02-07-2024, 11:00 AM
Great info as always ColoradoTree!
Women's Tennis 2024
02-07-2024, 02:37 PM
Thanks! And FYI, the updated singles/doubles rankings dropped, and here's where we stand:
#12 Connie Ma
#55 Alexis Blokhina
#56 Angelica Blake
#69 Valencia Xu
#75 Alexandra Yepifanova
Plus, Blake/Blokhina check in as the #56 doubles team in the country.
I think Hui is definitely worthy of being ranked, but she will struggle to get there even if she wins every remaining match, as she just won't have enough good wins over ranked players to move the needle on her ranking. And we should expect Xu's ranking to continue to drop as a result of the same issue.
Meanwhile, #1 UNC has the #2, #7, #8, #26, #28, #34, #45, and #62 players. EIGHT PLAYERS ranked that high! Oof. Yeah, sure, we're deep, too, but they can absorb injuries to two middle-of-the-lineup players and still be the best top 6 in the country.
Here's how the other top-ranked teams stack up with their respective singles players:
* #3 Oklahoma State has the #5, #17, #46, #54, and #122 players. (Plus the #13 and #14 doubles pairs.)
* #4 Georgia has #38, #48, #66, #111, and #114. (And the #31 and #32 doubles pairs.)
* #5 Michigan has #9, #18, #57, and #124. (And the #5 doubles pair.)
* #6 Pepperdine has #6, #15, #89, and #106. (#4 doubles pair.)
* #7 N.C. State has #10, #33, #39, and #40. (That's a great, great top 4, and with the #6 and #9 doubles pairs, that's a team that can survive their limited depth.)
* #8 Florida has #44, #67, and #70. (And no ranked doubles teams, FYI.)
* #9 Texas A&M has #1, #24, and #32. (And the #3 doubles pair.)
* #10 Texas has #29. (But they have the #35, #37, and #43 doubles pairs.)
#12 Connie Ma
#55 Alexis Blokhina
#56 Angelica Blake
#69 Valencia Xu
#75 Alexandra Yepifanova
Plus, Blake/Blokhina check in as the #56 doubles team in the country.
I think Hui is definitely worthy of being ranked, but she will struggle to get there even if she wins every remaining match, as she just won't have enough good wins over ranked players to move the needle on her ranking. And we should expect Xu's ranking to continue to drop as a result of the same issue.
Meanwhile, #1 UNC has the #2, #7, #8, #26, #28, #34, #45, and #62 players. EIGHT PLAYERS ranked that high! Oof. Yeah, sure, we're deep, too, but they can absorb injuries to two middle-of-the-lineup players and still be the best top 6 in the country.
Here's how the other top-ranked teams stack up with their respective singles players:
* #3 Oklahoma State has the #5, #17, #46, #54, and #122 players. (Plus the #13 and #14 doubles pairs.)
* #4 Georgia has #38, #48, #66, #111, and #114. (And the #31 and #32 doubles pairs.)
* #5 Michigan has #9, #18, #57, and #124. (And the #5 doubles pair.)
* #6 Pepperdine has #6, #15, #89, and #106. (#4 doubles pair.)
* #7 N.C. State has #10, #33, #39, and #40. (That's a great, great top 4, and with the #6 and #9 doubles pairs, that's a team that can survive their limited depth.)
* #8 Florida has #44, #67, and #70. (And no ranked doubles teams, FYI.)
* #9 Texas A&M has #1, #24, and #32. (And the #3 doubles pair.)
* #10 Texas has #29. (But they have the #35, #37, and #43 doubles pairs.)
Thanks! And FYI, the updated singles/doubles rankings dropped, and here's where we stand:
#12 Connie Ma
#55 Alexis Blokhina
#56 Angelica Blake
#69 Valencia Xu
#75 Alexandra Yepifanova
Plus, Blake/Blokhina check in as the #56 doubles team in the country.
I think Hui is definitely worthy of being ranked, but she will struggle to get there even if she wins every remaining match, as she just won't have enough good wins over ranked players to move the needle on her ranking. And we should expect Xu's ranking to continue to drop as a result of the same issue.
Meanwhile, #1 UNC has the #2, #7, #8, #26, #28, #34, #45, and #62 players. EIGHT PLAYERS ranked that high! Oof. Yeah, sure, we're deep, too, but they can absorb injuries to two middle-of-the-lineup players and still be the best top 6 in the country.
Here's how the other top-ranked teams stack up with their respective singles players:
* #3 Oklahoma State has the #5, #17, #46, #54, and #122 players. (Plus the #13 and #14 doubles pairs.)
* #4 Georgia has #38, #48, #66, #111, and #114. (And the #31 and #32 doubles pairs.)
* #5 Michigan has #9, #18, #57, and #124. (And the #5 doubles pair.)
* #6 Pepperdine has #6, #15, #89, and #106. (#4 doubles pair.)
* #7 N.C. State has #10, #33, #39, and #40. (That's a great, great top 4, and with the #6 and #9 doubles pairs, that's a team that can survive their limited depth.)
* #8 Florida has #44, #67, and #70. (And no ranked doubles teams, FYI.)
* #9 Texas A&M has #1, #24, and #32. (And the #3 doubles pair.)
* #10 Texas has #29. (But they have the #35, #37, and #43 doubles pairs.)
#12 Connie Ma
#55 Alexis Blokhina
#56 Angelica Blake
#69 Valencia Xu
#75 Alexandra Yepifanova
Plus, Blake/Blokhina check in as the #56 doubles team in the country.
I think Hui is definitely worthy of being ranked, but she will struggle to get there even if she wins every remaining match, as she just won't have enough good wins over ranked players to move the needle on her ranking. And we should expect Xu's ranking to continue to drop as a result of the same issue.
Meanwhile, #1 UNC has the #2, #7, #8, #26, #28, #34, #45, and #62 players. EIGHT PLAYERS ranked that high! Oof. Yeah, sure, we're deep, too, but they can absorb injuries to two middle-of-the-lineup players and still be the best top 6 in the country.
Here's how the other top-ranked teams stack up with their respective singles players:
* #3 Oklahoma State has the #5, #17, #46, #54, and #122 players. (Plus the #13 and #14 doubles pairs.)
* #4 Georgia has #38, #48, #66, #111, and #114. (And the #31 and #32 doubles pairs.)
* #5 Michigan has #9, #18, #57, and #124. (And the #5 doubles pair.)
* #6 Pepperdine has #6, #15, #89, and #106. (#4 doubles pair.)
* #7 N.C. State has #10, #33, #39, and #40. (That's a great, great top 4, and with the #6 and #9 doubles pairs, that's a team that can survive their limited depth.)
* #8 Florida has #44, #67, and #70. (And no ranked doubles teams, FYI.)
* #9 Texas A&M has #1, #24, and #32. (And the #3 doubles pair.)
* #10 Texas has #29. (But they have the #35, #37, and #43 doubles pairs.)
02-09-2024, 09:35 AM
It's matchday!
#2 Stanford takes on #8 Florida today at 9:00am in its second top-10 matchup of the young season. For the newer women's tennis fans among you, this might not strike you as any different as playing any other good SEC team that we rarely otherwise see. But Stanford-Florida was arguably the marquee rivalry in the sport for decades, from the late 80s through the Gibbs-Ahn-Burdette era about a decade ago. Stanford's 20 NCAA team titles lead the way, but Florida's 7 are next-best. We used to have an annual non-conference matchup with them, but that fell by the wayside a ways back, and it's a shame.
Here's a taste of that rivalry: in 1988, we beat them in the NCAA title match. in 1990, we did it again. In 1996, they beat us in the title match, but we returned the favor in 1997. We did it again in 1999 and 2002, and while they beat us in the 2003 national title match, that kicked off our run of three straight titles (albeit none against Florida). We beat them in the 2010 title match. They beat us in 2011 and 2017. And that's just head-to-head matchups in the actual NCAA championship match!
Florida is no longer the preeminent program in the East, having been surpassed by Georgia and now by North Carolina for the time being (though it still boggles my mind that UNC has won just one NCAA title--last year's), but neither are they too far off the pace, and who knows whether UNC or UGA or Texas will have the staying power that Florida showed over decades. This will be an excellent and difficult match.
Anyway, so far this year the #8 Gators are 4-1, with their lone loss coming to #5 Michigan in Ann Arbor. Florida dropped a very close doubles point, and then got double-bageled on Court 4 to go down 2-0. Florida got into it with a straight sets win from Gailis on Court 2, but Michigan made it 3-1 with a 6-2, 6-2 win over Briggs on Court 1, and then Michigan clinched on Court 3, winning 6-1 in the third set over De Oliveira. When the match was suspended, Courts 5 and 6 were in third sets, with Lopez trailing 1-2 and Rowinska about to lose, down 1-5.
Interestingly, Florida hasn't shut out anyone yet this season. They beat Baylor 6-1 to open the season, with Briggs losing badly on Court 2. They beat FIU 4-2 at Kickoff Weekend, with de Oliveira and Briggs losing badly on Courts 1 and 2. They beat San Diego 4-3 in what is their best win of the young season, winning a very close doubles point and then they got wins from Briggs over De Las Heras on 1 (3 sets, but 6-0 in the third), Gailis over Mack on 2 (6-3, 7-6), and Dudeney over Desiatnikov on 4 (6-3, 6-4). They took losses on Court 3 (Goldsmith led UF's Dahlstrom 5-2 when she retired due to injury), 5 (USD's McBride beat Lopez 7-6, 6-1), and 6 (USD's Evans beat Rowinska 7-5, 6-2). They then beat FSU 4-2, winning doubles handily but dropping Courts 2 (de Oliveira losing 7-5, 6-0) and 6 (Williams losing 6-3, 6-3).
The lineup has not been consistent, which can happen in the early season. The top three seem to be Briggs, Gailis, and de Oliveira in some order, with Dudeney and Dahlstrom next in some order, and then the outstanding freshman Qavia Lopez on Court 6 in an ideal world, with then either Rowinska or Williams next up. But they haven't played a match with that top 6 yet, so we'll see how they line up today.
Ranked players are #44 Emily de Oliveira, #67 Carly Briggs, and #70 Rachel Gailis. But in the preseason rankings, Sara Dahlstrom was #13, Briggs was #34, Dudeney was #77, and Gailis was #92, with Lopez as the #7 newcomer. So, if healthy, they'll have six players in their lineup who are worthy of being ranked, just like we will. It'll be a tough one, but I'd give us the edge. Without knowing the singles matchups, it's hard to make predictions, but we should win this one.
Live stats: https://www.ioncourt.com/leagues/2024-it...am-indoors
Live video: https://web.track.tennis/index.html#/@8e...Jc8_jxs00c
#2 Stanford takes on #8 Florida today at 9:00am in its second top-10 matchup of the young season. For the newer women's tennis fans among you, this might not strike you as any different as playing any other good SEC team that we rarely otherwise see. But Stanford-Florida was arguably the marquee rivalry in the sport for decades, from the late 80s through the Gibbs-Ahn-Burdette era about a decade ago. Stanford's 20 NCAA team titles lead the way, but Florida's 7 are next-best. We used to have an annual non-conference matchup with them, but that fell by the wayside a ways back, and it's a shame.
