Teams

RCW - Witmer

2024 USTA 55 & Over League · 9.0 Men

8 players · average NTRP 4.00 / CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA

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 →
Schedule3 played
2024-08-11vs RCW - ThomanLost 12
L#1 DoublesJohn Hufnagel / Brian Fortson vs Tom Brink / Mark Koons5-7, 4-6
L#2 DoublesPaul Dano / Steve Campbell vs Paul Elliott / Victor Fissella2-6, 6-7
W#3 DoublesEric Glatsky / Gregg Pearson vs Matthew Ludwig / Kirk Thoman6-3, 3-6, 1-0
2024-08-11vs RCW - ThomanLost 03
L#1 DoublesStephen Nichols / Paul Dano vs Robert Belser / Michael Davis3-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesEric Glatsky / Gregg Pearson vs Paul Elliott / Michael Moyer2-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesSteve Campbell / Brian Fortson vs Mark Koons / Matthew Ludwig3-6, 2-6
2024-08-11vs RCW - ThomanLost 03
L#1 DoublesEric Glatsky / Gregg Pearson vs Robert Belser / Victor Fissella3-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesSteve Campbell / Stephen Nichols vs Tom Brink / Mark Koons2-6, 4-6
L#3 DoublesJohn Hufnagel / Paul Dano vs Paul Elliott / Michael Moyer3-6, 2-6
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 · 9.0 Men
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1RCW - Thoman0381263
2RCW - Witmer031817107

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 3.67 estimated across 4 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
Gregg Pearson
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 31% · published 4
3.67
Eric Glatsky
usually #3 Doubles 47%, also #2 Doubles 41% · published 4
3.66
Stephen Nichols
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
3.54
Brian Fortson
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4
John Hufnagel
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Paul Dano
usually #2 Doubles 55%, also #3 Doubles 27% · published
Robert Rittase
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Steve Campbell
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.

Eric Glatsky + Gregg Pearson7552% games−5.3% vs expected
John Hufnagel + Eric Glatsky2540% gamesnot enough data
Robert Rittase + Gregg Pearson6064% gamesnot enough data
Robert Rittase + Eric Glatsky224 matchesnot enough data
Stephen Nichols + Gregg Pearson213 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
Gregg Pearson
299W–143L career · 16 lines in 2024
2%91%7%
3.79
4
Eric Glatsky
286W–231L career · 17 lines in 2024
11%88%1%
3.67
Stephen Nichols
33W–52L career · 4 lines in 2024
13%86%1%
3.66
4
Brian Fortson
30W–121L career · 4 lines in 2024
38%62%<1%
3.54
John Hufnagel
50W–42L career · 6 lines in 2024
not enough data
Paul Dano
83W–62L career · 11 lines in 2024
not enough data
Robert Rittase
35W–18L career · 6 lines in 2024
not enough data
Steve Campbell
78W–61L career · no lines in 2024
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.