Coup Droit wrote:

---

Maybe everyone knows this but, according to the BBC site, talking about Dan Evans :

"Every saint has a past, and every sinner has a future," is the Oscar Wilde quote tattooed to his arm.

---

He has had that tattoo for quite a while (inside of left forearm)

philwrig wrote:

---

DWH wrote:

---

Read it was Harry Skinner if anyone knows anything about him.

http://straightsets.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/tomic-loses-while-his-father-watches/ (Right at the bottom of the article)

 

---

 He played at Ilkley and lost to Ben Lott in qualies.

ITF profile :http://www.itftennis.com/procircuit/players/player/profile.aspx?playerid=100046287

 

---

 Thanks. Had a quick look further down that list. Turns out he and Dan played in Felixstowe qualifying in 2005. (Dan won in 3 sets). How old would he have been then? 15/16? I guess he's come a long way. 

Montana Doug wrote:

---

Helen40 wrote:

---

Montana Doug wrote:

---

Now.....can anyone remind me why Dan was not given a Wild Card into Wimbledon???? Esp as there were extra that were given to those who should have instead headed to the qualifying?

---

 I'm still glad that he wasn't. I think that our younger players should be made to fight and prove their worth/resolve instead of being handed so much ie coaching WCs and funding. Dan has fought his was through qualies, and it seems to have given him the confidence and tools to have taken out Kei.

---

 I wish he was. Clearly he did well in Davis Cup and at Queens to suggest that he could have done well there on the grass....yes he toiled well over here this Summer and his confidence is high esp after qualifying....I just feel that with his talent he deserved more than two Wimbledon Wild Cards.....reward those with the potential and who have shown that they have the game to be more than a plucky loser and I think Dan did that both in DC and Queens.

---

 I don't disagree that if WCs are handed out that Dan was deserving. What I am saying is that there should be less WCs given out fullstop, and all players should have to fight for it like they do in the countries where there are less tournaments. this would sort out who really wants it and is prepared to do the hard yards. talent is all very well, but only the hard graft will get you there. e.g. Andy.

Do the BBC proof read their articles?

"With Court 13 now bursting at the seams as passers-by edged into the alleyways to get a look at the first big upset of the tournament, Evans broke for the sixth time to seal victory after one hour and 57 minutes."......

"It was the second win of the day for British players after 30th seed Laura Robson earlier beat Lourdes Dominguez Lino 7-5 6-0 on the nearby Court 13."

Helen40 wrote:

---

Montana Doug wrote:

---

Helen40 wrote:

---

Montana Doug wrote:

---

Now.....can anyone remind me why Dan was not given a Wild Card into Wimbledon???? Esp as there were extra that were given to those who should have instead headed to the qualifying?

---

 I'm still glad that he wasn't. I think that our younger players should be made to fight and prove their worth/resolve instead of being handed so much ie coaching WCs and funding. Dan has fought his was through qualies, and it seems to have given him the confidence and tools to have taken out Kei.

---

 I wish he was. Clearly he did well in Davis Cup and at Queens to suggest that he could have done well there on the grass....yes he toiled well over here this Summer and his confidence is high esp after qualifying....I just feel that with his talent he deserved more than two Wimbledon Wild Cards.....reward those with the potential and who have shown that they have the game to be more than a plucky loser and I think Dan did that both in DC and Queens.

---

 I don't disagree that if WCs are handed out that Dan was deserving. What I am saying is that there should be less WCs given out fullstop, and all players should have to fight for it like they do in the countries where there are less tournaments. this would sort out who really wants it and is prepared to do the hard yards. talent is all very well, but only the hard graft will get you there. e.g. Andy.

---

 This is difficult for me to comment on as I left England in 1991, but was raised there until I turned 25. I was an athletic kid but never played tennis. I never really had an opportunity to play tennis. We had tennis courts at my school but then nets were never up and believe it or not I only played football and even cricket on those courts (six and out if you hit it over the fence). The only time I watched tennis was Wimbledon and I was especially interested in British players. My interest waned when the Brits went out.
 

Now I live in the States and my son got into tennis. I feel badly as I feel like I missed out on a great sport which is also a British sport. Here kids have dreams, college scholarships etc etc. There is an incentive and clubs everywhere. There are ways to get involved and play the sport year round. I feel wild cards are important to British players as hopefully it will engage the public and lead to more people caring about the sport and more people being involved and picking the sport up.

My son plays basketball and soccer for his school, he also plays tennis. He asked me what sports I played as a kid and I said soccer/football. That was it. I played it year round, sure a little rugby and cricket, did half marathons as I got older, but that was it because that is all I saw on the TV being a child of the 70s and 80s. I think wild cards can assist British tennis greatly by keeping more British tennis players and dreaming and getting that pay day to keep the dream alive. Here you have tennis scholarships even for the kids that will never crack the top 100, what do you have there for the late developer or the kid who just might not be good enough?  Dan looks like he will do well and crack the top 100 hopefully soon, but he could have walked away a few years back if it were not for his two Wimbledon wild cards.  Anyway, this is too long and we might just have to agree to disagree.