Teams

SATL18/EMulch/SAC

USTA Adult 18 & Over (3.0-4.0, 9.0) · Men - 3.5

7 players · average NTRP 3.25 / SOUTH CAROLINA

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
2026-04-19vs SATA 3.5M 18 & Over (Patterson)Lost 01
L#1 DoublesEvan Mulch / Trevor Fitzgibbon vs Daniel Feig / Khanh LE2-6, 2-6
2026-03-29vs SATA 3.5M 18 & Over (Patterson)Lost 02
L#1 DoublesRon Smith / Johnny Rubio vs Jason Patterson / Ron Moore2-6, 4-6
L#1 SinglesAlexander Meek vs Daniel Hines4-6, 6-2, 0-1
2026-03-24vs SATA 3.5M 18 & Over (Patterson)Lost 03
L#1 SinglesAlexander Meek vs Daniel Hines3-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesDaniel Mason / Steve Thomas vs Khanh LE / Ganesh Karri1-6, 4-6
L#2 SinglesTravis Greer vs Daniel Feig4-6, 3-6
2026-03-15vs SATA 3.5M 18 & Over (Patterson)Lost 02
L#1 DoublesJason Coley / Fred BRUTSKY vs Ron Moore / Myint Khaing5-7, 2-6
L#1 SinglesEvan Mulch vs Chris Ollinger2-6, 1-6
2026-03-08vs SATA 3.5M 18 & Over (Patterson)Lost 12
L#1 SinglesAlexander Meek vs Daniel Hines4-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesTravis Greer / Johnny Rubio vs Dan Troxell / Khanh LE6-4, 6-4
L#2 SinglesEvan Mulch vs Chris Ollinger0-6, 1-6
2026-03-02vs SATA 3.5M 18 & Over (Patterson)Split 22
L#1 DoublesTravis Greer / Andrew Batson vs Chris Ollinger / Daniel Feig4-6, 2-6
W#1 SinglesAlexander Meek vs Myint Khaing5-7, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesFred BRUTSKY / Jason Coley vs Dan Troxell / Ganesh Karri6-3, 7-5
L#2 SinglesEvan Mulch vs Daniel Hines3-6, 0-6
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 · Men - 3.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1SATA 3.5M 18 & Over (Patterson)501649129
2SATL18/EMulch/SAC0541634225

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 3.11 estimated across 6 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.

3.46
Travis Greer
usually #2 Singles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.29
Alexander Meek
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 3.5
3.20
Ron Smith
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.01
Evan Mulch
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 3.5
2.86
Daniel Mason
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published 3
2.83
Fred BRUTSKY
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #1 Singles 20% · published 3
Jason Coley
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 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.

Jason Coley + Fred BRUTSKY2449% games+3.1% vs expected
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.

Travis Greer
20W–10L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%63%37%
3.46
3.5
Alexander Meek
19W–10L career · 4 lines in 2026
1%94%5%
3.29
Ron Smith
20W–20L career · 1 line in 2026
7%92%1%
3.20
3.5
Evan Mulch
13W–14L career · 4 lines in 2026
47%53%<1%
3.01
3
Daniel Mason
22W–11L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%86%14%
2.86
3
Fred BRUTSKY
16W–13L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
2.83
Jason Coley
4W–6L career · 2 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.