Teams

TJames (CSRC)

2025 Adult 40 & Over League · 40 & Over Adult 4.0 Men - Tues PM

10 players · average NTRP 3.90 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule6 played
2025-04-29vs BSteffey (Southampton)Won 21
W#1 DoublesTrey Walters / Michael Ziemer vs Joseph Gann / Robert Kampmeyer6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesAllan Reich / Robert Wallace vs Chris Pridnia / Aaron Backus6-1, 6-2
L#3 DoublesMichael Boyce / Jay Pfeifer vs Scott Lucas / Jason King4-6, 7-6, 1-0
2025-04-29vs RMarks (Blakeney)Lost 01
L#1 DoublesChris Elkins / Allan Reich vs Lawrence Jinks / Hakan Pehrsson3-6, 3-6
2025-04-15vs TCastain (WSRC)Lost 01
L#3 DoublesPreston Hurrell / Jay Pfeifer vs Kevin Warren / David LaGrega1-6, 2-6
2025-04-08vs NSiens (Life Time)Won 10
W#1 DoublesChris Elkins / Michael Ziemer vs Jordan Teel / Tim Melton6-3, 2-6, 1-0
2025-03-25vs DWatson (Jeff Adams)Split 11
W#2 DoublesAllan Reich / Michael Boyce vs Mark Krasniewski / Roy Ojiligwe6-3, 6-4
L#3 DoublesSam Moran / Jay Pfeifer vs David Watson / Joseph Moubarak7-5, 4-6, 0-1
2025-03-04vs RPietrykowski (PPRSC)Won 10
W#3 DoublesAllan Reich / Michael Ziemer vs Kent Franks / Rich Pietrykowski6-2, 6-2
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 40 & Over Adult 4.0 Men - Tues 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 3.67 estimated across 9 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.

3.89
Chris Elkins
published 4
3.87
Michael Ziemer
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.82
Michael Heintz
published
3.73
Trey Walters
published
3.70
Allan Reich
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4
3.69
Andrew Nesbitt
published 4
3.58
Michael Boyce
published
3.57
Ted James
published
3.13
Jay Pfeifer
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
Reed Griffith
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.

Jay Pfeifer + Allan Reich314 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
Chris Elkins
5W–3L career · no lines in 2025
<1%78%22%
3.89
4
Michael Ziemer
16W–4L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%82%17%
3.87
Michael Heintz
1W–2L career · no lines in 2025
1%89%10%
3.82
Trey Walters
5W–4L career · no lines in 2025
5%92%3%
3.73
4
Allan Reich
36W–13L career · 4 lines in 2025
7%91%2%
3.70
4
Andrew Nesbitt
2W–2L career · no lines in 2025
9%90%1%
3.69
Michael Boyce
5W–5L career · no lines in 2025
28%71%<1%
3.58
Ted James
2W–2L career · no lines in 2025
30%70%<1%
3.57
3.5
Jay Pfeifer
28W–27L career · 3 lines in 2025
17%83%<1%
3.13
Reed Griffith
0W–1L career · no lines in 2025
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.