05-10-2019, 05:24 PM
Twitter correct March point Stanford
And shin Wins
And shin Wins
The CardBoard
/
C-House!
/
The CardBoard
/
NCAA Championship Women's Tennis: Super Regionals vs. Kansas
NCAA Championship Women's Tennis: Super Regionals vs. Kansas
05-10-2019, 05:25 PM
UCLA eliminates Washington, 4-0
The other Pac-12 team in the Round of 16 will play tomorrow. USC vs USC.
The other Pac-12 team in the Round of 16 will play tomorrow. USC vs USC.
05-10-2019, 05:54 PM
(05-10-2019, 07:55 AM)ColoradoTree Wrote: As I noted before, the matches on #1 (+0.07) and #6 (-0.05) are toss-ups. So, even if we drop doubles today, UTR and the team's history would suggest we should feel confident about getting 4 wins in singles, whether that 4th win comes from Shin as a moderate favorite or from Gordon or Higuchi in the toss-up ranks. Playing at home is a great advantage, too.
. . . . .
[Gordon has] the toughest match of the day today, so I fully expect it to be close, but I'd bet against her taking a loss. If she loses the first, we'll clinch elsewhere first, because that match will go three.
Well, that was amazingly prescient, CT.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
(05-10-2019, 07:55 AM)ColoradoTree Wrote: As I noted before, the matches on #1 (+0.07) and #6 (-0.05) are toss-ups. So, even if we drop doubles today, UTR and the team's history would suggest we should feel confident about getting 4 wins in singles, whether that 4th win comes from Shin as a moderate favorite or from Gordon or Higuchi in the toss-up ranks. Playing at home is a great advantage, too.
. . . . .
[Gordon has] the toughest match of the day today, so I fully expect it to be close, but I'd bet against her taking a loss. If she loses the first, we'll clinch elsewhere first, because that match will go three.
Well, that was amazingly prescient, CT.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
As I've commented before, the match illustrates how tough it's going to be to repeat with court 6 flipped from last year (formerly an almost guaranteed win, now our most likely loss in the lineup). The teams we will be playing from here on out will have a better player than Gordon at #1; doesn't mean she can't win, but she probably won't win. So the most likely scenario is that we will have to win 2-5 (like we did today) or get the doubles point in place of one of those singles courts.
As I've commented before, the match illustrates how tough it's going to be to repeat with court 6 flipped from last year (formerly an almost guaranteed win, now our most likely loss in the lineup). The teams we will be playing from here on out will have a better player than Gordon at #1; doesn't mean she can't win, but she probably won't win. So the most likely scenario is that we will have to win 2-5 (like we did today) or get the doubles point in place of one of those singles courts.
05-10-2019, 06:35 PM
Well, that was closer than I would have liked, but it was a pretty good night for UTR. All four Stanford favorites coming in won, the toss-up at #1 was a tight three-setter, and #6 was a tight match. And recall that UTR figures Kansas as the 7th or 8th best team in the country, so beating a team that good by any score on any court is something I’ll happily take.
Really, once Arbuthnott and Shin shook off their bad starts, they controlled those matches. Lord slipped early in the second but turned it back on. Lampl did her thing. Gordon fought, but fell just short—I really thought she’d pull that one out. And Madurawe lost a close one in her first competitive NCAA match (no, New Mexico State doesn’t count), which should be a good learning experience.
I don’t think we’re as good as last year, but that may still be enough. The team we’d be the biggest underdog against is Georgia, and we lost that one 4-3, so why not us?
Really, once Arbuthnott and Shin shook off their bad starts, they controlled those matches. Lord slipped early in the second but turned it back on. Lampl did her thing. Gordon fought, but fell just short—I really thought she’d pull that one out. And Madurawe lost a close one in her first competitive NCAA match (no, New Mexico State doesn’t count), which should be a good learning experience.
I don’t think we’re as good as last year, but that may still be enough. The team we’d be the biggest underdog against is Georgia, and we lost that one 4-3, so why not us?
Well, that was closer than I would have liked, but it was a pretty good night for UTR. All four Stanford favorites coming in won, the toss-up at #1 was a tight three-setter, and #6 was a tight match. And recall that UTR figures Kansas as the 7th or 8th best team in the country, so beating a team that good by any score on any court is something I’ll happily take.
