Teams

NNM Adult 65 & Over 8.0M McClanahan - JC

2025 USTA Adult 65 & Over League - NNM · 8.0 Men

14 players · average NTRP 3.93 / NORTHERN NEW MEXICO

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 →
Schedule7 played
W#1 DoublesCurtis Neeld / Steve Gutierrez vs Paul Wantuck / Frederick Ellis6-1, 6-0
L#2 DoublesDaniel McClanahan / David Mirabal vs Vahl Jackson / David Harnick6-4, 5-7, 0-1
L#3 DoublesJames Glacken / Richard Schaefer vs Rich Bechtold / Michael Lacey1-6, 0-6
L#1 DoublesDaniel McClanahan / Kaz Dziamka vs Stephen Post / Roger Prucino2-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesStephen Madeyski / Marck Wright vs Michael Fugate / Paul Black3-6, 7-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesDouglas Oltmans / Bruce Burnham vs David Harnick / Peter Martin1-6, 2-6
W#1 DoublesCurtis Neeld / Steve Gutierrez vs Stephen Post / Paul Black6-2, 7-6
L#2 DoublesMarck Wright / David Mirabal vs Peter Martin / David Harnick5-7, 6-4, 0-1
L#3 DoublesDavid Eisert / Douglas Oltmans vs Vahl Jackson / Peter Korsan1-6, 7-6, 0-1
L#1 DoublesRick McCormick / Daniel McClanahan vs Peter Martin / David Harnick3-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesDavid Mirabal / Stephen Madeyski vs Stephen Post / Roger Prucino7-6, 2-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesKaz Dziamka / Douglas Oltmans vs Michael Fugate / Robert Johnston6-7, 4-6
W#1 DoublesRick McCormick / Bruce Burnham vs Peter Martin / Michael Fugate6-3, 6-2
L#2 DoublesKaz Dziamka / Monte Woods vs Rich Bechtold / Robert Johnston3-6, 3-6
W#3 DoublesCurtis Neeld / Richard Schaefer vs David Harnick / Peter Korsan6-4, 6-1
W#1 DoublesMarck Wright / Stephen Madeyski vs Paul Wantuck / Michael Lacey6-1, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesDavid Eisert / Monte Woods vs David Harnick / Peter Martin2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesBruce Burnham / Douglas Oltmans vs Stephen Post / Roger Prucino4-6, 6-4, 0-1
L#1 DoublesDaniel McClanahan / David Eisert vs David Harnick / Peter Martin0-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesCurtis Neeld / Steve Gutierrez vs Paul Wantuck / Frederick Ellis6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesStephen Madeyski / Marck Wright vs Rich Bechtold / Michael Fugate6-2, 6-2
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 · 8.0 Men
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1NNM/Martin/Adult65&Over/8.0M Martin5214720179
2NNM Adult 65 & Over 8.0M McClanahan - JC2571429205

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 3.61 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.

Curtis Neeld
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
3.75
Stephen Madeyski
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
Douglas Oltmans
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
James Glacken
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.74
Rick McCormick
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.68
David Mirabal
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.63
Bruce Burnham
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.44
Steve Gutierrez
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published
3.42
Daniel McClanahan
usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
David Eisert
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
Kaz Dziamka
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Marck Wright
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
Monte Woods
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Richard Schaefer
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.

Daniel McClanahan + David Eisert8849% games+0.5% vs expected
David Mirabal + Rick McCormick5252% gamesnot enough data
Douglas Oltmans + Curtis Neeld4250% gamesnot enough data
Curtis Neeld + David Mirabal2454% gamesnot enough data
Douglas Oltmans + Stephen Madeyski224 matchesnot enough data
Marck Wright + Stephen Madeyski314 matchesnot enough data
Douglas Oltmans + Bruce Burnham033 matchesnot enough data
Douglas Oltmans + David Eisert123 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.

4.5
Curtis Neeld
36W–17L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Stephen Madeyski
60W–60L career · 4 lines in 2025
3%95%3%
3.75
4
Douglas Oltmans
49W–60L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
4
James Glacken
0W–2L career · type S · 1 line in 2025
not enough data
Rick McCormick
124W–73L career · 2 lines in 2025
3%94%2%
3.74
4
David Mirabal
29W–30L career · 3 lines in 2025
8%91%1%
3.68
4
Bruce Burnham
25W–22L career · 3 lines in 2025
17%83%<1%
3.63
Steve Gutierrez
131W–188L career · 10 lines in 2025
<1%67%32%
3.44
3.5
Daniel McClanahan
78W–105L career · 4 lines in 2025
<1%73%27%
3.42
3.5
David Eisert
30W–36L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Kaz Dziamka
11W–17L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Marck Wright
35W–35L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Monte Woods
26W–43L career · 2 lines in 2025
not enough data
Richard Schaefer
6W–19L career · no lines in 2025
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.