Teams

SFV-Porter Valley CC/Susan Goss

2025 SoCal Doubles 18 SFV Fall WE · SFV 18 WEEKEND - Men 4.5

12 players · average NTRP 4.25 / 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 →
Schedule2 played
2025-10-26vs SFV-LLW-Balboa/Ik Jun/Joe ChanLost 12
L#1 DoublesSteve Felsen / Neil Patak vs Sebastien Damas / Daniel Gold3-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesSteve Kim / Jeff Bailes vs David Castillo / Kevin Ng6-4, 1-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesShane Duffy / Kent Goss vs Ik Jun / Gene Park6-7, 3-6
2025-10-05vs SFV-LLW-Balboa/Ik Jun/Joe ChanWon 21
L#1 DoublesNeil Patak / Evan Press vs Conrad Chilcott / Daniel Gold4-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesShane Duffy / Jay Jackson vs Ashish Bangar / Solomon Daud6-1, 6-4
W#3 DoublesRaman Sain / Steve Felsen vs Brandon Su / Derrick Perry2-6, 6-3, 1-0
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 SFV 18 WEEKEND - Men 4.5 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 3.91 estimated across 7 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.

Alan Esguerra
published 4.5
4.22
Jay Jackson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
4.12
Dhruv Sareen
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.98
Chad Fenwick
published 4
3.83
Shane Duffy
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.78
Neil Patak
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.73
Shyam Markus
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.68
Evan Press
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Jeff Bailes
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Kent Goss
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Raman Sain
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Steve Felsen
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · 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.

Jay Jackson + Shane Duffy123 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
Alan Esguerra
0W–1L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Jay Jackson
7W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
6%92%2%
4.22
4.5
Dhruv Sareen
71W–45L career · 2 lines in 2025
19%80%<1%
4.12
4
Chad Fenwick
12W–5L career · no lines in 2025
<1%55%45%
3.98
Shane Duffy
25W–21L career · 4 lines in 2025
1%87%12%
3.83
Neil Patak
3W–6L career · 2 lines in 2025
2%92%6%
3.78
4
Shyam Markus
46W–31L career · 3 lines in 2025
5%92%2%
3.73
Evan Press
2W–4L career · 1 line in 2025
10%89%1%
3.68
Jeff Bailes
1W–0L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Kent Goss
0W–1L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Raman Sain
2W–0L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Steve Felsen
1W–1L career · 2 lines in 2025
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.