I think your right I should do what he is saying , where do I start ? Lets see with and 8 yr old who can't win a match , who is playing up to have and excuse for losses or for the most part what has he done that anyone has " seen" ?
I am not Manti Teo sorry bud
I agree with you about the path , but will disagree on the timeline , I see why most have trouble cracking through early so I believe after a year or so he should be fine making his move .
So according to Justinmadison a player with no WTA points can enter a WTA event without ever playing one professional match. TCFs girl will not have to work her way up the pro ranks just like everybody else you say. How do you do this? I would love to hear this explanation.
So according to Justinmadison a player with no WTA points can enter a WTA event without ever playing one professional match. TCFs girl will not have to work her way up the pro ranks just like everybody else you say. How do you do this? I would love to hear this explanation.
Brad - looks like DB has the tools to succeed but the criticism leveled most often against you on these boards which resonates with me is that you have not put DB under pressure and there is always an excuse - typically the boys 12's - he was a pusher - any victories are always against incredible players - its like saying your greatest weakness is you are too much of a perfectionist in an interview.
Not according to me. TCF is the one who knows how this is done. TCF clearly knows more than Brad about these matters. He plans for his girl to win OB early, say 12 or 13, and then go pro. He has a plan for her to make top 100 WTA early probably by the time she is 18 or 19. Brad is the one who insists on working up through futures etc.
I hope you are right but I don't see it that way. Are you committed to 3, 4 or 5 years slugging it out in the Futures if that is what it takes?
He test off the charts physically already in some critical areas so there is only a little to clean up and he will be fine , the plus, he now believes he can get it done so like every level before 10's 12, 14 16 18 we got into them figured them out and rose to the top !
So now we start the futures and repeat the process again , Coach are you in CA ?
justinmadison, I am just a realist who plays the odds. Of course anyone making it as a money making pro is a long shot. However, over time, a higher percentage of money makers showed extreme promise at a young age....won OB's, top ITFs, Jr. Slams. Tennis Cruz once did a study and found that like 90% of the money making pros reached certain milestones at a young age.
So we are going the direct route, playing way above her age group....and watching for signs of either extreme talent or not so much. For example....timed spider drills vs very talented athletes....throwing a tennis ball from one baseline to the other....still searching for another 8 year old girl who can throw a ball from one baseline and hit the fence behind the other baseline half way up. Why extreme throwing? Because strong throwers many times make strong servers.
All along the way, testing, looking for the athletic ability and desire needed to make it. Putting under pressure to see if she plays better against the odds, plays well when favored, can defend the court when she is expected to be the best player and also fight when a huge underdog.
As she ages, the decisions will be made.....if things falter, so be it. No off the charts results by age 14-16? College, college, college.
Enter the pros and not see consistent rankings jumps the 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year a money maker? Bang, done, tennis is now a hobby and its off to enter a real career.
Not saying a player can not make it slugging it our through futures year after year after year. Of course some players have done so. All I am saying is that is not our plan....either show amazing prodigy like results all along the way or head to college. The odds are long enough without taking red eye flights to Mexico to grunge for points for 4 years.
I said my piece many times about BB. Impressed with the player he produced, however if it were my son he would now be focused on college and could dabble in futures in the summers. I just do not think his path with the less than crazy great results his player has produced, says he has a realistic chance at making money in tennis. I would stack the odds by heading to college if my kid has the same comparable results at age 15-17.
I appreciate your post. Obviously BB is going to give his player plenty more time, I would not bother as I do not see anything that even hints of money making potential in his results the past several years.
Thats just not for us. A friend recently made some connections where it may be possible to have Stefano Capriati take a look at our girls and evaluate them. I would love for him to give me a brutally honest review of where she stands compared to Jennifer at age 8.
The Williams sisters, Capriati, Seles, all jumped off the page at young ages to anyone who watched them. Either we show age comparative ability to players like that or we go to college.
Part of the reason for this extreme approach is she hit her first tennis ball as a toddler and has every advantage as far as training, opportunity, and size. So it would be total denial not to accept all along the way that she either has it or does not have it.
I think BB is in the same position....kid started tennis young, totally dedicated, Cali where he has the chance to play a ton, great size all along.....tons of advantages yet not off the charts prodigy success. His 10s-18s juniors success is nice but no big deal....with all his advantages he should be winning on the level a Nadal was at age 16-17. He should be the 16-17 year old winning these futures all the time.
If that were us, the brutal evaluation would have lead to the college route by now.
Results in the juniors, even the junior Grand Slams, are not as predictive of a pro career as they were 10-20 year ago. Have to go through the Futures today.
I appreciate your post. Obviously BB is going to give his player plenty more time, I would not bother as I do not see anything that even hints of money making potential in his results the past several years.
Thats just not for us. A friend recently made some connections where it may be possible to have Stefano Capriati take a look at our girls and evaluate them. I would love for him to give me a brutally honest review of where she stands compared to Jennifer at age 8.
The Williams sisters, Capriati, Seles, all jumped off the page at young ages to anyone who watched them. Either we show age comparative ability to players like that or we go to college.
Part of the reason for this extreme approach is she hit her first tennis ball as a toddler and has every advantage as far as training, opportunity, and size. So it would be total denial not to accept all along the way that she either has it or does not have it.
