In Georgia the 10 and under division will be quick start only. I think this is a major set back for tennis in Georgia as well as other states that use this format.I can understand doing quick start in the 8 and under but 10 and under that makes no sense.My daughter just turned 8 and has been playin in the 10 and under division for the last two years with regular balls on a regular sized court and improved dramatically.Why punish her with quick start when she is way too advanced for that????? So now she has to play in the 12 and under division as an 8 year old.In the long run this might help her but for now its gonna be tough on her confidence to play 12 year olds who are much more mature and much bigger physically.I think it would have made much more sense to have quick start and regular tennis as an option for these tournaments.
Shame on the U.S.T.A
- Thread starter ga tennis
- Start date
I agree quick start is great for kids learing tennis but an 8 year old who has been playin for years its useless! If the U.S.T.A. is trying to develop players to compete with the rest of the world this is not the right way to do it.At 10 years old little girls who are serious about their tennis dont wanna have to take several steps backwards in their development and do quick start! I really dont understand why they would punish these kids like this.Im gonna have my little girl play up in the 12 division i just hope that it doesnt discourage her.I explained to her that this will make her a better player when it really matters.Its just such a difference mentally and physically between an 8 year old and a 12 year old.
Whenever I see QS marketed, it sounds like it's a catch-all to "get kids interested", which is great. But kids that are already "developing" their tennis should not be forced to play QS in tournaments. That, as you say, is taking steps backwards.
It seems to me they are trying to get the "numbers" up for tennis participation, which the USTA likes to tout. I get that as it's about money, but it has nothing to do with developing competitive players.
It seems to me they are trying to get the "numbers" up for tennis participation, which the USTA likes to tout. I get that as it's about money, but it has nothing to do with developing competitive players.
so sad! but so true.
GATennisMom
New User
My husband and I feel the same way as you. Our son plays the 10U in Georgia and he just turned 7 a couple weeks ago. What were afraid of is that the 12U level 5 tournaments will fill and lot of the kids that played the 10s will not have high enough rank in the 12s to get into the tournament - many are limited to 16 participants. We feel they should have both - if they were smart, just make the level 5 10s be Quick Start and then the level 4s be full court and they could have the best of both worlds and allow the kids to progress upwards. Getting more kids exposed to tennis is USTA top priority with Quick Start. The southern section is the first to adapt to my knowledge and I am not sure the others will go in this direction. Good luck to you and your daughter!
Are you guys playin little mo in may?
GATennisMom
New User
Yes we our doing Little Mo in May - should be a good tournament!
TennisCoachFLA
Banned
I agree with you 1 billion %. Quickstart for 8-9-10-11 year olds is beyond ridiculous.
Just like in GA, our state of Florida has so many kids that are way beyond Quickstart by age 8.
The USTA and its junior tennis program may be beyond repair.
MordredSJT
Rookie
I think you are looking at this the wrong way if you are thinking of quickstart as just the introductory programs that are in the quickstart format. I will say up front, I work at a facility that uses quickstart heavily. One of our pros helped write the new quickstart curriculum for the younger children, and another pro here participated in developing quickstart style training for more high performance juniors. We have been using foam balls, and low compression balls with smaller courts and appropriate size racquets since I got here (before there was a quickstart initiative by the USTA).
Our juniors are consistently more technically developed and tactically aware compared to kids in surrounding areas that don't use these methods. We do not teach our high performance kids the same way we teach a kid who has never played. We teach advanced technical skills and tactics, and they can learn and repeatedly implement these things with the low compression balls and smaller courts.
We had our first USTA quickstart tournament here a while ago (we regularly have our own club tournaments for our competitive kids, this was the first sanctioned tournament) and the kids that were not from our club stood out like sore thumbs. They did not have the same kind of repeatable technique. They slapped and lunged, hit one or two good shots, and then did something atrocious. Our kids can all hit topspin groundstrokes with full swings off both sides and keep the ball in play in the smaller court. A lot of them have also developed net skills and the ability to produce and use angles from different court positions.
The sooner kids develop a sound, repeatable, advanced technical foundation...the better. And this is the goal for the competitive kids in this format. In my opinion, this is a good thing and should be embraced.
