2013 Team AEGON announcement

steven · Tennis legend

RE: 2013 Team AEGON announcement

PaulM · Tennis legend

He's become a caricature of himself

Spectator · All-time great

Mr Harman isn't the only journalist who has commented on the cuts to doubles: Courtney Nguyen noted "Speaking of which, the LTA is cutting funding for doubles. Thats quite a blow considering Great Britains depth and quality in the doubles game." Rather nice to see someone linking the terms "Great Britain" and "depth and quality" for once - makes a change from the usual. Fully merited, too.

I'm not wholly happy about the cuts myself. (Well, as one of this board's most vehement doubles fans, I would say that, wouldn't I.) On the one hand, it's clear that the absolutely vital thing is access to Louis Cayer, and if the LTA is funding that, they're getting best value for money. Nor do the top-50 players, all of whom made over $150,000 last year, need help paying airfares. It's also true that the vast majority of our top doubles players have made it largely on their own: most of them didn't get funding until they were already well on their way up. But a blanket ban doesn't seem wholly helpful - apart from everything else, it sends a signal that doubles aren't really valued, despite all they contribute to GB tennis.

Would love to see the LTA turn around and really market doubles in the UK. We have three GB or part GB top-20 teams that can legitimately hope to contend for the WTF next year ... and depending on what happens with Mr Marray and the Skupskis, could have more. They're all highly marketable. Why not go for it?

(Incidentally, Mr Inglot's next stop is the Necker Cup. I'd guess - or at least hope - that the players don't actually get much in the way of fees for going there, as it's to raise money for charity. But the setting and the chance to be a part of the group of ATP/WTA players involved alone must make it an intriguing proposition ....)

-- Edited by Spectator on Tuesday 12th of November 2013 06:19:12 AM

Spectator · All-time great

I've just had a look at the matrix, and it seems as if on the men's side, according to the matrix, there are only a very few automatically eligible for funding - indeed, as I read it, Dan Evans (if they choose to ignore that he's 151 and not 150, which would seem reasonable ... as would an exception because of exceptional performance), Mr Edmund, Mr Golding, Mr Broady and Mr Ward-Hibbert. Of course Mr Ward and some of the doubles players (or is there a complete ban on doubles funding, even for the DC players?) could be eligible for DC funding.

On the women's side, it looks even tougher. Freya Christie, for example, doesn't qualify (yes, she's top 150 ITF. And she's reached the final of a G2. But she hasn't won a 10K or reached the third round of a Grade A). As far as I can tell, none of the 17 or 18 year olds comes close. Of the 19 year olds, only Ms Robson qualifies. No 20 year olds qualify. Of the 21 year olds, only Ms Watson, and of the 22 year olds, only Ms Konta.

I know that no one "deserves" funding. But it seems to me that on the women's side, you can't really talk about funding player development if the only people who qualify are three of the best players in the world. And on the men's, while it looks a bit fairer, the arbitrary nature of the cut-offs (if they go strictly by the rules Mr Bambridge, for example, won't make it, despite showing clear promise and falling just shy of the mark ... indeed one or two more tournaments and he might have made it) means that the funding seems very, very restricted. And this is the talented 1993s-1995s we're talking about. In the next few years following them, will any fit the criteria?

Does this suggest that what's really happening is that the LTA is going over to a pretty much entirely bonus based system?

Spectator · All-time great

Somewhat amusingly, I went back to see whether Andy Murray would have automatically qualified as a 15-year old. I'm not wholly sure. He was top 700 ITF, and he had won two G5s, but it looks as if he didn't play the individual TE tournament ... (he has no points from it ... though he did well in the team tournament) and it looks as if the one pro tournament (which was a satellite, not a futures) in which he won a round was not one for which he had also qualified (he appears to have come in as a lucky loser ... but maybe a satellite would have counted for more).

Clearly, though, they'd worked out he was OK, as he got a WC into Queen's qualifying the next Spring ...

-- Edited by Spectator on Monday 18th of November 2013 05:51:35 PM

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

I wouldn't provide direct financial funding to any of the top 100 players (or maybe top 120/top 150). Laura has won over USD 600k this year (purely from WTA prize money, i.e. not appearance money, individual tournament top-up prize money, commercials or anything else). Heather has won about USD 300k.

The NTC provides excellent facilities - training, coaching, nutritionists, physios etc. etc. and these are obviously available, year-round, to our top players. But they don't need direct funding for travel or coaches.

Several of the women on tour have been tweeting that the criteria are just off the wall - as you say, only the very top players in the whole world qualify (supposedly less than ten players in the whole world qualify for Matrix A funding for the 1994s).

indiana · Tennis legend

When a number of us suggested in the past that the funding basis was too elitist ( and needed more widely spread ), it certainly wasn't quite that elite !

indiana · Tennis legend

And what's with the no announcement as to who is getting funding ? Very open, NOT !

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

indiana wrote:
And what's with the no announcement as to who is getting funding ? Very open, NOT !

hear, hear 100%.

This smacks of 'we got such a lot of criticism in the past that we'll just do it behind closed doors this time; then even if it's just as bad, nobody can have a go at us'.

If the LTA receives public money (lottery or whatever), then they should be public about what it gets spent on - simple.

paulisi · Tennis legend

indiana wrote:
And what's with the no announcement as to who is getting funding ? Very open, NOT !

May be no one qualifies??? I suspect so few names, that it is fairly obvious who is on the list.

indiana · Tennis legend

Enlighten me then...

Although, as CD says, with the LTA receiving public funding it is something that they should be publicly announcing as they have previously.

Miriambee · Futures level

One wonders if the freedom of information act could be put to good use here?

Also the excuse for not sharing the info might be jealousy among those who have it and those who haven't got it, as well as not wanting public criticism.

indiana · Tennis legend

Hmm, I have been hoping that over-obsession with what the media and public think, as opposed to just doing the right things, might belong more in the past, post Roger Draper.

Ratty · County player

Dan Evans currently has 346 points, and a ranking of 150.

He got 235 of those points in 3 tournaments, all in the space of 5 weeks. Without them, he'd be ranked 372. Life is pretty random ...

paulisi · Tennis legend

indiana wrote:
Enlighten me then...

Although, as CD says, with the LTA receiving public funding it is something that they should be publicly announcing as they have previously.

Men:

Dan E & Dan C - (B), Kyle (A)

Women:

Joko, Laura, Heather(A), Tara(B)

I don't think anyone else qualifies under the matrix for "seniors". Everyone else is either too old or not ranked highly enough.