Teams

Arthur-40/3.5/M/StoneCreek

2025 Man · Cov Adult 40 & Over - Men

16 players · average NTRP 3.38 / LOUISIANA

View scouting list →

Flight standings for Cov Adult 40 & Over - 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 2.85 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.

Cristian Topescu
usually #1 Doubles 38%, also #2 Doubles 28% · published 4
Brett Fortenberry
usually #3 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 3.5
2.98
Brian Darr
usually #2 Doubles 29%, also #3 Doubles 29% · published 3
2.73
Allen Amir Parvizian
usually #3 Doubles 56%, also #2 Doubles 32% · published 3
Edward Bergeron
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Henry Ferger
usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
Jason Rolling
usually #1 Doubles 39%, also #2 Doubles 39% · published
Jeffrey Barach
usually #2 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published
Mark Farrow
usually #3 Doubles 36%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published
Matt Slimming
usually #1 Doubles 48%, also #2 Doubles 30% · published
Neal Daigle
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 29% · published
Richard Kramer
usually #2 Doubles 80%, also #3 Doubles 20% · published
Roderick Chandler
usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Russell Arthur
usually #3 Doubles 44%, also #1 Doubles 31% · published
Scott Alphonso
usually #3 Doubles 47%, also #2 Doubles 29% · published
Stephen Short
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #3 Doubles 43% · 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.

Jason Rolling + Matt Slimming8165% gamesnot enough data
Mark Farrow + Neal Daigle4166% gamesnot enough data
Mark Farrow + Scott Alphonso314 matchesnot enough data
Russell Arthur + Jason Rolling033 matchesnot enough data
Jeffrey Barach + Jason Rolling213 matchesnot enough data
Henry Ferger + Stephen Short303 matchesnot enough data
Richard Kramer + Neal Daigle033 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
Cristian Topescu
24W–12L career · 31 lines in 2025
not enough data
3.5
Brett Fortenberry
4W–1L career · 5 lines in 2025
not enough data
3
Brian Darr
20W–18L career · 20 lines in 2025
<1%55%45%
2.98
3
Allen Amir Parvizian
23W–23L career · 25 lines in 2025
5%92%3%
2.73
Edward Bergeron
7W–8L career · 6 lines in 2025
not enough data
Henry Ferger
5W–2L career · 4 lines in 2025
not enough data
Jason Rolling
42W–20L career · 33 lines in 2025
not enough data
Jeffrey Barach
14W–15L career · 15 lines in 2025
not enough data
Mark Farrow
17W–12L career · 14 lines in 2025
not enough data
Matt Slimming
48W–25L career · 39 lines in 2025
not enough data
Neal Daigle
9W–14L career · 14 lines in 2025
not enough data
Richard Kramer
6W–9L career · 10 lines in 2025
not enough data
Roderick Chandler
5W–4L career · 6 lines in 2025
not enough data
Russell Arthur
15W–11L career · 16 lines in 2025
not enough data
Scott Alphonso
20W–5L career · 17 lines in 2025
not enough data
Stephen Short
7W–6L career · 7 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.