← Teams

MV-Harbell

2024 Mixed 40 & Over · 7.0 Mixed

9 players · average NTRP 3.5 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.49 estimated across 4 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.

3.75
Mary Chennault
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.67
Alex Harbell
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.29
Julie Arness
usually #1 Doubles 71%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 3.5
3.27
Cecile Bamer
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
—
Michael Lemmons
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
—
Stephanie Harbell
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 17% · published 3
—
Craig Mcreary
usually #2 Doubles 86%, also #1 Doubles 14% · published 0
—
Randy Walker
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 0
—
Tony Chennault
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 0
Results8 ties
2024-03-10Split 1–1
W#1 DoublesCraig Mcreary / Cecile Bamer vs Mihee Park / Kok Waii Wong7-6, 6-3
L#3 DoublesMichael Lemmons / Stephanie Harbell vs Yukiko Namba / Leo Keppinger6-2, 6-1
2024-03-02Split 1–1
W#1 DoublesJulie Arness / Alex Harbell vs Morgan Cowling / Daniel Turner2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesCecile Bamer / Craig Mcreary vs HOLLY LIBERATORE / Alex McIntosh6-4, 6-4
2024-02-18Won 2–0
W#1 DoublesJulie Arness / Alex Harbell vs Nina Bakos / Justin Levinsohn6-1, 6-1
W#2 DoublesCraig Mcreary / Stephanie Harbell vs Annette Hill / Tri Pham6-4, 6-3
2024-02-10Won 2–1
W#1 DoublesAlex Harbell / Julie Arness vs Astrid Andreu / Robert Broad6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesCraig Mcreary / Cecile Bamer vs Melissa Smith / Jason Dortch6-1, 6-1
L#3 DoublesRandy Walker / Karen Walker vs Tony Moreno / Dayna Jahnke-Corwin6-2, 6-2
2024-02-03Lost 1–2
W#1 DoublesAlex Harbell / Stephanie Harbell vs Shaoping Lin / Christina Bergstrom6-3, 6-4
L#2 DoublesCraig Mcreary / Cecile Bamer vs Pete Kovalenko / Kyra John6-4, 3-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJulie Arness / Rich Johnson vs Michael Jansen / Rochelle Pluymers6-4, 4-6, 1-0
2024-01-27Lost 1–2
W#1 DoublesAlex Harbell / Karen Walker vs James Takahashi / Lisa Hockman6-4, 2-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesCraig Mcreary / Stephanie Harbell vs THAO VAN / TRIET NGUYEN6-7, 6-2, 1-0
L#3 DoublesRandy Walker / Julie Arness vs Hien Lu / Sandi Martes6-3, 6-0
2024-01-20Won 3–0
W#1 DoublesAlex Harbell / Julie Arness vs Tommy Albo / Parish Burns6-2, 6-4
W#2 DoublesStephanie Harbell / Tony Chennault vs Gabriela McIntosh / Craig Wallachy6-3, 7-5
W#3 DoublesMary Chennault / Michael Lemmons vs Maya Mori / Alex McIntosh1-6, 7-6, 1-0
2024-01-07Lost 1–2
L#1 DoublesJulie Arness / Rich Johnson vs Craig Frasier / Laura Rundle6-2, 6-3
W#2 DoublesStephanie Harbell / Craig Mcreary vs Cathy Gatzke / Cary Gatzke6-4, 5-7, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMichael Lemmons / Mary Chennault vs Timothea Barnatan / Colin Looi7-6, 5-7, 1-0
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.
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.

4
Mary Chennault
106W–57L career
1%98%1%
3.75
4
Alex Harbell
127W–53L career
5%95%0%
3.67
3.5
Julie Arness
84W–57L career
1%98%1%
3.29
3.5
Cecile Bamer
16W–15L career
5%91%4%
3.27
3
Michael Lemmons
25W–30L career
not enough data
—
3
Stephanie Harbell
70W–26L career
not enough data
—
0
Craig Mcreary
45W–43L career
not enough data
—
0
Randy Walker
20W–27L career
not enough data
—
0
Tony Chennault
37W–27L career
not enough data
—

Three percentages are the year-end projection — chance of moving down, staying, moving up — and the number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. 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.