Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Link Back -> Andrew Murray message board -> British men discussion section -> Week 18 - Challenger ($100.000+H) - Busan, South Korea (Hard)
Post Info TOPIC: Week 18 - Challenger ($100.000+H) - Busan, South Korea (Hard)
TMH


Futures qualifying

Status: Offline
Posts: 1776
Date:
RE: Week 18 - Challenger ($100.000+H) - Busan, South Korea (Hard)
Permalink  

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.

 You are very tiresome.



__________________
indiana


Tennis legend

Status: Online
Posts: 41006
Date:
Permalink  

Deleted  -  not to add to the fun.



-- Edited by indiana on Friday 6th of May 2016 08:29:51 PM

__________________
wimdledont


Challenger level

Status: Offline
Posts: 2442
Date:
Permalink  

indiana wrote:

Deleted  -  not to add to the fun.



-- Edited by indiana on Friday 6th of May 2016 08:29:51 PM

 Same but opposite.

 

GL to Evo.



__________________
A131


Intermediate Club Player

Status: Offline
Posts: 336
Date:
Permalink  

TMH wrote:
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.

 You are very tiresome.

 Well maybe - but I was just replying to other comments. Sorry if that's not ok with you!



__________________
RJA


Hall of fame

Status: Offline
Posts: 9639
Date:
Permalink  

A131 wrote:
TMH wrote:
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.

 You are very tiresome.

 Well maybe - but I was just replying to other comments. Sorry if that's not ok with you!

It is a legitimate discussion but what I think grates with some people is it being brought up in numerous tournament threads when ever someone mentions the prospect of Wimbledon wild cards.



__________________
wolf


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 13908
Date:
Permalink  

indiana wrote:

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

I didn't say I found the topic boring. I said I found people saying the same thing over and over boring. I must have read the same thing at least 20 times on different threads where it get stated that wild cards shouldn't be given at Grand Slams etc. 

And it is off topic to the thread. If you want to discuss go and talk about it in a dedicated wild card thread to your hearts content. This topic is about the Busan challenger.



__________________
Jaffa


Challenger level

Status: Offline
Posts: 2417
Date:
Permalink  

My 2 pence on this:

All very well that people have an opinion on this.

If a grand slam was in Serbia, or any other country for that matter it would be WEIRD if they didn't award local WC's so for me it is absolutely fine.

What I do have an issue with, however, is threads continually turning in to a debate about why and why not regarding wild cards. It really winds me up as a viewer (I don't really post compared to how much I read this site).

I appreciate that at this time of year it really is a topic for discussion but I for one would appreciate a dedicated thread which would allow for the tournament threads to not be hijacked. I would then be happy to make a long post on the subject!

Sorry for the rant but it's just how I feel.

__________________
Jaffa


Challenger level

Status: Offline
Posts: 2417
Date:
Permalink  

wolf wrote:
indiana wrote:

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

I didn't say I found the topic boring. I said I found people saying the same thing over and over boring. I must have read the same thing at least 20 times on different threads where it get stated that wild cards shouldn't be given at Grand Slams etc. 

And it is off topic to the thread. If you want to discuss go and talk about it in a dedicated wild card thread to your hearts content. This topic is about the Busan challenger.

 Wish I had just quoted this In hindsight! smile



__________________
korriban


Challenger level

Status: Offline
Posts: 2443
Date:
Permalink  

watching livestream. 5-2* Dan. Win or lose this match, this is the best I've ever seen Dan play, and against an extremely good and relentlessly solid player IMO. His topspin backhand has been outstanding, used FAR more than he used to, and to tremendous effect. A very dangerous player now, easily top 50 on this form. I hope he can keep up this sort of level today. What a joy.



__________________
Oakland2002


All-time great

Status: Offline
Posts: 5134
Date:
Permalink  

Evo Evo Evo, Evoooo. evo

Lurvley first set ... Got the Milkman moving

__________________
Oakland2002


All-time great

Status: Offline
Posts: 5134
Date:
Permalink  

One waon Dan does have is his range of shots and the ability to use the whole court... Backhand slice also building a bit of pressure in longer points

__________________
Constant


Lower Club Player

Status: Offline
Posts: 154
Date:
Permalink  

early break 2-1 up in the second =)

__________________
stevemcqueen


Futures qualifying

Status: Offline
Posts: 1791
Date:
Permalink  

Morning all.  Milkman plays apoor game -  4 UEs all to end longish rallies. Dan serves, he leads 2-1



__________________
Oakland2002


All-time great

Status: Offline
Posts: 5134
Date:
Permalink  

These boys will have done some yardage by the time this match is over even if it finishes in 2, quality serving from Dan. Great shot making by both. a fabulous watch so far for all the right reasons.

__________________
stevemcqueen


Futures qualifying

Status: Offline
Posts: 1791
Date:
Permalink  

Fast hold to love for Dan.  3-1



__________________
«First  <  1 … 11 12 13 14 15 16  >  Last»  | Page of 16  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
Link Back -> Andrew Murray message board -> British men discussion section -> Week 18 - Challenger ($100.000+H) - Busan, South Korea (Hard)
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard