Weeks 26-27 - Wimbledon women's main draw

tony_orient · ATP qualifying

Weeks 26-27 - Wimbledon women's main draw

murray_2k9 · Challenger qualifying

I think when you consider who the women lost to, you cant really complain at the results. Although Zvonareva was a bit of a question mark, she played well to dismiss Vekic in the next round, which demonstrates how well Tara was playing.

As a big Heather fan, I am thrilled that she seems to be back and has her love of tennis again. Shes such a competitor and has really added some muscle to her game. She needs to keep looking at the Sloanes, Eugenie, Halep type players as motivation; excellent movement is extremely difficult to beat on any surface.

Jaffa · Challenger level

Well, I personally think the criticism of Tara is incredibly unfair.

I saw the final set of Tara, I think I gave her a bit of a fright as I gave her a big come on Tara as she walked round the corner of court 12 to 2 as I was going to my seat! Bless her. She played superb for the first half of the set, she would've given anybody a game. She missed a shot at BP to go two breaks up by millimetres and that in my opinion was the margin the match was decided on. She was SO tight when she served for the match the first time and didn't really go for her shots. Zvonareva really took advantage. However you can't say she hasn't got a good attitude when she goes and breaks back to love in the next game! She has it all but she isn't experienced in those matches. If she can just go on a good run and get herself in positions to play these big matches more often I don't see why she won't be top 100.

That said, I saw a set of her and Konta in the doubles and her second serve was getting eaten alive, that's something she'll have to really work on.

Saw a bit of Zvonareva v Vekic and she looked in control making Tara's result less disappointing.

Konta's serve is huge, I never realised. Just a shame she can't get it in the box more often!

Saw Anna and Jos in the doubles, they were superb in the first set and deserved to take it but Anna's serve went awry just when she needed it most and she lost her confidence. Jos is a big girl and you can see why she is an excellent doubles player.

We were supposed to see Naomi V Wozniacki because of Tsonga and Querrey having an absolute slugfest, which was a shame.

A131 · Intermediate Club Player

'' I think when you consider who the women lost to, you cant really complain at the results. Although Zvonareva was a bit of a question mark, she played well to dismiss Vekic in the next round, which demonstrates how well Tara was playing ''

--------------------------------------------

Or how much better Zvonereva played against Vekic than she did against Tara Moore.

Spectator · All-time great

I am with Ratty insofar as I think it is far too easy to slate people for not being perfect in their discipline. Endemic indiscipline is one thing, and is hard to justify when you are on public funds. But judging who is endemically undisciplined and who is simply having a period of frustration (who hasn't had a point in their - funded - working life where they just couldn't face doing all that they should? I love my work, and I've had the odd day like that!) is really tough. People like Ms Watson and M Hoferlin may be able to point to particular cases based on insider knowledge, but as an outsider, I'd be reluctant to weigh in.

I also think that there's a difficulty insofar as people can sometimes make it sound as if the sole barrier to A's success is a lack of effort: if he/she only tried more, he/she would be top (name your number). I'm not always wholly convinced. The great fallacy tends to be to look at someone with natural talent (in any field) and to think that if you married that talent with degree of application X, Y would be the result. But that's not always true.

Jaffa · Challenger level

Top post spectator.

indiana · Tennis legend

Hmm, A131, not that you would really evidently let off our WCs, no matter how well they played.

Because, I recall from earlier that you feel they are fair game, indeed will "deserve" all the stick they may get for accepting MD WCs ( or as you put it, applying for WCs ) and then daring to lose in R1. "I really hope the media do tear into them".

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Don't get me wrong: I've never said, here or elsewhere, that Tara doesn't work hard enough. I've no idea, nor heard the opinion of someone who does have an idea.

I've said, and still think, that she should change coach. Although Jane has done many good things, there has been a block over several years with certain aspects, and sometimes you have to take a risk and change things.

However, I still think the LTA should really on board take Heather's (and Julien's) comments.

In particular, re the coaches.

The media (and this thread) have focused on Heather's comments about the players but she was just as critical, if not more, of the coaches who sit back and "let them slip, let them get away with it".

She talks about them doing nothing if a player doesn't feel like turning up that week; ignoring exceptional instances, that can't be right, neither by the player nor the coach.

Peter too · Tennis legend

This is turning out to be a Wimbledon of surprises, at least in the women's game, with the top two seeds out before the second week.

-- Edited by Peter too on Saturday 28th of June 2014 06:54:40 PM

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

Can't believe Serena's out. I'd gone out as I thought that there would be no more play today. What happened?

Peter too · Tennis legend

Helen40 wrote:
Can't believe Serena's out. I'd gone out as I thought that there would be no more play today. What happened?

