Teams

Team 2 Who Is We? Flipper Grillers

2026 NOVA Tri-Level · NOVA Tri-Level 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 Men

18 players · average NTRP 3.54 / VIRGINIA

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
2026-08-26vs Team 4 Lord of the StringsSplit 11
W#1 DoublesRaghu Menon / Vipul Chawla vs Kenneth Kawahara / Etienne Beurier6-4, 6-2
L#3 DoublesRyan Kwon / Matthew Trimboli vs Shawn Cole / Fabian Mesa3-6, 0-6
W#1 DoublesVipul Chawla / Sandipp Rou Perepu vs Jesse Cebulash / Kazi Hassan6-2, 6-3
W#3 DoublesBenoit Kroely / Alberto Gutierrez Medina vs Jongchan Kim / Erik Stang6-4, 1-6, 1-0
2026-08-22vs Team 9 FDPWon 20
W#2 DoublesHanlun Song / Nathan Chow vs FENG LI / Frank Wang6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesRyan Kwon / Alberto Gutierrez Medina vs Michael Chen / Wei Lu6-0, 6-1
2026-08-19vs Team 7 WolvesWon 20
W#1 DoublesDaniel Jones / Vipul Chawla vs Kaiwen Sun / Warren Chen4-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#3 DoublesMatthew Adedeji / Alberto Gutierrez Medina vs Tianshu Xiao / Meng-chien Su6-2, 6-0
2026-08-03vs Team 3 Tiger Balm TriWon 30
W#1 DoublesDaniel Jones / Vipul Chawla vs Neil Cruz / Keshav Goyal4-6, 6-1, 1-0
W#2 DoublesRohit Munjal / Hanlun Song vs Jaehong Park / Calvin Cheng6-3, 6-2
W#3 DoublesMatthew Adedeji / Ryan Kwon vs Andre Mallqui / Jon Veasey-Deters6-3, 6-2
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 standings9 teams · NOVA Tri-Level 4.0, 3.5, 3.0 Men
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Team 5 Net Assets2051343
2Team 4 Lord of the Strings2042446
3Team 2 Who Is We? Flipper Grillers1030117
4Team 8 Net Dominators Rabbit Grillers1133644
5Team 3 Tiger Balm Tri1124858
6Team 9 FDP12361287
7Team 1 Belle Haven Tri-Level0112428
8Team 7 Wolves0112432
9Team 6 Challengers0224657

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 3.57 estimated across 16 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.

4.13
Hung Huynh
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
4.06
Raghu Menon
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
4.00
Sandipp Rou Perepu
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.96
Vipul Chawla
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.94
Anand Rajeswaran
published 4
3.83
Hanlun Song
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
Daniel Jones
published 4
3.75
Mike Ly
published 4
3.67
Kevin Hill
published
3.52
Brandon Wales
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.49
Nathan Chow
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.34
Matthew Adedeji
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.28
Benoit Kroely
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
Rohit Munjal
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.14
Matthew Trimboli
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
3.13
Alberto Gutierrez Medina
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
3.08
Ryan Kwon
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.82
Brian Lochhead
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.

Matthew Trimboli + Benoit Kroely4260% games+7.5% vs expected
Brandon Wales + Hanlun Song4164% games+3.5% vs expected
Sandipp Rou Perepu + Benoit Kroely7170% gamesnot enough data
Brian Lochhead + Benoit Kroely4259% gamesnot enough data
Sandipp Rou Perepu + Vipul Chawla5063% gamesnot enough data
Hanlun Song + Mike Ly5074% gamesnot enough data
Vipul Chawla + Rohit Munjal404 matchesnot enough data
Alberto Gutierrez Medina + Benoit Kroely404 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.

Hung Huynh
24W–9L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%17%83%
4.13
Raghu Menon
64W–31L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%33%67%
4.06
4
Sandipp Rou Perepu
133W–67L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%50%50%
4.00
4
Vipul Chawla
88W–33L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%61%39%
3.96
4
Anand Rajeswaran
27W–56L career · no lines in 2026
<1%67%33%
3.94
3.5
Hanlun Song
159W–45L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%1%99%
3.83
4
Daniel Jones
4W–11L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
4
Mike Ly
229W–89L career · no lines in 2026
4%93%4%
3.75
Kevin Hill
59W–14L career · no lines in 2026
<1%11%89%
3.67
3.5
Brandon Wales
65W–28L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%45%55%
3.52
Nathan Chow
13W–4L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%53%47%
3.49
Matthew Adedeji
11W–1L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%1%99%
3.34
3
Benoit Kroely
96W–41L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%2%98%
3.28
3.5
Rohit Munjal
151W–47L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
3
Matthew Trimboli
119W–61L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%16%84%
3.14
3
Alberto Gutierrez Medina
14W–5L career · type S · 3 lines in 2026
<1%17%83%
3.13
Ryan Kwon
11W–2L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%28%72%
3.08
3
Brian Lochhead
34W–23L career · type S · no lines in 2026
1%89%10%
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.