| 1 | 71: W. Jackowski - E. Chodźko, 4.0, ZP/- |
1 | EW |
4  | N |  8 | -1 |
-50 | 80.28 |
| 1 | 71: W. Jackowski - E. Chodźko, 4.0, ZP/- |
2 | EW |
2 | S |  Q | +2 |
170 | 15.18 |
| 1 | 71: W. Jackowski - E. Chodźko, 4.0, ZP/- |
3 | EW |
3 | S | A | -2 |
-100 | 21.24 |
| 1 | 71: W. Jackowski - E. Chodźko, 4.0, ZP/- |
4 | EW |
4 | S |  A | = |
620 | 22.75 |
| 1 | 71: W. Jackowski - E. Chodźko, 4.0, ZP/- |
5 | EW |
3  | N | 3 | +3 |
690 | 21.24 |
| 1 | 71: W. Jackowski - E. Chodźko, 4.0, ZP/- |
6 | EW |
4 | E | A | -1 |
100 | 25.78 |
| 2 | 68: J. Antoniewicz - Z. Kwiatkowski, 0.0, |
7 | EW |
3 | E | 5 | -1 |
100 | 37.89 |
| 2 | 68: J. Antoniewicz - Z. Kwiatkowski, 0.0, |
8 | EW |
5 | N | A | = |
400 | 33.35 |
| 2 | 68: J. Antoniewicz - Z. Kwiatkowski, 0.0, |
9 | EW |
3 | N | Q | +2 |
460 | 30.32 |
| 2 | 68: J. Antoniewicz - Z. Kwiatkowski, 0.0, |
10 | EW |
2 x | S | J | -1 |
-200 | 98.44 |
| 2 | 68: J. Antoniewicz - Z. Kwiatkowski, 0.0, |
11 | EW |
3 | S | 4 | = |
110 | 46.97 |
| 2 | 68: J. Antoniewicz - Z. Kwiatkowski, 0.0, |
12 | EW |
4 x | W | A | -3 |
500 | 10.64 |
| 3 | 67: B. Tomaszewski - Z. Kondyjowski, 3.0, -/ZP |
13 | EW |
2 | N | A | -1 |
-100 | 46.97 |
| 3 | 67: B. Tomaszewski - Z. Kondyjowski, 3.0, -/ZP |
14 | EW |
3 | W | K | = |
-110 | 98.44 |
| 3 | 67: B. Tomaszewski - Z. Kondyjowski, 3.0, -/ZP |
15 | EW |
4 | N | 4 | +1 |
650 | 27.29 |
| 3 | 67: B. Tomaszewski - Z. Kondyjowski, 3.0, -/ZP |
16 | EW |
6 | W | Q | -2 |
200 | 1.56 |
| 3 | 67: B. Tomaszewski - Z. Kondyjowski, 3.0, -/ZP |
17 | EW |
4 | E | K | -2 |
100 | 33.35 |
| 3 | 67: B. Tomaszewski - Z. Kondyjowski, 3.0, -/ZP |
18 | EW |
3 | E | Q | +1 |
-170 | 68.17 |
| 4 | 69: E. Kaczmarek - M. Żakowicz, 21.0, ZP |
19 | NS |
3 | S | J | -2 |
-100 | 3.07 |
| 4 | 69: E. Kaczmarek - M. Żakowicz, 21.0, ZP |
20 | NS |
3 | E | 5 | = |
-600 | 46.97 |
| 4 | 69: E. Kaczmarek - M. Żakowicz, 21.0, ZP |
21 | NS |
4 | E | 3 | = |
-420 | 16.70 |
| 4 | 69: E. Kaczmarek - M. Żakowicz, 21.0, ZP |
22 | NS |
1 | E | 6 | -1 |
100 | 48.49 |
| 4 | 69: E. Kaczmarek - M. Żakowicz, 21.0, ZP |
23 | NS |
1 | E | T | +3 |
-180 | 28.81 |
| 4 | 69: E. Kaczmarek - M. Żakowicz, 21.0, ZP |
24 | NS |
2 x | E | Q | -3 |
500 | 97.06 |
| 5 | 70: H. Pakuła - M. Sankiewicz, 9.0, ZP |
25 | NS |
2 | W | J | -1 |
100 | 33.82 |
| 5 | 70: H. Pakuła - M. Sankiewicz, 9.0, ZP |
26 | NS |
4 | S | Q | -1 |
-100 | 44.12 |
| 5 | 70: H. Pakuła - M. Sankiewicz, 9.0, ZP |
27 | NS |
3 | S | A | +2 |
150 | 42.65 |
| 5 | 70: H. Pakuła - M. Sankiewicz, 9.0, ZP |
28 | NS |
1 | E | 6 | = |
-90 | 40.20 |
| 5 | 70: H. Pakuła - M. Sankiewicz, 9.0, ZP |
29 | NS |
1 | W | 5 | = |
-90 | 50.00 |
| 5 | 70: H. Pakuła - M. Sankiewicz, 9.0, ZP |
30 | NS |
2 | N | A | +1 |
110 | 60.00 |
