Whilst I think it is exciting times for British tennis at the moment Edmund and Evo looking top 100 stuff, I am bit alarmed by what is coming through. We don't really have any 18-23 in the top 500 apart from edmund, broady and loyd.
I really think you need to be top 400 as a bare minimum by the age of 22-23 if you are considering a tennis career.
Indeed. Also ( as I may have mentioned ) no teenagers in the top 1000 and a current grand total of 5 ranking points from our juniors
It's good at the top with Kyle and Evo's progress, and I look forward to following the progress of our top half dozen or so and indeed others. But the numbers are really not there in the younger guys, basically since the Evo+ year of 1990 born, with an interjection of the 1995 borns - Kyle, Luke, Evan, Cameron.
Hopefully we will have quite a number of late bloomers or I have visions of the top 25 table telling a not so good story in a few years.
-- Edited by indiana on Friday 12th of February 2016 04:24:38 PM
Agreed. You do get late bloomers in life, I mean look at that chap from Panama who broke into the top 100 for the first time in the last few years, was he 33?? But I'm sure the stats will point that if you are not ranked in the top X by age X, than you will not ever break into the top 100.
I spoke to couple of guys from LTA Elite Tennis team and they were suggesting that whilst Top 100 is older then before, the age people get into top 100 is younger. It's just that people are carrying on playing more so overall there is less churn and fewer new entrants.
They also admitted LTA are pursuing a 'participation' strategy so more focus on increasing player numbers and less on supporting players. Hence many of our juniors haven't been paid for to go abroad and get their junior rankings up in comparison to previous years. Though they argued that there were no obviously exceptional boys under 16 at the moment and support would be available if there were any with exceptional talent coming through.
All in all, agree that it sounds like might be shortage of real talent coming through for a bit though Evans, Edmund, Bedene mean we have more to watch than we have for a fair bit, and Glasspool has real potential given speed with which he has reached top 450.
I doubt anyone would really dispute that the age profile of the top 100 has got older. I see ( from the live-tennis.eu site ) that there are currently just 21 under 25s in the top 100 and just 6 in the top 50 ( Kyle at quite recently turned 21 is #13 of these aged under 25 ).
I had not heard before that the age players have been entering the top 100 has been getting younger. A bit surprised. Now while that might to some arguable extent support some of the LTA's age rationale, is anyone aware of data confirming this?
-- Edited by indiana on Friday 12th of February 2016 11:58:41 PM
So we currently have a bit of a combination of the elite youngster concentration not finding many really elite youngsters, while continuing not going much at all out of the way to help a bit older players in a world when more older players are coming through..
It's cutting things at relatively little cost that rather bemuse me most, such as the bonus pool for good competition performance.
-- Edited by indiana on Saturday 13th of February 2016 11:48:47 AM
Translated: that without the fortune of a wealthy family or sponsor, you need to be exceptional at an early age to succeed as a British tennis player.
*sigh*
And many of these relatively exceptional at an early age will be those introduced to the local tennis club by mummy and daddy at an early age.
The real athlete that finds tennis at a later date will always be playing catch up even with possibly greater potential.
Hopefully they are at least continuning to find decent resources to aim at lament identification outside the early 'pool'.
-- Edited by indiana on Saturday 13th of February 2016 11:28:55 AM
The French alternative is just to get so many 'mummies and daddies' playing at local tennis club level that it takes care of itself and very few are left out.
I spoke to couple of guys from LTA Elite Tennis team and they were suggesting that whilst Top 100 is older then before, the age people get into top 100 is younger. It's just that people are carrying on playing more so overall there is less churn and fewer new entrants.
I'd love to see some stats to back this up because it sounds like bull**** to me.
Whilst I think it is exciting times for British tennis at the moment Edmund and Evo looking top 100 stuff, I am bit alarmed by what is coming through. We don't really have any 18-23 in the top 500 apart from edmund, broady and loyd.
I really think you need to be top 400 as a bare minimum by the age of 22-23 if you are considering a tennis career.
Indeed. Also ( as I may have mentioned ) no teenagers in the top 1000 and a current grand total of 5 ranking points from our juniors
It's good at the top with Kyle and Evo's progress, and I look forward to following the progress of our top half dozen or so and indeed others. But the numbers are really not there in the younger guys, basically since the Evo+ year of 1990 born, with an interjection of the 1995 borns - Kyle, Luke, Evan, Cameron.
Hopefully we will have quite a number of late bloomers or I have visions of the top 25 table telling a not so good story in a few years.
-- Edited by indiana on Friday 12th of February 2016 04:24:38 PM
Agreed. You do get late bloomers in life, I mean look at that chap from Panama who broke into the top 100 for the first time in the last few years, was he 33?? But I'm sure the stats will point that if you are not ranked in the top X by age X, than you will not ever break into the top 100.
I assume you're referring to Estrella Burgos, who is Dominican.