Teams

Bangers

2026 USTA ADULT 55 and OVER - BOISE · TV

9 players · average NTRP 4.00 / IDAHO

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 →
Schedule5 played
2026-06-23vs Overserved 55'sLost 01
L#2 DoublesChad Vincent / Mike Buckingham vs Mike Kirby / Willie Lafrades4-6, 6-2, 0-1
2026-06-16vs Idaho/Limbago/55&Over8.0MWon 10
W#2 DoublesChad Vincent / Mike Buckingham vs Steve Schneider / Brent Bradburn6-2, 6-4
2026-06-04vs Overserved 55'sWon 10
W#2 DoublesChad Vincent / Mike Buckingham vs Mike Kirby / Michael Hermes6-4, 7-5
2026-06-02vs Idaho/Limbago/55&Over8.0MLost 01
L#1 DoublesMike Buckingham / Chad Vincent vs Joseph Higgins / Steve Schneider6-7, 5-7
2026-05-19vs Overserved 55'sWon 10
W#1 DoublesChad Vincent / Brian Johnson vs Di-Yuan Tzeng / Jeffrey Wood7-6, 6-1
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 standings4 teams · TV
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1Idaho/Limbago/55&Over8.0M7218922235
2Overserved 55's63171023218
3Bangers54171021226
4Old Faulters0922552319

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 3.83 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.

4.03
Mike Buckingham
published 4
4.01
Ken Coffey
published 4.5
3.93
Brian Johnson
published 4
3.92
Bruce Goslovich
published 4
3.91
Brian Naeve
published 4
3.87
Jeffrey Trask
published 4
3.81
Chad Vincent
usually #2 Doubles 60%, also #1 Doubles 40% · published 4
3.65
Jeffrey Henken
published 4
3.38
Russell Moorhead
published 3.5
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.

Brian Naeve + Mike Buckingham7159% games+5.1% vs expected
Mike Buckingham + Chad Vincent12458% games+3.5% vs expected
Jeffrey Henken + Jeffrey Trask22955% games−3.3% vs expected
Ken Coffey + Chad Vincent8647% gamesnot enough data
Brian Johnson + Chad Vincent8062% gamesnot enough data
Mike Buckingham + Ken Coffey6064% gamesnot enough data
Jeffrey Henken + Russell Moorhead5070% gamesnot enough data
Russell Moorhead + Ken Coffey3255% gamesnot 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
Mike Buckingham
120W–80L career · no lines in 2026
<1%42%58%
4.03
4.5
Ken Coffey
117W–83L career · no lines in 2026
48%52%<1%
4.01
4
Brian Johnson
207W–115L career · no lines in 2026
<1%68%32%
3.93
4
Bruce Goslovich
47W–47L career · no lines in 2026
<1%73%27%
3.92
4
Brian Naeve
53W–35L career · no lines in 2026
<1%73%27%
3.91
4
Jeffrey Trask
45W–49L career · no lines in 2026
<1%83%17%
3.87
4
Chad Vincent
33W–25L career · 5 lines in 2026
1%89%9%
3.81
4
Jeffrey Henken
103W–59L career · no lines in 2026
15%85%1%
3.65
3.5
Russell Moorhead
109W–102L career · type A · no lines in 2026
<1%79%20%
3.38

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.