2013 NCAA Men's Division 1

wow the ITA computers are now as bad as the BCS computers. UCLA jumps UVA, who is undefeated!! What _ _ _ _'N Joke.
As for the SEC rankings!! Good grief.
 
JLyon said:
wow the ITA computers are now as bad as the BCS computers. UCLA jumps UVA, who is undefeated!! What _ _ _ _'N Joke.
As for the SEC rankings!! Good grief.
Click to expand...

I've given up trying make sense of it. Interesting to see an undefeated team go down but hey, this is college tennis.
 
if the draw were seeded per these rankings, UVA would be celebrating with champagne on making the finals right now automatically

but they won't be that lucky

other half would have 1 UCLA v 8/9 Duke, 4 USC v 5 OSU

and they'd get to join an easy SEC lovefest with Mississippi in quarters who can't even make quarters of their conf tournament, then winner of two other SEC teams in semis...they might be able to rest their top 3 til the semis
 
Clemson_tennis said:
All is forgiven for Kentucky. Back up to 8.
Click to expand...

they should be above duke again, though, as i always point out :)

team A - 11 losses, none of them to undefeated teams

team B - 4 losses, two of them to undefeated teams

both team A and team B have their worst loss to the same team, Illinois

clearly team A is better
 
Noticed that Bama barely squeaked through with a winning record. What's the deal now, you need to be at least .500 in duals including conference tournament results? When did they initiate that rule?
 
Art Rust Jr said:
Noticed that Bama barely squeaked through with a winning record. What's the deal now, you need to be at least .500 in duals including conference tournament results? When did they initiate that rule?
Click to expand...

New rule this year. It was a really smart one. That's why you may have noticed a number of ranked teams add mid and late season matches to their schedules against unranked teams to pad their wins. I heard the rule was put in place to keep out teams with a losing record (SEC teams). But as with many rules, if there's a loophole, it will be found.
 
andfor said:
New rule this year. It was a really smart one. That's why you may have noticed a number of ranked teams add mid and late season matches to their schedules against unranked teams to pad their wins. I heard the rule was put in place to keep out teams with a losing record (SEC teams). But as with many rules, if there's a loophole, it will be found.
Click to expand...

I would expect the inmates to change that rule for next year, in regards to scheduling matches in the last 3rd of the season. Hilarious to see so many major conference schools rushing out to play SWAC schools in double-headers and in one case triple header trying to pad their records even though it does not help their rankings.
 
start of something good

No. 41 Stanford 4, No. 33 Washington 2

DOUBLES
1) Bots/McMorrow (WASH) d. No. 53 Denis Lin/Morrissey (STAN) 8-5
2) Romanowicz/Stineman (STAN) d. Hawke/Manthou (WASH) 8-3
3) Jamin Ball/Ho (STAN) d. Hudson Barnhart/Egger (WASH) 8-6
Order of Finish: 1, 2, 3

SINGLES
1) No. 46 John Morrissey (STAN) vs. No. 14 Kyle McMorrow (WASH)
abandoned 2) Marton Bots (WASH) d. No. 117 Nolan Paige (STAN) 3-6, 6-1, 6-2
3) Maciek Romanowicz (STAN) d. Max Manthou (WASH) 7-5, 7-5
4) Emmett Egger (WASH) d. Robert Stineman (STAN) 7-5, 6-4
5) Daniel Ho (STAN) d. Viktor Farkas (WASH) 6-3, 6-2
6) Trey Strobel (STAN) d. Nicholas Kamisar (WASH) 4-6, 6-3, 6-4
Order of Finish: 5, 2, 4, 6, 3
 
JLyon said:
wow the ITA computers are now as bad as the BCS computers. UCLA jumps UVA, who is undefeated!! What _ _ _ _'N Joke.
As for the SEC rankings!! Good grief.
Click to expand...

I completely agree that UVA should have been seeded No. 1 and are the best team. But, the ITA computers actually aren't that crazy, IMO. We all know the formula. UCLA is No. 1 because their resume of wins/losses is, based on that formula, better than UVA's. It's really not a judgment of UCLA being better than UVA, it's just the inevitable result of adding up the numbers.

