[ColoradoTree]

Got busy this weekend, but we defeated USC and then Cal to become the forever-reigning Pac-12 tournament champions!

First, USC: 

* We dropped the doubles point, unfortunately.
* Blake was a force of nature, beating Snow Han 6-0, 6-2 to tie up the match at 1-1;
* Blokhina dropped her match to Eryn Cayetano (who has spent time in the top 10 in her career) 6-3, 6-3 to put SC back up, 2-1;
* Hui controlled her match over Koenig, winning 6-4, 6-3 to tie it up again;
* Ma put us up 3-2 with a 6-4, 6-0 win over Emma Charney;
* the other two matches were into third sets, so SC had a chance, but Yepifanova took her third set over Grace Piper 6-1 to clinch the match 4-2!
* Xu was up a break in her third set, so odds are she would’ve closed the deal if necessary, but it’s another example of her struggling against weaker opponents. 


And then Cal, who knocked off UCLA in the semifinal:
* we took doubles behind wins on 1 and 3;
* there was no suspense in this one, as Blake racked up her second dominating win over a ranked opponent in a row, 6-0, 6-1 over Viller Moeller;
* Yepifanova made it 3-0 with a 6-0, 6-2 win over Alsola;
* Ma clinched it with a 6-3, 6-1 win over Ivanov!
* when it was clinched, the other three matches looked destined for third sets; Blokhina and Hui had won their first sets but trailed in the second; Xu was the only one to lose her first set but was up in the second.

With that win, it should have been enough to make Stanford the #2 team in the country and the 2 seed at NCAAs—we’ll find out Monday!

[ColoradoTree]

Got busy this weekend, but we defeated USC and then Cal to become the forever-reigning Pac-12 tournament champions!

First, USC: 

* We dropped the doubles point, unfortunately.
* Blake was a force of nature, beating Snow Han 6-0, 6-2 to tie up the match at 1-1;
* Blokhina dropped her match to Eryn Cayetano (who has spent time in the top 10 in her career) 6-3, 6-3 to put SC back up, 2-1;
* Hui controlled her match over Koenig, winning 6-4, 6-3 to tie it up again;
* Ma put us up 3-2 with a 6-4, 6-0 win over Emma Charney;
* the other two matches were into third sets, so SC had a chance, but Yepifanova took her third set over Grace Piper 6-1 to clinch the match 4-2!
* Xu was up a break in her third set, so odds are she would’ve closed the deal if necessary, but it’s another example of her struggling against weaker opponents. 


And then Cal, who knocked off UCLA in the semifinal:
* we took doubles behind wins on 1 and 3;
* there was no suspense in this one, as Blake racked up her second dominating win over a ranked opponent in a row, 6-0, 6-1 over Viller Moeller;
* Yepifanova made it 3-0 with a 6-0, 6-2 win over Alsola;
* Ma clinched it with a 6-3, 6-1 win over Ivanov!
* when it was clinched, the other three matches looked destined for third sets; Blokhina and Hui had won their first sets but trailed in the second; Xu was the only one to lose her first set but was up in the second.

With that win, it should have been enough to make Stanford the #2 team in the country and the 2 seed at NCAAs—we’ll find out Monday!

[ColoradoTree]

The NCAA women's selection show is this afternoon at 3:30pm PT. The suspense won't be in whether we host a regional (we will) or what our seed will be (we'll be #2) or whether there will be a dangerous team at our regional (I mean, define dangerous, but it would take a truly horrendous effort to lose to whoever the 2 seed in our regional pod will be). Rather, it'll be in how the rankings fall in the top 16 and what our potential Super Regional and quarterfinal opponents could be. 

We'd be in line to play the 15th seed in a Super Regional, and based on the latest results, the #15 team in the ITA rankings looks like it'll be Florida, who we beat 4-0 back at Indoor Nationals in February. But while the NCAA generally defers to the ITA rankings, the committee also looks at head-to-head wins among neighboring teams in the rankings, as well as records against common opponents and Top 50 wins. And Florida has more Top 50 wins than #14 NC State and a better record against common opponents, so it's likely that the NCAA committee will depart from the ITA rankings here and move Florida to 14 and bump NC State down to the 15th seed. (In theory, this same practice could have kept us from being the 2 seed, but we had a better record than Michigan against common opponents, so we're the #2.) 

As for a potential quarterfinal opponent, SEC champion Georgia looks like they'll end up ranked and seeded 7th. The SEC is a very deep conference, but they ate each other alive this season--in the next ITA rankings, they should have the #7, #13, #15, #16, #17, and #19 teams. 

So, my predictions for tonight are as follows:

* We're the 2 seed
* As for potential future opponents, UGA is the 7 seed and NC State is the 15 seed. 
* If you went straight chalk for teams 17-32, we'd get #31 Notre Dame as the 2 seed in our regional, but that would mean a conference rematch between Michigan and #30 Wisconsin, so they probably just swap those two and we get Wisconsin. 
* We'll get one of the teams who got an automatic qualifying spot by virtue of winning their weaker conference tournaments. None of the several lowest-ranked ones are on the West Coast, so we'll get someone like Fairfield, Chicago State, Alabama State, UMass, etc. But they'll also try and fit most of those programs with regionals that are within driving distance, so there's no way of knowing exactly who we'll get. Only one West Coast team in the bottom quarter of the 64 qualified teams, and that's Sacramento State, so they'll probably land with Cal, UCLA, USC, or Pepperdine. 
* As for our 3 seed, the only West Coast teams in that 33-48 group (that's seeding, not ranking--the lowest-ranked team to make the field as an at-large selection will likely be #42 Harvard, with everyone after that being automatic qualifiers from weaker conferences) are San Diego State and Cal Poly, so perhaps Cal Poly to cut down on travel? (You could send them to Cal, too, of course.) I would guess our seed would mean they'd try and give us one of the six worst teams in that group, which are Grand Canyon, Denver, SDSU, Old Dominion, ETSU, and Cal Poly. I'll say we get Cal Poly and SDSU goes to the only other CA team in the top 6, Pepperdine. (That said, that would be a regular season rematch, albeit a nonconference one, so if the committee decides to avoid those, maybe they send SDSU to USC or UCLA instead.)

We'll see in a couple of hours!

---

Singles and doubles selections for the individual NCAA championships will be announced tomorrow, but Ma will likely be the Pac-12's automatic entrant and Yepifanova and Blake look to be pretty safe bets with their rankings and recent results.

[ColoradoTree]

The NCAA women's selection show is this afternoon at 3:30pm PT. The suspense won't be in whether we host a regional (we will) or what our seed will be (we'll be #2) or whether there will be a dangerous team at our regional (I mean, define dangerous, but it would take a truly horrendous effort to lose to whoever the 2 seed in our regional pod will be). Rather, it'll be in how the rankings fall in the top 16 and what our potential Super Regional and quarterfinal opponents could be. 

We'd be in line to play the 15th seed in a Super Regional, and based on the latest results, the #15 team in the ITA rankings looks like it'll be Florida, who we beat 4-0 back at Indoor Nationals in February. But while the NCAA generally defers to the ITA rankings, the committee also looks at head-to-head wins among neighboring teams in the rankings, as well as records against common opponents and Top 50 wins. And Florida has more Top 50 wins than #14 NC State and a better record against common opponents, so it's likely that the NCAA committee will depart from the ITA rankings here and move Florida to 14 and bump NC State down to the 15th seed. (In theory, this same practice could have kept us from being the 2 seed, but we had a better record than Michigan against common opponents, so we're the #2.) 

As for a potential quarterfinal opponent, SEC champion Georgia looks like they'll end up ranked and seeded 7th. The SEC is a very deep conference, but they ate each other alive this season--in the next ITA rankings, they should have the #7, #13, #15, #16, #17, and #19 teams. 

So, my predictions for tonight are as follows:

* We're the 2 seed
* As for potential future opponents, UGA is the 7 seed and NC State is the 15 seed. 
* If you went straight chalk for teams 17-32, we'd get #31 Notre Dame as the 2 seed in our regional, but that would mean a conference rematch between Michigan and #30 Wisconsin, so they probably just swap those two and we get Wisconsin. 
* We'll get one of the teams who got an automatic qualifying spot by virtue of winning their weaker conference tournaments. None of the several lowest-ranked ones are on the West Coast, so we'll get someone like Fairfield, Chicago State, Alabama State, UMass, etc. But they'll also try and fit most of those programs with regionals that are within driving distance, so there's no way of knowing exactly who we'll get. Only one West Coast team in the bottom quarter of the 64 qualified teams, and that's Sacramento State, so they'll probably land with Cal, UCLA, USC, or Pepperdine. 
* As for our 3 seed, the only West Coast teams in that 33-48 group (that's seeding, not ranking--the lowest-ranked team to make the field as an at-large selection will likely be #42 Harvard, with everyone after that being automatic qualifiers from weaker conferences) are San Diego State and Cal Poly, so perhaps Cal Poly to cut down on travel? (You could send them to Cal, too, of course.) I would guess our seed would mean they'd try and give us one of the six worst teams in that group, which are Grand Canyon, Denver, SDSU, Old Dominion, ETSU, and Cal Poly. I'll say we get Cal Poly and SDSU goes to the only other CA team in the top 6, Pepperdine. (That said, that would be a regular season rematch, albeit a nonconference one, so if the committee decides to avoid those, maybe they send SDSU to USC or UCLA instead.)

We'll see in a couple of hours!

---

Singles and doubles selections for the individual NCAA championships will be announced tomorrow, but Ma will likely be the Pac-12's automatic entrant and Yepifanova and Blake look to be pretty safe bets with their rankings and recent results.

[Spiny_Norman]

Stanford is the overall #2 seed. Round 1 vs UMass. Winner plays the winner of LSU vs. Baylor. In the most current ITA ranking LSU is 31st and Baylor is 35th.

As Colorado Tree foresaw, Stanford is placed on the bracket opposite 15 seed NC State and 7 seed Georgia.

Bracket here - https://www.ncaa.com/brackets/tennis-women/d1/2024

Among P12 teams, Washington, Arizona, and ASU are unseeded. UCLA is #8, Cal is #10. USC is #11.

[Spiny_Norman]

Stanford is the overall #2 seed. Round 1 vs UMass. Winner plays the winner of LSU vs. Baylor. In the most current ITA ranking LSU is 31st and Baylor is 35th.

As Colorado Tree foresaw, Stanford is placed on the bracket opposite 15 seed NC State and 7 seed Georgia.

Bracket here - https://www.ncaa.com/brackets/tennis-women/d1/2024

Among P12 teams, Washington, Arizona, and ASU are unseeded. UCLA is #8, Cal is #10. USC is #11.

[ColoradoTree]

One fun detail is that the seeding is based on the unreleased ITA rankings after the conference tournaments finish up, and while those rankings should come out today, there's a website, collegetennisranks.com, that does a great job of doing the calculations for what they should look like. 

So, we'll be #2, LSU should be #32, and Baylor should be #34. #1 Oklahoma State gets #33 Alabama and #36 SMU, so pretty much as expected. But there's a big ol' quirk in #3 Michigan's region. Their 2 seed is #30 Notre Dame, but the 3 seed is #80 Xavier, who is the 16th-lowest-ranked team in the field, so they really should have been a 4 seed. But instead they made #74 Cal Poly a 4 seed in USC's region and that bumped Xavier up to a 3 seed. I mean, it doesn't really matter--Michigan will get an easy match and then a match against a 30ish team, just like we will--but it's a head scratcher from a process perspective. 

As for the Pac-12 teams:

All the seeded teams should be expected to win their regionals, but there are varying degrees of difficulty. 
* USC gets San Diego as their 2 seed, and San Diego won that match in the regular season, 4-3 (winning doubles and the top three courts). Sure, this match will be at USC, and it's fair by rankings, but that's a rough second round matchup. 
* Cal gets a very rough draw as well--Auburn is ranked #17 and is the highest-ranked non-host. By rights, they should be playing at the 16th seed, but that's another SEC team in Tennessee, so that's why not. But then why not #15 NC State? NC State caught #19 South Carolina, so it's not like they have an easy second round match, but then it's two SEC teams at #13 and #14, so the next option is #12 Ohio State, who got #29 Vanderbilt as their 2 seed, so Cal unquestionably got a little hosed there. But all the ACC and SEC teams in the teens and twenties, combined with the obligation to avoid conference matchups in the regionals, makes it tough to have a perfectly fair bracket by ranking. 
* UCLA has the smoothest path overall, though they have #58 Denver as their 4 seed, and DU should be a 3 seed, as I noted below. But UCLA will roll in that match, and then they'd get #25 Texas Tech, and while that's not a match you take lightly, UCLA shouldn't really have all that much trouble there. 

Moving onto the unseeded teams:
* ASU should beat Northwestern, but I don't see them beating Pepperdine in Malibu;
* Oklahoma should handle Arizona; and
* Washington should really beat Princeton, but I don't see how they beat UVA in the second round.

Looking Ahead to Super Regionals:

* If we get there, we'd get a rematch of last year's NCAA semifinal against NC State, when the Wolfpack beat us 4-0. But this is a very different NC State team, as they no longer have super-freshman Diana Shnaider (now off to the pros) or Alana Smith, both of whom were Top 15 players when we ran into them last year. They're too good for us to just roll over them, but I'd call us decent favorites there. 
* If Cal gets past Auburn, I wouldn't be shocked for them to beat Georgia in the Super Regional, though having those at campus sites has been a massive benefit for the host school since the NCAA went from having the final 16 at the final site to just the final 8. Can you imagine a Stanford-Cal rematch in a NCAA quarterfinal? 
* UCLA would likely host Texas in a Super Regional, a replay of a match UCLA won 5-2 in the regular season, also at home. 
* If USC gets past San Diego, they'd go to Malibu to face Pepperdine, and the Waves won both regular-season matchups, 4-2 at National Indoors and 4-0 in Malibu a month ago. USC has the talent to pull an upset, but I don't think they will. 

