Teams

Rabon/18s/4.0/COQ

2026 Man · Cov Mixed 18 & Over

14 players · average NTRP 4.00 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2026-07-11Lost 01
L#2 DoublesJohn Rabon / Catherine Martinez vs PATRICK MAUTI / Deneen Neitzschman1-6, 0-6
2026-06-07Lost 01
L#2 DoublesJohn Rabon / April Luscy vs Susan Rogge / Shane McCarthy1-6, 1-6
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 standings2 teams · Cov Mixed 18 & Over
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Thompson/4.0/18s/COQ701839140
2Rabon/18s/4.0/COQ0731836225

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 3.62 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.

3.81
Maxwell Agnew
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.81
Carolyn Kalman
usually #2 Doubles 37%, also #3 Doubles 32% · published 4
3.64
Catherine Martinez
usually #1 Doubles 36%, also #3 Doubles 27% · published 4
3.58
David Butler
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.54
Daniel Butler
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.48
April Luscy
usually #2 Doubles 39%, also #3 Doubles 31% · published 4
3.46
John Rabon
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Jack Ellis
usually #1 Doubles 64%, also #2 Doubles 36% · published
Laurel Bobrowski
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #1 Doubles 13% · published
Mark Schneider
published
Patricia Schultz
usually #1 Doubles 65%, also #3 Doubles 18% · published
Paul Kalman
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Victoria Bienvenu
usually #1 Doubles 42%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
Wendi Corales
usually #1 Doubles 65%, also #3 Doubles 18% · 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.

Jack Ellis + Maxwell Agnew5073% gamesnot enough data
David Butler + Daniel Butler404 matchesnot enough data
April Luscy + Patricia Schultz303 matchesnot enough data
April Luscy + John Rabon033 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.

Maxwell Agnew
18W–2L career · 6 lines in 2026
1%89%9%
3.81
4
Carolyn Kalman
18W–15L career · 19 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.81
4
Catherine Martinez
22W–9L career · 10 lines in 2026
16%84%1%
3.64
4
David Butler
6W–3L career · 3 lines in 2026
28%72%<1%
3.58
4
Daniel Butler
6W–3L career · 3 lines in 2026
38%62%<1%
3.54
4
April Luscy
12W–13L career · 13 lines in 2026
55%45%<1%
3.48
John Rabon
4W–11L career · 2 lines in 2026
62%38%<1%
3.46
Jack Ellis
19W–3L career · 14 lines in 2026
not enough data
Laurel Bobrowski
7W–1L career · 8 lines in 2026
not enough data
Mark Schneider
2W–0L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Patricia Schultz
15W–9L career · 17 lines in 2026
not enough data
Paul Kalman
4W–3L career · 4 lines in 2026
not enough data
Victoria Bienvenu
8W–6L career · 11 lines in 2026
not enough data
Wendi Corales
15W–13L career · 17 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.