Teams

Harley

2026 NE Adult 65&Over · 7.0 Adult Men

10 players · average NTRP 4.00 / NEBRASKA

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2026-05-14vs WinquestLost 12
W#1 DoublesMark Beiting / Kirk Teters vs Lynn Bluml / Greg Allen6-4, 6-4
L#2 DoublesWade Winingham / John Crook vs Michael Ebert / Mike Gardner3-6, 6-7
L#3 DoublesRobert Roth / Randy Haller vs Brad Miller / Ronn Winquest5-7, 6-7
2026-05-07vs WinquestLost 12
L#1 DoublesMark Beiting / Gordon Hinrichs vs Mike Gardner / Michael Ebert4-6, 6-7
L#2 DoublesRobert Roth / Roderick Harley vs Ronn Winquest / Brad Miller3-6, 7-5, 1-0
W#3 DoublesWade Winingham / Randy Haller vs Roger Penland / Lynn Bluml6-4, 6-1
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 standings2 teams · 7.0 Adult Men
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Winquest3063777
2Harley032714100

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 3.40 estimated across 1 rated player. 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.

Curtis Goebel
published 4
3.40
Robert Roth
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Gordon Hinrichs
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Harold Tu
published
John Crook
published
Kirk Teters
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Mark Beiting
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Randy Haller
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Steve Sunde
published
Wade Winingham
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · 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.

Wade Winingham + Mark Beiting213 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
Curtis Goebel
9W–10L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Robert Roth
20W–7L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%75%24%
3.40
Gordon Hinrichs
9W–14L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Harold Tu
4W–1L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
John Crook
0W–4L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Kirk Teters
1W–0L career · 1 line in 2026
not enough data
Mark Beiting
7W–14L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Randy Haller
18W–33L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Steve Sunde
4W–2L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Wade Winingham
7W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
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.