{"id":20119,"date":"2023-04-25T20:43:30","date_gmt":"2023-04-26T01:43:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/?p=20119"},"modified":"2023-04-26T11:26:39","modified_gmt":"2023-04-26T16:26:39","slug":"badminton-out-about-burnsville-triangular","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/?p=20119","title":{"rendered":"Badminton Out & About: Burnsville Triangular"},"content":{"rendered":"

It was a 4-3 times three in Burnsville with all matches ending with the same score. When the dust had settled it was #6 Highland Park leaving with two wins, #5 Edina splitting, and host #3 Burnsville on the short end. The day opened with Highland Park topping Edina. Then the Hornets edged out the Blaze followed by the Scots scoring the dramatic win over Burnsville. The key\/deciding match in each case:<\/p>\n

Game 1: Third singles where Sara Shiferaw of Highland Park won in three. She trailed 1-0 after the first set and had 21-18 wins in the final two. This was one of two three setters in game one. The other came at second singles won be Tenzin Tsephel of Edina.<\/p>\n

Game 2: first doubles was the decider with Ivy Petersen & Sanna Coma beating Burnsville\u2019s Jasmine Tran & Sherlyn Rojas in two sets with the same score 21-15. The only match that went three sets came at second doubles where Leah Merid & Lisa Genis of Burnsville lost the first set and then took the next two. Edina had already picked up win number four before this match finished.<\/p>\n

Game 3: HP took all singles matches in this win. But the final piece of the victory was at first singles. In a 28 minute match it was Sunshine Vang stopping Maddie Blackbourn in three sets 21-13. With all the matches completed the crowd grew around this contest. The second set had the most drama with Blackbourn, after trailing by six early, rallying to win. Not only did she prevail in the comeback, but had to survive match point. Vang also held off set point twice before taking that 22-21 lead. One more time Vang held off set point, but errors (due to the fatigue factor) derailed any finish for HP. It was tight to the turn in the third set with Vang with the bird at 11-10. A six point run created the breathing room Vang needed (18-10). More details will follow in the number crunching.<\/p>\n

Here are the two match winners today<\/p>\n

Singles<\/strong><\/p>\n

1 Sunshine Vang, HP<\/p>\n

2 Tenzin Tsephel, Edina<\/p>\n

3 Sara Shiferaw, HP<\/p>\n

4 Tsheng Yang, HP<\/p>\n

Doubles<\/strong><\/p>\n

1 Ivy Petersen \/ Hanna Coma, Edina<\/p>\n

2 Leah Merid \/ Lisa Genis, Burnsville<\/p>\n

3 The Burnsville third doubles won twice, but with different players in each match.<\/p>\n

HP is 3-0 this week over ranked teams, all by the exact 4-3 score. Yesterday they bumped off #2 Harding at home. Today they took down #3 & #5. Tomorrow the Scots face #4 Washington.<\/p>\n

Burnsville was not at full strength today with Corinna Benson, the usual second singles out of town. Today marked the first time in a week that Betsey Lundberg of Edina returned to action.<\/p>\n

FIRST MATCH: SUNSHINE VANG V BETSEY LUNDBERG<\/strong><\/p>\n

Just as yesterday, Vang had almost an airtight side out game at 88%.\u00a0 She also replicated her strength at winners with\u00a0 a\u00a0 +23 advantage. The trioka of clears, drops and smashes went with 9, 9 and 7 points respectively . Lundberg scored 66% of her winners off soft drives.\u00a0 Most of Vang’s winners came on the right side of the court (72%).\u00a0 Vang also won 76% of longer rallies 16-5, and had a whopping +20 advantage in odd stroke winners.<\/p>\n

Vang didn’t get her first run until her fifth service but when it was over she had an 11-5 lead. By that point nine of her points came on winners. four on soft drives. She would only get one more soft drive score the rest of this match. Lundberg’s only run came in the second set and that was after two runs by Vang and the score a safe 16-5 margin.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Category<\/strong><\/td>\nVANG<\/strong><\/td>\nLUNDBERG<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Side out<\/td>\n14\/16-.875<\/td>\n4\/17-.235<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Longest side out string<\/td>\n7<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
3+ Runs<\/td>\n5<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Longest point string<\/td>\n6<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
SERVING<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
First serve<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
First point<\/td>\n1, 2<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Service points<\/td>\n25<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Serving %<\/td>\n39\/40-.975<\/td>\n19\/19-1.000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Point generated off serve<\/td>\n.610<\/td>\n.167<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
POINTS<\/strong><\/td>\n41<\/strong><\/td>\n18<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Points after 11<\/td>\n20<\/td>\n8<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Points after own errors<\/td>\n7<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Winners after own errors<\/td>\n6<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
STROKES<\/strong><\/td>\n182<\/strong><\/td>\n68<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Strokes per point<\/td>\n4.439<\/td>\n3.778<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
5+ rallies (%)<\/td>\n16 (.390)<\/td>\n5 (.278)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2- rallies (%)<\/td>\n8 (.195)<\/td>\n7 (.389)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
WINNERS<\/strong><\/td>\n32 (.780)<\/strong><\/td>\n9 (.500)<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Aces<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Blocks<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Clears<\/td>\n9<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Drives<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Drops<\/td>\n9<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Soft drives<\/td>\n5<\/td>\n6<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Smashes<\/td>\n7<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Even Stroke Winners<\/td>\n11 (.344)<\/td>\n8 (.889)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2nd<\/sup> Stroke Winners<\/td>\n6 (.188)<\/td>\n5 (.278)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Odd Stroke Winners<\/td>\n21 (.656)<\/td>\n1 (.056)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ERRORS<\/strong><\/td>\n9 (.219)<\/strong><\/td>\n9 (.500)<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Deep<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Net<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Wide<\/td>\n6<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Serve<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Even stroke errors<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n6<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2nd<\/sup> stroke errors<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Odd stroke errors<\/td>\n7<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
WINNER LOCATION<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Left<\/td>\n9 (.281)<\/td>\n4 (.444)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Right<\/td>\n23 (.719)<\/td>\n5 (.556)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Largest Lead<\/td>\n11, 12<\/td>\n1, 0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
W:E Ratio<\/td>\n3.556<\/td>\n1.000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Margin<\/td>\n11.50<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Set Point %<\/td>\n2\/2-1.000<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Time<\/td>\n14:10<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

SECOND MATCH: MADDIE BLACKBOURN V BETSEY LUNDBERG<\/strong><\/p>\n

Burnsville’s Maddie Blackbourn only allowed Betsey Lundberg to score on four of her services, siding out at 82% in the two set win. The contrast between these two came on the winner side of point scoring. Just coming off the injury, Lundberg relied heavily on the soft drive scoring 11 times or 61% of her winners in that method. Blackbourn cranked up her smash game, but had other shots available too. 44% of her winners came on smashes, with a dozen in that category.<\/p>\n

Lundberg had the early lead in set one getting the first run on her second service to build out to a 5-1 advantage. She would only score two more times on her serve all match. There was a five point sequence where each player sided out on the two count. Lundberg still held a 14-10 lead when Blackbourn picked up her first run to tie it at 14 on her ninth service. It was all knotted up at 18 when a four stroke drive by Blackbourn gave her her first lead of the match. A seven stroke smash put her on the verge. Lundberg responded with a six stroke smash—her only smash in two matches to hold off set point. Blackbourn got a two stroke smash to cap the win.<\/p>\n

Blackbourn held Lundberg scoreless on all eight of her serves in set two. She picked up her first run on her fourth service for a 9-3 lead. She added three more for a convincing 21-8 win .<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Category<\/strong><\/td>\nBLACKBOURN<\/strong><\/td>\nLUNDBERG<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Side out-%<\/td>\n18\/22-.818<\/td>\n11\/22-.500<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Longest side out string<\/td>\n8<\/td>\n4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
3+ Runs<\/td>\n6<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Longest point string<\/td>\n4<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
SERVING<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
First serve<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
First point<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Service points<\/td>\n21<\/td>\n6<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Serving %<\/td>\n41\/42-.976<\/td>\n26\/28-.929<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Point generated off serve<\/td>\n.488<\/td>\n.222<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
POINTS<\/strong><\/td>\n43<\/strong><\/td>\n27<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Points after 11<\/td>\n25<\/td>\n12<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Points after own errors<\/td>\n6<\/td>\n6<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Winners after own errors<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
STROKES<\/strong><\/td>\n180<\/strong><\/td>\n95<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Strokes per point<\/td>\n4.186<\/td>\n3.519<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
5+ rallies (%)<\/td>\n13 (.302)<\/td>\n6 (.222)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2- rallies (%)<\/td>\n17 (.395)<\/td>\n11 (.407)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
WINNERS<\/strong><\/td>\n27 (.628)<\/strong><\/td>\n18 (.667)<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Aces<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Blocks<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Clears<\/td>\n4<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Drives<\/td>\n4<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Drops<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Soft drives<\/td>\n5<\/td>\n11<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Smashes<\/td>\n12<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Even Stroke Winners<\/td>\n13\u00a0 (.481)<\/td>\n14\u00a0 (.778)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2nd<\/sup> Stroke Winners<\/td>\n10 (.370)<\/td>\n9 (.500)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Odd Stroke Winners<\/td>\n14 (.519)<\/td>\n4 (.222)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ERRORS<\/strong><\/td>\n9<\/strong><\/td>\n16<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Deep<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Net<\/td>\n4<\/td>\n11<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Wide<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Serve<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Even stroke errors<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n6<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2nd<\/sup> stroke errors<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Odd stroke errors<\/td>\n7<\/td>\n10<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
WINNER LOCATION<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Left<\/td>\n18 (.667)<\/td>\n12 (.667)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Right<\/td>\n9 (.333)<\/td>\n6 (.333)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Largest Lead<\/td>\n3, 13<\/td>\n4, 0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
W:E Ratio<\/td>\n3.000<\/td>\n1.125<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Margin<\/td>\n8.000<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Set Point %<\/td>\n2\/3-.667<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Time<\/td>\n17:50<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

