Teams

Montana/Vroman/55&Over8.0M

2023 USTA Adult 55 & Over · Men 8.0 - 55 & Over

7 players · average NTRP 4.12 / MONTANA

No matches recorded for this roster in this league — it may be a placeholder registration, or the season may not have started.

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2023-06-30vs Q team 8.0 55Split 11
W#1 DoublesScott Hanson / James Shaffer vs Raymond Armstrong / Russ Fagg1-0
L#2 DoublesJimmy Vroman / Dennis Vap vs Paul Beck / Scott Johnson0-1
2023-06-30vs Q team 8.0 55Lost 12
L#1 DoublesEnrique Osorio / Chuck Smith vs Raymond Armstrong / Russ Fagg0-1
L#2 DoublesJimmy Vroman / Dennis Vap vs Paul Beck / Scott Johnson0-1
W#3 DoublesScott Hanson / James Shaffer vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2023-06-29vs Q team 8.0 55Won 30
W#1 DoublesJon Catton / Thomas Shea vs Cary Burg / Mark Oja6-3, 6-3
W#2 DoublesChuck Smith / James Shaffer vs Raymond Armstrong / Russ Fagg6-3, 6-2
W#3 DoublesScott Hanson / Dennis Vap vs N/A6-0, 6-0
2023-06-21vs Q team 8.0 55Split 11
L#1 DoublesJimmy Vroman / Dennis Vap vs Raymond Armstrong / Russ Fagg0-1
W#2 DoublesThomas Shea / Jon Catton vs Dean Derby / Mark Oja6-1, 7-6
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 standings2 teams · Men 8.0 - 55 & Over
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Montana/Vroman/55&Over8.0M3184866
2Q team 8.0 5513481697

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

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 3.65 estimated across 3 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.

4.16
Scott Hanson
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
Dennis Vap
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
Thomas Shea
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.63
Jimmy Vroman
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.17
James Shaffer
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Enrique Osorio
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Jon Catton
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
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.

Jimmy Vroman + Enrique Osorio0522% games−11.2% vs expected
Jimmy Vroman + Dennis Vap1646% gamesnot enough data
Scott Hanson + James Shaffer314 matchesnot 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
Scott Hanson
15W–14L career · type S · 3 lines in 2023
13%86%1%
4.16
4
Dennis Vap
5W–17L career · 3 lines in 2023
not enough data
4
Thomas Shea
14W–16L career · type S · 2 lines in 2023
not enough data
4
Jimmy Vroman
22W–56L career · 3 lines in 2023
18%82%<1%
3.63
James Shaffer
13W–13L career · 2 lines in 2023
11%88%1%
3.17
Enrique Osorio
5W–17L career · 1 line in 2023
not enough data
Jon Catton
15W–9L career · 2 lines in 2023
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.