Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Week 34 - US Open, Women's Qualifying Singles, New York, USA - Hard


Futures level

Status: Offline
Posts: 1991
Date:
RE: Week 34 - US Open, Women's Qualifying Singles, New York, USA - Hard


Ace Ventura wrote:

Q Dart vs Q Bogdan - I'll take that.

Wang didn't get a LL, neither did Flipkens - they went to Hon, Badosa, Lepchenko and Gibbs.


 Ah so pleased for Nicole Gibbs. After her recent cancer diagnosis and recovery, nice to see her receive some good fortune. 



__________________


Satellite level

Status: Offline
Posts: 1258
Date:

Fantastic to see Harriet come through that match to qualify. I had to leave it at one set all and feared the worst. A fellow qualifier in the main draw is as good as could have been expected.



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 55413
Date:

Goes without saying, SO pleased to see Harriet come through three good matches to qualify. She is such a dedicated person, works so hard, has a great physique for tennis, and has really made some good coaching decisions during her young career.

I like Wang a lot too - only a junior - saw her at Roehampton this year - quite a different style.

Mind you, if China's Xiyu Wang, born 2001, lost, China's Xinyu Wang, born 2001, won.

And we thought we had problems with too many Katies.....

__________________


Top national player

Status: Offline
Posts: 3386
Date:

I love this girl, I was reasonably confident she could make it through as she has such spirit. She has also had her injury problems but to make it through qualifying at 2 Slams is no mean achievement. Hopefully with a bit of good fortune and no injuries she can push on and qualify by right for the AO because she has certainly proved she deserves to be there.

__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 23353
Date:

Coup Droit wrote:

Mind you, if China's Xiyu Wang, born 2001, lost, China's Xinyu Wang, born 2001, won.

And we thought we had problems with too many Katies.....


 There are 41 Yang's listed on the ITF - two Xinyu's but only one Xiyu. We are lucky !

 

So pleased for Harriet - one of the first of the younger players I ever saw play live some four years ago. Still hasn't reached her full potential and has room to improve but heading into the top 100 in the near future I'm sure.



__________________
Jan


Hall of fame

Status: Online
Posts: 7945
Date:

Fabulous! Very well done Harriet

__________________


Club Coach

Status: Offline
Posts: 667
Date:

Really good news for Harriet. Hopefully this can be a springboard to better things.
I do think she needs to work on her overall fitness and physicality to compete at a higher level. Her serve is really pretty poor.

__________________


All-time great

Status: Offline
Posts: 5404
Date:

LordBrownof wrote:
Ace Ventura wrote:

Q Dart vs Q Bogdan - I'll take that.

Wang didn't get a LL, neither did Flipkens - they went to Hon, Badosa, Lepchenko and Gibbs.


 Ah so pleased for Nicole Gibbs. After her recent cancer diagnosis and recovery, nice to see her receive some good fortune. 


 Yes good to see Gibbs back. 



__________________


Challenger qualifying

Status: Offline
Posts: 2196
Date:

Great to see Harriet come through. I also feared the worse after the second set.

Just watched the third set back now. Mid way through that set there was some excellent tennis from both. Harriet's scrambling and getting one more ball back at the end proved to be the decisive factor.

Great stuff and a good 1st round draw.

__________________

GO TEAM GBR IN 2025!

DF


Tennis legend

Status: Online
Posts: 11708
Date:

So the USA had 20 in the Qualifying and only 2 came through, though others are in the MD through the LL route.

We had 4 in the Qualifying and did well to get 1 through.

Well done Harriet !!

__________________


Top national player

Status: Offline
Posts: 3386
Date:

A more accurate comparision would be Wimbledon qualifying where we got the round number of zero through. 



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 55413
Date:

emmsie69 wrote:

A more accurate comparision would be Wimbledon qualifying where we got the round number of zero through. 


 Yes, but that's not a fair comparison because all our good hopes of qualifying already had wildcards into the main draw. So you only ever have the far weaker players in the Wimbly qualifiers - all our WTA 100- 250 players aren't there. 



__________________


Top national player

Status: Offline
Posts: 3386
Date:

Coup Droit wrote:
emmsie69 wrote:

A more accurate comparision would be Wimbledon qualifying where we got the round number of zero through. 


 Yes, but that's not a fair comparison because all our good hopes of qualifying already had wildcards into the main draw. So you only ever have the far weaker players in the Wimbly qualifiers - all our WTA 100- 250 players aren't there. 


The same is true for the US players at the US open though so it is a pretty fair comparision, the only difference being that they have far more players that actually get into qualifying by right.



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 18097
Date:

emmsie69 wrote:
Coup Droit wrote:
emmsie69 wrote:

A more accurate comparision would be Wimbledon qualifying where we got the round number of zero through. 


 Yes, but that's not a fair comparison because all our good hopes of qualifying already had wildcards into the main draw. So you only ever have the far weaker players in the Wimbly qualifiers - all our WTA 100- 250 players aren't there. 


The same is true for the US players at the US open though so it is a pretty fair comparision, the only difference being that they have far more players that actually get into qualifying by right.


The USA has five times our population but still have the same number of wild card spaces. If we use all the WC spaces it removes all our likely qualifiers from the field. If the USA uses all the WC spaces it still leaves four-fifths of their likely qualifiers to fight it out.



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 23353
Date:

Peter too wrote:
emmsie69 wrote:
Coup Droit wrote:
emmsie69 wrote:

A more accurate comparision would be Wimbledon qualifying where we got the round number of zero through. 


 Yes, but that's not a fair comparison because all our good hopes of qualifying already had wildcards into the main draw. So you only ever have the far weaker players in the Wimbly qualifiers - all our WTA 100- 250 players aren't there. 


The same is true for the US players at the US open though so it is a pretty fair comparision, the only difference being that they have far more players that actually get into qualifying by right.


The USA has five times our population but still have the same number of wild card spaces. If we use all the WC spaces it removes all our likely qualifiers from the field. If the USA uses all the WC spaces it still leaves four-fifths of their likely qualifiers to fight it out.


The USA had 39 women in the main draw or qualifying draw (including wild cards) - according to the US Open web site. Ptetty much every player in the top 300.


Also, there are reciprocal WC's with France and Australia



__________________
«First  <  114 15 16 17  >  Last»  | Page of 17  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard