Teams

OV A55&O 9.0 Bibo (Racquet Club Columbus)

2022 Winter A55&O · 2022 Columbus

8 players · average NTRP 4.25 / 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
2022-04-30vs Dayton KTC HeinzWon 21
W#1 DoublesMichael Jones / Richard Jordan vs Dave Hensley / Leighton Jones6-2, 6-1
W#2 DoublesTed Becker / James Flower vs Darrin Heinz / Jim Minard6-1, 6-7, 1-0
L#3 DoublesMichael White / Geoffrey Bibo vs Jeffrey Brown / Scott Shope1-6, 2-6
2022-04-23vs Dayton KTC HeinzWon 30
W#1 DoublesMichael Jones / Richard Jordan vs James Bosse / Jim Kohls6-0, 6-0
W#2 DoublesJames Flower / Ted Becker vs Darrin Heinz / John Peyton6-2, 6-2
W#3 DoublesMichael White / Phil Diaz vs Jim Minard / Kenneth Burns6-1, 6-2
2022-03-19vs Dayton KTC HeinzLost 12
W#1 DoublesKen Bruce / Dale Wynkoop vs Jeffrey Brown / Darrin Heinz6-1, 6-3
L#2 DoublesGeoffrey Bibo / Jeffrey Cempre vs Kenneth Burns / Lawrence Schmidt6-7, 4-6
L#3 DoublesSteven Frandsen / Doug Myser vs James Bosse / Jim Kohls4-6, 4-6
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 · 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 4.01 estimated across 3 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.

4.23
Dale Wynkoop
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 4.5
4.12
Jeffrey Cempre
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
Geoffrey Bibo
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published 4
3.69
Steven Frandsen
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Ken Bruce
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Phil Diaz
usually #3 Doubles 100% · published
Richard Jordan
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published
Ted Becker
usually #2 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.

Jeffrey Cempre + Dale Wynkoop3350% games+2.7% vs expected
Jeffrey Cempre + Geoffrey Bibo152047% games−6.7% vs expected
Geoffrey Bibo + Dale Wynkoop1440% games−8.8% vs expected
Dale Wynkoop + Ken Bruce213 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
Dale Wynkoop
69W–56L career · 1 line in 2022
4%94%2%
4.23
Jeffrey Cempre
46W–69L career · 1 line in 2022
18%82%<1%
4.12
4
Geoffrey Bibo
27W–43L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Steven Frandsen
37W–56L career · 1 line in 2022
7%92%1%
3.69
Ken Bruce
3W–3L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Phil Diaz
6W–8L career · 1 line in 2022
not enough data
Richard Jordan
3W–2L career · 2 lines in 2022
not enough data
Ted Becker
35W–16L 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.