Teams

MO - Mathison

2025 Combo 18 & Over Men - Mobile · 8.5 Men 18

9 players · average NTRP 4.50 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2025-07-29vs MTC - RyanLost 03
L#1 DoublesNathan Smith / Zachary Hubbard vs Anthony Nguyen / Jack Meador0-1
L#2 DoublesCharles Mathison / Thomas Jackson vs Johnny Still / John O'Brien0-1
L#3 DoublesWilliam Hooper / Wilfred Fontenot vs Joey Campbell / Jason Antoine0-1
2025-07-08vs MTC - RyanSplit 11
L#1 DoublesWilliam Hooper / Manning Courtney vs Les Steiner / Wes Steiner6-1, 3-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesTrey Hamlin / Cedric Nitz vs Jeremy Tapper / Joey Campbell6-3, 6-2
2025-06-25vs MTC - RyanWon 30
W#1 DoublesMark Moore / Cedric Nitz vs Matthew Davis / Jeremy Tapper6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesNathan Smith / Zachary Hubbard vs Les Steiner / Wes Steiner6-1, 6-0
W#3 DoublesCharles Mathison / Thomas Jackson vs Jason Brannon / Chad Necaise6-2, 6-1
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 · 8.5 Men 18
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1MO - Mathison511351090
2MTC - Ryan4213511114

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 4.00 estimated across 4 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.

4.41
Cedric Nitz
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.32
Austin Jackson
published 4.5
Charles Mathison
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
3.86
Manning Courtney
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.43
Thomas Jackson
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Tom Smith
published
Trey Hamlin
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
William Hooper
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Zachary Hubbard
usually #1 Doubles 86%, also #2 Doubles 14% · published
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
Cedric Nitz
5W–1L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%75%24%
4.41
4.5
Austin Jackson
4W–0L career · type D · no lines in 2025
1%91%8%
4.32
4.5
Charles Mathison
3W–1L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Manning Courtney
7W–5L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%86%14%
3.86
Thomas Jackson
22W–6L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%70%30%
3.43
Tom Smith
1W–0L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Trey Hamlin
5W–0L career · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
William Hooper
3W–2L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Zachary Hubbard
27W–11L career · 7 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.