Here's a taste of that rivalry: in 1988, we beat them in the NCAA title match. in 1990, we did it again. In 1996, they beat us in the title match, but we returned the favor in 1997. We did it again in 1999 and 2002, and while they beat us in the 2003 national title match, that kicked off our run of three straight titles (albeit none against Florida). We beat them in the 2010 title match. They beat us in 2011 and 2017. And that's just head-to-head matchups in the actual NCAA championship match!
Florida is no longer the preeminent program in the East, having been surpassed by Georgia and now by North Carolina for the time being (though it still boggles my mind that UNC has won just one NCAA title--last year's), but neither are they too far off the pace, and who knows whether UNC or UGA or Texas will have the staying power that Florida showed over decades. This will be an excellent and difficult match.
Anyway, so far this year the #8 Gators are 4-1, with their lone loss coming to #5 Michigan in Ann Arbor. Florida dropped a very close doubles point, and then got double-bageled on Court 4 to go down 2-0. Florida got into it with a straight sets win from Gailis on Court 2, but Michigan made it 3-1 with a 6-2, 6-2 win over Briggs on Court 1, and then Michigan clinched on Court 3, winning 6-1 in the third set over De Oliveira. When the match was suspended, Courts 5 and 6 were in third sets, with Lopez trailing 1-2 and Rowinska about to lose, down 1-5.
Interestingly, Florida hasn't shut out anyone yet this season. They beat Baylor 6-1 to open the season, with Briggs losing badly on Court 2. They beat FIU 4-2 at Kickoff Weekend, with de Oliveira and Briggs losing badly on Courts 1 and 2. They beat San Diego 4-3 in what is their best win of the young season, winning a very close doubles point and then they got wins from Briggs over De Las Heras on 1 (3 sets, but 6-0 in the third), Gailis over Mack on 2 (6-3, 7-6), and Dudeney over Desiatnikov on 4 (6-3, 6-4). They took losses on Court 3 (Goldsmith led UF's Dahlstrom 5-2 when she retired due to injury), 5 (USD's McBride beat Lopez 7-6, 6-1), and 6 (USD's Evans beat Rowinska 7-5, 6-2). They then beat FSU 4-2, winning doubles handily but dropping Courts 2 (de Oliveira losing 7-5, 6-0) and 6 (Williams losing 6-3, 6-3).
The lineup has not been consistent, which can happen in the early season. The top three seem to be Briggs, Gailis, and de Oliveira in some order, with Dudeney and Dahlstrom next in some order, and then the outstanding freshman Qavia Lopez on Court 6 in an ideal world, with then either Rowinska or Williams next up. But they haven't played a match with that top 6 yet, so we'll see how they line up today.
Ranked players are #44 Emily de Oliveira, #67 Carly Briggs, and #70 Rachel Gailis. But in the preseason rankings, Sara Dahlstrom was #13, Briggs was #34, Dudeney was #77, and Gailis was #92, with Lopez as the #7 newcomer. So, if healthy, they'll have six players in their lineup who are worthy of being ranked, just like we will. It'll be a tough one, but I'd give us the edge. Without knowing the singles matchups, it's hard to make predictions, but we should win this one.
Live stats: https://www.ioncourt.com/leagues/2024-it...am-indoors
Live video: https://web.track.tennis/index.html#/@8e...Jc8_jxs00c
It's matchday!
#2 Stanford takes on #8 Florida today at 9:00am in its second top-10 matchup of the young season. For the newer women's tennis fans among you, this might not strike you as any different as playing any other good SEC team that we rarely otherwise see. But Stanford-Florida was arguably the marquee rivalry in the sport for decades, from the late 80s through the Gibbs-Ahn-Burdette era about a decade ago. Stanford's 20 NCAA team titles lead the way, but Florida's 7 are next-best. We used to have an annual non-conference matchup with them, but that fell by the wayside a ways back, and it's a shame.
Here's a taste of that rivalry: in 1988, we beat them in the NCAA title match. in 1990, we did it again. In 1996, they beat us in the title match, but we returned the favor in 1997. We did it again in 1999 and 2002, and while they beat us in the 2003 national title match, that kicked off our run of three straight titles (albeit none against Florida). We beat them in the 2010 title match. They beat us in 2011 and 2017. And that's just head-to-head matchups in the actual NCAA championship match!
Florida is no longer the preeminent program in the East, having been surpassed by Georgia and now by North Carolina for the time being (though it still boggles my mind that UNC has won just one NCAA title--last year's), but neither are they too far off the pace, and who knows whether UNC or UGA or Texas will have the staying power that Florida showed over decades. This will be an excellent and difficult match.
Anyway, so far this year the #8 Gators are 4-1, with their lone loss coming to #5 Michigan in Ann Arbor. Florida dropped a very close doubles point, and then got double-bageled on Court 4 to go down 2-0. Florida got into it with a straight sets win from Gailis on Court 2, but Michigan made it 3-1 with a 6-2, 6-2 win over Briggs on Court 1, and then Michigan clinched on Court 3, winning 6-1 in the third set over De Oliveira. When the match was suspended, Courts 5 and 6 were in third sets, with Lopez trailing 1-2 and Rowinska about to lose, down 1-5.
Interestingly, Florida hasn't shut out anyone yet this season. They beat Baylor 6-1 to open the season, with Briggs losing badly on Court 2. They beat FIU 4-2 at Kickoff Weekend, with de Oliveira and Briggs losing badly on Courts 1 and 2. They beat San Diego 4-3 in what is their best win of the young season, winning a very close doubles point and then they got wins from Briggs over De Las Heras on 1 (3 sets, but 6-0 in the third), Gailis over Mack on 2 (6-3, 7-6), and Dudeney over Desiatnikov on 4 (6-3, 6-4). They took losses on Court 3 (Goldsmith led UF's Dahlstrom 5-2 when she retired due to injury), 5 (USD's McBride beat Lopez 7-6, 6-1), and 6 (USD's Evans beat Rowinska 7-5, 6-2). They then beat FSU 4-2, winning doubles handily but dropping Courts 2 (de Oliveira losing 7-5, 6-0) and 6 (Williams losing 6-3, 6-3).
The lineup has not been consistent, which can happen in the early season. The top three seem to be Briggs, Gailis, and de Oliveira in some order, with Dudeney and Dahlstrom next in some order, and then the outstanding freshman Qavia Lopez on Court 6 in an ideal world, with then either Rowinska or Williams next up. But they haven't played a match with that top 6 yet, so we'll see how they line up today.
Ranked players are #44 Emily de Oliveira, #67 Carly Briggs, and #70 Rachel Gailis. But in the preseason rankings, Sara Dahlstrom was #13, Briggs was #34, Dudeney was #77, and Gailis was #92, with Lopez as the #7 newcomer. So, if healthy, they'll have six players in their lineup who are worthy of being ranked, just like we will. It'll be a tough one, but I'd give us the edge. Without knowing the singles matchups, it's hard to make predictions, but we should win this one.
Live stats: https://www.ioncourt.com/leagues/2024-it...am-indoors
Live video: https://web.track.tennis/index.html#/@8e...Jc8_jxs00c
#2 Stanford takes on #8 Florida today at 9:00am in its second top-10 matchup of the young season. For the newer women's tennis fans among you, this might not strike you as any different as playing any other good SEC team that we rarely otherwise see. But Stanford-Florida was arguably the marquee rivalry in the sport for decades, from the late 80s through the Gibbs-Ahn-Burdette era about a decade ago. Stanford's 20 NCAA team titles lead the way, but Florida's 7 are next-best. We used to have an annual non-conference matchup with them, but that fell by the wayside a ways back, and it's a shame.
Here's a taste of that rivalry: in 1988, we beat them in the NCAA title match. in 1990, we did it again. In 1996, they beat us in the title match, but we returned the favor in 1997. We did it again in 1999 and 2002, and while they beat us in the 2003 national title match, that kicked off our run of three straight titles (albeit none against Florida). We beat them in the 2010 title match. They beat us in 2011 and 2017. And that's just head-to-head matchups in the actual NCAA championship match!
Florida is no longer the preeminent program in the East, having been surpassed by Georgia and now by North Carolina for the time being (though it still boggles my mind that UNC has won just one NCAA title--last year's), but neither are they too far off the pace, and who knows whether UNC or UGA or Texas will have the staying power that Florida showed over decades. This will be an excellent and difficult match.
Anyway, so far this year the #8 Gators are 4-1, with their lone loss coming to #5 Michigan in Ann Arbor. Florida dropped a very close doubles point, and then got double-bageled on Court 4 to go down 2-0. Florida got into it with a straight sets win from Gailis on Court 2, but Michigan made it 3-1 with a 6-2, 6-2 win over Briggs on Court 1, and then Michigan clinched on Court 3, winning 6-1 in the third set over De Oliveira. When the match was suspended, Courts 5 and 6 were in third sets, with Lopez trailing 1-2 and Rowinska about to lose, down 1-5.
Interestingly, Florida hasn't shut out anyone yet this season. They beat Baylor 6-1 to open the season, with Briggs losing badly on Court 2. They beat FIU 4-2 at Kickoff Weekend, with de Oliveira and Briggs losing badly on Courts 1 and 2. They beat San Diego 4-3 in what is their best win of the young season, winning a very close doubles point and then they got wins from Briggs over De Las Heras on 1 (3 sets, but 6-0 in the third), Gailis over Mack on 2 (6-3, 7-6), and Dudeney over Desiatnikov on 4 (6-3, 6-4). They took losses on Court 3 (Goldsmith led UF's Dahlstrom 5-2 when she retired due to injury), 5 (USD's McBride beat Lopez 7-6, 6-1), and 6 (USD's Evans beat Rowinska 7-5, 6-2). They then beat FSU 4-2, winning doubles handily but dropping Courts 2 (de Oliveira losing 7-5, 6-0) and 6 (Williams losing 6-3, 6-3).
The lineup has not been consistent, which can happen in the early season. The top three seem to be Briggs, Gailis, and de Oliveira in some order, with Dudeney and Dahlstrom next in some order, and then the outstanding freshman Qavia Lopez on Court 6 in an ideal world, with then either Rowinska or Williams next up. But they haven't played a match with that top 6 yet, so we'll see how they line up today.
Ranked players are #44 Emily de Oliveira, #67 Carly Briggs, and #70 Rachel Gailis. But in the preseason rankings, Sara Dahlstrom was #13, Briggs was #34, Dudeney was #77, and Gailis was #92, with Lopez as the #7 newcomer. So, if healthy, they'll have six players in their lineup who are worthy of being ranked, just like we will. It'll be a tough one, but I'd give us the edge. Without knowing the singles matchups, it's hard to make predictions, but we should win this one.
Live stats: https://www.ioncourt.com/leagues/2024-it...am-indoors
Live video: https://web.track.tennis/index.html#/@8e...Jc8_jxs00c
02-09-2024, 12:20 PM
winning handily on courts 1-3, and being effectively tied on the lower 3 courts when play was stopped, is not the usual recipe I expected for our wins!
-ds
-ds
02-09-2024, 12:42 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-09-2024, 12:54 PM by ColoradoTree.)
A solid doubles win, with Blake/Blokhina trailing 4-5 on Court 1 when it was clinched, but Ma/Yepifanova controlled their match, winning 6-2, and Hui/Xu took theirs 6-4.
In singles, we ran out the same lineup we've been using, and Florida used the following:
1. Blake vs. Briggs
2. Ma vs. Gailis
3. Yepifanova vs. De Oliveira
4. Blokhina vs. Dudeney
5. Hui vs. Lopez
6. Xu vs. Rowinska
We came out swinging, winning five of six first sets. And while usually it's our depth that carries us, today it was the top of the lineup imposing their will. Yepifanova was off court first with a 6-0, 6-2 win over De Oliveira, Blake was next with a 6-1, 6-2 win over Briggs, and Ma clinched it with a 6-3, 6-2 win over Gailis. Love it. No notes. If we can get play like that from our top 3, the sky is the limit. And while I expect these sorts of things from Ma and Yepifanova, we haven't seen dominance like this from Blake yet this season, so I'm particularly excited about that performance. She just wiped the floor with the preseason #34 player! Sometimes it's not just the win, but how you get there, and hopefully that dominance injects a little extra confidence.
On the back three courts, however, I do have some notes. In a battle of highly-touted freshmen on Court 5, Hui won the first set over Lopez 6-4 but dropped the second 6-2, and they hadn't yet started their third. On Court 6, Xu handled Rowinska 6-2 in the first, but was down a break in the second, with Rowinska serving for the set up 5-3. And on Court 4, Blokhina lost the first 6-4 to Dudeney but was on serve in the second, 4-4, when the match was abandoned. Entirely possible that we pull out one or more of those matches in three if we needed them. And a Xu comeback in the second set wasn't out of the question (it was 15-30 in that game, so two more points and Xu would be back on serve, down 4-5).
But that's all first world problem kinda stuff. We shut out a top 10 team. That's a great result however you slice it. Onward and upward!
As for tomorrow's opponent, we won't know until later this afternoon. Georgia and Ohio State don't play until a half hour from now, so we'll have the benefit of a few hours' extra rest over the winner.
FYI, Cal has a potential upset brewing over Michigan (which works to our benefit, since we play Cal this year and not Michigan). Cal took a very close doubles point (winning 7-6 on 2 and 7-5 on 3 with Court 1 tied 6-6), and while Michigan won quickly on Court 5 to level the match, Cal answered right back with a win on Court 3 for a 2-1 lead, and Michigan won 7-6, 6-1 on Court 1 for a 2-2 match. Cal won first sets on two other matches, so they could win a tight one if they hold onto those, but one is in a second-set tiebreaker (Court 4) and the other just went to a third set (Court 2). The final match is on Court 6, where Cal's Lan Mi dropped the first 6-1 but is tied in a second-set tiebreaker.
Wowza. Lan Mi takes the second set tiebreaker 11-9 to keep her match alive against Piper Charney, who is another top freshman (the #8 behind #2 Hui, #4 Eleana Yu, and #7 Lopez of Florida). But on the other hand, Wiersholm drops her tiebreaker and is already down a break in her third set on Court 4. And on Court 2, Alsola leads UM's Fliegner 1-0 in the third, but it's on serve.
In singles, we ran out the same lineup we've been using, and Florida used the following:
1. Blake vs. Briggs
2. Ma vs. Gailis
3. Yepifanova vs. De Oliveira
4. Blokhina vs. Dudeney
5. Hui vs. Lopez
6. Xu vs. Rowinska
We came out swinging, winning five of six first sets. And while usually it's our depth that carries us, today it was the top of the lineup imposing their will. Yepifanova was off court first with a 6-0, 6-2 win over De Oliveira, Blake was next with a 6-1, 6-2 win over Briggs, and Ma clinched it with a 6-3, 6-2 win over Gailis. Love it. No notes. If we can get play like that from our top 3, the sky is the limit. And while I expect these sorts of things from Ma and Yepifanova, we haven't seen dominance like this from Blake yet this season, so I'm particularly excited about that performance. She just wiped the floor with the preseason #34 player! Sometimes it's not just the win, but how you get there, and hopefully that dominance injects a little extra confidence.
On the back three courts, however, I do have some notes. In a battle of highly-touted freshmen on Court 5, Hui won the first set over Lopez 6-4 but dropped the second 6-2, and they hadn't yet started their third. On Court 6, Xu handled Rowinska 6-2 in the first, but was down a break in the second, with Rowinska serving for the set up 5-3. And on Court 4, Blokhina lost the first 6-4 to Dudeney but was on serve in the second, 4-4, when the match was abandoned. Entirely possible that we pull out one or more of those matches in three if we needed them. And a Xu comeback in the second set wasn't out of the question (it was 15-30 in that game, so two more points and Xu would be back on serve, down 4-5).
But that's all first world problem kinda stuff. We shut out a top 10 team. That's a great result however you slice it. Onward and upward!
As for tomorrow's opponent, we won't know until later this afternoon. Georgia and Ohio State don't play until a half hour from now, so we'll have the benefit of a few hours' extra rest over the winner.
FYI, Cal has a potential upset brewing over Michigan (which works to our benefit, since we play Cal this year and not Michigan). Cal took a very close doubles point (winning 7-6 on 2 and 7-5 on 3 with Court 1 tied 6-6), and while Michigan won quickly on Court 5 to level the match, Cal answered right back with a win on Court 3 for a 2-1 lead, and Michigan won 7-6, 6-1 on Court 1 for a 2-2 match. Cal won first sets on two other matches, so they could win a tight one if they hold onto those, but one is in a second-set tiebreaker (Court 4) and the other just went to a third set (Court 2). The final match is on Court 6, where Cal's Lan Mi dropped the first 6-1 but is tied in a second-set tiebreaker.
Wowza. Lan Mi takes the second set tiebreaker 11-9 to keep her match alive against Piper Charney, who is another top freshman (the #8 behind #2 Hui, #4 Eleana Yu, and #7 Lopez of Florida). But on the other hand, Wiersholm drops her tiebreaker and is already down a break in her third set on Court 4. And on Court 2, Alsola leads UM's Fliegner 1-0 in the third, but it's on serve.
(This post was last modified: 02-09-2024, 12:54 PM by ColoradoTree.)
A solid doubles win, with Blake/Blokhina trailing 4-5 on Court 1 when it was clinched, but Ma/Yepifanova controlled their match, winning 6-2, and Hui/Xu took theirs 6-4.
In singles, we ran out the same lineup we've been using, and Florida used the following:
1. Blake vs. Briggs
2. Ma vs. Gailis
3. Yepifanova vs. De Oliveira
4. Blokhina vs. Dudeney
5. Hui vs. Lopez
6. Xu vs. Rowinska
We came out swinging, winning five of six first sets. And while usually it's our depth that carries us, today it was the top of the lineup imposing their will. Yepifanova was off court first with a 6-0, 6-2 win over De Oliveira, Blake was next with a 6-1, 6-2 win over Briggs, and Ma clinched it with a 6-3, 6-2 win over Gailis. Love it. No notes. If we can get play like that from our top 3, the sky is the limit. And while I expect these sorts of things from Ma and Yepifanova, we haven't seen dominance like this from Blake yet this season, so I'm particularly excited about that performance. She just wiped the floor with the preseason #34 player! Sometimes it's not just the win, but how you get there, and hopefully that dominance injects a little extra confidence.
On the back three courts, however, I do have some notes. In a battle of highly-touted freshmen on Court 5, Hui won the first set over Lopez 6-4 but dropped the second 6-2, and they hadn't yet started their third. On Court 6, Xu handled Rowinska 6-2 in the first, but was down a break in the second, with Rowinska serving for the set up 5-3. And on Court 4, Blokhina lost the first 6-4 to Dudeney but was on serve in the second, 4-4, when the match was abandoned. Entirely possible that we pull out one or more of those matches in three if we needed them. And a Xu comeback in the second set wasn't out of the question (it was 15-30 in that game, so two more points and Xu would be back on serve, down 4-5).
But that's all first world problem kinda stuff. We shut out a top 10 team. That's a great result however you slice it. Onward and upward!
As for tomorrow's opponent, we won't know until later this afternoon. Georgia and Ohio State don't play until a half hour from now, so we'll have the benefit of a few hours' extra rest over the winner.
FYI, Cal has a potential upset brewing over Michigan (which works to our benefit, since we play Cal this year and not Michigan). Cal took a very close doubles point (winning 7-6 on 2 and 7-5 on 3 with Court 1 tied 6-6), and while Michigan won quickly on Court 5 to level the match, Cal answered right back with a win on Court 3 for a 2-1 lead, and Michigan won 7-6, 6-1 on Court 1 for a 2-2 match. Cal won first sets on two other matches, so they could win a tight one if they hold onto those, but one is in a second-set tiebreaker (Court 4) and the other just went to a third set (Court 2). The final match is on Court 6, where Cal's Lan Mi dropped the first 6-1 but is tied in a second-set tiebreaker.
Wowza. Lan Mi takes the second set tiebreaker 11-9 to keep her match alive against Piper Charney, who is another top freshman (the #8 behind #2 Hui, #4 Eleana Yu, and #7 Lopez of Florida). But on the other hand, Wiersholm drops her tiebreaker and is already down a break in her third set on Court 4. And on Court 2, Alsola leads UM's Fliegner 1-0 in the third, but it's on serve.
In singles, we ran out the same lineup we've been using, and Florida used the following:
1. Blake vs. Briggs
2. Ma vs. Gailis
3. Yepifanova vs. De Oliveira
4. Blokhina vs. Dudeney
5. Hui vs. Lopez
6. Xu vs. Rowinska
We came out swinging, winning five of six first sets. And while usually it's our depth that carries us, today it was the top of the lineup imposing their will. Yepifanova was off court first with a 6-0, 6-2 win over De Oliveira, Blake was next with a 6-1, 6-2 win over Briggs, and Ma clinched it with a 6-3, 6-2 win over Gailis. Love it. No notes. If we can get play like that from our top 3, the sky is the limit. And while I expect these sorts of things from Ma and Yepifanova, we haven't seen dominance like this from Blake yet this season, so I'm particularly excited about that performance. She just wiped the floor with the preseason #34 player! Sometimes it's not just the win, but how you get there, and hopefully that dominance injects a little extra confidence.
On the back three courts, however, I do have some notes. In a battle of highly-touted freshmen on Court 5, Hui won the first set over Lopez 6-4 but dropped the second 6-2, and they hadn't yet started their third. On Court 6, Xu handled Rowinska 6-2 in the first, but was down a break in the second, with Rowinska serving for the set up 5-3. And on Court 4, Blokhina lost the first 6-4 to Dudeney but was on serve in the second, 4-4, when the match was abandoned. Entirely possible that we pull out one or more of those matches in three if we needed them. And a Xu comeback in the second set wasn't out of the question (it was 15-30 in that game, so two more points and Xu would be back on serve, down 4-5).
But that's all first world problem kinda stuff. We shut out a top 10 team. That's a great result however you slice it. Onward and upward!
As for tomorrow's opponent, we won't know until later this afternoon. Georgia and Ohio State don't play until a half hour from now, so we'll have the benefit of a few hours' extra rest over the winner.
