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
2	Burlington W (3–1 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	4	1.00	4	1.000	0.0	6.30
4	Manitowoc W (3–0 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	3	2	1	0.67	10	.900	2	0.67	5	.400	2.0	7.58
7	Spokane L (1–3 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	13	5	2	1.25	19	.895	3	0.75	10	.300	5.0	6.99
11	Burlington W (3–2 sets)	5	.	.	.	.	.	4	2	4	0.40	14	.714	2	0.40	3	.667	2.0	3.65
14	Cincinnati L (2–3 sets)	5	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	2	0.40	9	.222	0.0	6.55
16	Teutopolis W (3–0 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	2	0.67	7	.286	0.0	8.00
18	San Diego W (3–2 sets)	5	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	5	1.00	3	1.667	0.0	6.53
19	Mendon L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	1	0.33	3	.333	0.0	5.65
22	Teutopolis W (3–1 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	4	2	4	0.50	11	.636	3	0.75	8	.375	2.0	6.05
25	Antioch L (1–3 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	4	1.00	4	1.000	0.0	4.95
29	Spokane W (3–1 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	5	0	1	0.00	13	.923	2	0.50	7	.286	0.0	8.96
Total		44	.	.	.	.	.	29	11	12	0.25	67	.821	30	0.68	63	.476	11.0	6.47

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
2	Burlington W (3–1 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	10	2.50	13	2.13	31	2	.935	0.0	6.30
4	Manitowoc W (3–0 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	7	2.33	9	2.47	17	0	1.000	2.0	7.58
7	Spokane L (1–3 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	11	2.75	10	2.14	22	0	1.000	5.0	6.99
11	Burlington W (3–2 sets)	5	.	.	.	.	.	3	0.60	13	2.19	27	1	.963	2.0	3.65
14	Cincinnati L (2–3 sets)	5	.	.	.	.	.	13	2.60	10	2.31	16	1	.938	0.0	6.55
16	Teutopolis W (3–0 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	10	3.33	9	2.31	13	2	.846	0.0	8.00
18	San Diego W (3–2 sets)	5	.	.	.	.	.	7	1.40	14	2.46	24	0	1.000	0.0	6.53
19	Mendon L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	6	2.00	9	2.13	16	1	.938	0.0	5.65
22	Teutopolis W (3–1 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	9	2.25	8	2.10	20	0	1.000	2.0	6.05
25	Antioch L (1–3 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	6	1.50	16	2.23	30	1	.967	0.0	4.95
29	Spokane W (3–1 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	15	3.75	12	2.37	19	0	1.000	0.0	8.96
Total		44	.	.	.	.	.	97	2.20	123	2.25	235	8	.966	11.0	6.47