Teams

SD 3.5 CTC/ CHS (10:30AM)/ Kamas

2024 SoCal Fall Doubles SD WE · SD Men 3.5

15 players · average NTRP 3.50 / SAN DIEGO

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
W#2 DoublesJeffrey Newton / Blake Stockstad vs Ryan Mallory / Tony Andrade6-3, 6-4
W#1 DoublesJeffrey Newton / Blake Stockstad vs David Escobar / Robert Boyhan6-3, 6-1
2024-10-13vs SD 3.5 SDTRC (9AM)/ RussellLost 01
L#1 DoublesJeffrey Newton / Blake Stockstad vs Ramiro Muzquiz / Russell Austin4-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJeffrey Newton / Blake Stockstad vs Jon Cieslak / John Evans6-3, 7-6
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 standings for SD Men 3.5 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 3.40 estimated across 14 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.

3.56
Scott Hart
published
3.56
Will Roth
published
3.49
John McCauley
published
3.49
Michael Kamas
published
3.42
Jeremy HACKWORTH
published
3.42
Dee Domingo
published 3.5
3.41
Justin Cook
published
3.38
Brendan Farley
published 3.5
3.38
Dave Werth
published 3.5
3.36
Blake Stockstad
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.35
John Torres
published
3.31
Jeffrey Newton
published
3.27
Daniel Gebremedhin
published 3.5
3.16
Marc Villanueva
published
Eric Traboulay
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.

Brendan Farley + John McCauley4255% games−4.0% vs expected
John Torres + Marc Villanueva314 matchesnot enough data
Jeffrey Newton + Blake Stockstad213 matchesnot enough data
Jeffrey Newton + Dee Domingo213 matchesnot enough data
Scott Hart + Dave Werth213 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.

Scott Hart
5W–10L career · no lines in 2024
34%66%<1%
3.56
Will Roth
2W–10L career · no lines in 2024
34%66%<1%
3.56
John McCauley
6W–5L career · no lines in 2024
<1%53%47%
3.49
Michael Kamas
18W–10L career · no lines in 2024
<1%54%46%
3.49
Jeremy HACKWORTH
30W–17L career · no lines in 2024
<1%72%27%
3.42
3.5
Dee Domingo
30W–23L career · no lines in 2024
<1%73%27%
3.42
Justin Cook
3W–2L career · no lines in 2024
<1%74%26%
3.41
3.5
Brendan Farley
6W–4L career · no lines in 2024
<1%79%20%
3.38
3.5
Dave Werth
7W–3L career · no lines in 2024
<1%80%20%
3.38
3.5
Blake Stockstad
70W–25L career · 4 lines in 2024
1%84%15%
3.36
John Torres
6W–8L career · no lines in 2024
1%85%15%
3.35
Jeffrey Newton
9W–4L career · no lines in 2024
1%90%9%
3.31
3.5
Daniel Gebremedhin
5W–7L career · no lines in 2024
3%92%5%
3.27
Marc Villanueva
3W–2L career · no lines in 2024
12%87%1%
3.16
Eric Traboulay
1W–0L career · no lines in 2024
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.