Another one bites the dust....

[Tennishacker]

Originally Posted by hound 109

I wouldn't have a huge problem this.....BUT some kids don't need or want (or live near) an "approved" academy.

They might use the dough to get 2 lessons a week from the 2012 equivilent to a Landsdorp, 3-4 days a week at a fitness center, a couple of drop in drills at the local college, entry fees into mens tournaments & travel expenses to National (or international) tournaments. (Since they might be playing every 3 out of 5 weekends).

Again, i say send the kids the $$. If their "pathway" doesn't result in higher results as they age, it'll only cost them.

But if they want to use every penny to offset a super academy expense....then that's OK too. If their "pathway" doesn't deliver, they start getting less $$ (or no money) .


Oh.....& maybe save a few bucks to invest more funds for Futures Tour players (here in the States), so those following the dream have a little bit easier time of it. Heck.....send them Hampton/Fairfield or Subway vouchers.

^^^ is the biggest problem.

We have good juniors, but once their out of the juniors, they disappear in the challengers and futures.

Just not enough tournaments, money for them to reach ATP & WTA tour.

[coaching32yrs]

Originally Posted by Tennishacker

Coach, you can't be serious.

Why did Taylor T. and Melanie O. blow up under them?

Like I said, maybe the USTA in their fitness presentation to HP parents made it sound a lot better than it really is. I can't say much about fitness because I don't know much. I do know that I played with Penn Marathon balls today and for the first 1/2 hour hit every other ball against the back fence. Boy are those light and fast. Not for guys like me who hit a gravity ball
(need Earth's gravity to bring the ball down in the court).

[tennis5]

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 19, 2012
USTA Releases Collarini

http://tenniskalamazoo.blogspot.com/

I received a brief statement from the USTA today regarding the announcement over the weekend
that Andrea Collarini would return to representing Argentina after nearly three years playing under the US flag.

"Andrea has asked that he be able to represent Argentina again.

We will release him.

We wish him all the best."

I followed up with a question regarding any repayment of grants, etc. that Collarini received while training with the USTA

and I was told he would not be required to provide any reimbursement,

and the paperwork releasing him to Argentina is being sent to the ITF.

End of Zoo article.
---------------------------


Collarini words about life under Boca's USTA PD -
........the U.S.T.A. “pays me everything,”
meaning that they are now providing financial backing for his touring of the junior and pro circuit.

So glad that he this young man who hid no fact where his loyalties lies gets to keep all that "pays me everything" $

[tennis5]

When I was reading more about Collarini, I came across this paragraph...

http://www.tennis.com/tournaments/20.../#.UINgzY7EXGk

It happened this year in the case of Sean Berman, who reached January’s Australian Open boys’ final. The USTA, which funded Berman for several years, declined to offer his immediate release when the South Africa-born Berman declared his intention to play for Australia. “We would not release him because we had given him direct financial support,” Curry (USTA spokesperson) said.

How did this ever end with Berman, who was not American born, did the USTA recoup their money?

[10ismom]

Originally Posted by tennis5

When I was reading more about Collarini, I came across this paragraph...

http://www.tennis.com/tournaments/20.../#.UINgzY7EXGk

It happened this year in the case of Sean Berman, who reached January’s Australian Open boys’ final. The USTA, which funded Berman for several years, declined to offer his immediate release when the South Africa-born Berman declared his intention to play for Australia. “We would not release him because we had given him direct financial support,” Curry (USTA spokesperson) said.

How did this ever end with Berman, who was not American born, did the USTA recoup their money?

Don't know details about Berman. For Collarlini, I read somewhere that he was born in the US but grew up and trained in Argentina. Followed his coach, got invited to train at USTAPD.
He most likely has a dual citizenship. If he was not selected for the USA Davis cup team, going back to play for Argentina will give him a chance to play that high level Davis cup ( instead of no chance here).
If he is also American, how would you penalize him? Same thing like penalizing USTAPD kids who will go play college instead?

[jigglypuff]

Originally Posted by tennis5

When I was reading more about Collarini, I came across this paragraph...

http://www.tennis.com/tournaments/20.../#.UINgzY7EXGk

It happened this year in the case of Sean Berman, who reached January’s Australian Open boys’ final. The USTA, which funded Berman for several years, declined to offer his immediate release when the South Africa-born Berman declared his intention to play for Australia. “We would not release him because we had given him direct financial support,” Curry (USTA spokesperson) said.

How did this ever end with Berman, who was not American born, did the USTA recoup their money?

I mean, who cares anymore. What's the difference if they throw money at American born or non-American born players. It's money down the toilet either way.

[Mitch Bridge]

"Oh.....& maybe save a few bucks to invest more funds for Futures Tour players (here in the States), so those following the dream have a little bit easier time of it. Heck.....send them Hampton/Fairfield or Subway vouchers."

USTA shouldn't give $ directly to parents for their kid's tennis training because you need a simpler system to monitor. Also, other kids to train with is critical.

Support through vouchers to players ranked 300 to 1000 would be a huge help at the challenger qualifying level where trips are made weekly to different regions. These are the players directly trying to succeed and still paying to play professionally. They have proven that they can earn points but need the funding to travel weekly around the globe chasing challenger level qualies.

[Tennishacker]

Originally Posted by Mitch Bridge

Support through vouchers to players ranked 300 to 1000 would be a huge help at the challenger qualifying level where trips are made weekly to different regions. These are the players directly trying to succeed and still paying to play professionally. They have proven that they can earn points but need the funding to travel weekly around the globe chasing challenger level qualies.

Agree, plus need to increase prize money and sponsor more tournaments.

[tennis5]

He was very decided during Wimbledon 2009 press conference while Canada issue was brought up, "USTA has taken me since the day I moved, and obviously been having some really good results, and they're behind me and backing me, helping me out with coaches and everything, and I can't ask for more."




Guess he had a change of heart.

[andfor]

Originally Posted by tennis5

He was very decided during Wimbledon 2009 press conference while Canada issue was brought up, "USTA has taken me since the day I moved, and obviously been having some really good results, and they're behind me and backing me, helping me out with coaches and everything, and I can't ask for more."




Guess he had a change of heart.

At that point in his tennis (2009) that made complete sense to him. At this point in his career (2012) the opportunity to play for Canada and play Davis Cup for Canada makes sense to him. He understands the consequences. On the surface to many it may appear to be turncoat. They way I see it is an opportunity to alter for the better in Jessie's opinion a career that has a very short shelf life. If the USTA can't hold on to these guys too bad. They know what they are getting into when they take on a player with dual-citizenship. Jessie is a good player and kid, good luck to him.

[db10s]

Originally Posted by kme5150

How much more has to happen before somebody at the USTA PD loses their job over ignorant decisions like this? There are no repercussions for their actions at all.

They won't get fired..... It's a good ole boy club.....

[2ndServe]

giving money based on rankings will result in failure. You've got kids chasing points, dodging people, NOT fixing their game which at their age has gaping holes. Why, because fixing your game takes months, years, learning the transition game, retooling serves, hitting bigger 2nd serves will result in double faults, taking more chances on 2nd serve returns/short balls/neutral balls all this will result in more errors. But that's the shots that are needed at the next level.

You can't just punt it over with good topspin and expect to win at the highest levels but I still see this at the futures level. The only US guys who are making a dent in the pro game now are probably Ryan Harrison, Sock, Johnson and it's because they have huge serves with exceptional spin. Please read this guy he knows what he's talking about

http://blog.tennisspeed.com/2008/04/...vey-of-us.html

http://blog.tennisspeed.com/2007/04/...vey-of-us.html

Basically the top juniors and college players are giving up 20+ mph and that gives the other player too much time.


I rarely ever see US guys on junior or futures tour with a big enough gun to consistently hold serve against pros. Then they get balls near the service line that they can't consistently punish against top level players (sure they can hit winners, force errors on me/you/lower level guys but not against the top 1% of 1%).

If player development is to continue you need to seek out guys with live arms, who can hit huge serves, penetrating balls(forget about % and consistency you can learn/develop that, you can't go from being a consistent safe guy to having a live arm).

[cmb]

Originally Posted by Tennishacker

^^^ is the biggest problem.

We have good juniors, but once their out of the juniors, they disappear in the challengers and futures.

Just not enough tournaments, money for them to reach ATP & WTA tour.

I dont know man, its easy to say that. But having been through the grind...I don't know if having money to play more tournaments would ever help someone whos ranked 800 get to be top 100.

You either have it or you don't. Leandro Migani went from being unranked to being ranked top 300 this year....if you have the game, you will make it. If you don't, no amount of money flushed down the toilet in futures will ever help



*been there*

[Mitch Bridge]

Originally Posted by cmb

I dont know man, its easy to say that. But having been through the grind...I don't know if having money to play more tournaments would ever help someone whos ranked 800 get to be top 100.

You either have it or you don't. Leandro Migani went from being unranked to being ranked top 300 this year....if you have the game, you will make it. If you don't, no amount of money flushed down the toilet in futures will ever help



*been there*

In today's pro world players are playing against countries that are supplying coaches, physios, funding and a team atmosphere. A player out there without proper funding has no shot. When it is time to leave Futures and play primarily Challenger qualies, players have to travel to a new city every week, and it is very expensive. So, far too many players opt to stay at the Futures level where there in no chance of being a successul pro. Funding controls choices and choices can make or break a player even with the right game.

[andfor]

Originally Posted by Mitch Bridge

In today's pro world players are playing against countries that are supplying coaches, physios, funding and a team atmosphere. A player out there without proper funding has no shot. When it is time to leave Futures and play primarily Challenger qualies, players have to travel to a new city every week, and it is very expensive. So, far too many players opt to stay at the Futures level where there in no chance of being a successul pro. Funding controls choices and choices can make or break a player even with the right game.

True. My understanding is at pro tournaments if you are from a particular country and your federation has coaches and physio's there and if you are from that country you can use them at any time. The USTA is the opposite if you are at a pro tournament and a US based player not part of PD you can not use the USTA resources.

Where I see the problem with the pro tour is that the early rounds at the ATP level and prize money at the Challeger and Futures levels needs to be increased. You are right that many player lower in the ranking choose not to pursue the highest ranking they might acheive due to the funding it takes to get their while not making enough prize money along the way to sustain ones self. The futures level has not had a prize money increase in years. Not sure how long it's been but I know that's the case.

In many team sports hundreds of nameless athletes make big money. In tennis if you're not in the top 150 in the world you probably lost money during the year. There's more money to go around and getting more at the early rounds and the lower circuit levels really should be addressed. I understand the Futures and Challeger levels should not be tours that fully self-sustain players, but a little more prize money to help these guys get by and give them a better shot should be addressed.

[superfittennis]

You don't have a clue how little is spent on fitness.

[TCF]

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

[andfor]

Originally Posted by TCF

In reality, it is even worse. The USTA study estimated it takes around $140000 in total expenses to stay on tour. So unless you are top 100, and more like top 80, you are not making a great living from playing tennis. and you have to stay in the top 80 for years to make it a career. Guys have had great years, reached the top 100, faded quickly....in the end they will still end up feeding balls to old ladies most likely.

Understood and point taken, you've asserted this many times before. I'm not saying 150 is a good place to be financially for a pro tennis player to stay and banking money their is unlikely in today's world. But 150 is a rough estimate for a place to earn enough prize money and maintain a minimal self-sufficiency. Many factors determine the def. of tennis pro self-suffciency. How much travel and coaching was paid for etc. to get that ranking? Some players do it on a shoestring budget or have family members coaching. At 150 how much money you made in a year depends on how you got your ranking. Was it mostly in the Futures and Challengers? If so your earnings may be on the low side vs. a player who got their playing mostly challegers and tour stops. Doubles winnings is a factor. Did the player play any slams (bigger $$$), was he injured (less $$$) and did he play a full schedule, etc.?

Jack Sock is the current number 150, made $163,009 in 2012. Look at the numbers 149 and 151 players and the earnings are much, much less, likely due to injury. Igor Kusnitsyn ranked 162 made $266,223 in 2012, btw Kusnitsyn travels on his own, no coach.

Not being argumentative, 150 is just a rough number.

[BMC9670]

Originally Posted by andfor

Where I see the problem with the pro tour is that the early rounds at the ATP level and prize money at the Challeger and Futures levels needs to be increased. You are right that many player lower in the ranking choose not to pursue the highest ranking they might acheive due to the funding it takes to get their while not making enough prize money along the way to sustain ones self. The futures level has not had a prize money increase in years. Not sure how long it's been but I know that's the case.

In many team sports hundreds of nameless athletes make big money. In tennis if you're not in the top 150 in the world you probably lost money during the year. There's more money to go around and getting more at the early rounds and the lower circuit levels really should be addressed. I understand the Futures and Challeger levels should not be tours that fully self-sustain players, but a little more prize money to help these guys get by and give them a better shot should be addressed.

Originally Posted by TCF

In reality, it is even worse. The USTA study estimated it takes around $140000 in total expenses to stay on tour. So unless you are top 100, and more like top 80, you are not making a great living from playing tennis. and you have to stay in the top 80 for years to make it a career. Guys have had great years, reached the top 100, faded quickly....in the end they will still end up feeding balls to old ladies most likely.

Prize money is not going to increase at this level - just not enough sponsor and spectator money coming in - and certainly no TV audience for advertisers/sponsors. Let's face it - tennis is very different than popular team sports. People don't want to watch it in big enough numbers (outside of majors) and players are not taken care of by teams. Not a lot of ways to change the system as it is, unless the USTA somehow comes up with something similar to other federations. I don't see it happening.

[andfor]

Originally Posted by BMC9670

Prize money is not going to increase at this level - just not enough sponsor and spectator money coming in - and certainly no TV audience for advertisers/sponsors. Let's face it - tennis is very different than popular team sports. People don't want to watch it in big enough numbers (outside of majors) and players are not taken care of by teams. Not a lot of ways to change the system as it is, unless the USTA somehow comes up with something similar to other federations. I don't see it happening.

That's the logical argument on the surface. That's the short term view. However if the ITF, ATP, USTA, etc. wants to grow the game long-term they will have to do something to address the underlying minor league tour system. I could go on and on why they need they need a healthy Future/Challenger system for the up and coming players to feed the Tour level events. The amount of dollars needed to fund those minor league tours is minor compared to the revenues generated by the ATP/WTA tours has to be fratiomal. If the basis for having Futures and Challenger tournaments with healthy prize money is profitable events funded by healthy fan attendance the pro game is doomed. Minor league systems typically are not money makers on most all levels. Comparing tennis to minor league baseball or other team sports is misguideded. Look at golf minor league tours may be a little closer to the model needed. Does the Nationwide and Hooters tours really make money from fan attendance? I don't know the actual answers but am willing to guess, no.

Point is there's funds and means available to fund the lower level pro system. Until its perceived as a problem by those in charge, I agree with you and don't see much change coming anytime soon.