What's a joke is that the selection committee doesn't use the rankings as a guide and generally follow them, but then make common-sense adjustments as necessary. But, then you'd have people harping about the committee's subjective bias.

Regardless, it all sort of worked out brilliantly for UVA with UCLA, USC, OSU on the opposite half.
 
bluetrain4 said:
I completely agree that UVA should have been seeded No. 1 and are the best team. But, the ITA computers actually aren't that crazy, IMO. We all know the formula. UCLA is No. 1 because their resume of wins/losses is, based on that formula, better than UVA's. It's really not a judgment of UCLA being better than UVA, it's just the inevitable result of adding up the numbers.

What's a joke is that the selection committee doesn't use the rankings as a guide and generally follow them, but then make common-sense adjustments as necessary. But, then you'd have people harping about the committee's subjective bias.

Regardless, it all sort of worked out brilliantly for UVA with UCLA, USC, OSU on the opposite half.
Click to expand...

exactly!!!

also when uva was ranked #1 they had the curse, but now at #2 they have less pressure IMO :twisted:
 
Final team rankings are out. Memphis made a nice jump to get into the top 20. The final singles and doubles rankings don't come out until next Wednesday June 5th.

Rank Avg School Previous
1 95.40 University of Virginia 3
2 92.09 UCLA 1
3 78.87 University of Georgia 2
4 76.29 Ohio State University 5
5 71.72 University of Southern California 4
6 63.56 University of Tennessee 6
7 59.79 Duke University 9
8 58.28 Pepperdine 12
9 56.86 University of Kentucky 8
10 56.47 University of Mississippi 7
11 54.72 Mississippi State University 10
12 54.72 Baylor University 13
13 54.54 University of Oklahoma 14
14 54.51 Texas A&M University 11
15 47.92 Vanderbilt University 16
16 43.72 University of Florida 15
17 43.57 California 18
18 40.02 University of South Carolina 17
19 37.55 Wake Forest University 19
20 36.48 University of Memphis 32
21 35.32 Clemson University 23
22 34.95 Louisiana State University 20
23 34.22 University of Texas 21
24 33.93 University of Illinois 26
25 33.31 University of Tulsa 25
 
Based on these final rankings, for what its worth, Memphis is most improved, hands down.

Someone position WF for this earlier.
 
Interesting to go back and look at the initial freshmen/newcomer rankings that came out at the start of the year to see how they performed.

Rank Player School

1. Michael Redlicki - Duke - 19-7 record primarily at #3. Very solid year.
2. Bruno Semenzato - Duke - 3-3 record at the bottom 3 spots. Definitely did not live up to #2 ranking.
3. Leonard Stakhovsky - Oklahoma - 10-10 record at 5 and 6. Didn't live up to #3 billing.
4. Shane Vinsant - Texas A&M - 20-8 record primarily at 4. 14-9 at #2 dubs. Very nice year.
5. Dragos Dima - Cornell - 5-3 record in the fall but didn't play in spring.
6. Ben Wagland - Georgia - 18-4 record at 1, 2, 3 & 4. Started the year at 4 and finished at 1. Made Quarters in dubs at NCAAs. Very nice year.
7. Axel Alvarez - Oklahoma - 20-6 at 3 and 4. Very solid year.
8. Pedro Dumont - Miss St - 15-5 record with most action at 6. Very solid contribution.
9. Julian Lenz - Baylor - 16-5 record at 1, 2, and 3. Lived up to the hype.
10. Boris Arias - LSU - 9-6 record at 5 & 6. No really great wins.
 
Based on these final rankings, for what its worth, Memphis is most improved, hands down.

Someone position WF for this earlier.


....I take it math was not one of your better subjects. Memphis moved from 35 in 2012 to 20 in 2013, Wake Forest moved from 69 in 2012 to 19 in 2013....seems pretty clear to me who the most improved was
 
TopDawg said:
Interesting to go back and look at the initial freshmen/newcomer rankings that came out at the start of the year to see how they performed.

