I actually don't like when people make conclusions such as "if player A lost to player B, who then got destroyed by plyer C", cause they can't be used as fullproof evidence of anything. Some players just don't match well to eachother, someone's game might be better suited to one player's than another's. Of course, I'm not saying that Petra would've ended up better than Doi cause Sharka is currently in a league of her own (OK, in a league with Serena), but it doesn't prove it either.
The same goes for claiming that a player who lost in qualies, if it weren't for the loss, would've drawn the same player his conquerer ended up getting in the main draw
Anyone had science classes and possibly heard of something called the butterfly effect
? Or maybe of cause and effect systems?
So to summarize, the only thing I'm sorry about here is that Petra wasn't the one who ended up with a hundred points, even if it meant getting double bageled by MaSha.