Week 20 - Challenger (€35,000+H) - Heilbronn II, Germany (Clay)

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

RE: Week 20 - Challenger (€35,000+H) - Heilbronn II, Germany (Clay)

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Shame that Kavcic got cross with the umpire - he's got a bit of pep back.

Jaffa · Challenger level

It's now 4-4*. Break back has been coming.

Oakland2002 · All-time great

Wildcard s, I am a fan Zerev kryicos Kyle great choices raises the pulses of tennis nerds around Europe. Great for players under 21 who have top 30 potential. Allows them to size up the task, perhaps be competitive in the first set or if good enough move up the ATP rankings fast, the big wedge of 26 yr olds between 30 and 250, ie mature fit experienced players potentially slow the progress of really good juniors Hewitt, Murray etc... and in the absence of wildcards their exposure to top players not to win but to play and learn what is required to win would be very limited. The rankings by age is a useful marker as to how the awards of 50% of wildcards could be stratified with perhaps 50% at the discretion of the tournament organizers. Lets face it playing an ATP event is going to be detrimental in the short term to most young players ranking ie they depart pronto, and the reason why Kyle is not in a place to play in qualification for the FO and having to rely on WC to get into challengers but some big points would rapidly propel him upwards, he must have taken advice from Andy and his camp must have taken a strategic view on this. If wildcards didn't exist he would be on a steady plod round futures and challenger qualification as would the others mentioned above. Hoping for a win this afternoon to almost make it a futures winning points haul. Go kyle

Jaffa · Challenger level

James lost 7-5 in the third

EddietheEagle · County player

Very poor end by Ward. Mentally poor, in particular on handling those short balls.

stevemcqueen · Futures qualifying

Coup Droit wrote:
stevemcqueen wrote:
Coup Droit wrote:
Very good set of tennis. Well done. Don't quite agree about the UEs towards the end (although the forehand dropshot was definitely poor)

But the other faults were the right ball, the right shot, and just missed by a bit. They wouldn't even count as UEs by most coaches scoring system.

Completely different from the off-balance wild swipes at the ball in the first set.

And now . . . .
Yes they are UEs! I'm not saying it was bad shot selection, but UEs all the same.

The ITF may count them as UEs; the ATP might or might not - the distinction between forced and unforced errors is subjective depending on each shot/rally.
But most top coaches think the definition is wrong. They use 'missed opportunity error' as more important. i.e. if you have an open line and a short ball and you play a good shot and miss by 6 inches, they will not put that as an unforced error (although ITF will)
However, if you have the same ball and hit a more conservative shot back in the court, there's no ITF-stlye UE but the coach will mark it as an error - a missed opportunity error (or whatever you want to call it).
So I agree they were UEs by the ITF system, I'm saying that most coaches think that system is unhelpful and don't use it and would have counted tons of UEs by James in the first set but not most of those ones towards the end int he second. After all, anyone can make no UEs,, but they'll end up making tons of Enforced errors (and watch clean winners go past).

Sorry to be a pedant, but whether a player is being passive or aggressive, a point is a point, an error is an error. A UE is always a UE even if there are other metrics available. A case in point is that last game

stevemcqueen · Futures qualifying

EddietheEagle wrote:
Very poor end by Ward. Mentally poor, in particular on handling those short balls.

I have to disagree with you on this: Dino showed considerable mental fortitude to come back from a poor first set. In the end it was a very, very close match against a player with a significantly higher ranking. In the last half of the final set, Dino would be the first to admit that his response to drop shots was well below what he is capable of. He got to the ball with sufficent time but missed.....

The last two sets were decent quality tennis. I liked the angles that Dino generated, and I liked the way he redoubled his efforts after a very ordinary first set

korriban · Challenger level

stevemcqueen wrote:
EddietheEagle wrote:
Very poor end by Ward. Mentally poor, in particular on handling those short balls.
I have to disagree with you on this: Dino showed considerable mental fortitude to come back from a poor first set. In the end it was a very, very close match against a player with a significantly higher ranking. In the last half of the final set, Dino would be the first to admit that his response to drop shots was well below what he is capable of. He got to the ball with sufficent time but missed.....
The last two sets were decent quality tennis. I liked the angles that Dino generated, and I liked the way he redoubled his efforts after a very ordinary first set

Didnt see the match, but in general James plays more aggressively and more freely when behind or with his back to the wall in matches.......and plays defensively, reacting to his opponent and with many more UEs (thinking about technique rather than just hitting the ball perhaps) when ahead or close to the line. The fact that Kavcic was dropping James implies he was hanging back and waiting........we've this before. Shame.

EddietheEagle · County player

He'd got the break. He should have shut his opponent out, particularly after Kavcic went AWOL in trying to do the umpire's job and responded poorly himself. Those drop responses by Ward were dreadful as was the one he tried himself. He seemed to hold back on the power at the end too which Kavcic took advantage of. It was close, I agree, but Ward will see that as a winnable match, one in his hands which he threw away with rash shots and unforced errors.

indiana · Tennis legend

Interesting re the UEs discussion :)

I would imagine most of us think UEs are indeed counted as steve suggests and indeed as CD concurs that the ITF basically count them, i.e. essentially based on the difficulty of the ball the player faced and then whether he returned it in or out.

I ( finally ) understood where CD is coming from. Perhaps I'd personally look on his interpretation as looking for' 'strategic errors' rather than the common appraisal of UEs by the ITF and I would have expected quite similarly by the ATP.

I quite understand the coaches being more interested in their shot strategy and 'playing the right shot', but it is unrealistic and far too subjective ( there will always be some element of subjectivity in 'UEs' whatever ) and what is the right shot for one player may not be the right one for others.

So, I do see where you are coming from, CD, but also very much understand why folk will disagree / be confused as to where you are coming from. I think in practice, the ITF have to basically count UEs as they do ( and steve presumed ) and everyone just to realise that, take it in context and attach as much meaning as they wish.

And I do prefer using the term 'UEs' as Steve looks at them and the ITF count them.

A131 · Intermediate Club Player

RE: WILDCARDS - As I said in another thread as far as so called promosing juniors are concerned, I can tolerate these being handed out to regular ATP events, Challenger or lower but not to the main draw of a grand slam. They are far too bigger events to be handing out freebies and totally unfair on other countries. By all means give them a WC to qualifying should they need it - at least make them earn the right to be there. The only people who should get wildcards or perhaps worthy of consideration are former top 10/20 players coming back from injury/defending champions - maybe top 50 if they are home grown - but outside of that you should go through qualifying. Surely players of any age must feel better when they have come through qualifying to get a place in the main draw rather than by the back door.

indiana · Tennis legend

I meant 'unrealistic and far too subjective' for the ITF to count 'UEs' in the way CD describes coaches counting them.

Again, I understand what he is aluding to, but it is really a different count.

Bob in Spain · Tennis legend

The match prior to Kyle has just finished. Should be starting any time now.

indiana · Tennis legend

I agree with A131 that no player should be getting a Slam MD WC based on youth or nationality when their ranking is not good enough. In my view similarly re reputation or crowd pulling ability.

Injury would be the one exception I can think of and the PR system covers that pretty well.

The Slams are the pinnacle of tennis and entry should be earned by results and points.

Of course it is not going to change much, if at all, in the foreseeable future, but doesn't.t mean some of us can't say we think it's pish !