indiana wrote:

---

Cam was my early runner with his United Cup and ATP 250 Auckland exploits.

But ultimately I have chosen between two players at extremely different points in their careers, Andy and Mark.

My vote goes to Magnificent Murray.

---

 Similarly , those were my candidates Indy. Cam ran out after the AO; Mark came through late and , whilst it sounds impressive, I just dont know enough to make him my player of the month - hopefully many opportunities to come. 

andy was magnificent and inspirational and I really hope he wins this player of the month , i really do. 

but , for me, one player popped him by centimetres- Alfie Hewett. He won the Australian Open mens singles and doubles , his first singles title here; he won the big warm up event as well and goes back to number one in the world. Im not really sure what more a wheelchair player can or should do - if he isnt voted for now, he will never be and Id have to question the whole point of putting forward our wheelchair players. And that would be just sad and regressive. 

so I hope some more people join me in voting for him and I hope he or Andy win it this month! 

JonH comes home wrote:

---

Coup Droit wrote:

---

It was Andy v Mark

(I don't follow wheelchair tennis and actually have certain issues with transparency in wheelchair tennis anyway)

So, old guy v young guy......

And, like Indy, Magnificent Murray edged it

---

 Maybe one for the wheelchair section, CD, but you wont read it probably ! What are your concerns re transparency in wheelchair tennis? 

maybe pop on to the wheelchair tour section but Id genuinely be interested? 

---

 Just a one-liner - so as not to distract - but I find the marketing a little questionable, given that extremely few (none?) of the players actually need wheelchairs in real life (they used to walk up to collect their trophies and I was told by an LTA bod that the authorities changed it - which is just a marketing ploy, and rather a cheap one IMO)

In response to Jon below, I'm not querying the rules - all the players qualify for wheelchair tennis based on a list of medical rules which are (I expect, I'm no medic) fine and well thought out.

But the organisers want to perpetuate the myth that all the players are wheelchair bound, as opposed to wheelchair players. I've been at events where the wheelchair guys are all walking to their cars after, larking about, dragging their chairs with one hand, or pushing them. And, again, no complaint - in fact, it's great. 

BUT they're not allowed to go and collect their trophies like that because (supposedly and probably true) it risks losing support. So it's the authorities who run the sport that I don't approve of, not the players.

Interesting CD. Though sort of by the way and not Alfie's fault. For me, it's more that it's just such a small group and overall there isn't any real equivalence of Seniors vs Juniors vs Wheelchairs, or singles vs doubles, before even considering different levels within these categories, so I certainly don't count titles of Player A vs Player B or work to any formula / rule  Of course I watch and look at results  and moreso titles, and they are part of my consideration but the impact of other matters often swings my vote - eg. with a previous Slam winner who exited the Aussie Open in R3 this year. We will all thankfully look at things a bit differently with say as above even one point swinging someone's vote. For many there will be an emotional element to who has most impacted them in a particular month and that is fine with me.

Great what the wheelchair players produce but as I have said before 'just' winning all they can win is unlikely to get them on my personal radar as overall PoM or PoS. But if it does for others then I'd say continue to nominate them.