Weeks 39 & 40 - French Open, Roland-Garros, Paris (clay)

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

RE: Weeks 39 & 40 - French Open, Roland-Garros, Paris (clay)

HarryGem · Club Coach

Ace Ventura wrote:
dodrade wrote:
Ace Ventura wrote:
Watson was especially perplexed at the failure to get more talented girls into the game: Its the best sport for female athletes. Nine of the top 10 highest paid women athletes in the world are in tennis on Forbes. I think we do have to get that message across.

Something that amazes me as well. It's pretty much the only sport (that's not totally niche) where top end women can not only be as rich as the men, but also just as famous. If you asked 10 casual sports fans, who were by no means tennis experts, to name '10 active tennis players', then most would include women in their list, one in particular, and that just wouldn't happen in football, cricket, rugby, even golf, which is probably most similar to tennis in terms of it's calendar, majors, ranking system etc.
The Shenzhen Finals last year paid more than the London ATP equivalent, and there is such a lucrative platform available to them, particularly with the mixed slam events, and we have arguably the most famous tennis tournament in the world in our home country, an event that can lay the foundations to superstardom. People will say its less riskier to instead get involved in a team sport like football with perhaps a friendlier, less cut throat atmosphere, more of your expenses paid, and a guaranteed income etc. but if you're a really talented (female) athlete from a young age, and confident in your own ability, then tennis is by far the most lucrative option if you do go on to 'make it'.

I know it's easy for me to say, and there'll be tennis parents on here and others more involved in tennis, who know the ins and outs, who'll likely have a different opinion, but from the outside looking in, with real female trailblazers and pioneers in the sport, Wimbledon (with it's dedicated BBC coverage), one of the sports bigger governing bodies, the top end obscene finances, it really does baffle me how little players, particularly women, we actually produce.
It's a pretty tiny number at the top though, the reality for most pros is a struggle to break even on the ITF circuit.
Yeah, I know, the clue is in the phrase, but it's at least something to aspire to. It's been discussed to death on various different threads on here with people pointing to more realistic sporting alternatives for British girls etc. but even if you were top 75-100 (which is obviously still really good and hard to achieve) you'd get entry into every slam, so that would be circa £200k just like that, and more if you got, and took advantage of, a decent draw, entry into most WTA intl events, and quals for the bigger WTA events. Plus there'd be a decent chance to become a relative household name and thus possible sponsorship/endorsement opportunities.
We've obviously been a bit unlucky with injuries with a few of our better younger players, particularly Boulter who did crack the top 100, but as it stands, we literally have 2 players, one 29, the other 28 years old, inside the top 150. Fair play to other countries who may have a great system, but it really does amaze me how we have so few top 100 players considering all the above factors, even if it has been like that for years.

Bravo to Heather for raisng this issue. Whether you agree or not, something needs to change, or British tennis is going to become virtually irrelevant. I'm also a bit fed up with the it has been like that for years argument which seems so defeatist and frankly so what.

I don't know the answer but we have a large population, not an especially poor one, and yet we produce relatively few top players. The fact that Jo and Heather remain our top two players on the women's side and that, frankly, none of the next generation, look close to emulating them, is indicative of how feeble the situation is.

We clearly need more competitions in the UK at the lower end of the game to get our players the maximum exposure we can at the least expense for them. Obviously not very feasible right now. How racially diverse is the game in this country? How many BAME coaches are there? Do we need to do more to attract players from certain parts of society?

Obviously at the bottom end of the game finances are a struggle. But it isn't all about prize money there are other revenue streams to explore once the world gets back on its feet.

The US college system seems a good way for young players to expand their game but how easy is it to get into it?

wales1994 · County player

The UK doesn't care about tennis. The LTA have a terrible track record of getting the masses involved in the sport. I'm obviously just a casual player of no particularly decent standard, I live in South London.... now the winter months set in, there are 0 indoor courts near me that aren't for private members only. Even to book an hour slot for nearby courts you have to book within 5 minutes of a court becoming available for 5 days time.

The reason countries like Spain, France, Italy and so on churn out such high volumes of tennis players is accessibility and opportunity. Statistically by having more players, old, young, social - then you have more chances of inspiring more players to play. But tennis courts are sparse (ESPECIALLY in London), indoor courts are even rarer, crazy considering we're a nation of atrocious weather! There are fundamental problems at grass roots levels in the UK. We have the money, we have the resources, we have the opportunity but the governing body fails to deliver.

Even looking at our players, rarely do the ones who make it, hone their skills in the UK.

-- Edited by wales1994 on Thursday 1st of October 2020 02:29:44 PM

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Well said, Wales

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Enjoyed watching young Clara Burel (born 2001) make the third round of the French Open.

Played a really good match.

SuperT · Futures level

Ferro has just beaten the 14th seed. I only saw the final set but she was brilliant. Maybe put's Heather's performance into context?

