Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Oli Golding


Challenger qualifying

Status: Offline
Posts: 2279
Date:
RE: Oli Golding


Spectator wrote:

No views here about what Mr Golding should or should not do - he doubtless has many options, and one can only wish him the best in whichever he chooses.


But to go back to sherbert's point about tennis players not having money to spend outside tennis because of low earnings and high costs. I think that's quite an issue actually. Yes, students are also often on a budget, as are other young people beginning other careers. But many of them are putting a short-term investment into something which has a reasonable shot of bringing them a decent income in the not-too-distant future, and there are mechanisms in place to make their investments more sensible (eg student loan repayment schedules linked to actual income)

By contrast, the young tennis players are in a sport where only about 150 to 200 people a year in the world are going to make enough from singles tour (ITF and ATP) tennis actually to have an income (after expenses) of more than about £15,000 or £20,000. So assuming that most players now "break through" at 24/25, if they don't go to university, you're talking roughly five or six years in which they will need to be singularly committed to their work, have very high outlays for work-related expenses, probably therefore run at a loss (with no equivalent of student loans) or only the thinnest of positive margins, live a peripatetic existence (which for some may be an attraction, but for others may negatively impact friendships and other relationships), forego other more lucrative options ... and perhaps at the end have very little financially to show for the investment, given the slim chances of making a living on the main Tour. Oh, and if it doesn't work out as they'd hoped, they'll then need to find work in their mid-20s without benefit of higher education and starting several years behind their peers.

Don't get me wrong: I know there's a huge attraction in playing a sport one loves, competing professionally, seeing the world, experiencing camaraderie etc. It's not a question of seeking pity. But sherbert's point seems a very fair one: the economics aren't great and they certainly don't encourage players who aren't an immediate "sure thing" to stick with the sport.

Great hearing from CD and The Optimist about systems in other places that enable players to put together careers that are more viable ... and that embed tennis in the popular consciousness at the same time.



-- Edited by Spectator on Thursday 28th of August 2014 09:15:31 PM


I completely agree with what youre saying, the tour is tough, but unfortunately if you cant afford to do lots outside of tennis then thats tough luck. Its very easy as tennis fans to romanticise somewhat and think that players should be funded because the tour is difficult and have a nice life on the side of their ITF tournaments - but why? Yes, very few make it, but how is that any different to the kids who go to, say, ballet school? A lot of dancers want to make it, but very few do and unfortunately that is the risk they take when they choose to enrol in such a school. They take on the debt, they have to pay it back and if they dont make it or cant hack it thats tough, they move on to something else.

For me the only difference between the two is the fact that students have loans and tennis players do not and I dont think its a bad idea to offer tennis players support through a more formal loan system rather than them relying on funding/parents. That way they make informed decisions regarding the potential risks/benefits of a career in tennis but do not have the option taken away from them if they cant pay up immediately.

The assumption that a degree is a ticket to a well paid job is also very outdated. The graduate market is absolutely saturated at the moment and a lot of degrees do not lead to well paid jobs. Tennis players, like students, are doing something that they believe will lead to a good future lifestyle (income only being one factor in this, there are lots of students who study because of passion for the subject, rather than chasing a high salary) and this is their decision, a risk they take and sadly they are not entitled to a standard of living that they cannot afford just because they are athletes!



__________________


ATP qualifying

Status: Offline
Posts: 2706
Date:

Just read the Mail article.  I can't claim to really know Oli but have come across him from time to time over the years. He's always come across as a bit of a scatterbrained and slightly immature personality, but a good-hearted lad, totally likeable and utterly devoted to his tennis.  It will be a real shame if he gives up.  IMO he has the makings of a game which will go far.  I last saw him at Wimby qualies and as always he played an attacking 'risky' game that was a bit rough around the edges but which would form the basis for something so much better.  Even before the NTC, I believe Oli changed coaching arrangements and training centres more than most.  I suspect this long term instability is the main reason he is disillusioned.  He always struck me as someone who would benefit from a long term POSITIVE coaching environment.  For all his bravado, I feel he is prone to a lack of self-confidence.  I can't know how the current crop of NTC players feel, but several who have spent some time training there since it opened have spoken to me of an overwhelming sense of negativity about the place, of nothing being good enough and of not feeling in partnership with the coaching staff.  They also say that financially, it is an unbelievable package and almost impossible to turn down.  Don't know most of these people well enough to know if there's an element of sour grapes there but certain there is more than a grain of truth.  If Oli returns, think it imperative he gets into the right training base.  Hope we see him playing again.

