Time to get some wins and move back towards the top 250.

R1: DUNNE, Katy (GBR) 5 286 lost to KOBORI, Momoko (JPN) 415 6-1 2-6 2-6

A win, at least, in the doubles:
R16: Dunne/Zhao (GBR/CAN) [3] 502 defeated Ozeki/Saigo (JPN/JPN) 1623 6-4 6-1 [10-4]

QF: Dunne/Zhao (GBR/CAN) [3] 502 v. Morisaki/Yonehara (JPN/JPN) 1304

Katy threatening at least to soon be a top 200 doubles player and quite a bit beyond given how concentrated her points are from May this year on.

Re, for her no doubt, the much more important singles, like CD I so admire Katy as a fighter trying to be all she can be. Whether she will ever make the top 200 I am not so sure. Hope so.

The idea that somehow our Top 10 juniors are expected to get to Top 200 as a pro still astonishes me.
This simply is not the case in other nations, the expectation is much higher. Top 100 minimum, and then, can they push into 70, 50, 30 or more.
There is a disconnect between British Juniors and the rest.
We seem to somehow be gaming the scheduling or doubles weighting in the Junior rankings, or otherwise just producing players that can play junior tennis successfully to the detriment of the development of a long term game that will flourish in seniors. Players hit a brick wall, and almost have to re-learn parts of their games and tactics.

There are some generalisations in the above, but out of necessity, to save writing 3000 words.

Oh, no. That was understood. It was not a comment about contributors personal projections or assessments of Katy, or any other player.
My point was general, with Katy and our other recent top juniors from the start of their professional careers.
Given the rankings that they achieved, we should have similarly ambitious expectations, as other nations do - not hopes. History generally bears this out: top juniors (~10-15 and under) mostly make top 50 at worst.
But we looked at ours and thought they might make top 200. That was not British pessimism, reservedness, or an unwillingness to over-promote ones own chances, but a more realistic assessment of what our players had *actually* learned and developed as juniors, and the gap that would then exist to the transition to the professional game.
Which is why, above, I postulate: "We seem to somehow be gaming the scheduling or doubles weighting in the Junior rankings, or otherwise just producing players that can play junior tennis successfully to the detriment of the development of a long term game that will flourish in seniors."
Developing good junior players, that can be successful in the junior system, the way that tennis is played there, and tailored towards that to the detriment of a career or sound fundamentals.
This is somewhat analogous to the British junior football coaches of local teams, where they teach you to chase after the ball, not formations and tactics; or to 'get stuck in' and put your foot through the ball (or an opponent!), rather than sound technique. That only get you so far.
Is that what is happening in tennis, a short-term mentality, for whatever reason, perhaps the need to finally, after a long time without, produce successful juniors, and a focus on just achieving that target by any means, without consideration that doing so could easily be a cul-de-sac; developmentally speaking. And, more importantly, in terms of professional success, as that is where the most publicity and ability to spread the game is generated.
In sales environments, people will focus only on achieving the targets set them, the wider implications (mostly) are irrelevant, the bonus comes from meeting the target, so people take the shortest route there possible. Similarly, if the LTA or UK Sport, or some other body, linked a section of funding, or performance bonuses, to a formula dictating that there must be 'x' juniors at a certain level, then that target would be met by whatever methods available.
Or. is it even worse, so desperate have we (the LTA) become to counter the criticism that their is no production line or structure for development, that they have produced successful juniors to counter that claim, bu that was the limit of their ambition. They have not implemented a long term improvement, just created the quickest stop to one particular argument.
Either way, or else, there is something disconnected between us and other nations in this respect.