Really, once Arbuthnott and Shin shook off their bad starts, they controlled those matches. Lord slipped early in the second but turned it back on. Lampl did her thing. Gordon fought, but fell just short—I really thought she’d pull that one out. And Madurawe lost a close one in her first competitive NCAA match (no, New Mexico State doesn’t count), which should be a good learning experience.
I don’t think we’re as good as last year, but that may still be enough. The team we’d be the biggest underdog against is Georgia, and we lost that one 4-3, so why not us?
Really, once Arbuthnott and Shin shook off their bad starts, they controlled those matches. Lord slipped early in the second but turned it back on. Lampl did her thing. Gordon fought, but fell just short—I really thought she’d pull that one out. And Madurawe lost a close one in her first competitive NCAA match (no, New Mexico State doesn’t count), which should be a good learning experience.
I don’t think we’re as good as last year, but that may still be enough. The team we’d be the biggest underdog against is Georgia, and we lost that one 4-3, so why not us?
05-10-2019, 07:17 PM
That was exciting, but frustrating. Watching the livestream tests a fans patience. Thanks to all of you who posted score updates. That really helped. There was a period where I could see that Gordon was going down, but had no idea what was happening in Shin's 3rd set.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
That was exciting, but frustrating. Watching the livestream tests a fans patience. Thanks to all of you who posted score updates. That really helped. There was a period where I could see that Gordon was going down, but had no idea what was happening in Shin's 3rd set.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
05-10-2019, 07:39 PM
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
05-10-2019, 09:18 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-10-2019, 09:33 PM by ColoradoTree.)
FYI, we don't always run through the field with 4-0 and 4-1 wins like we did last year. On the road to the 2016 title, Stanford beat Texas A&M 4-3 in the second round, then Florida 4-3 in the Round of 16, Michigan 4-3 in the quarterfinals, Vanderbilt 4-2 in the semifinals, and Oklahoma State 4-3 in the championship match. I get sick just thinking of that one.
Now it's onto Orlando to face Pepperdine next Friday, where we're favored by more than we were against Kansas (according to UTR, at least), despite Pepperdine being ranked several spots higher. Slam.tennis gives us a 83% of beating Pepperdine, less than the 87% they gave us today. FWIW, I'll stick with UTR as a predictive tool more than those percentages (which only tabbed UCLA as a 60% favorite at home vs. Washington, when I would've put that at 90% or more). Here's how UTR sees the individual matches:
1. Gordon up 0.12 (Gordon beat #37 Lahey 6-4, 6-2 at the USTA Blizzard Wild Card Challenge back in December)
2. Lord up 0.16
3. Lampl up 0.54
4. Arbuthnott up 0.63
5. Shin up 0.40
6. Madurawe down 0.35; Higuchi down 0.55 (Pepperdine's #6, Anastasia Iamachkine, has the team's 3rd-highest UTR)
So, three pretty sizable advantages, two slight ones, and one big deficit. In doubles, the #1 team has a 9-6 dual match record, the #2 team has an 11-2 record, and the #3 team has a 15-3 record. And they lost doubles today, with UCF winning #2 narrowly and #3 handily while Pepperdine won big on #1. So winning the doubles point should certainly be on the table. Earlier this year, Lampl/Yee lost 6-4 to Pepperdine's Failla/Iamachkine, the pair they'll face on Friday, so hopefully they can figure out a way to turn that around.
In other action (some of which was discussed earlier), Pepperdine beat UCF 4-2, Duke beat N.C. State 4-0, and UCLA beat Washington 4-0 (in a match that was predicted to be close by slam.tennis but which UTR thought would be a blowout). UCLA awaits the UNC-Oklahoma State winner, and Duke awaits the South Carolina-USC winner. The final quarterfinal will be between the Georgia-Michigan and Vanderbilt-Texas A&M winners.
The early match tomorrow is USC-South Carolina, where I'm skeptical USC can pull off another win--a season-opening win in Australia is one thing, but a NCAA match on South Carolina's home courts is another. I'm probably most looking forward to the UNC-Oklahoma State match--that's another one where the ITA rankings think it'll be a blowout, but where UTR thinks it should be pretty close. I still think UNC will win, but I think Oklahoma State will keep it closer than they did at Indoor Nationals, when UNC won 4-0.
In any event, now that we're through, let's root for a little chaos. USC over South Carolina, Oklahoma State over UNC, and Michigan over Georgia. Unlikely upsets, sure, but I'll take all the help we can get!
It's funny--I think we're a better team in a lot of ways this year, but it doesn't feel quite like last year, when we were way underseeded but where UTR and other metrics saw us as the best team coming into the tournament. There was a sense of magic in that we knew how good this team was, but somehow the rest of the tennis world was sleeping on us. Now that we're properly seeded, it's even more nerve-wracking. My confidence level should be higher than last year, but it's lower.
Now it's onto Orlando to face Pepperdine next Friday, where we're favored by more than we were against Kansas (according to UTR, at least), despite Pepperdine being ranked several spots higher. Slam.tennis gives us a 83% of beating Pepperdine, less than the 87% they gave us today. FWIW, I'll stick with UTR as a predictive tool more than those percentages (which only tabbed UCLA as a 60% favorite at home vs. Washington, when I would've put that at 90% or more). Here's how UTR sees the individual matches:
1. Gordon up 0.12 (Gordon beat #37 Lahey 6-4, 6-2 at the USTA Blizzard Wild Card Challenge back in December)
2. Lord up 0.16
3. Lampl up 0.54
4. Arbuthnott up 0.63
5. Shin up 0.40
6. Madurawe down 0.35; Higuchi down 0.55 (Pepperdine's #6, Anastasia Iamachkine, has the team's 3rd-highest UTR)
So, three pretty sizable advantages, two slight ones, and one big deficit. In doubles, the #1 team has a 9-6 dual match record, the #2 team has an 11-2 record, and the #3 team has a 15-3 record. And they lost doubles today, with UCF winning #2 narrowly and #3 handily while Pepperdine won big on #1. So winning the doubles point should certainly be on the table. Earlier this year, Lampl/Yee lost 6-4 to Pepperdine's Failla/Iamachkine, the pair they'll face on Friday, so hopefully they can figure out a way to turn that around.
In other action (some of which was discussed earlier), Pepperdine beat UCF 4-2, Duke beat N.C. State 4-0, and UCLA beat Washington 4-0 (in a match that was predicted to be close by slam.tennis but which UTR thought would be a blowout). UCLA awaits the UNC-Oklahoma State winner, and Duke awaits the South Carolina-USC winner. The final quarterfinal will be between the Georgia-Michigan and Vanderbilt-Texas A&M winners.
The early match tomorrow is USC-South Carolina, where I'm skeptical USC can pull off another win--a season-opening win in Australia is one thing, but a NCAA match on South Carolina's home courts is another. I'm probably most looking forward to the UNC-Oklahoma State match--that's another one where the ITA rankings think it'll be a blowout, but where UTR thinks it should be pretty close. I still think UNC will win, but I think Oklahoma State will keep it closer than they did at Indoor Nationals, when UNC won 4-0.
In any event, now that we're through, let's root for a little chaos. USC over South Carolina, Oklahoma State over UNC, and Michigan over Georgia. Unlikely upsets, sure, but I'll take all the help we can get!
(05-10-2019, 07:45 PM)oldalum Wrote:(05-10-2019, 06:35 PM)ColoradoTree Wrote: so why not us?We always win when I don't expect us to, so I'm just preparing us to win again. :)
It's funny--I think we're a better team in a lot of ways this year, but it doesn't feel quite like last year, when we were way underseeded but where UTR and other metrics saw us as the best team coming into the tournament. There was a sense of magic in that we knew how good this team was, but somehow the rest of the tennis world was sleeping on us. Now that we're properly seeded, it's even more nerve-wracking. My confidence level should be higher than last year, but it's lower.
(This post was last modified: 05-10-2019, 09:33 PM by ColoradoTree.)
FYI, we don't always run through the field with 4-0 and 4-1 wins like we did last year. On the road to the 2016 title, Stanford beat Texas A&M 4-3 in the second round, then Florida 4-3 in the Round of 16, Michigan 4-3 in the quarterfinals, Vanderbilt 4-2 in the semifinals, and Oklahoma State 4-3 in the championship match. I get sick just thinking of that one.