Our juniors are consistently more technically developed and tactically aware compared to kids in surrounding areas that don't use these methods. We do not teach our high performance kids the same way we teach a kid who has never played. We teach advanced technical skills and tactics, and they can learn and repeatedly implement these things with the low compression balls and smaller courts.
We had our first USTA quickstart tournament here a while ago (we regularly have our own club tournaments for our competitive kids, this was the first sanctioned tournament) and the kids that were not from our club stood out like sore thumbs. They did not have the same kind of repeatable technique. They slapped and lunged, hit one or two good shots, and then did something atrocious. Our kids can all hit topspin groundstrokes with full swings off both sides and keep the ball in play in the smaller court. A lot of them have also developed net skills and the ability to produce and use angles from different court positions.
The sooner kids develop a sound, repeatable, advanced technical foundation...the better. And this is the goal for the competitive kids in this format. In my opinion, this is a good thing and should be embraced.
When they try to make the comparison between tennis and football,basketball,baseball,etc...the comparison isnt valid. I know pro baseball,basketball,football players who didnt even start till they were 15.With little girls in tennis they sometimes turn pro at 15.Wasting those early years doin quickstart will be devestating for young girls with the dream of playing pro tennis.Tennis cannot be compared to those other sports its totally different!I use to watch a 12 year old Monica Seles train while i was at N.B.T.A she was an animal she beat the h... out of the ball. Now imagine if she would have had to do quickstart till 10??????????
It sounds like it helps kids become good recreatioal players and make their highschool tennis team, but to compete with the rest of the world???.The U.S.T.A doesnt need to make the 10 and under division quickstart only. What about those kids that are way too good for quickstart?I just dont understand what is their plan for these kids? My daughter has been playin on a regulation court with regulation balls since she was 5 and she would take is as an insult if she had to play quickstart.My problem with the U.S.T.A is why are our great8 to 10 year olds are being neglected just to get the numbers up????
MordredSJT
Rookie
I think you missed the main point of my post. We are not just training recreational players who will be ok on a high school team. The first level of our competitive junior program uses low compression balls and a 60' court exclusively, and our kids eventually transition to the next level of the program where we use those balls for certain purposes and begin mixing in regular tennis balls and the full court, and they eventually pass into our highest level program where they almost exclusively use regular balls (but will occasionally utilize foam and low compression balls for certain purposes).
These programs have not just produced "good" high school players. They have produced several DI NCAA scholarship players since I have been here, as well as an 8 year old Little Mo national champion (yes she trained almost exclusively with low compression balls building her technique and then had a short phase of training to adapt to the regular balls and full size courts before the tournament), and we also have a girl and boy who have won or been finalists in multiple national 12's tournaments in singles and doubles.
They were all trained in our high performance, competitive program using low compression balls and smaller courts. This system can and does produce high level players. The USTA is also, I believe, looking at it from the perspective that the more kids we get trying and staying with tennis, the better the chances that we get more high level players.
These programs have not just produced "good" high school players. They have produced several DI NCAA scholarship players since I have been here, as well as an 8 year old Little Mo national champion (yes she trained almost exclusively with low compression balls building her technique and then had a short phase of training to adapt to the regular balls and full size courts before the tournament), and we also have a girl and boy who have won or been finalists in multiple national 12's tournaments in singles and doubles.
They were all trained in our high performance, competitive program using low compression balls and smaller courts. This system can and does produce high level players. The USTA is also, I believe, looking at it from the perspective that the more kids we get trying and staying with tennis, the better the chances that we get more high level players.
O.K. i guess i was wrong about quick start. The problem i have is why are all 10 and under tournaments going quickstart? Do you agree with all 10s going this route?
Even more devestating [sic] for their parents.
1) She can play in the 10s, no one is stopping her (well, someone is).
2) Have you asked your daughter what she wants to do?
3) Are you sure she is technically and tactically sound enough to win at QuickStart? After all, that's what the program is designed to produce (rather than moonballers).
