[2nd_serve]

Originally Posted by RobertCB

An automatic review would be great but I do not think there would be enough available resources to review all of the potential conflicts. And putting your end of the sentence sarcasm aside, the NCAA will probably continue to ask its body to self police and report "potential" violations with the understanding that the reporting party may not be privy to all of the material facts; and therefore, not stigmatize the reporting as filing a "false accusation of cheating".

I am suggesting the automatic review only for the back to back matches where a player is moved more than one position. A computer guy could write that code in an easy afternoon. And by being an automatic review it would be without a moral overlay, or a gaming agenda.

[RobertCB]

Okay I get it, I am not hip to all the rule details, the mere act in its self is a violation so no follow-up is needed. I just assumed that the computer would spit out all the irregularities, now there would be no need for coaches to self police, and then a NCAA staff member would be required to investigate each occurrence to see if there was a legitimate reason for the change. Bad assumption on my part .

[tennisbuddy12]

I am not saying it's wrong that LB reported. They should have, but they didn't report it to be fair for other teams. The team they reported have personal issues between them. Did UCI cheat? Who knows and that is a different situation. I am not going to disclose what I know due to me being a confidant. I believe that any team reported, should have each violation sought into detail. I see why the injury excuse isn't used because it can be abused. Again, when I said LB was being "shady," it had nothing to do with them reporting it, but WHY they reported that specific team. LB has a personal vendetta against different teams and THAT is why they reported this specific violation.

[beachman49]

Taking you at your word that there is some issue between the coaches can I suggest you might want to temper 'numerous' vendetta number down to two schools? Does that constitute numerous? I personally hope more schools turn each other in and the rampant cheating will be greatly reduced. Tennisace idea for a computer program seems too logical. Great idea Mr. tennisace.

[RobertCB]

tennisbuddy12, I would argue that the personal vendetta is the other way around and you are like a NBA referee that just catches the tail end of the play; however, I do acknowledge that our frame of reference maybe a little different. Now can we get back to posting about UCI .

[tennisbuddy12]

Originally Posted by RobertCB

tennisbuddy12, I would argue that the personal vendetta is the other way around and you are like a NBA referee that just catches the tail end of the play; however, I do acknowledge that our frame of reference maybe a little different. Now can we get back to posting about UCI .

Believe what you want. Obviously, you are on the in with LB and that's fine. The great thing about this board is that we can have and share our own opinions, but I don't like bashing other teams and if that's what (you think lol) I've been doing, that is totally not what I was hoping.

[fantic]

UF; Oyen at #3

She wasn't that spectacular at Riviera(although I DO like her play, and her drop shot is just )
Moreover she lost to Janowicz at the Regional.
No way she's #3 according to strength.

[UFGatorFan]

Originally Posted by fantic

UF; Oyen at #3

She wasn't that spectacular at Riviera(although I DO like her play, and her drop shot is just )
Moreover she lost to Janowicz at the Regional.
No way she's #3 according to strength.

Different day, different results. Today she gets a win over Plotkin in straights, while Mather had to go to 3 sets, and Janowicz and Cercone lost. I truly believe 3-6 is interchangeable. It's about matchups. I don't think Oyen at #3 is far fetched. It doesn't scream a violation of order of strength.

[fantic]

Well I thought Nze is more well known than Plotkin
And Janowicz and Cercone lost at 5 & 6??

[fantic]

to be fair, I'll confess on MY part;

I think USC doubles #1 and #2 should be switched.

Pulido/Ramos is losing now. Regional semi was just matchup,
they both knew each other well so it contributed to the outcome,
methink.

I mean, a team that leads Cako/Hein 7-1 simply canNOT be #2,
moreover that team actually WON the UNLV invite.

So Christian/Sanchez should be #1, and Pulido/Ramos #2, and I think
that's better for the team to have a chance of win, too.

What if Pulido/Ramos lose #1 and Lao/Kinstler at #3 also loses?

[spartyfan]

Interesting switch since it is hard to see how it was justified to begin with. It is even harder to justify it afterwards.
But it's working..

#43 Pepperdine 4, #67 U. of San Diego 3
Doubles
1. Issara/Zalameda (PEPP) def. Coupez/Maja Sujica (USD) 8-3
2. Colffer/Moore (PEPP) vs. Claus/Escalona (USD) 5-7, Susp.
3. Bhargava/Oates (PEPP) def. Depenau/Hoffpauir (USD) 8-5
Pepperdine Wins Doubles Point
Singles
1. Stephanie Hoffpauir (USD) def. Marie Zalameda (PEPP) 6-0, 6-4
2. Anamika Bhargava (PEPP) def. Laura Claus (USD) 3-6, 6-4, 6-2
3. Khunpak Issara (PEPP) def. Josymar Escalona (USD) 4-6, 6-1, 6-2
4. Arianna Colffer (PEPP) def. Juliette Coupez (USD) 6-2, 6-2
5. Anna Depenau (USD) def. Andrea Oates (PEPP) 6-3, 3-6, 6-2
6. Marite Raygada (USD) def. Megan Moore (PEPP) 6-3, 6-1
Match Notes
San Diego 1-2; National ranking #67
Pepperdine 2-1; National ranking #43
Order of finish: Doubles (1,3); Singles (4,6,1,3,5,2)


