British Tennis Forum - Celebrating 20 Years!

Stircrazy wrote:

---

Stircrazy wrote:

---

PQQF:  (pq1) Alastair Gray WR 371 defeated Aidan McHugh WR 496 by 3 & 4

PQQF:  (pq2) Giles Hussey WR 379 defeated Kyle Edmund WR 476 by 3-6 6-4 6-3  

---

PQQF:  James Story WR 561 defeated (pq3) Charles Broom WR 439 by 6-4 7-6(6) 

Pleased for James.

---

 I know someone else was going to post this anyway but Hamish Stewart has just beaten Liam Broady: 4-6 6-4 7-5

JonH comes home wrote:

---

The womens semis are all posted and ready to start - do we know for certain that the men won't be playing semis? tbh, I don't think it is a bad thing at all if they manage to not play semis and get all 4 through to qualies

---

 It has happened previously that all 4 men semi-finalists were slated for Qualifying Wildcards.  However, they played the semis anyway even though there was only pride at stake.  I can't remember the year -- around 2017 perhaps.

Stircrazy wrote:

---

JonH comes home wrote:

---

The womens semis are all posted and ready to start - do we know for certain that the men won't be playing semis? tbh, I don't think it is a bad thing at all if they manage to not play semis and get all 4 through to qualies

---

Nowt showing on the "planned" page of the live scoreboard, just the two girls' matches on the "live" page. 

---

 the womens didnt appear in the planned section until shortly before they went on, however, so not sure we can take that as definitive just yet! 

pauldepstein wrote:

---

pauldepstein wrote:

---

JonH comes home wrote:

---

The womens semis are all posted and ready to start - do we know for certain that the men won't be playing semis? tbh, I don't think it is a bad thing at all if they manage to not play semis and get all 4 through to qualies

---

 It has happened previously that all 4 men semi-finalists were slated for Qualifying Wildcards.  However, they played the semis anyway even though there was only pride at stake.  I can't remember the year -- around 2017 perhaps.

---

         Oh, I get the difference now.  Around 2017, it was rumoured (correctly) that the top four men from Aorangi would get a QWC but this wasn't officially announced.  Here we have a quite different situation where the 4 wildcard places from Aorangi are announced on the Wimbledon website.  Making them play semis anyway would be totally crazy -- just sacrificing their valuable prep time to make it even less likely for them to win Q1.

---

Ok, cool - it is on the website - that is definitive then!! 

Congrats all 4! Ali, James, Giles and Hamish!

pauldepstein wrote:

---

JonH comes home wrote:

---

pauldepstein wrote:

---

pauldepstein wrote:

---

JonH comes home wrote:

---

The womens semis are all posted and ready to start - do we know for certain that the men won't be playing semis? tbh, I don't think it is a bad thing at all if they manage to not play semis and get all 4 through to qualies

---

 It has happened previously that all 4 men semi-finalists were slated for Qualifying Wildcards.  However, they played the semis anyway even though there was only pride at stake.  I can't remember the year -- around 2017 perhaps.

---

         Oh, I get the difference now.  Around 2017, it was rumoured (correctly) that the top four men from Aorangi would get a QWC but this wasn't officially announced.  Here we have a quite different situation where the 4 wildcard places from Aorangi are announced on the Wimbledon website.  Making them play semis anyway would be totally crazy -- just sacrificing their valuable prep time to make it even less likely for them to win Q1.

---

Ok, cool - it is on the website - that is definitive then!! 

Congrats all 4! Ali, James, Giles and Hamish!

---

         Well, the part that is definitive is that we do know who has qualified.  What isn't 100% definitive is whether the four qualifiers play off against each other anyway.  However, it would seem a really stupid thing to do.

---

 I am pretty sure they wont - the only point of the play offs is finding those who get through to the main qualifying field, once that is done, they cease to have any real role. Given they have played once and most of them played three setters, earlier, I am certain they won't play anymore today.  

Coup Droit wrote:

---

I don't think that was me, Jon

The facilities thing makes no sense to me at all

After all, each player has a certain number of people with them - so toilets, food etc has to be laid on, whatever

As does security - you can't just assume because they're X's mates, that's everything's fine

The amount of spectators would be small - it wouldn't change anything - it'll be a fraction of the players and their friends/family - just look at how many go to the W35s say at the NTC - barely a dozen

It's ridiculous that spectators aren't allowed

I remember one savvy member of this forum used to go and hang round the gates and get one of the players (chosen at random) to sign them in as a guest

Very sensible tactics...

 

The Wimbledon branding is unknown outisde a small hardcore number of people - who live all over the country and won't come down to London for it

There's zero publicity

And even so, if there's 32 players on day 1, with 2 tagalongs per person, you've got 32 +64 i.e. about 100, plus all the regular coaches and infrastructure people, so an extra 30 or so is a small percentage difference 

It's not possible that the food can't cater for a little more - it's barely more than sandwiches anyway

Security is practically zero when you go to the NTC (i.e. the bod centre) so it can't be anything here either - I've never been stopped at the NTC, never been asked to open my bag, or anything 

And toilets are toilets - 200 people (half men, half women) can manage with the toilets they have, which are fine   - Aorangi Park is very well equipped 

It's utterly daft, IMO, to say they can't manage a few spectators IF THEY WANTED TO (which they obviously don't)  

---

      Of course, hypocritical me is much more upset about the no-spectators policy having just been a victim of it.  I blagged my way in on all previous years but this year was actually turned away.

      Another possible consideration is that with spectators allowed, there would be no way for the "competitors' guests" to feel special other than by giving them free food.

      In practice, an organiser would want "guests" who had some special privileges so free food would have to be costed in.  Not much of a consideration though -- we'd be talking a few hundred quid extra, I suppose.  Currently, I don't think Competitors' Guests get anything except for entry -- I was a guest of Dan Little once.