THIRD MATCH: SUNSHINE VANG V MADDIE BLACKBOURN<\/strong><\/p>\n

This was the only one of the first singles to go the distance. And it decided the outcome of the team portion.<\/p>\n

Sunshine Vang broke free in the first match with her second run on her tenth service for a 17-13 lead. She got the bird back on a two stroke smash, added another five stroker, and finished the run with back to back three stroke soft drives including a back hander. Blackbourn held off set point twice but the set ended on a serve that was wide.<\/p>\n

Vang appeared to be in command in the second set building an 8-2 advantage after her third service. Blackbourn, who did not get a run in the first set, picked a good time to go with one with four straight to narrow the gap to 8-6. Vang kept the lead out to 17-14. Blackbourn added her third and final run of four on her eighth service to inch forward 18-17. Fatigue for both was becoming evident with more hitting errors than winners. Vang gave away 16 in this set, three on that final Blackbourn run. This time it was Vang to hold off set point trailing at 20-18. A six stroke drop to the right followed by a three stroke smash tied it at 20. Blackbourn had her third set point after a six stroke clear. Again Vang held off a set point and then put her self at set point with a five stroke soft drive to the right. Blackbourn regained the lead after two straight Vang hitting errors. One final time Vang held off set point. Two more hitting errors ended the set with the score tied at one set each.<\/p>\n

Even though the final set had the biggest margin spread at 21-13 it does\u00a0 not indicate the level of competitiveness. Points wen on forever. Of the 44 possible points in this set 17 were decided over five strokes—-38.6%. On top of that six points lasted over ten strokes. It was Vang that prevailed on those winning 4-2. The first two sets\u00a0 only had two ten stroke points. At the turn it was still tight with Vang holding the one point lead 11-10. It was on the eighth Vang service that the game broke for the HP player. After a two stroke soft drive to the right Vang tacked on five more points. All were on errors, but two lasted ten and sixteen strokes. Vang ended the day with a five stroke soft drive securing the win for the Scots.<\/p>\n