FYI, Cal has a potential upset brewing over Michigan (which works to our benefit, since we play Cal this year and not Michigan). Cal took a very close doubles point (winning 7-6 on 2 and 7-5 on 3 with Court 1 tied 6-6), and while Michigan won quickly on Court 5 to level the match, Cal answered right back with a win on Court 3 for a 2-1 lead, and Michigan won 7-6, 6-1 on Court 1 for a 2-2 match. Cal won first sets on two other matches, so they could win a tight one if they hold onto those, but one is in a second-set tiebreaker (Court 4) and the other just went to a third set (Court 2). The final match is on Court 6, where Cal's Lan Mi dropped the first 6-1 but is tied in a second-set tiebreaker.
Wowza. Lan Mi takes the second set tiebreaker 11-9 to keep her match alive against Piper Charney, who is another top freshman (the #8 behind #2 Hui, #4 Eleana Yu, and #7 Lopez of Florida). But on the other hand, Wiersholm drops her tiebreaker and is already down a break in her third set on Court 4. And on Court 2, Alsola leads UM's Fliegner 1-0 in the third, but it's on serve.
02-09-2024, 01:13 PM
ColoradoTree, thanks as always for the recaps and analyses. Your updates are one of the things I look forward to the most when checking this forum.
I apologize if you covered this before, but if I remembered correctly, Ma and Yepifanova may have been ahead of Blake in the lineup order heading into this season? If so, are you surprised that it seems like Blake is in the top singles slot so far this season?
I apologize if you covered this before, but if I remembered correctly, Ma and Yepifanova may have been ahead of Blake in the lineup order heading into this season? If so, are you surprised that it seems like Blake is in the top singles slot so far this season?
ColoradoTree, thanks as always for the recaps and analyses. Your updates are one of the things I look forward to the most when checking this forum.
I apologize if you covered this before, but if I remembered correctly, Ma and Yepifanova may have been ahead of Blake in the lineup order heading into this season? If so, are you surprised that it seems like Blake is in the top singles slot so far this season?
I apologize if you covered this before, but if I remembered correctly, Ma and Yepifanova may have been ahead of Blake in the lineup order heading into this season? If so, are you surprised that it seems like Blake is in the top singles slot so far this season?
02-09-2024, 01:43 PM
(02-09-2024, 01:13 PM)TheFarm07 Wrote: ColoradoTree, thanks as always for the recaps and analyses. Your updates are one of the things I look forward to the most when checking this forum.
I apologize if you covered this before, but if I remembered correctly, Ma and Yepifanova may have been ahead of Blake in the lineup order heading into this season? If so, are you surprised that it seems like Blake is in the top singles slot so far this season?
Question for Colorado
Based on the rankings posted for the top ten teams, we have only one player ranked above #50, other teams have more but are ranked below us. I suppose it must have to do with how good are players at 4,5 and 6 are, but the entire process seems out of whack.
(02-09-2024, 01:13 PM)TheFarm07 Wrote: ColoradoTree, thanks as always for the recaps and analyses. Your updates are one of the things I look forward to the most when checking this forum.
I apologize if you covered this before, but if I remembered correctly, Ma and Yepifanova may have been ahead of Blake in the lineup order heading into this season? If so, are you surprised that it seems like Blake is in the top singles slot so far this season?
Question for Colorado
Based on the rankings posted for the top ten teams, we have only one player ranked above #50, other teams have more but are ranked below us. I suppose it must have to do with how good are players at 4,5 and 6 are, but the entire process seems out of whack.
We just beat Ohio State 4-1 in the Quarters.
We won the doubles point on the back two courts:
Ma/Yepifanova d. Cantos Siemers/Spencer 6-1
Hui/Xu d. Atway/Chavez 6-3
Blake/Blokhina down 4-5
In the singles matches:
Cantos Siemers (OSU) d. Blake 6-1, 6-2
Ma easily handled Ratliff 6-0, 6-2
Yepifanova also won in straight sets 7-6 (3), 6-3
Blokhina clinched it and won in two tight sets 7-6 (5), 7-5
Hui was up a set, but down in the second tiebreak, 6-3, 6-6 (3-6)
Xu was up a break in the third 6-1, 5-7, 3-0
We'll play the winner of the late match between (3) Oklahoma State v. (6) Texas in the semis tomorrow
(4) Michigan already advanced in the first quarters of the day beating Virginia who had ousted (5) Pepperdine yesterday and they await the winner of the intrastate matchup between (1) North Carolina and (8) N.C. State
We won the doubles point on the back two courts:
Ma/Yepifanova d. Cantos Siemers/Spencer 6-1
Hui/Xu d. Atway/Chavez 6-3
Blake/Blokhina down 4-5
In the singles matches:
Cantos Siemers (OSU) d. Blake 6-1, 6-2
Ma easily handled Ratliff 6-0, 6-2
Yepifanova also won in straight sets 7-6 (3), 6-3
Blokhina clinched it and won in two tight sets 7-6 (5), 7-5
Hui was up a set, but down in the second tiebreak, 6-3, 6-6 (3-6)
Xu was up a break in the third 6-1, 5-7, 3-0
We'll play the winner of the late match between (3) Oklahoma State v. (6) Texas in the semis tomorrow
(4) Michigan already advanced in the first quarters of the day beating Virginia who had ousted (5) Pepperdine yesterday and they await the winner of the intrastate matchup between (1) North Carolina and (8) N.C. State
(This post was last modified: 02-10-2024, 03:34 PM by TheFarm07.)
We just beat Ohio State 4-1 in the Quarters.
We won the doubles point on the back two courts:
Ma/Yepifanova d. Cantos Siemers/Spencer 6-1
Hui/Xu d. Atway/Chavez 6-3
Blake/Blokhina down 4-5
In the singles matches:
Cantos Siemers (OSU) d. Blake 6-1, 6-2
Ma easily handled Ratliff 6-0, 6-2
Yepifanova also won in straight sets 7-6 (3), 6-3
Blokhina clinched it and won in two tight sets 7-6 (5), 7-5
Hui was up a set, but down in the second tiebreak, 6-3, 6-6 (3-6)
Xu was up a break in the third 6-1, 5-7, 3-0
We'll play the winner of the late match between (3) Oklahoma State v. (6) Texas in the semis tomorrow
(4) Michigan already advanced in the first quarters of the day beating Virginia who had ousted (5) Pepperdine yesterday and they await the winner of the intrastate matchup between (1) North Carolina and (8) N.C. State
We won the doubles point on the back two courts:
Ma/Yepifanova d. Cantos Siemers/Spencer 6-1
Hui/Xu d. Atway/Chavez 6-3
Blake/Blokhina down 4-5
In the singles matches:
Cantos Siemers (OSU) d. Blake 6-1, 6-2
Ma easily handled Ratliff 6-0, 6-2
Yepifanova also won in straight sets 7-6 (3), 6-3
Blokhina clinched it and won in two tight sets 7-6 (5), 7-5
Hui was up a set, but down in the second tiebreak, 6-3, 6-6 (3-6)
Xu was up a break in the third 6-1, 5-7, 3-0
We'll play the winner of the late match between (3) Oklahoma State v. (6) Texas in the semis tomorrow
(4) Michigan already advanced in the first quarters of the day beating Virginia who had ousted (5) Pepperdine yesterday and they await the winner of the intrastate matchup between (1) North Carolina and (8) N.C. State
02-10-2024, 04:20 PM
Question for ColoradoTree (among many since other posters want your take on numerous things!): if Blake continues to struggle at the No. 1 spot and Ma and Yepifanova continue to thrive at the No. 2 and 3 spots… at what point do opponents accuse Stanford of fixing the line-up? It is kind of surprising based on previous results, but then again, I am not at practice so I don’t know how Blake is performing relative to Ma and Yepifanova.
Also, it looked like Yepifanova did an internship at Apple (from her IG account). Do you think that factored in at all in her ‘lack of improvement’?
Also, it looked like Yepifanova did an internship at Apple (from her IG account). Do you think that factored in at all in her ‘lack of improvement’?
Question for ColoradoTree (among many since other posters want your take on numerous things!): if Blake continues to struggle at the No. 1 spot and Ma and Yepifanova continue to thrive at the No. 2 and 3 spots… at what point do opponents accuse Stanford of fixing the line-up? It is kind of surprising based on previous results, but then again, I am not at practice so I don’t know how Blake is performing relative to Ma and Yepifanova.
Also, it looked like Yepifanova did an internship at Apple (from her IG account). Do you think that factored in at all in her ‘lack of improvement’?
Also, it looked like Yepifanova did an internship at Apple (from her IG account). Do you think that factored in at all in her ‘lack of improvement’?
02-10-2024, 07:55 PM
UNC has looked to have a very formidable lineup this year. Almost unbeatable it seemed. But just upset by NC St 4-3. The last two matches went down to the wire, with NC St winning 8-6 in the tiebreaker. Will be interesting how the rest of the weekend pans out and how rankings are after.
UNC has looked to have a very formidable lineup this year. Almost unbeatable it seemed. But just upset by NC St 4-3. The last two matches went down to the wire, with NC St winning 8-6 in the tiebreaker. Will be interesting how the rest of the weekend pans out and how rankings are after.
02-11-2024, 03:12 PM
(02-10-2024, 07:55 PM)spike5882 Wrote: UNC has looked to have a very formidable lineup this year. Almost unbeatable it seemed. But just upset by NC St 4-3. The last two matches went down to the wire, with NC St winning 8-6 in the tiebreaker. Will be interesting how the rest of the weekend pans out and how rankings are after.
UNC got skunked 4-0 in a consolation match by Virginia today.
Michigan is facing NC State in one semifinal. Stanford plays Oklahoma State at 3:30 in the other semifinal.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
(02-10-2024, 07:55 PM)spike5882 Wrote: UNC has looked to have a very formidable lineup this year. Almost unbeatable it seemed. But just upset by NC St 4-3. The last two matches went down to the wire, with NC St winning 8-6 in the tiebreaker. Will be interesting how the rest of the weekend pans out and how rankings are after.
UNC got skunked 4-0 in a consolation match by Virginia today.
Michigan is facing NC State in one semifinal. Stanford plays Oklahoma State at 3:30 in the other semifinal.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
02-11-2024, 09:00 PM
I see we lost to Oklahoma State. Can't see details though.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
02-11-2024, 09:11 PM
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
02-12-2024, 03:00 PM
Hey all, sorry I was out of pocket this weekend and I left you all to fend for yourselves!
But our Indoor Nationals is at an end, and we booked wins over #8 Florida and #12 Ohio State while dropping a competitive match to #3 Oklahoma State. As I noted in talking about this before the tournament, this particular result doesn't change my view that we're one of the handful of teams that have the talent to challenge for a national title. And given UNC's poor performances here, I'm probably a little more excited, because perhaps they're not quite as far ahead of everyone else as the tennis world has generally assumed. So, the big picture takeaway is that the loss to Oklahoma State shouldn't dampen our enthusiasm too much. We're still an excellent, deep team that is one of the few teams that is likely to make a run.
