WHAT CAN THE “PROMOTIONAL COMMITTEE” DO
TO “GROW THE GAME”

By Charles E. Vasoll

After criticizing the APTA Promotional Committee for its issuance of “PT” bumper stickers in the February issue (see “Volleying” for response from Fritz Odenbach) I thought that I owed it to them and to the sport to do some positive thinking about their problem and what I could suggest to be of assistance.

The “growth of the game” has been the subject of discussion for every Board of Directors of the APTA. The desire for “growth of the game” comes naturally. All of us who love to play want to spread the word about our enjoyment and have others enjoy it as we do. There is no doubt that it is a worthy effort but actually making something happen has really eluded the Association. One reason is the fact that there has been a ”split decision” on what is desired.

There is a large faction of persons who want to keep the game in the private clubs and in their home back yards. On the other side, there are those who want to bring the sport into the public domain at municipal playgrounds, pay-to-play facilities, and public clubs such as the YMCA’s. Often, because of these differing views, there is stagnation instead of growth.

From this circumstance, comes my first observation about the growth that everyone wants but which still seems to elude us. The APTA Board and an influential portion of its membership must come to an agreement as to where they want the game to be played. If it is to remain an exclusive sport for the “elite” in private golf, tennis and yacht clubs, it must be recognized that the number of possible participants is severely limited. That does not mean that “growth” must be abandoned; but that the emphasis changes dramatically. I know of at least two private golf clubs and one tennis club here on Long Island that need to be introduced to the sport and won over to build courts. I will be the first to admit that this is not an easy task. Even at my home club, I have campaigned for over a decade to add a fourth court to enable more members to play at peak times and in club tournaments.

On the other hand, if an all out effort is to be made to bring the sport into the public arena, another set of circumstances arises. Anyone who has attempted to bring platform tennis courts to a municipal park knows the difficulty of the task, even if they succeed. Certainly the vendors who sell and build courts, know how tough it is. Sometimes a few very, very dedicated individuals can be persuasive enough to get a Recreation Department in their Town or Village to erect courts. However, I repeat, it is not easy.

In both of these circumstances, the difficulty is “money”. Neither private clubs nor public organizations find it easy to justify the capital cost of building courts. They don’t know how they are going to be paid for and maintained. Certainly in the public circumstance, the use of tax funds becomes an issue. In the case of private clubs, platform tennis takes a rear seat to the primary sport or activity of the club whether it is golf, tennis or boating. Further, the club’s governing body is typically drawn from the principal interest of the club making it difficult, if not impossible to introduce or expand the sport.

So what is a “Promotional Committee” to do? I will make two suggestions.

First, it should hire a “Dick Reilly”. If you are not familiar with that name, you should be. He was elected to the Platform Tennis Hall of Fame in 1974. It was largely because of his contribution to the game by the introduction of the aluminum deck for the court, which replaced treated wood. But more than that, he was a super salesman. He visited clubs, and other interested parties, using a photo slide show to demonstrate and sell his product. This led to more courts being built and that, in turn, produced more players for the game. Yes, that means the Promotional Committee must help the selling effort of the private area that builds courts. That, to me however, is the bottom line of the whole effort to “grow the game”.

Second, I believe the Committee needs to work with the existing court builders to find a means to reduce the cost of the courts. I am not suggesting that we return to treated wood, but there may be other materials in the market place that can be successfully substituted for aluminum, which might lower the price of building a court. I know this has been tried before and failed but that was many years ago. It is difficult to justify $80,000 to $100,000 for two courts whether it is in a private club or in the public sector. A less expensive capital cost may find a more willing buyer.

All right, let’s get back to the bumper sticker. The idea is certainly not new. I can remember when “Racquets Plus”, a sporting goods store heavily into platform tennis in Chatham, New Jersey, gave them out with a purchase. Viking Athletics has also used them. My comment was on the style and message, more than on the use of the sticker. I don’t understand how the Committee expects “PT” to be translated into “platform tennis”. In fact, I have learned that it stands for “Provincetown” in Massachusetts. In my opinion, a sticker needed to have more obvious emphasis on the sport and less on the form.

Click HERE to Return to Archives