I mean, ultimately the NCAA tournament is always a difficult affair, but we don't have a whole heckuva lot to complain about in terms of our path. Well, at least until a potential final, when you're looking at playing for a national championship against #1 Oklahoma State in Stillwater. So, what are the odds Oklahoma State falls short of the final?

* I just can't see them losing in the first three rounds. Maybe #16 Tennessee or #22 Duke finds lightning in a bottle in the Super Regional? But I doubt it. 
* They'd get the UCLA-Texas winner in the quarterfinal. Oklahoma State was pushed to the brink by UCLA, just beating them 4-3 at ITA Kickoff Weekend (Stanford might well be the #1 team in the country if that match had gone the other way, as Oklahoma State would've been deprived of 4 top wins at National Indoors, including one over us.) And the same is true of Texas, who lost to them 4-3 twice--once at National Indoors and once in the conference slate--before dropping the Big 12 championship match 4-0 (though the three remaining singles matches were all in third sets, so it could've gone the same way). 
* If they win the quarterfinal, they'd get the UNC-UVA winner in the semi. (It's gonna be UNC.) UNC was the preseason #1 team, and while the shine was off a little following UNC's stumbles at National Indoors, the Heels only lost once more the rest of the way, avenging their 2 losses to NC State with a 4-0 win in the ACC semi, and avenging its 0-4 loss to UVA at National Indoors with two 4-1 wins, one in the ACC final. UNC is cruising right now, and no one wants to play them. I don't want to play them. Heck, I don't know if I'd rather play Oklahoma State in Stillwater for a national championship or UNC. Both are terrifying.

---

But there's one big potential issue here. All the teams have to list all of their potential singles players and doubles teams, in order of strength. And Eleana Yu isn't on our list, suggesting she's injured and won't be able to go at any point in the NCAA tournament (or, even worse, that she's unhappy and sitting out ahead of a potential transfer). That might explain why Xu keeps getting run out there at 6. But Yu also played in (and won) the penultimate regular season match at UW, so whatever the issue is, it's something more recent. 

That means if we suffer an injury in the singles lineup, Houghton will slide in at 6 rather than Yu. And that's a big, big drop. Maybe someone at the Stanford Daily can ask Lele a question or two?

[ColoradoTree]

One fun detail is that the seeding is based on the unreleased ITA rankings after the conference tournaments finish up, and while those rankings should come out today, there's a website, collegetennisranks.com, that does a great job of doing the calculations for what they should look like. 

So, we'll be #2, LSU should be #32, and Baylor should be #34. #1 Oklahoma State gets #33 Alabama and #36 SMU, so pretty much as expected. But there's a big ol' quirk in #3 Michigan's region. Their 2 seed is #30 Notre Dame, but the 3 seed is #80 Xavier, who is the 16th-lowest-ranked team in the field, so they really should have been a 4 seed. But instead they made #74 Cal Poly a 4 seed in USC's region and that bumped Xavier up to a 3 seed. I mean, it doesn't really matter--Michigan will get an easy match and then a match against a 30ish team, just like we will--but it's a head scratcher from a process perspective. 

As for the Pac-12 teams:

All the seeded teams should be expected to win their regionals, but there are varying degrees of difficulty. 
* USC gets San Diego as their 2 seed, and San Diego won that match in the regular season, 4-3 (winning doubles and the top three courts). Sure, this match will be at USC, and it's fair by rankings, but that's a rough second round matchup. 
* Cal gets a very rough draw as well--Auburn is ranked #17 and is the highest-ranked non-host. By rights, they should be playing at the 16th seed, but that's another SEC team in Tennessee, so that's why not. But then why not #15 NC State? NC State caught #19 South Carolina, so it's not like they have an easy second round match, but then it's two SEC teams at #13 and #14, so the next option is #12 Ohio State, who got #29 Vanderbilt as their 2 seed, so Cal unquestionably got a little hosed there. But all the ACC and SEC teams in the teens and twenties, combined with the obligation to avoid conference matchups in the regionals, makes it tough to have a perfectly fair bracket by ranking. 
* UCLA has the smoothest path overall, though they have #58 Denver as their 4 seed, and DU should be a 3 seed, as I noted below. But UCLA will roll in that match, and then they'd get #25 Texas Tech, and while that's not a match you take lightly, UCLA shouldn't really have all that much trouble there. 

Moving onto the unseeded teams:
* ASU should beat Northwestern, but I don't see them beating Pepperdine in Malibu;
* Oklahoma should handle Arizona; and
* Washington should really beat Princeton, but I don't see how they beat UVA in the second round.

Looking Ahead to Super Regionals:

* If we get there, we'd get a rematch of last year's NCAA semifinal against NC State, when the Wolfpack beat us 4-0. But this is a very different NC State team, as they no longer have super-freshman Diana Shnaider (now off to the pros) or Alana Smith, both of whom were Top 15 players when we ran into them last year. They're too good for us to just roll over them, but I'd call us decent favorites there. 
* If Cal gets past Auburn, I wouldn't be shocked for them to beat Georgia in the Super Regional, though having those at campus sites has been a massive benefit for the host school since the NCAA went from having the final 16 at the final site to just the final 8. Can you imagine a Stanford-Cal rematch in a NCAA quarterfinal? 
* UCLA would likely host Texas in a Super Regional, a replay of a match UCLA won 5-2 in the regular season, also at home. 
* If USC gets past San Diego, they'd go to Malibu to face Pepperdine, and the Waves won both regular-season matchups, 4-2 at National Indoors and 4-0 in Malibu a month ago. USC has the talent to pull an upset, but I don't think they will. 

I mean, ultimately the NCAA tournament is always a difficult affair, but we don't have a whole heckuva lot to complain about in terms of our path. Well, at least until a potential final, when you're looking at playing for a national championship against #1 Oklahoma State in Stillwater. So, what are the odds Oklahoma State falls short of the final?

* I just can't see them losing in the first three rounds. Maybe #16 Tennessee or #22 Duke finds lightning in a bottle in the Super Regional? But I doubt it. 
* They'd get the UCLA-Texas winner in the quarterfinal. Oklahoma State was pushed to the brink by UCLA, just beating them 4-3 at ITA Kickoff Weekend (Stanford might well be the #1 team in the country if that match had gone the other way, as Oklahoma State would've been deprived of 4 top wins at National Indoors, including one over us.) And the same is true of Texas, who lost to them 4-3 twice--once at National Indoors and once in the conference slate--before dropping the Big 12 championship match 4-0 (though the three remaining singles matches were all in third sets, so it could've gone the same way). 
* If they win the quarterfinal, they'd get the UNC-UVA winner in the semi. (It's gonna be UNC.) UNC was the preseason #1 team, and while the shine was off a little following UNC's stumbles at National Indoors, the Heels only lost once more the rest of the way, avenging their 2 losses to NC State with a 4-0 win in the ACC semi, and avenging its 0-4 loss to UVA at National Indoors with two 4-1 wins, one in the ACC final. UNC is cruising right now, and no one wants to play them. I don't want to play them. Heck, I don't know if I'd rather play Oklahoma State in Stillwater for a national championship or UNC. Both are terrifying.