And FYI, Ohio State will climb higher than #12 based on their first-round win over #4 Georgia, though they also lost a 4-3 match to Texas yesterday. And Florida will drop, as they followed up their loss to us with a 4-1 loss to Georgia and a 4-0 loss to Auburn. Yikes. So, the OSU win will probably pay dividends as the season goes on, and the Florida win probably will, too (as their losses here were all to teams that will remain highly-ranked), as long as Florida manages to get several quality wins in SEC play. And the Oklahoma State loss will barely make a dent to us, as that looks like a team that should enjoy a top 5 ranking the rest of the year. If you're going to take a loss, then this sure isn't a bad one to take.
I'll get into some match-specific comments in a little bit, but first, here are some big picture thoughts on overall winners/losers from the weekend as far as teams go:
Stock pointing up: Oklahoma State (3-0), Michigan (3-0), NC State (2-1), Virginia (2-1)
Oklahoma State will probably be #1 next week, and rightfully so. And Michigan has a good argument to be right next to them, with good wins over Cal, UVA (also listed here because they beat UNC and Pepperdine), and NC State (also listed here because they beat UNC).
Held serve: Stanford (2-1), Georgia (2-1), Pepperdine (2-1), Texas (2-1), Ohio State (1-2)
Pepperdine got wins over Cal and USC, but that does less for them than it would for other teams, because USC is already on the Waves' schedule and Cal is already on there twice. So Pepperdine will have five matches in total against those two by the time the season is over. Georgia has to be frustrated in dropping the match to Ohio State, but they rebounded with nice wins over Florida and Texas A&M. Texas beat A&M, dropped a 4-3 match to Oklahoma State, and beat Ohio State, so nothing to be ashamed of there. And for OSU, they lost to two great teams but pulled off a big upset over Georgia, so that's a plus weekend on net for them.
Disappointed: UNC (1-2), Texas A&M (1-2), USC (1-2), Cal (1-2), Auburn (1-2)
Shocked by UNC's lackluster performance here. Losing a close one to NC State is one thing, but getting shut out by UVA?? And then A&M lost to Texas and Georgia but did notch a nice win over Auburn. USC lost to UNC, squeaked out a win over UW that won't count for a ton, and lost to Pepperdine. Same thing for Cal: lost to Michigan, beat UW, and lost to Pepperdine. And Auburn got smoked by Oklahoma State and A&M but then smoked the Gators, though that win might not be all that valuable in the end.
Might as well not have shown up: Washington (0-3), Florida (0-3)
The Huskies got crushed by NC State and then had the bad draw luck of catching two teams already on its schedule, Cal and USC. And Florida sure showed they're not the 8th-best team in the country.
But our Indoor Nationals is at an end, and we booked wins over #8 Florida and #12 Ohio State while dropping a competitive match to #3 Oklahoma State. As I noted in talking about this before the tournament, this particular result doesn't change my view that we're one of the handful of teams that have the talent to challenge for a national title. And given UNC's poor performances here, I'm probably a little more excited, because perhaps they're not quite as far ahead of everyone else as the tennis world has generally assumed. So, the big picture takeaway is that the loss to Oklahoma State shouldn't dampen our enthusiasm too much. We're still an excellent, deep team that is one of the few teams that is likely to make a run.
And FYI, Ohio State will climb higher than #12 based on their first-round win over #4 Georgia, though they also lost a 4-3 match to Texas yesterday. And Florida will drop, as they followed up their loss to us with a 4-1 loss to Georgia and a 4-0 loss to Auburn. Yikes. So, the OSU win will probably pay dividends as the season goes on, and the Florida win probably will, too (as their losses here were all to teams that will remain highly-ranked), as long as Florida manages to get several quality wins in SEC play. And the Oklahoma State loss will barely make a dent to us, as that looks like a team that should enjoy a top 5 ranking the rest of the year. If you're going to take a loss, then this sure isn't a bad one to take.
I'll get into some match-specific comments in a little bit, but first, here are some big picture thoughts on overall winners/losers from the weekend as far as teams go:
Stock pointing up: Oklahoma State (3-0), Michigan (3-0), NC State (2-1), Virginia (2-1)
Oklahoma State will probably be #1 next week, and rightfully so. And Michigan has a good argument to be right next to them, with good wins over Cal, UVA (also listed here because they beat UNC and Pepperdine), and NC State (also listed here because they beat UNC).
Held serve: Stanford (2-1), Georgia (2-1), Pepperdine (2-1), Texas (2-1), Ohio State (1-2)
Pepperdine got wins over Cal and USC, but that does less for them than it would for other teams, because USC is already on the Waves' schedule and Cal is already on there twice. So Pepperdine will have five matches in total against those two by the time the season is over. Georgia has to be frustrated in dropping the match to Ohio State, but they rebounded with nice wins over Florida and Texas A&M. Texas beat A&M, dropped a 4-3 match to Oklahoma State, and beat Ohio State, so nothing to be ashamed of there. And for OSU, they lost to two great teams but pulled off a big upset over Georgia, so that's a plus weekend on net for them.
Disappointed: UNC (1-2), Texas A&M (1-2), USC (1-2), Cal (1-2), Auburn (1-2)
Shocked by UNC's lackluster performance here. Losing a close one to NC State is one thing, but getting shut out by UVA?? And then A&M lost to Texas and Georgia but did notch a nice win over Auburn. USC lost to UNC, squeaked out a win over UW that won't count for a ton, and lost to Pepperdine. Same thing for Cal: lost to Michigan, beat UW, and lost to Pepperdine. And Auburn got smoked by Oklahoma State and A&M but then smoked the Gators, though that win might not be all that valuable in the end.
Might as well not have shown up: Washington (0-3), Florida (0-3)
The Huskies got crushed by NC State and then had the bad draw luck of catching two teams already on its schedule, Cal and USC. And Florida sure showed they're not the 8th-best team in the country.
Hey all, sorry I was out of pocket this weekend and I left you all to fend for yourselves!
But our Indoor Nationals is at an end, and we booked wins over #8 Florida and #12 Ohio State while dropping a competitive match to #3 Oklahoma State. As I noted in talking about this before the tournament, this particular result doesn't change my view that we're one of the handful of teams that have the talent to challenge for a national title. And given UNC's poor performances here, I'm probably a little more excited, because perhaps they're not quite as far ahead of everyone else as the tennis world has generally assumed. So, the big picture takeaway is that the loss to Oklahoma State shouldn't dampen our enthusiasm too much. We're still an excellent, deep team that is one of the few teams that is likely to make a run.
And FYI, Ohio State will climb higher than #12 based on their first-round win over #4 Georgia, though they also lost a 4-3 match to Texas yesterday. And Florida will drop, as they followed up their loss to us with a 4-1 loss to Georgia and a 4-0 loss to Auburn. Yikes. So, the OSU win will probably pay dividends as the season goes on, and the Florida win probably will, too (as their losses here were all to teams that will remain highly-ranked), as long as Florida manages to get several quality wins in SEC play. And the Oklahoma State loss will barely make a dent to us, as that looks like a team that should enjoy a top 5 ranking the rest of the year. If you're going to take a loss, then this sure isn't a bad one to take.
I'll get into some match-specific comments in a little bit, but first, here are some big picture thoughts on overall winners/losers from the weekend as far as teams go:
Stock pointing up: Oklahoma State (3-0), Michigan (3-0), NC State (2-1), Virginia (2-1)
Oklahoma State will probably be #1 next week, and rightfully so. And Michigan has a good argument to be right next to them, with good wins over Cal, UVA (also listed here because they beat UNC and Pepperdine), and NC State (also listed here because they beat UNC).
Held serve: Stanford (2-1), Georgia (2-1), Pepperdine (2-1), Texas (2-1), Ohio State (1-2)
Pepperdine got wins over Cal and USC, but that does less for them than it would for other teams, because USC is already on the Waves' schedule and Cal is already on there twice. So Pepperdine will have five matches in total against those two by the time the season is over. Georgia has to be frustrated in dropping the match to Ohio State, but they rebounded with nice wins over Florida and Texas A&M. Texas beat A&M, dropped a 4-3 match to Oklahoma State, and beat Ohio State, so nothing to be ashamed of there. And for OSU, they lost to two great teams but pulled off a big upset over Georgia, so that's a plus weekend on net for them.
Disappointed: UNC (1-2), Texas A&M (1-2), USC (1-2), Cal (1-2), Auburn (1-2)
Shocked by UNC's lackluster performance here. Losing a close one to NC State is one thing, but getting shut out by UVA?? And then A&M lost to Texas and Georgia but did notch a nice win over Auburn. USC lost to UNC, squeaked out a win over UW that won't count for a ton, and lost to Pepperdine. Same thing for Cal: lost to Michigan, beat UW, and lost to Pepperdine. And Auburn got smoked by Oklahoma State and A&M but then smoked the Gators, though that win might not be all that valuable in the end.
Might as well not have shown up: Washington (0-3), Florida (0-3)
The Huskies got crushed by NC State and then had the bad draw luck of catching two teams already on its schedule, Cal and USC. And Florida sure showed they're not the 8th-best team in the country.
But our Indoor Nationals is at an end, and we booked wins over #8 Florida and #12 Ohio State while dropping a competitive match to #3 Oklahoma State. As I noted in talking about this before the tournament, this particular result doesn't change my view that we're one of the handful of teams that have the talent to challenge for a national title. And given UNC's poor performances here, I'm probably a little more excited, because perhaps they're not quite as far ahead of everyone else as the tennis world has generally assumed. So, the big picture takeaway is that the loss to Oklahoma State shouldn't dampen our enthusiasm too much. We're still an excellent, deep team that is one of the few teams that is likely to make a run.
And FYI, Ohio State will climb higher than #12 based on their first-round win over #4 Georgia, though they also lost a 4-3 match to Texas yesterday. And Florida will drop, as they followed up their loss to us with a 4-1 loss to Georgia and a 4-0 loss to Auburn. Yikes. So, the OSU win will probably pay dividends as the season goes on, and the Florida win probably will, too (as their losses here were all to teams that will remain highly-ranked), as long as Florida manages to get several quality wins in SEC play. And the Oklahoma State loss will barely make a dent to us, as that looks like a team that should enjoy a top 5 ranking the rest of the year. If you're going to take a loss, then this sure isn't a bad one to take.
I'll get into some match-specific comments in a little bit, but first, here are some big picture thoughts on overall winners/losers from the weekend as far as teams go:
Stock pointing up: Oklahoma State (3-0), Michigan (3-0), NC State (2-1), Virginia (2-1)
Oklahoma State will probably be #1 next week, and rightfully so. And Michigan has a good argument to be right next to them, with good wins over Cal, UVA (also listed here because they beat UNC and Pepperdine), and NC State (also listed here because they beat UNC).
Held serve: Stanford (2-1), Georgia (2-1), Pepperdine (2-1), Texas (2-1), Ohio State (1-2)
Pepperdine got wins over Cal and USC, but that does less for them than it would for other teams, because USC is already on the Waves' schedule and Cal is already on there twice. So Pepperdine will have five matches in total against those two by the time the season is over. Georgia has to be frustrated in dropping the match to Ohio State, but they rebounded with nice wins over Florida and Texas A&M. Texas beat A&M, dropped a 4-3 match to Oklahoma State, and beat Ohio State, so nothing to be ashamed of there. And for OSU, they lost to two great teams but pulled off a big upset over Georgia, so that's a plus weekend on net for them.
Disappointed: UNC (1-2), Texas A&M (1-2), USC (1-2), Cal (1-2), Auburn (1-2)
Shocked by UNC's lackluster performance here. Losing a close one to NC State is one thing, but getting shut out by UVA?? And then A&M lost to Texas and Georgia but did notch a nice win over Auburn. USC lost to UNC, squeaked out a win over UW that won't count for a ton, and lost to Pepperdine. Same thing for Cal: lost to Michigan, beat UW, and lost to Pepperdine. And Auburn got smoked by Oklahoma State and A&M but then smoked the Gators, though that win might not be all that valuable in the end.
Might as well not have shown up: Washington (0-3), Florida (0-3)
The Huskies got crushed by NC State and then had the bad draw luck of catching two teams already on its schedule, Cal and USC. And Florida sure showed they're not the 8th-best team in the country.
02-12-2024, 03:07 PM
Stanford vs Texas at Taube on Feb 23 is going to be a barn burner. Fingers crossed for good weather.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
Stanford vs Texas at Taube on Feb 23 is going to be a barn burner. Fingers crossed for good weather.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
02-12-2024, 03:22 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-12-2024, 03:45 PM by ColoradoTree.)
As for our matches, here are some takeaways:
* I continue to be confused by Blake at 1. She handled herself well against Florida, got absolutely crushed for our lone loss to Ohio State, and then she was holding her own against the #17 player in the country. But just nowhere near consistent enough to justify the top spot, though sometimes she shows flashes. And sometimes obviously more than flashes. But sometimes she absolutely looks the part and sometimes she gets run off the court.
* In all three matches, our usual script was flipped, as it was mostly the top of the lineup delivering big wins for us. Ma was 3-0 on Court 2 and what's more, she controlled each of those matches. Yepifanova was 3-0 on Court 3. And while Blake fell flat against Ohio State, she dominated against Florida and was outpunching her weight against Oklahoma State when the match was abandoned.
* Doubles wasn't the problem, as we won the doubles point twice.
* It was our back three courts that didn't deliver. On 4, Blokhina won a close match against Ohio State, but it shouldn't have been that close. And she lost to Oklahoma State and was losing to Florida when the match was abandoned. She wasn't good enough, and she wasn't playing to her usual level. On 5, Hui didn't book a win, splitting sets against Florida, nearly doing the same against Ohio State (she was down 6-3 in the second-set tiebreaker when the match was abandoned), and she lost a lopsided three-setter to Oklahoma State--while she did well to shake off a first-set bagel by winning the second 6-2, she wasn't competitive in the third. And for Xu at 6, I'd be looking over my shoulder if I were her. About to be forced into a third set against Florida and not very competitive against Oklahoma State. She was halfway to booking a win over Ohio State, up 3-0 in the third, but given her issues with finishing matches, there's no guarantee that ends up in our favor. Her spot in the lineup isn't exactly ironclad, so don't be surprised if we see Yu get some matches at 6. Might not be permanent, but perhaps Xu could use a temporary demotion to kick her game into gear.
* No shame at all in losing to Oklahoma State. That's an outstanding team, it's still early, and we're playing indoors, which is not our natural habitat. And I love what our top three courts showed in that match. Gutsy performances from each. And plenty of time for Blokhina to right the ship, Hui to better adjust to college tennis, and for Xu to either step up her game or get replaced by Yu.
I mean, my very first thought when I saw Blake at 1 in the first match of the year was "wait, are we stacking? Lele would never stack, would she?" But we've also seen plenty of flashes from Blake where she shows she belongs in that role. While she got wiped off the court by Texas A&M's Stoiana and Ohio State's Cantos Siemers (the #1 and #14 players, respectively), she's also beaten the #58 and #67 players, and she had a narrow lead over the #17 player in the third set yesterday. But she also was losing to her counterparts from Colorado and Maryland when both of those matches were abandoned, so the "she's not our #1" moments have outweighed the others.
And no idea as to Yepifanova's summer. I'm sure she stayed in plenty good shape and was ready for the fall. She would probably be doing just fine on Court 2, and that's where I think she belongs on this team.
But, uh, yeah. I don't think most objective observers of this team would agree that Blake is the best player on it. But she's also done enough to make it very difficult for another team to prove that we shouldn't be playing her at #1. And Lele probably has some internal challenge matches to point to in order to justify playing her there. I trust Lele above all else, so I am 100% sure that Lele believes that Blake has earned this opportunity at the #1 line. She's not doing this to try and sandbag opponents, because like I've said before, Blake was nearly automatic last year at #3, so it's not like playing Yepifanova there makes us more likely to pick up wins there.
(And sorry to TheFarm07 for not responding on a similar point earlier!)
Yeah, individual player rankings often don't totally align with where that player plays for their team, and it's hugely dependent on fall tournaments where you can get matches against other top-ranked teams, and some players tend to play better when a team result is on the line versus just playing for themselves. And sometimes players get hot and rattle off some wins but then come back to earth in dual season play.
But absolutely, the whole is not necessarily the sum of its parts, as much as it would make analyzing and predicting matches easier. It's part of why I like to look at preseason rankings and last season's rankings when I'm breaking down a team. A player might be ranked, say, #75 like Yepifanova, but she was the preseason #21 and finished last year ranked #28. She is way, way better than the #75 player in the country. But her results so far this season don't justify it, and college tennis rankings care about your resume in the end. All of those UNC players aren't going to be ranked at season's end, because they'll get displaced by folks who are regularly in their own teams' lineups and racking up wins. But some of those UNC players are in the rankings now because they had a good fall season, and the number of wins counted in the rankings is lower now than it will be by the end of the spring. End-of-season rankings tend to make a little more sense, but even then, it helps to have a sense of what that player has shown in the past. Maybe they've been hurt, maybe they've missed time due to playing some pro events--but their ranking doesn't necessarily equal their quality.
* I continue to be confused by Blake at 1. She handled herself well against Florida, got absolutely crushed for our lone loss to Ohio State, and then she was holding her own against the #17 player in the country. But just nowhere near consistent enough to justify the top spot, though sometimes she shows flashes. And sometimes obviously more than flashes. But sometimes she absolutely looks the part and sometimes she gets run off the court.
* In all three matches, our usual script was flipped, as it was mostly the top of the lineup delivering big wins for us. Ma was 3-0 on Court 2 and what's more, she controlled each of those matches. Yepifanova was 3-0 on Court 3. And while Blake fell flat against Ohio State, she dominated against Florida and was outpunching her weight against Oklahoma State when the match was abandoned.
* Doubles wasn't the problem, as we won the doubles point twice.
* It was our back three courts that didn't deliver. On 4, Blokhina won a close match against Ohio State, but it shouldn't have been that close. And she lost to Oklahoma State and was losing to Florida when the match was abandoned. She wasn't good enough, and she wasn't playing to her usual level. On 5, Hui didn't book a win, splitting sets against Florida, nearly doing the same against Ohio State (she was down 6-3 in the second-set tiebreaker when the match was abandoned), and she lost a lopsided three-setter to Oklahoma State--while she did well to shake off a first-set bagel by winning the second 6-2, she wasn't competitive in the third. And for Xu at 6, I'd be looking over my shoulder if I were her. About to be forced into a third set against Florida and not very competitive against Oklahoma State. She was halfway to booking a win over Ohio State, up 3-0 in the third, but given her issues with finishing matches, there's no guarantee that ends up in our favor. Her spot in the lineup isn't exactly ironclad, so don't be surprised if we see Yu get some matches at 6. Might not be permanent, but perhaps Xu could use a temporary demotion to kick her game into gear.
* No shame at all in losing to Oklahoma State. That's an outstanding team, it's still early, and we're playing indoors, which is not our natural habitat. And I love what our top three courts showed in that match. Gutsy performances from each. And plenty of time for Blokhina to right the ship, Hui to better adjust to college tennis, and for Xu to either step up her game or get replaced by Yu.
(02-10-2024, 04:20 PM)Sakibomb25 Wrote: Question for ColoradoTree (among many since other posters want your take on numerous things!): if Blake continues to struggle at the No. 1 spot and Ma and Yepifanova continue to thrive at the No. 2 and 3 spots… at what point do opponents accuse Stanford of fixing the line-up? It is kind of surprising based on previous results, but then again, I am not at practice so I don’t know how Blake is performing relative to Ma and Yepifanova.
Also, it looked like Yepifanova did an internship at Apple (from her IG account). Do you think that factored in at all in her ‘lack of improvement’?
I mean, my very first thought when I saw Blake at 1 in the first match of the year was "wait, are we stacking? Lele would never stack, would she?" But we've also seen plenty of flashes from Blake where she shows she belongs in that role. While she got wiped off the court by Texas A&M's Stoiana and Ohio State's Cantos Siemers (the #1 and #14 players, respectively), she's also beaten the #58 and #67 players, and she had a narrow lead over the #17 player in the third set yesterday. But she also was losing to her counterparts from Colorado and Maryland when both of those matches were abandoned, so the "she's not our #1" moments have outweighed the others.
And no idea as to Yepifanova's summer. I'm sure she stayed in plenty good shape and was ready for the fall. She would probably be doing just fine on Court 2, and that's where I think she belongs on this team.
But, uh, yeah. I don't think most objective observers of this team would agree that Blake is the best player on it. But she's also done enough to make it very difficult for another team to prove that we shouldn't be playing her at #1. And Lele probably has some internal challenge matches to point to in order to justify playing her there. I trust Lele above all else, so I am 100% sure that Lele believes that Blake has earned this opportunity at the #1 line. She's not doing this to try and sandbag opponents, because like I've said before, Blake was nearly automatic last year at #3, so it's not like playing Yepifanova there makes us more likely to pick up wins there.
(And sorry to TheFarm07 for not responding on a similar point earlier!)
(02-09-2024, 01:43 PM)GK3 Wrote:(02-09-2024, 01:13 PM)TheFarm07 Wrote: ColoradoTree, thanks as always for the recaps and analyses. Your updates are one of the things I look forward to the most when checking this forum.
I apologize if you covered this before, but if I remembered correctly, Ma and Yepifanova may have been ahead of Blake in the lineup order heading into this season? If so, are you surprised that it seems like Blake is in the top singles slot so far this season?
Question for Colorado
Based on the rankings posted for the top ten teams, we have only one player ranked above #50, other teams have more but are ranked below us. I suppose it must have to do with how good are players at 4,5 and 6 are, but the entire process seems out of whack.
Yeah, individual player rankings often don't totally align with where that player plays for their team, and it's hugely dependent on fall tournaments where you can get matches against other top-ranked teams, and some players tend to play better when a team result is on the line versus just playing for themselves. And sometimes players get hot and rattle off some wins but then come back to earth in dual season play.
But absolutely, the whole is not necessarily the sum of its parts, as much as it would make analyzing and predicting matches easier. It's part of why I like to look at preseason rankings and last season's rankings when I'm breaking down a team. A player might be ranked, say, #75 like Yepifanova, but she was the preseason #21 and finished last year ranked #28. She is way, way better than the #75 player in the country. But her results so far this season don't justify it, and college tennis rankings care about your resume in the end. All of those UNC players aren't going to be ranked at season's end, because they'll get displaced by folks who are regularly in their own teams' lineups and racking up wins. But some of those UNC players are in the rankings now because they had a good fall season, and the number of wins counted in the rankings is lower now than it will be by the end of the spring. End-of-season rankings tend to make a little more sense, but even then, it helps to have a sense of what that player has shown in the past. Maybe they've been hurt, maybe they've missed time due to playing some pro events--but their ranking doesn't necessarily equal their quality.
