This isn't really a tennis instruction question, but I couldnt figure out what topic to post it under. I play for a strong high school team in the south, and this year we had an open varsity girls slot (I have played on varsity for 4 years.) Our coach placed someone in the position that was several places under the varsity level on the ladder, and never had her play anyone to prove herself, saying she was a better "doubles player." Yet there was never any demonstration of these supposed better doubles abilities than the other girls. As experienced players or coaches, how would ya'll suggest determining if someone is a better doubles player than someone even if they're obviously worse in singles, and how much do ya'll buy into that philosophy? In the past we have had players that are definitely stronger in doubles than in singles, but they have still been able to prove themselves over enough people in singles to stay on varsity.