Division I Men's Team Indoors

[mikej]

1 University of Virginia 1
2 University of Tennessee 3
3 Ohio State 4
4 University of Texas at Austin 5
5 UCLA 6
6 Duke University 17
7 University of Illinois 9
8 Stanford 7
9 University of Southern California 2
10 University of Florida 11
11 Baylor 8
12 University of Georgia 16
13 University of Kentucky 13
14 Texas A&M 10
15 University of Louisville 12
16 Georgia Tech 15
17 Texas Tech 14
18 University of Mississippi 18
19 University of Washington 29
20 California 19

pretty reasonable new rankings...i think georgia should be getting more credit for their weekend, and i don't really understand why texas deserves #4...but it's getting closer to feeling about right for this year's group of teams

obviously usc should recover a bit, i think they're a top six for sure even though i'm not as in love with their chances as a lot of people seem to be this year (deservedly so with their recent history)

 

[mikej]

and the womens...

Rank Team Last Week Ranking
1 Stanford 1
2 Florida 2
3 North Carolina 4
4 Duke 6
5 University of Michigan 8
6 California 5
7 Baylor 3
8 University of Miami (FL) 9
9 University of Virginia 23
10 University of Georgia 10

congrats to uva on their big jump...four ACC teams in the top 10, should be a good dual season

 

[matchplay]

Most top recruits want to develop their tennis talents and have a shot at a pro career. They also want a good education, especially since a pro career is hardly a certainty.

Stanford has gotten some monster recruits. By that, I mean that only the top 5 recruits in a given class are likely to have a good shot at a pro career, and most of them will get no higher than playing Challengers. Klahn, Thacher, and Clayton were all top 3 recruits when they came out. They are all still good players, but only Klahn has a shot to get out of Futures and Challengers some day without getting a wild card.

Most schools have a mixture of players who performed about as expected when they were recruited, better than expected, and worse than expected. Stanford has had one player in its recent history perform better than expected: Klahn. However, we might be overrating Klahn based on getting hot at one tournament last May. Devin Britton won an NCAA title the year before, and it is far from clear that he will ever be in an ATP tour event without a wild card. The consensus is that he got hot for one tournament.

We also have to consider that NCAA singles play starts the day after the team final. Players who compete in the team final are often worn out and go out early in the individual tournament. Steve Johnson and J.P. Smith fit that description last year. That helped Klahn win the title.

Given all that, and the fact that Klahn was a top 3 recruit in the first place, there is only last May's tournament title to indicate that Klahn has done better than expected. So it might be more accurate to say that no player in recent history at Stanford (last 5-6 recruiting classes) has developed into a better player than expected. Look into the junior backgrounds of Hirschman, Clayton, Thacher, Klahn, Kandath, Lin, etc., and then say who turned out better than expected.

That's what I mean by wasting talent.

Well stated clark
i asked a few weeks back if anyone could name more than a handful of college ballers that have made money or will project to make money on tour....(say top 30 in the world for an average of 3 years might enable you to put a few bucks away for a rainy day)-the more i think about it, just Isner & Blake come to mind in recent years. Klahn could have gone the way of Britton, but i would guess he is too wise to have made that mistake & has fantastic parental guidence as well as a coach that mentors for 'life". let's face it, even Harrison is a long shot.
some of the UVA guys will have as good a shot as anyone. in a few years, another school will recruit well & be afforded the same talent pool. Stanford has had its many runs & a history of many championships...USC has had great teams lately, Duke could make runs in the next several years- it's the circle of life.
it is hard to win period, only a handful of kids & teamd do it consistantly.

 

[DownTheLine]

Well if the Mens Stanford team ever does bad we could always look to the womens to brag.

 

[diredesire]

any more news from the stringing room?

What more are you interested in? Now that the tournament's over, I can ask for some specifics, anything besides Stanford? Like I said earlier, I'm taking requests

 

[bfactor61]

Virginia please

 

[T1000]

Is that Duke over Stanford that I see?

 

[diredesire]

Virginia please

I'll try and get access to the stringing log, any particular frame you're interested in? Lots of frames in the mid 50s, team strings were adrenaline, rpm 16 and 17, and alu. I believe they may have had bboriginal too...

 

[PennAlum]

Sam didnt' get rejected at Stanford. He's always had 2 choices. Go PRO or play for a year at USC then go pro. Sam is from that area and was always interested in playing for USC and not anywhere else. At least that is what i read in an article way back when Sam was still considering Pro or College.
JP Mcenroe got into stanford and played for a year. and it wasn't because he was a national scholar......

You are misinformed. Querry couldn't get into Stanford. I know for a fact.

 

[PennAlum]

One of the main reasons why Stanford players typically don't improve is the academic rigors of Standford. First you have to be smart enough to get in and then being smart you quickly realize that your tennis college career is only a temporary haven and relatively unimportant in the greater scheme of life compared to getting great grades and getting a job for a hedge fund, private equity or institutional Wall Street firm! Then you have a chance to get seriously rich. Stanford players realize the odds of wealth accumulation is better served with good grades than pursuing a career on the ATP. The same influences are realized by Ivy players, many of which top 20 in the country in the 18s USTA juniors before entering college. Food for thought. Yes it is fun to think of the possibilities that a college player can break through in the pros but Stanford and Ivy players know that nowadays for every James Blake there are many more Devin Brittons and other journeymen who can barely make a living:

Rank
210 Rajeev Ram
215 Witten, Jesse
260 DeHeart, Ryler
282 Kim, Kevin
286 Levine, Jesse
314 Ouellette, Greg
337 Yani, Michael
345 Monroe, Nicholas
386 El Mihdawy, Adam
395 Evans, Brendan
465 Cox, Jordan
466 Simmonds, Phillip
481 Poole, Robbye
484 Kudla, Denis
528 Shabaz, Michael
551 Zivkovic, Dennis
564 Collarini, Andrea
584 Thompson, Nathan
614 Strode, Blake
617 Sykut, Maciek
622 Domijan, Alexander
637 Johnson, Steve
638 Krajicek, Austin
664 Odesnik, Wayne
684 Kosakowski, Daniel
685 Sock, Jack
688 Hochwalt, Tyler
707 Pollock, Conor
711 Ludlow, James
715 Trombetta, Ty
721 Jenkins, Jarmere
763 Williams, Rhyne
769 Koniecko, Bryan
781 Buchanan, Chase
783 Nunez, Eric
784 McClune, Michael
799 Klahn, Bradley
802 Young, Ryan
805 Britton, Devin
810 Racz, Christopher
811 Kwon, Chris
833 Bangoura, Sekou

 

[Fedace]

What more are you interested in? Now that the tournament's over, I can ask for some specifics, anything besides Stanford? Like I said earlier, I'm taking requests

What type of Alu was Thacher using ? BB, Alu power, Alu power rough ? and what grip size ? any lead added to the stock frame ? any info on Alex Clayton gear ? thanks

 

[bfactor61]

Alex Domijan,Jarmere Jenkins,Michael Shabaz, and Sanam Singh

 

[mikej]

One of the main reasons why Stanford players typically don't improve is the academic rigors of Standford. First you have to be smart enough to get in and then being smart you quickly realize that your tennis college career is only a temporary haven and relatively unimportant in the greater scheme of life compared to getting great grades and getting a job for a hedge fund, private equity or institutional Wall Street firm!

You are misinformed. Querry couldn't get into Stanford. I know for a fact.

lol, a very new poster who thinks Stanford is the only great athletic program that feeds Wall Street and great non-tennis careers

and coincidentally you're going along with this Querrey story...I'm so glad you "know for a fact" but you're going to have to do a little better than that...even when clark and I provided a great deal of evidence of a certain individual not getting in to Duke, db laughed it off as fiction (a family history of going to Duke and tennisrecruiting winter commitment that suddenly shifted to wake forest in March)...no one can really prove these stories considering admissions records are not public, but I want at least as much information as we previously provided

one more question:
how much is db paying you?

i'd think you were another account of db's if you weren't trying to stir up trouble over at penn...your alma mater's tennis program sounds super already but destroying it more is probably a good idea you rabble-rouser

 

[diredesire]

What type of Alu was Thacher using ? BB, Alu power, Alu power rough ? and what grip size ? any lead added to the stock frame ? any info on Alex Clayton gear ? thanks

It was BB ALU, I don't recall grip size (I need these requests BEFORE they leave, dude ). If i had to guess, I'd say 3/8. I don't recall seeing any lead on the Stanford frames that came across our machines (3 frames total, the rest strung at the other site). No info on Clayton, like I said, we had two sites, and Stanford was almost always at the other one I can try e-mailing the other site. I'll let you know what I get back!

Alex Domijan,Jarmere Jenkins,Michael Shabaz, and Sanam Singh

We didn't have them itemized by name (players won't fill out a full order form, for whatever reason. Can you shoot me school and frame they play with?

 

[PennAlum]

lol, a very new poster who thinks Stanford is the only great athletic program that feeds Wall Street and great non-tennis careers

one more question:
how much is db paying you?

i'd think you were another account of db's if you weren't trying to stir up trouble over at penn...your alma mater's tennis program sounds super already but destroying it more is probably a good idea you rabble-rouser

Are you stupid? I know Querrey's junior coach we've discussed it at the time. Querrey then was going to play for USC but told the coach that he didn't need any financial aid. He had good success on the tour and decided to go straight to the pros. I really don't care if you don't believe me, piker. Stanford has a less forgiving admission director. Just because I tell you that Querrey didn't get into Stanford does NOT imply that I think Stanford is the only great athlete program Blah, blah, blah. Don't read threads with a forgone bias, it makes you look stupid.

