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	Quincy L (0–3 sets)	3	6	2.00	5	27	.037	1	0	2	0.00	9	.778	.	.	.	.	6.0	3.65
2	Ames L (1–3 sets)	4	8	2.00	6	32	.063	3	0	2	0.00	11	.818	1	0.25	1	1.000	9.5	4.14
3	Carlsbad L (0–3 sets)	3	7	2.33	6	21	.048	0	0	0	0.00	6	1.000	0	0.00	1	.000	7.5	4.72
12	Ames L (0–3 sets)	3	3	1.00	2	9	.111	3	1	2	0.33	6	.667	.	.	.	.	4.5	2.17
14	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	3	1.00	2	9	.111	0	0	2	0.00	6	.667	.	.	.	.	4.5	2.97
26	Teutopolis L (0–3 sets)	3	5	1.67	8	22	-.136	2	0	3	0.00	7	.571	.	.	.	.	5.0	2.93
Total		19	32	1.68	29	120	.025	9	1	11	0.05	45	.756	1	0.05	2	.500	37.0	3.43

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	Quincy L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	7	2.33	13	2.08	26	3	.885	6.0	3.65
2	Ames L (1–3 sets)	4	0	3	3	1	0.75	6	1.50	9	2.04	24	2	.917	9.5	4.14
3	Carlsbad L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	4	1.33	13	2.17	24	3	.875	7.5	4.72
12	Ames L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	2	0.67	6	1.43	23	6	.739	4.5	2.17
14	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	0	3	3	0	1.00	7	2.33	8	1.76	21	5	.762	4.5	2.97
26	Teutopolis L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	3	1.00	13	2.12	25	3	.880	5.0	2.93
Total		19	0	8	8	2	0.42	29	1.53	62	1.94	143	22	.846	37.0	3.43