LTA in court

EddietheEagle · County player

RE: LTA in court

TMH · Futures qualifying

EddietheEagle wrote:
I have not suggested top 300 before you're nineteen is an absolute rule. It is a useful rule of thumb and a guide which stands whether you decide to call it tosh or not. You can refine it any way you like. Many of the players you cite in denouncing the argument were either not fully committed to professional tennis (being university students for example or were just undecided. Raonic, for example, didn't decide to go professional until just before his eighteenth birthday and John Isner was at university playing college tennis. Other players had serious injury issues when young which self-evidently would slow their development. Tsonga would be a prime example of that. Those players all had the talent to make the 300 breakthrough at a younger age had they had the inclination to do so or were injury free.

The fact remains that by and large, if you've ambitions to making it as a top 100 ATP player (which I suggest is the benchmark we ought to be looking at) you need to be looking to get your ranking to 300 or thereabouts before your nineteenth birthday or at least have it on a fast climbing trajectory. Once you get to twenty plus and start languishing, particularly in futures, your chances of eventually breaking through start to diminish significantly unless of course those other pertinent factors have got in the way such as education or injury.

61% of the current top 100 didn't make the top 300 until after their 19th birthday.

30% didn't make the top 300 until their 20s.

21% didn't make the top 300 until they were 21 or older.

Hell, 7 of them didn't make the top 300 until they were over 23.

It is in no way a 'useful rule of a thumb'. Certainly not at 18. Not in this day and age.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Eddie, the facts stand against you (see TMH above). You can't argue that the ones that didn't make it until quite late don't count because they were 'not fully committed' - that's just using the stats you like, and ignoring (or finding excuses for) the stats you don't like.

It's also using convenient 20-20 hindsight. Yes, Tsonga had a lot of talent (as shown by junior results? subjective judgement? hindsight?) and serious back injuries. But does Oliver Golding also have a lot of talent? Did he have 'serious injuries' last year? Probably not as much in either category but Tsonga made top 10 - so maybe Oliver can make top 100 no problem. i.e. it's all question of degree.

Obviously, there's some truth in the fact that the 'stars' will generally make their move earlier. But if nearly two-thirds of the current top 100 were outside the top 300 at 18 (your 'rule of thumb') and a fifth of all top 100 players were ranked outside the top 300 until after their 21st birthdays, that's pretty clear that it's not much use as a rule of thumb.

Just to give the opposite extreme, Stephane Robert has been a serious player most of his career. Broke into the top 300 at age 23. Made the top 200 for a shortish time. Dropped out of the top 300 again at 25. Back in. And out again at 27. Back in top 300 at 29. In out, shake it all about. And currently WR 86, at age 33, with a CH of 61 at age 30. Prize money of over a million dollars. It's not a stellar career. But it's pretty damn good.

I'm not, of course, claiming Stephane is typical - no need: TMH has given the general overall statistics and one can't argue with them - just that it's worth remembering for every 18 year-old superstar, there are other good players who come and go (less noticed) who represent the other end of the spectrum. ANd a lot who fall in the middle.

PaulM · Tennis legend

Trouble is CD, the LTA agree with Eddie and base their funding around that. Many have tried and failed to demonstrate that tennis isn't like that anymore.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

PaulM wrote:
Trouble is CD, the LTA agree with Eddie and base their funding around that. Many have tried and failed to demonstrate that tennis isn't like that anymore.

I know, I know - makes you cry . . . .

indiana · Tennis legend

G, S & M :)

I'd also mention how many of the GB men's good 89 / 90 generation, after a bit of a collective lull, have in the last year or so been blasting through their CHs and on upwards. OK, none are even top 100 players yet, but it is just an illustration of how players can break through at different times. Even Roger Draper was infamously dismissive of that group, pointing to it being the new generation that mattered. The LTA have made some comments at times showing some awareness of changing trends, but seemingly not really followed this with actions.

As for nitpicking on many of the names mentioned so far, yes all players are individuals with individual circumstances. If Eddie wants to have a go at the 61% of the current top 100 that were not top 300 before age 19, good luck to him. However, that very fact is mainly why you just can't make out that such a ( supposedly useful ) rule of thumb applies, especially when it so clearly doesn't.

There are grains of truth in it when referencing the absolute top players, but top 100, just no. And I was clearly far from the only person that knew unstinctively this to be the case as soon as it was mentioned. However, factual evidence never does any harm.

Spectator · All-time great

Two very interesting discussions in one thread. Well done to TMH for gathering the data to confirm what most of us would have posited from general observation. And some really interesting comments from Mr Lewis, CD et al on access. I've seen schemes to increase access in a different context that were quite close to what Mr Lewis suggests (especially around getting people together in a group, providing mentoring and transport) and it worked really well. The idea of getting wealthier clubs to support also sounds a really good one. Hope that someone somewhere decides to take the suggestion on!

A1 tennis academy · Satellite level

Spectator wrote:
Two very interesting discussions in one thread. Well done to TMH for gathering the data to confirm what most of us would have posited from general observation. And some really interesting comments from Mr Lewis, CD et al on access. I've seen schemes to increase access in a different context that were quite close to what Mr Lewis suggests (especially around getting people together in a group, providing mentoring and transport) and it worked really well. The idea of getting wealthier clubs to support also sounds a really good one. Hope that someone somewhere decides to take the suggestion on!

We have a long way to go to ! But GB top 25 tennis is moving in the right direction

We are improving our average ATP ranking in men's GB top 25 ,

Evo has climbed from 200-300 range to 100-150 . We have a double GS champ & we are no2 in the world men's doubles Rankings .

Each top 25 player needs a mentor in addition to their parents and coach . I know Marcus has not achieved as much in the last 18 months as some people would like but it's progress and highlights that greater success will come from a Relative small amount of funding combined with dedicated mentoring and building a team of dedicated volunteers ( 3 -4 at A1 ) around your players .

-- Edited by A1 tennis academy on Saturday 12th of April 2014 08:58:49 AM

A1 tennis academy · Satellite level

I took a GB top 100 18U player last week to a regional tournament from a single parent family and mother Could not take when I arrived there were 3 fathers from the same club all of whom could have taken this young lad .

It was very much we are competitors no team spirit & no collaboration .

I rarely see a club coach with his players at a junior tournament , alll only 10% of top 25 ( excluding top 3 ) have coacheI regularly in attendence at Pro tournaments

What I am saying its the individualism v team work again .

I would like to see coaches attending with groups of players

Gosling are an exception which I would like to become the norm .

Simple things that can make a huge difference .

We need MR motivators & team builders !

-- Edited by A1 tennis academy on Saturday 12th of April 2014 08:50:32 AM

-- Edited by A1 tennis academy on Saturday 12th of April 2014 09:23:18 AM

johnnylad · Tennis legend

Kevin Anderson was College as well.

Which adds another interesting addition to the debate.

Salisbury, Glasspool, Manlow and others are all products of college plus both Skupskis. What about the route Tennis Smart keep pushing - more financially viable than trawling the futures tour from the age of 16, and more likely to give players the right perspective. Even Colin Fleming proved more successful post college than pre college.

Pity Andrew Bettles seems to have disappeared - he looked a player at 15

indiana · Tennis legend

Colin Fleming is an interesting one.

Of course, his great success as a doubles player, first with Ken Skupski and then Ross Hutchins, came post college.

But I always thought that there was an unfulfilled talent in singles, and his highest rankings before returning to college and then post college, before concentrating more and more on doubles, were very similar.

His initial singles high was WR 365 in August 2006 and then he worked his way back to just surpass this with his CH of WR 359 in September 2009. On each occasion if he had kept at his pro singles I do think he was heading at least into the top 300 and the ability was there to go higher.

However, there can be no doubt that the decision to concentrate on doubles has worked out well for him, so I doubt that he really has many regrets.

EddietheEagle · County player

Just Googling around, one recent anomaly concerns the average age of top 50 and top 100 players which has risen dramatically. Some stats suggest the average age of a top pro has risen by over three years compared with just seven years ago. That's a phenomenal rise. David Ferrer would be a classic example, higher ranked now than at age 27. Is this sports science and the training effect spreading out or just a phenomenal crop of current players?

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

EddietheEagle wrote:
Just Googling around, one recent anomaly concerns the average age of top 50 and top 100 players which has risen dramatically. Some stats suggest the average age of a top pro has risen by over three years compared with just seven years ago. That's a phenomenal rise. David Ferrer would be a classic example, higher ranked now than at age 27. Is this sports science and the training effect spreading out or just a phenomenal crop of current players?

Eddie, my man smile

All reports I've seen say it's thanks to sports science and training. And will carry on (although not indefinitely presumably!). The improvements in the understanding of the importance of physio, conditioning, recuperation, nutrition etc etc are major. And as you say, the leap up in average age is really significant. In terms of physical strength, men do not hit their prime until at least mid-twenties anyway. New racquets allow strength to be used to greater effect.

The increase in money has been another major factor. Players are strongly 'incentivised' to stay in tennis and get in the top 100 as the financial rewards are so much more significant than they used to be. Hence, chicken and egg - look after yourself, do cross-training as opposed to single training and risk injury, work hard to get the rewards at the end.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

indiana wrote:
But a big issue does remain how much do the wealthier clubs generally want to help ?

Prescription may not be ideal, but sometimes be necessary. Has the LTA control / influence they could bring to bear by insisting that all clubs say have certain programs in place for disadvantaged kids ?

Several interesting posts on the other pages that I'd missed somehow along the way.

Indy makes a good point - presumably a large, wealthy, completely privately funded club can operate its own rules? Can the LTA bring pressure to bear? Do the clubs care?

I know that abroad the answer lies in the fact that, yes, of course you can set up a private tennis club in France. But you won't be 'certified' by the FFT. So your club members won't have a licence, get a ranking, be able to play in matches, enter teams etc. Equally, the club won't be eligible for subsidies or grants or favourable tax treatment that associations (a bit like charities) get. The second might not matter if you were mega rich (although it's a big chunk of money). But the first problem is major and a real deal-breaker. Does the same apply here? If not, could it?

Morally, I can't get my head round what A1 says about the three fathers, all with their own sonny jims, and not one who'd offered to drive the other kid. I've driven more kids to more matches than had hot dinners. This usually included my own kids of course, so no claim to fame, but frankly a car full of three or four kids all off to play is far more fun for everyone, and environmentally better, than everyone going on their own (even assuming they have parents who can). Even when both parents had cars and wanted to go, we'd take it in turns - two parents together in the front - two or more kids in the back, the boot full of bags and raquets - it's what it's all about, surely . . .

Those parents should be ashamed of themselves . . .

Just lastly, following up on a point somewhere else: The Optimist (I think, sorry if I got wrong) wrote something about the NTC closing ranks and now only helping the real top players (even in terms of advice and facilities). We've all talked before about how the NTC resource is an amazing resource and should be available, in my view, to practically all serious players, as long as feasibly possible i.e. not funding as such, but making courts, nutritionists, physios etc. available to all.

But are we sure they don't? I know Anna Smith has major physio and re-hab there (and she can't be funded as such). Alex Ward has been training there over the last week (and he presumably is not on the funding list either). It would be nice if there were a bit more transparency as to what exactly the LTA do and provide at the NTC.

A1 tennis academy · Satellite level

Going back to the orginal thread I had a chat with our top team pros yesterday at our national Aegon match they basically said that there was never any evidence of any racism at the Lta .