Teams

Tocc 2025 3.0 #3

2025 Singles League 18 & Over-GC · Men 3.0

5 players · average NTRP 3.00 / MISSISSIPPI

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-12-28vs Gautier - TaylorLost 03
L#1 SinglesLee Gabardi vs Patrick Taylor6-4, 4-6, 0-1
L#2 SinglesAdam Wilkerson vs Joseph Mouney2-6, 1-6
L#3 SinglesJohn Mcmillan vs Drew Bosarge2-6, 1-6
2025-12-18vs Mitchell TOCCLost 03
L#1 SinglesJohn Mcmillan vs Robert Carter5-7, 2-6
L#2 SinglesAdam Wilkerson vs Brent Bingham2-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#3 SinglesJay Osman vs John Cleary6-4, 5-7, 0-1
2025-11-20vs Baughman/Knight BBTC 3.0Lost 02
L#1 SinglesAdam Wilkerson vs Robert Mills7-6, 4-6, 0-1
L#2 SinglesMark Mathis vs David Baughman6-7, 1-6
2025-11-13vs St. Martin-MathewsWon 21
W#1 SinglesLee Gabardi vs Toby Pete6-1, 6-0
L#2 SinglesJay Osman vs Ryan Johnston1-6, 3-6
W#3 SinglesAdam Wilkerson vs Adam Anderson6-2, 6-0
2025-11-06vs OSTC - FriersonSplit 11
W#2 SinglesJohn Mcmillan vs Alex Brechbiel6-1, 7-6
L#3 SinglesAdam Wilkerson vs Connor Boleware2-6, 1-6
2025-10-23vs Biloxi BaconWon 30
W#1 SinglesJay Osman vs Joe Mitchell7-5, 6-3
W#2 SinglesJohn Mcmillan vs Daniel Brantley6-0, 6-3
W#3 SinglesAdam Wilkerson vs David Mendenhall6-3, 6-0
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 standings6 teams · Men 3.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Gautier - Taylor7119514161
2BBTC MATTHEWS SINGLES339920158
3Baughman/Knight BBTC 3.03371125166
4Tocc 2025 3.0 #32471122157
5TOCC Men's 3.0 Bourcy1451022160
6Biloxi Bacon1641735234

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 2.80 estimated across 4 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.

2.93
Lee Gabardi
usually #1 Singles 44%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
2.82
Jay Osman
usually #3 Singles 60%, also #1 Singles 20% · published
2.72
John Mcmillan
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Singles 25% · published
2.72
Adam Wilkerson
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 3
Mark Mathis
usually #2 Singles 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.

Jay Osman + Adam Wilkerson0527% games−1.6% vs expected
Adam Wilkerson + John Mcmillan224 matchesnot enough data
Adam Wilkerson + Lee Gabardi303 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.

Lee Gabardi
33W–18L career · 9 lines in 2025
<1%70%30%
2.93
Jay Osman
21W–26L career · 5 lines in 2025
1%89%9%
2.82
John Mcmillan
5W–8L career · 4 lines in 2025
6%92%2%
2.72
3
Adam Wilkerson
21W–38L career · 6 lines in 2025
6%92%2%
2.72
Mark Mathis
3W–14L career · 1 line 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.