Week 26 - USA F18 ($10,000) - Rochester, NY (clay)

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

Week 26 - USA F18 ($10,000) - Rochester, NY (clay)

RJA · Hall of fame

The decision to send Liam and Luke to the US rather than let them play on grass is starting to look even worse.

indiana · Tennis legend

Yep, last time I checked there were 52 weeks in a year, I think they could have afforded a few weeks staying back home and playing on grass.

Their results have undeniably been very disappointing, and it is them losing the matches ! But I do wonder what their mindset has been.

In my view Liam and Luke shouldn't be near here and even Ashley has just had a profile go online, err evidently looking forward to the grass season this year and trying Wimbledon qualifying.

jenks · Social player

The decision is frankly abysmal. No way they should be missing the grass court season. Almost as if they are being tested by being told to miss it...

However, its wont be viewed as a poor decision because they haven't done particularly well. Sending them to play on clay has clearly been a developmental decision with any points gained being a bonus. In other words if it was felt that the points were the important thing at this stage they would have been in the wimbledon qualis and then the the 15ks. Much better chance of getting a good haul of points.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

SF: (1) Luke Bambridge & Liam Broady CR 751 (388+363) def. (WC) Jordan Benjamin & Matthew Gamble (USA/USA) UNR 6-1 2-6 10-7

and now, as SC says, will play Nguyen/Smith in the final.

RJA · Hall of fame

jenks wrote:
The decision is frankly abysmal. No way they should be missing the grass court season. Almost as if they are being tested by being told to miss it...

However, its wont be viewed as a poor decision because they haven't done particularly well. Sending them to play on clay has clearly been a developmental decision with any points gained being a bonus. In other words if it was felt that the points were the important thing at this stage they would have been in the wimbledon qualis and then the the 15ks. Much better chance of getting a good haul of points.

As Indiana correctly states there are several other months in the year when they can play on clay to develop their game. Personally I am not convinced that playing against such weak fields aids development anyway.

Also if you look at Liam's schedule it is blindingly obvious that he, or at very least his team, have been targeting weak events for a long time now. His ranking of 387 is largely a result of his schedule. In the last 12 months he has beat only one player ranked in the top 300 and only 2 ranked 300-400.

steven · Tennis legend

Surely if you're looking for weak fields, going to US Futures would be a silly thing to do - they're an absolute minefield, full of under-ranked college players, as we have seen.

RJA · Hall of fame

steven wrote:
Surely if you're looking for weak fields, going to US Futures would be a silly thing to do - they're an absolute minefield, full of under-ranked college players, as we have seen.

Ordinarily US fields are quite strong, those for these tournaments are not.

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

Final: (4) Daniel Nguyen & Connor Smith (USA/USA) CR 1890 (982+708) defeated (1) Luke Bambridge & Liam Broady CR 751 (388+363) by 3 & 3 bleh

jenks · Social player

RJA wrote:
jenks wrote:
The decision is frankly abysmal. No way they should be missing the grass court season. Almost as if they are being tested by being told to miss it...

However, its wont be viewed as a poor decision because they haven't done particularly well. Sending them to play on clay has clearly been a developmental decision with any points gained being a bonus. In other words if it was felt that the points were the important thing at this stage they would have been in the wimbledon qualis and then the the 15ks. Much better chance of getting a good haul of points.
As Indiana correctly states there are several other months in the year when they can play on clay to develop their game. Personally I am not convinced that playing against such weak fields aids development anyway.
Also if you look at Liam's schedule it is blindingly obvious that he, or at very least his team, have been targeting weak events for a long time now. His ranking of 387 is largely a result of his schedule. In the last 12 months he has beat only one player ranked in the top 300 and only 2 ranked 300-400.

Yes, pretty sure that our first paragraphs are making the same point...

Maybe I didn't word my second paragraph very well. Im not saying thats how I would view it, im trying to make the point that I feel that is how the LTA will view it. They sent them over for clay court work. Points can't have mattered or they would have had them in the various grass court tournaments in the UK.

