just FYI - interesting match for DB

[coaching32yrs]

Originally Posted by tenniscp

Btw, coaching 32, I know you like Donaldson, as do I, but from US junior players that you have seen, who do you like and for what reason. Just picking your brain.

I think we are in a brief lull here CP. None of the 15-17 year old US boys jump off the page. Of course the finalists from 2 years ago - Kudla and Sock are a given. They will make it. Schneider is a beautiful player. Size a problem. Kozlov is a tennis Mozart. Normally his size and style of play don't translate to the pro game but I wouldn't bet against him. He's still so young and far away. He is the one I would watch.

[tenniscp]

Originally Posted by coaching32yrs

I think we are in a brief lull here CP. None of the 15-17 year old US boys jump off the page. Of course the finalists from 2 years ago - Kudla and Sock are a given. They will make it. Schneider is a beautiful player. Size a problem. Kozlov is a tennis Mozart. Normally his size and style of play don't translate to the pro game but I wouldn't bet against him. He's still so young and far away. He is the one I would watch.

In total agreement on Kozlov. The kid is special, creative, daring, solid on both sides, plays loose, for now anyway. It just seems like he is not afraid to try shots, angles, chips and etc no matter what the score is and that brings poetry to his game. Justified concern about the size and strength, however, for his game, I think it will actually be counterproductive to beef up and get much stronger since it will probably take away from elasticity and fluidity of his game.

Schnieder, a great junior competitor but I am afraid that s where the epithets end. His biggest weapon, competitiveness and mental fortitude as well as steady baseline game will fair well on the lower levels of futures, but i do not see him getting to the next level.

So, I take it that the Rubins, McDonalds, Papas, Donaldsons and others do not impress you.

[coaching32yrs]

Originally Posted by tenniscp

In total agreement on Kozlov. The kid is special, creative, daring, solid on both sides, plays loose, for now anyway. It just seems like he is not afraid to try shots, angles, chips and etc no matter what the score is and that brings poetry to his game. Justified concern about the size and strength, however, for his game, I think it will actually be counterproductive to beef up and get much stronger since it will probably take away from elasticity and fluidity of his game.

Schnieder, a great junior competitor but I am afraid that s where the epithets end. His biggest weapon, competitiveness and mental fortitude as well as steady baseline game will fair well on the lower levels of futures, but i do not see him getting to the next level.

So, I take it that the Rubins, McDonalds, Papas, Donaldsons and others do not impress you.

Have not seen Papa. I have seen quite a bit of Kreuger as well. They all impress me. Whether they have the combination of weapons, consistency and athleticism to make it as a pro is another question. It may be there in some or all of them. I just have not seen it yet. I think the Steve Johnson route, college, is the right path for them.

[Number1Coach]

Originally Posted by tenniscp

In total agreement on Kozlov. The kid is special, creative, daring, solid on both sides, plays loose, for now anyway. It just seems like he is not afraid to try shots, angles, chips and etc no matter what the score is and that brings poetry to his game. Justified concern about the size and strength, however, for his game, I think it will actually be counterproductive to beef up and get much stronger since it will probably take away from elasticity and fluidity of his game.

Schnieder, a great junior competitor but I am afraid that s where the epithets end. His biggest weapon, competitiveness and mental fortitude as well as steady baseline game will fair well on the lower levels of futures, but i do not see him getting to the next level.

So, I take it that the Rubins, McDonalds, Papas, Donaldsons and others do not impress you.

years back I watched Raonic get his butt handed to him by Klahn NCAA champ over at the Carson ITF ,wondered what Raonic was playing tennis for ?

Do you thing Raonic should have gone to college and hang out with Klahn?

[mikej]

Originally Posted by Number1Coach

years back I watched Raonic get his butt handed to him by Klahn NCAA champ over at the Carson ITF ,wondered what Raonic was playing tennis for ?

Do you thing Raonic should have gone to college and hang out with Klahn?

He was #35 itf by the time he decided to go pro - so he fit the mold of the reasonable group that successful pros come from - as much as you repeatedly pretend he sucked as a junior

Your son is nowhere near that level of junior tennis yet, keep dreaming

[Freak4tennis]

Originally Posted by mikej

He was #35 itf by the time he decided to go pro - so he fit the mold of the reasonable group that successful pros come from - as much as you repeatedly pretend he sucked as a junior

Your son is nowhere near that level of junior tennis yet, keep dreaming

steve g tennis has two sections, young guns, and young guns year end rankings. It pretty much spells everything out and while you are pretty much spot on. There is the random 1 in a million outlier. The one thing that is clear though, as you said Jr success is NOT a determining factor of pro success BUT most of the successful pro's had successful junior careers.

