How many hours/week and years of training does it take to get a scholarship

[codagalie]

What is the average amount of training including matches, hitting, and gym workouts, that it takes a kid to get a full ride scholarship to a university?

Starting from a young age, for a boy or a girl.

How may hours per week, during how many years?

I know a girl that got a full ride to Harvard (don't really know her, but we played on the same courts). She also excelled at her high school, 4.0+ gpa. Her dad was her coach, and I wonder how many hours she was putting in, but never asked.

 

[MathGeek]

A full ride academic scholarship is probably a better bet.

 

[MathGeek]

I'm married to a Harvard grad. Schools like Harvard are a different deal. Few students pay to go to Harvard. Most get a lot of financial aid. If you get in (meet the academic requirements) and play tennis fairly well, you will likely get financial aid without being anywhere near the skill level it would take to get a tennis scholarship to a big state school.

For most mortals, athletic scholarships to NCAA Division I schools (or even the lower divisions) are a dicey deal. It's not just a matter of achieving a high skill level, it's avoiding injury and competing for a very limited number of scholarships with all the other athletes in the region. There are 10-100 athletes vying for those same scholarships. Serious contenders for the academic scholarships are much more rare (compared with the number available).

 

[jcgatennismom]

Girls can get a full ride as tennis is a headcount sport. For men's teams, there are only 4.5 allowed athletic scholarships for a roster of 10-12. If no seniors are graduating, some years coaches may have no $ for athletic scholarships for freshmen. Look at this thread from earlier in the fall for more details http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/are-full-rides-likely.544057/. In general most of the US junior boys getting partial scholarhips started playing tennis between 6-10 and have been playing 20+ tournaments a year for 6+ years and probably have trained 12-20 hours a week for 5-10+ years. Many parents of 3 star and higher players spend $15-30K+ a year on training and tournament travel. Don't go into tennis as investment as parents will spend exponentially more than most will get back in scholarship. Play tennis if you have a passion for it. HIgh school tennis is fun but that is not the route to college tennis-tournaments are. If you enjoy the sport, there is nothing wrong with playing high school tennis and then tennis on campus-it will save you dollars and time. That said most players will have to attend some training for several years to play on a decent high school team but you may be talking 4-6 hours a week vs 12+.

 

[jmnk]

I'm married to a Harvard grad. Schools like Harvard are a different deal. Almost no one pays to go to Harvard. All the students get some kind of scholarship, usually a full tuition scholarship. If you get in (meet the academic requirements) and play tennis fairly well, you can get a tennis scholarship without being anywhere near the skill level it would take to get a tennis scholarship to a big state school.

For most mortals, athletic scholarships to NCAA Division I schools (or even the lower divisions) are a dicey deal. It's not just a matter of achieving a high skill level, it's avoiding injury and competing for a very limited number of scholarships with all the other athletes in the region. There are 10-100 athletes vying for those same scholarships. Serious contenders for the academic scholarships are much more rare (compared with the number available).

This is truly fascinating information. Obviously official data provided by Harvard is misleading because :

A) they state there's no athletic scholarships awarded at Harvard,
B) roughly 60%of students get some financial aid which means that 40% get none.

 

[MarTennis]

What is the average amount of training including matches, hitting, and gym workouts, that it takes a kid to get a full ride scholarship to a university?

Starting from a young age, for a boy or a girl.

How may hours per week, during how many years?

I know a girl that got a full ride to Harvard (don't really know her, but we played on the same courts). She also excelled at her high school, 4.0+ gpa. Her dad was her coach, and I wonder how many hours she was putting in, but never asked.

Boys: Highly unlikely to get a full or partial scholarship. Need to be top 20 in the nation and choose a school willing to capitulate to your demand of a full scholarship. Also not guaranteed unless in writing or at school that has policy of awarding multiyear scholarship (rare), but USC is one of them.

Girls: Must be top 100 for full. Partials available for marginal talent.

 

[MathGeek]

This is truly fascinating information. Obviously official data provided by Harvard is misleading because :

A) they state there's no athletic scholarships awarded at Harvard,
B) roughly 60%of students get some financial aid which means that 40% get none.

They still wordsmith it that way, but the reality is much different:

http://deadspin.com/5892921/is-harvard-now-behaving-like-any-other-college-basketball-juggernaut

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/23/s...-game-as-sports-teams-in-ivies-rise.html?_r=0

If a kid gets into Harvard as a recruited athlete, it gets paid for.

 

[jmnk]

What is the average amount of training including matches, hitting, and gym workouts, that it takes a kid to get a full ride scholarship to a university?

Starting from a young age, for a boy or a girl.

How may hours per week, during how many years?

I know a girl that got a full ride to Harvard (don't really know her, but we played on the same courts). She also excelled at her high school, 4.0+ gpa. Her dad was her coach, and I wonder how many hours she was putting in, but never asked.

It is very common to say 'such and such got a full ride to 'insert Ivy League school here' because of exceptional academic or athletic achievements. Especially parents do it all the time to illustrate how special their kid is. The reality is that if indeed there's a full ride it is because of the financial need. Obviously being a great athlete can help you to get into such Ivy League school - but it will not significantly affect your financial help.

