← Teams

THPRD-Mounts/Rich

2020 Adult 55 & Over · 7.0 Men

8 players · average NTRP 3.14 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 2.86 estimated across 6 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.

—
Clay Funkhouser
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.15
Kirk Planck
usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
2.91
Aaron Bowman
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.90
Michael Rich
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.87
Jim Mounts
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.83
Jeff Gonzales
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.51
George Scott
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
—
Steve Sanford
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 0
Results8 ties
2019-11-17Lost 1–2
L#1 DoublesJeff Gonzales / Kirk Planck vs Mike Baker / Ken Pacioni3-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesClay Funkhouser / Steve Sanford vs Terry Casebeer / Michael Siebers6-2, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesGeorge Scott / Page Watts vs Jim George / Douglas Stirling6-1, 6-2
2019-11-10Lost 1–2
L#1 DoublesJeff Gonzales / Michael Rich vs Terry Casebeer / David Swanson6-1, 6-3
L#2 DoublesKirk Planck / Anthony Kershaw vs Ken Pacioni / Oscar Polo6-4, 6-2
W#3 DoublesAaron Bowman / Jim Mounts vs Jim George / Douglas Stirling6-4, 6-3
2019-11-02Won 2–0
W#1 DoublesPaul Stutzman / Jeff Gonzales vs Tom Tsuruta / Steven Garlock6-1, 6-7, 1-0
W#2 DoublesKirk Planck / Page Watts vs James Prouty / Daniel Moore Jr6-0, 6-0
2019-10-27Lost 1–2
L#1 DoublesJeff Gonzales / Clay Funkhouser vs Randy Boose / Gordon Osaka6-2, 6-4
L#2 DoublesPaul Stutzman / Michael Rich vs David Keller / Jim Gerber7-5, 6-3
W#3 DoublesAaron Bowman / Kirk Planck vs Dave Brown / Scott Beall4-6, 6-3, 1-0
2019-10-12Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesSteve Sanford / Kirk Planck vs Robert Wendland / Steven Garlock6-3, 6-1
W#2 DoublesClay Funkhouser / Paul Stutzman vs Douglas Metzker / James Prouty6-0, 6-2
W#3 DoublesPage Watts / Michael Rich vs Daniel Moore Jr / Neil Nathanson6-3, 6-1
2019-10-05Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesMichael Rich / Paul Stutzman vs Lynn Marzette / Alex Mazzia2-6, 6-2, 1-0
L#2 DoublesPage Watts / George Scott vs Jon Peters / Charles Hahn6-3, 6-2
L#3 DoublesJim Mounts / Anthony Kershaw vs Hayward Reed / Mark Muckerheide6-0, 6-3
2019-09-29Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesMichael Rich / Paul Stutzman vs Tony Moreno / Stan Ihori6-2, 6-0
L#2 DoublesClay Funkhouser / Jeff Gonzales vs Craig Mills / RICK ROGOWAY6-4, 7-6
L#3 DoublesCharles Duncan / Jim Mounts vs Glen Mitzel / Brian Noll7-6, 6-3
2019-09-22Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesSteve Sanford / Clay Funkhouser vs Bill Lowblad / Andrew Kitchen6-4, 6-3
L#2 DoublesMichael Rich / Jeff Gonzales vs Alan Potts / Mark Becker6-0, 6-3
L#3 DoublesPage Watts / Jim Mounts vs Ronald Meier / Makoto Sakaguchi6-1, 4-6, 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.

3.5
Clay Funkhouser
37W–53L career
not enough data
—
3.5
Kirk Planck
91W–71L career
6%94%0%
3.15
3
Aaron Bowman
30W–58L career
0%93%7%
2.91
3
Michael Rich
45W–77L career
0%95%5%
2.90
3
Jim Mounts
59W–65L career
0%96%4%
2.87
3
Jeff Gonzales
19W–58L career
0%98%2%
2.83
3
George Scott
26W–78L career
35%65%0%
2.51
0
Steve Sanford
31W–35L career
not enough data
—

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.