British Tennis Forum - Celebrating 20 Years!

Jajon wrote:

---

I will say this was a very funny moment: x.com/kostekcanu/status/1954987590085644747

(Having a baby/young child out in that heat seems crazy to me)

---

 Annabel Croft said she felt sorry for the parents as everyone would be looking at them.  I just thought how selfish they were!

And now the Daily Mail has run an article on it which has attracted lots of comments from those who know nothing about tennis criticising Emma e.g accusing her of blaming her loss on the baby, saying she is useless as she has lost again and should give up tennis.   I wasted far too much time posting replies to them!

KK wrote:

---

And now the Daily Mail has run an article on it which has attracted lots of comments from those who know nothing about tennis criticising Emma e.g accusing her of blaming her loss on the baby, saying she is useless as she has lost again and should give up tennis.   I wasted far too much time posting replies to them!

---

How can anyone see a super long and tight loss to the world #1 as her being useless? She might not ever win a slam again, but I'm really impressed with how she's put her head down this year, she's injury free and played a full year. Love to see her as a regular in the top 20, and right now - I don't think that's out of the realms of possibility. 

All I can say at the moment is thank gawd for Emma just now.

Otherwise, in both men's and women's singles tour and challenger events it is certainly the most non happening North American hard court period I can recall, with the various losses ( some very poor ), playing elsewhere or just missing.

General prep for the US Open MD and qualies looks awful.

Bring back the clay.

As I said earlier in the thread, OER already had Kudermetova ahead of Emma, with Emma as live #35 even before today. I don't think live-tennis has Kudermetova's points quite right.

Whatever, they're all now agreed that Kudermetova is ahead of Emma with Emma as live #35 and two known top 32 withdrawals. There has been some speculation re Andreeva after a fall in Montreal and withdrawal from here but also thoughts that she will at least give herself all the time she can, like past the draw date.

Linette ( L16 vs Kudermetova tomorrow ) and Maneiro ( L16 vs Sabalenka tonight ) are also now just one win away from overtaking Emma.

Re not being seeded, of course you can still get quite good draws and / or draws can open up, but to my mind the odds are definitely more in your favour being seeded. And as a low seed you are not guaranteed to meet a top seed in the L32, what you are is bracketed to possibly meet a top 8 seed in the L32. But any non seed is bracketed with a top 16 seed ( very possibly a top 8 seed ) in any one of the L128, L64 and L32 and a seed of some description in one of the first 2 rounds. Naa, as I say, by luck it can work out but the odds are you are better being seeded - essentially why players do want to be seeded.

indiana wrote:

---

As I said earlier in the thread, OER already had Kudermetova ahead of Emma, with Emma as live #35 even before today. I don't think live-tennis has Kudermetova's points quite right.

Whatever, they're all now agreed that Kudermetova is ahead of Emma with Emma as live #35 and two known top 32 withdrawals. There has been some speculation re Andreeva after a fall in Montreal and withdrawal from here but also thoughts that she will at least give herself all the time she can, like past the draw date.

Linette ( L16 vs Kudermetova tomorrow ) and Maneiro ( L16 vs Sabalenka tonight ) are also now just one win away from overtaking Emma.

Re not being seeded, of course you can still get quite good draws and / or draws can open up, but to my mind the odds are definitely more in your favour being seeded. And as a low seed you are not guaranteed to meet a top seed in the L32, what you are is bracketed to possibly meet a top 8 seed in the L32. But any non seed is bracketed with a top 16 seed ( very possibly a top 8 seed ) in any one of the L128, L64 and L32 and a seed of some description in one of the first 2 rounds. Naa, as I say, by luck it can work out but the odds are you are better being seeded - essentially why players do want to be seeded.

---

 All of what you say is of course correct, but it is worth remembering that 2 out of 3 non-seeds do not face a seed in the first round, (ie 64 out of 96 places you can end up in the draw), so that is good odds to first face a seed in the second round.

Then if you make the second round, assuming all 32 seeds made it that far, you would have a one in two chance of facing a top 16 seed, so again some chance of making the third round without really facing a top player.

Of course though, not all the seeds make it through to Round 2 and even less to Round 3.

That for me is the reason why being unseeded is only slightly worse than being seeded 17-32, because if you probably had average luck as a non-seed, you would avoid a seed in Round One and then face a mid ranking seed in Round 2. Of course getting average luck is like throwing a  total of seven with 2 dice - statistically by far the most likely outcome, but as anyone who has ever played dice based games will tell you, there are lots of times that you roll the dice and it isn't your day and you end up with a 2 or 3, and others where you end up with an 11 or 12.

I just have a feeling Emma will miss out on getting a seeding, but I am still hopeful that she is playing well enough to have a real run again this year - just needs a bit of luck with that draw.

I'm more concerned for Fran - having risen so nicely in the rankings and easily in the top 100, it would be very cruel if she just misses the cut and is forced to qualify. It's going to be a close for her and Emma, I think.