JonH comes home wrote:

---

Rich2310 wrote:

---

I also for got to say and many have maybe already said this. But imo the first worst thing to happen after her US victory was getting rid of Andrew Richardson. There was a connection there. We will never know what might have been if he had stayed as her coach. from that moment onward it feels like Emma has been in freefall tbh.

---

 Agree with this. I also think her team are approaching it all wrong, as befits a management agency and not where she is in tennis terms.

They are treating her like a US Open champion to be rolled out at the big events and be monetised. She is a US Open champion, but that was a shock and hasn't been repeated (for lots of reasons) so far by her, anywhere near.

She really is a player ranked sub 200 in the world with the talent and potential to be higher but not yet with the game craft etc. So forget monetising her. Play her in events where the number 200 in the world would play or maybe the level higher and rebuild her craft and harden her game. I don't know if that is ITF events like this week where Heather is playing, in Roehampton mixed with a combo of WTA 125 / 250 events but it surely isnt putting her out at the 1000 level events. 

It must frustrate everyone around her to see her keep losing after one match - Kyle is building back up through ITF and Challengers; Paul Jubb the same; Andy dipped down for a while (and maybe should again).

So should Emma    

---

 As usual Jon this is a very fair assessment. I dont think we can say shes not up for it or isnt enthused enough after a tew months and a couple of tournaments. I also think she was being very honest in her statement and shouldnt be ccriticised for admitting she needs a lot of work in a lot of areas to get her game up to scratch. I agree Jon that shes been badly advised in tennis terms. it was madness to get rid of Andrew Richardson so soon after New York. I think its probably very likely that the same people suggesting that are also suggesting that she play higher level tournaments. Maybe shes now listening to wiser voices and is aware of getting back to basics. I wish her well and I hope the press dont pulverise her. Shes still a young woman and the pressures at this level must be extensive given the scrutiny shes under.

I agree, let's compare this to Kerber, Osaka, Wozniacki returns after long lay offs. They aren't setting the world on fire. Although Osaka has just won back to back matches for the first time since returning. These things take time. There are only a handful of players like Steffi and Serena who can just walk onto court after months off and just slot straight back in. That is not the norm though. 

I remember hearing once that it takes once or twice the length of the injury or 'off' period to get back to where a player was before the injury or period away from tennis. I think it's still early days for Emma and all we've learned so far is that she is under-ranked in real terms. Where exactly she should be ranked is something we probably won't know until the very end of the year. She's young. Let's give it (and her) time.

It's early days but all we have to go on at present is performance this year. It is interesting to see where UK players are in the Race.

Pos Pts Player
31 245 Boulter
59 160 Raducanu
64 144 Burrage
68 137 Dart
90 88 Watson
175 20 Jones

On that basis, after being out for such a long time, she doesn't seem to be doing too badly and one would expect her to be rather higher towards the end of the year. I do think she would now benefit from playing in a tournament or two at a lower level, just to get more time on court and to get back into the winning momentum frame of mind she developed in 2021.

The WTA Race positions quoted are misleading as they don't include points won at ITF level. The actual WTA points won by players this year are as follows:

Boulter 245
Dart 219
Raducanu 170
Burrage 159
Miyazaki 126
Watson 96

EDIT: Boulter's points are correct

-- Edited by 9vicman on Thursday 15th of February 2024 12:57:51 PM

RJH1962 wrote:

---

Helen40 wrote:

---

Lambda wrote:

---

It might be perhaps worth noting on 2024 points alone, Emma was ranked 65 at the beginning of the week ahead of Jodie (67) but behind Katie (33) and Harriet (41).

---

 That means little to me. As she's GS winner, she will always be able to get into tournaments with higher points available - even for stepping foot on court!

---

 Does she not have to win a match to actually get points?  If you get beaten in the first round and didn't go though qualification then I didn't think you got any points. 

---

 You get 1 point for appearing at a WTA125, WTA250 or WTA500 tournament, and 10 points for WTA1000 and Slams. Not that those points will help much with ranking.

There are also single points for appearing at W50 and above tournaments.

9vicman wrote:

---

It's interesting that the WTA and ATP differ in this regard. The WTA offer first round loser points for all events at W50 and above, and wild cards still receive points. The ATP only offer first round loser points at the Slams and M1000 events, and wild cards don't receive points.

However even if Raducanu gets 10 points for a first round loss as a wild card, it's not going to make a huge difference unless she is winning matches.

---

 It depends where you are in the rankings IMO. She will move up from where she is. Not a jot of difference when you are 150 plus.