Teams

BBTL (A) 9.0M 55 & Over (Nitz)

Adult 55 & Over - USTA · Adult Men - 9.0 Combined

14 players · average NTRP 4.62 / SOUTH CAROLINA

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 →
Schedule2 played
2026-03-22Won 10
W#1 DoublesStephen Nitz / Robert Tillison vs Robert Hauver / William Mitchell6-3, 7-5
L#3 DoublesAnthony Brittis / Robert Tillison vs Daniel Lieberman / Albert Day5-7, 2-6
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 standings2 teams · Adult Men - 9.0 Combined
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1BBTL (A) 9.0M 55 & Over (Nitz)419615143
2BBTL55/Lieberman/TLC146919154

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 3.97 estimated across 5 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.

Dave Williams
published 5
4.11
Todd Stone
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
4.08
Bill Higgs
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.95
Adam Ravens
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
3.91
Anthony Brittis
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
3.81
Stephen Nitz
usually #1 Doubles 33%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
Glenn Sheaffer
usually #2 Doubles 43%, also #1 Doubles 43% · published
John Brittis
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published
Kurt Kamperman
usually #3 Doubles 40%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published
Mark Sheaffer
usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #1 Doubles 25% · published
Robert Tillison
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #1 Doubles 50% · published
Steve Simone
published
Thomas Jilly
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
Thomas McEvoy
usually #1 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.

Bill Higgs + Todd Stone224 matchesnot enough data
Glenn Sheaffer + Mark Sheaffer123 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.

5
Dave Williams
10W–5L career · type S · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Todd Stone
15W–8L career · 4 lines in 2026
21%78%<1%
4.11
4.5
Bill Higgs
3W–5L career · 4 lines in 2026
27%72%<1%
4.08
4.5
Adam Ravens
5W–10L career · 5 lines in 2026
65%35%<1%
3.95
4.5
Anthony Brittis
3W–13L career · 3 lines in 2026
75%25%<1%
3.91
Stephen Nitz
4W–17L career · 3 lines in 2026
92%8%<1%
3.81
Glenn Sheaffer
5W–5L career · 7 lines in 2026
not enough data
John Brittis
1W–6L career · 4 lines in 2026
not enough data
Kurt Kamperman
1W–4L career · 5 lines in 2026
not enough data
Mark Sheaffer
2W–2L career · 4 lines in 2026
not enough data
Robert Tillison
3W–2L career · 2 lines in 2026
not enough data
Steve Simone
4W–6L career · no lines in 2026
not enough data
Thomas Jilly
1W–5L career · 6 lines in 2026
not enough data
Thomas McEvoy
8W–2L career · 1 line in 2026
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.