Players

Match		Sets	Attack					Serve						Set
m	opponent/sets	sp	k	k/s	e	ta	pct	pts	sa	se	sa/s	ta	pct	a	a/s	ta	pct	pts	rating
1	Burlington L (0–3 sets)	3	0	0.00	1	3	-.333	6	2	3	0.67	13	.769	26	8.67	67	.388	2.0	4.22
2	Schenectady L (2–3 sets)	5	2	0.40	2	7	.000	8	6	1	1.20	16	.938	42	8.40	98	.429	8.5	4.28
7	Albuquerque L (0–3 sets)	3	0	0.00	0	1	.000	7	1	1	0.33	15	.933	35	11.67	74	.473	2.0	7.71
10	Mendon L (0–3 sets)	3	2	0.67	2	8	.000	2	0	1	0.00	8	.875	22	7.33	59	.373	4.0	4.02
12	Schenectady L (1–3 sets)	4	0	0.00	1	4	-.250	8	0	4	0.00	17	.765	37	9.25	77	.481	2.0	5.68
15	Teutopolis L (1–3 sets)	4	2	0.50	0	5	.400	1	0	4	0.00	9	.556	24	6.00	90	.267	3.0	2.48
18	San Diego W (3–0 sets)	3	3	1.00	1	6	.333	6	2	0	0.67	12	1.000	25	8.33	63	.397	5.0	4.32
19	Carlsbad L (0–3 sets)	3	0	0.00	0	1	.000	3	2	1	0.67	9	.889	27	9.00	69	.391	2.5	3.52
22	Schenectady L (0–3 sets)	3	0	0.00	0	2	.000	5	1	3	0.33	14	.786	30	10.00	73	.411	1.5	4.90
32	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	1	0.33	0	3	.333	2	1	2	0.33	10	.800	28	9.33	61	.459	2.0	4.00
Total		34	10	0.29	7	40	.075	48	15	20	0.44	123	.837	296	8.71	731	.405	32.5	4.51

Match		Sets	Block					Dig		Receive
m	opponent/sets	sp	s	a	t	be	blk/s	d	d/s	3	rt	rcv	e	pct	pts	rating
1	Burlington L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	4	1.33	.	.	.	.	.	2.0	4.22
2	Schenectady L (2–3 sets)	5	0	1	1	0	0.20	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	8.5	4.28
7	Albuquerque L (0–3 sets)	3	0	2	2	1	0.67	6	2.00	.	.	.	.	.	2.0	7.71
10	Mendon L (0–3 sets)	3	1	2	3	1	1.00	2	0.67	.	.	.	.	.	4.0	4.02
12	Schenectady L (1–3 sets)	4	0	4	4	0	1.00	8	2.00	.	.	.	.	.	2.0	5.68
15	Teutopolis L (1–3 sets)	4	1	0	1	1	0.25	6	1.50	.	.	.	.	.	3.0	2.48
18	San Diego W (3–0 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	3	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	5.0	4.32
19	Carlsbad L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	2.5	3.52
22	Schenectady L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	1	0.33	3	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	1.5	4.90
32	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	1	0.33	.	.	.	.	.	2.0	4.00
Total		34	2	11	13	4	0.38	33	0.97	.	.	.	.	.	32.5	4.51