Donald Young: A junior player????

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by coolhandluke, Jul 9, 2007.

  1. coolhandluke

    coolhandluke Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Messages:
    249
    What's this. D. young winning junior Wimbledon. How is that possible? How do you turn pro but are still eligible to play in the Juniors. Can't win in the Pros, but always win the juniors. It seems that we are really seeing another player who can win big in the juniors but his game is not a pro game!!!!!
     
    #1
  2. gsquicksilver

    gsquicksilver Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Messages:
    645
    Location:
    SoCal
    could it be a different donald young?
     
    #2
  3. MasterTS

    MasterTS Professional

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2005
    Messages:
    1,124

    If you're under 18 then you qualiffy to play in the boys18. The only reason you don't see many pros do it when they were young like Nadal/Gasquet is because it's kinda a step back and a pretty big disgrace. Nadal was beating moya at monte carlo TMS at 16.
     
    #3
  4. also they should be convincing juinors around 17 or 18 to stay in the juinors until they proved themself to be capable of beating top playes, unless they have nadal talents and are beating many older players they should stay in juinors not strattleing against pros and joes
     
    #4
  5. MoFed

    MoFed Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2007
    Messages:
    692
    Location:
    Victorville, CA
    I don't think they should be allowed to go back to juniors once they turn pro. For NCAA once you enter pro drafts you are no longer eligible to play college level. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
     
    #5
  6. bluetrain4

    bluetrain4 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    8,864
    This has nothing to do with the NCAA. (BTW, why would anyone cite the NCAA as a model for anything, an organization committed only to creating an appearance of amatuerism, since NCAA athletes are "not paid.")

    The junior/senior division in tennis is not an amatuer/professional division as well. It is simply an age division. Granted, most players who are under 18 and do well on the regular tour, or even at the challenger level won't go back to juniors, but there is absolutely nothing stopping them from doing so.

    Young failed miserably in his regular tour events, won a futures and made the semis of a challenger. I think it was smart of him to go back and play Wimbledon juniors to give him the confidence to win. That may sound ridiculous since the level is lower, but players need to learn how to win somewhere. Tiger Woods has talked about this at length when discussing his junior and amatuer career. Winning the US Amatuer helped him know how to close out bigger tournaments, even though the overall talent level is lower.
     
    #6
  7. beernutz

    beernutz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,426
    Location:
    expanding my Ignore List

    Finally, an intelligent answer.
     
    #7
  8. MoFed

    MoFed Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2007
    Messages:
    692
    Location:
    Victorville, CA
    I'm not saying that the NCAA is a model for anything. You are missing the point. Once you try-out for the pros (enter the pro drafts) you are no longer eligible for NCAA. The same should be true for tennis. Once you turn pro, you shouldn't be able to go back to the juniors. (Which is part of what I said). Juniors to me are like amateurs, NCAA are amateurs.
     
    #8
  9. VGP

    VGP Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    Messages:
    6,311
    Location:
    Location: Location
    Problem was that too many tournaments were awarding wild-cards to Donald Young. He wasn't ready yet.

    Donald Young is still only 17 and does qualify for the juniors as it's age based. But, to be 17 and be ranked in the top 300 still means he's on track for the pros.

    The kid's gotta have wheels though, I don't see him growing much more in the next year or two.

    As for NCAA you can have turned pro and have ranking points and still be eligible. You just have to prove that your winnings don't out weigh your expenditures for playing tournaments. It's a gray area.
     
    #9
  10. jrachiever

    jrachiever Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Messages:
    217
    This is not at all unusual and I don't understand the surprise over this. When Edberg won the juniors at all 4 majors in 1983 he also played 10 tour level events (including the main draw of all the slams except the French). Richard Gasquet was in the top 200 when he won the US Open juniors in 2002. There are probably hundreds of similar examples out there. The juniors signify an age group, not a pro vs amateur distinction.
     
    #10
  11. ferocious4hand

    ferocious4hand Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    425
    Location:
    NorCal
    Would have sucked for DY if he didn't win Jr. Wimbledon.
     
    #11
  12. JW10S

    JW10S Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,896
    You can be a professional and still compete in ITF junior events.
     
    #12
  13. beernutz

    beernutz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,426
    Location:
    expanding my Ignore List
    This is not true either actually. The NCAA allows you to try out for the pros in one sport and even if you play professionally, to come back and play as an amateur in another sport. So there are 'professional' athletes playing NCAA 'amateur' sports.

    I don't like letting Pros play in the Juniors either but I don't think your NCAA analogy is all that appropriate here.
     
    #13
  14. Mikael

    Mikael Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,049
    It would impossible to have a system where "pros" can't play junior tournaments, because it is impossible to determine who has "turned pro". We're not in the 60s anymore, when you turned pro or didn't. It's not clear cut. I'm willing to bet almost all the guys in the junior top 50 have ATP points and regularly play futures. Does it mean they're pros? Do you become a pro when you first make the main draw of a futures tournament? Or only when you win a futures tournament altogether? Or when your prize money allows you cover your expenses? The line is too blurry. And if you decide to take a radical stance and say that a "pro" is anyone that has taken part in an ATP tournament (sweet, I guess that makes me a pro), then I guarantee you most of the junior top 100 will be taken out, because those guys are precisely trying to transition from the junior game to the pro game...
     
    #14
  15. J-man

    J-man Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,053
    Does it really matter. Sure he's pro but he does not play like it
     
    #15
  16. couch

    couch Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2004
    Messages:
    1,896
    Have you seen him play? I have and I bet he will have some decent results down the road. The "KID" is 18, give him a break. How many pros have great results at 18? Not too many. The guys that have great results at 18 and under are the exception, not the rule.
     
    #16
  17. dukemunson

    dukemunson Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2006
    Messages:
    278

    great post...hits it right on...it was good for D Young to get one or two wildcards, to get a taste...but then it got ridiculous as he kept getting them...get some wins, win the US Open juniors, play the challengers and work your way up...
     
    #17
  18. Pancho

    Pancho Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Messages:
    633
     
    #18

Share This Page