Teams

ACAC Richman

2023 Richmond Tri-Level 18 & Over Weeknight · Richmond Tri-Level 4.5, 4.0, 3.5 Men

13 players · average NTRP 3.80 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2023-10-25Lost 01
L#1 DoublesEn-Tien Chen / Jason Voigt vs Ryan Baker / Todd Prince5-7, 6-4, 0-1
2023-10-11vs Woodlake EstesLost 01
L#1 DoublesJason Voigt / En-Tien Chen vs Chris Grinnell / Renato Mendoza3-6, 0-6
2023-09-27vs MAC Snow (4.5)Lost 01
L#1 DoublesJason Voigt / Scott Kim vs Eric Spivack / Marsh Baker3-6, 3-6
2023-09-06vs Magnolia Green Sebetic / GruhlLost 01
L#1 DoublesJason Voigt / Scott Kim vs Logan Gruhl / Colin Mudrick3-6, 0-6
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 standings for Richmond Tri-Level 4.5, 4.0, 3.5 Men have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 3.61 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.

4.02
Jason Voigt
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.01
Scott Kim
published
3.92
En-Tien Chen
published
3.79
Miguel Romero
published
3.77
Keith Adams
published
3.75
Chris Naughton
published 4
3.68
Eddie Kim
published
3.56
Jonathan Brew
published
3.53
Doug Okay
published
3.33
David Aschheim
published 3.5
3.31
Jeff Richman
published
3.26
Benjamin Andrews
published 3.5
2.99
Brian Premock
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.

Scott Kim + Jason Voigt123 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
Jason Voigt
75W–93L career · 4 lines in 2023
45%55%<1%
4.02
Scott Kim
4W–19L career · no lines in 2023
48%52%<1%
4.01
En-Tien Chen
8W–1L career · no lines in 2023
<1%72%28%
3.92
Miguel Romero
28W–32L career · no lines in 2023
2%91%7%
3.79
Keith Adams
15W–11L career · no lines in 2023
3%92%5%
3.77
4
Chris Naughton
8W–9L career · no lines in 2023
4%93%3%
3.75
Eddie Kim
30W–8L career · no lines in 2023
<1%10%90%
3.68
Jonathan Brew
6W–7L career · no lines in 2023
33%67%<1%
3.56
Doug Okay
5W–12L career · no lines in 2023
40%60%<1%
3.53
3.5
David Aschheim
16W–7L career · no lines in 2023
1%87%12%
3.33
Jeff Richman
5W–8L career · no lines in 2023
91%9%<1%
3.31
3.5
Benjamin Andrews
3W–10L career · no lines in 2023
3%93%4%
3.26
3.5
Brian Premock
5W–7L career · no lines in 2023
52%48%<1%
2.99

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.