Teams

WI Tri-Level Mid Men NEL Western Terry

2026 WI Tri Level · WI Tri-Level Mid Doubles Men

9 players · average NTRP 3.75 / WISCONSIN

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
L#1 DoublesJacques Verbauwhede / Zach Janssen vs Adam Hawley / Robert Downey3-6, 5-7
L#1 DoublesLorenzo Verniani / Zach Janssen vs Adam Hawley / Robert Downey3-6, 2-6
L#1 DoublesJayden Wartman / Tanner Belschner vs Adam Hawley / Nathan Barash4-6, 2-6
L#1 DoublesJayden Wartman / Tanner Belschner vs Nathan Barash / Adam Hawley6-7, 5-7
L#1 DoublesJayden Wartman / Daniel Wickman vs Nathan Barash / Robert Downey2-6, 6-7
L#1 DoublesJacques Verbauwhede / Jayden Wartman vs Robert Downey / Adam Hawley0-6, 1-6
W#1 DoublesZach Janssen / Jayden Wartman vs Adam Hawley / Nathan Barash6-1
W#1 DoublesZach Janssen / Jayden Wartman vs Adam Hawley / Christopher Jumes6-4, 7-5
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 WI Tri-Level Mid Doubles 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 3.61 estimated across 6 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.

3.81
Daniel Wickman
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.79
Jacques Verbauwhede
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.69
Tanner Belschner
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.47
Andrew Terry
usually #3 Doubles 55%, also #2 Doubles 36% · published 3.5
3.46
Tom Leggett
usually #1 Doubles 69%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.43
Ross Mollet
usually #3 Doubles 63%, also #2 Doubles 38% · published
Ethan Hoag
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
Jayden Wartman
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Zach Janssen
usually #1 Doubles 100% · 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.

Jacques Verbauwhede + Daniel Wickman5257% games+10.5% vs expected
Jacques Verbauwhede + Andrew Terry5361% gamesnot enough data
Jacques Verbauwhede + Tom Leggett4348% gamesnot enough data
Andrew Terry + Ross Mollet404 matchesnot enough data
Andrew Terry + Ethan Hoag404 matchesnot enough data
Jacques Verbauwhede + Ethan Hoag213 matchesnot enough data
Ross Mollet + Ethan Hoag303 matchesnot enough data
Tom Leggett + Ethan Hoag213 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
Daniel Wickman
25W–13L career · 6 lines in 2026
1%90%8%
3.81
Jacques Verbauwhede
69W–45L career · 16 lines in 2026
2%92%6%
3.79
Tanner Belschner
3W–6L career · 2 lines in 2026
8%90%1%
3.69
3.5
Andrew Terry
56W–28L career · 11 lines in 2026
<1%58%42%
3.47
Tom Leggett
33W–51L career · 16 lines in 2026
60%40%<1%
3.46
Ross Mollet
28W–8L career · 8 lines in 2026
<1%69%31%
3.43
Ethan Hoag
29W–17L career · 14 lines in 2026
not enough data
Jayden Wartman
2W–8L career · 6 lines in 2026
not enough data
Zach Janssen
22W–4L career · 4 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.