Ivy League Tennis

Anyone else notice how close every match has been in the Ivies this year on the men's side? Literally almost every match has been 4-3 and many have been decided by 7-6 in the 3rd set. Shows how competitive the league has gotten.

Also, two teams with new coaches made big jumps this year. Dartmouth went from 2-5 last year to 4-2 as of now this year and was very close to beating Ivy Champs Cornell (came down to 7-6 in the 3rd at 5 singles) and Princeton (came down to a 3rd set at 4). Quite an improvement over last year. Cornell also showed an improvement from 2nd the last to years to the clear favorites this year. They've won every match 4-3 and squeaked out quite a few of them. Very mentally tough team, although they are losing 4/6 starters next year.
 

SoCal10s

Hall of Fame
hey wait until next year when those Ivies get all their recruits .. some "blue chip" and 5 stars going to Ivies instead of typical D1 tennis schools .. looks like everyone's getting more competitive ..
 

Automator

Semi-Pro
Cornell made a great hire when they grabbed Bresky. I'm pretty confident that he's going to build a very good program, if he doesn't get lured away by a high major.
 

Vicious Vik

Semi-Pro
hey wait until next year when those Ivies get all their recruits .. some "blue chip" and 5 stars going to Ivies instead of typical D1 tennis schools .. looks like everyone's getting more competitive ..

Nah, won't mean much. Blue chippers have been to the Ivy League before but flopped. Like Marc Powers. It's not guaranteed in the Ivy League, nahmean?
 

Vicious Vik

Semi-Pro
hey wait until next year when those Ivies get all their recruits .. some "blue chip" and 5 stars going to Ivies instead of typical D1 tennis schools .. looks like everyone's getting more competitive ..

Nah, won't mean much. Blue chippers have been to the Ivy League before but flopped. Like Marc Powers. It's not guaranteed in the Ivy League, nahmean?
 

PennAlum

Rookie
Nah, won't mean much. Blue chippers have been to the Ivy League before but flopped. Like Marc Powers. It's not guaranteed in the Ivy League, nahmean?

Marc Powers didn't flop. He was undefeated at #1 in Ivy League play as a freshman and was voted Rookie of the Year and MVP in the Ivy League, a first! Maybe a little sophomore slump this year but I wouldn't call him a flop.
 

Nellie

Hall of Fame
Ivy league teams typically have a couple of strong players. They just lack the depth of Div1 teams that recruit and offer scholarships.
 

bluetrain4

G.O.A.T.
I never understood why Ivies (at least some of them) couldn't be consistent tennis powers. Harvard has been ranked in the Top 25 over the years, and some other teams have had their moments.

These schools have money, and a few have pretty good facilities.

I would expect the weather plays a factor since every school is in New York or New England.

Academics is a double edged sword. On the one hand, the high academic standard immediately removes a lot of players from eligibility.

On the other hand, great academics and prestige should be a big attraction to both American and foreign players who can meet those standards. I mean, a team only needs 6 or 7 good players to be competitive. I know things have changed somewhat, but Stanford has combined great tennis and stringent academic standards, though it has a big weather advantage.

I would just think that of all the super-smart good tennis players out there, at least one Ivy League school, because of the Ivy League's academic reputation and prestige, could get 6 or 7 players good enough to have consistently top 20 or even top 15 team.
 
Academically smart does not always equate to tennis smart. You can be a smart student and play dumb as a rock or be a bad student and be tactically brilliant. Don't assume that all Ivy league players are smarter players.(or even smarter individuals but that's an entirely different debate)
 

bluetrain4

G.O.A.T.
Academically smart does not always equate to tennis smart. You can be a smart student and play dumb as a rock or be a bad student and be tactically brilliant. Don't assume that all Ivy league players are smarter players.(or even smarter individuals but that's an entirely different debate)

I wasn't assuming that at all.
 
I agree bluetrain4. It seems like tennis attracts players/family’s that could afford the tuition and would love to have their kid at an Ivy League school. Let’s face it, almost no one is going pro, so the best academic schools should be their first choice. I am puzzled too.
 

SoCal10s

Hall of Fame
Ivy boys have to do one thing more than others ,and that's study.. everyone of their classmates are all top students in the country and they have to compete in school work against those top students and still train hard and play great tennis.. it's just too hard for a young person to do,plus all those hormones are still chasing girls and social life of college .. don't expect too much..
 

SoCal10s

Hall of Fame
Academically smart does not always equate to tennis smart. You can be a smart student and play dumb as a rock or be a bad student and be tactically brilliant.

you are absolutely right on this.. I know a guy who is at a top academic school in the country ,when he played a junior match in his senior year.. he was up a set and 5-0 in the second and he started swinging for home runs .. he ended up losing that match .. this wasn't the only one of a kind thing either..
 

bluetrain4

G.O.A.T.
Ivy boys have to do one thing more than others ,and that's study.. everyone of their classmates are all top students in the country and they have to compete in school work against those top students and still train hard and play great tennis.. it's just too hard for a young person to do,plus all those hormones are still chasing girls and social life of college .. don't expect too much..

True, but how is this not the case for other top academic schools? What about places like Stanford, Northwestern, Vandy, Duke? I can' t imagine that there's some magical cut off for schools where sudying is imperative and it only includes the eight Ivies.
 

SoCal10s

Hall of Fame
it's the same everywhere at those top schools ,that's why no Americans are going pro... but seeing what I saw at Ojai .. this crop of 16 years old looks very good ... a few looks like they have some tools to make the pros...
 

ClarkC

Hall of Fame
True, but how is this not the case for other top academic schools? What about places like Stanford, Northwestern, Vandy, Duke? I can' t imagine that there's some magical cut off for schools where sudying is imperative and it only includes the eight Ivies.

To be perfectly honest, I have seen stagnation from a number of blue chip recruits over the years at all of these top academic schools, and not just the Ivies.
 
I am about the skill level of the people who are being recruited, but I was wondering what type of grades/other stuff would you need to get into uPenn or Brown or Cornell. Could someone answer me please?
 

Automator

Semi-Pro
You need to have decent grades and a good SAT score. Obviously, recruited athletes don't have to meet the same standards that non-athletes, but you do need to have honors classes on your transcipt and a good GPA. The admissions department wants to know that you are capable of doing the work required to graduate.
 

tennis5

Professional
To be perfectly honest, I have seen stagnation from a number of blue chip recruits over the years at all of these top academic schools, and not just the Ivies.

The stagnation at the top academic schools in tennis is due to the amount of schoolwork that one is required to do in order to keep up with all the brains at the school. It is a lot of hard school work.
 

VamosRafa650

New User
Is it particularly hard to play for an Ivy League? I know they're D1, but I've seen some of their matches on youtube and some of their players (lower singles/doubles) are pretty bad. I know most of them were like 4 or 5 star recruits, but they probably played in a bad section and got high in the rankings there. Seriously, some of the Ivy tennis players look worse than some of the 3 star recruits I know.
 

tennisnoob3

Professional
Is it particularly hard to play for an Ivy League? I know they're D1, but I've seen some of their matches on youtube and some of their players (lower singles/doubles) are pretty bad. I know most of them were like 4 or 5 star recruits, but they probably played in a bad section and got high in the rankings there. Seriously, some of the Ivy tennis players look worse than some of the 3 star recruits I know.

:shock:

yeah because eastern, FL, CA, and Texas are all weak, right?
 

Bobby Riggs

New User
The cost of an Ivy League education, like all coleges has risen a lot since the 90's. The Ivies don't offer athletic scholarships and the this makes it very hard to recruit against top programs in the country offering athletic schollys. In addition, the Ivy League has an academic index that makes for another recruiting challenge for Ivy coaches.

As mentioned the weather in the Northeast is an issue as well, but this is less of a consideration in my view ( the Big 10 & Notre Dame, for example, do well despite this ). Ivy workloads aren't any more demanding than they are at many other top schools though.
 

PennAlum

Rookie
But in general, those players want to go to the big tennis schools that would help lead them to pro land.

Not necessarily, smart Ivy players know that it is next to impossible to make a living as a ATP pro. They realize that and employ the tennis card to get them into the Ivies and pursue a job in finance where the chance for success is much greater.
 
Last edited:

PennAlum

Rookie
I wasn't talking smarts, I was talking tennis. Of the blue chips in the last few years, maybe one goes to an Ivy. The tennis isn't strong enough. I'm sure the academics are fine, but top 25 kids may be looking for a tennis future -whether warranted is another discussion. But the tennis at the Ivy's isn't good enough for most, again, top 25 players.

True as that may be for blue chips, it will be interesting to see who can actually make a good living (top 50) on the tour for this generation. So far only Ryan Harrison and Christina McHale have shown the goods. Kids who turned pro recently have not made the grade including Cox, Kudla, Britton, Smyczek, Kuznetsov, McClune and a host of others.
 

Tennishacker

Professional
The cost of an Ivy League education, like all coleges has risen a lot since the 90's. The Ivies don't offer athletic scholarships and the this makes it very hard to recruit against top programs in the country offering athletic schollys..

Not necessarily true, some of the ivy's under pressure from government will offer free education if parents income is below 160K or some number around that amount.
 
I never understood why Ivies (at least some of them) couldn't be consistent tennis powers. Harvard has been ranked in the Top 25 over the years, and some other teams have had their moments.

These schools have money, and a few have pretty good facilities.

I would expect the weather plays a factor since every school is in New York or New England.

Academics is a double edged sword. On the one hand, the high academic standard immediately removes a lot of players from eligibility.

On the other hand, great academics and prestige should be a big attraction to both American and foreign players who can meet those standards. I mean, a team only needs 6 or 7 good players to be competitive. I know things have changed somewhat, but Stanford has combined great tennis and stringent academic standards, though it has a big weather advantage.

I would just think that of all the super-smart good tennis players out there, at least one Ivy League school, because of the Ivy League's academic reputation and prestige, could get 6 or 7 players good enough to have consistently top 20 or even top 15 team.

Spend five minutes with a Stanford tennis player and any Ivy player, and you immediately recognize a big difference in intellectual prowess. Stanford lowers its standards for athletes much more than the Ivies do.
 
And in what alternate universe is this happening in? No average family making over 90k will get "free anything" from any major institution let alone from an ivy. My son and daughter were both top juniors and played/play D1 she went up east and he played in Tx at a top ten program. The truth is being a great athlete does not get you that much pull in getting in, you still have to go thru the normal admitting process and being a recruited athlete gets you a few points (very few) in the admittance review. My daughter was recruited hard by 2 ivy programs but decided on a smaller NE school so she could play 2 sports - loans, grants and aid is available but for the most part mommy and daddy will still have to find 25k to 30k easy to attend an ivy and play.

A few of the Ivies offer finaid up to $160,000 in yearly family income, depending on circumstances. Secondly, the Ivies and NESCAC have two guaranteed slots per recruiting year, and once, every four years, can recruit a player below Ivy academic standards, as long as the team standards are within parameters. A few of the long-time coaches with resumes of academic success, can often get their third recruit in as well. These facts are well-known to those involved in the admission process.

The cost, is what it is. Beyond what I do professionally for student-athletes, my own children also were recruited, but chose D III for the flexibility and higher in-depth educational standards at a liberal arts college. I was quite happy to pay the freight for two kids who were also Super-Seniors, so I paid for 10 years of education, not 8, which averaged $45K per year. From jump, my son had only 2-3 classes with 20 students, and the rest averaged 12. My daughter had only two classes with more than 10 students in total, and the rest had less than 10 students per class. When she was struggling during her sophomore year, the dean of the college would call her every morning to help get her going, and met with her on a weekly basis. Bottom Line: You get what you pay for.
 
Last edited:

tennis5

Professional
I think weather is a bigger issue than most people are giving credit for...

Ivy's are in a cold, snowy winter climate with indoor tennis..

It is just a huge turnoff for someone from the West or the South.
 
Last edited:
I think weather is a big issue than most people are giving credit for...

Ivy's are in a cold, snowy winter climate with indoor tennis..

It is just a huge turnoff for someone from the West or the South.

Please....it's not that cold in Philly or NYC--which is the #1 destination for college applicants.
 

tennisnoob3

Professional
Please....it's not that cold in Philly or NYC--which is the #1 destination for college applicants.

you obviously don't live in the area. NYC area had one of the coldest winters to date. iirc it snowed in march/april.

and tball, your statistic about 8 of the top ten schools in the country being in California is wrong, unless it is Public schools only due to the large amount of state schools and all of them being under one application system. NYU,BC, and BU, Cornell and Harvard are always in the top ten of applications received(private).
 
Last edited:

tball2day

Semi-Pro
Data from a couple years ago but here ya go, pub and private. NYU comes in at #8, Harvard around 15. These numbers at all the schools are higher for 2011 obviously.

55437 , UCLA
48263 , UC Berkeley
47365 , UCSD
42414 , UC Irvine
40933 , UC Santa Barbara
40605 , UC Davis
39089 , Penn State
31160 , Indiana U
29952 , Purdue
29814 , U Michigan
29547 , Rutgers
29501 , U Texas
29159 , U Minnesota
28161 , U Maryland
27612 , U Florida
25589 , Michigan State
25478 , U Wisconsin

Private

37245 , NYU
35900 , USC
34125 , Tulane
33930 , Boston University
33073 , Cornell
30845 , Boston Coll
27462 , Harvard
25299 , Stanford
25013 , Northwestern
22935 , U Penn
22817 , Yale
22584 , Columbia
 

duusoo

Rookie
Spend five minutes with a Stanford tennis player and any Ivy player, and you immediately recognize a big difference in intellectual prowess. Stanford lowers its standards for athletes much more than the Ivies do.
No way. Stanford does not compromise in sports like tennis. This is an outstanding academic institution. I am more suspicious of Duke than any of the big name schools. One thing I do know is that in Hockey some bending is done at the Ivy's. I knew a kid from Fargo Shanley that played for Brown in the early 80's, who was very weak, mid level graduate, but played all 4 years, and also got a 1st class education, and went to Cornell Law School. Ivy's have great networking opportunities.
 

10isplayer

Semi-Pro
No way. Stanford does not compromise in sports like tennis. This is an outstanding academic institution. I am more suspicious of Duke than any of the big name schools. One thing I do know is that in Hockey some bending is done at the Ivy's. I knew a kid from Fargo Shanley that played for Brown in the early 80's, who was very weak, mid level graduate, but played all 4 years, and also got a 1st class education, and went to Cornell Law School. Ivy's have great networking opportunities.

Yes, I am 100% sure Stanford comprises for their tennis players because I know players on the team and they have very good grades but their grades wouldn't normally be good enough to get into stanford without their athletics.
 

duusoo

Rookie
Yes, I am 100% sure Stanford comprises for their tennis players because I know players on the team and they have very good grades but their grades wouldn't normally be good enough to get into stanford without their athletics.
I'm in K-Town, we don't live that far apart, but I just don't think so. Stanford is pretty pure. Duke isn't, and I know it, because I defended a player who was a 10 yr NBA star that was recruited bu Duke, and not at all an academic performer. Northwestern is also very clean. SMU also on the clean side.
 

10isplayer

Semi-Pro
I'm in K-Town, we don't live that far apart, but I just don't think so. Stanford is pretty pure. Duke isn't, and I know it, because I defended a player who was a 10 yr NBA star that was recruited bu Duke, and not at all an academic performer. Northwestern is also very clean. SMU also on the clean side.

Ok cool I know a lot of people from there. But trust me I personally know some of the recruits and they have very good grades and high ACT scores (30,31) but that's not good enough for Stanford normally. Almost all schools bend the rules for their athletes somewhat. I don't know what else to say other than you have to trust me :confused: Stanford wants to perform well in all athletics but with how much time is needed to spend on the court now a days along with all the travel it's incredibly difficult to do that well in both areas. Why would lowering their standards for tennis players make Stanford any less pure? Tennis players are often successful in college academics because most of them already know how to balance their time.
 

Bash and Crash

Semi-Pro
I'm in K-Town, we don't live that far apart, but I just don't think so. Stanford is pretty pure. Duke isn't, and I know it, because I defended a player who was a 10 yr NBA star that was recruited bu Duke, and not at all an academic performer. Northwestern is also very clean. SMU also on the clean side.

Stanford helps it athletes......from local news recently

Stanford University has dropped a secret list of classes widely regarded as easy and aimed at helping star athletes get through school. Classes on the list, which has existed for 11 years, were "always chock-full of athletes and very easy A's," a soccer player tells the San Francisco Chronicle. University officials concede the list was designed to accommodate athletes' demanding schedules, but disagree that it consists of easy courses. Officials jettisoned the list, however, when revelation of the roster of classes triggered controversy on campus.
 

tennis5

Professional
Please....it's not that cold in Philly or NYC--which is the #1 destination for college applicants.

Sure, it is not like Minnesota, but it is snowy and therefore, the tennis is inside.

Ask any good junior who grew up in California if they want to play college tennis indoors....

The answer is no.
 
Sure, it is not like Minnesota, but it is snowy and therefore, the tennis is inside.

Ask any good junior who grew up in California if they want to play college tennis indoors....

The answer is no.

The DI season ends in the beginning of Nov, so your playing outdoors all fall. The semester starts the last week in Jan, so you play indoors for 5 weeks, unless the weather is inclement, and if that happens in CA, you just don't play; you cannot go indoors. All high schools and colleges go outdoors in the NYC Metro area on March 1st. The real question becomes, does the cultural environment and weaker public high schools in CA, prepare students for Ivies or NE liberal arts colleges, as the kids in the East are pressured to prepare for at a young age.
 
Last edited:
you obviously don't live in the area. NYC area had one of the coldest winters to date. iirc it snowed in march/april.

I live 10 blocks from Ground Zero, and the snow and cold certainly was not that bad. I played outdoors in Jan and Feb when the courts were not wet. And it frequently snows in March in NYC, but it's gone in a day or so. Unless something is amiss, if we get snow on Monday, it's outta site by Wed/Thur.
 

tennis5

Professional
The DI season ends in the beginning of Nov, so your playing outdoors all fall. The semester starts the last week in Jan, so you play indoors for 5 weeks, unless the weather is inclement, and if that happens in CA, you just don't play; you cannot go indoors. All high schools and colleges go outdoors in the NYC Metro area on March 1st. The real question becomes, does the cultural environment and weaker public high schools in CA, prepare students for Ivies or NE liberal arts colleges, as the kids in the East are pressured to prepare for at a young age.

Aren't the Columbia courts in an indoor permanent bubble?

Can someone chirp in here who plays for Columbia.
 
Last edited:

tennis5

Professional
I live 10 blocks from Ground Zero, and the snow and cold certainly was not that bad. I played outdoors in Jan and Feb when the courts were not wet. And it frequently snows in March in NYC, but it's gone in a day or so. Unless something is amiss, if we get snow on Monday, it's outta site by Wed/Thur.

In 2011, you played outdoors in Jan and Feb in NYC?
By February, the city had 61 inches of snow.. ( Dec = 20.1 inches, Jan = 36.0, Feb = 4.8 )
There was so much snow in NYC, that they ran out of places to put it.
 
Last edited:
In 2011, you played outdoors in Jan and Feb in NYC?
By February, the city had 61 inches of snow.. ( Dec = 20.1 inches, Jan = 36.0, Feb = 4.8 )
There was so much snow in NYC, that they ran out of places to put it.

Dude, snow melts, DUH!

And I said the City, not the boroughs, where even after a major blizzard, everything is gone in 5 days.
 
You can be defensive and make silly claims, and say all you want about the weather not being that big a deal, but for many committed tennis players, if you have lived in CA or FLA or other mild climates, the cold of the NE is too extreme to want to take on. It is a huge factor in selecting schools. Actually, it's a huge factor whether you are a tennis player or not. It's what you are use to and prefer. There are great places to live and go to school in NE, but not if don't like or want to tolerate the climate.

No guts no glory. If you want to be recognized as a weak tennis player, so be it.
 
Top