What does it take to play in Ivy Leauge Schools?
 

For example, you want to play for Harvard or Princeton. What does it take?
Do you need to have the perfect grades even if you will be presumed to the team?
What kind of results do you need for playing in Ivy Leauge? Whould good results against the best players in your country be good or do you have to have big tournaments wins like ITF?
What kind of demands is it for scholarship or full scholarship?

Please share info about this!

Thanks.

Grades and test scores (SAT, ACT, AP) are a big part of Ivy League + a very strong tennis results (strong JR ranking, good results, etc.)

If you really want to dig into the tennis stats of the players at these schools, check their website athletic profiles; that will give you a good clue what one would need to do to get on the team. As for school results, you can find out from the counselors.

Hope this helps.

Ivy League schools do not offer athletic scholarship.

Scholarships for these schools are financial need-based.
If you are not qualified for financial aid, tuition, room and board, etc cost ~ $50,000 (US dollars) per year.

Check the college websites, they always are clearly written.

For NON-US students, I do think colleges may have restriction on financial aid/scholarship from schools.
I could be wrong so please check their websites if that applied to your case.

Columbia is $60K now, most are $55-60K. You need to be national ranked 170 or so, better to be top 125. Ivy League tennis is strong with 1 or 2 foreigners per team. Harvard is currently ranked #16 nationally. Strong academics is a prerequisite, SAT's above 2000 generally, some leeway dependent on how strong your tennis is and the coaches relationship with the admissions office at their respective school. Some coaches can get almost anyone in it seems.

Being able to spell league may be a start. Just sayin.

I'm convinced some posts are just a spoof.

Kids today grew up with spell check. None of them can spell.

Great question. I have been following this for three years now due to the fact that parents really talk, and not about their own kids.

First, being an athlete there is really being a student first, except maybe for the helmet sports.
There are none of the benefits that you would receive at other D1 schools such as priority with class selection.

Second, grades, SAT subject test scores, Honors, AP classes, and the SATs factor heavily into going to these schools.
This year's recruiting class, there were quite a few high ranked kids who wanted to go to the IVY's
and their own academic package was not high enough.
Surprising, you would think the coach could pull a kid through, but most of the time they can't.
Other kids, where they were ranked lower, but were real standouts academically got in.

Folks are always saying that the kids don't want to play in a cold climate, indoor bubble with a ton of work, and so they don't go to the IVY's.
But, I think it plays both ways, and the IVYS are very selective in regards to the academics.

Good luck, and there are lots of opportunities to play college tennis out there if you are open minded.

Agreed.

Anyway, I think the Ivy League academic index link got washed away in one of the recent deletions. So here is the link below. Pretty self-explanatory.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/25/sp...=2&ref=sports#

Almost all A's-adjusted 3.9-and 2000 on the SAT seems to be the formula if the coach really wants you. I coach a player at Princeton, and he is at the top academically, but the coach wouldn't consider him at 150 nationally. We improved his ranking to top 50, and the coach was all over him. Harvard, Princeton, Yale are a little tougher most years, but it is cyclical. Last year Cornell won the Ivy League.

My youngest daughter isn't at one of the Ivy League schools, she is a two sport captain (neither being tennis) at another hard-to-get-into institute just down the street from Harvard, MIT. As with the Ivy League schools, MIT only offers need-based scholarships, besides, most of the sports there are DIII. Getting in doesn't require straight A's, and she did get a B both semesters of AP Calc BC when she was a junior, although she followed that up with an A in both Multivariable Calc and Differential Equations taught by the local community college at her high school during her senior year. To get into an Ivy-level school you pretty much need all parts of your SATs to be at least 700, most also require SAT subject tests (and of course, high scores), and personal interviews.

All the top schools get tons of qualified applicants, and participation in activities such as sports are one way of making yourself stand out from other applicants. When my daughter took the community college classes, every one of the twelve kids in those classes applied to MIT, every one had grades and scores similar to or better than hers, and she was the only one admitted. Being a multi-sport athlete, belonging to different school clubs, and having an amazing work experience that I'm not allowed to talk about all contributed to getting her in. And from what we've been told by an admissions officer at an Ivy, the top schools get so many qualified applicants that at some point they just start randomly selecting. Then when you get in you get the privilege of giving them 50+ thousand a year. At least she has a really good job lined up.

I didn't play tennis at one, but I can tell you (from what I heard while attending one) that the requirements in terms of academics can be relaxed either moderately or extremely depending on what sport you're going in for and to what degree the coach wants you in the program.

So yes, it's true that the Ivy League schools cannot give out athletic scholarships, but they can certainly lower their standards to let you in if you're competent enough in whatever sport you play. The upside is that if you manage to get in, there's no pressure to continue playing tennis (or whatever sport that may be) and you can focus on your studies if you decide against playing. I knew some guys that did this, and I think it served them very well in terms of setting them up with jobs post-grad.

That may be, but it doesn't say much for their character.

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

Not necessarily true.

If you look at the top Ivies, there are many blue chips, 5 stars, alot of 4 & 3 stars.
Read the nytimes article previously posted by Misterbill, it explains the flexibility the coaches have getting in kids who have low academics.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/25/sp...=2&ref=sports#

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

Deep pockets!

Tennisshacker, I usually agree with you, but the low academics refers to the helmet sports ( football, ice hockey and lacrosse).

My question is does the Ivys take a B student for tennis?

Hard to answer that, when my child was being recruited by Cornell, the coach at the time gave us the impression that things could be worked out. Even Middlebury, (equally high requirements), coach also said same thing.

Treeman10, I didn't say it's true for all athletes; I said for some.

Before you get to defensive, I think you're mischaracterizing my post and partly, that's my fault as it was open to misinterpretation. When I said they can lower standards if you're competent enough, it doesn't mean that everyone that is competent enough will get in with lowered standards. I meant to say that if a coach really wants you, they can give a heads up to the admissions committee and they'll certainly take note of that when they consider whether or not to admit a student.

I heard similar things from the mouths of varsity athletes and even people who worked with the admissions committee as well. Some sports were allotted a 'quota' of sorts -- a number of students they can get in with relaxed standards.

To be fair, I think if the schools just offered athletic scholarships it'd help everyone out. Because these schools don't, some student-athletes are stigmatized regardless of whether they actually were accepted with lower standards because nobody has any way of knowing so they all assume that the student is just a dumb jock.

I don't know that it speaks to their character or not. They were offered admittance to the school without any conditions on what it takes to stay there. Perhaps once students started playing, they found that it was too much work or that the system wasn't a good fit after all. Ultimately it is the student's decision and shouldn't reflect one way or another on his/her character, and I think it's unfair to say otherwise without knowing the specific circumstances. I knew a student who played football and had an injury; he was sidelined for awhile could have gone back, but he decided to stop playing and focus on his studies. Honestly, I think it was a good move; it's not like he was going to turn pro.