 

[jmnk]

I'm married to a Harvard grad. Schools like Harvard are a different deal. Almost no one pays to go to Harvard. All the students get some kind of scholarship, usually a full tuition scholarship. If you get in (meet the academic requirements) and play tennis fairly well, you can get a tennis scholarship without being anywhere near the skill level it would take to get a tennis scholarship to a big state school.[...]

This is truly fascinating information. Obviously official data provided by Harvard is misleading because :

A) they state there's no athletic scholarships awarded at Harvard,
B) roughly 60%of students get some financial aid which means that 40% get none.

They still wordsmith it that way, but the reality is much different:

http://deadspin.com/5892921/is-harvard-now-behaving-like-any-other-college-basketball-juggernaut

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/23/s...-game-as-sports-teams-in-ivies-rise.html?_r=0

If a kid gets into Harvard as a recruited athlete, it gets paid for.

I'm not sure if you read the articles you have quoted. They state two facts:

1. being an exceptional athlete may help you get admitted to an Ivy League school, even with somewhat less-than-stellar academic results. No one argues otherwise.
2. Ivy League schools have such huge financial resources that they can offer need based financial aid to a greater pool of prospective students. Meaning even those students that come from relatively speaking middle class families. That includes athletes as well. Which in turns may make it cheaper/comparable for such athletes to attend Ivy League school without athletic scholarship (but on Ivy League need based scholarship) than to attend a non-Ivy League school on (partial) athletic scholarship.

none of that is really a secret. go to any major school financial aid calculator and you can easily compare how much you would be offered in financial need based aid. You will realize fairly quickly that Ivy League schools offer way better need based aid than virtually any other university. But it is still need-based aid, it will be offered to accepted both athletes and non-athletes.

 

[MathGeek]

Right, did you read the part where the coaches submit lists of recruited players to the admissions offices? Do you think those students would get in if they were not on the coach's list?

If an athlete gets in because they are a recruited athlete, and it gets paid for, then it might not be called an athletic scholarship, but ...

The same thing is true at the Air Force Academy and West Point where my wife and I have served on the faculty. Sure, all the students in both schools have it all paid for by the schools. But the academic standards for admission are much lower for recruited athletes. It may not be categorized as an athletic scholarship, but the recruited athletes would not be there without their athletic skills.

The service academies may actually be the easiest way for a tennis player to score a full scholarship.

 

[jmnk]

Right, did you read the part where the coaches submit lists of recruited players to the admissions offices? Do you think those students would get in if they were not on the coach's list?

If an athlete gets in because they are a recruited athlete, and it gets paid for, then it might not be called an athletic scholarship, but ...

The same thing is true at the Air Force Academy and West Point where my wife and I have served on the faculty. Sure, all the students in both schools have it all paid for by the schools. But the academic standards for admission are much lower for recruited athletes. It may not be categorized as an athletic scholarship, but the recruited athletes would not be there without their athletic skills.

The service academies may actually be the easiest way for a tennis player to score a full scholarship.

yes, I did read that part. I stated in my previous post:
"

1. being an exceptional athlete may help you get admitted to an Ivy League school, even with somewhat less-than-stellar academic results. No one argues otherwise.

"

I'm not sure why you seem to imply that there's something not quite right with that. A school makes a decision: do we accept a student with "28 on ACT + professional level athletic prospect" or "34 on ACT + 5.0 weighted GPA". I see nothing wrong with them accepting the former - if a student is such an accomplished athlete he must be driven, dedicated, persistent, able to juggle academics with sports, likely able to deal with adversity, pressure and so on. Saying "the recruited athletes would not be there without their athletic skills." is like saying: a student A would not be there without his violin playing skills, or without his revenue generating self-started business, or without any XYZ skill that makes that student stand out.

Or the school may accept the latter, the academically inclined one. In either case the financial aid offered will be tied to the financial situation of the student, not to his ACT score or athletic records.

there is a significant difference between athletic aid and need-based aid, even though the money may be the same. All I'm asking is for you not to misinform folks here seeking advise.

 

[MathGeek]

there is a significant difference between athletic aid and need-based aid, even though the money may be the same. All I'm asking is for you not to misinform folks here seeking advise.

As the articles linked point out, there is not always a significant difference. It's more of an accounting trick: a distinction without a difference. If there is a difference, it is this: if you get injured or otherwise unable to compete/perform in the sport, you do not lose the financial aid. This is true at the military academies as well. The coach can get it for you (if you are admitted), but the coach cannot take it away. I worked with many cadets at the Air Force Academy who were intercollegiate athletes when they began and would not have been admitted otherwise. But when academic demands, injury, or other issues warranted, they dropped their sports without losing their scholarships. When you can get this deal, it is even better than an athletic scholarship.

