Week 34 - US Open Qualifying

nicofrance · Strong Club Player

RE: Week 34 - US Open Qualifying

nicofrance · Strong Club Player

BeefyDeedz wrote:
nicofrance wrote:
Let's hope Nishioka gets a stinker of a draw, that might mitigate some of the pain. Overall though this is a shocker especially as Kyle is clearly the more talented player but nerves might have played a part.
Surely this account is satirical? Fantastic if it is, though!

It's not satirical! If Kyle sees Nishioka get a winnable match he would feel even worse at the missed opportunity.

indiana · Tennis legend

You might be right, but it isn't that obvious and it's not making excues just to point that out.

Leads of 3-0*, 4-1* and 5-2* look great, but are only one break ahead and indeed were only one break here.

Kyle saved BPs at *3-1 ( three I believe ), was at 30-30 at *4-2 ( I don't know about his first two service games of the set ). The break at *5-3 just in the context of the games didn't exactly come right out of the blue. Yes, the pressure in the service game to win the match possibly / probably had some effect, but I simply do not know how much and you don't know either.

That he then lost his serve again to lose the match did compound things, but sorry I'm not accepting folk are just making excuses for just a bit of hold on here, yes it looks as if it's a match Kyle could and should have won, especially from the position he was in, but things are not as obvious as you make out. Very "tabloid" though ...

Jaggy1876 · Grand Slam Champion

These things happen in Tennis as we know the scoring system lends itself to momentum shifts. Perhaps the variance in Nishiokas game made the difference rather than a choke. He is such an up and down player that when he gets in the zone it may confuse the opponent. Only Kyle I guess will know be interesting to say what he says.

Spectator · All-time great

We are excited - rightly - about Mr Edmund. Others are excited - equally rightly - about Mr Nishioka. They're both extremely talented, and I suspect that they will, barring injury or other unforeseen circumstances, be playing each other in Slams for years to come. Given that they are both gifted, I'm definitely with the "two players on the court ... who knows what happened" group. And I'm rather amused by the injunction that Mr Edmund not "sulk" - from everything I have ever read on this board, that's not really in his character. As BiS says - he's a very level-headed young man, and he's got some interesting opportunities coming up. Plenty to focus on beyond this match!

indiana · Tennis legend

Spectator wrote:
We are excited - rightly - about Mr Edmund. Others are excited - equally rightly - about Mr Nishioka. They're both extremely talented, and I suspect that they will, barring injury or other unforeseen circumstances, be playing each other in Slams for years to come. Given that they are both gifted, I'm definitely with the "two players on the court ... who knows what happened" group. And I'm rather amused by the injunction that Mr Edmund not "sulk" - from everything I have ever read on this board, that's not really in his character. As BiS says - he's a very level-headed young man, and he's got some interesting opportunities coming up. Plenty to focus on beyond this match!

And just as you indicate re Kyle's supposed "dreadful loss which will take some time to get over", some of us similarly expressed real question marks ( and why ) on Laura being adversely effected after her supposed "desperate loss which will do nothing for her confidence".

I suppose a certain amount of proof will be in the pudding(s).

-- Edited by indiana on Saturday 29th of August 2015 11:33:35 AM

goldenboy · Club Coach

Nishioka's drawn fellow qualifier p-h mathieu... Good draw...

Jaffa · Challenger level

Kyle iis first for a LL spot, no?

Oakland2002 · All-time great

So what can we draw from last nights loss. Frustrating though it is to loose in the last round of qualifying against an opponent you have beaten consistently before, it emphasis the importance of the fine margins between defeat and victory at this level against a closely matched opponent. Kyles victory at Aptos was more about his opponent imploding than anything else.

I don't think there is any suggestion that Kyle is a sulker for any great period of time, every interview he give is pragmatic and refers to long term progression, flattening the fluctuating emotion of the day to day with an eye on the wider picture. His family talk of a stubborn streak that drives his progress. He is not completely out of the picture yet and I feel this loss will be psychological spurr as opposed to trough to dig out of.

