2007 Michigan MLK Individual Detail
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
2 |
7 |
0 |
20 |
5.00 |
inf |
100 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
4 |
5 |
0 |
20 |
5.50 |
inf |
110 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
4 |
6 |
0 |
20 |
6.00 |
inf |
120 |
Chicago E |
1.0 |
0 |
9 |
1 |
20 |
4.25 |
0.00 |
85 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
11 |
0 |
20 |
5.50 |
0.00 |
110 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
5 |
5 |
2 |
20 |
5.75 |
2.50 |
115 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
6 |
6 |
3 |
20 |
6.75 |
2.00 |
135 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
3 |
9 |
0 |
20 |
6.75 |
inf |
135 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
2 |
7 |
0 |
20 |
5.00 |
inf |
100 |
| Total |
9.0 |
26 |
65 |
6 |
180 |
5.61 |
4.33 |
1010 |
Peter, Chicago B
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
1 |
4 |
1 |
20 |
2.50 |
1.00 |
50 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
3.00 |
inf |
60 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Chicago E |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
1 |
20 |
1.25 |
0.00 |
25 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
20 |
2.00 |
0.00 |
40 |
| Total |
9.0 |
5 |
21 |
2 |
180 |
1.53 |
2.50 |
275 |
Bruce, Chicago B
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chicago E |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.75 |
inf |
15 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.75 |
inf |
15 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
| Total |
9.0 |
2 |
9 |
0 |
180 |
0.67 |
inf |
120 |
Ray, Chicago B
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
20 |
0.75 |
0.00 |
15 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Chicago E |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
20 |
-0.75 |
0.00 |
-15 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
| Total |
9.0 |
0 |
10 |
6 |
180 |
0.39 |
0.00 |
70 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
20 |
2.50 |
0.00 |
50 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Rochester C |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
20 |
2.50 |
0.00 |
50 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
4 |
1 |
20 |
1.75 |
0.00 |
35 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
| Total |
9.0 |
0 |
24 |
2 |
180 |
1.28 |
0.00 |
230 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
2 |
8 |
0 |
20 |
5.50 |
inf |
110 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
1 |
6 |
2 |
20 |
3.25 |
0.50 |
65 |
Rochester C |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
20 |
2.50 |
0.00 |
50 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
20 |
2.00 |
0.00 |
40 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
1 |
8 |
2 |
20 |
4.25 |
0.50 |
85 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
7 |
1 |
20 |
3.25 |
0.00 |
65 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
| Total |
9.0 |
4 |
45 |
11 |
180 |
2.53 |
0.36 |
455 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
20 |
1.50 |
1.00 |
30 |
Rochester C |
1.0 |
1 |
8 |
2 |
20 |
4.25 |
0.50 |
85 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
20 |
0.75 |
0.50 |
15 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
6 |
0 |
20 |
3.00 |
0.00 |
60 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
1 |
20 |
1.25 |
0.00 |
25 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
3 |
20 |
0.25 |
0.00 |
5 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
| Total |
9.0 |
3 |
28 |
12 |
180 |
1.47 |
0.25 |
265 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.33 |
30 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.75 |
inf |
15 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
20 |
2.00 |
0.00 |
40 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
20 |
2.50 |
0.00 |
50 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
5 |
1 |
20 |
2.25 |
0.00 |
45 |
Wisconsin |
1.0 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.33 |
30 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
0.25 |
0.00 |
5 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
6 |
1 |
20 |
2.75 |
0.00 |
55 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
4 |
2 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
| Total |
9.0 |
3 |
31 |
11 |
180 |
1.67 |
0.27 |
300 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
6 |
0 |
20 |
3.00 |
0.00 |
60 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
4 |
1 |
20 |
1.75 |
0.00 |
35 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
1 |
4 |
1 |
20 |
2.50 |
1.00 |
50 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
6 |
3 |
20 |
2.25 |
0.00 |
45 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
1 |
7 |
2 |
20 |
3.75 |
0.50 |
75 |
Wisconsin |
1.0 |
1 |
5 |
0 |
20 |
3.25 |
inf |
65 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
| Total |
9.0 |
3 |
39 |
7 |
180 |
2.22 |
0.43 |
400 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Wisconsin |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
3 |
20 |
0.25 |
0.00 |
5 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
20 |
0.75 |
0.00 |
15 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
| Total |
9.0 |
0 |
10 |
5 |
180 |
0.42 |
0.00 |
75 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
1.25 |
inf |
25 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
1.25 |
inf |
25 |
Wisconsin |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
0.25 |
0.00 |
5 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
| Total |
9.0 |
2 |
8 |
3 |
180 |
0.53 |
0.67 |
95 |
Don, Pittsburgh A
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Pittsburgh B |
1.0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.75 |
inf |
35 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
| Total |
9.0 |
1 |
10 |
0 |
180 |
0.64 |
inf |
115 |
Mike, Pittsburgh A
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
20 |
2.00 |
0.00 |
40 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
1 |
4 |
1 |
20 |
2.50 |
1.00 |
50 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
20 |
2.00 |
0.00 |
40 |
Pittsburgh B |
1.0 |
1 |
4 |
0 |
20 |
2.75 |
inf |
