Week 23 - Challenger (€64,000) - Nottingham, UK (grass)

RJA · Hall of fame

RE: Week 23 - Challenger (€64,000) - Nottingham, UK (grass)

denver23 · Social player

RJA wrote:
The bottom line is that the paying punters, quite understandably, want to see home players in tournaments.

Well maybe - but they should earn the right to be there.

There are also those of us who feel that you would still get 40 odd thousand on the gate at Wimbledon during day 1 or 2 irrespective of whether some crappy Brit happens to be playing on Court 11 such is the pull of Wimbledon. Th effect at best would be minimal.

How would you like it if you were a player from some other country and slogged your guts out all year to gain a ranking of say 108 only to see people ranked way below you get fast tracked into the main draw of a slam solely on the basis of where they live.

johnnylad · Tennis legend

Using the logic from earlier I would know I needed to work hard enough to be ranked 105.

Jaggy1876 · Grand Slam Champion

denver23 wrote:
RJA wrote:
The bottom line is that the paying punters, quite understandably, want to see home players in tournaments.
Well maybe - but they should earn the right to be there.
There are also those of us who feel that you would still get 40 odd thousand on the gate at Wimbledon during day 1 or 2 irrespective of whether some crappy Brit happens to be playing on Court 11 such is the pull of Wimbledon. Th effect at best would be minimal.
How would you like it if you were a player from some other country and slogged your guts out all year to gain a ranking of say 108 only to see people ranked way below you get fast tracked into the main draw of a slam solely on the basis of where they live.

So does that apply to the other 3 slams well.Australia France and the US have players ranked as dad as 400-500 in as wild cards where it suits.

Shhh · Challenger level

denver23 wrote:
RJA wrote:
The bottom line is that the paying punters, quite understandably, want to see home players in tournaments.
Well maybe - but they should earn the right to be there.
There are also those of us who feel that you would still get 40 odd thousand on the gate at Wimbledon during day 1 or 2 irrespective of whether some crappy Brit happens to be playing on Court 11 such is the pull of Wimbledon. Th effect at best would be minimal.
How would you like it if you were a player from some other country and slogged your guts out all year to gain a ranking of say 108 only to see people ranked way below you get fast tracked into the main draw of a slam solely on the basis of where they live.

You raise a good point denver23, I agree that 8 wild cards is too many. Few countries have that many players in depth capable of stepping up. Also, the very high reward of £20k+ is looked at by players for a reward for being ranked where they are after a years efforts.

Adding Wild Cards not only adds interest within the grounds (see the scrums that form around where the Brits are playing) but adds interest for the media. Adding a player from whatever Scotland/Wales/N. Ireland would get column inches written in that region just as it would for a player from "up North", Channel Islands, little village, inner city etc. It helps promote the tournament outside the capital, building interest and support vital for making the event it is. Foreign wild cards (The Scud, Goran etc) may also help generate additional coverage with their "stories". Afterall, from the tournaments point of view, little interest is added by incluing the 105, 106 and 107th ranked players.

It should also be pointed out that for the last few years Wimbledon has not used all eight wild cards and has indeed reverted to ranking (I dont think in other country has responded in kind??????) and, to increase the strength of the tournament has offered two to the winners of the two build up events at Nottingham thus adding to their quality as well.

Its debatable, thats for sure, I personally think 6 would be a fairer number, 8 is a bit too generous in my opinion but, when making your point dont refer to hard working British players as "crappy" even if you think their quality is lacking.

-- Edited by Shhh on Sunday 9th of June 2013 09:05:51 AM

murray_2k9 · Challenger qualifying

I love the idea of WCs - especially the way Wimbledon includes good grass courters who are ranked lower than they should be (e.g. Mahut) Juniors winners, talented youngsters (GB and Michelle Larcher de Brito etc) and adds some extra spice to the competition.

I suspect most of the resistance comes from the fact that we dont have hordes of players lining up to do some damage in the Main Draw. I suspect if we had numerous teenagers ranked around the top 500 mark , some doing well in junior slams, others making their impact on futures events - then we would be all for giving them the chance to showcase their talent on a big stage in a nothing-to-lose match - just ask Nick Kyrgios what he thinks of them after beating Stepanek at the French.

Wimbledon is a business. The ITF does not bother with WCs to wind the public up or to have people humiliated in R1. Whether you like them or not they work, they add value and they are here to stay.

-- Edited by murray_2k9 on Sunday 9th of June 2013 09:18:32 AM

KK · Club Coach

denver23 wrote:
RJA wrote:
The bottom line is that the paying punters, quite understandably, want to see home players in tournaments.
Well maybe - but they should earn the right to be there.
There are also those of us who feel that you would still get 40 odd thousand on the gate at Wimbledon during day 1 or 2 irrespective of whether some crappy Brit happens to be playing on Court 11 such is the pull of Wimbledon. Th effect at best would be minimal.
How would you like it if you were a player from some other country and slogged your guts out all year to gain a ranking of say 108 only to see people ranked way below you get fast tracked into the main draw of a slam solely on the basis of where they live.

You are right Wimbledon would still be a sell out without the extra British players. However there are considerations other than gate receipts. Having more Brits playing increases the enjoyment of a large number of those who go to Wiimbledon. This is important too. It shouldn't just be about taking their money.

Having more Brits playing also increases the enjoyment of those watching on television. No doubt most forums members, like me, have been in both categories.

Tennis36 · Masters Series Champion

Ebden is a set up in the final , does this mean evo's record of losing to the winner is going to go on....

johnnylad · Tennis legend

Yes. Ebden just won 7-5 in the third.

steven · Tennis legend

Tennis36 wrote:
Ebden is a set up in the final , does this mean evo's record of losing to the winner is going to go on....

Yes, 9 tournaments this year, won 2 and lost to the eventual winner in the other 7. If you add in the two British Tour events at the started of the year where he reached the Final, then the run of tournaments he has either won or lost to the winner since the start of the year goes up to 11.

RJA · Hall of fame

His early Queen's opponents might be looking at that stat with interest.

R1: Pella - no way
R2: Harrison or Nieminen - unlikely
R3: Del Potro - potential winner

steven · Tennis legend

Yes, I know - I was tempted to tweet "so you might like to put some money on del Po winning Queen's" before .. er .. deciding not to wink - neither Dan reaching R3 nor del Po winning the title are beyond the realms of possibility.

steven · Tennis legend

John Lloyd has just said on the BBC commentary that James Ward was offered a wild card for this first Nottingham Challenger but declined it in order to get some match practice on grass. It didn't work out, of course, but fair enough.

-- Edited by steven on Monday 10th of June 2013 03:03:20 PM

Spectator · All-time great

Like the attitude, though. Keep free rides to a minimum, just try to work through and win.