Teams

Frith 4.0 55 Spring

2026 Decatur Spring Adult 55 and Over · 4.0 Men

11 players · average NTRP 3.83 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2026-04-04vs DE - WadeWon 20
W#1 DoublesDANIEL FRITH / Newell Johnson vs James Steele / Gregory Edwards6-4, 4-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesRay Palmer / Eugene Schrock vs Perry Baker / Ron Chesser7-6, 7-5
2026-03-30vs DE - WadeLost 03
L#1 DoublesDANIEL FRITH / Ray Palmer vs Craig Satterfeal / James Steele4-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesNewell Johnson / Chuck Potter vs Johnny Maplesden / Paul Hebert3-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesDavid Collis / Stephen Crowell vs Kerwin Wade / Gregory Edwards3-6, 4-6
2026-03-24vs DE - WadeLost 12
L#1 DoublesChuck Potter / DANIEL FRITH vs Ron Chesser / Johnny Maplesden3-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesNewell Johnson / Eugene Schrock vs Patton Watson / James Steele5-7, 3-6
W#3 DoublesStephen Crowell / David Collis vs Kerwin Wade / Andrew Plankenhorn6-1, 4-6, 1-0
2026-03-14vs DE - WadeLost 02
L#1 DoublesJohn Smith / Chuck Potter vs Ron Chesser / Patton Watson6-2, 1-6, 0-1
L#2 DoublesCraig Hovan / Mike McCann vs Kenny Coffey / Kerwin Wade6-4, 3-6, 0-1
2026-03-10vs DE - WadeSplit 11
L#1 DoublesEugene Schrock / Mark Smith vs Ron Chesser / Johnny Maplesden4-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesDANIEL FRITH / Newell Johnson vs Kerwin Wade / Perry Baker7-6, 6-3
2026-03-07vs DE - WadeLost 12
W#1 DoublesJohn Smith / Kevin Strickland vs Patton Watson / Kenny Coffey3-6, 6-1, 1-0
L#2 DoublesMark Smith / Edwin Garner Jr vs Ron Chesser / Craig Satterfeal4-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesRay Palmer / Craig Hovan vs Andrew Plankenhorn / Paul Hebert7-6, 3-6, 0-1
2026-03-04vs DE - WadeLost 12
L#1 DoublesChuck Potter / John Smith vs Gregory Edwards / Patton Watson4-6, 6-0, 0-1
L#2 DoublesDANIEL FRITH / Edwin Garner Jr vs Johnny Maplesden / Kenny Coffey1-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesNewell Johnson / David Collis vs Perry Baker / Kerwin Wade6-2, 6-7, 1-0
2026-02-28vs DE - WadeLost 12
L#1 DoublesDavid Collis / Mark Smith vs Johnny Maplesden / Kenny Coffey2-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesMike McCann / Kevin Strickland vs Gregory Edwards / Paul Hebert3-6, 6-7
W#3 DoublesNewell Johnson / Eugene Schrock vs Kerwin Wade / Perry Baker7-5, 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 standings2 teams · 4.0 Men
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1DE - Wade62141024219
2Frith 4.0 55 Spring26101432224

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 3.57 estimated across 11 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.

3.81
Eugene Schrock
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.73
Kevin Strickland
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.70
DANIEL FRITH
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.59
Chuck Potter
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.55
Craig Hovan
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.53
Edwin Garner Jr
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.50
Ray Palmer
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.48
Mike McCann
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.45
David Collis
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.44
Stephen Crowell
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.44
Newell Johnson
usually #2 Doubles 36%, also #1 Doubles 36% · 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.

Stephen Crowell + Newell Johnson2448% games+3.5% vs expected
DANIEL FRITH + Chuck Potter3351% games−1.2% vs expected
Newell Johnson + DANIEL FRITH6451% games−1.9% vs expected
Eugene Schrock + Newell Johnson5253% games−2.8% vs expected
Stephen Crowell + David Collis5257% gamesnot enough data
Stephen Crowell + Edwin Garner Jr2445% gamesnot enough data
Newell Johnson + Mike McCann5065% gamesnot enough data
Newell Johnson + David Collis314 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
Eugene Schrock
16W–21L career · 4 lines in 2026
1%92%8%
3.81
Kevin Strickland
19W–17L career · 2 lines in 2026
4%94%2%
3.73
4
DANIEL FRITH
66W–36L career · 5 lines in 2026
7%92%1%
3.70
4
Chuck Potter
31W–21L career · 4 lines in 2026
24%76%<1%
3.59
3.5
Craig Hovan
88W–60L career · type A · 6 lines in 2026
<1%36%64%
3.55
4
Edwin Garner Jr
16W–25L career · 2 lines in 2026
40%60%<1%
3.53
Ray Palmer
40W–62L career · 3 lines in 2026
51%49%<1%
3.50
Mike McCann
27W–21L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%55%44%
3.48
3.5
David Collis
38W–17L career · 8 lines in 2026
<1%64%36%
3.45
Stephen Crowell
20W–24L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%67%32%
3.44
Newell Johnson
75W–85L career · 11 lines in 2026
<1%68%32%
3.44

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.