← Teams

SHC-Christensen/Socolofsky

2025 Adult 40 & Over · 4.0 Men

10 players · average NTRP 3.95 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.60 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.

3.94
Marcus Kroloff
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
—
Brad Socolofsky
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
—
Brian Theobald
usually #1 Singles 100% · published 4
—
Jason Crawford
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
—
Ted Rose
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.70
Sam Bradshaw
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.66
Pete Stirling
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.54
Jonathan Caplan
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.41
Don Ormsby
usually #1 Singles 80%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published 4
3.38
Russ DeMoss
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
Results8 ties
2025-03-09Won 2–1
W#1 DoublesJae Joon Kang / Marcus Kroloff vs Deepak Selvanathan / Ajay Kumar Tippisetti7-5, 6-4
W#2 DoublesPete Stirling / Hector M Salomon vs Saril Valiyaparambil / Martin von Haartman6-2, 2-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesBrad Socolofsky / Russ DeMoss vs Richard Shih / Eddie Shin6-2, 6-4
2025-03-01Won 2–0
W#1 SinglesDon Ormsby vs Brent Grubb6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesRuss DeMoss / Sam Bradshaw vs Pete Jacobs / James Ringelberg7-6, 7-6
2025-02-16Lost 1–2
L#1 SinglesDon Ormsby vs Ben Merritt7-5, 6-3
L#2 DoublesMarcus Kroloff / Bill Christensen vs Doug Post / Julian Illingworth2-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#3 DoublesSam Bradshaw / Russ DeMoss vs Patrick Herbst / Tyler Forrest6-2, 6-2
2025-02-08Won 3–0
W#1 SinglesBrian Theobald vs Thomas Huff6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesSam Bradshaw / Matt Brown vs Ernie Levenson / Warren Hill6-0, 6-3
W#3 DoublesTed Rose / Russ DeMoss vs John Convery / Patrick Donnelly6-2, 7-6
2025-02-02Won 2–0
W#1 SinglesDon Ormsby vs Frank Mathews6-4, 7-5
W#2 DoublesJonathan Caplan / Marcus Kroloff vs Peter Johnson / Peter Singson6-1, 6-4
2025-01-12Lost 0–3
L#1 SinglesBrian Theobald vs Franco Rosete6-4, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesBill Christensen / Jonathan Caplan vs Todd Kuribayashi / Jack Yothers6-2, 7-6
L#3 DoublesDon Ormsby / Brad Socolofsky vs Wahyu Setyawan / Aman Wasu7-5, 7-5
2025-01-10Won 2–1
W#1 DoublesSam Bradshaw / Michael Chang vs Jim DeWeese / John Barnes6-3, 6-0
L#1 SinglesBrian Theobald vs Frank O'Mahony6-0, 6-4
W#3 DoublesBill Christensen / Ted Rose vs Jeffrey Gates / Matt Hagen6-3, 6-4
2025-01-05Won 3–1
L#1 DoublesPete Stirling / Jason Crawford vs Jack Carlson / Philip Stephenson3-6, 6-3, 1-0
W#1 SinglesDon Ormsby vs Eric Peterson6-4, 6-4
W#2 DoublesRuss DeMoss / Hector M Salomon vs Rich Rice / Parth Pandey7-5, 6-0
W#3 DoublesMatt Brown / Jonathan Caplan vs Steve Martini / Jason Moore-Greenke6-1, 6-0
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
Marcus Kroloff
33W–11L career
0%86%14%
3.94
4
Brad Socolofsky
15W–32L career
not enough data
—
4
Brian Theobald
13W–15L career
not enough data
—
4
Jason Crawford
33W–25L career
not enough data
—
4
Ted Rose
7W–2L career
not enough data
—
4
Sam Bradshaw
30W–19L career
4%96%0%
3.70
4
Pete Stirling
23W–16L career
7%93%0%
3.66
4
Jonathan Caplan
37W–61L career
24%76%0%
3.54
4
Don Ormsby
21W–45L career
58%42%0%
3.41
3.5
Russ DeMoss
84W–42L career · type A
0%97%3%
3.38

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.