Talking of naughty, today's generally good article at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/tennis/article5962735.ece includes:

"Neither Murray nor Djokovic managed a win in Florida last year so it is all to play for as the tournament unfolds. There are 570 ranking points separating them, so, should Murray reach a second Masters Series final in succession and Djokovic lose before the fourth round, or the Scot wins the title and Djokovic loses before the final, Britain will have its highest-ranked player since the world-ranking system was introduced in 1973."

Not true, I'm afraid - if Nole loses in R3, he'll get 45 points, so an appearance in the Final (600 points) would still leave Muzza 25 points behind.

He did make me doubt my 'what if' stats for at least 5 seconds though ... even the Count can't manage that

thats true mjd, i overlooked that initially.

Well done, OEM! Today's Net Post at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/tennis/article6000689.ece leads with the LTA needing to stage more events, which has a great quote from Evo:

""There is no comfort zone in a Challenger [event] wherever it's played, believe me"

OEM picks up the point made by posters here about Italy, etc, and says:

"Considering the wastefulness of much of what happens at the LTA (a subject too deep to go into now), and their desire for ranking improvement, would it not be decidedly better to put on more tournaments? The sport as a whole would benefit: the venues would improve, the local public would watch due to the appetite to see tennis of this quality (and it is very good indeed) and there would be a consequent uptake of interested young players."

... the kind of things most of us have been saying about this issue for ages.

There's a bit of a muddle with "Evans ... is the first British player since Murray to win a Challenger" (er, Boggo!), but I assume he meant the first British player to win his first Challenger since Muzza, but the whole article is excellent and well worth reading.

Btw OEM says Evo "is closing in on Richard Bloomfield, the British No 5." I'm sure he's now passed him, taking into account points to go and and comeoff at the end of Miami, but I seem to be the only one who's noticed, so am I missing something?

-- Edited by steven on Monday 30th of March 2009 10:13:14 AM

steven wrote:

---

I may have had a little dig at OEM yesterday for getting his stats wrong, but today he's come up with one of the most interesting (and deep tennis fan-oriented) articles I've read for a long time about Muzza analysing what it's going to take to get him to no. 1 -  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/tennis/article5970223.ece

---

Sheddie did an analysis of what Andy needed to add to his then ridiculously predictable second serve, written back in the first few months of this messageboard. The surprising thing is how long it took Andy and team Murray to get round to it.

The most interesting thing I've heard Andy say, and this is something that I hadn't thought of myself, is how when playing top opponents, you need to vary your tactics from match to match so they can't predict what you are going to do and be ready and waiting for it. Right now I think Andy could beat Roger playing anything from all-out attack to total defence; less sure that anything other than a well executed expansive game would beat Rafa.

steven wrote:

---

There's a bit of a muddle with "Evans ... is the first British player since Murray to win a Challenger" (er, Boggo!), but I assume he meant the first British player to win his first Challenger since Muzza, but the whole article is excellent and well worth reading.

---

I agree that it's worth reading, steven, but there's also another muddle:  OEM has managed to confuse Jan Minar, whom Dan did beat, with his younger - & more highly ranked - brother, Ivo, who was playing in Barletta last week!

 

Drew wrote:

---

Finally the LTA report of Evans win...you would hope that it was written by someone watching the match...bloody awful. I think we should offer our services to the LTA Steven !

---

The sad thing is, I think if they were interested, they'd already be doing a better job of it themselves.

I realise, btw, that somebody said on one of these threads that money spent on live scoring and stuff would be better spent on the grass roots, but in this case I disagree. Firstly because I doubt it costs very much to implement live scoring and secondly because I agree with OEM that the standard of tennis at Challengers is very high, and if there were more of them and they were marketed better so that more people came to see them, it might inspire the kind of kids who might get to Queen's or Wimby once in a blue moon, if at all to carry on following the players they see and try to reach that level themselves.

Other countries manage to make a big thing of Challengers, particularly countries that have no ATP events (where I guess it's easier), but even Germany, which has 4 ATP events, manages to make a big event of their Challengers as far as I can tell.

 

An interesting read, especially as LTA by cutting down on Challengers has taken exactly the reverse decisions to those suggested - much to every one amazement, makes you wonder how 'in touch' they really are!

The Most Interesting Fact -
"Tennis is the fastest growing sport in America among 'traditionals' with an increase in participation of 43 per cent from 2000 to 2008, according to the Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association (SGMA). Tennis was one of only four sports to experience any increase during the study period and outpaced its nearest rival, racquetball, by 32 per cent. Tennis is well ahead of other traditional sports like baseball, golf, gymnastics and football, all of which suffered a decline in participation during the past eight years.

The difference is at majority of US events they create a 'party atmosphere' with spectator participation and other activities arranged for most days.