Meeting with LTA Chief Exec

emma · Strong Club Player

Meeting with LTA Chief Exec

Michael D · All-time great

emma wrote:

sorry, its been such a long time since I've been on here or any internet website, I've forgotten how to quote or put it in bold. this is what Oakland2002 wrote:

"I only have experience with one performance centre but my impression is it is empathetically co-ordinated by an emotional intelligent individual whose team work at a number of levels, yes there is an elite academy producing potential professional players and a steady stream of youngsters going to college but also there is a relationship with local clubs to deliver performance sessions and produce a cohort of good players likely to strength their first teams. "

anyhow, just wanted to say this sounds ideal and i would imagine quite rare but certainly an excellent blueprint for any organisation to have.

Yes, I would agree with this.The question about the regional performance centres here was in terms of their accessibility. They aren't necessarily. It necessitates being in or near one of the major urban centres, which is fine if you are not so great if you aren't. That issue of the 'relationship with local clubs' is critical, only that the clubs might not be that near the centre itself. Anyway, I'm sure it is the only development model we are going to get for the time being, so I hope the LTA puts a bit more consultation and thought into trying to make it work as well they can, especially in terms of the linkages.

JonH · All-time great

indiana wrote:
Yes, unless someone believes there is a definitive interpretation of "rapidly rising" here it seems all slightly in the eye of the beholder, but not a point personally I would have argued over. It is generally rising quicker than it was for a while.

Thought I would put this into a global context. Probably off the point but maybe interesting to some

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/mar/22/collapse-civilisation-near-certain-decades-population-bomb-paul-ehrlich

Topemp · Strong Club Player

Oakland2002 wrote:
Michael D wrote:
It's the wrong model, and in direct contrast to France's far more successful community based model, which has led to a far greater flourishing of the game amongst an equivalent population size.
I dont know within the limitations of the status quo, we are so far away from a French model which might as well be pie in the sky, in terms of depth of players and administrators/volunteers that I can't see an alternative to bringing the best juniors together at centres of excellence.

I think the one big difference that can't be overlooked between us and the other Europeans is that we play Cricket. We also have better athletes than almost all of them, so the percentage of our sporting talent that plays Tennis compared to France, Spain, Italy and Germany is inevitably going to be smaller because we have more competition from other sports.

-- Edited by Topemp on Thursday 22nd of March 2018 02:23:10 PM

indiana · Tennis legend

It is a fair point about the diversity of sports in the UK ( not quite sure of the impact of cricket but I'm Scottish and it's a very low impact here ). And what most of them offer to the youngster interested in sport are generally sports much more accessible and at a generally much cheaper price ( although yes steps are being taken around the country in that regard ) and even if the tennis club is affordable that long standing tennis club culture of not exactly being the hive of competitiveness, but often more a social club, can be a turn-off for that competitive athlete.

The culture built over oh so many years compared to say France is a huge drawback. But one still to try and change as much as possible and those who stand in the way to be fought against.

How many folk including some non youngsters here just say that they want more chance to play some competitive tennis matches. We so need much more of an intial base re accessibility and competition.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Topemp wrote:
Oakland2002 wrote:
Michael D wrote:
It's the wrong model, and in direct contrast to France's far more successful community based model, which has led to a far greater flourishing of the game amongst an equivalent population size.
I dont know within the limitations of the status quo, we are so far away from a French model which might as well be pie in the sky, in terms of depth of players and administrators/volunteers that I can't see an alternative to bringing the best juniors together at centres of excellence.
I think the one big difference that can't be overlooked between us and the other Europeans is that we play Cricket. We also have better athletes than almost all of them, so the percentage of our sporting talent that plays Tennis compared to France, Spain, Italy and Germany is inevitably going to be smaller because we have more competition from other sports.

Seriously? From my experience, there are way more decent sports clubs (of all sports - bar cricket!) available to young people in France than there is for most young people in the UK.

Taking my nieces/nephews here, one female sporty teenager about 10 miles out from a big town has athletics on offer, within public transport range, and nothing else. Even if driven, there's nothing of real note within 30 mins drive (allowing for traffic). It's just not feasible. So she did athletics, although being a very skilful ball player. And then dropped out because she wasn't that into athletics (she wanted a ball sport). And now is a typical teenager doing no sport of note at all.

On the contrary, because public funding gives all communities sports halls in France, that are shared between different sports, for free, even in 'my' small village there was baskbetball, tennis, judo, handball, volleyball and table tennis, as well as cycling and football and rugby, all on offer nearby. And practically every sport under the sun if you went 30 mins by car.

Michael D · All-time great

Yes from my experience with sporty adolescents now in their early 20s, cricket has really dropped off the radar of state schools these days, even where they still have fields, and the focus is more on council run sports centres, where the real competition to tennis is football and rugby, easy sports to play because the main equipment required is only boots. Even amateur football these days stretches out incessantly across the calendar, seemingly consuming almost as many months as the professional variant. As ever, tennis' problem is the expense, not just for equipment, but then for the coaches, since as the tennis is not being played at schools, the coaches have to be paid, and then for the travel required to any competitions, should they want to play competitively. For the whole area I live in, cricket hardly features.

Interestingly I have one son who has recently left university who has been spurred to take up tennis again more seriously. What spurred him on? The French system.... One local club here participates in an annual long weekend exchange event with a French club near Rennes, where all the facilities that CD describes above exist AND a cohort of male and female youngsters playing the sport, in a size town very similar to ours here. But to play, he is essentially taking on part time jobs to fund his tennis, whilst he thinks about longer term career partners... but the real absence of anyone to play with regularly means his main hitting partner is a ball machine. This in a location that is at least an hour away from any regional centre, which have enough on their hands as it is, and don't have outreach.... It just doesn't compare with the French small town community club we visit. And not surprisingly these days, to cobble together a team to visit France every other year, the English club here enlists friends from far and wide across the southern UK, whereas the French club are people from that town full stop. Six to eight years ago there was much more young player participation than there is now... in recent years it has really fallen by the wayside and the energy has drained out.

Elegant Point · Satellite level

IMO the LTA need a complete rethink. The cost of tennis is prohibitive for many families. To have a child playing at National standard and just going to tournaments in the UK is a massive financial commitment. Add in the cost of tournaments abroad and you are shrinking the number of families who can fund this even further. To increase diversity, tennis needs to be more affordable. Many Easter European countries don't have anywhere near the budget of the LTA - how do they do it? Also as others have mentioned the LTA should look at the French system. When compared to the cost of other sports like football, rugby, athletics etc. its no wonder many families chose them over tennis.

A friend once commented on how she would love to give the LTA a complete overall starting by publishing parents salaries alongside the childs ranking (that would be interesting, lol) and means testing all LTA funding for juniors.

Oakland2002 · All-time great

I agree with you whole heartedly re tenniss lack of economic and cultural diversity, but I feel it is the former that drives the later for the most part. Compared to almost all sports apart from some pretty niche Olympic sports, equestrian etc.... the costs are punitive. One of my kids plays tennis and football the focus is purely recreational but at both at the age of 10/11 was sent football arranged by the school, Tennis at the suggestion of a coach to entertain the next level.

Football club membership £30 a month, 12 months a year, professional football academy on trial, 2 sessions elite coaching groups of 14 (6 age 10, 6 age 11, 2 trialists) a week, match Saturday cost £70 per year... but you are contracted when signed for a two year period you cannot leave for another club unless they pay compensation one boy got stuck in limbo for a year because of this. You are essentially weekly until signed my child got 6 months of coaching, it cost nothing and was then released in preference to faster quicker children, the process seemed fair the training was excellent and now back playing regularly at the right level with their rivals community club. 5 years later has boots and socks on this morning ready to to training.

Playing tennis three times a week with a view to becoming competitive at a basic level as a juniors parent will pay £60-£80 a year to be a member of a club, £25 for a performance group hit, £10 club session, £35 private lesson. Perhaps 34 weeks a year £3400 or the cost of a family holiday, a genuine performance package £10k

There is definitely some value in means testing funding between the age of 8-12. The major challenge for Tennis is that coaches get paid even at the grass roots level and that is why it is so expensive, you cannot begin to assess potential until a child had had significant coaching. To make a big step up at 12 you want to just take the best players. The key to improving things is having a critical mass of 12 years playing tennis in other sports Rugby Football Cricket that coaching is offered by volunteers who do it for free. Expansion of resources in parks opening up those in state schools are steps in the right direction and the areas in which I would put funding.

paulisi · Tennis legend

I'll add athletics to the costing. Club membership for juniors@ £40, training £2 per session and competition £3-£5 per event.
Not much really.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Just to give a comparison, Oakie (and I know I bang on about France but it's directly relevant when we're looking at cost for what's on offer):

Prices 2018 for a youngster at my old club, three outdoor courts, three indoor courts (town of 50,000):

Club membership - 0 (if you sign up for the ecole de tennis, that's free, and means you can play whenever you like, all year, no priority for adults, no extra charge for indoors)
Annual FFT Licence - 20 euros
Lessons:
Top youngsters as selected (about 20): 300 euros a year for 4 1/2 hours lessons a week
Next batch of youngsters as selected (about 35): 270 euros a year for 3 hours a week
All the rest (about 150): 190 euros p.a. for 1.5 hours a week or 140 p.a. for one hour a week

The lessons follow the school year.

So it's effectively 300 a year for the top lot, for 3 lessons a week. And the best of them will get weekly extra coaching for free from the FFT, five minutes away at the town's FFT site (the FFT has offices and courts in every county)

(NB This is not the biggest club in the town. There's another, with more outdoor courts, and another 250 kids or so, with prices pretty much the same. There's also about eight clubs, in the 'suburbs' (five minutes out, in different directions), all with about 50-70 kids, with slightly lower tariffs (based on one lesson a week, or two, depending whether the kids is selected for the competition group or not).

-- Edited by Coup Droit on Saturday 24th of March 2018 09:58:48 AM

The Optimist · ATP qualifying

The thing about tennis clubs as opposed to Academy tennis is that academy tennis is priced by the hour and club tennis generally is not. Many clubs (although I agree not all) offer a reasonable price for junior members (especially if they are prepared to play in junior teams). The old 'no juniors to be visible' attitude is largely (and literally) dying out. Modern parents want their children to be welcomed at clubs and won't join a place where they aren't wanted. Consequently many of the old adults-only clubs are now changing their tune as their membership lists drop. Still a way to go, but once you have paid your membership you can drop your kids off their for several hours on end and it ends up being value for money. Most clubs run social sessions, challenge ladders and boxes etc etc. Academy tennis on the other hand is between £18 and £30 for a court for an hour (they are usually indoor courts) plus around £30+ for a coach for an hour or £10-12 for a group lesson. Plus charges for fitness sessions etc etc. To me, it seems an ideal time to try and strengthen the club system for juniors and not to be skimming off the best kids as early as possible.

Born2WinTennis · Club Coach

300 euros a year for 4 1/2 hours lessons a week.

So 300/52 = 5.75 euros/week
5.75/4.5 hours = 1.28 euros/hour

So the club is only earning just over 1 euro per hour per child. Compared to probably on average £5 per hour per child in the UK.

I think from memory you said the club top up the coach's salary from club membership fees. So effectively adult members are subsidising the coaching programme. Let's say the coach earns 20/hour and there's 6 players in the group, 6 x 1.28 = 7.68, 20-7.68 = 12.32
12.32 x 4.5 x 52 = 2882

So for this one group the club would top up the coaches earnings by nearly 3k. How much are typical memberships fees for adults? 200/year?
If we multiply by the three programmes you mention and come to 9k, then at 200/year that would be the equivalent of 45 adult membership fees.

Just keen to understand the finances a bit more because I really don't understand why it's so different over here. I am fairly sure clubs over here are not turning massive profits each year, so somehow the French clubs seem to be able to subsidise the coaching programme when we cannot. Or do they have lots of volunteer coaches?

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Hi, Born2win, as you say, the sums are important.

Just a few things to add:

It's not 52 weeks a year, lesson are just during the school year. And France has a pretty short school year. So there's probably only approx. 33 weeks of tennis lessons.

Your 20 euros/hour is spot on for the main coach (some are employed on a contract - about 20k).

There are very few completely voluntary coaches now. But there are a lot of good junior players training to be coaches/planning go to sports uni and they will take a lot of the basic classes (actually they do a great job, by and large). And they get minimum wage (with club perks). So probably about 9/hour.

The basic premise is that the standard lessons should make a profit - i.e. the kids paying 140 a year for one hour per week are paying 4.25 a week. There will be at least 6 in a group, sometimes more for the little kids. So at least 25 per hour to the club. And the monitor costs say 10 per hour. So it's 15 euros an hour profit to the club. And with the bulk of the kids being in the general group (say 20 groups of 6/7 kids), it adds up.

This then is supposed to subsidise the 'competition' group (the top lot) which is definitely loss-making.

One can argue it's elitist and wrong but it's completely standard practice and accepted because the theory is that the top juniors will bring prestige to the club (by dint of being top juniors) and will also play for the adult teams and so benefit the club that way too. It's because of this that even the club itself will subsidise the top junior groups.

Does this make sense?

Born2WinTennis · Club Coach

Thanks Coup, very interesting, so actually some of the bottom groups (lower standard but more participants) subsidise the higher groups (higher standard but less participants).

On another matter, I'm meeting Leon Smith tonight for a Q&A, so if anyone would like any burning questions answered? I'm going to ask about the format changes ITF vs ATP proposals for the Davis Cup and what he thinks of them. From memory he actually came out in favour of 3 sets instead of 5 sets due to better viewing for kids, which I don't agree with so will ask him about that too.