Wild Cards

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

RE: Wild Cards

The Optimist · ATP qualifying

paulisi wrote:

I suspect they are still debating over Cav, Tara and Emily over whom to give the main draw, but I suspect all will get something. They are probably waiting for Tara to play this week.

Can't see Naomi C or EWS getting MD WCs. Naomi nowhere near her previous level yet and Harriet, who is stronger, only has a QWC. Suspect EWS too long in the tooth for the current LTA regime. Tara A possibility.

paulisi · Tennis legend

philwrig wrote:
paulisi wrote:
www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/news/articles/2015-06-17/wild_cards_announcement_for_the_championships_2015.html

Does Ed need one? He should get in direct.

There are still a few spare places.
He certainly needs one for the MD, Naomi is outside the top 200 and gets one. Why different for Men's compared to Ladies.

Ed was 10th alt for Wimbledon qualifiers before the wildcard announcements today, so I would expect him to get direct in to qualifying and release another wildcard.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

But they've got plenty of Q wildcards in reserve.

Phil's point, I think, is still that Ed's been hard done by by not getting a main draw one, despite being in the top 250, hard-working, great attitude etc.

indiana · Tennis legend

Reluctant as I am to get into ( specifically ) MD WC discussions, clearly the LTA look at more than rankings and have generally always made that clear. As well as Naomi being just outside the top 200 she did well at Wimbledon last year.

The fact that these points are soon to come off so her ranking could drop a fair bit is arguably superceded by the very point that they were gained at Wimbledon.

A131 · Intermediate Club Player

indiana wrote:
Reluctant as I am to get into ( specifically ) MD WC discussions, clearly the LTA look at more than rankings and have generally always made that clear. As well as Naomi being just outside the top 200 she did well at Wimbledon last year.

The fact that these points are soon to come off so her ranking could drop a fair bit is arguably superceded by the very point that they were gained at Wimbledon.

Nor should anyone expect you to get into (specifically) MD WC discussions. You have explained them clearly enough and often enough as have I. I think it is fair to say that JK would have got one irrespective of her results over the past few weeks, irrespective of whether she qualified for the main draw at the French Open, irrespective of attitude. She's British (well an imported Brit) - end of story. As for Naomi Broady - not once has she ever reached the main draw of any grand slam on merit or come through any qualifying event to reach the main draw (including Wimbledon) and I'm still not convinced she would have come through qualifying this year had she been made to. This is now her 4th WC and she's 25 and been on the tour for nearly 10 years. Does it not tell you something? If Naomi Broady was not British she would not be in the main draw - so I think the arguments regarding performances on grass last year or any other year and the supposed 'unique surface' is a bit of a fallacy. Just my view.

Jaffa · Challenger level

But A131 every other country gives WC's to similar sorts of players so why shouldn't we?

indiana · Tennis legend

Jaffa, the issue A131 and I have is with ALL the SLAMS doling out MD WCs to home players and some other favoured souls, NOT Wimbledon in isolation.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Interesting stats and comments:

www.nytimes.com/2015/06/24/sports/tennis/no-home-advantage-lately-for-british-wild-cards.html

Spectator · All-time great

Yes - and Mr Ward comes across very well. Thanks for the link.

Born2WinTennis · Club Coach

I love that last sentence:

And finding solutions to the seemingly never-ending troubles afflicting British tennis could take nearly as long as 77 years.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

So the Australian federation has turned down its reciprocal-programme US Open Main Draw wildcard to the women's draw as it does not have any player worthy of it . . . .

indiana · Tennis legend

Yay, the Australian federation. So who's next in line on the entry list

Oakland2002 · All-time great

Can't believe I am saying this but I am hardening my stance on Wimbledon wildcards, the 8% win rate by Brits against the 20- 30% win ratio of wild cards in the other slams makes me wince.

Watching our qualifying wild cards also struggle to get through the first round implys we just don't have the strength in depth to justify the MD wild cards traditionally offered, fine give opportunity and cash to those with a chance of progression but to get to the 20-30 % win rate they may have to be qualifying WC as opposed to MD.

Etienne · Club Coach

I think that the wild cards at Wimbledon are becoming more discerning already. Obviously last year 3 WCs weren't given for the women rather than handing them out to the likes of Moore, Dunne and Dart. Robson was obviously a special case and would have been given a WC by any country anywhere. Konta got hers on merit, and was unfortunate in her first round draw against Sharapova. Only N Broady could fell that she was fortunate.

For the men, Ward and L Broady obviously won, Edmund didn't but his French Open form merited a WC. Again, Klein might have been a bit borderline. But if it hadn't been him it would have been Kim Copperjans the top seed in qualifying who promptly lost in the first round of qualifying.

I think that the prospect of a Wimbledon WC is a great incentive to British players in the months beforehand.