No I haven't seen the RCJ (regularly competing junior) figures since about 2016. I used to get sent them every quarter I think.

You raise an interesting and pertinent question.

The absence of published, basic data for junior participation suggests the figures may not be palatable for public disclosure. You can deduce this almost, because given a long history of LTA straw-clutching, in the corollary situation of positive, encouraging trends, these same stats would be shouted from the rooftops.

I doubt it has anything to do with Andy Murray. I think Rafa is a far more influential totem for juniors. It could be the collateral effect of compulsory mini-tennis for the under 10s now coming through, a policy which many parents and coaches regard as restictive. How many elite players have come out of mini-tennis? Can the LTA name any? Did Andy Murray? I doubt it.

Since your last post, I've occasionally looked around for anything on the topic of participation and playing numbers specifically, but there's a dearth of available information. I think one can safely assume the LTA are sitting on some very negative trends. This snippet on declining junior participation numbers from the October 29th LTA Board minutes gives a clue.

"Scott Lloyd said that a full scale review of the Tennis for Kids programme will take place to look at the reasons why the numbers have decreased, the learnings and what the ideal targets and conversion rates into the programme, more broadly, should be going forward. Participation figures for those playing once a year continues to be a challenge and the LTA will be focussing on this metric and its links with the fan strategy. Participation figures for those playing once a month, however, are declining at a lesser rate. Figures for those playing padel will be included in the Dashboard metrics going forward. Clare Hollingsworth thought it would be beneficial to have an overview of how well some of the initiatives are doing that support the Dashboard metrics. Scott Lloyd said that he and the Executive are already beginning to think about the top line business measures for 2020 and whether they should consider some softer measures to reflect the direction of travel. In the meantime, he said that an updated business narrative would be produced to aid the Boards use externally."

It is significant to note how the LTA is resorting to chicanery to boost the numbers by incorporating padel and tennis participation figures together. That looks like basic crookery to me. I wonder what Sport England have to say about that.

LTA doublespeak is now being applied to mini-tennis. This is apparently no longer mini tennis as soon you'll only be able to refer to it as tennis which will then only confuse the issue when trying to distinguish between the two.

"Julie Porter said that the mini-tennis coaching framework will stay the same but the content will be refreshed. It will not be called mini-tennis as the idea is to have a continuous programme from 4-18 years with a clear pathway of the progression from each stage."

These people must think we're all plonkers.

Perhaps that's why they merged Padel with the LTA, to gamble on padel participation figures being included in the tennis figures. The whole focus for years has been participation, so to see a near 100k drop between 2018 and 2019 is shocking. Especially as this is people who play at least twice a month, i.e. regular players.

Increasingly participation is not rocket science -  a quick google search by anyone at the LTA with half a brain would provide numerous viable ideas.

IMO drastic changes are not always required - making better use of existing resources and making it more affordable would be a good starting point.  

Affordability: academies and clubs could employ college players as hitting partners over the summer; LTA needs to improve the standard of grade 3 tournaments (used to be decent ) which are local and therefore cheaper to attend - by providing prize money, a staggered draw similar to UTR tours and encouraging college players to enter over the summer.

The LTA could fund a number of means tested tennis scholarships to UK universities to encourage diversity??

Apropos, broadening the sport's appeal, you have to ask yourself why the Diploma in Sporting Excellence, funded by Sport England, was rejected by the LTA but taken up by a whole swathe of other national governing bodies. Here we see how England Hockey intelligently uses the DiSE to extend the uptake of hockey as a career by serious, young aspiring athletes who might otherwise miss out because they're state school pupils rather than private schools where the bulk of hockey facilities are centered. In other words seizing an opportunity to address the very same problems of exclusivity and cost that characterises tennis.

https://spark.adobe.com/page/eBkeUBbbXnNU3/

In stark contrast, this is what the LTA's lame response was:-

"The Diploma in Sporting Excellence (DiSE) is a new and different programme for those sports affected. Following a detailed review we have decided not to deliver the DiSE programme within tennis at this time to enable the LTA to focus on coach education and development along with the new performance pathway."

https://www.lta.org.uk/play-compete/performance-tennis-players/pro-players-area/advanced-apprenticeship/

So politics prevails at the expense of seizing whatever opportunities you can to extend the reach of tennis. Presumably, because they're scared it might prove more popular than or divert attention away from their own failed mini-tennis to ATP player pathway/national academy cr.p. It's shockingly poor.

On the subject of trends, I have noticed (in the south east anyway) performance coaches leaving the commercial indoors centres due to bad deals and no more interest in performance. I was amazed to see how many of the top players in my county train outside.