Despite both losingin similar scores, Escalona and Claus are switched

#67 San Diego 4, #15 Washington 3
Doubles
(1) Denise Dy/Venise Chan (UW) def. Juliette Coupez/Stephanie Hoffpauir (USD) 8-3
(2) Josymar Escalona/Laura Claus (USD) def. Andjela Nemcevic/Samantha Smith (UW) 8-4
(3) Maja Sujica/Anna Depenau (USD) def. Aleksandra Krsljanin/Adriana Pavlovic (UW) 8-1
Order of finish: 3, 1, 2*
USD wins doubles point.
Singles
(1) #55 Venise Chan (UW) def. Stephanie Hoffpauir (USD) 6-1, 6-4
(2) #6 Denise Dy (UW) def. Josymar Escalona (USD) 6-4, 6-4
(3) Laura Claus (USD) def. Samantha Smith (UW) 6-3, 5-7, 7-6 (5)
(4) Andjela Nemcevic (UW) def. Juliette Coupez (USD) 4-6, 6-4, 7-5
(5) Anna Depenau (USD) def. Aleksandra Krsljanin (UW) 6-3, 6-0
(6) Marite Raygada (USD) def. Adriana Pavlovic (UW) 6-1, 7-6 (4)
Order of finish: 5, 1, 2, 6, 4, 3*


#49 San Diego 4, #58 Arizona 3
Doubles
(1) Landsman/Marks (UA) def. Hoffpauir/Coupez (USD) 8-5
(2) Escalona/Claus (USD) def. #68 Stubbe/Smyth (UA) 8-4
(3) Sujica/Depenau (USD) def. McRann/Huh (UA) 8-3
USD wins doubles point.
Order of finish: 1, 2, 3
Singles
(1) Stephanie Hoffpauir (USD) def. Natasha Marks (UA) 1-6, 6-2, 6-0
(2) Sarah Landsman (UA) def. Josymar Escalona (USD) 6-1, 6-3
(3) Lacey Smyth (UA) def. Laura Claus (USD) 6-4, 6-3
(4) Kim Stubbe (UA) def. Juliette Coupez (USD) 4-6, 6-3, 6-4
(5) Anna Depenau (USD) def. Susan McRann (UA) 7-5, 6-1
(6) Maja Sujica (USD) def. Jane Huh (UA) 6-0, 6-2
Order of finish: 2, 6, 3, 5, 1*, 4


#49 San Diego 5, #27 South Florida 2
Doubles
(1) Hoffpauir/Coupez (USD) def. #25 Bejlkova/Alonso (USF) 8-7 (4)
(2) Escalona/Claus (USD) def. Vasenina/Bonte (USF) 8-4
(3) Depenau/Sujica (USD) def. Rehberger/Parker (USF) 8-6
San Diego wins doubles point.
Order of finish: 2, 3*, 1
Singles
(1) Stephanie Hoffpauir (USD) def. #24 Irene Rehberger (USF) 6-2, 3-6, 6-4
(2) Ecaterina Vasenina (USF) def. Josymar Escalona (USD) 6-4, 6-1
(3) Laura Claus (USD) def. Loreto Alonso (USF) 6-4, 6-4
(4) Janette Bejlkova (USF) def. Juliette Coupez (USD) 3-6, 6-1, 6-1
(5) Anna Depenau (USD) def. Alessandra Bonte (USF) 6-4, 2-6, 6-4
(6) Marite Raygada (USD) def. Kate Parker (USF) 6-3, 6-4
Order of finish: 2, 4, 3, 6, 1*, 5

If that is legal than those are some impressive wins and USD should be climbing the Top 30 quickly?

[fantic]

frankly I wasn't that impressed with Escalona. Think she should play #4 or lower.

[fantic]

I highlighted Duke and UCLA doubles, but UF is also experimenting with
Will /Cercone from March, 4 matches in a row. Is this kind of switching linueps
allowed even in March? What if they do like this through the conference title matches?
Are they allowed then to send the 'original ranked' doubles into the doubles championship
at Stanford?

[fantic]

Those Fahoum related posts should've been posted here

Anyway, Nadine seems to have been put to an 'ordeal' like Wozniacki at GM

(of course, by me )

Is she the 'rightful' #1, the best player in the team, even though she's

ranked WAY BELOW Reka?

Today she proved her mettle, beating Bek in 3 sets (double bagel), but it's still

only one match, against not-so-powerful and struggling Josipa (she had SO many 3 setters

this season )

Anyway Nadine joins the 'august' list of winners who beat Josipa this season;

Chan, Urbina, De Bruycker, Sanchez, Will, Muresan, Eichkorn.

Let's see if she can maintain the 'momentum' during the ACC tourney and at Stanford NCAA

P.S. By the way, Duke is still maintaining the Nze/Fahoum split in doubles. Wonder if they WILL
play NCAA doubles, which I don't think they should, since they're not playing together for
a long~~ time

[fantic]

CAL.

Cossou at #6

(

FYI She was one of the best #2s in the NATION)

She seemed okay when playing Andrews (USC)

(Dunno why she wasn't playing all season either )

Goransson, who is either #3 or 4, is struggling right now.

Cossou definitely should play above her