Week 10 - ATP Masters 1000 - Indian Wells CA, USA (ex-AM) - Hard

steven · Tennis legend

RE: Week 10 - ATP Masters 1000 - Indian Wells CA, USA (ex-AM) - Hard

philwrig · Hall of fame

Lopez was poor, so a great opportunity, but still he can compete at this level with his best tennis, so positives going forward.

LouieG · County player

Good effort, good money and decent points, any chance Ward will still play Irving?

-- Edited by LouieG on Monday 10th of March 2014 01:20:21 AM

Spectator · All-time great

If any GB player deserves the series of chances and felicitous happenings that Mr Ward has been given of late, it is surely he. So very glad. Wish he had managed to beat Mr Lopez again - but quite a respectable showing, and does him no harm in terms of the possibility of future chances to be known as the person who this year has conquered Mr Querrey, won a round in Dubai, and then came very close to beating Mr Lopez (the highest non-seed in the draw) after having had almost no notice that he would play in his first Masters.

I assume that he knew he was in with a shot at the LL position, was aware that Mr del Potro was an uncertainty, and had enough friends around that staying wasn't unthinkable. Good choice.

-- Edited by Spectator on Monday 10th of March 2014 04:52:02 AM

imoen · Admin: Moderator+Tennis Legend

It's it lovely when we talk about losing a match like this being a disappointment! Great to see Ward get the opportunity and even though he lost in the end he clearly didn't squander it.

Sorry if this has already been answered but how many points does he gain from this?

steven · Tennis legend

imoen wrote:
It's it lovely when we talk about losing a match like this being a disappointment! Great to see Ward get the opportunity and even though he lost in the end he clearly didn't squander it.

Sorry if this has already been answered but how many points does he gain from this?

18, made up of 8 for qualifying plus 10 R1 loser points, which is what seeds who get a bye then lose in R2 get.

He's getting close to getting back in the top 150 again and has only 14 more points to defend in March and April, though he then has 51 points due off on 5 May, having reached the An-Ning Challenger Final last year.

stevemcqueen · Futures qualifying

Another question for the resident pedants: JW will graciously accept a 2nd round loser's cheque for $16k. Players in qualifying who win their matches and make it thru to the main draw receive no prize money for qualifying. Their prize money comes exclusively from what the earn in the main draw. However, JW didn't win his final qualifying match and according to the qualifying draw sheet losers of the fqr should get $2,800. I'm not trying to say he desrves it, I'm just curious.....

Do we know if he is headed for Texas?

Cheers all

paulisi · Tennis legend

Watched quite a bit of James' match and Lopez was there for the taking.

Lopez upped his first serve in the second and third sets and cut out some of the errors that had been so prolific in the first set.

I think Mark Petchey summed up James' game aptly in that he missed pace off his forehand and didn't have a serve and volley aspect to his game and would not progress much past 150 until this appeared.

Does James have a full time coach that travels with him?

Jan · Hall of fame

Glad to see that James made a close match of it, but would have loved to see the W.
Good luck to him for his next tournament.

Spectator · All-time great

I've long wondered whether Mr Ward had a traveling coach. If not, does anyone know why not? And if it's finance, surely it would be to everyone's advantage to see him make that final step?

Ratty · County player

paulisi wrote:
I think Mark Petchey summed up James' game aptly in that he missed pace off his forehand and didn't have a serve and volley aspect to his game and would not progress much past 150 until this appeared.

I think this is a bit of a nothing comment from Petchey. Exactly the same could be said about Ferrer. And if Lopez was down at 150 people would say it's because he doesn't have a backhand.

The "real" reason is of course no more than that the sum of the parts of James' game doesn't quite add up to the sum of the parts of higher ranked players' games. Which is kind of a boring thing to say.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Ratty wrote:
paulisi wrote:
I think Mark Petchey summed up James' game aptly in that he missed pace off his forehand and didn't have a serve and volley aspect to his game and would not progress much past 150 until this appeared.
I think this is a bit of a nothing comment from Petchey. Exactly the same could be said about Ferrer. And if Lopez was down at 150 people would say it's because he doesn't have a backhand.
The "real" reason is of course no more than that the sum of the parts of James' game doesn't quite add up to the sum of the parts of higher ranked players' games. Which is kind of a boring thing to say.

I happen to agree. Very few of the players (top or otherwise) have a serve and volley aspect to their game. And quite a few have dodgy forehands. (And, as you say, some have dodgy backhands. Some have dodgy court coverage. Or dodgy mental resilience).

James has a cracking forehand when he believes in it. Most of the time he doesn't.

Spectator · All-time great

Given past form, I would always assume Steven knows best, but (taken from Jon Wertheim's column), this is apparently what "Sharko" thinks will happen:

How does it work when a lucky loser replaces a seed who has a bye, as was the case with James Ward taking Juan Marin del Potro's spot at Indian Wells? Does the lucky loser automatically get the ranking points and money from a first-round win?
-- Miles Benson, Hudson, Mass.

Here's the ATP Tour's Greg Sharko: "Ward will receive 10 first-round points, since he lost in his opening match with a bye, plus 16 lucky-loser points for a total of 26 points. He will receive second-round prize money of $16,000."

Read More: sportsillustrated.cnn.com/tennis/news/20140312/tennis-mailbag/

Steven's explanation makes more sense ... but it will be interesting to see what emerges next Monday.

Madeline · Admin:Moderator + Tennis Legend

I'm pretty sure Steven is right and Sharko is wrong in this particular case - 16 points is for an actual qualifier in IW, with 8 for reaching the FQR. So I reckon Steven's total of 18 is right, unfortunately. If Sharko is right then the points shown on the Q draw PDF is wrong.

-- Edited by Madeline on Thursday 13th of March 2014 05:10:35 PM

indiana · Tennis legend

I suspect Sharko's downfall ( I think Steven is right ) is the big main draw in Indian Wells ( and Miami ).

Normally in Masters, a FQR loser gets 16 points and a qualifier 25 points.

But where the main draw is > 56, a FQR loser gets 8 points and a qualifier 16 points.

Losers of their first MD match ( including after a bye ) get 10 points.

8 + 10 = 18