Wimby Mens WCs

Count Zero · Tennis legend

Wimby Mens WC's

Salmon · Tennis legend

Tennis Australia has the best wild card policy I have ever seen. They give a reason for each wild they hand out - even the ones in the Australian Open Juniors.

Ratty · County player

Philippoussis gets wild cards because he is an ex-finalist, and I don't see anything wrong with that. The most exciting Wimbledon final ever came as a result of giving another ex-finalist a wild card (Goran in 2001).

And talking of that, the big G came to Wimbledon in 2001 on the back of 5 defeats in his last 6 matches. Could it be Tim's year in 2007!!!!

I reckon that Bloomfield (just) and Bogdanovic should get WC's, and no-one else. That means no women. No-one else has shown any sign of stepping up from Challenger level on a consistent basis.

Salmon · Tennis legend

But Philippoussis would have been back inside the top 50 if he was that good. And Flip will never do a Goran - he's too sane for that.

He has had more wild cards into tournaments across the world in the last few years than all the Brits combined.

Sheddie · administrator

The Panda Bear wrote:

I would love to see the Murrays ask for a wild card to Jamie. It's unlikely that he'll be denied one and at least it'll go to a Brit. And Jamie could stun quite a few clay courters out there!

I agree with you that Jamie's a lot better than his career best singles ranking...he's definately good enough to be top 500. However, I don't think he could make it to the top in singles...he feels that himself and so I don't think he'd be interested in a singles wc, he could win a match against a clay-courter but there's little point if he's not going to be playing singles week in, week out on the tour...there's other players who'd deserve one more.

Jamie's not going to go back to the singles tour...he'd have to start off right at the bottom again in futures and can you see him doing that, having competed in slams and masters series...he realises that it's best to concentrate on doubles where he can get right to the top of the game and surely challenge for slams

Sheddie · administrator

Ratty wrote:

Philippoussis gets wild cards because he is an ex-finalist, and I don't see anything wrong with that. The most exciting Wimbledon final ever came as a result of giving another ex-finalist a wild card (Goran in 2001).

And talking of that, the big G came to Wimbledon in 2001 on the back of 5 defeats in his last 6 matches. Could it be Tim's year in 2007!!!!

I reckon that Bloomfield (just) and Bogdanovic should get WC's, and no-one else. That means no women. No-one else has shown any sign of stepping up from Challenger level on a consistent basis.

Phillippousis hasn't done anything though with his wcs, he can't even maintain a place in the top 100, it's ridiculous to keep giving him wcs year after year just because of 2003, he hasn't shown anything like that form since.

Why wouldn't you give wcs to Naomi Cavaday and Georgie Stoop ??? In the past 18 months, Naomi has gone from unranked to top 300, in March she won a 25K in the USA - beating a top 130 player 1 and 1 in the final and she's beaten several top 150 players recently plus Brandi who was top 30. Georgie's gone from low 800s to the verge of the top 250, she's also made two 25K finals. They both have to have wcs.

Jamie Baker also deserves one for his challenger successes this year, plus Josh Goodall after qualifying for two slams in 2006. Hasn't been a great 2007 for him so far but maybe a win at Wimbledon would spark a return to his best

Salmon · Tennis legend

Yeah, Jamie has almost no chance of cracking he top 100, but some doubles players do play singles on a part time basis - Zimonjic for example.

Plus Jamie will be playing a lot of dead rubbers in the years to come. I agree that they have no importance, but given the option between winning a tie by 4-1 and 5-0, I know which one everybody would choose...

Salmon · Tennis legend

Greg would be kicked out if he asked for a wild card at the USO this year.

Happycynic · Pro player

Is Phillipo injured? I notice he hasn't actually played in '07.

I don't wish to defend him (he has been in the doldrums for a little time, and I'm no fan of his tennis which is based on fast courts and service speed), but his current ranking (145) comes from playing just 10 tournaments. If he had played the full 18, he would easily be top 100 and qualify by right. If the ten tournies are caused by injury, then you can see the case (although it galls me, as he has had more than one chance in the past). I can see it happening again.

Salmon · Tennis legend

Yes, he was injured. He is back now and will play some exho sort of thing in his native Greece.

He has had 21 wild cards in 2005 and 2006. Who exactly is he to get that many??

Sheddie · administrator

it makes Donald Young seem rather hard-done by in comparison

Salmon · Tennis legend

And Donald earned two of those wild cards through the play offs they have in Kalamazoo.

Wild cards should always go to domestic players or else they should be traded. Even if Fed gets injured and wants a wild card into Wimbly he should be shown the door. Maybe a qualies one if he manages to do the Slam this year and the next...

The future of Swiss tennis is not our bloody headache.

GC77 · County player

Wildcards are given out to both help local players and to give the local crowd (who form the vast majority of the people there) more players to follow, support and generally get excited by.

Ratty, why on earth would you want to give wildcards to unknown foreign journeymen/women languishing in the hundreds in the world rankings, many of whom would never win a match, and some who even ardent tennis followers have never heard of, over a young up and coming British player, who if nothing else needs the money and publicity to further their tennis career.

In my opinion, only a foreign player who has done incredibly well in the past and is only in the hundreds in the rankings due to injury should be given a wildcard. Maybe an exceptional young foreign player who is racing through the rankings. But beyond that, as many British players as possible should be given a chance. Every other country does it, so there is no reason for 'British politeness' to be brought to the table. Same goes for qualies, with perhaps a little more leeway for younger foreign talent (with reciprical agreements of course;) ).

Salmon · Tennis legend

Hear, hear!

And there's no young player who deserves it this year except for maybe Cilic and Zverev. Although I don't think that Zverev has a future that is too deep inside the top 50 because he can't play on anything other than fast surfaces.

imoen · Admin: Moderator+Tennis Legend

and we'd best not give Cilic a wildcard before the Davis Cup tie, we don't want to help his career

I agree though, wildcards should only be given to foreigners as an exchange thing or if they are really exceptional/low ranked because of injuries. So for example, I didn't mind Philippoussis being given a wildcard the first time becuase he is a former finalist and he had been hindered by injury. However, since then he's not proved that he's still at the highest level when fully fit so he no longer deserves a wildcard.

And whats the harm in helping out our lower ranked players financially with a wildcard to Wimbledon, if we want them to jet around the world picking up points at tennis tournaments we have to take into account how difficult it is to make a career in tennis and not begrudge them an easy whatever it is from being in a grandslam.