If you've followed this blog or my Twitter account (AllAboutTennisBlog, @TennisBlogger1) you would know that a lot of my tweets are about wildcards and the faults in the wildcard process. I still believe that wildcards in some form can exist in tennis, but the way and extent to which they are given out is truly sickening, with major reform needed. With that said, however, I will give Wimbledon credit for truly being the best major for not handing out the "walking bye" home" wildcard.
I have compiled a bunch of data regarding hometown wildcards either for a future article or just for general use, but in the past three years combined, Wimbledon has only given out 11 total wildcards to British female players. This, when compared to a slam like the French Open, which has given 19 "home" wildcards out, and you can see that Wimbledon doesn't just hand wildcards to any random player with a British flag next to their name. And, while Wimbledon British wildcard recipients have been very unsuccessful over the past three years, with only one match win since 2013, with a significantly less number of "home" wildcards, it seems reasonable to expect a significantly lower number of wins, as well.
This brings me to Laura Robson and the issue of the Wimbledon wildcard. I saw on Twitter the other day that Chris Goldsmith was tweeting out (and continues to tweet) some nonsense about how Robson deserves a wildcard based on random, anecdotal evidence such as a 4R Wimbledon results from three years ago and how she has beat a group of top players in the past. Goldsmith, however, completely ignores the obvious and instead cherry picks what he wants to form a weak argument. Therefore, I have taken to the blog to explain why Laura Robson absolutely does not deserve a Wimbledon wildcard.
Let's start off with Robson's results this year, specifically. On the year, in events bigger than $25,000's (which Robson is only 2-3 in), Laura has compiled a 2-10 record, meaning her winning percentage on the year is .17. If we look at her record in the main draws of events larger than 25k's, Robson is 1-8 for a horrific winning percentage of .11. Yes, the player that Goldsmith is advocating a wildcard has won one main draw match all season, which came, on clay, against a player currently ranked outside of the top 500 in the world in the live rankings.
This year, Robson has been a victim to nine straight set losses, and in tournaments bigger than $25k's, has only won five sets ON THE YEAR! Five sets! How anyone could advocate for a player who is struggling to win matches in $25,000 tournaments and has won only five sets in $50,000 tournaments and larger boggles mind. Robson currently is on a six match losing streak, as well, only winning one set out of her past 13. But yet, Goldsmith wants to shower this young lady with a wildcard because she really has the results to back her up this season!
But, how has she done on grass? Shouldn't that matter much more than how she did on clay? Absolutely, but unfortunately, this doesn't help Robson much either. This season, Robson has played two grass court tournaments, losing both in the First Round and managing just one set between the two matches. And, it's not as if she were playing a top player in either tournament. In Eastbourne, a 50k tournament, she battled world number 161 (live rankings) and lost in three sets. Then, in Nottingham, she took on world number 229 in the live rankings, Michelle Larcher de Brito, and lost that match in straight sets. Again, if Robson is having trouble taking sets off of players ranked outside of the Top 150 on grass, should Wimbledon, the premier grass court tournament in the world, really be handing her a wildcard?
In fact, Robson hasn't won a grass court match since that 2013 run, losing both of the grass court matches she played in last season (winning 0 sets), and not playing grass court matches in 2014, I believe due to injury. It's also important to note that outside of that 2013 run, she only won one other grass court match during that season, going 1-2 outside of Wimbledon and losing in straight sets in her two losses. And, while Robson did beat Angelique Kerber at Wimbledon in 2011, that was her only victory at Wimbledon from the first time she played Women's Singles in 2009 until her run in 2013.
If we are going to analyze her 2013 run further, we would note that during her run, while she did beat 10 seed Maria Kirlenko in the First Round, Kirlenko had suffered a knee injury during a warmup tournament very-well could not have been 100% in that match. In the Second Round, she faced clay-courter Mariana Duque-Marino, a player that has only been to the Second Round of Wimbledon twice, and in the Third Round she beat another unseeded player, Marina Erakovic, a player who has never made a Round 16 appearance at a slam. Then, in the Round of 16, when she took on a competent grass courter in Kaia Kanepi, Robson lost in straight sets.
Again, I'm all for giving players wildcards when they have proven they deserve them, but do the results I just laid out for you really warrant a wildcard to one of the four biggest tournaments of the season? Even with that Round of 16 run at Wimbledon, her winning percentage there is still .40, as she has a 4-6. In addition, to give y'all some perspective, Ashleigh Barty, who has just picked up tennis again after temporarily quitting in 2014, in just her second tournament back, discounting Eastbourne qualifying, in matches played at the 50k level and above, has 3.5 times as many match wins as Robson, which includes quadruple as many main draw wins, as many wins at the WTA Tour level, and has seven wins on grass to zero for Robson. Now, I'm not saying that Wimbledon should be giving Barty a wildcard, but this just puts things into perspective for Laura.
I'm also not opposed to giving wildcards out for good results during the previous year's tournaments. I was all for the French Open giving Andrea Mitu a wildcard for her French Open Round of 16 appearance during the previous season instead of Tessah Adrianjafitrimo. However, when we have to reach three years in the past, and only for a Round of 16 result, to justify giving a player with a 2-9 record in 50k and up tournaments all year a wildcard, then it just looks a little desperate, and really, pathetic.
If Robson has a great run next week, then great, give her a wildcard, it will be well deserved. But, if Wimbledon gives Robson a wildcard based on the current results, then it would be a total and complete disgrace and would make the calls to get rid of the wildcard system altogether even louder. Because, a player like Tara Moore, with a Final run in Eastbourne and winning a match in Nottingham does deserve to have her moment at Wimbledon, but given that Wimbledon is one of the four biggest tournaments of the year, the tennis governing body for Britain, the LTA, should act like it. And, by that, I mean, actually give out wildcards to players who deserve them. And beating some of the top players at random points of previous years, quite some time ago, doesn't exactly scream "deserving" to me.
Because, at the end of the day, let's be honest, there is no justification for giving Laura Robson a wildcard other than the fact that she is British, and that would look a lot like a corrupt, unfair system to me. Robson simply does not deserve a Wimbledon wildcard.
