High School Tennis Should Mirror College

[Mitch Bridge]

Originally Posted by WARPWOODIE

That is a great idea!! ....but how would those points be applied?...say for a freshmen still playing the 14s versus a senior who is in the 18s. In HS tennis, the age of players doesn't factor in the play.

Better yet, allow the one on one match ups of the tournament playing kids to reflect their match results in their TRN profiles, provided they already have TRN ratings. By doing so, it gives the tournament playing kids, who never would have considered playing HS tennis, a second look. Their is plenty of high level competition in HS league and State Championships. I even heard, but can't confirm, that colleges coaches/recruiters show up to watch players that have interest in their programs.

TRN could work well here!

[andfor]

Originally Posted by WARPWOODIE

That is a great idea!! ....but how would those points be applied?...say for a freshmen still playing the 14s versus a senior who is in the 18s. In HS tennis, the age of players doesn't factor in the play.

Better yet, allow the one on one match ups of the tournament playing kids to reflect their match results in their TRN profiles, provided they already have TRN ratings. By doing so, it gives the tournament playing kids, who never would have considered playing HS tennis, a second look. Their is plenty of high level competition in HS league and State Championships. I even heard, but can't confirm, that colleges coaches/recruiters show up to watch players that have interest in their programs.

H.S. matches would all count as 18u matches. If H.S. tournaments were counted by the USTA, then by defualt the would count towards TRN, under TRN's requirements, etc. Yea, it would be great for H.S. tennis to get ranking points. They would have to be local or section type points at the most, better than nothing. Here's the downside, it would likely require all H.S. tennis players to have a USTA membership. Some players or schools could not afford to pay each players dues. So something would have to give. The biggest problem would be national adoption of the idea. If the USTA was smart they would pursue it more. Possibly allow for free memberships for H.S. players for example between March and June for those who only play H.S. tennis. And discounts for those who actually played H.S. during the school year. It's a cool concept but if you can get the USTA, then all the state H.S. athletic associations to adopt it, the next step would be to relay on the coaches to get all their players signed up.

Maybe this could be done for TRN purposes only. Sort of like some of the ITF's played here in the states.

I see more roadblocks than pathways. Maybe I'm a little short sighted on the whole concept.

[WARPWOODIE]

The bottom line for the USTA is increasing membership, which translates into $$$. For that reason, I don't see why the USTA wouldn't explore the ideas being discussed here (if they haven't already) relating to High School tennis and make them happen. Their mission is to grow the game and we see that with the TAUT initiative. A membership fee (be it prorated or what) for a high school player who don't or doesn't regularly play tournaments is a small compromise to me. The USTA already gives grants/subsidies to kids less fortunate, so why not allocate funding as well to a limited number of high schoolers who make it to the season's end league and state championship. Once the logistics are ironed out, I think it will work.

[sundaypunch]

Originally Posted by Mitch Bridge

I am not suggesting HS tennis needs to be better to attract more potential professsional players. It needs to be better to make our sport bigger and better. Why wouldn't all tennis players want our game more respected, and the quality of play higher. Doesn't make sense leaving it in mediocrity. It is the fifth biggest sport in the US and will only climb with changes like this one that I am presenting.

The problem with this is that high school is much too late to do this.

In the area I live in, junior tennis has greatly declined in the past couple of decades. Kids have been drawn away to more accessible sports. Tennis is not convenient while soccer, football and baseball are.

The only way to compete for many is to play USTA. It works for some but is expensive. The other issue is that the level of play is way too high for many novice players. They want to play in leagues or tournaments but it is USTA or nothing.

If you want to get people hooked on the sport, it needs to happen well before high school. You can play in a soccer or baseball league in most any town in the country during the summer or fall. This isn't the case for tennis.

Having tennis leagues in small towns with teams sponsored by the local hardware store is what would work. The tennis crazy parents are already involved and will do whatever it takes for junior to play. You have to attract the parents and kids that don't really care about tennis. It it's fun, many of these kids will get hooked and the sport will grow from there. Kids want to be part of a team. I know that USTA has junior team tennis. Again, this is not very convenient and is way more advanced than what many kids need.

I don't think that changing high school tennis to be less inclusive (varsity) is going to attract more to the sport.

[gplracer]

I used to coach a high school team in Georgia back in the 1990's. The problem is that no one really cares about high school tennis results. The colleges look at rankings and other things. In Georgia the whole system is team based. There is no state singles competition. If you are the #1 player in the boys 18s but your team sucks, you will never get out of your region.

[gplracer]

Originally Posted by sundaypunch

The problem with this is that high school is much too late to do this.

In the area I live in, junior tennis has greatly declined in the past couple of decades. Kids have been drawn away to more accessible sports. Tennis is not convenient while soccer, football and baseball are.

