Teams

B4 ACAC Stephens Assault 4.0

2021 Richmond Adult 18 & Over Weeknight Men · Richmond Weeknight Adult 18 & Over Men 4.0

13 players · average NTRP 3.89 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2021-05-27vs B7 Raintree StoneWon 10
W#2 DoublesWilliam Price / Gary Reinhardt vs Edward Yesbeck / Michael McMillen6-2, 7-6
2021-05-25vs B6 MAC CousinsLost 01
L#1 DoublesMarc Oosterhuis / William Price vs Aric Mueller / Adam Hamilton4-6, 7-6, 1-0
2021-05-22vs B5 Avalon Ghita 4.0Lost 02
L#1 DoublesMajd Babik / Keith Garrison vs Tejas Raval / Ayush Gandhi6-7, 3-6
L#2 DoublesMarc Oosterhuis / William Price vs Chip Gay / Andrew Zima2-6, 6-2, 0-1
2021-05-13vs B2 Burkwood McKelveySplit 11
L#1 DoublesKeith Garrison / Majd Babik vs Jeff Shifflett / Keith Harvey4-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesSteve Hamant / William Price vs Norman Howland / Adam Decker6-4, 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 Weeknight Adult 18 & Over Men 4.0 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 3.63 estimated across 12 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.

4.18
Jimmy Qing
published
3.86
Majd Babik
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.82
William Price
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.77
David Knudson
published 4
Greg Deeb
published 4
3.73
Chris Naughton
published 4
3.67
Marc Oosterhuis
published
3.60
Doug Okay
published 4
3.60
Steve Hamant
published
3.50
Gary Reinhardt
published 4
3.43
Keith Garrison
published
3.25
Benjamin Andrews
published 3.5
3.17
Gregory Ewald
published 3.5
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.

William Price + Majd Babik4255% gamesnot enough data
Marc Oosterhuis + Chris Naughton213 matchesnot enough data
Marc Oosterhuis + Doug Okay213 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.

Jimmy Qing
3W–5L career · no lines in 2021
8%91%1%
4.18
4
Majd Babik
202W–105L career · 2 lines in 2021
<1%85%15%
3.86
4
William Price
98W–103L career · 4 lines in 2021
1%91%8%
3.82
4
David Knudson
4W–3L career · no lines in 2021
2%94%4%
3.77
4
Greg Deeb
1W–0L career · no lines in 2021
not enough data
4
Chris Naughton
8W–9L career · no lines in 2021
4%94%2%
3.73
Marc Oosterhuis
12W–7L career · no lines in 2021
9%90%1%
3.67
4
Doug Okay
5W–12L career · no lines in 2021
22%78%<1%
3.60
Steve Hamant
1W–8L career · no lines in 2021
22%78%<1%
3.60
4
Gary Reinhardt
5W–6L career · no lines in 2021
51%49%<1%
3.50
Keith Garrison
3W–6L career · no lines in 2021
70%30%<1%
3.43
3.5
Benjamin Andrews
3W–10L career · no lines in 2021
2%95%3%
3.25
3.5
Gregory Ewald
14W–9L career · no lines in 2021
10%89%<1%
3.17

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.