Teams

Soh - Game Changers

2025 Montgomery Combo Fall · Montgomery Combo Fall 7.5 Men

11 players · average NTRP 3.30 / MARYLAND

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2025-11-15vs Fung - RPMSplit 11
W#1 DoublesJohnson Yoo / Na Kim vs Matthew Bent / Kurubel Asgedom6-3, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJin Soh / Jaeseong Lee vs Kameron Hnath / Chung-Kai Hsiao6-3, 3-6, 0-1
2025-11-03vs Chen - Grins and GigglesLost 01
L#2 DoublesJin Soh / Jaeil Ahn vs Ce Charles Li / Hanlun Song4-6, 2-6
2025-10-25vs McKeon - DefendersWon 10
W#2 DoublesNa Kim / Paul Song vs Joe Iosue / Hugo Frega6-2, 7-6
2025-10-19vs Wolf - Sultans of SwingWon 10
W#3 DoublesJin Soh / Na Kim vs Chris Odell / Xavier Ona6-3, 6-3
2025-10-10vs Zhang - Les BallersSplit 11
L#2 DoublesJin Soh / Jin-Gu Lee vs Max Wang / Shubo Zhang2-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesJaeil Ahn / Na Kim vs Jian Liu / Jim Zhang6-4, 6-4
2025-10-04vs Fung - RPMWon 10
W#2 DoublesJin Soh / Jaeseong Lee vs Kameron Hnath / Isaac Lai6-2, 6-3
2025-09-29vs Chen - Grins and GigglesWon 10
W#2 DoublesYong Ryu / Jin Soh vs Fengji Zhang / Ce Charles Li6-3, 7-6
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 Montgomery Combo Fall 7.5 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 3.30 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.

3.71
Johnson Yoo
published
3.62
Yong Ryu
published
3.54
Jeeho Lee
published
3.40
Jin-Gu Lee
published
3.36
Na Kim
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.28
Jaeil Ahn
published 3.5
3.27
Jin Soh
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.22
Paul Song
published
3.11
Young Seung Kim
published
2.96
Jaeseong Lee
published 3
2.82
Insung Kang
published 3
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.

Young Seung Kim + Insung Kang2446% games+9.2% vs expected
Jin Soh + Yong Ryu4155% games+1.3% vs expected
Jin Soh + Young Seung Kim123 matchesnot enough data
Jin Soh + Jin-Gu Lee213 matchesnot enough data
Jaeseong Lee + Johnson Yoo213 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.

Johnson Yoo
11W–10L career · no lines in 2025
5%94%1%
3.71
Yong Ryu
5W–9L career · no lines in 2025
19%81%<1%
3.62
Jeeho Lee
7W–8L career · no lines in 2025
38%62%<1%
3.54
Jin-Gu Lee
8W–6L career · no lines in 2025
<1%78%21%
3.40
3.5
Na Kim
19W–8L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%85%14%
3.36
3.5
Jaeil Ahn
10W–11L career · no lines in 2025
2%94%4%
3.28
3.5
Jin Soh
58W–47L career · 6 lines in 2025
2%94%4%
3.27
Paul Song
13W–15L career · no lines in 2025
4%94%2%
3.22
Young Seung Kim
5W–8L career · no lines in 2025
21%79%<1%
3.11
3
Jaeseong Lee
4W–3L career · type S · no lines in 2025
<1%61%39%
2.96
3
Insung Kang
2W–8L career · no lines in 2025
1%91%9%
2.82

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.