The Optimist wrote:

---

The LTA rankings/ratings systems are the result of well-meaning objectives - I just don't think they realised how people would game the system or the value people would put on the numbers associated with their name.  

When it was just a rating system, updated twice per year, the Competitions Department at the LTA received a lot of feedback indicating that juniors found it very demotivating not seeming to progress for a year or more.  This was particularly pertinent because tournaments were seeded by committee.  Players were sorted by rating and each group of players with the same rating were judged by the tournament organisers as to any seeding order.  The less well-known kids in any locality just felt they couldn't get off the starting blocks and that their improvement (which can be quite rapid in children if they decide to focus on the sport) just didn't get recognised.  Thus the rankings were introduced, to be run fortnightly, to give kids in particular a sense that they were making progress throughout the year.  Seedings at all LTA sanctioned events was to be done by rating sub-divided by ranking.  Hence the two systems and it seemed to work better for the juniors (particularly the younger ones) than a simple rating had.  And it made tournaments seem fairer too.  

Then they got feedback that after the first 3 months of any ratings period, many juniors simply stopped competing and withdrawals during tournaments rose sharply - particularly between players of the same rating.  Research showed that juniors did not want to risk losing a ratings rise that they already had in the bag and that they did not enjoy playing opponents at their own rating or just below in case it negatively impacted on their ability to move up a level.  It also showed that for many juniors, tennis matches had become about not losing rather than enjoyment and development.  So they decided that losses against an opponent of your own rating would no longer count as a negative in the ratings recalculations.  They also introduced an interim ratings run in between the two twice-yearly ones.  These enable those who have already got the right win-loss ratio to move up after 3 months with this new improved rating to be used as the base for the next 'main' ratings recalculation.  The aim of all these changes was to get juniors to play consistently throughout the year and to encourage players to have a more positive attitude towards competing.  All good intentions but it clearly has worked out in unexpected ways!

---

Thanks,  The O.

Sounds like it all needs a very carefullly considered root and branch overhaul, a blank canvas as it were, rather than just continually applying sticking plaster to problems as they are seen to arise. That can end up a bit messy.

Love the "new vision", such radical ideas   Is that saying that these were not part of the old vision ?

Unfortunately probably true. Well now follow through in making it much more than words.

Coup Droit wrote:

---

News of the LTA losing money, the closure of all the regional offices and lots of other good news :(

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/46102307

---

The 10% fall in participation is particularly alarming considering the LTA has been 'putting participation at the centre of all we do' in recent years. Sport England will not be impressed which could put extra pressure on finances on top of reduced handout from Wimbledon  and reduced sponsorship post Aegon. The LTA should really be reviewing how much the grass court Wimbledon shoulder events are costing them as they look for too lavish and costly for what they are.

The 'new vision' is so weak and just a repeat of what they have been saying for years. Needs a thorough review of how tennis is delivered and played so as to make it fun, cheaper, less time consuming and more sociable for kids. For example the current format of entry level Team Tennis means matches can last 4 hours+ in addition to travel time. Most coaches see tennis as a gravy train to fleece the well off. Compare that to rugby where your kid gets an hours of training and an hour of matches every Sunday for £70 a year.

I am sure it is no coincidence that Judy Murray has given this interview at the same time as the LTA bombshell -

We are competing with more distractions for our kids now than ever before. They have computer games, social media and so much more to lure them away from sport and we have to try and reverse that trend.

If they try tennis and feel it is boring, too difficult or too cold, they will go and do something else. Thats the reality. We cant just rely on people showing up to play our sport and we have to work harder to get people playing and keeping them there. Too many are slipping away from tennis at the moment and we have to reverse that trend.

To do that, we need to find a way to make it cheap and doable for everyone to play as there has always been a feeling that it is a sport for the elite.

One-on-one lessons will always be expensive, especially if you are adding court hire on top of costs. If you come from countries like Scotland or Ireland, where the weather is often an issues, you can pay up to £20-per-hour just to hire a court and that is before getting a coach in for a lesson. Those costs quickly become prohibitive for a lot of people.

That is why I always embrace doing tennis lessons with a large number of people on the court. It makes it affordable and can be very enjoyable when a large group get together and share an experience. If you have 18 people in a lesson, it reduces the cost per person and that offers the scope to bring more people into the sport.

When you look at a one-on-one lesson a coach with a basket of balls, it can look daunting. It may feel like everyone is looking at me from the sidelines and I would not want that pressure if I was trying a sport for the first time. We have to work harder to sell our sport in a world where there are a variety of factor pulling people of all ages away from tennis.

https://www.tennis365.com/tennis-features/exclusive-judy-murray-urges-tennis-to-shed-its-elitist-tag-and-open-its-doors-to-the-masses/

Definiition of expert

Ex = has been

spurt = drip under pressure

The LTA needs a massive dose of reality and a total overhaul - the current format just doesn't achieve ie getting more players in at grass roots level and developing junior players (including those whose parents are not massively wealthy) to provide world class players for the future.

After the recent success of Sabrina Stocker in reaching the final 5 in the apprentice, maybe all those with a vested interest in the future of British tennis need to flood the show with 'tennis entrepreneurs' and persuade no nonsense Sugar to come up with a viable alternative to the LTA ;0)