Fiend at Court Unplugged
I am astonished at how frequently the tennis industry references and recycles participation research data from golf. As an example, the 2020 Tennis Industry Forum meeting included a presentation from the Chief Research Officer of the National Golf Foundation. I have arrived at the conclusion that tennis has a weird obsession with golf.
On some level, I kind of get it. Both sports are historic staples of the country club elites. However, tennis is still seated at the kids table within that family. It takes a lot of resources and time to maintain a golf course. Tennis often relegated to that quiet corner of landscape between the maintenance shed and the rolling green fairways. If the country club board of directors is the metaphorical parent of both sports, golf is definitely the favored child.
Usually there is a common thread that ties the Friday-Saturday-Sunday “Unplugged” posts together. From the preamble of this topic, it may seem like this is one those occasions with no unifying relationship. However, the tennis centric culture of the USTA is very directly the launch point for today’s discussion. You see, the recently departed Director of Digital Platform Development was an exception to the apparent hiring bias that favors selection of former tennis players to executive leadership positions at the USTA. Her previous position was with… wait for it… with the United States Golf Association. If you can’t find a person from the tennis community, by golly golf will do.
One of the earliest posts on this site, “The Insidious Rise of Fast4,” was prompted by the fact that the USTA is promoting shorter formats of play on the assumption that the modern consumer would play more tennis if it didn’t take so much time. The thing is, I have been unable to find a credible research study that supports that assertion for tennis. If independent research exists, it hasn’t been publicly released.
However, switching the sport from tennis to golf reveals a plethora of published data, studies, and editorials expressing length of play as a participation depressor. The Reuter’s article referenced below outlines the case very clearly. At the time is was published, people simply were not playing golf due to the length of a round. In addition, that effect was particularly protracted for the 24-44 age group for golf. That is key because that is the demographic where a lot of disposable income lives.
The 2020 Tennis Industry Forum consumer trends presentation delivered by the Chief Research Officer of the National Golf Foundation did not include tennis specific research or data. It was asserted that there are significant parallels and overlap between tennis and golf playing communities. I assume that is a direct reference to historic fact that both sports are frequently found in the country club environment. The hard data that was shared in that presentation was very golf specific. Quite frankly, I think that tennis needs to invest in its own research data rather than blithely accepting hand-me-down information and strategy from another sport.
That being said there were some interesting points raised by the National Golf Foundation presentation. It was interesting to learn that golf participation statistics includes engagement at non-golf venues. Think Top Golf, indoor driving ranges, and golf simulators. Fairly recently this site discussed how Pickleball is initially engaging tennis players with games and lessons on the gym floors at public recreation centers. It is kind of a long putt (see what I did there?) but that probably also represents the greatest opportunity for tennis. To build participation in tennis, creative ideas for extending the venue of first contact with prospective consumers is needed. We simply must reach outside of the confines of the fences of tennis centers.
Per the presentation at the 2020 Tennis Industry Forum, golf traced a sharp decline in participation decline at the same time social media captured the public consciousness. The conclusion that was drawn from that is that shorter attention spans created a lack of tolerance for the length of time it takes to play a round of golf. I would need to see a lot more data to be convinced. Correlation is not the same thing as causation. The same time social media became a phenomenon was also the approximate time that streaming media services and live sports programming also exploded. I am unconvinced that short attention spans are the issue, but rather competition in the market space for entertainment and leisure time.
Based on their own research data, the National Golf Foundation has drawn the conclusion that the primary issue with golf isn’t attracting new participants. In fact, it was clearly articulated that golf is good at pulling in people to give the sport a try. The primary concern for golf is retention of players. For that reason, the NGF presentation indicated that the service model of the golf industry is focused on the consumer experience.
The same language used in the Tennis Industry Forum presentation is reflected in objective #1 of the USTA Strategic Choices manifesto which was unveiled last year. “Attract, Engage and Retain a New Generation of Diverse Tennis Participants.” In reviewing that statement, I was happy to find “Attract” included and listed first.
The USTA continues to tout the recent 22% surge in new participation, which I have started referring to as “COVID Boomers.” That boost in participation is an unexpected dividend. Details on how the USTA is working to Engage and Retain that new community are a little thin. Presumably someone is working hard on that.
I sincerely hope that the COVID boomers haven’t created some false sense that tennis has solved the attraction problem. We cannot neglect that part of the equation. It may not be important for golf, but it is critically important for tennis.
- 2020 Tennis Industry Forum, David Lorentz, National Golf Foundation Chief Research Officer (starts at 34:18 and runs through 42:37)
- Golf-A round of golf takes too long to play, survey finds, Reuters, April 27, 2015.
