Teams

Medina, Christian

2025 Combo 18 & Over-JXN · Men 5.5

11 players · average NTRP 3.25 / MISSISSIPPI

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2025-09-30vs Walker, TylerWon 30
W#1 DoublesHayden Perkins / Richard Masong vs Stephen Baldwyn / Parker Fowler6-0, 6-1
W#2 DoublesBlair Williamson / Christopher Loftin vs Jake Ponder / Walker Loflin6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesChristian Medina / Seth Thompson vs Tyler Walker / Grady Champion6-3, 6-0
2025-08-26vs Walker, TylerWon 30
W#1 DoublesRichard Masong / Julio Morales vs Jake Ponder / Jack Wood6-1, 6-1
W#2 DoublesBlair Williamson / Christopher Loftin vs Tyler Walker / Parker Fowler6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesWeber Herbison / Abram Diaz vs Walker Loflin / Carlton Reid6-0, 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 standings for Men 5.5 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 3.06 estimated across 10 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.

3.29
Chad Myers
published 3.5
3.13
Julio Morales
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.09
Peter Mills
published
3.08
Hayden Perkins
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.05
Christian Medina
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.04
Blair Williamson
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 3
3.03
Christopher Loftin
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.02
Abram Diaz
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.99
Richard Masong
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
2.85
John Jeffreys
published
Weber Herbison
usually #3 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.

Julio Morales + Richard Masong6085% games+20.6% vs expected
Abram Diaz + Christian Medina2446% games+7.5% vs expected
Blair Williamson + Chad Myers303 matchesnot enough data
Hayden Perkins + John Jeffreys303 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.

3.5
Chad Myers
42W–9L career · no lines in 2025
2%92%6%
3.29
Julio Morales
29W–22L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%17%83%
3.13
Peter Mills
10W–11L career · no lines in 2025
<1%27%73%
3.09
Hayden Perkins
14W–10L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%27%73%
3.08
3.5
Christian Medina
34W–37L career · 6 lines in 2025
37%63%<1%
3.05
3
Blair Williamson
32W–17L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%37%63%
3.04
Christopher Loftin
10W–11L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%41%59%
3.03
3
Abram Diaz
29W–19L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%43%57%
3.02
Richard Masong
26W–11L career · 6 lines in 2025
<1%53%47%
2.99
John Jeffreys
16W–12L career · no lines in 2025
1%85%15%
2.85
Weber Herbison
9W–6L 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.