← Teams

VTC-Shook/Darling

2025 Adult 70 & Over · 70 & Over Men

10 players · average NTRP 3 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 2.86 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.

3.22
Robert Piercy
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
3.12
Mister Archedon
published 3.5
3.09
Steve Thunstedt
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.05
Lee Wiegand
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.92
David Shook
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3
2.82
Steven Darling
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.70
Jeff Sunshine
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
2.48
Robert Hillison
published 2.5
2.34
Wesley Eader
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 2.5
—
Walter Schwane
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 2.5
Results8 ties
2025-08-29Lost 0–2
L#1 DoublesKen Embree / Robert Piercy vs Mark Becker / James Horen5-7, 6-2, 1-0
L#2 DoublesSteven Darling / Greg Luevano vs Norman Langston / William Pettis6-4, 6-4
2025-08-21Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesRobert Piercy / Lee Wiegand vs Mark Rothert / Douglas Walker2-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesSteven Darling / Steve Thunstedt vs Eugene Avery / Christopher Thomas7-5, 6-1
L#3 DoublesMister Archedon / Wesley Eader vs Jim Gerber / Paul Leibowitz6-4, 4-6, 1-0
2025-08-14Lost 0–1
L#2 DoublesDavid Shook / Bob McBride vs Scott Quinn / Richard Clark6-3, 6-5
2025-08-07Won 2–1
W#1 DoublesKen Embree / Lee Wiegand vs Jim George / Jed Macy6-0, 6-3
L#2 DoublesSteve Thunstedt / Bob McBride vs Keith Jones / Paul Blankenmeister6-3, 6-3
W#3 DoublesWalter Schwane / Robert Hillison vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2025-07-23Split 1–1
W#1 DoublesMister Archedon / Lee Wiegand vs James Horen / Greg van Gasse6-7, 7-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesSteven Darling / David Shook vs Thomas Mehlhorn / Jim Borell6-2, 6-4
2025-06-25Lost 1–2
L#1 DoublesKen Embree / Steve Thunstedt vs Ed Kohos / Richard Gronostajski7-5, 6-4
W#2 DoublesWesley Eader / Robert Piercy vs Richard Clark / Paul Parkinson4-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 DoublesGreg Luevano / Walter Schwane vs Charles Ross / James Carey6-2, 6-1
2025-06-17Split 1–1
W#1 DoublesSteven Darling / Robert Piercy vs Paul Blankenmeister / Terry Casebeer6-0, 6-2
L#2 DoublesWesley Eader / Bob McBride vs Keith Jones / Doug Cumming6-3, 6-2
2025-06-03Won 2–1
L#1 DoublesMister Archedon / David Shook vs Terence Gariety / Mark Rothert6-4, 6-4
W#2 DoublesRobert Piercy / Ken Embree vs Eugene Avery / Christopher Thomas6-2, 6-0
W#3 DoublesJeff Sunshine / Steve Thunstedt vs Stanley Zaklan / Alan Karpinski4-6, 6-2, 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.

3.5
Robert Piercy
88W–79L career
1%99%0%
3.22
3.5
Mister Archedon
108W–47L career
7%93%0%
3.12
3.5
Steve Thunstedt
32W–46L career · type S
25%74%1%
3.09
3
Lee Wiegand
62W–61L career · type A
0%70%30%
3.05
3
David Shook
34W–36L career
0%91%9%
2.92
3
Steven Darling
63W–87L career
0%99%1%
2.82
3
Jeff Sunshine
21W–22L career
6%93%1%
2.70
2.5
Robert Hillison
18W–8L career · type A
0%41%59%
2.48
2.5
Wesley Eader
55W–103L career · type A
0%79%21%
2.34
2.5
Walter Schwane
20W–38L 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.