U.S. Qualifying was exactly the right place for Kyle to be this week, in the round in terms of development he will have gained no end. Development for competency at any level to expert at that level is around implementing high quality practice in real time competitive situations against a closely matched opponent. Chunking the experience and refining it. The closely matched component is essential when margins are fine and progress incremental. I understand accepting this interpretation which has been widely published and is based on some experience in the field ie that of coaching in the wider sense may initiate a frontal response, particularly after this loss.

Given Kyle is 20 and is where he is. He would have required a wildcard to be in ithe main draw this week and although ending in disappointment has been a good one. We know we all hate wild cards for the very reason so carefully articulated by A131 and Indi "cream rise to the top etc... "

He has spent a week at Flushing meadow perhaps longer, knows the place knows the set up, in the long term the experience he has had through qualifying here and indeed at Flinders park and RG where he was more successful will serve him much better than his brief stop at Wimbledon. He's done exceptionally high quality ground work for 2016, that is where he is developmentally, accept it and enjoy his success.

indiana · Tennis legend

The first thing I'd draw is I even more wish that Kyle had never been in qualifying, but rather in the main draw.

As you point out Oakland, I am one who is against Slam MD WCs so absolutely accept Kyle was where he should have been, in qualifying.

What I did say, and stand by, is that it is a pity that Kyle was in qualifying, that his great push into the top 100 hadn't come just that bit earlier so that he had made the main draw. For qualifying was no ideal place to be.

For a player who has contested as he has at challenger level and above, is now top 100 and yes still young but is 20, the "experience" of playing US qualifying I believe is much overrated. I felt that qualify or not qualify, but to stick with such an argument when he has not qualified, while consistent, surprises me

The experience of the main draw would to me have been much better, and it's not as if he couldn't have won at least a R1 match, since he is a player generally on the rise and could anyway have drawn a qualifier ( as Nishioka ironically has - a good draw can come from direct entry or qualifying ), or a WC or a 90s ranked clay court specialist, and won. Then he would have played at least two rounds in the US Open main draw with that experience, prize money and points. And if he had come through qualifying to this stage, I'm thinking those 3 additional matches wouldn't exactly help.

Everything is not for the best. Kyle being in qualifying here wasn't. The good thing to look forward to is that hopefully we won't see Kyle in Slam qualifying again for a very long time, starting with at least maintaining his ranking and avoiding Aussie Open qualifying.

Anyway, like others, I do see Kyle as having such a head on his shoulders that it won't faze him losing here or likely hold him back particularly. Just I don't see any real good in having competed in and lost in qualifying here, not in comparison with preparing unhindered for a US Open main draw round one match.

-- Edited by indiana on Saturday 29th of August 2015 11:54:51 AM

Oakland2002 · All-time great

Indi I feel you continue to show lack of insight into the development process, the concept of progression from competence to expert and the breadth of the informal curriculum in which Kyle is developing of which qualifying is part. But there you go. I am confident he will come away from the U.S. open bettered prepared for 2016 having played qualifying than if he had merely gone straight into the MD.

I understand your reasoning behind a dislike of wild cards and from a playing and development point of view I am being to feel you are right

indiana · Tennis legend

Thank you for your feedback on my insight.

Seems like another one we will have to agree to disagee on.

Mervatron · Masters Series Champion

Well, well, well. What happened there?

Stopped following the score when Kyle was serving at 4-2 up in the third and expected to come back to a win.

Big lesson for Kyle today. Qualifying would have just capped a great trip to north America but it wasn't to be.

Hopefully he mixes up some ATP events and challenegrs for the rest of the year. I feel he needs a few solid ATP events before he makes his next big break.

steven · Tennis legend

It gets worse for Kyle, sadly - under the old rules from a few years back, he'd have been first in line for a lucky loser place as the highest-seeded FQR loser, but he has ended up being only 4th in line, having been last out of the random draw among the top four FQR losers

Julia Carrot · All-time great

^^^^^^^