"Wow....you type long posts with a few decent points. But as John Wooden says, do not mistake activity for achievement. This post of yours is silly and a total over simplification."
A very typical response that I would expect (and thanks for one of John Wooden's classic lines as I know it well but you may want to also apply it to yourself . . .). I suspect you are part of the system for which my statement applied so obviously you will try to defend it . . . your response is over simplified and this is precisely why nothing will change with respect to our player development program.
I'm not going to take the time to respond to each of your inadequate responses except to say I never said a pro had to be Top 75 (I know the break even for men and women pros) . . . and, just we are clear, to define pro as top 75 is stupid in this context. If the discussion was pros that make a living at it for a period time, which is not the context of this discussion, then you would make a fair point.
Looking from the outside as a former collegiate player (dad played in the NBA), it's a shame how we defend a tennis development system that is clearly broken and flawed.
As for my ability to type long posts, that's the result of taking collegiate athletics, using it to obtain a college degree, then a master's, then a law degree . . .
. . . so instead of reading between the lines, I'll take that statement as a compliment but, for the record, I'll make more than just a "few decent" points
I'll sign off with respect to this topic . . .