Teams

Yadkin/Mays/Willow Creek/18+6.5

2026 Yadkin Valley Combo 18 & Over · Men 6.5 - Thursday Nights

7 players · average NTRP 2.83 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 upcoming · 2 played
Sep 10 6:30 PM
Willow Creek Clubhouse
Sep 17 6:30 PM
Brantley MaysDaneika Eaton
Sep 24 6:30 PM
Wake Forest University
Oct 1 6:30 PM
Wake Forest University
Oct 8 6:30 PM
Willow Creek Clubhouse
Oct 15 6:30 PM
Willow Creek Clubhouse
2026-08-20vs Yadkin/Clay/18+6.5 ComboLost 03
L#1 DoublesJim Caress / Matt Howell vs Chris Blankenship / Blake Suess2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesScott Hambright / Brantley Mays vs Logan Caldwell / Vance Faulkner4-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesEddie Scott / Ben Bailess vs Matt Crews / Adam Elledge6-4, 0-6, 0-1
2026-08-13vs Yadkin/Araujo-Howard/18+6.5Lost 03
L#1 DoublesJim Caress / Brantley Mays vs Daniel Lamanna / Manuel Gimeno Amoros4-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#2 DoublesEddie Scott / Caleb Evans vs Alex Djuro / Tyler Elseth4-6, 0-6
L#3 DoublesScott Hambright / Ben Bailess vs Paul Howard / Donavan Hylarides3-6, 4-6
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 standings4 teams · Men 6.5 - Thursday Nights
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Yadkin/Clay/18+6.5 Combo2060344
2Yadkin/Araujo-Howard/18+6.51030121
3Yadkin/Whitman/18+6.5 Combo0103636
4Yadkin/Mays/Willow Creek/18+6.502061270

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 3.09 estimated across 6 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.

3.50
Scott Hambright
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.48
Matt Howell
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.35
Jim Caress
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.27
Eddie Scott
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.49
Caleb Evans
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.43
Brantley Mays
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
Ben Bailess
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
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.

Brantley Mays + Matt Howell134 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.

Scott Hambright
2W–5L career · 2 lines in 2026
49%51%<1%
3.50
Matt Howell
5W–7L career · 1 line in 2026
57%43%<1%
3.48
Jim Caress
1W–7L career · 2 lines in 2026
85%15%<1%
3.35
Eddie Scott
2W–6L career · 2 lines in 2026
95%5%<1%
3.27
3
Caleb Evans
4W–6L career · type S · 1 line in 2026
53%47%<1%
2.49
3
Brantley Mays
1W–5L career · type S · 2 lines in 2026
70%30%<1%
2.43
2.5
Ben Bailess
0W–2L career · type S · 2 lines in 2026
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.