Another under-ranked college player (wasn't Ed one of those once?) - Aragone was the University of Virginia's MVP this year.
Calling him under-ranked, is that any different from observing he is a College player? Because all College players are under-ranked are they not, inherent due to not playing on the tour full time. So does it not become a redundancy to state it each time one of our touring players draws a guy in College?
The majority of College players aren't going to become superstars, not even the NCAA winners. And him being the best player in his team doesn't mean much with the plethora of US Colleges that there are. I don't know, it just feels like people frequently make out College players to sound like super scary threats when 99% of them are of a level where they are not going to go anywhere near pro tennis once their degree is finished.
I agree that it's a bit tautological, but I was just trying to add emphasis - my point was that if he's the top player (assuming that's what MVP implies, though reading Oakland's post, that assumption was incorrect) at one of the top tennis-playing universities, he is probably more than just a run of the mill college player.
__________________
GB on a shirt, Davis Cup still gleaming, 79 years of hurt, never stopped us dreaming ... 29/11/2015 that dream came true!
As Wolf said above, No. Luke is a better player overall and plays doubles regularly as well as singles. That in my opinion is all you need to judge it.
If any of the worlds top 10 singles players played doubles every week they'd also be top of the doubles rankings. Look at what happens when the Williams sisters play doubles for example.
Liam has been showing some better form recently. Including today, 58 of his 127 points have come in the last couple of months. If he can keep that up, he should climb the rankings as he only has 35 points to defend until the end of the year.
Liam has been showing some better form recently. Including today, 58 of his 127 points have come in the last couple of months. If he can keep that up, he should climb the rankings as he only has 35 points to defend until the end of the year.
Yeah, I'd noticed that too, both the points and the form. Always wonder if there's a reason or if form is rather just one of life's little mysteries......But great to see him playing well and getting some results.
Re the Bambo/Joe argument, I've no idea who's the better doubles player or what the dynamics are now between Joe and Dave O'Hare (begs a few questions....) But it didn't go well on the court for Joe yesterday, especially considering the rankings (although Millot at 1159 can't be an accurate reflection):
L16: (3) Jarryd Chaplin (AUS) & Joe Salisbury CR 319 (177+142) lost to Hans Hach & Vincent Millot (MEX/FRA) CR 1386 (227+1159) 6-2 1-6 10-5