← Teams

LOTC-Mayer/Jaffe

2019 Adult 40 & Over · 4.0 Men

8 players · average NTRP 3.93 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.62 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.

4.17
Luke Filose
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
—
Alan Kaplan
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4
3.70
Justin Shull
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.62
Howard Jaffe
usually #1 Singles 75%, also #3 Doubles 13% · published 4
3.46
Neil Soiffer
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.42
Kevin Semonsen
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.33
Michael Lavios
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
—
David Swanson
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 0
Results8 ties
2019-06-23Lost 1–2
L#1 SinglesHoward Jaffe vs Vincent Lee6-4, 2-6, 1-0
L#2 DoublesSteve Elliott / Luke Filose vs Agus Rusli / Patrick Harkin6-4, 6-3
W#3 DoublesKevin Semonsen / Peter Weber vs Jeffrey Jackson / Kevin Heller4-6, 7-6, 1-0
2019-06-15Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesNeil Soiffer / Paul Garry vs Carlin Jackson / Tony Moreno5-7, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesMichael Lavios / Kelly Robertson vs Russ DeMoss / Randy Nicholson7-6, 6-2
L#2 SinglesHoward Jaffe vs Ralph Miele6-7, 6-3, 1-0
2019-06-09Lost 1–2
L#1 SinglesHoward Jaffe vs Michael Chang6-2, 7-6
W#2 DoublesMichael Lavios / Kevin Semonsen vs Mark Stephenson / Marcus Kroloff5-7, 7-6, 1-0
L#2 SinglesDavid Swanson vs Matt Brown6-1, 6-4
2019-06-05Lost 1–2
L#1 SinglesHoward Jaffe vs Patrick Harkin6-4, 6-2
L#2 DoublesKelly Robertson / Alan Kaplan vs Patrick Maginnis / Kevin Heller6-4, 6-2
W#3 DoublesLuke Filose / Neil Soiffer vs David Pham / Danny Denning6-4, 6-4
2019-06-02Lost 1–2
L#2 DoublesAlan Kaplan / Michael Mayer vs Jack Hughes / Jim Nudelman7-5, 6-7, 1-0
L#2 SinglesDavid Swanson vs Meshi Chavez6-4, 6-2
W#3 DoublesMichael Lavios / Howard Jaffe vs Jason Moore-Greenke / Kyle Nagelmann6-0, 6-7, 1-0
2019-06-01Won 3–2
W#1 DoublesWilliam Weber / Justin Shull vs Len Morales / Tim Luangrath6-1, 6-2
L#1 SinglesHoward Jaffe vs Dave Vinik6-2, 7-5
W#2 DoublesAlan Kaplan / Paul Garry vs Tony Khamsouk / George Young6-4, 6-3
L#2 SinglesDavid Swanson vs Joseph Nguyen7-6, 6-2
W#3 DoublesDavid Vedder / Kevin Semonsen vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2019-05-19Won 3–0
W#1 SinglesHoward Jaffe vs William Hergenhan6-2, 4-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesWilliam Weber / Justin Shull vs Patrick Herbst / Robert Torch6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesMichael Lavios / David Vedder vs Tuan Truong / Joachim Vondeling6-4, 7-6
2019-04-27Split 1–1
W#1 SinglesHoward Jaffe vs Dave Vinik7-5, 7-5
L#3 DoublesNeil Soiffer / Mickey Brivic vs George Young / Tim Luangrath3-6, 6-4, 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.

4.5
Luke Filose
106W–43L career
1%99%0%
4.17
4
Alan Kaplan
11W–13L career
not enough data
—
4
Justin Shull
136W–38L career
2%98%0%
3.70
4
Howard Jaffe
23W–29L career · type S
16%84%0%
3.62
4
Neil Soiffer
96W–138L career
44%56%0%
3.46
3.5
Kevin Semonsen
48W–44L career
0%91%9%
3.42
3.5
Michael Lavios
30W–56L career
2%89%8%
3.33
0
David Swanson
14W–12L 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.