'23 USO Day 2 OoP & Discussion

[ponchi101]

About Felix, he was also being lauded as a "for sure" slams winner, and it is not that he has not won one, he truly looks lost out there.
I find that was completely not obvious.

[meganfernandez]

How about a WC into the qualies? A bit more fair?
And the players' associations could have a say: NO WC's for players ranked below a certain cutoff point. Because, as I said, then somebody gets taken out of $82K.

She wouldn't take a qualies wild card. I don't think tournaments should have to acquiesce to the players council for WCs. It's a marketing tool.There probably are some rules for WCs, right? Like you need to have been active within a certain time or achieved a certain ranking at some point? They can't give one to a celebrity, for instance, just to see what would happen.

I see where you're coming from, but any rule like that would be arbitrary and would also bite up-and-coming players who don't have a high ranking. This isn't the problematic part of wild cards to me. All of them take money out of a higher-ranked player's pocket, and allowing a fan favorite in is more justifiable (because it's for fans) than swapping them between Slam host countries.

[nelslus]

How about a WC into the qualies? A bit more fair?
And the players' associations could have a say: NO WC's for players ranked below a certain cutoff point. Because, as I said, then somebody gets taken out of $82K.

She wouldn't take a qualies wild card. I don't think tournaments should have to acquiesce to the players council for WCs. It's a marketing tool.There probably are some rules for WCs, right? Like you need to have been active within a certain time or achieved a certain ranking at some point? They can't give one to a celebrity, for instance, just to see what would happen.

I see where you're coming from, but any rule like that would be arbitrary and would also bite up-and-coming players who don't have a high ranking. This isn't the problematic part of wild cards to me. All of them take money out of a higher-ranked player's pocket, and allowing a fan favorite in is more justifiable (because it's for fans) than swapping them between Slam host countries.

I totally would stop this giving out automatic US/Aussie/Roland Garros/Wimbledon WC's nonsense. While these WC's have been hugely important for some of my favorite players from these countries- it's hugely archaic, unfair, and pure entitlement. AND- get rid of WC's due to players with powerful PR teams, family ties, etc. WC's go to the "Next-In" top ranked players on the lists. Merit based only. I hate how all of this could have hurt the careers of players from other countries.

AS for V- i do think that, once you've achieved such a level of greatness- true HOF careers- you get a lifetime supply of WC's (AND Rice-A-Roni, the San Francisco treat ). If- AND PLEASE, WORLD, DON'T LET THE FOLLOWING EVER HAPPEN!!!!- Roger at 48 decided he wanted to play on the tour again and lose to Van Assche in 1R at Wimbledon- then, so be it. Make it rain, Roger.

Mind you- I do wish that V had been fare more graceful and bowed out of this tournament. Forgetting for the moment her age- she's clearly nowhere near 100% physically/health-wise, and should have let another player have a chance at the opportunity and $'s.

I'm definitely not saying I'm right here- and, it could be decided to limit the time period for when former HOF players get WC's.

OH, and btw- fellow geezers- it IS Day 3 of this Open. Perhaps it's time to head over there.

[ti-amie]

Venus loss upset me. As has been said it's how she lost not that she lost. I understand that she feels the late diagnosis of her auto-immune disease did rob her of chances to achieve more glory but sadly it may be time for her to have a serious talk with herself about where she's going with her career.

I agree the "WC's for life" for Slam winners should be looked at again. I'm sure Raducanu will be using them to play higher than her ranking next year. Just think Vondrousova will now be in the same position going forward.

[ponchi101]

So.
Two good weeks at ANY slam would guarantee you a $240K income for ten years, in Emma's case. Even if the best she does from now on is attending the Met Gala.
That's a good deal.

[meganfernandez]

Venus loss upset me. As has been said it's how she lost not that she lost. I understand that she feels the late diagnosis of her auto-immune disease did rob her of chances to achieve more glory but sadly it may be time for her to have a serious talk with herself about where she's going with her career.

I agree the "WC's for life" for Slam winners should be looked at again. I'm sure Raducanu will be using them to play higher than her ranking next year. Just think Vondrousova will now be in the same position going forward.

No WCs for life for anyone. But V is an active player, just beat a Top 15 player and is a huge fan favorite who’s life was just made into an Oscar-winning movie. I think her home Slam can justify the WC. She transcends tennis.

I’ll say what I did on Twitter - she stands for doing what you love beyond the age when you shouldn’t be able to, and competing fairly and fully even if you might fall on your face, then holding your head high. That’s what Venus stands for now and I think it is worthy of attention. The sports stage usually gives us a lot less than that.

I’m not a Venus super fan. I don’t watch her anymore. But I don’t think the WC was out of place. And they can’t go on forever.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk