Why oh why did Kosakowski go pro?

[jdubbs]

Well Michael Russell apparently recently got his BS from the University of Phoenix...

I don't think Kosakowski will be living in his parents' basement. Unless his arm falls off or something he should always be able to make a decent living from tennis in one form or another. So I don't blame him for putting college on hold.

Well, you can be a ball feeder giving lessons to housewives and beginners (that's where the majority of the players are in tennis) for the rest of your life, or you be Director of Tennis at a club, for instance. That takes knowledge of finance, marketing, business...all skills that they typically require a college degree for.
Which one makes more sense in the long run?
I know of a former pro that finished at Stanford and retired a couple of years ago to a very good professional job paying 6 figures plus.
Not going to be able to do that when the money runs out in 2-3 years and he's faced with either paying for college or giving lessons for the rest of his life.

 

[Rob_C]

January thru USO is more than 2/3 of the season. It's only a month and a half break at the end of the year. Most pros are done in November except those that make the Tour Finals. Everything important (majors, 1000s, and 500s) are done so it's just a few small tourneys to skip.

Everyone needs break time and whether you take 5 one week breaks or 1 five week break is an individual's decision. McEnroe said in his book that when it came to down time, he ate and drank and sat around doing nothing for weeks.

So maybe I was off on my estimate, but there are still big tournaments to play after the US Open. There are 1000s, Shanghai & Paris, plus 500s, Tokyo, Valencia, Basel, Bejing. If you're a lower level pro, around 100, & you are able to play these tourneys, it's in your best interest to play these to gain enough pts to be able to get directly into the bigger tournaments the following year.

 

[socaltennnis]

Well, you can be a ball feeder giving lessons to housewives and beginners (that's where the majority of the players are in tennis) for the rest of your life, or you be Director of Tennis at a club, for instance. That takes knowledge of finance, marketing, business...all skills that they typically require a college degree for.
Which one makes more sense in the long run?

I can't believe I am having this conversation, but here it goes. You do know there is more than just one way to live life, right? Just because a college degree is the traditional way that people go before making a living does not mean its the only way nor is it even an assured way of having a comfortable living. Depending on what concentration your degree is in, your degree can have little net value in the real world. On top of that, college tennis players are not majoring in the most job-desirable majors out there. They are typically graduating in jock majors and go into jobs that are outside their degree or sticking with tennis jobs.

I know of a former pro that finished at Stanford and retired a couple of years ago to a very good professional job paying 6 figures plus.
Not going to be able to do that when the money runs out in 2-3 years and he's faced with either paying for college or giving lessons for the rest of his life.

A Stanford graduate having a 6 figure salary does not have general application to all college graduates just as John Isner doing 4 years of college tennis and becoming top 10 have general application to all American juniors. You are just choosing two examples at the top of their professions. And if anyone were to end up with a low paying desk job or ranked 300th in the world, who are we to judge them or their decisions?

And why is "giving lessons for the rest of ones life" such a bad thing?

 

[jdubbs]

I can't believe I am having this conversation, but here it goes. You do know there is more than just one way to live life, right? Just because a college degree is the traditional way that people go before making a living does not mean its the only way nor is it even an assured way of having a comfortable living. Depending on what concentration your degree is in, your degree can have little net value in the real world. On top of that, college tennis players are not majoring in the most job-desirable majors out there. They are typically graduating in jock majors and go into jobs that are outside their degree or sticking with tennis jobs.



A Stanford graduate having a 6 figure salary does not have general application to all college graduates just as John Isner doing 4 years of college tennis and becoming top 10 have general application to all American juniors. You are just choosing two examples at the top of their professions. And if anyone were to end up with a low paying desk job or ranked 300th in the world, who are we to judge them or their decisions?

And why is "giving lessons for the rest of ones life" such a bad thing?

I sort of stopped at "I can't believe I'm having this conversation"
Sort of why they invented message boards, didn't they? I guess I could have made another Fed/Nadal thread but I found this an interesting topic.
And, since it's generated a lot of replies, others are also interested, pro and con.

And giving lessons is an option, not the best one, but it's always good to have options.

I guarantee Kosakowski -and I'm just picking on him, there are lots just like him -will one day be asking himself a lot of the same questions and wonder if he had chosen another path of finishing school before going pro, whether that would have been the better option.

Something to think about, that's all. I hope the kid makes it big...we need more great American players after all.

