International Premier Tennis League – A Hit in Kickoff Season

This past November, the International Premier Tennis League (IPTL) kicked off with competition between the:
• Micromax Indian Aces
• Musafir.com UAE Royals
• Manila Mavericks
• DBS Singapore Slammers

Match play includes:
1. Five sets
a. Men’s Singles
b. Women’s Singles
c. Mixed Doubles
d. Men’s Doubles
e. Men’s Legends’ Singles
2. Each set is played first to six games with a five minute shoot-out at five-all.
3. No-ad scoring applies for each game and each game won counts as one point for the team’s total.

The order of play is to be decided by the home team, and the team lineup is given to the umpire 45 minutes before the match starts. There are other slight differences in the rules that make the matches fun for all parties.

Critics of the league claim that it is not real tennis, that it is a commercial venture to benefit the league owner, and that it will detract from the WTA and ATP circuits. The critics are entitled to their opinions; however, it should be noted that the first season of the league was well received by fans and players. That is great for the sport!

Colorado tennis fans should note that Scott Davidoff, former coach for the CU men’s tennis team, is the Executive Director for the IPTL. Hats off to Scott and his group for demonstrating to people around the world how much fun it is to play and watch tennis.

For more details on the IPTL click here or check out the embedded You Tube video below.

<iframe width=”560″ height=”315″ src=”//www.youtube.com/embed/oi2Is7pMlx4″ frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen>

Bill Scanlon – American Tennis Doesn’t Have to Suck

The following editorial was written by Bill Scanlon. It was posted on various websites prior to the firing of Patrick McEnroe.

Scanlon’s sentiment is that American tennis doesn’t need to suck. He stated that if you agree, please repost, send this to at least three people via email, and join AdvantageUSATennis.com (it’s free!).

Scanlon won the NCAA Singles Championships as a freshman at Trinity. Afterwards he turned professional and played on the ATP tour for 13 years. At one point he was a top ten player and reached the semifinals of the U.S. Open.

If I Wanted to Keep American Tennis Down

By Bill Scanlon

Last year, my partner and I formed Advantage USA Tennis, a non-profit to help support and promote American tennis. Just for fun, we imagined what we might do if our goal was, instead, to keep American tennis in the dumps.

Here are some of our crazy and entertaining ideas. Obviously, no one would ever actually do them, but just imagine….

First, we’d formally establish a “system” and make sure that every player has to learn the exact same way. That way, if faced with polar opposites like Sampras and Agassi, we could guarantee that one or the other will be shut down.

Next, centralize all the training into one location. Make sure that the players are only exposed to one teaching philosophy and a very few teachers.

At the junior level, we’d reduce the number of national tournaments. There are too damn many opportunities for kids to get excited about tennis. We need most of them to be discouraged and moving on to other sports.

Unfortunately, some players will still show promise. We’d identify these potential champions (threats) early – offer financial incentives to get them into our system. Get them to leave whatever environment has helped them develop thus far. They must relocate to the central training center and conform to the system.

Once we have the players in the system:

Remove the parents. Their love and passionate support could nurture and motivate, potentially causing a player to believe that he could become a champion. Strong parental (or family) influence must not be allowed, as it could result in a future Connors, Agassi, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, McEnroe, Chang, Bryan Brothers, Williams Sisters, Evert, Sharapova, Graf, Hingis, Seles, Jaeger, Pierce, etc.

Also, remove any coach (or major influence) who has had previous success with the player. Strong, loyal, one-on-one bonds could result in a future Borg, Vilas, Federer, Sampras, Lendl, Becker, Edberg, Roddick, Navratilova, Austin, Davenport, etc.

Coaches should be assigned, shared, and changed often. Allow no personal bonding, continuity, or individual loyalty because these could encourage and motivate the players. It could also build confidence and unacceptable levels of self-esteem. Ideally, a coach should be assigned to a male and female player simultaneously, on separate tours.

Coaches (especially former top-ten players) should be required to teach conformity by the system. Allowing their personal experience and individual knowledge could lead to unacceptable progress.

Finally, once the system has achieved the goal (American tennis sucks), it’s time to build an even bigger central training center and an even bigger system to perpetuate the problem.

USTA Player Development Not Producing Elite Players

The USTA Player Development program has never been effective, but in 2014 it continues to reach new lows. Prior to the U.S. Open there are only two men ranked in the top 50  and 6 men ranked in the top 100.