---

But there's one big potential issue here. All the teams have to list all of their potential singles players and doubles teams, in order of strength. And Eleana Yu isn't on our list, suggesting she's injured and won't be able to go at any point in the NCAA tournament (or, even worse, that she's unhappy and sitting out ahead of a potential transfer). That might explain why Xu keeps getting run out there at 6. But Yu also played in (and won) the penultimate regular season match at UW, so whatever the issue is, it's something more recent. 

That means if we suffer an injury in the singles lineup, Houghton will slide in at 6 rather than Yu. And that's a big, big drop. Maybe someone at the Stanford Daily can ask Lele a question or two?

[Spiny_Norman]

It takes guts, fortitude and outstanding play to beat an elite opponent in front of their fans, but Stanford has done it before. Stanford beat Oklahoma State 4-3 in Tulsa in 2016 in an epic national final. The intensity and pressure were off the charts, but Stanford ultimately won the day.

[Spiny_Norman]

It takes guts, fortitude and outstanding play to beat an elite opponent in front of their fans, but Stanford has done it before. Stanford beat Oklahoma State 4-3 in Tulsa in 2016 in an epic national final. The intensity and pressure were off the charts, but Stanford ultimately won the day.

[Jamesy]

One fun detail is that the seeding is based on the unreleased ITA rankings after the conference tournaments finish up, and while those rankings should come out today, there's a website, collegetennisranks.com, that does a great job of doing the calculations for what they should look like. 

So, we'll be #2, LSU should be #32, and Baylor should be #34. #1 Oklahoma State gets #33 Alabama and #36 SMU, so pretty much as expected. But there's a big ol' quirk in #3 Michigan's region. Their 2 seed is #30 Notre Dame, but the 3 seed is #80 Xavier, who is the 16th-lowest-ranked team in the field, so they really should have been a 4 seed. But instead they made #74 Cal Poly a 4 seed in USC's region and that bumped Xavier up to a 3 seed. I mean, it doesn't really matter--Michigan will get an easy match and then a match against a 30ish team, just like we will--but it's a head scratcher from a process perspective. 

As for the Pac-12 teams:

All the seeded teams should be expected to win their regionals, but there are varying degrees of difficulty. 
* USC gets San Diego as their 2 seed, and San Diego won that match in the regular season, 4-3 (winning doubles and the top three courts). Sure, this match will be at USC, and it's fair by rankings, but that's a rough second round matchup. 
* Cal gets a very rough draw as well--Auburn is ranked #17 and is the highest-ranked non-host. By rights, they should be playing at the 16th seed, but that's another SEC team in Tennessee, so that's why not. But then why not #15 NC State? NC State caught #19 South Carolina, so it's not like they have an easy second round match, but then it's two SEC teams at #13 and #14, so the next option is #12 Ohio State, who got #29 Vanderbilt as their 2 seed, so Cal unquestionably got a little hosed there. But all the ACC and SEC teams in the teens and twenties, combined with the obligation to avoid conference matchups in the regionals, makes it tough to have a perfectly fair bracket by ranking. 
* UCLA has the smoothest path overall, though they have #58 Denver as their 4 seed, and DU should be a 3 seed, as I noted below. But UCLA will roll in that match, and then they'd get #25 Texas Tech, and while that's not a match you take lightly, UCLA shouldn't really have all that much trouble there. 

Moving onto the unseeded teams:
* ASU should beat Northwestern, but I don't see them beating Pepperdine in Malibu;
* Oklahoma should handle Arizona; and
* Washington should really beat Princeton, but I don't see how they beat UVA in the second round.

Looking Ahead to Super Regionals:

* If we get there, we'd get a rematch of last year's NCAA semifinal against NC State, when the Wolfpack beat us 4-0. But this is a very different NC State team, as they no longer have super-freshman Diana Shnaider (now off to the pros) or Alana Smith, both of whom were Top 15 players when we ran into them last year. They're too good for us to just roll over them, but I'd call us decent favorites there. 
* If Cal gets past Auburn, I wouldn't be shocked for them to beat Georgia in the Super Regional, though having those at campus sites has been a massive benefit for the host school since the NCAA went from having the final 16 at the final site to just the final 8. Can you imagine a Stanford-Cal rematch in a NCAA quarterfinal? 
* UCLA would likely host Texas in a Super Regional, a replay of a match UCLA won 5-2 in the regular season, also at home. 
* If USC gets past San Diego, they'd go to Malibu to face Pepperdine, and the Waves won both regular-season matchups, 4-2 at National Indoors and 4-0 in Malibu a month ago. USC has the talent to pull an upset, but I don't think they will. 

I mean, ultimately the NCAA tournament is always a difficult affair, but we don't have a whole heckuva lot to complain about in terms of our path. Well, at least until a potential final, when you're looking at playing for a national championship against #1 Oklahoma State in Stillwater. So, what are the odds Oklahoma State falls short of the final?

* I just can't see them losing in the first three rounds. Maybe #16 Tennessee or #22 Duke finds lightning in a bottle in the Super Regional? But I doubt it. 
* They'd get the UCLA-Texas winner in the quarterfinal. Oklahoma State was pushed to the brink by UCLA, just beating them 4-3 at ITA Kickoff Weekend (Stanford might well be the #1 team in the country if that match had gone the other way, as Oklahoma State would've been deprived of 4 top wins at National Indoors, including one over us.) And the same is true of Texas, who lost to them 4-3 twice--once at National Indoors and once in the conference slate--before dropping the Big 12 championship match 4-0 (though the three remaining singles matches were all in third sets, so it could've gone the same way). 
* If they win the quarterfinal, they'd get the UNC-UVA winner in the semi. (It's gonna be UNC.) UNC was the preseason #1 team, and while the shine was off a little following UNC's stumbles at National Indoors, the Heels only lost once more the rest of the way, avenging their 2 losses to NC State with a 4-0 win in the ACC semi, and avenging its 0-4 loss to UVA at National Indoors with two 4-1 wins, one in the ACC final. UNC is cruising right now, and no one wants to play them. I don't want to play them. Heck, I don't know if I'd rather play Oklahoma State in Stillwater for a national championship or UNC. Both are terrifying.

---

But there's one big potential issue here. All the teams have to list all of their potential singles players and doubles teams, in order of strength. And Eleana Yu isn't on our list, suggesting she's injured and won't be able to go at any point in the NCAA tournament (or, even worse, that she's unhappy and sitting out ahead of a potential transfer). That might explain why Xu keeps getting run out there at 6. But Yu also played in (and won) the penultimate regular season match at UW, so whatever the issue is, it's something more recent. 

That means if we suffer an injury in the singles lineup, Houghton will slide in at 6 rather than Yu. And that's a big, big drop. Maybe someone at the Stanford Daily can ask Lele a question or two?

Where do you find the list of potential singles players for our team?

[Jamesy]

One fun detail is that the seeding is based on the unreleased ITA rankings after the conference tournaments finish up, and while those rankings should come out today, there's a website, collegetennisranks.com, that does a great job of doing the calculations for what they should look like. 

