2001 Wimbledon Championships – Women's Doubles Qualifying

Players and pairs who neither have high enough rankings nor receive wild cards may participate in a qualifying tournament held one week before the annual Wimbledon Tennis Championships.

Women's Doubles Qualifying
2001 Wimbledon Championships

Seeds

  1. Eva Martincová / Tatiana Perebiynis (Qualified)
  2. Maja Matevžič / Dragana Zarić (Qualified)
  3. Eleni Daniilidou / Caroline Schneider (Qualifying competition)
  4. Li Na / Petra Rampre (First round)
  5. Amanda Augustus / Jennifer Embry (Qualified)
  6. Haruka Inoue / Maja Palaveršić (Qualifying competition)
  7. Anastasia Myskina / Alexandra Stevenson (First round)
  8. Zsófia Gubacsi / Vanessa Henke (Qualifying competition)

Qualifiers

Qualifying draw

First qualifier

First Round Qualifying Competition
          
1 Eva Martincová
Tatiana Perebiynis
6 6
Amanda Hopmans
Marion Maruska
3 3
1 Eva Martincová
Tatiana Perebiynis
77 77
6 Haruka Inoue
Maja Palaveršić
63 64
Shelley Stephens
Tong Ka-po
66 6 2
6 Haruka Inoue
Maja Palaveršić
78 2 6

Second qualifier

First Round Qualifying Competition
          
2 Maja Matevžič
Dragana Zarić
6 77
Clarisa Fernández
Milagros Sequera
2 64
2 Maja Matevžič
Dragana Zarić
6 6
8 Zsófia Gubacsi
Vanessa Henke
1 1
WC Alice Barnes
Jane O'Donoghue
2 6 6
8 Zsófia Gubacsi
Vanessa Henke
6 4 8

Third qualifier

First Round Qualifying Competition
          
3 Eleni Daniilidou
Caroline Schneider
6 6
Nadejda Ostrovskaya
Tara Snyder
2 4
3 Eleni Daniilidou
Caroline Schneider
5 1
5 Amanda Augustus
Jennifer Embry
7 6
Samantha Reeves
Jessica Steck
65 2
5 Amanda Augustus
Jennifer Embry
77 6

Fourth qualifier

First Round Qualifying Competition
          
4 Li Na
Petra Rampre
4 2
Dawn Buth
Natalie Grandin
6 6
Dawn Buth
Natalie Grandin
6 7
Rika Fujiwara
Kim Eun-ha
4 5
Rika Fujiwara
Kim Eun-ha
7 77
7 Anastasia Myskina
Alexandra Stevenson
5 62
gollark: I think most of them use "IPS" now, whatever that actually stands for, and have good viewing angles. My laptop screen was clearly minimal-budget and is "TN"-based, so the viewing angles are bad.
gollark: Also differently sized pixels, quite plausibly.
gollark: Your monitor and TV might use different panel technology.
gollark: No. Via confusing relativity things, light still goes at the same speed relative to you on the ship. You could happily walk around even closer to light speed, and to outside observers you'd just seem to get closer to light speed but never actually reach it. Something like that.
gollark: Anyway, this doesn't seem to... explain anything usefully? It seems like a retroactive justification for *why* stuff is the way it is, but in a way which doesn't seem amenable to making useful predictions, and is also extremely vague.


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