← Teams

MAC-Aguilar/Pitman

2019 Adult 18 & Over · 4.5 Men

6 players · average NTRP 4.33 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.82 estimated across 5 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.

—
Quintin Yray
published 4.5
4.02
Mike Easton
usually #2 Singles 88%, also #1 Singles 13% · published 4.5
3.96
Christopher Haddon
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 30% · published 4.5
3.93
Rodrigo Aguilar
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
3.63
James Ringelberg
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 4
3.57
Thomas Turnbull
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
Results11 ties
2019-07-20Lost 0–1
L#3 DoublesBrooke Burnett / Christopher Haddon vs Eric Le / Tamra Godfrey6-1, 6-2
2019-07-19Won 1–0
W#2 DoublesChristopher Haddon / Elise Orban vs Craig Schmid / Tonya Schmid6-1, 0-6, 1-0
2019-04-05Lost 1–2
L#1 DoublesCarson Hall / Christopher Haddon vs Brett Darrow / Steve Fogg7-6, 6-2
L#2 SinglesMike Easton vs Nam Cho7-6, 6-1
W#3 DoublesJoseph Remington / Rodrigo Aguilar vs Adam Buchwald / Todd Wilcox6-3, 5-7, 1-0
2019-03-30Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesChristopher Haddon / Carson Hall vs Keith Abel / Steve Bolstad6-4, 7-6
W#2 SinglesMike Easton vs Brandon Gross6-3, 6-1
W#3 DoublesMark Simpson / James Ringelberg vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2019-03-17Won 2–1
W#1 DoublesJoseph Remington / Christopher Haddon vs Anthony Nelson / Cord Speelman1-6, 7-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesCarson Hall / Rodrigo Aguilar vs Leo Han / Kyle Cavelti6-3, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 SinglesMike Easton vs John Heim6-4, 6-4
2019-02-02Won 3–1
W#1 DoublesRodrigo Aguilar / Carson Hall vs Cristian Crisan / Arya Naghdi6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesRyan Pitman / Thomas Turnbull vs N/A6-0, 6-0
L#2 SinglesMike Easton vs Nick Yazzolino6-4, 6-4
W#3 DoublesChristopher Haddon / Max Mooney vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2019-01-25Lost 1–3
L#1 DoublesMark Simpson / James Ringelberg vs Todd Klindt / Ian Pray7-5, 6-3
L#2 DoublesChristopher Haddon / Robert Prall vs Justin Greene / Chris Rivera7-6, 6-4
L#2 SinglesMike Easton vs Kristopher Celtnieks6-3, 3-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesCarson Hall / Rodrigo Aguilar vs Rudd McGarity / Adrien Leemin6-4, 6-2
2019-01-18Won 2–0
W#1 SinglesMike Easton vs Kofi Asare-Konadu6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesRodrigo Aguilar / Carson Hall vs Nathaniel Israel / Keisuke Komine6-3, 5-7, 1-0
2019-01-12Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesChristopher Haddon / Jim Young vs Steve Vanderploeg / Chris Fahlbusch7-6, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesRodrigo Aguilar / Carson Hall vs Butch Dela Cruz / Shane Peterman7-5, 6-0
W#2 SinglesMike Easton vs Yascha Noonberg7-5, 6-7, 1-0
2019-01-06Won 2–0
W#2 DoublesJoseph Remington / Christopher Haddon vs Ken Crowley / Benjamin Brewer6-2, 6-3
W#2 SinglesMike Easton vs Jason L Lemieux6-0, 6-1
2018-12-09Won 1–0
W#3 DoublesChristopher Haddon / Elise Orban vs Stefan Lagielski / Julie Atchley6-7, 6-1, 1-0
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.
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.

4.5
Quintin Yray
3W–7L career · type S
not enough data
—
4.5
Mike Easton
52W–45L career
16%84%0%
4.02
4.5
Christopher Haddon
39W–77L career
25%75%0%
3.96
4.5
Rodrigo Aguilar
37W–36L career
38%62%0%
3.93
4
James Ringelberg
73W–77L career
8%92%0%
3.63
4
Thomas Turnbull
86W–92L career
16%84%0%
3.57

Three percentages are the year-end projection — chance of moving down, staying, moving up — and the number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. 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.