Teams

NWO Tri-Level doubles Barden-Launchpad

2022 USTA League Tennis Tri-Level Doubles NWO · 18&Over Men Tri-level - 3.5, 4.0 4.5

9 players · average NTRP 4.00 / NORTHWESTERN OHIO

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 →
Schedule4 played
L#1 DoublesZach Barden / Michael Toland vs Drew Dominiak / Mike King6-7, 3-6
W#2 DoublesMatt Damschroder / Randy Kim vs Kyle Crocker / Sushil Sudershan7-5, 6-3
L#3 DoublesClayton Gifford / David Tusing vs James Kaczorowski / Richard Hausman2-6, 1-6
L#1 DoublesMichael Toland / Elliot Beak vs Landon Shell / Charles Horvath6-7, 4-3, 0-1
W#2 DoublesRandy Kim / Matt Damschroder vs Aco Radujevic / Jacob Rabenhorst6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesClayton Gifford / William Connelly Jr vs Nathan Gauthier / Cole Imm6-2, 6-4
W#2 DoublesMatt Damschroder / Randy Kim vs Robert Winsor / Kyle Crocker6-0, 6-3
L#3 DoublesWilliam Connelly Jr / David Tusing vs Chris Barrow / Richard Hausman3-6, 1-6
W#1 DoublesElliot Beak / Michael Toland vs Ethan Shell / Charles Horvath7-5, 7-5
W#2 DoublesRandy Kim / Matt Damschroder vs William Hutchinson / Tristan Uribes6-1, 6-2
W#3 DoublesDavid Tusing / Clayton Gifford vs Nathan Gauthier / Cole Imm6-3, 6-3
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 standings3 teams · 18&Over Men Tri-level - 3.5, 4.0 4.5
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NWO Tri-level doubles Sudershan/King TWOS40102589
2NWO Tri-Level doubles Barden-Launchpad22751099
3NWO Tri-level Doubles Uribes/Gauthier-Launchpad0411123145

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 3.75 estimated across 5 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.

4.12
Elliot Beak
published 4.5
3.78
Matt Damschroder
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.75
Clayton Gifford
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.75
Randy Kim
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.37
David Tusing
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Michael Toland
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Nick Eyde
published
William Connelly Jr
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Zach Barden
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 0
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.

Matt Damschroder + Randy Kim19659% games+7.0% vs expected
David Tusing + Clayton Gifford9655% games+0.8% 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.

4.5
Elliot Beak
7W–10L career · no lines in 2022
19%81%<1%
4.12
4
Matt Damschroder
148W–91L career · 4 lines in 2022
2%94%5%
3.78
4
Clayton Gifford
148W–101L career · 3 lines in 2022
3%95%3%
3.75
4
Randy Kim
213W–135L career · 4 lines in 2022
3%95%2%
3.75
3.5
David Tusing
83W–55L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%83%16%
3.37
Michael Toland
15W–24L career · 3 lines in 2022
not enough data
Nick Eyde
1W–3L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
William Connelly Jr
64W–64L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
0
Zach Barden
64W–33L career · 1 line in 2022
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.