-7, 1-0
L#2 SinglesJeffrey Kwok vs Roger Wang0-6, 1-6
L#3 SinglesJason Mora vs Trenman Yau2-6, 1-6
W#1 SinglesDastan Mazhetayev vs Omar Enciso6-2, 6-3
L#3 SinglesAbraam Guirguis vs William Pence6-3, 3-6, 0-1
2026-01-11vs SGV Dare Doubles-Qian-WN/SU2Split 11
W#2 SinglesManuel Almazan vs George Cheah4-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#3 SinglesJason Mora vs Sam Qian4-6, 2-6
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 standings7 teams · SGV - Men 4.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1SGV LLW Flint Fighters- Ortiz Reyes-Flint Canyon/SA45113515138
2SGV Dare Doubles-Qian-WN/SU25111719158
3SGV Triforces-D.Li-WN/SU10339921160
4SGV Noobies B-Koh-San Marino HS/SU23381022166
5SGV Underdogs-Bui-Diamond Bar HS-SU10:30249918146
6SGV Noobies A-Han-San Marino HS/SU102481024164
7SGV Busy Beavers-Wang-Cal Tech/SA21551330186

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 3.58 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.

4.08
Alan Han
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4.5
3.94
Dastan Mazhetayev
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 4
3.79
Manuel Almazan
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #2 Singles 25% · published
David Kim
published 4
3.62
Alexander Pham
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 4
3.46
Stephen Kim
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
3.38
Abraam Guirguis
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #3 Singles 20% · published 3.5
3.21
Jeffrey Kwok
usually #3 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
3.16
Jason Mora
usually #3 Singles 100% · 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
Alan Han
21W–13L career · 2 lines in 2026
28%72%<1%
4.08
4
Dastan Mazhetayev
14W–9L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%67%33%
3.94
Manuel Almazan
17W–0L career · 4 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
3.79
4
David Kim
8W–1L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
4
Alexander Pham
7W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
21%79%<1%
3.62
Stephen Kim
11W–18L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%<1%>99%
3.46
3.5
Abraam Guirguis
19W–14L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%79%21%
3.38
Jeffrey Kwok
2W–7L career · 3 lines in 2026
7%91%2%
3.21
Jason Mora
12W–12L career · 2 lines in 2026
12%87%1%
3.16

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.