Topemp wrote:

---

indiana wrote:

---

Not that bad looking efforts by our 4 juniors considering how hugely lacking experience they are at such a level and generally hugely out ranked they were. Probably about as much as could be realistically hoped for.

Good stuff so far from those who are much more ready for this level.

---

 Hmm, I think you're probably right, but I couldn't help think as the four more experienced ones went thru what some of those who were knocked out in pre-qualies would have done with draws like Safwat. Maybe just getting guys thru' isn't priority, but still a bit frustrated, given how well the older ones did that we didn't see a couple more of them there. 

Suspect Loffhagen, Draper and McHugh will have a good few years of QWCs to come. 

That said, it'll be good experience I guess.  

---

Ok, from having watched them all today with great interest, I'm with you Topemp.

Last year, I had them in order of interest as George, Aidan, Jack and Anton.

My feeling today is basically the same.

And, most definitely, that the wildcards were - as suspected - not the right decision.

From top to bottom:

George played a super first set - in fact, both players did. It was an excellent set of tennis, as good as any going on elsewhere, and George was 100% of the level. Until the very end of the set when experience just told. He's bulked out from last year, still has excellent timing, strength, acceleration, and still unfortunately has slightly AWOL moments in his head. He really is a very exciting player and I'd double my bet from last year, if I could, at the same odds, but can't. 

The problem was that he was shaking out his elbow at the end of the set and the second set was never going to be anything, both from his elbow and from the disappointment of not closing out the first.  Zopp's camp were quite concerned at the level of George, I was sitting near them, and they only began to relax at the end of the first. In short, it was a wildcard well used.

Aidan was a tad disappointing. Not his fault but he is VERY small and slight/slender for a top tennis player - he hasn't grown (to the naked eye) at all since last year and honestly looks the size and weight of your average 14 year-old. Maybe he'll have a late growth spurt and it's not the be all and end all, but it's a concern. His play was OK, good in places, even very good at times, and he was not ridiculous on the court, far from it. But the young Spaniard (only one year older than Aidan and twice his weight) was not really pushed, he had to focus a bit more in the second but the result was not really in question.

Jack's score is very misleading. The first set was one-way traffic. Mo broke instantly and then seemed to be treating it as grass court practice, trying out shots he'd never do normally, just coasting on his serve and happy to play points on Jack's. The second set had the same score and again Mo broke early and then served it out. But, credit to Jack, it was a lot, lot closer, a lot better play by Jack and Mo was really having to dig deep to get the job done. Jack acquitted himself well in that set. All that said, Jack should not have had a wildcard this year, Mo is not a great grass court player, a lot looked like a lesson, you don't send an unranked junior of his age into Grand Slam qualis (unless he has a certain father behind him), it was wrong.

If Jack's was wrong, then Anton's was wrong in spades. (And surely Anton only got the nod because otherwise you can't justify giving Jack one). Without being mean, the first set was awful, and embarrassing. Anton has a biggish serve and not much else. (So much to work on would be the optimistic way to look at it). In the second, he played a bit better and his opponent played a bit worse and he made a set out it. Which is good, and a relief for all those watching. But the result was never in question and nearly any of our top-1000 players could have done considerably better.    

Yes, it has just been far too much too soon with certainly some of the juniors as against their experience to date of barely touching at futures level in some cases.

In possible QR1 winners I only noticed the experienced players being mentioned. No-one frankly gave the juniors much chance and I imagine that was particularly the case with Jack and Anton whose participation was much doubted by quite a few here ever from the announcement. Now it's often understandably tough for our WCs but a chance would be good rather than just taking part.

There's giving opportunities, experience and all that stuff. This was to me more pretty much wasting some Q WCs with as said most in the top 1000 having likely more chance than some who would unlikely have been near getting through the play-offs if there. And also probably overrating the "experience".

I did say from the scorelines that it looked like not that bad efforts given their lack of experience and it has been very good to subsequently hear much more from these that were there. You wouldn't say no to the WC offer but some there just shouldn't have been in that position.

Marcus got a Wimbledon doubles Q WC at 17 then singles and doubles Q WCs at 18.

Jack F-H pushing Evo to 3 sets before being beaten "squarely and fairly" (sic) by Evo in the play-off FQR is one reason that I argued in this if any year there should have still been at least one additional Q WC space left going into the play-offs. But no, it was apparently somehow important to give out each and every one of these WCs in advance. Mess.

Edit: apologies, Oakie, you were back quick while I was still adding and editing my JFH bit.