Jamie's Wimbledon column for the Beeb. Since it consists of his thoughts as expressed to Jonathan Jurejko, I blame whoever transcribed his words for "were a good team" towards the end...
How are Stefanos and his brother in the MD? Their combined ranking is something like 278, did they get a wildcard?
111 for entry ranking based on current rankings. Petros doubles 108 and Stefanos singles 5. You can use either singles or doubles ranking to enter doubles.
How are Stefanos and his brother in the MD? Their combined ranking is something like 278, did they get a wildcard?
111 for entry ranking based on current rankings. Petros doubles 108 and Stefanos singles 5. You can use either singles or doubles ranking to enter doubles.
That's so annoying to me! Very nepotistic. I get that 108 is a decent ranking by his own merit, but he's now gotten into multiple masters and slams based purely on his brother saying 'ok, I'll do it for you'.
That is so unfair on doubles players who may just miss out on entry because you can use your singles ranking. That should be changed. I'd be preety annoyed if I were a doubles only player ranked near the top 50 for my hard work but then missed out on bigger opportunities because somebody can pull rank with their singles ranking. How the hell is that justified.
Because top singles players are generally better at doubles even if they don't have a high doubles ranking
I can appreciate that but it still doesn't really seem fair on those who are only doubles players. The top singles players don't need the money whereas in doubles the prize money is only a fraction of singles. It just feels like doubles players get a rough deal all because they don't play solo.
Well, it would be unfair if they changed the rules mid-way
But the doubles players know the rules; you could say 'if they want the higher money, they should concentrate on singles'
After all, I'm sure badminton players would say it's unfair how much doubles tennis players get compared with badminton players
Not trying to be difficult but the doubles players aren't 'entitled' to anything - frankly, I think they're extremely lucky - it's never on TV - it's not in the press - doubles is basically subsidised completely by the singles players
Because top singles players are generally better at doubles even if they don't have a high doubles ranking
I can appreciate that but it still doesn't really seem fair on those who are only doubles players. The top singles players don't need the money whereas in doubles the prize money is only a fraction of singles. It just feels like doubles players get a rough deal all because they don't play solo.
Every event is the same: players can use their singles or doubles ranking to enter doubles. Tournaments want top players to play doubles if they can. Any player choosing to focus on doubles will know the deal at the start - yes it is tough, but ultimately a case of market forces. And yes, a lot of the top singles players can play good doubles.
-- Edited by 9vicman on Thursday 6th of July 2023 05:00:37 PM