Have heard that there will be at least 2 BT events during the first half of the year with an increased prize pot of just over £8K, giving the winners £1,500 each and the runners up £800. Perhaps this is part of the new approach to funding.
Have heard that there will be at least 2 BT events during the first half of the year with an increased prize pot of just over £8K, giving the winners £1,500 each and the runners up £800. Perhaps this is part of the new approach to funding.
It's a good idea - as long as some highly ranked 'pesky' doesn't get tempted to enter by the new bigger prize pot - and then you can't really say you're 'funding' British tennis . . .
(But the principle of making players 'win' their funding is not a bad one . . ._
The British Tour seem well funded, certainly a lot of events. Only a few ranked players take part in most events though.....would the prize money not be better spent via futures and/or challengers?
The British Tour seem well funded, certainly a lot of events. Only a few ranked players take part in most events though.....would the prize money not be better spent via futures and/or challengers?
It's a fair point but, for my tuppenceworth, I'm in favour of a well-funded Tour system.
I think it's supposed to be aimed at the young, up-and-coming players or those coming back from injury or whatever i.e. those unranked players who need a hand getting their foot on the ladder. I think also there's actually quite a lot of lower ranked players who seem to take part reasonably regularly (no idea of the exact numbers but there always seem a handful).
I rather like the system because I think it helps British tennis 'swell' down the pyramid i.e. broadens the base (very lowly ranked players may play the pre-qualies, or the qualies, word gets round, their friends might try, their younger siblings come to watch, local newspapers may (!) report on it etc. etc.). Otherwise I rather think the GB system gets more and more linear, just a few that we pray may head upwards.
I agree 100% with that ideal Coup, its just that in reality I see few up and coming players using it as a way on to the ladder. Maybe I'm mis-reading it but it seems an awful lot of prize money over the year when we are so short of tournaments. If it was used more by those on the pro-circuit I'd think it a great thing.
Given the reduction in domestic tournaments, it's probably a good idea, but my one concern is that players like Bloomfield and Goodall will mop up the prize money despite no longer playing on the tour. I see both are chasing the money again this week although the fields are a lot stronger.
Given the reduction in domestic tournaments, it's probably a good idea, but my one concern is that players like Bloomfield and Goodall will mop up the prize money despite no longer playing on the tour. I see both are chasing the money again this week although the fields are a lot stronger.
In fairness, this week is the invitation only event, the top 32 on each leaderboard (or lower if they can't all make it). Be interesting to see if either of them play as much next year.