Rank Player School

1. Michael Redlicki - Duke - 19-7 record primarily at #3. Very solid year.
2. Bruno Semenzato - Duke - 3-3 record at the bottom 3 spots. Definitely did not live up to #2 ranking.
3. Leonard Stakhovsky - Oklahoma - 10-10 record at 5 and 6. Didn't live up to #3 billing.
4. Shane Vinsant - Texas A&M - 20-8 record primarily at 4. 14-9 at #2 dubs. Very nice year.
5. Dragos Dima - Cornell - 5-3 record in the fall but didn't play in spring.
6. Ben Wagland - Georgia - 18-4 record at 1, 2, 3 & 4. Started the year at 4 and finished at 1. Made Quarters in dubs at NCAAs. Very nice year.
7. Axel Alvarez - Oklahoma - 20-6 at 3 and 4. Very solid year.
8. Pedro Dumont - Miss St - 15-5 record with most action at 6. Very solid contribution.
9. Julian Lenz - Baylor - 16-5 record at 1, 2, and 3. Lived up to the hype.
10. Boris Arias - LSU - 9-6 record at 5 & 6. No really great wins.
Click to expand...

Very nice breakdown Top Dawg!
Was wondering about the other top Freshmen, Boegerts, Efferding, Hitzlik, Giron, Styslinger, etc. and how they were projected/ranked by ITA?

Re. the OSU Rola and Kobelt pro-tential, Right now Kobelt because of length and power generated on serve has the best game for grass and indoor venue, but Rola is uber talented.
I have watched Blaz the last 3 years and many comparisons have been floated, Andy Murray, Berdych, even Stephen Edberg.
Tucker has been wonderful for both of these student athletes tennis development, especially Rola's power and fitness and Kobelt's ground game.
 
TopDawg said:
Interesting to go back and look at the initial freshmen/newcomer rankings that came out at the start of the year to see how they performed.

Rank Player School

1. Michael Redlicki - Duke - 19-7 record primarily at #3. Very solid year.
2. Bruno Semenzato - Duke - 3-3 record at the bottom 3 spots. Definitely did not live up to #2 ranking.
3. Leonard Stakhovsky - Oklahoma - 10-10 record at 5 and 6. Didn't live up to #3 billing.
4. Shane Vinsant - Texas A&M - 20-8 record primarily at 4. 14-9 at #2 dubs. Very nice year.
5. Dragos Dima - Cornell - 5-3 record in the fall but didn't play in spring.
6. Ben Wagland - Georgia - 18-4 record at 1, 2, 3 & 4. Started the year at 4 and finished at 1. Made Quarters in dubs at NCAAs. Very nice year.
7. Axel Alvarez - Oklahoma - 20-6 at 3 and 4. Very solid year.
8. Pedro Dumont - Miss St - 15-5 record with most action at 6. Very solid contribution.
9. Julian Lenz - Baylor - 16-5 record at 1, 2, and 3. Lived up to the hype.
10. Boris Arias - LSU - 9-6 record at 5 & 6. No really great wins.
Click to expand...

I had the best domestic recruits who did not turn pro pegged at the start of the season as Redlicki, Hiltzik, and Styslinger, in uncertain order. That seems like a good selection in hindsight. I would put Vinsant right behind them. The ITA list seems slanted towards overseas recruits, many of whom did not perform as well as these four domestic recruits, yet Hiltzik and Styslinger did not make the list.

It often turns out to be an apples vs. oranges comparison to look at junior ITF rankings and compare to top American blue chips at TRN. Numbers 2, 3, 5, and 10 on the list certainly were not better than Hiltzik and Styslinger.

NOTE: My original classification of the elite American recruits included two who turned pro, Bjorn Fratangelo and Mitchell Krueger.
 
Well another season is over which makes me sad yet look forward to next year (could be a tough one for IU unless some recruit appears that takes us by surprise)
 
tennis7777777 said:
Based on these final rankings, for what its worth, Memphis is most improved, hands down.

Someone position WF for this earlier.


....I take it math was not one of your better subjects. Memphis moved from 35 in 2012 to 20 in 2013, Wake Forest moved from 69 in 2012 to 19 in 2013....seems pretty clear to me who the most improved was
Click to expand...

