Week 26 - ITF ($100K + H) - Southsea, Great Britain Grass

Michael D · All-time great

Week 26 - ITF ($100K + H) - Southsea, Great Britain Grass

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

I think Katie B also has a wildcard into this.

But I agree with everything else. Someone else (maybe you but I think it was Jaggy) made a very similar point in another thread. It's just daft.

Ignoring fairness etc., even on a commercial basis, why have a tiny (but expensive) ITF event when you've got Eastbourne going on?

Michael D · All-time great

It may have been Jaggy as these are my first comments on the subject! I did see some earlier remarks but was struck again on the crassness of spending so much on a restricted field of just 16 in total, when indeed as you say Eastbourne is also going on, and so little is invested now in helping new players, or those returning from injury, come through and (re)build their rankings.

wolf · Tennis legend

The problem has been that only 72 players can play Eastbourne (48 MD+24 Q) and it's the only WTA this week. This meant top 100 players weren't even making Eastbourne qualies and had no grass practice the week before Wimbledon. And a similar story in the doubles. So that's why this tournament has been created.

Jaffa · Challenger level

Any ranking points on this?

Michael D · All-time great

wolf wrote:
The problem has been that only 72 players can play Eastbourne (48 MD+24 Q) and it's the only WTA this week. This meant top 100 players weren't even making Eastbourne qualies and had no grass practice the week before Wimbledon. And a similar story in the doubles. So that's why this tournament has been created.

So why restrict it to just 16 players with no qualifying then?

wimdledont · Challenger level

Fully agree.

With the increase in prize money at Surbiton, Mancs and Ilkley from 50k to 100k, and a new 100k found here, the LTA has found another 250k in prize money for this year - sufficient funds for them to have laid on another dozen or so ITF tournaments at 15k/25k level, which could produce a thriving competitive professional tennis culture in this country, giving innumerable opportunities for several dozen players.

The Downey era, which seems to be defined by vacuous soundbites dressed up as strategy, seems to have thrown up two contradictory soundbites - "Getting more people to play more tennis, more often" and "Own the month of June" - which combine to produce "Less people playing less professional tennis, less often".

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

wolf wrote:
The problem has been that only 72 players can play Eastbourne (48 MD+24 Q) and it's the only WTA this week. This meant top 100 players weren't even making Eastbourne qualies and had no grass practice the week before Wimbledon. And a similar story in the doubles. So that's why this tournament has been created.

So you spend £150k or so for 14 top players, 7 of whom will only play one match, about 60-90 mins, near the start of the week ?

It's hardly huge grass practice. And definitely not worth the money (in my view).

Give free access to grass practice courts and allow the players to do their own match practice.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Michael D wrote:
wolf wrote:
The problem has been that only 72 players can play Eastbourne (48 MD+24 Q) and it's the only WTA this week. This meant top 100 players weren't even making Eastbourne qualies and had no grass practice the week before Wimbledon. And a similar story in the doubles. So that's why this tournament has been created.
So why restrict it to just 16 players with no qualifying then?

That's because the others will all be in Wimbly qualis

But, as above, just allow players to organise their own matches. One match (which is all half of them will have, by definition) is hardly huge practice. And hugely expensive.

wolf · Tennis legend

Michael D wrote:
wolf wrote:
The problem has been that only 72 players can play Eastbourne (48 MD+24 Q) and it's the only WTA this week. This meant top 100 players weren't even making Eastbourne qualies and had no grass practice the week before Wimbledon. And a similar story in the doubles. So that's why this tournament has been created.
So why restrict it to just 16 players with no qualifying then?

Because otherwise you would have half the draw inside the top 100 and the other half outside the top 230.

Michael D · All-time great

Coup Droit wrote:
wolf wrote:
The problem has been that only 72 players can play Eastbourne (48 MD+24 Q) and it's the only WTA this week. This meant top 100 players weren't even making Eastbourne qualies and had no grass practice the week before Wimbledon. And a similar story in the doubles. So that's why this tournament has been created.

So you spend £150k or so for 14 top players, 7 of whom will only play one match, about 60-90 mins, near the start of the week ?
It's hardly huge grass practice. And definitely not worth the money (in my view).
Give free access to grass practice courts and allow the players to do their own match practice.

And also for wimdledont's comment on the Downey contradiction. For the life of me I don't understand how someone like that can manage to earn a CEO's salary when he clearly doesn't have any real strategic nous at all. But mind you, I have worked with enough organisations, including on organisational development issues, to know that the culture of the high profile but dysfunctional CEO propped up by unsung others, whose working lives are made unnecessarily stressful as a result, is not uncommon.

Jaggy1876 · Grand Slam Champion

As mentioned I commented on another thread, failing to see any benefit just cost here. It's a for the few not the many policy again.

On that topic did anyone see Judy Murray highlighting the Tory run Elmbridge Borough Council charging for use of public park tennis courts? No wonder we struggle to attract decent amounts of young players to take up the sport in even it's most basic form. There's a petition online to scrap the charges, link below.

ift.tt/2rwdK8e

indiana · Tennis legend

Whatever the supposed need ( and there are clearly a good number of Wimbledon direct entrants that are clearly not able to get into Eastbourne ) I don't see that it was up to us to spend such money on a then very limited pesky ( plus Laura and Katie B ) benevolence event on top of Eastbourne and Wimbledon qualifying.

-- Edited by indiana on Friday 23rd of June 2017 11:14:23 AM

Jaggy1876 · Grand Slam Champion

The other thing that is noticable about the saturation of grass court bigger tournaments is the relative quality of the fields. A lot of withdrawals and pull outs in Nottingham and Birmingham and even in the 100ks. A stronger Eastbourne field at the moment probably because a lot have chosen to have a bigger break after the French.

Be interesting to see how many withdrawals we get for the main draw. There will be a few lucky loser spots up for grabs that's for sure.

DavidC · Tennis legend

What I have read about the genesis of this tournament ( www.tennishead.net/news/on-tour/2017/06/23/canoe-lake-ready-to-host-southsea-trophy and www.portsmouth.co.uk/business/major-plans-unveiled-to-bring-spirit-of-wimbledon-to-southsea-1-6831355 ) seems generally positive in terms of community benefit, with free admission to the event and reasonably priced public access to play on these courts outside tournament week (though not as cheap as was originally mooted).

I don't know who has contributed what to fund the tournament, but with the clear benefit to the ITF/WTA in provision before Wimbledon and the keenness of those involved in the business venture it is possible that the LTA contribution is not as much as first appears.