← Teams

THPRD-Shull

2020 Mixed 40 & Over · 7.0 Mixed

10 players · average NTRP 3.65 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.37 estimated across 9 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.

—
Janna McDougall
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.74
Karen Dellinger
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.70
Justin Shull
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.50
Anita Rockwell
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.40
Edmund Yuan
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.39
Andalib Khan
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.25
Jing Feng
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.15
Kirk Planck
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.14
Jane Shu
usually #2 Doubles 83%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published 3.5
3.05
WonKyu Kim
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
Results8 ties
2020-02-29Won 2–0
W#1 DoublesGreg Finnegan / Janna McDougall vs JULIE ANDREWS / Anthony Hadfield6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesAndalib Khan / Anita Rockwell vs JT Smith / Cheryl Hopkins7-5, 6-2
2020-02-23Won 2–0
W#2 DoublesJinquan Wu / Andalib Khan vs Lori Zoborowski / Rand Zoborowski6-4, 6-3
W#3 DoublesJing Feng / Justin Shull vs Yanchen Qi / Robert Wendland6-1, 6-1
2020-02-16Won 2–0
W#2 DoublesJustin Shull / Janna McDougall vs Kaie Wellman / Allen VanLeuven6-1, 6-0
W#3 DoublesAnne Lang / Edmund Yuan vs Lana Lane / Douglas Walker6-4, 6-3
2020-02-08Split 1–1
L#1 DoublesWonKyu Kim / Karen Dellinger vs Paul Harwood / Diane di Vito6-4, 6-1
W#2 DoublesAndalib Khan / Anita Rockwell vs Jay Mark / Bin He6-4, 6-2
2020-02-02Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesJustin Shull / Janna McDougall vs Guy Neal / Sheila Schmidt6-1, 6-1
W#2 DoublesJinquan Wu / Andalib Khan vs Matt Bolte / Gail Bolte6-2, 6-3
W#3 DoublesJing Feng / Kirk Planck vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2020-01-31Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesWonKyu Kim / Karen Dellinger vs N/A6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesJane Shu / Greg Finnegan vs Daniel Turner / KEELEY PLOMBON6-1, 6-3
W#3 DoublesAndalib Khan / Anita Rockwell vs Jeff Marshall / Gabriela McIntosh6-1, 6-2
2020-01-26Split 1–1
W#1 DoublesEdmund Yuan / Sharon Chastain vs Mark Meyer / Kristin Eckelman6-1, 6-4
L#2 DoublesJane Shu / Greg Finnegan vs Joe Conyard / Brooke Daniel5-7, 6-3, 1-0
2020-01-10Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesLarry Hermida / Anita Rockwell vs Michael Callahan / Sharon Vipond6-2, 7-5
L#2 DoublesKirk Planck / Sharon Chastain vs Dan Bingham / Gina Meyer6-4, 6-4
L#3 DoublesWonKyu Kim / Karen Dellinger vs Brenner Daniels / Mary Beth Thomsen6-1, 6-7, 1-0
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.
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.

4
Janna McDougall
58W–34L career
not enough data
—
4
Karen Dellinger
141W–68L career
1%99%0%
3.74
4
Justin Shull
136W–38L career
2%98%0%
3.70
3.5
Anita Rockwell
124W–51L career
0%80%20%
3.50
3.5
Edmund Yuan
113W–86L career
0%96%4%
3.40
3.5
Andalib Khan
60W–32L career
0%94%6%
3.39
3.5
Jing Feng
113W–80L career
1%99%0%
3.25
3.5
Kirk Planck
91W–71L career
6%94%0%
3.15
3.5
Jane Shu
79W–33L career
6%94%0%
3.14
3.5
WonKyu Kim
78W–64L career
22%78%0%
3.05

Three percentages are the year-end projection — chance of moving down, staying, moving up — and the number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. 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.