Teams

NIN FW 65&O 8.0 M: SB Toner

NIN FW Adult 65 & Over · NIN FW Adult 65 & Over 8.0 M

7 players · average NTRP 4.00 / NORTHERN INDIANA

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 →
Schedule3 played
2026-08-28vs NIN FW 65&O 8.0 M: FW PetersonWon 21
L#1 DoublesMichael Shetterly / Brian Norris vs Tim Koehl / Steve White2-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesSteven Chung / Joel Hostetler vs John Nichols / Peter Rogers6-0, 6-4
W#3 DoublesSteve Reed / Douglas Toner vs Joseph Justice / Joseph Kosnik6-3, 6-2
2026-08-21vs NIN FW 65&O 8.0 M: FW PetersonWon 30
W#1 DoublesBrian Norris / Michael Shetterly vs Tim Koehl / Steven Hibler7-5, 2-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJoseph Lee / Joel Hostetler vs Jay Gulyas / Mark Smith6-2, 6-3
W#3 DoublesDouglas Toner / Steve Reed vs Peter Rogers / Eric Smith6-3, 7-5
2026-08-16vs NIN FW 65&O 8.0 M: FW PetersonWon 21
L#1 DoublesSteven Chung / Michael Shetterly vs Tim Koehl / Steve White6-7, 4-6
W#2 DoublesBrian Norris / Joel Hostetler vs Steven Hibler / Mark Smith6-2, 6-4
W#3 DoublesJoseph Lee / William Mountford vs Eric Smith / Joseph Justice6-0, 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 · NIN FW Adult 65 & Over 8.0 M
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NIN FW 65&O 8.0 M: SB Toner000000
2NIN FW 65&O 8.0 M: FW Peterson000000

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 3.79 estimated across 5 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.

4.32
William Mountford
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.79
Steve Reed
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.67
Brian Norris
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.63
Joel Hostetler
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.54
Douglas Toner
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
Michael Shetterly
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Steven Chung
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.

Douglas Toner + Steve Reed8557% gamesnot enough data
Steven Chung + Steve Reed7256% gamesnot enough data
Steven Chung + Brian Norris5353% gamesnot enough data
William Mountford + Douglas Toner6063% gamesnot enough data
Michael Shetterly + Brian Norris4149% gamesnot enough data
Brian Norris + Steve Reed224 matchesnot enough data
Steven Chung + Douglas Toner123 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.

William Mountford
50W–8L career · 1 line in 2026
1%91%8%
4.32
Steve Reed
40W–17L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%93%6%
3.79
4
Brian Norris
44W–21L career · 3 lines in 2026
9%90%1%
3.67
Joel Hostetler
29W–29L career · 3 lines in 2026
16%84%<1%
3.63
4
Douglas Toner
44W–29L career · 2 lines in 2026
37%63%<1%
3.54
Michael Shetterly
12W–3L career · 3 lines in 2026
not enough data
Steven Chung
47W–22L career · no 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.