Teams

*1-MPiland-HR

2024 Eno River Adult 40 & Over · 40 & Over Adult 4.5 Men Weekend

9 players · average NTRP 4.50 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 played
2024-04-28vs *2-SNarayan-CHTCWon 20
W#1 DoublesRichard McClenny / Ben Cooke vs Boyd Blackburn / George Newsome7-6, 4-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesJames Easthom / John Pelphrey vs Jackson Naftel / Scott Benson6-1, 3-6, 1-0
2024-04-14vs *2-SNarayan-CHTCLost 02
L#1 DoublesBen Cooke / Richard McClenny vs Casey Black / Jackson Naftel2-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesErik J Erikson / James Easthom vs Sravan Narayan / Boyd Blackburn7-6, 5-7, 0-1
2024-03-24vs *2-SNarayan-CHTCSplit 11
W#2 DoublesBen Cooke / Richard McClenny vs George Newsome / Dan Clemson6-1, 6-2
L#3 DoublesCarl Rist / James Easthom vs Jackson Naftel / Casey Black7-5, 3-6, 1-0
2024-03-10vs *2-SNarayan-CHTCLost 01
L#2 DoublesEric Labow / James Easthom vs Mic Wallace / Casey Black4-6, 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 standings for 40 & Over Adult 4.5 Men Weekend 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 4.13 estimated across 7 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.

4.28
Richard McClenny
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
Ben Cooke
published 4.5
4.21
David Slack
published 4.5
4.17
James Easthom
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 4.5
4.13
Erik J Erikson
published
4.07
John Pelphrey
published
4.06
Matt Piland
published
4.01
Kyle Couch
published
Eric Labow
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.

Erik J Erikson + Richard McClenny123 matchesnot enough data
David Slack + James Easthom213 matchesnot enough data
Matt Piland + Kyle Couch123 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
Richard McClenny
429W–129L career · 3 lines in 2024
2%92%5%
4.28
4.5
Ben Cooke
1W–1L career · no lines in 2024
not enough data
4.5
David Slack
3W–2L career · no lines in 2024
7%91%2%
4.21
4.5
James Easthom
56W–28L career · 4 lines in 2024
11%88%1%
4.17
Erik J Erikson
23W–9L career · no lines in 2024
18%81%<1%
4.13
John Pelphrey
6W–9L career · no lines in 2024
31%69%<1%
4.07
Matt Piland
5W–6L career · no lines in 2024
33%67%<1%
4.06
Kyle Couch
2W–6L career · no lines in 2024
47%53%<1%
4.01
Eric Labow
1W–3L 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.