LTA Funding and Participation

Ratty · County player

RE: LTA Funding and Participation

Spectator · All-time great

Yes, PaulM, I agree with you - which is why making the changes now stings so much. In a year's time, if they made the same changes to the bonus scheme, I doubt many people would argue as vociferously.

Ratty, some fair points, but for me it all comes back to sustaining a competitive culture that encourages people to engage - it's not just about creating the odd top 100 player ... it's also about having a "tennis culture" that's fun, offers lots of opportunities for competition at a relatively high level, and thus enables young players to interact well with those who have experience in playing at the pro level. That doesn't ultimately need to be funded directly by the LTA - but until something else exists, they need to kickstart it. Otherwise you do run the risk that you have a lot of relatively low-level youngsters playing, lose the players who can't make ends meet at the (say) 300 level, and have a few Challenger players who are too far ahead of the youngsters for them to interact on a regular basis.

PS: I quite agree with you about the social media outcry - understandable that there's frustration, but broadcasting it is perhaps not always the best move.

-- Edited by Spectator on Saturday 20th of December 2014 06:41:45 PM

indiana · Tennis legend

Strange one, Ratty. I am not aware of anyone that has suggested that the mean age of breaking into the ATP top 100 is age 27 ( as distinct to the mean age of these who are in the top 100 - not that I know what that is ). I've not analysed this at all, but even with the average age at various levels increasing ( I think generally accepted ), I would certainly have thought the average breakthrough into top 100 was quite a few years earlier, in fact I'm sure it is. 24 does seem possible.

Andy and James are each age 27 ( that is not an average top 100 breakthrough age ). While it has been great to see James's recent ranking progress, if he reaches the top 100 soon I am sure that will be a fair bit later than average. The point is not that the mean age for breaking through to the top 100 is 27, it isn't, but that breakthroughs seem to be getting later and indeed quite a number can and do breakthrough to that top 100 past 25 and at such as 26 and 27, even later.

Re the bonus cut offs, it is the over 19 yo cut off for future bonuses that you will see has brought most disquiet - many players are still making big strides in their early 20s. The over 25 cut off for challenger bonuses, less so, although under that James would not have qualified for any challenger bonuses at all last year.

There have been various suggestions why it is worth helping more than these potential top 100ers eg. that arguably we do need a core at various levels from 100 to 500 that up and coming players can more relate to. If they can't really relate and in spite of being ambitious can see how difficult life could be ( unless they do reach more elite levels ) if they have other options, particularly sporting, tennis loses more players, more that might not initially look top 100 potential, but might have significantly broken through later.

The suggestion that the LTA should be looking for 20 James Wards before one Andy Murray brought many nods of agreement here. Aim to produce more top 300 players ( rather than give up on helping them if they are not likely to be top 100 ) then I think the more top 100 will follow. I wonder when ( assuming they now do ) the LTA came to think of James as top 100. I suggest probably not even at age 25.

Instead hugely weighted resources seem planned on being thrown at top juniors. Some will continue to advance, eg. Kyle, some won't, eg George Morgan, some may retire ( at least for a time ), eg. Oli. I would prefer to look to develop more of a top 300 at least core, actually gone reasonably well this year ( from which some will go higher ) than this top 100 obsession and too early age limitations.

I do agree with one particular point, that it would seem wrong to accuse these top LTA folk of being clueless or incompetent. But there are certainly questions worth asking and points worth making by these interested in British tennis. And while we hear a lot about what the LTA are changing, I do not hear any really convincing answers to some of the real concerns. Should we not question, raise concerns, when we have these ?

PaulM · Tennis legend

Yes you might think that anyone who advises those players might have told them to express their views in a different way ;)

David Sammels blog on the importance of the 200-500 ranked group cannot be emphasised enough. It's so important to have a solid base of pros at that level who are accessible relatable inspirational and a benchmark for those with eyes on a bigger prize.

If the lta doesn't want to fund them it needs to be explaining its initiatives to foster the tennis culture CD mentions. And it's not, its cutting BT and NCL funding. We will have no senior competitive environment domestically, so how is any new prospect going to ply their trade? Who are they going to compete against? Others just like them? Pointless. Learn from defeats and wins against experienced hands. Speak to them, hit with them, play doubles with them.

We have such a poor club and general tennis culture compared to Europe eg France, so why is every policy so far seemingly aimed at eroding what little we have further.

indiana · Tennis legend

Seems a lot of independent agreement here ( I had not for instance read Spectator's post prior to my last one ) about the importance of retaining a core of players at different levels between 100 and 500, why that core seems to being put at risk and the possible negative consequences.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Actually Indy I have definitely seen a study that says that the average age for breaking into the top 100 in 27 (as well it being your prime and the average age of those already in there being the same).

But, in maths terms, it was a very simplistic study that took no notice of the number of months/years that you stay in the top 100.

i.e. A guy who breaks in at age 20 and stays in the top 100 for the next ten years counts as 1 guy aged 20. And a guy aged 30 who gets to number 90 and stays there two weeks counts as 1 guy age 30. So now your average is 25.

And basically there are a whole huge heap of men who manage to break in for a few weeks when in their late 20s, early 30s, who nobody notices, who tilt the numbers dramatically.

(Mind you, I was in a committee room at the time, for a French Junior tennis GM, and nobody accepted the study, lots of very loud Gallic protestations - but I'm sure it was right, just slightly misleading).

But backing up Spec, PaulM, yourself, and others, and leaving the cuts aside, what do the LTA propose to do to actually make tennis a thriving, self-sufficient, dynamic industry in the UK ? Would be good to hear something . . .

PS I'm all in favour of the 24 year-olds speaking out. Social media has a lot of influence. They need their voices to be heard. Not just to keep schtum in the hope they don't 'offend' anyone in power. (They're not getting any money anyway, so they might as well have their say). In fact, the one player who was so anti all the changes up until a few days ago and has suddenly changed tune and is now toeing the party line, seems rather disingenuous to me (although I note that the public spat from yesterday, with another player who spoke a lot of sense, has been deleted).

indiana · Tennis legend

Thanks, CD, like Ratty I did severely doubt that 27 was the mean breakthrough to top 100 age though unlike him it had passed me by as ever having been said, let alone be any received wisdom.

Still surprises me a bit, but I can see that it could be a slightly misleading ( even if true ) statistic as you describe in the sense of the effect of late short break ins to the top 100.

Anyway, apologies to Ratty for doubting his words.

Ratty · County player

Spectator wrote:
Ratty, some fair points, but for me it all comes back to sustaining a competitive culture that encourages people to engage - it's not just about creating the odd top 100 player ... it's also about having a "tennis culture" that's fun, offers lots of opportunities for competition at a relatively high level, and thus enables young players to interact well with those who have experience in playing at the pro level. That doesn't ultimately need to be funded directly by the LTA - but until something else exists, they need to kickstart it. Otherwise you do run the risk that you have a lot of relatively low-level youngsters playing, lose the players who can't make ends meet at the (say) 300 level, and have a few Challenger players who are too far ahead of the youngsters for them to interact on a regular basis.

That's an interesting point. We have 21 male players ranked 300 - 1000. Some of them are quite young and maybe still in with a shout of the top 100. But most are older and have little chance. Wouldn't the latter interact better with young players if they were coaches? They'd also actually earn some money ...

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Ratty wrote:
Spectator wrote:
Ratty, some fair points, but for me it all comes back to sustaining a competitive culture that encourages people to engage - it's not just about creating the odd top 100 player ... it's also about having a "tennis culture" that's fun, offers lots of opportunities for competition at a relatively high level, and thus enables young players to interact well with those who have experience in playing at the pro level. That doesn't ultimately need to be funded directly by the LTA - but until something else exists, they need to kickstart it. Otherwise you do run the risk that you have a lot of relatively low-level youngsters playing, lose the players who can't make ends meet at the (say) 300 level, and have a few Challenger players who are too far ahead of the youngsters for them to interact on a regular basis.

That's an interesting point. We have 21 male players ranked 300 - 1000. Some of them are quite young and maybe still in with a shout of the top 100. But most are older and have little chance. Wouldn't the latter interact better with young players if they were coaches? They'd also actually earn some money ...

Yes, George Morgan supposedly is now going to become a coach.

But given that one of the main problems in the UK is no one can coach players in how to transition from top junior to top senior, then, having players who were top juniors but couldn't transition to top senior become coaches, seems to be sadly rather missing the point . . .

(Although Trotman has done well for himself . . . )

But I think Sammel and Spectator, and others, are right - you can't have a football structure that jumps straight from U18s to Premier Division. The sport should be set up to support the whole pyramid - it's all connected, all building blocks for the rows beneath and above. Allez, LTA - rise to the challenge.

sherbert · Lower Club Player

I have had this conversation with Neil so many times - why don't you stop playing tennis and become a coach? It would be good to have him stop travelling - and I also wouldn't complain about the bills finally being shared!! But then I think about it from his point of view - playing tennis competitively is all he's known since the age of 5. Most people will have written his career off, and they may well be right - but to him there is that tiny chance that he might get a good run of luck, be injury free and play his best tennis for a few months - and before you know it, you're up the rankings.

I'm sure a lot of the players of Neil's age feel the same. All they want to do is play tennis - but unfortunately, like everything - it's all about the money.

kundalini · Specialist Reporter + Intermediate Club Player

By my maths (apologies for any errors), of the current top 500 male players, 171 have broken into the top 100 at some point.

Age at which they broke into top 100 - number of players who did so at that age: 33 - 1, 29-2, 28-4, 27-4, 26-8, 25-14, 24-14, 23-22, 22-26, 21-26, 20-23, teen-27.

So that's 19 players who broke into the top 100 after their 26th birthday. 11 who managed it after their 27th birthday.

current top 50 - 18, 18, 16, 20, 18, 18 , 18, 20, 19, 20, 19, 22, 18, 20, 24, 21, 18, 18, 22, 20, 21, 21, 21, 20, 22, 17, 24, 21, 21, 22, 25, 22, 19, 22, 19, 21, 23, 20, 20 25, 22, 20, 21, 21, 21, 21, 21, 18, 22, 17

ranked 51-100 - 22, 19, 21, 23, 21, 18, 18, 22, 23, 22, 21, 20, 23, 27, 20, 19, 21, 23, 23, 22, 19, 22, 20, 21, 26, 28, 19, 33, 24, 23, 26, 24, 20, 24, 19, 20, 23, 22, 25, 23, 24, 21, 23, 21, 25, 17, 20, 24, 22, 26

ranked 101-200 - 25, 28, 19, 24, 25, 26, 23, 27, 23, 23, 23, 27, 22, 21, 23, 20, 23, 21, 22, 24, 25, 25, 18, 29, 22, 26, 26, 24, 20, 20, 21, 20, 24, 22, 21, 22, 25, 22, 21, 22, 23, 20, 20, 25, 23, 23, 25, 22

ranked 201-300 - 28, 21, 19, 25, 23, 27, 20, 26, 24, 28, 21

ranked 301-400 - 20, 26, 22, 25, 29, 24, 23, 25, 22, 22

ranked 401-500 - 20, 23, 24

Names I recognise outside top 500 (not included in totals above) - 19, 19, 28, 22, 25 , 25, 21, 24

(Approach used: ATP website, ranking histories, looked for date they broke into top 100 then subtracted date of birth)

-- Edited by kundalini on Monday 22nd of December 2014 12:01:31 AM

Ratty · County player

Impressive research.

So for those 171 players who've been in the top 100, the median age for entering the top 100 is 22. That's way lower than all the recent messaging about players supposedly developing later would lead one to believe. Maybe there is sense in cutting off Futures subsidies at 19, after all.

PaulM · Tennis legend

Yes I understood that the age of the top 100 was increasing but only because ita generally easier to stay there but on the whole the breakthrough age remains in your early 20s

PaulM · Tennis legend

But I suppose one argument is that GB players develop later partly due to our education system and the tendency to not drop out of school until much later than in other countries. Or at least thats the perception anyway.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

David Sammel's research is very well-presented and makes good reading, and (with some wide variations) largely backs up kundalini's amazing efforts which is brilliant stuff:

www.ucollectinfographics.com/ranking-statistics-worlds-top-100-male-tennis-players/