I made my assessment without consulting the previous years rankings knowing I was at risk. Thanks for the kind words. Making the vault from the Cusa vs the ACC I stand by my assertion. Memphis tennis vs Wake Forest tennis, are you kidding?
 
ClarkC said:
I had the best domestic recruits who did not turn pro pegged at the start of the season as Redlicki, Hiltzik, and Styslinger, in uncertain order. That seems like a good selection in hindsight. I would put Vinsant right behind them. The ITA list seems slanted towards overseas recruits, many of whom did not perform as well as these four domestic recruits, yet Hiltzik and Styslinger did not make the list.

It often turns out to be an apples vs. oranges comparison to look at junior ITF rankings and compare to top American blue chips at TRN. Numbers 2, 3, 5, and 10 on the list certainly were not better than Hiltzik and Styslinger.

NOTE: My original classification of the elite American recruits included two who turned pro, Bjorn Fratangelo and Mitchell Krueger.
Click to expand...

Hard not to go with Styslinger as the best American freshman after the year he had. Difficult to compare hiltzik and redlicki because Hiltzik played higher, which definitely helped his ranking, but for a worse team. Redlicki looks to be the better doubles player. I'd say these three Americans plus Wagland and Lenz are the best 5 freshmen of the year with Llamas just missing the cut.
 
10isplayer said:
Hard not to go with Styslinger as the best American freshman after the year he had. Difficult to compare hiltzik and redlicki because Hiltzik played higher, which definitely helped his ranking, but for a worse team. Redlicki looks to be the better doubles player. I'd say these three Americans plus Wagland and Lenz are the best 5 freshmen of the year with Llamas just missing the cut.
Click to expand...

As a UVa fan, I am pleased with Styslinger, but Hiltzik was the only player to beat Blaz Rola this spring, I believe. Redlicki ran into the freshman wall and ran out of gas at the end of the season, but he did a pretty good job at #3 all year on a good roster, playing ahead of Mengel and Hemmeler and Tahir. I've got to respect all three of those guys this year. Their second years will be interesting.
 
Conference - Number of teams in the top 75 (total teams in conference)
AAC - 3 (7)
ACC - 10 (12)
ATL 10 - 2 (11)
ATLANTIC SUN - 2 (9)
BIG 10 - 10 (12)
BIG 12 - 5 (6)
COLONIAL ATH - 1 (7)
CON USA - 3 (12)
IVY - 5 (eight)
MISSOURI VALLEY - 2 (5)
MTN WEST - 3 (eight)
PAC 12 - 7 (eight)
SEC - 13 (13)
SOUTHERN - 2 (eight)
SOUTHLAND - 1 (7)
SUMMIT LEAGUE - 1 (6)
SUN BELT - 1 (7)
WEST COAST - 3 (10)
 
floridatennisdude said:
Man, Duke is loaded
Click to expand...

kme5150 said:
Yes, they are. That is without Semenzato in the line-up. With that roster there is no reason to finish the year outside the top 4.
Click to expand...

SoCal10s said:
and a lot of talent on the bench also...
Click to expand...

mikej said:
will be interesting to see who gets booted out of the lineup by semenzato

i think they'll do a good bit of shuffling during the season and ultimately hemmeler will be focusing on dubs later in the year...maybe a chance that semenzato doesn't adjust to the college game quickly as well, always tough to tell until they play some big dual matches...i just have a hard time seeing tahir on the outside of the singles lineup considering the way he has stepped up with some bigtime results in the past 6 months
Click to expand...

This is how we all felt at the beginning of the year about Duke. It turned out that Semenzato did not boot anyone out of the lineup. Had he been good enough to do so, he could have played at least whenever anyone else was not 100% (which occurs for every team several times a season, and Duke had players like Mengel missing from the lineup at times as late as the NCAA tournament).

A lot of college players make their biggest improvement from freshman season to sophomore season. It will be interesting to see how Semenzato does next year. As a UVa fan, I am just glad that any stellar college career he might have did not coincide with Cunha still being at Duke.

EDIT: Ditto for watching the improvement from first year to second year of Redlicki.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top