Teams

A40 3.0M TP Licari

2022 NEOTA Adult 40 & Over · NEOTA A40&O 3.0 Men

15 players · average NTRP 3.00 / NORTHEASTERN OHIO

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 →
Schedule1 played
2022-05-17vs A40 3.0M PM SanchezSplit 22
L#1 DoublesFrank Licari / Michael Terapane vs Jonathan Glazer / Ben Gilbert6-1, 3-6, 0-1
W#1 SinglesPeacock Gregory vs Andrew Chan6-4, 6-3
W#2 DoublesVince Cheverine / Jamie Daniels vs Michael Kenny / Max Steiner6-4, 2-6, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMark Robeson / Steve Barker vs William Farr / Denny Huff4-6, 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 standings for NEOTA A40&O 3.0 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 2.82 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.

3.35
Mike Devine
published
3.28
Steve Barker
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
3.10
John Consilio
usually #4 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 17% · published
2.80
Frank Licari
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
Harvey Krieger
published 3
2.75
Ron Novak
published
2.48
Vince Cheverine
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.47
Mark Robeson
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
2.33
Brett Kimmell
published 3
Curt Binder
published
Jamie Daniels
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Michael Terapane
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Peacock Gregory
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
Rich Herbruck
published
Thomas Parks
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.

Ron Novak + Frank Licari4747% games+3.5% vs expected
Vince Cheverine + Ron Novak2537% games+2.7% vs expected
Frank Licari + John Consilio4256% games−2.2% vs expected
Vince Cheverine + Frank Licari4841% games−5.8% vs expected
Frank Licari + Michael Terapane2450% gamesnot enough data
John Consilio + Steve Barker2341% gamesnot enough data
John Consilio + Mike Devine314 matchesnot enough data
Vince Cheverine + Mike Devine213 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.

Mike Devine
45W–15L career · no lines in 2022
<1%87%12%
3.35
Steve Barker
77W–60L career · 1 line in 2022
1%94%5%
3.28
John Consilio
116W–87L career · 6 lines in 2022
22%78%<1%
3.10
3
Frank Licari
86W–84L career · 1 line in 2022
1%93%6%
2.80
3
Harvey Krieger
8W–18L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Ron Novak
89W–144L career · no lines in 2022
3%95%3%
2.75
Vince Cheverine
62W–177L career · 1 line in 2022
56%44%<1%
2.48
Mark Robeson
12W–26L career · 1 line in 2022
59%41%<1%
2.47
3
Brett Kimmell
15W–22L career · no lines in 2022
90%10%<1%
2.33
Curt Binder
21W–25L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Jamie Daniels
2W–8L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Michael Terapane
45W–33L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Peacock Gregory
1W–9L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Rich Herbruck
26W–64L career · no lines in 2022
not enough data
Thomas Parks
11W–23L 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.