(This post was last modified: 02-12-2024, 03:45 PM by ColoradoTree.)
As for our matches, here are some takeaways:
* I continue to be confused by Blake at 1. She handled herself well against Florida, got absolutely crushed for our lone loss to Ohio State, and then she was holding her own against the #17 player in the country. But just nowhere near consistent enough to justify the top spot, though sometimes she shows flashes. And sometimes obviously more than flashes. But sometimes she absolutely looks the part and sometimes she gets run off the court.
* In all three matches, our usual script was flipped, as it was mostly the top of the lineup delivering big wins for us. Ma was 3-0 on Court 2 and what's more, she controlled each of those matches. Yepifanova was 3-0 on Court 3. And while Blake fell flat against Ohio State, she dominated against Florida and was outpunching her weight against Oklahoma State when the match was abandoned.
* Doubles wasn't the problem, as we won the doubles point twice.
* It was our back three courts that didn't deliver. On 4, Blokhina won a close match against Ohio State, but it shouldn't have been that close. And she lost to Oklahoma State and was losing to Florida when the match was abandoned. She wasn't good enough, and she wasn't playing to her usual level. On 5, Hui didn't book a win, splitting sets against Florida, nearly doing the same against Ohio State (she was down 6-3 in the second-set tiebreaker when the match was abandoned), and she lost a lopsided three-setter to Oklahoma State--while she did well to shake off a first-set bagel by winning the second 6-2, she wasn't competitive in the third. And for Xu at 6, I'd be looking over my shoulder if I were her. About to be forced into a third set against Florida and not very competitive against Oklahoma State. She was halfway to booking a win over Ohio State, up 3-0 in the third, but given her issues with finishing matches, there's no guarantee that ends up in our favor. Her spot in the lineup isn't exactly ironclad, so don't be surprised if we see Yu get some matches at 6. Might not be permanent, but perhaps Xu could use a temporary demotion to kick her game into gear.
* No shame at all in losing to Oklahoma State. That's an outstanding team, it's still early, and we're playing indoors, which is not our natural habitat. And I love what our top three courts showed in that match. Gutsy performances from each. And plenty of time for Blokhina to right the ship, Hui to better adjust to college tennis, and for Xu to either step up her game or get replaced by Yu.
I mean, my very first thought when I saw Blake at 1 in the first match of the year was "wait, are we stacking? Lele would never stack, would she?" But we've also seen plenty of flashes from Blake where she shows she belongs in that role. While she got wiped off the court by Texas A&M's Stoiana and Ohio State's Cantos Siemers (the #1 and #14 players, respectively), she's also beaten the #58 and #67 players, and she had a narrow lead over the #17 player in the third set yesterday. But she also was losing to her counterparts from Colorado and Maryland when both of those matches were abandoned, so the "she's not our #1" moments have outweighed the others.
And no idea as to Yepifanova's summer. I'm sure she stayed in plenty good shape and was ready for the fall. She would probably be doing just fine on Court 2, and that's where I think she belongs on this team.
But, uh, yeah. I don't think most objective observers of this team would agree that Blake is the best player on it. But she's also done enough to make it very difficult for another team to prove that we shouldn't be playing her at #1. And Lele probably has some internal challenge matches to point to in order to justify playing her there. I trust Lele above all else, so I am 100% sure that Lele believes that Blake has earned this opportunity at the #1 line. She's not doing this to try and sandbag opponents, because like I've said before, Blake was nearly automatic last year at #3, so it's not like playing Yepifanova there makes us more likely to pick up wins there.
(And sorry to TheFarm07 for not responding on a similar point earlier!)
Yeah, individual player rankings often don't totally align with where that player plays for their team, and it's hugely dependent on fall tournaments where you can get matches against other top-ranked teams, and some players tend to play better when a team result is on the line versus just playing for themselves. And sometimes players get hot and rattle off some wins but then come back to earth in dual season play.
But absolutely, the whole is not necessarily the sum of its parts, as much as it would make analyzing and predicting matches easier. It's part of why I like to look at preseason rankings and last season's rankings when I'm breaking down a team. A player might be ranked, say, #75 like Yepifanova, but she was the preseason #21 and finished last year ranked #28. She is way, way better than the #75 player in the country. But her results so far this season don't justify it, and college tennis rankings care about your resume in the end. All of those UNC players aren't going to be ranked at season's end, because they'll get displaced by folks who are regularly in their own teams' lineups and racking up wins. But some of those UNC players are in the rankings now because they had a good fall season, and the number of wins counted in the rankings is lower now than it will be by the end of the spring. End-of-season rankings tend to make a little more sense, but even then, it helps to have a sense of what that player has shown in the past. Maybe they've been hurt, maybe they've missed time due to playing some pro events--but their ranking doesn't necessarily equal their quality.
* I continue to be confused by Blake at 1. She handled herself well against Florida, got absolutely crushed for our lone loss to Ohio State, and then she was holding her own against the #17 player in the country. But just nowhere near consistent enough to justify the top spot, though sometimes she shows flashes. And sometimes obviously more than flashes. But sometimes she absolutely looks the part and sometimes she gets run off the court.
* In all three matches, our usual script was flipped, as it was mostly the top of the lineup delivering big wins for us. Ma was 3-0 on Court 2 and what's more, she controlled each of those matches. Yepifanova was 3-0 on Court 3. And while Blake fell flat against Ohio State, she dominated against Florida and was outpunching her weight against Oklahoma State when the match was abandoned.
* Doubles wasn't the problem, as we won the doubles point twice.
* It was our back three courts that didn't deliver. On 4, Blokhina won a close match against Ohio State, but it shouldn't have been that close. And she lost to Oklahoma State and was losing to Florida when the match was abandoned. She wasn't good enough, and she wasn't playing to her usual level. On 5, Hui didn't book a win, splitting sets against Florida, nearly doing the same against Ohio State (she was down 6-3 in the second-set tiebreaker when the match was abandoned), and she lost a lopsided three-setter to Oklahoma State--while she did well to shake off a first-set bagel by winning the second 6-2, she wasn't competitive in the third. And for Xu at 6, I'd be looking over my shoulder if I were her. About to be forced into a third set against Florida and not very competitive against Oklahoma State. She was halfway to booking a win over Ohio State, up 3-0 in the third, but given her issues with finishing matches, there's no guarantee that ends up in our favor. Her spot in the lineup isn't exactly ironclad, so don't be surprised if we see Yu get some matches at 6. Might not be permanent, but perhaps Xu could use a temporary demotion to kick her game into gear.
* No shame at all in losing to Oklahoma State. That's an outstanding team, it's still early, and we're playing indoors, which is not our natural habitat. And I love what our top three courts showed in that match. Gutsy performances from each. And plenty of time for Blokhina to right the ship, Hui to better adjust to college tennis, and for Xu to either step up her game or get replaced by Yu.
(02-10-2024, 04:20 PM)Sakibomb25 Wrote: Question for ColoradoTree (among many since other posters want your take on numerous things!): if Blake continues to struggle at the No. 1 spot and Ma and Yepifanova continue to thrive at the No. 2 and 3 spots… at what point do opponents accuse Stanford of fixing the line-up? It is kind of surprising based on previous results, but then again, I am not at practice so I don’t know how Blake is performing relative to Ma and Yepifanova.
Also, it looked like Yepifanova did an internship at Apple (from her IG account). Do you think that factored in at all in her ‘lack of improvement’?
I mean, my very first thought when I saw Blake at 1 in the first match of the year was "wait, are we stacking? Lele would never stack, would she?" But we've also seen plenty of flashes from Blake where she shows she belongs in that role. While she got wiped off the court by Texas A&M's Stoiana and Ohio State's Cantos Siemers (the #1 and #14 players, respectively), she's also beaten the #58 and #67 players, and she had a narrow lead over the #17 player in the third set yesterday. But she also was losing to her counterparts from Colorado and Maryland when both of those matches were abandoned, so the "she's not our #1" moments have outweighed the others.
And no idea as to Yepifanova's summer. I'm sure she stayed in plenty good shape and was ready for the fall. She would probably be doing just fine on Court 2, and that's where I think she belongs on this team.
But, uh, yeah. I don't think most objective observers of this team would agree that Blake is the best player on it. But she's also done enough to make it very difficult for another team to prove that we shouldn't be playing her at #1. And Lele probably has some internal challenge matches to point to in order to justify playing her there. I trust Lele above all else, so I am 100% sure that Lele believes that Blake has earned this opportunity at the #1 line. She's not doing this to try and sandbag opponents, because like I've said before, Blake was nearly automatic last year at #3, so it's not like playing Yepifanova there makes us more likely to pick up wins there.
(And sorry to TheFarm07 for not responding on a similar point earlier!)
(02-09-2024, 01:43 PM)GK3 Wrote:(02-09-2024, 01:13 PM)TheFarm07 Wrote: ColoradoTree, thanks as always for the recaps and analyses. Your updates are one of the things I look forward to the most when checking this forum.
I apologize if you covered this before, but if I remembered correctly, Ma and Yepifanova may have been ahead of Blake in the lineup order heading into this season? If so, are you surprised that it seems like Blake is in the top singles slot so far this season?
Question for Colorado
Based on the rankings posted for the top ten teams, we have only one player ranked above #50, other teams have more but are ranked below us. I suppose it must have to do with how good are players at 4,5 and 6 are, but the entire process seems out of whack.
Yeah, individual player rankings often don't totally align with where that player plays for their team, and it's hugely dependent on fall tournaments where you can get matches against other top-ranked teams, and some players tend to play better when a team result is on the line versus just playing for themselves. And sometimes players get hot and rattle off some wins but then come back to earth in dual season play.
But absolutely, the whole is not necessarily the sum of its parts, as much as it would make analyzing and predicting matches easier. It's part of why I like to look at preseason rankings and last season's rankings when I'm breaking down a team. A player might be ranked, say, #75 like Yepifanova, but she was the preseason #21 and finished last year ranked #28. She is way, way better than the #75 player in the country. But her results so far this season don't justify it, and college tennis rankings care about your resume in the end. All of those UNC players aren't going to be ranked at season's end, because they'll get displaced by folks who are regularly in their own teams' lineups and racking up wins. But some of those UNC players are in the rankings now because they had a good fall season, and the number of wins counted in the rankings is lower now than it will be by the end of the spring. End-of-season rankings tend to make a little more sense, but even then, it helps to have a sense of what that player has shown in the past. Maybe they've been hurt, maybe they've missed time due to playing some pro events--but their ranking doesn't necessarily equal their quality.
