Tennis Forum banner

Who should get USTA RG WC, Chirico or ITF winner?

6K views 99 replies 40 participants last post by  Absolute10 
#1 ·
Although the USTA usually gives their RG WC to their ITF winner, surely the exploits of Louisa Chirico on the main WTA Tour beating Ana Ivanovic amongst others have trumped whatever Taylor Townsend or Grace Min can bring to the mix. Do you think the wild card should go to her or should the USTA give the card to a player who has won their little green clay tour without beating any top 50 players?
 
#2 ·
It's ironic, because Chirico won last year's WC benefiting from the rule oddities that put her ahead of a contender with better results (Stewart).

She obviously has a better claim but you really can't change the rules mid-race.

Again if Slam WCs were distributed more fairly it wouldn't be an issue. Scrap the reciprocal WCs that guarantee AUS/FRA/USA WCs at 3 out of 4 Slams - they just take up space unnecessarily. Players outside the cut-off who perform well in the WTA warm-ups should take priority over the Slam nations' circle-jerk: not just Chirico but Buyukakcay, Tig and Cirstea are clearly the most deserving of a step up into the MD.

And looking at it logically, the results of the big European red clay ITFs should be far more relevant to a RG WC than the US green clay ITFs.

So in short, almost everything about the GS WC selection process is messed up, semi-corrupt and not designed to reward the most in-form players who missed the cut-off.
 
#6 ·
I completely agree with you - Wimbledon is the only slam that gives some WCs on merit like that. Another irony is that Cagla, Chirico, Sorana and Tig will doubtless get the benefit of their clay exploits by getting into the main draw of Wimbledon but will have to qualify for RG.
 
#7 ·
Really, the priorities for Slam MD WCs should go something like:

- Former top players who have been out due to injury/motherhood
- Players outside the cut-off who have had big results in the weeks since (unusual to have so many already in the clay season, but all four should be rewarded)
- Previous year's junior champion (if WCs don't exist to support the best young talent there's really no point to them)
- Results of the biggest, most relevant ITFs (European red clay in this case) - like the USTA's race except open to all players
- Then and only then, locals
- And no reciprocal WCs ever

God, and we don't even know what scrub Tennis Australia will drag up from the depths of the ITF circuit for RG. Maybe it will be Patterson again!
 
#10 ·
Basically what Wimbledon does.

Of course I agree. I think a local player outside of top 200 has no business receiving a MD WC for a Slam unless she is a very young player in the rise.

Inside top 200 seems reasonable enough for me for a local player to receive it.
And the reciprocal system is so annoying.
 
#11 ·
I hope Louisa qualifies anyway! I remember last year Margarita won her title in Baku but since the cut off for US Open was earlier she still had to qualify (despite beeing in the top 100, around 80th place?) and she didn't if I'm correct. So it's not so sure. You never know.
 
#13 ·
I know this isn't a serious question, but I'll take the bait anyway. There is no way the USTA can or should suddenly pull out the rug from under the players who've been battling for 3 straight weeks for that WC. Chirico's approach of playing on the larger stages in Europe is absolutely going to pay off for her in the long run; I love what she's doing. But she would not want or expect to be handed this WC at the expense of players who signed up for the challenge in the US.
 
#17 ·
rules are meant to be broken
 
#18 · (Edited)
Chirico is ranked high enough to play the French Open Qualifiers.. If she keeps up this run, she will have no problem making it to the Main Draw. She herself won the WC contest last year.

2 of the 3 tournaments for the WC have already taken place. She could have stayed home to try to win that WC again. But she elected to show everyone she can raise her ranking, playing in the big league.. And she is doing well..
She doesn't care about WC right now, otherwise, she'd be playing in Florida this week, chasing that WC.
 
#19 ·
There are actually a bunch of 'top seeds' since it's actually a set of 8 qualification mini draws, not a single tourney.

The upside is that you get to play much, much lower ranked players in comparison to the seeds in the main draw, which quite a few of them will have to play a top50 player in the very first round.

So, if she doesn't get that MDWC, she'll be happy for the top seed in qualies.

