WB Comments on Ltr to US Tennis Industry-PART I

[ClarkC]

Originally Posted by Alohajrtennis

I often see posts comparing the US system to a European country like, Spain, etc. What we sometimes lose sight of is that many USTA Sections have populations equivalent to whole European countries.

In that case, each large USTA section should produce as many top pros as a single European country of comparable size. They should be able to do it all at the sectional level, without a whole lot of involvement with the USTA and its national tourneys and PD. They can host plenty of USTA sectional tournaments under the current system, their players don't have to travel as far as players in less populous sections, and some of the most populous sections have really good weather for tennis.

But it seems as if these top sections, while they are producing a disproportionate number of the top American players, are not producing a great proportion of the top world players. E.g., when was the last time that Southern California produced a player with singles accomplishments that equaled Robin Soderling, who comes from a country of about 8 million people, with not very good weather for tennis?

There is a lot to be concerned about with the USTA, but as cmb indicated, there are plenty of other things to be concerned about than national draw sizes and the wasted money at USTA PD and so on. Maybe sectional leaders can break down the age segregation barriers on an experimental basis by getting some clubs to sponsor open-age tournaments, for example. I would not wait for the USTA to figure it all out at a national level.

[coaching32yrs]

Originally Posted by sureshs

Vain Bryan's list of US coaches and his hatred for foreign coaches seems to worded like a politician.

His hatred of foreign coaches funded by the USTA is targeted towards just one guy I think: Jose Higueras. He is not the first person to be upset by Jose's top appointment at the USTA and his belief in the Spanish style and clay courts, and the fact that Jose has not taken US citizenship.

Vain should keep in mind that of the coaches he listed, only Annacone was found worthy by Federer of coaching him. Guess who is the other? Higueras.

Vain needs to reminded that the following American pro players have been coached by Higueras: Chang, Martin, Sampras, Ginepri.

Vain needs to contact the above players and ask them why they did not hire the "incredible" American coaches instead, thus providing them employment for that period of time. The answer may not be appreciated by Vain, because he does not know that excellence in tennis does not go by his narrow minded views, as he never accomplished anything at an elite level that the tennis world cares about.

I also love how Vain mentions American coaches of all shapes and sizes to show that though he hates foreign coaches, he is all-inclusive about gender and race and should never be perceived as bigoted. Very clever politician at work here.

I am not a fan of WBryan's. He singled me out at a presentation he gave a couple years back because I wouldn't clap and singalong to his lame guitar playing. He continued to belittle me the entire presentation. But he does have a point here. I see most of the American boys matches at the USO. Never see Higueras there. Never see PMac there. Never seen PMac at a supernational. Did see Higueras once- he was there to watch one player. I learned a long time ago that the person on the work floor managing day in day out- that's the person really in charge. In USTA PD that person is Jay Berger. He's always there watching, talking to coaches, talking to parents. WB wants the coaches in the trenches in charge. PM and JH are not even at the biggest events, let alone in the trenches.

[Number1Coach]

Originally Posted by coaching32yrs

I am not a fan of WBryan's. He singled me out at a presentation he gave a couple years back because I wouldn't clap and singalong to his lame guitar playing. He continued to belittle me the entire presentation. But he does have a point here. I see most of the American boys matches at the USO. Never see Higueras there. Never see PMac there. Never seen PMac at a supernational. Did see Higueras once- he was there to watch one player. I learned a long time ago that the person on the work floor managing day in day out- that's the person really in charge. In USTA PD that person is Jay Berger. He's always there watching, talking to coaches, talking to parents. WB wants the coaches in the trenches in charge. PM and JH are not even at the biggest events, let alone in the trenches.

I happen to be a fan of Jay Berger's , I like his style no nonsense , he is a real pri*k but he is one i wouldnt mind working with DB ,someone who doesnt give a crapp about your feeling while working for the higher levels.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by coaching32yrs

I am not a fan of WBryan's. He singled me out at a presentation he gave a couple years back because I wouldn't clap and singalong to his lame guitar playing. He continued to belittle me the entire presentation. But he does have a point here. I see most of the American boys matches at the USO. Never see Higueras there. Never see PMac there. Never seen PMac at a supernational. Did see Higueras once- he was there to watch one player. I learned a long time ago that the person on the work floor managing day in day out- that's the person really in charge. In USTA PD that person is Jay Berger. He's always there watching, talking to coaches, talking to parents. WB wants the coaches in the trenches in charge. PM and JH are not even at the biggest events, let alone in the trenches.

PMac will be busy with his commentating duties during the USO. Re: his not being around, CEOs are not usually around when the people are working in the trenches. They should not be - their job is to network with their peers and bring in more business.

I don't support PMac, don't get me wrong. When I pointed out how Taylor Townsend was treated, lots of people were upset on this forum. But not supporting PMac does not mean you have to support Wayne Bryan.

I am sure Bryan has valid points. He can make those points without the rest of the politics and be less sarcastic. One gets the feeling that if he is in charge, he will behave just like the others do.

[Alohajrtennis]

Originally Posted by ClarkC

In that case, each large USTA section should produce as many top pros as a single European country of comparable size. They should be able to do it all at the sectional level, without a whole lot of involvement with the USTA and its national tourneys and PD. They can host plenty of USTA sectional tournaments under the current system, their players don't have to travel as far as players in less populous sections, and some of the most populous sections have really good weather for tennis.

But it seems as if these top sections, while they are producing a disproportionate number of the top American players, are not producing a great proportion of the top world players. E.g., when was the last time that Southern California produced a player with singles accomplishments that equaled Robin Soderling, who comes from a country of about 8 million people, with not very good weather for tennis?

They should be. But what you seem to be assuming above is that European players play primarily within there own countries, which at the higher levels is not the case. See the post above abut the European tournament system. Robin Soderling played all over Europe, not just in Sweden. So, while sections should be producing tour players proportional to European countries, they still need the national tournament system. No argument from me on PD being a waste of Money.

Originally Posted by ClarkC

There is a lot to be concerned about with the USTA, but as cmb indicated, there are plenty of other things to be concerned about than national draw sizes and the wasted money at USTA PD and so on. Maybe sectional leaders can break down the age segregation barriers on an experimental basis by getting some clubs to sponsor open-age tournaments, for example. I would not wait for the USTA to figure it all out at a national level.

I think we can do both, mulit-task. Fight for a better national tournament system, as well as for innovation and more control at the sectional level.

That's my main problem with PD. Seems to be recreating 80's eastern-bloc methods, top down centralized approach. I think a more typical American approach would work better - let the sections innovate, compete, be labs for different approaches.

[cmb]

alot of the french guys ranked 200 to 500 only played in france. Tristan lamasine...made Semis of RG last year never played ITF juniors. only French money tournaments......and that is a Fact! I saw him there! lol he entered RG with a Wildcard

[cmb]

Originally Posted by andfor

Why would you not just coach them yourself when you move back to the U.S.?

Way too expensive to get good competition. Entry fees are 75 bucks at a national, in france it cost 75 bucks total to play a tournament, including gas money.
and in the states if you are actually a good player it costs even more. In France the young players get money from clubs and sections when they reach a certain level.

after seeing how it is there, i cant even tell kids why they should be playing tennis here....honest, but its the truth.

[Alohajrtennis]

Originally Posted by cmb

alot of the french guys ranked 200 to 500 only played in france. Tristan lamasine...made Semis of RG last year never played ITF juniors. only French money tournaments......and that is a Fact! I saw him there! lol he entered RG with a Wildcard

That's becuase it's France...population 65 million...that's like the Florida and Southern section combined...They don't need to travel to get better competition but they can if they want...but players from smaller countries like Sweden, Serbia, Switzerland and Czeck Republic can and do travel more.

I think the parallels here are obvious.

[sureshs]

Why keep comparing Western Europe and US? One of the reasons for the strong tennis pipeline in Europe is the way to finish secondary school at age 16 and the guarantee of social services (unemployment assistance, job placement assistance, medical benefits) for players who don't make it as a pro. There was a poster from Germany in another section of this forum who said he was going for becoming a pro but did not worry about failure because his government would always provide for him regardless. You cannot separate such issues from tennis. I am not saying it is good or bad, but in the US a failed tennis pro can be in the poor house very fast.

[Alohajrtennis]

Originally Posted by sureshs

Why keep comparing Western Europe and US? One of the reasons for the strong tennis pipeline in Europe is the way to finish secondary school at age 16 and the guarantee of social services (unemployment assistance, job placement assistance, medical benefits) for players who don't make it as a pro. There was a poster from Germany in another section of this forum who said he was going for becoming a pro but did not worry about failure because his government would always provide for him regardless. You cannot separate such issues from tennis. I am not saying it is good or bad, but in the US a failed tennis pro can be in the poor house very fast.

So if they fail as a tennis player they always have life on the dole to look forward to.....great..but why settle for that, they can just get a scholarship to a US college...

[Alohajrtennis]

Originally Posted by sureshs

Why keep comparing Western Europe and US? One of the reasons for the strong tennis pipeline in Europe is the way to finish secondary school at age 16 and the guarantee of social services (unemployment assistance, job placement assistance, medical benefits) for players who don't make it as a pro. There was a poster from Germany in another section of this forum who said he was going for becoming a pro but did not worry about failure because his government would always provide for him regardless. You cannot separate such issues from tennis. I am not saying it is good or bad, but in the US a failed tennis pro can be in the poor house very fast.

