See, we'll get you in the end

My fault mainly, I'm afraid - since I started doing the top 500 table for the GR site (the precursor of the top 25 table today), I've been referring to the number of Brits in the top 500 as a measure of the depth of the men's game - e.g. the fact that we hit a medium term high of 20 in Oct 2005 and two years later, we were down to just 7, 2 of them retired. Nobody had broken up into the top 500 in between and a lot had almost got there then fallen away, so in that sense it was looking like a big barrier for players to cross.

Also, I'm sure I once read that getting to the top 500 enhanced players' status within the ATP in some (fairly minor) way, but I can't remember how and I have't been able to find the reference again, so I might be imagining it.

I don't see anything wrong with (briefly) celebrating someone getting to such a round number, but you're right about the approximate levels that really matter and I'm certainly not surprised that it's not seen as a big deal by the players.

It probably doesn't mean he's got there anyway btw - the current no. 500 does have 52 points, but from less tournaments.