Teams

2-DNaden-HS

2022 Eno River Combo 40 & Over · Eno River 40 & Over Combo 6.5 Men Evening

9 players · average NTRP 2.83 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2022-10-04vs 4-AYoung-EV-6.5-Combo-40+Lost 01
L#2 DoublesJeff Denhard / Phil Nobile vs Mohammed Dessouky / Lee Goldberg0-6, 2-6
2022-09-27vs 5-COMBO-Bland-CHTCLost 01
L#1 DoublesJeff Denhard / Jeffrey Szafran vs David Gilliam / Gary Glish2-6, 3-6
2022-09-20Lost 01
L#1 DoublesJeff Denhard / Mark Macdonald vs Chris Lee / Kyle Jackson2-6, 1-6
2022-09-06vs 3-RLong--CCC-40 6.5Lost 01
L#2 DoublesJeff Denhard / Dave Thomas vs Arash Chehrazi / JAMES MONTAGUE4-6, 3-6
2022-08-30vs 4-AYoung-EV-6.5-Combo-40+Lost 01
L#1 DoublesJeff Denhard / Chris Konvalinka vs Joe Gonzalez / Lee Goldberg3-6, 2-6
2022-08-23vs 5-COMBO-Bland-CHTCLost 01
L#3 DoublesChris Konvalinka / Jeff Denhard vs Robert Kern / Mitch Kleiman2-6, 6-7
2022-08-16vs 1-CLee-HSLost 01
L#3 DoublesJeffrey Szafran / Jeff Denhard vs Michael Holt / Will Johnson7-5, 2-6, 0-1
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 Eno River 40 & Over Combo 6.5 Men Evening 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 2.77 estimated across 8 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.

3.10
Scott Hartman
published
3.04
Mark Macdonald
published
2.95
Dave Thomas
published 3
2.85
David Evert
published 3
2.77
Jeff Denhard
usually #1 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 3
2.63
Van Blalock
published 2.5
2.61
Andy Jones
published 3
2.17
David Naden
published 2.5
Chris Konvalinka
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.

Dave Thomas + Andy Jones1541% games−1.5% vs expected
Dave Thomas + David Evert404 matchesnot enough data
Dave Thomas + David Naden224 matchesnot enough data
Dave Thomas + Scott Hartman123 matchesnot enough data
Dave Thomas + Jeff Denhard213 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.

Scott Hartman
6W–12L career · no lines in 2022
21%79%<1%
3.10
Mark Macdonald
8W–9L career · no lines in 2022
39%61%<1%
3.04
3
Dave Thomas
34W–28L career · no lines in 2022
<1%65%35%
2.95
3
David Evert
35W–54L career · no lines in 2022
<1%87%12%
2.85
3
Jeff Denhard
49W–54L career · 7 lines in 2022
2%94%4%
2.77
2.5
Van Blalock
20W–22L career · no lines in 2022
0%16%84%
2.63
3
Andy Jones
13W–15L career · no lines in 2022
20%80%<1%
2.61
2.5
David Naden
4W–9L career · no lines in 2022
0%99%1%
2.17
Chris Konvalinka
2W–0L career · no lines in 2022
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.