Originally Posted by TCF
Not at all. Night and day difference between touting success in USTA 10s-16s and WINNING OBs, or Jr. Slams, or top ITFs, or futures at young ages. (When he did the study the OB was way more important than it is now....the field these days has very few of the top 10 guys in it.)
That is what the Tennis Cruz study found, that guys who went on to the top 100 had certain high level junior successes at the very highest levels of the junior 18s.
BB has constantly touted success at the 10s-16s USTA level. Please list one major ITF, Herr, OB, Jr. Slam or any major 18s tournament he has ever won. Am I missing them?
But back to the main point....his path is his path, maybe he will be the rare one that beats the odds. But its just not for us. We either are that player with consistent prodigy results, INCLUDING when she is old enough for 18s, Jr. Slams, etc.....or its off to college.
Touting a level of success in 10s-16s, without then a huge leap at age 16 to dominating the world 18s and getting quite deep in futures after futures, is very misleading to me. The results of "early success" MUST be consistent and MUST continue when they hit the age 15-16-17 range where they are off the charts.
The fact is a fully dedicated player who has trained solely for tennis for 10-12 years, will hit the ceiling. No magical improvements will appear by slogging it out in futures for years. The guys that show that improvement most likely got fully into tennis at older ages and thus had lots more room for improvement once they fully dedicated to the sport.
Again, BB should do what he thinks is right. I just have no use for his advice because we are on totally different paths.
I see. It just seems to me that you're as set in your way as Brad was in his, which you heavily criticized. Anyway, good luck to the both of you.
Pro Kennex 7G, Head Rip Control 17 @ 58lbs, rubber band dampener, Tourna Grip.
Last edited by BMC9670 : 02-10-2013 at 06:30 AM.