Junior rankings

indiana · Tennis legend

RE: Junior rankings

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Absolutely, Indy. It's the dilemma.

France will not fund youngsters to go and train elsewhere. Generally, they will not fund you using a non-federation coach either. Their way or the high-way approach.

I don;t believe Italy does either (and I strongly doubt that Spain would, although I don;t know).

Of course, the perfect solution is that the home federation develops such a level of expertise and offer that no one WANTS or NEEDS to go elsewhere. But, as said, it's chicken and egg. And, yes, who do you sacrifice along the way ?

The problem is, IMHO, is that the GB offer is not right. As The Optimist says on another thread, there is no club involvement and the HPCs are purely tennis-based. There is seemingly no integration of academics, no links with local schools, and no team tennis at a club level. It's all in isolation.

wimdledont · Challenger level

But, but, but...

WRT junior girls, the Uk is doing exceptionally well, and has been for some time.

The ITF site search function lets you search by nationality, here...

www.itftennis.com/juniors/rankings/rankings-list/players.aspx

13 girls from the UK in the top 250. That's good.

Better than, for example, France (5), which is probably the best comparison, as it is a European country with its own Grand Slam.

Other examples include Germany (2)!!!???, Italy (6), Spain (4), Australia (11), China (11).

Russia and the US, admittedly, have too many to count. But AFAICT, the UK comes third in terms of numbers of juniors with a reasonable ranking, <250.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Yes, but it's how they turn into adult senior players that matters.

indiana · Tennis legend

Oh, I've been going on about the potential in this group of GB girls for the last couple of years and it still looks pretty good, although as CD says the transition to seniors is such a crucial stage.

BUT paying too much attention to junior rankings is rather dangerous, I think phrases like "take with a fair pinch of salt" are often used. Very varied backgrounds and concentration on ITF juniors and early movements to ITF seniors ( much more marked in girls and I think also more marked in some of these other countries compared to GB ).

Top 200 ? - noted with interest. But at least top 50 before my interest is really spiked that this could be a real player. Not to say that others may not come through more later.

paulisi · Tennis legend

I'd be interested to compare GB junior ranking to senior ranking. Hev and Laura won junior grand slams and made top 50.
Katy and Katie top 30 and climbing up the rankings quickly.

I would suggest top 50 junior has a good future as a senior. The rest will have to really work at it to succeed.

kundalini · Specialist Reporter + Intermediate Club Player

paulisi wrote:
I'd be interested to compare GB junior ranking to senior ranking. Hev and Laura won junior grand slams and made top 50.
Katy and Katie top 30 and climbing up the rankings quickly.

I would suggest top 50 junior has a good future as a senior. The rest will have to really work at it to succeed.

What's a good future as a senior ? About 300 players at least covering their costs. Senior careers spanning 10 years so that would be an average of 30 per year age group. I'd suggest top 20 achieved at age 17 or younger have a decent chance; others need (raw) weapons and a willingness to put in the hard work.

Katie (age 17) and Katy (age 18) junior career highs just inside top 10. Jamie Baker career high 6 in juniors.

Anne K and Bally both made Wimbledon juniors semis near the end but their junior career highs achieved earlier, 60 and 77 respectively. Tara made quarters of Wimbledon juniors and finalist at Roehampton as a 17 year old but those were the only 2 events she played once she turned 16. Tara's junior career high 73 (age 15)

Naomi Cavaday 23 (aged 17 almost 18)

Mel South didn't play a great deal of juniors career high 350 (combined ranking)

Katie O'Brien 135 combined ranking

Naomi Broady had minimal impact, career high 251

JoKo 11 (achieved when 16 almost 17)

Jade Curtis 26 (achieved when 18) She reached 325 as an adult.

Georgie Stoop Gent 234

Sam Murray 198 (age 17)

Eleanor Dean 47 (age 16 almost 17)

Having gone through the junior results of about 15 british women, they seem to take juniors seriously (10+events in a calender year) for a relatively short period of time 12-18 months, which might be when 15, 16 or 17. Their best results often come late on when only playing 2 or 3 events.

I tend to agree with indiana above. Junior rankings on their own tell you very little about potential.

The ITF juniors' website has year end top 100 rankings going back 10 years. Jen Ren (ch 71), Steph Cornish (ch 44) and Hannah James all featured. Jess Ren ch 81 didn't. On the Boys' side plenty of british names that haven't gone on to be top 400 as adults.

