2019 male prediction rankings

Vandenburg · Futures level

RE: 2019 male prediction rankings

indiana · Tennis legend

Personally when I saw that JFH prediction I thought actually that could be a good shout and momentarily considered adding him to my 10 instead of Mr Klein.

I predict that Jack will at least be close enough to GB #10 to earn some score.

the addict · Tennis legend

JFH is one of the few guys that will have any ATP ranking under the new scheme - and I reckon he'll ick up a few points. Only needs around 60 during the year to get to WR350.

And I reckon that's more than Glasspool will get ;)

indiana · Tennis legend

Anyway let's recall Vandy's reply to cecil in last year's predictions.

"James Ward 178?

Surely this is classed as trolling?"

James was ultimately WR 194, within 10% and earning 4 out of a maximum 5 world points as well as GB points for cecil.

Plus Vandy now starts a thread regarding the possibility of James ending 2019 as GB #2. So who knows where he will be regarding JFH a bit down the line.

He is a one. Hey ho.

Michael D · All-time great

the addict wrote:
JFH is one of the few guys that will have any ATP ranking under the new scheme - and I reckon he'll ick up a few points. Only needs around 60 during the year to get to WR350.

And I reckon that's more than Glasspool will get ;)

He's one of the 4 with 1 point for reaching a 25k final!

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

Vandenburg wrote:
the addict wrote:
1 Kyle Edmund 12
2 Andy Murray    22
3 Cameron Norrie 55
4 Daniel Evans       80
5 Jay Clarke    175
6 James Ward 210
7 Jan Choinski    220
8 Liam Broady    260
9 Jack Draper   330
10 Jack Findel-Hawkins 340
Major colonel Findel Hawkins

Major Colonel? What the hell's that supposed to be when it's all at home? confuse

Michael D · All-time great

My provisional list... Would like to see McHugh there too, if I could figure out how long it is going to take him to be able to get into Challenger tournaments.

Kyle Edmund 12
Andy Murray 17
Cameron Norrie 67
Daniel Evans 78
Jay Clarke 167
Jan Choinski 186
James Ward 212
Jack Draper 245
Evan Hoyt 332
Liam Broady 356

the addict · Tennis legend

Michael D wrote: ............. My provisional list... Would like to see McHugh there too .........

Pick any two from Draper, Storrie, Watson, JFH, Peniston and McHugh - they're all in the same position with 6, 1 or 0 points.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Ok, here goes (and with hopes that Hoyt, Lloyd, the US college lot, Paul Jubb, Ryan Storrie (if recovered) and others all get safely esconced in Bob's top-500) -

Andy 10

Kyle 12

Cam 55

Evo 100

James Ward 140

Jan C 170

Jay 250

Liam 280

Jack D 410

George Loff 415

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

Andy 7
Kyle 12
Cam 50
Evo 120
Wardy 180
Jan C 200
Jay 220
Jack D 250
Liam 270
Aiden 400

scottie1 · Futures level

Murray 6
Edmund 10
Evans 75
Norrie 78
Ward 160
Broady 189
Choinski 192
Clarke 205
Draper 330
McHugh 345

Miriambee · Futures level

Edmund 18

Murray 30

Norrie 80

Evans 140

Clarke 190

Ward (J) 220

Choinski 230

Draper 330

Hoyt 350

McHugh 380

brittak · Pro player

Edmund 18

Murray 41

Norrie 73

Evans 112

Clarke 147

Ward 180

Choinski 228

Broady 229

Hoyt 391

Findel-Hawkins 427

Bob in Spain · Tennis legend

Mr Positive is in town. So here goes.

Edmund 6
Murray 8
Evans 49
Norrie 52
Clarke 121
Choinski 155
Ward 180
Hoyt 214
Broady 225
Draper 315

I think it will be very difficult for anyone outside the current Top 500 to make huge leaps this year as the new rankings system is going to hold them back. Already plenty of criticisms of the system and strange anomalies being highlighted on Twitter.

indiana · Tennis legend

Though Alex Ward has shot back up over 300 places to WR 404 in the first rankings of the new era

Seriously yes, be interesting to see which previously futures players can now make the necessary impression in challengers if they can get into challengers at all. Will it indeed prove very difficult? How the best young players like Jack and Aidan can continue to develop will be telling.

Re the twitter comments so much going on I always thought that unintended consequences and anomalies were likely and we haven't properly got going yet. I'm rather doubting that they have had computer models looking at loads of scenarios, which could have exposed some of these in advance, and that there will be a lot of crossing fingers.

Sorry, not really the place to waffle on so much re these changes.