Teams

JMontague-DUR

2026 Eno River Singles 18 & Over · 18 & Over Singles 3.5 Men Evening

6 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2026-07-01vs JPobst-DURLost 01
L#1 SinglesArash Chehrazi vs Jackson Freeman2-6, 4-6
2026-06-24vs DWork-SVCWon 20
W#1 SinglesArash Chehrazi vs Kobi Talma6-4, 6-1
W#2 SinglesMontgomery Fletcher vs Aaron Westrick6-3, 6-4
2026-06-17vs EChen-UNCWon 30
W#1 SinglesConor Kregecz vs Eamonn Lanigan7-5, 7-6
W#2 SinglesMichael Ratliff vs Eric Shen7-5, 6-4
W#3 SinglesMontgomery Fletcher vs Stuart Beeson6-3, 6-4
2026-06-10vs TKharva-DURWon 10
W#2 SinglesArash Chehrazi vs Joshua Hunter6-1, 6-2
2026-06-03vs JByrd-NCCUWon 30
W#1 SinglesConor Kregecz vs Jameson Blount6-0, 6-2
W#2 SinglesMichael Ratliff vs Galen Howlett6-4, 6-4
W#3 SinglesArash Chehrazi vs Monty Gaither6-2, 6-3
2026-05-27vs RDowling-HRSplit 11
W#1 SinglesConor Kregecz vs Rory Dowling6-3, 6-0
L#2 SinglesJAMES MONTAGUE vs Mark Fossum5-7, 3-6
2026-05-13vs RNair-DURSplit 11
L#1 SinglesConor Kregecz vs Behram Jamaspi5-7, 6-7
W#2 SinglesMontgomery Fletcher vs Kirill Kochkin3-6, 6-3, 1-0
2026-05-06vs VVerdier-DURWon 20
W#1 SinglesArash Chehrazi vs Jacob McLennan7-5, 6-1
W#2 SinglesConor Kregecz vs Valentin Verdier6-1, 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 18 & Over Singles 3.5 Men Evening 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 3.42 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.

3.60
Conor Kregecz
usually #1 Singles 80%, also #2 Singles 20% · published 3.5
3.51
Montgomery Fletcher
usually #2 Singles 67%, also #3 Singles 33% · published
3.48
Michael Ratliff
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
3.36
JAMES MONTAGUE
usually #2 Singles 100% · published
3.33
Arash Chehrazi
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #3 Singles 20% · published 3.5
3.26
Ethan Holston
usually #3 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · 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.

Michael Ratliff + Montgomery Fletcher123 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
Conor Kregecz
69W–28L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%25%75%
3.60
Montgomery Fletcher
26W–17L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%47%53%
3.51
Michael Ratliff
23W–20L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%56%44%
3.48
JAMES MONTAGUE
17W–28L career · 1 line in 2026
1%84%15%
3.36
3.5
Arash Chehrazi
87W–56L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%87%12%
3.33
Ethan Holston
3W–7L career · 3 lines in 2026
3%92%4%
3.26

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.