Rankings are not important

[samk8249]

if youre focused on them youre headed for a downward spiral, make a long term goal and work on your game in practice as well as tournaments. If you focus on just winning youre not going to get the results you want.

[tenniscrazed]

if youre focused on them youre headed for a downward spiral, make a long term goal and work on your game in practice as well as tournaments. If you focus on just winning youre not going to get the results you want.

To a certain extent and to a certain age you are 100% correct. Focus on improving and developing is very important and that is what practices are for. Use lower level tourneys to attempt those things you might not attempt otherwise, by the same token stick with your strengths in the higher level tourneys with the intent on winning your matches.

Please remember the old saying "to the winner go the spoils".

[trojankid]

your right smank3249 rankings are not inportant but if you want to go to a division 1 college you half to have a great ranking in the 18s and 16 nationals not the 12s and 14s like every parent thinks

[10isDad]

your right smank3249 rankings are not inportant but if you want to go to a division 1 college you half to have a great ranking in the 18s and 16 nationals not the 12s and 14s like every parent thinks

You have to have a "great ranking in the 18s and 16 nationals" if you want to play at the college of your choice. There are LOTS of schools out there, not just the schools everybody's heard about. For example, not too many people out there have heard of Longwood University, but it's a D1 school. Their #3 player was ranked #189 nationally when he graduated. Their #4/5 player was MUCH lower - in the 500's.

If you're a decent player and willing to look at some of the less well-known schools, there are tennis spots and possibly scholarship money available.

[10isDad]

From an article about Rankings - since this message board seems to censor a certain word??? the missing word is r-e-c-r-u-i-t-s:

Rankings are not everything
Paul “Hobie” Holbach
Women’s Tennis Coach - Bowdoin College

Having coached in the juniors for 25 years and having coached national junior champions(Nicole London, Lindsay Davenport), NCAA Champions(Debbie Graham, Stella Sampras) and WTA Professionals(Kimberly Po, Marianne Werdel), and more. I can tell you that your junior ranking does NOT always correlate with you becoming successful at the college level and/or the professional level. Now as head women’s tennis coach at Bowdoin College in Maine I can tell you that the rankings of players are only one of several factors that I do consider in my recruiting process.

Rankings are a computerized way to group players and give you an indication of where you are at in your own age group. It’s a system that does give students motivation and goals. It’s a system that allows tournaments to do a better job of seedings and pairings. Yet, it does NOT always give you a better indication of who is going to be a better collegiate player or professional.

There are many collegiate coaches who consider rankings a huge indicator of a junior players success. Some even require their ******** to be ranked a certain position in order to consider them at their university or college. I disagree with this position. I think that “results” and “direct wins/losses” are a better indicator of their future, in addition to potential.

Rankings can be misleading. Some players are ranked higher simply because they play more tournaments. Some have the financial means to play more tournaments and therefore are ranked higher. Some are ranked higher because they can afford to travel to larger and bigger tournaments. Some players are ranked lower because they play more than one sport, play less tournaments, live in an area where tournaments are not as prevalent or even have suffered some injuries that have caused their rankings to drop some.

My main point is for all juniors(and parents) to remember that rankings do not mean everything. College coaches look for improvement, potential, motivation, and good attitude. One of the first things that I do is to talk to opposition coaches of junior players. I like to find out what “others” say about this junior player. I like to look at results against other ********. Plus, I like to talk to the ******** to find out what they are like as a person. No college coach wants to spend years with a player they do not like as an individual. At Bowdoin we have players that have improved in their years at college. College coaches want players that are going to get better in college, not just stay the same. Rankings do not always show that indicator.

So remember, rankings are not everything in the recruiting process. Be concerned with your attitude, your improvement, your desire. These qualities mean more than any computer number that comes up.

[tenniscrazed]

You have to have a "great ranking in the 18s and 16 nationals" if you want to play at the college of your choice. There are LOTS of schools out there, not just the schools everybody's heard about. For example, not too many people out there have heard of Longwood University, but it's a D1 school. Their #3 player was ranked #189 nationally when he graduated. Their #4/5 player was MUCH lower - in the 500's.

If you're a decent player and willing to look at some of the less well-known schools, there are tennis spots and possibly scholarship money available.