 

[Ihatetennis]

Let's be real, there are a ton of athletes that are getting into good schools because they are good athletes. My friend had a 2.9 gpa but was a 5 star, he got a full ride to an sec school before transferring away. he wouldnt have had a shot without tennis

 

[Ihatetennis]

What is the average amount of training including matches, hitting, and gym workouts, that it takes a kid to get a full ride scholarship to a university?

Starting from a young age, for a boy or a girl.

How may hours per week, during how many years?

I know a girl that got a full ride to Harvard (don't really know her, but we played on the same courts). She also excelled at her high school, 4.0+ gpa. Her dad was her coach, and I wonder how many hours she was putting in, but never asked.

16+ hours a week over 10+ years and thats just training. add the tournaments and youre closer to 25-30 hours a week. and summers are usually 7-9 hours a day

basically a ton of tennis and at least 15k a year spent on a kid, ideally it should be closer to 30 to get d1 scholarships

30x12=360k

the only way it pays off is if you go to a school with 90k tuition on a full ride. but it also pays off if your grades arent good enough to get you into a school, or if you have no other extracariculars to put on an application

 

[Nacho]

Someone may have already mentioned this, but Ivy League schools don't give athletic scholarships, so her scholarship is related to something else and not tennis. She may have been given an opportunity to play on the team before hand or recruited for that purpose, but the scholarship is not an athletic one.

As far as tennis training for an athletic scholarship in general, it really depends on the individual and how talented they are. D-1, high level college athletes are certainly top level athletes. To get to that level you are talking about a mixed program of cross training and tennis training. I played D-1 tennis in the early 90's and before that I practiced tennis 4 afternoons a week for 2-3 hours, worked out 45 minutes-hour in the morning doing a mix of weights and sprinting, and then played tournaments on the weekends, or set up practice matches. I would typically take one day off a week. Once in school it was a regimen of 1 hour working out and 2 hours practice a day, plus matches. Today it is much more grueling and as much about fitness as it is about tennis. Besides the fitness aspects, the player needs to be a top calibre player with a high national ranking and usually an ITF Jr. ranking.

But, as mentioned you can do all the training you want, results are what get the scholarships and they both need to be relative to each other. Best to find actual players today and look into their histories to get a gauge. Find coaches who trained them and inquire. Tennis is fitness, but also is mental and if a child doesn't believe they can win they can practice all they want, but will struggle.

 

[illzoni]

Damn, MathGeek, your posts have a lot of good info interlaced with utter BS.

The Ivy League schools do not provide athletic scholarships. However, the are willing and able to negotiate the family's expected investment in the cost of education when determining the academic scholarship. It is an important distinction.

The service academies don't offer athletic scholarships. Or any scholarships, really. Academy graduates are obligated to serve in the armed forces post-graduation. The idea that less-qualified student athletes get accepted doesn't constitute an athletic scholarship, as the post-graduation obligation remains.

I suspect your wife sends you to the store for apples and you come home with oranges.

 

[tennis_ocd]

Has anyone mentioned that Ivies don't give athletic scholarships? lol. You guys are arguing in circles; of course it's not an "athletic scholarship" but athletics are what got the "scholarship." MathGeek has it right; a distinction with a real difference. (And what differences exist are actually better than an athletic scholarship.)

But the original questions begs such silliness as a potential athletic scholarship is a poor reason to dedicate such youth time to acquire.

 

[MathGeek]

I suspect your wife sends you to the store for apples and you come home with oranges.

More likely wine and flowers.

But the bottom line is that most students would do better to spend the time and effort on academic pursuits when it comes scholarship time. (Or financial aid by any other name.)

I can have most average or above students competing at the highest levels in state science fairs with about 5 hours per week spend on a science project over the course of a year. The students I've mentorede had over an 80% success rate winning first place in category at the state level. Can anyone compete at that level in most of the sporting endeavors at that level of effort? What will that level of effort get you at scholarship time compared with winning a category at the state science fair? I also successfully mentored the very weakest students at the Air Force Academy (many of them intercollegiate athletes) in completing publication quality scientific research. Results in academic pursuits are simply a much better bet given modest ability and consistent hard work over time.

Incidentally, similar levels of success are possible in specific sporting disciplines at levels of effort at or below one hour per day. But very few schools offer scholarships in the shooting sports. Being the top junior in the state in just about any shooting sport requires much less time per week than just about any NCAA sport.

The biggest benefit of sports come college time for most students is more related to well-roundedness and leadership than to athletic prowess that will be competitive in the NCAA. The financial aid comes in lots of packages and under lots of descriptions: grants, scholarships, fellowships, etc., but the bottom line is that it helps pay the bills.

 

[illzoni]

More likely wine and flowers.

But the bottom line is that most students would do better to spend the time and effort on academic pursuits when it comes scholarship time. (Or financial aid by any other name.)

I can have most average or above students competing at the highest levels in state science fairs with about 5 hours per week spend on a science project over the course of a year. The students I've mentorede had over an 80% success rate winning first place in category at the state level. Can anyone compete at that level in most of the sporting endeavors at that level of effort? What will that level of effort get you at scholarship time compared with winning a category at the state science fair? I also successfully mentored the very weakest students at the Air Force Academy (many of them intercollegiate athletes) in completing publication quality scientific research. Results in academic pursuits are simply a much better bet given modest ability and consistent hard work over time.

