Class in Session: A History in Classification

July 24, 2017

By Rob Kaminski
MHSAA benchmarks editor

This is the first part in a series on MHSAA tournament classification, past and present, that will be published over the next two weeks. This series originally ran in this spring's edition of MHSAA benchmarks.

Conversation and discussion at the March 2017 MHSAA Representative Council Meeting leaned heavily toward the subject of 8-Player Football and how to properly balance its tournament with the growing number of schools sponsoring the sport.

While the proposal to split the tournament into two divisions beginning with the 2017 school year was adopted, the MHSAA then faced questions such as when to set the divisions, how to determine qualifiers and where to host the championship games.

The topic continues to create a buzz in Class D schools across both peninsulas, and likely will do into the start of school this fall.

Likewise, the lone holdouts still conducting tournaments by class – MHSAA Boys and Girls Basketball and Girls Volleyball – took center stage at the May Council discussion, and following the 2017-18 school year, class is out for good. Both genders of basketball, and girls volleyball, will move to divisional formats thereafter.

There is much to be decided to be sure; but as those in education are well aware, history is the best teacher.

Fortunately for the sports in flux and for all sports under the governance of the MHSAA, the Association more or less wrote the book on the subject of sport classification. Following is a history lesson, with a little advanced division thrown in.

Class structure

Credited with being the first state with multiple tournament classifications, Michigan’s attention to trends and shifts in philosophy aimed at fair play and equal tournament opportunity can be traced from 80 years ago to the present.

In the earliest years of the MHSAA, there were four classifications for elections and tournaments –  Classes A, B, C and D. Classes C and D had far more schools than Classes A and B. For example, 80 years ago (1937), there were only 58 schools in Class A, 94 schools in Class B, 297 schools in Class C and 253 schools in Class D.

Gradually through the years, as Michigan’s major cities spawned suburbs, there was a shift in the other direction to the point 30 years ago (1987) when school size became more balanced: 173 Class A schools, 178 Class B schools, 179 Class C schools and 182 Class D schools.

Up until 1987, the MHSAA published the dividing line between each classification, after which schools submitted their enrollments. Then, for 1988 and thereafter, the MHSAA adopted the plan of gathering all enrollments first and then placing 25 percent of the schools in each of four classes. This completed the equalization of the number of schools in each class for elections.

However, the change for 1988 did nothing to equalize the number of teams actually entered by each class in each sport. And unlike the early years of the Association when there were many more Class C and D teams than A and B teams, there were more Class A and B teams than C and D teams entering MHSAA tournaments decades later.

Moreover, the difference in number of teams entered in the different classifications for a sport continued to increase as many small schools, the fastest growing portion of the MHSAA's membership, sponsor only a few sports, or they sponsor no sports at all but enter into cooperative programs with other schools.

Because of these differences, Class A or B schools sometimes had to win twice as many games as Class C or D schools to reach the MHSAA Finals in a sport. At times, the larger classifications had District Tournaments, even rat-tail games, and/or a Quarterfinal game, and the smaller classifications did not. Most Class D Districts have had four teams (some only three), while Class A Districts often had seven or eight teams. In Regional levels of individual sports, the number of entries in the larger classification once greatly outnumbered those in the smaller classifications of the tournament for the same sport.

Over the years, these dividing lines between classes escalated gradually, as did the differences in enrollments of largest and small schools in each class. In 1937 the dividing lines were 700, 300 and 100 between Class A and B, B and C, and C and D, respectively. By 1987, the dividing lines were 1,129, 571 and 298, respectively, leading to the current method of collecting enrollments and then setting the classification.

With the pendulum swinging well past center by the late 1980s, coaches associations, MHSAA sport committees, tournament managers and school administrators began discussion and offered proposals to correct what many believed had become a flawed system of MHSAA tournament classification.

At the 1996 MHSAA Update Meetings, ¾ of 858 respondents to that year’s annual survey indicated they favored a system that would divide schools which actually sponsor each sport into two, three or four nearly equal divisions.

Problem solving

At its meeting May 4-6, 1997, the Representative Council defeated a motion that would have adopted in one action a coordinated plan of reclassification for all sports to equalize the number of schools in each tournament for each respective sport. Instead, the Council discussed and voted on each proposal that had been presented from sport committees.

This resulted in the Representative Council adopting four equal divisions for baseball and softball, four equal divisions for boys and girls tennis, four equal divisions for boys soccer and three equal divisions for girls soccer, effective with the 1997-98 school year. Helping in the decision was the success of the 1995-96 MHSAA Wrestling season, which saw the sport move to four divisions for its tournament structure

The Council delayed action on similar proposals for football and boys golf at that time to glean additional input. The same decision was made with respect to a proposal from the Ice Hockey Committee that would have split the Class A schools in two divisions and left the Class B/C/D Tournament unchanged.

“The gist of the move from classes to divisions was to equalize the path to championships for students of all schools, regardless of the size of those schools,” said MHSAA Executive Director Jack Roberts.

While the restructuring accomplished that goal for the majority of competitors, opposition exists now as it did then. The primary argument in opposition to the changes is that, in some sports, it increases the range between largest and smallest schools in the division for smallest schools, even as the range is usually reduced for other divisions.

Larger schools offered a counterpoint.

“The larger schools suggested that while they may have more students, they also attempt to sponsor more sports than the smaller schools, in some cases spreading the enrollment as thin as a much smaller school with fewer sports,” Roberts said.

“Even today, the idea of four equal divisions can be unpopular among some Class D schools which feel especially burdened by the equal division concept,” Roberts said. “There was enough opposition in 1997 that equal divisions were rejected for boys and girls basketball and girls volleyball, and some of that opposition remains.”

The numbers of schools sponsoring each MHSAA tournament are still close to the totals today, with the exception of soccer in both genders, which has enjoyed substantial increases. This spring, 466 girls teams were scheduled to compete in the MHSAA Soccer Tournament, while 473 boys teams will suit up this fall.

Since the beginning of MHSAA divisions in 1996 with wrestling, 147 additional team champions have been crowned and countless individuals have known the thrill of victory due to an extra level of Finals in various sports. Girls soccer has seen the most growth in opportunity, moving from two classes in 1987 to three divisions the following year, and then four divisions in 2000. Boys soccer had enjoyed four classes for two years prior to the new four-division format, and it was the sport of soccer that helped to create a caveat in the nearly equal division movement.

Lower Peninsula boys and girls swimming & diving expanded from two to three divisions in 2008, while boys and girls bowling are the most recent sports to enjoy increased tournament opportunity, adding a fourth division in 2010.

“Fairness is in the eye of the beholder. While having the same number of schools in each division is one kind of fairness, holding in check the enrollment range between the largest and smallest schools in Division 4 is another kind of fairness that is dear to a great number of people,” Roberts said. “Because more schools sponsor basketball and volleyball than other sports, Class D schools would have been least affected by the equal divisions concept in those sports; but that, and ‘tradition,’ did not dissuade the opponents in the 1990s.”

The shift to divisions not only paved the way for student-athletes, but also assisted administrators and schools hosting tournaments. MHSAA tournament mangers looked to equal divisions to more closely equalize the number of schools in District or Regional Tournaments and to better equalize the length of day required for these rounds of tournaments, both for management and participating teams and individuals.

Pinning down an answer

Wrestling became the first MHSAA Tournament to be conducted in nearly equal divisions when team and individual champions were crowned in Divisions 1, 2, 3 and 4 rather than Classes A, B, C/D for the 1996 winter championships. 

The movement was well received, as schools saw more opportunity for success: four champions where there once were three at the District, Regional and Final levels, and a smaller range of enrollment between the smallest and largest school in all four tournaments, leading to the impetus for the Fall 1996 Update Meeting Survey of schools regarding similar movement in other sports.

Team champions that year were Holt (D1), Petoskey (D2), Middleville Thornapple Kellogg (D3) and Dundee (D4).

Getting their kicks

When the "equal divisions" concept was approved by the Representative Council for most MHSAA Tournaments for the 1997-98 school year, there was opposition from the smallest schools which, under the equal divisions, are forced to play against larger schools than reside in Class D. Compelling arguments were made – and still are – that an enrollment difference between schools with smaller enrollments (e.g., Class D) is more difficult to overcome in athletic competition than an even larger enrollment difference between schools with larger enrollments (e.g., Class A).

The opposition was most intense in soccer because of the number of students needed to field a team and the physical nature of the sport. As a result, from 2000-01 through 2010-11, soccer operated with a “20-percent modification.” This placed 20 percent of all schools that actually sponsored soccer in Division 4, and the remaining 80 percent were placed equally in Divisions 1, 2 and 3.

At the time the 20 percent modification was adopted, it was also established that soccer would return to four equal divisions when the largest Division 4 soccer school had an enrollment equal to or smaller than the mid­ point for Class C schools. That occurred in 2010.

Last class on the schedule

In the same volume of “history being the best teacher,” one can also find the adage, “times change.” While the division format was a welcome change in some sports, others were left to hold class without change.

In the sports of boys and girls basketball, and girls volleyball, the number of schools sponsoring the sports were so close to the overall membership of the MHSAA that divisions were not necessary; the enrollment breakdowns themselves were enough to delineate equal opportunity for tournament success.

That is no longer the case, according to MHSAA membership. The last move from classes to divisions occurred for the 2006-07 school year following Council action. Before this May, that is. Action at the most recent Representative Council meeting, May 2017, called for the shift to divisions for MHSAA Boys and Girls Basketball, and Girls Volleyball, beginning with the 2018-19 season.

“Because the MHSAA Volleyball Committee had requested this change several times a number of years ago, and because the Council felt the change inevitable, there should not be further delay,” Roberts said. “It is an important detail that the Class D maximum has dropped 50 students over the past decade so the objection that much larger schools would be competing in Division 4 isn’t very strong now.”

Using the 2017-18 enrollment figures, just eight Class C schools would be competing in Division 4 for boys basketball, 11 for girls basketball and 14 for girls volleyball.

Good things came of the previous most-recent switches in 2006-07. Competitive Cheer was re-classified from Class A, B and C-D into four equal divisions assisting in the rapid growth of sponsoring schools (approximately 80 schools per division). Alpine skiing was changed from Class A and B-C­ D to two equal divisions.

At that time, the MHSAA Basketball Committee had recommended to the Council the study of increased classifications, but status quo remained.

Back on the grid

As such, MHSAA Basketball and Volleyball remained the only holdovers of the MHSAA class structure. Discussion resurfaced periodically during the last two decades to bring those tournaments in line with the other MHSAA sports.

Regular-season football-playing schools are separated by class, then are reshuffled by divisions for the playoffs. Football, as we know, underwent a significant postseason facelift in the late 1990s.

While MHSAA Football also remained a class sport through 1998, it had expanded from four to eight classes from 1990-98, becoming the first MHSAA sport to crown more than four team champions. Member schools were asked to consider a pair of options in November of 1997. One called for eight equal divisions, and the second would leave Class D by itself as division 8, and split Class A, B and C schools into seven nearly equal divisions.

After much discussion, retooling, and crunching of formulas, the MHSAA unveiled its revised Football Playoff model that continues to roll today, nearly 20 years later. It was determined that 256 teams would qualify for the tournament based first on a minimum of six wins, then by Playoff Points determined by formula. From there, the field would be divided into eight divisions, with the field being filled out by a nearly equal number of five-win teams in each division as needed to reach 256.

Eight championships would indeed be enough, until football sponsorship among the MHSAA’s smallest schools – some with rich football traditions – began to trend downward. The MHSAA again went to the drawing board, examining the viability of 8-player football. After an experimental year in 2010 without a tournament, the 8-player game was playoff-ready for 2011, with a field of 16 qualifiers embarking on a four-week tournament.

Not only did the 8-player option restore recently canceled programs, but it also created teams in schools which previously had none, and convinced some 11-player schools that this new division was the best path to take.

What did this do for the Class D holdovers staying in the traditional 11-player game? Well, a couple of things, positive and negative. As two and three dozen Class D schools opted for the 8-player game, the remaining 11-player Class D schools at times found themselves in disrupted leagues and had to travel further to complete schedules. They also competed against larger teams in Division 8 of the 11-player MHSAA Football Playoffs.

However, the growth of the 8-player game among the smallest schools also resulted in more Class D schools qualifying for the MHSAA Football Playoffs than ever before. In 2012, an all-time high 44 percent of Class D schools sponsoring football qualified for either the 8-player tournament or Division 8 of the 11-player tournament. That compared to 42.2 percent of Class C schools, 44.9 percent of Class B schools and 41.6 percent of Class A schools which qualified for the 2012 playoffs.

Much is to be determined in the most recent chapter of MHSAA Tournament expansion as the 8-Player Football Playoffs welcome a second division. As the past illustrates, there will be pluses and minuses. History also shows that the MHSAA has received maximum input from its constituents, researched all possibilities, and will find solutions to questions still in the balance before an additional group of athletes hoists a new trophy in November.

Through the Years

A chronology of when which sports moved from Class to Division in the MHSAA. 

1995-96: LP Wrestling

1997-98: Baseball, Boys Soccer, Girls Soccer, Softball, LP Girls Tennis, LP Boys Tennis

1998-99: LP Boys Golf, LP Girls Golf

1999-2000: Ice Hockey, LP Boys Track & Field, LP Girls Track & Field

2000-01: LP Boys Cross Country, LP Girls Cross Country, UP Boys Cross Country, UP Girls Cross Country, UP Boys Golf, UP Girls Golf, UP Boys Tennis, UP Girls Tennis, UP Boys Track & Field, UP Girls Track & Field

2002-03: LP Girls Swimming & Diving, LP Boys Swimming & Diving

2005-06: Boys Bowling, Girls Bowling

2006-07: Girls Competitive Cheer, Boys Skiing, Girls Skiing

2018-19: Boys Basketball, Girls Basketball, Girls Volleyball

Note: Boys and Girls Lacrosse has been a divisional sport since it began in during the 2004-05 school year.

Preview: Reunited Co-Champs, Title Streak Possibilities Headline Tennis Finals

By Geoff Kimmerly
MHSAA.com senior editor

June 1, 2022

Many of the strongest contenders are familiar heading into this weekend’s Lower Peninsula Girls Tennis Finals.

But intriguing storylines could make all four tournaments especially memorable for the teams playing to finish on top.

Ann Arbor Pioneer and Bloomfield Hills tied for the Division 1 title a year ago, and are expected to match up to decide this weekend’s championship. In Division 2, Grand Rapids Forest Hills Northern is favored to play for a third-straight championship, but with an old rival returning to the field. Finals winning streaks in Divisions 3 and 4 face perhaps their stiffest obstacles this time around as well-seeded Bloomfield Hills Cranbrook Kingswood and Ann Arbor Greenhills look to start their own championship runs.

All four divisions again will be played over multiple locations. Division 1 will be played Kalamazoo College and Western Michigan University, with the final rounds at K-College – and that tournament will begin Thursday and conclude Friday.

The other three divisions will follow the more traditional Friday/Saturday format. Division 2 will be played at Hope College and Holland Christian, finishing up at Hope. Division 3 will play at Midland Tennis Center and Midland High, with final rounds at MTC, and Division 4 will play early rounds at University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Pioneer and Ann Arbor Greenhills high schools before concluding at U-M.

Below is a glance at the highest-ranked teams in each division and additional No. 1 singles players expected to be in contention. Click for full brackets and more from the MHSAA Website.

LP Division 1 at Kalamazoo College and Western Michigan University

Top-ranked: 1. Ann Arbor Pioneer, 2. Bloomfield Hills, 3. Troy.

Ann Arbor Pioneer: Last season’s championship was the program’s first since 2010, and the singles lineup that swept all four flight titles is back intact – junior Reese Miller (23-0) at No. 1, sophomore Elsie Van Wieren at No. 2, senior Mia Goldstein at No. 3 and sophomore Bridgette Kelly at No. 4 are all top seeds. All four doubles flights are seeded fourth or higher, led by second-seeded senior Ashley Capelli and junior Juliana Pullen at No. 1 and sophomore Mia Berens and freshman Natalie Guo at No. 2. Capelli and Pullen made the No. 1 doubles semifinals last season, while Berens was part of a semifinalist pairing at No. 2.

Bloomfield Hills: Last season’s title was the program’s first and came on the strength of three doubles flight championships and two singles runner-up finishes. The Black Hawks are seeded first at No. 1 doubles with seniors Danielle Herb and Carly Bernard, No. 2 with senior Noa Goldstein and junior Natalie Raab, and No. 3 with seniors Eryn Stern and Grace Bickersteth; and they are seeded second at No. 4 with junior Colleen Pettengill and senior Ellie Alberts. Goldstein (No. 1), Bernard (No. 2), Stern and Raab (No. 3) were part of champion pairs in 2021, with Bickersteth and Alberts the runner-up at No. 4. Bloomfield Hills also has three singles flights seeded third or higher; Julia Yousif was last season’s No. 4 runner-up and is seeded second at that flight, and Grace Shaya was runner-up at No. 3 last spring and is seeded second returning to her flight as well. Raegan Tomina, who won No. 2 doubles with Bernard last year, is the third seed at No. 2 singles this time.

Troy: The Colts are seeking their first Finals team championship since 2003 after tying for fourth last year. All four doubles flights are seeded, led by junior Vienna Thieu and sophomore Michelle Baik topping the No. 4 bracket and junior Varsha Penumalee and senior Prisha Akasapu the second seed at No. 3. Juniors Grace Zhu and Stephanie Ochoa are the third seed at No. 1 doubles after finishing runner-up at No. 2 last season, and sophomore Nika Tanako and senior Sophie Chong were the runners-up at No. 3 in 2021 and are seeded third at No. 2 this weekend. Two singles flights are seeded as well.

Sienna Osborne, Lake Orion sophomore: She enters as the fourth seed at No. 1 singles after going 1-1 as an unseeded entry a year ago. She’s 17-3 this spring, with her defeats to Pioneer’s Miller once and Nicole Fu (see below) twice.

Jenna Redmile, Salem sophomore: She’s the second seed at No. 1 singles after also entering last season’s bracket unseeded and reaching the quarterfinals. She’s 21-1 with her lone loss to Miller.

Nicole Fu, Rochester Adams freshman: The third seed at No. 1 as only a freshman is 17-3 with losses to Miller, Osborne and fifth-seeded Kavitha Gowda of Troy Athens.

LP Division 2 at Hope College and Holland Christian

Top-ranked: 1. Grand Rapids Forest Hills Northern, 2. Birmingham Seaholm, 3. Grosse Pointe South.

Grand Rapids Forest Hills Northern: The Huskies have won two straight championships (last season and in 2019, with 2020 canceled due to COVID-19) and claimed last year’s title by a commanding 14 points while winning seven flights. Abigial Siminski (25-1) is the reigning champion at No. 1 singles and was runner-up in 2019, and she’s seeded second at that flight this weekend. All eight FHN flights are seeded, and six as second or first seeds. Senior Isabella Paul and sophomore Ryan Morey are the top-seeded No. 2 doubles pair, with seniors Tanishka Shenoy and Maya Echtinaw top seeds at No. 3 and junior Ava Hamilton and sophomore Paige McKenzie the top seeds at No. 4.  Senior Sophie Richards and Rhea Marwaha are only third seeds at No. 1 doubles, but also the reigning champions at that flight. Morey was part of the 2021 champion at No. 2, and Shenoy and Echtinaw also are returning champions at their flight. Sophomore Nathalie Lanne is the second seed at No. 2 singles (after finishing runner-up at No. 4 last season), and freshman Andrea Wang is the top seed at No. 3.

Birmingham Seaholm: The Maples are back in Division 2 after finishing third in Division 1 a year ago, and they’re seeking to finish first again for the first time since 2018. All eight flights are seeded third or higher, led by top-seeded senior Lauren Whitall at No. 4 singles and junior Madeleine Leo and senior Nina Graham on the top line at No. 1 doubles. Senior Jane Wineman and junior Tatum Hirsch at No. 3 doubles, junior Sydney Fong and sophomore Jenna Tin at No. 4 and sophomore Courtney Marcum at No. 2 singles all are second seeds. Senior Sophie MacKinnon (13-4) is the third seed at No. 1 singles.

Grosse Pointe South: The Blue Devils also are back in Division 2 after a run through Division 1, where they tied for fourth last spring. Seven flights are seeded as they seek to add to their most recent championship in 2019 in Division 1, where they’ve won three team titles over the last nine seasons. Sophomore Maeve Hix and junior Megan Kommeier lead with a second seed at No. 2 doubles. Senior Moira Hix (21-6) is the fourth seed at No. 1 singles.

Emma Chrome, Mason senior: Playing in her first Finals since reaching the quarterfinals at No. 2 doubles as a freshman, Chrome is the fifth seed at No. 1 singles and undefeated at 20-0.

Lizzie Novak, Mattawan senior: She’s also undefeated at 12-0 after recovering from an early-season injury, and she’s the top seed at No. 1 singles with an April 21 win over Siminski. Novak was the No. 2 singles champion as a freshman in 2019 and played a USTA schedule instead last spring.

LP Division 3 at Midland Tennis Center and Midland High School

Top-ranked: 1. Bloomfield Hills Cranbrook Kingswood, 2. East Grand Rapids, 3. Bloomfield Hills Marian.  

Bloomfield Hills Cranbrook Kingswood: There is a lot of notable recent history at this event for the Cranes. After winning five straight championships from 2011-15, they saw Detroit Country Day win the next five – while finishing runners-up the last three Finals (with no season in 2020). Seven of eight flights are top seeds with the eighth a second seed this weekend. Freshman Yenna Park (16-0) is the top seed at No. 1 singles, with reigning champion Charlotte Brown back as the top seed at No. 2. Sophomores Sienna Ilitch and Olivia Zhang are the top seeds at Nos. 3 and 4 singles, respectively, after finishing as runners-up at those flights in 2021. Freshman Chloe Qin is teaming with senior Gaby Levine as the top seed at No. 1 doubles, with freshman Ava Clogg and sophomore Grace Zhang top-seeded at No. 3 and sophomores Daryn Krause and Kayli Lala top-seeded at No. 4. Krause and Lala were the No. 3 runners-up a year ago, and Zhang was part of the runner-up at No. 4 in 2021. Junior Morgan Dresner-Hagaman and freshman Chiarra Martella are second-seeded at No. 2.

East Grand Rapids: The Pioneers moved back into Division 3 after finishing fourth in Division 2 last season, and they most recently were champions in 2017 in Division 2. Seven flights are seeded, with five first or second seeds. Seniors Meg Simon and Ella Webb lead as the top-seeded pair at No. 2 doubles, with junior Ava Godlewski and sophomore Dana Goedken the second seeds at No. 3 and senior Kelly Couvrier and freshman Kate Simon second seeds at No. 4. Sophomore Sam Connor is the second seed at No. 3 singles, and freshman Sophia DeGuzman is the second seed at No. 4. Seniors Julia and Jennifer Ernst are third seeds at No. 1 doubles, but were second seeds at that flight in Division 2 last year as they reached the semifinals. Senior Allie Tol (19-4) might be the strongest five seed in any bracket this weekend, with her losses to FHN’s Siminski (twice), Park and Marian senior Gaby Gryzenia (see below).

Bloomfield Hills Marian: The Mustangs edged Country Day by a point to finish Regional runner-up to Cranbrook two weeks ago, and Marian was runner-up in Division 2 last season before moving back into Division 3 this year. The Mustangs’ most recent championship came in Division 2 in 2016, and they also were runners-up in 2018. All eight flights are seeded, with three seeded third or second. Gryzenia (13-4) leads the way as that second seed, at No. 1 singles, after reaching the quarterfinals at that flight in Division 2 last spring.

Sophia Grzesiak, Detroit Country Day freshman: She tops the lineup at No. 1 singles for the reigning five-time team champion, and enters her first Finals as the fourth seed in her flight. While only 7-8 this spring, she’s split matches with Gryzenia over the last month and taken losses from Park and Pioneer’s Miller.

Julia Gurne, Pontiac Notre Dame sophomore: The reigning No. 1 singles runner-up enters this time as the third seed with an 11-7 record but 10 wins over her last 12 matches.

LP Division 4 at University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Pioneer and Ann Arbor Greenhills

Top-ranked: 1. Ann Arbor Greenhills, 2. Bloomfield Hills Academy of the Sacred Heart, 3. Grand Rapids Catholic Central.

Ann Arbor Greenhills: The Gryphons are seeking their first Finals championship since 2017 and finished ninth last season. But the lineup has been boosted by six freshmen including the top three singles players – third-seeded Maddie Morgan (18-4) at No. 1 and top seeds Shangyang Xia at No. 2 and Sophie Chen at No. 3. Seniors Rukmini Nallamothu and Georgia Branch are top seeds at No. 1 doubles after they filled the top two singles flights last season, and senior Sabeen Malick and freshman Meera Tewari have the top line at No. 4. Sophomore Manassa Gollapalli is the second seed at No. 4 singles, with senior Lana Koualti and freshman Sophia Kleer second-seeded at No. 2 doubles and sophomore Parini Rao and freshman Meera Pandey second-seeded at No. 3.

Bloomfield Hills Academy of the Sacred Heart: The Gazelles own a three-season Finals winning streak and have claimed seven of the last nine Division 4 championships. Doubles are a traditional strength, and this year’s team is up to that high standard. Senior Marisa Nafso and sophomore Kayla Nafso are the second seed at No. 1 but also the reigning champion at that flight. Junior Jade Horcoff and senior Angelina Kakos are the top seed at No. 2, with Kakos part of last season’s No. 3 doubles champion. Sophomores Lulu George and Maggie Pulte are the top seeds at No. 3 after finishing runner-up last season at No. 2, and junior Katie Kelly and sophomore Jordan Rivenburgh are the second seeds at No. 4. Senior Isabelle Burg (9-8) is the fourth seed at No. 1 singles after finishing runner-up at No. 2 a year ago, and seven of her eight defeats are against top-four seeded players in the Division 3 and 4 brackets.

Grand Rapids Catholic Central: The Cougars are seeking their first top-two finish at a Finals in this sport, and most recently tied for sixth in Division 3 a year ago. They are seeded in six of eight flights, with three doubles pairs seeded fourth and junior Hannah Lourido the top seed at No. 4 singles.

Moorea McNalley, Clarkston Everest Collegiate senior: She looking to add to her No. 1 singles championships in 2019 and last season, and is seeded second this weekend with her only loss 6-1, 6-2, to top seed Maddy Zampardo (see below). She has two wins over Morgan and also defeated Notre Dame Prep’s Gurne.

Maddy Zampardo, Grosse Pointe Woods University Liggett junior: Playing in her first Finals, Zampardo is undefeated at 7-0 and the top seed at No. 1 singles with two wins over Burg, the win noted above over McNalley and another that stands out against Grosse Pointe South’s Hix.

PHOTO Ann Arbor Pioneer's Reese Miller returns a volley during her championship match at last season's LP Division 1 Finals. (Click for more from High School Sports Scene.)