Anyone else poor and tired of competitive tennis costs?

klu375

Semi-Pro
There are so many opportunities to compete and develop your game. For example, Florida juniors that were unable to get in the Easter Bowl were competing in a designated tournament back home. And kids that are stuck between age groups can use their ranking in the lower age group to get into the higher age group in the national open tournaments. I believe they take the top 4 that applied from the lower age group.

Actually more because other younger players will end up on top of the alternate lists and some will get in. For some reason they believe that a younger player ranked 200 is more deserving than an older player ranked 301.
 
TCF, I think you misunderstood. I was not implying that college coaches are mindless and look exclusively at rankings for their recruiting. My point was that WITHOUT A RESPECTABLE RANKING, a kid doesn't get to participate. And if you can't participate, you can't improve as much without playing better players. It's not about "chasing" some meaningless ranking; it's about having OPPORTUNITIES to play the best so you can develop as a player.

I understand your point. There are more than one way to improve though, I know college coaches that look for kids who think outside the box.

No money or late to the rankings game? Okay, what did you do? Whine about it? Or did you construct killer wall drills and make videos of them explaining what you strategy you were implementing? Did you ride your bike to every local college and stalk players after practice to hit with you? Did you bag groceries and use the money to go to a few tournaments? Did you invent taxing ball machine drills to mimic real play?

The point is it won't be fair, the opportunities won't be the same. But I know how college coaches work. They will take a kid who did the extra and develop his game the first year if he lacks all the tournament experience of a richer kid who played the rankings game from age 10.

And in some way kids that do the off the beaten path stuff have an advantage with some coaches. They get tired of dealing with Chad and Biff who have had every advantage and been top 20 USTA since age 10. A team full of Chad and Biffs is a pain to coach. So they mix in both foreign players to win matches and keep their jobs....and they mix in the kids who bagged groceries.
 
Last edited:

Tennisdork

New User
I understand your point. There are more than one way to improve though, I know college coaches that look for kids who think outside the box.

No money or late to the rankings game? Okay, what did you do? Whine about it? Or did you construct killer wall drills and make videos of them explaining what you strategy you were implementing? Did you ride your bike to every local college and stalk players after practice to hit with you? Did you bag groceries and use the money to go to a few tournaments? Did you invent taxing ball machine drills to mimic real play?

The point is it won't be fair, the opportunities won't be the same. But I know how college coaches work. They will take a kid who did the extra and develop his game the first year if he lacks all the tournament experience of a richer kid who played the rankings game from age 10.

And in some way kids that do the off the beaten path stuff have an advantage with some coaches. They get tired of dealing with Chad and Biff who have had every advantage and been top 20 USTA since age 10. A team full of Chad and Biffs is a pain to coach. So they mix in both foreign players to win matches and keep their jobs....and they mix in the kids who bagged groceries.
Tenniscoach I agree with what you are saying,anytime one has to struggle for something, usually they become a stronger person and perhaps have a little more hunger than the next guy.I also agree with BSPE if you do not have the ranking then you cant play the top tournaments, therefore losing out on opportunities to compete with the best players.Playing the best elevates your game, I dont give a rip about rankings , but I feel like if your kid doesnt play many tournaments will they get left behind?I think about not having my son play tournaments , and just play matchs against women, men , other juniors , and just practice with his coach and play with his friends doubles , singles on the weekend.
 

BSPE84

Semi-Pro
I understand your point. There are more than one way to improve though, I know college coaches that look for kids who think outside the box.

No money or late to the rankings game? Okay, what did you do? Whine about it? Or did you construct killer wall drills and make videos of them explaining what you strategy you were implementing? Did you ride your bike to every local college and stalk players after practice to hit with you? Did you bag groceries and use the money to go to a few tournaments? Did you invent taxing ball machine drills to mimic real play?

The point is it won't be fair, the opportunities won't be the same. But I know how college coaches work. They will take a kid who did the extra and develop his game the first year if he lacks all the tournament experience of a richer kid who played the rankings game from age 10.

And in some way kids that do the off the beaten path stuff have an advantage with some coaches. They get tired of dealing with Chad and Biff who have had every advantage and been top 20 USTA since age 10. A team full of Chad and Biffs is a pain to coach. So they mix in both foreign players to win matches and keep their jobs....and they mix in the kids who bagged groceries.

Sure what you're saying is plausible, but I don't think you can deny that a kid with national results would get the first look. But just for grins, let's use our favorite subject on the board as a case study: DB. You and I agreed that his dad should have seeked to get him more competition against the top kids in his age group. Why? Because as you said he was better off learning how to compete against the best his age instead of playing low level 18's. Now that DB is in officially in the 16's, the opportunities to play the best his age are no longer available to him because he has no ranking in the 16's. He will have to bag groceries, play low level 18's and men's open, whatever. Assuming he chooses that path, I'm guessing that a Peter Smith or Billy Martin wouldn't find the time to look at kids like him considering their alternatives. Point is, he will have to work a lot harder to sell himself and it won't be as easy for sure.
 
Sure what you're saying is plausible, but I don't think you can deny that a kid with national results would get the first look. But just for grins, let's use our favorite subject on the board as a case study: DB. You and I agreed that his dad should have seeked to get him more competition against the top kids in his age group. Why? Because as you said he was better off learning how to compete against the best his age instead of playing low level 18's. Now that DB is in officially in the 16's, the opportunities to play the best his age are no longer available to him because he has no ranking in the 16's. He will have to bag groceries, play low level 18's and men's open, whatever. Assuming he chooses that path, I'm guessing that a Peter Smith or Billy Martin wouldn't find the time to look at kids like him considering their alternatives. Point is, he will have to work a lot harder to sell himself and it won't be as easy for sure.

Okay, lets look at DB. The goal is pros or bust his dad says. Most every top 100 pro was top 16s and 18s and ITF or Junior Slams or Orange Bowl winners.

So yeah, you better get into the top of the rankings for that goal. You can't dodge the top boys in the 16s and 18s if your goal is a money making pro.

This thread is about getting into college without the money to be a top ranked USTA kid.
 

willshot

Semi-Pro
Okay, lets look at DB. The goal is pros or bust his dad says. Most every top 100 pro was top 16s and 18s and ITF or Junior Slams or Orange Bowl winners.

So yeah, you better get into the top of the rankings for that goal. You can't dodge the top boys in the 16s and 18s if your goal is a money making pro.

This thread is about getting into college without the money to be a top ranked USTA kid.


Where in the OP said that this is about getting into college. The kid wants to go pro i believe. Either way you need rankings.
 
Tenniscoach I agree with what you are saying,anytime one has to struggle for something, usually they become a stronger person and perhaps have a little more hunger than the next guy.I also agree with BSPE if you do not have the ranking then you cant play the top tournaments, therefore losing out on opportunities to compete with the best players.Playing the best elevates your game, I dont give a rip about rankings , but I feel like if your kid doesnt play many tournaments will they get left behind?I think about not having my son play tournaments , and just play matchs against women, men , other juniors , and just practice with his coach and play with his friends doubles , singles on the weekend.

I don't think they will be left behind. College coaches know there are limited opportunities to get into the top tournaments. They know its a numbers game. And they know its a financial game for many kids.

BSPE is also right, if you feel being ranked at the top and playing all the top tournaments, and playing the top ranked kids is the only way to go, you better start the rankings game in the 12s.
 

BSPE84

Semi-Pro
There are so many opportunities to compete and develop your game. For example, Florida juniors that were unable to get in the Easter Bowl were competing in a designated tournament back home. And kids that are stuck between age groups can use their ranking in the lower age group to get into the higher age group in the national open tournaments. I believe they take the top 4 that applied from the lower age group.

Chalk, whatever works and we all do the best we can. I happen to believe that national competition is important to develop a college level player. Feel free to disagree.

But as far as your solution for kids between age groups, don't count on it. For this past Easter Bowl, one of my kid's friends who is a real nice player No.2 in the 12's in SoCal (he gave up the 12's long ago) and top 15 National found himself about 25th on the 14's alternates list.
 
Where in the OP said that this is about getting into college. The kid wants to go pro i believe. Either way you need rankings.

Good catch, the OP did say later on his kid wants to be a pro. Another poster later in the thread was asking when rankings became important for college.

You don't need to be top ranked USTA to get looked at by college coaches.
 
Last edited:

willshot

Semi-Pro
Good catch, the OP did say later on his kid wants to be a pro. Another poster later in the thread was asking when rankings became important for college.

You don't need to be top ranked USTA to get looked at by college coaches.

You don't need to be top ranked but playing high level tournys and matches is def part of the process of achieving better matchplay, mental strength, and experience. Winning a real match in a real tourny is different from practice matches. I know there are exceptions but this is what i believe will help the development of play.
 
You don't need to be top ranked but playing high level tournys and matches is def part of the process of achieving better matchplay, mental strength, and experience. Winning a real match in a real tourny is different from practice matches. I know there are exceptions but this is what i believe will help the development of play.

Agreed....ideally every kid who wants to become the best tennis player would have the same opportunity to play the same best kids.

But that is unrealistic for the majority. I don't want any parent or kid to take the easy way out...."oh we can't afford to play all the best kids, and be high ranked and play the best tournaments. Wah, our kid won't play college tennis".

There are other ways. Maybe not the first choice, but they do work. College coaches are coaches, they have assistants, they don't expect every kid to be a finished product by any means.
 
Last edited:

BSPE84

Semi-Pro
Okay, lets look at DB. The goal is pros or bust his dad says. Most every top 100 pro was top 16s and 18s and ITF or Junior Slams or Orange Bowl winners.

So yeah, you better get into the top of the rankings for that goal. You can't dodge the top boys in the 16s and 18s if your goal is a money making pro.

This thread is about getting into college without the money to be a top ranked USTA kid.

You can't dodge the top kids in your age group if you're aiming for D1 either :).
 

seminoleG

Semi-Pro
Sure what you're saying is plausible, but I don't think you can deny that a kid with national results would get the first look. But just for grins, let's use our favorite subject on the board as a case study: DB. You and I agreed that his dad should have seeked to get him more competition against the top kids in his age group. Why? Because as you said he was better off learning how to compete against the best his age instead of playing low level 18's. Now that DB is in officially in the 16's, the opportunities to play the best his age are no longer available to him because he has no ranking in the 16's. He will have to bag groceries, play low level 18's and men's open, whatever. Assuming he chooses that path, I'm guessing that a Peter Smith or Billy Martin wouldn't find the time to look at kids like him considering their alternatives. Point is, he will have to work a lot harder to sell himself and it won't be as easy for sure.

See the USTA by reducing Draws and changing the National Format is heading down the path Junior Basketball did years ago.

Which led to the AAU system because HS Basketball didn't allow the identification of those talented guys at various age group (graduation years).

I am suprised the only Junior Tour is the USTA sanctioned events. With the mis-management I have seen lately I would be very suprised If we don't see other organized SPONSOR backed events begin to appear.

Soccer has several governing bodies and the various regions and leagues that do very well, as do other sports.

A college bud of mine works with a major sports equipment/apparel company and I asked why they arent in Junior Tennis. Basically lack of resources but they are exploring it. Ammount of $$$$ to be made compared to the traditional sports will decide it. I explained how the USTA system works and he asked:
- Do Tourney Directors make money? If not who makes money?
- So you have 10000000 points so what? Do you get player of the year or something?
- Can the #500 kid play aginst the #1 Kid? If the#500 kid wins then what?

Same questions I asked 2 years ago. Still don't know the answers.
 
Last edited:

10schick

Rookie
Still a tough proposition I think, for the simple reason of economics. In the case of the Copper Bowl, I wouldn't want to take my kid to Tucson for a quali this week and hope he loses so I won't have to come back the following week... My pocketbook won't handle that very long and the kid probably needs time to study a little bit too right :).

see below. Computer freaking out.
 
Last edited:

10schick

Rookie
Still a tough proposition I think, for the simple reason of economics. In the case of the Copper Bowl, I wouldn't want to take my kid to Tucson for a quali this week and hope he loses so I won't have to come back the following week... My pocketbook won't handle that very long and the kid probably needs time to study a little bit too right :).

No, no... it was back to back. They held the quali, you win, you stay, you don't you go home. Then a few days later was the Copper Bowl. Bring your school work with you always.
 

BSPE84

Semi-Pro
No, no... it was back to back. They held the quali, you win, you stay, you don't you go home. Then a few days later was the Copper Bowl. Bring your school work with you always.

...but Tucson is soooo boring and my boss might start to wonder why I have a job :).

But still, the things you have to do... and it makes it even more sad when you hear things like people sleeping in their car and the USTA giving WC's to kids playing up then letting them stay a week at Higueras' ranch before Easter Bowl... :shock:
 

tennis5

Professional
Background info:

Copper Bowl ( a huge draw, fun, event) was right after Winter Nationals
(which is also in Arizona).

So, for someone from the East, you already had flown to Arizona, and then a day or two later, you had the Copper Bowl ( same location, no flights).

To enter in the Copper Bowl qualy, ( let's say to enter the next age group),
it was convenient as you were already there. Two tournaments in Arizona, same period of time, one flight.

Then, this year, you had Arizona for end of December, flew back to the NE.
And come January 22nd, you had choices of flying to Florida, Las Vegas, MN , Alabama, GA, or Texas.

I thought the new reduced draws were suppose to reduce travel expenses.
 

tennis5

Professional
Last thought...

My son just really started to play tennis..

( my husband and I don't play....)

He use to play tennis once a week, from ages 8-12
( as he played another sport ( not soccer ) 6 times a week for two travel leagues... yes, beyond crazy... as he got totally burnt out and felt like it wasn't his own anymore, and so switched to tennis last year.

Last summer, age 13, he entered these L3 events with no national points and got in.

He got enough of a ranking, that he could play the bigger events.

But, now, when he ages up, he is not going to be able to do that again.

And not to be a whiner...
but, it is not realistic to age up this summer and play the 16's...

For two reasons.

First, there are boys who are ranked much higher than him nationally,
who can not get into these tournaments as there are not enough slots.

Second, I don't think it makes sense for a 14 year old boy to play a boy on the cusp of 17.

So, I am trying to figure out how this will all play out.

But, it feels like to me that he will miss part of the 16's national experience.
And that in turn, he will miss some exposure to college coaches.

Oh, and I am not DB's dad.
 

chalkflewup

Hall of Fame
Chalk, whatever works and we all do the best we can. I happen to believe that national competition is important to develop a college level player. Feel free to disagree.

But as far as your solution for kids between age groups, don't count on it. For this past Easter Bowl, one of my kid's friends who is a real nice player No.2 in the 12's in SoCal (he gave up the 12's long ago) and top 15 National found himself about 25th on the 14's alternates list.

I understand the significance of rankings in the older divisions, however; I don't believe the University of Virginia is tracking the 10s, 12s, and 14s.

As far as the #2 kid in the 12s from SoCal is concerned, did he win a Super National? If he gave up on the 12s long ago, then how is he doing in the 14s? Your always going to find a kid that didn't get in. The gap years are tough and kids often take lumps in that gap year but I think that helps groom kids into being better competitors.

Kids need to win, they need to lose, and they need to learn that life isn't always fair. Tennis is a great classroom for life.
 

chalkflewup

Hall of Fame
Last thought...

My son just really started to play tennis..

( my husband and I don't play....)

He use to play tennis once a week, from ages 8-12
( as he played another sport ( not soccer ) 6 times a week for two travel leagues... yes, beyond crazy... as he got totally burnt out and felt like it wasn't his own anymore, and so switched to tennis last year.

Last summer, age 13, he entered these L3 events with no national points and got in.

He got enough of a ranking, that he could play the bigger events.

But, now, when he ages up, he is not going to be able to do that again.

And not to be a whiner...
but, it is not realistic to age up this summer and play the 16's...

For two reasons.

First, there are boys who are ranked much higher than him nationally,
who can not get into these tournaments as there are not enough slots.

Second, I don't think it makes sense for a 14 year old boy to play a boy on the cusp of 17.

So, I am trying to figure out how this will all play out.

But, it feels like to me that he will miss part of the 16's national experience.
And that in turn, he will miss some exposure to college coaches.

Oh, and I am not DB's dad.

At some point, your son will be on the cusp of 17 and playing the 14 year junior. Dem are rules.
 

BSPE84

Semi-Pro
I understand the significance of rankings in the older divisions, however; I don't believe the University of Virginia is tracking the 10s, 12s, and 14s.

As far as the #2 kid in the 12s from SoCal is concerned, did he win a Super National? If he gave up on the 12s long ago, then how is he doing in the 14s? Your always going to find a kid that didn't get in. The gap years are tough and kids often take lumps in that gap year but I think that helps groom kids into being better competitors.

Kids need to win, they need to lose, and they need to learn that life isn't always fair. Tennis is a great classroom for life.

Sorry, :confused:
 

chalkflewup

Hall of Fame

It sounds like the kid gave up on the 12s a long time ago because he wasn't being challenged. So if he's made the decision to play 14's then he can earn his way in to the nationals like the rest of the kids. If he's not quite there yet, then he'll get there eventually.
 

BSPE84

Semi-Pro
It sounds like the kid gave up on the 12s a long time ago because he wasn't being challenged. So if he's made the decision to play 14's then he can earn his way in to the nationals like the rest of the kids. If he's not quite there yet, then he'll get there eventually.

You argued that kids should try to use their ranking in a lower age group to qualify and how many younger kids USTA allows per event yadi yada. My real life example was just to demonstrate that it's easier said than done... Now it sounds like you want to argue the merits of the kid's 14's ranking? I'm sorry but that makes no sense.
 

chalkflewup

Hall of Fame
You argued that kids should try to use their ranking in a lower age group to qualify and how many younger kids USTA allows per event yadi yada. My real life example was just to demonstrate that it's easier said than done... Now it sounds like you want to argue the merits of the kid's 14's ranking? I'm sorry but that makes no sense.

My kid is in that odd year and just got into the national open based on the ranking in the lower age group. So it does happen.

I probably didn't do a good job explaining so, let me try and clarify what i meant with respect to my comment about the merit of the SoCal kid's 14s ranking. I was merely asking you how the kid was doing in the 14s. You mentioned he was long done playing in the 12s which would imply that he was playing in tbs 14s and working on his 14s ranking. If that is the case, then he has opportunities to earn his way into the national tournaments - that's all.
 

tennis5

Professional
Well, this is off topic to the original thread, but relevant to the last posts about playing up.

Is it better for long term development for junior players for them to:

1) Play in their age group, be the #1 seed ( and thus have a target on their back),
have everything to lose, play kids with lesser talent, but have the mental stress.
So, this #1 category would be facing less tennis skills, but more mental pressure.

Or

2) Play the older age group, be no seed, have everything to gain,
play kids with more talent ( and thus improve your game), and have zero pressure.
So this #2 category would be facing more tennis skills, but no mental pressure.
 
Having gone through the recruiting process with my daughter recently I can say that the coaches want to see #1. They want to see how they do with the target on them AND (surprisingly) how they do in the backdraw. Kid's who W/D after the main draw turn off a lot of coaches.
 

Tennishacker

Professional
Well, this is off topic to the original thread, but relevant to the last posts about playing up.

Is it better for long term development for junior players for them to:

1) Play in their age group, be the #1 seed ( and thus have a target on their back),
have everything to lose, play kids with lesser talent, but have the mental stress.
So, this #1 category would be facing less tennis skills, but more mental pressure.

Or

2) Play the older age group, be no seed, have everything to gain,
play kids with more talent ( and thus improve your game), and have zero pressure.
So this #2 category would be facing more tennis skills, but no mental pressure.

Brad, you gotta do both.
 
Well, this is off topic to the original thread, but relevant to the last posts about playing up.

Is it better for long term development for junior players for them to:

1) Play in their age group, be the #1 seed ( and thus have a target on their back),
have everything to lose, play kids with lesser talent, but have the mental stress.
So, this #1 category would be facing less tennis skills, but more mental pressure.

Or

2) Play the older age group, be no seed, have everything to gain,
play kids with more talent ( and thus improve your game), and have zero pressure.
So this #2 category would be facing more tennis skills, but no mental pressure.

#1 is the toughest. Its easy to play better players in other settings. Heck any kid can enter an open and battle ex college players. You can find a way to accomplish #2 at anytime.

I think the vast majority of playing up in the 16s and 18s is to dodge kids their age. Losing to kids their age would bust many delusions. Playing older kids, you lose its fine, you win you are Nadal.

Some sections a talented kid may have no choice but to play up though. But when you see playing up all the time in FL. and CA. for example, and the kid is not already top ranked in his age group....its dodging and fooling oneself
 
Last edited:

chalkflewup

Hall of Fame
#1 is the toughest. Its easy to play better players in other settings. Heck any kid can enter an open and battle ex college players. You can find a way to accomplish #2 at anytime.

I think the vast majority of playing up in the 16s and 18s is to dodge kids their age. Losing to kids their age would bust many delusions. Playing older kids, you lose its fine, you win you are Nadal.

Some sections a talented kid may have no choice but to play up though. But when you see playing up all the time in FL. and CA. for example, and the kid is not already top ranked in his age group....its dodging and fooling oneself

I think you need a mix of playing up and playing within your group. Both are beneficial to junior development.
 