The questions that need to be answered are the #4 and 5's actually getting in play time and why is Longwood Universities roster 43% resident aliens. I go back to this issue because #4 and 5 are on the bench and are really just hitting partners with little chance of any play time.

If only 10% of the roster were resident aliens then these guys and many others would get the training and competition play time.

College tennis is not an Olympic event whereas schools are playing schools from other countries. They are playing other American Universities. From a recruiting standpoint all American children benefit from either an allotment or from some type of draft system of both the top 100 ranked and the "resident alien" student athlete.

[10isDad]

The questions that need to be answered are the #4 and 5's actually getting in play time and why is Longwood Universities roster 43% resident aliens. I go back to this issue because #4 and 5 are on the bench and are really just hitting partners with little chance of any play time.

If only 10% of the roster were resident aliens then these guys and many others would get the training and competition play time.

College tennis is not an Olympic event whereas schools are playing schools from other countries. They are playing other American Universities. From a recruiting standpoint all American children benefit from either an allotment or from some type of draft system of both the top 100 ranked and the "resident alien" student athlete.

Dude - it's college tennis: 6 singles and 3 doubles matches. Yes #s 4 & 5 get playing time...

[tenniscrazed]

Dude - it's college tennis: 6 singles and 3 doubles matches. Yes #s 4 & 5 get playing time...

I stand corrected they are getting play time and if the quality is high then they are getting high quality playtime.

This is an interesting topic because tennis ranks second highest to hockey in the recruitment of "resident alien" student athletes. That's a direct quote from the NCAA. Yet we have zillions of US Jr.'s that would jump at the chance to pursue their educational and athletic goals.

[tenniscrazed]

10isdad -- As is obvious by your screen name you are likewise a tennis parent. In light of this I would like you and others to enjoy the link below.


http://www.ncaa.org/library/research/ethnicity_report/2005-06/2005-06_race_ethnicity_report.pdf

850 boys and 700+/- girls American Jr.s, in this report may not have had the opportunity to play in the 2006 years. Those were the lost roster spots. That seems like a drag to me.

[JLyon]

I stand corrected they are getting play time and if the quality is high then they are getting high quality playtime.

This is an interesting topic because tennis ranks second highest to hockey in the recruitment of "resident alien" student athletes. That's a direct quote from the NCAA. Yet we have zillions of US Jr.'s that would jump at the chance to pursue their educational and athletic goals.

I would beg to differ, Take a look at the drop off of American Juniors between 14 and 16 anf then 16 to 18s. I have know way to many excellent juniors who lost the drive by the time they hit 18s and quit. If there were so many excellent US juniors then coachs would be recruiting them, but not enough quality players are available and many other do not want to be bothered with looking at what they consider inferior schools even though scholarships are available or *gasp* go the JUCO route for 2 years and gain valuable experience.

[RiosTheGenius]

if youre focused on them youre headed for a downward spiral, make a long term goal and work on your game in practice as well as tournaments. If you focus on just winning youre not going to get the results you want.
so what are we as members of this forum suppossed to say.... thank you for your words of wisdom?.. your statement doesn't really leave it open for discussion so why start the thread?...

[RiosTheGenius]

i'd be a lie if I said I don't look at the rankings all the time

[10isDad]

850 boys and 700+/- girls American Jr.s, in this report may not have had the opportunity to play in the 2006 years. Those were the lost roster spots. That seems like a drag to me.

We just go round and round on this. The only way it'll change is if the mindset of the ADs isn't about winning. As long as it is, and as long as a very few schools get the "cream of the crop" of American players, then foreigners will be recruited. Otherwise, the other schools cannot compete. Don't compete and there's more of a risk of the non-revenue sport being cut.

Get rid of foreign players and the overall quality of college tennis goes down. As has been stated ad nauseum, playing college tennis is a privelege. Americans should have to work for that right. Foreigners have and they're getting more and more chances to play in college. Unfortunately more foreigners also have a better chance of getting into college ball simply because there are national tennis federations that subsidize training. We, being less socialist in our government structure, do not. We merely have the USTA.

The way to change the outlook for US juniors is for our juniors to train harder/better/smarter. Additionally, make tennis a more 'cool' sport and a more affordable sport that would appeal to the relatively untapped minority populations in the US. For that the USTA needs to assist: more grassroots programs.