Incidentally, similar levels of success are possible in specific sporting disciplines at levels of effort at or below one hour per day. But very few schools offer scholarships in the shooting sports. Being the top junior in the state in just about any shooting sport requires much less time per week than just about any NCAA sport.

The biggest benefit of sports come college time for most students is more related to well-roundedness and leadership than to athletic prowess that will be competitive in the NCAA. The financial aid comes in lots of packages and under lots of descriptions: grants, scholarships, fellowships, etc., but the bottom line is that it helps pay the bills.

There's more of the good stuff from you.

Our hopes for our son are that tennis gets the selection committee's attention at a school for which he's academically qualified, but might otherwise get lost in the shuffle.

I would add that I believe a gifted female athlete, with moderate training and high level of interest in tennis, could possibly tip the balance into tennis making financial sense. And perhaps some other sports, as well. Thank you Title IV.

 

[MathGeek]

Our hopes for our son are that tennis gets the selection committee's attention at a school for which he's academically qualified, but might otherwise get lost in the shuffle.

An average of five hours per week should be more than enough to accomplish this goal. You don't need to spend megabucks, he just needs to make the Varsity team.

I would add that I believe a gifted female athlete, with moderate training and high level of interest in tennis, could possibly tip the balance into tennis making financial sense. And perhaps some other sports, as well. Thank you Title IV.

Title IX does change things more favorably for female athletes, but there is still a big gap between a very good high school athlete and someone projected to be good enough in NCAA competition to warrant a full scholarship. I don't know of any schools where I would say a marginally greater investment in tennis will likely pay off at scholarship time. I have seen some promising cases in women's lacrosse and volleyball. Still, the laws of supply and demand being what they are, there is an over-supply of aspiring athletes and an under-supply of hard working students. And if you're a minority female hoping to major in science and engineering, an above average work ethic and intelligence is likely good enough: lots of demand, almost no supply.

To summarize, for athletic scholarships, you need tremendous drive, hard work, and a lot of God given talent.

For academic scholarships, students need drive, hard work for four years of high school, and a 98.6 degree body temperature. We've raised a very lazy generation of students.

 

[jmnk]

More likely wine and flowers.

But the bottom line is that most students would do better to spend the time and effort on academic pursuits when it comes scholarship time. (Or financial aid by any other name.)

that I agree with as well.

I can have most average or above students competing at the highest levels in state science fairs with about 5 hours per week spend on a science project over the course of a year. The students I've mentorede had over an 80% success rate winning first place in category at the state level. Can anyone compete at that level in most of the sporting endeavors at that level of effort? What will that level of effort get you at scholarship time compared with winning a category at the state science fair? I also successfully mentored the very weakest students at the Air Force Academy (many of them intercollegiate athletes) in completing publication quality scientific research. Results in academic pursuits are simply a much better bet given modest ability and consistent hard work over time.

while that is true let's put it in perspective. You can't really be comparing lets say a first place in tennis at the state level with first place in science fair at the state level. I mean with all due respect for science fairs being major individual sport state level champion carries way more 'admission time weight' . In other words, if you want to have a prayer to get into an Ivy League school, your science fair placement at the state level should probably not even be one of the 6-8 most exceptional achievements listed on your college application.

Incidentally, similar levels of success are possible in specific sporting disciplines at levels of effort at or below one hour per day. But very few schools offer scholarships in the shooting sports. Being the top junior in the state in just about any shooting sport requires much less time per week than just about any NCAA sport.

The biggest benefit of sports come college time for most students is more related to well-roundedness and leadership than to athletic prowess that will be competitive in the NCAA. The financial aid comes in lots of packages and under lots of descriptions: grants, scholarships, fellowships, etc., but the bottom line is that it helps pay the bills.

agreed as well.

 

[jmnk]

Has anyone mentioned that Ivies don't give athletic scholarships? lol. You guys are arguing in circles; of course it's not an "athletic scholarship" but athletics are what got the "scholarship." MathGeek has it right; a distinction with a real difference. (And what differences exist are actually better than an athletic scholarship.)
[...]

actually no. Athletics may help you get admitted to an Ivy school. Whether you get any financial aid depends solely on your financial situation. A perfect example is the case of Justin Combs, Diddy's Son, who got full athletic scholarship to UCLA. In that case, because UCLA does give out athletic scholarships, he was offered one even though he is obviously not eligible for any need-based aid. Hypothetically, had he tried and got accepted to an Ivy League, and his football helped him to get in, he would have not got any financial aid there - because the only aid available is need-based and there's no way he qualifies for that.

 

[MathGeek]

You can't really be comparing lets say a first place in tennis at the state level with first place in science fair at the state level. I mean with all due respect for science fairs being major individual sport state level champion carries way more 'admission time weight' . In other words, if you want to have a prayer to get into an Ivy League school, your science fair placement at the state level should probably not even be one of the 6-8 most exceptional achievements listed on your college application.