02-21-2024, 11:41 AM
A few points now that we're on the other side of Indoor Nationals:
* We've switched from the coaches' poll to the computerized rankings, and we come in at #3, since we've got some valuable wins. Interestingly, UNC has dropped to #8 because of their limited resume with their disappointing Indoor Nationals performance. But we now have a top 75 rather than a top 25, and here's where this year's scheduled opponents land on that list, and whether we get them at home or away (teams yet to play in bold):
1. Oklahoma State (L, neutral)
4. Texas (Feb. 23, home)
7. Ohio State (W, neutral)
9. USC (Mar. 30, home)
12. San Diego (W, away)
13. Pepperdine (Apr. 5, home)
15. Florida (W, neutral)
16. Cal (Apr. 19, away)
19. Texas A&M (W, neutral)
29. UCLA (Mar. 29, home)
34. UW (Apr. 14, away)
35. ASU (Mar. 8, away)
43. Arizona (Mar. 9, away)
48. Utah (Mar. 24, home)
52. Oregon (Apr. 7, home)
57. UC Santa Barbara (Feb. 24, home)
65. Colorado (Mar. 23, home)
* We've got some new singles rankings as well:
12. Ma (same as last time)
21. Yepifanova (up 54 spots)
45. Blake (up 11 spots)
70. Blokhina (down 15 spots)
82. Xu (down 13 spots)
* Stanford scheduled Pacific in a last-minute match, and used it as an opportunity to rest Yepifanova and Blokhina entirely and Blake in singles, which led to some random doubles pairs, and it led to us losing the doubles point (with Blake/Houghton losing on 1 and Ma/Sun losing on 3). But we then rolled as would be expected in singles with the following lineup:
1. Ma won 6-2, 6-3
2. Hui won 7-5, 6-1
3. Xu won 6-1, 6-0
4. Yu won 6-1, 6-1
5. Houghton won 6-2, 6-1
6. Okpara won 6-3, 6-1
Disappointing in doubles, but you're throwing in two players who normally don't play at all and putting them on different pairs--not having watched the match, I can't say for sure, but I would imagine the UOP pairs targeted Houghton on 1 and Sun on 3.
* Next up is #4 Texas, and thank goodness we get them at home. Here's how we'd line up in singles against them:
1. #45 Blake vs. #22 Sabina Zeynalova
2. #12 Ma vs. #33 Tanya Sasnouskaya
3. #21 Yepifanova vs. #36 Malaika Rapolu
4. #70 Blokhina vs. #125 Charlotte Chavatipon
5. Hui vs. Taisiya Pachkaleva
6. #82 Xu vs. #103 Vivian Ovrootsky
In doubles, it'd probably be this:
1. #46 Blake/Blokhina vs. #11 Pachkaleva/Zeynalova
2. #41 Ma/Yepifanova vs. Sasnouskaya/Rapolu
3. Hui/Xu vs. Chavatipon/Ovrootsky
Very, very difficult to predict, but I'll say Stanford just edges the Longhorns.
* We've switched from the coaches' poll to the computerized rankings, and we come in at #3, since we've got some valuable wins. Interestingly, UNC has dropped to #8 because of their limited resume with their disappointing Indoor Nationals performance. But we now have a top 75 rather than a top 25, and here's where this year's scheduled opponents land on that list, and whether we get them at home or away (teams yet to play in bold):
1. Oklahoma State (L, neutral)
4. Texas (Feb. 23, home)
7. Ohio State (W, neutral)
9. USC (Mar. 30, home)
12. San Diego (W, away)
13. Pepperdine (Apr. 5, home)
15. Florida (W, neutral)
16. Cal (Apr. 19, away)
19. Texas A&M (W, neutral)
29. UCLA (Mar. 29, home)
34. UW (Apr. 14, away)
35. ASU (Mar. 8, away)
43. Arizona (Mar. 9, away)
48. Utah (Mar. 24, home)
52. Oregon (Apr. 7, home)
57. UC Santa Barbara (Feb. 24, home)
65. Colorado (Mar. 23, home)
* We've got some new singles rankings as well:
12. Ma (same as last time)
21. Yepifanova (up 54 spots)
45. Blake (up 11 spots)
70. Blokhina (down 15 spots)
82. Xu (down 13 spots)
* Stanford scheduled Pacific in a last-minute match, and used it as an opportunity to rest Yepifanova and Blokhina entirely and Blake in singles, which led to some random doubles pairs, and it led to us losing the doubles point (with Blake/Houghton losing on 1 and Ma/Sun losing on 3). But we then rolled as would be expected in singles with the following lineup:
1. Ma won 6-2, 6-3
2. Hui won 7-5, 6-1
3. Xu won 6-1, 6-0
4. Yu won 6-1, 6-1
5. Houghton won 6-2, 6-1
6. Okpara won 6-3, 6-1
Disappointing in doubles, but you're throwing in two players who normally don't play at all and putting them on different pairs--not having watched the match, I can't say for sure, but I would imagine the UOP pairs targeted Houghton on 1 and Sun on 3.
* Next up is #4 Texas, and thank goodness we get them at home. Here's how we'd line up in singles against them:
1. #45 Blake vs. #22 Sabina Zeynalova
2. #12 Ma vs. #33 Tanya Sasnouskaya
3. #21 Yepifanova vs. #36 Malaika Rapolu
4. #70 Blokhina vs. #125 Charlotte Chavatipon
5. Hui vs. Taisiya Pachkaleva
6. #82 Xu vs. #103 Vivian Ovrootsky
In doubles, it'd probably be this:
1. #46 Blake/Blokhina vs. #11 Pachkaleva/Zeynalova
2. #41 Ma/Yepifanova vs. Sasnouskaya/Rapolu
3. Hui/Xu vs. Chavatipon/Ovrootsky
Very, very difficult to predict, but I'll say Stanford just edges the Longhorns.
A few points now that we're on the other side of Indoor Nationals:
* We've switched from the coaches' poll to the computerized rankings, and we come in at #3, since we've got some valuable wins. Interestingly, UNC has dropped to #8 because of their limited resume with their disappointing Indoor Nationals performance. But we now have a top 75 rather than a top 25, and here's where this year's scheduled opponents land on that list, and whether we get them at home or away (teams yet to play in bold):
1. Oklahoma State (L, neutral)
4. Texas (Feb. 23, home)
7. Ohio State (W, neutral)
9. USC (Mar. 30, home)
12. San Diego (W, away)
13. Pepperdine (Apr. 5, home)
15. Florida (W, neutral)
16. Cal (Apr. 19, away)
19. Texas A&M (W, neutral)
29. UCLA (Mar. 29, home)
34. UW (Apr. 14, away)
35. ASU (Mar. 8, away)
43. Arizona (Mar. 9, away)
48. Utah (Mar. 24, home)
52. Oregon (Apr. 7, home)
57. UC Santa Barbara (Feb. 24, home)
65. Colorado (Mar. 23, home)
* We've got some new singles rankings as well:
12. Ma (same as last time)
21. Yepifanova (up 54 spots)
45. Blake (up 11 spots)
70. Blokhina (down 15 spots)
82. Xu (down 13 spots)
* Stanford scheduled Pacific in a last-minute match, and used it as an opportunity to rest Yepifanova and Blokhina entirely and Blake in singles, which led to some random doubles pairs, and it led to us losing the doubles point (with Blake/Houghton losing on 1 and Ma/Sun losing on 3). But we then rolled as would be expected in singles with the following lineup:
1. Ma won 6-2, 6-3
2. Hui won 7-5, 6-1
3. Xu won 6-1, 6-0
4. Yu won 6-1, 6-1
5. Houghton won 6-2, 6-1
6. Okpara won 6-3, 6-1
Disappointing in doubles, but you're throwing in two players who normally don't play at all and putting them on different pairs--not having watched the match, I can't say for sure, but I would imagine the UOP pairs targeted Houghton on 1 and Sun on 3.
* Next up is #4 Texas, and thank goodness we get them at home. Here's how we'd line up in singles against them:
1. #45 Blake vs. #22 Sabina Zeynalova
2. #12 Ma vs. #33 Tanya Sasnouskaya
3. #21 Yepifanova vs. #36 Malaika Rapolu
4. #70 Blokhina vs. #125 Charlotte Chavatipon
5. Hui vs. Taisiya Pachkaleva
6. #82 Xu vs. #103 Vivian Ovrootsky
In doubles, it'd probably be this:
1. #46 Blake/Blokhina vs. #11 Pachkaleva/Zeynalova
2. #41 Ma/Yepifanova vs. Sasnouskaya/Rapolu
3. Hui/Xu vs. Chavatipon/Ovrootsky
Very, very difficult to predict, but I'll say Stanford just edges the Longhorns.
* We've switched from the coaches' poll to the computerized rankings, and we come in at #3, since we've got some valuable wins. Interestingly, UNC has dropped to #8 because of their limited resume with their disappointing Indoor Nationals performance. But we now have a top 75 rather than a top 25, and here's where this year's scheduled opponents land on that list, and whether we get them at home or away (teams yet to play in bold):
1. Oklahoma State (L, neutral)
4. Texas (Feb. 23, home)
7. Ohio State (W, neutral)
9. USC (Mar. 30, home)
12. San Diego (W, away)
13. Pepperdine (Apr. 5, home)
15. Florida (W, neutral)
16. Cal (Apr. 19, away)
19. Texas A&M (W, neutral)
29. UCLA (Mar. 29, home)
34. UW (Apr. 14, away)
35. ASU (Mar. 8, away)
43. Arizona (Mar. 9, away)
48. Utah (Mar. 24, home)
52. Oregon (Apr. 7, home)
57. UC Santa Barbara (Feb. 24, home)
65. Colorado (Mar. 23, home)
* We've got some new singles rankings as well:
12. Ma (same as last time)
21. Yepifanova (up 54 spots)
45. Blake (up 11 spots)
70. Blokhina (down 15 spots)
82. Xu (down 13 spots)
* Stanford scheduled Pacific in a last-minute match, and used it as an opportunity to rest Yepifanova and Blokhina entirely and Blake in singles, which led to some random doubles pairs, and it led to us losing the doubles point (with Blake/Houghton losing on 1 and Ma/Sun losing on 3). But we then rolled as would be expected in singles with the following lineup:
1. Ma won 6-2, 6-3
2. Hui won 7-5, 6-1
3. Xu won 6-1, 6-0
4. Yu won 6-1, 6-1
5. Houghton won 6-2, 6-1
6. Okpara won 6-3, 6-1
Disappointing in doubles, but you're throwing in two players who normally don't play at all and putting them on different pairs--not having watched the match, I can't say for sure, but I would imagine the UOP pairs targeted Houghton on 1 and Sun on 3.
* Next up is #4 Texas, and thank goodness we get them at home. Here's how we'd line up in singles against them:
1. #45 Blake vs. #22 Sabina Zeynalova
2. #12 Ma vs. #33 Tanya Sasnouskaya
3. #21 Yepifanova vs. #36 Malaika Rapolu
4. #70 Blokhina vs. #125 Charlotte Chavatipon
5. Hui vs. Taisiya Pachkaleva
6. #82 Xu vs. #103 Vivian Ovrootsky
In doubles, it'd probably be this:
1. #46 Blake/Blokhina vs. #11 Pachkaleva/Zeynalova
2. #41 Ma/Yepifanova vs. Sasnouskaya/Rapolu
3. Hui/Xu vs. Chavatipon/Ovrootsky
Very, very difficult to predict, but I'll say Stanford just edges the Longhorns.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »