Discussion in 'Junior League & Tournament Talk' started by ga tennis, Jan 24, 2013.
5-10%? 30% after tax on my son.
I think this is a pretty good assessment
Not sure how much time Michael Chang actually teaches tennis in China. I think he is pretty busy playing exhibition and senior tours.
Not for me to say the Chinese billionaire, or you, is stupid.
A friend of mine is a lot crazier - they would spend almost everything after basic family needs on their daughter and son's tennis training. Both kids were attending a full-time tennis academy. The daughter is playing for a Big 10 power house. The son is a blue chip. For many Chinese families, children are the main focus of their daily life!
We could have spent the same amount for our son to attend a good private school. About 30% of children in Delaware attend private schools. Would you say that these families are stupid and waste their money? Would the children attending private school have a better life than those attending public schools? But I am sure that these parents just want their children to have the best education possible. For us, tennis would allow my son to have a lot better chance of getting into an Ivy. Tennis has made my son happier and healthier, given him confidence, allowed him to meet so many good friends... It's really worthy every penny!
Agree. Not for me to judge. Hope the intention behind my prior post was not misunderstood
I do agree with you that spending $700 a day or $250,000 a year is insane or not very smart!
If $250,000 is 30% or less of the family's annual after tax income, how can we say it is not smart?
Now, if the money is being spent so the kid has "a lot better chance of getting into an Ivy", of course it is good to understand those odds.
Each Ivy sport has its number of "slots" with its admissions office. The candidates it proposes to the admissions office need to have academic stats close to or above the minimum Academic Index score. I would say for tennis there are two, maybe three slots per year.
Some Ivies require each sport to meet the Academic Index minimum. Others combine the scores across all sports, so that if the recruits in some sports are a little below the threshold, a high Index number in other sports can compensate.
In the former case, sports...not only tennis....can be a tiebreaker between two applicants with the same academic credentials, as long as those credentials exceed the Index standard. In the latter case, unfortunately for tennis families, Ivies usually look to tennis recruits to offset low Index scores from kids in other less civilized athletic pursuits. So at these schools the tennis recruits probably would have been admitted even without tennis.
Links about the academic index have been posted here before you joined, but if you google it, you will be directed to the key sites
That family wanted to make their son a professional tennis player. However, top tennis coaches in China did not want to train him. Based on this only, I just don't think spending $250,000 a year in US would make this kid a touring pro that can make a decent living. So, this is not smart money.
On the other hand, if the boy is smart and is willing to work hard, he may improve his tennis enough to become a 5 star. In addition, he may get 2,000 SAT to meet minimum AI for an Ivy. Again, if getting into a top college is the goal, then one only needs to spend far less than $100,000 a year with Evert or Bollettieri.
How about donating $1,000,000 to an Ivy? Would that help kids' admission?
I think the minimum AI for Ivy athletes is about 190. Safe is maybe about 210. Don't see where 2000 SAT is the key criterion or minimum. Maybe that donation would help you, who knows!
Sorry, I'm not saying it literally, but meaning that you can't just buy a tennis player. I'm just assuming they are doing it to make him a pro as per the post about that kid. Hey if parents want and can afford to fork out wads of cash keep it coming, but doesn't guarantee a tour player, which I suspect many of the parents are looking for.
I agree with that!
(But maybe you can buy an Ivy Leaguer. Not sure about that myself, hope more people post up on that topic)
Well I know a kid who is on Harvard, one of their top players and he trained pretty much with one coach, at small club, and had 4.95 gpa. Never full time, and not sure what his parents spend but I would guess about one month of bills was about the same as one day for the kid from China.
Winston Lin, the #1 single at Columbia, ranked #40 something ITA, was coached by his dad, a professor. He only hit one hour a day in the winter. His dad did not start to play tennis until he was about 40. Really amazing!
In percentage terms?
I'm calling a time out for myself, because I don't see from this thread or anywhere else where this supposed Chinese family was trying to buy a ranking or an Ivy admission. For all we know the exorbitant tennis expense was chump change to them and a frolic.
On the other hand........lots of indications on the Board that good ol' 'mericans are spending a high percentage of their wealth on just those objectives.
Not judging this to be good or bad.......just wondering how China got dragged into this. Because Li Na made the finals?
Anyway, I'm on time out here for at least a few more posts.
From page two.......
"My daughter trained with a boy from china who is here to become a pro. The mom said there are few choices and competition is too strong to get the top pros attention in china. Here she buys the time and gets what she wants. She is of new money where she says that her son will never have to get a job so she will do whatever it takes to reach her sons dream. She spends $700/day on tennis!"
I'm only commenting on this, not racist or anything else. Why do posters on here get so bent out of shape? As a teaching pro I personally think parents spend more than needed in chasing the tennis dream, but it is their money and dreams to pursue. I see parents pulling kids out of school to train full time and their kids are barely ranked top150 locally. But, it is what it is, academies have a business to run.
Separate names with a comma.