It's like the trying to be an actor theory. Can't get auditions without a SAG card, can't get a SAG card without being in a show.

Can't prove your worth in the pro's, because you didn't prove your worth in the Jr's. Can't prove your worth in the Jr's because you can never play the best Jr's consistently enough to prove your worth.

[tenniscp]

Originally Posted by Number1Coach

years back I watched Raonic get his butt handed to him by Klahn NCAA champ over at the Carson ITF ,wondered what Raonic was playing tennis for ?

Do you thing Raonic should have gone to college and hang out with Klahn?

You probably meant to ask that question of coach32? But I ll answer it all the same. I know for a fact that Raonic was recruited by UVA' s Brian Boland and was set to go there until the very last moment. I have not seen Raonic play at 17, so I m not going to pretend that I saw his great potential and predicted his bright future. That s too easy and something that others here do, appear to be nostradamuses post fact. Obviously now we know that Raonic chose the right path. But I would have been more impressed with you if you came on these boards after Klahn manhandled Raonic at the International Springs and predicted that it would be indeed Raonic and not Klahn who d go on to become a top 10 player.

[Number1Coach]

Originally Posted by tenniscp

You probably meant to ask that question of coach32? But I ll answer it all the same. I know for a fact that Raonic was recruited by UVA' s Brian Boland and was set to go there until the very last moment. I have not seen Raonic play at 17, so I m not going to pretend that I saw his great potential and predicted his bright future. That s too easy and something that others here do, appear to be nostradamuses post fact. Obviously now we know that Raonic chose the right path. But I would have been more impressed with you if you came on these boards after Klahn manhandled Raonic at the International Springs and predicted that it would be indeed Raonic and not Klahn who d go on to become a top 10 player.

no meant it for you and wanted to point out that here is raonic being recruited hard no doubt and he went down a path all on this board would have disagreed with except you , sure you would have just raised and eyebrow and said lets see ! yet he had goals and a vision of what he was after and got it done , right now we at 16 have "every' school showing great interest yet I know there are 2 paths we will choose the right one .

[Number1Coach]

Originally Posted by Freak4tennis

steve g tennis has two sections, young guns, and young guns year end rankings. It pretty much spells everything out and while you are pretty much spot on. There is the random 1 in a million outlier. The one thing that is clear though, as you said Jr success is NOT a determining factor of pro success BUT most of the successful pro's had successful junior careers.

It's like the trying to be an actor theory. Can't get auditions without a SAG card, can't get a SAG card without being in a show.

Can't prove your worth in the pro's, because you didn't prove your worth in the Jr's. Can't prove your worth in the Jr's because you can never play the best Jr's consistently enough to prove your worth.

Great point but good ole mike says all that i have said about ex national champions would keep those schools from showing interest but once again he is wrong there according to emails we have received .

I just laugh cause every one on here says there is No right way to build a tennis player , no guarantee you will get to become a high level pro No matter what you do BUT if you do the path we have chosen it wont work !

[mikej]

Originally Posted by Number1Coach

Great point but good ole mike says all that i have said about ex national champions would keep those schools from showing interest but once again he is wrong there according to emails we have received .

Haha - you have tons of communication from d1 coaches, no doubt

But no serious interest / offers from the top guys like Peter smith and boland, which is why you fell through when I took you up on your offer to forward proof of such

Some coaches have the luxury of a fantastic pool of talent to choose from and don't need to deal with your mess of a family or spend years convincing DB to play tennis rather than complain about line calls - lucky them

Then again maybe you'll prove me wrong and end up with a top few team - we shall see

[floridatennisdude]

Originally Posted by Number1Coach

Great point but good ole mike says all that i have said about ex national champions would keep those schools from showing interest but once again he is wrong there according to emails we have received .

I just laugh cause every one on here says there is No right way to build a tennis player , no guarantee you will get to become a high level pro No matter what you do BUT if you do the path we have chosen it wont work !

Yea, it's funny how people say there is"no right way" and then when you and DB openly explain your "way" everyone says its wrong. The irony. Keep pushing!

[NLBwell]

Whether someone goes the Isner/Blake route or the Raonic/Querry route, in the end what matters is how well they can play tennis.

[Freak4tennis]

Originally Posted by Number1Coach

years back I watched Raonic get his butt handed to him by Klahn NCAA champ over at the Carson ITF ,wondered what Raonic was playing tennis for ?

Do you thing Raonic should have gone to college and hang out with Klahn?

You need to read a book Fooled by Randomness: The Hidden Role of Chance in Life and in the Markets by Nassim Nicholas Taleb.

