← Teams

PTC-Bledsoe/Casey

2019 Mixed 18 & Over · 6.0 Mixed

9 players · average NTRP 3.28 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.04 estimated across 9 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.

3.69
Nina Hanson
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.31
Julie LaMontagne
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.28
Erin Casey
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.11
Jamil Panni
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
2.90
Hilary Johnson
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.86
Paul Best
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.84
Yone Akagi
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.75
William Seidl
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 13% · published 3
2.60
Michael McTague
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
Results8 ties
2018-10-28Won 2–1
L#1 DoublesHilary Johnson / William Seidl vs Anne Johnson / Rich Johnson6-2, 3-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesNina Hanson / Michael McTague vs Patricia Kuchar / Wesley Eader6-0, 6-3
W#3 DoublesYone Akagi / Jamil Panni vs Jennifer Gwin / Richard Clark7-5, 6-3
2018-10-20Won 2–0
W#1 DoublesErin Casey / William Seidl vs Ann Hays / Dave Sato6-3, 6-1
W#3 DoublesYone Akagi / Jamil Panni vs Jinmi Kemple / Peter Sankhagowit6-4, 6-2
2018-10-14Won 2–1
W#1 DoublesLisa Bledsoe / William Seidl vs Cricket Forsey / Jeff McLaughlin6-2, 6-4
L#2 DoublesJamil Panni / Julie LaMontagne vs Dan Tracy / Robin Welter7-5, 6-2
W#3 DoublesMichael McTague / Hilary Johnson vs Theresa Gonzales / Monte Gonzales6-4, 6-1
2018-10-06Split 1–1
L#1 DoublesErin Casey / Paul Best vs Christina Bergstrom / Colin Looi6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesJamil Panni / Julie LaMontagne vs Dave Sasaki / Leah Black6-4, 2-6, 1-0
2018-09-29Won 2–0
W#1 DoublesHilary Johnson / Michael McTague vs Karen Harlow / Kim Fjeldsted6-3, 7-6
W#3 DoublesNina Hanson / Paul Best vs Dayna Jahnke-Corwin / Neal Linegar7-6, 6-4
2018-09-23Lost 1–2
L#1 DoublesWilliam Seidl / Erin Casey vs Kevin Jarvis / Michele Sutherland6-3, 6-3
L#2 DoublesHilary Johnson / Michael McTague vs Nick Hooker / Sarah Ferrer6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesJulie LaMontagne / Steve Siegel vs Spencer Byrd / Nicola Ash6-0, 6-0
2018-09-16Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesHilary Johnson / William Seidl vs Lamone Voravongseng / Kathy Cook6-4, 2-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJulie LaMontagne / Jamil Panni vs Jeff Kennedy / Janie Donaldson6-4, 7-6
W#3 DoublesYone Akagi / Michael McTague vs Jane King Ayers / Eric Ayers6-2, 6-3
2018-09-09Won 2–0
W#1 DoublesErin Casey / William Seidl vs Rich Johnson / Anne Johnson6-4, 6-3
W#3 DoublesHilary Johnson / Michael McTague vs Wesley Eader / Patricia Kuchar6-3, 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.
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.

4
Nina Hanson
110W–57L career
4%96%0%
3.69
3.5
Julie LaMontagne
85W–69L career
0%99%1%
3.31
3.5
Erin Casey
142W–91L career
0%99%1%
3.28
3.5
Jamil Panni
82W–59L career
10%90%0%
3.11
3
Hilary Johnson
68W–64L career
0%95%5%
2.90
3
Paul Best
46W–76L career
0%97%3%
2.86
3
Yone Akagi
66W–52L career
0%98%2%
2.84
3
William Seidl
58W–56L career
3%96%1%
2.75
3
Michael McTague
50W–87L career
18%82%0%
2.60

Three percentages are the year-end projection — chance of moving down, staying, moving up — and the number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. 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.