GB Elite tennis: What's so special about Croatia and Serbia, and what can we learn?

korriban · Challenger level

RE: GB Elite tennis: What's so special about Croatia and Serbia, and what can we learn?

paulisi · Tennis legend

Very interesting discussion. I'd like to see the LTA promote the game(particularly the women's game) via the TV media. The only focus the ladies get on terrestrial channels is in and around Wimbledon. Sky also have very little ladies coverage.

Maybe the LTA can do a weekly/fortnightly 30 minute feature that focuses on the ATP/WTA tour and the British players progress and put it on terrestrial TV at a good time i.e Saturday lunchtime

Spectator · All-time great

So, just a thought. I was looking at the Challenger pages on the ATP website and saw that Kudla had reached a career high. It seemed as if there were a lot of young US players doing well, so I decided to have a quick look at players 23 or under (the 1989/90 cohort and younger) who had reached top 200 or top 300 status. I first looked in WG Davis Cup countries, then went back and looked at some countries that weren't WG but had top-ranked juniors (the starred results). The results are interesting: single numbers represent total top 300, numbers with a slash are total top 200/total top 300.

Gives a slightly different picture to the general top 250, top 500, I think. Noticed also that our strong cluster in the 300s/400s was pretty good in comparison with many countries ... but didn't have time to look further.

Israel 0
Kazakhstan 0
Belarus 0/1*
Moldova 0/1*
India 0/1
Croatia 0/1
Taiwan 0/1*
Poland 1*
Lithuania 1*
Bulgaria 1*
Portugal 1*
Czech Republic 1
Serbia 1
Brazil 1
Austria 0/2
Switzerland 0/2
Belgium 1/2
China 2
Russia 2
Italy 0/3
France 1/3
Australia 1/3
Japan 2/3
Canada 2/3
Germany 3/
Spain 2/5
USA 6/8
Argentina 7/10

-- Edited by Spectator on Thursday 9th of May 2013 06:17:02 AM

-- Edited by Spectator on Thursday 9th of May 2013 06:18:28 AM

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

OK, so this is about Spain, and not about Croatia and Serbia, but there's a lot of discussion about what works elsewhere in general, and what, possibly, British tennis could learn.

So it seemed the best thread for Dan Kiernan, head coach of Soto, as to why he thinks that tennis is so successful in Spain.

www.sototennis.com/page/407/Directors-Blog

It's quite interesting.

Bob in Spain · Tennis legend

Coup Droit wrote:
OK, so this is about Spain, and not about Croatia and Serbia, but there's a lot of discussion about what works elsewhere in general, and what, possibly, British tennis could learn.

So it seemed the best thread for Dan Kiernan, head coach of Soto, as to why he thinks that tennis is so successful in Spain.

www.sototennis.com/page/407/Directors-Blog

It's quite interesting.

If only the Spanish were even half as good at running their economy as they were at producing tennis players, I wouldn't have to suffer the kind of stupid (that's the polite word) news I have heard today.

May have to think abuot emigrating - again.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Some people may well have seen the story when it came out of the British 'Williams' sisters (in fact, the nieces of Yannik Noah!), who had to move to France as they had so little LTA support here.

www.theguardian.com/sport/2011/jun/26/britain-tennis-sisters-marley-lea-manga

They then looked to the Gulf states for further support:

www.gulf-times.com/qatar/178/details/370131/%E2%80%98europe%E2%80%99s-williams-sisters%E2%80%99-looking-for-sponsors-in-qatar

Just to say, I believe that they have now become French nationals. Which is a shame, really. And are both doing well with their tennis.

The first article does give a pretty damning picture of LTA's junior tennis programme - it may not be completely true, or not true for everyone, but it deserves airing again.

-- Edited by Coup Droit on Saturday 10th of May 2014 09:52:25 PM

indiana · Tennis legend

I do agree that it is wrong priorities to allocate a great deal of money to a few very young 'stars'.

Those who particularly shine early on will tend to be the more privileged, from such as tennis parents and private tennis clubs rather than actually naturally the best tennis players. And then some folk wonder why so many players fall away - one reason is they never were really that great, just got a very good headstart.

In general better indeed to spread the money more widely, get into the grassroots and find these special talents, players that may have no idea that they are special talents.

Ratty · County player

Forgive my cynicism, but I've seen an awful lot of "my child is special, so why won't OTHER PEOPLE pay for their hobby?" stories over the years. The tennis ones always have the obligatory "elitist" digs at the LTA.

Somehow, none of these special children ever seem to "make it". Funny, that.

baxi2 · Lower Club Player

indiana wrote:
I do agree that it is wrong priorities to allocate a great deal of money to a few very young 'stars'.

Those who particularly shine early on will tend to be the more privileged, from such as tennis parents and private tennis clubs rather than actually naturally the best tennis players. And then some folk wonder why so many players fall away - one reason is they never were really that great, just got a very good headstart.

In general better indeed to spread the money more widely, get into the grassroots and find these special talents, players that may have no idea that they are special talents.

The problem with this is that nearly all top players also shine early so its virtually impossible to tell who will make the grade !

I also would have thought most of the top players come from privileged backgrounds anyway.

korriban · Challenger level

indiana wrote:
I do agree that it is wrong priorities to allocate a great deal of money to a few very young 'stars'.

Those who particularly shine early on will tend to be the more privileged, from such as tennis parents and private tennis clubs rather than actually naturally the best tennis players. And then some folk wonder why so many players fall away - one reason is they never were really that great, just got a very good headstart.

In general better indeed to spread the money more widely, get into the grassroots and find these special talents, players that may have no idea that they are special talents.

Absolutely right.....well in general, anyway. Cricket is another example. Dominated at a very young age by the sons of rich pushy parents who network their way around local clubs and prep schools to nuance their kids into the "A" teams, and who spend ridiculous sums on private coaching and nets from as young an age as coaches will allow (often all through the Winter) and top of the range kit. I see this week in week out at my kids' school. Their kids are then "pushed forward" to county trials and invariably succeed.............so at U10 to U13 it's packed with kids who have very little talent, but objectively do better at the trials than talents with no training or athletes who aren't there. By U15/U16 this has almost completely reversed, but the parents can say "my son was county" for the rest of their lives, which is all they really care about. Oh, and the smug-fest, and the constant exaggeration, mis-information and belittling of others who can't afford to do the same............it touches a nerve for me. furious

Tennis has a similar side to it, so if selections are made at a young age, it is likely to be skewed, biased and misleading. But the biggest issue is that the potential superstars may not have ever picked up a racket......

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

I agree with the comments above. I thought the Gulf story was illuminating. :::)))

The comment that he is now getting 9000 euros per child from the FFT is not quite fair either as this is a benefits-in-kind figure, not cash in hand (not unless Normandy has a VERY different system from the rest of the country).

However, the fact that this 9000 help is available to a large number of players is true (in a proper pyramid style - i.e. smaller amount for a huge number, middling amount for a very large number, etc.). And generally does not depend on 'who you know' as rankings talk for themselves and anyone can play ranking matches so it's not a closed-shop system. No-one is 'invited' to take part in important championships as Mr M says (is that true?).

I thought the initial detection story was weird/wrong (I believe vehemently in a strong club-based system). I realise the girl was only 4 but, again, elsewhere, the national federation would not get called because some good 4 year-old was hitting balls in the park - as people here say, it's way too early to start hot-housing a kid with national funds.
She should have been able to enrol at the local club (with reasonable rates) and the club would have taken it form there through their junior programme and 'scholarship' arrangement with the federation.

However, there's a reasonable chance, I think, that we might see these girls back as British one day so there's no harm mentioning them. (NB They're doing very well, but not absolutely flying. We'll see . . . )

indiana · Tennis legend

It is correct when you look at the ages top players started, I get the impression that they just about all started from very young ages ( 4, 5 , indeed younger ! ).

But while it must undoubtedly be very helpful, I find it very difficult not to believe that a naturally talented ball player with an aptitude for tennis couldn't essentially pick up a racket at 10 / 11 ( even later ? ) and with good positive coaching be quite a success.

Is this 'grounding' from say 4 - 10 absolutely vital ? I would suggest preferable but far from a be all and end all. But in this country neither are there anything like enough good cheap opportunities for youngsters to later 'come across' the sport and find it's for them, and I really do question how much the LTA seriously does sort of 'find a star' programs like some of our successful Olympic sports do.

I accept that you have to start in tennis much much younger than these who have quite famously first stepped into a rowing boat or onto a bike at comparative late ages.

But investing so much on very young stars, who in many cases were just in the right place at the right time ( essentially the best of a small subsection ) at the expense of looking for better, makes little sense to me.

The fact that there are also very few really good players in other countries that started 'late' just suggests to me that this is a problem many countries share to varying extents.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

I tend to agree and, again, just speaking from what I've been involved in,, the French system tried the 'earlier is better, let's get them from the cradles' and it misfired badly. Nobody over 10 really stood any chance and 6 year-olds had the most ridiculous training programmes.

They've now gone the opposite way; it almost doesn't start seriously until ten.

I think the key thing is to be involved in sport. I did some research about the French men who were in the Aussie Open (no reason, it was just at the appropriate time). At age 12, half were still doing a serious other sport as well, mostly football. i.e. up till 12 they could juggle Wednesday afternoons and weekends being completely sport driven, but shared between two sports. In their teens,, they'd opted for tennis (apart from one who'd been football-first up to 16).

Tennis is a technical sport so there's some argument for starting early but, guess what, excellent ball players tend to find the technique is quite easy to pick up so no big deal!

So, yes, go and try 'poaching' kids from the football clubs. Or, better, have free open-door sports days, down at the sports centre where all sports are showcased (well, all that you can). I think the throwing money at 6 year-olds approach is daft.

What you need to do is get the parents playing, and the big brothers and sisters, and then the family will be at the club, and the kids will play, and the littl'uns will want to follow and beat big brother and fifteen years later you've got a first rate player, some fit(ish!) adults and kids who will pass the same thing on their own kids.

indiana · Tennis legend

Interesting research on the French players, CD.

I wonder just how much research the LTA engages in and how much they then use this and combine it with err common sense !

Perhaps the combined assets of the British Tennis forum could help them.

The Optimist · ATP qualifying

Having been involved in junior sport, particularly but not exclusively tennis, for many years, one thing about this story leaps out at me. Kids develop at very different rates. Many kids in many sports look great, even outstanding, in the early years. Roll on to late teens - a few of them still look outstanding, maybe world-class, others look average and the rest, if still in their chosen sport, utterly useless. Equally many who do not shine when starting their sport come through later.

In my mind, no national association should be giving star treatment to 8 and 9 year olds. It is unfair pressure on them and probably short-sighted - there's an above average chance that they're just early developers rather than a future number 1. That's not to say that it shouldn't be giving all keen 8 & 9 year olds access to affordable courts and coaching but that is a very different scenario to funding a couple of early developers.

Currently the LTA does pick the beneficiaries of funding very young based on talent ID days. These aim to objectively measure the athletic potential and hand-eye co-ordination of participants. But again it just picks out the early developers or those who have had more practice. It also does nothing to measure those important qualities such as hard-work, enthusiasm, drive, ambition, attitude, competitiveness etc etc etc. Things which ultimately may have more bearing on a career in sport than how far you can throw the ball or how many pull ups you can do at 11.

Even worse, although it operates a system which only picks out the early developers or those which have had the opportunity for more practice, IT NEVER LOOKS AGAIN. Gradually all those who first got funding or a Futurestars sweatshirt, are dropped from the scheme and eventually only 2 or 3 are left by late teens. Those who, even if they started young, only get into their stride at say 13 or 14, never get a look in. No other sport I have been involved with does this. They all have either yearly trials, scouts visiting clubs or competitions on a regular basis, late developers being pulled in and struggling early stars being given every support to regain their mojo.

The whole thing needs a major overhaul. The LTA money should go to clubs who offer free or very reduced membership for kids and towards making coaching affordable for them. Clubs should be able to put forward good kids for consideration for extra tuition / help from the LTA at any age and the 'exclusive' LTA performance coaches should be out on the road, helping these clubs get the best from their youngsters.

Phew - feel better for getting that off my chest !!!