Wimbledon Wildcards

I know I am looking a bit far ahead, but this one is for all you Brit tennis fans.

With Wimbledon round the corner, which Britain male players would you be tempted to hand wildcards to this year? We all the know the heartbreak we have endured with Alex Bogdanovic with a record of 8 wildcards and 8 first round defeats and I am sure he won't be getting another one anytime soon. So from the list below who would you deem worthy enough of one of these wildcards?

215 - James Ward
276 - Daniel Cox
305 - Daniel Evans
338 - Joshua Milton
344 - Richard Bloomfield
383 - Jamie Baker
416 - Morgan Phillips
432 - Chris Eaton
433 - Joshua Goodall
461 - David Rice
463 - Daniel Smethurst
473 - Alexander Ward
970 - Oliver Golding
986 - George Morgan

Personally myself I would hand them to James Ward, Daniel Cox, Oliver Golding and George Morgan. Golding and Morgan have shown some promise being 17 & 18 respectfully and I am hoping for a Murray 2005 like springboard. I am wondering how the organisers will view the wildcards. I think they need to give them to players that can improve from being in such a major tournament.

Who would you guys pick?

For me just James Ward and maybe Cox as he's improved quite a bit this year.I'm not sure Golding or Morgan are ready for Wimbledon main draw just yet.It would be lovely to see a Murray 2005-esque performance from one of them (or Liam Broady) but Murray was several hundred ranking places ahead of where they are now at the time of his breakthrough.

"With Wimbledon round the corner, which Britain male players would you be tempted to hand wildcards to this year?"

None of them. Both James Ward and Daniel Evans were handed wildcards at Wimbledon in 2009 and they lost in the first round.

The best James Ward has done in a GS qualifier is Q2 in AO2010 (he has never got past the Q1 stage at the FO or USOpen). The best Daniel Cox has done is Q2 at Wimbledon 2009, while Daniel Evans got to Q2 at AO2010.

This year (Jan 2011 to date) only Daniel Evans has obtained more than 18 ranking points from a single tournament. There are 25 points to be won in the qualifiers so I would give wildcards to allow them into the Wimbledon qualifiers. Only James Ward has sufficient rankings to qualify for the qualifying tournament directly - all the others would need wildcards (into the qualifiers). I think up to 8 (?) wildcards can be given in the qualifiers.

GS
Qualifying tournament 128 --> 3 rounds --> 16 qualifiers
16 qualifiers + 8 wildcards + 104 based on ranking --> 128 into main draw.

Ollie Golding has a wildcard for Queens. I shall be watching with great interest. Hope the BBC show his match.

Hmmmm Golding has drawn Nicolas Mahut while Daniel Cox and James Ward are drawn against each other.

legendkillar how many wildcards?

A difficult one this. If Boggo doesn't merit one then neither does Cox as he has does diddly squat to earn it. Ward I'm not so sure about.

What criteria are they going to use? They have tried a play off at the NTC but may as well toss a coin for all the good it has done them.

Looking at the ratings why not say none of you are good enough to even merit a wildcard except perhaps Ward and then skip a generation. That means just Golding and Morgan in addition but (quite frankly) the rest don't serve one.

Also Cox has "improved quite a lot this year". Really? It doesn't show in his results.

To be honest, any wildcard from the host country is going to be for the sole use of by-passing the Qualies or...giving someone a chance to taste a slam event, something they might not have a chance to do when their young and up against it in the qualifying rounds.

I'd rather giver it to a kid for experience than somebody that is definitely not going beyond the 1st round, having said that, some of our youngsters...Morgan and Golding have been doing really well at their respective levels.

So those two I would grant them a wildcard and two of our young women...Watson and Robson and a couple more, just this once though.

But that should be it really, 8 cards in total, we really should be getting it into their heads to get good enough to qualify for a slam event and if cards are granted one year, then that should be it for two years I think, after that, one more card and then you're on your own.

Am I a little hitler or what !

Jubbahey wrote:To be honest, any wildcard from the host country is going to be for the sole use of by-passing the Qualies or...giving someone a chance to taste a slam event, something they might not have a chance to do when their young and up against it in the qualifying rounds.