55 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
20 |
2.00 |
1.00 |
40 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
20 |
2.50 |
0.00 |
50 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
20 |
2.50 |
0.00 |
50 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
| Total |
9.0 |
3 |
34 |
2 |
180 |
2.08 |
1.50 |
375 |
Jason, Pittsburgh A
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
1 |
20 |
1.25 |
0.00 |
25 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
1 |
20 |
1.25 |
0.00 |
25 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
20 |
2.00 |
0.00 |
40 |
Pittsburgh B |
1.0 |
1 |
4 |
1 |
20 |
2.50 |
1.00 |
50 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
8 |
0 |
20 |
4.00 |
0.00 |
80 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
20 |
0.75 |
0.00 |
15 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
| Total |
9.0 |
1 |
31 |
4 |
180 |
1.69 |
0.25 |
305 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Pittsburgh B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
| Total |
9.0 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
180 |
0.06 |
0.00 |
10 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
2.25 |
inf |
45 |
Chris Ray et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
| Total |
9.0 |
1 |
6 |
0 |
180 |
0.42 |
inf |
75 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
0.25 |
0.00 |
5 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Chris Ray et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
| Total |
9.0 |
0 |
8 |
1 |
180 |
0.42 |
0.00 |
75 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
4 |
1 |
20 |
1.75 |
0.00 |
35 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
0.25 |
0.00 |
5 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
20 |
-0.75 |
0.00 |
-15 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
0.25 |
0.00 |
5 |
Chris Ray et al |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
| Total |
9.0 |
0 |
9 |
7 |
180 |
0.31 |
0.00 |
55 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
20 |
0.75 |
0.00 |
15 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
4 |
1 |
20 |
1.75 |
0.00 |
35 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chris Ray et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
| Total |
9.0 |
0 |
7 |
2 |
180 |
0.33 |
0.00 |
60 |
Max, Carleton A
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
1.00 |
1.00 |
20 |
Carleton B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
| Total |
9.0 |
1 |
5 |
4 |
180 |
0.25 |
0.25 |
45 |
John, Carleton A
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.75 |
inf |
15 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
20 |
0.75 |
0.00 |
15 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Carleton B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
| Total |
9.0 |
1 |
8 |
2 |
180 |
0.47 |
0.50 |
85 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
6 |
0 |
20 |
3.00 |
0.00 |
60 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
2.25 |
inf |
45 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
1 |
4 |
0 |
20 |
2.75 |
inf |
55 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
8 |
1 |
20 |
3.75 |
0.00 |
75 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
5 |
1 |
20 |
2.25 |
0.00 |
45 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
20 |
2.00 |
0.00 |
40 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
20 |
2.50 |
0.00 |
50 |
Carleton B |
1.0 |
0 |
8 |
0 |
20 |
4.00 |
0.00 |
80 |
| Total |
9.0 |
2 |
46 |
2 |
180 |
2.67 |
1.00 |
480 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
20 |
2.50 |
0.00 |
50 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
1 |
5 |
1 |
20 |
3.00 |
1.00 |
60 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
1 |
4 |
2 |
20 |
2.25 |
0.50 |
45 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
20 |
2.50 |
0.00 |
50 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
4 |
2 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
5 |
2 |
20 |
2.00 |
0.00 |
40 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
20 |
2.50 |
0.00 |
50 |
Carleton B |
1.0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
1.00 |
1.00 |
20 |
| Total |
9.0 |
3 |
37 |
8 |
180 |
2.08 |
0.38 |
375 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Chicago C |
1.0 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
20 |
1.50 |
1.00 |
30 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
1 |
20 |
1.25 |
0.00 |
25 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
20 |
0.75 |
0.00 |
15 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
1.00 |
1.00 |
20 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
4 |
1 |
20 |
1.75 |
0.00 |
35 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
6 |
0 |
20 |
3.00 |
0.00 |
60 |
| Total |
7.0 |
2 |
21 |
5 |
140 |
1.54 |
0.40 |
215 |
Micah, Illinois B
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Chicago C |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
| Total |
7.0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
140 |
0.11 |
0.00 |
15 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Chicago C |
1.0 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
20 |
2.00 |
1.00 |
40 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
9 |
1 |
20 |
4.25 |
0.00 |
85 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
0.25 |
0.00 |
5 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
5 |
1 |
20 |
2.25 |
0.00 |
45 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
1 |
5 |
0 |
20 |
3.25 |
inf |
65 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
20 |
2.00 |
1.00 |
40 |
| Total |
7.0 |
3 |
29 |
5 |
140 |
2.21 |
0.60 |
310 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Chicago C |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
0.25 |
0.00 |
5 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
0.25 |
0.00 |
5 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
1 |
6 |
1 |
20 |
3.50 |
1.00 |
70 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
0.25 |
0.00 |
5 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
20 |
0.75 |
0.00 |
15 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
| Total |
8.0 |
1 |
15 |
5 |
160 |
0.88 |
0.20 |
140 |
James, Illinois B
