Teams

FD 6.0 CV2 Casamento

2025 NEOTA Fusion Doubles · NEOTA 18&O 6.0 Fusion Doubles

14 players · average NTRP 3.12 / NORTHEASTERN 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 →
Flight standings17 teams · NEOTA 18&O 6.0 Fusion Doubles
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1FD 6.0 CV2 Casamento802048133
2FD 6.0 PW1 Lonsway82181225239
3FD 6.0 NC Snyder7321922220
4FD 6.0 GR Bortz64161437284
5FD 6.0 MV2 Herbruck53131124214
6FD 6.0 CC Lombardo55151533259
7FD 6.0 MV1 Carracher55161436283
8FD 6.0 PM Perkins55141636280
9FD 6.0 PW2 Merugu55131739303
10FD 6.0 TRR Dworakowski46151534258
11FD 6.0 TP1 Derrig46141635282
12FD 6.0 MV3 Wu46151537282
13FD 6.0 MM Bode46131740294
14FD 6.0 WE Woodruff35111327204
15FD 6.0 CV1 Carroll3591533245
16FD 6.0 TP2 Licari37102041309
17FD 6.0 CSC Taylor1771737251

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 2.99 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.

3.38
Roger Lee
published
3.38
Ali Payerl
published 3.5
3.37
Jamie Casamento
published
3.19
Lauren Erb
published
3.00
Nagaraju Sarabu
published
2.96
Andy Kreger
published 3
2.93
Brandon Johannes
published 3
2.87
Nick Slezak
published
2.83
Jonathan Slain
published
2.76
Stephanie Johannes
published
Amanda Wilcox
published 3
2.68
Justin Wilcox
published
2.48
Emily Washington
published
Nancy Paskevich
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.

Ali Payerl + Jamie Casamento16368% games+10.2% vs expected
Jonathan Slain + Brandon Johannes61144% games+6.9% vs expected
Nancy Paskevich + Lauren Erb9559% games+2.2% vs expected
Andy Kreger + Nick Slezak4157% games−1.8% vs expected
Roger Lee + Nagaraju Sarabu314 matchesnot enough data
Roger Lee + Jonathan Slain303 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.

Roger Lee
57W–27L career · no lines in 2025
<1%80%20%
3.38
3.5
Ali Payerl
47W–14L career · no lines in 2025
<1%81%19%
3.38
Jamie Casamento
37W–10L career · no lines in 2025
<1%82%18%
3.37
Lauren Erb
45W–42L career · no lines in 2025
9%90%1%
3.19
Nagaraju Sarabu
27W–18L career · no lines in 2025
<1%50%50%
3.00
3
Andy Kreger
14W–22L career · no lines in 2025
<1%63%37%
2.96
3
Brandon Johannes
38W–48L career · no lines in 2025
<1%69%31%
2.93
Nick Slezak
24W–18L career · no lines in 2025
<1%82%17%
2.87
Jonathan Slain
26W–25L career · no lines in 2025
1%87%12%
2.83
Stephanie Johannes
20W–15L career · no lines in 2025
3%92%5%
2.76
3
Amanda Wilcox
13W–36L career · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Justin Wilcox
9W–20L career · no lines in 2025
10%89%1%
2.68
Emily Washington
15W–14L career · no lines in 2025
0%57%43%
2.48
Nancy Paskevich
66W–43L career · no lines in 2025
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.