There's only three spaces left - it's so 'unfair' (arguably ?) if only one of the semi-finalists gets the WC. But that's life.... and it's happened before.... if it's between two semi-finalists, it sort of makes sense to follow the ranking (it's neutral and can't be argued with) which would definitely mean Lucy would lose out every time (if she loses her semi). Which is a real shame as she's playing very well. But you're responsible for your results in the last 12 months so it's as decent a way of differentiating as any other and better than most.
Wimbledon decided to only give 3 doubles wildcards so the last four went to the next ins on the entry list.
Disappointing decision. Particularly given they were happy to give wcs to James Ward who plays next to no doubles amd it terrible at it when he does.
Is this confirmed? The Wimbly page I'm looking at is not updated.
If so, I completely agree. Tara and Nik should have got one, no question. And others, why not....
And, yes, especially as you say considering they've given one to james. And to Kyle too.
Neither play doubles.
I note that neither are playing doubles this week at Nottingham (and, yes, I know that both are nursing injuries but it's almost like James sticks himself in for a doubles at Surbiton, plays as though thinking about what he's going to have for dinner that night, gets his wildcard and say 'great, done the bare minimum,, got the WC, that's all folks').
Sorry if this overlaps with the men's thread but....
Roland Garros featured 17 French female doubles players, 14 of them wildcards.
The Oz Open featured 17 Ozzies, 14 of them wildcards.
The US Open '14 featured 29 Yanks, 14 of them wildcards.
Wimbledon will feature 6 British women doubles players, 5 of them wildcards.
yes, and some of those French players were MILES away from making it as of right - Irina and Constance were ranked about 330 and 490 in doubles, de bernardi was about 550 and Reix about 700 !!!
The Americans give doubles wildcards to promising juniors without a ranking in the women's game.
Tornado Black, for example, played 2 doubles matches in 2014, one at a 10k (which she lost), and one at the US Open (also lost), after which she did get a ranking, as she had 10 points.
Nik Slater is WR203 for doubles. Her prize money earnings for 2015 to date are US$2,276 (approximately £1,500). Her only chance of actually making a living playing doubles is to get a high enough ranking to qualify for WTAs and, especially, Grand Slams. Joss Rae's earnings to date are only US$13,763 (about £10,000).
To do so, she needs to accumulate approximately 1,200 ranking points, from 11 tournaments. As a women's ITF 50k tournament gives you only 80 points for winning your 4 matches, she very rarely even gets the chance to compete for the necessary ranking points.
This psychopathic "tough luck" policy threatens to destroy yet another playing career.
I don't have a problem with this in as much as singles to be honest as I think doubles should be with singles I don't really understand players only playing doubles at a young age. It strikes of not being good enough.
Subjective to those they are playing. I'm sure if the top players played doubles they'd be just as good. The fact it is a secondary sport in terms of ability and interest so I don't see how mediocrity should be rewarded except for the very best.
I'm pleased that Laura has got a MDWC for Wimbledon. No pressure on her to win, and she can enjoy the experience of being back playing again in front of a good crowd, before starting the hard work of finding her match sharpness in the ITFs. Plus it will allow us a chance to watch her play.