PDA

View Full Version : ITA tennis rankings published next week, what do the TF experts say


2nd_serve
Dec 29th, 2009, 07:26 PM
Next week the ITA pre-season team tennis rankingshttp://www.itatennis.com/AwardsAndRankings/Rankings/2009-10_Division_I_Women_s_Rankings.htm will be published. There is some great expertise on this board, What do you predict??

gouci
Dec 29th, 2009, 08:05 PM
The pre-season rankings will probably reflect the end of season rankings from last year. It is just a starting point and the 1st poll isn't very accurate outside the top 30. :help: Plus many international players don't make their debuts until the Spring or coaches don't like to display their team's full strength in the fall tourneys making it hard to gauge how good teams really are. However like the BCS in football the higher ranking you have to start the season with is an advantage in that the burden is on the teams under you to try and take your ranking away. The Team Indoors should start to shake up the rankings a bit.

When the rankings come out making a case for who's stock should rise or fall is where the predictions will come in. :lol:

fantic
Dec 30th, 2009, 12:59 AM
Well, we all know the results, so it might be obvious..
I'm just a fan, but for fun on individual ranking;

up; Falconi, Chan, Petukhova(they misspelled it!), Marks, Thongdach, Ramos, Dy, Zheltova, Hein, Molnar, Pluskota, Nedeltcheva, Secerbegovic(she was very impressive at WAATC, especially against Pantic..),Hadziselimovic, Budiharto, Weatherholt, and of course the freshmen Will, Embree, Lao, Ellis, Colffer, etc. will make debut..

johnnytennis
Dec 31st, 2009, 02:25 PM
Who will be the sleepers from the top 35 teams from last May's final ranking? I see Texas, Michigan, Illinois being very good teams this year that should move up from last year. How they finished in May: Michigan #18, Texas #32, Illinois #33. The Big Ten should be a lot better this year especially at the top of the conference. I also think Florida looks to have the best team in the country based on the new players they brought in. A team that might fall from a year ago is Notre Dame. They only played 3 players most of the fall season so I assume they're dealing with a lot of injuries on that team.

fantic
Dec 31st, 2009, 04:40 PM
NU also had losses. #2 Rose, #5 Ghazal, #6 Robison..wonder if Turvy is any good..

Duke; #1 Cecil, #5 Mang, #6 Robinson out

Florida, Baylor, Georgia, ND (if they're not injured), Stanford, UCLA had relatively less losses.

Tennisace
Dec 31st, 2009, 06:59 PM
I'm surprised that Georgia Tech and Notre Dame weren't able to keep the momentum they had a few years back. They've struggled (relatively) with recruiting the last couple of years, which is odd considering the stellar years they had two years ago. Of course GT was severely hurt when Marino turned pro.

From a recruiting stand point of view its interesting to determine what the lag period is between NCAA success and when schools reap those rewards, especially for "second tier" recruiting schools. I define second tier schools as the great tennis schools that are less popular (California, Northwestern, North Carolina, Virginia, etc.) than perennial first choices (Stanford, USC, UCLA, Florida, etc.).

Based on interest in California, it looks like it takes 2-3 years after the success for it to register with new recruits.

You have to give a lot of credit to Michigan and Illinois who seem to making the most of their recent success and (possibly) have changed their recruiting strategy to gain better talent. It always puzzles me why North Carolina and Virginia can't get a constant flow of top talent.

fantic
Dec 31st, 2009, 10:35 PM
I'm surprised that Georgia Tech and Notre Dame weren't able to keep the momentum they had a few years back. They've struggled (relatively) with recruiting the last couple of years, which is odd considering the stellar years they had two years ago. Of course GT was severely hurt when Marino turned pro.

From a recruiting stand point of view its interesting to determine what the lag period is between NCAA success and when schools reap those rewards, especially for "second tier" recruiting schools. I define second tier schools as the great tennis schools that are less popular (California, Northwestern, North Carolina, Virginia, etc.) than perennial first choices (Stanford, USC, UCLA, Florida, etc.).

Based on interest in California, it looks like it takes 2-3 years after the success for it to register with new recruits.

You have to give a lot of credit to Michigan and Illinois who seem to making the most of their recent success and (possibly) have changed their recruiting strategy to gain better talent. It always puzzles me why North Carolina and Virginia can't get a constant flow of top talent.

I don't know ANYTHING about recruiting, but still, GT and ND got Falconi and Frilling, respectively :D
GT is continually producing stellar players like Miller, McDowell, Falconi..eh..ND getting Sanders is not good enough? :D I'm not rebutting, just saying what L~ITTLE info I have :lol:

And everybody's mentioning it and I've agreed before too, yes, Illinois & Michigan seems to have a bright future. Big 10 surely would be one of the most interesting regions in for a couple of years..

Tennisace
Dec 31st, 2009, 11:37 PM
I don't know ANYTHING about recruiting, but still, GT and ND got Falconi and Frilling, respectively :D
GT is continually producing stellar players like Miller, McDowell, Falconi..eh..ND getting Sanders is not good enough? :D I'm not rebutting, just saying what L~ITTLE info I have :lol:

And everybody's mentioning it and I've agreed before too, yes, Illinois & Michigan seems to have a bright future. Big 10 surely would be one of the most interesting regions in for a couple of years..

I will agree that both teams have top talent at the top of their line-up but the middle and bottom are quite weak (which should have been stronger due to attraction of better recruits via their NCAA success). Simply, schools that do well at NCAAs should be able to appeal to more recruits, thus strengthening the middle and bottom of the line up.

As we have seen in the past, NCAA tennis is no longer about having a strong top half of the line-up but perhaps more than ever No. 4-6 is even more important. All the top schools have virtually undefeated No. 4-6.

It also doesn't help that GT lost Johansson and Hickey (and Flower) all to transfers.

fantic
Jan 1st, 2010, 01:28 AM
I will agree that both teams have top talent at the top of their line-up but the middle and bottom are quite weak (which should have been stronger due to attraction of better recruits via their NCAA success). Simply, schools that do well at NCAAs should be able to appeal to more recruits, thus strengthening the middle and bottom of the line up.

As we have seen in the past, NCAA tennis is no longer about having a strong top half of the line-up but perhaps more than ever No. 4-6 is even more important. All the top schools have virtually undefeated No. 4-6.

It also doesn't help that GT lost Johansson and Hickey (and Flower) all to transfers.

You're absolutely right, in winning the team tourney, having one or two elite players don't guarantee anything. You need DEPTH. After all, how did UCLA & Duke win. Clemson last year, they might've had the best one two punch in the nation in Mijacika & Bek, but they still lost.

And I 'think' that Baylor and ND's success last season was also due to their depth. Were the rankings of Ormond, Broosova, Tefft, Frilling high? nope. But they had depth, BU's no. 2~5 squad were REALLY solid, and ND had an excellent doubles program as well. (So I think doubles is...crucial)

And yes, wonder why GT is losing so many players..anyway, Happy New year, everyone. :wavey:

gouci
Jan 4th, 2010, 11:30 PM
I can see the following conferences potentially having new champions for the 2009-10 season.

SEC - Florida (Georgia champs last year)
- FL gets blue chippers Lauren Embree, Allie Will and transfer Claire Bartlett. Also gets Caroline Hitimana WTA 1053
- FL makes up for losing #6 Megan Alexander & #5 Barbara Pinterova
- GA gets Alexandrina Naydenova WTA 612
- GA loses #4 Monika Dancevic

Ivy League - Yale or Harvard (Princeton last year)
- Yale gets blue chip Elizabeth Epstein plus 5 stars Sarah Guzick & Stephanie Kent
- Yale loses #1 Janet Kim & #8 Lauren Ritz
- Har. gets blue chippers Hideko Tachibana & Kristin Norton. Plus 5 stars Sophie Chang & Alex Lehman
- Har. makes up for losing #1 Beier Ko & #2 Laura Peterzan
- Prin. gets blue chip Monica Chow but loses more than they're getting
- Prin. loses #1 Lauren McHale for this season, #4 Rebecca Parks & #9 Sarah Huah

WAC - Hawaii (Fresno St. last year)
- HI gets Maraike Biglmaier WTA 694, Barbara Pinterova ITF 78, Katarina Poljakova WTA 824
- HI loses #1 Ellen Linsenbolz, #3 Anja-Vanessa Peter and #5 Melinda Wong
- FSU gets Olga Kirpicheva WTA 1032, Melissa McQueen Canada U18 #11, Anna Mikhaylova, Julia Gragera-Cano and 4 star Bianca Modoc
- FSU loses #1 Melanie Gloria, #4 Tinesta Rowe, #6 Bruna Paes, #7 Danon Beatty

Big West - UC Irvine (Long Beach St. last year)
- UCI gets April Bisharat WTA 962 and 5 star Kristina Smith
- UCI loses #4 Clare Fermin, #6 Heidi Kaloi, #7 Ali Borowicz
- LBS gets Klaudia Malenovska WTA 575 Jaklin Alawi WTA 884 & Anna Jeczmionka Poland U18 #5
- LBS loses #1 Hannah Grady, #6 Lisa Sutton, #7 Jessica Weeks

Mid-American - Akron (Miami-Ohio last year)
- Akron gets Angelina Jogasuria ITF 196, Angelika Jogasuria & Prang Pantusart ITF 173
- MO loses #1 Monica Gorny


If the 1st rankings are really accurate than the potentially new conference champs should have about the same or better ranking than the champs from last year. But I suspect the better ranking will only happen maybe for Florida over Georgia.

2nd_serve
Jan 5th, 2010, 09:38 PM
Women’s National Team Rankings
Administered by the ITA
NCAA Division I Tennis
January 5, 2010

Rank Team LY Final
1 Duke (21) 1
2 Northwestern (9) 2
3 California (3) 4
4 Georgia (4) 3
5 Baylor (2) 6
6 Notre Dame 5
7 Miami 7
8 Florida (12) 14
9 USC 9
10 Georgia Tech 8
11 Tennessee 10
12 UCLA 12
13 Stanford 13
14 Clemson 11
15 Florida State 19
16 Fresno 16
17 South Carolina 17
18 UNC 20
19 Arkansas, Fayetteville 15
20 Michigan 18
21 Mississippi 21
22 Vanderbilt 22
23 SMU 23
24 Washington 27
25 Alabama 26
26 Virginia 28
27 TCU 29
28 Kentucky 25
29 LSU 24
30 Arizona State 31
31 Texas 32
32 Florida International 30
33 Illinois

UFGatorFan
Jan 5th, 2010, 11:11 PM
12 first place votes for Florida but only ranked 8th? Interesting. I definitely think on paper they are the team to beat this year. Women's tennis must be pretty deep if GaTech and Stanford are that far down, too.

2nd_serve
Jan 6th, 2010, 12:15 AM
The Duke webpage (http://www.goduke.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&SPID=1840&SPSID=22608)roster shows only five players, Is there a certain date by which they need to announce their full roster?

Tennisace
Jan 6th, 2010, 01:29 AM
These rankings and pre-season are really not an accurate reflection of what the final rankings will be. Rankings will fluctuate greatly between now and the next set of rankings, and become more accurate as the season goes along.

fantic
Jan 6th, 2010, 06:14 AM
Well, we all know the results, so it might be obvious..
I'm just a fan, but for fun on individual ranking;

up; Falconi, Chan, Petukhova(they misspelled it!), Marks, Thongdach, Ramos, Dy, Zheltova, Hein, Molnar, Pluskota, Nedeltcheva, Secerbegovic(she was very impressive at WAATC, especially against Pantic..),Hadziselimovic, Budiharto, Weatherholt, and of course the freshmen Will, Embree, Lao, Ellis, Colffer, etc. will make debut..

Falconi 8 ->1
Chan 16 11
Petukhova 22 4
Marks 29 46
Thongdach 47 43
Ramos 53 39
Dy 58 3
Zheltova 56 26
Hein 68 68
Molnar 72 65
Pluskota 84
Nedeltcheva 90 50
Secerbegovic 92 24
Hadziselimovic 99 113
Budiharto 120 28
Weatherholt 110 116

Marks, Pluskota (not even ranked? )Hadziselimovic, Weatherholt actually went down in, contrary to my prediction :confused:
and where's the Cal double?

fantic
Jan 6th, 2010, 08:27 PM
the fallen but sure to rise(ranking below #30);

30 Frilling
46 Marks
57 Gilchrist
58 McKenna
71 Chifchieva
81 Boonstra
83 Andersson
91 Nze
92 Revzina
99 Eichkorn
100 Tsang
113 Hadziselimovic

Unranked
Ormond
Julia Cohen
Ute Schnoy
Rybakova
Pluskota
Hojckova
Novakova
Hyndman, Fudge, Fansler, Mather, Poorta...

fantic
Jan 6th, 2010, 08:34 PM
some schools that have multiple ranked players;

Baylor

17 Broosova
24 Secerbegovic
55 Stanivuk
70 Borsanyi
Ormond, Filipak unranked.

UT

22 Ellis
27 Damico
59 Corovic
Craddock, Larsson, Mello unranked.

Florida State

23 McCreless(Macfarlane)
34 Scharle
62 Segareli (Fr)
115 Sargeant (Fr)
unranked Rybakova

Vanderbilt

29 Wu
31 Newman
32 Preeg
97 Steinbauer

fantic
Jan 6th, 2010, 09:01 PM
Freshmen debut

13 Will
15 Embree
16 Burdette
18 Lao
22 Ellis
33 White (Illinois)
37 Pulido
52 Vasenina (Univ. of So. Florida)
62 Segareli (Florida St)
74 Sardinha (Syracuse)
82 Guarachi (Univ of Alabama)
85 Turvy (NU)
86 Tachibana (Harvard)
94 Allen (UConn)
95 Chang (Harvard)
102 Johnson (Bowling Green St)
102 Conroy (Mount St. Mary's)
112 Bartnik (Columbia)
115 Sargeant (Florida St)
117 Urbina (Texas A&M)
122 Epstein (Yale)
123 Colffer (Pepp)
124 Vasilieva(Wash St)

gouci
Jan 6th, 2010, 09:46 PM
Freshmen debut

13 Will
15 Embree
16 Burdette
18 Lao
33 White (Illinois)
52 Vasenina (Univ. of So. Florida)
62 Segareli (Florida St)
82 Guarachi (Univ of Alabama)
85 Turvy (NU)
86 Tachibana (Harvard)
123 Colffer

there must be more..

Some you missed :o

22. Aeriel Ellis - Texas
37. Valerie Pulido - USC
61. Nelly Ciolkowski - Clemson
69. Anya Morgina - South Carolina
74. CC Sardinha - Syracuse
94. Julia Allen - Connecticut
95. Sophie Chang - Harvard
102. Jade Johnson - Bowling Green
102. Kelly Conroy - Mount St. Mary's :haha:
112. Nicole Bartnik - Columbia
117. Nazari Urbina - Texas A&M
122. Elizabeth Epstein - Yale
124. Liudmila Vasilieva - Washington St.

fantic
Jan 6th, 2010, 10:18 PM
Some you missed :o

22. Aeriel Ellis - Texas
37. Valerie Pulido - USC
61. Nelly Ciolkowski - Clemson
69. Anya Morgina - South Carolina
74. CC Sardinha - Syracuse
94. Julia Allen - Connecticut
95. Sophie Chang - Harvard
102. Jade Johnson - Bowling Green
102. Kelly Conroy - Mount St. Mary's :haha:
112. Nicole Bartnik - Columbia
117. Nazari Urbina - Texas A&M
122. Elizabeth Epstein - Yale
124. Liudmila Vasilieva - Washington St.

aach, I just came in to update..thanks:D
I'll incorporate it in the original post

fantic
Jan 6th, 2010, 10:59 PM
women who 'jumped'

name, former ranking(last Sep), current ranking

Zheltova 56 26
Dy 58 3
Nedeltcheva 90 50
Secerbegovic 92 24
Macfarlane 93 23
Fahoum 116 21
Budiharto 120 28
Muresan * 36

of those I'm particularly surprised with Macfarlane & Fahoum, the others I've more or less predicted(although not the extent..some of them made quantum leaps :lol:)

2nd_serve
Feb 4th, 2010, 10:03 PM
omen’s National Team Rankings
Administered by the ITA
NCAA Division I Tennis
February 4, 2010

Ranking School Last Week
1 Duke 1
2 Northwestern 2
3 California 3
4 Georgia 4
5 Baylor 5
6 Miami 7
7 Florida 8
8 USC 9
9 Georgia Tech 10
10 Tennessee 11
11 UNC 17
12 UCLA 12
13 Notre Dame 6
14 Stanford 13
15 Clemson 14
16 Michigan 19
17 Arkansas, Fayetteville 18
18 Mississippi 20
19 Vanderbilt 21
20 Washington 23
21 Florida State 25
22 South Carolina 16
23 Virginia 26
24 TCU 27
25 SMU 22
26 Arizona State 29
27 Texas 30
28 Florida International 31
29 Fresno 15
30 Alabama 24
31 Kentucky 34
32 Illinois 32
33 Ohio State 38
34 Auburn 35
35 Tulsa 36
36 Texas A&M 37
37 DePaul 46
38 Boise State 33
39 VCU 44
40 Pepperdine 40
41 UNLV 41
42 LSU 28
43 South Florida 43
44 Yale 49
45 San Diego 60
46 Wake Forest 39
47 Princeton 45
48 San Diego State 42
49 Indiana 47
50 William & Mary 48
51 Old Dominion 53
52 Long Beach State 51
53 UC Irvine 58
54 Virginia Tech 55
55 Denver 50
56 Nebraska 56
57 Georgia State 52
58 Mississippi State 57
59 Sacramento State 59
60 Colorado 61
61 Utah 63
62 Minnesota 64
63 Brown 65
64 Harvard 66
65 BYU 67
66 Charleston 73

2nd_serve
Feb 12th, 2010, 06:29 PM
1 Duke 1
2 California 3
3 Northwestern 2
4 Florida 7
5 Baylor 5
6 Miami 6
7 USC 8
8 Stanford 14
9 Georgia Tech 9
10 Georgia 4
11 UNC 11
12 UCLA 12
13 Tennessee 10
14 Clemson 15
15 Notre Dame 13
16 Michigan 16
17 Arkansas 17
18 Mississippi 18
19 Vanderbilt 19
20 Florida State 21
21 Washington 20
22 South Carolina 22
23 TCU 24
24 Virginia 23
25 Arizona State 26
26 Texas 27
27 FIU 28
28 Ohio State 33
29 Illinois 32
30 SMU 25
31 Texas A&M 36
32 Tulsa 35
33 DePaul 37
34 Auburn 34
35 Boise State 38
36 VCU 39
37 Pepperdine 40
38 Alabama 30
39 UNLV 41
40 South Florida 43
41 Kentucky 31
42 Fresno 29
43 Yale 44
44 William & Mary 50
45 Indiana 49
46 Princeton 47
47 San Diego State 48
48 UC Irvine 53
49 Virginia Tech 54
50 Long Beach State 52
51 Nebraska 56
52 Minnesota 62
53 San Diego 45
54 Wake Forest 46
55 Oklahoma NR
56 Arizona NR
57 Saint Mary's NR
58 LSU 42
59 Sacramento State 59
60 Old Dominion 51
61 Colorado 60
62 Harvard 64
63 Brown 63
64 BYU 65
65 Denver 55
66 Utah 61
67 Georgia State 57
68 Mississippi State 58
69 Marshall 67
70 Winthrop 70
71 Nevada 68
72 Charleston 66
73 Oklahoma State NR
74 Oregon 72
75 Miami, Ohio 71

gouci
Feb 12th, 2010, 07:50 PM
35 Boise State 38 = :cuckoo:

- BS lost 4 scholarship players from last season and have downgraded replacements.


55 Oklahoma NR = :cuckoo::cuckoo:

- Oklahoma flip flopped their #2 & #3 singles to beat an Alabama team that was without 2 of their starters including #1 singles Tiffany Welcher.


70 Winthrop 70

- Winthrop didn't move up after upsetting #51 Old Dominion? :rolleyes:


42 Fresno St. 29
57 St. Mary's NR

- How is St. Mary's ranked 15 spots below Fresno St.? :rolleyes:

johnnytennis
Feb 16th, 2010, 06:24 PM
Does anyone have any idea what the top 10/15 team rankings will be this week? So hard to tell!

2nd_serve
Feb 16th, 2010, 08:09 PM
Does anyone have any idea what the top 10/15 team rankings will be this week? So hard to tell!

I'd think that
Northwestern has to go to #1
That UNC has to be on the top ten list. maybe 4th with Duke and Cal in between at 2 and 3.

And Florida and Baylor should stay near the top too.

johnnytennis
Feb 18th, 2010, 09:40 PM
Team Rankings

http://www.itatennis.com/AwardsAndRankings/Rankings/2009-10_Division_I_Women_s_Rankings/February_18__2010_-_DI_Women_s_Team_Rankings.htm

gouci
Feb 18th, 2010, 11:41 PM
25 DePaul 33 = :cuckoo:

- This is the same DePaul team that didn't make the NCAAs last season but minus last year's #1 singles player.

37 Indiana 45 = :cuckoo::cuckoo:

- Another team that didn't make the NCAAs last season. Indiana's only result since the 2/12 rankings was losing to DePaul 2-4. DePaul moved up 8 so Indiana needs to also? :lol:


42 Boise St. 35 = down 7
43 St. Mary's 57 = up 14
58 Winthrop 70 = up 12

- got all of the above right :yeah:


49 Sacramento St. 59

- Funny how being idle except a 0-7 loss to Stanford moves Sac. St. up 10 spots in the rankings. :lol:

fantic
Feb 19th, 2010, 06:18 AM
I was engrossed in Gossip Girl and Damages season 2 that I didn't even know the new ranking was out :lol:

PLAYERS ON THE RISE (name, last rank, current rank)

Sanchez 8 3
Broosova 17 9
Barte 18 13
<b>Muresan 36 16</b>
<b>Gilchrist 57 21</b>
Frilling 30 23
<b>Ramos 39 19</b>
-----------------
Thongdach 43 27
<b>Rehberger 77 26</b>
Nakic 42 28
<b>Murray 48 29</b>
Box 40 30
-----------------
<b>Potgieter 88 33
Hardenbergh 72 36
Burdette * 37</b>
Sorbello 51 38
Pavelec 49 39
<b>Tsang 100 40</b>
-----------------
Nedeltcheva 50 45
<b>Plotkin * 47
Hickey * 48
------------------
Weatherholt 116 53
Tan * 54
Eichkorn 99 55
Tuohimaa * 56
Cao 79 57
Trunk * 58</b>
Chifchieva 71 59
<b>Granson 80 60
-------------------
Vasilieva 124 61
Tigu * 62</b>
Henle 73 63
Rybakova * 64
Wong * 65
Guarachi 68
Urbina 69
McVeigh 70
-----------------
Albers 72
Bartnik 74
Andersson 75
---------------
Schnoy 81
Hitimana 86

fantic
Feb 19th, 2010, 09:50 PM
The fallen; more than 10(name, last rank, current rank)

Lao 18 31
Zsilinszka 20 34
---------------
Marand 25 41
McCreless 23 44
Zheltova 26 46
Scharle 34 49
--------------
Damico 27 50
Pulido 37 51
Newman 31 52
---------------
Zubori 38 66
Flower 53 67
---------------
Corovic 59 71
Constantinescu 56 76
Jones 54 77
Duncan 67 78
Preeg 32 79
----------------
White 33 85
Molnar 65 87
Marks 46 88
-----------------
Ciolkowski 61 90
Lesniak 47 92
McKenna 58 97
----------------
Nze 91 104
Borsanyi 70 105
Hein 68 106
Turvy 85 108
Allen 94 109
----------------
Krupina 66 112
Tachibana 86 115
Harutyunyan 75 116
Mejia 93 118
----------------
Widjaja 60 122

fantic
Feb 19th, 2010, 10:00 PM
the stars of last season & their current ranking;

Z(34), Marand(41), Chifchieva(59), Boonstra(80), Marks(88), McKenna(97), Nze(104)

johnnytennis
Feb 19th, 2010, 11:18 PM
the stars of last season & their current ranking;

Z(34), Marand(41), Chifchieva(59), Boonstra(80), Marks(88), McKenna(97), Nze(104)

The individual rankings are really insignificant right now. When they start computerizing the numbers the first week of March, you will then see a more reliable ranking. Right now, you have 12 people deciding who and where people should be ranked.

Embittered
Feb 19th, 2010, 11:32 PM
Are the ones with an average of 5 the undefeated ones? (Average of what, by the way?) So at this early stage in the season, there's only one undefeated player, the delightfully lower case julia allen. My unreliable recollection is that there were half a dozen this time last year...;)

Oh. I think I see it. I must be thinking of later last year. I guess there's a minimum number of matches you have to play to get a ranking. ms. allen, if she keeps her record intact, will probably be joined by others in the next ranking lists.

fantic
Feb 20th, 2010, 12:19 AM
Of course, it's a bit unreal that their ranking is so low :lol:

Tenniswish
Feb 22nd, 2010, 02:53 PM
Here's a quick look (well, maybe not so quick) at the teams ranked #50-#75 with losing records. Maybe some times beating a ranked team isn't a sign that you belong in the rankings but that the team that is in the rankings doesn't belong there.

#75 East Tenn State - 2-2 record - 0 ranked wins
#74 Denver - 3-7 - 0 ranked wins - Denver is a cause of a lot of mess below because they debuted at #49 in January despite losing their top two players and their coach from last year

#72 Utah - 3-5 - 1 ranked win - See Denver above
#70 LSU - 2-4 - 0 ranked wins
#69 BYU - 3-4 - 1 ranked win - See Denver above
#67 Wake Forest - 3-5 - 0 ranked wins - 5 losses are to top 40 teams
#56 San Diego - 4-5 - 1 ranked win - See LSU above
#54 Kentucky - 1-7 - 1 ranked win over Alabama who is 4-3 with a single ranked win over Oregon who is #73 and has no ranked wins
#51 Irvine - 3-3 - 1 ranked win over #60

Other noteworthy records,
#68 Old Dominion - 7-4 - 1 ranked win - See Denver above
#64 NC State - 3-2 - 1 ranked win - See ODU which means See Denver
#62 Miss State - 4-1 - 0 ranked wins - beat Georgia State which was as high as #51
#61 Virginia Tech - 4-3 - 1 ranked win - See East Tenn State above
#60 San Diego State - 4-3 - 0 ranked wins BUT close losses to #46/#51
#58 Winthrop - 3-2 - 1 ranked win - See ODU which means See Denver

Comment with whatever conclusions you want to make.

Some teams in this list definitely belong where they are, but some probably don't. Last year's results and name recognition can only go so far, and then the trickle down effect with school's like Denver, Kentucky, and LSU will be significant because wins over them may not count for much unless they start winning.

gouci
Feb 22nd, 2010, 05:54 PM
Tenniswish welcome to the board. :wavey:
A very nice attempt for a 1st post as a newbie but it needs a little work.

1. Why would you group East TN St. and UC Irvine with teams of "losing records" when 0.500 is not a losing record?
...teams ranked #50-#75 with losing records.


2. You understated Denver's situation. In addition to losing their top two players and their coach Denver also lost their #5 & #6 singles. That's 4 starters lost from last season's line-up not just 2.


3. You didn't mention Kentucky only has 5 players on scholarship and is playing with a walk-on at #6. Or Alabama is playing with 2 starters out including #1 Tiffany Welcher.


4. The problem I have with your list is that this early in the season a team's winning percentage is kind of irrelevant.

Ex. #51 UCI lost to #4 UCLA, #9 USC & #46 Long Beach St. all on the road & all to teams ranked above them. So you almost slander UCI as a team that doesn't belong where they're ranked by including them on your list of teams with losing records which UCI doesn't even have. :fiery:

What is relevant and what you should have focused on are ranked teams with bad losses.

Ex. You left out the biggest offender which is #41 Fresno St. which has a 0-5 record and lost to teams under them in #43 St. Mary's and #50 UNLV.

What could have made your post better was looking deeper and weeding out some of the teams like UCI & East TN St. that didn't belong on your list because they really didn't have any "bad losses."

Tenniswish
Feb 22nd, 2010, 09:24 PM
Gouci -

Thanks for the comments back.

1) You are absolutely right about the .500 versus losing record comment. I did a late addition of the .500 teams and didn't catch what I had written earlier. My fault.

2) Certainly no intention of slandering UCI which is pretty well placed with a win over #60 - note how that is mentioned and is a much more positive comment than just about any other. I also specifically said, "Some teams in this list definitely belong where they are," and that would almost certainly include UCI. The notes next to UCI and next to San Diego State were intended to suggest that they were well placed. I just included them for full disclosure - almost as a comparison of what a team that belongs has done compared to some teams that may not have the resume to be included.

3) East Tennessee State is an interesting case and one that got included when I decided to add in the .500 teams as well. They are certainly very good, but I would guess they only jumped into the rankings because of their win over Georgia State not because of close losses. That win doesn't seem so incredible any more. I agree that they are certainly not horribly placed. Actually, they are a team that is probably hurt by the lack of information being considered because they could be much higher because of the quality play they have shown in losses against top teams - a 4-3 loss to Tennessee (#10)and a 5-2 loss to Virginia Tech (#61). Their performance to date seems better to me than several teams listed.

Finally, I didn't really go higher than #50 because I wasn't really looking for teams that are a little misplaced or in the wrong order but more for teams that maybe shouldn't be in the rankings at all. There has been so little movement in and out of the rankings since last year's final results (which is an odd place to start from) even though there is plenty of information to be considered that would make for some more significant changes than we've seen to date.

For example, if the rankings in January had accurately taken into account Denver's decline, then several of the teams that moved into the rankings because of wins that were over Denver or a Denver opponent probably wouldn't be there now. An interesting question would be who would be there instead???

There seems to be too much protection to losing to each other for the teams in the rankings. In a top 25 basketball, football or soccer ranking, a loss by #24 to #15 pretty much always means dropping out of the rankings. By comparison, here you can get teams that are 1-7, 3-7 or even 0-5 and are having their rankings barely dented. I think that will change when the computer kicks in because the average that gets you #65 in the country will take a hit regardless of the ranking of someone to whom you lose.

johnnytennis
Feb 22nd, 2010, 10:01 PM
Gouci -

Thanks for the comments back.

1) You are absolutely right about the .500 versus losing record comment. I did a late addition of the .500 teams and didn't catch what I had written earlier. My fault.

2) Certainly no intention of slandering UCI which is pretty well placed with a win over #60 - note how that is mentioned and is a much more positive comment than just about any other. I also specifically said, "Some teams in this list definitely belong where they are," and that would almost certainly include UCI. The notes next to UCI and next to San Diego State were intended to suggest that they were well placed. I just included them for full disclosure - almost as a comparison of what a team that belongs has done compared to some teams that may not have the resume to be included.

3) East Tennessee State is an interesting case and one that got included when I decided to add in the .500 teams as well. They are certainly very good, but I would guess they only jumped into the rankings because of their win over Georgia State not because of close losses. That win doesn't seem so incredible any more. I agree that they are certainly not horribly placed. Actually, they are a team that is probably hurt by the lack of information being considered because they could be much higher because of the quality play they have shown in losses against top teams - a 4-3 loss to Tennessee (#10)and a 5-2 loss to Virginia Tech (#61). Their performance to date seems better to me than several teams listed.

Finally, I didn't really go higher than #50 because I wasn't really looking for teams that are a little misplaced or in the wrong order but more for teams that maybe shouldn't be in the rankings at all. There has been so little movement in and out of the rankings since last year's final results (which is an odd place to start from) even though there is plenty of information to be considered that would make for some more significant changes than we've seen to date.

For example, if the rankings in January had accurately taken into account Denver's decline, then several of the teams that moved into the rankings because of wins that were over Denver or a Denver opponent probably wouldn't be there now. An interesting question would be who would be there instead???

There seems to be too much protection to losing to each other for the teams in the rankings. In a top 25 basketball, football or soccer ranking, a loss by #24 to #15 pretty much always means dropping out of the rankings. By comparison, here you can get teams that are 1-7, 3-7 or even 0-5 and are having their rankings barely dented. I think that will change when the computer kicks in because the average that gets you #65 in the country will take a hit regardless of the ranking of someone to whom you lose.

As mentioned last week, the rankings are still done
by committee through February. I believe they are computerized on the March 2nd rankings when they will be a lot more accurate. A team like Kentucky with a record of 1-7 has no bussiness being ranked no matter how few scholarship athletes they have on the team. When you open in January ranked 28th, it takes awhile for them to drop you out.

gouci
Feb 23rd, 2010, 01:13 AM
In the past the problem I've had with the rankings is there's a lag of 1 week before the latest results take effect. I don't know why they don't just run it through the computer twice to eliminate that 1 week lag. Does it cost money for the computer to run through an extra cycle?

The bottom line is the only rankings that really count are the ones the selection committee uses to determine the at-larges and seedings for the NCAA tournament.

IMHO the tennis rankings used to determine the NCAA field are the most accurate and better than the rpi rankings for basketball, baseball, women's volleyball or the BCS standings in football. All those other college sports have lots of complaints and debates about their at-large selections and who got screwed but that's not an issue in tennis.

fantic
Feb 23rd, 2010, 08:09 PM
team ranking is out

http://www.itatennis.com/AwardsAndRankings/Rankings/2009-10_Division_I_Women_s_Rankings/February_23__2010_-_DI_Women_s_Team_Rankings.htm

UNC #1?
ND jumped to 7, (I guess ND winning against NU influenced these 2 rankings. ND swept the upper 3 singles positions..)
Michigan is still AHEAD of UF & USC, STAN,
UM went DOWN,
and I think ASU is underestimated..
and curious about this Ohio St team..

fantic
Feb 23rd, 2010, 08:28 PM
According to their website Michigan team are having an autograph session after each games this week! (Too bad I'm not there :lol:)

And the HC Ronni Bernstein..if they can keep their ranking throughout the season and advance to the NCAA, she might get the coach of the year award..they already made school history by reaching the highest ranking #7 last week..

its_a_racquet
Feb 24th, 2010, 03:09 AM
In the most recent rankings, OSU is definitely ranked too high. In the Big Ten, I predict:

NU
MI
IL
OSU


By the end of the season, my prediction is that's how the final rankings will appear.

johnnytennis
Feb 24th, 2010, 02:56 PM
In the most recent rankings, OSU is definitely ranked too high. In the Big Ten, I predict:

NU
MI
IL
OSU


By the end of the season, my prediction is that's how the final rankings will appear.

As someone that follows the Big Ten, I cant disagree with you. Illinois has dropped in the rankings to No. 39 but is really closer to being a top 20 team. This is their best team they've had in many years. They lost a bunch of 4-3 heartbreakers to good teams. The Big Ten in general has really moved up a few notches this year and could become a power conference in Women's tennis.

its_a_racquet
Feb 24th, 2010, 07:50 PM
Johnny - agreed. Also as has been discussed, Michigan will give Northwestern a run for their money this year. I think Illinois will def. OSU (4-3ish) when they play and also believe that Indiana could be a tough match for OSU. IU just defeated Tennessee 6-1, while the Bucks fell to the same (depleted lineup due to injuries) TN team 5-2 a couple days prior. So the top 5 teams in the Big 10 are much improved over 2-4 years ago, that's for sure. I think the top 2 teams (NU and MI) are a step or two ahead of the rest.

Northwestern has a chance to redeem their loss vs Notre Dame this Friday and Sunday vs. Illinois and Georgia Tech. Then, over their spring break, they play both Duke and North Carolina outdoors.....then Michigan and Baylor,etc. Their coach puts together a pretty good schedule......

johnnytennis
Feb 24th, 2010, 08:50 PM
I know Michigan has a couple tough matches coming up at home. Today against TCU and on Friday against Baylor. If I get back home earlier enough, I might watch some of it as they have streaming video & audio for all their home matches.

gouci
Feb 28th, 2010, 07:54 AM
Dropped Out

73. Oregon
74. Denver
75. East Tennessee St.


Jumped In

73. Akron
74. Binghamton
75. Middle Tennessee State

johnnytennis
Feb 28th, 2010, 06:43 PM
Dropped Out

73. Oregon
74. Denver
75. East Tennessee St.


Jumped In

73. Akron
74. Binghamton
75. Middle Tennessee State

Oregon was close to getting back into the rankings after yesterdays ultra close road match against No. 23 Indiana where Oregon loss 4-3.

gouci
Mar 2nd, 2010, 09:43 PM
Dropped Out = 6

64. Fresno St.
65. San Diego St. = :fiery::fiery: only lost 2-5 to USC since last rankings
66. Old Dominion
68. BYU
72. LSU
75. Middle Tennessee St.


Got Ranked

48. Purdue
54. Iowa = lost 1-6 to #63 Minnesota :cuckoo:
70. Central Florida
71. Cal Poly
74. Delaware St. - MEAC team for those who didn't know :lol:
75. South Carolina Upstate - Atlantic Sun team for those who didn't know :lol:


Over Ranked Teams :cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo:

24. DePaul = lost to 2-5 to last week #71 Utah
28. Marshall
32. Rice = lost 2-5 to #35 Pepperdine
36. Oklahoma
39. Arizona = lost 2-5 to last week #71 Utah
41. Utah = lost 3-4 to #61 Oklahoma St.

fantic
Mar 2nd, 2010, 09:51 PM
notable changes of individual ranking ;

NAME LAST CURRENT
Vallverdu 7 4
Gullickson 11 6
Dy 4 7
Barte 13 9
Whoriskey 7 10
AP 6 12
Frilling 23 14
Embree 22 15
Fahoum 15 18
Zheltova 46 19
Wu 32 20
Lao 31 22
Bek 18 24
Nedeltcheva 45 25
Ellis 17 26
Muresan 16 27
M. Burdette 24 28
Damico 50 29
Scharle 49 30
Remynse 43 34
Boxx 30 36
Eichkorn 55 40
Secerbegovic 25 41
Thongdach 27 42
Zsilinszka 34 45
Sorbello 38 47
Marand 41 48
Nagaraj 107 51
Jones 77 52
Andersson 75 56
Potgieter 33 57
Boonstra 80 62
Plotkin 47 64
Trunk 58 65
Nze 104 69
Widjaja 122 73
Chifchieva 59 76
Hammel * 80
Colffer * 81
Stanivuk 123 82
Marks 88 89
Pulido 51 91
Matzenauer * 93
White 85 94
Munch-Soegaard * 99
Kichoutkin * 100
McKenna 97 105
Duncan 78 111
Fudge * 113
Montez * 124

fantic
Mar 2nd, 2010, 10:07 PM
how can USC be lower than Clemson, which USC beat 5-2 not long ago?
I guess USC has to win against UCLA to get back to top 10 :lol:

CTSEMT
Mar 3rd, 2010, 02:34 AM
Hard to give much credibility these rankings. I mean, was I the only one to notice that Texas's #9 Abby Liu suddenly jumped into the rankings this week at #61? Right ahead of Marrit Boonstra :eek:

How can this be? Well, according to the ITA results site, she pulled a stunning 6-0, 6-1 upset over national top 10 Petukhova of Fresno St, who mysteriously dropped from #1 to #6 in the lineup to compete against her in Texas's last match??

In reality, looks like Petukhova sat out that match and Liu actually beat another Fresno Ana (Mikhaylova) as confirmed by the Texas site, but seriously, doesn't anyone do a sanity check on these??

fantic
Mar 3rd, 2010, 03:38 AM
oh, yes, I noticed that too, my first silly thought was; 'is she Amber Liu's sister?' :lol:

johnnytennis
Mar 3rd, 2010, 05:16 AM
Dropped Out = 6

64. Fresno St.
65. San Diego St. = :fiery::fiery: only lost 2-5 to USC since last rankings
66. Old Dominion
68. BYU
72. LSU
75. Middle Tennessee St.


Jumped In

48. Purdue
54. Iowa = lost 1-6 to #63 Minnesota :cuckoo:
70. Central Florida
71. Cal Poly
74. Delaware St. - MEAC team for those who didn't know :lol:
75. South Carolina Upstate - Atlantic Sun team for those who didn't know :lol:


Very misranked teams :cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo:

24. DePaul = lost to 2-5 to last week #71 Utah
28. Marshall
32. Rice = lost 2-5 to #35 Pepperdine
36. Oklahoma
39. Arizona = lost 2-5 to last week #71 Utah
41. Utah = lost 3-4 to #61 Oklahoma St.

Iowa got in the rankings after beating No. 44 Princeton last week. Princeton is the biggest mystry team in the country. Mostly top blue chip players and they struggle to stay above 50 in the rankings.

johnnytennis
Mar 3rd, 2010, 05:28 AM
notable changes of individual ranking ;

NAME LAST CURRENT
Vallverdu 7 4
Gullickson 11 6
Dy 4 7
Barte 13 9
Whoriskey 7 10
AP 6 12
Frilling 23 14
Embree 22 15
Fahoum 15 18
Zheltova 46 19
Wu 32 20
Lao 31 22
Bek 18 24
Nedeltcheva 45 25
Ellis 17 26
Muresan 16 27
M. Burdette 24 28
Damico 50 29
Scharle 49 30
Remynse 43 34
Boxx 30 36
Eichkorn 55 40
Secerbegovic 25 41
Thongdach 27 42
Zsilinszka 34 45
Sorbello 38 47
Marand 41 48
Nagaraj 107 51
Jones 77 52
Andersson 75 56
Potgieter 33 57
Boonstra 80 62
Plotkin 47 64
Trunk 58 65
Nze 104 69
Widjaja 122 73
Chifchieva 59 76
Hammel * 80
Colffer * 81
Stanivuk 123 82
Marks 88 89
Pulido 51 91
Matzenauer * 93
White 85 94
Munch-Soegaard * 99
Kichoutkin * 100
McKenna 97 105
Duncan 78 111
Fudge * 113
Montez * 124

I thought the rankings and records of players were done on the computer this ranking period. Some strange rankings in both singles and doubles that didnt make sense. How do you beat 3 ranked players in the last 2 weeks and not show up in the rankings someplace.

fantic
Mar 3rd, 2010, 12:16 PM
How do you beat 3 ranked players in the last 2 weeks and not show up in the rankings someplace.

but...who? :lol:

10sE
Mar 3rd, 2010, 01:45 PM
Very misranked teams

Remember that it's not only who you have lost to, but who you have beat. Check some of those "overrated" and "underrated" teams' wins.

gouci
Mar 3rd, 2010, 03:58 PM
10sE nice to see you again. :bounce:

I looked at the entire record of all the teams on my list. You're not dealing with a newbie poster here. :lol:
I even went further than that looking at each team's roster and noting all the new starters each team has gained as well as all the starters from last season each team has lost. I stand by my list but I can expand my thoughts for a specific team if you have one in mind.

gouci
Mar 4th, 2010, 04:55 PM
Hey Form maybe you can pass these errors along through the proper channels so the ITA can correct it by the time the next rankings come out. :help:


In reality, looks like Petukhova sat out that match and Liu actually beat another Fresno Ana (Mikhaylova) as confirmed by the Texas site, but seriously, doesn't anyone do a sanity check on these??

1. The player sitting at #126 is getting screwed out of being ranked. :lol:

- If #126 was ranked that effects everyone that has played that #126 player and so on with the domino effect. :lol:



2. Here's another error I noticed that affects the Big West. San Francisco's #1 player is listed under 2 different names in "Jenni Heinser" and "Jennifer-Lee Heinser."

- This error is essentially treating Heinser as 2 separate players and has divided her record into 2.
- Maybe if they combined Heinser's record it may be good enough to get her nationally ranked.
- Cal Poly's Suzie Matzenauer defeated Heinser and would improve her ranking if Heinser was ranked.
- Pacific's Jenifer Widjaja lost to Heinser and a loss to a ranked Heinser is better than a loss to an unranked Heinser for Widjaja's ranking.


3. San Francisco's Melinda Akerbrant is also listed twice but it doesn't have the implications to the national rankings.

- I guess the ITA needs to look out for anytime a player is listed twice and needs to fix that error on their website.

johnnytennis
Mar 7th, 2010, 07:30 PM
With Stanford beating Cal 5-2 yesterday, how is that going to affect the top 10 rankings this week?

2nd_serve
Mar 7th, 2010, 10:10 PM
With Stanford beating Cal 5-2 yesterday, how is that going to affect the top 10 rankings this week?

I can't find my source, but I think someone wrote that this week the rankings will switch over to computer based rankings from coaches poll rankings. Could someone speak up if I am right or wrong about that? (and maybe explain the implications.)

2nd_serve
Mar 7th, 2010, 10:12 PM
Hey Form maybe you can pass these errors along through the proper channels so the ITA can correct it by the time the next rankings come out. :help:




1. The player sitting at #126 is getting screwed out of being ranked. :lol:

- If #126 was ranked that effects everyone that has played that #126 player and so on with the domino effect. :lol:



2. Here's another error I noticed that affects the Big West. San Francisco's #1 player is listed under 2 different names in "Jenni Heinser" and "Jennifer-Lee Heinser."

- This error is essentially treating Heinser as 2 separate players and has divided her record into 2.
- Maybe if they combined Heinser's record it may be good enough to get her nationally ranked.
- Cal Poly's Suzie Matzenauer defeated Heinser and would improve her ranking if Heinser was ranked.
- Pacific's Jenifer Widjaja lost to Heinser and a loss to a ranked Heinser is better than a loss to an unranked Heinser for Widjaja's ranking.


3. San Francisco's Melinda Akerbrant is also listed twice but it doesn't have the implications to the national rankings.

- I guess the ITA needs to look out for anytime a player is listed twice and needs to fix that error on their website.

Sounds like there should be a unique number for every player, and then there would be less chances of errors.

gouci
Mar 8th, 2010, 02:35 AM
I can't find my source, but I think someone wrote that this week the rankings will switch over to computer based rankings from coaches poll rankings. Could someone speak up if I am right or wrong about that? (and maybe explain the implications.)

Here's the ranking dates and methods (http://www.itatennis.com/Assets/ita_assets/pdf/Rankings/ITA_DivI_RankingDates_2009-10.pdf).

johnnytennis
Mar 9th, 2010, 09:12 PM
Women's Rankings: - March 9
http://www.itatennis.com/AwardsAndRankings/Rankings/2009-10_Division_I_Women_s_Rankings/March_9__2010_-_Division_I_National_Team_Rankings.htm

Men's Rankings - March 9
http://www.itatennis.com/AwardsAndRankings/Rankings/2009-10_NCAA_Division_I_Men_s_Rankings/March_9__2010_-_ITA_DI_Men_s_National_Team_Ranking.htm

gouci
Mar 9th, 2010, 10:57 PM
Dropped Out = 7

65. Winthrop
66. San Diego
68. Binghamton
69. Kentucky
70. Central Florida
74. Delaware St.
75. South Carolina Upstate


Got Ranked

60. Washington St.
64. Northwestern St.
66. UNC Greensboro
67. College of Charleston
70. North Florida
73. Old Dominion
74. Miami (Ohio)


Over Ranked Teams

23. DePaul = lost to Utah & Iowa
36. Oklahoma

johnnytennis
Mar 11th, 2010, 05:02 PM
With matches involving Baylor, UCLA, USC, North Carolina and Florida this week, it looks like another shake up in the top 10 this week.

johnnytennis
Mar 15th, 2010, 03:10 AM
An interesting week coming up for the rankings as there were a few upsets this week in the top 25.