In life as in tennis there is a continuing role of "chance". To be fooled by "chance" is a huge risk. Vegas makes tons of dough preying on the "fooled by chance" theory.

In the case of Raonic he was making finals of futures by 17 1/2. Although his results were spotty (he lost to Jarmere Jenkins, Marcus Fugate) but he also took Malisse to a 6 & 6 loss. You've really got to judge the actual results & performance objectively.

I'm not saying your player can't be a money making pro BUT don't be fooled by "chance" that's all. Let the results dictate direction.

[justinmadison]

Originally Posted by floridatennisdude

Yea, it's funny how people say there is "no right way" and then when you and DB openly explain your "way" everyone says its wrong. The irony. Keep pushing!

I am not sure I understand the irony part. I am pretty sure everyone on the board believes there is “no right way” and they also believe there are “many wrong ways”. I don’t see this as ironic.

The question being endlessly argued is if Number1’s is one of the right or wrong ways.

[Number1Coach]

Originally Posted by justinmadison

I am not sure I understand the irony part. I am pretty sure everyone on the board believes there is “no right way” and they also believe there are “many wrong ways”. I don’t see this as ironic.

The question being endlessly argued is if Number1’s is one of the right or wrong ways.

Great question , I would then look at 'any' player like a stock and see if there is a continual climb, improvement , potential , if so then it's all about watching the progress .

Most on here take uneducated and blinded guesses based on stats that do have some indication but are not facts or law , take TCF he based everything on video and hearsay never personal observation yet he was 100% convinced of the outcome even though the progress was outperforming his predictions over and over , will just have to see what happens .

[mikej]

Originally Posted by Number1Coach

Most on here take uneducated and blinded guesses based on stats that do have some indication but are not facts

haha, I realize that most of the "stats" you post on here are utter bs like your son's unforced errors / winners vs peliwo that i called you out on, or an incorrect round that raonic made it to in carson back in the day before you were corrected on that

but most of the time, when intelligent people post real stats that they have taken a little time to research and/or consider the reliability of, they are actual facts

you son's ITF ranking is a fact, not some fake stat someone pulled out of a hat

your son having zero gold balls and zero ITF tournament titles is a fact, not an opinion - unless my research betrays me - but i think you would have corrected that by now if it were misinformation

[coaching32yrs]

Originally Posted by mikej

haha, I realize that most of the "stats" you post on here are utter bs like your son's unforced errors / winners vs peliwo that i called you out on, or an incorrect round that raonic made it to in carson back in the day before you were corrected on that

but most of the time, when intelligent people post real stats that they have taken a little time to research and/or consider the reliability of, they are actual facts

you son's ITF ranking is a fact, not some fake stat someone pulled out of a hat

your son having zero gold balls and zero ITF tournament titles is a fact, not an opinion - unless my research betrays me - but i think you would have corrected that by now if it were misinformation

It's a reality check for all tennis players and parents out there. If a player has no significant wins by age 16+ there is zero chance of going pro. If his/her best win is against #9 and has multiple recent losses to players in the 70s, 80s and 90s that means no shot. Doesn't matter what I say, you say, parent says, coaches say. The record speaks for itself.

[Number1Coach]

Originally Posted by coaching32yrs

It's a reality check for all tennis players and parents out there. If a player has no significant wins by age 16+ there is zero chance of going pro. If his/her best win is against #9 and has multiple recent losses to players in the 70s, 80s and 90s that means no shot. Doesn't matter what I say, you say, parent says, coaches say. The record speaks for itself.

Here is the scary reality on stats if you go to 1 of the 200 or so colleges to play tennis D1 -D3 heres what you have 2 players Isner and Anderson both taller then 6'8 who have done anything significant in the last 15 years coming out of college ,, Now lets see 200 teams x 6 to 8 players over 15 years = a tennis pro career death sentence yeah ?

Now lets look at the last 15 years of kids in the top 100 itf = 1500 top 100 players and how many have made top 20 ATP? better odds but more fail here as a successful jr. then make it .

So both paths have horrible odds so any route you take is a crapp shoot but the 1 common thread all have that made it focused on development not results !!!

Coaching 32 results mean nothing you should focus on developing your players !

[andfor]

#1. You've been around here long enough to not need this board anymore. I know you enjoy the banter. Focus your energy on maximizing D's game and progres, let it play out and speak for itself. It will.

[Soianka]

Originally Posted by andfor

#1. You've been around here long enough to not need this board anymore. I know you enjoy the banter. Focus your energy on maximizing D's game and progres, let it play out and speak for itself. It will.

I agree.

........