Going into the 2014 U.S. Open there are 27 countries with men ranked in the top 50 according to the ATP rankings. There are three countries with more than two ranked men:

  • Spain – 10 players
  • France – 6 players
  • Czechoslovakia 3 players.

The following countries each have two players ranked in the top 50:

  • Switzerland – 3rd and 4th
  • Argentina – 13th and 26th
  • Canada – 6th and 46th
  • Croatia – 27th and 30th
  • Germany – 25th and 35th
  • USA – 15th and 47th
  • Italy – 17th and 49th

John Isner and Donald Young are the top ranked Americans.

The following countries each have one player ranked in the top 50:

  • Serbia – 1st
  • Bulgaria – 8th
  • Great Britain – 9th
  • Japan – 11th
  • Latvia – 12th
  • Rhodesia/South Africa – 20th
  • Ukraine – 22nd
  • Russia – 23rd
  • Columbia – 32nd
  • Taipei/Taiwan – 34th
  • Portugal – 38th
  • Uruguay – 40th
  • Australia – 41st
  • Poland – 43rd
  • Uzbekistan 44th
  • Austria – 45th
  • Kazakhstan – 50th

Only six American men are ranked in the top 100. In addition to Isner and Querrey, the other top 100 Americans are:

  • Steve Johnson – 51st
  • Jack Sock – 55th
  • Sam Querrey – 57th
  • Tim Smyzcek – 90th

Thanks to the USTA Player Development Program, the state of American professional tennis has never been worse.

USTA Player Development Program – Quantity not Quality

As the U.S. Open approaches, the USTA press corps will be out in force to brag about the great crop of young American women produced by the USTA Player Development program.

Unfortunately for the Americans and the USTA, other countries are producing players who can actually win in the Grand Slams. To date, the USTA Player Development program has produced a contingency of players who will be eliminated by the third round. Quantity will be the mantra for the young American women in the 2014 U.S. Open, not quality.

The August 18th WTA rankings show the USA is at the top of the leader board for the greatest number of players in the top 50. There are 22 countries with players ranked in the top 50:

  • USA – 8
  • Czech Republic – 5
  • Italy – 4
  • Russia – 4
  • China – 3
  • Germany – 3
  • Serbia -3

The following countries each have two players ranked in the top 50:

  • Australia
  • France
  • Kazakhstan
  • Slovakia
  • Spain

The following countries each have one player ranked in the top 50:

  • Belgium
  • Canada
  • Denmark
  • Estonia
  • Japan
  • Kazakhstan
  • Poland
  • Romania
  • Ukraine
  • United Kingdom

A closer look at the rankings shows that Serena Williams is at the top of the list. Her sister Venus is ranked 20th. Sloane Stephens is ranked 22nd and Madison Keys is 28th.

The remaining four American women are far from being world-beaters. They are ranked between 39th and 48th and include Coco Vandeweghe, Christina McHale, Alison Riske, and Lauren Davis.

The Americans other than the Williams sisters are 19 to 24 years old. Contemporaries of this group include Halep, Kvitova, Bouchard, Wozniacki, Krunic, Cornet, and Bencic. Elite players who are slightly older include Radwanska, Cibulkova, and Azarenka. None of the young Americans have demonstrated the ability to compete against these players with success.

Most of the top 50 American women are young. Time will tell if they will mature and improve or if they continue to be cannon fodder for the world’s elite players.

 

TIA Positively Spins the Value of Tennis Industry

On March 22, the Tennis Industry Association (TIA) issued a press release titled, ” 2014 State of the Industry Values Tennis Economy at $5.55 Billion.” The emphasis was placed on $5.55 million.

There is a reason the TIA press release did not mention the amount of change in the value of the industry. A year ago TIA reported the tennis industry was valued at $5.4 billion in 2011. Between 2011 and 2013, the value of the tennis industry increased by $.15 billion, or 2.8%. Between 2011 and 2013, the CPI for all items increased by 3.2%.

The value of the industry did not keep up with the increase in inflation. In other words, the net value of the industry declined slightly over the past two years.

Tennis is an important part of our society, it is a small industry that employs workers in all states; however, the tennis industry is not a significant part of the U.S. economy.

Nominal GDP increased from $15.5 trillion in 2011 to $16.7 trillion in 2013, an increase of 8.2%. (The nominal GDP is used because the TIA data is not adjusted for inflation).

The value of the industry increased at a rate less than GDP output. In other words, the value of the tennis industry expanded at a rate lower than the overall economy, i.e. tennis is losing market share.

There are three possible reasons for the “stagnation” of the value of the industry.
• Over the past year, the sport attracted more “occasional players” than “frequent” players. While the total number of players may have increased, the newcomers didn’t spend as much as the industry core, the “frequent” player. Historically, the industry has a poor track record of converting “occasional players” to “frequent players.” For example, there were only 5.9 million frequent players in 1999. Today that number is about 5.4 million.
• There is a flaw in the methodology for the collection of the TIA data.
• The industry is growing; however, there are weaknesses.

The TIA has to publicly spin the data – that is what they are getting paid to do. Hopefully they are accompanying the spin with a dose of reality in board rooms and behind closed doors.

Tennis Scorekeepers

For many years, tennis facilities did not have portable tennis scorekeepers on each court. Since most play is recreational, club managers didn’t feel they were necessary. The reason for not including them was certainly not the cost. Depending on the model a scorekeeper is only $50 to $75 per unit.

The scorekeepers are ideal for league play and tournaments. In addition, they can be used for instructional drills. In many cases, they are even being used for recreational matches.

Their greatest value is for junior programs. For kids just learning to play the sport, the scorekeepers reduce the confusion of keeping score. As it turns out, most juniors do an excellent job posting the score correctly, particularly if they are winning.

The scorekeepers allow parents to be more engaged in the matches because they always know the score. They can easily follow multiple matches or keep track of the score when they are interrupted.

If you are a tennis player at a facility that does not have tennis scorekeepers, encourage the facility manager to make them available. Such a simple investment improves the tennis experience for the players and spectators alike.

tennis scorekeeper

 

USTA Women’s Player Development – Quantity or Quality?

After dominating the women’s circuit in 2013, it was no surprise to see Serena Williams’ name at the top of the WTA January 6, 2014 rankings. Given the global appeal of the sport it was also no surprise that players from 10 countries filled out the top 10 slots.

  1. Serena Williams  United States
  2. Victoria Azarenka  Belarus
  3. Maria Sharapova  Russia
  4. Na Li  China
  5. Agnieszka Radwanska  Poland
  6. Petra Kvitova  Czech Republic
  7. Sara Errani  Italy
  8. Jelena Jankovic  Serbia
  9. Angelique Kerber  Germany
  10. Caroline Wozniacki  Denmark.

Only two Americans earned spots in the top 25. In addition to Serena Williams, Sloane Stephens was ranked 13th. The top 25 included players from 16 countries. The following six countries had multiple players in the top 25:

  • 5 Russia
  • 2 Germany
  • 2 Italy
  • 2 Romania
  • 2 Serbia
  • 2 United States.

Players from 37 countries were ranked in the top 100. The following 21 countries had multiple players in the top 100:

  • 11 United States
  • 7 Germany
  • 6 Italy
  • 6 Russia
  • 6 Spain
  • 5 Czech Republic
  • 5 Slovakia
  • 4 China
  • 4 France
  • 4 Japan
  • 4 Romania
  • 3 Serbia
  • 3 Ukraine
  • 2 Austria
  • 2 Belarus
  • 2 Belgium
  • 2 Croatia
  • 2 Israel
  • 2 Kazakhstan
  • 2 Poland
  • 2 Switzerland

A closer look at the rankings shows that most of the Americans women are not in the upper echelon.  The American women and their ranking in the top 100 follow:

  • 1  Serena Williams
  • 13  Sloane Stephens
  • 28  Jamie Hampton
  • 36  Madison Keys
  • 38  Venus Williams
  • 48  Bethanie Mattek-Sands
  • 52  Varvara Lepchenko
  • 55  Alison Riske
  • 65  Christina McHale
  • 67  Lauren Davis
  • 71  Vania King

On a positive note, there are more American players in the top 100 than any other country. On the downside, Serena Williams and Sloane Stephens are the only impact players.

Clearly, the focus of the USTA Player Development is quantity rather than quality. Time will tell whether Stephens and her younger counterparts will follow in the footsteps of the Williams sisters and someday become difference-makers.

 

Is Tennis Really a Lifetime Sport?

For many years the tennis industry has marketed itself as a lifetime sport.

Data produced by the National Sporting Goods Association shows that about 28% of tennis players are juniors, 7 to 17 years in age.

Many stop playing when they graduate from high school or college and enter the workforce. Only about 9.0% of tennis players are between the ages of 18 and 24.

Once they become more settled they again pick up their racquets or start playing for the first time. Almost 57% of the players are between the ages of 25 and 54.

Only 7.0% of players are 55 years old or greater.

When a comparison is made between the age categories for tennis and all sports and leisure activities, it is apparent that tennis is not a lifetime sport. Essentially, fewer players participate when they reach their 50s.

Is tennis a lifetime sport? It is a great sport and it can be played long after a person graduates from high school or college. Given the data, it may be a stretch to call it a lifetime sport .

lifetime sport
Is tennis really a lifetime sport?

Title IX – Opportunities for Men and Women Tennis Coaches

The adoption of Title IX in 1972 created opportunities for women athletes and coaches.

Currently, 8 of the 11 head coaches in the PAC 12 women’s’ tennis programs are female. The USC, Oregon, and Utah programs have male head coaches and Oregon State is the lone school without a tennis program.

Four of the 10 assistant coaches are female and 2 of the 6 volunteer coaches are female. Overall 14 of the 27 coaches for women’s’ teams are female.

It is a much different story with the men. There are 8 schools with programs (OSU, WSU, CU, and ASU do not have men’s programs.)  All 23 coaches (head, assistant, and volunteer) are males.  This is a bit surprising, given there are qualified women who are capable of coaching men.

Given there are differences in coaching men and women, it makes sense that a majority of the head coaches are female. The fact that a majority of the assistant and volunteer coaches are male is an indication that men have learned the subtleties of coaching women.  It is also an indication that

there is a larger labor pool of male coaches and teaching professionals than women. Finally, many head coaches, including women head coaches, prefer to have men on their staffs because they can hit the ball harder in workouts with the women players.

Overall, the PAC 12 ratio of male to female coaches is 72% men/28% women. This is not significantly different from the male/female ratio of the teaching/coaching profession. The good news is that because of Title IX, more qualified women coaches are working in coaching positions and more men have become qualified to coach women.

Where is the Tennis Industry Really Headed?

Spin is essential in the sport of tennis, both on and off the court.

For the past two months, the Tennis Industry Association (TIA) has been releasing information from the most recent annual TIA/USTA industry study. Like most sectors of the economy, the tennis industry felt the pain of the Great Recession. Unfortunately, the recovery has closely resembled the bounce of a dead tennis ball on a cold day.

The tennis industry has been in a mature stage since the end of the short-lived 1975 tennis boom.  Given the tradition of the sport and its global appeal, it seems reasonable to expect participation in the sport grow at a rate equal to or slightly greater than changes in the population.

Between 1999 and 2012 the tennis population expanded at a slower rate than the overall population. This would infer that Initiatives to generate interest in the sport may have prevented a decline or slower rate of growth; however, they have clearly failed to “grow the game” at or above the rate of population growth.

The tennis industry closely follows the Pareto Principle. Frequent players, those who play 21 times a year or more, account for about 70% of total spending and 17% to 25% of all players. Since 1999, this segment of the tennis population has declined, a sign that long-term efforts to “grow the game” in this critical area have not been successful.

Regular/casual players are responsible for about 30% of the total spending. Since 1999 this group has made up 75% to 83% of total players. Initiatives to generate interest in regular/casual players have had a minimal impact on long-term net increases in participation.

The growth of the tennis industry, as measured by the TEII, has been about half that of Nominal Personal Consumption and GDP for the period 2003 to 2012. The volatility of the global economy has created a challenging environment for the sport’s manufacturers and service providers.

It seems so simple looking on from the outside. Industry leaders need to develop strategies to effectively fix the problem in four areas:

  1. Retain and increase the number of frequent players. This is the easy part – Frequent players already know the merits of tennis. They simply have to be given compelling reasons to keep doing what they love to do.
  2. Convert regular player into frequent players. Again, regular players have a passion for the game. Teaching professionals should create reasons to keep them engaged. Like the age-old bumper sticker said, “Think Globally, Act Locally.”
  3. Create enough excitement about the sport that casual players turn into regular players. The onus for making this happen lies with the tennis professionals.
  4. Strategically introduce players to the game.

For a full review of the latest TIA data, without the spin, read, “Where is the Tennis Industry Really Headed?