FINAL: Dave Rice WR 691 beat (Q) Alexios Halebian (USA) WR 1386 (CH 1044 last year) by 3 & 5
Winning this tournament without dropping a set Dave will return to the singles top 600 for the first time in 8 months. This is his 2nd Futures singles title, the first having been won in Zacatecas, Mexico in 2010, before he started concentrating more on doubles.
__________________
GB on a shirt, Davis Cup still gleaming, 79 years of hurt, never stopped us dreaming ... 29/11/2015 that dream came true!
NB quote from a US website about yesterday's win :
"I wouldn't be too disappointed by Peliwo's loss as this was a deceptively tough match up for him. Rice is a seriously underrated player and his singles career has suffered because of his focus on doubles but he should easily be top 400, if not higher. He has a very good serve volley game and plays with a lot of spin and variety. Pelwio will not have played that many matches against someone like him".
Although maybe, in fact, that was posted by someone from this forum (Brit Tennis Fan ???? anyone ?)
I don't know who said that but it strikes me as a pretty accurate assessment.
Just noticed ONCE AGAIN (as is the case almost every week), the LTA's round up of the week's results contains glaring factual errors, implying they don't check their information, or just don't care. Either way it's the sort of lack of attention to detail that sets a dreadful example to the very players who they are trying to support in being ultra professional and looking for every small advantage to beat the opposition.
Apparently David Rice beat Halebian in 3 sets (by the same score that Josh G lost to Halebian) - he won easily in 2; and apparently, Naomi captured the doubles title in India last week - the country is called Indonesia. Would have been nice to give a bit more flavour on Dan's win (first on clay, first outside GB/Ireland); or David's win (first for over a year); or Tom F's 4th or 5th SF in 2013 (he was only mentioned for losing to Jack in Turkey).
I've stopped bothering to let them know about their factual errors (I did try for a while) as it is such a regular occurance, and it's clear they aren't really that bothered - I presume the top brass don;t even look at the website.