Week 10 - ITF ($25K) - Preston, UK Hard

TomTraubert · Futures level

RE: Week 10 - ITF ($25K) - Preston, UK Hard

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

Got any more Anna? Can turn this around, just one break to recover.
3-6 6-3 *0-3

-- Edited by AliBlahBlah on Monday 3rd of March 2014 06:55:32 PM

TomTraubert · Futures level

ah no 0-4*

TomTraubert · Futures level

oh hold on breaks back still hanging in *1-4

TomTraubert · Futures level

just katy through

anna going down 2-6 in the third

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

Lots of decent effort, promising positions and better than expected performance against large ranking odds.
Only one 'W' at days end though.

Eden: 5-7 0-6
Katy: 4-6 7-6(5) 6-4

Lucy: 6-4 2-6 2-6
Lauren: 0-6 1-6
Alannah: 2-6 2-6
Nicola: 4-6 0-6
Sarah Beth: 4-6 4-6
Emily: 4-6 6-7(5)
Anna: 3-6 6-3 2-6

paulisi · Tennis legend

One more win than I expected.

Unfortunately Katy has the top seed in final qualifying. She will be competitive, but I'm not expecting her to win.

paulisi · Tennis legend

DavidC wrote:
paulisi wrote:
Nice to see Eden competitive in the first set and was serving for the set. Not bad for a 15yr old on the up. Is she based in the north west? Only she was at the Wirral watching qualis and playing at Preston.
Eden's home base is in Cheshire, though she moved down to Bath last year to join the academy there

Makes sense why she was at Wirral then.

Peter too · Tennis legend

Q1: DUNNE, Katy (GBR) 506 beat PERA, Bernarda (USA) 13 364 4-6 7-6(5) 6-4
Q1: MCMINN, Lauren (GBR) 1208 lost to BORECKA, Martina (CZE) 14 369 0-6 1-6
Q1: BROWN, Lucy (GBR) 632 lost to HESSE, Amandine (FRA) 3 223 6-4 2-6 2-6
Q1: RICHARDSON, Eden (GBR) UNR lost to BARBIERI, Gioia (ITA) 4 238 5-7 0-6
Q1: GEORGE, Nicola (GBR) UNR lost to KERKHOVE, Lesley (NED) 5 245 4-6 0-6
Q1: GRIFFIN, Alannah (GBR) UNR lost to TOMOVA, Viktoriya (BUL) 15 400 2-6 2-6
Q1: SMITH, Anna (GBR) 486 lost to RAMIALISON, Irina (FRA) 7 279 3-6 6-3 2-6
Q1: ASKEW, Sarah Beth (GBR) 1208 lost to VAN DER MEET, Angelique (NED) 11 307 4-6 4-6
Q1: WEBLEY-SMITH, Emily (GBR) 432 lost to MARTINCOVA, Tereza (CZE) 8 284 4-6 6-7(5)

Q2: DUNNE, Katy (GBR) 506 v KONTAVEIT, Anett (EST) 1 201

TomTraubert · Futures level

i thought itd be much closer but katy got given a real good going over by jess rens bff kontaveit

1-6 1-6

TomTraubert · Futures level

kontaveit is pretty good and starting to make good on her early promise and potenshal - last 2 outings were runner up spots in $15K & $25K
katy only held serve once in the match though

indiana · Tennis legend

And then there were none.

No real reflection on the individuals, but much more on the awful lack of depth beyond say our top 9 players, who are competitive at 25Ks and beyond.

Finding others for 25K qualifiers feels a bit like throwing them to the wolves, although there were a few decent looking performances in QR1 and hopefully it is good experience for them.

I was thinking we should maybe have more 10Ks, but truthfully unlike the guys we are struggling to find that many competitive players at even 10K level.

