Girls Daily Tennis Results
View Mode |
|
Line-up View |
Match Results (with W/L records if available) |
% Games Won By Court |
Results |
---|
Big Walnut 3 (4 / 0) - Worthington Christian 2 (0 / 1) | Score: 3-2 % Games: 47% # Games: 41 - 46 O.o.F.: 1-4-2-5-3 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Big Walnut | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Worthington Christian |
Carlisle 5 - Xenia 0 | Score: 5-0 % Games: 78% # Games: 61 - 17 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Carlisle | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Xenia |
Centerville-B 4 - Troy 1 (0 / 1) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 53% # Games: 48 - 42 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Centerville-B | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Troy |
Central Crossing 4 (1 / 0) - Westland 1 (0 / 2) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 62% # Games: 61 - 38 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Central Crossing | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Westland |
Columbus School For Girls 3 (2 / 0) - Olentangy Berlin 2 (1 / 1) | Score: 3-2 % Games: 54% # Games: 41 - 35 O.o.F.: 1-5-2-3-4 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Columbus School For Girls | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Olentangy Berlin |
Delaware Hayes 3 (2 / 1) - Hilliard Darby 2 (0 / 2) | Score: 3-2 % Games: 51% # Games: 59 - 56 O.o.F.: 5-2-3-1-4 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Delaware Hayes | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Hilliard Darby |
Dublin Coffman 3 (1 / 0) - Hathaway Brown 2 (1 / 1) | Score: 3-2 % Games: 50% # Games: 53 - 53 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Dublin Coffman | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Hathaway Brown |
Granville 4 (1 / 0) - Whetstone 1 (0 / 1) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 50% # Games: 51 - 52 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Granville | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Whetstone |
Grove City 5 (1 / 0) - Jonathan Alder 0 (0 / 2) | Score: 5-0 % Games: 91% # Games: 60 - 6 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Grove City | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Jonathan Alder |
Hathaway Brown 3 (1 / 1) - New Albany 2 (0 / 1) | Score: 3-2 % Games: 63% # Games: 55 - 33 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Hathaway Brown | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
New Albany |
Highland 5 (3 / 0) - Olentangy Orange 0 (0 / 1) | Score: 5-0 % Games: 74% # Games: 61 - 21 O.o.F.: 2-5-3-4-1 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Highland | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Olentangy Orange |
Kenton Ridge 5 - Sidney 0 | Score: 5-0 % Games: 87% # Games: 61 - 9 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Kenton Ridge | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Sidney |
Lancaster 5 (1 / 1) - Athens 0 | Score: 5-0 % Games: 90% # Games: 60 - 7 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Lancaster | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Athens |
Mariemont 4 (1 / 0) - Loveland 1 (1 / 1) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 72% # Games: 59 - 23 O.o.F.: 1-5-2-3-4 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Mariemont | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Loveland |
North Canton Hoover 4 (6 / 0) - Massillon Jackson 1 (3 / 1) | Score: 4-1 % Games: 64% # Games: 52 - 29 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
North Canton Hoover | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Massillon Jackson |
Notre Dame-Cathedral Latin 3 (1 / 0) - Gilmour Academy 2 (0 / 1) | Score: 3-2 % Games: 68% # Games: 47 - 22 O.o.F.: 1-2-4-5-3 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Notre Dame-Cathedral Latin | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Gilmour Academy |
Perrysburg 5 (5 / 1) - Port Clinton 0 | Score: 5-0 % Games: # Games: 0 - 0 O.o.F.: 4-1-2-3-5 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Perrysburg | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Port Clinton |
Strongsville 5 (1 / 0) - Copley 0 (0 / 4) | Score: 5-0 % Games: 90% # Games: 60 - 7 O.o.F.: 4-2-3-5-1 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Strongsville | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Copley |
Sycamore 5 (5 / 0) - Bexley 0 (0 / 1) | Score: 5-0 % Games: 79% # Games: 57 - 15 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Sycamore | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Bexley |
Sycamore 3 (5 / 0) - Turpin 2 (0 / 1) | Score: 3-2 % Games: 51% # Games: 56 - 53 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Sycamore | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Turpin |
Woodridge 5 (2 / 0) - Our Lady Of The Elms 0 (0 / 1) | Score: 5-0 % Games: 74% # Games: 61 - 21 O.o.F.: 5-4-1-3-2 |
Team Line-ups | Sngl 1 |
Sngl 2 |
Sngl 3 |
Doub 1 |
Doub 2 |
|
![]() |
Woodridge | |||||
Results (Winning %) | ||||||
![]() |
Our Lady Of The Elms |
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: