Teams

MLJBanner/Peninsula

2022 40 & Over Mixed Doubles · Mixed 7.0 Mon pm 40s

10 players · average NTRP 3.75 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule7 played
2022-08-08vs MLWGO-Goodwin/NMP 7.0 Mon 40Lost 01
L#3 DoublesBrooke Hondros / John Hondros vs Wendy Goodwin / Caleb Steedley4-6, 3-6
2022-08-01vs MLDBA-Baker/NMP/40+Split 11
W#1 DoublesBill Moore / Julie Moore vs Scott Wiley / Nicole Biffle6-2, 6-4
L#2 DoublesElizabeth Foreman / Louis Foreman vs Cynthia Delay / Joseph Davis5-7, 6-0, 0-1
2022-07-30vs MLTVallejos/EdgemoorWon 10
W#1 DoublesBill Moore / Julie Moore vs Scott Hudson / Julia Mueller6-1, 6-2
2022-07-11vs M-LBEdenfield/Cooper/TrumpWon 10
W#2 DoublesBill Moore / Julie Moore vs Brandon Sheets / Alison Cooper7-5, 6-2
2022-06-27vs MLTStephen/CSDWon 20
W#2 DoublesBill Moore / Julie Moore vs Walter Ortiz / Kathleen Rissberger6-3, 7-6
W#3 DoublesElizabeth Foreman / Louis Foreman vs Megan Hartley / Antony Jayapal7-6, 6-4
2022-06-20vs MLDRoberge/NorthstoneWon 20
W#2 DoublesBill Moore / Julie Moore vs Cristen Morgan / Joseph Spain6-3, 6-3
W#3 DoublesElizabeth Foreman / Louis Foreman vs Liz Mcclain / Lee Newman6-2, 6-3
2022-06-13vs MLPNOYES/River RunWon 10
W#2 DoublesBill Moore / Julie Moore vs Amy Reyerson / John Reyerson6-3, 6-0
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 Mixed 7.0 Mon pm 40s 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 3.49 estimated across 9 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.

3.90
3.79
Louis Foreman
usually #3 Doubles 67%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.75
Bill Moore
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4
3.62
Ryan Whalen
published
3.38
Gayle Larson
published 3.5
3.30
Thomas Larson
published
3.29
Brent King
published 3.5
3.21
Brooke Hondros
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published 3.5
3.17
Jim Beam
published
John Hondros
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.

Elizabeth Foreman + Louis Foreman134 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
Elizabeth Foreman
32W–30L career · no lines in 2022
<1%77%23%
3.90
4
Louis Foreman
266W–113L career · 3 lines in 2022
1%93%6%
3.79
4
Bill Moore
131W–92L career · 6 lines in 2022
3%95%3%
3.75
Ryan Whalen
4W–9L career · no lines in 2022
17%83%<1%
3.62
3.5
Gayle Larson
7W–8L career · no lines in 2022
<1%82%18%
3.38
Thomas Larson
9W–9L career · no lines in 2022
1%92%7%
3.30
3.5
Brent King
6W–11L career · no lines in 2022
1%94%5%
3.29
3.5
Brooke Hondros
95W–57L career · 1 line in 2022
5%93%1%
3.21
Jim Beam
9W–16L career · no lines in 2022
10%89%<1%
3.17
John Hondros
0W–1L 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.