indiana wrote:

---

I think Vandy does have a point just about history putting great store on Slams. So although clearly Andy has a very much better overall record and 2 Olympic titles it is a pity that Stan has that extra Slam. Slam lists for ever more will have Stan on 3 and Andy on 2 ( well unless Andy does the unthinkable ). Though credit Stan for peaking for them and he is a better player than the rest of his record suggests. He likes his off time.

Though who really believes Andy blames Evo? He had just the one MP vs Stan by the way although a golden chance to get to another in a great performance. I think Andy may blame Andy though for not having more than 2.

Edit : duh to me but rather sleepily misled. Andy of course has 3 Slam titles so Stan is not ahead of him anyway! 

-- Edited by indiana on Thursday 7th of March 2019 09:11:35 PM

---

 I think vandy said Stan had won 3 different slams hence  3 of a kind which trumps Andy and his two different slams, albeit with three titles. I think that was his point but could be wrong . 

JonH wrote:

---

indiana wrote:

---

I think Vandy does have a point just about history putting great store on Slams. So although clearly Andy has a very much better overall record and 2 Olympic titles it is a pity that Stan has that extra Slam. Slam lists for ever more will have Stan on 3 and Andy on 2 ( well unless Andy does the unthinkable ). Though credit Stan for peaking for them and he is a better player than the rest of his record suggests. He likes his off time.

Though who really believes Andy blames Evo? He had just the one MP vs Stan by the way although a golden chance to get to another in a great performance. I think Andy may blame Andy though for not having more than 2.

Edit : duh to me but rather sleepily misled. Andy of course has 3 Slam titles so Stan is not ahead of him anyway! 

-- Edited by indiana on Thursday 7th of March 2019 09:11:35 PM

---

 I think vandy said Stan had won 3 different slams hence  3 of a kind which trumps Andy and his two different slams, albeit with three titles. I think that was his point but could be wrong . 

 

---

Yes, I agree that's what they did appear to mean, as per the post I followed up with. As I indicated, I am not sure it's a great issue. 

JonH wrote:

---

If I recall agassi reached 4 slams having won a title at each and it got held in higher esteem than if he'd won say two in us and two in French

---

Ah but big difference with winning all Slams. That is regarded as major.

Not so much 3 from 3 Slams as against 3 from 2.

the addict wrote:

---

Not a headline, but the Beeb still mentions it in yesterday's the write-up of qualifying

---

 I've tweeted to the BBC complaining about this. Everyone who's interested in tennis knows about the drugs ban and I think are largely bored with it being dragged up in every single article.  Those not interested in tennis are unlikely to read the article in any case, like I don't read the racing pages. 

Dan vs Stan is scheduled second on Stadium 2 for Friday.

Berdych vs Lopez first on from 7 pm GMT.

Ace Ventura wrote:

---

Good news for the Norwich City fan(s) on here. You'd expect that football match will just be more or less finishing and then Dan starting and should be finished at a reasonable hour as well.

---

 For various postern reasons there are no canaries in my local.

indiana wrote:

---

Not predicting who but I'd put the chances of us having a top 10 man or woman singles player in the next 5 to 10 years nearer 50% than almost zero. Though Kyle, having already been WR 14 and currently WR 23, must be a possibility, even by more luck    And without putting any pressure on I wouldn't discount at least one existing male and one existing female junior aged player. Could even be some as yet barely known junior or someone almost totally unexpected. How many a few years beforehand would have thought Jo would make WR 4?

Re Felix A-A, yes be interesting to watch his progress.

-- Edited by indiana on Friday 8th of March 2019 01:00:03 AM

---

As is our general trend I am much more optimistic than Indi... Kyle if he stays fit has an excellent chance of being a top 10 player. In terms of youngsters we have at least two that would be very well supported by all federations as potential top 10 players.

Unfortunately now completely skewed by the impact of the transition tour Jack Draper is still in the top 20 Players not yet 19 and having only turned 17 in December generally that is a fairly robust predictor of top 10 potential. On the girls side there are a Number of girls with top 100 potential although very early days Emma Rs transition to the senior tour pre GCSE appears to be primarily driven by the level of competition she needs to progress. As far as I am aware she is still in full time state school education at an institution that has very high academic standards although well supported by the LTA we will get a better idea of how she compares to the likes of Clara Tauson who has from what I can tell effectively been fulltime from the age of 14.

Personally I define top 100 as being a successful ATP touring professional and I am just excited to watch many of our young players develope and hopefully exceed that target and as Indi has stated it is very unpredictable for so many reasons. As an aside Fran is one of our elite in terms  juniors in transition with a not unrealistic chance of breaking top 200 perhaps 100, where would that sit in terms of tennis achievement? Top 10 or better, as I said lots to look forward to And get excited about post Andy.