I'd rather giver it to a kid for experience than somebody that is definitely not going beyond the 1st round, having said that, some of our youngsters...Morgan and Golding have been doing really well at their respective levels.

So those two I would grant them a wildcard and two of our young women...Watson and Robson and a couple more, just this once though.

But that should be it really, 8 cards in total, we really should be getting it into their heads to get good enough to qualify for a slam event and if cards are granted one year, then that should be it for two years I think, after that, one more card and then you're on your own.

Am I a little hitler or what !

I agree with you. I think it should be given to upcoming kids. I would choose Morgan and Golding for sure. It worked with Andy Murray and I think it will help with their development, than wasting them on a Bogdanovic.

The problem is that - as has been pointed out - they are (or have been) quite often handed out to guys who would have no chance in the qualifiers.

Boggo actually pushed Mahut in the qualifiers last year (not quite as long as the tie-break with Isner but not far off). He's obviously though never won a match in the the main draw and has slid a long way down the rankings now anyway.

Sure both Golding and Morgan would be a big surprise to win in the main draw. Would they benefit from the experience? Definitely. The rest? Debatable and maybe they should have to battle through the qualifiers to earn their chance.

One last point. Not having anyone other than Andy in the top 100 is one thing. The fact that we have no-one else inside the top 200 tells you all you need to know. They just ain't good enough and on current evidence (Morgan and Golding apart due to their youth) show no sign of closing that gap.

I sometimes wonder if old Boggo would have fared better if hadn't had so many cards, he may well have learnt to get his game together over a whole match rather than a couple of sets.

well newballs, that all depends on whether Golding or Morgan stay in the UK or go abroad for their coaching as all the LTA seem to do is train them to be Wannabies rather than Havetohaves

hey newballs and welcome.

I think in the past they have been given out lightly. I can remember Chris Eaton winning a first round match and never really pressed on. I know last year they were handed to more Brit players and it didn't really pay off.

Morgan and Golding can close in that gap, but it will take time. I think Tim Henman was in his 20's before making the top 100 and I think Murray has become the yardstick because he achieved it before his 20's. We need to give them time.

Jubbahey interesting one.

George Morgan has always fitted into the LTA setup it seems. Used to be in Bolton I believe and now?

Golding is an interesting one. There were rumours of him going to an academy in Spain or France. Getting a bit late in the day though for that although I believe he was out at least practising for a while out in Barcelona.

Both Robson and Watson went overseas to further their tennis ambitions. Murray naturally went too and there are many who believe Henman would have benefited from doing likewise.

They have been released.

Arnaud Clement
Daniel Cox
Daniel Evans
Alejandro Falla
James Ward

Still 3 left and no youngsters? What is wrong with the organisers!

Agree, I dont see the harm in handing out the wildcards to some youngsters to give them valuable experience. If we're serious about promoting and driving tennis standards in the UK we have to get the grassroots into top level competition as early as possible - the experience fuels desire too, something that seems to have been sadly lacking in the LTA set-up in past years.

I think there is maybe an expectation that Oliver Golding might be a new Andy Murray. Unfortunately I don't see that to be the case. He just is not good enough. He may eventually reach the top 100 but it is about time people realised how lucky we are in this country to have Murray, probably the best British player since Fred Perry and considering how few people play tennis in this country probably the best for the forseeable future.

Morgan and Golding have to go through the qualifiers. To me it is silly to have Golding playing as a WC at Queens, but not Wimbledon. Daniel Evans is a wasted WC.

I would like to see James Blake with a wildcard because he has been loyal to grass events in Britain.

steveo77 wrote:I think there is maybe an expectation that Oliver Golding might be a new Andy Murray. Unfortunately I don't see that to be the case. He just is not good enough. He may eventually reach the top 100 but it is about time people realised how lucky we are in this country to have Murray, probably the best British player since Fred Perry and considering how few people play tennis in this country probably the best for the forseeable future.

I think Golding has potential. No-one will be an Andy Murray and it is silly for this the country to expect any player to develop at the same quick pace he did. There is no expectation heaped on Golding. We are saying that he has potential to progess up the rankings. The kid is 17 and he has time on his side to refine his game. He has solid parts to his game which is good to see and I can't see why he can't be a top 100 player at 21.

steveo

I don't think anyone beyond Oliver's mum expects him to have as much success as Murray - as you say, Andy is a genuinely world class player, and should be both the role model and target for the younger players aspirations (i.e. he's made it, I can too if I work hard). A more realistic goal though is to aim to replicate the limited success that the LTA has had in developing the female players - getting well into the top 100 and edging the top 50, which was a good achievement for players with the talent and history of Keothavong and Baltacha (wonder how Elena would have done without the illness issues - regular top 50?).

As other have pointed out, it is little short of a scandal that for all the money the LTA invest in player development, we don't have anyone other than Murray in the top 200 of the men's game, and that it's probably over a decade since there was last an LTA-developed male player in the top 100 (Henman not being LTA funded, Rusedski not being British). At least Golding and Morgan have time on their side and some potential that might let them get there.

Guys

Golding and Morgan at the moment are the future. Both have talent and IMO both should get wildcards.

To suggest already that Golding "is not good enough" is frankly ludicrous. He played pretty well against Mahut and showed more promise on the "world stage" than Evans did in his Davis Cup outing.

James Ward is apparently giving Stan Warwinka a run for his money at the moment. He definitely deserves a wildcard. The others??

I don't mind the likes of Golding and Morgan (Broady too) getting WCs for qualies.

There are decent points on offer which can be helpful with boosting ranking at this stage of their careers.

Another issue with giving these youngsters WCs for the maindraw is the fact that they will certainly get slated when they inevitably lose, whether they draw Federer or a Spanish 'I'm only here for the holiday' clay courter.

I feel that if they were allowed to develop as most other players of their standing in the world without all the media attention after showing even a glimpse of potential, it might be a lot easier. But I guess that comes with not having that many players playing the game, so the reliance is on a small number of hopefuls. Unlike more traditional tennis playing nations, which have a large number of players to spread the expectation out.

Ward beat Wawrinka in straights btw, probably deserves his WC.

Hey dj good to see you over here.

It was a great performance from Ward from what I have read and an under par Wawrinka. Hard to imagine this was the guy who pushed Murray to 5 sets at Wimbledon.

I am with you that Morgan and Golding should get WC's as way to begin the development by getting a taster of a slam event and what would be required to continue performing at these events.

djlovesyou wrote: I don't mind the likes of Golding and Morgan (Broady too) getting WCs for qualies.

There are decent points on offer which can be helpful with boosting ranking at this stage of their careers.

Another issue with giving these youngsters WCs for the maindraw is the fact that they will certainly get slated when they inevitably lose, whether they draw Federer or a Spanish 'I'm only here for the holiday' clay courter.

...

I agree with you 100% - they will only get decent points in the main draw if they win their first round matches, otherwise it would be better to go through the qualifiers where there is a maximum of 25 points for the men and 60 points for the ladies available.

That's exactly what I said in my post, but you didn't quote that bit.

Mea culpa - amended

I see Dudi Sela and Gilles Muller have been awarded wildcards

Can't believe Daniel Evans got one

The wildcards have had mixed fortunes,

Sela and Muller made it through.

Clement went out in 5 sets.

Cox, Ward and Evans eliminated.

Falla yet to play Melzer.

To be fair to our guys, they got fairly tough draws:
Cox well beaten by Stakhovsky (#46 in the rankings, a talented player lacking a bit of physicality to push on higher) - not a terrible performance although showing our guy was a bit out of his depth

Evans losing in 4 including 2 breakers to 20th seed Mayer - that's a pretty good showing and certainly justified him being given the opportunity.

Ward losing in straight with 1 breaker to 19th seed Llodra - a tough draw on grass to get one of the few remaining guys that serve-volley's regularly and who is definintely better on grass than on slower courts, so a reasonable performance. Ward will be slightly disappointed though that he hasn't built on the results from Queens - could have racked up a few more points with a kinder draw first up.