Teams

EFSC - Campbell

2026 Brevard Combo 18 & Over · 6.5 Men

9 players · average NTRP 3.33 / REGION_4

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2026-08-27vs Kiwi - BurkeWon 30
W#1 DoublesJamin Campbell / Cameron Evans vs Thomas Hargrove / Noel Donaghey7-6, 5-7, 1-0
W#2 DoublesEdward Jones / James Pretorius vs Bill Jordan / Christoper Moore7-5, 6-4
W#3 DoublesBrent Traina / David Charitat vs David Norris / Mark Redmon6-1, 4-6, 1-0
2026-08-13vs Rockledge - TullochWon 10
W#1 DoublesJamin Campbell / James Pretorius vs Mathew Deater / Mark Craig6-4, 7-5
2026-08-09vs Fee - MatiasWon 30
W#1 DoublesJamin Campbell / James Pretorius vs Rodrigo Gustavo Martins Vieira / James Dovell6-2, 6-0
W#2 DoublesRob Barham / Ellery Canlas vs Ives Antonio Caldeira Guedes / Ricardo Chicarino6-0, 6-0
W#3 DoublesBrent Traina / Edward Jones vs Rodrigo Matias / Fabio Raboneze6-1, 6-1
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 6.5 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 3.17 estimated across 8 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.

3.36
Cameron Evans
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.35
Rob Barham
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.32
James Pretorius
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.16
Vincent Vo
published
3.14
Jamin Campbell
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.13
Brent Traina
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.03
Edward Jones
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
2.86
Ellery Canlas
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
David Charitat
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
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.

Rob Barham + Vincent Vo224 matchesnot enough data
James Pretorius + Jamin Campbell303 matchesnot enough data
Brent Traina + Jamin Campbell213 matchesnot enough data
Jamin Campbell + Cameron Evans303 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.

3.5
Cameron Evans
15W–1L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%83%16%
3.36
Rob Barham
12W–8L career · 1 line in 2026
1%86%13%
3.35
James Pretorius
38W–16L career · 4 lines in 2026
1%89%10%
3.32
Vincent Vo
15W–6L career · no lines in 2026
13%86%1%
3.16
Jamin Campbell
16W–5L career · 2 lines in 2026
16%84%1%
3.14
3.5
Brent Traina
9W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
17%82%<1%
3.13
Edward Jones
9W–13L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%41%59%
3.03
Ellery Canlas
13W–12L career · 1 line in 2026
1%84%16%
2.86
3
David Charitat
4W–0L career · 1 line 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.