No. 2 UCLA lost to No 9 Baylor
No. 3 Notre Dame lost to No. 7 Duke
No. 4 N. Carolina lost to No. 5 Florida and No. 9 Baylor.
No. 12 Tennessee lost to No. 25 Vanderbilt
No. 13 USC lost to No. 32 Arizona St.
No. 20 South Carolina lost to No. 69 Auburn
No. 24 Yale lost to No. 47 FIU

gouci
Mar 16th, 2010, 10:14 PM
Dropped Out = 9

56. Texas A&M
66. UNC Greensboro
68. Akron
69. Alabama
70. North Florida
72. TCU
73. Old Dominion
74. Miami (Ohio)
75. Cal Poly


Got Ranked

59. Winthrop
64. San Diego State
65. Charleston Southern
66. Iowa State
67. Tulane
68. Wichita State
69. Coastal Carolina
73. USC Upstate
75. UC Santa Barbara


Way Over Ranked Teams

23. DePaul = lost to Utah & Iowa
25. Iowa = lost to Minnesota
36. Oklahoma = beat 2 ranked teams that were missing starters

desariofan
Mar 16th, 2010, 11:18 PM
WOW Baylor shot up from #9 to #1 . that's. They did play and beat some good teams. My gators are climbing up the rankings slowly but surely!

johnnytennis
Mar 17th, 2010, 09:28 PM
I'm a little surprised to see Michigan drop to #8 in the team rankings this week considering they were the last team to beat now #1 Baylor just over 2 weeks ago before Baylor had their three big wins this past week. You would have thought that win would have helped them, not hurt them. Oh well! The Big Ten is looking a lot better this year. Purdue's made some big strides, Illinois is a lot better then their ranking, Ohio State is better as well as Iowa and Indiana. When Minnesota is healthy they too are a much better team. It might be the strongest this conference has been in a very long time. I don't think it's going to be automatic for Northwestern this year as it has been in the past. Just my opinion!

its_a_racquet
Mar 17th, 2010, 10:44 PM
I'm a little surprised to see Michigan drop to #8 in the team rankings this week considering they were the last team to beat now #1 Baylor just over 2 weeks ago before Baylor had their three big wins this past week. You would have thought that win would have helped them, not hurt them. Oh well! The Big Ten is looking a lot better this year. Purdue's made some big strides, Illinois is a lot better then their ranking, Ohio State is better as well as Iowa and Indiana. When Minnesota is healthy they too are a much better team. It might be the strongest this conference has been in a very long time. I don't think it's going to be automatic for Northwestern this year as it has been in the past. Just my opinion!


Johnny - you're not exactly going out on a limb much saying it's not automatic for NU this year, since Michigan has proven themselves as a top-tier team. As a conference, there is also a lot more overall depth with eight teams in the ranking system top-75, with only Penn State, Wisconsin and Mich. State not making the grade.

Clearly NU and MI have separated themselves. Those two teams play on 4/3 and likely again during the Big 10 tourney following that.......will be fun to follow!!

Embittered
Mar 23rd, 2010, 08:43 PM
What on earth??

The top two teams are playing now. Apparently.

its_a_racquet
Mar 23rd, 2010, 10:01 PM
What on earth??

The top two teams are playing now. Apparently.

? Not sure what Baylor is doing today, but #2 Northwestern is playing North Carolina right now. NU got the doubles point......still in 1st set in the singles matches..........stay tuned.........

gouci
Mar 24th, 2010, 01:00 AM
Dropped Out = 10

58. College of Charleston
60. Virginia Tech
66. Iowa State
67. Tulane
68. Wichita State
69. Coastal Carolina
70. Washington St.
72. Northwestern St.
73. USC Upstate
75. UC Santa Barbara


Got Ranked

44. Texas A&M
52. Cal Poly
64. North Florida
66. Akron
67. Texas Tech
68. Old Dominion
69. East Tennessee St.
71. Alabama
74. Santa Clara
75. San Diego

desariofan
Mar 24th, 2010, 05:32 AM
The rankings don't make any sense whatsoever this week...

davidjaime
Mar 24th, 2010, 09:13 AM
How can ASU drop down 5 spots from 18 to 23 and below USC & Washington whom they beat? when they swept their two matches over the weekend and only losses being Georgia Tech who improve their ranking from 36th to 13th and Cal who is ranked 10th .

for a team like Iowa to be ranked higher than
ASU, WASHINGTON, USC makes no sense at all.

Embittered
Mar 24th, 2010, 09:21 AM
? Not sure what Baylor is doing today, but #2 Northwestern is playing North Carolina right now. NU got the doubles point......still in 1st set in the singles matches..........stay tuned.........
Ah. Apologies. I was referring to the NC and Baylor switcheroo in yesterday's rankings, which was mystifying at the time. But now it's clear that the rankings computer is so powerful it can see a short distance into the future and take account of matches that haven't finished yet.:p

gouci
Mar 31st, 2010, 01:47 AM
Dropped Out = 4

67. Texas Tech
68. Old Dominion
71. Alabama
74. Santa Clara


Got Ranked

65. Nevada
68. Virginia Tech
69. College of Charleston
73. North Texas

johnnytennis
Apr 6th, 2010, 05:57 PM
New rankings are out and you are finally starting to see some separation between No. 1 and No. 10.


1 78.60 Baylor University
2 76.66 North Carolina
3 74.59 University of Michigan
4 72.47 University of Florida
5 69.01 Northwestern University
6 68.71 University of Notre Dame
7 67.75 Duke University
8 65.90 UCLA
9 58.28 Clemson University
10 57.57 University of Miami (Florida)

fantic
Apr 6th, 2010, 07:26 PM
Hmm..if USC is out of top 16, does it mean the team have to travel to other california teams for the regionals.

Winning against Arizona teams might not be enough..

Or, do I have to hope that the other teams tank in those last weeks :devil:

2nd_serve
Apr 6th, 2010, 07:34 PM
Hmm..if USC is out of top 16, does it mean the team have to travel to other california teams for the regionals.

Winning against Arizona teams might not be enough..

Or, do I have to hope that the other teams tank in those last weeks :devil:


Here is a link to the official memorandum (http://www.itatennis.com/Assets/ita_assets/pdf/NCAA+Championships/2010+NCAA+Championships/2010+NCAA+Championship+Memo.pdf)that explains the site selection process.

Not to cheer against a team, but for information purposes, #14 lost to a team ranked in the 30's after these were calculated.

gouci
Apr 6th, 2010, 07:57 PM
Dropped Out = 2

71. Colorado
74. San Diego St.


Got Ranked

70. LSU
73. TCU

2nd_serve
Apr 6th, 2010, 08:15 PM
1 78.60 Baylor University (http://www.baylorbears.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/bay-w-tennis-sched.html) 2
2 76.66 North Carolina (http://tarheelblue.cstv.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/unc-w-tennis-sched.html) 1
3 74.59 University of Michigan (http://www.mgoblue.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/mich-w-tennis-sched.html) 8
4 72.47 University of Florida (http://www.gatorzone.com/tennis/sched.php?sport=tennw) 3
5 69.01 Northwestern University (http://nusports.cstv.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/nw-w-tennis-sched.html) 4
6 68.71 University of Notre Dame (http://www.und.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/nd-w-tennis-sched.html) 6
7 67.75 Duke University (http://www.goduke.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&KEY=&SPID=1840&SPSID=22613) 5
8 65.90 UCLA (http://www.uclabruins.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/ucla-w-tennis-sched.html)7
9 58.28 Clemson University (http://clemsontigers.cstv.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/clem-w-tennis-sched.html) 10
10 57.57 University of Miami (http://hurricanesports.cstv.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/mifl-w-tennis-sched.html)(Florida) 9
11 55.35 Stanford (http://www.gostanford.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/stan-w-tennis-sched.html)12
12 51.81 California (http://www.calbears.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/cal-w-tennis-sched.html)11
13 44.77 Florida State University (http://www.seminoles.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/fsu-w-tennis-sched.html) 17
14 40.09 University of Georgia (http://www.georgiadogs.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=8800&KEY=&SPID=3590&SPSID=40715) 13
15 39.64 University of South Carolina (http://gamecocksonline.cstv.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/scar-w-tennis-sched.html) 19
16 37.70 University of Tennessee (http://www.utladyvols.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/tennw-w-tennis-sched.html)

North Carolina has an impressive schedule to get the team match tough for the Championship.

gouci
Apr 6th, 2010, 08:46 PM
Teams that have been ranked top 75 in the past vs their ranking on 4/6/10.


88. Alabama (#25 pre-season)

89. Denver (#49 pre-season)(1st year head coach)

96. Furman (#72 pre-season)

97. Miami of Ohio (#70 pre-season)(Interim head coach)

98. Oregon (#71 pre-season)

__________


126. Louisville

127. Marquette

132. Boston (#61 pre-season)

186. Boston College

187. Richmond

189. Fresno State (#16 pre-season)

220. Penn State

223. Kentucky (#28 pre-season)

232. Penn (1st year head coach)

259. Missouri

286. New Mexico (1st year head coach)

298. South Alabama (#53 pre-season)

.

mboyle
Apr 6th, 2010, 08:57 PM
Duke is better than 7th. We will move up after we beat Carolina tomorrow. GTHC!

desariofan
Apr 6th, 2010, 09:23 PM
well i like how my girls of UF are stealthily being ranked just below the top 2 spots week in and out as underdogs. hopefully they'll prove those coaches who vote wrong come NCAA tourney time, which I'll be there.

ANYONE GOING??

johnnytennis
Apr 6th, 2010, 10:02 PM
1 78.60 Baylor University (http://www.baylorbears.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/bay-w-tennis-sched.html) 2
2 76.66 North Carolina (http://tarheelblue.cstv.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/unc-w-tennis-sched.html) 1
3 74.59 University of Michigan (http://www.mgoblue.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/mich-w-tennis-sched.html) 8
4 72.47 University of Florida (http://www.gatorzone.com/tennis/sched.php?sport=tennw) 3
5 69.01 Northwestern University (http://nusports.cstv.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/nw-w-tennis-sched.html) 4
6 68.71 University of Notre Dame (http://www.und.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/nd-w-tennis-sched.html) 6
7 67.75 Duke University (http://www.goduke.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&KEY=&SPID=1840&SPSID=22613) 5
8 65.90 UCLA (http://www.uclabruins.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/ucla-w-tennis-sched.html)7
9 58.28 Clemson University (http://clemsontigers.cstv.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/clem-w-tennis-sched.html) 10
10 57.57 University of Miami (http://hurricanesports.cstv.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/mifl-w-tennis-sched.html)(Florida) 9
11 55.35 Stanford (http://www.gostanford.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/stan-w-tennis-sched.html)12
12 51.81 California (http://www.calbears.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/cal-w-tennis-sched.html)11
13 44.77 Florida State University (http://www.seminoles.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/fsu-w-tennis-sched.html) 17
14 40.09 University of Georgia (http://www.georgiadogs.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=8800&KEY=&SPID=3590&SPSID=40715) 13
15 39.64 University of South Carolina (http://gamecocksonline.cstv.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/scar-w-tennis-sched.html) 19
16 37.70 University of Tennessee (http://www.utladyvols.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/tennw-w-tennis-sched.html)

North Carolina has an impressive schedule to get the team match tough for the Championship.

They definitely have the toughest schedule. That can help them as you say but it can hurt them as well if they start losing. Confidence and momentum are key this time of year!

fantic
Apr 6th, 2010, 10:28 PM
ANYONE GOING??
:mad:
:lol:

I'll just console myself that in terms of star power last year was better...:angel:

last year's seniors;

I was privileged to watch these players;

Arkansas; Aurelija Miseviciute
California; Bojana Bobusic, Claire Ilcinkas, Marion Ravelojaona
UCLA; Ashley Joelson
Duke; Melissa Mang, Jessi Robinson
Fresno State; Melanie Gloria, Tinesta Rowe
Georgia; Monica Dancevic
Georgia Tech; Christy Striplin
Northwestern; Georgia Rose, Nazlie Ghazal, Keri Robison
Notre Dame; Kelcy Tefft
South Carolina; Gira Schofield
Stanford; Jessica Nguyen
USC; Amanda Fink
ASU; Laila Abdala

Baylor, Miami, Florida have no seniors.

-----

And Ani Mijacika, Mallory Cecil, Julia Cohen..

desariofan
Apr 7th, 2010, 01:37 AM
:mad:
:lol:

I'll just console myself that in terms of star power last year was better...:angel:

last year's seniors;

I was privileged to watch these players;

Arkansas; Aurelija Miseviciute
California; Bojana Bobusic, Claire Ilcinkas, Marion Ravelojaona
UCLA; Ashley Joelson
Duke; Melissa Mang, Jessi Robinson
Fresno State; Melanie Gloria, Tinesta Rowe
Georgia; Monica Dancevic
Georgia Tech; Christy Striplin
Northwestern; Georgia Rose, Nazlie Ghazal, Keri Robison
Notre Dame; Kelcy Tefft
South Carolina; Gira Schofield
Stanford; Jessica Nguyen
USC; Amanda Fink
ASU; Laila Abdala

Baylor, Miami, Florida have no seniors.

-----

And Ani Mijacika, Mallory Cecil, Julia Cohen..

OH I KNOW!

Was it in Texas last year?

At least I got to see Audra Cohen playing 3 years back in Athens. So smooth and strong at the same time.

Of all the girls you mentioned, the only person worth seeing for me was Aurelija Miseviciute. That girl is not only beautiful in person, but has a beautiful game as well. She also is the most gracious and fair on court.