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
0.25 |
0.00 |
5 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
| Total |
7.0 |
0 |
3 |
1 |
140 |
0.18 |
0.00 |
25 |
Chris, Chicago D
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
20 |
-0.50 |
0.00 |
-10 |
Weiner et al |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
20 |
0.75 |
0.00 |
15 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
20 |
0.75 |
0.00 |
15 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
20 |
0.75 |
0.00 |
15 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
0.25 |
0.00 |
5 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
20 |
2.00 |
0.00 |
40 |
| Total |
9.0 |
0 |
18 |
10 |
180 |
0.72 |
0.00 |
130 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Weiner et al |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
20 |
0.75 |
0.00 |
15 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
20 |
0.75 |
0.00 |
15 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
3 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
| Total |
9.0 |
0 |
14 |
6 |
180 |
0.61 |
0.00 |
110 |
Nina, Chicago D
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Weiner et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
| Total |
9.0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
180 |
0.03 |
0.00 |
5 |
Dani, Chicago D
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Weiner et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
| Total |
9.0 |
0 |
7 |
0 |
180 |
0.39 |
0.00 |
70 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Illinois A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
| Total |
9.0 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
180 |
0.22 |
0.00 |
40 |
Jon M., Rochester B
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Illinois A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
| Total |
9.0 |
0 |
8 |
0 |
180 |
0.44 |
0.00 |
80 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
1.25 |
inf |
25 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Illinois A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
1 |
20 |
1.25 |
0.00 |
25 |
| Total |
9.0 |
1 |
7 |
3 |
180 |
0.39 |
0.33 |
70 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Illinois A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.75 |
inf |
35 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
4 |
1 |
20 |
1.75 |
0.00 |
35 |
Pittsburgh C |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
0.25 |
0.00 |
5 |
| Total |
9.0 |
1 |
15 |
3 |
180 |
0.83 |
0.33 |
150 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
20 |
0.75 |
0.00 |
15 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
| Total |
7.0 |
0 |
10 |
2 |
140 |
0.64 |
0.00 |
90 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chicago A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
| Total |
7.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
140 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chicago A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
| Total |
8.0 |
0 |
5 |
1 |
160 |
0.28 |
0.00 |
45 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Rochester A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chicago D |
1.0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
1.25 |
inf |
25 |
Chicago A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
| Total |
7.0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
140 |
0.25 |
inf |
35 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Vanderbilt |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Illinois B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Carleton A |
1.0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.75 |
inf |
15 |
Pittsburgh A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Chicago A |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Lafer et al |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Rochester B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
20 |
-0.50 |
0.00 |
-10 |
| Total |
7.0 |
1 |
5 |
3 |
140 |
0.36 |
0.33 |
50 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Illinois A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Chris Ray et al |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Wisconsin |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
0.25 |
0.00 |
5 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Chicago C |
1.0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.75 |
inf |
35 |
Carleton B |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
20 |
0.75 |
0.00 |
15 |
Weiner et al |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
20 |
0.75 |
0.00 |
15 |
Pittsburgh B |
1.0 |
0 |
4 |
2 |
20 |
1.50 |
0.00 |
30 |
Rochester C |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
| Total |
9.0 |
1 |
17 |
5 |
180 |
0.89 |
0.20 |
160 |
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Illinois A |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Chris Ray et al |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Wisconsin |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Chicago C |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Carleton B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Weiner et al |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Pittsburgh B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20 |
-0.25 |
0.00 |
-5 |
Rochester C |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
| Total |
9.0 |
0 |
4 |
3 |
180 |
0.14 |
0.00 |
25 |
Sam C, Chicago E
| Opponent |
GP |
15 |
10 |
-5 |
TUH |
P/TU |
P/N |
Pts |
Illinois A |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Chris Ray et al |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Wisconsin |
1.0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
20 |
0.50 |
0.00 |
10 |
Chicago B |
1.0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.75 |
inf |
15 |
Chicago C |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Carleton B |
1.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0 |
Weiner et al |
1.0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
20 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
20 |
Pittsburgh B |
1.0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |