Teams

Br.Eckles18S4.0

2023 Cap 18 & Over Singles League · 4.0 Men

8 players · average NTRP 4.43 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2023-07-20Lost 02
L#2 SinglesMatthew James vs Gordon Paulson2-6, 5-7
L#3 SinglesJeron Russell vs Chirag Patel5-7, 5-7
2023-07-13vs Is.Pataki18SWon 30
W#1 SinglesMatthew James vs Robert Whitehurst6-2, 6-3
W#2 SinglesJackson Cabell vs Istvan Pataki6-0, 7-5
W#3 SinglesMatthew Hanauer vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2023-07-06vs Ka.Mehra18SWon 30
W#1 SinglesBrett Eckles vs Vamsee Pasangulapati6-3, 6-0
W#2 SinglesJeron Russell vs Eslam Soliman6-1, 6-1
W#3 SinglesJackson Cabell vs Ganesh Rao6-1, 6-2
2023-06-29Won 20
W#1 SinglesMatthew James vs Lucas Trepanier6-2, 6-3
W#3 SinglesJackson Cabell vs Ty Giggey6-2, 6-2
2023-06-12vs St.Wingo18SWon 10
W#3 SinglesJeron Russell vs Barrett Rankin6-1, 6-0
2023-06-11vs Ry.Sheppard18SWon 20
W#1 SinglesJeron Russell vs Jack Hu7-6, 5-7, 1-0
W#3 SinglesBrett Eckles vs Raymond Xu6-2, 6-2
2023-06-08vs Ma.Gregson18SSplit 11
L#1 SinglesKwame Owens vs Daniel Gallo1-6, 4-6
W#2 SinglesMatthew James vs Sergii Porokh7-6, 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 standings for 4.0 Men 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 4.18 estimated across 8 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.

4.52
Kwame Owens
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 5
4.43
Brett Eckles
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #2 Singles 38% · published 4.5
4.34
Rawle Sue-Ho
published
4.24
Matthew James
usually #2 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 50% · published 4.5
4.18
Matthew Hanauer
usually #3 Singles 100% · published 4.5
3.93
Craig Radley
published 4
3.93
Jeron Russell
usually #3 Singles 50%, also #1 Singles 25% · published 4
3.87
Jackson Cabell
usually #3 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 4.5
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.

Jeron Russell + Jackson Cabell161849% games+4.7% vs expected
Brett Eckles + Kwame Owens5165% gamesnot 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.

5
Kwame Owens
168W–56L career · 1 line in 2023
no projection at this level
4.52
4.5
Brett Eckles
223W–95L career · 8 lines in 2023
<1%69%31%
4.43
Rawle Sue-Ho
17W–9L career · no lines in 2023
1%86%13%
4.34
4.5
Matthew James
67W–60L career · 4 lines in 2023
4%93%3%
4.24
4.5
Matthew Hanauer
162W–105L career · 1 line in 2023
10%89%1%
4.18
4
Craig Radley
12W–10L career · no lines in 2023
<1%69%31%
3.93
4
Jeron Russell
142W–90L career · 4 lines in 2023
<1%70%30%
3.93
4.5
Jackson Cabell
44W–62L career · 3 lines in 2023
83%17%<1%
3.87

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.