Some of the posters above might suggest it was lack of application by Serina wink but it could also be that Alize Cornet played her socks off. She actually beat Serina the last time they met, in Dubai earlier this year but Serina was still expected to win on the Wimbledon turf. I only saw a few games at the end but from the commentators it sounded as if Alize had a game plan and stuck to it, it seemed to consist of non-stop attack and from what I saw at the end Serina started making unforced errors. The commentators said it looked a most unlikely result after Serina ran off the 1st set 6-1 only to lose the next two 6-3 6-4. Alize was 2 breaks up in the 3rd set but lost one by easing up on her attack.

From her post match celebrations you might think Alize was pleased to have won biggrin

-- Edited by Peter too on Sunday 29th of June 2014 01:50:18 AM

Mervatron · Masters Series Champion

When they came back at 1-1 deuce Serena looked on a mission and was totally dominant. I then Saw Alize doggedly win her serve in set 2 then the next second she was a break up and I had to leave.

Its seems that both Serena and Li Na lost to a similar tactic of clever dropshots and mixing up the play, neither seemed to be coping well with it.

I think Li Na will be gone from the game by the end of 2015 Serena too unless she wins another GS in the meantime. I think the changing of the guard is happening. It's going to be interesting to see who does take over. I think it will be a mix of Halep, Sharapova and Azarenka at first. Maybe Bouchard will be in the mix too

Miriambee · Futures level

At the French open a lot of the top seeds dropped out well before they were expected to.

A131 · Intermediate Club Player

indiana wrote:
Hmm, A131, not that you would really evidently let off our WCs, no matter how well they played.

Because, I recall from earlier that you feel they are fair game, indeed will "deserve" all the stick they may get for accepting MD WCs ( or as you put it, applying for WCs ) and then daring to lose in R1. "I really hope the media do tear into them".

Yes Indy - Having had time to think about it more that last quote which of course I do remember saying was a bit strong (you might think more than a bit - which is fair enough). I still think the media have the right to raise questions/investigate the reasons as to why our WC's are there without getting into heating arguments with them or ridicule them by putting on the back pages and making an example of them like they sometimes do with the England Football Manager/Team - or have done in the past. And yes given the level at which they normally play at which has received a bit of attention over the last few weeks is not exactly lucrative and they will not be able to play the sport forever and think about life after tennis, then they are very likely to grab what they can when they can and give their bank balance a boost. But given that they are accepting a wild card into one of the biggest events in sport not just tennis then, I think they should also accept that the press (who incidentally have been fairly lenient with them this year I feel - well I haven't come across any really scathing articles/pieces unless it is about British Tennis in general) might well ask them to justify the amount of relatively large sum of money they are getting for essentially not having to qualify and not have posters on here keep making the excuse or hide behind the fact that their opponent is/was much higher ranked (usually) and therefore can't be expected to win when they don't get beyond the first round.

I think you sense that I am reluctant to give any credit to any of our wc's no matter how well they played which again is fair comment. I didn't see their matches so I will accept that it may well be that NB, TM, DS, DC all played well but they were all spared the pressure of having to qualify and win three matches in a row. How many of them would have come through qualifying? Like PaulM quite rightly said earlier in this thread you just can't predict what will happen in this sport, but I am far from convinced that any of them would have made it to the main draw. Hypothetical I know. I would also make the point that bar DS, all the Brits that received a wild card into the MD have received a wild card before - James Ward was on his fifth, Dan Evans on his third as was Naomi Broady with 2 handed to the rest. Between them they have won 2 out of 20 matches so excuse me for not getting too excited just because they might have played well because the usual trend is they make no significant progress up the rankings (some even go down) in the months/year that follow and still end up receiving a wild card the following year. But if they can prove me wrong then fair play to them.

Now as far as wc's in general are concerned I am coming round a bit more to a few of the ways in which they are allocated. One is the wild card given to the winner of the Nottingham Challenger event that Wimbledon award - which I thought to myself (before Nick Kyrgios's run - he's done ever so well) is not a bad idea. At least they have proved something and had to win even more matches than what they would have had face in qualifying and it is awarded to whoever wins, as opposed to the Australian or the American or the French person who does best over a course of a tournament or series of tournaments which is what the other slams do. I haven't given Wimbledon the credit they deserve for that but I will now - but I would get rid of the all white rule - just seems so archaic now. The other wc I would keep is the wild card given to the best college player at the US Open. There is a trend there and it does seem to produce some good players - Isner, Steve Johnson, Bradley Klahn - going further back Todd Martin (think he was a college player) and even further Tim Mayotte if anyone remembers him and it seems a much tougher environment than the U18's. That is all so far though and would still in general make everyone else qualify.

I see Katie Boulter is about to play Tornado Black - I bet she could whip up a storm if she had to - whip up a storm get it!! Sorry terrible joke.

A131 · Intermediate Club Player

Tornado Black is currently up 3-0 first set. Hope KB is not going to get blown away. Blown away - sorry I'll stop it now!!