Teams

LCTA (A) 3.5M 70 & Over (Peiffer)

70 & Over Doubles · 3.5 Men

12 players · average NTRP 3.50 / SOUTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2026-04-16vs LCTA70/Geller/Pine ForestLost 12
L#1 DoublesHank Adorno / Jack Barker vs Cliff Bernstein / Leon Geller7-5, 3-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesJohn Baiardi / Daniel Hill vs Daryl Bishop / Raymond Lloyd5-7, 1-6
W#3 DoublesMatthew Ellman / Michael Ward vs Mark Brodeur / Pete Lebhar6-2, 6-3
2026-04-09vs LCTA70/Garvin/MaybankWon 21
L#1 DoublesHank Adorno / Matthew Ellman vs Greg Garvan / Mark Laskowski4-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesWilliam Lark / Daniel Hill vs Bob Tamietti / Wen Chen6-7, 7-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesRobert Zimpfer / Robert Peiffer vs Jeff Young / Howard Chambers6-2, 6-1
2026-03-19vs LCTA70/Geller/Pine ForestWon 30
W#1 DoublesDavid Hubbard / Thomas Felix vs Frank Grubb / Daryl Bishop7-6, 6-2
W#2 DoublesHank Adorno / Jack Barker vs Jack Buchanan / Raymond Lloyd7-5, 6-1
W#3 DoublesMichael Ward / Matthew Ellman vs Pete Lebhar / Kenneth Dauses3-6, 6-2, 1-0
2026-03-12vs LCTA70/Garvin/MaybankWon 30
W#1 DoublesHank Adorno / Jack Barker vs Greg Garvan / Paul Lambert6-2, 6-0
W#2 DoublesThomas Felix / David Hubbard vs Mark Laskowski / Joseph John6-3, 6-4
W#3 DoublesMatthew Ellman / Michael Ward vs Bob Tamietti / Bernard Mcfadden6-0, 6-0
2026-02-26vs LCTA70/Geller/Pine ForestWon 21
W#1 DoublesHank Adorno / Jack Barker vs Donald Balderson / Pete Lebhar6-2, 6-0
L#2 DoublesDavid Hubbard / Michael Ward vs Cliff Bernstein / Leon Geller5-7, 4-6
W#3 DoublesThomas Felix / Robert Zimpfer vs Daryl Bishop / Raymond Lloyd6-3, 5-7, 1-0
2026-02-19vs LCTA70/Garvin/MaybankWon 21
L#1 DoublesDavid Hubbard / Michael Ward vs Greg Garvan / Mark Laskowski4-6, 5-7
W#2 DoublesHank Adorno / Matthew Ellman vs Drew Kapur / Wen Chen6-3, 6-1
W#3 DoublesThomas Felix / Robert Zimpfer vs David Brennan / Jeff Young6-2, 6-0
2026-02-13vs LCTA70/Geller/Pine ForestWon 30
W#1 DoublesHank Adorno / Jack Barker vs Daryl Bishop / Pete Lebhar6-3, 6-0
W#2 DoublesDavid Hubbard / Michael Ward vs Donald Balderson / Raymond Lloyd6-3, 6-2
W#3 DoublesWilliam Lark / Thomas Felix vs Frank Grubb / Richmond Welch7-6, 6-2
2026-02-10vs LCTA70/Garvin/MaybankWon 30
W#1 DoublesJohn Baiardi / Jack Barker vs David Brennan / Wen Chen6-1, 6-2
W#2 DoublesDavid Hubbard / Michael Ward vs Bob Tamietti / Paul Lambert6-0, 6-1
W#3 DoublesThomas Felix / William Lark vs Mark Laskowski / Jeff Young6-2, 6-1
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 standings3 teams · 3.5 Men
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1LCTA (A) 3.5M 70 & Over (Peiffer)7119513155
2LCTA70/Geller/Pine Forest53141021198
3LCTA70/Garvin/Maybank0832142283

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 3.42 estimated across 9 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.

3.70
Jack Barker
usually #1 Doubles 83%, also #2 Doubles 17% · published 3.5
3.66
Hank Adorno
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
3.52
David Hubbard
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.41
Michael Ward
usually #3 Doubles 43%, also #2 Doubles 43% · published
3.35
Thomas Felix
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published
3.33
John Baiardi
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
3.32
William Lark
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.26
Matthew Ellman
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published
3.26
Robert Zimpfer
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Daniel Hill
published 3.5
Jim Geiger
published
Robert Peiffer
usually #3 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.

Jack Barker + John Baiardi6065% games+15.1% vs expected
Jack Barker + Hank Adorno18174% games+7.6% vs expected
Michael Ward + Matthew Ellman191056% games+5.6% vs expected
Hank Adorno + Matthew Ellman4261% games−5.9% vs expected
Michael Ward + David Hubbard51342% games−6.7% vs expected
Hank Adorno + Thomas Felix5079% gamesnot enough data
Michael Ward + Hank Adorno213 matchesnot enough data
David Hubbard + William Lark123 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
Jack Barker
38W–23L career · type A · 6 lines in 2026
<1%6%94%
3.70
3.5
Hank Adorno
68W–13L career · type A · 7 lines in 2026
<1%12%88%
3.66
3.5
David Hubbard
58W–90L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%45%55%
3.52
Michael Ward
53W–49L career · 7 lines in 2026
<1%76%24%
3.41
Thomas Felix
28W–19L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%87%13%
3.35
John Baiardi
50W–37L career · 2 lines in 2026
1%90%9%
3.33
William Lark
63W–49L career · 3 lines in 2026
1%91%8%
3.32
Matthew Ellman
67W–52L career · 5 lines in 2026
2%94%3%
3.26
Robert Zimpfer
7W–4L career · 3 lines in 2026
2%94%3%
3.26
3.5
Daniel Hill
7W–14L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Jim Geiger
10W–16L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Robert Peiffer
1W–11L career · 1 line 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.