Teams

CDTA W 18&OM3.5 2.MT Chi Brown Sun 12 $30

CDTA 2Winter 18 & Over W · E

18 players · average NTRP 3.62 / CHICAGO

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 →
Schedule5 played
L#2 DoublesMark Swantek / Jason Kowitt vs Jeffrey Porto / Keith Mills3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#1 SinglesMauricio Builes vs Misha Hanson3-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesMichael Chan / Jason Kowitt vs Thomas Huneck / Adam Yasinow7-6, 6-3
L#3 DoublesBrett Huelat / Joe Monge vs Arkadiusz Bryja / Segundo Auqui3-6, 3-6
L#2 SinglesMauricio Builes vs Joey Zhou1-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesJason Kowitt / Mark Swantek vs Dali Wang / Jay Huang0-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#1 DoublesCharlie Anderson / Joseph Guarascio vs Howard Wu / John Kim6-0, 6-7, 0-1
W#2 SinglesMauricio Builes vs Aldair Arriola Gomez2-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#3 DoublesMark Swantek / Jason Kowitt vs Richard Rykhus / Vytas Kasniunas6-4, 6-5
W#3 DoublesJason Kowitt / Charles Stone vs Steve Pautler / Scott Blue6-4, 7-6
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 standings10 teams · E
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1CDTA A18&O 3.5M Heritage Rustagi72311429321
2CDTA W 18&OM3.5 7.River Trails Ciuca Sat 6 $2572291637314
3CDTA W 18&OM3.5 3.Centennial Anderson Sat 5 $2072301538368
4CDTA W 18&OM3.5 5.Tam Rykhus Sun 11 $2254252047390
5CDTA W 18&OM3.5 2.MT Chi Brown Sun 12 $3045232252401
6CDTA W 18&OM3.5 4.Oak Lawn Noamany Sat 6 $2045212454387
7CDTA W 18&OM3.5 1.Schaumburg Zhou Sat 10 $2045202556412
8CDTA W 18&OM3.5 9.Wheaton Mills Sat 4 $2036172862439
9CDTA W 18&OM3.5 6.Centennial Lado Sat 1 $2027172860416
10CDTA W 18&OM3.5 10.MT Pal Korczak Sun 1 $2527123371479

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 3.48 estimated across 9 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.

Daniel Michael
published 4
3.65
Keith Sgariglia
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.63
Joseph Guarascio
usually #1 Singles 40%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
3.63
Nikhil Gaur
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 38% · published
3.59
Deuce Tu
published 3.5
3.55
Andrew Zens
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.45
Keith Boutell
usually #3 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 43% · published
3.32
Mark Swantek
published 3.5
3.31
Gene Fleischer
published 3.5
Brett Huelat
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
Charlie Anderson
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.21
Kedar Bhat
published 3.5
Jason Kowitt
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
Joe Monge
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Mauricio Builes
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published
Michael Costello
published
Robert Manuel
published
Scott Williamson
published
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.

Joseph Guarascio + Deuce Tu6362% games+7.2% vs expected
Kedar Bhat + Deuce Tu7753% games+6.3% vs expected
Kedar Bhat + Gene Fleischer5449% games+2.0% vs expected
Gene Fleischer + Deuce Tu9357% games+0.6% vs expected
Keith Sgariglia + Keith Boutell7650% games−6.6% vs expected
Gene Fleischer + Keith Sgariglia6551% gamesnot enough data
Gene Fleischer + Michael Costello4648% gamesnot enough data
Keith Sgariglia + Andrew Zens4448% gamesnot 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
Daniel Michael
25W–26L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Keith Sgariglia
82W–71L career · 6 lines in 2024
14%86%1%
3.65
Joseph Guarascio
41W–19L career · 5 lines in 2024
<1%17%83%
3.63
Nikhil Gaur
38W–17L career · 8 lines in 2024
<1%18%82%
3.63
3.5
Deuce Tu
65W–53L career · no lines in 2024
<1%25%75%
3.59
4
Andrew Zens
67W–53L career · 10 lines in 2024
37%63%<1%
3.55
Keith Boutell
78W–93L career · 7 lines in 2024
<1%64%36%
3.45
3.5
Mark Swantek
29W–30L career · no lines in 2024
1%89%10%
3.32
3.5
Gene Fleischer
82W–46L career · no lines in 2024
1%90%9%
3.31
3.5
Brett Huelat
9W–3L career · 2 lines in 2024
not enough data
3.5
Charlie Anderson
1W–4L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
3.5
Kedar Bhat
118W–128L career · no lines in 2024
6%92%2%
3.21
Jason Kowitt
4W–9L career · 5 lines in 2024
not enough data
Joe Monge
0W–1L career · 1 line in 2024
not enough data
Mauricio Builes
7W–7L career · 3 lines in 2024
not enough data
Michael Costello
20W–29L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Robert Manuel
8W–3L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Scott Williamson
17W–24L career · no lines in 2024
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.