Having a 4 Star (or 3 star) 6th Grader (or 7th grader) repeat their grade?

watergirl

New User
1 - 5 Star - who actually went down to a 4 star.
1 - 4 star - stayed a 4 star
3 - 3 stars - stayed a 3 star

All have only recently (last 3 months) changed their graduation year so it will be interesting to see how it pans out in the future.

I do think there is a fairness issue if age is not in the formula.
 

hound 109

Semi-Pro
TRN's clients are

1. College Coaches
2. Junior players who hope to be recruited
3. Advertisers

The college coaches want to build the best team possible. I don't think they care whether a prospective recruit has dropped back a grade or two. They are concerned with the product they see Junior Year in High School. If that product is nearing 19 years old with 20 more pounds of muscle and a couple more years of experience, then bingo! They all want to keep their jobs, feed the family. Their teams need to perform. They want the best odds chance.

So news flash -- TRN and the college coaches are just fine with the system.

Again, you can try to change the system, or you can work within the system... that is your choice.

That being said, here is a possible idea that could be win/win/win for all customers of the TRN:

Add another field to the Player Overview.

That field will simply factor 'Age of Player' into the (what I think is pretty perfect) comprehensive Recruiting List formula. This will give a better picture for those clients (players and the coaches) who ARE interested in age-related comparison.

No birthdays/birth quarters need to be listed on the player's pages.

The topper is that TRN can sell the naming rights to this field to an advertiser and hopefully make some money!



***BTW I find it oppresive when users hop into discussions and start calling the people discussing matters whiners. It's obvious they haven't read the threads, thought things through and/or have anything to contribute to the discussion. Keep on discussing things people!

Good post.
 
Which is why a kid who's 12-18 mos. older than most (in a grade) has the advantage.....if he routinely beats a kid HIS age (but a grade higher)....the TRN algorythym has this as a HUGE win....when actually he just beat a kid his own age.

Yes older player do have an advantage, we all agree on that fact. Generally speaking kids in a higher grade are better players, if you beat better players your ranking goes up. You ranking has nothing to do with age. It has everything to do with how you compare with other players in your grade.

TCF, I provided 4 kids (not 5) from my observation.
I do like adding age into the "formulas" for coming up with rankings. No reason why it couldn't be part of the formula since i assume that TRN obtains the ages (or age up dates) from the USTA electronically (along with the match results).

You don’t seem to understand what college coaches are trying to do. They are trying to find the best kids in a class. Age is not a factor. The only thing that matters is how they compare in skill to other kids in there class. How is this difficult to understand? You cannot add age to the formula when age does not matter.

Bingo. If a kid gets more credit for beating a kid with an 'older' class year, then it is encouraging the holding back stuff.

Total no brainer, use age in the formulation, not Class year. So even if they refuse to list the kid's ages, at least factor age into their equation.

This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. The only thing the coach cares about is how the kids compare to other kids in the same graduating class. You suggestion to substitute age for Class year shows a complete misunderstanding of what TRN is all about.

I do think there is a fairness issue if age is not in the formula.

You have got to be kidding. I am not sure even how to begin to respond to this statement. We have lost all perspective on the issues at hand. The only factor is how you compare to kids in your Class. When you are playing a collage match they do not ask who is younger and then give that person a few games to make the match fairer. We have really dropped off the deep end.
 
justinmadison, I don't really disagree with the facts as you've presented them BUT TRN isn't just for college coaches although that may be their primary goal. It is also a tool for parents and while the age of a recruit may not matter to college coaches per se it could be a tool the kid and parent use in recruiting when talking to coaches (i.e being able to accurately point out that you/your kid is a 17 YO HS senior and a couple others being considered are 19 YO HS seniors - There is a 'tennis potential' angle that can be used by the kid/parent of the younger kid and could be of use to the coach. Granted it's a minute point in the big picture but one that there is no harm in making available, IMO.

Again, it's just one added item so I don't see any downside, even if it's just useless to most people.
 
justinmadison, I don't really disagree with the facts as you've presented them BUT TRN isn't just for college coaches although that may be their primary goal. It is also a tool for parents and while the age of a recruit may not matter to college coaches per se it could be a tool the kid and parent use in recruiting when talking to coaches (i.e being able to accurately point out that you/your kid is a 17 YO HS senior and a couple others being considered are 19 YO HS seniors - There is a 'tennis potential' angle that can be used by the kid/parent of the younger kid and could be of use to the coach. Granted it's a minute point in the big picture but one that there is no harm in making available, IMO.
Again, it's just one added item so I don't see any downside, even if it's just useless to most people.

I don’t think I agree. You would have to make a case the 17 YO HS senior has more potential than a 19 YO HS senior. Why would you believe this is true? Tennis players continue to improve well past mid-twenties. If anything, as a college coach I am more likely to take the 19 YO because they will be more mature and I should have fewer problems both on court and off court. Older is better. Trying to use age backfires on the younger players.
 

Soianka

Hall of Fame
You have got to be kidding. I am not sure even how to begin to respond to this statement. We have lost all perspective on the issues at hand. The only factor is how you compare to kids in your Class. When you are playing a collage match they do not ask who is younger and then give that person a few games to make the match fairer. We have really dropped off the deep end.

I have to agree.

Keysmickey wrote: There is a 'tennis potential' angle that can be used by the kid/parent of the younger kid and could be of use to the coach. Granted it's a minute point in the big picture but one that there is no harm in making available, IMO.

My daughter is starting the college recruiting process and I don't see how it would ever be helpful to compare yourself to another player and try to use the fact that you are a couple of years younger as a selling point.

I think it would seem kind of ridiculous and desperate to make such an argument.

Coaches really do not discuss other potential recruits with a player anyway.
 
Coaches really do not discuss other potential recruits with a player anyway.

They certainly do with the top kids and parents. Just like in football where you want to know how many QBs a school is taking, tennis kids and parents want to know the other recruits. It determines the competition for playing # 1 singles, #2 singles, etc. I know many kids who have changed schools based on the landscape of other recruits.
 
Your opinions are valid but it doesn't mean they are the only way ... Having gone through the process last year with a daughter who was (1) on the very young edge of her class and (2) a very late starter to tennis (12), meant her up side vs. kids who have been playing since age six or seven had the possibility of being huge (Note: I said possibility as this will never be black and white or an across the board thing) but it was (in fact) a useful selling point in our case. We certainly were able to 'weed out' programs whose coaches only wanted the 'complete player' in favor of those coaches who actually looked forward to the opportunity of being a real coach to a certain degree (there are a lot of them out there). We could have sold on her results (of which she had some good ones) or her ranking alone, which was mid 4 star but I knew her true value was in what is to come and the age issue certainly affects that viewpoint to some (small) degree.

What I am saying is that it may not be a big deal and the usefulness certainly isn't across the board but that doesn't mean it can't be helpful in some situations. Remember not all of the players are the same, come from the same background or are looking for the same things. The same is true of the individual coaches. Therefore I ask again, how can the inclusion of this information be detrimental to anyone? If you don't find it necessary that is fine, but if it might help someone else then why be against it?
 
Again, I don't get the opponents. Just ignore the age on there if you don't like it.

Justin Madison, don't really get your deal on this. We have said many times it is irrelevant how coaches use it. We want age on there to make the system more transparent. Coaches know the ages....we get that, why do you keep harping on what coaches do with TRN? TRN has branched out into a bigger site with tennis tips, news, etc. They are not targeting just college coaches anymore.

So we have a junior tennis system that goes by age from the day a kid picks up a racquet, yet age is meaningless for TRN. Makes no sense. Junior tennis is unique. In football and basketball, high school sports rule. And in football and basketball a freshman can play against seniors if they are good enough. But in junior tennis, USTA tournaments are much bigger than high school tennis. And in USTA tournies, it goes by ages. The day you are to old for the 16s, you have to move up to the 18s. So age has a unique position in junior tennis during the crucial high school years.

It is irrelevant if it is a 'big' deal or not a big deal. Junior tennis has age as one major component from day 1. It would be cool to see the ages when you pull up the rankings. And there is no excuse for them not to be on there.
 
Last edited:

tennis5

Professional
Your opinions are valid but it doesn't mean they are the only way ... Having gone through the process last year with a daughter who was (1) on the very young edge of her class and (2) a very late starter to tennis (12), meant her up side vs. kids who have been playing since age six or seven had the possibility of being huge (Note: I said possibility as this will never be black and white or an across the board thing) but it was (in fact) a useful selling point in our case. We certainly were able to 'weed out' programs whose coaches only wanted the 'complete player' in favor of those coaches who actually looked forward to the opportunity of being a real coach to a certain degree (there are a lot of them out there). We could have sold on her results (of which she had some good ones) or her ranking alone, which was mid 4 star but I knew her true value was in what is to come and the age issue certainly affects that viewpoint to some (small) degree.

What I am saying is that it may not be a big deal and the usefulness certainly isn't across the board but that doesn't mean it can't be helpful in some
situations. Remember not all of the players are the same, come from the same background or are looking for the same things. The same is true of the
individual coaches. Therefore I ask again, how can the inclusion of this information be detrimental to anyone? If you don't find it necessary that is fine, but if it might help someone else then why be against it?

Very helpful insight from you and your daughter going through the process. Thanks!
 

tennis5

Professional
Perhaps, TRN was once only a college recruiting site?
But, today, it is also used for placement in local academies
and summer programs.
I am placing my son in a two week program, and I was surprised
that the coach talked about stars, not USTA ranking.
 
Common sense, a 16 year old Class of 2015 who beats a 17.5 year old Class of 2015 should get more points toward a ranking.

This is why I started posting. You statement is absolutely, 100%, wrong. Whatever you say to the contrary TRN (Tennis Recruiting Network) is about college tennis recruiting. You specifically state in your post that age should be included in a ranking that is only about how you compare to those people in you class. Dead wrong.
 
This is why I started posting. You statement is absolutely, 100%, wrong. Whatever you say to the contrary TRN (Tennis Recruiting Network) is about college tennis recruiting. You specifically state in your post that age should be included in a ranking that is only about how you compare to those people in you class. Dead wrong.

No matter how many ways you say it, you are not correct. Age matters in tennis and should be included in the ranking formula.

A graduating class year is 100% arbitrary. Some kids are 17 as college freshmen like I was, some are almost 20 as high school seniors.

You don't have rankings and ratings based on something arbitrary like Class of. You don't give more status to wins over older class ofs when they might have been held back. That makes no sense at all.

TRN star ratings matter....and are based on an arbitrary formula and arbitrary Class of years. That is wrong.

TRN should rank by AGES. Then you should pull up Class of years. It is the reverse of what it should be. The general public, parents, kids should see a ranking list by AGE. Then a coach should pull up Class Of list to see who is going to be available to recruit.

TRN is no longer just for coaches. Their content is designed to attract everyone. The advantage over USTA rankings is they consider schedule strength, etc. So even if they rank by age they will still be much different than USTA rankings.

It could be even greater site. Ranking lists pulled up by age, then also could be pulled up by Class of. That would be a killer website.
Common sense and you sir are totally backwards on this issue.
 
Last edited:

hound 109

Semi-Pro
Quote:posted by hound 109

....I do like adding age into the "formulas" for coming up with rankings. No reason why it couldn't be part of the formula since i assume that TRN obtains the ages (or age up dates) from the USTA electronically (along with the match results).

posted by JustinMadison

You don’t seem to understand what college coaches are trying to do. They are trying to find the best kids in a class. Age is not a factor. The only thing that matters is how they compare in skill to other kids in there class. How is this difficult to understand? You cannot add age to the formula when age does not matter.

JM, i understand exactly what coaches are doing & are trying to do. What coaches are doing NOW is just not as much on my radar since my kid is 6 years from HS graduation (or 7 years if i decide to stop whining & start joining the academy kids & Euro's by holding my kid back). ;)

Thus the point of my Original Post several pages back.

(But fwiw, i have posted my opinion of a 20 y/o college freshman...& 20 y/o college "Euro" freshmen in another thread.)


As others have said.....TRN began as a college scholarship site. It now posts info on 8th graders, & 7th graders, & 6th graders, & 5 graders..... & even 4th graders & (i think) 3 rd graders. They also post the kid's footwear, his ACADEMY, his town & how he measures up with kids in his STATE, region & country. They have a place to put if he's left handed or right handed & his weight....but not his age?

As you know, for many, TRN is a "go to" site, if you want to get a feel for the competition in National Tournaments & also in deciding what tournaments will have better fields (yes, some of us look for "better competition"). It's NOT used as a recruitment site for the 5th grade through 9th grade crowd.....it's used as an informational site. It's NOT used as a "college recruitment" site for most academies.....it's used as a MARKETING tool......to make money.

A person is merely requesting a piece of info or some data (which can be voluntary or involuntary, i don't care)... & this data would give MORE information to the reader. That this person (who requests info) would be called a "whiner" (by some here) is goofy logic.

Those making such a claim either don't understand TRN..... or are clueless, or are members of those type of academies who possibly encourage holding kids back..... or are parents of little boys & girls who already HAVE been held back. (i personally think that there are alot of "those" types of Academy folks posting here).

(note - in our section, some (most) academies are great, but there are a few that aren't....i suspect this is true in most sections.)

The whiner comment is a smokescreen & red herring. IMO, the fact is....that having more information is almost always better than having less information....unless one is making money on only a few people having information.



Parents Star Jealousy, or PSJ syndrome :). That's what this is about.

It's more amusement than jealousy.

At the higher levels of a section, the tennis crowd is a pretty small one. Everyone knows everyone else.

In a ranking tournament two weeks ago, lots of laughs were had at the expense of the 5' 11", 14 y/o 6th grader (who always was a problem child), who was playing (and losing to) a 5'9 14 y/o 8th grader. Note - the height is irrelevent.... (except for amusement purposes that he's 8-14 inches taller than most, if not ALL 6th graders).

What's laughable is that the TRN algorythims & imputs looks at this match as a heroic effort by a 5 star 6th grader "playing up" against an 8th grader.....when it was actually just a run of the mill match against two 3 star quality 8th graders (or 14 y/o kids)....or whatever.

.
 
Last edited:

BSPE84

Semi-Pro
Just for grins, let's look at the case of number1coach's pupil :). Many times the point has been made on TT that this 14/15-year old's WINNING in the 18s doesn't say anything about his true talent. The stated reason was that his victories against kids up to four years older are meaningless because his opponents albeit older were considered "hobby" players.

So I find arguing that you can't judge a true talent by sheer age of the competition then stating that TRN math should give more weight to victories against older players somewhat hyprocritical.
 

hound 109

Semi-Pro
Clarification, wasn't talking to you :).

Since:

- i started the thread.
- had the post immediately before yours.
- & you didn't post WHO you were "talking to" (or provide a quote).

....then i still say let's not.

Let's start a new thread if anyone wants to discuss some quasi uber junior in SoCal (who has a rich dad & a private coach) & how his wins (& losses) over kids 3-4 years (or 3-4 grades) older affects his TRN ranking, his ITF ranking, his IQ & his SAT scores.

or not.
 

tennis5

Professional
I don’t think I agree. You would have to make a case the 17 YO HS senior has more potential than a 19 YO HS senior. Why would you believe this is true? Tennis players continue to improve well past mid-twenties. If anything, as a college coach I am more likely to take the 19 YO because they will be more mature and I should have fewer problems both on court and off court. Older is better. Trying to use age backfires on the younger players.

You said you were in the process of moving to Stockholm Sweden at the beginning of this thread and planned to keep your son in his original grade. If you don't mind me asking, have you changed your mind?
 
You said you were in the process of moving to Stockholm Sweden at the beginning of this thread and planned to keep your son in his original grade. If you don't mind me asking, have you changed your mind?

We talked with him about repeating the 9th grade and he vetoed the idea. He will be a 10th grader in his new school. They have an IB program which is very demanding. I expect that tennis will take a back seat at this point. He is playing several clay tournament this summer, one national Swedish, one TennisEurope and one ITF. We will see how that goes.
 
Top