The key stat in all these matches were odd stroke winners—Vang led in that category here 17-7. Blackbourn won the second set 14-4 in that category. And Vang overwhelmed Lundberg 21-1 in the first match in that stat category.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Category<\/strong><\/td>\nVANG<\/strong><\/td>\nBLACKBOURN<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Side out<\/td>\n18\/35-.514<\/td>\n16\/34-.471<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Longest side out string<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
3+ Runs<\/td>\n7<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Longest point string<\/td>\n6<\/td>\n4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
SERVING<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
First serve<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n1, 3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
First point<\/td>\n2, 3<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Service points<\/td>\n31<\/td>\n23<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Serving %<\/td>\n59\/64-.922<\/td>\n53\/57-.930<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Point generated off serve<\/td>\n.477<\/td>\n.411<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
POINTS<\/strong><\/td>\n65<\/strong><\/td>\n56<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Points after 11<\/td>\n32<\/td>\n29<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Points after own errors<\/td>\n20<\/td>\n16<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Winners after own errors<\/td>\n10<\/td>\n9<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
STROKES<\/strong><\/td>\n288<\/strong><\/td>\n140<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Strokes per point<\/td>\n4.431<\/td>\n2.500<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
5+ rallies (%)<\/td>\n23 (.354)<\/td>\n20 (.357)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2- rallies (%)<\/td>\n16 (.246)<\/td>\n14 (.250)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
WINNERS<\/strong><\/td>\n37 (.569)<\/strong><\/td>\n23 (.411)<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Aces<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Blocks<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Clears<\/td>\n7<\/td>\n6<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Drives<\/td>\n6<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Drops<\/td>\n5<\/td>\n4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Soft drives<\/td>\n8<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Smashes<\/td>\n10<\/td>\n8<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Even Stroke Winners<\/td>\n20 (.541)<\/td>\n16 (.696)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2nd<\/sup> Stroke Winners<\/td>\n7 (.189)<\/td>\n4 (.174)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Odd Stroke Winners<\/td>\n17 (.459)<\/td>\n7 (.304)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ERRORS<\/strong><\/td>\n33 (.589)<\/strong><\/td>\n28 (.431)<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Deep<\/td>\n6<\/td>\n4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Net<\/td>\n12<\/td>\n14<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Wide<\/td>\n10<\/td>\n6<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Serve<\/td>\n5<\/td>\n4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Even stroke errors<\/td>\n16<\/td>\n13<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2nd<\/sup> stroke errors<\/td>\n5<\/td>\n5<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Odd stroke errors<\/td>\n17<\/td>\n15<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
WINNER LOCATION<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Left<\/td>\n14 (.378)<\/td>\n8 (.348)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Right<\/td>\n23 (.622)<\/td>\n15 (.652)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Largest Lead<\/td>\n5, 6, 8<\/td>\n1, 2, 1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
W:E Ratio<\/td>\n1.121<\/td>\n0.821<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Margin<\/td>\n3.00<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Set Point %<\/td>\n2\/5-.400<\/td>\n1\/5-.200<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Time<\/td>\n28:10<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

It was a 4-3 times three in Burnsville with all matches ending with the same score. When the dust had settled it was #6 Highland Park<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"spay_email":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false},"categories":[2,5],"tags":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p8CdKT-5ev","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":20660,"url":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/?p=20660","url_meta":{"origin":20119,"position":0},"title":"Badminton Out & About: Burnsville Triangular with Edina & Highland Park 4.24.2024","date":"April 24, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Blaze hosted Edina & Highland Park on Wednesday with the Hornets taking two wins, the Scots one. Burnsville was shut out. The day feature three of the top singles players around. In that case #1 Phlower Vang of Highland Park won twice, but the second win came after Burnsville's\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Badminton"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":19684,"url":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/?p=19684","url_meta":{"origin":20119,"position":1},"title":"2022 Fifth Badminton Poll","date":"April 30, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Each team is to send their results after each match to kja8067@gmail.com or by text. Teams will be ranked fully. Single and doubles ranked 1 to 12. Interesting Facts: Burnsville leads in match wins in singles with 44. Second is Highland Park at 42. Burnsville also leads in match wins\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Badminton"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":20026,"url":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/?p=20026","url_meta":{"origin":20119,"position":2},"title":"2023 Badminton Poll #2","date":"April 2, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Here is badminton poll #2 Seven more teams joined action last week. There is probably one, possibly two more teams to start action. Singles now has ten players listed. Doubles have eight listed. Some Number 2s have made both lists. This next week will be relatively quiet as Minneapolis and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Badminton"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":20106,"url":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/?p=20106","url_meta":{"origin":20119,"position":3},"title":"2023 Badminton Poll & News #5","date":"April 23, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Before we get to the polls, I am introducing a new feature: CAREER WINS Other sports have career leaders in points scored, or leaders in home runs. Badminton career wins seems to be the best option right now. If these numbers are incorrect or incomplete send me the documentation and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Badminton"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":20601,"url":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/?p=20601","url_meta":{"origin":20119,"position":4},"title":"2024 Badminton Poll #4","date":"April 14, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"We are at the halfway point. Rolling spring break is finished. All teams will be in action next week. St. Paul moves their conference match start times to 5:30. I am up to 23 teams charted (82%). Five to go---North, Burnsville, Fridley, Hiawatha, TCA (I did see Burnsville at the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Badminton"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":20571,"url":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/?p=20571","url_meta":{"origin":20119,"position":5},"title":"2024 Badminton Poll #3","date":"April 6, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"We are almost done with rolling spring break. Last week it was Minneapolis and assorted schools, this week St. Paul is off. The big news last week was the Edina Invitational was back on after being on hiatus for four years. Edina won the team portion, took two of the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Badminton"","img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20119"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=20119"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20119\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":20132,"href":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20119\/revisions\/20132"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=20119"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=20119"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/kjasr.com\/live\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=20119"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}