Now it's onto Orlando to face Pepperdine next Friday, where we're favored by more than we were against Kansas (according to UTR, at least), despite Pepperdine being ranked several spots higher. Slam.tennis gives us a 83% of beating Pepperdine, less than the 87% they gave us today. FWIW, I'll stick with UTR as a predictive tool more than those percentages (which only tabbed UCLA as a 60% favorite at home vs. Washington, when I would've put that at 90% or more). Here's how UTR sees the individual matches:
1. Gordon up 0.12 (Gordon beat #37 Lahey 6-4, 6-2 at the USTA Blizzard Wild Card Challenge back in December)
2. Lord up 0.16
3. Lampl up 0.54
4. Arbuthnott up 0.63
5. Shin up 0.40
6. Madurawe down 0.35; Higuchi down 0.55 (Pepperdine's #6, Anastasia Iamachkine, has the team's 3rd-highest UTR)
So, three pretty sizable advantages, two slight ones, and one big deficit. In doubles, the #1 team has a 9-6 dual match record, the #2 team has an 11-2 record, and the #3 team has a 15-3 record. And they lost doubles today, with UCF winning #2 narrowly and #3 handily while Pepperdine won big on #1. So winning the doubles point should certainly be on the table. Earlier this year, Lampl/Yee lost 6-4 to Pepperdine's Failla/Iamachkine, the pair they'll face on Friday, so hopefully they can figure out a way to turn that around.
In other action (some of which was discussed earlier), Pepperdine beat UCF 4-2, Duke beat N.C. State 4-0, and UCLA beat Washington 4-0 (in a match that was predicted to be close by slam.tennis but which UTR thought would be a blowout). UCLA awaits the UNC-Oklahoma State winner, and Duke awaits the South Carolina-USC winner. The final quarterfinal will be between the Georgia-Michigan and Vanderbilt-Texas A&M winners.
The early match tomorrow is USC-South Carolina, where I'm skeptical USC can pull off another win--a season-opening win in Australia is one thing, but a NCAA match on South Carolina's home courts is another. I'm probably most looking forward to the UNC-Oklahoma State match--that's another one where the ITA rankings think it'll be a blowout, but where UTR thinks it should be pretty close. I still think UNC will win, but I think Oklahoma State will keep it closer than they did at Indoor Nationals, when UNC won 4-0.
In any event, now that we're through, let's root for a little chaos. USC over South Carolina, Oklahoma State over UNC, and Michigan over Georgia. Unlikely upsets, sure, but I'll take all the help we can get!
It's funny--I think we're a better team in a lot of ways this year, but it doesn't feel quite like last year, when we were way underseeded but where UTR and other metrics saw us as the best team coming into the tournament. There was a sense of magic in that we knew how good this team was, but somehow the rest of the tennis world was sleeping on us. Now that we're properly seeded, it's even more nerve-wracking. My confidence level should be higher than last year, but it's lower.
Now it's onto Orlando to face Pepperdine next Friday, where we're favored by more than we were against Kansas (according to UTR, at least), despite Pepperdine being ranked several spots higher. Slam.tennis gives us a 83% of beating Pepperdine, less than the 87% they gave us today. FWIW, I'll stick with UTR as a predictive tool more than those percentages (which only tabbed UCLA as a 60% favorite at home vs. Washington, when I would've put that at 90% or more). Here's how UTR sees the individual matches:
1. Gordon up 0.12 (Gordon beat #37 Lahey 6-4, 6-2 at the USTA Blizzard Wild Card Challenge back in December)
2. Lord up 0.16
3. Lampl up 0.54
4. Arbuthnott up 0.63
5. Shin up 0.40
6. Madurawe down 0.35; Higuchi down 0.55 (Pepperdine's #6, Anastasia Iamachkine, has the team's 3rd-highest UTR)
So, three pretty sizable advantages, two slight ones, and one big deficit. In doubles, the #1 team has a 9-6 dual match record, the #2 team has an 11-2 record, and the #3 team has a 15-3 record. And they lost doubles today, with UCF winning #2 narrowly and #3 handily while Pepperdine won big on #1. So winning the doubles point should certainly be on the table. Earlier this year, Lampl/Yee lost 6-4 to Pepperdine's Failla/Iamachkine, the pair they'll face on Friday, so hopefully they can figure out a way to turn that around.
In other action (some of which was discussed earlier), Pepperdine beat UCF 4-2, Duke beat N.C. State 4-0, and UCLA beat Washington 4-0 (in a match that was predicted to be close by slam.tennis but which UTR thought would be a blowout). UCLA awaits the UNC-Oklahoma State winner, and Duke awaits the South Carolina-USC winner. The final quarterfinal will be between the Georgia-Michigan and Vanderbilt-Texas A&M winners.
The early match tomorrow is USC-South Carolina, where I'm skeptical USC can pull off another win--a season-opening win in Australia is one thing, but a NCAA match on South Carolina's home courts is another. I'm probably most looking forward to the UNC-Oklahoma State match--that's another one where the ITA rankings think it'll be a blowout, but where UTR thinks it should be pretty close. I still think UNC will win, but I think Oklahoma State will keep it closer than they did at Indoor Nationals, when UNC won 4-0.
In any event, now that we're through, let's root for a little chaos. USC over South Carolina, Oklahoma State over UNC, and Michigan over Georgia. Unlikely upsets, sure, but I'll take all the help we can get!
(05-10-2019, 07:45 PM)oldalum Wrote:(05-10-2019, 06:35 PM)ColoradoTree Wrote: so why not us?We always win when I don't expect us to, so I'm just preparing us to win again. :)
It's funny--I think we're a better team in a lot of ways this year, but it doesn't feel quite like last year, when we were way underseeded but where UTR and other metrics saw us as the best team coming into the tournament. There was a sense of magic in that we knew how good this team was, but somehow the rest of the tennis world was sleeping on us. Now that we're properly seeded, it's even more nerve-wracking. My confidence level should be higher than last year, but it's lower.
05-10-2019, 09:27 PM
USC got a bad break in that the match time tomorrow has been moved earlier to 6:00 a.m. PT, due to impending rain.
05-11-2019, 08:45 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-11-2019, 08:49 AM by ColoradoTree.)
And South Carolina wins 4-0. The doubles point was competitive, and the three remaining singles matches were either in third sets or heading for one, but USC just didn’t have enough today.
Michigan took the doubles point from Georgia, but (1) Georgia isn’t a great doubles team, and (2) Georgia already has five of six first sets in singles.
Michigan took the doubles point from Georgia, but (1) Georgia isn’t a great doubles team, and (2) Georgia already has five of six first sets in singles.
(This post was last modified: 05-11-2019, 08:49 AM by ColoradoTree.)
And South Carolina wins 4-0. The doubles point was competitive, and the three remaining singles matches were either in third sets or heading for one, but USC just didn’t have enough today.
Michigan took the doubles point from Georgia, but (1) Georgia isn’t a great doubles team, and (2) Georgia already has five of six first sets in singles.
Michigan took the doubles point from Georgia, but (1) Georgia isn’t a great doubles team, and (2) Georgia already has five of six first sets in singles.
(05-10-2019, 09:35 PM)ColoradoTree Wrote: that football game at NorthwesternThe kickoff time was unfavorable for us, but on that occasion the coaches made a tactical mistake that made it worse. They have something like a 4- or 5-hour standard schedule of activities before each game (meetings, meal, warmup, etc.), and they decided it was best not to alter their usual pattern, which meant they had to wake up really early. Afterward the coaches concluded they should have cut the pre-game preparations short and let them sleep longer.
(05-10-2019, 09:35 PM)ColoradoTree Wrote: that football game at NorthwesternThe kickoff time was unfavorable for us, but on that occasion the coaches made a tactical mistake that made it worse. They have something like a 4- or 5-hour standard schedule of activities before each game (meetings, meal, warmup, etc.), and they decided it was best not to alter their usual pattern, which meant they had to wake up really early. Afterward the coaches concluded they should have cut the pre-game preparations short and let them sleep longer.
