Teams

KANDULA/40/5.5/CM/BREC

2026 BR Southern Combo 40 & Over - Men · 5.5 BR (40&O) Men

9 players · average NTRP 3.00 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule3 upcoming · 2 played
Sep 17 6:30 PM
Independence Park Tennis Center
Oct 1 6:30 PM
Highland Park Tennis Center
Oct 8 6:30 PM
BREC Forest Park Tennis Center
2026-09-10vs LADNIER/40/5.5/CM/BRECWon 21
W#1 DoublesChandra Kandula / Matt Davis vs Mauricio Toscano / Chris Patureau6-4, 6-4
L#2 DoublesSaleh Babazadeh / Paul Berniard vs James Mason / Jude Chenevert6-0, 5-7, 0-1
W#3 DoublesKristopher Schmoll / Matthew Tregre vs Scott Saporito / Felix Burch6-0, 6-3
2026-09-03vs LADNIER/40/5.5/CM/BRECWon 30
W#1 DoublesJonathan Travis / Matt Davis vs James Liford / Chris Patureau6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesKip Smith / Josh Yankowsky vs Randy Pastuszek / Russ Ladnier6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesChandra Kandula / Saleh Babazadeh vs Scott Saporito / David Mott6-2, 6-3
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 standings2 teams · 5.5 BR (40&O) Men
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1LADNIER/40/5.5/CM/BREC000000
2KANDULA/40/5.5/CM/BREC000000

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 2.62 estimated across 7 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.

3.05
Kip Smith
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.05
Jonathan Travis
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
2.76
Kristopher Schmoll
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Haridas Devadas
published 3
2.72
Chandra Kandula
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3
2.34
Saleh Babazadeh
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.20
Matthew Tregre
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.20
Josh Yankowsky
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Jonathan Kughn
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.

Chandra Kandula + Kip Smith2345% gamesnot enough data
Chandra Kandula + Kristopher Schmoll134 matchesnot enough data
Kip Smith + Jonathan Travis224 matchesnot enough data
Chandra Kandula + Jonathan Travis123 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.

Kip Smith
51W–50L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%35%65%
3.05
Jonathan Travis
17W–6L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%36%64%
3.05
Kristopher Schmoll
20W–24L career · 3 lines in 2026
2%94%3%
2.76
3
Haridas Devadas
0W–2L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
3
Chandra Kandula
45W–50L career · 5 lines in 2026
4%94%2%
2.72
Saleh Babazadeh
20W–32L career · 2 lines in 2026
0%89%11%
2.34
Matthew Tregre
14W–18L career · 1 line in 2026
0%99%1%
2.20
Josh Yankowsky
14W–14L career · 1 line in 2026
0%99%1%
2.20
Jonathan Kughn
5W–3L career · no lines 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.