Teams

3 Westwood Turton Senior Whackers

2023 Richmond Adult 40 & Over Weekend · Richmond Adult 40 & Over 3.5 Men

17 players · average NTRP 3.50 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule1 played
2023-06-11vs 8 Avalon GhitaLost 01
L#3 DoublesJackson Dyer / Mark Wickersham vs Radu Siminiceanu / Brad Williamson4-6, 6-7
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 Richmond Adult 40 & Over 3.5 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 3.22 estimated across 16 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.

3.90
Yancey Jones
published 4
3.79
Jackson Dyer
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.60
Mark Reams
published
3.38
Kirby Fields
published
3.29
Mark Wickersham
published
3.26
Harry Turton
published 3.5
3.24
Brad Rodgers
published 3.5
3.23
Jeff Hause
published
3.17
Mike Philhower
published
3.08
Joseph Racelis
published
3.07
James Moslow
published 3.5
3.04
Lonnie Lemco
published
3.02
Vincent Wood
published
2.89
Baxter Phillips III
published 3.5
2.85
Gardner Mundy
published 3
2.72
George Bishop
published 3
Jim Fraser
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.

Jackson Dyer + Yancey Jones361064% games+7.5% vs expected
Harry Turton + Mark Wickersham123 matchesnot enough data
Mark Wickersham + Lonnie Lemco033 matchesnot enough data
Joseph Racelis + Lonnie Lemco033 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.

4
Yancey Jones
89W–39L career · no lines in 2023
<1%78%22%
3.90
4
Jackson Dyer
141W–63L career · 2 lines in 2023
1%93%5%
3.79
Mark Reams
3W–3L career · no lines in 2023
21%78%<1%
3.60
Kirby Fields
11W–14L career · no lines in 2023
<1%83%17%
3.38
Mark Wickersham
13W–19L career · no lines in 2023
1%94%5%
3.29
3.5
Harry Turton
16W–26L career · no lines in 2023
2%95%3%
3.26
3.5
Brad Rodgers
2W–8L career · type A · no lines in 2023
3%94%2%
3.24
Jeff Hause
10W–16L career · no lines in 2023
4%94%2%
3.23
Mike Philhower
4W–6L career · no lines in 2023
10%90%1%
3.17
Joseph Racelis
1W–5L career · no lines in 2023
26%74%<1%
3.08
3.5
James Moslow
5W–12L career · no lines in 2023
29%71%<1%
3.07
Lonnie Lemco
13W–29L career · no lines in 2023
<1%39%61%
3.04
Vincent Wood
1W–9L career · no lines in 2023
43%57%<1%
3.02
3.5
Baxter Phillips III
5W–4L career · no lines in 2023
80%20%<1%
2.89
3
Gardner Mundy
6W–5L career · no lines in 2023
<1%87%13%
2.85
3
George Bishop
3W–6L career · no lines in 2023
5%94%2%
2.72
Jim Fraser
1W–2L career · no lines in 2023
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.