So, we'll be #2, LSU should be #32, and Baylor should be #34. #1 Oklahoma State gets #33 Alabama and #36 SMU, so pretty much as expected. But there's a big ol' quirk in #3 Michigan's region. Their 2 seed is #30 Notre Dame, but the 3 seed is #80 Xavier, who is the 16th-lowest-ranked team in the field, so they really should have been a 4 seed. But instead they made #74 Cal Poly a 4 seed in USC's region and that bumped Xavier up to a 3 seed. I mean, it doesn't really matter--Michigan will get an easy match and then a match against a 30ish team, just like we will--but it's a head scratcher from a process perspective. 

As for the Pac-12 teams:

All the seeded teams should be expected to win their regionals, but there are varying degrees of difficulty. 
* USC gets San Diego as their 2 seed, and San Diego won that match in the regular season, 4-3 (winning doubles and the top three courts). Sure, this match will be at USC, and it's fair by rankings, but that's a rough second round matchup. 
* Cal gets a very rough draw as well--Auburn is ranked #17 and is the highest-ranked non-host. By rights, they should be playing at the 16th seed, but that's another SEC team in Tennessee, so that's why not. But then why not #15 NC State? NC State caught #19 South Carolina, so it's not like they have an easy second round match, but then it's two SEC teams at #13 and #14, so the next option is #12 Ohio State, who got #29 Vanderbilt as their 2 seed, so Cal unquestionably got a little hosed there. But all the ACC and SEC teams in the teens and twenties, combined with the obligation to avoid conference matchups in the regionals, makes it tough to have a perfectly fair bracket by ranking. 
* UCLA has the smoothest path overall, though they have #58 Denver as their 4 seed, and DU should be a 3 seed, as I noted below. But UCLA will roll in that match, and then they'd get #25 Texas Tech, and while that's not a match you take lightly, UCLA shouldn't really have all that much trouble there. 

Moving onto the unseeded teams:
* ASU should beat Northwestern, but I don't see them beating Pepperdine in Malibu;
* Oklahoma should handle Arizona; and
* Washington should really beat Princeton, but I don't see how they beat UVA in the second round.

Looking Ahead to Super Regionals:

* If we get there, we'd get a rematch of last year's NCAA semifinal against NC State, when the Wolfpack beat us 4-0. But this is a very different NC State team, as they no longer have super-freshman Diana Shnaider (now off to the pros) or Alana Smith, both of whom were Top 15 players when we ran into them last year. They're too good for us to just roll over them, but I'd call us decent favorites there. 
* If Cal gets past Auburn, I wouldn't be shocked for them to beat Georgia in the Super Regional, though having those at campus sites has been a massive benefit for the host school since the NCAA went from having the final 16 at the final site to just the final 8. Can you imagine a Stanford-Cal rematch in a NCAA quarterfinal? 
* UCLA would likely host Texas in a Super Regional, a replay of a match UCLA won 5-2 in the regular season, also at home. 
* If USC gets past San Diego, they'd go to Malibu to face Pepperdine, and the Waves won both regular-season matchups, 4-2 at National Indoors and 4-0 in Malibu a month ago. USC has the talent to pull an upset, but I don't think they will. 

I mean, ultimately the NCAA tournament is always a difficult affair, but we don't have a whole heckuva lot to complain about in terms of our path. Well, at least until a potential final, when you're looking at playing for a national championship against #1 Oklahoma State in Stillwater. So, what are the odds Oklahoma State falls short of the final?

* I just can't see them losing in the first three rounds. Maybe #16 Tennessee or #22 Duke finds lightning in a bottle in the Super Regional? But I doubt it. 
* They'd get the UCLA-Texas winner in the quarterfinal. Oklahoma State was pushed to the brink by UCLA, just beating them 4-3 at ITA Kickoff Weekend (Stanford might well be the #1 team in the country if that match had gone the other way, as Oklahoma State would've been deprived of 4 top wins at National Indoors, including one over us.) And the same is true of Texas, who lost to them 4-3 twice--once at National Indoors and once in the conference slate--before dropping the Big 12 championship match 4-0 (though the three remaining singles matches were all in third sets, so it could've gone the same way). 
* If they win the quarterfinal, they'd get the UNC-UVA winner in the semi. (It's gonna be UNC.) UNC was the preseason #1 team, and while the shine was off a little following UNC's stumbles at National Indoors, the Heels only lost once more the rest of the way, avenging their 2 losses to NC State with a 4-0 win in the ACC semi, and avenging its 0-4 loss to UVA at National Indoors with two 4-1 wins, one in the ACC final. UNC is cruising right now, and no one wants to play them. I don't want to play them. Heck, I don't know if I'd rather play Oklahoma State in Stillwater for a national championship or UNC. Both are terrifying.

---

But there's one big potential issue here. All the teams have to list all of their potential singles players and doubles teams, in order of strength. And Eleana Yu isn't on our list, suggesting she's injured and won't be able to go at any point in the NCAA tournament (or, even worse, that she's unhappy and sitting out ahead of a potential transfer). That might explain why Xu keeps getting run out there at 6. But Yu also played in (and won) the penultimate regular season match at UW, so whatever the issue is, it's something more recent. 

That means if we suffer an injury in the singles lineup, Houghton will slide in at 6 rather than Yu. And that's a big, big drop. Maybe someone at the Stanford Daily can ask Lele a question or two?

Where do you find the list of potential singles players for our team?

[ColoradoTree]

Here's where you find the NCAA rosters: https://web2.ncaa.org/tennis/public/year...ions/31703

[ColoradoTree]

Here's where you find the NCAA rosters: https://web2.ncaa.org/tennis/public/year...ions/31703

[ColoradoTree]

It takes guts, fortitude and outstanding play to beat an elite opponent in front of their fans, but Stanford has done it before. Stanford beat Oklahoma State 4-3 in Tulsa in 2016 in an epic national final. The intensity and pressure were off the charts, but Stanford ultimately won the day.

Absolutely. And that match was one for the ages. All you can ask for is an opportunity to show that kind of guts, fortitude, and outstanding play when it matters most, and we have that opportunity before us. 

Getting another title this year would keep alive the streak--going back to the early '90s--of each class winning a national title in their time here. In fact, that six-year stretch without a title from '91 to '97 is the only such stretch since the NCAA championships began in 1982. In other words, only the classes of '95 and '96--in the entire history of NCAA women's tennis--left Stanford without a women's tennis national championship. Blake was a HS senior when we won our last one in 2019, so this is our last chance to get her one (or to get one for Houghton or Geller).

[ColoradoTree]

It takes guts, fortitude and outstanding play to beat an elite opponent in front of their fans, but Stanford has done it before. Stanford beat Oklahoma State 4-3 in Tulsa in 2016 in an epic national final. The intensity and pressure were off the charts, but Stanford ultimately won the day.

Absolutely. And that match was one for the ages. All you can ask for is an opportunity to show that kind of guts, fortitude, and outstanding play when it matters most, and we have that opportunity before us. 

Getting another title this year would keep alive the streak--going back to the early '90s--of each class winning a national title in their time here. In fact, that six-year stretch without a title from '91 to '97 is the only such stretch since the NCAA championships began in 1982. In other words, only the classes of '95 and '96--in the entire history of NCAA women's tennis--left Stanford without a women's tennis national championship. Blake was a HS senior when we won our last one in 2019, so this is our last chance to get her one (or to get one for Houghton or Geller).

[Jamesy]

---

But there's one big potential issue here. All the teams have to list all of their potential singles players and doubles teams, in order of strength. And Eleana Yu isn't on our list, suggesting she's injured and won't be able to go at any point in the NCAA tournament (or, even worse, that she's unhappy and sitting out ahead of a potential transfer). That might explain why Xu keeps getting run out there at 6. But Yu also played in (and won) the penultimate regular season match at UW, so whatever the issue is, it's something more recent. 

She's not injured.

[Jamesy]

---

But there's one big potential issue here. All the teams have to list all of their potential singles players and doubles teams, in order of strength. And Eleana Yu isn't on our list, suggesting she's injured and won't be able to go at any point in the NCAA tournament (or, even worse, that she's unhappy and sitting out ahead of a potential transfer). That might explain why Xu keeps getting run out there at 6. But Yu also played in (and won) the penultimate regular season match at UW, so whatever the issue is, it's something more recent. 

She's not injured.

[ColoradoTree]

Jamesy, you have any idea what's going on with Yu, then? It's concerning, and because I tend to catastrophize, I start thinking she's going to transfer, even though tennis has seemed a bit more immune to the roster damage caused by NIL money. A team discipline issue?

I did notice that she wasn't in any of the team pictures in Ojai at Pac-12s, while Houghton, Sun, and Okpara were. (Geller wasn't there, either, despite having been honored at Senior Day along with Houghton.)

[ColoradoTree]

Jamesy, you have any idea what's going on with Yu, then? It's concerning, and because I tend to catastrophize, I start thinking she's going to transfer, even though tennis has seemed a bit more immune to the roster damage caused by NIL money. A team discipline issue?

I did notice that she wasn't in any of the team pictures in Ojai at Pac-12s, while Houghton, Sun, and Okpara were. (Geller wasn't there, either, despite having been honored at Senior Day along with Houghton.)

[ColoradoTree]

New ITA rankings dropped, and as expected, Stanford is #2. UMass is unranked (the ITA only lists the top 75, and they're at #151, per collegetennisranks.com), and our potential second-round opponents are #32 (LSU) and #34 (Baylor). 

In singles, we've got three ranked players: #7 Ma, #25 Blake, and #29 Yepifanova. And we've got one ranked doubles team: #10 Ma/Yepifanova. 

A couple other lineup quirks of note, and they're likely Super Regional opponents on the other half of the bracket, which is good for us:

* UNC is listing #22 Elizabeth Scotty as their #1, bumping #6 Fiona Crawley down a line. Crawley has a 12-3 record at #1 this year and 3-0 at #2, while Scotty is just 1-0 there, compared to 7-0 at #2, 2-0 at #3, and 2-0 at #4. I'm not going to pore over every UNC box score to see how many times Scotty played #1 this year, but since UNC lost Reese Brantmeier for the year with a meniscus tear at National Indoors, I looked at the three matches they had just before then, and sure enough, Brantmeier was at 1, Crawley was at 2, and Scotty was at 4 for each of those matches. While both are terrific players, Crawley has been above Scotty all year. This one just feels wrong. That said, I don't see a brobdingnagian advantage in doing it. I think this makes UNC slightly less likely to win on Court 1 and more likely to win on Court 2, but they were already very likely to win on both courts, so it's just strange. 

* Texas A&M has inserted Carson Branstine back into their lineup after she was out much of the year playing ITF tournaments internationally. She made the following statement in response to someone on Twitter questioning why she's back on the roster and taking the spot of someone who's been playing all year:

"Four surgeries, countless hours of rehab, all crafting a comeback story that wouldn't fit on your average stat sheet. My journey back to @AggieWTEN was less about physical presence and more about mental fortitude. So as the postseason rolls in and I'm back on the roster, remember, the true essence of teamwork is not just showing up, it's never giving up." 

A nice sentiment, and she indeed had hip surgery 12 months ago, but then there's this: she played in an ITF tournament in April in Tunisia; she played in two different ITF tournaments in February in Turkey (and was scheduled for a third that was cancelled); two January ITF tournaments in Tunisia and one in the US; and another couple of tournaments in Tunisia in November. Rather than work her way back into form playing a mix of college matches and domestic tournaments, she was off the A&M roster and played international tournaments. 

She is eligible to play, that's not the issue. But she hasn't been on the roster before now this season, and some feel that this is dirty pool, to use a phrase that I'm sure the kids these days wouldn't understand. Anyway, she was entered at #3 singles in her first match back, that was challenged, and she was forced to play at #1, while Mary Stoiana--ranked #1 in the country basically all year--now plays #2 singles for the Aggies, bumping everyone down a line and making this a very different team. Having her at 1 vs. 3 doesn't mean a whole lot--it's a very dangerous top 3 either way, though A&M probably would have just listed her at #1 if they truly thought she was ready to come back at #1--but it's the downstream effects on the lineup that are frustrating for potential opponents. Doesn't mean that A&M is destined for another deep NCAA run, and this new lineup just lost to Georgia in the SEC tournament final, 4-1 (and it could've been 6-1; Branstine had lost at 1, Stoiana was about to lose at 2, and the match at 6 was about to go into a third set). But the Aggies now look a lot more dangerous than your average #13 national seed.

Anyway, I'm very happy to be on the other side of the bracket from both of these potentially very dangerous teams. (Of course, two of UNC's losses this year were to NC State, our likely Super Regional opponent, and this A&M just lost 4-1 to our likely quarterfinal opponent, Georgia. So, there's danger everywhere you look, I guess.)

[ColoradoTree]

New ITA rankings dropped, and as expected, Stanford is #2. UMass is unranked (the ITA only lists the top 75, and they're at #151, per collegetennisranks.com), and our potential second-round opponents are #32 (LSU) and #34 (Baylor). 

In singles, we've got three ranked players: #7 Ma, #25 Blake, and #29 Yepifanova. And we've got one ranked doubles team: #10 Ma/Yepifanova. 

A couple other lineup quirks of note, and they're likely Super Regional opponents on the other half of the bracket, which is good for us:

* UNC is listing #22 Elizabeth Scotty as their #1, bumping #6 Fiona Crawley down a line. Crawley has a 12-3 record at #1 this year and 3-0 at #2, while Scotty is just 1-0 there, compared to 7-0 at #2, 2-0 at #3, and 2-0 at #4. I'm not going to pore over every UNC box score to see how many times Scotty played #1 this year, but since UNC lost Reese Brantmeier for the year with a meniscus tear at National Indoors, I looked at the three matches they had just before then, and sure enough, Brantmeier was at 1, Crawley was at 2, and Scotty was at 4 for each of those matches. While both are terrific players, Crawley has been above Scotty all year. This one just feels wrong. That said, I don't see a brobdingnagian advantage in doing it. I think this makes UNC slightly less likely to win on Court 1 and more likely to win on Court 2, but they were already very likely to win on both courts, so it's just strange. 

* Texas A&M has inserted Carson Branstine back into their lineup after she was out much of the year playing ITF tournaments internationally. She made the following statement in response to someone on Twitter questioning why she's back on the roster and taking the spot of someone who's been playing all year:

"Four surgeries, countless hours of rehab, all crafting a comeback story that wouldn't fit on your average stat sheet. My journey back to @AggieWTEN was less about physical presence and more about mental fortitude. So as the postseason rolls in and I'm back on the roster, remember, the true essence of teamwork is not just showing up, it's never giving up." 

A nice sentiment, and she indeed had hip surgery 12 months ago, but then there's this: she played in an ITF tournament in April in Tunisia; she played in two different ITF tournaments in February in Turkey (and was scheduled for a third that was cancelled); two January ITF tournaments in Tunisia and one in the US; and another couple of tournaments in Tunisia in November. Rather than work her way back into form playing a mix of college matches and domestic tournaments, she was off the A&M roster and played international tournaments. 

She is eligible to play, that's not the issue. But she hasn't been on the roster before now this season, and some feel that this is dirty pool, to use a phrase that I'm sure the kids these days wouldn't understand. Anyway, she was entered at #3 singles in her first match back, that was challenged, and she was forced to play at #1, while Mary Stoiana--ranked #1 in the country basically all year--now plays #2 singles for the Aggies, bumping everyone down a line and making this a very different team. Having her at 1 vs. 3 doesn't mean a whole lot--it's a very dangerous top 3 either way, though A&M probably would have just listed her at #1 if they truly thought she was ready to come back at #1--but it's the downstream effects on the lineup that are frustrating for potential opponents. Doesn't mean that A&M is destined for another deep NCAA run, and this new lineup just lost to Georgia in the SEC tournament final, 4-1 (and it could've been 6-1; Branstine had lost at 1, Stoiana was about to lose at 2, and the match at 6 was about to go into a third set). But the Aggies now look a lot more dangerous than your average #13 national seed.

Anyway, I'm very happy to be on the other side of the bracket from both of these potentially very dangerous teams. (Of course, two of UNC's losses this year were to NC State, our likely Super Regional opponent, and this A&M just lost 4-1 to our likely quarterfinal opponent, Georgia. So, there's danger everywhere you look, I guess.)

[ColoradoTree]

OK, the road to Stillwater starts today! Stanford takes on UMass at 1pm at Taube, in what will be the final postseason for this storied facility. (A big renovation will result in the Arrillaga Tennis Center, and while I assume we'll have somewhere to play next year, the construction won't be done until 2026, looks like.) 

What to watch for: we should win super, super easily, so if anyone struggles, that's noteworthy. 

How to watch: https://gostanford.com/sports/2022/3/17/...ideo-stats 

Anything else going on today? LSU-Baylor will be playing at 10am, so you can scout next round's opponent.

How are we feeling? Great, honestly. This is a very talented team that looks to be in great form and peaking at the right time (well, the top 3 courts are in outstanding form, and the back 3 courts are in decent form). This team has a very solid shot at the title.

---

As a quick aside on LSU/Baylor as their match gets started:

*Baylor has just one ranked singles player, #95 Miska Kadleckova (who plays #1), while LSU has two, #101 Florentine Dekkers and #110 Aran Teixido-Garcia (who play #1 and #2, respectively).
* In doubles, LSU has one ranked duo, #52 Erickson/Sahdiieva, while Baylor has none.
* Baylor common opponents: they beat Wazzu 6-1 (we won 7-0); they lost to UW 4-2 (we won 6-1); they lost to Florida 6-1 (we won 4-0); they lost to Texas 4-0 twice (we won 4-3); they lost to Texas A&M 4-0 (we won 4-3); they beat ASU 4-2 (we won 4-1); they lost to Oklahoma State 7-0 (we lost 4-2 and it looked like it would've been 4-3).
* LSU common opponents: they lost to Pepperdine 4-0 (we won 4-0); they lost to Florida 4-0 (we won 4-0); they lost to A&M 6-1 (we won 4-3).

Sometimes we have tough second-round matches, especially when we've had those years where we go on deep runs as the #12 or #15 seed. But the benefit of the #2 seed is that the outcome shouldn't be in too much doubt. It'll be a legit match, of course, but there is a very large talent gap.

---

Stanford nearly swept the final Pac-12 season awards, getting Coach of the Year for Lele, Singles Player of the Year for Blake, and Freshman of the Year for Hui. Just missed out on Doubles Team of the Year, which went to UCLA's Tian Fangran/Elise Wagle. Blake, Ma, and Yepifanova were first team all-conference, Hui was on the second team, and Blokhina and Xu were honorable mention.

[ColoradoTree]

OK, the road to Stillwater starts today! Stanford takes on UMass at 1pm at Taube, in what will be the final postseason for this storied facility. (A big renovation will result in the Arrillaga Tennis Center, and while I assume we'll have somewhere to play next year, the construction won't be done until 2026, looks like.) 

What to watch for: we should win super, super easily, so if anyone struggles, that's noteworthy. 

How to watch: https://gostanford.com/sports/2022/3/17/...ideo-stats 

Anything else going on today? LSU-Baylor will be playing at 10am, so you can scout next round's opponent.

How are we feeling? Great, honestly. This is a very talented team that looks to be in great form and peaking at the right time (well, the top 3 courts are in outstanding form, and the back 3 courts are in decent form). This team has a very solid shot at the title.

---

As a quick aside on LSU/Baylor as their match gets started:

*Baylor has just one ranked singles player, #95 Miska Kadleckova (who plays #1), while LSU has two, #101 Florentine Dekkers and #110 Aran Teixido-Garcia (who play #1 and #2, respectively).
* In doubles, LSU has one ranked duo, #52 Erickson/Sahdiieva, while Baylor has none.
* Baylor common opponents: they beat Wazzu 6-1 (we won 7-0); they lost to UW 4-2 (we won 6-1); they lost to Florida 6-1 (we won 4-0); they lost to Texas 4-0 twice (we won 4-3); they lost to Texas A&M 4-0 (we won 4-3); they beat ASU 4-2 (we won 4-1); they lost to Oklahoma State 7-0 (we lost 4-2 and it looked like it would've been 4-3).
* LSU common opponents: they lost to Pepperdine 4-0 (we won 4-0); they lost to Florida 4-0 (we won 4-0); they lost to A&M 6-1 (we won 4-3).

Sometimes we have tough second-round matches, especially when we've had those years where we go on deep runs as the #12 or #15 seed. But the benefit of the #2 seed is that the outcome shouldn't be in too much doubt. It'll be a legit match, of course, but there is a very large talent gap.

---

Stanford nearly swept the final Pac-12 season awards, getting Coach of the Year for Lele, Singles Player of the Year for Blake, and Freshman of the Year for Hui. Just missed out on Doubles Team of the Year, which went to UCLA's Tian Fangran/Elise Wagle. Blake, Ma, and Yepifanova were first team all-conference, Hui was on the second team, and Blokhina and Xu were honorable mention.

[ColoradoTree]

LSU won a tight doubles point to go up 1-0, and singles is similarly closely-fought, though with five first sets decided, Baylor has won four of them, LSU won one, and the last one is in a tiebreaker. This one feels like it could go the distance, despite Baylor's performance in the first sets. We'll see if they can consolidate those matches and clinch it early.

---

Dekkers won the tiebreaker on Court 1 to give LSU two first sets. Most of the second sets are tight, so this one could still go either way.

[ColoradoTree]

LSU won a tight doubles point to go up 1-0, and singles is similarly closely-fought, though with five first sets decided, Baylor has won four of them, LSU won one, and the last one is in a tiebreaker. This one feels like it could go the distance, despite Baylor's performance in the first sets. We'll see if they can consolidate those matches and clinch it early.

---

Dekkers won the tiebreaker on Court 1 to give LSU two first sets. Most of the second sets are tight, so this one could still go either way.

[SkiBum80]

Appreciation ColoradoTree for your detailed summaries and analyses of our women's tennis team.

[SkiBum80]

Appreciation ColoradoTree for your detailed summaries and analyses of our women's tennis team.

[ColoradoTree]

Appreciation ColoradoTree for your detailed summaries and analyses of our women's tennis team.

Happy to do it! 

FYI, it's now 2-1 LSU as they trade straight-set wins (Baylor on 6, LSU on 2), but the four other matches look likely to go to a third set, so the winning team today will have had to work hard for it.

[ColoradoTree]

Appreciation ColoradoTree for your detailed summaries and analyses of our women's tennis team.

Happy to do it! 

FYI, it's now 2-1 LSU as they trade straight-set wins (Baylor on 6, LSU on 2), but the four other matches look likely to go to a third set, so the winning team today will have had to work hard for it.

[oldalum]

tied up at 2-2, the remaining 3 matches are all in a third set, LSU is up a break in one.

[oldalum]

tied up at 2-2, the remaining 3 matches are all in a third set, LSU is up a break in one.

[ColoradoTree]

LSU takes it 4-3! So it'll be the Tigers tomorrow assuming all goes well against UMass.

[ColoradoTree]

LSU takes it 4-3! So it'll be the Tigers tomorrow assuming all goes well against UMass.

[ColoradoTree]

A nice gesture as Ma/Yepifanova sit out doubles, allowing everyone to slide up a line there and in particular to get Okpara/Houghton a chance to get some NCAA action on Court 3. Those two seized the opportunity, winning 6-0. Hui/Xu are up 5-2, so the doubles point should be booked shortly. (Blake/Blokhina are struggling a bit on Court 1, up just 3-2.)

It will be the standard singles lineup, however: Blake, Ma, Yepifanova, Blokhina, Hui, and Xu. Let's come out strong!

---

And Hui/Xu book the doubles point with a 6-2 win, and it's 1-0 Stanford!

---

Stanford 1, UMass 0

1. Blake vs. Danielle Hack
2. Ma vs. Thamonpan Jongle
3. Yepifanova vs. Ella Faessler
4. Blokhina vs. Mariana Campino
5. Hui vs. Renata Farmina
6. Xu vs. Polina Akimova

---

Never mind! Looks like we're giving Ma and Yepifanova the day off entirely, as the singles lineup is being edited from what was previously posted:

1. Blake vs. Hack
2. Blokhina vs. Jongle
3. Hui vs. Faessler
4. Xu vs. Campino
5. Houghton vs. Akimova
6. Sun vs. Amelia Tye

I mean, it should still be a quick 4-0, but Sun is far enough behind the rest of the roster that I'd be surprised if she was one of the three singles wins. But a good chance to reward a player who's practiced all year without seeing much of the court.

---

In the early going:

Stanford 1, UMass 0

1. Blake leads 3-2
2. Blokhina leads 3-2
3. Hui leads 4-1
4. Xu trails 1-3
5. Houghton leads 3-0
6. Sun leads 4-1

I'm sure she'll turn it around, but I am so tired of these flat starts from Xu. You're a seasoned veteran! You are playing someone miles below your talent level--be better!

[ColoradoTree]

A nice gesture as Ma/Yepifanova sit out doubles, allowing everyone to slide up a line there and in particular to get Okpara/Houghton a chance to get some NCAA action on Court 3. Those two seized the opportunity, winning 6-0. Hui/Xu are up 5-2, so the doubles point should be booked shortly. (Blake/Blokhina are struggling a bit on Court 1, up just 3-2.)

It will be the standard singles lineup, however: Blake, Ma, Yepifanova, Blokhina, Hui, and Xu. Let's come out strong!

---

And Hui/Xu book the doubles point with a 6-2 win, and it's 1-0 Stanford!

---

Stanford 1, UMass 0

1. Blake vs. Danielle Hack
2. Ma vs. Thamonpan Jongle
3. Yepifanova vs. Ella Faessler
4. Blokhina vs. Mariana Campino
5. Hui vs. Renata Farmina
6. Xu vs. Polina Akimova

---

Never mind! Looks like we're giving Ma and Yepifanova the day off entirely, as the singles lineup is being edited from what was previously posted:

1. Blake vs. Hack
2. Blokhina vs. Jongle
3. Hui vs. Faessler
4. Xu vs. Campino
5. Houghton vs. Akimova
6. Sun vs. Amelia Tye

I mean, it should still be a quick 4-0, but Sun is far enough behind the rest of the roster that I'd be surprised if she was one of the three singles wins. But a good chance to reward a player who's practiced all year without seeing much of the court.

---

In the early going:

Stanford 1, UMass 0

1. Blake leads 3-2
2. Blokhina leads 3-2
3. Hui leads 4-1
4. Xu trails 1-3
5. Houghton leads 3-0
6. Sun leads 4-1

I'm sure she'll turn it around, but I am so tired of these flat starts from Xu. You're a seasoned veteran! You are playing someone miles below your talent level--be better!

[BostonCard]

Stanford wins 4-0 as Blake, Hui, and Sun all won their matches in two sets. Houghton was a game away from winning her match as well. Xu lost her first set, but as CT predicted, she turned things around and bageled her opponent in set 2.  Blokhina needed a tiebreak to win her first set, and was up 1-0 when play was suspended.

BC

[BostonCard]

Stanford wins 4-0 as Blake, Hui, and Sun all won their matches in two sets. Houghton was a game away from winning her match as well. Xu lost her first set, but as CT predicted, she turned things around and bageled her opponent in set 2.  Blokhina needed a tiebreak to win her first set, and was up 1-0 when play was suspended.

BC

[ColoradoTree]

Xu’s play this season has been absolutely maddening. I would’ve dropped her in favor of Yu months ago. 

And I very much do not love that first set from Blokhina. 

But good for Sun! She totally surprised me. 

Onto the next!

[ColoradoTree]

Xu’s play this season has been absolutely maddening. I would’ve dropped her in favor of Yu months ago. 

And I very much do not love that first set from Blokhina. 

But good for Sun! She totally surprised me. 

Onto the next!