 

[tball2day]

.......................

 

[onehandbh]

Thing is, I will believe someone like John Isners mom who talked about all those other kids who went pro and are off the tour with no degree, no more scholarship money. Can you live at home and finish your degree in your late 20's? Sure, but how many do?
I get that the dream of a pro career is seductive, but the evidence is clear that 99 percent of these kids don't make it.
And its not as if playing tennis at 22 after 4 years of college is going to set you back, is it?

It's not as bad as gymnastics, but in pro tennis, for the most part, the
late teens to early 20's appears to be when most top pros start to
make their mark. If you think you might have a chance, then you probably
have to go for it and skip college. Not sure why it is, considering that
for men, the age they hit their peak strength and speed may not be as
a teenager. Not sure about reflexes, recovery, etc.

 

[Rob_C]

I sort of stopped at "I can't believe I'm having this conversation"
Sort of why they invented message boards, didn't they? I guess I could have made another Fed/Nadal thread but I found this an interesting topic.
And, since it's generated a lot of replies, others are also interested, pro and con.

And giving lessons is an option, not the best one, but it's always good to have options.

I guarantee Kosakowski -and I'm just picking on him, there are lots just like him -will one day be asking himself a lot of the same questions and wonder if he had chosen another path of finishing school before going pro, whether that would have been the better option.

Something to think about, that's all. I hope the kid makes it big...we need more great American players after all.

You do know that Kosakowski has an older brother & sister, Marcin & Sylvia, both of whom went to DI schools for four yrs, both of whom are now, guess what, teaching tennis for a living.

 

[Avles]

I guarantee Kosakowski -and I'm just picking on him, there are lots just like him -will one day be asking himself a lot of the same questions and wonder if he had chosen another path of finishing school before going pro, whether that would have been the better option.

Easy to guarantee something which probably we'll never be able to verify!

I guess I'm just wondering how many players like Kosakowski there really are who wind up toiling in obscurity because they gave up their scholarship.

My guess (and it's just a guess, I don't travel in those circles) is that most guys who reach that high a level at his age end up doing fairly well for themselves, unless they make other bad choices.

 

[onehandbh]

Well Michael Russell apparently recently got his BS from the University of Phoenix...

When I look for a new doctor I usually check to see where they
studied and did their interning.

When i see Devry University or University of Phoenix, I feel relieved because I know they got
some Kwality education.

 

[andfor]

When I look for a new doctor I usually check to see where they
studied and did their interning.

When i see Devry University or University of Phoenix, I feel relieved because I know they got
some Kwality education.

Another degree snob.

All these folks here talk about kids needing to go to college, play college tennis and get their degree. Then play pro tennis. It's all because they'll never make it on the pro tour and it cost's too much, $150K a year blah, blah, blah. Then an ATP touring pro gets his degree from an credited college and then it's isn't good enough. Playing pro tennis before college or getting a degree while playing the tour, there's no way to win.

Name one doctor who you've ever personally been to that has a degree from Devry University or University of Phoenix. Although many may not exist, you can't name one.

I'm sure you'll scoff at the following pros who have completed college degrees.
http://www.10sballs.com/2011/12/16/vera-zvonareva-and-mikhail-youzhny-earn-college-degrees/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janko_Tipsarević

 

[onehandbh]

For from it, mate. My objections to certain for-profit online universities is that
they are often *REALLY* expensive and the attendees end up with huge loans.
They are given a sales pitch that they'll make a lot of money with their online
degree so they bite the bullet and many end up in a bit of financial
mess when they default on a big federal loan.

I think there are often community colleges and city colleges (both public and
Less expensive) that would have been better options.

Another degree snob.

All these folks here talk about kids needing to go to college, play college tennis and get their degree. Then play pro tennis. It's all because they'll never make it on the pro tour and it cost's too much, $150K a year blah, blah, blah. Then an ATP touring pro gets his degree from an credited college and then it's isn't good enough. Playing pro tennis before college or getting a degree while playing the tour, there's no way to win.

Name one doctor who you've ever personally been to that has a degree from Devry University or University of Phoenix. Although many may not exist, you can't name one.

I'm sure you'll scoff at the following pros who have completed college degrees.
http://www.10sballs.com/2011/12/16/vera-zvonareva-and-mikhail-youzhny-earn-college-degrees/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janko_Tipsarević

 

[formula16]

Something John Isner's mom said the other day made me think of this thread. She said there were a lot of juniors who went pro while John went to college. Now he's top 10 or close to it and none of them made it.

With the game becoming so physical and guys doing better later in life, it's better to get your degree and compete straight after.

I guarantee Kosakowski will struggle in the lower levels until he can't afford to tour anymore (since it costs $140K on average to tour). He could go back to school later in life, but of course it won't be paid for.

Kind of a sad story.

I dont think isner would have anywhere close to the success he is having if it wasnt for that serve

 

[kme5150]

I dont think isner would have anywhere close to the success he is having if it wasnt for that serve

I agree, but that can be said about a lot of guys like Roddick, Karlovic, and Raonic.

 

[info81]

My 2 cents

I am a newbie here but I say if someone wants to play pro they should skip collage. I did not go to collage until I was 23. I did not play tennis but worked at other things that did not pan out. If someone really wants to go back to school they will go back. 23-24 is not that old to start school and lots of people attend collage without a scholarship. If we want to have great American players they need to be dedicated. I think those years on the tour would help you in school later as well.

Having said that it is great that tennis is a global sport and people from Eastern Europe are hungry to win. For a female athlete it is one of the only sport where you can make big money.

 

[floridatennisdude]

I am a newbie here but I say if someone wants to play pro they should skip collage. I did not go to collage until I was 23. I did not play tennis but worked at other things that did not pan out. If someone really wants to go back to school they will go back. 23-24 is not that old to start school and lots of people attend collage without a scholarship. If we want to have great American players they need to be dedicated. I think those years on the tour would help you in school later as well.

Having said that it is great that tennis is a global sport and people from Eastern Europe are hungry to win. For a female athlete it is one of the only sport where you can make big money.

Plus, the great thing about college is that the chicks are always the same age

 

[LeeD]

We should let everyone live their own life.
K would probably never buckle down in college anyways, wasn't going to study and be a bookworm. Notice his hair lenght.
He's more a free spirit, living out his dreams.
And when he's 26, after graduating (if he stayed in school), he'd wonder why he didn't go for it when he had the chance.
He made the right move, for HIM at the time.

 

[ClarkC]

I am a newbie here but I say if someone wants to play pro they should skip collage. I did not go to collage until I was 23. I did not play tennis but worked at other things that did not pan out. If someone really wants to go back to school they will go back. 23-24 is not that old to start school and lots of people attend collage without a scholarship. If we want to have great American players they need to be dedicated. I think those years on the tour would help you in school later as well.

Having said that it is great that tennis is a global sport and people from Eastern Europe are hungry to win. For a female athlete it is one of the only sport where you can make big money.

Interesting post.

 

[tball2day]

.....................

 

[yonexpurestorm]

i just wanted to give my 2 cents for what its worth. given the opportunity to take a stab at being a pro tennis player i think i would go for it. as for the whole free ride to college thing, my company offers full tuition reimbursement. there are a lot of companies that offer tuition, even to employees who arent very high in the corporate structure. for me college was fun and a good experience, but how many ppl get to take a stab at the tour.

 

[justinmadison]

A few years ago I played in a pro-am during a Challenger event in Dallas. The pro I was playing doubles with had a little bruise over his left eye and I asked him about it. He shrugged it off as nothing but I got him to tell me the story. The week before, while staying in a single hotel room with five other players, an argument had broken out which involved a little pushing and shoving. Apparently, after sharing a couple of pizzas everyone wanted to take the last piece in their bag to eat the next day.

 

[jdubbs]

i just wanted to give my 2 cents for what its worth. given the opportunity to take a stab at being a pro tennis player i think i would go for it. as for the whole free ride to college thing, my company offers full tuition reimbursement. there are a lot of companies that offer tuition, even to employees who arent very high in the corporate structure. for me college was fun and a good experience, but how many ppl get to take a stab at the tour.

Point is though, you can take a stab at the tour at 22...players are all older anyway nowadays on tour.

 

[floridatennisdude]

Point is though, you can take a stab at the tour at 22...players are all older anyway nowadays on tour.

It's definitely doable and surprising how many folks don't get it still. The days of Capriatti, Agassi, etc turning pro in their early teens are pretty much over. College is a more viable option than ever to get quality competition before making the leap.

I dont have a tennis prodigy in my house, but if I did they would be enrolling for the spring of college tennis at a minimum. Unless they were to completely dominate, they'd dabble in the pros only during the summer and fall. The safety net of a near free education with free training is too much to pass on.

But, to each their own. College isn't an ideal environment for everyone.

 

[Clemson_tennis]

correct. Tomic is the only under 20 in the top 100.

David Goffin is making his breathrough now and he is 21.

 

[Rob_C]

It's definitely doable and surprising how many folks don't get it still. The days of Capriatti, Agassi, etc turning pro in their early teens are pretty much over. College is a more viable option than ever to get quality competition before making the leap.

I dont have a tennis prodigy in my house, but if I did they would be enrolling for the spring of college tennis at a minimum. Unless they were to completely dominate, they'd dabble in the pros only during the summer and fall. The safety net of a near free education with free training is too much to pass on.

But, to each their own. College isn't an ideal environment for everyone.

I'm starting to doubt the value of college preparation in a way. I'm not sure if guys are improving the way they're supposed to. I was at the ATP qualies in ATL and I watched Pasha & Taboada play. Their backhands both needed improvement, along with their volleys. Both missed really easy sitter volleys in the match.

Taboada especially had a noticeably weaker backhand.

Steve Johnson, IMO, had a weak backhand in college, I havent seen him play probably since last summer, but, whenever I did, he predominantly sliced the ball from that side, which is a dead giveaway.

 

[brettsticker86]

We should let everyone live their own life.
K would probably never buckle down in college anyways, wasn't going to study and be a bookworm. Notice his hair lenght.
He's more a free spirit, living out his dreams.
And when he's 26, after graduating (if he stayed in school), he'd wonder why he didn't go for it when he had the chance.
He made the right move, for HIM at the time.

You think because of his haircut, he's a free spirit and wasn't going to study? That sounds pretty intelligent

 

[The Wreck]

I'm starting to doubt the value of college preparation in a way. I'm not sure if guys are improving the way they're supposed to. I was at the ATP qualies in ATL and I watched Pasha & Taboada play. Their backhands both needed improvement, along with their volleys. Both missed really easy sitter volleys in the match.

Taboada especially had a noticeably weaker backhand.

Steve Johnson, IMO, had a weak backhand in college, I havent seen him play probably since last summer, but, whenever I did, he predominantly sliced the ball from that side, which is a dead giveaway.

But those guys weren't on the verge of becoming pros out of high school. They were both very good, highly regarded players, but they weren't even in a Kosaowski type situation. I also don't think that, at least Nacho, has any sort of serious professional aspirations, but that's just a guess. Can't really say that college doesn't work just based on that.

You also have to consider nerves, level of competition, and the way they practice compared to other professionals, but still.

 

[floridatennisdude]

I'm starting to doubt the value of college preparation in a way. I'm not sure if guys are improving the way they're supposed to. I was at the ATP qualies in ATL and I watched Pasha & Taboada play. Their backhands both needed improvement, along with their volleys. Both missed really easy sitter volleys in the match.

Taboada especially had a noticeably weaker backhand.

Steve Johnson, IMO, had a weak backhand in college, I havent seen him play probably since last summer, but, whenever I did, he predominantly sliced the ball from that side, which is a dead giveaway.

Andy Roddick had a weak backhand at 19. Still does now and still slices a lot. He stayed top 10 in the world for a decade. I don't judge a player off one aspect of their game.

Johnson is a tough player. He is head and shoulders better than any of the UGA guys you reference. Not even comparable.

 

[Rob_C]

But those guys weren't on the verge of becoming pros out of high school. They were both very good, highly regarded players, but they weren't even in a Kosaowski type situation. I also don't think that, at least Nacho, has any sort of serious professional aspirations, but that's just a guess. Can't really say that college doesn't work just based on that.

You also have to consider nerves, level of competition, and the way they practice compared to other professionals, but still.

Wasnt saying they had pro aspirations, but, if college is supposed to improve your game, did they forget about the backhand?? Taboada's been in school for yrs, his backhand is still a liability. They had 4 yrs to fix it, what happened??

Andy Roddick had a weak backhand at 19. Still does now and still slices a lot. He stayed top 10 in the world for a decade. I don't judge a player off one aspect of their game.

Johnson is a tough player. He is head and shoulders better than any of the UGA guys you reference. Not even comparable.

Wasnt comparing Johnson to either guys I mentioned, except for the fact that they have noticeably weaker backhands.