On the side issue re funding 18+ that seems to have developed on this thread, if ITF events paid in real terms what they paid when Henman was starting his career all those years ago this would be a non issue.  Good players, regularly reaching semis and finals would largely cover their costs as he did.  The others would fall by the wayside.  As it is, the events pay exactly the same prize money as they did way back then.

 

 



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 55287
Date:

The point re the futures prize money is spot on.

Apart from the fact, of course, as Ratty and others have pointed out, that even paying such peanuts as they do now, there STILL seems to be a large and steady supply of new hopefuls and, then, new stars.

So it's sort of hard to say that ITF futures absolutely need to pay more.

And in many ways our guys are already one of the best funded set in the world because the top ones get their WCs (Wimbledon, Qs, Queens etc. etc.) and, KEY, the others get the bonus top-up which effectively means that the ITF futures ARE currently paying what they should do (for the British players, not for anyone else).

__________________


Satellite level

Status: Offline
Posts: 1432
Date:

Big loss if stops now unlikely to make top 100 if stops too long .

Its a shame because comes from a generation of players that had so some much potential . Myself and nick Fulwood believe that success in ITF juniors can be a double edged sword . 

And there is evidence that early success at ITF juniors certainly historically eg Marcus made no12 world & oli a GS junior title Br can be a double edged sword complacently only follows success and careful management /mentoring at this stage could have made  all the difference .

Transition between ITF junior success and men's pro tour is proving difficult for a lot of players is this a British problem or the international norm ? 

I believe that it's normal but has been a particular problem

With our juniors in last 5-6 years . 

What I believe is missing is a charismatic leader of these young players eg A British version ( and it needs to be a man or woman from these shores ) of Nick Bolleteri  from an early age . 

The right attitudes need to be fostered in players at a early age 10 yrs old Sadly by the critical age of 18 too many of our talented players have the wrong attitudes . 

New Coaches/managers /mentors  at 21+ are then often fighting a losing battle trying make up for lossed time and change harden attitudes . 

I am fortunate enough to get close up

To most of our top 50 mens players One thing that sets Andy Murray apart from the rest is the right attitude and we all know he's definitely got his mothers genes and is father is very focused . 

Too many of our current top GB players have not got the right attitude it's simple as that !  . 

 

 

 

 

 

 



__________________
Gary Lewis


Tennis legend

Status: Online
Posts: 57743
Date:

Interestingly, one of the players mentioned in the Telegraph article & the same age as Oli, Dominic Thiem (WR 45), came from two sets down to beat Ernests Gulbis, the 11th seed, at Flushing Meadow yesterday...

 



__________________


Challenger level

Status: Offline
Posts: 2443
Date:

Stircrazy wrote:

Interestingly, one of the players mentioned in the Telegraph article & the same age as Oli, Dominic Thiem (WR 45), came from two sets down to beat Ernests Gulbis, the 11th seed, at Flushing Meadow yesterday...

 


 Just developing at his own pace.....

......but seriously, I don't always agree with Gary, but this attitude/seriousnous issue is critical to me. Taking tennis and professionalism seriously does NOT mean you can't have a laugh (Andy certainly does). Some of Oli's peers seemed even from day 1 as much more professional and serious (albeit very spurious data, outside in, etc) and by a coincidence those guys appear to have done very well. I remember Tim Henman making exactly this point when he gave a masterclass to a selection of Brits now in our top 10 and a few other non-Brits like Vesely and others.....he saw a stark difference in overall attitude and professionalism.

On the one hand you could simply say they are developing earlier, and a faster pace......but that would be to ignore the simple truth that we can ALL influence the speed of our own development positively and negatively by deeds, attitudes and openness to learn. Good coaching, funding and leadership helps too, of course. My strong impression is that this appears to be a greater challenge [on average] for GB players than certain other countries.....for whatever reason.......which slows down the rate of progress......which extends the financial burden......which increases the pressures, the resentment, the desperation......which, etc.



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 18651
Date:

A1 tennis academy wrote:

Big loss if stops now unlikely to make top 100 if stops too long .

Its a shame because comes from a generation of players that had so some much potential . Myself and nick Fulwood believe that success in ITF juniors can be a double edged sword . 

And there is evidence that early success at ITF juniors certainly historically eg Marcus made no12 world & oli a GS junior title Br can be a double edged sword complacently only follows success and careful management /mentoring at this stage could have made  all the difference .

Transition between ITF junior success and men's pro tour is proving difficult for a lot of players is this a British problem or the international norm ? 

I believe that it's normal but has been a particular problem

With our juniors in last 5-6 years . 

What I believe is missing is a charismatic leader of these young players eg A British version ( and it needs to be a man or woman from these shores ) of Nick Bolleteri  from an early age . 

The right attitudes need to be fostered in players at a early age 10 yrs old Sadly by the critical age of 18 too many of our talented players have the wrong attitudes . 

New Coaches/managers /mentors  at 21+ are then often fighting a losing battle trying make up for lossed time and change harden attitudes . 

I am fortunate enough to get close up

To most of our top 50 mens players One thing that sets Andy Murray apart from the rest is the right attitude and we all know he's definitely got his mothers genes and is father is very focused . 

Too many of our current top GB players have not got the right attitude it's simple as that !  . 

 


 The analysis I did some while ago of a particular year (don't have to hand unfortunately) confirmed my impression that while most of the top 5 juniors worldwide made it through to the top 100 ATP sooner or later there was a rapid drop-off in successful transition, so that when you get to players with a junior high outside the top 10, unless one of the top ATP ranked juniors, the percentage making the top 100 ATP eventually is very low 



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Online
Posts: 40784
Date:

Andy appears to be a very good example of a player, who is prepared to work very hard, but does so ( and wants to do so ) in a pleasing environment with others who are in it with him, enjoy each others company and really feel in it together against the world. Now, Andy can clearly afford a big team, but ideally the principle is the same with the straight player / coach relationship.

I get the impression that with many of our youngsters, particularly at the NTC, and related to that thread, there is often not a good training environment. Various coaches are foisted on players, and it is simply their job to work with the player. If there is not a real sense of togetherness, mutually having similar goals and yes, wishing to work hard, but with enjoyment and purpose, the player can I feel get disillusioned. The training environment can be very important.

I often think of football clubs who employ foreign manager to do a job, but that manager barely speaks English. That can not help the training environment, the banter, and in turn players not enjoying the week day training environment can take that onto the pitch.

I feel that Oli has not had a great environment, and while he has real issues he has needed to address himself, obstacles have seemingly been put in his way.

We currently have a really promising group of junior girls. It is so important that they are as much as possible part of an environment that helps them be all they can be. The LTA must look at them all individually, be a support and not put unnecessary obstacles in their way, be where possible an enabler, not a dictator. It would have concerned me if too many were based at the NTC in the rumoured environment and successful development rate of recent times

__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 55287
Date:

In reference to the top juniors becoming top seniors comments from A1 and David:

just my view, but I sometimes think that we look at it the wrong way round.

i.e. we ask 'how many top juniors go on to become top seniors?'

But this puts the emphasis on the junior status which, frankly, we don't really care about.

It seems to me that the crucial question is 'how many top ranked seniors were once top juniors?'

i.e. it's related, obviously, but puts the focus on the senior status.

And if you look at the current ATP top 20 male tennis players, and their listed ITF Junior Career High in singles, or the combined (i,e, factors in some doubles) if they are younger and the singles was no longer used or was lower i.e. taking the best possible junior ranking, you get:

Djoko - combined CH 24
Nadal - CH 145
Roger - CH 1
Stan - CH 7
Ferrer - unranked/ never ranked
Raonic - combined CH 35
Berdych - CH 6
Dimitrov - CH 1
Andy - combined CH 2
Tsonga - CH 2
Nishikori - combined CH 7
Gulbis - combined CH 525
Del Potro - CH 3
gasquet - CH 1
Isner - CH 93
Cilic - combined CH 1
Fognini - CH 8
Robredo - CH 8
Bautista - combined CH 47
Anderson - combined CH 28

So, out of the top 20 seniors, there are 7 ex-top 5 juniors and 8 who never even made the top 20 juniors.

Make of it what you will, and it's obvious that most top seniors were very good juniors. But I think it's quite interesting . . .



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 19392
Date:

Interesting stats CD. But I wonder how much these figures were swayed by some players entering early into the senior ranks and not focusing on junior tournaments.

Perhaps as really promising 16/17 years olds, they simply played senior events and didn't bother at all to play juniors at all.

__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 55287
Date:

Bob in Spain wrote:

Interesting stats CD. But I wonder how much these figures were swayed by some players entering early into the senior ranks and not focusing on junior tournaments.

Perhaps as really promising 16/17 years olds, they simply played senior events and didn't bother at all to play juniors at all.


 

Definitely the case with some of the Spaniards (there and further down the list). Yes, maybe they were 'good' as juniors, just weren't focused on junior rankings.

Following that, I'd expect to see the junior ranking standard go up for the younger guys i.e. on the basis that as the average age of the very top seniors has got so markedly older over the last decade or so, the chances of youngsters quitting junior tennis and going straight to seniors would be less now so they'd stay in juniors longer and get a higher ranking. Not sure I see it, though maybe would have to look lower down.



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 10642
Date:

Anne Keothavongs tweet was very telling, suggesting coaches were in some cases poor and not passionate about their job.

__________________


Challenger level

Status: Offline
Posts: 2443
Date:

Really interesting stats. Nadal famously was an outstanding junior (Les Petit's As) but was focussing on pro matches from a ridiculously young age, and I believe Novak went down a similar route. Gulbis is an outlier (in every sense!!) - no idea what his early route was, but I'll bet it was unusual. And I presume David Ferrer chose a completely different path as a junior. Wasn't he working on building sites as an 18 year old? John Isner in the 90s.....well, without being unkind, I actually think he is, even now, a rather average tennis player with an incredible serve, which I presume he didn't have as a kid. And I presume he wasn't 6 foot 10 at that age either.



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 55287
Date:

Purely randomly, and just out of interest, I did the same thing for the players ranked ATP WR 50-69 (the very top players, I think, are not always really representative of the ATP players as a whole - more a very specialised subset).


50 - Kukushkin - no junior ranking that I could find
51 - Steve Johnson - CH 660
52 - Roger-Vasselin - CH 145
53 - Ivan Dodig - CH 376
54 - Nieminen - CH 11
55 - Jack Sock - CH 22
56 - David Goffin - CH 10
57 - Querrey - CH 10
58 - Tursunov - CH 246
59 - Benj. Becker - CH 199
60 - Kyrigios - CH 1
61 - Lajovic - CH 132
62 - Gabashvili - CH 33
63 - Berlocq - CH 306
63 - Golubev - CH 101
64 - Klizan - CH 1
65 - Delbonis - CH 321
66 - Tomic - CH 2
67 - G Muller - CH 1
68 - Mayer - CH 8
69 - haase - CH 3

So, again, a reasonable number of top 5 juniors - namely 5 out of 20. But a whopping 10 out of 20 never even made the top 100 juniors.

__________________
TMH


Futures qualifying

Status: Offline
Posts: 1776
Date:

That's very interesting.

Makes you wonder how players can go from being relatively mediocre junior players to surpassing the majority of their peers 5-10 years down the line. Just hard work, dedication, later development?

Of course we don't know the full story for many of them and just because some of them never had a top junior ranking, doesn't mean they weren't one of the best juniors around at that time. Sock for instance actually won the junior USO in his final year, yet never surpassed the top 20.

Edmund is another good example of one who was never a top five junior but so far is progressing quicker than many of his peers who were ranked above him at junior level. Of course there were a lot of clearly mega-talented kids he competed with who are progressing at a similar pace (Quinzi, Nishioka, Coric, Kokkinakis, Chung).

But clearly, junior rankings aren't everything.



-- Edited by TMH on Saturday 30th of August 2014 07:28:45 PM

__________________
«First  <  15 6 7 8 912  >  Last»  | Page of 12  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard