Teams

4 Westwood Racelis Senior Whackers

2022 Richmond Adult 40 & Over Weekend · Richmond Adult 40 & Over 3.5 Men

14 players · average NTRP 3.50 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2022-07-20vs 3 CCV Murphy ParkerWon 10
W#1 SinglesYancey Jones vs Don Steinbrugge6-3, 6-3
2022-06-26vs 1 Avalon CalhounLost 01
L#2 DoublesKirby Fields / Yancey Jones vs Laurent Beausergent / Richard Bland0-6, 7-6, 0-1
2022-06-12vs 9 ACAC WilsonWon 10
W#2 DoublesYancey Jones / Harry Turton vs Jeffrey Johnson / Jeffrey Foddrell7-5, 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 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 3.33 estimated across 13 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.

3.91
Andrew Cecil
published 4
3.90
Yancey Jones
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Singles 33% · published 4
3.60
Mark Reams
published
3.49
Carter Berry
published 3.5
3.38
Kirby Fields
published
3.36
James Mullahy
published 3.5
3.29
Mark Wickersham
published
3.26
Harry Turton
published 3.5
Christopher Hester
published 3.5
3.25
Frank Payne
published 3.5
3.23
Jeff Hause
published
3.08
Joseph Racelis
published
2.85
Gardner Mundy
published 3
2.72
George Bishop
published 3
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.

Harry Turton + Mark Wickersham123 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
Andrew Cecil
15W–6L career · no lines in 2022
<1%75%25%
3.91
4
Yancey Jones
89W–39L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%78%22%
3.90
Mark Reams
3W–3L career · no lines in 2022
21%78%<1%
3.60
3.5
Carter Berry
10W–7L career · no lines in 2022
<1%53%47%
3.49
Kirby Fields
11W–14L career · no lines in 2022
<1%83%17%
3.38
3.5
James Mullahy
22W–18L career · no lines in 2022
<1%86%14%
3.36
Mark Wickersham
13W–19L career · no lines in 2022
1%94%5%
3.29
3.5
Harry Turton
16W–26L career · no lines in 2022
2%95%3%
3.26
3.5
Christopher Hester
3W–1L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
3.5
Frank Payne
3W–6L career · no lines in 2022
3%95%3%
3.25
Jeff Hause
10W–16L career · no lines in 2022
4%94%2%
3.23
Joseph Racelis
1W–5L career · no lines in 2022
26%74%<1%
3.08
3
Gardner Mundy
6W–5L career · no lines in 2022
<1%87%13%
2.85
3
George Bishop
3W–6L career · no lines in 2022
5%94%2%
2.72

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.