Jimmy09 wrote:

---

I disagree A131 there is nobody else you would give it to. Unfortunately/fortunately wildcards will never be scrapped, so whilst they are still around why should they not give it to our next highest brits

---

I could give a tonne of reasons why not and yes wc's are here for the foreseeable future but if enough people believe like me, and admittedly it would take a humungous effort, that they create a lot of unfairness and that too much bias and favoritism is involved (and I'm only talking about GSMDWC'S here) then maybe the ITF, who oversee the grand slams and whose objective I though was to grow the game globally as opposed to just 4 countries, might just sit down with those that run the grand slams and just see if we can at least get them severely reduced if not scrapped completely. GS I think are far too bigger events to give freebies out and if we have to have them and there are still say 3 to distribute (8 is far too many) then there should some strong compelling justification as to why he/she should get one - not just because they happen to be from the US, France, GB or Australia.

I agree Jimmy!  If they're there, why not give them to our own??  I can tell you in the States they wouldn't be having discussions as to whether they had any candidates worthy enough!  And I doubt they would be in many other countries either.  If they didn't have obvious candidates then they'd be slinging some youngsters in.  I like wildcards - kinda like the romance of them, the chance to see new faces etc etc (accepting that others on here vehemently disagree) but I do prefer to see them used for younger players and am not over keen on the same players getting them year after year if they haven't made any progress in between.  Nonetheless, I'd rather they went to Brits in those categories than a foreigner without a special claim such as illness or being an exceptional rising young star.

I've read all the arguments about GSs being special and the pinnacle etc, but I see it as swings and roundabouts.  Many other countries have WTA / ATP events or high grade challengers and give their players a leg-up through WCs to those events.  The competition calendar here does not allow that - 10Ks or GSs really and not much in the middle.  Many of those who just 'miss out' on grand slam entry, MD or Q have had a helping hand in getting to that position from WCs in high level events in their own countries in a way that our own players haven't, so I see it as all balancing out in the end (even if, as in life, there are still a few obvious winners and losers).  

Ducks back behind parapet and waves white flag......

A131 wrote:

---

Jimmy09 wrote:

---

I disagree A131 there is nobody else you would give it to. Unfortunately/fortunately wildcards will never be scrapped, so whilst they are still around why should they not give it to our next highest brits

---

I could give a tonne of reasons why not and yes wc's are here for the foreseeable future but if enough people believe like me, and admittedly it would take a humungous effort, that they create a lot of unfairness and that too much bias and favoritism is involved (and I'm only talking about GSMDWC'S here) then maybe the ITF, who oversee the grand slams and whose objective I though was to grow the game globally as opposed to just 4 countries, might just sit down with those that run the grand slams and just see if we can at least get them severely reduced if not scrapped completely. GS I think are far too bigger events to give freebies out and if we have to have them and there are still say 3 to distribute (8 is far too many) then there should some strong compelling justification as to why he/she should get one - not just because they happen to be from the US, France, GB or Australia.

---

 I think your views on the matter are pretty clear. But the fact is WCs are here to stay, so the question is who do you give them to? For me Liam, a promising young Brit who has found some level of form and won a round last year (admittedly with a very good draw) is a shoe in, if not him who else would get one above him?

RJA wrote:

---

stevemcqueen wrote:

---

His occasional  commentary might be a problem at wimbledon....

---

Dan's always been pretty smart in knowing what he can and can't get away with. I must have seen him get dozens of code violations but I don't recall ever seeing him get a point penalty. 

---

 The Robbie Savage of tennis then     ( not unamusing that the one time he did get sent off he shouldn't have been )

A131 wrote:

---

Spaced wrote:

---

A131 wrote:

---

Jimmy09 wrote:

---

I disagree A131 there is nobody else you would give it to. Unfortunately/fortunately wildcards will never be scrapped, so whilst they are still around why should they not give it to our next highest brits

---

I could give a tonne of reasons why not and yes wc's are here for the foreseeable future but if enough people believe like me, and admittedly it would take a humungous effort, that they create a lot of unfairness and that too much bias and favoritism is involved (and I'm only talking about GSMDWC'S here) then maybe the ITF, who oversee the grand slams and whose objective I though was to grow the game globally as opposed to just 4 countries, might just sit down with those that run the grand slams and just see if we can at least get them severely reduced if not scrapped completely. GS I think are far too bigger events to give freebies out and if we have to have them and there are still say 3 to distribute (8 is far too many) then there should some strong compelling justification as to why he/she should get one - not just because they happen to be from the US, France, GB or Australia.

---

 I think your views on the matter are pretty clear. But the fact is WCs are here to stay, so the question is who do you give them to? For me Liam, a promising young Brit who has found some level of form and won a round last year (admittedly with a very good draw) is a shoe in, if not him who else would get one above him?

---

Without going into detail I'm sure there are several of the 100+ people ranked above him who have found some level of form over 12 months (not 2 weeks) who should get one above him - Karen Kachanov and Rublev (the young Russians), Ymer (the young swede) - equally promising in my view and even younger. Hell most of those in the top 100-200. I know that's not how it works/won't happen by why should I reward Broady for lack of improvement. So what if won a round last year - so did Kenny De Schepper.

---

Yay A131    and polite of you to answer a question even if some people find the Slam MD WC 'system' disagreements boring. And anyway always new folk each year to lead to a better path

-- Edited by indiana on Friday 6th of May 2016 03:07:19 PM

I don't know why we don't offer a WC each to Aus/France/US in exchange for a WC for each of their Grand Slams? I'm sure we had an arrangement like this in the past.

given the paucity of potential beneficiaries here, this would work to our advantage, giving someone ranked c.100-250 (say) guaranteed entry to another grand slam. Better this than a journeyman ranked 400-500 receiving WC to Wimbledon MD, imho.

I do also like the idea of one Wimbledon main draw WC being available for a playoff winner (as opposed to just qWC)

The Optimist wrote:

---

I agree Jimmy!  If they're there, why not give them to our own??  I can tell you in the States they wouldn't be having discussions as to whether they had any candidates worthy enough!  And I doubt they would be in many other countries either.  If they didn't have obvious candidates then they'd be slinging some youngsters in.  I like wildcards - kinda like the romance of them, the chance to see new faces etc etc (accepting that others on here vehemently disagree) but I do prefer to see them used for younger players and am not over keen on the same players getting them year after year if they haven't made any progress in between.  Nonetheless, I'd rather they went to Brits in those categories than a foreigner without a special claim such as illness or being an exceptional rising young star.

I've read all the arguments about GSs being special and the pinnacle etc, but I see it as swings and roundabouts.  Many other countries have WTA / ATP events or high grade challengers and give their players a leg-up through WCs to those events.  The competition calendar here does not allow that - 10Ks or GSs really and not much in the middle.  Many of those who just 'miss out' on grand slam entry, MD or Q have had a helping hand in getting to that position from WCs in high level events in their own countries in a way that our own players haven't, so I see it as all balancing out in the end (even if, as in life, there are still a few obvious winners and losers).  

Ducks back behind parapet and waves white flag......

---

It's ok Opt you can come out - no one is gonna hurt you! Totally accept your views and without sounding condescending I think you make some good points. Having said that, and I think you realise this, many other countries don't have events where you get £30k for losing in the first round or where double ranking points are available so may be the benefit of reaching the main draw of a grand slam (via ranking/qualification or wc) may still outweigh the benefits of getting a wc to an ATP/WTA/Challenger event in a non slam country. Perhaps that needs closer inspection but as you say there will be winners and losers.