Teams

GS - Logel

2025 Adult 40 & Over Fall Day League - GS · 3.5 Adult Men

6 players · average NTRP 3.25 / ALABAMA

View scouting list →
Schedule5 played
2024-10-20vs GS - LenazLost 03
L#1 DoublesJackson Faulkenberry / Chris Logel vs Matt Osborne / Jeff Boll2-6, 3-6
L#1 SinglesRuben Risco vs Chris Policelli2-6, 1-6
L#3 DoublesJason Willis / Nathan Hancock vs Leonard Thigpen / Tim Arant5-7, 5-7
2024-10-18vs GS - LenazLost 04
L#1 DoublesAndrew Harrell / David Thompson vs Matt Osborne / Leonard Thigpen2-6, 3-6
L#1 SinglesJason Willis vs Jason Dyken2-6, 4-6
L#2 DoublesChris Logel / Nathan Hancock vs Rex Jones / Jeff Boll2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesRuben Risco / David Brown vs Andrew Hart / Ryan Young6-7, 1-6
2024-10-08vs GS - LenazLost 13
L#1 DoublesDavid Thompson / Ruben Risco vs Rex Jones / Leonard Thigpen3-6, 6-3, 0-1
W#1 SinglesJason Willis vs Tim Arant6-2, 6-1
L#2 DoublesDavid Brown / Andrew Harrell vs Ryan Young / Andrew Hart2-6, 3-6
L#3 DoublesChris Logel / Nathan Hancock vs Jason Dyken / Chris Policelli1-6, 0-6
2024-09-29vs GS - LenazLost 13
L#1 DoublesChris Logel / Jackson Faulkenberry vs Landon Gilliland / Jason Dyken2-6, 3-6
L#1 SinglesJason Willis vs Chris Policelli5-7, 7-6, 1-0
W#2 DoublesRuben Risco / Nathan Hancock vs Andrew Hart / Brandon Lenaz6-2, 0-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesDavid Thompson / Andrew Harrell vs Ryan Young / Tim Arant2-6, 4-6
2024-09-22vs GS - LenazSplit 22
L#1 DoublesNathan Hancock / Jason Willis vs Landon Gilliland / Andrew Hart5-7, 2-6
L#1 SinglesRuben Risco vs Chris Policelli1-6, 6-7
W#2 DoublesDavid Thompson / Andrew Harrell vs Ryan Young / Brandon Lenaz7-5, 3-6, 1-0
W#3 DoublesChris Logel / Jackson Faulkenberry vs Jason Dyken / Tim Arant7-6, 6-4
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 3.5 Adult Men 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 3.36 estimated across 2 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.

3.40
Jason Willis
usually #1 Singles 60%, also #1 Doubles 20% · published
3.32
Chris Logel
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
Andrew Harrell
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published 3
Jackson Faulkenberry
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
Nathan Hancock
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #2 Doubles 40% · published
Ruben Risco
usually #1 Singles 40%, also #1 Doubles 20% · 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.

Chris Logel + Nathan Hancock224 matchesnot enough data
Chris Logel + Jackson Faulkenberry123 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.

Jason Willis
1W–7L career · 5 lines in 2025
76%24%<1%
3.40
3.5
Chris Logel
18W–6L career · 5 lines in 2025
1%89%10%
3.32
3
Andrew Harrell
1W–7L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Jackson Faulkenberry
1W–2L career · 3 lines in 2025
not enough data
Nathan Hancock
3W–8L career · 5 lines in 2025
not enough data
Ruben Risco
3W–5L career · 5 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.