I know that this has been discussed ad nauseum before (but what the heck).
The 18s nationals entry list for girls is once again very weak. There are plenty of arguments against it (again, I know) but why not experiment and give the winner a main draw wildcard into Wimbledon?
I accept it is 10 months away, but what a great way to get the best girls all competing at the same place and give us a great week of tennis viewing......
yep, giving the winner a Q WC makes sense - in the 'carrot' sort of approach.
However, the 'stick' approach works too, and is what's done in France : the nationals are mandatory (effectively) for anyone who is funded (in any way) by the federation. i.e. the national results are a key part of the consideration for next year as to whether you'll get funding/help or not.
the very top 18 year-olds sometimes get dispensation but the top 16 year-olds/14 year-olds hardly ever.
mervatron has a good point re the LTA / All England problem (would be so much better if it was all done under the same body). However, the LTA could offer a WC to a 25k event. (Too much of tennis revolves around Wimbledon - would be good to broaden it out).
But if the LTA run the nationals and the LTA give out funding/coaching/whatever, then why not tie the two together ? What's the point of running meaningless nationals?
Correct me if I am wrong. The LTA almost has no power to wield the stick as before vis-a-vis most of the top 18s since most probably have a main source of funding that has nothing to do with the LTA, which IMHO is a very good thing.
I know that this has been discussed ad nauseum before (but what the heck).
The 18s nationals entry list for girls is once again very weak. There are plenty of arguments against it (again, I know) but why not experiment and give the winner a main draw wildcard into Wimbledon?
I accept it is 10 months away, but what a great way to get the best girls all competing at the same place and give us a great week of tennis viewing......
Just to point out the difference but the French National Championships for U18s are taking place this week (the other categories have taken place either last week or a month ago as there are two sessions).
In the boys, Théo Fourniere is ATP WR 476, and number 1 seed. Alex muller and Joncour, ATP WR 837 and 838 are the other favourites. (NB Théo Fourniere is the son of Amelie Mauresmo's old trainer).
In the girls, Fiona Ferro (WTA 271) and Harmony Tan (WTA 514) are the top seeds, followed by a group of WTA ranked players. e.g. Tessah Adr. WTA 536, Yerolymos WTA 648, Decker, WTA 919, Salas etc.)
The depth and strength is obvious.
Every county gets to enter one player, regardless of ranking. The counties with higher ranked players are allowed to enter two, three of (occasionally) four (as decided by a committee earlier in the year). It means that it is a true 'national' championship as every county is represented. The boys' draw is 55 strong this year (the best players getting first-round byes). NB No U16s are allowed to enter - everyone has to play their correct category and only that category.
All these players are obviously still juniors and could be playing the US Open Juniors too if they'd focused on their junior ranking. But only Tessah has the right ranking in the girls as she's a year younger - the others have stopped juniors a while ago. The 1998 boys are going to the US too, I believe, but not the 1997s.
Presumaby if you were awarding the girls national under 18 champion a Wimbledon MD WC you'ed do the same with the boys.
Now I accept that different generations vary, but currently that would look like sending some poor lamb ( well less poor with the R1 reward ) to the slaughter.
Currently any GB under 18 boy would look to have a struggle to impact at all on qualies though I'd have much less of an issue with awarding the under 18 boys and girls winners Wimbledon Q WCs.
-- Edited by indiana on Tuesday 25th of August 2015 10:45:07 AM
I don't think an automatic MD WC is the way to go. (A Wimbly Q wildcard is a possibility).
What you need to do is make the Nationals prestigious, linked to LTA support, and corporate support (because the National Champion title matters). So that the players WANT to take part because it's a key tournament of the year and media attention etc. will come from it (or have to, if they want LTA help).
I think there are some good suggestions here. First sign of madness is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Why not move nationals to the week straight after the French Open during the extra week of the grass season. Then in form players could be granted wild cards off the back of good nationals performance. If not all age groups perhaps just the U18s?
Yes, I've posted on this elsewhere (as I suspect many of us have) but do feel that a wee incentive would be helpful. The French and US versions suggest that!
But it's a hard call what it should be: a few years ago, when you had Mr Edmund, Mr Golding and Mr Broady as your top juniors, looking towards Wimbledon made some sense for the boys. Right now, for the boys, it wouldn't ... for the girls it might.
And there is a strong difference between GB and France/US/Australia, which is that the relative paucity of people who currently are ranked to play at the top level means that top juniors are liable to get WCs anyway.
So, for example, Frances Tiafoe played the US nationals this year to get the US Open MDWC, and was very open about the fact that he was doing so. I'd guess that if we had a 17-year-old ranked 275, he'd know in advance that he was likely to get quite a lot of WCs ... so wouldn't feel the same pressure.
So it's an interesting question what incentives would work for the 18s.
To put some numbers to this, looking at the Grand Slams, on the men's side, if the cut-off for RG were today and France decided to hand out 8 MDWCs to its top not-making-the-cut men, the cutoff would be 206. For the US equivalent, it would be 221. For Australia, 274. If you then took the next 8 down for the QWCs, the cut-offs for France would be 282, for the US 321, and for Australia 478. For the UK, the 8 MDWCs would end at 355, and the 8QWCs would cut off at 710. Obviously, the guidelines don't work that way ... but your chances of consideration as a junior will probably be higher.
