Usta

[floridakeys]

Found this podcast interview with Chris Lewis on..

http://www.*********e1510.com/

He has some interesting points regarding Quick Start, junior development, and USTA politics.. What does everyone think?

[floridakeys]

google tennis zone chris lewis.. it seems the website url cannot be written here..

[seminoleG]

Candid, and the dynamic of the institution vs Individual having the same goal but colliding paths cannot be discussed enough..

[Tennishacker]

Chris Lewis is absolutely correct, the USTA is a big bureaucracy where everybody protects their job by "inventing" all these new programs.

Great post florlidakeys!

[TennisCoachFLA]

Its like him and I had our brains separated at birth! Unreal, we think exactly alike on every part of this issue. And it just seems like such basic common sense.

Thanks for the post.

[seminoleG]

Originally Posted by TennisCoachFLA

Its like him and I had our brains separated at birth! Unreal, we think exactly alike on every part of this issue. And it just seems like such basic common sense.

Thanks for the post.

TCF,
I like the fact he advocates no specific or mandated way. We had a Travel Soccer tourney this weekend. I can't stress how letting my daughter compete with very skilled soccer players allows us to get a weekend of fitness and foot work not a raquet or ball in sight.

So many ways to eat this elephant we need a supporting entity to help not direct. Still waiting on names and addresses of QS academies for us to attend since SO MANY hi performance coaches are advocating. Honest, not kidding we want to try a few weeks. Still waiting USTA.

[TennisCoachFLA]

Originally Posted by seminoleG

TCF,
I like the fact he advocates no specific or mandated way. We had a Travel Soccer tourney this weekend. I can't stress how letting my daughter compete with very skilled soccer players allows us to get a weekend of fitness and foot work not a raquet or ball in sight.

So many ways to eat this elephant we need a supporting entity to help not direct. Still waiting on names and addresses of QS academies for us to attend since SO MANY hi performance coaches are advocating. Honest, not kidding we want to try a few weeks. Still waiting USTA.

I promised not to bash Quickstart and won't. I am more looking at the big picture, overall USTA junior development.

I would have loads of scouts, reviewing video, attending tournaments, getting leads from tennis coaches. Go look at kids from ages 5-12. Track the promising ones, keep tabs, if the promise continues look for ways to supplement their training. Kind of what mentors do with the AAU basketball kids. Find them, woo them, help them develop. Make it market forces, the best performing scouts make more money.

The USTA should just be the nice old grandpa, helping out. No need for its own high performance facilities.

[Pro_Tour_630]

is this the same chris lewis that owns http://www.tennis-experts.com/kids-tennis-balls.html

[TennisCoachFLA]

Originally Posted by Pro_Tour_630

is this the same chris lewis that owns http://www.tennis-experts.com/kids-tennis-balls.html

Yup. He is a high performance guy. He said the kids who show lots of promise at a young age, the ones who might be Davis Cup caliber players some day, should not use it in his opinion. Perhaps he has some kids for my half of our experiment.

He was not talking about the rest of kids. I doubt he has any issue with it being used in some capacity. He said he just didn't like mandates.

I realize, and I bet he realizes, that our reality is not folks in your position's reality. Most kids play tennis just for some fun and exercise. We are using our theory to try to develop some great players in the future. We may be wrong, time will tell.

[Pro_Tour_630]

Just one question who decides who to fund directly? it will end up bureaucratic by nature, how do you know who is the best player to be funded directly, scouts? OK I think my son is the best player and I want funding $100,000.00 now so I the parent can decided where (TCF) to spend this money ( TCF I will cut a deal with you remember no tournaments and the scout) It will end up in a process with a whole list of procedures to follow, tax implications, quid pro ques, ear markings etc.... and get mucked up in favoritism in the end.

Little Johnny: hey Grandpa just give me the money ( $50 million from us open) so That I can do whatever I want with it, I know what I am doing, just like with all those what have you investments and worthless things I bought in the past, only this time it is different

[TennisCoachFLA]

Originally Posted by Pro_Tour_630

Just one question who decides who to fund directly? it will end up bureaucratic by nature, how do you know who is the best player to be funded directly, scouts? OK I think my son is the best player and I want funding $100,000.00 now so I the parent can decided where (TCF) to spend this money ( TCF I will cut a deal with you and the scout) It will end up in a process with a whole list of procedures to follow, tax implications, quid pro ques, ear markings etc.... and get mucked up in favoritism in the end.

Little Johnny: hey Grandpa just give me the money ( $50 million from us open) so That I can do whatever I want with it, I know what I am doing, just like with all those what have you investments and worthless things I bought in the past, only this time it is different

The scouts would get paid a flat salary with bonuses for kids that end up ranked top 16s, top 18s, or win certain tournaments.....a big payoff if they crack top 200, top 100, etc.

I don't get your last paragraph. Since the USTA has never funded individual players or private coaches, those individuals have never wasted a dime. So why would they be asking Grandpa for another chance when they haven't even done anything yet?

Look, these are just wild ideas thrown around on the internet. None of them will ever be even considered. The USTA will do things the same way they always have. High performance hasn't produced even one pro since it first started in Key Biscayne 1999. Whatever, good luck to all, good night.

[seminoleG]

Originally Posted by Pro_Tour_630

Just one question who decides who to fund directly? it will end up bureaucratic by nature, how do you know who is the best player to be funded directly, scouts? OK I think my son is the best player and I want funding $100,000.00 now so I the parent can decided where (TCF) to spend this money ( TCF I will cut a deal with you remember no tournaments and the scout) It will end up in a process with a whole list of procedures to follow, tax implications, quid pro ques, ear markings etc.... and get mucked up in favoritism in the end.

Little Johnny: hey Grandpa just give me the money ( $50 million from us open) so That I can do whatever I want with it, I know what I am doing, just like with all those what have you investments and worthless things I bought in the past, only this time it is different

AAU Basketball has figured this out. If you wonder how they continue to churn out the best Basketball players at a Junior Level use their model. Kids from all over the USA.

Also look up ODP (Olympic Development Program) Soccer. It has several Camps and once they identify Junior Players they then Follow them. They also require they play in several tournaments and they chart them.

So the process is:
1- Kids/Coaches/Scouts/Whoever identifies a kid.
2- Kid attends a series of Mandatory Camps (regionalized) located throughout US seperated by year group not skill level
3- Camps Drill and play
4- Kids that make the cut (list published each year) are then funded
5- Progress Tracked (they were good enough to make the cut so their coach/parents/.... method is working)

This process in soccer produces top teams year after year.
This process in AAU produces some of the best Basketball players year after year
This process requires boots on the ground.
This process gets the best players not the players with the best records

Yes their is administration but difference is RESULTS. A case worker that produces nothing is no longer employed.

[seminoleG]

Talent Identification is the Key

Pro - If you can't do that then you and TCF are correct.

Junior's with resources skew this. Right now the #3-5 G10s all play everyday and privately coached 6 hours min per week.

So is that a Talent?

I argue that a good coach can take any Junior with moderate coordination and produce wins.

The Talent Identification process has to be able to see this and apply an appropriate methodology to account for it.

[maggmaster]

Out of curiosity seminole, what would you say the talent differential is? How much of a difference does talent make between two players who practice an equivalent amount, are at the same fitness level and have the same physical gifts( height, muscle recruitment, etc)?

[TennisCoachFLA]

Originally Posted by seminoleG

AAU Basketball has figured this out. If you wonder how they continue to churn out the best Basketball players at a Junior Level use their model. Kids from all over the USA.

Also look up ODP (Olympic Development Program) Soccer. It has several Camps and once they identify Junior Players they then Follow them. They also require they play in several tournaments and they chart them.

So the process is:
1- Kids/Coaches/Scouts/Whoever identifies a kid.
2- Kid attends a series of Mandatory Camps (regionalized) located throughout US separated by year group not skill level
3- Camps Drill and play
4- Kids that make the cut (list published each year) are then funded
5- Progress Tracked (they were good enough to make the cut so their coach/parents/.... method is working)

This process in soccer produces top teams year after year.
This process in AAU produces some of the best Basketball players year after year
This process requires boots on the ground.
This process gets the best players not the players with the best records

Yes their is administration but difference is RESULTS. A case worker that produces nothing is no longer employed.

True. A system of scouts and talent identification would have to demand results in ITFs also. Beating a top 10 ranked ITF kid would result in points toward funding.

Pro Tour is correct, it would be a system where tricks and favoritism could play a role. Thats why a very clear performance incentive would have to be in place once the kid hit age 15.

Kids 5-10 just track and help lightly fund the promising ones with equipment and 3 hours a week coaching paid for, kids 11-14 start to separate out the most promising and fund more, kids at 15 start to demand major results at top tournaments, including ITFs.

Keep the scouts in line with incentives. If a certain percentage of their 5-10 year old picks bomb, they lose bonus money. You won't play favorites and pick bad kids if your bonus is on the line. You can have regional camps where the picks compete in fun but challenging drills at age 11-14.....any totally obvious favoritism kids who can't play are weeded out, scout put on notice.