I would not represent winning science fairs as a big step in getting admitted to an Ivy League school. But first place in a state science fair is a great plan for those hoping to secure academic scholarships to state schools and mid-tier private schools. It is almost a guarantee of a full academic scholarship. LSU works fairly hard to keep their science fair winners, but most of them get scholarship offers to better schools in other states. I've mentored science projects that competed in Louisiana, California, New York, Ohio, and Colorado. There is much greater return on effort at scholarship time than any sport I can think of.

I married a beautiful and brilliant engineer who was a high school tennis player (best at her high school, middle of the pack statewide), but got her full ride to Harvard based more on her academic accomplishments. (It it was a third party, merit based, academic scholarship). Back in those days, there was not the stiff competition there is now, but her application included things like top 5% of her class, some notable scientific accomplishments, good test scores (top 5%, not perfect), and excellent letters of recommendation from her science mentors. I'm don't think her scientific accomplishments are really comparable with winning a state science fair, but there definitely were not 6-8 accomplishments on her application that I would regard as more impressive.

If you think about it, doing good enough with a science project to place first at the state level will likely bring with it several other factors to greatly strengthen admission and scholarship applications: letters of recommendation from mentors and judges, likely publication in a scientific journal (if the mentors are smart enough to encourage it), a pretty good score on the science portion of the ACT, etc.

 

[jmnk]

I would not represent winning science fairs as a big step in getting admitted to an Ivy League school. But first place in a state science fair is a great plan for those hoping to secure academic scholarships to state schools and mid-tier private schools. It is almost a guarantee of a full academic scholarship. LSU works fairly hard to keep their science fair winners, but most of them get scholarship offers to better schools in other states. I've mentored science projects that competed in Louisiana, California, New York, Ohio, and Colorado. There is much greater return on effort at scholarship time than any sport I can think of.

I married a beautiful and brilliant engineer who was a high school tennis player (best at her high school, middle of the pack statewide), but got her full ride to Harvard based more on her academic accomplishments. (It it was a third party, merit based, academic scholarship). Back in those days, there was not the stiff competition there is now, but her application included things like top 5% of her class, some notable scientific accomplishments, good test scores (top 5%, not perfect), and excellent letters of recommendation from her science mentors. I'm don't think her scientific accomplishments are really comparable with winning a state science fair, but there definitely were not 6-8 accomplishments on her application that I would regard as more impressive.

If you think about it, doing good enough with a science project to place first at the state level will likely bring with it several other factors to greatly strengthen admission and scholarship applications: letters of recommendation from mentors and judges, likely publication in a scientific journal (if the mentors are smart enough to encourage it), a pretty good score on the science portion of the ACT, etc.

hey, I'm not disagreeing at all in general. it's just that the way you stated it it sounded as if you are saying that 'investing' merely 5hrs/week for a year preparing for science fair is going to bring similar 'return on effort investment' as training 12-15hrs/week since being 8-10 years old.

I must also disagree with "But first place in a state science fair is a great plan for those hoping to secure academic scholarships to state schools and mid-tier private schools. It is almost a guarantee of a full academic scholarship." Perhaps you experience is different. but I know several students that got accepted to Ivy level schools (meaning they are very, very academically accomplished) and yet they were not offered full academic scholarships from other state schools they applied to and got accepted to (as virtually everyone applying to Ivy school also applies elsewhere as a backup, and you can see the admission offers). I'm sure there are schools where you going to get full academic scholarship for science fair placement - you just may not want to spend 4 years there....

 

[MathGeek]

it's just that the way you stated it it sounded as if you are saying that 'investing' merely 5hrs/week for a year preparing for science fair is going to bring similar 'return on effort investment' as training 12-15hrs/week since being 8-10 years old.

That is what I am saying. Of course, a student needs to do well in their classwork also. But why be surprised that if the goal is a college funding, the returns on investing time in scholarly pursuits are much greater than athletic pursuits? The first five hours or so spent on athletics will yield a return helping student applicants come across as fit, well rounded, not video game addicts, etc. But above that, returns quickly diminish.

but I know several students that got accepted to Ivy level schools (meaning they are very, very academically accomplished) and yet they were not offered full academic scholarships from other state schools they applied to and got accepted to (as virtually everyone applying to Ivy school also applies elsewhere as a backup, and you can see the admission offers). I'm sure there are schools where you going to get full academic scholarship for science fair placement - you just may not want to spend 4 years there....

There are some top tier state schools out there where academic scholarships are hard to come by: Ga Tech, UC Berkeley, UCLA, UVa, UofM, etc. But winning a science fair in Ohio gives you a good shot at an academic scholarship if you apply to a range of in-state schools: Ohio State, Ohio U., and Kent State. It is no guarantee if you only apply to one. Winning a science fair in Louisiana gives you a real good shot at an academic scholarship to LSU or La Tech. If the state school you apply to happens to be a top 20 public school nationally, your odds are reduced, but there are likely a lot of schools in the top 100 that will be happy to give students of this caliber a full tuition scholarship. Most of the schools in the top 100 are a better deal if they offer a full academic scholarship. How many schools ranked from 20-100 are worth their full price of tuition compared with schools ranked 100-200 if you can attend for free?