So, rather than trying to pressure the NCAA to enact changes (which isn't going to happen), and rather than continuing to whine about how we're being taken advantage of, pressure your sectional USTA to start using their money wisely. Donate old racquets to organizations that will distribute them to underpriveleged kids. Donate moneys to organizations that help sponsor the development of said kids. Volunteer with grassroots tennis programs. Take action to help build better, more highly skilled juniors now. College isn't the time to try to develop kids. College is when already highly skilled players are honed to be even better.

[JLyon]

We just go round and round on this. The only way it'll change is if the mindset of the ADs isn't about winning. As long as it is, and as long as a very few schools get the "cream of the crop" of American players, then foreigners will be recruited. Otherwise, the other schools cannot compete. Don't compete and there's more of a risk of the non-revenue sport being cut.

Get rid of foreign players and the overall quality of college tennis goes down. As has been stated ad nauseum, playing college tennis is a privelege. Americans should have to work for that right. Foreigners have and they're getting more and more chances to play in college. Unfortunately more foreigners also have a better chance of getting into college ball simply because there are national tennis federations that subsidize training. We, being less socialist in our government structure, do not. We merely have the USTA.

The way to change the outlook for US juniors is for our juniors to train harder/better/smarter. Additionally, make tennis a more 'cool' sport and a more affordable sport that would appeal to the relatively untapped minority populations in the US. For that the USTA needs to assist: more grassroots programs.

So, rather than trying to pressure the NCAA to enact changes (which isn't going to happen), and rather than continuing to whine about how we're being taken advantage of, pressure your sectional USTA to start using their money wisely. Donate old racquets to organizations that will distribute them to underpriveleged kids. Donate moneys to organizations that help sponsor the development of said kids. Volunteer with grassroots tennis programs. Take action to help build better, more highly skilled juniors now. College isn't the time to try to develop kids. College is when already highly skilled players are honed to be even better.

Excellent post!!

[samk8249]

i'd be a lie if I said I don't look at the rankings all the time

well a lot of people (like yourself) go on ranking websites all the time and end up going into tournaments worried about how "your ranking will go down" if you lose or "im supposed to beat this kid because i have a better ranking than him" i used to have this attitude and it doesnt work. you get down on yourself when you don't win. you play to win rather than play your game and focus on improving. when you don't focus on winning and ranking you keep your attitude up and set the stage for a successful future

[tenniscrazed]

We just go round and round on this. The only way it'll change is if the mindset of the ADs isn't about winning. As long as it is, and as long as a very few schools get the "cream of the crop" of American players, then foreigners will be recruited. Otherwise, the other schools cannot compete. Don't compete and there's more of a risk of the non-revenue sport being cut.

Get rid of foreign players and the overall quality of college tennis goes down. As has been stated ad nauseum, playing college tennis is a privelege. Americans should have to work for that right. Foreigners have and they're getting more and more chances to play in college. Unfortunately more foreigners also have a better chance of getting into college ball simply because there are national tennis federations that subsidize training. We, being less socialist in our government structure, do not. We merely have the USTA.

The way to change the outlook for US juniors is for our juniors to train harder/better/smarter. Additionally, make tennis a more 'cool' sport and a more affordable sport that would appeal to the relatively untapped minority populations in the US. For that the USTA needs to assist: more grassroots programs.

So, rather than trying to pressure the NCAA to enact changes (which isn't going to happen), and rather than continuing to whine about how we're being taken advantage of, pressure your sectional USTA to start using their money wisely. Donate old racquets to organizations that will distribute them to underpriveleged kids. Donate moneys to organizations that help sponsor the development of said kids. Volunteer with grassroots tennis programs. Take action to help build better, more highly skilled juniors now. College isn't the time to try to develop kids. College is when already highly skilled players are honed to be even better.

Great post, thank you for all your work and effort. I agree the mindset at the AD level must change. I also agree that athletic participation at the college level is a priviledge not right. If in fact American Jrs., are opting out of furthering their careers because the offers that came in were from mid or lower level d1 schools and the parents and children turned them down for no playtime at all. Then the mindset must change at their level as well. Listen I had three school choices that was it. I made most with what I had, if our kids are turning offers down then you are absolutely right in saying they do not deserve to play.