-- Edited by kundalini on Thursday 5th of February 2015 12:09:02 AM

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

I think you're right, kundalini. Unless funding depends on it, most player use junior tournaments as a stepping stone, a tool as part of their progress, at the right time in their development. A means to an end. Very few use it as an end in its own right. And certain countries set such little store by junior rankings that their juniors play very little, and then do very well at adult level.

Spectator · All-time great

Yes, it's why unseeded players can be really dangerous in junior GS draws - as those are often the only junior tournaments that some of the really good players from such programmes/countries will enter. Rafa Nadal, when he played Junior Wimbledon (the one ITF junior tournament he played, other than Davis Cup), was an unseeded WC, as he had no ITF points. Jack Sock was an unseeded wildcard at the USO (He had played some ITFs, but I think it was less than five).

wimdledont · Challenger level

I completely agree with and share all of these quibbles about the unreliability of the junior rankings.

The best junior in the world at present is almost certainly Bencic, who aint on the list, nor Konjuh. I don't imagine they're that bothered about winning a Junior Exempt pass into ITF 25ks.

But they were on it at some time, and they hung around on the way up and down.

It's also really unrepresentative in that only the best 12 results count; which for some of the girls is only about a third of the story.

And still the fact remains that the UK seems very well represented among these junior ranks. And, all things being equal, you would expect that a similar proportion of the adult ranks would be made up of individuals from the same nations. And if France, Spain or Italy can have hidden gems who don't appear on the juniors list, why can't we?

With 13 girls in the top 250, the UK has over 5% of juniors. Carry that on for a decade, and you should end up with 5% of the WTA ranks; 5 women in the top 100, 5 from 101-200, etc...

So EITHER we are in the course of witnessing a golden age, when GB reaps the Murray dividend, and sees a fine crop of youngsters come through; OR the LTA is making a pig's ear of offering any kind of career prospect to any recently graduated junior entering the pro ranks, other than giving up playing, and making a living by coaching, entering into tennis marketing or admin, or waitressing, or groundskeeping.

Or quite a lot of both.

There does seem to be a very promising crop of junior girls right now; and the LTA is appears to be already working hard at preventing as many as possible from trying to make the transition to the top professional ranks. That transition could cost the LTA money, and the LTA has actually had a recent financial crisis so severe that it actually had to fire some bureaucrats. There's not a lot of money to spend on people so naive as to try to improve the state of GB tennis by hitting tennis balls.

If ditching the bonus scheme doesn't do it, then more-than-halving the number of UK ITF tournaments this Spring, and tightening the Wimbledon WC financial-lifeline criteria will probably work.

After that, they'll be reduced to briefing against the active ITF players to the press; which they usually reserve for second half of the first week of Wimbledon...

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30878568

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

It's all a chicken and egg thing for the LTA.

The LTA (unfortunately?) HAS to focus on junior ITFs for its promising youngsters because there is no alternative. There is no club tennis. Which is deep, across the board and goes all the way up to top 200 in other top European countries. That's why the countries you mention have 'hidden gems' - they are not 'hidden' at all, on the domestic level. But they don't bother playing juniors because, for some, it adds nothing and isn't necessary.

Chloe Paquet, as mentioned on the ITF Glasgow thread, is a good example. People think she must be an 'easier' draw because she's currently 'only' WR400. But she's rising fast (only just left sixth-form college), has beaten top 200 players in club tennis, has a domestic ranking of about WTA 180 or so, was runner-up in the junior national championships. i.e. she's not a hidden gem at all for the French. But she basically never played juniors (got to ITF 900 or so I think). Top coaches simply told her not to bother and to just learn her craft and get her experience at club level.

The LTA can't - or won't - do this. (It would be a monumental change; not sure it's possible). So they have to use juniors as their way of giving youngsters experience, and their ranking criteria. Which means we will always have rather more than 'average'. We've had plenty of top juniors before (Draper was always twittering on about it) so I'm not convinced it's the next golden age. (Although I think some of our girls are exciting prospects).

But it makes the players very isolated and vulnerable when they hit 18. Now it's 100% pro adult tennis; no choice and very unforgiving. Whereas the European players stay playing club tennis as well, using it as complimentary for their pro stuff, providing - in a competitive setting - long-standing friends/hitting partners/team mates/coaches/funding/match experience/a support network etc. etc.

BeefyDeedz · Pro player

Hey CD, are there any downsides to the French system? It all seems pretty hunky-dory but there must be a reason countries like GB aren't adopting a similar strategy, or even attempting to. I haven't seen a single tennis club that felt even slightly like a community in North or South Yorkshire. It was definitely a contributing factor to many people that I know picking up team sports, some of whom have indeed turned professional and are playing in the world-class leagues.

indiana · Tennis legend

Very interesting, CD.

Yes, we may have 13 girls in the top 250 of the ITF junior rankings, indeed 12 in the top 200, but it does seem pretty clear that that is a significantly overgenerous pointer to our true strength in the girls ( although it is a generally pretty promising group for GB and one that I follow with interest ).

It also means that if, as is very likely, these ranking comparisons don't project forward into seniors then that is certainly not the fault of the LTA's handling of their transition from juniors to seniors.

What though is of real interest here is the questions BeefyDeedz asks re the general French club set-up ( and some others ), which is so so different from the UK. That it is so so different is where more questions maybe should be laid at the LTA.

In general, though, I do think top 50 ITF girls is fairly significant, even if that may be nearer top 100 in reality. On that basis Katie Swan is one really to follow and that is clearly the case. And Maia Lumsden and Gabby Taylor, who are or have been inside the top 50 at age 16, girls to paying attention to.

Of course, we will also have some girls who concentrate much less on ITF than other GB girls, such as Tara in the past or Freya from now on. But that is very much more normal in many other countries.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Beefy, honestly, there are many similar things in France that really stink - the teaching of classical music, for instance, is a disgrace: elitist, REALLY poor quality, expensive, close door, no public system of exams - any child taking music lessons here will be streets ahead of their equivalent in France.

BUT the tennis system is great, overall I can't really fault it.

I'm honestly not sure (I've never really played tennis in the UK - it wasn't really an option when I was a kid and what you get for your money now, in London, puts you off so I only play when I'm in France) but I think the main problem here (and it's historic) is the number of private clubs.

France has no private clubs. Federation doesn't allow it. (Of course, you could set one up but you'll get no public grant to help and no chance of team matches or tournaments because you're not affiliated with the federation so no one will join). So, net net, anyone can join anywhere and everybody has to play together.

Equally, schools basically don't do high-level competitive sport (kids have Wednesday afternoons off so they can go and do sports themselves). So everything is concentrated at federation club level. I don;t know but I get the impression that the pool of players here is small and then gets split sort of three ways - private, posh clubs, open clubs and sports centres, and schools. So there's no nucleus. So you really can';t set up meaningful team competitions. And if you don;t have proper team competitions, in my view it's not a sport, just a healthy past-time (like walking your dog). Sport is about competing. And that brings fans, and supporters and everything you associate with a sport.

And it does feed on itself. The tennis club, based on sport, is also certainly a community. Kids hang out there all through the summer holidays, they have New year's Eve parties and everyone goes, certain people prop up the bar and never seem to ever lift a racket. But at the same time there will be a large core of very good players (of all ages). Also, no priority for doubles (!) And kids have equal playing and booking rights.

Sorry to hear about Yorkshire. My niece is a very able ball player, age about 12. Very keen on sport. Would love to do tennis but there's nothing local on offer (hampshire). So she does athletics, which hosts training evenings most evenings, adults coming along for free to help train them, keep an eye on them, lovely warm welcoming atmosphere, nice team meets at a weekend. She really is not suited to running (far better at ball sports) but they provide everything she's looking for - apart from the fact she would love to play tennis !

BeefyDeedz · Pro player

Very interesting Coup, thanks for the detail. I think it's safe to say that any fan of British tennis must look at the tennis base in the UK and wonder just exactly what the LTA's goal actually is. Your final paragraph is possibly the most worrying, because as I mentioned, there are so many promising sportspeople from public schools in my area who either can't afford the tennis rates around here, or simply find the system too impossible that they just defer. As expected, there are dozens upon dozens of local sports teams that range in levels for no cost other than a pair of football boots and the petrol to get to the training ground, although carpools are common obviously.

Now, I'm not saying that those who went to become successful in sports like rugby and football would have made excellent tennis players without qualification, but these people who are seemingly just excellent athletes need to be picked up whilst the Murray factor is on, which will be turned off in a good half a dozen years. If you're a 10 year-old with both parents working full-time, do you go through the hoops of arranging an hour at the local sports centre for £7 p/h or do you ask your parents to take you to play football for nothing on a thursday evening and then for a match on a Sunday morning? I had no choice but to play football and rugby, as there was no other sports base here.

The LTA seem to be pushing to filter out these 'low' performance players early, but they don't have a big enough net to even capture enough players to filter.