Teams

WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT Sandoval

2026 WI Tri-Level · WI Mid Tri Men Doubles

13 players · average NTRP 4.00 / WISCONSIN

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
W#1 DoublesMax Bohn / Murphy Schaff vs Paul Isaac / Brian Parkos6-3, 1-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesMichael Ohtake / Jun Hyung Chang vs Hai Nguyen / Joseph Mercurio6-1, 6-3
2026-03-10vs WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT RiceWon 20
W#1 DoublesDaichi Hikimoto / Nathan Wood vs Lee Taylor / John Rice6-1, 6-3
W#3 DoublesJack Brody / Aidan Stuckert vs Christopher Green / Julian Irwin6-2, 7-6
2026-02-24vs WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT KnutsonSplit 11
L#1 DoublesMichael Walsh / Murphy Schaff vs Jonathan Figueira / Brayden Parman1-6, 1-6
W#3 DoublesJack Brody / Matthew Lister vs Craig Bald / Andrew Jaw6-4, 6-3
2026-02-17vs WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT HanWon 20
W#1 DoublesDaichi Hikimoto / Nathan Wood vs Timothy Daley / Michael McPhee6-4, 7-6
W#2 DoublesJonathan Sandoval / Abtin Molavi vs Zonglin Han / Adam Cook6-0, 6-1
2026-02-12vs WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT BergaminiSplit 11
L#1 DoublesMichael Walsh / Murphy Schaff vs David Jumes / Matthew Bauman3-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJonathan Sandoval / Abtin Molavi vs Kevin Grant / Ben Garstecki5-7, 7-5, 1-0
2026-02-05Lost 01
L#2 DoublesKyle Coplan / Abtin Molavi vs Enes Akyuz / Xiaotong Wang4-6, 4-6
2026-01-29vs WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT MiuraWon 20
W#2 DoublesMichael Ohtake / Jun Hyung Chang vs Michael Happel / John Weyers6-2, 6-3
W#3 DoublesAidan Stuckert / Jack Brody vs Oguz Alagoz / Kin Miura7-6, 7-5
2026-01-15vs WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT IsenseeLost 12
L#1 DoublesMurphy Schaff / Nathan Wood vs Justin Yee / Erik Dustrude6-4, 1-6, 0-1
W#2 DoublesMichael Ohtake / Kyle Coplan vs Chris Isensee / Chase Peck6-1, 6-2
L#3 DoublesJack Brody / Matthew Lister vs Andrew Thooft / Matthew Ulrich2-6, 3-6
2026-01-08vs WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT DundasWon 10
W#2 DoublesKyle Coplan / Michael Ohtake vs Alex Dundas / Michael Cerminaro6-4, 6-4
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 standings11 teams · WI Mid Tri Men Doubles
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT Dundas9122822233
2WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT Akyuz7322817217
3WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT Sandoval7321923245
4WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT Isensee73181229267
5WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT Kosobucki64161430269
6WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT Knutson55161430256
7WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT Rice46121838310
8WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT Bergamini46131741308
9WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT Han2892146317
10WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT Miura2892146320
11WI Mid Tri M Doubles MALT Antony Peter2872349324

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 3.84 estimated across 12 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.

4.51
Max Bohn
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
4.24
Daichi Hikimoto
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
4.09
Murphy Schaff
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.03
Nathan Wood
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
4.03
Michael Ohtake
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.83
Jonathan Sandoval
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 43% · published
3.83
Kyle Coplan
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.64
Aidan Stuckert
usually #3 Doubles 89%, also #2 Doubles 11% · published 3.5
3.62
Abtin Molavi
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.52
Joe Leung
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.45
Matthew Lister
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
3.25
Jack Brody
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Jun Hyung Chang
usually #2 Doubles 100% · 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.

Max Bohn + Michael Ohtake5262% games+10.7% vs expected
Aidan Stuckert + Joe Leung7256% games+6.7% vs expected
Max Bohn + Jun Hyung Chang4163% games+4.4% vs expected
Joe Leung + Jack Brody6552% games+4.3% vs expected
Kyle Coplan + Michael Ohtake11461% games+3.6% vs expected
Jonathan Sandoval + Jun Hyung Chang5551% games+2.9% vs expected
Jonathan Sandoval + Nathan Wood5260% games+1.7% vs expected
Jonathan Sandoval + Kyle Coplan4546% games−6.3% 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.

Max Bohn
67W–48L career · 10 lines in 2026
<1%47%53%
4.51
4.5
Daichi Hikimoto
40W–36L career · 8 lines in 2026
5%92%3%
4.24
Murphy Schaff
10W–10L career · 4 lines in 2026
25%75%<1%
4.09
Nathan Wood
39W–28L career · 3 lines in 2026
41%59%<1%
4.03
Michael Ohtake
68W–32L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%42%58%
4.03
Jonathan Sandoval
88W–74L career · 7 lines in 2026
1%88%11%
3.83
Kyle Coplan
60W–46L career · 9 lines in 2026
1%88%11%
3.83
3.5
Aidan Stuckert
65W–17L career · 9 lines in 2026
<1%16%84%
3.64
4
Abtin Molavi
81W–34L career · 3 lines in 2026
19%80%<1%
3.62
Joe Leung
53W–73L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%45%55%
3.52
Matthew Lister
59W–22L career · 5 lines in 2026
<1%65%35%
3.45
Jack Brody
37W–43L career · 4 lines in 2026
4%93%4%
3.25
Jun Hyung Chang
52W–41L 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.