It can work, the bugs could be worked out over time, it would take major stones by someone at USTA to implement.

[seminoleG]

Originally Posted by maggmaster

Out of curiosity seminole, what would you say the talent differential is? How much of a difference does talent make between two players who practice an equivalent amount, are at the same fitness level and have the same physical gifts( height, muscle recruitment, etc)?

Ahhh Maggmaster,

This past weekend I thought about just that. If I had to invest $$$$ into 6 Girls to make a soccer team who would I pick. One team had a girl that ran all over the field but could never seem to get in position for a goal. Another girl scored at will, another had great footwork but just slow.

Impossible for me to pick, UNLESS I saw the USA Junior Soccer team and what the most successfull players looked like at that age. So until I knew what that looked like how could I pick?

Wasn't the USTA looking at Capriati, Williams, Everett? If not why not, and if so are they one of a kinds or do you see them in others?

That is where the 50 pound head guys use past performance/present performance and whatever they can to GUESSTIMATE.

Until this system in in place for a good grouping (say start now 5+ years???)to get thru you just don't know.

Look at NFL. The Scouting Combine (relative is a Scout for NFL Team) I go with him to the Senior Bowl and other places to test players (he has PHD Psych) With all the money and resources they STILL GET IT WRONG!

Jamarcus Russell/Ryan Leaf/.......... Just to name a few.

So you take a sample of all kids using some past data. Big/Small/Fast/Slow/Smart/not so smart/
See how they do and adjust and you will get a better than 50% solution.

Once again if you look at the NFL, I use this because this is the pinnacle of talent identificaiton (money and resources) they Mostly get it right.

But they build a Physical and Mental model of what the perfect player is and see how far or close to that a prospect is. Even with all this they miss but have decades of data(many undrafted GREATS!)

Key pont as the model changes they adjust, and adjust and adjust.

So to answer your question
I would have them play Basketball, Volleyball, Field Hockey..... Let them play Tag, Wii, board games......
The Competitors will rise, the more athletic will show, the strategic thinkers will shine. Evaluate them away from the Tennis Court that will level the playing field.

[TennisCoachFLA]

seminole....I wouldn't care about Wii or soccer or anything else to indicate talent or competitiveness.

I would keep it simple. Some boys can score a basketball in traffic despite being a little slower. Some boys have handle. Some are great competitors. Basketball keeps it simple, they have them play. The best move on to play the best. The scouts and coaches look for things while they actually play basketball.

Same in tennis. Some kids don't let the technique fail under pressure. Some may have less technique but get to every ball and never give up. Some kids have natural racquet head speed and their balls have a natural heaviness to them. Some kids have the knack for finding the open court and constructing points.

I would have my scouts watch the kids play tennis in specially designed drills and practice matches. Design the drills to look for technique under pressure and heart, etc. Look for kids that have the 'it' for tennis.

The kids with less tennis experience look for other things on court. How quickly they pick stuff up. Natural athletic ability, never quit trying to reach a ball.

[maggmaster]

So you would create a tennis combine. No match play though?

[TennisCoachFLA]

Originally Posted by maggmaster

So you would create a tennis combine. No match play though?

Yes I would have match play. However trained coaches know what to look for in match play. Match play can bring out the worst in some kids just trying to win.

There is a line between a kid who is defensive and smart and one who pitty pats just to win, lots of variation on the 'pusher' theme. So I would indeed have match play, scouted by folks who know what to look for.

I want to find kids who will win when they are 18 not just when they are 12.

[Delano]

This was a really insightful interview. Thanks for posting it.

The problem with heavy handed regulation is that no plan, no matter how good, will turn crappy tennis coaches into good ones, but it will stymie good coaches (or drive them from the field altogether).

Chris Lewis's approach seems to be: identify talent, both in players and coaches, and support it. Give options like quick start, but don't mandate them - allow talented players and coaches the autonomy to make decisions, and let results speak.

On a different point - a lot of people here seem to dislike the quick start equipment. I don't care much for the foam balls either, but I've found that the lower net has made a huge difference in how much my kid (5yo) enjoys the game. We use ordinary tennis balls (though I prefer slightly old, flat ones), and I put a $40 mini net across the garage. I should point out that I'm not a tennis coach, and I never give technical instruction, we just knock the ball around. But he does have a better time with the lower, flatter ball, and because I don't have to worry about the high bounce after clearing a high tennis net, we can play at a better pace.

Most people don't seem to have any real problem with quickstart for very young kids, though, the main gripe seems to be 1) that it's mandated, and 2) they're pushing it for kids long past the 5yo age.