1988 Southern Cross Classic – Singles

Jana Novotná won in the final 7–5, 6–4 against Jana Pospíšilová.

Singles
1988 Southern Cross Classic
Champion Jana Novotná
Runner-up Jana Pospíšilová
Final score7–5, 6–4

Seeds

A champion seed is indicated in bold text while text in italics indicates the round in which that seed was eliminated.

  1. Lori McNeil (Second Round)
  2. Nicole Provis (Second Round)
  3. Radka Zrubáková (Semifinals)
  4. Catarina Lindqvist (Quarterfinals)
  5. Jana Novotná (Champion)
  6. Dianne Balestrat (Quarterfinals)
  7. Beverly Bowes (First Round)
  8. Laura Garrone (First Round)

Draw

Key
First Round Second Round Quarterfinals Semifinals Final
1 L McNeil 1 7 6
  T Mochizuki 6 6 3 1 L McNeil 4 5  
  J Pospíšilová 6 7     J Pospíšilová 6 7  
  C Toleafoa 2 6     J Pospíšilová 6 2 6
  O Tsarbopoulou 6 6   6 D Balestrat 3 6 2
  L Lapi 3 2     O Tsarbopoulou 7 1 2
  N Dahlman 1 3   6 D Balestrat 6 6 6
6 D Balestrat 6 6     J Pospíšilová 6 1 7
4 C Lindqvist 6 4 6   M Strandlund 1 6 5
  J-A Faull 2 6 1 4 C Lindqvist 7 6 6
  M Bowrey 6 6 3   B Cordwell 6 7 2
  B Cordwell 7 1 6 4 C Lindqvist 6 4 2
  C van Renterghem 7 3 4   M Strandlund 4 6 6
  E Smylie 5 6 6   E Smylie 2 2  
  M Strandlund 6 6     M Strandlund 6 6  
7 B Bowes 2 3     Jana Pospíšilová 5 4  
8 L Garrone 6 4   5 Jana Novotná 7 6  
  R McQuillan 7 6     R McQuillan 5 7 6
  L Field 6 4     C Tessi 7 5 3
  C Tessi 7 6     R McQuillan 3 2  
  M Lindström 1 4   3 R Zrubáková 6 6  
  J Jonerup 6 6     J Jonerup 6 6 4
  M Jaggard 2 4   3 R Zrubáková 7 4 6
3 R Zrubáková 6 6   3 R Zrubáková 4 2  
5 J Novotná 1 6 6 5 J Novotná 6 6  
  S Appelmans 6 1 1 5 J Novotná 6 6  
  J Richardson 6 6     J Richardson 2 2  
  K McDonald 2 2   5 J Novotná 1 6 6
  P Jung 3 4     T Scheuer-Larsen 6 0 3
  T Scheuer-Larsen 6 6     T Scheuer-Larsen 5 6 6
  A Scott 4 5   2 N Provis 7 3 3
2 N Provis 6 7  
gollark: If you want serious treatment:- make actual testable claims- try and explain actual ideas involved- don't just dump unreadably vast amounts of random trash and expect people to read them (I doubt you have)- ideally get peer-reviewed papers but the rest is more important
gollark: *This* doesn't make sense. You're not explaining any ideas but dumping piles of irrelevant information at us.
gollark: Yes.
gollark: Again, that random paper is on *engine nozzle design*.
gollark: They do not seem to be asserting anything significant and coherent and that's not a meaningful claim.

References
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.