Teams

OC LLW Boot Camp - FVTC - Frank T - Sat3

2026 USTA Adult 55 & Over - OC · OC Men - 8.0

18 players · average NTRP 4.00 / SO.CALIFORNIA

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
W#2 DoublesJeffery Kam / Dao Ho vs Corey Rhodes / Ray Tang6-1, 7-5
W#2 DoublesJeffery Kam / Brian Richardson vs Gary Plumley / Stephen Sampson6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesCharles Klein / Hanh Pham vs Richard Fair / Russ Anno6-1, 6-3
W#2 DoublesCharles Klein / Binh Nguyen vs Robert Logan / Stephen Sampson6-0, 6-2
W#3 DoublesDavid Porte / Jeffery Kam vs Jeff McMichael / Ray Tang6-3, 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 standings for OC Men - 8.0 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 3.82 estimated across 13 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.

4.35
David Porte
published 4.5
4.34
Hyoungmoon Ki
published
4.13
Enrique Garcia
published
4.00
Charles Klein
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.98
Frank Tran
published
3.97
Brian Richardson
published 4.5
3.93
Linh Trinh
published
Bin Wu
published 4
Dao Ho
published 4
3.71
Jon Peabody
published
3.64
Jeffery Kam
usually #2 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.54
Hong Ye
published
3.42
Nam Kim
published
3.31
Placido MacAraeg
published
3.29
Mark Gross
published
Dean Kitano
published 3.5
Timothy Ching
published
shahram yazdanpanah
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.

Mark Gross + Jeffery Kam033 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.

4.5
David Porte
21W–3L career · no lines in 2026
1%85%14%
4.35
Hyoungmoon Ki
6W–0L career · no lines in 2026
1%86%13%
4.34
Enrique Garcia
13W–11L career · no lines in 2026
17%83%<1%
4.13
4
Charles Klein
68W–22L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%50%50%
4.00
Frank Tran
10W–16L career · no lines in 2026
55%45%<1%
3.98
4.5
Brian Richardson
8W–7L career · no lines in 2026
59%41%<1%
3.97
Linh Trinh
5W–1L career · no lines in 2026
<1%69%31%
3.93
4
Bin Wu
no matches on record · no lines in 2026
not enough data
4
Dao Ho
1W–2L career · type S · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Jon Peabody
23W–9L career · no lines in 2026
6%92%2%
3.71
3.5
Jeffery Kam
148W–117L career · type A · 5 lines in 2026
<1%16%84%
3.64
Hong Ye
19W–9L career · no lines in 2026
<1%40%60%
3.54
Nam Kim
10W–2L career · no lines in 2026
<1%72%28%
3.42
Placido MacAraeg
10W–6L career · no lines in 2026
1%90%8%
3.31
Mark Gross
28W–14L career · no lines in 2026
2%91%7%
3.29
3.5
Dean Kitano
2W–2L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Timothy Ching
4W–4L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
shahram yazdanpanah
6W–4L 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.