National Academies

Tennis_observer · Social player

National Academies

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Lambda wrote:
There's an update to the list of who is at the National Academies.

The new intake at Loughborough are
Hollie Smart (Middlesex)
Rhys Lawlor (Hertfordshire)
Zechariah Hamrouni (Avon)
Ruby Cooling (Lincolnshire)

joining
Alex Winder
Daniella Piani
Henry Searle
Amalia Widdowson
Talia Neilson-Gatenby
Abby Kelliher
Mika Stojsavljevic

Left the Academy at Loughborough are Given Roach, Luca Pow (both US College), Mimi Xu (Pro Scholarship), Ranah Stoiber (MWP) and Hugo Coquelin.

There's only 4 players left at Stirling, reducing to 3 after Christmas.
They are
Hannah Rylatt (US College bound September 2024),
Henry Jefferson (US College bound early 2024),
Hephzibah Oluwadare
Charlie Robertson.

Having left Stirling are Ella McDonald (Pro Scholarship), Millie Skelton (US College), Viktor Frydrych and Phoenix Weir.

Rather like Max Carrier that we talked about previously, I do sort of wonder why and how Alex Winder's name is here - what pedigree does he have that warrants this selection? (He's just lost in the QR1 at the J60 in Glasgow, and I can't see any previous results that stand out from a while ago, that would then suggest injury has been a problem.

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

Coup Droit wrote:
Lambda wrote:
There's an update to the list of who is at the National Academies.

The new intake at Loughborough are
Hollie Smart (Middlesex)
Rhys Lawlor (Hertfordshire)
Zechariah Hamrouni (Avon)
Ruby Cooling (Lincolnshire)

joining
Alex Winder
Daniella Piani
Henry Searle
Amalia Widdowson
Talia Neilson-Gatenby
Abby Kelliher
Mika Stojsavljevic

Left the Academy at Loughborough are Given Roach, Luca Pow (both US College), Mimi Xu (Pro Scholarship), Ranah Stoiber (MWP) and Hugo Coquelin.

There's only 4 players left at Stirling, reducing to 3 after Christmas.
They are
Hannah Rylatt (US College bound September 2024),
Henry Jefferson (US College bound early 2024),
Hephzibah Oluwadare
Charlie Robertson.

Having left Stirling are Ella McDonald (Pro Scholarship), Millie Skelton (US College), Viktor Frydrych and Phoenix Weir.
Rather like Max Carrier that we talked about previously, I do sort of wonder why and how Alex Winder's name is here - what pedigree does he have that warrants this selection? (He's just lost in the QR1 at the J60 in Glasgow, and I can't see any previous results that stand out from a while ago, that would then suggest injury has been a problem.

Widdowson and Kelliher are new names for me - what is their pedigree/ form like?

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Abby is 2007-born, and was very petite (don't know if she still is)
I seem to remember she got injured....she certainly hasn't played for 6 months or so
Amalia is 2008-born. And also hasn'y played that much
I can't say a lot about their relative potential in terms of their peer group (just from my very limited position, I wouldn't rate either particularly highly, for instance, of the 2008-ers, I think Leticia Romanova has better potential, and Isabelle Britton, and a couple of others) - but I do know both names

paulisi · Tennis legend

Tennis is about opinions and players have dips and great spells and age is a key factor especially on the boy's side.

Alex Winder is only young. He was pretty successful in TE, but unsurprisingly it is quite hard to step from playing 13/14 year old to playing big, powerful 17 and 18 year olds. I remember talking to Toby Samuel's mum, who said that Toby had to change his game style to cope with the older players, otherwise he would have got hit off court. It actually takes time to do it and do it well.
Max Carrier is GB no 3 for his age, but is somewhat unfairly judged against Oli Bonding and Ben who are exceptional talents for their age.

Of the girls mentioned, both Abby and Amalia have been at Loughborough for a while.
Abby has a very dynamic game for someone much smaller than her counterparts and was really flying up the rankings until her long term absence, presumably due to injury.
Amalia I have also seen, but she didn't stand out then, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything. For example I've watched Mia Wainwright multiple times and the first few times I didn't rate her, however when she played Liverpool, a few weeks ago she grew in confidence and was a totally different player.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Age being a factor isn't particularly helpful though, given all the 2008 boys are the same age, all the 2009 ones the same age, etc. etc.
So, it's hard for all of them to step up (or not), it's not specific to Alex, so doesn't help in terms of where he sits, say, in comparison to others.
I don't look at it particularly in terms of results but at potential based on tennis level (which was my previous role).
In Toby's cohort, the LTA two big picks were Toby and Ben Heynold. The TA had no interest in Arthur Féry, nor indeed much in Felix Gill. I've no idea about Alex, I can see his result sheet but I haven't seen him play, which was my question to anyone who has.
Being GB no 3 is irrelevant in terms of detection - it's the absolute level that matters, not the relative level. As per Arthur, look further afield in your 2007s, or concentrate on the 2008s if the 2007 don't cut it.
But, again, I've only seen Max play once which is better than nothing but sometimes not enough.
With all these decisions though it's a question of where best to spend the money. It's not whether Amalia, say, is a good player or not but whether she's a better choice than someone else because choosing her automatically rules out that other player.

