oh dear

Have had it running in the background and not seen that much but, from what I have seen, the score seems fair.

So in order to get a Wimbledon wildcard, you must be capable of beating a direct entry player. Sela is only ranked 110 and presumably will have to go through qualifiers, so i'm not sure if Kyle should get a main draw wildcard.
Stick him in qualifying.

Evo, Ward and maybe Cox are probably the only GB players who should get main draw wildcards unless they show something in the next two weeks.

I bet you that Kyle does get a Wimbledon MD WC though. On balance, I'd agree with that.

MD WCs to James, Kyle, Dans E, C & S, and Q WCs for Dave, Marcus and Oli ?

When I saw Kyle push Gilles Simon to 7-6 7-6 last year, it seemed like it was only a couple of pressure points in the tie break that stopped Kyle winning. When I compare this match to that one however, I never really got the feeling that Kyle was going to win unless Sela played poorly. There where major differences in the styles of Simon and Sela that for me, account for the difference.

In the Simon game, it almost at times became a "slugfest" as Simon consistently rallied hard and Kyle was able to get into a rhythm and match him. Sela today though, had a much more subtle approach. His use of angles, change of pace etc was a bit too much for Kyle to handle. Kyle played a decent game, particularly in the 2nd set when Sela's level dipped and he was able to take advantage. But overall, Sela's experience and guile was a bit too "clever" for Kyle today.

Like everyone here, I would love to see Kyle make a dash up the rankings, but we need to be patient as he continues to learn the game and we shouldn't heap too much expectation and pressure on him.

With reference to Paulisi's comment above, I think Kyle has already proved he has the capability to beat "direct entry players" but he is not going to beat all of them all of the time. Let's remember that Sela is a wily old campaigner who has been a top 30 player. With the right match up in R1 (assuming he does get a WC) I would not rule out Kyle's chances of getting a win.

indiana wrote:

---

Kyle losing in three sets to Sela hardly shows that he is incapable of beating a Wimbledon direct entry. I'd say he is, though would need a rather good draw and be on his game. But he has shown he can raise his game and I'd have more confidence in him than others who have in the past and will probably this year get MD WCs.

Just as Katy's ONE really very good win here is not enough to my mind for a MD WC, Kyle's ONE loss here is certainly not enough to show he shouldn't get one

---

Indy - I would love to see all the British Players, bar Murray, to go through qualifying and see what really would happen. I thought Dan Evans would comfortably get through qualifying last year - just shows how wrong you can be.

Anyway you know my thoughts on wc's - haven't the energy for another debate! 

A131 - you know that I essentially agree with you, so we ourselves wouldn't really have a debate.

My discusions now on actual WCs are based on where we and other Slams are with MD WCs, and not where some of us would like to be, i.e. essentially no MD WCS in Slams, save possibly illness / injury absences. And I too would actually quite like to see them all in qualifying ( and similar with Aussies, French and Americans in their Slams ).

But in discussing MD and Q WCs, I have been trying to avoid constant disclaimers of the type : "that said, I actually don't like having MD WCs in Slams", and risk getting back "Yes, we know !" :)