Teams

BELVEDERE TC 40AM3.5A

2025 ADULT 40&Over · Men's 3.5

21 players · average NTRP 3.50 / NO. CALIFORNIA

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 →

Flight standings for Men's 3.5 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 3.38 estimated across 20 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.

3.92
Andrew Glickman
published 4
3.74
Michael Barker
published
3.63
Christopher Sheldon
published 3.5
3.57
Christopher Sargent
published 3.5
3.51
Brian McPeake
published 3.5
3.49
Ruben Kalra
published
3.48
Iain Hassall
published 3.5
3.42
Rob Schult
published
3.40
James Redfern
published 3.5
3.38
Thomas Byrne
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.37
Charles Bigelow
published 3.5
3.35
Van Wilshire
published
3.34
Houman Behzadi
published 3.5
3.31
Jad Dunning
published 3.5
3.31
Cameron Hillyer
published 3.5
3.26
Max Catalano
published
David Flaherty
published 3.5
3.22
Nick Meyer
published
3.04
Mike Denzler
published
3.04
Samuel Hocking
published
2.80
BRIAN Endres
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.

Nick Meyer + Iain Hassall4259% games+7.6% vs expected
Christopher Sargent + Charles Bigelow213 matchesnot enough data
Christopher Sargent + James Redfern303 matchesnot enough data
Christopher Sargent + Christopher Sheldon303 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
Andrew Glickman
3W–4L career · no lines in 2025
<1%72%28%
3.92
Michael Barker
2W–2L career · no lines in 2025
<1%3%97%
3.74
3.5
Christopher Sheldon
17W–3L career · no lines in 2025
<1%15%85%
3.63
3.5
Christopher Sargent
17W–7L career · no lines in 2025
<1%31%69%
3.57
3.5
Brian McPeake
8W–3L career · no lines in 2025
<1%46%54%
3.51
Ruben Kalra
5W–8L career · no lines in 2025
<1%53%47%
3.49
3.5
Iain Hassall
8W–2L career · no lines in 2025
<1%55%45%
3.48
Rob Schult
8W–0L career · no lines in 2025
<1%74%26%
3.42
3.5
James Redfern
23W–10L career · no lines in 2025
<1%77%23%
3.40
Thomas Byrne
7W–19L career · 1 line in 2025
82%18%<1%
3.38
3.5
Charles Bigelow
9W–5L career · no lines in 2025
<1%85%15%
3.37
Van Wilshire
8W–9L career · no lines in 2025
<1%87%12%
3.35
3.5
Houman Behzadi
3W–4L career · no lines in 2025
<1%89%11%
3.34
3.5
Jad Dunning
4W–0L career · no lines in 2025
1%92%7%
3.31
3.5
Cameron Hillyer
5W–2L career · no lines in 2025
1%92%7%
3.31
Max Catalano
10W–6L career · no lines in 2025
2%94%3%
3.26
3.5
David Flaherty
0W–2L career · type S · no lines in 2025
not enough data
Nick Meyer
5W–5L career · no lines in 2025
5%94%2%
3.22
Mike Denzler
8W–6L career · no lines in 2025
<1%36%64%
3.04
Samuel Hocking
1W–7L career · no lines in 2025
38%62%<1%
3.04
3
BRIAN Endres
9W–11L career · no lines in 2025
1%93%6%
2.80

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.