Teams

Webster 40s 8.5 Combo M Tues PM

2024 Piedmont Combo 40 & Over · 8.5 Men 40+ Tues PM

10 players · average NTRP 4.00 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
W#1 DoublesNeal Dorman / Neal Lewis vs Anthony Decandia / Robert Lough6-3, 7-6
W#3 DoublesJon Post / Peter Glud vs Brooks Jackson / Keith Black6-4, 7-6
2024-10-01vs Rosario 40s 8.5 Combo M Tues PMLost 01
L#3 DoublesPeter Glud / Neal Lewis vs Bryan Vescio / Amiel Rossabi1-6, 4-6
W#2 DoublesNeal Lewis / Jeff Payne vs John Bradley / Peter Novosad2-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJon Post / Steve Webster vs Lee Picklesimer / Jeffrey Albright4-6, 3-6
2024-09-10vs Rosario 40s 8.5 Combo M Tues PMWon 10
W#1 DoublesNeal Lewis / Neal Dorman vs Andrew Hjelt / Raymond Rosario0-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJon Post / Glenn Mosseller vs Chuck Burns / Jason Altmann3-6, 6-7
2024-08-27vs Winter/OFRC 40s 8.5 Combo M Tues PMSplit 11
W#2 DoublesNeal Lewis / Neal Dorman vs Todd Palmer / Michael Xu6-1, 5-7, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJon Post / Jeff Payne vs Kenny Winter / Keith Black3-6, 5-7
W#2 DoublesNeal Lewis / Neal Dorman vs Michael Corthum / Peter Novosad6-3, 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 standings for 8.5 Men 40+ Tues PM have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 3.63 estimated across 7 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.

3.72
Jon Post
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.72
Eric Nocera
published
3.70
Glenn Mosseller
published
3.64
Hal Browne
published
3.63
Jeff Payne
published
3.52
Peter Glud
published
3.46
Matt Mallard
published
Gordon Huellmantel
published
Neal Dorman
published
Neal Lewis
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · 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.

Hal Browne + Glenn Mosseller1435% gamesnot enough data
Hal Browne + Gordon Huellmantel123 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
Jon Post
67W–36L career · 4 lines in 2024
6%92%2%
3.72
Eric Nocera
17W–24L career · no lines in 2024
6%92%2%
3.72
Glenn Mosseller
5W–11L career · no lines in 2024
7%91%2%
3.70
Hal Browne
7W–16L career · no lines in 2024
17%83%<1%
3.64
Jeff Payne
9W–6L career · no lines in 2024
19%81%<1%
3.63
Peter Glud
16W–18L career · no lines in 2024
45%55%<1%
3.52
Matt Mallard
4W–13L career · no lines in 2024
60%40%<1%
3.46
Gordon Huellmantel
1W–4L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Neal Dorman
1W–14L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
Neal Lewis
162W–71L career · 6 lines in 2024
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.