I think you need a mix of playing up and playing within your group. Both are beneficial to junior development.

Its all about why you play up. Playing up to test the player who is rocking his own age group is great and valuable. Playing up against very low ranked kids to say you "played the 18s" is not.
 

seminoleG

Semi-Pro
Its all about why you play up. Playing up to test the player who is rocking his own age group is great and valuable. Playing up against very low ranked kids to say you "played the 18s" is not.

We got some girls that skipped 12s and went to 14s. If you saw them play you would see why unless you are dominating the lower age it's a waste.

They stay back, play defense, hit short, never take the opening. Weak court presence..... They have low expectations and play down to them. When they get a big hitter they are overwhelmed even if they could compete they don't. Losing becomes comfortable, and easier than working hard. They practice like losers. Some wins or good losses in their age group would ave been a better option.
 

ClarkC

Hall of Fame
Well, this is off topic to the original thread, but relevant to the last posts about playing up.

Is it better for long term development for junior players for them to:

1) Play in their age group, be the #1 seed ( and thus have a target on their back),
have everything to lose, play kids with lesser talent, but have the mental stress.
So, this #1 category would be facing less tennis skills, but more mental pressure.

Or

2) Play the older age group, be no seed, have everything to gain,
play kids with more talent ( and thus improve your game), and have zero pressure.
So this #2 category would be facing more tennis skills, but no mental pressure.

It is best to do a mixture of the two, to vary the mental and physical experience. Surprising that so many tennis kids and parents cannot see this. But competitive sports are tied strongly to egos, and once someone thinks "I have left [fill in age group] behind" then they refuse to play anything but the next age group up. So, they deliberately avoid getting a mixture of experiences.
 

BSPE84

Semi-Pro
It is best to do a mixture of the two, to vary the mental and physical experience. Surprising that so many tennis kids and parents cannot see this. But competitive sports are tied strongly to egos, and once someone thinks "I have left [fill in age group] behind" then they refuse to play anything but the next age group up. So, they deliberately avoid getting a mixture of experiences.

I think physical attributes will have a lot to do with whether it makes sense to play up - even just occasionally. I know around here, the average 12U wouldn't do very well if he runs into a 14U kid who's about to age out. Same with a young 14U trying the 16s. The kid will develop bad habits and risk injury.
 
If your kid is winning 2:1 or better ratio in the age group against the best competition you can afford to play, great. Play up a little for further development. But a kid who may be winning 30-50% of their matches? They would improve more with properly designed drills or practice matches where kids go for shots.
 
For me Ernesto Escobedo is the perfect example of playing up. Won the Easter Bowl in 14’s. Made it through qualifying and lost to Bjorn Fratangelo in the L1 18’s spring championship. Lost 5,4 to Marcos Giron in the Claremont ITF, played several L2’s in 16s, Orange Bowl in 14s – lost Cons final, Won the Orange County designated in 16s.

In short he is dominating his age group and showing up at all the biggest tournaments. Doing well in 16’s at the designated and L2’s, and finally going 5,4 with Marcos - WOW. Watch out for this guy.


http://tennislink.usta.com/Tourname...2498&p=2157&PlayerID=ryrAN9bzsULf8VbcgP0Otg==
 

BSPE84

Semi-Pro
For me Ernesto Escobedo is the perfect example of playing up. Won the Easter Bowl in 14’s. Made it through qualifying and lost to Bjorn Fratangelo in the L1 18’s spring championship. Lost 5,4 to Marcos Giron in the Claremont ITF, played several L2’s in 16s, Orange Bowl in 14s – lost Cons final, Won the Orange County designated in 16s.

In short he is dominating his age group and showing up at all the biggest tournaments. Doing well in 16’s at the designated and L2’s, and finally going 5,4 with Marcos - WOW. Watch out for this guy.


http://tennislink.usta.com/Tourname...2498&p=2157&PlayerID=ryrAN9bzsULf8VbcgP0Otg==

Agreed, this guy has nothing left to prove in the 14s after Easter Bowl... I'm guessing he'll be aging up soon anyway. What a beast!
 

chalkflewup

Hall of Fame
Agreed, this guy has nothing left to prove in the 14s after Easter Bowl... I'm guessing he'll be aging up soon anyway. What a beast!

He didn't drop a set at the Easter Bowl and beat Henrik 4&1 in the finals. I understand he ages up in a month or two.
 
Top