LTA Team Aegon - "The Young Ones"

korriban · Challenger level

LTA Team Aegon - "The Young Ones"

indiana · Tennis legend

Were not the AEGON selections very much according to the matrices, so I don't know how appropriate it is to talk about "calls / non calls".

Yes, a lot of the 20 / 21 yos seem to have plateaued in a year when many of the unfunded 23 / 24 yos have seemed to up their games after themselves at best plateauing for a time.

There are certainly questions that could be asked. Maybe there is actually too much focus and beneficial treatment in the matrices for the 21 and unders as against these over 21 when from memory the targets rise very sharply ?

Maybe the work which is done with the funding group needs further assessment, although one would hope that that is ongoing ?

And yet again I question whether the LTA is just paying lip service to rather than truly recognising how in today's game players are coming through later ? I do think some of the still developing early to mid 20 players could be shown more support rather than flinging so much resource at a selection of juniors and early senior players.

indiana · Tennis legend

Actually, while I do think the matrices are too young biased, what you are saying kirriban is indeed very much in retrospect.

I look at the INS and OUTS among the men and really I would argue that they were fairly logical at the time. The only real arguements folk had at the time were how the system favoured less performing young players such as George Morgan as against progressive slightly older players like Neal Pauffley ( I ageee that Neal has certainly not performed as hoped, but I do think the principles of our support for him at the time were correct ).

Looking at the list of OUTS that have performed well ( Dan C, Ashley H, Marcus W, Tom F, Jonny O'M, Richard G ) it is no surprise at all or controversy that generally these were not in the AEGON funding group. Neither objective matrices or subjective form assessment make much of a case. The LTA may be guilty of various things, but I don't expect them to anticipate huge turnaround in performances and have funded such as Ashley, Marcus and Tom.

So, the issue is nor with the OUTS, but yes again one can question how well the INS have developed / been developed.

korriban · Challenger level

There's also something amiss with certain behaviours being created or at least not discouraged because of the very generous travel and overseas personal coaching support that our Team Aegon boys get.......

.....is it right that this week, for example:

1. Kyle is on his own playing a Futures in Poland (with a personal LTA supported coach)

2. Oli is on his own playing a Futures in Switzerland (no doubt with a personal LTA coach)

3. James is on his own playing a Futures in Spain (no doubt with a personal LTA coach)

How much is all this costing? Surely a financially accountable and objectives/rules driven organisation would find a more sensible way of working.

This has been happening again and again this year. I don't mind the travel assistance, and I don't mind the personal coaching for those that are the elite, but surely travelling in small groups with planned schedules makes much more sense for all concerned.......perhaps with the exception of a super-talented prospect like a Kyle........but that's probably 1 individual per year tops.

I like a lot of things the LTA is trying to do, but this I just don't get!

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Josh Goodall is tweeting that the LTA is changing its bonus top-up rules to put a GBP 5k ceiling limit on futures wins. (got fed up paying Dan C and Marcus so much money ????)

But making the top=up far more generous for challengers.

Doesn't answer all the questions but they're showing where their priorities lie and that must be good.

Should alos bode well for challengers tourneys here next year.

paulisi · Tennis legend

Would expect the LTA to put on lots more GB mens challengers in that case next year. Looks like enough GB players are going to be there or there abouts to make the main draw for a lower valued challenger if they so wish.

Dan E, James W, Dan C, Kyle, Marcus, Alex W etc

A1 tennis academy · Satellite level

If does grate a little when A1 have put in so much time & funding and MW has out performed most of their aegon players - without a coach so far in 2013 and when I ask repeatedly for access to an Lta coach or funding for a coach it falls on "death ears " . Sadly I think the mindset is they will be admitting they got it wrong in the past and theres no provision for turning back or giving for 2nd chances .I think the truth is its not just a matter of funding the right players it's also a matter of good player management and building a team spirit that fully exploits the Aegon players full potential .

The good news is that GB tennis is moving forward in the right direction .

A1 tennis academy · Satellite level

Attitude is more important than skill or funding and the team is only as good as the captain

SMC1809 · All-time great

Death ears? That sounds far worse than just deaf ears.

A1 tennis academy · Satellite level

Sorry meant deaf ears , but it could be the death of an otherwise successful career if we allow talent to slip through the net . I don't think it's happening that often with ATP ranked players but even with the best intentions it's going to happen earlier in the talent identification process which therefore requires clearly identifable safety nets in its design .

A1 tennis academy · Satellite level

That's an interesting change when will that be implemented ?

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

A1 tennis academy wrote:
That's an interesting change when will that be implemented ?

Indiana is probably right, sounds logical. But you could also tweet Josh G. and ask him - his tweet was the source of the info.

-- Edited by Coup Droit on Monday 7th of October 2013 07:36:11 AM

indiana · Tennis legend

I don't know, but I would guess from the start of next year.

If you are going to make such a change, I would have thought that to be the most sensible and fair effective date.

Bob in Spain · Tennis legend

This is a snippet from one of my Murcia reports where I spoke to Beechy about the current situation earlier in the year. It certainly seems to back up the theory.

I used the opportunity to ask him his opinion on the lack of Challenger events in the UK. He was quite philosophical and defended the situation because of the dearth of GB players in the 100 - 300 ranking range. He didn't see the point in organising challenger events so that overseas players can come over and rack up their points tally. He was also confident that once we got to the stage of more players developing to that level, the number of Challengers would increase.

I think Phil also had conversation with people just before Wimbledon that seemed to suggest a deliberate strategy of getting players up the rankings with a dearth of 10k futures and then reintroducing Challengers when we had the players to compete.

-- Edited by Bob in Spain on Monday 7th of October 2013 10:18:39 AM

korriban · Challenger level

If I didn't know better, this is actually starting to sound like an LTA plan that's starting to come together on the men's side! smile

If Josh's tweet is accurate, then this is an excellent move I think.

A couple of years ago, I think it would be fair to say that we probably had a similar number of top 300/350 male players compared to now, but that there was a distinct lack of depth in the 350-750 bracket. There is absolutely no question that there has been a surge of British players coming into the 350-750 range or improving their positions towards the higher end of this range. We are starting to have a reasonable volume of players in this rankings bracket, and the fact that the predominant colour is blue rather than red in Steven's table suggests that these players are on the way up rather than on the way down. It would be better to have another 10-15 players knocking on the door, but it's still good progress.

A number of posters, myself included, were bemoaning the wholesale elimination of Challenger events in GB (down to 2 in June on grass, both in Nottingham), which not only reduced the opportunities for decent points and to play better quality opposition for some of our players at home, but just as importantly further concentrated the British season into June/July as far as the players/fans were concerned. This is unhealthy. Furthermore, the reduction of $15ks and increase of $10ks also reduced bigger points scoring opportunities at home.

The argument was put foward by the LTA that once we had a much larger cadre of strong and improving players who were competitive or even comfortable at Futures level, this would be rebalanced in favour of more $15ks and a reintroduction of Challengers at home. The change in the tournament bonus scheme more towards Challengers and with limits on Futures suggests that this is indeed what the LTA is trying to do, and so I hope they follow through with more "big ticket" tournaments at home in line with this strategy.

There is a sense of virtuous cycle going on here......more players on the way up.......more belief that GB players are winners and that our training/coaching regimes are working........more strong players to train with.......more strong players to go on overseas tournament tours (practice partners, scouters, company, etc).......more learning opportunities...........more motivation to win to join successful friends.........more players on the way up, etc. If we now add "more financial incentives to play bigger tournaments" and "more big point tournaments at home"....it starts to look quite interesting for players, sponsors and fans alike.