I watched one match between her against Julia Cohen (as a gator), and man Cohen made prolly 10 bad calls, Aurelija just kept her cool and finished Cohen off in two sets. I was not proud of being a gator that day.

fantic
Apr 7th, 2010, 02:05 AM
Audra Cohen!!! I envy you more :lol:

Yes, Miseviciute was good.. kinda similar to Mosolova, methink. A superb rallying-machine ;)

johnnytennis
Apr 13th, 2010, 06:41 PM
New Team rankings today:

Rank School
1 North Carolina
2 Baylor University
3 University of Florida
4 University of Michigan
5 University of Notre Dame
6 Duke University
7 UCLA
8 Clemson University
9 Northwestern University
10 Stanford
11 University of Miami (Florida)
12 California
13 University of Georgia
14 University of Tennessee
15 Florida State University
16 University of Southern California
17 University of Mississippi
18 University of South Carolina
19 University of South Florida
20 University of Texas at Austin
21 Univ. of Iowa
22 DePaul University
23 University of Arkansas
24 Virginia Commonwealth University
25 Georgia Tech
26 University of Illinois
27 Arizona State University
28 University of Washington
29 SMU
30 Vanderbilt University
31 University of Virginia
32 Princeton University
33 Ohio State University
34 Texas A&M University
35 University of Tulsa
36 UNLV
37 North Carolina State
38 Indiana University-Bloomington
39 Saint Mary's College of California
40 Long Beach State University
41 Rice University
42 University of Utah
43 University of Oklahoma
44 Boise State University
45 Florida International University (FIU)
46 Yale University
47 Pepperdine
48 Purdue University
49 University of Nebraska (Lincoln)
50 Wake Forest University
51 College of William and Mary
52 Auburn University
53 Dartmouth College
54 Sacramento State
55 University of Arizona
56 Harvard University
57 Marshall University
58 Cal Poly
59 Oklahoma State University
60 University of Minnesota
61 Winthrop University
62 Brown University
63 University of Colorado
64 University of North Florida
65 College of Charleston
66 University of San Diego
67 UC Irvine
68 University of Nevada
69 Charleston Southern University
70 East Tennessee State University
71 Louisiana State University
72 Akron
73 University of Alabama
74 Wichita State University
75 San Diego State University

fantic
Apr 13th, 2010, 07:26 PM
Thus this mean USC MUST defeat UCLA to ensure the top 16? :sobbing:

2nd_serve
Apr 13th, 2010, 09:35 PM
Am I right, that in a week that Georgia Tech (http://ramblinwreck.cstv.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/geot-w-tennis-sched.html) beat #6 Duke, and lost to #1 North Carolina 5-2, they dropped five ranking spots from 20 to 25.
April 6 (http://ramblinwreck.cstv.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/geot-w-tennis-sched.html)
April 13 (http://www.itatennis.com/AwardsAndRankings/Rankings/2009-10_Division_I_Women_s_Rankings/April_13__2010_-_Division_I_Women_s_Team_Ranking.htm)

And Duke (http://www.goduke.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&KEY=&SPID=1840&SPSID=22613), loses three matches that week, North Carolina, Clemson, and Georgia Tech, and moves from 7 to 6 in the ranking.

gouci
Apr 13th, 2010, 10:37 PM
Dropped Out = 4

66. Mississippi St.
69. Virginia Tech
73. TCU
74. North Texas


Got Ranked

63. Colorado
73. Alabama
74. Wichita State
75. San Diego St.

johnnytennis
Apr 14th, 2010, 06:18 AM
Am I right, that in a week that Georgia Tech (http://ramblinwreck.cstv.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/geot-w-tennis-sched.html) beat #6 Duke, and lost to #1 North Carolina 5-2, they dropped five ranking spots from 20 to 25.
April 6 (http://ramblinwreck.cstv.com/sports/w-tennis/sched/geot-w-tennis-sched.html)
April 13 (http://www.itatennis.com/AwardsAndRankings/Rankings/2009-10_Division_I_Women_s_Rankings/April_13__2010_-_Division_I_Women_s_Team_Ranking.htm)

And Duke (http://www.goduke.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&KEY=&SPID=1840&SPSID=22613), loses three matches that week, North Carolina, Clemson, and Georgia Tech, and moves from 7 to 6 in the ranking.

Your right but it doesn't make sense. I thought we would see Duke out of the top ten. I question how Northwestern has stayed up as high as they have with all their loses recently but I assume it's from its wins at the ITA Indoors which seems like ages ago!

tennisbuddy12
Apr 14th, 2010, 06:32 AM
I am so upset about GA Tech......they were close to a regional bid esp. after beating Duke and they went down 5 friggin spots!!

mboyle
Apr 15th, 2010, 07:07 PM
I would just like to point out that Florida hasn't lost more than 1 point in a match since indoors. The points that they have lost have all come either from retirements or third set dead rubber tiebreakers. They may be the most dominant team in all NCAA sports right now. Signing Embree and Will in the same year was really clutch. I wish Will had come to Duke. :( We're on the struggle bus now!

desariofan
Apr 15th, 2010, 08:06 PM
I would just like to point out that Florida hasn't lost more than 1 point in a match since indoors. The points that they have lost have all come either from retirements or third set dead rubber tiebreakers. They may be the most dominant team in all NCAA sports right now. Signing Embree and Will in the same year was really clutch. I wish Will had come to Duke. :( We're on the struggle bus now!

was duke one of her prospects? I know that she opted for UF because of Embree choosing UF.

But, I'd have to agree with what you say about the Gators. They are looking mighty tough right now. Embree & Barlette in particular have really raised their level of play since the indoors. You must've felt :fiery::fiery: when UF blanked Duke 7-0 few weeks ago :lick:

The good thing about them is that they don't seem to take their success so far for granted. Things was close to going weary when they played against Tennessee last weekend. Apparently after sweeping the doubles matches, 5 out of 6 singles matches for UF were down. The 6-1 for them was very deceiving. That woke them up when they played UGA 2 days later with a convincing 6-1 win.

I just can't wait to seem them next weekend in Athens for the SEC championships!

:)

T2000
Apr 15th, 2010, 08:07 PM
I would just like to point out that Florida hasn't lost more than 1 point in a match since indoors. The points that they have lost have all come either from retirements or third set dead rubber tiebreakers. They may be the most dominant team in all NCAA sports right now. Signing Embree and Will in the same year was really clutch. I wish Will had come to Duke. :( We're on the struggle bus now!

I agree, Florida should be the number one seed.

fantic
Apr 15th, 2010, 09:27 PM
I just can't wait to seem them next weekend in Athens for the SEC championships!

:)

They won't have trouble winning the SEC championship, I think..

desariofan
Apr 16th, 2010, 02:08 AM
They won't have trouble winning the SEC championship, I think..

dont jinx!

fantic
Apr 16th, 2010, 04:10 AM
nah, their strength is above or beyond jinx :lol: too deep!

johnnytennis
Apr 16th, 2010, 05:29 AM
was duke one of her prospects? I know that she opted for UF because of Embree choosing UF.

But, I'd have to agree with what you say about the Gators. They are looking mighty tough right now. Embree & Barlette in particular have really raised their level of play since the indoors. You must've felt :fiery::fiery: when UF blanked Duke 7-0 few weeks ago :lick:

The good thing about them is that they don't seem to take their success so far for granted. Things was close to going weary when they played against Tennessee last weekend. Apparently after sweeping the doubles matches, 5 out of 6 singles matches for UF were down. The 6-1 for them was very deceiving. That woke them up when they played UGA 2 days later with a convincing 6-1 win.

I just can't wait to seem them next weekend in Athens for the SEC championships!

:)

I have watched them both play and would put Baylor 1st, Florida 2nd. They are both excellent teams but I think Baylor might be a little stronger in singles.

fantic
Apr 16th, 2010, 06:53 AM
Well it's not that surprising BU & UF should vie for the championship ;)

johnnytennis
Apr 16th, 2010, 04:11 PM
Well it's not that surprising BU & UF should vie for the championship ;)

Fantic, being the No. 1 and No. 2 teams doesn't mean they will be in or win the championships. I think there are a few teams that are almost as good and very well could be in there too.

mboyle
Apr 16th, 2010, 10:08 PM
was duke one of her prospects? I know that she opted for UF because of Embree choosing UF.

But, I'd have to agree with what you say about the Gators. They are looking mighty tough right now. Embree & Barlette in particular have really raised their level of play since the indoors. You must've felt :fiery::fiery: when UF blanked Duke 7-0 few weeks ago :lick:

The good thing about them is that they don't seem to take their success so far for granted. Things was close to going weary when they played against Tennessee last weekend. Apparently after sweeping the doubles matches, 5 out of 6 singles matches for UF were down. The 6-1 for them was very deceiving. That woke them up when they played UGA 2 days later with a convincing 6-1 win.

I just can't wait to seem them next weekend in Athens for the SEC championships!

:)

Yeah it came down to Duke and UF. I mean, I was mad, but this is a tough year for us since Mal left. I honestly feel that, if we had Mal at number one again this year, we would still be the best in the country. We're still in the running for two top prospects for next year. I'm still going to keep the faith. But losing to Carolina twice in one year is enough to make me sick to my stomach.

mboyle
Apr 16th, 2010, 10:09 PM
Well it's not that surprising BU & UF should vie for the championship ;)

BU isn't in the same league as UF right now. UF isn't even losing points. They're barely losing sets.

desariofan
Apr 17th, 2010, 01:58 AM
BU isn't in the same league as UF right now. UF isn't even losing points. They're barely losing sets.

Ditto

johnnytennis
Apr 17th, 2010, 05:49 AM
BU isn't in the same league as UF right now. UF isn't even losing points. They're barely losing sets.

Disagree!

fantic
Apr 17th, 2010, 06:13 AM
Don't underestimate BU's depth. :) Moreover Broosova is really doing well this season and Secerbegovic is a DANGEROUS player.

http://itarankings.itatennis.com/TeamSchedule.aspx?did=4&confid=176&teamid=500&Seasonid=10

If you check UF & BU's results at ita website..

Don't see any BIG difference here.

BU lost to UNC and MICH, after that win all the way. That includes; USC, UCLA, UNC, ND, NU

UF lost to NU & UCLA, teams BU have beaten.

Their significant wins; FL st, Duke, UNC, TENN, UGA..

And I don't think Duke would've been #1 even if Cecil stayed :p

Hell I was the first to congratulate UF's asst coach during Riviera saying that this is a championship team,

but you can't say championship is a LOCK :lol:

Who knows, MICH might sweep the doubles and lower singles positions to win all the way! :lol:

desariofan
Apr 17th, 2010, 08:14 AM
Don't underestimate BU's depth. :) Moreover Broosova is really doing well this season and Secerbegovic is a DANGEROUS player.

http://itarankings.itatennis.com/TeamSchedule.aspx?did=4&confid=176&teamid=500&Seasonid=10

If you check UF & BU's results at ita website..

Don't see any BIG difference here.

BU lost to UNC and MICH, after that win all the way. That includes; USC, UCLA, UNC, ND, NU

UF lost to NU & UCLA, teams BU have beaten.

Their significant wins; FL st, Duke, UNC, TENN, UGA..

And I don't think Duke would've been #1 even if Cecil stayed :p

Hell I was the first to congratulate UF's asst coach during Riviera saying that this is a championship team,

but you can't say championship is a LOCK :lol:

Who knows, MICH might sweep the doubles and lower singles positions to win all the way! :lol:

the points is -- nothing is a lock or a certainty yet.

I see many teams pulling it through at the end, and surely UF or BU are among them.

Michigan sure looks like a dark horse, however, so does UCLA.

fantic
Apr 17th, 2010, 03:59 PM
UCLA certainly has depth. Pantic and Seguso are not even playing singles, mind you... :mad:

And they were thrashing Cal before the match suspended due to rain..

USTennisfan
Apr 20th, 2010, 09:16 PM
Wow new rankings are out!

Why is the computer so upset with University of Miami. This week they lost to #1 North Carolina 4-3, and beat #6 Duke 4-3, and they are still only 11th!! They have only 4 losses, all to top 10 teams (North Carolina, Baylor, Michigan, and UCLA), and every loss was 4-3. They've beaten two other teams ranked higher then them, (Duke, and Clemson)that are in the top 10, and also have beaten Georgia, and Florida State that are in the top 20...

Amazing...

2nd_serve
Apr 20th, 2010, 09:31 PM
Wow new rankings are out!

Why is the computer so upset with University of Miami. This week they lost to #1 North Carolina 4-3, and beat #6 Duke 4-3, and they are still only 11th!! They have only 4 losses, all to top 10 teams (North Carolina, Baylor, Michigan, and UCLA), and every loss was 4-3. They've beaten two other teams ranked higher then them, (Duke, and Clemson)that are in the top 10, and also have beaten Georgia, and Florida State that are in the top 20...

Amazing...

At the time of the Duke match I looked with some attention to University of Miami scores, and like you, though that this team is underrated in the rankings. Maybe another member can comment on this, but I believe the computer doesn't care if the match is 4-3, or 7-0. Treats them the same.

But if a person is making predictions, we would look at the score, and if we know enough, about which players had the wins and loses. The score lines, is another reason that I both admire and fear that other sunshine state team.

It is my sense also that the rankings give too much importance to the beginning of the season matches, particularly the indoor matches. Tennis is an outdoor sport, and at the beginning of the year the students should be studying, and athletically peaking in the final weeks of the NCAA and conference championships.

Amalgamate
Apr 20th, 2010, 09:48 PM
It is my sense also that the rankings give too much importance to the beginning of the season matches, particularly the indoor matches. Tennis is an outdoor sport, and at the beginning of the year the students should be studying, and athletically peaking in the final weeks of the NCAA and conference championships.

:bowdown: So true!

Also, why the Northwestern bump? :scratch: A good indoor tournament (which is clearly expected; It's an indoor school) and it's like the rest of the season doesn't matter :lol:

USTennisfan
Apr 20th, 2010, 10:37 PM
Form said... "The computer only cares about who you beat... and a small bonus for doing it on the road.
4-3 or 7-0, it's the same. They have two wins ahead of them but the schools in front of them have more high level wins.""

Really, I don't know about that. Duke lost to North Carolina (twice), Florida, Georgia Tech, Clemson, and Miami. They have 3 Top 10 wins against Michigan, N. Dame, and Northwestern. But the 6 losses is big. And Clemson lost to North Carolina, Miami, Michigan, and USC, and has NO top 10 wins.

So they both look like teams that shouldn't be ranked ahead of Miami that don't fall under your criteria if you take a good look...

USTennisfan
Apr 20th, 2010, 10:53 PM
Thanks Form for the extra thoughts on this. Even Duke's finish looks bad, and isn't worthy of Top 10, IMO. Miami ran the table in the ACC, (no easy feat)and swept all until North Carolina last week, and even with the losing at the last minute of Julia Cohen, the number 1 who left at the last minute in late January and left them high and dry without replacement of her scholarship, and only playing 6 players all year, they just seem to be the "little engine that could" if you know what I mean...

johnnytennis
Apr 21st, 2010, 02:30 AM
At the time of the Duke match I looked with some attention to University of Miami scores, and like you, though that this team is underrated in the rankings. Maybe another member can comment on this, but I believe the computer doesn't care if the match is 4-3, or 7-0. Treats them the same.

But if a person is making predictions, we would look at the score, and if we know enough, about which players had the wins and loses. The score lines, is another reason that I both admire and fear that other sunshine state team.

It is my sense also that the rankings give too much importance to the beginning of the season matches, particularly the indoor matches. Tennis is an outdoor sport, and at the beginning of the year the students should be studying, and athletically peaking in the final weeks of the NCAA and conference championships.

I agree. I'm someone who questions the formulas they use for these rankings in both team and individual. I think they need someone to come in and re-work the current system they use. To many things don't make sense!

johnnytennis
Apr 21st, 2010, 02:39 AM
Thanks Form for the extra thoughts on this. Even Duke's finish looks bad, and isn't worthy of Top 10, IMO. Miami ran the table in the ACC, (no easy feat)and swept all until North Carolina last week, and even with the losing at the last minute of Julia Cohen, the number 1 who left at the last minute in late January and left them high and dry without replacement of her scholarship, and only playing 6 players all year, they just seem to be the "little engine that could" if you know what I mean...

Miami should be ahead of both Northwestern and Duke. I also think the ITA should publish the formuals they use for their rankings. Why keep it a secret?

gouci
Apr 21st, 2010, 02:43 AM
Dropped Out = 3

69. Charleston Southern
70. East Tennessee State
74. Wichita State


Got Ranked

67. TCU
70. Texas Tech
71. BYU

10sE
Apr 21st, 2010, 03:09 AM
Way Over Ranked Teams

23. DePaul = lost to Utah & Iowa
25. Iowa = lost to Minnesota
36. Oklahoma = beat 2 ranked teams that were missing starters

UCI, this was your list of WAY over-ranked teams from a month ago...I mentioned that you have to look at who they have beaten and not just who they have lost to. DePaul is 30, Iowa is 28, and OU is 37, so it looks like they will probably finish just about where they were at that point. I think that you had Utah and Rice on an earlier list as well, and both of those teams are holding pretty steady. It's a long season and I don't think that many teams can make it through without a bad loss or two and I stand by my point that you have to look at the entire body of work and not just call teams overrated because they have had one or two bad outings.

fantic
Apr 21st, 2010, 05:27 AM
what's the individual ranking cut-line for NCAA? 64th?

fantic
Apr 21st, 2010, 05:57 AM
thanks.

then these are the players in danger of not playing singles...who participated last year;

61 Ormond
62 Boxx
70 McKenna (last season Riviera champ)
71 Scharle
75 Boonstra (last season UF #1 & defeated Barte to advance to elite 8 )
97 Heinser
106 Marks (Pac-10 runner-up and defeated Chifchieva at NCAA)

fantic
Apr 21st, 2010, 06:03 AM
I especially cannot understand how Boonstra's ranking is STILL so low. She started #6, I believe.

ok she lost to Metzger and Hickey, which IS terrible, but that's all. She even defeated Zsilinszka.

gouci
Apr 22nd, 2010, 09:16 AM
Question for Gouci... who's not going to make the tourney? You so many locks and maybes...who's out (barring a tourney title)
I project every team ranked outside the top 48 on 4/20 to be out with the exception of #52 Purdue.

- So I've eliminated #49 FIU from an at-large but they are still favored to win the Sun Belt auto bid.

- Purdue has a long shot at an at-large. They would have to sweep still on the schedule #28 Iowa, #66 Minnesota as well as getting another top 45 win in the Big 10 Tournament. :help:

- Speaking of Minnesota they've lost 6 of their last 7 and will probably also lose their final two. When I 1st proclaimed Long Beach St. a lock Minnesota was in the mid 50's but will probably end the year sliding to the 70's. So at-large contenders with a win over Minnesota like Long Beach St. and Indiana will probably get pulled down by Minnesota more than I originally projected. :unsure:

gouci
Apr 22nd, 2010, 06:29 PM
LB, presently the last team in as at large, could also get a slight bump from SDSU beating USD on Monday (not factored in this weeks rankings) but that full effect will take two spins (SDSU will move from 75 to about 70 this week; then LB gets a slight bump post tourney in the final spins).


1. Form you are wrong. LBS will not get a delayed rankings boost from San Diego St. beating San Diego. :cuckoo::cuckoo:

- Ex. Nebraska upset Texas A&M last week. This week Nebraska's ranking increased from #49 to #40. Next week LBS will get a delayed rankings boost from Nebraska's ranking increase this week.

- SDSU upset USD on Monday. This week SDSU's ranking went from #75 to #75. SDSU's ranking didn't change even after the USD win was already accounted for. Next week LBS will not get a delayed rankings boost from SDSU beating USD because SDSU's ranking remained the same.


2. San Diego State did beat ranked San Diego but in the same period SDSU lost to Wyoming. :crazy:
Those 2 results probably canceled each other out resulting in SDSU's ranking to remain the same.


3. What will boost SDSU's ranking next week is TCU.

- TCU defeated ranked UCI 2 weeks ago but the results were not entered into the ITA website. So last week when TCU should have been ranked they were not. After last week's ranking came out the error was caught and the results were entered. So this week TCU gets ranked at #67.

- Last week TCU was not ranked but ranked #67 this week. This will increase SDSU's ranking next week. That in turn will increase both UCI's and LBS's ranking via delay 2 weeks from now. Then UCI's ranking increase will give LBS another slight computer points boost 3 cycles from now.

- Form I needed to point out that you were wrong because you'll see SDSU's ranking improve next week and think you were right. :lol:
In reality SDSU's increase comes from TCU and not USD.

gouci
Apr 22nd, 2010, 06:55 PM
But otherwise yes the anchor has been thrown again thanks to losses to St Marys and blowing it vs Pepperdine (had match won). My estimation is LB must beat Cal Poly in semi's (the toughest match of tourney) to get in at large range. Which of course would also make them favorite to win tourney and automatic bid anyway.

Ultimately, one team from Big West yet again. My prediction.

1. Form I don't think you've played all the way through what happens if Long Beach St. loses to Cal Poly. LBS is in a win-win situation.

- If Cal Poly upsets LBS than Cal Poly's ranking will jump up which in turn will pull LBS's ranking up too.

- Then whomever wins the Big West Tourney among Cal Poly, UCI or UCSB will get another rankings boost for a good win in the finals. Since LBS has wins over all 3 teams, LBS's ranking will get pulled up slightly again regardless of who wins the Big West title in that scenario.


2. The WCC tourney will be interesting to follow.

- If St. Mary's beats Pepperdine for the title that will give them a rankings boost. By domino effect SDSU's ranking will rise up also pulling up with it UCI and LBS. :help:

- If Pepperdine beats St. Mary's for the title that will give them a rankings boost which might just be enough to help USC edge out Florida St. for the last regional hosting spot. :shrug:

gouci
Apr 22nd, 2010, 07:16 PM
Likewise, I don't believe Pepp winning would be valuable enough to nudge USC forward enough while FSU will be gaining some points just because the SEC does have a 'team' tourney.
Wrong again old 49er!
Florida State is in the ACC not SEC. :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

FSU plays Duke in the ACC tourney quarter-finals so probably no gain for FSU there.

gouci
Apr 22nd, 2010, 07:37 PM
SDSU has not yet gotten the mini bump for beating USD... read the ranking rules please...
If that's the case than SDSU should get a double bump up from both USD and TCU. :lick:

And for the 1000 time... losses have almost zero impact... you GAIN points with wins
Yeah I think I was the one who told you this concept a year ago when UCI lost to San Francisco! :lol:

Losses have almost zero impact is true. But from my past observations the exception is once the L's reaches double digits, like with SDSU's 10th loss, they somehow have more of an impact.

fantic
Apr 23rd, 2010, 06:11 AM
If Pepperdine beats St. Mary's for the title that will give them a rankings boost which might just be enough to help USC edge out Florida St. for the last regional hosting spot. :shrug:

How do you guys do these ranking things :worship:

And I sure hope you're right :lol: Pepperdine FTW :rocker2:

tennisbuddy12
Apr 23rd, 2010, 06:35 AM
How do you guys do these ranking things :worship:

And I sure hope you're right :lol: Pepperdine FTW :rocker2:

uh uh GO GAELS!!! :)

fantic
Apr 23rd, 2010, 06:54 AM
WHAT....are you rooting for any specific player? :lol:

tennisbuddy12
Apr 23rd, 2010, 08:48 AM
WHAT....are you rooting for any specific player? :lol:

I am really good friends with a player on there hahaha...I would love to see SMC beat Pepp again :)

fantic
Apr 23rd, 2010, 01:10 PM
Nah..Pepp doubles won't make the same mistake again ;) And Pepp hc was kind to me at SW Regional, and I've been to some of their matches

last year, apart from getting a free pizza and t-shirt, so. Go WAVES! :lol: Too bad the WCC championship is on the same date with Ojai this time..loved it

last year.. too bad I'm gonna miss Heinser play, was looking forward to Heinser vs Colffer vs Coupez vs Poorta

USTennisfan
Apr 23rd, 2010, 09:09 PM
And the "little Engine that could", couldn't as Miami lost 4-3 to Georgia Tech in the ACC Quarterfinals

tennisbuddy12
Apr 23rd, 2010, 09:22 PM
Beat me to it :lol:

UM was up 3-1 and it went down to 3 singles..UM was up in that match 4-2 and 5-4 next time I checked

#20 Georgia Tech def. #11 University of Miami

1. #1 Irina Falconi (GT) def. #8 Laura Vallverdu (UM) 6-2,6-3
2. #31 Bianca Eichkorn (UM) def. Viet Ha Ngo (GT) 6-0,6-1
3. Sasha Krupina (GT) def. #84 Anna Bartenstein 7-5,2-6,7-6
4. Lynn Blau (GT) def. Danielle Mills (UM) 6-3,7-6
5. Elizabeth Kilborn (GT) def. #87 Gabriela Mejia 7-5,1-6,6-3
6. Claudia Wasilweski (UM) def. Hillary Davis (GT) 6-3,6-4

1. #7 Laura Vallverdu/Gabriela Mejia (UM) def. #21 Irina Falconi/Sasha Krupina 8-4
2. #37 Bianca Eichkorn/Anna Bartenstein (UM) def. Lynn Blau/Hillary Davis (GT) 8-4
3. Danielle Mills/Claudia Wasilweski (UM) vs. Elizabeth Kilborn/Viet Ha Ngo (GT) 7-5 DNF

Amalgamate
Apr 24th, 2010, 01:17 AM
This may be a stupid question, but how long has Amanda McDowell not been playing for Georgia Tech?

tennisbuddy12
Apr 24th, 2010, 02:05 AM
This may be a stupid question, but how long has Amanda McDowell not been playing for Georgia Tech?

No, its not stupid! She played her last match in February....:sad:

desariofan
Apr 24th, 2010, 04:29 AM
As for SEC action quarters...

UF cruises past LSU 4-0 - highlight was Clair Barlette clenching @ #6
Then I swung by UGA vs USC action and it was epic, alas, USC upsets UGA 4-1, the lone win from Gullickson @ # 1.
I actually was rooting for UGA just so I can see UF whoops them ass in front of their home crowd LOL.
Tennessee takes down Vanderbilt 4-2, while Ole Miss takes down Arkansa 4-2


SEMIS : UF vs USC and TEN vs OM

fantic
Apr 24th, 2010, 04:49 AM
they are all useless...just can't help USC, can they :sobbing:

mboyle
Apr 24th, 2010, 09:10 AM
And I don't think Duke would've been #1 even if Cecil stayed :p

We may still have lost to UF. How that coach managed to snag Embree and Will I'll never know...but, every other match we have lost has been 4-3. Last year, we went into every match with a guaranteed point from number 1 singles, because Mal almost literally never lost. This year, we give up number 1 singles against every good team because Ellah is really a number 2 player. Liz Plotkin should really be playing 3 or 4 since she's coming back from injury. If we had Mal, we'd probably have Cecil, Nze, Zslinska, Plotkin, Granson and Clayton as our lineup. We sure as hell would not be losing to ragamuffin teams like Carolina (probably the most overrated tennis team ever...) I think we'd be 27-1 right now instead of 19-7. Oh well. I still have the men's basketball to be happy about...

its_a_racquet
Apr 24th, 2010, 02:35 PM
Mboyle (or tennisbuddy).......do you think if M. Cecil had 'do-overs', that she would play college tennis again for at least a 2nd year? After turning pro, I don't think she has cracked the top-300 yet so just curious if you have any insight. I know it hasn't even been a year yet.........

fantic
Apr 24th, 2010, 02:45 PM
We may still have lost to UF. How that coach managed to snag Embree and Will I'll never know...but, every other match we have lost has been 4-3. Last year, we went into every match with a guaranteed point from number 1 singles, because Mal almost literally never lost. This year, we give up number 1 singles against every good team because Ellah is really a number 2 player. Liz Plotkin should really be playing 3 or 4 since she's coming back from injury. If we had Mal, we'd probably have Cecil, Nze, Zslinska, Plotkin, Granson and Clayton as our lineup. We sure as hell would not be losing to ragamuffin teams like Carolina (probably the most overrated tennis team ever...) I think we'd be 27-1 right now instead of 19-7. Oh well. I still have the men's basketball to be happy about...

Cecil shouldn't have left for pro so early. Her individual and team victory wasn't complete, she lost to Gullickson at the

team tourney and was lucky not to have met G and Juricova during ind. tourney. And the team got lucky by Ilcinkas' injury during doubles at the team final. Moreover I think Falconi this year is better than last season's Cecil.

I'm really mad at Duke losing to FSU, thereby assisting in blowing USC's chance of hosting the NCAA regional :lol:

mboyle
Apr 24th, 2010, 10:47 PM
Mboyle (or tennisbuddy).......do you think if M. Cecil had 'do-overs', that she would play college tennis again for at least a 2nd year? After turning pro, I don't think she has cracked the top-300 yet so just curious if you have any insight. I know it hasn't even been a year yet.........

She really wanted to come back. She tried to sue the NCAA to let her come back if she gave back all her prize money, but they wouldn't let her do it. She worked really hard to rejoin the team but it just wouldn't work because she signed with an agent. If she hadn't signed with an agent, she could have gotten away with playing the open and then returning her prize money, but alas...

mboyle
Apr 24th, 2010, 10:51 PM
Cecil shouldn't have left for pro so early. Her individual and team victory wasn't complete, she lost to Gullickson at the

team tourney and was lucky not to have met G and Juricova during ind. tourney. And the team got lucky by Ilcinkas' injury during doubles at the team final. Moreover I think Falconi this year is better than last season's Cecil.

I'm really mad at Duke losing to FSU, thereby assisting in blowing USC's chance of hosting the NCAA regional :lol:

I don't think she was "lucky" not to have met Gullickson/Juricova. She was killing Jurikova in the team finals 6-4; 3-0 when Duke clinched, and Mal didn't lose to the same person twice all year. In fact, every time she played the same person again, she improved against them. She lost the first match to Cohen, then beat her 6-4; 6-1, then 6-2; 6-1, then 6-1; 6-0. She lost to Mosolova the first time, then beat her the second time. She took three sets against Muskavite (sp?) from Arkansas the first time, then beat her 6-3; 6-3 the second time.

To say that the team got lucky is just preposterous. We beat Cal 4-0 and were up in two of the other three matches. There's no doubt that Duke was the best women's tennis team last season. This season is sadly a different story...but at least we have some solid recruits for next year...hopefully we pick up Capra too.

Amalgamate
Apr 24th, 2010, 10:57 PM
She really wanted to come back. She tried to sue the NCAA to let her come back if she gave back all her prize money, but they wouldn't let her do it. She worked really hard to rejoin the team but it just wouldn't work because she signed with an agent. If she hadn't signed with an agent, she could have gotten away with playing the open and then returning her prize money, but alas...

When did all this hoopla occur? Poor Mallory, a few bad decisions :sad:

Amalgamate
Apr 24th, 2010, 11:01 PM
This season is sadly a different story...but at least we have some solid recruits for next year...hopefully we pick up Capra too.

You need Capra. As you said earlier, you don't have a number 1.

mboyle
Apr 24th, 2010, 11:14 PM
When did all this hoopla occur? Poor Mallory, a few bad decisions :sad:

Last fall. She was actually pretty set on returning to school as of June/July. I was really surprised she went pro. But yeah, it's kind of upsetting that UCLA and people get all these rando Romanian girls who didn't make it in the pros and are now like 24 years old, but Mal can't come back just because she played the Open as opposed to like the Bucharest open. I think they should be more forgiving...

And yes, we need Capra. Ellah could be a number one but her back is giving out, which is why she hasn't been as solid as she was the previous two years.

Amalgamate
Apr 24th, 2010, 11:24 PM
Last fall. She was actually pretty set on returning to school as of June/July. I was really surprised she went pro. But yeah, it's kind of upsetting that UCLA and people get all these rando Romanian girls who didn't make it in the pros and are now like 24 years old, but Mal can't come back just because she played the Open as opposed to like the Bucharest open. I think they should be more forgiving...

And yes, we need Capra. Ellah could be a number one but her back is giving out, which is why she hasn't been as solid as she was the previous two years.

Really? :unsure:

Dated August 27, 2009 a week before the US Open:

“It was a really tough decision,” Cecil said. “There were so many things drawing me back to Duke, but at the same time I feel like it’s my time. The [age] frame for women’s tennis is so young so I thought this is my opportunity to pursue my career. I had a great semester at Duke, a great team and so many great memories. It was a really tough decision, but I am excited to start this new journey.”
http://sports.chronicleblogs.com/2009/08/27/cecil-turns-pro/

Honestly, I am sure the first round money was enough incentive. I'd believe that come fall she was begging to return to Duke.

And yea, don't get me started on some of these foreign girls. If Mallory was willing to give up her prize money, and granted I don't know all the details, but I think she should have been able to return. The poor girl might be back at duke in the next year (maybe two) and she can't play on the team :sad:

johnnytennis
Apr 24th, 2010, 11:56 PM
Really? :unsure:

Dated August 27, 2009 a week before the US Open:

“It was a really tough decision,” Cecil said. “There were so many things drawing me back to Duke, but at the same time I feel like it’s my time. The [age] frame for women’s tennis is so young so I thought this is my opportunity to pursue my career. I had a great semester at Duke, a great team and so many great memories. It was a really tough decision, but I am excited to start this new journey.”
http://sports.chronicleblogs.com/2009/08/27/cecil-turns-pro/

Honestly, I am sure the first round money was enough incentive. I'd believe that come fall she was begging to return to Duke.

And yea, don't get me started on some of these foreign girls. If Mallory was willing to give up her prize money, and granted I don't know all the details, but I think she should have been able to return. The poor girl might be back at duke in the next year (maybe two) and she can't play on the team :sad:

And I just read what you get by going four years to Duke on the cost of a scholarship which is worth $50,750 a year. It's sad they dont take that in account when making their decision. It will take you a long time on the pro circuit to earn $203,000.

gouci
Apr 25th, 2010, 12:25 AM
But yeah, it's kind of upsetting that UCLA and people get all these rando Romanian girls who didn't make it in the pros and are now like 24 years old, but Mal can't come back just because she played the Open as opposed to like the Bucharest open. I think they should be more forgiving...
Who are you talking about please? :confused:
UCLA doesn't have any Romanians on their team. Plus I haven't heard of any Romanian in all of women's college tennis who is 24 years old. The closest is Gabriela Niculescu who is 23 and went to USC.

Amalgamate
Apr 25th, 2010, 12:33 AM
She should have maintained her amateur status longer and then made a more substantiated decision after more pro experience. I'm sure now she really regrets turning pro at that time.

desariofan
Apr 25th, 2010, 03:42 AM
Okay fair...but I want Mal back. I'm so hurt that we lost to effing CAROLINA twice in one season I can't tell you...Seriously...Shinann Featherson is actually obese, I felt like chanting the 1800-Jenny Craig number during her match, Katrina Tseng was a 2 star coming out of high school and sounds like she's constipated every time she hits the ball, Sanaz Marand doesn't have a backhand and is a raging b*tch to fans, and their number three girl looks like one of the Ivan brothers from the Capital One commercial. I've never seen a bigger bunch of misfits.

oh dear:eek:

gouci
Apr 25th, 2010, 04:08 AM
I'm waiting for your post Amalgamate! :lol:

Amalgamate
Apr 25th, 2010, 04:16 AM
I'm waiting for your post Amalgamate! :lol:

:scratch: How did you know I was writing a post? And what are you referring to? I spent so long on it -- too long!-- that when I went to post, I was logged out :crying2: :sobbing: Give me a few minutes to regroup, and I will respond.

its_a_racquet
Apr 25th, 2010, 04:17 AM
mboyle - your stock here just went to zero for me. while you are full of insights and information that are interesting.....your 'more than' personal attacks on players aren't appreciated.

of course there is a rivalry with duke and north carolina.....but that still doesn't give you the right to attack others personally.

at yet, you refer to jesus and God in your sign-off.....how very ironic.......

Amalgamate
Apr 25th, 2010, 04:44 AM
Okay fair...but I want Mal back. I'm so hurt that we lost to effing CAROLINA twice in one season I can't tell you...Seriously...Shinann Featherson is actually obese, I felt like chanting the 1800-Jenny Craig number during her match, Katrina Tseng was a 2 star coming out of high school and sounds like she's constipated every time she hits the ball, Sanaz Marand doesn't have a backhand and is a raging b*tch to fans, and their number three girl looks like one of the Ivan brothers from the Capital One commercial. I've never seen a bigger bunch of misfits.

Your comments are incredibly tasteless. :rolleyes: But actions always speak louder than words.... :secret: Your good friend God knows that!


Feb. 14, 2010
No. 11 North Carolina 4, No. 1 Duke 3
1. #6 Sanaz Marand/Sophie Grabinski (UNC) def. Ellah Nze/Amanda Granson (DU), 8-6
2. #22 Katrina Tsang/Shinann Featherston (UNC) def. Reka Zsilinszka/Elizabeth Plotkin (DU), 8-3 2 star and Jenny Craig annihilate two of Duke's stars? :eek:
3. Monica Gorny/Jessica Stiles (DU) def. Jocelyn Ffriend/Haley Hemm (UNC), 9-8 (4)
Order of finish: 2, 3, 1

Singles
1. #100 Katrina Tsang (UNC) def. #20 Reka Zsilinszka (DU), 6-2, 6-1 Constipated 2 star crushes former blue chip, #3 in her graduating class, and moon ball queen!:worship:
2. #25 Sanaz Marand (UNC) def. #91 Ellah Nze (DU), 7-6, 4-6, 6-4 Bitch with no backhand for the win! :)
3. Elizabeth Plotkin (DU) def. Jelena Durisic (UNC), 4-6, 6-4, 6-3
4. Zoe De Bruycker (UNC) def. #80 Amanda Granson (DU), 6-4, 7-6 Freshman beats seasoned senior :lick:
5. #63 Monica Gorny (DU) def. Sophie Grabinski (UNC), 6-4, 6-0
6. Mary Clayton (DU) def. Shinann Featherston (UNC), 7-6, 7-6
Order of finish: 1, 5, 4, 6, 3, 2




April 7, 2010
No. 2 North Carolina 4, No. 7 Duke 3
Doubles
1. #11 Sophie Grabinski/Sanaz Marand (UNC) def. #42 Amanda Granson/Ellah Nze (DU) 8-3
2. Monica Gorny/Mary Clayton (DU) def. #27 Katrina Tsang/Shinann Featherston (UNC) 9-7
3. #58 Reka Zsilinszka/Elizabeth Plotkin (DU) def. Jocelyn Ffriend/Haley Hemm (UNC) 8-5
Order of finish: 3, 1, 2

Singles
1. #32 Sanaz Marand (UNC) def. #40 Ellah Nze (DU) 6-4, 4-6, 6-3 No backhand bitch wins again!
2. #51 Katrina Tsang (UNC) def. #62 Elizabeth Plotkin (DU) 2-6, 6-2, 6-2 2 star defeats the loved Plotkin :hearts:
3. #39 Reka Zsilinszka (DU) def. Jelena Durisic (UNC) 6-4, 6-4
4. Amanda Granson (DU) def. #118 Sophie Grabinski (UNC) 7-5, 6-4
5. Shinann Featherston (UNC) def. Monica Gorny (DU) 6-2, 4-6, 7-5 Jenny Craig wins 7-5 in the 3rd? :eek: She didn't keel over after the second set? Wow! :bowdown:
6. Gina Suarez-Malaguti (UNC) def. Mary Clayton (DU) 6-2, 6-1 Ouch little Clayton.
Order of finish: 6, 3, 4, 2, 5, 1*

April 23, 2010
#14 Florida State University 4, #10 Duke 2

The next day...

April 24, 2010
No. 1 North Carolina 4, No. 14 Florida State University 0

Duke (19-7, 7-5 ACC)
UNC (26-3, 13-0 ACC)
:bigclap:

:woohoo: Misfits :woohoo:

"And to my fellow believers on this board, keep up the good fight."
- PREACH IT mboyle! AMEN! :cheer:


:spit:

johnnytennis
Apr 25th, 2010, 06:10 AM
Okay fair...but I want Mal back. I'm so hurt that we lost to effing CAROLINA twice in one season I can't tell you...Seriously...Shinann Featherson is actually obese, I felt like chanting the 1800-Jenny Craig number during her match, Katrina Tseng was a 2 star coming out of high school and sounds like she's constipated every time she hits the ball, Sanaz Marand doesn't have a backhand and is a raging b*tch to fans, and their number three girl looks like one of the Ivan brothers from the Capital One commercial. I've never seen a bigger bunch of misfits.

So tell us what you really think.

mboyle
Apr 25th, 2010, 06:23 AM
mboyle - your stock here just went to zero for me. while you are full of insights and information that are interesting.....your 'more than' personal attacks on players aren't appreciated.

of course there is a rivalry with duke and north carolina.....but that still doesn't give you the right to attack others personally.

at yet, you refer to jesus and God in your sign-off.....how very ironic.......

Do yall go to college? I mean people say way worse things than this. I mean, Sanaz said worse things than that to the fans in the stand during her match, so...especially between Duke and Carolina. It's like...part of the culture. But since people apparently don't understand that, I deleted my post. I apologize for offending you all. I just was poking fun at Carolina's team, seeing as they are our rivals...

fantic
Apr 25th, 2010, 06:33 AM
Well I understood, I think it's part of the fun of rivalry :lol: Hope everybody didn't take it too seriously :angel:

Amalgamate
Apr 25th, 2010, 06:36 AM
Do yall go to college? I mean people say way worse things than this. I mean, Sanaz said worse things than that to the fans in the stand during her match, so...especially between Duke and Carolina. It's like...part of the culture. But since people apparently don't understand that, I deleted my post. I apologize for offending you all. I just was poking fun at Carolina's team, seeing as they are our rivals...

Poking fun and being downright nasty (keep those things to your fellow devils) are two very different things.

mboyle
Apr 25th, 2010, 06:38 AM
Your comments are incredibly tasteless. :rolleyes: But actions always speak louder than words.... :secret: Your good friend God knows that!


Feb. 14, 2010
No. 11 North Carolina 4, No. 1 Duke 3
1. #6 Sanaz Marand/Sophie Grabinski (UNC) def. Ellah Nze/Amanda Granson (DU), 8-6
2. #22 Katrina Tsang/Shinann Featherston (UNC) def. Reka Zsilinszka/Elizabeth Plotkin (DU), 8-3 2 star and Jenny Craig annihilate two of Duke's stars? :eek:
3. Monica Gorny/Jessica Stiles (DU) def. Jocelyn Ffriend/Haley Hemm (UNC), 9-8 (4)
Order of finish: 2, 3, 1

Singles
1. #100 Katrina Tsang (UNC) def. #20 Reka Zsilinszka (DU), 6-2, 6-1 Constipated 2 star crushes former blue chip, #3 in her graduating class, and moon ball queen!:worship:
2. #25 Sanaz Marand (UNC) def. #91 Ellah Nze (DU), 7-6, 4-6, 6-4 Bitch with no backhand for the win! :)
3. Elizabeth Plotkin (DU) def. Jelena Durisic (UNC), 4-6, 6-4, 6-3
4. Zoe De Bruycker (UNC) def. #80 Amanda Granson (DU), 6-4, 7-6 Freshman beats seasoned senior :lick:
5. #63 Monica Gorny (DU) def. Sophie Grabinski (UNC), 6-4, 6-0
6. Mary Clayton (DU) def. Shinann Featherston (UNC), 7-6, 7-6
Order of finish: 1, 5, 4, 6, 3, 2




April 7, 2010
No. 2 North Carolina 4, No. 7 Duke 3
Doubles
1. #11 Sophie Grabinski/Sanaz Marand (UNC) def. #42 Amanda Granson/Ellah Nze (DU) 8-3
2. Monica Gorny/Mary Clayton (DU) def. #27 Katrina Tsang/Shinann Featherston (UNC) 9-7
3. #58 Reka Zsilinszka/Elizabeth Plotkin (DU) def. Jocelyn Ffriend/Haley Hemm (UNC) 8-5
Order of finish: 3, 1, 2

Singles
1. #32 Sanaz Marand (UNC) def. #40 Ellah Nze (DU) 6-4, 4-6, 6-3 No backhand bitch wins again!
2. #51 Katrina Tsang (UNC) def. #62 Elizabeth Plotkin (DU) 2-6, 6-2, 6-2 2 star defeats the loved Plotkin :hearts:
3. #39 Reka Zsilinszka (DU) def. Jelena Durisic (UNC) 6-4, 6-4
4. Amanda Granson (DU) def. #118 Sophie Grabinski (UNC) 7-5, 6-4
5. Shinann Featherston (UNC) def. Monica Gorny (DU) 6-2, 4-6, 7-5 Jenny Craig wins 7-5 in the 3rd? :eek: She didn't keel over after the second set? Wow! :bowdown:
6. Gina Suarez-Malaguti (UNC) def. Mary Clayton (DU) 6-2, 6-1 Ouch little Clayton.
Order of finish: 6, 3, 4, 2, 5, 1*

April 23, 2010
#14 Florida State University 4, #10 Duke 2

The next day...

April 24, 2010
No. 1 North Carolina 4, No. 14 Florida State University 0

Duke (19-7, 7-5 ACC)
UNC (26-3, 13-0 ACC)
:bigclap:

:woohoo: Misfits :woohoo:

"And to my fellow believers on this board, keep up the good fight."
- PREACH IT mboyle! AMEN! :cheer:


:spit:

I mean I'm well aware of the matches...I was at the second one. Liz Plotkin, by the way, injured her wrist after the first set, which is the only reason she lost. Also, Gorny was up 0-30 in the 5-5 game and then lost eight of the next ten points. Duke overall was up 3-1 with three matches in the third set, and we lost all three of them. Again, I'm pretty shocked at how people reacted though. The University Store sells t-shirts that read "Go to Hell Carolina" and we tell each of the players on the Carolina basketball team to eat sh*t when they come to Cameron as part of our chant. We get cheer sheets that instruct us to make personal attacks against the other team, like when Tennessee Lady Vols came we were instructed to chant "Wal Mart" and to throw Wal-Mart bags on court because one of their players had been caught shop lifting from Wal Mart three years before. It's nothing personal as in like if I saw them on the street. But obviously when they suit up in Carolina blue they become our rivals, and we want to beat our rivals. It's one thing when they are actually better and deserve to win, but it hurts when they have clear issues with their games and win anyway because they are better fighters. Perhaps you should read "To Hate Like This is to be Happy Forever". I think it's hard to comprehend the Duke-Carolina rivalry if you aren't part of it, and maybe I forget that sometimes since I am part of it, so I'm sorry, but I definitely wasn't like...hating the individuals. Like obviously if we were on the street I'd help them in a heartbeat if they needed something, but when they suit up, they represent UNC, which is Duke's rival, and half the fun of sports is hating your rival...

Amalgamate
Apr 25th, 2010, 06:54 AM
I mean I'm well aware of the matches...I was at the second one. Liz Plotkin, by the way, injured her wrist after the first set, which is the only reason she lost. Also, Gorny was up 0-30 in the 5-5 game and then lost eight of the next ten points. Duke overall was up 3-1 with three matches in the third set, and we lost all three of them. Again, I'm pretty shocked at how people reacted though. The University Store sells t-shirts that read "Go to Hell Carolina" and we tell each of the players on the Carolina basketball team to eat sh*t when they come to Cameron as part of our chant. We get cheer sheets that instruct us to make personal attacks against the other team, like when Tennessee Lady Vols came we were instructed to chant "Wal Mart" and to throw Wal-Mart bags on court because one of their players had been caught shop lifting from Wal Mart three years before. It's nothing personal as in like if I saw them on the street. But obviously when they suit up in Carolina blue they become our rivals, and we want to beat our rivals. It's one thing when they are actually better and deserve to win, but it hurts when they have clear issues with their games and win anyway because they are better fighters. Perhaps you should read "To Hate Like This is to be Happy Forever". I think it's hard to comprehend the Duke-Carolina rivalry if you aren't part of it, and maybe I forget that sometimes since I am part of it, so I'm sorry, but I definitely wasn't like...hating the individuals. Like obviously if we were on the street I'd help them in a heartbeat if they needed something, but when they suit up, they represent UNC, which is Duke's rival, and half the fun of sports is hating your rival...

:yawn: My brother went to Duke undergrad and Duke for grad school. I comprehend the Duke-Carolina rivalry. I just didn't think the college slurs used when drunkenly shit-talking at a basketball game was appropriate for the forum setting.

1. The whole point of my post was to tell you, look dude, UNC is better this year. Look no further than Florida State.
2. Don't talk about "issues with their games". Reka is on your team. But she is a fighter and that's why she wins. Every UNC player could be a former two star and overweight, but at the end of the day if they beat you guys --which they did-- then damn, they must be scrappier and fight harder.
3. I don't know if you play tennis or really any other sport (and this isn't an insult, I genuinely do not know) but not looking like a misfit has very little to do with winning at the end of the day. You yourself said UNC are fighters. How does that sting? Heart outweighs technique.

gouci
Apr 25th, 2010, 07:01 AM
I've done more than my share to keep the UC Irvine - Long Beach St. rivalry bitter, at least among the fans. :boxing:

But I don't cross the line into personal attacks. :o

Be aware there's a different standard what can be said privately in the stands and what can be posted on a public board.

Amalgamate
Apr 25th, 2010, 07:02 AM
I've done more than my share to keep the UC Irvine - Long Beach St. rivalry bitter, at least among the fans. :boxing:

But I don't cross the line into personal attacks. :o

Be aware there's a different standard what can be said privately in the stands and what can be posted on a public board.

:worship: Well, you can just delete all my posts now. :lol:

fantic
Apr 25th, 2010, 07:06 AM
I've done more than my share to keep the UC Irvine - Long Beach St. rivalry bitter, at least among the fans. :boxing:

But I don't cross the line into personal attacks. :o

Be aware there's a different standard what can be said privately in the stands and what can be posted on a public board.

gouci I LOVE you and form bitching each other :lol:

Amalgamate
Apr 25th, 2010, 07:11 AM
gouci I LOVE you and form bitching each other :lol:

:confused: Gouci's "bitching" here was not referring to form. Are you referencing the actual post you quoted or just the historical form and gouci banter?

fantic
Apr 25th, 2010, 07:23 AM
of course the latter :angel: they do that all the time, it's quite entertaining :lol:

mboyle
Apr 25th, 2010, 07:48 AM
:yawn: My brother went to Duke undergrad and Duke for grad school. I comprehend the Duke-Carolina rivalry. I just didn't think the college slurs used when drunkenly shit-talking at a basketball game was appropriate for the forum setting.

1. The whole point of my post was to tell you, look dude, UNC is better this year. Look no further than Florida State.
2. Don't talk about "issues with their games". Reka is on your team. But she is a fighter and that's why she wins. Every UNC player could be a former two star and overweight, but at the end of the day if they beat you guys --which they did-- then damn, they must be scrappier and fight harder.
3. I don't know if you play tennis or really any other sport (and this isn't an insult, I genuinely do not know) but not looking like a misfit has very little to do with winning at the end of the day. You yourself said UNC are fighters. How does that sting? Heart outweighs technique.

I mean okay you've made your point. Maybe it wasn't appropriate. I deleted the post. I never meant to offend people. People talk about Reka's moonballs all the time and I don't go ballistic. I thought it was funny, but whatever.

UNC is better this year in terms of results. Duke is mentally a mess right now. UNC is kind of like Wozniacki to me. I have no idea how they are so good, but they are mentally quite tough and they know how to win. But it's still frustrating when you can see clearly how Duke could have won the match, how, technically, shot for shot, they were a better team (indicated by their high school ratings, if nothing else), but they got out fought and Carolina got into their heads. Kudos to them. I will say that Duke blanketed Florida State 4-0 last week, so I'm really confused how we lost to them Friday, but whatever.

fantic
Apr 25th, 2010, 08:06 AM
Well I saw Nze and Marand at NCAA last year and they are both good players.

And Marand was especially good against Mijacika, I think.

I also think Marand/Grabinsky doubles were pretty solid at Riviera this season(last year). They were

also highly ranked last season, if I remember rightly.

fantic
Apr 25th, 2010, 08:17 AM
I don't think she was "lucky" not to have met Gullickson/Juricova. She was killing Jurikova in the team finals 6-4; 3-0 when Duke clinched, and Mal didn't lose to the same person twice all year. In fact, every time she played the same person again, she improved against them. She lost the first match to Cohen, then beat her 6-4; 6-1, then 6-2; 6-1, then 6-1; 6-0. She lost to Mosolova the first time, then beat her the second time. She took three sets against Muskavite (sp?) from Arkansas the first time, then beat her 6-3; 6-3 the second time.

To say that the team got lucky is just preposterous. We beat Cal 4-0 and were up in two of the other three matches. There's no doubt that Duke was the best women's tennis team last season. This season is sadly a different story...but at least we have some solid recruits for next year...hopefully we pick up Capra too.

It's not preposterous at ALL. Granted Duke was a strong team, but still, Ilcinkas had to RETIRE at the

crucial moment at #2 doubles. And I think Cal #1 doubles was winning, no? Now that injury gave the

momentum entirely to duke, it NATURALLY affected singles play. Ilcinkas was singles #4. Duke won

singles #5 & 6, aside from #3.

And again, Cecil was lucky not to have met Gullickson and Juricova. That's a fact.

tennisbuddy12
Apr 25th, 2010, 08:27 AM
I went to tennisrecruit and Tsang wasn't a 2 star...she wasn't rated and when she was, she was top 10

mboyle
Apr 25th, 2010, 09:16 AM
It's not preposterous at ALL. Granted Duke was a strong team, but still, Ilcinkas had to RETIRE at the

crucial moment at #2 doubles. And I think Cal #1 doubles was winning, no? Now that injury gave the

momentum entirely to duke, it NATURALLY affected singles play. Ilcinkas was singles #4. Duke won

singles #5 & 6, aside from #3.

And again, Cecil was lucky not to have met Gullickson and Juricova. That's a fact.

She didn't retire, Cecil/Robinson won 8-5. Cal was up 7-5 at number 1 doubles.
Cecil was up 6-4; 3-0 at number 1
Ellah lost the first set but was up a break in the second at number 2
Even if we lost 4,5 and 6 (highly unlikely), we still could have won that match. Duke lost the doubles rubber against Arkansas, Northwestern and several other good teams throughout the year and still killed everyone in singles. Duke didn't get lucky. They were clearly the team to beat.

Cecil was KILLING Juricova. Maybe you could argue that she would have lost to Gullickson, but whatever. She still has the title.

fantic
Apr 25th, 2010, 01:00 PM
Ilcinkas just STAYED on the rest of the doubles, she couldn't even MOVE, she hurt her ankle or something,

of course Duke #2 doubles got an easy win. And she COULD NOT play singles.

You do know that Bobusic, #5, had a monster performance at NW R regional and almost

upset Boonstra, #1 of UF who defeated Barte at the NCAA? :)

Cal had to fill #6 by utilising Ravelojaona, Bobusic had to play 4, Chang 5, respectively.

It was an emergency situation. Again, Duke got lucky.

its_a_racquet
Apr 25th, 2010, 01:19 PM
Do yall go to college? I mean people say way worse things than this. I mean, Sanaz said worse things than that to the fans in the stand during her match, so...especially between Duke and Carolina. It's like...part of the culture. But since people apparently don't understand that, I deleted my post. I apologize for offending you all. I just was poking fun at Carolina's team, seeing as they are our rivals...


Boyle - fans at Davis Cup are different than most professional tennis matches. In college tennis, fans at Baylor, North Carolina and Duke (just to name the three most obvious ones) are different too. Do the slurs and personal attacks thrown out at players during matches (and during points at times) work to impact opponents? Do the NC fans hanging on the fence yelling from 15 ft away at opponents during points help the NC team?

Maybe those slurs and attacks help their teams, but in my opinion, it sure shows the character and true nature of those people. I think and believe very strongly that behavior crosses from 'rivalry' or 'it's just college' to poor sportsmanship and at least for sports like tennis, there's no room for that.

If Duke and NC want to behave that way when playing each other go for it, but leave it at that, and leave it off this message board.

And finally.....Boyle........you were courteous enough to remove your original post but it is now copied 3 - 4 times here in replies to you.....so until those are removed......you've done nothing to 'fix' your behavior.

gouci
Apr 25th, 2010, 05:02 PM
Maybe those slurs and attacks help their teams, but in my opinion, it sure shows the character and true nature of those people.
...
And finally.....Boyle........you were courteous enough to remove your original post but it is now copied 3 - 4 times here in replies to you.....so until those are removed......you've done nothing to 'fix' your behavior.its_a_racquet I will have to disagree with you on 1 point. It's not about the "true nature" of people which suggests something not correctable. It's about flawed ideas thinking certain behavior is OK usually resulting from immaturity or over reacting from the heat of the moment. You can try to correct the flawed ideas by pointing out why it's not OK behavior and hope it sinks in.

And you shouldn't blame mboyle for something beyond his control like his post being copied. :lol:

its_a_racquet
Apr 25th, 2010, 11:52 PM
Gouci - I'm sure you had a point which was deep and meaningful in the first part of your response but you lost me.....don't bother trying again.....I'm more than ok if you disagree with me and just leave it at that.

And all I was saying to MBoyle was to not feel better about taking back his words by removing his post. That doesn't do much on this board since the words are still plastered about here.......not 'blaming' him for anything.

gouci
Apr 26th, 2010, 07:04 AM
Marshall could bounce into at large contention with yesterday's huge win over # 27 TCU... could make them mid 40's...At least you got the state of Texas right. :happy:
The team Marshall upset isn't TCU but is from Texas. :cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo:

mboyle
Apr 27th, 2010, 07:22 AM
Ilcinkas just STAYED on the rest of the doubles, she couldn't even MOVE, she hurt her ankle or something,

of course Duke #2 doubles got an easy win. And she COULD NOT play singles.

You do know that Bobusic, #5, had a monster performance at NW R regional and almost

upset Boonstra, #1 of UF who defeated Barte at the NCAA? :)

Cal had to fill #6 by utilising Ravelojaona, Bobusic had to play 4, Chang 5, respectively.

It was an emergency situation. Again, Duke got lucky.

I could just as easily say Cal got lucky. Liz Plotkin tore her ACL. Tara Iyer hurt her back and could not play. Tara was a top 50 national player and Liz Plotkin was one of the best recruits in the country when she got to Duke. Injuries are part of tennis. But when you beat a team 4-0, luck has nothing to do with it. You would have won anyway. It's not like Cal number 2 was up huge when the injury occurred. Maybe it would have been 4-2 or something without the injury, but I just think you're dreaming if you think Cal had a chance in that match the way the Duke girls played.

fantic
Apr 27th, 2010, 07:43 AM
Plotkin, Iyer? Don't remember if they competed in the NCAA last year. Ilcinkas was actually PLAYING in the tourney and got injured DURING THE MATCH. TOTALLY DIFFERENT.

And r~ight, Then obviously NU coach was dreaming too when she said that she felt Cal was the best team in the country, eh?

this is the link; http://www.aggieathletics.com/ncaa2009/tennis/match11women.html

Sweet Dreams :wavey:

And uh...last time I checked Juricova was losing the 2nd set 2-3 :p

Let's see, Cal would've won the dbls point,

#1 could go either way,

#2 Cossou will win (ranked 26), Nze 37th

#3 Z

#4 Ilcinkas

#5 Bobusic

#6 dunno

Cal losing to Duke 2-4? Absolutely NO way, sir. :)

USTennisfan
Apr 27th, 2010, 08:10 PM
New Ranking is out for 4/27/10

USTennisfan
Apr 27th, 2010, 08:11 PM
Rank Avg School Last Week
1 79.75 Baylor University 2
2 77.04 North Carolina 1
3 75.26 University of Florida 3
4 69.67 University of Michigan 4
5 65.51 Northwestern University 6
6 65.22 University of Notre Dame 5
7 64.31 UCLA 7
8 63.11 Stanford 9
9 58.75 Clemson University 8
10 57.87 Duke University 10
11 54.86 University of Miami (Florida) 11
12 51.00 California 12
13 49.42 Georgia Tech 20
14 47.91 University of Tennessee 13
15 44.87 Florida State University 14
16 39.38 University of Mississippi 17
17 39.21 University of South Carolina 16
18 39.18 University of Texas at Austin 19
19 37.41 University of Georgia 15
20 34.52 University of Southern California 18

USTennisfan
Apr 27th, 2010, 08:11 PM
Rank Avg School Last Week
1 79.75 Baylor University 2
2 77.04 North Carolina 1
3 75.26 University of Florida 3
4 69.67 University of Michigan 4
5 65.51 Northwestern University 6
6 65.22 University of Notre Dame 5
7 64.31 UCLA 7
8 63.11 Stanford 9
9 58.75 Clemson University 8
10 57.87 Duke University 10
11 54.86 University of Miami (Florida) 11
12 51.00 California 12
13 49.42 Georgia Tech 20
14 47.91 University of Tennessee 13
15 44.87 Florida State University 14
16 39.38 University of Mississippi 17
17 39.21 University of South Carolina 16
18 39.18 University of Texas at Austin 19
19 37.41 University of Georgia 15
20 34.52 University of Southern California 18

10sE
Apr 27th, 2010, 09:11 PM
Pretty tight there for that 16 spot. Could Texas take it with a couple of good wins in the Big 12 tournament?

Tennisace
Apr 27th, 2010, 09:52 PM
Does anyone know how the NCAA tournament placement works? Specifically is Cal most likely to draw the first Pac-10 team that is not hosting a regional (i.e. as of now USC)?

2nd_serve
Apr 27th, 2010, 10:31 PM
Does anyone know how the NCAA tournament placement works? Specifically is Cal most likely to draw the first Pac-10 team that is not hosting a regional (i.e. as of now USC)?

This is the memo (http://www.itatennis.com/Assets/ita_assets/pdf/NCAA+Championships/2010+NCAA+Championships/2010+NCAA+Championship+Memo.pdf) that explains it. It is also found as a link from the ITA ranking page.

I believe that they avoid having same conference teams play each other in the first round.

2nd_serve
Apr 27th, 2010, 10:42 PM
oops, that memo and this handbook (http://web1.ncaa.org/web_files/champ_handbooks/tennis/2010/10_1_mw_tennis.pdf) explain the procedures. I find the handbook confusing, it is as if they say that they will be using calculation with strength of schedule, with three other criterias, and then say ignore that, we are going to use the ITA rankings.

Amalgamate
Apr 27th, 2010, 11:33 PM
Thoughts:

Baylor :o They don't start one American girl.
I think Flordia being ranked below UNC is silly. Florida hasn't lost a match since indoors (where come on, they aren't exactly an indoor powerhouse) and they crushed UNC 6-1. (Yes, I know rankings don't work quite like this)
Stanford finally a top 8 seed! :yeah:

A few strong teams that you could argue are leading the pack (e.g. Baylor, Florida) but the tourney looks to be quite open this year.

johnnytennis
Apr 27th, 2010, 11:38 PM
Pretty tight there for that 16 spot. Could Texas take it with a couple of good wins in the Big 12 tournament?

The only good win that would help Texas in the rankings is beating Baylor. Beating any other team in the Big 12 Tournament wont help them at all.

johnnytennis
Apr 27th, 2010, 11:52 PM
Thoughts:

Baylor :o They don't start one American girl.
I think Flordia being ranked below UNC is silly. Florida hasn't lost a match since indoors (where come on, they aren't exactly an indoor powerhouse) and they crushed UNC 6-1. (Yes, I know rankings don't work quite like this)
Stanford finally a top 8 seed! :yeah:

A few strong teams that you could argue are leading the pack (e.g. Baylor, Florida) but the tourney looks to be quite open this year.

With you pretty much wanting to give the trophy to Baylor or Florida, that's normally the kiss of death especially with so many strong teams out there this year. I could see one of eight or nine teams that could win the Championship this year!

Amalgamate
Apr 28th, 2010, 12:53 AM
With you pretty much wanting to give the trophy to Baylor or Florida, that's normally the kiss of death especially with so many strong teams out there this year. I could see one of eight or nine teams that could win the Championship this year!

What do you mean "wanting to give the trophy to Baylor or Florida"? Those are the last two teams I want to see win, especially Florida. And kiss of death for what? It would be bad if I was competing against these teams this year, but I'm not. How could my comment in any way be a kiss of death?

Tennisace
Apr 28th, 2010, 12:53 AM
I didn't mean that Cal would draw a Pac-10 opponent in the first round but rather that it is quite likely that they will have USC in their regional. I'm assuming that Washington will head to UCLA. ASU to Stanford and then Cal to USC.

gouci
Apr 28th, 2010, 02:01 AM
Dropped Out = 1

73. Akron


Got Ranked

60. North Texas