We teach what we need to learn.
12 year old vs you know who
- Thread starter AnyPUG
- Start date
About 12 years. Started as a 3.0 and became a 4.5 in 2014.
mucat
Hall of Fame
mucat
Hall of Fame
Last time we check, he has a winning record in 4.5.
He beat most recreational players. (Of course, we are all elite players here......)
zill
Legend
talent and not paying attention to technique too much. The downside of the rapid rise is it will be harder to move higher up because there and above technique is key.
The first year I played USTA was 2011, and as far as I recall I ended that year as a 3.0 C. I suppose it's possible that when I initially registered for leagues and filled out the questionnaire, I was initially marked as a 2.5, but I really don't remember at all. I played in some non-USTA leagues in the summer/fall of 2010,
I got bumped to 4.5 at the end of the 2014 league year. So yes, a little over four years.
LOL- that's one way to look at it. To me that's like saying a baseball player "plateaued" by becoming a consistent .300 hitter early in his career, but never becoming a .325 hitter.
Literally picking up a racquet and messing around, probably as a kid in gym class or something similar. Playing sets/matches, 2010.
Nah. I was suggesting tactics and consistency. Got plenty that. What I lack is more puff and net skills.
heninfan99
Talk Tennis Guru
Skill, technique, talent, athleticism. Hacking is no match.
Well, that is considerably more than the 12 years you mentioned at first. I have investigated many claims of men reaching 4.5 from scratch, and this kind of thing pops up only if you dig deep.
"Picking up a racket and messing around" goes a long way in developing neuronal connections when done as a kid.
I guess it depends on your definition of "from scratch." It's almost impossible to completely avoid any exposure whatsoever to a mainstream sport growing up.
For an apt comparison, let's take golf. I have been to a driving range and I have played mini golf. I have not, however, taken any golf lessons or played an actual round of golf in my life. If I were to start doing those things now, I think it would be considered starting from scratch by most people's definition.
That's not entirely true. Some kids will get hit in the face for years before they catch a ball and quit long before they even develop a hint of hand eye coordination.
user92626
G.O.A.T.
It could be wrong muscle memory buildup as well. Then what?
You cannot generalize whatever, random activities that people have done will help them later in tennis.
What I have observed is...if people suck, they suck regardless how much time or "training" they've spent, done. This place is littered with examples.
The pro circuit is no different. Kyrgios will never win a grand slam regardless of how early he started tennis. Medvedev, Tsit will never reach the Big 3's status.
megamind
Legend
he already has
It could be wrong muscle memory buildup as well. Then what?
You cannot generalize whatever, random activities that people have done will help them later in tennis.
What I have observed is...if people suck, they suck regardless how much time or "training" they've spent, done. This place is littered with examples.
The pro circuit is no different. Kyrgios will never win a grand slam regardless of how early he started tennis. Medvedev, Tsit will never reach the Big 3's status.
Any kind of activity involving dexterity done as kids has use in many fields as an adult, including driving. Just look at the physical abilities and poise of women today who played sports as girls compared to previous generations where they were not allowed to.
This is proven fact. Carnivores like tigers will play together as cubs mimicking some of the dangerous things they will do later on, but not actually doing it. This "play" helps develop the skills for them to become an apex predator later on.
Then nothing. You will be a mediocre recreational player for life. So what? There are so many other benefits of playing these sports early, with or without proper technique.
I wouldn't liken tigers playing to children playing. All tigers turn pro. They are all talented.
No. When wild animals are rescued as babies and brought up under human protection, they don't develop the skills needed to survive in the wild. Releasing them into the wild is an elaborate process of slowly developing their survival skills while not putting them in real danger, and then ultimately letting them go.
Though most of the lower animals which are heavily hard-wired don't need any preparation, like fishes. The higher the mammal, the more training under parental protection it needs before being able to survive. It is the trade-off for having a more complex brain. Human babies are the worst, good for nothing.
They have skills specialized for them, due to their brain being like a dedicated hardware circuit.
What we have is a brain which can run all kinds of software, so the correct programs have to be loaded.
mucat
Hall of Fame
Questions to GSG:
Is there a styling of play you found difficult to play against? And how do you manage playing against players with this style?
Do you lose more now after people watched you play on youtube and find your kryptonite? (I doubt this....everyone got a plan until they get punched in the mouth)
Is there a styling of play you found difficult to play against? And how do you manage playing against players with this style?
Do you lose more now after people watched you play on youtube and find your kryptonite? (I doubt this....everyone got a plan until they get punched in the mouth)
mucat
Hall of Fame
Yea, they either turn pro or die.
user92626
G.O.A.T.
It's not nothing. It would hurt your assumption/argument that starting early helps. Particularly your assertion "all of them improve hand-eye coordination and judgment of moving objects."
Most tennis juniors also either turn pro or die in the swamps of high school and college tennis (and resurface as fat slow adults 20 years later asking on TT if their old racket model is still available).
So playing which sport does NOT improve hand(foot)-eye coordination and judgement of moving objects?
mucat
Hall of Fame
Even if junior do not turn pro, they still retain their skills. For a tiger, it will be removed from existence literally, not philosophically. Just a light difference.
But I agree anyone could be a high level tennis player if give enough training. However, being one of the best in the world requires both training and talent.
Last edited:
user92626
G.O.A.T.
Don't remember Kyrgios even made to the finals.
What is this inside joke that i'm not getting that you guys are so liking?
Don't remember Kyrgios even made to the finals.
What is this inside joke that i'm not getting that you guys are so liking?
He won doubles Slam at AO.
user92626
G.O.A.T.
So how much improvement are you talking about here? Is it worth mentioning?
(I can play the game of answering by asking questions, too)
user92626
G.O.A.T.
Ah I see. Doubles don't count. It's for unfit and failed players. You know that.
user92626
G.O.A.T.
CERTAINLY Not all of them become an apex predator, bro. In fact only the minority succeed. Majority fail. That's why we see so few tigers in a large area. Same with lions. Only one succeeds whereas many get killed. LOL
Golf. The ball is stationary and there's nothing you can do once it's moving.
Yes, but all the living ones are still a success.
user92626
G.O.A.T.
And you miss suresh's assumption that early childhood playing, training automatically means success later.
The ball is small and the hitting surface to ball size ratio is very low compared to tennis. Even executing a swing and hitting the ball instead of the grass is a great achievement for beginners. No one misses a tennis ball.
I've seen a pro swing and miss.
megamind
Legend
megamind
Legend
FuzzyYellowBalls
Legend
I think people are over-estimating the advantage of watching GSG pre-match. Whatever weaknesses GSG has, if any, people can debate that all day, can be reveled after a handful of games against him. A player either can or can't overcome the supreme counterpunching. Some think coming to the net is the key, maybe so, but without debating if that is correct, during the first 3-4 points you will see it's possible to go to the net and that GSG is going to get a lot of balls back. There isn't a "aha" moment watching these matches, no tendencies or patterns to take advantage of in my opinion.
mucat
Hall of Fame
I totally agree. Watched Ben/GSG 's match against Ian. It might give the impression of coming to the net is the key to beat Ben ...., the typical come to the net against pusher tips. But the truth is (I think), Ian is a very good volleyer and has tons of competitive match experience. We can only use tools within our toolset, there is no summoning skill out of thin air in a match if we seldom practice for it.
