Yes its clever scheduling given it is essentially a 25k level field at best.
It's not really that similar to a 25k field. At Aldershot this week, the number 3 seed was WR 436, 3 places lower than the last direct acceptance here. Put another way, 20 players in the top 400 here versus 2 in Aldershot. Or 14 players in the top 350 versus 1.
Yes its clever scheduling given it is essentially a 25k level field at best.
It's not really that similar to a 25k field. At Aldershot this week, the number 3 seed was WR 436, 3 places lower than the last direct acceptance here. Put another way, 20 players in the top 400 here versus 2 in Aldershot. Or 14 players in the top 350 versus 1.
Check back a few weeks and I think you will find it is similar. Its a weak challenger field, poor argument comparing Aldershot most of the players that would play there have travelled for the weaker challengers. My point stands, you sometimes need to look deeper to compare.
Yes its clever scheduling given it is essentially a 25k level field at best.
It's not really that similar to a 25k field. At Aldershot this week, the number 3 seed was WR 436, 3 places lower than the last direct acceptance here. Put another way, 20 players in the top 400 here versus 2 in Aldershot. Or 14 players in the top 350 versus 1.
Check back a few weeks and I think you will find it is similar. Its a weak challenger field, poor argument comparing Aldershot most of the players that would play there have travelled for the weaker challengers. My point stands, you sometimes need to look deeper to compare.
This is weaker that many challenger fields but, it is a 50k challenger, not an 80k or higher. Its certainly higher than an average 25k.
L16: Charles Broom & Daniel Cukierman (ISR) CR 578 (306+272) vs Nicola Kuhn & Illya Marchenko (GER/UKR) UNR L16: Billy Harris & Courtney John Lock (ZIM) CR 609 (351+258) vs (2) Tristan Schoolkate & Dane Sweeny (AUS/AUS) CR 410 (237+183)