Teams

Serving Smiles

2026 Mixed 40 and Over League · 7.0

13 players · average NTRP 3.64 / MAUI

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2026-08-09vs Wells GangWon 21
W#1 DoublesJennifer Goldyn / Pete Goldyn vs Susan Armstrong / Gary Oshiro0-6, 7-5, 1-0
L#2 DoublesNobuo Kitayama / Claire Bowman vs Evangeline Roxas-Butlig / Richard Butlig1-6, 5-7
W#3 DoublesHiromi Kitayama / Reid Bowman vs Diane Chaves / Reuben Dela Cruz4-6, 6-4, 1-0
2026-08-08vs Mike 7.0-2Won 30
W#1 DoublesPete Goldyn / Jennifer Goldyn vs Kevin Kato / Barbara Grandon6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesJamie Iredale / Tesha Newman vs Don Booth / Cynthia Sawyer6-2, 7-5
W#3 DoublesNobuo Kitayama / Hiromi Kitayama vs Steve Ulene / Gail Matsui7-5, 6-4
2026-08-01vs Mike 7.0-1Lost 12
L#1 DoublesJamie Iredale / Tesha Newman vs Ricky Tobita / Erika Varcak3-6, 3-6
L#2 DoublesBrad Helman / Linda Moore vs Justin Simpson / Jill Kanahele5-7, 1-6
W#3 DoublesNobuo Kitayama / Hiromi Kitayama vs James Simmons / shar martin3-6, 6-4, 1-0
2026-07-26vs Wells GangWon 21
L#1 DoublesReid Bowman / Claire Bowman vs Wayne Feike / Carol Lam0-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesNobuo Kitayama / Nan Li vs Gary Oshiro / Susan Armstrong6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesBrad Helman / Hiromi Kitayama vs David Raatz / Lore Lee Robello6-0, 6-2
2026-07-19vs MCC Hawaiian HustleLost 12
L#1 DoublesLee Wolfe / Claire Bowman vs Justin Prouty / Gina Teliho6-7, 6-7
L#2 DoublesNobuo Kitayama / Hiromi Kitayama vs Laurel Falit / Yeshua Goodman4-6, 6-4, 0-1
W#3 DoublesNan Li / Daniel Medina vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2026-07-18vs Mike 7.0-2Won 21
W#1 DoublesLee Wolfe / Nan Li vs Tom Keirnes / Cynthia Sawyer6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesBrad Helman / Linda Moore vs Ryan Brittle / Linda Lau6-0, 6-2
L#3 DoublesShara Wolfe / Reid Bowman vs Steve Ulene / Tamara Farwig3-6, 7-5, 0-1
2026-07-12vs MCC Hawaiian HustleWon 21
W#1 DoublesShara Wolfe / Jamie Iredale vs Laurel Falit / Mark Reedy7-5, 6-3
W#2 DoublesNan Li / Nobuo Kitayama vs Melanie Devereux / Curt DeCrinis6-0, 6-2
L#3 DoublesLinda Moore / Daniel Medina vs Jonathan Yudis / Natalie Plotkin5-7, 6-7
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 standings5 teams · 7.0
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Mike 7.0-16115614144
2Serving Smiles5213819172
3MCC Hawaiian Hustle4211717167
4Wells Gang25101125187
5Mike 7.0-20721939248

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 3.46 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.

3.97
Brad Helman
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.88
Nobuo Kitayama
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.77
Lee Wolfe
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.70
Jennifer Goldyn
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.65
Daniel Medina
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.60
Tesha Newman
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.41
Shara Wolfe
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.38
Jamie Iredale
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.24
Reid Bowman
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
2.78
Hiromi Kitayama
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3
2.71
Claire Bowman
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3
Nan Li
published
Pete Goldyn
usually #1 Doubles 100% · 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.

Lee Wolfe + Shara Wolfe8554% gamesnot enough data
Nobuo Kitayama + Hiromi Kitayama213 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
Brad Helman
65W–35L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%58%42%
3.97
4
Nobuo Kitayama
10W–2L career · type S · 8 lines in 2026
<1%81%19%
3.88
4
Lee Wolfe
42W–20L career · 4 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.77
4
Jennifer Goldyn
65W–41L career · 2 lines in 2026
8%91%2%
3.70
4
Daniel Medina
44W–56L career · 3 lines in 2026
15%85%1%
3.65
3.5
Tesha Newman
86W–61L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%23%77%
3.60
3.5
Shara Wolfe
97W–35L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%75%25%
3.41
3.5
Jamie Iredale
3W–3L career · type S · 3 lines in 2026
<1%80%20%
3.38
3.5
Reid Bowman
1W–2L career · type S · 3 lines in 2026
4%93%3%
3.24
3
Hiromi Kitayama
4W–1L career · type S · 5 lines in 2026
2%92%6%
2.78
3
Claire Bowman
0W–3L career · type S · 3 lines in 2026
7%91%2%
2.71
Nan Li
0W–4L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Pete Goldyn
2W–0L 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.