mjd wrote:

---

I wonder why this thread is headed 35k+H ?
Doesn't fit in with £, $ or 30k (Euro symbol
doesnt show)

---

Steveg shows it as $35K+H, and E30K+H. The ATP site and the tournament fact sheet show it as E30K without the H. Take your pick!

 

Ok better late than never:

Manchester Challenger Day 3

 

After a day of rain and pure Manchester weather, the 2^nd round matches were postponed a day, but still ended up on the indoor courts. This hugely affected the way some of the games were going to go, and in particular some of the 5 Brits that were on show. All Brits were on the nearside Court 1, meaning touching distance to the spectators. This gave us a lucky (well unlucky in some cases!) view of the matches in progress.

 

Motomura bt Slabinsky 6-3 6-4 I have no doubt that Slabba would of won this if play had continued on the outdoor grass courts. However, the courts were much slower giving advantage to Motomura. On arrival Alex was already a break down serving at 1-4. Straight away I was witness to some very dodgy line calls, which seemed to be a running theme throughout the day. The indoor courts did not seem to aid the officials either as a variety of blatant errors were on display. Motomura was able to take his time and attack Slabinskys serves and baseline shots, picking the corners several times. As the 2^nd set rolled on, it became obvious that Slabinsky was going to have to win this game rather than expect Motomura to lose it. The Japanese player was more consistent and comfortable with the surface. Slabinsky didnt look to be moving a freely on the surface, become agitated with himself missing shots he would normally of got. When serving at 4-4 in the 2^nd set, a couple of double faults gave advantage to Motomura who gratefully accepted and saw out the match. A match Slabba could of won in different circumstances. 

 

Snobel(2) bt Cakl 6-2 7-6(4) Again this match was already 4-1 to Snobel, but this game already had a double break. After witnessing Cakl in the qualifying indoors already, I knew he wasnt 100% comfortable on this surface. Snobel seemed to be hitting the shots more easily and his shot choice was winning him the game, unsettling his fellow countryman. Cakl was not getting his serves away from Snobel as much with Pavel returning and attacking each one. In the 2^nd set, the smaller, balder Czech started to attack the taller, hairier Czech and make a match of it. However, Snobel is a bizarre player, moving around the court like hes not really interested. He never seemed to be in a rush to get to balls and often just left the ball rather than exert any energy. If Im honest it looked more like a practise match than a 2^nd round clash and the game saw itself out.

 

Goodall(7) bt Klein 6-4 6-2 Lets get one thing straight right away, Klein did not like the fact he was playing indoors! From warm-up to handshake at the end, he was muttering and complaining about the fact he was playing indoors for a grass court tournament. I think someone should of told him that this tournament happened to be in Manchester! Throughout the game, Klein tried to serve volley but with the surface slower, he was making more mistakes and Goodall picked him off with ease. Once he had been broken at 3-3, Klein held his stomach as if hed been winded by a football. He kept holding it whenever he made a mistake on a shot throughout the match, and at one point did call the trainer. The trained professional came on but didnt seem to take much sympathy on what sounded like a complaint about stomach illness rather than muscular injury. Im not doubting Klein is a great player, but actor he aint and I believe that he just did not like the surface, saw Goodall was better but didnt want to show that he was being beaten, like a substitute who does that limp when they get pulled off. Oh, but back to the game, and Josh hit the ball very sweetly and his movement was brilliant. At Queens he was criticised for his shot selection, but here he got it right every time. Now Klein might of really been injured, but either way Goodall played brilliantly. He looks a lot more leaner and fitter this year and if he plays like this he could finally hit the heights we all know he can.

 

Rehnquist(4) bt Dellacqua 6-2 6-0 Gazzs pick for the title and at the end of this Im still convinced he will go to the end at least. However, when the play had been moved indoors I thought it might suit the big serving Italian better. And, it looked that way in the opening 4 games which all went to deuce several times. Dellacqua has a huge serve, but that is it really. Rehnquist moves around the court very freely and seems to have great determination and stamina. However, one fact is that Massimo does not like a rally. You can see the fear when Rehnquist returned his serve think how am I going to finish this?!!. He does have one more weapon, and that is his backhand which he hits as hard as his serves. To his credit, he did try to alter his game and his shots, but to no avail. If he learns to hit a ball at the net, he could of worried Rehnquist more, but the Swede never looked in danger after breaking. There was a part of me that did want to see Dellacqua make the final just to see what top hed wear as every match his shirt seems to be tighter! Maybe a topless final!

 

Bloomfield bt Eaton 6-3 6-4 As soon as this moved indoors it was advantage Bloomfield. Eaton, supported by a buoyant crowd, couldnt adapt his game to the surface and that was all Rich needed. The LTA need to look at Eaton and if they believe he could be the golden boy of Tennis then they need to give him a good coach and educate him. He has a good game, but its using the right shots in the right environment. As the game wore on, the confident swagger that he had on route to the court slowly turned into a scared, despondent stance. You forget that Eaton is only 20 and that this was his first Challenger 2^nd round match, so he will learn and improve his shot choice. That saying, the game wasnt a spectacle. For the first 7-8 games I dont think we saw any point have more than 3 shots. Both playing big serves, but Bloomfield more consistent with his execution. Eatons main problem was that he wasnt getting the 1^st serve in. When he did, he approached the shot with eagerness only for Bloomfield to hit the return right at him startling Eaton or knock it down the line. Eaton seem to hope that Bloomfield would return right down the middle as that was the route he made to the net every point. Richard used his experience, positioning himself to attack the serve and knock winners down the line. In the 2^nd set we saw a rally or 2, but it was only a matter of time till Bloomfield win. Eaton will grow from this, but please LTA look after this guy and dont let it become another so-near-yet-so-far story.

 

Smeets(1) bt Faurel 6-7(6) 6-4 6-0 Well the crowds picked the right time to come, with Bloomfield/Eaton match having 3 shot points, and this bore-fest on the other court! Saying that, this was really only the case for the first set. Here I think Faurel and Smeets were having a competition to see who could hit the ball into the net first. Faurel actually broke at 4-4 when Smeets did, you guessed it, hit the ball into the net, only for Smeets to break straight back when Faurel decided hed do the same! When the tie break came, both players seemed to decide we better start playing here, and points became more interesting. Faurel actually started to look like a decent player and had a cracking backhand slice. But then Smeets realised he was the number 1 seed and started playing too. There were some interesting rallies developing with Faurel displaying this fitness and speed, and Smeets showing he has some great attacking net play mixed with smashing backhand baseline play. Eventually, Faurel started to make too many errors, whereas Smeets kept the ball in court.

 

Groth(5) bt Cox 7-6(1) 6-4 Real shame here as Cox could of caused a real upset. He displayed here though that he is no longer a junior and needs to be plying his trade on the senior circuit week in week out. His attitude and pre/post match preparation has been brilliant. Gone has the boy who took tennis as a hobby and joked around and in is a man who is focussed and determined to become a success. He has built up and his fitness/physique will be the making of his game removing any worries about his height. This was a close encounter with both players adapting to the indoor courts hitting the ball sweetly. Groth had that experience though and knew when to attack or not. He had a few more shots in his weaponry than Cox, mixing them up, approaching the net occasionally, slowing the game down and making Cox work. Cox however seemed to want to hit the winner each time. He did make Groth work, however this is a man who sweats profusely. The Aussie look shattered and grabbing the towel on only the 3^rd game! But where was this game lost then by Cox? Well, having already had few exchanges in the opening games, Cox had an encounter with a very poor umpire. Cox serving, the net shudders, Groth returns with Cox leaving it. Bizarrely the umpire states out point to Groth. Here is where Coxs head went. In the 2^nd set, he tried to recuperate himself, displaying another asset he has learnt in the last year is how to battle. However, with the choice of shots still lacking a break was disappearing. There were a few opportunities, but when broken himself late in the set Groth seized the initiative. A loss but lots of positives for Cox. For Groth, a new towel please.

 

Beck(3) bt Ebden 6-2 6-7(3) 6-3 Another one of my predictions destroyed when play was brought indoors. Before the game I straight away thought that Beck would have the upper hand, and he didnt disappoint coming into the match looking more comfortable, with Ebden displaying the same face of disgust as his colleague Klein. However, in the 2^nd set Ebden started to adapt his game to the surface and began to trouble Beck. Back, who had been controlling the rallies, started to make errors and be worked around himself. Ebden seemed to grow within the game, but Beck managed to just get a slight grip with an early break in the 3^rd. Ebden slowly started to look a little lost and was broken again on match point.

ATP draw sheet shows this as E30K (no +H) which is $47.5k (Is this near enough to $50K ?)

With 55 points shown for the winner it makes it either $50k or $35k+H so perhaps this title is correct if $ sign was added but then it would disagree with the drawsheets.

It was so much simpler when it was dollars only - I guess we Europeans just wanted equal rights!

I'm trying to put to the back of my mind the fact that Smeets lost the 1st set yesterday but won the 3rd 6-0 !

2007 - 292.
2006 - 275.
2005 - 279.
2004 - 281.
2003 - 301.

I'd say that Bloomers needs to get to the finals to have some chance.

I forgot that Jonny has his PR through which he could enter! It's unlikely that he will get in, but it's worth a try, I guess.