Teams

MG-Torbert

2024 · 2025 Fall USTA Adult 40 & Over Night League Mont

12 players · average NTRP 3.94 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2024-11-12vs Lagoon - Harris - 4.0 - 40 - FallWon 10
W#2 DoublesClay Torbert / Greg Alford vs Albert Smith / Stephen Chambers4-6, 7-6, 1-0
2024-10-15vs Lagoon - Harris - 4.0 - 40 - FallWon 10
W#2 DoublesClay Torbert / Edwin Hampton vs Stephen Chambers / John Morris6-2, 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 standings2 teams · 2025 Fall USTA Adult 40 & Over Night League Mont
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Lagoon - Harris - 4.0 - 40 - Fall52131533240
2MG-Torbert25141436263

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 3.80 estimated across 11 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.

4.02
Brian Cone
usually #1 Doubles 38%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published 4
4.01
Harrison Campbell
usually #1 Doubles 53%, also #2 Doubles 13% · published 4
3.93
Edwin Hampton
usually #3 Doubles 46%, also #1 Singles 18% · published 4
3.89
Mitchell Powell
usually #2 Doubles 46%, also #1 Doubles 46% · published
3.88
Paul Winn
usually #1 Doubles 86%, also #2 Doubles 14% · published
3.88
Mark Caradori
usually #1 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
3.83
Greg Alford
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.71
Clay Torbert
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.70
James Armstrong
usually #3 Doubles 36%, also #2 Doubles 27% · published 4
3.50
Athar Tanveer
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.46
Charlie Trotman
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 38% · published 4
David Loe
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
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.

Harrison Campbell + Brian Cone10266% games+6.7% vs expected
Mitchell Powell + Greg Alford10165% games+3.5% vs expected
Harrison Campbell + Greg Alford8162% games+2.4% vs expected
Mark Caradori + Greg Alford4161% gamesnot enough data
Charlie Trotman + Greg Alford2347% gamesnot enough data
Mitchell Powell + Brian Cone314 matchesnot enough data
James Armstrong + Greg Alford404 matchesnot enough data
Greg Alford + Edwin Hampton404 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
Brian Cone
31W–15L career · 8 lines in 2025
<1%45%55%
4.02
4
Harrison Campbell
56W–9L career · type A · 14 lines in 2025
<1%47%53%
4.01
4
Edwin Hampton
26W–17L career · 11 lines in 2025
<1%71%29%
3.93
Mitchell Powell
28W–8L career · 11 lines in 2025
<1%81%19%
3.89
Paul Winn
21W–8L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%81%19%
3.88
Mark Caradori
18W–6L career · 5 lines in 2025
<1%83%17%
3.88
4
Greg Alford
89W–45L career · 15 lines in 2025
1%89%10%
3.83
4
Clay Torbert
11W–2L career · 2 lines in 2025
5%93%1%
3.71
4
James Armstrong
23W–21L career · 11 lines in 2025
6%93%1%
3.70
4
Athar Tanveer
9W–14L career · 5 lines in 2025
49%51%<1%
3.50
4
Charlie Trotman
7W–16L career · 8 lines in 2025
63%37%<1%
3.46
3.5
David Loe
0W–2L career · 1 line 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.