RJA · Hall of fame

jenks wrote:
RJA wrote:
jenks wrote:
The decision is frankly abysmal. No way they should be missing the grass court season. Almost as if they are being tested by being told to miss it...

However, its wont be viewed as a poor decision because they haven't done particularly well. Sending them to play on clay has clearly been a developmental decision with any points gained being a bonus. In other words if it was felt that the points were the important thing at this stage they would have been in the wimbledon qualis and then the the 15ks. Much better chance of getting a good haul of points.
As Indiana correctly states there are several other months in the year when they can play on clay to develop their game. Personally I am not convinced that playing against such weak fields aids development anyway.
Also if you look at Liam's schedule it is blindingly obvious that he, or at very least his team, have been targeting weak events for a long time now. His ranking of 387 is largely a result of his schedule. In the last 12 months he has beat only one player ranked in the top 300 and only 2 ranked 300-400.
Yes, pretty sure that our first paragraphs are making the same point...
Maybe I didn't word my second paragraph very well. Im not saying thats how I would view it, im trying to make the point that I feel that is how the LTA will view it. They sent them over for clay court work. Points can't have mattered or they would have had them in the various grass court tournaments in the UK.

I think we broadly agree but my contention is that they probably expected the boys to pick up decent points on this tour as well.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

RJA wrote:
steven wrote:
Surely if you're looking for weak fields, going to US Futures would be a silly thing to do - they're an absolute minefield, full of under-ranked college players, as we have seen.
Ordinarily US fields are quite strong, those for these tournaments are not.

Just curious, how does one determine if the fields are quite strong or not? Obviously the ATP rankings are pretty irrelevant - is there a college listing (first division? whatever?) that one can check easily ? I've never really found one, and am not sure what I'm looking at most of the time.

NB Jenks, the 'to get points/to get experience on clay' is broadly the same - one can't really argue that the LTA only sent them over to get experience, and not points - after all, if they lose in the first round, they get no points AND they get no experience either. The two go pretty much together.

Spectator · All-time great

The easiest way to check US rankings is to look at the ITA rankings website - this is the men's one: www.itatennis.com/AwardsAndRankings/Rankings/2013-14_ITA_NCAA_Division_I_Men_s_Rankings.htm. Broadly speaking, that catches a lot. But it doesn't necessarily catch everything: if you have someone (eg Hunter Callahan or, for that matter, Jonathan Cornish at Virginia) who is relatively low in the roster of a very strong programme, they will probably be underranked. Conversely, Winston Lin, coming out of Columbia, was probably a bit overranked.

There may be better options: I just picked this up along the way from Zoo Tennis.

-- Edited by Spectator on Monday 30th of June 2014 09:43:12 AM

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Thanks, Spectator. Appreciate it.

I will go and have a look and see if I can get a bit of a better handle on things.

Division 1 is the top division is it ? No daft 'premiership' or whatever above that?

jenks · Social player

Coup Droit wrote:
RJA wrote:
steven wrote:
Surely if you're looking for weak fields, going to US Futures would be a silly thing to do - they're an absolute minefield, full of under-ranked college players, as we have seen.
Ordinarily US fields are quite strong, those for these tournaments are not.

Just curious, how does one determine if the fields are quite strong or not? Obviously the ATP rankings are pretty irrelevant - is there a college listing (first division? whatever?) that one can check easily ? I've never really found one, and am not sure what I'm looking at most of the time.
NB Jenks, the 'to get points/to get experience on clay' is broadly the same - one can't really argue that the LTA only sent them over to get experience, and not points - after all, if they lose in the first round, they get no points AND they get no experience either. The two go pretty much together.

No, I do get this point. I just dont think the LTA will have placed a decent haul of points at the top of the agenda for this trip. Yes it would have been nice but i feel the LTA felt the important thing was game and practice time on clay. One caveat i would like to add though is that over the three weeks the boys could well have played 9 matches and come home with 6 points in total. Or alternatively played 7 matches and come home with 18 points. Which is better for their long term development? I don't have the foggiest idea myself.

Anyway, all this speculation aside, I think we all agree they should have been in the UK on the grass doing what Oli looks to be in trouble for doing (with his decent point haul in his pocket).