Teams

A9 Avalon George

2023 Richmond Adult 18 & Over Weeknight Men · Richmond Adult 18 & Over 4.0 Men

12 players · average NTRP 3.42 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2023-06-08vs A2 Salisbury RileyLost 01
L#2 DoublesNicholas Grainger / Brent Belding vs Ken Riehm / Joseph West2-6, 2-6
2023-05-25vs A7 acac Advantage Stephens 4.0Lost 01
L#2 DoublesNicholas Grainger / Matthew Luchsinger vs Charlie Wilson / Sanjay Srinivasan4-6, 3-6
2023-05-18vs A5 ACAC BardaroWon 10
W#3 DoublesMatthew Luchsinger / Nicholas Grainger vs Jesse Smith / John Delisio2-6, 6-2, 1-0
2023-05-04vs A10 MTC FusterWon 10
W#2 DoublesNicholas Grainger / Dan Plant vs Yalier Fuster / Julius Javellana6-4, 6-1
2023-04-27vs A8 Woodlake KroosLost 01
L#3 DoublesNicholas Grainger / Matthew Luchsinger vs Wieslaw Gumulak / Samuel Mauldin2-6, 0-6
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 standings for Richmond Adult 18 & Over 4.0 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 3.31 estimated across 11 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.

3.58
Nicholas Grainger
usually #1 Singles 36%, also #3 Doubles 27% · published 3.5
3.55
Matthew Lefkowitz
published
3.44
Robert Calhoun
published
3.44
Andrew Armstrong
published 3.5
3.39
Brent Belding
published 3.5
3.37
Gabriel Ghita
published 3.5
3.31
Scott Boyle
published
3.27
Chris Broaddus
published 3.5
3.18
Matthew Luchsinger
published
2.99
Glenn Mizrach
published
2.93
Beverly Clary
published 3
Satya Ravva
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.

Gabriel Ghita + Robert Calhoun7163% games+5.6% vs expected
Gabriel Ghita + Nicholas Grainger314 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
Nicholas Grainger
108W–50L career · 11 lines in 2023
<1%28%72%
3.58
Matthew Lefkowitz
1W–3L career · no lines in 2023
37%63%<1%
3.55
Robert Calhoun
27W–15L career · no lines in 2023
<1%66%34%
3.44
3.5
Andrew Armstrong
7W–4L career · no lines in 2023
<1%68%32%
3.44
3.5
Brent Belding
15W–9L career · no lines in 2023
<1%78%22%
3.39
3.5
Gabriel Ghita
136W–77L career · no lines in 2023
<1%83%17%
3.37
Scott Boyle
18W–16L career · no lines in 2023
1%90%9%
3.31
3.5
Chris Broaddus
5W–3L career · no lines in 2023
3%92%5%
3.27
Matthew Luchsinger
9W–16L career · no lines in 2023
10%89%1%
3.18
Glenn Mizrach
12W–28L career · no lines in 2023
<1%52%48%
2.99
3
Beverly Clary
6W–9L career · no lines in 2023
<1%69%31%
2.93
Satya Ravva
1W–4L career · no lines in 2023
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.