0-15

15-15

30-15

30-30

40-30

40-40

adv Ormachea

40-40

adv Ormachea

5-3

 

15-0

30-0

40-0

40-15

5-4

Laura really losing the important points, won more points and a break down.

Nothing really between the players in that set, probably just a couple of lucky points to Ormaechea (the net chord to break especially) 30 points to 29 in total.

OK, she had wom more points until that final game !

Too good from the Argentinian

C'mon Laura !

I think we are favourites to win each of the last two ties, but our overall chances would look so very much better if Laura could put us 2-1 up.

I think indiana is just about right - we all knew before the tie started that the no. 2 was going to be a desperately hard choice with Hev out of action. Just to take the pros and cons we actually knew about (and there were no doubt plenty of issues we weren't aware of too):

JoKo

pros - young, fit and with more recent experience on clay
cons - not in great form, a bit dodgy recently when it has got tight, limited FC experience

Anne

pros - FedCup experience, the most in form of the three (not really saying much), once reached a WTA SF on clay
cons - lost last 10 matches on clay, foot problems (though she tweeted that this wasn't an issue)

Bally

pros - FedCup experience including a far better FedCup singles record than Anne, generally better on clay than Anne, hard as nails in FedCup
cons - lack of match practice, fitness issues (but probably not an issue if she won in 2 sets)

There was also the consideration that the doubles rubber was probably a better hope for us than the 4th singles rubber, so we'd want our best team for that with at least one player fresh. If that was what clinched the decision, maybe it should have been revisited after Laura lost, but who knows whether it was or not.

If any of the three players had been put in and won, we could point to one of more of the 'pros' for that player as being the reason why they were the right pick and if any of the three players had been put in and lost, we could point to one or more of the 'cons' as a reason why it was absurd to pick them in the first place. Judy may not have got it right, but it wasn't easy either way. I think it probably was right to put JoKo in on day 1 - she had as good a chance as any of them (i.e. a very small one) of beating Ormaechea and using the player without injury issues on day 1 was more likely to keep her options open if the 4th rubber turned out to be crucial. Bally was probably a dodgy pick, but had she won in 2 sets (as was clearly very possible), nobody would be complaining.

In the end, the rubber that tripped us up wasn't so much the 4th one as the 3rd, i.e. Laura losing to Ormaechea. If you're looking at the tie as an Argentine fan, Ormaechea played well above her ranking and was the main reason Argentina won the tie.

I'm more than 80% sure we'd have won had Heather been available ... and nearly 100% sure we'd have won had we been at home, even if we'd had another player injured as well.

 

-- Edited by steven on Sunday 21st of April 2013 10:31:45 PM