Outing the the malaise in the Penn tennis program will hope to embarrass the A.D. in firing the morally and ethically bankrupted coach and will be good for the program.

 

[Fedace]

Are you stupid? I know Querrey's junior coach we've discussed it at the time. Querrey then was going to play for USC but told the coach that he didn't need any financial aid. He had good success on the tour and decided to go straight to the pros. I really don't care if you don't believe me, piker. Stanford has a less forgiving admission director. Just because I tell you that Querrey didn't get into Stanford does NOT imply that I think Stanford is the only great athlete program Blah, blah, blah. Don't read threads with a forgone bias, it makes you look stupid.

Outing the the malaise in the Penn tennis program will hope to embarrass the A.D. in firing the morally and ethically bankrupted coach and will be good for the program.

Agree. Querry said himself "you have to hit the iron while its hot". after 2 straight challenger wins during summer. That pretty much made up his mind to turn pro instead of going to USC.

 

[mikej]

Are you stupid? I know Querrey's junior coach we've discussed it at the time. Querrey then was going to play for USC but told the coach that he didn't need any financial aid. He had good success on the tour and decided to go straight to the pros. I really don't care if you don't believe me, piker. Stanford has a less forgiving admission director. Just because I tell you that Querrey didn't get into Stanford does NOT imply that I think Stanford is the only great athlete program Blah, blah, blah. Don't read threads with a forgone bias, it makes you look stupid.

Outing the the malaise in the Penn tennis program will hope to embarrass the A.D. in firing the morally and ethically bankrupted coach and will be good for the program.

My lumping you in with db had more to do with your other, non-Querrey statements about things Stanford students realize, such as:
"Stanford players realize the odds of wealth accumulation is better served with good grades than pursuing a career on the ATP. The same influences are realized by Ivy players"

when you're saying that as the reason Stanford players might not be developing as much as other programs, and mentioning only one other group of students in the country that realize similar things, the obvious implication is that players at other schools don't realize and accomplish such things...which is ridiculous, I can just barely count on two hands the number of players in the last 5 years from the team where I went that work on Wall Street now - not that a finance career is my definition of success, but just going along with your example

Querrey is just another piece of the puzzle...a personal anecdote certainly isn't going to make me believe Stanford wasn't willing to have their team aided by Querrey for a year or two before he turned pro when other posters (Fedace) and the internet (his wiki and the linked article) disagree (well, at least they make no mention of Stanford while mentioning USC as his college option)...like you say, I imagine you obviously don't care whether I believe this story...just weighing in since others (well, other) have weighed in on my supposed lack of evidence that a certain top-10 recruit got rejected from Duke

probably did respond a little more venomously than was necessary, but I've been hearing the same condescending refrain for a while from a certain poster, so I brought a little baggage along, my bad

 

[Fedace]

Querry's 1st choice was USC. period. no other explanation needed.

 

[PennAlum]

when you're saying that as the reason Stanford players might not be developing as much as other programs, and mentioning only one other group of students in the country that realize similar things, the obvious implication is that players at other schools don't realize and accomplish such things...which is ridiculous, I can just barely count on two hands the number of players in the last 5 years from the team where I went that work on Wall Street now - not that a finance career is my definition of success, but just going along with your example

Querrey is just another piece of the puzzle...a personal anecdote certainly isn't going to make me believe Stanford wasn't willing to have their team aided by Querrey for a year or two before he turned pro when other posters (Fedace) and the internet (his wiki and the linked article) disagree (well, at least they make no mention of Stanford while mentioning USC as his college option)...like you say, I imagine you obviously don't care whether I believe this story...just weighing in since others (well, other) have weighed in on my supposed lack of evidence that a certain top-10 recruit got rejected from Duke

probably did respond a little more venomously than was necessary, but I've been hearing the same condescending refrain for a while from a certain poster, so I brought a little baggage along, my bad

np on the venom, my apologies in return. Said coach was also surprised that Querry couldn't get into Stanford. He said that the admission requirements would not accommodate him and in that vein was one of the reason Stanford's tennis team had suffered over the years. They would never say on Wikipedia that he couldn't get into Stanford because it's just not public information. Players like to say the the college they will be playing for IS their first choice. That's why you see players discarding all their exploratory college choices after they sign on Tennis Recruiting. Besides, this is not the first time we have all seen Fedace being inaccurate subject to hyperbole.

