Is it fair?

End of day one and Andy's our only hope. Guess it could be worse if he loses to Harrison tonight (OK that won't happen...)

Seriously though it won't be Andy's fault if Djokovic or another of the big four apart from him win again but it can't be a lot of fun seeing the best GB tennis representation for 20 years (other than that inflated for at least a round by Wimbledon wild-cards) blown away. 20 games were managed in all with more than half of those from Ward and no sets won.

Positive points? Well, I like Watson's honesty and attitude. At least she had the presence of mind to not just look for obvious excuses. " I don't mind having a first round like that. If I want to be the best, I've got to beat everyone and I've gained experience from this. I wasn't really there today, but there's always next time – I'm going to be playing a lot more tournaments."

After that I'm struggling for any unless others have seem some cause for optimism I've overlooked. Expecting a second participant in week two might have been wishful thinking. It would have been nice though to have more than one for the second day.

The reality is, of course, Andy has every chance of making the semis or even (Djokovic obliging) going the whole way. Problem is it's Andy or nothing and doesn't that just become all too predictable?

I don't know if you watched tennis in the 1980's or early 1990's, but it's a bit better following British tennis now than it was then, even if all the focus ends up on one player.

The women always used to be better than the men - one thing I have noted is their relative collapse.

I get the argument, but I don't get the title. What's not fair about them getting beaten by better opponents?

bogbrush nothing wrong with losing to better opponents (both Bally and Ward had more than a chance though and have to be disappointed they didn't do better).

What I meant was putting all the expectation again now on Andy's shoulders. I don't want to start that is he/isn't he good enough to win a slam debate again but we've been here countless times with Henman before - all the British media making him favourite whilst the average fan and his opponents come the semis knowing different.

The point being Andy may win here. It would be a big shock though if he beat, say, both Djokovic and Federer in doing so and it would be nice to have at least a temporary diversion from his efforts in doing so during the rest of the fortnight.

I think the thing is NB Andy is Britain's only hope of a Slam success.

Robson and Watson are work's in progress. Any negative result is harsh to hold against them given the opposition they faced. Azarenka and Jankovic were always going to be a steep challenge. I am more annoyed with Baltacha as she done so much good hard work and un-does it by losing to lower ranked players. Keothavong is never going to get back to her best because that injury has seriously plagued her career.

Ward is developing late and for him to make the first round of a Slam outside of Wimbledon is fantastic. He will no doubt be looking at qualifying for ATP 500 events or even Master 1000 events.

What annoys me the most, take last year Queens gave Golding a wildcard and Wimbledon didn't. Murray was 17 when he had his Wimbledon wildcard and the rest is history. Golding will 18 when he gets his and already will be steps and strides behind where Murray was with his game and career. The LTA clearly again crap at judging talent. Exposure to Slam events at a young age is not a bad thing. Not all youngsters will go the way of Bogdanovic.

For me it has been a plus, but with some negatives.

lk that's a bit harsh on Bally given her overall slam record. She didn't have a great start to the season and (apparently) was visibly upset by her loss today. Nobody needs to tell her that was a match she could have won given better form.

Keothavong (in all honesty) is a solid top 100 player but has a pretty poor slam record with her best days probably behind her.

Yes, Robson and Watson can learn from their respective defeats and come back improved players as a result. Didn't watch Watson so I can't comment - other than to say that was probably (Kviotova aside) the toughest opponent possible. I don't think it's unfair to question Robson's mindset though. She needs to cut out those DFs and her movement went to pieces when Jankovic upped her game midway through the first set. She was injured the latter part of last year so hopefully she'll move on from this one.

Golding? Well, he was too old to be short-listed for the young sports personality award but not mature enough supposedly for a Wimbledon wild-card. If they hand them out to the younger Broady and Edmunds assuming Ollie gets one himself then they are going to look pretty stupid (yet again).

I don't think it is harsh on Bally NB. She lost to Vania King at the FO last year despite being a set up. Again a lower ranked player than her. Same again at the US Open. Despite retiring in that match, a set up. It is one thing doing hard work putting your paces in, but to start falling at the easier hurdles is a big no no. Once Robson and Watson hit their peaks and get to the same level as Bally, I won't expect them to make the same mistakes.

legendkillar wrote:Robson and Watson are work's in progress.

I was so thrilled to see the correct application of the "s" after work, rather than the attempt to pluralise "progress" that might be expected these days.

How tragic, then, to see an inappropriate apostrophe.


:holdsheadinhandsandshakeshead:


Your friendly neighbourhood pedant.

bogbrush wrote:

legendkillar wrote:Robson and Watson are work's in progress.

I was so thrilled to see the correct application of the "s" after work, rather than the attempt to pluralise "progress" that might be expected these days.

How tragic, then, to see an inappropriate apostrophe.


:holdsheadinhandsandshakeshead:


Your friendly neighbourhood pedant.

Not inappropriate as the application of it was singular.

The classification was separate and therefore not implying they were one in the same.

sorry to be even more pendant.

legendkillar wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

legendkillar wrote:Robson and Watson are work's in progress.

I was so thrilled to see the correct application of the "s" after work, rather than the attempt to pluralise "progress" that might be expected these days.

How tragic, then, to see an inappropriate apostrophe.

:holdsheadinhandsandshakeshead:

Your friendly neighbourhood pedant.

Not inappropriate as the application of it was singular.

The classification was separate and therefore not implying they were one in the same.

sorry to be even more pendant.

You meant pedantic, of course.

Nice comeback on the "s" though.

I thought Robson and Watson looked like decent players in theory.