Week 4 - Israel F2 ($10,000) - Eilat (Hard)

A1 tennis academy · Satellite level

RE: Week 4 - Israel F2 ($10,000) - Eilat (Hard)

paulisi · Tennis legend

Good news on the challenger front.

Marcus may have a better chance getting a doubles wc than a singles one

TMH · Futures qualifying

A1 tennis academy wrote:
plankton wrote:
Don't chase the wimbly money - go challengers to develop their games.
Easy to say if you're not funding them though!!
They need the Wimbledon prize money there is a growing queue of players and coaches knocking on my door as saying my turn ?if they qualified for wimbie I could help 1/2 players lower down the food chain.
After Wimbledon should be 100% challengers and higher ranked ATP events

It's a very short-termist approach and if the boys failed to reach it, whilst playing mainly Futures, it would be seriously hindering their careers as well.

No harm in having it as a goal, but it needs to be achieved in a sustainable way. IE Challengers.

And as has been said countless times on this board, there's no guarantee they would get a WC if they only played Futures even if they do get inside the top 250.

Spectator · All-time great

It seems a risky strategy indeed, given not only that top 250 is no guarantee of a WC (as noted, in 2012 when Rice and Thornley didn't get a MD WC, it was despite being within the top-200, having qualified for Wimbledon the year before, having been finalists in a Challenger, and having won more futures titles than one could shake sticks at) ... but also that there's a lot of competition for those WCs: Rice and Thornley, Delgado, Brydan Klein, and Smethurst are all ranked higher than Willis and Burton right now, and JWH and Richard Gabb are right alongside them. Wouldn't bet against some combination of Broady/Bambridge/Golding/Hoyt also making a move.

Which isn't to say that it's not worth a go, or that they may not make it ... just to echo what others say about there not being a simple correlation between reaching 250 and getting the WC.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

A1 tennis academy wrote:
plankton wrote:
Don't chase the wimbly money - go challengers to develop their games.
Easy to say if you're not funding them though!!
They need the Wimbledon prize money there is a growing queue of players and coaches knocking on my door as saying my turn ?if they qualified for wimbie I could help 1/2 players lower down the food chain.
After Wimbledon should be 100% challengers and higher ranked ATP events

There's a dichotomy here.

You want them to get the Wimbly prize money so that it frees up funds so you can help other players. Makes sense.

The lads, fundamentally, don't care about helping other players. Quite rightly.

What's the budget forecasts? i.e. on a six-month forecast, where will M & L be if (a) they make the semis/finals of every futures they enter and get the Wimbly money? (b) make the first/second round of X number of Challengers and don't get the Wim. money? Then factor in the chance that they don;t get the W place in the first scenario and the chance that they may also qualify for W in the second scenario. Where do you break even ?

A1 tennis academy · Satellite level

plankton wrote:
Don't chase the wimbly money - go challengers to develop their games.
Easy to say if you're not funding them though!!

They need the Wimbledon prize money there is a growing queue of players and coaches knocking on my door as aying my turn ?if they qualified for wimbie I could help 1/2 players lower down the food chain.

After Wimbledon should be 100% challengers and higher ranked ATP events

At the moment they are on target for 220-230 end of April I think chances of a WC probably depends on many factors that are not under the players or my control . If does not happen its not the end of the world but it be nice to know that progress is being recognised .

After Wimbledon my advice would be to focus on challengers with goal of qualifying for US open & australian open in 12 months time

A1 tennis academy · Satellite level

Spectator wrote:
It seems a risky strategy indeed, given not only that top 250 is no guarantee of a WC (as noted, in 2012 when Rice and Thornley didn't get a MD WC, it was despite being within the top-200, having qualified for Wimbledon the year before, having been finalists in a Challenger, and having won more futures titles than one could shake sticks at) ... but also that there's a lot of competition for those WCs: Rice and Thornley, Delgado, Brydan Klein, and Smethurst are all ranked higher than Willis and Burton right now, and JWH and Richard Gabb are right alongside them. Wouldn't bet against some combination of Broady/Bambridge/Golding/Hoyt also making a move.

Which isn't to say that it's not worth a go, or that they may not make it ... just to echo what others say about there not being a simple correlation between reaching 250 and getting the WC.

No break even for A1 because it's a donation . The players only need 15-20,000 us dollars per year earnings to be self sufficient . This really means achieving a doubles ranking in the top 100

But top 200 by the end of year should be min goal and with current performance only need same performance plus 2 SF challengers to achieve it !

spud · Challenger qualifying

A1 tennis academy wrote:
plankton wrote:
Don't chase the wimbly money - go challengers to develop their games.
Easy to say if you're not funding them though!!
After Wimbledon my advice would be to focus on challengers with goal of qualifying for US open & australian open in 12 months time

Qualify as in be direct acceptances for US and Aussy? In which case they'd need to be ranked top 100 i would have thought. Otherwise I don't think they do doubles qualifying for them events

A1 tennis academy · Satellite level

spud wrote:
A1 tennis academy wrote:
plankton wrote:
Don't chase the wimbly money - go challengers to develop their games.
Easy to say if you're not funding them though!!
After Wimbledon my advice would be to focus on challengers with goal of qualifying for US open & australian open in 12 months time

Qualify as in be direct acceptances for US and Aussy? In which case they'd need to be ranked top 100 i would have thought. Otherwise I don't think they do doubles qualifying for them events

Qualifiers