As for the debate -
If it weren't Taylor and her resurrection, I'm not sure other Americans would ignite such a discussion.
 
#21 ·
If it weren't Taylor and her resurrection, I'm not sure other Americans would ignite such a discussion.
It has nothing to do with Taylor. It has to do with the USTA's deal with every US player in the MDWC challenger: that whoever wins the most points in any 2 of the 3 events will get a RG MDWC. These players have all organized their schedules around this deal. There is no way the USTA could suddenly withdraw that arrangement and say, oops, sorry, we've changed our minds, no WC for you, you should have gone to Europe. :crazy:
 
#20 ·
Based off of form at the moment, let's make Chirico and Townsend play a match. I'm confident Taylor would beat Louisa in straight sets.

Not impressed with the Ivanovic win due to Ana being extremely mental the last 8 months.

Though I agree that Louisa definitely should not have to play qualies based off her current results.
 
#22 ·
Not saying she "deserves" this but it's quite ironic given how she got the WC last year over Stewart.

Chirico: W-1R-F
Stewart: F-F-W

Yet Chirico got the WC based off of a shoddy rule system that the USTA has in place. So if they did give it to her over Taylor (or the WC race winner) :spit:

Now not only did the rules not change to use all 3 events rather than 2 out of 3, but they increased the level of the third ITF in the race :spit:

50k - 50k - 75k

Meaning if a US player wins the third event, they would pretty much position themselves to get the WC (with a semi decent result in one of the 50ks).

Not that I don't want Taylor to get the WC, because I very much so do, but I also would like this system to be exposed once again.
 
#24 ·
Given the circumstances why doesn't the USTA cut a deal with the French Fed to give them 2 WC"s at the USO in exchance for an extra one here that way it doesn't punish Townsend/Min etc who is playing within the rules they set silly as they be. It also would gurantee a MD spot for an American not named Serena who could actually reach W2 at Roland Garros
 
#25 · (Edited)
lol .. those deals are not made on a dime.
Townsend has not won the WC this year yet. There are 9 girls who can win it, Townsend is one of them.
When Chirico won it last year, she was not the leader going in the last leg of the contest. Townsend is the current leader but it's not a done deal, and she knows it.
Grace Min, Tatishvili, Stewart, and 5 others are still well positioned enough to win this WC.

The question of "Who Should Get the WC" is already resolved. There is a contest in place. The winner of that Contest gets the WC.
The end.
 
#27 ·
That's what Inger67 said. The rule used to be 3 of 3.
They changed it to best 2 of 3.
And Inger is saying they refused to change back the rule to 3 of 3.
All 3 tournaments should count. That would be fair. Otherwise, the winner of Indian Harbour is almost guaranteed to win the WC. That makes no sense.
 
#30 ·
That's what Inger67 said. The rule used to be 3 of 3.
They changed it to best 2 of 3.
And Inger is saying they refused to change back the rule to 3 of 3.
All 3 tournaments should count. That would be fair. Otherwise, the winner of Indian Harbour is almost guaranteed to win the WC. That makes no sense.
It has been 2 out of 3 for as long as I can remember -- definitely it was 2 out of 3 last year.

But I agree with both of you that throwing one 75K into the mix makes the series unequal. Though the players knew that going in.
 
#33 ·
Since this is the WC topic, I'll copy this post here. This was posted in a Taylor thread, so don't mind the bias :) :

So if my calculation is right, here is the WC deal.
Right now, Taylor and Grace Min are well positioned. But someone else could snatch the WC from them.

1/ Grace Min and Taylor: the one who wins in Florida this week takes the WC.

2/ If Taylor reaches the Final against anyone other than Grace Min, win or lose, she gets the card. (80 + 70 = 150 points)

3/ If Taylor doesn't reach the Final and Grace Min doesn't win IHB this week, Taylor's takes the card if none of the following girls wins the tournament:
Pegula, Tatishvili (29 +115= 144pts),
Maria Sanchez, Jennifer Brady, Katerine Stewart, K.Day, Vickery (15 +115=130 points)
... beating Taylor whose best 2 tournaments would total 128 (48 + 80 =128).
 
#37 ·
I doubt Chirico is sad about it now...
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top