[fantic]

Stanford 2~4 lineup;

In this case I agree to Tennisace's notion to put their lineup according to rank.

RANK

GIBBS 12
AHN 17
BURDETTE 22

LINEUP

BURDETTE #2
AHN #3
GIBBS #4

Gibbs is simply too dominant.

Moreover Ahn is struggling right now, losing the first set against Pulido who's form is
like crap this season (you could argue she only won because Pulido got reinjured
at the close of the 1st set. Val retired in the 3rd.) ,
also losing a set against Bhargava of PEP,
allowing Samantha Smith of UW to take 5 games in the 2nd,
def. Melissa McQueen of Fresno State 4-6, 7-6 (6), 1-0 (3)

But like Duke, Stanford won't take chances, I guess

[fantic]

Hell, you could even argue that Gibbs should play #1 right now.

Because Barte is struggling too.

Lost to Juricova (granted, it's a retirement )
Lost to Sanchez 3,3 (While Gibbs forced a 3 setter at UNLV invite)
Lost to Dy 67, 67,
def McCall Jones 7-6, 3-6, 6-1
def. Liz Fournier of WSU 75, 60
def. Pavlina Smatova of UO 63, 75
def. Zoe De Bruycker 76, 62
U against Claudine Paulson of Arkansas 75,65
( Claudine is #4 of Arkansas)
def. Marta Lesniak of SMU 64,76(2)

Not exactly the result worthy of #4 in the nation..

[2nd_serve]

Fantic,
I think your being very enthusiastic for the topic by bringing up order of strength on Stanford. Gibbs is great, but its not going to happen during this year that she plays #1. As to Burdette/Ahn/Gibbs, I observe that when they are changed in order of the line-up, it does not involve a strategic decision to take a loss at a lower position, in order to have a better chance to get more wins, but might involve the motivation that it is important for every player on the team to play competitive matches during the season, so she is match tough when the NCAA's begin.

[Amalgamate]

Originally Posted by fantic

Hell, you could even argue that Gibbs should play #1 right now.

Because Barte is struggling too.

Lost to Juricova (granted, it's a retirement )
Lost to Sanchez 3,3 (While Gibbs forced a 3 setter at UNLV invite)
Lost to Dy 67, 67,
def McCall Jones 7-6, 3-6, 6-1
def. Liz Fournier of WSU 75, 60
def. Pavlina Smatova or UO 63, 75
def. Zoe De Bruycker 76, 62
U against Paulson of Arkansas 57,56
def. Marta Lesniak of SMU 64,76(2)

Not exactly the result worthy of #4 in the nation..

What? Barte only lost once to someone ranked lower than her (Dy). And Dy is ranked #5.

[fantic]

Originally Posted by 2nd_serve

Fantic,
I think your being very enthusiastic for the topic by bringing up order of strength on Stanford. Gibbs is great, but its not going to happen during this year that she plays #1. As to Burdette/Ahn/Gibbs, I observe that when they are changed in order of the line-up, it does not involve a strategic decision to take a loss at a lower position, in order to have a better chance to get more wins, but might involve the motivation that it is important for every player on the team to play competitive matches during the season, so she is match tough when the NCAA's begin.

Well, this topic IS fun, so dabbling in it is a harmless experiment I think. And you KNOW that I'm not bringing this only against Stanford, hell I even brought the issue against USC. One just have to ask uncomfortable questions sometimes (maybe I have a talent for a reporter )

And you know, Gibbs IS currently the 2ND BEST RANKED PLAYER IN THE TEAM, no matter what AND, her results are quite impressive too As I said, Gibbs forced a 3 setter against Sanchez while Barte...

[fantic]

Originally Posted by Amalgamate

What? Barte only lost once to someone ranked lower than her (Dy). And Dy is ranked #5.

Oh come on, I just illustrated the detailed match results. Please erase 'Barte' just for a moment( I KNOW you would have no objection had it been Will of UF ) and just look at the results. Do you honestly think those are the dominant results for the #4 in the nation?

Amal I know you have an affection for Stanford, but let's try to be a tad more objective for this minute

[2nd_serve]

Originally Posted by fantic

Well, this topic IS fun, so dabbling in it is a harmless experiment I think. And you KNOW that I'm not bringing this only against Stanford, hell I even brought the issue against USC. One just have to ask uncomfortable questions sometimes (maybe I have a talent for a reporter )

+1 Google, like FB

[2nd_serve]

As for the matches that Barte did not dominate against lower player, I take that as a sign that she can still totally win even when she doesn't have her stuff that day. After all, she did win all those matches, and Amal, is right, the only loss she had was to #5 Dy, and that was two tiebreakers.

[fantic]

Originally Posted by 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?

bump.

[fantic]

Originally Posted by 2nd_serve

As for the matches that Barte did not dominate against lower player, I take that as a sign that she can still totally win even when she doesn't have her stuff that day. After all, she did win all those matches, and Amal, is right, the only loss she had was to #5 Dy, and that was two tiebreakers.

Fair enough. I just 'observed' from a different point of view She struggles too often against MUCH lower ranked players. I mean, struggling against #4 player of Arkansas? No offense to Paulson, but it is what it is

[fantic]

UCLA.

So, is Dolehide (5) better than Johansson (6) right now?

I think not.

I think it's even arguable that Pantic and

Seguso are better than Dolehide right now..

[fantic]

there is a certain 'trend' this year, that being transfers playing #1

Fahoum of Duke, Jones of UCLA, Novakova of Baylor, O'Neill of GT

OF those Fahoum and Jones are pretty similar in that;

1. good doubles players(Fahoum at Old Dominion and Jones at BYU
were pretty good, scoring some upsets at Riviera and NCAA as such)
2. and both playing #2 doubles
3. losing singles
4. Former #3s, now still at #3s, playing comfortably swiping opponents,
Reka Z and Andrea Remynse.

[fantic]

you could of course argue that Nina Secerbegovic, who was one of the best #2 in the nation last season, deserves the #1 spot(she upset Schnack at the NCAA, which I more or less predicted at that time).

Look at the match results at ITA website. Nina scoring like 15 matches winning streak, quite comfortably winning.

She only lost 3 times, one to Barte, one to Sanchez in 3 sets, one to Tomljanovic, admittedly a weird loss (2,3)

[2nd_serve]

Since we are just talking loosely, I'll bring up Cal's lineup at #3 and #4. By results, Shuttling, hasn't done things to move herself up in the lineup, especially playing over the #4 player, who is after all ranked in the 40's.

[mboyle]

I'm so tired of this issue.