Wimbledon WC's

DUSTY DICK · Club Coach

RE: Wimbledon WC's

helki · Futures qualifying

Boggo bashing time. weirdface

He's not my favourite player and he can be so frustrating but... he's 243 and JB is 250. What's to argue under the current set-up! Both Bloomers and Ward have dropped down the rankings, -36 and -7 respectively. Josh and Slabba are 269 and 324. I shall have more respect for the one/s who come through the qualifying rounds, even if they go out in the 1st round, than if they'd had WC and gone out that particular round.

I would go to W even if we had no players in the draws: I like to watch good tennis. I agree if we had some players of the right calibre it would be all the better.

mjd · Challenger qualifying

As Roger Draper is so keen on sticking to the rules - Ignoring the fact that Richard Bloomfield got thro to the doubles 3rd round last year and has sucessfully partnered many other players and Ken Skupski has only been back playing for less than a year their combined doubles ranking is 442 which is higher than Bamford & Goodall at 450.

Have I missed something here?

-- Edited by mjd at 20:45, 2008-06-10

Salmon · Tennis legend

Smidster wrote:

While I take your point that come Wimbledon pretty much everyone rallies round the Brits.

On the other hand however what is the impact on the public if we give all the WC's to Brits and they all get hammered in straight sets?

Nice point and I won't pretend that finances won't be hit if Brits keep losing. But I also think that it won't as hit as it would be if there were absolutely no Brits or just one Brit (unless Andy is good enough to get to the quarters every year, which isn't a cert at the moment).

Does failure kill the hopes of a sporting fan? Well, 1966 was a long time ago and we all will see the papers (and flags!) in 2010...

Yorkie · Lower Club Player

Greenleaf wrote:

Only Boggo and Baker get main draw WCs. Skupski, Seator, Slabba, Bloomers and Wardy get them for qualies.

http://www.lta.org.uk/News/All-news-items/Wimbledon-wild-cards-confirmed/

Thats a disgrace

I would bet the world on the pair of them limping out in straight sets and learning nothing from it

Well done to the British tennis authorities, genius!

Salmon · Tennis legend

helki wrote:

I would go to W even if we had no players in the draws: I like to watch good tennis. I agree if we had some players of the right calibre it would be all the better.

I'd advise you not to trust the genius of the AELTC if you want to watch quality tennis - last year they gave a 15 year old girl a WC and she hadn't played a women's match on grass before. She got one game out of the match - a fine treat for many connoisseurs who want to see good tennis.

Not referring to you, of course, so don't take offence!

I've never understood why people say that Brits bring down the level of the field. It's not like if you have non-Brits, you'll get 66 people in the second round. It's also not like they get drubbed - most play their hearts out, and always achieve far better than what many non-Brits do (like Massu nearly getting triple bagelled, Almagro taking only three games off Nadal) at Slams. Boggo, Marray etc. have done far better against Federer, Hewitt, Nadal and others so saying that they bring down the level is totally incorrect.

-- Edited by Greenleaf at 20:54, 2008-06-10

wolf · Tennis legend

helki wrote:

Both Bloomers and Ward have dropped down the rankings, -36 and -7 respectively.

So in the two weeks since the last rankings update they have dropped down slightly. So what? That is going to happen to all players throughout the year.

Salmon · Tennis legend

Yes, exactly, having a fixed set of rules for WCs is dumb as rules can't judge talent.

Say in twelve months' time, one of our younger players (1988 onwards) somehow managed to get his ranking up to 253 while there was an older player ranked 245. The rule would say that the latter deserves it more.

-- Edited by Greenleaf at 21:03, 2008-06-10

Shhh · Challenger level

Guys, go back to the start of this thread and, what has happened today is what was going to happen. It dosen't make it right, but its certainly no surprise. People going on about Edward Seator should get one, Miles Kasiri etc.....it was never going to happen.

Also, its not the AELTC awarding these. They may or make not make one or two choices themselves but chiefly rely on the LTA to recomend who should be the recipitants. Todays news is what the LTA have recomended to the AELTC and they have accepted.

Yorkie · Lower Club Player

Boggo could play someone outside the top 1000 and he get thumped, its a shambles, what is this like his 4th or 5th WC?

We must be the larfing stock of the tennis world!

Salmon · Tennis legend

I don't see why you are blaming Boggo, Yorkie, although I don't deny that if they wanted to give only two to Brits, Wardy should have have got one.

It's not like Boggo threatened them into giving him one. And anyone would have jumped at the chance to play Wimbly!

Count Zero · Tennis legend

be fair yorkie, the majority of boggo's loses have been to players around 160ish in the world. its frustrating i agree, esp as he has lost matches he was winning.

of course he will take the wc if offered, as will baker despite not having played competitive tennis for several months.

mjd · Challenger qualifying

So lets recap - In addition to reducing number of challenger tournaments making it more difficult to achieve points without travelling the world and reducing the level of futures events (presumably to save money to pay their extravagent salaries!) which not only reduces winnings which could be used for travel but also greatly reduces the number of points available, making it more difficult to climb the rankings. they now prefer to finance foreign players through wimby wildcards.
As I have said before this is not necessarily good news for Wimbledon - last year it was hardly possible to get near courts that had a GBR player who would have been unknown to many and yet courts with quite respected foreign players on had no problem getting near at all!
I noted that Roger Draper quickly quoted Serbia and Croatia in his examples today, perhaps he should have quoted arguably the most successful country, Spain not halfway through the year and yet playing their 23 Futures event this week. How many players do they have in the top 100?

Robxon · Lower Club Player

I have to say that I am completely undecided on this issue. On one hand, one of the highlights of Wimbledon for me is the unexpected performance of a "plucky" Brit in the first round. So much promise for the future but...

On the other hand I do think that playing at Wimbledon should be the peak of a tennis player's career. The fairest way to do that is to take the ATP ranking as that is a reflection of performance over a whole year.

I also believe that the National Junior Champion (Dan Cox this year?) should get a WC into the Main Draw. That would add a competetive edge to the Nationals. The Americans do this with the losing finalist getting a WC into the qualies.

I have understood that 250 would be the cut-off for a while now and I am pleased that at least they have set a target and have stuck to it.

I believe that James Ward has a comparative case to Ian Flanagan's of 2004 when he beat Philippoussis and Hanescu while ranked in the 800s. He wanted a MD WC on the back of that performance but was given one to the qualies.

I would dearly hope that we will not be having the same discussion next year but I rather fear that we will with still not enough players in the top 250.

I notice that nobody has mentioned Jamie Murray today yet. Is there any news on that front?

jazar · Junior player

Greenleaf wrote:

I'd advise you not to trust the genius of the AELTC if you want to watch quality tennis - last year they gave a 15 year old girl a WC and she hadn't played a women's match on grass before. She got one game out of the match - a fine treat for many connoisseurs who want to see good tennis.

the people who went to that match (pavlyuchenkova vs hantuchova) didnt go to see good tennis, they went to perve