Teams

Laughlin 40s 6.5W Combo Tues PM

2026 Piedmont Combo 40 & Over · 6.5 40 & Over Men Tuesday PM

13 players · average NTRP 3.38 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule2 played
2026-08-25vs Arnett 40s 6.5M Combo Tues PMSplit 11
L#2 DoublesScott Laughlin / John Archambault vs Kevin VanVooren / Anthony Scott Crawford5-7, 2-6
W#3 DoublesBrian Henderson / Bill Vary vs Kenton Kreager / Scott Bartels6-3, 4-6, 1-0
2026-08-18vs Knight 40s 6.5M Combo Tues PMWon 30
W#1 DoublesVince Credle / Glenn Gorman vs Don Knight / David Clowers6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesDavid Rachels / RICHARD LUGO vs Rod Mendoza / Brant Davenport6-1, 6-1
W#3 DoublesWilliam Johnson / Garland Hilliard vs Chris Sigley / Douglas Reece2-6, 6-3, 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 6.5 40 & Over Men Tuesday PM 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 3.11 estimated across 13 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.

3.42
Scott Laughlin
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.36
Bill Vary
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.32
Bill Watson
published 3.5
3.27
David Rachels
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3.5
3.21
Vince Credle
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.13
RICHARD LUGO
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
3.04
Glenn Gorman
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
3.04
William Johnson
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.02
Garland Hilliard
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.99
Sean Stevens
published
2.94
John Archambault
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.92
John Mickler
published
2.74
Brian Henderson
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3
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.

David Rachels + Brian Henderson2351% games+5.1% vs expected
Garland Hilliard + RICHARD LUGO4160% games+3.5% vs expected
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.

Scott Laughlin
11W–27L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%71%29%
3.42
3.5
Bill Vary
46W–19L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%83%16%
3.36
3.5
Bill Watson
27W–28L career · no lines in 2026
1%89%10%
3.32
3.5
David Rachels
18W–29L career · 2 lines in 2026
3%92%5%
3.27
Vince Credle
35W–24L career · 1 line in 2026
7%91%2%
3.21
RICHARD LUGO
18W–3L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%18%82%
3.13
Glenn Gorman
34W–20L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%38%62%
3.04
William Johnson
17W–21L career · 1 line in 2026
39%61%<1%
3.04
Garland Hilliard
40W–23L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%45%55%
3.02
Sean Stevens
5W–0L career · no lines in 2026
<1%53%47%
2.99
John Archambault
8W–8L career · 1 line in 2026
<1%65%34%
2.94
John Mickler
11W–12L career · no lines in 2026
<1%72%27%
2.92
3
Brian Henderson
25W–37L career · 1 line in 2026
4%93%3%
2.74

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.