20 GB men in the top 500 two years ago today

Strongbow · All-time great

RE: 20 GB men in the top 500 two years ago today

indiana · Tennis legend

Bob in Spain wrote:
I do think the numbers are slightly more distorted now by the number of 18-22 year olds that are playing college tennis in the USA. I am sure a few of these may have broken into the top 500 had they dived straight into the Futures circuit.

Also of course, in spite of Tennisnow's 2013 expectations of much fewer fairly imminent retirals compared to previously when we were up around the 20 mark, we have fully or to most intents for the foreseeable lost from that once so promising 1989/90 born cohort Rice, Milton, Cox, Willis and Smethurst. Evo and Alex Ward remain top 500 from these years with Pauffley in the 700s for now.

Other younger hopes have been lost too such as Oli Golding and Lewis Burton.

thejester · Satellite level

The beeb have put an article together to herald Andys new ranking of 839. Probably the only time youll ever see them mention lads like Peniston and Gabb! Interesting to see that they seem to think Andy is now ranked alongside part-time US-College and Challenger players... not sure how many challengers youd get into with a ranking in the 800s but hey, why not completely ignore the existence of the futures tour eh? Anyways, lets hope that Mr Murray stays fit and healthy, and that hes not competing for that GB 23 spot for long!

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

indiana wrote:
Bob in Spain wrote:
I do think the numbers are slightly more distorted now by the number of 18-22 year olds that are playing college tennis in the USA. I am sure a few of these may have broken into the top 500 had they dived straight into the Futures circuit.
Also of course, in spite of Tennisnow's 2013 expectations of much fewer fairly imminent retirals compared to previously when we were up around the 20 mark, we have fully or to most intents for the foreseeable lost from that once so promising 1989/90 born cohort Rice, Milton, Cox, Willis and Smethurst. Evo and Alex Ward remain top 500 from these years with Pauffley in the 700s for now.
Other younger hopes have been lost too such as Oli Golding and Lewis Burton.

Yes. This is the bit that constantly shocks me - that there are so few players over 25 still going in the UK.

(Talking singles here but those Indy mentions above haven't been lost to doubles either). Ed Corrie could be added to the Alex Ward and Evo. And maybe Brydan. But our numbers are SO skinny. All the others have evaporated. Of course, it's good that several go on into coaching but that's not what's needed.

If you look at Italy, say, it's true that the majority of the players outside the top 300 are 25 or under but there's still a considerable portion of 'older' players. And it's vital for the health of the sport.

That's my problem with the emphasis being for ever on the 'next' and the 'next' cohort of youngsters. It's the same old record. And if we get one or two top players, then lovely. But it's pretty random.

Nix · Futures level

Im not sure though if the over 25s of Great British players are really sustainable compared to Italys cohort of over 25s. We have only got two players over 25 (Im counting this as 26 upwards inckusive) who earned over $50k in 2018: Andy and Dan. Italy has 8. Their top six have earned over $100k. Our numbers 4-10 havent earned $10k.

Im wondering if the issue is not so much why are older players give up, its more that we just dont have the strenghth in depth, so not enough good players are coming through.

I might be missing your point CD, so if I am I apologise, but how can players who are really not good enough to make a living benefit British tennis?

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

The problem of not having a full pyramid of players, in my view, Nix, is that the whole tennis industry suffers.

For instance, I hear time and time again from parents that their youngster 'doesn't have anyone to play with'. It seems to me that, for GB kids, the only option is to have academy lessons (v expensive) and then play iTF matches (v expensive). Hence, a lot go abroad (v expensive). And others who can't afford it, stop.

If you have a good club structure with lots of guys ranked 1000+, actively playing (although maybe doing other things too), then there is a dynamic tennis scene which feeds through.

I don't think it's anything to do with being sustainable on an individual level - as you say, you've got to be top 150 or so to be that.

But it means the level gets raised, good kids get the benefit of hitting partners, tennis has a higher profile, more sponsors, more events, more people join, and the whole thing is more dynamic.

What we have at the moment seems to be a mill to produce a 'star' top 20 player. The potential for that seems to be decided by age 18. So all the others are purely superfluous. In my view, those 'superfluous' players are essential to the health of the whole.

Oakland2002 · All-time great

Nix makes a very good point, by 25 you should be making a good living out of playing tennis professionally if not what is the point, there are other things in life people generally want to get on with. Competitive professional tennis doesn't exist as a semi professional entity in the Uk partly because nobody will pay to watch it.

All coaching is professional (which upsets me as often we hear the way in is to be part of a tennis family where you get a lot of your early years coaching for free.. ref Mrs Draper and Ben, Mrs Murray and Jamie, all the Clarkes (and thank you)) and that is where the living is to be had if you want to stay involved in tennis.

Personally I think the environment is much healthier for the players now, the numbers may get worse before it gets better as the larger cohort of players in strong college programmes move forward. At least they will know relatively quickly after 2-3 years on tour after leaving college at 22 ish whether there is money to be made playing tennis or to explore other avenues of employment.

One most also consider the pragmatic approach to doubles, I think that goose may well get cooked as the field becomes more competitive but well worthwhile developing significant coaching expertease in that area to stay ahead of the game, we talk about the potential for Andy as a coach but Jamie although he probably has many more years left picking up silverware also has a very impressive skill set and a wealth of experience to mine.

Nix · Futures level

I do see what youre saying CD. I wonder if the golf professional model might work, then. So that they spend some of their time working in clubs, coaching the elite players and acting as hitting partners to the top juniors, while gaining some experience from playing in ITF tournaments. If their professional funding was contingent on putting back into grass roots and junior elites, it might benefit the game overall. Im not sure if this already happens, apologies at my lack of detailed knowledge of the grass roots game.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Nix wrote:
I do see what youre saying CD. I wonder if the golf professional model might work, then. So that they spend some of their time working in clubs, coaching the elite players and acting as hitting partners to the top juniors, while gaining some experience from playing in ITF tournaments. If their professional funding was contingent on putting back into grass roots and junior elites, it might benefit the game overall. Im not sure if this already happens, apologies at my lack of detailed knowledge of the grass roots game.

Yes, interesting.

By the way, I wasn't saying that the LTA should directly fund the older, lower ranked players - that doesn't happen elsewhere in Europe (that I know of).

I just think that the LTA should realise that a successful tennis structure is not one that has one or two star players, period. And that there are many ways to favour a wider playing base (pro and semi-pro, as well as grass roots level). And the LTA should be aware of the asset that a broader high-level base can be when they plan their strategy.

I don't know anything about pro-golf, or top club golf, but it may well be a very good comparator - there are quite a lot of similarities. Good idea.

Nix · Futures level

Thanks CD. I agree with you too about not just having one or two star players. Yes the LTA just dont seem to think outside the box. But then the same old committee types often run these organisations.

Topemp · Strong Club Player

Toby wrote:
Croatia, population 4.25m has 9 men in the top 500 and reached the World Cup Final, I wonder if their tennis chief gets a six figure bonus?

Yes, but they're crap at Cricket, didn't come 2nd in the 2016 Olympic medal table and cant cycle. One of our biggest problems is we play so many sports that our talent gets diluted.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Topemp wrote:
Toby wrote:
Croatia, population 4.25m has 9 men in the top 500 and reached the World Cup Final, I wonder if their tennis chief gets a six figure bonus?
Yes, but they're crap at Cricket, didn't come 2nd in the 2016 Olympic medal table and cant cycle. One of our biggest problems is we play so many sports that our talent gets diluted.

Don't agree. Croatia are pretty great at basketball (bronze, I think, in the last Euros). And handball - got a bronze too, I think, in the world championships some time ago. Good team sports. And other sports too.

AND they only have 4 million people or so.

We have 65 million or so. We have to have enough to play cricket, football, cycle AND tennis.

indiana · Tennis legend

Coup Droit wrote:
Nix wrote:
I do see what youre saying CD. I wonder if the golf professional model might work, then. So that they spend some of their time working in clubs, coaching the elite players and acting as hitting partners to the top juniors, while gaining some experience from playing in ITF tournaments. If their professional funding was contingent on putting back into grass roots and junior elites, it might benefit the game overall. Im not sure if this already happens, apologies at my lack of detailed knowledge of the grass roots game.
Yes, interesting.
By the way, I wasn't saying that the LTA should directly fund the older, lower ranked players - that doesn't happen elsewhere in Europe (that I know of).
I just think that the LTA should realise that a successful tennis structure is not one that has one or two star players, period. And that there are many ways to favour a wider playing base (pro and semi-pro, as well as grass roots level). And the LTA should be aware of the asset that a broader high-level base can be when they plan their strategy.
I don't know anything about pro-golf, or top club golf, but it may well be a very good comparator - there are quite a lot of similarities. Good idea.

Yes, life is very difficult for these outside say the top 200 ranked, increadingly so down the rankings, unless you have independent finances and as many have there is a need to do some coaching say to help finance things.

But the LTA could help more !!! Not hugely finance, at least directly, but subsidise to an extent by being prepared to put on many more future level tournaments as they could. From probably too many they have gone to ridiculously too few and some of the names I mentioned referred to this as being a big issue around the time of their loss to pro tennis. These could incidentally also more help introduce our good juniors to senior tennis rather more than some play just now.

The LTA could afford to help support more of a pyramid system and give some sort of help to more especially in these days of a significantly older overall player base, more beyond these shores. They seem to actively choose not, to deter, to effectively say your time has been and gone, you're not going to be top 100, we're moving on. And that is no help to growing tennis in this country. As you said the whole tennis industry suffers the knock-on effects.

-- Edited by indiana on Tuesday 17th of July 2018 10:17:13 PM