It's been awhile since Roddick turned pro, but if I remember correctly, he didnt slice that much yrs ago. I think he started doing it more to get over the Federer hump.

Roddick also has that huge serve, dont forget.

 

[floridatennisdude]

^^^dude, you clearly compared the UGA guys to Johnson. If you didn't want to compare them, you should have left out the first 2 paragraphs.

I'm starting to doubt the value of college preparation in a way. I'm not sure if guys are improving the way they're supposed to. I was at the ATP qualies in ATL and I watched Pasha & Taboada play. Their backhands both needed improvement, along with their volleys. Both missed really easy sitter volleys in the match.

Taboada especially had a noticeably weaker backhand.

Steve Johnson, IMO, had a weak backhand in college, I havent seen him play probably since last summer, but, whenever I did, he predominantly sliced the ball from that side, which is a dead giveaway.

 

[Rob_C]

^^^dude, you clearly compared the UGA guys to Johnson. If you didn't want to compare them, you should have left out the first 2 paragraphs.

I was stating an opinion on what I saw. Wasnt comparing directly with anyone. Im sure they arent the only college players with weaker backhands compared to their forehands.

Now if I was comparing them to Johnson, I'd have said something like, I think Pahsa's backhand is better than SJs, or I think Taboada has more potential than SJ. That's a comparison.

Only brought up SJ cause he's relevant right now, just got done with college, and is considered a prospect, and he's also playing the ATL tournament. And, I also think he has a noticeably weaker backhand side.

 

[JLyon]

Andy Roddick had a weak backhand at 19. Still does now and still slices a lot. He stayed top 10 in the world for a decade. I don't judge a player off one aspect of their game.

Johnson is a tough player. He is head and shoulders better than any of the UGA guys you reference. Not even comparable.

Roddick also had a superstar serve and great FH, at the time, now he still has a great serve, but average FH

 

[floridatennisdude]

Roddick also had a superstar serve and great FH, at the time, now he still has a great serve, but average FH

And hence, I don't judge a player off one aspect of their game. That was my point.

 

[Clemson_tennis]

think about is he was still at UCLA

 

[andfor]

Just watched Rhyne Williams hand it to Steve Johnson. SJ needs more confidence in his BH. RW is playing very good tennis at the moment.

 

[Nostradamus]

Kawasaki ready for top 50 yet ?

 

[mikej]

Kawasaki ready for top 50 yet ?

haha, feddie sometimes your posts still annoy me, but your presence is worth it for the rare gem like this where you not only jump into a thread with an idiotic question but butcher a name in the process

like your good old inane posts where you ask if someone is related to someone famous with a vaguely similar name

thanks for the laugh

 

[Bartelby]

That doesn't mean they started late.

correct. Tomic is the only under 20 in the top 100.

David Goffin is making his breathrough now and he is 21.

 

[beernutz]

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Ko/D/Daniel-Kosakowski.aspx

Currently he is 254th in singles which is close to his highest rating of 249th and he has made just under $70k from playing since 2011. He has also gotten to travel to San Jose, Dallas, Maui, and Melbourne this year which sounds pretty freakin sweet to me.

 

[tball2day]

Kawasaki ready for top 50 yet ?

He did 0-50 in about five seconds

 

[Dear Djordje]

DK kept losing... probably would have gotten a lot more match practice by staying in college.

 

[andfor]

Doubt it. He's up to 237 now. His last year has been up and down. Looks like he doesn't have many points to defend until June.

 

[tennisplayer1993]

#1 at UCLA. Quits after his freshman year to go pro.
Gives up full scholarship worth another $200K, and a degree.

Horrible performance as a pro except for 1 tournament where he go to the round of 16 this summer in a challenger and 1 futures win.
Alright not completely horrible, but why not wait a couple more years, get more seasoning, and get your degree, go pro later? It's not as if the $20K you made this year will go very far.

I really don't understand this. This isn't the NBA where you get $1M+ guaranteed for going pro early. There are no guarantees in tennis, and its not as if he was going to make this money up anytime soon.

Anybody know his deal? I like the kid, but man, can't see why he would go pro and give up a nice scholarship like that.

I know a kid who got recruited by Stanford, ended up playing tennis for Columbia. He was told that he could try going pro after high school but he valued education more. He's a very tall lanky dude who was a consistent top 50 player in the country during high school and I believe a top 20 player during middle school (at one point he was 8). Very intelligent kid but he decided to get a well rounded education. Good for him.

 

[tennisplayer1993]

Roddick also had a superstar serve and great FH, at the time, now he still has a great serve, but average FH

Apparently Roddick was losing a lot as a junior before he got it going with his first professional coach. He was tempted to quit tennis and possibly just go to UGA (they had a powerhouse team back then) and play along his brother but I heard in the last year or so in high school, he took tennis very seriously and was the world #1 junior and didn't go to college because his coach really thought he had a chance to be a top 30 player at the time within a few years (incredible because roddick became a top 20 player by the time he was about 19 and was #1 in the world for awhile at 21).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwhITjGBbpk is a good video to see the hype about roddick around that age (17).

 

[TopDawg]

Daniel Kosakowski is 1 win away from a main draw spot at the Australian Open - Qualifying bracket

 

[backfootgrinder]

Fair enough. But realize that for 98% of players on tour, its a money-losing proposition. It costs a lot to compete year after year. And then you come back and that scholarship is gone.

I dunno, an education worth, lets call it $100K, fine, is still worth a lot. UCLA room, board, books etc is pretty pricey.
Degree would come in handy when trying to get a real job in a tough job market when tennis doesn't work out.
Trying to go back to college at 28-32 years old and pay full boat...well, good luck with that, most don't do it. He'll end up a country club pro at best. Nothing wrong with that...I guess.
You're telling me he couldn't compete in 3 more years? Didn't hurt Isner..at all. Young could have benefited from it too.

Anyway, it's his life. I get it. But its not now or never. Let him grow physically, learn the game more, play top collegiate players. Just seems shortsighted.

did young ever go to college?

 

[TopDawg]

did young ever go to college?

No college for DY

 

[jdubbs]

The sad story here is your post. The kid has been pro a little over a year. Just because a kid leaves college to go pro does not imply his plan is to be in the Top 100 in a year. Do you know his plan and goals? Looks like he's making progress to me. http://www.itftennis.com/ProCircuit/players/player/profile.aspx?PlayerID=100122323

Keep working hard everyday and looking for ways to improve Daniel.
Good luck.

Just wanted to update. With a 4-14 record in 2013, Kosakowski has slipped to 409 in the rankings. He made $10K last year gross.

Again, this is not to pick on him specifically, but to give up a world class education and free ride to college, get some confidence and graduate, and still have plenty of time for tennis and a shot at a pro tennis career, is ludicrous.

A good parallel would be Paul Goldstein, who got up to top 60 in the world AFTER graduating from Stanford, and returned to the working world and a good career.

I'm not one to judge (ok, maybe I am) but this seemed like a poor decision for him. I wish him the best.

 

[tennisballer]

It's also important to note, Kosakowski was out the last six months of last year after having surgery on his right shoulder which he said began bothering him in the middle of the spring. I agree with you that he may have made a rash decision turning pro so early, but just wanted to point out the reason for his massive slip in the rankings last year.

 

[JW10S]

Just wanted to update. With a 4-14 record in 2013, Kosakowski has slipped to 409 in the rankings. He made $10K last year gross.

Again, this is not to pick on him specifically, but to give up a world class education and free ride to college, get some confidence and graduate, and still have plenty of time for tennis and a shot at a pro tennis career, is ludicrous.

A good parallel would be Paul Goldstein, who got up to top 60 in the world AFTER graduating from Stanford, and returned to the working world and a good career.

I'm not one to judge (ok, maybe I am) but this seemed like a poor decision for him. I wish him the best.

You're not telling the whole story. Kosakowski missed a significant amount of time from the tour last year with an injury which is why his ranking has slipped. He recently started competing again and is able to gain entry into a certain number of tournaments using the 'protected ranking rule' (he can use his pre-injury ranking for entry). He just beat #179 ranked and #3 seed veteran Bobby Reynolds in straight sets in the Mexico challenger to move on.

And for many being a rookie on tour at age 22-23 doesn't work out either--so there is not always 'plenty of time' for a pro career.

 

[tennisballer]

On a side note, at least D. Kosakowski did spend a year to help him mature and show that he was able to win consistently at the top spot on a top team. Mitchell Kreuger is a name that comes to mind that really could've used that same type of seasoning. Instead he is now really struggling out on the futures circuit with no real upside insight for the near future. Hope that I'm wrong.