paulisi wrote:

---

Why would we not use one of the big city arenas like for DC?

---

 I imagine most of them would be booked up by now - they usually operate with quite a long lead time and do their utmost to avoid empty dates...

JonH wrote:

---

I wonder if anyone had any thoughts on the "level" the two Brits singles players reached this week in Fed Cup. Katie won matches against the world 112, 167, 171 and 311 - presumably that would like winning an ITF 60 level event, not quite at an ITF 125? I think the biggest Katie has won to date is a $50k event in Fukuoka, so is it reasonable to say this is her best full week to date?

For Jo, she beat 2 players top 60, another top 100 and one below top 100, so presumably an ITF125 level tournie win performance or would that reach WTA International Series level?

Interested to gauge thoughts?

---

Regarding Katie, that Fukuoka win was actually at 60k, but it was a ridiculously week run. It consisted of:

L32: Unranked WC

L16: Patterson, 350

QF: Broady, 127

SF: Kobori 325

F: Lykina 305

So the only top 300 player she beat was Naomi, who in hindsight, wasn't really at that ranking level. Broady has only won 8 matches since then, and interestingly, her only top 150 win of those 8 was against Boulter in the USO qualifiers, and 6 of the 8 wins were against people outside the top 200. So it was a very generous run indeed.

I was going to say Southsea as she got to the final, but I forgot it was only a 16 person field, so she only had to win 3 matches to get there. I'd say that Fed Cup run would be akin to a reasonably strong 80k or a weaker 100k, depending on location. European events are generally going to be stronger than Asian's of the same value because more of the better players are here. Some of the rankings in the ITF Shrewsbury list have changed, but if you look on the current 'Acceptance list' on the ITF page, if you remove Hev, 3 of those 4 opponents would have been down as seeds at Shrewsbury. It is pretty difficult to gauge the exact level, but yes, I'd say Fed Cup was definitely Katie's best run to date if we exclude Southsea (as it was only 3 wins).

Again for Jo, that's quite hard to gauge as well. You look at the likes of Nanchang 2018 (a WTA international) and there was only one player in the top 90, #267 made direct entry and even 128 was seeded, so this Fed Cup run compares much better than that. Her run to Nottm (2018) final was 97, 91, 118, 42 before losing and Fed Cup was certainly stronger than that. Nottm 2017 final was 213, 81, 88, 117, so again a lot stronger than that as well. If hypothetically, you had a WTA international run of say:

L32: Q Bondar

L16: Jakupovic

QF: (8) Krunic

SF: (4) Sakkari

Nobody would be labelling it a cake walk draw.

Ace Ventura wrote:

---

And that's 45 minutes I'll never get back...ha

---

 Ha indeed ! But interesting to read so thanks!

Interesting re the level of players played and beaten. As I have previously mentioned, away from Fed Cup, whatever Katie B hasn't achieved yet re bigger titles or wins in top tournaments her record against top 100 players since the start of last year is very good, thoroughly suggesting that she is far from out of place as a clear top 100 player herself. She has won 11 matches vs top 100 players and lost 10, being particularly successful against almost any player she has met in the 60 to 100 range, though just 2 top 50 wins there ( 42 & 47 ). In Fed Cup she can't do any better winwise than beat who's in front of her.

Hopefully she will become more able to back up performances and go deeper in big tournaments but just thought that record vs top 100 players was worth reitterating.

ROSAMUND wrote:

---

Re the level of opponent that Jo beat, she played 3 players i.e Jakopovic,Sakkari and Krunic who she had  beaten on grass courts in either 2017 or 2018. Sakkari  and Krunic are established top 60 players. Indeed the loss to Krunic in the 1st round of the 2017 US Open was the start of Jo's fall in ranking. Krunic had also beaten the Wimbledon  champion  Petra Kvitova   in the 2014 US Open. I had never heard of Bondar but midway through the 3rd set I thought Jo was going to lose.  There is one thing that puzzles me about Jo in Fed Cup terms that I don't think can be answered. Under Anne Keothavong, Jo has put in some brilliant performances in the Fed Cup including the 3rd set against Krunic which I will never forget. However if you go back to her  2015 Fed Cup performances under Judy Murray it might as well be 2 different people.She lost to basically some unknown from Turkey and then finished up winning only one game against Govortsova. The scoreline is thus far her worst ever career match score.  Is there any rational explanation for the difference between the general nadir of 2015 and the  brilliant effort in 2019? I also hasten to add that the first match of Jo's I ever watched live was at Eastbourne in 2015 when she beat Zarina Dyas who might be a Fed Cup opponent in 2019.

 

---

It seems to me that Jo thrives on being the clear leader of the (playing) team. She really seems prepared to carry the weight of the team on her shoulders, and it may very well help her in being able to push other thoughts to the side, and staying super-focused on her matchplay and her perceived responsibility. Katie B winning her matches is massive (and also the strong performances by Harriet and Katie S in the doubles), in terms of the effect it has on Jo, who said as much after a couple of her wins, that she had to play up to the standard of Katy B. Not letting your team mates down, and putting in your shift to the maximum for the team, are powerful self-motivators. Jo basically pushed herself to her absolute limit. With Anne K there at her side encouraging her and managing the team as a whole, the team doing really well as a unit, and the crowd and the team willing her on in her matches, it's definitely going to raise Jo's level. Probably to a higher level than when she plays individually, I would say.