There seems to be quite a few people suggesting that Colin and Jonny haven't performed well together but I don't think the evidence really backs up this assertion. Prior to the US Open they have played 13 tournaments together this year and which have resulted in 975 points, including 2 mandatory zeros and 2 none mandatory zeros. Extrapolating from that it would be reasonable to expect that a full season playing together would probably have produced at least 1800 points which would put both guys around 40 in the world. So while not a stellar performance, not a bad one either and a good run here would obviously change things for the better. Obviously Colin had done better with other partners but lets remember the context, a master final playing with one of the best singles players on the planet, a title with a top 10 doubles player and another title where the field was very weak. With just a few points going the other way Jonny and Colin could easily have won two titles this year and we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I don't know about others, RJA, but I am not sure that korriban and I are really tremendously far away from your own analysis of the Fleming / Marray combo.

It is really a question of context and quite high expectation ( although I don't think too high ) that leads me to say that I am a bit underwhelmed / you to say not a stellar points performance snd korriban and I to talk ( maybe vaguely ) about "average" performances. I think the sense was not really eyecatching.

I don't think we have said they haven't done well, it's just that nagging somehow expected more.

So it's tbat generality with a passing look at week to week results and quite a few thoughts of oh that got away / didnt think they'ed lose that one or it be so tight, plus of course good weeks. Anyway not got the time or inclination to really go back and analyse results at 1.30 am so it remains very much a general fairly passing impression while having some feel for rankings and results.

Miriambee wrote:

---

Jamie and John have started, currently 3 all, on serve it appears.

Don't know if I missed any breaks of serve earlier.

---

There were no service breaks in the first set.    I'm reliably informed (I'm still at work & unable to monitor every point), however, that they failed to convert a break point in the tenth game, so all credit to them for toughing it out in the tie-break.

-- Edited by Stircrazy on Thursday 29th of August 2013 04:11:40 PM

J&J will serve for the second set *5-4
come on lads!!

 

edit - which they win!

 

And I'd forgotten it was only best of 3, so that means they won the match!! Great stuff lads

-- Edited by Jan on Thursday 29th of August 2013 04:37:04 PM

Well, not to steal Spectator's thunder (!), but RJA put it up last night - I only mention it because he posted Ken's tweet, which is just wonderful:

RJA's Post

Looks like Ken has made it in, he just tweeted

"You in?" "No" "You in?" "No" "You in?" "No" "You in?" "Ohhhh Yeah!!!!!!" #usopen

worth putting up again . . .

johnnylad wrote:

---

Surely its because its got nothing to do with this ridiculously misleading combined ranking? Don't they take the higher of a players singles or doubles and add together?

i.e.

Djokovic/Nadal would be ranked 3 and not UNR due to Djokovic not having a doubles ranking?

---

For entry purposes, they take the higher ranking (singles or doubles) for each player and add them together. For seeding purposes, they add the doubles rankings together (ignoring the singles rankings)

Bob wrote:

---

steven wrote:

---

johnnylad wrote:

---

Surely its because its got nothing to do with this ridiculously misleading combined ranking? Don't they take the higher of a players singles or doubles and add together?

i.e.

Djokovic/Nadal would be ranked 3 and not UNR due to Djokovic not having a doubles ranking?

---

For entry purposes, they take the higher ranking (singles or doubles) for each player and add them together. For seeding purposes, they add the doubles rankings together (ignoring the singles rankings)

---

I agree but this has baffled me as Levinsky doesnt have a singles ranking and his doubles ranking is 787. Vesely has a singles ranking of 82 and a doubles ranking of 476. By adding the higher singles ranking of 82 for Vesely and 787 for Levinsky makes a total of 869. Still very low for automatic entry. Anyone know the reason for this?

---

I just looked at the Doubles Entry List and it looks as though there is some sort of protected ranking for this pair signified by the @ after their combined ranking at the time of the entry cut off date (same for Baker/Ram).

But that still doesn't explain @125.  There's a weird line in Levinsky's ATP profile home: "On 27 June, partnering Hajek, retired with back injury at 45 versus Llodra-Mahut in Wimbledon 2R " i.e. at 4-5 in the first set. 

So, it's very odd.

46 KAS, Christopher & MARACH, Oliver 124
47 ANDUJAR, Pablo & GARCIA-LOPEZ, Guillermo 125
48 LEVINSKY, Jaroslav & VESELY, Jiri @125
49 BAKER, Brian & RAM, Rajeev @128
50 DOLGOPOLOV, Alexandr & MALISSE, Xavier 129
51 BEDNAREK, Tomasz & LACKO, Lukas 132