I think BB is in the same position....kid started tennis young, totally dedicated, Cali where he has the chance to play a ton, great size all along.....tons of advantages yet not off the charts prodigy success. His 10s-18s juniors success is nice but no big deal....with all his advantages he should be winning on the level a Nadal was at age 16-17. He should be the 16-17 year old winning these futures all the time.
If that were us, the brutal evaluation would have lead to the college route by now.
There is nothing remotely comparable between 10s-18s USTA ranking success and the next level. No way to repeat a process when the 2 processes are unrelated. During the 10s-16s he was a foot taller than the other boys and most likely trained twice as hard. Those advantages are gone now.
#1 Coach: Interesting debate here. I have come around closer to your position. The rallying cry, including from me, was he needs to do something in a big junior event. Well, he did. Made a deep run at the OB. Beat top players along the way. It seems no mattter what he does, his critics keep moving the bar. Keep comparing him to Nadal. That's OK. But why not compare him to the guys that cracked the top 100 at age 25+ Soeda, Russell etc. Players develop different and big guys historically develop later- Isner, Anderson, Karlovic. All the junior stuff means very little- it's now all bout getting his feet wet in the Futures. Don't expect big results right away. Takes everyone time to adjust. He's got 14 months before worrying about college. Let's see what happens.
Example of the front door to the ATP.....sixteen-year-old Christian Garin of Chile won his first match at the ATP main draw level today.
Most of the players that make it show substantial rankings rises year after year. Almost no top 80 pros spent year after year at the futures level.
Hey Granite: You've got a nice player. Saw him play one of my guys couple years back.
#1 Coach: Your player has potential but he needs full time professional coaching. Is he getting that? The coaching he gets from you is not enough.
#1 Coach: Your player has potential but he needs full time professional coaching. Is he getting that? The coaching he gets from you is not enough.
However, over time, a higher percentage of money makers showed extreme promise at a young age....won OB's, top ITFs, Jr. Slams. Tennis Cruz once did a study and found that like 90% of the money making pros reached certain milestones at a young age.
There is nothing remotely comparable between 10s-18s USTA ranking success and the next level. No way to repeat a process when the 2 processes are unrelated. During the 10s-16s he was a foot taller than the other boys and most likely trained twice as hard. Those advantages are gone now.
right now I have had 5 age divisions to coach him in and we have risen to the top of each one now we are starting a new division , if we were a stock on the the exchange we have always increased in value , my question is why would we need another trader at this point ?
how is what I am doing not enough please explain in detail not generics like I have never played pro , I have never been there ,I don't know what it takes, be more specific , cause I never played US jrs or itfs and we have been pretty solid ??
Aren't these two statements contradictory? They are both early success, no?
Pros is different than juniors. It ain't a new division. Obviously he has had professional coaching along the way, Bij etc. Needs 1 pro coach very involved. He may have that now? The USTA should provide it. You still need to be very involved and calling the shots- the USTA is not going to like that. They refused to work together with D Young's parents, USTA wanted control. In my opinion the USTA was wrong and stupid.
Pros is different than juniors. It ain't a new division. Obviously he has had professional coaching along the way, Bij etc. Needs 1 pro coach very involved. He may have that now? The USTA should provide it. You still need to be very involved and calling the shots- the USTA is not going to like that. They refused to work together with D Young's parents, USTA wanted control. In my opinion the USTA was wrong and stupid.
Not at all. Night and day difference between touting success in USTA 10s-16s and WINNING OBs, or Jr. Slams, or top ITFs, or futures at young ages. (When he did the study the OB was way more important than it is now....the field these days has very few of the top 10 guys in it.)
That is what the Tennis Cruz study found, that guys who went on to the top 100 had certain high level junior successes at the very highest levels of the junior 18s.
BB has constantly touted success at the 10s-16s USTA level. Please list one major ITF, Herr, OB, Jr. Slam or any major 18s tournament he has ever won. Am I missing them?
But back to the main point....his path is his path, maybe he will be the rare one that beats the odds. But its just not for us. We either are that player with consistent prodigy results, INCLUDING when she is old enough for 18s, Jr. Slams, etc.....or its off to college.
Touting a level of success in 10s-16s, without then a huge leap at age 16 to dominating the world 18s and getting quite deep in futures after futures, is very misleading to me. The results of "early success" MUST be consistent and MUST continue when they hit the age 15-16-17 range where they are off the charts.
The fact is a fully dedicated player who has trained solely for tennis for 10-12 years, will hit the ceiling. No magical improvements will appear by slogging it out in futures for years. The guys that show that improvement most likely got fully into tennis at older ages and thus had lots more room for improvement once they fully dedicated to the sport.
Again, BB should do what he thinks is right. I just have no use for his advice because we are on totally different paths.
Andfor and chalk are not wrong. What I thought too about DY. I am close with a top dawg in American tennis. Tells me DY is really good kid. Was a wrestling match between him and USTA. USA players sided with DY. When DY and family wouldn't go along, USTA turned on them. Made damaging public statements etc. This is why you don't hear American pros speak out agnst USTA- fear of retribution. Only ones speaking their minds are anonymous powerless nut cases like me. I am not a conspiracy theorist. I know this from reliable sources.
You make good points andfor. Gotta go play a match. 30+ inches snow here. I must be crazy.
But its just not for us. We either are that player with consistent prodigy results, INCLUDING when she is old enough for 18s, Jr. Slams, etc.....or its off to college.