The idea of applying to Ivy League schools and then to one state school as a "back-up" plan is a stupid plan if an academic scholarship is needed or desired. Admission and scholarship committees are run by humans and an application viewed highly by one human committee may well be viewed less highly by another human committee. Playing the odds means applying to several schools in whatever tier a student expects to be admitted to. There are biases on every human committee, and most applicants have no way of knowing which biases will work for or against them in a given scholarship application.

Being married to a Harvard grad, and being a grad from a top 10 school also, I do not labor under the illusion that all the students admitted there are "very, very academically accomplished." It simply isn't true.

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandr...ges/rankings/national-universities/top-public

 

[mmk]

I'm married to a Harvard grad. Schools like Harvard are a different deal. Almost no one pays to go to Harvard. All the students get some kind of scholarship, usually a full tuition scholarship. If you get in (meet the academic requirements) and play tennis fairly well, you can get a tennis scholarship without being anywhere near the skill level it would take to get a tennis scholarship to a big state school.

For most mortals, athletic scholarships to NCAA Division I schools (or even the lower divisions) are a dicey deal. It's not just a matter of achieving a high skill level, it's avoiding injury and competing for a very limited number of scholarships with all the other athletes in the region. There are 10-100 athletes vying for those same scholarships. Serious contenders for the academic scholarships are much more rare (compared with the number available).

Harvard and the other Ivies don't give athletic scholarships, period. In fact Harvard and the engineering school down the street from them in Cambridge that my daughter went to don't give any athletic or academic scholarships, only need-based (and we didn't qualify). It may have been different when your wife went.
Most people I know who have kids that have received Division I athletic scholarships in numerous sports have spent more on training, club teams, travel, etc., than the cost of just sending their kid to college.

 

[illzoni]

Most people I know who have kids that have received Division I athletic scholarships in numerous sports have spent more on training, club teams, travel, etc., than the cost of just sending their kid to college.

Amen.

Our hopes for our son are that tennis gets the selection committee's attention at a school for which he's academically qualified, but might otherwise get lost in the shuffle.

We invest our time and money in tennis because we believe it's good for our son, he enjoys it, and ^^.

 

[Ihatetennis]

Amen.


We invest our time and money in tennis because we believe it's good for our son, he enjoys it, and ^^.

besides, playing a sport gives us a sense of belonging. no matter where we go we will always be tennis players, and we can always coach to make some money on the side

 

[tennis_ocd]

actually no. Athletics may help you get admitted to an Ivy school. Whether you get any financial aid depends solely on your financial situation.

Well actually yes in context of discussion -- you're just being argumentative. Athletics gets many students admitted to schools they'd otherwise be denied. Once in, financial aid formulas kick in for most.... (If not admitted it's irrelevant.)

Bottom line is athletics results in many kids receiving financial aid money from a school that otherwise wouldn't be offering.

 

[tennis_ocd]

And on the topic of "gaming" the system for academic dollars I think there is much to be gained by preparing well for the SAT exams.

 

[MathGeek]

And on the topic of "gaming" the system for academic dollars I think there is much to be gained by preparing well for the SAT exams.

This may or may not be good advice, depending on which schools a student applies to. A lot of schools these days are requiring the ACT, and a lot of schools accept either ACT or SAT results. The tests can be fairly different, and students with different strengths may do much better on one than on the other.

The SAT is a scholastic aptitude test. It tends to measure a student's raw intelligence rather than their educational achievements. The ACT is closer to an achievement test. Raw intelligence helps, but this test is more sensitive and a better indicator of how hard a student has worked over the years in middle school and high school.

The ACT also has a science portion; whereas, the SAT does not. It does not measure knowledge of scientific facts so much, but rather application of reasoning within the context of the scientific method. A science curriculum that emphasizes labs and evidence and reasoning behind testing hypotheses will better prepare students for the science portion of the ACT than a curriculum that emphasizes fact memorization and problem solving procedures (as Chemistry and Physics.)

If a schools accepts either the SAT or the ACT, I recommend the SAT for students with very high IQs but who have Aced most of their classes without working very hard. I recommend the ACT for students with IQs under 130 but who read a lot and have excellent work habits. I also recommend knowing which tests are accepted by the pool of schools to which a student anticipates applying.

The ACT has various test prep materials, also. These are a poor substitute for working hard through middle school and high school, but they will be beneficial for students who are not good test takers. Students who are good test takers will have very little benefit.

On the whole, parents who ensure their children complete their homework every day are doing much more to ensure college success of their children than parents who arrange for special preparation for the SAT or ACT and parents who pay thousands for tennis lessons over many years.