Actually, we were comparing to all of Europe, including eastern Europe. And the reason we keep comparing there system(s) to ours is becuase theirs seems to be working much better at the moment. That seems like a good reason to me. As a more serious response to your statement above regarding the social welfare and education system in these countries, it varies quite a bit by country. Not all students in all countries graduate at 16, most contraries have dual tracks where it may take to 18 or 19 to graduate. Social welfare systems vary from country to country as well.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Alohajrtennis

So if they fail as a tennis player they always have life on the dole to look forward to.....great..but why settle for that, they can just get a scholarship to a US college...

A few do that (it might seem like a lot, but there are many countries). But after they get a college degree in a liberal arts major and go back, what next? Again they know they can fall back on government support.

I knew a guy who trained as a junior in France. 6'4" and could wipe most club players off the court. But he was a nobody in French tennis and moved to the US for employment.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Alohajrtennis

Actually, we were comparing to all of Europe, including eastern Europe. And the reason we keep comparing there system(s) to ours is becuase theirs seems to be working much better at the moment. That seems like a good reason to me. As a more serious response to your statement above regarding the social welfare and education system in these countries, it varies quite a bit by country. Not all students in all countries graduate at 16, most contraries have dual tracks where it may take to 18 or 19 to graduate. Social welfare systems vary from country to country as well.

And many of the successful pros live and train outside their countries, I also know that. So comparison is very difficult.

[TCF]

================================================== ==

[HIGH-TECH TENNIS]

"The reason American kids fail is the same reason anyone fails, they are not good enough." HARSH BUT TRUE...which is one of the many reasons why eliminating opportunity to compete with and learn from players around this country is such an awful idea!!!

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by TCF

I think you are reaching on this one. The reasons are various including all the options American kids have for sports, tennis is far down the list. The structure of Euro clubs, etc. Better and consistent coaching. Less travel to get top competition.

Most American tennis kids come from families with assets. They can go to college if they fail as pros. Name me all these American families whose kids were good enough to make it as pros but who are now poor because of tennis? Or kids who were so scary talented but did not go pro because they were scared if they failed their family would be "poor". In my 20 plus years I can not think of any.

Europe has boatloads of unemployed and poor young people. France has a rate of over 10% and much higher for the younger people. Being poor in Europe is not any better than being poor here. They may have socialized medicine, we send the poor to the emergency rooms. We do have socialized medicine for the poor....its just that we spend 10 times more by using emergency rooms for it.

The reason American kids fail is the same reason anyone fails, they are not good enough.

All correct, but a larger number of poor is often comforting, in a perverse way. A poor guy in the US is in the small minority and people call him a bum. That can be more demoralizing than being poor

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by HIGH-TECH TENNIS

"The reason American kids fail is the same reason anyone fails, they are not good enough." HARSH BUT TRUE...which is one of the many reasons why eliminating opportunity to compete with and learn from players around this country is such an awful idea!!!

If it is harsh and true for everybody, then why does it matter in a comparative discussion?

I think tennis culture is more deeply embedded in Europe and South America, that is the real reason. And it is strange because the US has so many more opportunities for club players.

[coaching32yrs]

The reason Europe is developing more pros is simply because our best young athletes are not playing tennis. In Europe tennis is the 2nd or 3rd most popular sport. In the US it is around #10. Basketball and football are getting the superior athletes.

[Alohajrtennis]

Originally Posted by TCF

The reason American kids fail is the same reason anyone fails, they are not good enough.

This is true, but mostly because it is a truism. The question is why aren't our kids good enough.

Clearly, its Pmac's fault.

That was a joke.

It's not just one thing. Its not just PD, or the national tournament schedule, or the ROG mandate, or an anemic futures circuit, or getting better athletes interested in Tennis. The US tennis getting to where it where it's at now is the result a of a systematic failure at all these levels, coinciding with a massive increase in interest and focus on tennis abroad.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by coaching32yrs

The reason Europe is developing more pros is simply because our best young athletes are not playing tennis. In Europe tennis is the 2nd or 3rd most popular sport. In the US it is around #10. Basketball and football are getting the superior athletes.

Not sure about that. The athletes in basketball and football are not just superior, they are much bigger. I don't see the corresponding big boys in Europe playing pro tennis.

Isner and Querrey are among the tallest tennis players, along with Raonic and Karlovic.

I don't know if I am making myself clear - the basketball/football sized athletes are not playing tennis in any country.