Teams

Dayton KTC Heinz

2022 Winter A55&O · 2022 Columbus

7 players · average NTRP 4.50 / OHIO VALLEY

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 →
Schedule3 played
L#2 DoublesDarrin Heinz / Jim Minard vs Ted Becker / James Flower1-6, 7-6, 0-1
W#3 DoublesJeffrey Brown / Scott Shope vs Michael White / Geoffrey Bibo6-1, 6-2
L#1 DoublesJames Bosse / Jim Kohls vs Michael Jones / Richard Jordan0-6, 0-6
L#2 DoublesDarrin Heinz / John Peyton vs James Flower / Ted Becker2-6, 2-6
L#3 DoublesJim Minard / Kenneth Burns vs Michael White / Phil Diaz1-6, 2-6
L#1 DoublesJeffrey Brown / Darrin Heinz vs Ken Bruce / Dale Wynkoop1-6, 3-6
W#2 DoublesKenneth Burns / Lawrence Schmidt vs Geoffrey Bibo / Jeffrey Cempre7-6, 6-4
W#3 DoublesJames Bosse / Jim Kohls vs Steven Frandsen / Doug Myser6-4, 6-4
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 · 2022 Columbus
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1OV A55&O 9.0 Bibo (Racquet Club Columbus)2163759
2Dayton KTC Heinz12361294

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 4.41 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.

4.43
Darrin Heinz
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 4.5
4.40
Scott Shope
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
James Bosse
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 4.5
Jim Kohls
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
Jim Minard
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published
John Peyton
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Kenneth Burns
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · 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.

Scott Shope + Darrin Heinz3248% gamesnot enough data
Jim Kohls + James Bosse134 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.

4.5
Darrin Heinz
77W–36L career · 3 lines in 2022
<1%71%29%
4.43
Scott Shope
13W–6L career · 1 line in 2022
<1%79%21%
4.40
4.5
James Bosse
30W–26L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Jim Kohls
14W–9L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Jim Minard
51W–50L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
John Peyton
10W–6L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Kenneth Burns
9W–11L career · 2 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.