Many parents wrongly assume that getting into a "good" college and getting it paid for are keys to success. I've seen too many students flunk out of college to labor under that misconception. I would recommend most parents and students aim for more affordable schools and emphasize the real keys to college success:

1. Do all the assigned homework. Spend time on each subject every day.
2. Avoid the destructive behaviors that derail college careers: booze, drugs, internet porn, and gaming.

 

[tennis_ocd]

....
2. Avoid the destructive behaviors that derail college careers: booze, drugs, internet porn, and gaming.

Loved the post. Are the last two (really last three) really that prevent and destructive in college? Been quite a while for me but do have a couple kids currently attending. Don't see the last three as an issue (booze is as big as ever.) Should I worry more? lol

 

[MathGeek]

Loved the post. Are the last two (really last three) really that prevent and destructive in college? Been quite a while for me but do have a couple kids currently attending. Don't see the last three as an issue (booze is as big as ever.) Should I worry more? lol

My wife and I have taught at several schools and seen a lot of students flunk out. Illegal drugs are very big on campus and can quickly rob both motivation and ability.

Internet porn and gaming are big issues because they can become addictive and turn into huge time wasters. Once a student is spending 5-10 hours every day on this stuff, they simply don't have the time to work as hard as needed on their studies.

The military academies where we worked (USAFA and West Point) do a pretty good job curbing booze and drugs, so the time wasters (porn and gaming) take a bigger toll. We've also served on the faculty of enough state schools to see booze and drugs take their toll. Colleagues in states that recently legalized pot report much higher usage among college students, even among those technically under age (21). Availability has exploded. We moved out of Colorado soon after legalization to secure in-state residency in a state without such insanity.

 

[3kids]

Thought I would chime in having just gone through this with my high academic achieving (so so tennis playing--2* tennisrecruiting.net) daughter who's a freshman at one of these schools--Stanford/MIT/Harvard/Yale/Princeton


1. No athletic scholarships at Ivy League, MIT, Caltech but Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, and other Division 1 do offer athletic scholarships but you have to be extremely good

2. All these schools do offer need based aid, as an example tuition is free for Stanford students whose family income is less than $125,000/yr and room and board is free if less than ~$65,000

3. It's incorrect to say that almost no one pays to go to these schools though. About 20-30% pay full tuition at these schools. I should know as we are one of those paying full price.

4. My daughter spent 3-5 hours/day on schoolwork. ACT/SAT prep, volunteering, extracurriculars, summer research were on top of this. Basically she worked really really hard.

5. Tennis did help to round out her application and was a really fun activity to keep her healthy. She was a decent tennis player and could have been a very good player if she used the 3-5 hrs/day for tennis practice instead.

6. Would that have been time better spent? I would say no as there are hundreds (thousands?) of kids spending their time intensely training for limited spots at these schools. Now some of these kids do have dreams of going pro--that's another discussion!

7. These kids have different dreams than my daughter who's majoring in a STEM field. Despite her rigorous preparation, she's still struggling in college math/science courses since she's now among the best and brightest. I don't think the kids that have spent all those years on sports would be able to major in STEM if they wanted. There may be some rare exceptions but most would have to major in humanities/business.

8. One of her friends is attending the same college. This girl is academically OK but would not have been accepted if she wasn't a terrific tennis player. This girl is a blue chip recruit who did online high school and spent 4+ hours/day on tennis training since 10 years old.

9. Tennis definitely paid off for her but what about all the other kids who have been training just as long and hard. I guess you can say the same for all the other students who have worked just as hard as my daughter and did not get in but at least they can still go to many other good schools and likely on to good careers.

10. In the end, to each his own. Tennis served it's purposes for us but we found it can be like a drug. One can easily get sucked into believing coaches and how good they think you can be if only you spent more time (and money).

11. On the other hand--though the odds are infinitesimal, someone has to be Federer/Nadal/Djok/pro player right?

 

[Zachary Grooms]

What is the average amount of training including matches, hitting, and gym workouts, that it takes a kid to get a full ride scholarship to a university?

Starting from a young age, for a boy or a girl.

How may hours per week, during how many years?

I know a girl that got a full ride to Harvard (don't really know her, but we played on the same courts). She also excelled at her high school, 4.0+ gpa. Her dad was her coach, and I wonder how many hours she was putting in, but never asked.

Full rides and Tennis do not go hand in hand. You need a mix of academic money and athletic money. People playing for top 50 programs in D1, D2, and D3 have been playing/training most their lives and are competing with Internationals for spots as well (in the situation myself now and have been for 4 years). You need to train for at least 10-20 hrs a week and at least under 10 years old. However, you can pay all you want but if you don't have a true natural feeling for the game then it doesn't matter. I've watched players come to my team and their parents have payed so much to teach them yet they cannot compete at the next level.

 

[Ihatetennis]

Loved the post. Are the last two (really last three) really that prevent and destructive in college? Been quite a while for me but do have a couple kids currently attending. Don't see the last three as an issue (booze is as big as ever.) Should I worry more? lol

dont worry too much, but yes. pot is the biggest one, its not much of a drug as its neither addicting or harmful beyond acting dumb

cocaine and synthetic drugs are far less common but if they wanted to i wouldnt doubt the availability

 

[Ihatetennis]

This may or may not be good advice, depending on which schools a student applies to. A lot of schools these days are requiring the ACT, and a lot of schools accept either ACT or SAT results. The tests can be fairly different, and students with different strengths may do much better on one than on the other.

The SAT is a scholastic aptitude test. It tends to measure a student's raw intelligence rather than their educational achievements. The ACT is closer to an achievement test. Raw intelligence helps, but this test is more sensitive and a better indicator of how hard a student has worked over the years in middle school and high school..

I have to say i disagree with this, having taken the sat and act now i can say that the act is better for raw knowledge

on my sat i scored a 705 on the math and 560 and 580 in reading and writing, english being my second language some of the questions are a lot harder

in the sat they test how cuning you are with words, seeing which sentence is most correct(often times they are all correct)

in the act however you are given problems and the information to solve them, which tests how fast you are to react and answer as it is a timed test

i am waiting on my act score but in practice i had recieved 31-33 in 5/6 tests

 

[MathGeek]

I have to say i disagree with this, having taken the sat and act now i can say that the act is better for raw knowledge

on my sat i scored a 705 on the math and 560 and 580 in reading and writing, english being my second language some of the questions are a lot harder

in the sat they test how cuning you are with words, seeing which sentence is most correct(often times they are all correct)

in the act however you are given problems and the information to solve them, which tests how fast you are to react and answer as it is a timed test

i am waiting on my act score but in practice i had recieved 31-33 in 5/6 tests

I can see how someone whose first language is not English might reach that conclusion.

 

[Ihatetennis]

I can see how someone whose first language is not English might reach that conclusion.

i speak english well, and almost no spanish now lol

but i still stand by it. my english speaking born friend scored a 1400 sat and a 36 act, 1400/2400

 

[jcgatennismom]

I have to say i disagree with this, having taken the sat and act now i can say that the act is better for raw knowledge

on my sat i scored a 705 on the math and 560 and 580 in reading and writing, english being my second language some of the questions are a lot harder

in the sat they test how cuning you are with words, seeing which sentence is most correct(often times they are all correct)

in the act however you are given problems and the information to solve them, which tests how fast you are to react and answer as it is a timed test

i am waiting on my act score but in practice i had recieved 31-33 in 5/6 tests

So Ihatetennis, will you be committing somewhere during the fall NLI, or will you wait on your ACTs and commit early next year? I think you have posted you are a 2 star with strong academics. I have seen in our section that 2 stars have committed to D2 and D3 schools this week-dont know if they are getting an athletic $ at D2, but I am sure most of the guys are getting some academic $. Good luck with it. My son will go through this in a year, has been talking regularly with several coaches, and has visited some of them. If you think you are better than your ranking/rating and you are not an early commit, there are two showcases in early Dec-one in Sunrise FL and the other in Weston FL that will have lots of college coaches in attendance. There will be a lot of international players at those showcases-guys are probably staying in uS between Eddie Herr and Dec ITFs, but the showcases are open to American and international players. My son is not attending, but they did look interesting.

 

[Ihatetennis]

So Ihatetennis, will you be committing somewhere during the fall NLI, or will you wait on your ACTs and commit early next year? I think you have posted you are a 2 star with strong academics. I have seen in our section that 2 stars have committed to D2 and D3 schools this week-dont know if they are getting an athletic $ at D2, but I am sure most of the guys are getting some academic $. Good luck with it. My son will go through this in a year, has been talking regularly with several coaches, and has visited some of them. If you think you are better than your ranking/rating and you are not an early commit, there are two showcases in early Dec-one in Sunrise FL and the other in Weston FL that will have lots of college coaches in attendance. There will be a lot of international players at those showcases-guys are probably staying in uS between Eddie Herr and Dec ITFs, but the showcases are open to American and international players. My son is not attending, but they did look interesting.

I have 4 visits this next month

I got 2 full ride offers from naia, and some partial scholarships from d2. I am going d3 and not sure where yet. I get a lot of financial aid and merit aid so money isn't an issue

 

[Ihatetennis]

So Ihatetennis, will you be committing somewhere during the fall NLI, or will you wait on your ACTs and commit early next year? I think you have posted you are a 2 star with strong academics. I have seen in our section that 2 stars have committed to D2 and D3 schools this week-dont know if they are getting an athletic $ at D2, but I am sure most of the guys are getting some academic $. Good luck with it. My son will go through this in a year, has been talking regularly with several coaches, and has visited some of them. If you think you are better than your ranking/rating and you are not an early commit, there are two showcases in early Dec-one in Sunrise FL and the other in Weston FL that will have lots of college coaches in attendance. There will be a lot of international players at those showcases-guys are probably staying in uS between Eddie Herr and Dec ITFs, but the showcases are open to American and international players. My son is not attending, but they did look interesting.

I have 4 visits this next month

I got 2 full ride offers from naia, and some partial scholarships from d2. I am going d3 and not sure where yet. I get a lot of financial aid and merit aid so money isn't an issue