Now 15-40 down

Easy hold from Kunitysn.

JB *4-4

JB goes down 6-4 in the 3rd and ends participation in qualifying for the Brits

Yesterday Jamie was 4-2 down in the third and won it 6-4. Today he was 4-2 up in third and lost it 6-4.

All in all a very disappointing qualifying event from a British perspective.

Coup Droit wrote:

---

Much as it pains me to say so, I wouldn't call it disappointing.

ALL our male entries were wild-cards. That means that NONE of them had the required level. As such, you can't really expect any of them to win. Nice when a couple do, of course, but it's hardly a surprise if they don't.

What is incredibly disappointing is the level of British tennis and, in particular, the lack of depth. We have a few very good prospects. But most comparable countries have dozens of very good prospects. Because, of course, many of the good prospects will fall by the way. So you need some margin, which we don't have.

In fact, I was really impressed by the British tennis I saw yesterday. Lewis Burton was the only one who was actually outplayed and even he posted a good score. All of them looked as though they belonged at that level. So my question is: why aren't they actually at that level ?

---

I take your point but it is still disappointing.

As for why they aren't at that level. Well if I was being positive I would say that at least 4 of them (Evans, Corrie, JWH and Rice) seem to be on an upward trajectory in their career and that at least 3 of them (not sure about Rice) will hopefully be ranked quite a bit higher in 12 months time. You then have two players in Baker and Bogdanovic who are probably past their best but can still play at a pretty high level on occasions. Then there is Goodall who should IMO be capable of playing at this level, especially on grass, but who lacks the mental strength and seems to be drifting towards retirement.

There is no doubting that it is extremely poor that we have only one player in the top 200, and reasons and theories for this are much discussed.

I do not think though that there is anything peculiar that we have so many players that can seemingly play at top 200 level on occasion. To my mind tennis internationally is full of players outside the top 200 that can play at top 200 level at times, non top 100 players that can play at top 100 level etc. And put a group of such players from another country into a theoretical Grand Slam in their own cpuntry and I wpuld expect they too to appear to play above their general level. We also have at Wimbledon a certain levelling element in many cases on grass.

So, to me, nothing strange or "wrong" here. I am not one for generally thinking that GB players have some differemt psychological make up re such as playing above or below their general level, losing matches they should win or vice versa, choking etc etc.

There are certain elements that I maybe do wonder about as a generality such as behavior, serving etc but some of that may be backup related and is maybe not as different as we might imagine.

Yes, I do wish we could get some of these players pushing onto top 200 level, but producing the level ( such as it was ) here, I found neither surprising or in some way "wrong" for not being more regularly achieved. It is still more simply the case that our players as a whole are not good enough.

Jamie Baker qualified for Australian Open this year