- Reply to Topic
Thread: #26 Washington 6, #28 Michigan 1 Reply to Thread
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:


Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.

  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
02-13-2012 01:10 AM
Re: #26 Washington 6, #28 Michigan 1

Yeah, Michigan didn't impress me much.

Washington has a young team this year so I'm expecting it to be a down year. Should be fun when USC and UCLA come to town.
02-12-2012 06:38 PM
Re: #26 Washington 6, #28 Michigan 1

That's a very good win for Washington. McMorrow sounds like he played great. Michigan has the same issues as they have had the past few years, lack of depth. Except it's even worse this year without Jung
02-12-2012 06:35 AM
#26 Washington 6, #28 Michigan 1

Not two teams I expect to see ranked much higher than where they are now, but I went to this match today, mostly interested in the #1 singles matchup.

Doubles was interesting. UW's #2 doubles team got to a 7-2 lead but had a hard time closing it out. #1 was tight, with a few miscommunications between McMorrow and Egger perhaps costly. However it gave McMorrow a good warmup for King's serve.

As for King vs McMorrow, McMorrow was returning King's serve quite well, especially compared to doubles. He also appeared to impose his game more than King could. King had a bigger forehand but a less reliable backhand, and McMorrow had some success when he forced King to run to the backhand side, making King chip at the forehand. Also, McMorrow did a great job passing King when King came to the net, whereas McMorrow was pretty successful at net. In the second set, McMorrow almost got a break lead at 5-5, but some dodgy line calls by McMorrow and ump agreeing with [how 2 officials could agree on the bad call is a little strange but they tried to make up for it later] and King got really fired up. Tiebreak featured a few more bad calls, this time against McMorrow, but ultimately King missed enough shots and McMorrow made enough passing shots. This was the McMorrow that took down Cueto last year in that deciding match and it was nice to see him back.

As for the other 2 singles matches I saw, Bots and Petrone both tried to outhit each other from the baseline with Bots being successful, and Manthou did some serious moonballing and scrambling against Franks.

Also, unrelated side note, the Michigan players' shoes were really squeaky when they skidded and it was quite loud. Is this the revival of the adidas squeaky shoes?

The next match I hope to attend is UW vs Tulsa in early March.

No. 26 Washington 6, No. 28 Michigan 1

1) (22) King/Bernstein (UM) def. McMorrow/Egger (UW), 9-8 (3)
2) Hawke/Manthou (UW) def. Franks/Buzzi (UM), 8-5
3) Stith/Bots (UW) def. Petrone/Zhu (UM), 8-4
Order of finish: 2, 1, 3

1) (15) Kyle McMorrow (UW) def. (6) Evan King (UM), 6-3, 7-6 (6)
2) Emmett Egger (UW) def. Shaun Bernstein (UM), 6-2, 6-3
3) Marton Bots (UW) def. Alex Petrone (UM), 6-2, 6-3
4) Viktor Farkas (UW) def. Michael Zhu (UM), 6-3, 6-3
5) Barrett Franks (UM) def. Max Manthou (UW), 7-6 (1), 6-7 (5), (10-3)
6) Nicholas Kamisar (UW) def. Alex Buzzi (UM), 6-2, 6-2
Order of finish: 2, 4, 6, 3, 1, 5

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome