Jaggy1876 wrote:

---

Id say the 20/500 will be on as Kyle, Giles, Toby and Jack PJ will all make it in coming weeks or certainly there will be 18 or 19 there. Might hang on 19 and 9 through the spring is my gut feeling.

---

Short of there being no more than the current 17 in the top 500 that seems to cover most bases     It does seem to me to remain rather uncertain

Felix will need quite a few points in the next couple of months to stay in the top 500. 31 of his current 90 points are due to drop by 24/04. On the other hand Giles, already on 71 points and with nothing coming off until 15/05, needs very little, the cross-over might even come back down to 71 at some stage. The others? - would be good to see but I'm nor sure.

JonH comes home wrote:

---

to be fair 20/500 is probably more likely than 10/250 (which I just cant see happening). The thing with the 20/500 is that a) most of the contenders ie those in 501-500 range have thin schedules the next few weeks for sure, I dont see where the points will come from b) the reality is others around them play well or equal to them and although 14 or 20 points doesnt look much , for most of these guys it is a big haul still.

We shall see!

---

 Ha, that was a quick switch of the more likely    -  though to be fair you still see both as unlikely for a time yet.

Anyway, rather than just fling stones at others I should make some prediction. I'll say 20 in the top 500 comes first this coming autumn. But we shall see ...

-- Edited by indiana on Thursday 16th of February 2023 05:41:31 PM

20 in the top 500 does not equate to 40 in the top 1000, given it's supposed to be a pyramid

As to the Bob/Jaggy challenge, a few years back we were down to 14 or so in the top 500

It was miserable

The very fact that we're on the edge, even if it doesn't quite get cracked, is brilliant

The US college players are obviously constricted by their domestic agendas - it really doesn't matter if JoMo doesn't play now, as long as he plays well when he finally gives it his all. Same for Toby, Jack PJ, Max etc etc

Coup Droit wrote:

---

20 in the top 500 does not equate to 40 in the top 1000, given it's supposed to be a pyramid

As to the Bob/Jaggy challenge, a few years back we were down to 14 or so in the top 500

It was miserable

The very fact that we're on the edge, even if it doesn't quite get cracked, is brilliant

The US college players are obviously constricted by their domestic agendas - it really doesn't matter if JoMo doesn't play now, as long as he plays well when he finally gives it his all. Same for Toby, Jack PJ, Max etc etc

---

 It does really. If you consider all countries to be aiming for the same sort of development I see no real reason to look for our own distribution to be more of of a pyramid  40 in the top 1000 is as comparatively good as 20 in the top 500,, it's the same comparative depth, although of course we're much more interested in the top 500.

Anyway , re Jon's post, we are beating the 4 per 100 at 600 and 700.  With 8 in the 500s we have 25 in the top 600 and I'd noticed that George's SF last week will make him our 5th player in the 700s, giving us 30 in the top 700 this coming Monday.

The biggie of 4 in the top 100 is clearly covered just now and 5 the top 125 needs Liam and/or Ryan doing the business.

-- Edited by indiana on Thursday 16th of February 2023 06:28:50 PM

I fact its 33 top 1000 it appears so some way off that. And I guess unlikely to be something we achieve, 40 that is.

indiana wrote:

---

JonH comes home wrote:

---

I fact its 33 top 1000 it appears so some way off that. And I guess unlikely to be something we achieve, 40 that is.

---

 Yes, on Monday after our 30 in the top 700 we will only have 3 more between 700 and 1000. Bit strange but there will always be quite a bit of a randomness to the groupings.

In the live rankings we have George Loffhagen at #691 ( GB #30 ) and then a big gap to Max Basing at #828 ( GB #31 )

Guess if we are going to have just 33 in the top 1000 it's very good that 30 of these are in the top 700. And that slight queue adds to Bob's eternal hopes for cracking the 20 in the top 500

---

 Yes, if they're all 'live' rankings - which I think all of ours are now - i.e. no AWOL players drifitng down...

But it's not great to have so few underpinning the higher ones (although I accept that if you're only given 20 players, you'd want them in the top-500 rather than the 500-1000). Not very reassuring though when you have little depth. However, the college players rather throw a spanner in the normal works, as they can come out of nowhere and hit the ground running, which is great, and means the lower ranks should also include UTR ratings (or other) to be a true reflection