Another mass exodus, around this time of year, of young tennis talent from Britain over to the states to take up college places. As good as it clearly is for the students themselves and their tennis development (I would personally have loved to go). Is it actually good for British Tennis as a whole? Often I see these players get coaching jobs in the states after they graduate. The level of our British Tour and BUCS competitions suffer hugely due to the talent drain.
I know there are reservations, and it would be great if there were good, viable alternatives.
But, in short, the LTA system here (and the ITF/ATP/WTA in general) provides very little help for people at the lower end starting out. And our uni system just doesn't have the same depth. Way more players would drop out completely if they couldn't go to college.
NB I also have just finished re-reading Jonny Mac's autobiography, where he writes how crucial the time he spent at college was for him.
Does France have the same issue or do they have a much stronger Uni setup? I guess with the French money tournament structure it would be easier for them to stay domestically and improve.
Does France have the same issue or do they have a much stronger Uni setup? I guess with the French money tournament structure it would be easier for them to stay domestically and improve.
Yes, a much stronger uni set-up, in that there are elite tennis programmes at many unis, which allow you to take a year longer for your regular studies, because of the time you're giving to your sport. Lots also do practical elite sport as their actual degree (effectively to go on into sport as a business afterwards if they don't make it). And, as you say, the club system allows players to train, play and compete at a high level, even if they aren't doing tennis at all at uni.
However, that said, I've noticed more and more French kids going to the US for college. I don't know if this is to do with learning English, kids wanting to get away from home and experience the US, the standard of tennis there, or just a lemmings effect of one or two going, and word getting round, and suddenly they all want to.
I also voted yes. Those transition years are so important in a player's development, that for them to spend that traveling around the world, chasing points/money, probably with no coach makes it a very difficult period for young players. The college system provides them with so many other things. (1) A team environment in which many of them thrive. (2) Coaching support. (3) Medical support. (4) A back up plan in case a tennis career turns out not to be for them.
So that is why I think it is good for THEM. But your question was, is it good for GB tennis. My answer to that is also yes, because anything that helps young GB players, is also good for GB tennis. You mention that BUCS and British Tour lose out. But outside us tennis nerds, who follows that anyway. It is not as if we are denying thousands of fans the chance to watch GB players in action. Overall, I think the benefits of bringing more players through to ATP tour level and inspiring the next generation that way, far outweighs any detrimental effect on, for example, the British Tour.
As an addendum, I should add that a couple of years ago in "an evening with Leon Smith", I asked him very much the same question. He was a 100% advocate of getting young players into US colleges, to the point where he explained how the LTA played a part in finding the right "package", in terms of college/coach etc, for each individual player.
I vote a yes as there is not really an alternative development path here for those outside the LTA picks. I think we are moving in the right direction with good programs at Sterling, Bath and Loughborough but there isn't really a critical mass of college players this side of the pond. I especially think it is a yes for the boys. Most 18 yo are not physically strong enough to power through the lower levels of the tour and get stuck in the lower levels, struggling to get matches and improve. American college with its focus on general athleticism really provides something the boys cannot easily access over here as well as giving plenty of court time.
Yes from me too.
No obvious UK option to train, play and progress in competitive tennis from the age of 18, so the US keeps the kids playing and offers a good tennis environment with the backstop of further education. What other option would there be - a lonely traipse around Europe doing ITFs? No fun & certainly not cheap.
The one downside is for those of us who like going to "non-GB based" futures, only to find that there is almost no GB participation because they are all at college in the USA. But it's a price I am willing to pay.
The one downside is for those of us who like going to "non-GB based" futures, only to find that there is almost no GB participation because they are all at college in the USA. But it's a price I am willing to pay.
Oh Bob, hadn't thought of that, you've made me sad now. No camper vans, no washing..
My thought it is depends what you mean by good? If it is about producing higher ranked players than we would do otherwise, I don't have the evidence to comment so that is hard to define. Presumably someone could assess average rankings of those taking the college route and those not but it doesnt correlate to how they might have done otherwise
If it is to produce people who are kept within the tennis system and help develop others or the game in general through coaching or administration, again I dont know but presume there are some stats out there.
If it is to produce well rounder people who go on to contribute to life in general and develop as people, then a resounding yes.
there are limited 'tennis uni' options for those staying in the UK, especially if not a straight A student. College entry requirements are more diverse, allowing those without the grades for uni in the UK to continue in education and play tennis.
College provides more opportunities to play competitively as part of a team - great support network, can build confidence, larger pool of good players to compete against, train with the team so don't have to search for a club with similar level players to train with (seems to be difficult for 18+ if not at UK uni).
College pays for for the student-athletes to compete - flights, food, accommodation, physio, coach travels with them etc. Even travelling to Brit tours can add up ££ and once you include flights etc for ITF's it can become prohibitively expensive for some (lack of diversity as need wealthy parents to fund), lonely if travelling alone, can be demoralising for the youngsters if they keep losing. Would be interesting to know how many men who go straight on tour at 18 quit playing competitively within 4 years, which is the time taken to get a college degree.
The standard at Brit Tours/County Cup is higher (simply in terms of LTA ratings) in the summer when all of the college players return which is good for British tennis - if they weren't at college possible many of these players would be unable to continue to train/compete.
The one downside is for those of us who like going to "non-GB based" futures, only to find that there is almost no GB participation because they are all at college in the USA. But it's a price I am willing to pay.
Oh Bob, hadn't thought of that, you've made me sad now. No camper vans, no washing..
What makes it worse for me is that the Spanish futures that are nearest to where I live, invariable clash with the few GB futures that still take place.
