Teams

Matherne 18/5.5/M/N.CYPRESS

2025 Man · Cov Southern Combo 18 & Over - Men

10 players · average NTRP 3.00 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2025-09-13Won 10
W#1 DoublesJared Matherne / Connor Seale vs Luis Angel Perez Roman / Philip Qualls6-1, 6-2
2025-09-03vs Tusa 18/5.5/M/TchefunctaWon 10
W#3 DoublesConnor Seale / Alan Cox vs Jordan Nash / Nathaniel Parks6-0, 6-3
2025-08-23Won 10
W#2 DoublesJohn Ross Donnes / Connor Seale vs Nathan Naquin / Karl Schulze7-5, 4-6, 1-0
2025-08-16Lost 01
L#1 DoublesCaleb Morse / Connor Seale vs Evan Bailey / Ryan Bailey6-4, 4-6, 0-1
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 Cov Southern Combo 18 & Over - 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 2.83 estimated across 3 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.

3.14
Danny Wells
usually #2 Doubles 46%, also #1 Doubles 39% · published 3.5
2.78
Caleb Mcdonald
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 3
Andrew Killebrew
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
Caleb Morse
usually #3 Doubles 53%, also #2 Doubles 27% · published 3
2.57
Connor Seale
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 2.5
Jared Matherne
usually #1 Doubles 46%, also #2 Doubles 35% · published
Jean Paul Templet
usually #1 Doubles 44%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
John Ross Donnes
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 30% · published
Trey Caswell
usually #1 Doubles 35%, also #2 Doubles 35% · published
Tyler Crochet
usually #1 Doubles 42%, also #2 Doubles 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.

Tyler Crochet + Danny Wells11462% gamesnot enough data
John Ross Donnes + Tyler Crochet4164% gamesnot enough data
John Ross Donnes + Connor Seale2348% gamesnot enough data
Caleb Morse + Tyler Crochet213 matchesnot enough data
Jared Matherne + Trey Caswell213 matchesnot enough data
Danny Wells + Caleb Mcdonald213 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
Danny Wells
24W–13L career · 26 lines in 2025
16%84%1%
3.14
3
Caleb Mcdonald
15W–17L career · 14 lines in 2025
2%92%6%
2.78
3
Andrew Killebrew
3W–1L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
3
Caleb Morse
6W–9L career · 15 lines in 2025
not enough data
2.5
Connor Seale
10W–12L career · type S · 4 lines in 2025
0%32%68%
2.57
Jared Matherne
30W–11L career · 26 lines in 2025
not enough data
Jean Paul Templet
6W–7L career · 9 lines in 2025
not enough data
John Ross Donnes
12W–8L career · 10 lines in 2025
not enough data
Trey Caswell
25W–14L career · 22 lines in 2025
not enough data
Tyler Crochet
47W–22L career · 36 lines in 2025
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.