For the qualies (but not the main draw), I see that all the wildcards went to Brits. The problem with that (assuming that other Slams do the same thing) is that it introduces an unfair bias towards all players who are citizens of countries which host a slam (GB/US/FRA/AUS). So I think one qualifying wildcard (2 for the women) could go to the best remaining players of non-slam-hosting countries.
It does anyway Paul, effectively, as the unused wild card goes to the highest ranked player in the alternatives list , which typically would be a non Brit.
I'd like to see atleast 1 WC go to someone that has made a big jump in ranking after cut off. In effect that's what happened with Daria Saville and I think it was the right call but an actual GS policy would be helpful. As for the Brits that got the WC, it's refreshing this year to actually have hope that with a decent draw there could be some making it through atleast 1 round. I'm onboard with the reasoning behind giving home players WCs but there is a limit to the level you allow to play IMO and I really don't see who else should have got a WC based on rankings and recent results, particularly with so many UK 25ks this year so the remaining WCs going to next on the alternate list is fair. These are players that have got into the top 300 have earned that opportunity and the Brits lower down the rankings haven't.
For the qualies (but not the main draw), I see that all the wildcards went to Brits. The problem with that (assuming that other Slams do the same thing) is that it introduces an unfair bias towards all players who are citizens of countries which host a slam (GB/US/FRA/AUS). So I think one qualifying wildcard (2 for the women) could go to the best remaining players of non-slam-hosting countries.
It does anyway Paul, effectively, as the unused wild card goes to the highest ranked player in the alternatives list , which typically would be a non Brit.
That doesn't really answer Paul's point, Jon, as it was exceptional this year that there were quali wildcards left over and it didn't apply to the US, France or Australia anyway
Yes, Paul you have a point - normally all the wildcards for grand slam qualis go to home players - but the same applies for the 1000s, and all other high ranking events - it's obviously slightly unfair but that's the benefit the country gets for staging the event.
The point of the wildcards is to boost the tennis story in the host country - the draws are 128 - and only 9 wildcards. It's very small. So the best ranked 119 players get accepted directly. It really doesn't boost tennis very much by giving the spot to the 'best remaining player' - it simply means the 120th guy also gets in - it's not a wildcard, just an alternate
And there are certain caveats - i.e the UK usually gives last year's junior champion a wildcard - if needed. And that's always a foreign player. They are also good at giving main draw wildcards to non-British players (too good, some might say). Hence, the Dutch guy getting one here this year.
Now that all the men from the LTA play-off have been eliminated, I'll nominate my Man of the LTA Play-Off Event.
My choice is Stuart Parker for the following reasons:
1) He got through the LTA playoffs despite not being among the top two seeds.
2) Out of the 3 men in the qualies from the LTA playoffs, he was the only one who took a set from his opponent.