Teams

IA/Nesteby-Schadler/18&Over3.5M

2026 IA 18 & Over Adult League · 3.5 Men

11 players · average NTRP 3.50 / IOWA

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2026-05-02vs Randall: ElmcrestWon 31
W#1 DoublesJake Flanders / Steve Armstrong vs Drew Pierson / Matthew Foxhoven6-1, 6-3
W#1 SinglesDaniel Huff vs Samuel Patten6-1, 6-0
L#2 DoublesSteven Nesteby / Paolo Marilim vs Robert Tyler / Philip Wasta6-7, 7-6, 0-1
W#2 SinglesJeff Schadler vs Thomas Ross6-4, 6-1
2026-04-11vs Randall: ElmcrestWon 32
L#1 DoublesSteven Nesteby / Joseph Millam vs Patrick Cosgrove / Michael Damisch6-1, 3-6, 0-1
W#1 SinglesDaniel Huff vs Samuel Patten6-4, 6-3
L#2 DoublesJeff Schadler / Paolo Marilim vs Tom Randall / Ryan Sundermann6-2, 4-6, 0-1
W#2 SinglesNathan Harmon vs Jake Thomsen6-3, 3-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesJon Hinkhouse / Steve Armstrong vs Matthew Foxhoven / Philip Wasta6-4, 6-3
2026-03-28vs Randall: ElmcrestWon 21
W#1 DoublesSteven Nesteby / Ryan Geerts vs Patrick Cosgrove / Philip Wasta6-0, 6-7, 1-0
W#1 SinglesDaniel Huff vs Tom Randall6-0, 6-1
L#2 DoublesSteve Armstrong / Jeff Hightshoe vs Jake Thomsen / Tim Carstensen0-6, 6-4, 0-1
2026-02-21vs Randall: ElmcrestWon 50
W#1 DoublesJoseph Millam / Nathan Harmon vs Tom Randall / Jeffrey Garner6-4, 6-2
W#1 SinglesDaniel Huff vs Jake Thomsen6-2, 6-2
W#2 DoublesJeff Schadler / Jeff Hightshoe vs Bruce Croy / Ryan Sundermann6-2, 6-4
W#2 SinglesRyan Geerts vs Thomas Ross7-5, 6-3
W#3 DoublesJake Flanders / Steve Armstrong vs Steven Odegaard / Philip Wasta6-4, 6-4
2026-02-07vs Randall: ElmcrestWon 21
W#1 DoublesDaniel Huff / Steven Nesteby vs Drew Pierson / Greg Ervin6-0, 7-5
W#2 DoublesNathan Harmon / Ryan Geerts vs Matthew Foxhoven / Samuel Patten6-4, 7-5
L#3 DoublesJon Hinkhouse / Steve Armstrong vs Patrick Cosgrove / Tim Carstensen2-6, 4-6
2026-01-17vs Randall: ElmcrestWon 32
L#1 DoublesJeff Schadler / Steve Armstrong vs Michael Damisch / Robert Tyler4-6, 6-7
W#1 SinglesNathan Harmon vs Jake Thomsen7-6, 6-3
W#2 DoublesJon Hinkhouse / Jake Flanders vs Tom Randall / Tim Carstensen1-6, 7-6, 1-0
W#2 SinglesDaniel Huff vs Bruce Croy6-0, 6-3
L#3 DoublesSteven Nesteby / Jeff Hightshoe vs Matthew Foxhoven / Samuel Patten2-6, 6-0, 0-1
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 · 3.5 Men
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1IAWC/Versteeg-Wilker/18&Over3.5M7131924263
2IA/Nesteby-Schadler/18&Over3.5M42181227245
3Johnson & Almquist: Ames35142656373
4Kakade & Selby: Genesis35132758428
5Randall: Elmcrest24121841278

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 3.32 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.

3.50
Daniel Huff
usually #1 Singles 67%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published 3.5
3.38
Nathan Harmon
usually #2 Doubles 25%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.37
Jeff Schadler
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
3.37
Joseph Millam
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.32
Ryan Geerts
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #2 Singles 33% · published
3.31
Steve Armstrong
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
3.30
Jake Flanders
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.27
Jeff Hightshoe
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.27
Steven Nesteby
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
3.23
Jon Hinkhouse
usually #2 Doubles 29%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published
3.17
Paolo Marilim
usually #2 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.

Jeff Schadler + Steve Armstrong2647% games−4.4% vs expected
Jeff Hightshoe + Steve Armstrong2354% gamesnot enough data
Steven Nesteby + Paolo Marilim224 matchesnot enough data
Steven Nesteby + Ryan Geerts213 matchesnot enough data
Jake Flanders + Steve Armstrong303 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.

3.5
Daniel Huff
11W–5L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%49%51%
3.50
Nathan Harmon
6W–0L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%81%19%
3.38
Jeff Schadler
33W–23L career · 4 lines in 2026
<1%81%18%
3.37
Joseph Millam
3W–7L career · 3 lines in 2026
<1%82%18%
3.37
Ryan Geerts
13W–4L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%89%10%
3.32
Steve Armstrong
12W–18L career · 6 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.31
Jake Flanders
15W–9L career · 3 lines in 2026
2%91%8%
3.30
Jeff Hightshoe
29W–22L career · 3 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.27
Steven Nesteby
26W–31L career · 5 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.27
Jon Hinkhouse
18W–2L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%5%95%
3.23
Paolo Marilim
12W–6L career · 2 lines in 2026
11%88%1%
3.17

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.