Last edited:
How many kids do you have playin tennis? Yes i have asked her and she doesnt wanna do quickstart.Technically very sound!She dont moonball! sic??????? What do you mean by that ?My daugter ask me everyday when are we gonna go play tennis! She wants to be a pro i dont force her to do anything she doesnt want to do.How is that sic??????????
zettabyte how is that sick???? I come home from work everyday pick up the kids help them with homework then my daughter and i practice tennis till shes ready to stop.Will u please explain to me how im sic?When she was 6 i took her to the U.S. Open and she told her mother and i that she wanted to be a pro.What is sic about me doing everything i can to help her grt there?I guess Earl Woods and Richard Williams are sic?You dont know anything about me and to say im sic because i wanna help my daughter be the best player she can be well i guess im sic!
TennisCoachFLA
Banned
I see we have some Quickstart advocates here and thats fine. Quickstart is nice at age 3-6. And it is very nice for even older kids who are beginners. A beginning player at age 7 could benefit from a few months of Quickstart.
We also run a Quickstart program and the kids bore very easily. Sure they learn the technical aspects as a poster said. But our kids, almost 100% of them, whether they start Quickstart at age 4 or 8, progress through the program and are ready to move on in 6 months at the most. Most kids do not want to do more than 3-4 months of mini tennis.
Of course our kids can look over onto the next court and see elite 9 year old girls playing amazing full court tennis, so that may be the problem. Perhaps in a vacuum they would not see the limitations of Quickstart.
Quickstart has its purpose, let beginning kids get into tennis. Our issue is with the mandatory stuff up through the 10s. It just is not a good idea.
I would also like the poster who said it produces high quality players to list some of them. And not high quality 10s and 12s. Please educate me on the top ranked 18s who played mini tennis until age 10-11?
We also run a Quickstart program and the kids bore very easily. Sure they learn the technical aspects as a poster said. But our kids, almost 100% of them, whether they start Quickstart at age 4 or 8, progress through the program and are ready to move on in 6 months at the most. Most kids do not want to do more than 3-4 months of mini tennis.
Of course our kids can look over onto the next court and see elite 9 year old girls playing amazing full court tennis, so that may be the problem. Perhaps in a vacuum they would not see the limitations of Quickstart.
Quickstart has its purpose, let beginning kids get into tennis. Our issue is with the mandatory stuff up through the 10s. It just is not a good idea.
I would also like the poster who said it produces high quality players to list some of them. And not high quality 10s and 12s. Please educate me on the top ranked 18s who played mini tennis until age 10-11?
Last edited:
tennis coach florida how long has the u.s.t.a.been using quick start?
SplitStepper
Rookie
Completely agreed, from a veteran teaching pro. Shame on the usta for many things. This included. I'm still pissed about Arlan Kantarians salary.
LeftyServe
Semi-Pro
What is the USTA actually saying to justify Quickstart for 10 year olds? It seems to me that a legitimate reason for implementing Quickstart would be to increase the number of juniors playing "rec" tennis, the fear being that the game is too difficult for many young kids and that they will simply drop it....Nothing wrong with that line of reasoning, but surely there cannot be any pretense that Quickstart is necessary or even good for development of competitive juniors beyond the age of 6 or 7.
I'm not the poster in question, and I can't say for sure how long she played, but I'm pretty sure Henin started with mini-tennis.
If the 10s are playing on the 60' court with the orange ball, how is this that horrible? A slower ball and a smaller court makes the game tactically similar to the adult game.
If the OP's daughter is such a phenom as to be completely dominant and bored in those competitions, then move to Florida and send her to IMG. If not, then let her learn to hit with more spin and closer to the lines.
Junior golfers don't play from the back tees with adult clubs, junior baseballers don't play with MLB hardballs, junior footballers don't play on 100-yard fields, junior soccer players don't use a full sized ball. It's a no-brainer.
Now, of course, I'm not the tennis coach for Florida, so take what I say with the appropriate amount of salt.
I'm not the poster in question, and I can't say for sure how long she played, but I'm pretty sure Henin started with mini-tennis.
If the 10s are playing on the 60' court with the orange ball, how is this that horrible? A slower ball and a smaller court makes the game tactically similar to the adult game.
If the OP's daughter is such a phenom as to be completely dominant and bored in those competitions, then move to Florida and send her to IMG. If not, then let her learn to hit with more spin and closer to the lines.
Junior golfers don't play from the back tees with adult clubs, junior baseballers don't play with MLB hardballs, junior footballers don't play on 100-yard fields, junior soccer players don't use a full sized ball. It's a no-brainer.
Now, of course, I'm not the tennis coach for Florida, so take what I say with the appropriate amount of salt.
Its obvious you havent seen how good some of these 10 year old girls are.
The point isn't that a _few_ can compete well on a full court, it's that _more_ kids can compete well on a smaller court at 10.
So why punish those who can?
So why punish those that can compete? Those are the kids the u.s.t.a should really focus on.If the u.s.t.a wants to compete with the rest of the world this is a bad idea.They should have both options a quickstart draw and a regular draw.
I would disagree that those are the kids to focus on, in that athletic skill isn't the same at 8 as it is at 18 (I speak from experience, as I was an awkward youngster who grew up to play Division 1 Football for a National Championship team). Increase the size of the pool, don't shrink it. Puberty does some weird things to kids.
Second, what are your _specific objections_ to having your daughter play on a 60' court with a 3' net and a slower ball? Is it truly that you don't think she will be able to adjust to a regular ball and full sized court when she's faster and stronger, as all kids do in pretty much every other sport? Is tennis so different that graduated stages don't make sense?
Let me put it this way: From 8 to 10 your daughter learns good stroke mechanics and, more importantly, good tactics on a short court with a soft ball. Then, starting at age 10, you don't think your daughter can learn to play competitive tennis with a regulation ball on a regulation court by the time she's 18? Or 16? Really?
I can see both sides to this for training purposes. It depends on what you're working on. I agree with MordredSJT in that using the slower/lower balls can be very useful in training technique and tactics. It slows everything down - more time to get to a ball, set up, and hit as well as it being in a 4' to 5' kids strike zone has many benefits.
I frequently use Play n' Stay 78 balls (which are 25% slower/lower) with my 8 year old to rally and groove strokes. We can regular have 25 hit rallies where he's really hitting through (you have to to get it deep) where with regular balls we'll get 4-5 quality strokes before things fall apart. I also feed baskets of regular balls to get quality strokes from him. These are two different things for different purposes.
That said, I think there should be choices for tournament competition. I don't think EVERY kid 10U in a section should have to play QS. Yes, they can play up, but why not have a choice of tournaments/format?
I frequently use Play n' Stay 78 balls (which are 25% slower/lower) with my 8 year old to rally and groove strokes. We can regular have 25 hit rallies where he's really hitting through (you have to to get it deep) where with regular balls we'll get 4-5 quality strokes before things fall apart. I also feed baskets of regular balls to get quality strokes from him. These are two different things for different purposes.
That said, I think there should be choices for tournament competition. I don't think EVERY kid 10U in a section should have to play QS. Yes, they can play up, but why not have a choice of tournaments/format?
TennisCoachFLA
Banned
Yes, Henin is the example people mention when defending mini tennis. The story is that she played it as a kid. I think we went over this a while back and a poster in the know said Henin played mini tennis at like age 5-6. I highly doubt Henin was playing mini tennis at age 10-11.
To me its pretty simple, use Quickstart to get more little kids into tennis, but do not make it the sole source for competition for the 10s.
gatennis....I first saw the USTA touting Quickstart about 3 years ago, but mini tennis has been around forever.
To me its pretty simple, use Quickstart to get more little kids into tennis, but do not make it the sole source for competition for the 10s.
gatennis....I first saw the USTA touting Quickstart about 3 years ago, but mini tennis has been around forever.
MordredSJT
Rookie
Kids will get bored of anything if you don't challenge them and make the activities fun and interesting. Do they get less bored in a non quickstart junior program? On the same note, there are plenty of kids that want to eat ice cream for breakfast...that doesn't mean it is the best thing for them.
I don't claim to be a "quickstart advocate"...I can only speak to the experience that I have had with both quickstart and the use of the low compression balls and 60' court for training competitive kids.
I feel like a lot of the problems with implementing quickstart style programs is the attitude that some of your wording shows. Mini-tennis (which with a regular ball I find to be a great warm-up activity for anyone), translation...this is not REAL tennis, this is tennis for little kids. Kids do not want to hear that. We had similar issues when we started using the low compression and foam balls more around here. "We hate these balls, these are for the little kids." That's what our good 8-10 years olds used to say. They used to say that because after we started using those balls, they started to actually be able to easily rip the kind of topspin that we had been teaching them to. Once they grooved the technique, it was much easier to translate those swings to the normal ball.
We have some pretty good kids at our facility. The kids and the adults can all see them training on full courts with regular tennis balls and see how good they are. The same kids don't really complain anymore about using the low compression balls and the 60' court. We have invested in making a culture change in how that is presented to them. It isn't, "oh we are using the yellow lines and the squishy balls...these are for little kids" anymore...it is more like "oh, yellow lines and squishy balls...I guess I have to hit spin now." It is normal to them, and it isn't presented as a step down or something inferior and that is a big part of the equation.
As for the mandatory part, I think that is at the very least jumping the gun at this stage. There should be a gradual increase in the number of quickstart tournaments, and maybe down the road they can look at transitioning over or keeping a decent mixture. Then again, when has the USTA ever done anything that seemed reasonable and intelligent?
I can only assume this is at least partially addressed to me, even though you didn't actually address me directly. If it is, then I can only do what I did in a previous post...which is detail some of the success that our kids have had coming up through a program that uses aspects of quickstart, but is clearly geared towards high performance juniors. As I detailed before, they transition out of the low compression balls and smaller courts as their technical foundation becomes more advanced and more solid. The really exceptional ones can move along a little more quickly, but the different balls and court dimensions can always be used for specific purposes.
I would never claim that "mini-tennis", or quickstart, or whatever you choose to call it is the end all be all of instruction. The different balls, the different court dimensions, they are tools. They can be very good tools. I use them for many different things...and when I was working on shot tolerance with an adult in a lesson the other day and broke out the foam balls, at first he was skeptical, but after our first 200 ball rally in the service boxes taking full speed swings, spinning the crap out of those balls, moving our feet like crazy...he ceased to think of them as solely little kids balls.
Last edited:
the question i have for you is how has quickstart produced div 1 scholarship players when it hasnt been around but for 3 or 4 years?
TCF, i know mini tennis has been around forever i played college tennis and worked at N.B.T.A during the summers while i was in college.The question i have for the poster that stated quickstart has produced srveral div 1 scholarship players is how? If quick start is only a few years old how is this possible? TCF i would really like to talk more to you about how you are training your daughter? Its always good to talk with someone who is going thru the same thing with their child as you are... Thanks for all the replies everyone!!! I think this site can be a very uesful tool .There seems to be alot of knowledgable people who post here.THANKS AGAIN for the responses!
Why should i have my daughter go backwards in her development? Quick start is good when learning but at this stage in her development it makes no sense.Its like telling an 8 year old boy that plays baseball and practices hitting the ball being pitched to that all the games u will have to hit off a tee? Do you think this will help him????
MordredSJT
Rookie
It's more like taking an eight year old boy who has been playing on a Major League size field, with the mound at 60'6" and the bases at 90', with a wood bat...and letting him play little league on a smaller field, with a closer mound and bases, with aluminum bats.
If your daughter can hit an effective serve (and this is, to me, is actually a big part of what the 60' court helps with) with pace and spin, consistently hit aggressive topspin forehands and backhands in play 3-6' over the net, get the ball in her strike zone on most shots while setting up a good hitting stance (open or neutral depending on the ball), effectively mix in slice as a change of pace, defensive shot, or approach shot, move forward and the court and finish with an aggressive groundstroke or transition to the net and finish points with volleys....
Then I congratulate her on being an extremely well developed little player. She really doesn't need to do any kind of quickstart style play at all. If she can't do some of those things, then I think some play on a 60' court with low compression balls might actually benefit her. Has she ever played on a 60' court before? Have you seen her play on a 60' court before? I am just curious.
As for DI players, as I mentioned before we have been using similar programs for children at our facility for quite a while. I didn't necessarily say that Quickstart proper produced those players, but they definitely used foam balls when they were little kids starting out, and used different kinds of low compression balls, although the older kids likely transitioned to regular tennis balls much more quickly than we do now (none of them won any national level 12, 14, 16, or 18 tournaments though...the kids we have now are winning those tournaments in the 12's).
I doubt many women in the W.T.A can do all the things you have listed.I agree with you for the most part on how quickstart can help a child but my real issue is why make all 10 and under tournaments quickstart.Yes i have seen her play on a 60 foot court and i really dont see the point right now because she does fine on a regulation court with regulation balls.
TennisCoachFLA
Banned
I guess we have a difference in philosophy. After working with Macci and Saviano and Sanchez-Vicario, we just don't think kids need to do all those tennis skills at the younger ages. In our experience, if kids worry about developing all those attributes at a young age, they end up never having the explosive power needed to advance at the higher stages in tennis. They end up club level players with nice little strokes and games.
The approach used by these coaches and myself is to use mini tennis for the very young kids for about 6 months. Once they have the basic strokes and split step, they move on.
By 5-6-7 their shots are exploding off the racquet from both sides. Yes, you have to gradually move them around using hand fed drills as they can not cover the court. We also work on volleys.
Saviano goes crazy about little kids serving. He feels it is dumb as they will grow into that skill at 10-11-12.
We feel that kids HAVE to learn to see and explode into the ball first, the younger the better. Their timing develops first. That special pop that the top D-1 and pro players have is developed at a young age, or not all, with few exceptions. All those other parts of the game you mention can be developed along the way later. But unless they get that mental timing and perfect explosion of power first, its worthless.
Our philosophy is that little kids don't need to worry about playing a complete tennis game, they gradually learn the game after they have developed great strokes with amazing power.
Mini tennis thinks kids need to be all around players first.
I don't know about Henin, but I do know that the Williams sisters, Capriati, Pierce, Roddick, and countless D-1 scholarship players were developed without mini tennis and by the Macci like approach of power first, full size racquets as soon as possible, and not worrying about adding the other aspects of tennis until the kids are older.
Could your Quickstart kids destroy our kids at mini tennis? Yup. But when those same kids meet at age 16 and beyond, I will lay my bets on our kids.
Until Quickstart has a track record of producing Grand Slam champs and top D-1 players, I will stick with what Saviano and Macci have taught me.
Last edited:
B.T.W. i like your baseball analogy better than mine.
I was concerned about the serve. Her coach told me we are not in that big of a hurry to correct her service grip.It bothers me that she hits groundstrokes like a little pro but still serves with a forehand grip.I think its more of a strength issue with the service grip.
GATennisMom
New User
I have a son who just turned 7 and i have experienced both. He plays in the 10s reg tournament s and He played in a QS tournament and by the time he got to the final match in QS - it took two hours to play the match because the kids could hit forever and get to everything - remember not only are they playing on a 60ft court but its a 50% compression ball - you can be really slow and still get to the ball. Its suppose to help them in serve and volley - did not see one kid do that the entire tournament and to slice a 50% compression ball... The USTA should have had different levels and they could still achieve their goals. Level 6 - 60ft court 50% compression balls - Level 5 - Regular court 25% compression balls (this would be a good transition to the big courts) and then Level 4 and above is regular size court. but they still get to play against their age group. Then there is a progession and not make the kids who are having success in the 10s who are 7 and 8 years old have to move up and play the 12's - to big of gap just in physical size. There are some really good kids in georgia that are in this age group and i understand wanting to get more kids in to tennis and support that but there is a better answer than what they are doing!!!!
I guess I'm not getting it, but where is the punishment here? Those who have mastered valuable skills above all others will still be the best. The top athletes have more competitors to crush in an easier format. More trophies, more point accumulation, more publicity, more experience winning over more opponents.
I personally own multiple sets of all the qs and (of course) full size equipment and I have tested it all personally with my own hands and feet. Imho for more accomplished athletes, the difference between the formats is similar to the differences between fast ball and slow ball squash. The scaled down equipment makes it almost impossible to hit a ball that cannot be returned which results longer points and a more aerobic game. Endurance and concentration are further tested. Points are won by outsmarting your opponent and moving them around rather than fast reflexes and millimeter accurate shots.
Here in Jersey, there is zero competition in the qs format. That makes it pretty much unattractive for parents to spend much time or any money developing their kids in the format.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