Spireman · Club Coach

wales1994 wrote:
The UK doesn't care about tennis. The LTA have a terrible track record of getting the masses involved in the sport. I'm obviously just a casual player of no particularly decent standard, I live in South London.... now the winter months set in, there are 0 indoor courts near me that aren't for private members only. Even to book an hour slot for nearby courts you have to book within 5 minutes of a court becoming available for 5 days time.

The reason countries like Spain, France, Italy and so on churn out such high volumes of tennis players is accessibility and opportunity. Statistically by having more players, old, young, social - then you have more chances of inspiring more players to play. But tennis courts are sparse (ESPECIALLY in London), indoor courts are even rarer, crazy considering we're a nation of atrocious weather! There are fundamental problems at grass roots levels in the UK. We have the money, we have the resources, we have the opportunity but the governing body fails to deliver.

Even looking at our players, rarely do the ones who make it, hone their skills in the UK.

-- Edited by wales1994 on Thursday 1st of October 2020 02:29:44 PM

I agree especially with the last bit...even Andy went to train in Spain but then many from other countriess go to train in USA, eg Sharapova. On the juniors thread 'our' one girl in French open juniors is Matilda m and as far as I know she has basically trained in belgium then now spain for years, since probably u10 to y12 age. Saw a telegraph article about all the USA girls in us open, not just gauff but loads of others, I know partly skewed by those who didnt travel over but still..It seems to me that ours arent pushed to reach high enough standards at young enough ages. The lta and their coaches think they know best so they cherry pick at a young age, give funding, support, wildcards to a small number who could easily feel entitled and that they will make it.....hard for a 10, 12 or 14 yr old to understand how difficult it is. There are so many variables.....attitude, size, movement, work ethic, intelligence, tactical awareness, growth patterns, speed etc etc. It would be miraculous if anyone could pick a winner, meaning future top 100 player at 12. Yet they still try.....We need a massive pyramid of players then survival of the fittest, lots of competition and the lta could find out about and try to support many more players. Say you choose five or even 10 girls born in a particular year you can easily lose all of them as potential top players due to lack of interest getting older, injuries, playing differently as they get older and develop, failure to be able to develop tactically or technically....all sorts. Still the big problem is expense and the way tennis is organised.....we have to pay for coaching, group and individual, transport, entry fees, then accommodation, etc. This limits the pool of players massively. Team sports, dancing, athletics may all be more appealing. I can't see it changing soon. Meanwhile Czech republic have 13 yr old in french juniors, and USA have gauff and others....

brittak · Satellite level

JonH comes home wrote:
brittak wrote:
ROSAMUND wrote:
I see Thomas Hogstedt is now coaching Jelena Ostapenko. She's another player who's had a few coaches in her time.
And she has just knocked second seed Karolina Pliskova out!
Right coach, wrong player!!

??

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

brittak wrote:
JonH comes home wrote:
brittak wrote:
ROSAMUND wrote:
I see Thomas Hogstedt is now coaching Jelena Ostapenko. She's another player who's had a few coaches in her time.
And she has just knocked second seed Karolina Pliskova out!
Right coach, wrong player!!
??

I was trying to be funny!

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

I was having a light hearted joke at jo Konta expense, I think she can take it and probably see the irony in hogstedt taking a new player to the 3rd round, although admittedly he probably had little to do with it.

brittak · Satellite level

JonH comes home wrote:
I was having a light hearted joke at jo Konta expense, I think she can take it and probably see the irony in hogstedt taking a new player to the 3rd round, although admittedly he probably had little to do with it.

Oh sorry! Have been trying to puzzle out what facts I had got wrong!

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

8 of the top 16 seeds left, 1 of those between 17-32.

15 unseeded players left, 15.

One has to favour one of the top players to win but any of those 15 unseeded players could make a name this next week

ROSAMUND · Futures level

Well I bet nobody predicted a Krejcikova v.Podoroska last 16 match, winner into the quarterfinals. Neither player has ever been in the top 100 and it's not like 2 promising youngsters playing each other. Reading the papers it seems Paris is in for a wet time in the coming week. There also have far more events to play rather than the shortened US Open. Also more covid19 restrictions in Paris.

Ace Ventura · Tennis legend

Absolute collapse from Muguruza there, 3-0 *30-0 final set, crusining, then *40-30, broken, eventually got to 4-2*, but then lost the final 4 games to Collins. 2 DFs in the last game, and was basically relying on Collins missing.

There's obviously some surprise packages, but it's one of my least favourite L16 slam line ups that I can remember for quite some time.

indiana · Tennis legend

So simllar to the men, 5 of the top 7 seeds / top 11 ranked are into the L16 ( Halep, Svitolina, Kenin, Bertens, Kvitova ) but there is not the back up of 5 more top 20 players that there is in the men's L16.

The only other seed left is (30) Ons Jabeur WR 35. The 3 further top 50 players left are Zhang Shuai WR 39 and the two home players Garcia WR 45 and Ferro WR 49.

And I agree in that I find it altogether rather less than an enticing line-up.