Var · Pro player

Coup Droit wrote:
Age being a factor isn't particularly helpful though, given all the 2008 boys are the same age, all the 2009 ones the same age, etc. etc.
So, it's hard for all of them to step up (or not), it's not specific to Alex, so doesn't help in terms of where he sits, say, in comparison to others.
I don't look at it particularly in terms of results but at potential based on tennis level (which was my previous role).
In Toby's cohort, the LTA two big picks were Toby and Ben Heynold. The TA had no interest in Arthur Féry, nor indeed much in Felix Gill. I've no idea about Alex, I can see his result sheet but I haven't seen him play, which was my question to anyone who has.
Being GB no 3 is irrelevant in terms of detection - it's the absolute level that matters, not the relative level. As per Arthur, look further afield in your 2007s, or concentrate on the 2008s if the 2007 don't cut it.
But, again, I've only seen Max play once which is better than nothing but sometimes not enough.
With all these decisions though it's a question of where best to spend the money. It's not whether Amalia, say, is a good player or not but whether she's a better choice than someone else because choosing her automatically rules out that other player.

I was going to mention Arthur and Cam for a similar reason. Surely tennis players mature at different times - it's unfortunate we only tend to focus on the youngest stars sometimes. I am guilty of that TBH. I recall Peter Fleming talking about his career saying he wasn't even in the ballpark when he was 19 as it took a few years for him to find his game. However, some will never make it, unfortunately.

-- Edited by Var on Tuesday 28th of November 2023 02:03:41 PM

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Yes, that's part of the challenge of detection

One problem at the LTA, for instance, (which definitely used to be the case, not sure if it still is) is that the people in junior tennis got paid, effectively, on the success of the juniors, in juniors.

So if you're head of junior tennis, you'll just pick and put all your money/efforts into those who are likely to succeed in juniors. As an end in itself.

It not only effects who you pick but how you train them.

Toby's mother's point that paulisi mentions was maybe necessary in the cricumstance but is not necessarily right - changing your game in order to get some wins because you're now playing older, bigger people is a short-term strategy. You're obviously going to be older and bigger soon too. So many top coaches would say, stick with the 'best' tennis you were playing, and yes, you'll have a lot of losses for a while, but it'll pay dividends in the long-run.

Because what you really want is your junior tennis team to be assessed by how their picks do later in adult tennis.But it wasn't set up like that.

Var · Pro player

Coup Droit wrote:
Yes, that's part of the challenge of detection

One problem at the LTA, for instance, (which definitely used to be the case, not sure if it still is) is that the people in junior tennis got paid, effectively, on the success of the juniors, in juniors.

So if you're head of junior tennis, you'll just pick and put all your money/efforts into those who are likely to succeed in juniors. As an end in itself.

It not only effects who you pick but how you train them.

Toby's mother's point that paulisi mentions was maybe necessary in the cricumstance but is not necessarily right - changing your game in order to get some wins because you're now playing older, bigger people is a short-term strategy. You're obviously going to be older and bigger soon too. So many top coaches would say, stick with the 'best' tennis you were playing, and yes, you'll have a lot of losses for a while, but it'll pay dividends in the long-run.

Because what you really want is your junior tennis team to be assessed by how their picks do later in adult tennis.But it wasn't set up like that.

Aah that explains it. CD I remember waiting for Jack Pinnington Jones to burst onto the senior stage. He is still around 698 in the rankings. not bad for a top junior but when you look at Arthur Fery, 280 and only 8 months older you really start to question it. That said Arthur did do the right thing taking the college route, but no one can hardly remember the top juniors - their junior career only comes into background focus if they make it in the senior game. I still think Mimi is trying not to make that mistake and transition a little earlier which can only be a good thing.

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

Var wrote:
Coup Droit wrote:
Yes, that's part of the challenge of detection

One problem at the LTA, for instance, (which definitely used to be the case, not sure if it still is) is that the people in junior tennis got paid, effectively, on the success of the juniors, in juniors.

So if you're head of junior tennis, you'll just pick and put all your money/efforts into those who are likely to succeed in juniors. As an end in itself.

It not only effects who you pick but how you train them.

Toby's mother's point that paulisi mentions was maybe necessary in the cricumstance but is not necessarily right - changing your game in order to get some wins because you're now playing older, bigger people is a short-term strategy. You're obviously going to be older and bigger soon too. So many top coaches would say, stick with the 'best' tennis you were playing, and yes, you'll have a lot of losses for a while, but it'll pay dividends in the long-run.

Because what you really want is your junior tennis team to be assessed by how their picks do later in adult tennis.But it wasn't set up like that.

Aah that explains it. CD I remember waiting for Jack Pinnington Jones to burst onto the senior stage. He is still around 698 in the rankings. not bad for a top junior but when you look at Arthur Fery, 280 and only 8 months older you really start to question it. That said Arthur did do the right thing taking the college route, but no one can hardly remember the top juniors - their junior career only comes into background focus if they make it in the senior game. I still think Mimi is trying not to make that mistake and transition a little earlier which can only be a good thing.

I think, though, Jack is still on the college route - he just did well in a big event over there and has got a college national ranking of 3, so his WR is deflated quite a bit I would say, shouldnt we wait to see what happens maybe next summer and he is perhaps back in the UK playing events?

Arthur is further down that route and playing pro tennis now so his ranking will be better. I wouldnt write JPJ off just yet!!

Var · Pro player

JonH comes home wrote:
Var wrote:
Coup Droit wrote:
Yes, that's part of the challenge of detection

One problem at the LTA, for instance, (which definitely used to be the case, not sure if it still is) is that the people in junior tennis got paid, effectively, on the success of the juniors, in juniors.

So if you're head of junior tennis, you'll just pick and put all your money/efforts into those who are likely to succeed in juniors. As an end in itself.

It not only effects who you pick but how you train them.

Toby's mother's point that paulisi mentions was maybe necessary in the cricumstance but is not necessarily right - changing your game in order to get some wins because you're now playing older, bigger people is a short-term strategy. You're obviously going to be older and bigger soon too. So many top coaches would say, stick with the 'best' tennis you were playing, and yes, you'll have a lot of losses for a while, but it'll pay dividends in the long-run.

Because what you really want is your junior tennis team to be assessed by how their picks do later in adult tennis.But it wasn't set up like that.

Aah that explains it. CD I remember waiting for Jack Pinnington Jones to burst onto the senior stage. He is still around 698 in the rankings. not bad for a top junior but when you look at Arthur Fery, 280 and only 8 months older you really start to question it. That said Arthur did do the right thing taking the college route, but no one can hardly remember the top juniors - their junior career only comes into background focus if they make it in the senior game. I still think Mimi is trying not to make that mistake and transition a little earlier which can only be a good thing.
I think, though, Jack is still on the college route - he just did well in a big event over there and has got a college national ranking of 3, so his WR is deflated quite a bit I would say, shouldnt we wait to see what happens maybe next summer and he is perhaps back in the UK playing events?
Arthur is further down that route and playing pro tennis now so his ranking will be better. I wouldnt write JPJ off just yet!!

I would never write anyone off. Injuries happen and one of the best stories in British tennis this year is Katie Boulter who Is now starting to reach her potential when she was runner-up in the Junior Orange Bowl in 2011. .

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

I think Jon was joking

But the question isn't really about someone like Katie who has always had a lot of support, or Jack PJ, but the others who could have/would have/should have.....

i.e. someone 'wrote off' Gemma Heath even though she was an extemely promising youngster, with huge skills, and got to JWR 70 or so, but never really 'fitted the mould', so to speak.

And career-defining injuries are a big question for the LTA - the more I hear, the more worried I get....

Var · Pro player

Coup Droit wrote:
I think Jon was joking

But the question isn't really about someone like Katie who has always had a lot of support, or Jack PJ, but the others who could have/would have/should have.....

i.e. someone 'wrote off' Gemma Heath even though she was an extemely promising youngster, with huge skills, and got to JWR 70 or so, but never really 'fitted the mould', so to speak.

And career-defining injuries are a big question for the LTA - the more I hear, the more worried I get....

Lol! So whats the alternative? The injuries worry me as well.

JonH comes home · Tennis legend

Var wrote:
Coup Droit wrote:
I think Jon was joking

But the question isn't really about someone like Katie who has always had a lot of support, or Jack PJ, but the others who could have/would have/should have.....

i.e. someone 'wrote off' Gemma Heath even though she was an extemely promising youngster, with huge skills, and got to JWR 70 or so, but never really 'fitted the mould', so to speak.

And career-defining injuries are a big question for the LTA - the more I hear, the more worried I get....

Lol! So whats the alternative? The injuries worry me as well.

Definitely tongue in cheek - although there is a tendency for many of us to forget about players when they go to the States for college for a year or two, I certainly do!

PockyTastic · Futures level

Coup Droit wrote:
I think Jon was joking

But the question isn't really about someone like Katie who has always had a lot of support, or Jack PJ, but the others who could have/would have/should have.....

i.e. someone 'wrote off' Gemma Heath even though she was an extemely promising youngster, with huge skills, and got to JWR 70 or so, but never really 'fitted the mould', so to speak.

And career-defining injuries are a big question for the LTA - the more I hear, the more worried I get....

Id almost forgotten about Gemma Heath. Wasnt the LTAs issue that she chose to prioritise her A Levels or something? Last I remember she was due to go to uni in the US but not sure if that transpired (dont remember spotting her name in relevant threads on here?). From the few times I saw her play she looked to have a fair bit of potential so its a shame that shes not still playing competitively (appreciate she may have picked up an injury etc).