Boys Daily Tennis Results
View Mode |
|
Line-up View |
|
Match Results (with W/L records if available) |
% Games Won By Court |
Results |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Avon 5 (9 / 0) - Midview 0 (0 / 1) | Score: 5-0 % Games: 87% # Games: 60 - 9 O.o.F.: 1-2-3-5-4 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Avon | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Midview | |||||
| Beavercreek-B 5 - Lehman Catholic 0 (1 / 3) | Score: 5-0 % Games: 71% # Games: 61 - 25 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Beavercreek-B | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Lehman Catholic | |||||
| Bellbrook 4 (8 / 2) - Archbishop Alter 1 (2 / 4) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 64% # Games: 58 - 33 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Bellbrook | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Archbishop Alter | |||||
| Big Walnut 5 (8 / 0) - Grove City 0 (3 / 3) | Score: 5-0 % Games: 61% # Games: 59 - 37 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Big Walnut | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Grove City | |||||
| Canal Winchester 3 (4 / 5) - Westland 2 | Score: 3-2 % Games: 52% # Games: 43 - 40 O.o.F.: 2-5-1-3-4 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Canal Winchester | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Westland | |||||
| Carlisle 4 - Monroe 1 | Score: 4-1 % Games: 62% # Games: 60 - 37 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Carlisle | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Monroe | |||||
| Centerville 4 (8 / 2) - Walnut Hills 1 (1 / 3) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 66% # Games: 63 - 33 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Centerville | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Walnut Hills | |||||
| Centerville-B 4 (4 / 2) - Springboro-B 1 | Score: 4-1 % Games: 64% # Games: 57 - 32 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Centerville-B | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Springboro-B | |||||
| Chaminade-Julienne 5 (4 / 3) - Eaton 0 | Score: 5-0 % Games: 72% # Games: 61 - 24 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Chaminade-Julienne | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Eaton | |||||
| Columbus Academy 3 (4 / 3) - Dublin Coffman 2 (1 / 4) | Score: 3-2 % Games: 59% # Games: 56 - 39 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Columbus Academy | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Dublin Coffman | |||||
| Cuyahoga Valley Christian Academy 5 (5 / 0) - Padua 0 | Score: 5-0 % Games: 92% # Games: 48 - 4 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Cuyahoga Valley Christian Academy | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Padua | |||||
| Dayton Christian 3 - Wyoming 2 (0 / 1) | Score: 3-2 % Games: 55% # Games: 54 - 44 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Dayton Christian | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Wyoming | |||||
| Gahanna 4 (8 / 2) - Bexley-B 1 (2 / 2) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 67% # Games: 56 - 27 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Gahanna | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Bexley-B | |||||
| Granville 5 (1 / 0) - Westerville South 0 (0 / 6) | Score: 5-0 % Games: 94% # Games: 60 - 4 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Granville | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Westerville South | |||||
| Hawken 4 (4 / 2) - Chagrin Falls 1 (0 / 1) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 68% # Games: 56 - 26 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Hawken | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Chagrin Falls | |||||
| Hilliard Bradley 4 (2 / 3) - London 1 (3 / 3) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 64% # Games: 54 - 30 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Hilliard Bradley | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
London | |||||
| Kenton Ridge 3 (1 / 5) - Greenon 2 | Score: 3-2 % Games: 55% # Games: 54 - 45 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Kenton Ridge | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Greenon | |||||
| Lake-Uniontown 3 - North Canton Hoover 2 (6 / 3) | Score: 3-2 % Games: 50% # Games: 44 - 44 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Lake-Uniontown | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
North Canton Hoover | |||||
| Lakota East 5 (7 / 2) - Colerain 0 (1 / 2) | Score: 5-0 % Games: 98% # Games: 60 - 1 O.o.F.: 3-4-1-5-2 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Lakota East | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Colerain | |||||
| Lancaster 4 (5 / 4) - DeSales 1 (4 / 3) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 55% # Games: 57 - 46 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Lancaster | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
DeSales | |||||
| Loveland 3 (8 / 0) - Moeller 2 (5 / 3) | Score: 3-2 % Games: 51% # Games: 39 - 37 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Loveland | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Moeller | |||||
| Mason 4 (8 / 1) - Sycamore 1 (3 / 4) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 55% # Games: 61 - 49 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Mason | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Sycamore | |||||
| Mason-B 3 (2 / 0) - Beavercreek 2 (8 / 3) | Score: 3-2 % Games: 49% # Games: 45 - 47 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Mason-B | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Beavercreek | |||||
| Massillon Jackson 4 (8 / 2) - Glenoak 1 | Score: 4-1 % Games: 71% # Games: 53 - 22 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Massillon Jackson | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Glenoak | |||||
| Miami Valley School 3 (6 / 4) - Milton-Union 2 | Score: 3-2 % Games: 53% # Games: 59 - 52 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Miami Valley School | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Milton-Union | |||||
| New Albany 4 (8 / 0) - Bexley 1 (7 / 3) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 67% # Games: 59 - 29 O.o.F.: 2-3-1-5-4 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
New Albany | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Bexley | |||||
| Northwestern 3 (5 / 1) - Jonathan Alder 2 (5 / 5) | Score: 3-2 % Games: 63% # Games: 52 - 30 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Northwestern | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Jonathan Alder | |||||
| Oakwood 4 (6 / 1) - Kettering Fairmont 1 (5 / 5) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 64% # Games: 61 - 34 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Oakwood | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Kettering Fairmont | |||||
| Perrysburg 4 (4 / 0) - Fremont Ross 1 | Score: 4-1 % Games: 63% # Games: 58 - 34 O.o.F.: 3-4-2-1-5 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Perrysburg | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Fremont Ross | |||||
| Pickerington Central 5 (7 / 1) - Westerville North 0 (1 / 3) | Score: 5-0 % Games: 91% # Games: 60 - 6 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Pickerington Central | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Westerville North | |||||
| Pickerington North 4 (2 / 3) - Dublin Scioto 1 (4 / 3) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 62% # Games: 55 - 34 O.o.F.: 2-3-5-1-5 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Pickerington North | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Dublin Scioto | |||||
| Piqua 4 - Tecumseh 1 (0 / 3) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 62% # Games: 56 - 34 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Piqua | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Tecumseh | |||||
| Reynoldsburg 4 (3 / 4) - Thomas Worthington 1 (4 / 4) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 62% # Games: 54 - 33 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Reynoldsburg | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Thomas Worthington | |||||
| Seven Hills 3 (4 / 1) - Turpin 2 (0 / 1) | Score: 3-2 % Games: 59% # Games: 55 - 39 O.o.F.: 2-3-1-4-5 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Seven Hills | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Turpin | |||||
| Sidney 3 - Northmont 2 | Score: 3-2 % Games: 59% # Games: 50 - 35 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Sidney | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Northmont | |||||
| Tippecanoe-B 5 - Wayne 0 | Score: 5-0 % Games: 98% # Games: 60 - 1 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Tippecanoe-B | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Wayne | |||||
| Trotwood-Madison 3 - Stebbins 2 | Score: 3-2 % Games: 47% # Games: 46 - 51 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Trotwood-Madison | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Stebbins | |||||
| University School 3 (3 / 0) - Mentor 2 (0 / 1) | Score: 3-2 % Games: 63% # Games: 51 - 30 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
University School | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Mentor | |||||
| Upper Arlington 4 (9 / 1) - Watkins Memorial 1 (6 / 3) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 74% # Games: 57 - 20 O.o.F.: 5-3-4-2-1 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Upper Arlington | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Watkins Memorial | |||||
| Valley View 5 - Carroll 0 (1 / 3) | Score: 5-0 % Games: 83% # Games: 60 - 12 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Valley View | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Carroll | |||||
| Valley View-B 3 - Northeastern 2 (0 / 1) | Score: 3-2 % Games: 49% # Games: 52 - 55 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Valley View-B | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Northeastern | |||||
| Watterson 4 (3 / 2) - Chillicothe 1 (7 / 2) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 59% # Games: 49 - 34 O.o.F.: 1-5-2-4-3 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Watterson | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Chillicothe | |||||
| Westerville Central 4 (2 / 4) - Delaware Hayes 1 (6 / 3) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 71% # Games: 60 - 25 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Westerville Central | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Delaware Hayes | |||||
| Whetstone 5 (5 / 0) - Columbus North International 0 (0 / 1) | Score: 5-0 % Games: 100% # Games: 32 - 0 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Whetstone | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Columbus North International | |||||
| Whetstone 5 (5 / 0) - Beechcroft 0 (0 / 1) | Score: 5-0 % Games: 76% # Games: 62 - 20 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Whetstone | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Beechcroft | |||||
| Worthington Christian 5 (5 / 3) - Franklin Heights 0 (0 / 7) | Score: 5-0 % Games: 95% # Games: 60 - 3 |
| Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
|
Worthington Christian | |||||
| Results (Winning %) | ||||||
|
Franklin Heights | |||||
Frequently Asked Questions:
What is O.o.F? That is the Order of Finish. It is especially popular with college teams to indicate which court (or players) clinched (or secured) the win. As an example, if it was a 3-2 match, the last court to finish "clinched" the match for the winning team. That was the court everyone was watching at the end of the match. This is an optional field that coaches can enter. If your school or coach does not report scores into OhioTennisZone.com, please contact OhioTennisZone.com via Feedback to have your scores included online.
Member is logged in as: - Access level is:







































































