jcgatennismom
Hall of Fame
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/22/...latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront
Per this article, if 5 spots in MDs are reserved for top juniors, and ITA ranked college players can't even get in tour events due to quali draws reduced from 64/128 to 24, more top world juniors may skip college. One of the players interviewed for the article was Stanford's Axel Geller who was #1 world junior last year. His ATP ranking has dropped since playing college tennis as he plays less events. I think he is around 1500; however the goal of these changes is to have 750 or less players playing pro tournaments. Even the top ITA players can lose in early rounds-Faucett lost in the 2nd round of a $15k Quali last year. Petros Chrysochos had to play 4 rounds of Qualifying in Naples in Jan to make it into MD only to draw teammate Skander in MD 1st round. After splitting sets, Petros retired and Skander won. However, when Petros got a Challenger Quali WC in Texas, he qualified and then won 2 MD matches. Dave Miley who used to work for the ITF says the top 10-20 college players are equivalent to ATP 300-400 but they may not even get in to events in future years if they dont already have ATP points; their spots could go to talented world juniors who would probably lose to those college players. Just this spring, a former jr world 8 who had played multiple circuits lost to a 5 star HS senior playing his first future quali in the final Qualifying round. That former top world junior played 15+ Futures before winning a MD match.
If you enjoy watching the top college players give the article a read. The current ITF president is an American so he should know the value of college tennis. It seems ridiculous to have WCs for top juniors but not for top collegians. Future recruits may demand a minimum number of Futures during the year paid for by colleges and may even expect the coach to attend. We have obviously seen some of that in the past, but with these ITF changes, instead of a handful of players playing all fall, it could the majority of the line 1s and 2s gone most of the fall. Colleges could host transition tour events and give WCs to their players; I dont know how these changes affect current USTA pro circuit collegiate events-some were challenger level, e.g. events in Columbus, Charlottesvile, etc so may be exempt from changes, but the Future events held on college campuses would probably turn into transition tour events. Will colleges want to host an event that does not offer ATP points, just transition entry points?
Per this article, if 5 spots in MDs are reserved for top juniors, and ITA ranked college players can't even get in tour events due to quali draws reduced from 64/128 to 24, more top world juniors may skip college. One of the players interviewed for the article was Stanford's Axel Geller who was #1 world junior last year. His ATP ranking has dropped since playing college tennis as he plays less events. I think he is around 1500; however the goal of these changes is to have 750 or less players playing pro tournaments. Even the top ITA players can lose in early rounds-Faucett lost in the 2nd round of a $15k Quali last year. Petros Chrysochos had to play 4 rounds of Qualifying in Naples in Jan to make it into MD only to draw teammate Skander in MD 1st round. After splitting sets, Petros retired and Skander won. However, when Petros got a Challenger Quali WC in Texas, he qualified and then won 2 MD matches. Dave Miley who used to work for the ITF says the top 10-20 college players are equivalent to ATP 300-400 but they may not even get in to events in future years if they dont already have ATP points; their spots could go to talented world juniors who would probably lose to those college players. Just this spring, a former jr world 8 who had played multiple circuits lost to a 5 star HS senior playing his first future quali in the final Qualifying round. That former top world junior played 15+ Futures before winning a MD match.
If you enjoy watching the top college players give the article a read. The current ITF president is an American so he should know the value of college tennis. It seems ridiculous to have WCs for top juniors but not for top collegians. Future recruits may demand a minimum number of Futures during the year paid for by colleges and may even expect the coach to attend. We have obviously seen some of that in the past, but with these ITF changes, instead of a handful of players playing all fall, it could the majority of the line 1s and 2s gone most of the fall. Colleges could host transition tour events and give WCs to their players; I dont know how these changes affect current USTA pro circuit collegiate events-some were challenger level, e.g. events in Columbus, Charlottesvile, etc so may be exempt from changes, but the Future events held on college campuses would probably turn into transition tour events. Will colleges want to host an event that does not offer ATP points, just transition entry points?