I've seen many Ivy League tennis players deteriorate over the years. Many of these recruited players are top 25 in national juniors but they are on a different mission. The academic pressure is relentless and as they get to be juniors and seniors, they are looking to get better grades and land a good job. In the main, many of these players are economics majors and are looking to get a Wall Street job and in the main, these firms tend to focus their recruiting at Ivy League schools plus Stanford, even more so at the MBA level. They have given up on the ATP dream earlier on than the players than attend Florida, Ohio State, Texas, Georgia and the other highly ranked tennis schools. For these grads, the odds ARE better for them to focus on a successful finance career than an ATP career. You're not going to see Sekou, Trip, Chase, Sarmiento and players of that ilk work a career on Wall Street but for guys like Clayton, Klahn and Thatcher and other Ivy players, this is a distinct possibility.

I know Tripper, he obviously wanted to play for Duke all along. For him to switch to Wake is a decision made by Duke rather than him.

 

[bfactor61]

Virginia-babolat pure drive, wilson k blade, babolat pure storm

 

[mikej]

np on the venom, my apologies in return. Said coach was also surprised that Querry couldn't get into Stanford. He said that the admission requirements would not accommodate him and in that vein was one of the reason Stanford's tennis team had suffered over the years. They would never say on Wikipedia that he couldn't get into Stanford because it's just not public information. Players like to say the the college they will be playing for IS their first choice. That's why you see players discarding all their exploratory college choices after they sign on Tennis Recruiting. Besides, this is not the first time we have all seen Fedace being inaccurate subject to hyperbole.

Welp, if true (I'm still a bit of a skeptic on this one, even if it seems you're a pretty in-the-loop guy from your last post) I think that was an incredibly dumb decision by Stanford. I can understand not taking a top recruit under normal circumstances, once every so often (a la Tripper), if he's a four-year, going-to-be-working-towards-the-diploma kind of guy and just doesn't have the academic credentials you're looking for. But I don't see much harm in taking a guy who is going to survive some freshman classes, help one of your most visible athletic teams immensely for a year or two, then move along to the pro tour and potentially bring your program even more name recognition.

From an article db posted a number of times, I seem to remember that they now have a more reasonable admissions director with a Big-10 or something background. Good thing for Stanford, certainly, if their old gatekeeper was making crazy decisions like that.

 

[Clemson_tennis]

Tripper Carleton is the weirdest player in the nation. Drops bagels on ya then gets bageled. Mentally unstable on court

 

[PennAlum]

From an article db posted a number of times, I seem to remember that they now have a more reasonable admissions director with a Big-10 or something background. Good thing for Stanford, certainly, if their old gatekeeper was making crazy decisions like that.

Coach said Coach Whit tried his best to get him in but yes, under this new admission guy there has been more leeway Querrey probably would have gotten in under the new guy.

Trip has mental blocks against some players, e.g. he's always had a problem playing Evan King, it's never close. Then he's beaten a lot of quality guys the first time he plays them. Like a lot of current players, his backhand is so much better than his forehand which breaks down. Some of it is burnout as he's has been playing a very long long and was traveling by himself to junior nationals staying with host families.

 

[Tar Heel Tennis]

if Tripper had gone to Duke, we never would have seen the wonderfully entertaining match in last year's ACC Tourney against Reid - complete with the 100 yard racket toss

 

[diredesire]

Sorry about the huge delay, I went on a week and a half trip to LA. I got some information right before the trip from the stringer at the other site, as it isn't my records, I don't stand behind these frames listed, I don't think the stringers at the other site have as critical/perceptive an eye as I do when it comes to PJs etc. Half the time they dont' even list the specific model...

Red Code/Sensi (sensation?), J. Bar, H.Prestige, 57lb
Bradley // H. Prestige // ALU Power // 55 lb
Ryan // H. Prestige // ALU Power // 55 lb
Ted Kelly // K6.1 95 (no string pattern listed) // M ALU, X Pacific Gut @ 62LB
Alex Clayton // Prestige MP // Lux ALU // 59, 59, 60 (3 different frames)
Matt Kandath // "Head Liquidmetal" (you see what i mean?) // Alu Power //57
Denis Lin // Prestige MP // RedCode/Sensation 61lb

Stanford also recently played us, my stringing coworkers got the following:
Thatcher: YT Prestige MP, Lux @ 51
Clayton YT Prestige Mid, Lux @60
Klahn, YT Prestige MP, Lux @ 52? 53? (hard to read the picture they sent me)
Kelly k6.1 95 @ 64 lb Lux/Sensation
Lin, Redcode/Sensation @54Lb, YT prestige mid
Kandath, LM Rad OS, Lux @ 52.

Looks like the tensions (and in some cases strings!) changed up since indoors?? I wouldn't imagine this to be very common, though...