Beyond our top 9 ( i.e. down to Jade and the injured Amanda and Lisa ), for truly competitive 10K players I'd suggest that we only really have Emily, Anna ( but bigger sights on doubles ), Katy D, Lucy, and Manisha, plus Katie B coming through and also Eleanor ( who has not been seen again for a few weeks ? )

So, putting on more 10Ks might help the remainder have some closer matches, but currently unlikely very successful matches.

steven · Tennis legend

Naomi didn't need a wild card in the end so it has gone to Manisha:

L32: (WC) Samantha Murray WR 230 v (WC) Jessica Simpson WR 956 - H2H 1-0, 3 & 3, Shrewsbury 2013
L32: (WC) Manisha Foster WR 711 v (3) Kristyna Pliskova (CZE) WR 147 (CH 86 in Jan)
L32: Tara Moore WR 239 v (5) Marta Sirotkina (RUS) WR 165 (CH 115 in 2013) - H2H 0-1, 2 & 6, Barnstaple 2012
L32: (WC) Jade Windley WR 288 v (Q) Gioia Barbieri (ITA) WR 238 (= CH)
L32: Naomi Broady WR 222 v Stéphanie Foretz Gacon (FRA) WR 195 (CH 62 in 2003) - H2H 1-1, both in 2011

Katy reports that Anett has made up for thrashing her by picking her first out of the LL pot but there are no LL places yet.

-- Edited by steven on Wednesday 5th of March 2014 12:48:32 PM

The Optimist · ATP qualifying

indiana wrote:
And then there were none.

No real reflection on the individuals, but much more on the awful lack of depth beyond say our top 9 players, who are competitive at 25Ks and beyond.

Finding others for 25K qualifiers feels a bit like throwing them to the wolves, although there were a few decent looking performances in QR1 and hopefully it is good experience for them.

I was thinking we should maybe have more 10Ks, but truthfully unlike the guys we are struggling to find that many competitive players at even 10K level.

Beyond our top 9 ( i.e. down to Jade and the injured Amanda and Lisa ), for truly competitive 10K players I'd suggest that we only really have Emily, Anna ( but bigger sights on doubles ), Katy D, Lucy, and Manisha, plus Katie B coming through and also Eleanor ( who has not been seen again for a few weeks ? )

So, putting on more 10Ks might help the remainder have some closer matches, but currently unlikely very successful matches.

I think there has suddenly been a big upsurge in popularity of the US Uni route and that many of the 95 and 94 girls who would normally be making inroads on the 10Ks are over the pond. I can think of Claudia Marsala, Holly Reid, Shannon Newnes, Tegan Louw, Grace Lymer Sullivan, Kim Schmider, Kelly Burge, Ella Taylor, Kathryn Hughes, Laura Eales, Brigit Folland, Elle Stokes, Pippa Horn, Tiffany Williams, Emily Gibbons, Morven McCullouch, Pippa Carr, Anneka and Sophie Watts, Emma Devine, Anna Woosley, Katherine Whiteaway and I'm sure I've missed some. I also get the impression that there's an even bigger cohort heading that way this summer.

indiana · Tennis legend

Yes, the US College root is certainly taking a lot of players away, hopefully to reap future benefits in tennis and in life generally.

I do feel sorry for the cohort of essentially 10K players that remain such as vurrently Katy D, Lucy and Manisha. They are denied many home 10Ks, unlike the multitude the men get, so essentially really have to make clearly more costly trips abroad to get such competition, so probably have to limit their schedules ( Katy D, I am guessing is the only one of these particular 3 that is significantly funded ).

Emily has never exactly minded ( and seems able to and quite enjoy ) traveling about ( and probably wishes she was still more competitive at 25Ks and above ), and Anna is concentrated on doubles.

I wonder if it is there being such a small number that would likely benefit, in ranking points terms, from more GB 10Ks that means the LTA limits their number. But there are other lower ranked and unranked players that surely home 10Ks qualifying and some MDs would benefit too, if not currently bringing much success.

I wonder if in both men ( 10Ks vs Challengers ) and women ( 25Ks vs 10Ks ), the LTA is trying to be too clever by half in developing schedules more aimed at maximising home GB ranking points as against foreign raiders.

Providing a more naturally balanced programme would still see the best come through and would be fairer to all.