Teams

McCloud/18/2.5-3-3.5/TM/BTC

2026 Shrev-Boss Tri-Level 18 & Over - Men · 3.5,3.0,2.5 Shrev

15 players · average NTRP 3.12 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2026-08-05vs Sumner/18/2.5-3-3.5/TM/QTCWon 21
W#1 DoublesJamie Pipes / Austin Hedges vs Dwain Turnley / Steven Anderson6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesPatrick Hannon / Chris Thiels vs Lance Johnson / Ryan Stehr6-2, 6-2
L#3 DoublesMatt Hollowell / Jeremy Taylor vs Matthew Given / William Whited4-6, 1-6
2026-07-29vs Ashton/18/2.5,3,3.5/TM/BTCWon 21
L#1 DoublesJamie Pipes / David Wilkes vs James Hatfield / Michael Mazur3-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesCody Lenert / Patrick Hannon vs Clay ALLEN / Brady Chance6-1, 6-2
W#3 DoublesMatt Hollowell / John Walker vs Randy Davidson / John Davis6-0, 6-3
2026-07-22vs Bennett/18/2.5-3-3.5/TM/CTCLost 12
L#1 DoublesDaniel Brignac / Lee Daville vs Anthony Jeter / Timothy Miles6-2, 0-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesChris Thiels / Craig McCloud vs Robert Burleson / ShaMaurian Lindsey6-2, 4-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesTravis Estess / Justin Sain vs Michael Bennett / David Kendjie1-6, 0-6
2026-07-08vs Wood/18/2.5-3-3.5/TM/BTCLost 12
L#1 DoublesChris Tilley / Austin Hedges vs Ryan Grisso / Tim Stuart2-6, 5-7
L#2 DoublesCody Lenert / Craig McCloud vs Erik Luttkus / Isaac Thomas1-6, 7-5, 0-1
W#3 DoublesTravis Estess / Matt Hollowell vs Jake Wood / Chad Boudreau6-3, 7-5
2026-06-24vs Bryn/18/3-3.5-4/TM/STCCLost 12
L#1 DoublesDaniel Brignac / Austin Hedges vs Jon Bryn / Daniel Moore6-4, 2-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesWilliam Coats / Patrick Hannon vs Zachary Gifford / Eric Lang6-2, 6-2
L#3 DoublesMatt Hollowell / Justin Sain vs Patrick Gooszen / Stacy Hooper3-6, 5-7
2026-06-17vs Haynie/18/2.5-3.0-3.5/TM/POTCWon 21
W#1 DoublesJamie Pipes / Lee Daville vs Boothe Dugan / Carter Culverhouse6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesCody Lenert / Craig McCloud vs Byron Landon / Jeffery Hebert7-5, 6-4
L#3 DoublesTravis Estess / Justin Sain vs Brandon Gautreau / Drew Verner3-6, 3-6
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 standings7 teams · 3.5,3.0,2.5 Shrev
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Bennett/18/2.5-3-3.5/TM/CTC5112615121
2Bryn/18/2.5-3-3.5/TM/STCC4210818161
3Wood/18/2.5-3-3.5/TM/BTC4210822177
4Haynie/18/2.5-3.0-3.5/TM/POTC3310817140
5McCloud/18/2.5-3-3.5/TM/BTC339919152
6Sumner/18/2.5-3-3.5/TM/QTC1561225183
7Ashton/18/2.5,3,3.5/TM/BTC1561227188

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 3.01 estimated across 15 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.

3.51
Chris Tilley
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.44
Daniel Brignac
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.44
Jamie Pipes
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.31
Chris Thiels
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
3.24
Austin Hedges
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.24
Lee Daville
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.16
Cody Lenert
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
3.05
William Coats
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.05
Patrick Hannon
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.96
Brian Bouillon
published 3
2.91
Craig McCloud
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.74
Matt Hollowell
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.54
Caleb Pipes
published 2.5
2.24
Justin Sain
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.24
Travis Estess
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Chris Thiels + Craig McCloud5072% games+18.6% vs expected
Patrick Hannon + Cody Lenert5077% games+13.9% vs expected
Jamie Pipes + Austin Hedges2348% gamesnot enough data
Patrick Hannon + William Coats404 matchesnot enough data
Lee Daville + Brian Bouillon404 matchesnot enough data
Chris Tilley + Daniel Brignac123 matchesnot enough data
Jamie Pipes + Daniel Brignac213 matchesnot enough data
Jamie Pipes + Caleb Pipes213 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
Chris Tilley
17W–9L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%48%52%
3.51
3.5
Daniel Brignac
22W–24L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%65%35%
3.44
Jamie Pipes
39W–29L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%65%35%
3.44
3
Chris Thiels
40W–14L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%1%99%
3.31
3.5
Austin Hedges
26W–21L career · 3 lines in 2026
4%93%3%
3.24
Lee Daville
28W–4L career · 2 lines in 2026
4%92%3%
3.24
3
Cody Lenert
24W–5L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%12%88%
3.16
William Coats
53W–19L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%36%64%
3.05
Patrick Hannon
31W–5L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%37%63%
3.05
3
Brian Bouillon
29W–5L career · no lines in 2026
<1%61%39%
2.96
3
Craig McCloud
41W–48L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%74%26%
2.91
Matt Hollowell
32W–17L career · 4 lines in 2026
0%5%95%
2.74
2.5
Caleb Pipes
24W–14L career · no lines in 2026
0%38%62%
2.54
Justin Sain
3W–18L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%97%3%
2.24
Travis Estess
13W–32L career · 3 lines in 2026
0%97%3%
2.24

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.