Weeks 26 & 27: Wimbledon men's main draw (grass)

steven · Tennis legend

RE: Weeks 26 & 27: Wimbledon men's main draw (grass)

RJA · Hall of fame

steven wrote:
RJA wrote:
For some reason Janowicz doesn't like playing on grass, even though his game should be well suited to it. Still a very tough draw for Kyle.

Pretty good draw for James though and a chance to defend his R2 points.
James could do with defending those points too - Evo will take over his GB no. 2 spot if he doesn't, though of course James has far fewer points to defend over the rest of 2013.

But don't forget that Boggo can surpass Evo if he makes the QF at Winnetka.

denver23 · Social player

Funny that Kyle Edmund should draw Jerzy Janowicz. Around this time 4 years ago (2009) as an 18 year old Janowicz was ranked just inside the top 300, 100 plus places higher than what Edmund is now though that may be sligtly less come Monday. It was the same year the AELTC/LTA decided to award Dan Evans a WC to the main draw who was then just outside the top 300 but a year older - exceptional circumstances we were told. The only thing exceptional about it was that he hailed from the UK. Did Janowicz get a WC? No? He has since gone on to reach the top 30, should reach top 20, and beaten Murray, where as Evans (though the signs are that he might be getting his act together) has still not even cracked the top 200! Just another reason why I think wildcards should be scrapped or be subject to much stiffer criteria or reduced to the top 150 (instead of 250). Nothing against Edmund and despite his potential should have been made to qualify.

RJA · Hall of fame

denver23 wrote:
Funny that Kyle Edmund should draw Jerzy Janowicz. Around this time 4 years ago (2009) as an 18 year old Janowicz was ranked just inside the top 300, 100 plus places higher than what Edmund is now though that may be sligtly less come Monday. It was the same year the AELTC/LTA decided to award Dan Evans a WC to the main draw who was then just outside the top 300 but a year older - exceptional circumstances we were told. The only thing exceptional about it was that he hailed from the UK. Did Janowicz get a WC? No? He has since gone on to reach the top 30, should reach top 20, and beaten Murray, where as Evans (though the signs are that he might be getting his act together) has still not even cracked the top 200! Just another reason why I think wildcards should be scrapped or be subject to much stiffer criteria or reduced to the top 150 (instead of 250). Nothing against Edmund and despite his potential should have been made to qualify.

Tournaments give wild cards to home players, they always have done and they always will. You can have a academic debate about it but you are wasting your time. This is real life we are talking about and there are many practical reasons why wild cards are here to stay.

steven · Tennis legend

RJA wrote:
steven wrote:
RJA wrote:
For some reason Janowicz doesn't like playing on grass, even though his game should be well suited to it. Still a very tough draw for Kyle.

Pretty good draw for James though and a chance to defend his R2 points.
James could do with defending those points too - Evo will take over his GB no. 2 spot if he doesn't, though of course James has far fewer points to defend over the rest of 2013.
But don't forget that Boggo can surpass Evo if he makes the QF at Winnetka.

Yes, I know - all I meant is that James has to beat Lu or Evo will definitely pass him.

denver23 · Social player

RJA wrote:
denver23 wrote:
Funny that Kyle Edmund should draw Jerzy Janowicz. Around this time 4 years ago (2009) as an 18 year old Janowicz was ranked just inside the top 300, 100 plus places higher than what Edmund is now though that may be sligtly less come Monday. It was the same year the AELTC/LTA decided to award Dan Evans a WC to the main draw who was then just outside the top 300 but a year older - exceptional circumstances we were told. The only thing exceptional about it was that he hailed from the UK. Did Janowicz get a WC? No? He has since gone on to reach the top 30, should reach top 20, and beaten Murray, where as Evans (though the signs are that he might be getting his act together) has still not even cracked the top 200! Just another reason why I think wildcards should be scrapped or be subject to much stiffer criteria or reduced to the top 150 (instead of 250). Nothing against Edmund and despite his potential should have been made to qualify.
Tournaments give wild cards to home players, they always have done and they always will. You can have a academic debate about it but you are wasting your time. This is real life we are talking about and there are many practical reasons why wild cards are here to stay.

I know it is real life or there might be practical reasons as you say - doesn't mean its right.

thegingerlightbulb · Intermediate Club Player

denver23 wrote:
RJA wrote:
denver23 wrote:
Funny that Kyle Edmund should draw Jerzy Janowicz. Around this time 4 years ago (2009) as an 18 year old Janowicz was ranked just inside the top 300, 100 plus places higher than what Edmund is now though that may be sligtly less come Monday. It was the same year the AELTC/LTA decided to award Dan Evans a WC to the main draw who was then just outside the top 300 but a year older - exceptional circumstances we were told. The only thing exceptional about it was that he hailed from the UK. Did Janowicz get a WC? No? He has since gone on to reach the top 30, should reach top 20, and beaten Murray, where as Evans (though the signs are that he might be getting his act together) has still not even cracked the top 200! Just another reason why I think wildcards should be scrapped or be subject to much stiffer criteria or reduced to the top 150 (instead of 250). Nothing against Edmund and despite his potential should have been made to qualify.
Tournaments give wild cards to home players, they always have done and they always will. You can have a academic debate about it but you are wasting your time. This is real life we are talking about and there are many practical reasons why wild cards are here to stay.
I know it is real life or there might be practical reasons as you say - doesn't mean its right.

Why isn't it right. It's a British tournament therefore there needs to be some representation other than just Andy. The first few days of grand slams are normally a series of routine wins for the top seeds (I miss the days of having only 16 seeds). Therefore it's nice to have a British underdog to route for. The criteria for a wildcard is strict enough. Just three players men in the main draw is pretty small, and you want to make it smaller? I could see an argument against Ward (now 26 and continuing to frustrate on the big stage) but Edmund right now represents our best hope for the future.

Madeline · Admin:Moderator + Tennis Legend

@ denver:

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Well, I like wild-cards but for the anti-wildcard group, God's definitely on your side if you look at the draws. Justice is done . . .

Of the 16 proper qualifiers, only 1 has drawn a seed (and a clay specialist seed too).

Four are playing each other.
One has drawn a wildcard.
Two others have drawn players who are direct entry but ranked well over 100.
Two are playing players ranked 98 and 99.
One is playing a guy ranked 34 and one a player ranked 46
The remaining 4 are drawn against players in the 60s and 70s.

It must be nicest qualifier draw of all time.

There's going to be some big points and big prize money for some of these qualifiers.

johnnylad · Tennis legend

steven wrote:
RJA wrote:
For some reason Janowicz doesn't like playing on grass, even though his game should be well suited to it. Still a very tough draw for Kyle.

Pretty good draw for James though and a chance to defend his R2 points.
James could do with defending those points too - Evo will take over his GB no. 2 spot if he doesn't, though of course James has far fewer points to defend over the rest of 2013.

Lu beat Roddick at Wimbledon and is not what I'd call a good chance. Lu is expected to win and probably will, but if James does, well done to him

denver23 · Social player

''Why isn't it right. It's a British tournament therefore there needs to be some representation other than just Andy''

Why does there really need to be - we're not compelled to/legally ogliged to are we? I really don't think the effects on the tournament would be that catastophic, particularly now Laura and Heather are around, if there were no other Brits other those that qualify on merit. I can understand the public wanting to see British players but if they are not good enough to get in then so be it. I don't mind wildcards to normal tour events but not grandslams - it is not only unfair to about 100 other nations but there are those who feel it can be counterproductive. Money,greed, commercialism should not have that much influence but I know we don't live in an ideal world.

''Therefore it's nice to have a British underdog to route for. The criteria for a wildcard is strict enough. ''

Fine, if they have earned the right to be there. Not that strict - otherwise Kyle Edmund wouldn't be there and still subject to national bias.

SMC1809 · All-time great

If there wasn't any prize money, would you be less opposed to Wildcards?

savva0122 · Intermediate Club Player

If the guys were in the top 250 they'd get a wild card.

I used to think the draw ought to be filled with Brits, but they need ot be able to play at a certain level - I know it's controversial but the 250 barrier is quite effective.

Maza1987 · Challenger level

I'm another in the 'don't hand wild cards out like confetti' camp.

bookerman · Social player

Maybe so but if this was 2005 a certain Andy Murray would not have got to the 3rd round if he wasn't handed a wild card since he was ranked in the 300s at the time.