Teams

EW-PC-Marshall

2023 Adult 55 & Over · 7.0 MEN

9 players · average NTRP 3.42 / EASTERN WASHINGTON

View scouting list →
Schedule3 played
2022-11-05vs WRAC-NoydLost 03
L#1 DoublesCraig Hansen / Paul McDaniel vs Michael Bendtsen / Bryan Noyd0-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesJohn Almond / Bart Munson vs Kevin Kromholtz / Matthew Connelly7-5, 3-6, 0-1
L#3 DoublesTim Roloff / Glen Marshall vs Stephen Knox / Larry Woodward2-6, 7-5, 0-1
2022-11-05vs YTC-FergusonWon 30
W#1 DoublesCraig Hansen / Paul McDaniel vs Steve Howard / John Fernandez7-5, 6-1
W#2 DoublesEmmitt Jackson / Roman Gavino vs John Asriel / Robert Darby6-2, 6-1
W#3 DoublesVincent Beasley / John Hilmes vs Eric Rasmussen / Dan Ferguson6-4, 6-0
2022-11-04vs WCCP-WillmanWon 30
W#1 DoublesEmmitt Jackson / Roman Gavino vs Ray Willman / John Omlin6-3, 6-4
W#2 DoublesVincent Beasley / John Hilmes vs Jeffrey Gillespie / Bruce Johnson7-5, 6-1
W#3 DoublesBart Munson / John Almond vs Robert Vancott / Michael Moloney7-5, 6-3
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 standings5 teams · 7.0 MEN
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1EW-PC-Marshall2163670
2EW-IND-Mehlenbacher21631079
3WRAC-Wengreen12361389
4NP-Woodard03271493
5YTC-Ferguson03181697

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 3.24 estimated across 6 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.

3.78
Vincent Beasley
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.39
Emmitt Jackson
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.23
Roman Gavino
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3.5
3.13
Craig Hansen
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.00
Bart Munson
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.90
John Hilmes
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
Glen Marshall
published
John Almond
published
Tim Roloff
usually #3 Doubles 100% · 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.

Emmitt Jackson + Vincent Beasley7852% games+0.1% vs expected
Craig Hansen + Roman Gavino4944% games−1.6% vs expected
Bart Munson + Craig Hansen2443% gamesnot enough data
Bart Munson + Roman Gavino134 matchesnot enough data
Emmitt Jackson + Roman Gavino303 matchesnot enough data
Vincent Beasley + John Hilmes303 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
Vincent Beasley
48W–35L career · 6 lines in 2023
2%92%6%
3.78
3.5
Emmitt Jackson
48W–46L career · 6 lines in 2023
<1%78%22%
3.39
3.5
Roman Gavino
80W–81L career · 4 lines in 2023
5%92%3%
3.23
3.5
Craig Hansen
28W–49L career · 2 lines in 2023
18%81%<1%
3.13
3
Bart Munson
19W–27L career · 2 lines in 2023
<1%50%50%
3.00
3
John Hilmes
66W–53L career · 4 lines in 2023
<1%76%24%
2.90
Glen Marshall
1W–2L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
John Almond
0W–1L career · no lines in 2023
not enough data
Tim Roloff
5W–13L career · 1 line in 2023
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.