2016 Lorraine Open 88 – Doubles
Oksana Kalashnikova and Danka Kovinić were the defending champions, but both players chose not to participate.
Doubles | |
---|---|
2016 Lorraine Open 88 | |
Champions | |
Runners-up | |
Final score | 6–1, 6–3 |
Cindy Burger and Laura Pous Tió won the title, defeating Nicole Melichar and Renata Voráčová in the final, 6–1, 6–3.
Seeds
Nicole Melichar / Renata Voráčová (Final) Cindy Burger / Laura Pous Tió (Champions) Laura Pigossi / Sílvia Soler Espinosa (First round) Misa Eguchi / Evgeniya Rodina (Semifinals)
Draw
Key
- Q = Qualifier
- WC = Wild Card
- LL = Lucky Loser
- Alt = Alternate
- SE = Special Exempt
- PR = Protected Ranking
- ITF = ITF entry
- JE = Junior Exempt
- w/o = Walkover
- r = Retired
- d = Defaulted
First round | Quarterfinals | Semifinals | Final | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 | 7 | 6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
5 | 3 | 1 | 6 | 6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
6 | 6 | 1 | 6 | 3 | [10] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
3 | 2 | 77 | [4] | 4 | 6 | [8] | |||||||||||||||||||||
6 | 64 | [10] | 6 | 65 | [6] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
5 | 0 | 4 | 77 | [10] | |||||||||||||||||||||||
7 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
3 | 3 | 2 | 6 | 6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
6 | 6 | 6 | 1 | [7] | |||||||||||||||||||||||
0 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 6 | [10] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
4 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
6 | 6 | 2 | 6 | 6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
2 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
2 | 6 | 6 |
gollark: > The 22 nm node may be the first time where the gate length is not necessarily smaller than the technology node designation. For example, a 25 nm gate length would be typical for the 22 nm node.
gollark: As far as I know it *used* to actually be a measure of something, but they hit issues around... 22nm or something, don't really know... and despite said measure not changing very much the processes kept getting better, so they just reduced them.
gollark: I mean, generally if the number goes down the density of the transistors goes up, but it's not an actual measurement of anything.
gollark: They don't correspond to any actual measurement now.
gollark: <@!221827050892296192> They used to actually be represent size of the transistors involved, but they no longer do, so the names are basically just, er, "generations" of process technology.
References
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.