Really, we shouldn't be having this kind of 'clutching at straws' type conversation where we're almost vicariously involved in willing a player(s) to improve his ranking position. The underlying facts show just how desperately poor our tennis situation is generally. I was looking at the French players this morning. The ATP singles rankings is stuffed full of their players; seven top 100 and seven more top 200. No worries in France whether Monsieur X or Y makes a few points here or there or whenever. Because if he doesn't there's always someone else close by. With us it's still a case of plus ça change where modest players turn into overnight heroes then back again.
Get your general drift, but what is a forum such as this for if not idle speculation, chatter, personal theories and a great deal of hope that our players will do well and better themselves in future? I love the sport of tennis and, TBH, even the smallest gains by our admittedly modest stable of players fills me with good cheer.
Well said! And Mr Ward's a special case, isn't he. So close, having done it "on his own" ... it's a great storyline, if nothing else. And TBH, I have felt the same way (in terms of willing someone to do well) about some of the French players at times - when Nicolas Mahut finally won a singles title, I was delighted, even if it was simply a drop in the bucket of French success.
Wasn't really my point. I hope Ward does get over the line, for his sake. What's more important to me though is how he approaches the game i.e the process rather than the result. I can never predict a player's real ranking progress and I doubt many can. I heard someone say Kyle Edmund is top-50 material. Is he? I don't know. For me, it's whether he (or she) really does put it out there in an effort to get to where he can. I think Ward has come to that realisation himself, judging from his recent comments. The commendable effort he has made of late to improve his game underlines that, albeit he's now approaching the tail end of his career. If a player doesn't make top 100 but really did squeeze it all out in the effort, then for me that's a really good player.
The point was made about Marcus Willis having such fantastic talent or potential which I think would be common ground with everyone. However, I would simply ask what's he doing at his age ranked where he is? In my view, he pretty much sums up, to a large extent, where British tennis has been going for the last umpteen years.
Wasn't really my point. I hope Ward does get over the line, for his sake. What's more important to me though is how he approaches the game i.e the process rather than the result. I can never predict a player's real ranking progress and I doubt many can. I heard someone say Kyle Edmund is top-50 material. Is he? I don't know. For me, it's whether he (or she) really does put it out there in an effort to get to where he can. I think Ward has come to that realisation himself, judging from his recent comments. The commendable effort he has made of late to improve his game underlines that, albeit he's now approaching the tail end of his career. If a player doesn't make top 100 but really did squeeze it all out in the effort, then for me that's a really good player.
The point was made about Marcus Willis having such fantastic talent or potential which I think would be common ground with everyone. However, I would simply ask what's he doing at his age ranked where he is? In my view, he pretty much sums up, to a large extent, where British tennis has been going for the last umpteen years.
Interesting post that Ed and a good one to in my opinion - unless someone has a crystal ball it is nigh impossible to forecast any players ranking progress accurately let alone a British player. There have been so many British players who have been tipped for a good future over the years who have never really made any real impact on the world stage going back to Jamie Delgado, then the likes of Lee Childs followed by George Morgan, Oliver Golding, Dan Evans of course - though he was threatening for a while and may come again but who knows for sure?
As for Kyle Edmund (and to some extent Liam Broady) - I think there is a good chance he will reach the top 100 (if not top 50) if as you say they apply themselves and are not set back too much by illness/injury which can always be a factor or they don't pick the wrong coach, get bad advice, loose confidence etc etc. Plus there are a lot of good players out there, competition is tough, just never really know.
I was thinking the other week who might be in the top 10 in 5 years time (not their order of course!) and just because any player may have potential now,been getting good results does not mean that they will reach their full potential. You would have though the likes of Borna Coric, Kyrgios, Thiem, Jared Donaldson, possibly the Korean guy who beat Kyle Edmund recently, Kokkinakos. Andy Murray and Djokovic may still be there - not totally unrealistic. But will they? Be interested to hear what others think?
I find it adds interest to predict / speculate how players will do, while of course a lot is major guesswork and so many things / people can intervene, and I know that quite a lot of people here feel similarly, and of course we have our rankings predictions contests. Unsurprisingly, some folk are much more into such things than others, it's all good.
Yes, be interesting to see how the new kids on the block do. With the relatively fallow few years of players coming through after Nadal / Djokovic / Murray / Del Potro, within a couple of years in age, I always kind of hoped there would be a bit of a window for Andy if he stuck with it when say Federer retired, Nadal's body gave out and the next generation were still maturing. These could still come to pass to some extent though the years are passing, however the major likely fly in the ointment is, and has always looked like being, Mr Djokovic.
It is great that Andy has actually already achieved what he has against the current generation, but that in itself shows clear signs of perhaps lessening Andy's competitiveness going forward.
We're rather going off at a bit of a tangent ( a process I'm helping here ) from "James Ward", but it happens ...
Andy Murray provides a shining beacon to the likes of James Ward as to what is really involved in making the most of what you have. One wouldn't ever accuse Murray of having left any stone unturned, despite his faults.
More generally - my other point -was that it would be nicer still though in tennis, to have a bigger bunch of senior players higher up the rankings so we didn't have to live or die so vicariously each time any individual stepped out on court. Or get behind Mahut or this or that French or other player because we have none of our own. If UK cycling can organise itself for sporting success, why is it that tennis GB cannot emulate this performance? One of the great invisible barriers in my view is attitudinal, what limits and goals players inherently set for themselves. And here again I think Andy Murray can make a massive contribution to those that seek to follow in his train. That's where I felt Henman and Rusedski could have contributed more after they'd left the circuit.
More generally - my other point -was that it would be nicer still though in tennis, to have a bigger bunch of senior players higher up the rankings so we didn't have to live or die so vicariously each time any individual stepped out on court.
thars what i like about following british tennis! In all my years of following only andy has cracked the top 100. I am still waiting patiently for mr ward to be number 2 some years on And it will be all the sweeter for waiting
I don't get behind Mahut because we don't have any tennis players of our own - it's in addition to, not in replacement for our players. I just happen to like the way he plays, and he comes across as a lovely, generous person. I'd similarly support Jarkko Nieminen or Kevin Anderson or Venus Williams or Andrea Petkovic ... and if we had 10 players in the top 100, I'd continue being interested in "other" players' results, as well as in our own. Plenty of space for everyone!
Similarly, I'm happy to support our players in the Challengers and Futures levels even if they're never going to get near the top 100. The only reason for focusing so intently on Mr Ward's bid is the closeness of it.
Does the fact that I'm content to support people whatever their ranking, though, mean that I disagree with you that it would be good to have more people doing better? No. Point taken entirely!