Kansas beats TAMU 4-0 and on the remaining courts was leading on two lines and tied on one, so a convincing win after losing at TAMU 4-2 in conference play.
Only match left is UNC-OSU, UNC leads 3-2, and the two remaining courts (1 and 4) are starting third sets.
______________________________
Makenna-Jones is running away with the third set on court 1 (4-0) so UNC will likely get through, which will mean all top-8 seeds got through (more likely now that they host the quarterfinals).
Only match left is UNC-OSU, UNC leads 3-2, and the two remaining courts (1 and 4) are starting third sets.
______________________________
Makenna-Jones is running away with the third set on court 1 (4-0) so UNC will likely get through, which will mean all top-8 seeds got through (more likely now that they host the quarterfinals).
Kansas beats TAMU 4-0 and on the remaining courts was leading on two lines and tied on one, so a convincing win after losing at TAMU 4-2 in conference play.
Only match left is UNC-OSU, UNC leads 3-2, and the two remaining courts (1 and 4) are starting third sets.
______________________________
Makenna-Jones is running away with the third set on court 1 (4-0) so UNC will likely get through, which will mean all top-8 seeds got through (more likely now that they host the quarterfinals).
Only match left is UNC-OSU, UNC leads 3-2, and the two remaining courts (1 and 4) are starting third sets.
______________________________
Makenna-Jones is running away with the third set on court 1 (4-0) so UNC will likely get through, which will mean all top-8 seeds got through (more likely now that they host the quarterfinals).
05-13-2019, 10:06 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-13-2019, 10:08 AM by ColoradoTree.)
I'd argue that UTR's view of that UNC-Oklahoma State match (UNC with an edge, but a competitive match) was far more accurate than the slam.tennis view of the match (UNC 97% to win). It was 3-2 UNC with two matches into third sets, so it could have gone either way, but they looked prime to split those matches; if they'd played it out, that was a 4-3 match.
So, the quarterfinals are all set for this Friday:
9am: (2) UNC vs. (7) UCLA (slam.tennis says UNC is 96% to win)
11am: (3) Stanford vs. (6) Pepperdine (Stanford is 83% to win)
2pm: (1) Georgia vs. (8) Vanderbilt (UGA is 96% to win)
4pm: (4) South Carolina vs. (5) Duke (Duke is 56% to win)
They didn't say as much when announcing the change to the super regional format, but the NCAA had to understand that they'd be limiting the number of Cinderella teams making a run in the tournament, like oldalum noted. Of course, it also further emphasizes the importance of the regular season, and I don't have any argument with that. Put the Stanford-Kansas match (or the UNC-Oklahoma State or Pepperdine-UCF matches) at a neutral site, and you could well get a different result. But we got it at home because we'd earned that right. (Though like I've said elsewhere on this board, it was less about the scheduling approach--we basically replaced a couple of ranked matches with a different set of ranked matches--and more about the fact that we won the matches we needed to win, against just the one loss to the #1 national seed.)
If you're trying to monetize college tennis a little more, it makes all the sense in the world that you'd want the better teams capable of putting on the best display of tennis at the final site, so TV networks might be a little more interested. And lo and behold, the NCAA signed a deal with the Tennis Channel to televise the championships at the final site, with at least 50 hours of live matches (though that number includes the singles/doubles tournaments, too). We don't yet know which matches will be televised, but I think it's more likely that you'll see the team semis and final on TV--not sure how much quarterfinal action will make it on screen. But the Tennis Channel schedule is showing 6 straight hours starting at 4pm eastern on both Thursday and Friday, so it looks like the plan is to show the last two quarterfinals for both the men and the women. Another 6 hours on Saturday for the men's and women's semis and 6 hours for the men's and women's finals, so I'm not sure how that'll break down. It looks the Thursday/Friday coverage will be from 1pm to 7pm Pacific, which would allow you to show the end of the second quarter and all of the third and fourth quarterfinals, though there will be some overlap between the end of the third and the start of the fourth, so not sure what they'll do there). On Saturday, it'll be Noon-6pm Pacific, when the first women's semi starts at 11am, the men's second semi starts at 1pm, and the second women's semi starts at 3pm (the first men's semi is at 9am) On Sunday, it's from 11am-5pm, and the men's final starts at noon, and the women's final starts at 2pm. That said, this bracket was announced before the Tennis Channel deal was finalized, so I would imagine they'll adjust the timing of the semis and final to maximize television exposure.
So, the quarterfinals are all set for this Friday:
9am: (2) UNC vs. (7) UCLA (slam.tennis says UNC is 96% to win)
11am: (3) Stanford vs. (6) Pepperdine (Stanford is 83% to win)
2pm: (1) Georgia vs. (8) Vanderbilt (UGA is 96% to win)
4pm: (4) South Carolina vs. (5) Duke (Duke is 56% to win)
They didn't say as much when announcing the change to the super regional format, but the NCAA had to understand that they'd be limiting the number of Cinderella teams making a run in the tournament, like oldalum noted. Of course, it also further emphasizes the importance of the regular season, and I don't have any argument with that. Put the Stanford-Kansas match (or the UNC-Oklahoma State or Pepperdine-UCF matches) at a neutral site, and you could well get a different result. But we got it at home because we'd earned that right. (Though like I've said elsewhere on this board, it was less about the scheduling approach--we basically replaced a couple of ranked matches with a different set of ranked matches--and more about the fact that we won the matches we needed to win, against just the one loss to the #1 national seed.)
If you're trying to monetize college tennis a little more, it makes all the sense in the world that you'd want the better teams capable of putting on the best display of tennis at the final site, so TV networks might be a little more interested. And lo and behold, the NCAA signed a deal with the Tennis Channel to televise the championships at the final site, with at least 50 hours of live matches (though that number includes the singles/doubles tournaments, too). We don't yet know which matches will be televised, but I think it's more likely that you'll see the team semis and final on TV--not sure how much quarterfinal action will make it on screen. But the Tennis Channel schedule is showing 6 straight hours starting at 4pm eastern on both Thursday and Friday, so it looks like the plan is to show the last two quarterfinals for both the men and the women. Another 6 hours on Saturday for the men's and women's semis and 6 hours for the men's and women's finals, so I'm not sure how that'll break down. It looks the Thursday/Friday coverage will be from 1pm to 7pm Pacific, which would allow you to show the end of the second quarter and all of the third and fourth quarterfinals, though there will be some overlap between the end of the third and the start of the fourth, so not sure what they'll do there). On Saturday, it'll be Noon-6pm Pacific, when the first women's semi starts at 11am, the men's second semi starts at 1pm, and the second women's semi starts at 3pm (the first men's semi is at 9am) On Sunday, it's from 11am-5pm, and the men's final starts at noon, and the women's final starts at 2pm. That said, this bracket was announced before the Tennis Channel deal was finalized, so I would imagine they'll adjust the timing of the semis and final to maximize television exposure.
(This post was last modified: 05-13-2019, 10:08 AM by ColoradoTree.)
I'd argue that UTR's view of that UNC-Oklahoma State match (UNC with an edge, but a competitive match) was far more accurate than the slam.tennis view of the match (UNC 97% to win). It was 3-2 UNC with two matches into third sets, so it could have gone either way, but they looked prime to split those matches; if they'd played it out, that was a 4-3 match.
So, the quarterfinals are all set for this Friday:
9am: (2) UNC vs. (7) UCLA (slam.tennis says UNC is 96% to win)
11am: (3) Stanford vs. (6) Pepperdine (Stanford is 83% to win)
2pm: (1) Georgia vs. (8) Vanderbilt (UGA is 96% to win)
4pm: (4) South Carolina vs. (5) Duke (Duke is 56% to win)
They didn't say as much when announcing the change to the super regional format, but the NCAA had to understand that they'd be limiting the number of Cinderella teams making a run in the tournament, like oldalum noted. Of course, it also further emphasizes the importance of the regular season, and I don't have any argument with that. Put the Stanford-Kansas match (or the UNC-Oklahoma State or Pepperdine-UCF matches) at a neutral site, and you could well get a different result. But we got it at home because we'd earned that right. (Though like I've said elsewhere on this board, it was less about the scheduling approach--we basically replaced a couple of ranked matches with a different set of ranked matches--and more about the fact that we won the matches we needed to win, against just the one loss to the #1 national seed.)
