← Teams

SHC-Lee/Welter

2022 Mixed 55 & Over · 7.0 Mixed

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

View scouting list →
Scouting

Roster averages 3.20 estimated across 8 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.

3.79
Patrick Trank
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.68
Matthew Trank
usually #2 Doubles 57%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 4
3.46
Bill Rhoades
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.13
Jeff Welter
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.02
Ken Pacioni
published 3.5
2.90
Jennifer Trank
usually #1 Doubles 60%, also #2 Doubles 20% · published 3
2.89
Mike Baker
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
2.76
Michael Siebers
usually #3 Doubles 80%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published 3
Results8 ties
2022-05-28Lost 0–2
L#2 DoublesMatthew Trank / Lillian Lee vs Kelley Gaylor / JT Smith6-0, 7-5
L#3 DoublesMike Baker / Rhonda Baker vs Jacqueline Wilcox / Lee Wilcox6-1, 6-1
2022-05-08Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesMichael Siebers / Kathy Siebers vs Kristi Tompkins / Gerald Chase6-0, 6-1
L#2 DoublesRobin Welter / Jeff Welter vs Jim DeWeese / Rita DeWeese6-3, 6-3
L#3 DoublesMike Baker / Rhonda Baker vs Stephen Osborne / Jane Pinkowski7-5, 6-3
2022-04-30Lost 1–2
L#1 DoublesBill Rhoades / Jennifer Trank vs Bruce Trubo / Betty Trubo6-3, 6-3
L#2 DoublesMike Baker / Rhonda Baker vs Les Wellman / Pat Berends6-1, 6-4
W#3 DoublesMichael Siebers / Kathy Siebers vs Steven Garlock / Janice Thomas6-4, 3-6, 1-0
2022-04-22Lost 0–3
L#1 DoublesMatthew Trank / Jennifer Trank vs Sandra Ellis / Clay Funkhouser4-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#2 DoublesLillian Lee / Bill Rhoades vs Susie Garland / Michael Rich7-5, 7-5
L#3 DoublesRhonda Baker / Mike Baker vs Kathy Briscoe / George Scott6-4, 6-3
2022-04-16Lost 0–2
L#2 DoublesLillian Lee / Matthew Trank vs Dean Waters / Susan Rolfe4-6, 6-3, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMichael Siebers / Kathy Siebers vs Murray Jansen / Megan Clifford7-6, 6-0
2022-04-03Won 2–1
L#1 DoublesBill Rhoades / Lillian Lee vs Bill Henderson / Dorothy Cofield6-1, 7-6
W#2 DoublesRobin Welter / Jeff Welter vs Nicolle Lochner / Lawrence Reichman7-6, 6-1
W#3 DoublesJennifer Trank / Michael Siebers vs Matthew Casimo / Patries Ferguson6-3, 6-1
2022-03-26Lost 1–2
L#1 DoublesJennifer Trank / Patrick Trank vs Christine Taylor / Tony Moreno6-4, 6-7, 1-0
W#2 DoublesRobin Welter / Matthew Trank vs Stacy Naccachian / John Harris7-5, 6-3
L#3 DoublesKathy Siebers / Michael Siebers vs Karen Groenweghe / Jeffrey Taylor6-1, 6-1
2022-03-20Won 2–1
W#1 DoublesRhonda Baker / Patrick Trank vs Jane Pinkowski / Jeff Anhaltzer6-1, 6-3
L#2 DoublesJennifer Trank / Matthew Trank vs Gerald Chase / Joann Donahue6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesRobin Welter / Jeff Welter vs Jim DeWeese / Rita DeWeese7-5, 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.
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
Patrick Trank
87W–59L career
1%98%1%
3.79
4
Matthew Trank
78W–63L career
3%97%0%
3.68
4
Bill Rhoades
79W–87L career
43%57%0%
3.46
3.5
Jeff Welter
77W–46L career
11%89%0%
3.13
3.5
Ken Pacioni
17W–29L career
32%68%0%
3.02
3
Jennifer Trank
93W–104L career
0%96%4%
2.90
3
Mike Baker
47W–91L career
0%96%4%
2.89
3
Michael Siebers
20W–40L career · type S
6%91%4%
2.76

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.