Teams

Olson/Nashville

2025 Adult 55 & Over - Nashville · 4.0 Men - Sunday 2:00 pm

9 players · average NTRP 4.00 / TENNESSEE

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2025-05-04vs Markuson/NashvilleWon 20
W#1 DoublesStephen Levet / Lacy Privette vs Philip Markuson / Hans Westin6-1, 6-3
W#2 DoublesJeff Gaw / Glenn Kiger vs Sunny Koshy / Yale Riley6-1, 3-0
2025-04-27vs Markuson/NashvilleWon 21
L#1 DoublesStephen Levet / Mark Hansen vs Philip Markuson / Hans Westin6-2, 6-7, 0-1
W#2 DoublesJay Olson / Matt Holm vs Randall Malchow / Sunny Koshy6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesJames Demouy / Lacy Privette vs Steve Smith / Yale Riley7-5, 6-2
2025-04-27vs Markuson/NashvilleLost 12
W#1 DoublesJoseph McComb / Jeff Gaw vs Randall Malchow / Sunny Koshy6-3, 6-1
L#2 DoublesGlenn Kiger / Paul Peterson vs Yale Riley / Richard Hood3-6, 6-3, 0-1
L#3 DoublesMark Hansen / Dan Ostrander vs Hans Westin / Richard Hock6-4, 1-6, 0-1
2025-04-15vs Markuson/NashvilleWon 30
W#1 DoublesJeff Gaw / Matt Holm vs Chris Smeltzer / Frederick Young6-0, 6-1
W#2 DoublesJames Demouy / Joseph McComb vs Richard Hock / Hans Westin2-6, 6-4, 1-0
W#3 DoublesJay Olson / Dan Ostrander vs Randall Malchow / Philip Markuson6-2, 7-5
2025-04-13vs Markuson/NashvilleWon 21
W#1 DoublesJeff Gaw / Lacy Privette vs Steve Smith / Yale Riley7-6, 6-3
L#2 DoublesDan Ostrander / Paul Peterson vs Brad Dunn / Chris Smeltzer6-2, 6-7, 0-1
W#3 DoublesJoseph McComb / Jay Olson vs Richard Hood / Frederick Young6-1, 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 standings1 teams · 4.0 Men - Sunday 2:00 pm
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Olson/Nashville4110511102

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 3.78 estimated across 6 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.

3.86
Jeff Gaw
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published
3.85
James Demouy
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.83
Joseph McComb
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.81
Dan Ostrander
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
Glenn Kiger
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.70
Stephen Levet
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.63
Jay Olson
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Lacy Privette
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Matt Holm
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
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.

Jeff Gaw
8W–4L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%86%14%
3.86
4
James Demouy
24W–14L career · 2 lines in 2025
<1%88%12%
3.85
Joseph McComb
9W–1L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%90%9%
3.83
4
Dan Ostrander
5W–3L career · 3 lines in 2025
1%92%8%
3.81
4
Glenn Kiger
3W–1L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Stephen Levet
12W–3L career · 2 lines in 2025
6%93%1%
3.70
Jay Olson
5W–2L career · 3 lines in 2025
16%84%<1%
3.63
Lacy Privette
4W–0L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Matt Holm
3W–1L career · 2 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.