Wimbledon wildcards 2017 - Women

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

Wimbledon wildcards 2017

scottie1 · Futures level

skibbarriz wrote:
She's been a professional player for six years. That's long enough to see what someone's calibre is. She's not good enough to get into slam main draws by herself, never has been. And unlike James Ward or Laura Robson, she doesn't have public profile. By which i mean how many British people who will be watching wimby would think to name her if you asked them to name all the female British players they can think of. Very few. Plus she's not on a run of form that says she deserves to dropped straight into main draw in a slam.

For me this adds up to her not deserving a WC. But i recognise that in the current culture she will get one.

And if you are to compare her with Konta, mingled with thoughts about the value of continually supporting people; Jo's turn around as we know had nothing to do with being granted wild cards. Her sudden independence of all things LTA was a key trigger. If wildcards really were the answer to progression, Boggo and Arvind Parmar would have been winning calendar slams.

The criteria for WC's is tougher now than it used to be. And i would have it tougher and more discerning still. And I'd cut the amount of WCs' slams have in the first place. But luckily for them all i'm not in charge. As regards her public profile most dedicated tennis fans will know her I saw her playing in Edinburgh at the age of 16. If you take the general public as a whole then Konta Robson and Watson is all they would have heard which means none of the others would receive a wild card of any description.

Tara was the best grass court player last year and it's her best surface. She does blow hot and cold though! As regards her public profile most tennis fans if they follow the sport will know her, I have followed her progress since aged 16 on clay in Edinburgh and spoken to her a few times. The general public will have heard of Konta and Robson the rest probably no however Tara's ranking is much higher than Robson who won a weak tournament in Japan recently I would however like to see them both in the top 100.If it is a public profile for WC then Robson and possibly Watson would only get them

-- Edited by scottie1 on Thursday 25th of May 2017 07:47:57 AM

wimdledont · Challenger level

Clarification, I hope...

(Postcript) First of all, there may well be no wildcard still available for KB to contend for. I forgot that they generally give one to the Junior Wimbledon champion, currently Potapova iirc.

I think that KB is the best candidate of the Brit women ranked 6-12, for purely tennis related reasons. She is the only one inside the old mark of WR250 or better, some 50 points and ranking places ahead of her nearest possible rivals. She has recently won H2Hs with 3 of them - KD, Gabi and Harriet (twice). Amanda is injured, Freya is really out of form. KS may have warmed the bench in the Fed Cup, which may be a strong argument within a sofa-focussed organisation like the LTA; but KB is around 100 points - at their level, that's 2 complete 25k tournament wins - ahead, and KS has questions hanging over both her fitness and her form. Finally, KB has the most grass court points of any of them and, if dodgy Japanese carpet counts as grass-substitute, she's won getting on for 2/3 of her points on some sort of green stuff. She and Tara should have about the best "grass court weighting" of all the players in the world.

As in the top post, I think that 4 WCs are sewn up, and going to go to HW, NB, TM and LR. The committee has only to decide whether or not to give one to KB, or not. Traditionally, they are very risk-averse, apparently desperate at all costs to avoid headlines about an LTA corporate failure as the wildcards get beaten by the seeds, which is the press's default story during Wimbledon week 1. But that is not the story that the press would want to report on KB. Just as they managed to build up the UK's leading male sarong model of the 90s into the backpage staple superstar for a decade and some, they will try to put the best possible gloss on whatever KB does on court; and she might well get second-billing to Sharapova, at least with the picture desks, for as long as she remains in the tournament.

If you wish to see a swimsuit round introduced to the WTA, abolish Grand Slam wildcards. That transfers the primary source of patronage in the game to the organisers of tournaments such as Miami (IMG), who certainly sign up clients based on their modelling potential. Nastase's chum in Madrid? Indian Wells? Duba/Doha? Better off with the committees of the FFT, USTA, OzTA and the AELTC in charge, than to hand all power and influence to this sub-Trumpian rogues' gallery of dubious multi-millionaires.

skibbarriz · Strong Club Player

The Optimist wrote:
Totally agree!! These recent references to Katie B being more deserving of a WC than others due to her looks have made me feel quite uncomfortable.

I will spoiler this as its a bit off topic for this thread. About the WTA and such

Spoiler

Then you definitely don't want to hear what Bouchard's lawyer has to say about why the USTA should give her lots of money and the tennis community should in general look after her.

You have a young woman who is endorsed by all the major products, and shes bringing a lot of money to tennis in general, Morelli said. And tennis isnt exactly on the upswing these days, if you know what I mean. You need all the good players and all the beautiful-looking players, like she is in the sport. Dont you think you should take care of them? Shes one of your own.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/31/sports/tennis/eugenie-bouchard-lawsuit-concussion-united-states-open.html?_r=0

And you know Steve Simon would read that and nod his head. The female players should get rid of that guy pronto. Because he is changing the tone of things massively and operates in opposition and in comtempt of most of them.

indiana · Tennis legend

With currently a very clear leading ranked 12, just one direct entant entrant and presumably as usual a maximum of 8 initially awarded WCs ( MD + Q ) then 3 are initially going to lose out on any WC and thus in theory only the qualifying WC play-offs offering them a way in.

I would have thought Freya ( form and dropping ranking ) and Mandy ( recent ( still ? ) injury and grass averse ) are the current two in most danger. A third from our top 12 to miss out is rather less clear and form in the next few weeks looks important for quite a few to maybe get a MD WC ( Katie B say ) or to get any WC at all ( a few of the others ).

Be difficult to push in from outside. Looking at last year when Sam's past achievements ( and hence PR ) and very decent results going into Wimbledon were not deemed good enough ( I believe then they should have been good enough ), it would appear she will have to majorly step up again this year to have any chance of a Q WC.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Am I being slow, Indy? Why would there be a maximum of 8 wildcards, MD PLUS Qualis? Surely the AELTC can give Hev, Naomi, Laura R and Tara (plus maybe Katie B) a wildcard for the MD and still have their normal number to hand out in the Qualis? Which will nicely cover Katy, Katie S, Freya, Harriet, Katie B if necessary and Gabi. Plus two playoff cards.

(No idea about Mandy, her injury and her plans re grass).

the addict · Tennis legend

I think Indy meant 8 of each type. Last year there were 3 MWC and 7 QWC handed out to Brits (out of 6 and 8 - as 2 MDWC weren't used) - but that includes the playoffs.

wimdledont · Challenger level

Yeah, I think they may have awarded 11 in total in 2016? LR, KS, TM in the MD; with all 8 QWCs going to Brits. Either that year or in 2015, they gave EWS the final one after she's lost in pre-qualifying.

Mandy didn't enter any tournaments in Week 23 - Surbiton/Marseilles. If she doesn't appear on the entry list for Manchester Week 24, due in the next few hours, (i.e. she's already decided there is no chance she will be ready to play by then) I think she can be counted out for the whole of this year's grass season.

indiana · Tennis legend

No. I did mean the maximum 8 in TOTAL that are normally initially awarded before the Q WC play-offs. If that is in force as normal this year, there will be no more than an initial 8 TOTAL MD PLUS Q WCs.

Therefter clearly a further two Q WCs come from the Q WC play-offs and because there usually remain spaces usually some more Q WCs, normally other(s) who reach the Q WC play-off later stages. Could end up with about 12, but just an initially announced 8. The confusion appears to be the final total as against the initial announcement, which unless there has been a change this year, will be no more than 8 in total.

This was queried on the forum last year, but someone dug up that it was again LTA policy last year to have this initial maximim 8 British recommendations, and indeed there were I believe no more initially.

So I dropped the above in as a reminder that the world and his wife are very unlikely to get WCs initially but usually more free Q WC spots are filled up after the Q WC play-offs.

And so with Hev and Naomi claiming 2 of the initial 8 for starters some will go to the Q WC play-offs that will no doubt still be hoping for some form of WC. And hence I was speculating as to who that might be.

wimdledont · Challenger level

Thanks indi, that makes it clearer. I am very unconvinced though, that it makes any sense to inflict the schedule that our lot face in Week 25 on them - Ikley or Birmingham, but make sure you lose early or you'll miss out on the qWC play-offs; a ruinous schedule for Tara in 2015, for Sam in 2016.

Amanda has entered events in week 24, so may be back in contention, though she may yet withdraw.

PaulM · Tennis legend

Give Katie B a wildcard. Time to put her in that position and let her have a crack.

DavidC · Tennis legend

Regarding the MDWC for the reigning Wimbledon Junior champion, Wimbledon was the only one of the slams to voluntarily upgrade the QWC, which was part of the agreement between ITF and the Slams several years ago. It did so for a few years, but stopped doing so on a regular basis a while ago. Jelena Ostapenko was the last to get an upgrade in 2015 (and she was close to the main draw in ranking anyway). Since then junior slam winners have only occasionally even ended up with QWCs (Sofya Zhuk didn't get one last year, nor the 2015 US Open champion Dalma Galfi, and equally Rebeka Masarova wasn't given one for Roland-Garros this time - though Vera Lapko did receive a QWC at the 2017 Australian Open) This suggests that either more players view a Slam QWC as not worth taking up, or more likely the agreement has been quietly shelved.

A131 · Intermediate Club Player

wimdledont wrote:
Tara hasn't had a great year in 2017, and is around 225 in the Race.

But she picked up just short of 200 grass court points in 2016, probably inside the top 30 in the world over the last 12 months; and her current career high suggests that her current ytd is better than last year. She's on a comparable ranking to JoKo at the same age - around ten places ahead of Jo on her 24th birthday, and 120 or so short of where Jo fetched up on her 25th. Female athletes should peak at around 26. (Male = 28).

She's only received MDWCs in 2014 and 2016. In 2015 she was spectacularly shabbily treated, en route to winning a qWC via the play-offs, and ending up semi-injured in the process, after playing around 20 matches in just over as many days. She should definitely get a MDWC in 2017, especially since the slump of Heather and Naomi and the presence of Shazzer leaves her lower down the WTA grass court WC lists through no fault of her own..

Correction - She received a MDWC in 2013 so she has already had 3. It will probably be 4 come June but there is no way she deserves it.

A131 · Intermediate Club Player

philwrig wrote:
Is Tara in peak form at the moment ? No
Is Tara on grass a special player ? Yes
Can Tara do herself justice at Wimby ? Yes

Basically Tara does reach the grade for a MDWC on ranking, and given her ability on a grasscourt eventhough she's not currently playing her best tennis, can be very effective and certainly will not be outclassed so 100% yes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! should get a MDWC.

I think that's a bit of an exaggeration - she might have got better results on grass but she is not a special player on grass. Anyway I don't think the surface should have anything to do with it. She should get in on the strength of her ranking or go through qualifying and earn her place like 94% of the field have to do. As should the rest of them with the possible exception of HW. LR and NB must have already had about 10 wc's between them.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Your points are true, A131, but ONLY IF you don't agree with wildcards in the first place.

i.e. yes, get rid of wildcards and let everyone get in on merit. It's a valid argument, very fair. Although I don't agree with it, it makes some sense.

But if you accept the wildcard system, then Tara at 145, age 24, easily merits a wildcard.

The French have given one to Myrtille Georges, 2 years older than Tara and only ranked about 200.

And one to Amandine Hesse, aged six months younger than Tara, and only ranked about 220

And one to Alizé Lim, aged 2 years older than Tara, and only ranked about 250 !

So, again, if you don;t think wildcards should be allowed, then obviously Tara shouldn't get one (and nor should the French players above)

But if you accept wildcards, and how they are used by all federations, then Tara's is a slamdunk.