If you're trying to monetize college tennis a little more, it makes all the sense in the world that you'd want the better teams capable of putting on the best display of tennis at the final site, so TV networks might be a little more interested. And lo and behold, the NCAA signed a deal with the Tennis Channel to televise the championships at the final site, with at least 50 hours of live matches (though that number includes the singles/doubles tournaments, too). We don't yet know which matches will be televised, but I think it's more likely that you'll see the team semis and final on TV--not sure how much quarterfinal action will make it on screen. But the Tennis Channel schedule is showing 6 straight hours starting at 4pm eastern on both Thursday and Friday, so it looks like the plan is to show the last two quarterfinals for both the men and the women. Another 6 hours on Saturday for the men's and women's semis and 6 hours for the men's and women's finals, so I'm not sure how that'll break down. It looks the Thursday/Friday coverage will be from 1pm to 7pm Pacific, which would allow you to show the end of the second quarter and all of the third and fourth quarterfinals, though there will be some overlap between the end of the third and the start of the fourth, so not sure what they'll do there). On Saturday, it'll be Noon-6pm Pacific, when the first women's semi starts at 11am, the men's second semi starts at 1pm, and the second women's semi starts at 3pm (the first men's semi is at 9am) On Sunday, it's from 11am-5pm, and the men's final starts at noon, and the women's final starts at 2pm. That said, this bracket was announced before the Tennis Channel deal was finalized, so I would imagine they'll adjust the timing of the semis and final to maximize television exposure.
So, the quarterfinals are all set for this Friday:
9am: (2) UNC vs. (7) UCLA (slam.tennis says UNC is 96% to win)
11am: (3) Stanford vs. (6) Pepperdine (Stanford is 83% to win)
2pm: (1) Georgia vs. (8) Vanderbilt (UGA is 96% to win)
4pm: (4) South Carolina vs. (5) Duke (Duke is 56% to win)
They didn't say as much when announcing the change to the super regional format, but the NCAA had to understand that they'd be limiting the number of Cinderella teams making a run in the tournament, like oldalum noted. Of course, it also further emphasizes the importance of the regular season, and I don't have any argument with that. Put the Stanford-Kansas match (or the UNC-Oklahoma State or Pepperdine-UCF matches) at a neutral site, and you could well get a different result. But we got it at home because we'd earned that right. (Though like I've said elsewhere on this board, it was less about the scheduling approach--we basically replaced a couple of ranked matches with a different set of ranked matches--and more about the fact that we won the matches we needed to win, against just the one loss to the #1 national seed.)
If you're trying to monetize college tennis a little more, it makes all the sense in the world that you'd want the better teams capable of putting on the best display of tennis at the final site, so TV networks might be a little more interested. And lo and behold, the NCAA signed a deal with the Tennis Channel to televise the championships at the final site, with at least 50 hours of live matches (though that number includes the singles/doubles tournaments, too). We don't yet know which matches will be televised, but I think it's more likely that you'll see the team semis and final on TV--not sure how much quarterfinal action will make it on screen. But the Tennis Channel schedule is showing 6 straight hours starting at 4pm eastern on both Thursday and Friday, so it looks like the plan is to show the last two quarterfinals for both the men and the women. Another 6 hours on Saturday for the men's and women's semis and 6 hours for the men's and women's finals, so I'm not sure how that'll break down. It looks the Thursday/Friday coverage will be from 1pm to 7pm Pacific, which would allow you to show the end of the second quarter and all of the third and fourth quarterfinals, though there will be some overlap between the end of the third and the start of the fourth, so not sure what they'll do there). On Saturday, it'll be Noon-6pm Pacific, when the first women's semi starts at 11am, the men's second semi starts at 1pm, and the second women's semi starts at 3pm (the first men's semi is at 9am) On Sunday, it's from 11am-5pm, and the men's final starts at noon, and the women's final starts at 2pm. That said, this bracket was announced before the Tennis Channel deal was finalized, so I would imagine they'll adjust the timing of the semis and final to maximize television exposure.
05-13-2019, 12:46 PM
I'm happy about Tennis Channel coverage in part because I'm hoping for a good analyst who can be really informative about what's playing out.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »