MJD and the Count texted me almost simultaneously about the WCs while I was at Queen's yesterday (many thanks to both) and I've been thinking about the situation ever since.

I think Roger Draper once said that WCs should only be given to Brits who could conceivably win a match at Wimby, and that's a criterion I would agree with him on. Whether or not we get a GB WC through R1 depends so much on the luck of the draw, so the more Brits you have in there, the more chance you have of one getting through, as long as the Brits you have there are capable of winning a R1 match given a reasonable draw.

The last GB men's WC to win a Wimby main draw match was Bloomers, when he beat Berlocq - about as nice a draw as he could have got, for sure, but he did win it so convincingly that it gave rise to betting rumours (!), and he has played well against Haas (in R2 that year), Hewitt (in R1 last year) and Gonzo (at Queen's yesterday), with virtually all the set scores close.

If you had asked me a couple of weeks ago, I wouldn't have fancied his chances after his recent rankings slide, but he seems to be playing well now he's back on the grass, and I think he'd be more than capable of taking out a non-grass court specialist ranked outside the top 50 or so at Wimbledon.

The year before Bloomers beat Berlocq, David Sherwood got through to R2, also beating a clay courter ranked outside the top 50. What this suggests to me is that if Rog wants to mximise the chances of getting a second British man through to R2, he needs to maximise the number of British players in the draw who could conceivably beat a clay courter in the 50-100 range on grass. Certainly, if there's no chance of a player winning a main draw match even if they get a good draw, they shouldn't even be considered for a WC, but I think that to maximise the chances of getting a second Brit in R2, Bloomers, Ward and possibly Josh/Slabba/Skupski should have been given a chance, together with Boggo and Baker.

I am also surprised that Jonny Marray wasn't given at least a qualifying WC given his previous performances on grass and the fact that he's been out injured for the best part of a year, and perhaps even a QWC for Morgan Phillips, whose ranking would surely be much higher if he hadn't been out injured for a year too.

The one benefit of the WCs as they have been given out so far is that because you get points for winning each round in grand slam qualifying, those who only have QWCs have a better chance of getting at least some ranking points, which they all desperately need at the moment. They will also be well played in should they make it through, thus giving them a better chance in R1.

That's all good but the problem is that the luck of the draw applies in qualifying too, with plenty of under-ranked ringers around, we could easily lose someone with a shocker of a qualifying draw who, had they been given a main draw WC, would be one of the players who could conceivably reach R2.

Most of all though, how demotivating must it be to see the LTA taking away opportunities (i.e. home tournaments, WCs, etc, and not -as far as we know - negotiating any reciprocal arrangements with the other slams, which would make handing out WCs to lots of non-Brits a lot more palatable) without giving anything back and its boss publicly criticising the players at every opportunity in an apparent attempt to improve his own PR? I don't want to be unfair here when I don't know all the facts or what is said in private - perhaps that (i.e. Rog looking after no. 1) is not what it is and perhaps there are good reasons for what the LTA is doing, but watching Roger Draper, the players could be forgiven for thinking that there is only one person whose career he cares about and it's not any of them!

One of the worst things the LTA has done this year is to further cut the grass court season by removing one of the post-Wimbledon Challengers. Can you imagine any other country in the world reducing the number of tournaments it holds on its players' best surface, especially when such tournaments are virtually non-existent in the rest of the world as well?

If the LTA do start funding some of the travel, that would be a good thing, I think and I hope that some of the unallocated WCs are waiting to be given to any Brits who happen to qualify for Nottingham, so that they don't have to miss out on Wimby altogether if they make the main draw there and can't make it to Wimby qualifying as well.

To finish off, I should add that I think the WC system in general is inherently unfair, though I realise the commercial reasons why it exists, but given that WCs are here to stay, I think we should use it to help the home players as much as any other country would ... and from a purely selfish point of view as a fan, watching the Brits and really caring who wins a match is the main thing which makes going to the early part of a tournament exciting.

-- Edited by steven at 14:45, 2008-06-11

steven wrote:

---

I think Roger Draper once said that WCs should only be given to Brits who could conceivably win a match at Wimby, and that's a criterion I would agree with him on. Whether or not we get a GB WC through R1 depends so much on the luck of the draw, so the more Brits you have in there, the more chance you have of one getting through, as long as the Brits you have there are capable of winning a R1 match given a reasonable draw.

---

Of course, the more Brits you give wildcards to, the more chance each has of drawing another Brit wildcard, such that they all have a more realistic chance of winning a R1 match!


-- Edited by The Hoose at 14:21, 2008-06-11

Steven - I agree with everything you say- wish I had said it that way.

LOL I didn't mean thinking about it every minute since, in which case you'd probably be right, that would have been the sound of my sanity unwinding!

john wrote:

---

Not sure if anyone has mentioned this elsewhere but did anyone see Brad Gilbert's interview today. He was talking about the depth in the men's game now and was talking about the quality young players he had seen "when he'd been at Futures events with Alex".

The questions of the day now are,

1) Does Brad know the difference between Futures and Challengers

2) Does he even care that there is a difference between Futures and Challengers

3) Or, has Boggo been secretly playing Futures events, perhaps some special Futures events that aren't listed on the ITF site, and don't, in fact, exist at all.

---

Clearly he's been secretly working work Slabba throughout the year then as just hasn't said anything!

Probably just a mistake though and he clearly meant challengers, but doesn't bode well.

Maybe it means he hasn't picked up on the worried tone in Boggo's voice when he says "I think I'll be playing Futures soon" and thinks he just means more of the same events?

You have to hand it to Brad though, he always takes his charges to a new level - he took Agassi and Duckboy from top 10 to no. 1, Andy from top 100 to top 10 and he's doing an excellent job of taking Alex from Challengers to Futures

I still have some hope that Boggo can turn it around though, it's just a case of strining a few back to back wins together and believing again.