Teams

B6 Burkwood Harvey

2021 Richmond Adult 18 & Over Weekend · Richmond Adult 18 & Over Men 4.0

7 players · average NTRP 4.00 / VIRGINIA

View scouting list →
Schedule8 played
2021-06-06vs B1 ACAC Pfeiffer PoachersSplit 11
L#1 DoublesJeff Shifflett / Adam Decker vs Cliff Heller / Richard Sherman1-6, 2-6
W#3 DoublesSam McKelvey / Henry Rosenbaum vs Paul Davis / Josh Cohen4-6, 6-4, 1-0
2021-05-31vs B4 MTC PecciWon 20
W#2 DoublesAdam Decker / Billy Fulwider vs Tracy Marks / Peter Hornbach6-2, 6-2
W#2 SinglesSam McKelvey vs Christopher Kochensparger7-6, 6-2
2021-05-16vs B8 Deep Run Barnes Aging GunsSplit 11
L#1 SinglesSam McKelvey vs Colin Atkinson3-6, 1-6
W#2 DoublesAdam Decker / Henry Rosenbaum vs Brad Houff / John Evko7-6, 2-6, 1-0
2021-05-15vs B3 James River Stephens Surge 4.0Lost 01
L#2 DoublesSam McKelvey / Mario Wright vs Benjamin Andrews / Gary Reinhardt6-7, 6-3, 0-1
2021-04-25vs B7 Dominion KowalSplit 11
W#1 DoublesBilly Fulwider / Adam Decker vs Prabir Purohit / William Bales6-4, 6-1
L#2 SinglesSam McKelvey vs Ryan Thomas - (DQ)*2-6, 0-6
W#1 DoublesAdam Decker / Jeff Shifflett vs STEPHEN KENNEDY / Michael Oberleitner4-6, 6-2, 1-0
W#2 SinglesSam McKelvey vs THOMAS HONG6-2, 6-2
2021-04-11vs B8 Deep Run Barnes Aging GunsLost 02
L#1 SinglesSam McKelvey vs Geoff Campbell5-7, 2-6
L#3 DoublesMichael Hazelwood / Adam Decker vs Mahesh Sukumaran / Stuart Dowdy1-6, 6-3, 0-1
2021-04-04vs B1 ACAC Pfeiffer PoachersWon 10
W#1 DoublesBilly Fulwider / Adam Decker vs Richard Sherman / Michael Blackburn7-5, 2-6, 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.

Flight standings for Richmond Adult 18 & Over Men 4.0 have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

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 3.82 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.

4.22
Billy Fulwider
published 4.5
3.96
Keith Harvey
published
3.86
Adam Decker
usually #1 Doubles 57%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published 4
3.78
Sam McKelvey
usually #2 Singles 43%, also #1 Singles 29% · published 4
3.62
Michael Hazelwood
published
3.46
Mario Wright
published
Henry Rosenbaum
published 3.5
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.

Adam Decker + Sam McKelvey6153% gamesnot 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
Billy Fulwider
0W–3L career · no lines in 2021
4%94%2%
4.22
Keith Harvey
16W–11L career · no lines in 2021
62%38%<1%
3.96
4
Adam Decker
149W–62L career · 7 lines in 2021
<1%85%14%
3.86
4
Sam McKelvey
158W–91L career · 7 lines in 2021
1%94%5%
3.78
Michael Hazelwood
14W–21L career · no lines in 2021
18%82%<1%
3.62
Mario Wright
2W–11L career · no lines in 2021
63%37%<1%
3.46
3.5
Henry Rosenbaum
1W–0L career · no lines in 2021
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.