2016 Naturtex Women's Open – Doubles
Cristina Dinu and Lina Gjorcheska won the inaugural event, defeating Justyna Jegiołka and Guadalupe Pérez Rojas in the final, 4–6, 6–1, [10–4].
Doubles | |
---|---|
2016 Naturtex Women's Open | |
Champions | |
Runners-up | |
Final score | 4–6, 6–1, [10–4] |
This was a new event in the ITF Women's Circuit.
Seeds
Başak Eraydın / Stephanie Vogt (First round) Cristina Dinu / Lina Gjorcheska (Champions) Justyna Jegiołka / Guadalupe Pérez Rojas (Final) Barbora Krejčíková / Jesika Malečková (First round)
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 | 3 | 78 | [7] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
6 | 66 | [10] | 6 | 3 | [10] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
4 | 6 | [10] | 2 | 6 | [3] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
WC | 6 | 1 | [6] | 4 | 4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
3 | 6 | 6 | 3 | 6 | 6 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
WC | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 6 | [10] | |||||||||||||||||||||
2 | 1 | 6 | 0 | [4] | |||||||||||||||||||||||
6 | 6 | 3 | 6 | 1 | [4] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
2 | 4 | 6 | [10] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
WC | w/o | WC | w/o | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
6 | 2 | [10] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
4 | 2 | 6 | [7] | WC | 0 | 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||
2 | 6 | 6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
w/o | 61 | 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
2 | 6 | [4] | 2 | 77 | 6 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
2 | 6 | 3 | [10] |
gollark: I mean. Maybe it could work in small groups. But small tribe-type setups scale poorly.
gollark: 1. Is that seriously how you read what I was saying? I was saying: fix our minds' weird ingroup/outgroup division.2. That is very vague and does not sound like it could actually work.
gollark: I'm pretty sure we *have* done the ingroup/outgroup thing for... forever. And... probably the solutions are something like transhumanist mind editing, or some bizarre exotic social thing I can't figure out yet.
gollark: I mean that humans are bad in that we randomly divide ourselves into groups then fiercely define ourselves by them, exhibit a crazy amount of exciting different types of flawed reasoning for no good reason, get caught up in complex social signalling games, come up with conclusions then rationalize our way to a vaguely sensible-looking justification, sometimes seemingly refuse to be capable of abstract thought when it's politically convenient, that sort of thing.
gollark: No, I think there are significant improvements possible. But different ones.
References
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.