Teams

HMTC

2021 CTA TWILIGHT - NOCO · MEN 4.5 - TWILIGHT - NOCO

7 players · average NTRP 4.50 / COLORADO

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 →
Schedule6 played
2021-09-02vs LVTA REDWon 10
W#2 DoublesScott Schaffer / Todd Rosenzweig vs Christian Muna / Craig Stirn7-6, 6-3
2021-08-26vs CSU GOLDSplit 11
W#1 DoublesWes Marlan / Doug Ruffin vs Matt Krammer / Seth Krammer7-5, 6-2
L#2 DoublesKevin Ellis / Todd Rosenzweig vs Connor Clancy / Casey Krammer4-6, 3-6
2021-08-19vs FCCCLost 01
L#1 DoublesJohn Flynn / Scott Schaffer vs Shawn Farnell / Tom Weller1-6, 2-6
2021-08-12vs LVTA WHITELost 02
L#1 DoublesScott Schaffer / Doug Ruffin vs Ian McCusker / Jonathan Lumpkin4-6, 6-2, 0-1
L#2 DoublesKevin Ellis / Ryan Brownhill vs Jameson Lumpkin / John Behm5-7, 6-4, 0-1
2021-08-05vs LVTA BLUEWon 21
W#1 DoublesJohn Flynn / Doug Ruffin vs Nikolas Bote / Patrick OShea3-6, 7-6, 1-0
L#1 SinglesKevin Ellis vs Joshua Fields3-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#2 DoublesScott Schaffer / Chris Bailey vs Wayne Snyder / Terry Fine6-1, 6-0
2021-08-03vs CSU GREENWon 10
W#1 DoublesKevin Ellis / Doug Ruffin vs Michael Boyle / Michael Dirvonas6-1, 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 standings for MEN 4.5 - TWILIGHT - NOCO 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 4.29 estimated across 5 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.

4.36
Doug Ruffin
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.36
Kevin Ellis
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.26
Scott Schaffer
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.25
Ryan Brownhill
published
4.24
Todd Rosenzweig
published
John Flynn
published
Wes Marlan
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.

Doug Ruffin + Scott Schaffer7165% games+10.4% vs expected
Doug Ruffin + Kevin Ellis10561% games+7.4% vs expected
Wes Marlan + Scott Schaffer14163% games+5.4% vs expected
Kevin Ellis + Scott Schaffer13657% games−5.2% vs expected
Kevin Ellis + Todd Rosenzweig314 matchesnot enough data
Kevin Ellis + Ryan Brownhill123 matchesnot enough data
Scott Schaffer + Ryan Brownhill303 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
Doug Ruffin
61W–28L career · 4 lines in 2021
<1%85%15%
4.36
4.5
Kevin Ellis
73W–39L career · 4 lines in 2021
<1%86%13%
4.36
4.5
Scott Schaffer
97W–40L career · 4 lines in 2021
2%94%3%
4.26
Ryan Brownhill
7W–10L career · no lines in 2021
3%95%3%
4.25
Todd Rosenzweig
11W–6L career · no lines in 2021
3%95%2%
4.24
John Flynn
0W–2L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
Wes Marlan
15W–4L career · no lines in 2021
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.