Teams

KY/BG/JONES

COMBO 40 & OVER · 7.5 MEN

7 players · average NTRP 3.75 / KENTUCKY

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 →
Schedule4 played
2024-09-22vs KY/HOP/WIMSATTWon 21
L#1 DoublesBrent Mason / Brad Hales vs Mark Nash / Jim Rodway3-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesJaxon Grover / Theodore Eysenbach vs Randy Mitchell / Richard Wimsatt6-3, 6-3
W#3 DoublesHank Campbell / Nate Harlan vs Gene Koch / James Almand6-1, 1-6, 1-0
2024-09-22vs KY/HOP/WIMSATTWon 20
W#1 DoublesBrent Mason / Brad Hales vs Jim Rodway / Mark Nash7-6, 7-6
W#2 DoublesJaxon Grover / Theodore Eysenbach vs Randy Mitchell / Richard Wimsatt6-2, 6-2
2024-09-08vs KY/HOP/WIMSATTSplit 11
W#1 DoublesBradley Jones / Kelly Jones vs Thomas Greene / Jim Rodway7-6, 7-5
L#2 DoublesHank Campbell / Nate Harlan vs Brian Wyatt / Jeffrey Fritts6-7, 5-7
2024-09-08vs KY/HOP/WIMSATTWon 20
W#1 DoublesKelly Jones / Hank Campbell vs Thomas Greene / Jeffrey Fritts7-6, 6-4
W#2 DoublesNate Harlan / Bradley Jones vs Brian Wyatt / Jim Rodway6-1, 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 · 7.5 MEN
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1KY/BG/JONES31849103
2KY/HOP/WIMSATT134816114

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 3.61 estimated across 7 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.

3.90
Bradley Jones
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.87
Brad Hales
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.81
Nate Harlan
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.72
Jaxon Grover
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.40
Theodore Eysenbach
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.37
Brent Mason
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.17
Hank Campbell
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · 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.

Jaxon Grover + Nate Harlan2543% gamesnot enough data
Brad Hales + Nate Harlan123 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
Bradley Jones
20W–6L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%77%23%
3.90
4
Brad Hales
7W–9L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%83%16%
3.87
Nate Harlan
10W–11L career · 3 lines in 2024
1%92%7%
3.81
Jaxon Grover
13W–10L career · 2 lines in 2024
4%94%2%
3.72
Theodore Eysenbach
7W–0L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%77%23%
3.40
3.5
Brent Mason
9W–2L career · 2 lines in 2024
<1%83%17%
3.37
3.5
Hank Campbell
10W–14L career · 3 lines in 2024
10%89%1%
3.17

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.