The only way to compete for many is to play USTA. It works for some but is expensive. The other issue is that the level of play is way too high for many novice players. They want to play in leagues or tournaments but it is USTA or nothing.

If you want to get people hooked on the sport, it needs to happen well before high school. You can play in a soccer or baseball league in most any town in the country during the summer or fall. This isn't the case for tennis.

Having tennis leagues in small towns with teams sponsored by the local hardware store is what would work. The tennis crazy parents are already involved and will do whatever it takes for junior to play. You have to attract the parents and kids that don't really care about tennis. It it's fun, many of these kids will get hooked and the sport will grow from there. Kids want to be part of a team. I know that USTA has junior team tennis. Again, this is not very convenient and is way more advanced than what many kids need.

I don't think that changing high school tennis to be less inclusive (varsity) is going to attract more to the sport.

Tennis is way too expensive for the masses. Many people cannot afford the lessons and the tournaments. Others who can afford it do not want to pay it. They steer their kids into other cheaper sports.

[MarTennis]

Originally Posted by Mitch Bridge

Let's keep mind high school football and high school basketball are played at a very high level. Tennis can be pushed to a much higher level also. In fact, it needs to be.

I was one of those guys who just "joined" the tennis team. I fell in love with the sport but I didn't have the skills to compete, nor did the majority of guys on the team. There were only 2 decent players. One was a ESL student who taught himself, by hitting the ball as hard as he could until it started to fall in. I could see the love in his eyes.

[sundaypunch]

Originally Posted by gplracer

Tennis is way too expensive for the masses. Many people cannot afford the lessons and the tournaments. Others who can afford it do not want to pay it. They steer their kids into other cheaper sports.

I totally agree. This is why USTA junior tournaments as the default method of getting kids into the sport can't compete with baseball and soccer. You need the tennis equivalent of the local Little League to get masses of kids involved.

[julian]

Originally Posted by NLBwell

In high school, you are supposed to be teaching the game. As many players as possible should be playing. (Of course court availability,etc. limits that)

Some teams in MA cut and some do NOT
(I have coached both scenarios)

[gplracer]

Originally Posted by sundaypunch

I totally agree. This is why USTA junior tournaments as the default method of getting kids into the sport can't compete with baseball and soccer. You need the tennis equivalent of the local Little League to get masses of kids involved.

Tennis needs something that is for sure. The problem is that tennis is not the same as other sports in the way it is set up. In little league everyone signs up and they try to use something like a draft to make the teams even. Tennis is an indivual sport so that does not work. You have real lop sided matches because some kids can afford a lot more instruction than others. Even JTT which is for teams is different. Most of the time the teams come from clubs. In our area our club wins almost all the matches. My kids do not like JTT because the competition is not good. Once again there are lots of lop sided matches.

[Mitch Bridge]

High School tennis at the varsity level should not be about introducing the game of tennis to players. It should be prestigious, and the lack of prestige hurts the game. Kids that are 7 and 8 should look at their HS teams and want to be a part of that team someday. This is what we are missing motivationally for our young potential tennis players. True team tennis! Wearing the jacket and representing your school with pride.

[MarTennis]

Originally Posted by Mitch Bridge

High School tennis at the varsity level should not be about introducing the game of tennis to players. It should be prestigious, and the lack of prestige hurts the game. Kids that are 7 and 8 should look at their HS teams and want to be a part of that team someday. This is what we are missing motivationally for our young potential tennis players. True team tennis! Wearing the jacket and representing your school with pride.

...because many kids are beginnners in high school tennis. I love these kids, but I know what you mean.

[crazygamer2091]

As mentioned before, HS tennis is not a stepping stone into the pros as with college. HS is supposed to provide student athletes with a chance to participate in the game, grow and learn. Many can not even play at a 4.0 level so how can you expect them to play college format tennis?

I understand what you're saying about the top kids on varsity but the point is, there really isn't that big of a talent pool. I live in NJ where basically only 1st and 2nd singles is competitive on varsity due to the number of nationally ranked players playing those positions. Here's is an example, I train at Garden State Tennis Academy where they've trained numerous sectional, national and state champions including a Junior USO Quarter-finalist. They all played first or second singles at their highschool.

Jonathan Carcione: 2011 and 2012 State Champion. 1st singles at Ramapo. #4 Boys 18s ETA. Plays for Princeton University as of Fall 2012.
Maverick Lin: Made it to the Round of 32 at the Kalamazoo Super Nationals in 2012. 1st singles at Highland Park as a freshman. #6 Boys 16s ETA
Michael Chen: #19 Boys 16s ETA. 2nd singles at Holmdel.
Sarthak Mohanty: #38 Boys 16s ETA. 1st singles at JP Stevens.
Robin Anderson: 2010 Junior US Open Quarter-finalist. 1st singles at Matawan. Plays for UCLA as of Fall 2011.
Thomas Caputo #25 Boys 18s ranking according to TennisRecruiting. 1st singles at Livingston. 2012 State Singles Runner-Up. Plays for Michigan as of Fall 2012.

What I'm trying to say is that there is really no point in converting highschool tennis to college format if only the first two singles positions are competitive. With that being said, there is nothing against other varsity players. My school team plays in one of the toughest divisions in NJ and is consistently ranked in the top 3 due to the depth of our team. Just because 2nd and 3rd singles and 1st and 2nd doubles aren't held by nationally ranked players does not mean the team isn't good. You cannot expect a highschool athlete to play at a D1 level because honestly, its two different ball games.

Also, funding is a big issue. Some schools like Livingston and Holmdel have well funded programs that allows them to get new courts every two years. This attracts some of the best players to join their program. An example of this is Maverick Lin. He was supposed to go to JP Stevens but because Highland Park had more "silverware" he moved and went to the Highland Park program. Therefore, you cannot blame schools for lacking depth in their programs if competitors draw them away.

To conclude, there is nothing wrong with the highschool system as it is now. Just because the whole varsity isn't nationally ranked does not mean the players don't have individual skills they can bring to the table. There is no point in converting to a college format. Also take into consideration that many good players choose not to play HS tennis because the level of competitiveness is nothing close to that of USTA National tournaments and so on.

[sundaypunch]

Originally Posted by crazygamer2091

As mentioned before, HS tennis is not a stepping stone into the pros as with college. HS is supposed to provide student athletes with a chance to participate in the game, grow and learn. Many can not even play at a 4.0 level so how can you expect them to play college format tennis?

I understand what you're saying about the top kids on varsity but the point is, there really isn't that big of a talent pool. I live in NJ where basically only 1st and 2nd singles is competitive on varsity due to the number of nationally ranked players playing those positions. Here's is an example, I train at Garden State Tennis Academy where they've trained numerous sectional, national and state champions including a Junior USO Quarter-finalist. They all played first or second singles at their highschool.

Jonathan Carcione: 2011 and 2012 State Champion. 1st singles at Ramapo. #4 Boys 18s ETA. Plays for Princeton University as of Fall 2012.
Maverick Lin: Made it to the Round of 32 at the Kalamazoo Super Nationals in 2012. 1st singles at Highland Park as a freshman. #6 Boys 16s ETA
Michael Chen: #19 Boys 16s ETA. 2nd singles at Holmdel.
Sarthak Mohanty: #38 Boys 16s ETA. 1st singles at JP Stevens.
Robin Anderson: 2010 Junior US Open Quarter-finalist. 1st singles at Matawan. Plays for UCLA as of Fall 2011.
Thomas Caputo #25 Boys 18s ranking according to TennisRecruiting. 1st singles at Livingston. 2012 State Singles Runner-Up. Plays for Michigan as of Fall 2012.

What I'm trying to say is that there is really no point in converting highschool tennis to college format if only the first two singles positions are competitive. With that being said, there is nothing against other varsity players. My school team plays in one of the toughest divisions in NJ and is consistently ranked in the top 3 due to the depth of our team. Just because 2nd and 3rd singles and 1st and 2nd doubles aren't held by nationally ranked players does not mean the team isn't good. You cannot expect a highschool athlete to play at a D1 level because honestly, its two different ball games.

Also, funding is a big issue. Some schools like Livingston and Holmdel have well funded programs that allows them to get new courts every two years. This attracts some of the best players to join their program. An example of this is Maverick Lin. He was supposed to go to JP Stevens but because Highland Park had more "silverware" he moved and went to the Highland Park program. Therefore, you cannot blame schools for lacking depth in their programs if competitors draw them away.

To conclude, there is nothing wrong with the highschool system as it is now. Just because the whole varsity isn't nationally ranked does not mean the players don't have individual skills they can bring to the table. There is no point in converting to a college format. Also take into consideration that many good players choose not to play HS tennis because the level of competitiveness is nothing close to that of USTA National tournaments and so on.

Excellent post.

As for the juniors mentioned above, HS tennis is just an asterisk on their resume. Their USTA record and tennisrecruiting.net ranking is what has them heading off to D1 schools. Changing the format of HS tennis would do nothing to help them or others.

I'm in favor of attracting more juniors to tennis but I don't think that high school is the place to do it.

[Mitch Bridge]

If you have a star player player in a medium to lower level area, he may win his matches easily. I am sure that Jack Sock didn't have too many close matches but he still wanted to play. The problem is that our sport could be so much more attractive to a broader spectrum of athletes if it had more credibility, and you gain credibility by upping the quality. When players play doubles and singles in all of their matches, they will improve much more quickly, the matches will more exciting with this format, and high school tennis will be much more affordable than USTA. We need to open up our minds to the positive changes this could bring about. College tennis is a blast because of the team atmosphere, and high school tennis, if improved a great deal, could also be an awesome team tennis experience.

[sundaypunch]

Your premise is to make HS tennis more attractive by limiting a varsity team to six players. This just isn't going to work. It will make the sport less attractive as many kids will realize that they have no chance whatsoever to make the varsity team. No junior or senior is going to play on the JV team. They will quit the sport and do something else.

Tennis is already viewed by many as a sport for snobby rich people. Limiting the varsity team to a few exclusive players isn't going to get kids excited about the sport. If you have a school with 2000 kids, to even have a chance of getting a spot on the team you would have to already have had years of lessons and USTA play. I am in favor of talking about how to get more kids excited about the sport and how to make it more accessible to non-wealthy families. Making high school varsity tennis ultra exclusive will have the opposite effect.

The mission of HS sports is to provide opportunities for kids to experience teamwork, competition, the value of work/practice, etc. It is not in place to develop elite players or increase interest in a given sport.

[10ismom]

Originally Posted by Mitch Bridge

If you have a star player player in a medium to lower level area, he may win his matches easily. I am sure that Jack Sock didn't have too many close matches but he still wanted to play. The problem is that our sport could be so much more attractive to a broader spectrum of athletes if it had more credibility, and you gain credibility by upping the quality. When players play doubles and singles in all of their matches, they will improve much more quickly, the matches will more exciting with this format, and high school tennis will be much more affordable than USTA. We need to open up our minds to the positive changes this could bring about. College tennis is a blast because of the team atmosphere, and high school tennis, if improved a great deal, could also be an awesome team tennis experience.

It's a valid point to attract more athletes to tennis but I think this should be promoted earlier like in middle school tennis at age 11-13.
Tennis requires a lot of skills and take years to develop a decent player. If you attract an athletic kid as a new player at 14-15 in 9th-10th grade, it will be too late to develop 5 star, blue-chip or even a very good college player.

If lots of athletes already are crazy about tennis from middle school, keep taking lessons, practicing, competing then by high school their skills will be higher. High school tennis team will be more competitive to get into then you can build up the reputation there.

Middle school is a time to gear kids to tennis. I have seen many kids choose/change to join football, baseball or basketball team instead of tennis by middle school. Introducing mini-tennis in elementary school is even better to get more athletes to this sport.

[Mitch Bridge]

Originally Posted by sundaypunch

Your premise is to make HS tennis more attractive by limiting a varsity team to six players. This just isn't going to work. It will make the sport less attractive as many kids will realize that they have no chance whatsoever to make the varsity team. No junior or senior is going to play on the JV team. They will quit the sport and do something else.

Tennis is already viewed by many as a sport for snobby rich people. Limiting the varsity team to a few exclusive players isn't going to get kids excited about the sport. If you have a school with 2000 kids, to even have a chance of getting a spot on the team you would have to already have had years of lessons and USTA play. I am in favor of talking about how to get more kids excited about the sport and how to make it more accessible to non-wealthy families. Making high school varsity tennis ultra exclusive will have the opposite effect.

The mission of HS sports is to provide opportunities for kids to experience teamwork, competition, the value of work/practice, etc. It is not in place to develop elite players or increase interest in a given sport.

Is this the mission in football, basketball, baseball, wrestling, volleyball, etc. Not a chance! Of course it creates the bulk of the interest for all of these other sports. High school is the pinnacle of their sports careers and it should be in tennis also.

[Mitch Bridge]

Originally Posted by 10ismom

It's a valid point to attract more athletes to tennis but I think this should be promoted earlier like in middle school tennis at age 11-13.
Tennis requires a lot of skills and take years to develop a decent player. If you attract an athletic kid as a new player at 14-15 in 9th-10th grade, it will be too late to develop 5 star, blue-chip or even a very good college player.

If lots of athletes already are crazy about tennis from middle school, keep taking lessons, practicing, competing then by high school their skills will be higher. High school tennis team will be more competitive to get into then you can build up the reputation there.

Middle school is a time to gear kids to tennis. I have seen many kids choose/change to join football, baseball or basketball team instead of tennis by middle school. Introducing mini-tennis in elementary school is even better to get more athletes to this sport.

It needs to start even younger to make sure young kids pick tennis as one of their main sports. Making high school tennis better will keep it from being a fringe sport and put it in a higher place in the heirarchy.

[MarTennis]

How about ranking points for playing a minimum number of singles, doubles or combination thereof. This would provide an incentive for the juniors already competing in USTA events.