Wimbledon 2011 Wildcards

Deano · Improver

Wimbledon 2011 Wildcards

indiana · Tennis legend

I don't actually think there will be any leniency on the top 250 rule ( apart from for Laura as an obvious young prospect if she isn't top 250 ). I've not heard much about it this year but I presume it is again top 250 in the rankings 2 weeks before Wimbledon as last year ( i.e. on 06/06 )

Current WR 250 is on 216 ranking points.

If you subtract points to come off up to and including 06/06 :

Katie is on 216 points

Naomi B is on 178 points

Mel is on 170 points

Lisa is on 167 points

So Katie probably just needs a few points to be sure, the other 3 have probably about 40 to 50 points to earn over the next 7 weeks to make the top 250.

Emily and Tara have quite a bit more to do.

Anne K is borderline at the moment for a direct entry in that ( after taking off 90 points due to be deducted ) if she doesn't add anything over her lowest counter of 18 points in the next 3 weeks before the entry list is due out, she would be ranked about WR 110.

Assuming ( hopefully ) she's in OK, I would give main draw WCs to :

Heather, Laura, Katie ( assuming she is top 250 ) and anyone else that does make the top 250 by 06/06.

Qualifying WCs ( if not earning main draw WCs ) to :

Naomi B, Mel, Lisa, Emily and Tara

That makes 8 WCs in all ( main draw plus qualifying ) which I think was the maximum they stated before that they would give to GB players.

Anna Fitzpatrick could maybe challenge Emily or Tara if she is back playing and in form.

I have assumed unfortunately that Naomi Cavaday will be still injured / retired.

E&OE smile

-- Edited by indiana on Friday 15th of April 2011 10:46:49 PM

-- Edited by indiana on Saturday 16th of April 2011 12:16:09 PM

Shhh · Challenger level

Just to remind everyone, the inside the top 250 rule means the LTA will then "consider" offering the wild card.....it is not a guarantee.

indiana · Tennis legend

Good point, the Bogdanovic clause

PaulM · Tennis legend

I would leave Katie and Mel out this year regardless of ranking. They've had enough chances, and if they can't beat players ranked 300 they are better in qualifying where they might be able to win a few matches (Mel in particular should be looking to qualify).

I'd relax the top 250 to allow Lisa, Naomi, Tara (and Em if she picks up some more points in Japan) to be included with Laura and Heather (hopefully Anne makes it herself).

Tara is not going to pick up points before the grass, she's gone for a long green clay swing in the States which I can't see doing much for her ranking but she should be put forward.

Qualies I'd have Katie, Mel, Em and a couple of pre-qualies (probably Fitzy if fit, and Joss likewise). Also worth throwing a couple of our top juniors in for experience at this level.

LordBrownof · Futures level

Are they likely to give Tara and Lisa a break given the funding history?

Count Zero · Tennis legend

indiana wrote:
Good point, the Bogdanovic clause

Boggo's lasting legacy on Wimby

PockyTastic · Futures level

I think I'd do the following:

Main Draw WCs
1. Anne/ Bally/ Heather (if any of them needs one)
2. Laura
3. Katie
4. Naomi Broady

Qualies WCs
1. Mel - she could do with the confidence she'd hopefully get from a few wins
2. Lisa - given her run last year she needs to have the chance to defend her points
3. Tara - if she does well in the Nottingham events
4. Emily - if she is still fully fit (for once) come June
5. JoKo - she is likely to become British this year, and if she had already become british she surely would have had a WC last year if not the year before too...
6. Fitzy/ Ellie Dean/ Junior - Anna if she's back to health, if not then some junior such as Ellie who would give a decent showing and hopefully learn a lot too

jb288 · Satellite level

Agreed, Pocky. Though I suspect the chances of a MDWC for Naomi are slimming, and I'd rather leave one more open for the playoffs than give it to a random junior.

I'm glad all the girls will have the chance of the 2 Notts events this year, though I question using up so much of the LTAs resources on such high prize money - 1 25k, 1 75k and 3 more 25ks somewhere else in the year would be more my cuppa tea...also slightly worried we don't have enough girls who can score points to fill up Bham qualies/MD and Notts 100k MD in the same week!

indiana · Tennis legend

Still be surprised if there is any leniency on the "250 rule"

I am sure last year that the wording was clear that that there would be no exception other than for young players and injury / illness.

And it was only Laura and Heather re the young players and Jamie Baker re illness that exceptions were made for ( actually not sure now that I see this year's guidelines that there was anything re injury / illness last year, but anyay they did make an exception for Jamie which did seem fair enough ).

Of these in contention for MD WCs, other than Heather and Laura, I would think they will need to make that top 250. If anything, given as Shhh said there is no guarantee even if you do make the top 250, maybe Katie and / or Mel could be overlooked even if they did make the top 250. Personally though I would offer a MD WC to any Brit that did make the 250.

Of course, as PockyTasic suggests for Mel, there are arguements at times for playing qualiifying rather than having direct WC entry to the main draw. Cav last year evidently rejected a MD WC.

-- Edited by indiana on Friday 22nd of April 2011 11:31:15 PM

philwrig · Hall of fame

I wouldn't alter the 250 rule either.

wolf · Tennis legend

WC guidelines have been out for a few days (same as before) - http://www.lta.org.uk/NewWebsite/LTA/Documents/Players%20and%20Parents/Performance%20Players/Wimbledon%20Wild%20Card%20Policy%202011.pdf

I don't know the keep setting these ridiculous guidelines when they don't even stick to them.

murray_2k9 · Challenger qualifying

I think the LTA have the approach all wrong. While I agree Bally/Heather/Anne & Laura will all be guaranteed MDWCs and rightfully so, I think we need a new approach. Give our top juniors a play off for a MD WC and encourage some healthy competition with the 2 finalists getting a chance that all tennis players dream of. Yes, its risky, but if we are serious about producing grand slam winning players we need to get them used to the limelight as early as possible. Someone like Eleanor Dean would relish the chance no doubt and she proved in the juniors that her game is as good on grass as the top girls her age. So if she were to play Wimbledon a couple of times in the next few years with zero pressure by the time her game matures and she is physically and mentally strong enough to fulfill her talent, it will feel far more routine that July means playing in Wimbledon and she will, I believe, adapt to the situation far better.

I know it seems like a good idea to give the likes of Katie a MDWC and I certainly feel she deserves it if shes ranked in the top 250 as that is the deal, but it isnt going to turn her into a world champion. I think giving MDWCs to our top juniors is an excellent use and will celebrate our top young talent and spur our other youngsters on to improve.

-- Edited by murray_2k9 on Friday 22nd of April 2011 08:30:32 PM

indiana · Tennis legend

For all my various ( not particularly complimentary ) comments about the LTA and the Dodger, I have no great problems with the Wimbledon WC recommendation proposals.

Specifically responding to murray2k9's thoughts on junior players, I would say that when we have really exceptional young players, there is provision to give MD WCs as a "younger player who has performed particularly well prior to the Championships".

Laura in 2009 and 2010 and Heather in 2010 have been such exceptional cases ( actually both in 2010 had made the top 250 by the Championships start date, though not the cut-off date ). Laura may not make top 250 by the cut-off this year, but if fit will presumably get a MD WC and rightly so.

At present, while we have many really promising juniors, I'd say we have none ready to be thrust into the Wimbledon Main Draw or even Main Draw WC play-offs ( with a guarantee that some will get WCs ). Qualifying WC play-offs, fair enough, maybe even a direct qualifying WC for one or two, say Liam Broady. Liam maybe next year ( assuming he hasn't actually cracked the top 250 ! ) might very well be someone to give a MD WC to then, if he continues to make really significant progress.

There is of course much more to tennis, in spite of what many of the British public think than Wimbledon, so I see no great importance in giving them a very early exposure of a Wimbledon MD, and it might not be a very pleasant exposure, supposed zero pressure or not.

There is provision for the exceptional to to get a chance, but someone say like Eleanor Dean, at her present stage. IMO is just not ready.

-- Edited by indiana on Friday 22nd of April 2011 11:32:27 PM

Ratty · County player

Oh dear, so boring I know, but here's this tedious thread come round again, and it's time for my equally tedious thoughts:

THERE SHOULD BE NO WILDCARDS TO ANYONE AT ALL!!!

For the following reasons:

1. It's racist, and so illegal.

2. A couple of years ago I wondered why Boggo should be favoured for a wildcard over a foreigner with a similar ranking (about 180-odd, if I remember correctly). The player I chose at random was Blaz Kavcic. He's now ranked 87, and Boggo is now ranked 360. So here is (ahem) CONCLUSIVE PROOF that NOT getting a Wimbledon wildcard is good for your career!!!!!!

-- Edited by Ratty on Saturday 23rd of April 2011 06:26:55 AM