chalkflewup
Hall of Fame
I agree that the first year is tough but playing up within his section will make him a better player. Personally, I don't get caught up in rankings or L2, L3, etc... particularly in the younger age groups.
Orange Bowl to be played on clay
- Thread starter Tennishacker
- Start date
I agree that the first year is tough but playing up within his section will make him a better player. Personally, I don't get caught up in rankings or L2, L3, etc... particularly in the younger age groups.
Chalk, it is not about the ranking for many of us. It is about having the opportunity to compete with different kids IN YOUR OWN AGE GROUP and not stuck 1) playing the same ones over and over again in your section, or 2) get blown out in the second round by kids two years older who are more physically developed.
Agree to disagree
.chalkflewup
Hall of Fame
I hear that line all too often. Well I'm not flying my kid around the country just to play a new face. The pros see the same faces all the time.
Keysmickey
Rookie
But CFU, just because you don't want to travel around the country to play does that mean those who want to should be unable to? The occasional travel we did each year will probably be among the best memories I'll have in my life.
The pros are no model for junior tennis. They're being paid and it's a job. Junior tennis is about kids trying to find their way and parents who want their kids to have the best shot possible. I have no problem with the USTA and academies taking the best prospects and helping them to whatever degree they want but the system shouldn't put the kids who aren't in that elite category at such a disadvantage because of it.
The pros are no model for junior tennis. They're being paid and it's a job. Junior tennis is about kids trying to find their way and parents who want their kids to have the best shot possible. I have no problem with the USTA and academies taking the best prospects and helping them to whatever degree they want but the system shouldn't put the kids who aren't in that elite category at such a disadvantage because of it.
chalkflewup
Hall of Fame
I respect your perspective but where do you draw the line? You can't please everybody.
Keysmickey
Rookie
I feel more comfortable drawing the line at the point where the majority of the juniors are receiving the best treatment possible OVER the system currently in place where the few receive all of the considerations. Of course that is JUST me and my kids focus was never elite status ... Only college.
my only suggestion in order to make the expensive travel and lodging worthwhile in National tournaments is that everyone play a minimum of 4 matches. Two the first day and two the second day of a tournament. That way you can play different players of good ability and everyone feels like they played a lot. They should do the same thing with state tournaments as well. That's really what most of the kids want, to play the best players around and see how you stack up.
justinmadison
Semi-Pro
That is the kind of change that players and parents would rally behind. Let’s create more opportunities for players not fewer opportunities. That is how you develop more and better players.
I am continually amazed by those people who feel that taking away opportunities to compete with national players is good for anyone.
Keysmickey
Rookie
Agreed 100%.
boris becker 1
Semi-Pro
good idea then maybe you wont so many 1 dimensional usta kids
this is what ""zonals"" do they play a team format and get national point.. the same with intersectionals .. go check it out.. I don't know if they still have them though ..
Keysmickey
Rookie
Zonal's were great ... Among my daughters best memories, I think. But not many kids qualify and it's just one event.
Then you should ask your section why they do not send more teams. In the sections that have 4 teams almost any serious player can go to zonals.
Keysmickey
Rookie
USTA Florida mirrors USTA National in that they really don't care about this level player. There are way too many elite players in the State that need tending. My daughters' done with USTA so it isn't my place to make noise about it anymore. They heard from me enough during our time (LOL).
justinmadison
Semi-Pro
SoCal sent 6 teams to zonals last year for 14s. They finished 1st and 2nd. This is another thing that bugs me about the new national system. The “do well in your section” criteria for playing national tournaments is pretty different between a section that sends one team and cannot beat another section that sends six. In the past you could play level 3 tournaments for a chance to even out things against weaker sections, not any more.
Talking about "even things out". You have access to free or cheap courts the whole year, great competition within an hour drive and you are not happy. You prefer to be where almost nobody plays tennis and/or have to pay $50+/hr for court time 9 months out of the year. Maybe the kids who play tournament level tennis in these conditions have a greater need to play National tournaments.
justinmadison
Semi-Pro
I think you miss understood my comments. I am absolutely not trying to “even things out”. I am trying to get the best kids competing in the best tournaments. I don’t prefer to be where nobody plays tennis and I don’t want to have more accomplished players staying home to give a chance to the less accomplished players. If we are really trying to set up a system where the weaker players get to play National tournament to make up for their location we should all just quit now. American tennis is done.
No, I am just trolling as usual. But seriously you can see some Blue chips who go to all Nationals all the time and you can see some Blue Chips who do not go that often and do not have very high National ranking. But both are equally good. So National play is not a prerequisite of successfull tennis development. And Dallas will take care of your status anyway if you can beat these "National" players at home.
If we think that players who cannot rise through their section, even if it is the toughest section, are the future of American pro tennis, we are clueless and American tennis is done.
chalkflewup
Hall of Fame
justinmadison said:
Amen. I completely agree with this post.
Keysmickey
Rookie
I think all of these discussions turn into apples and oranges talks. I think there are a lot of posters looking at this from the Pro development first standpoint (same as the USTA). Me, and a few others, post to the what's best for the majority (or as I call it, the college tennis crowd).
I have no problem with the BEST kids playing in EVERY SINGLE tournament but tell me why the USTA has such a problem with a few lesser players making the field as well?
The 64 draw L2 and 64 & 128 draw L3 did not keep the better players from getting in and plying the tough competition it ONLY means they may have to play a lesser player in the first round AND risk being upset by a lesser "upstart" (the biggest issue to the USTA and academies, I think). A 64 draw is whittled down to the 32 level after the first match (the 128 in two). I honestly can't see why anyone can't see the ramifications, positive v negative when looking at the big picture.
I have no problem with the BEST kids playing in EVERY SINGLE tournament but tell me why the USTA has such a problem with a few lesser players making the field as well?
The 64 draw L2 and 64 & 128 draw L3 did not keep the better players from getting in and plying the tough competition it ONLY means they may have to play a lesser player in the first round AND risk being upset by a lesser "upstart" (the biggest issue to the USTA and academies, I think). A 64 draw is whittled down to the 32 level after the first match (the 128 in two). I honestly can't see why anyone can't see the ramifications, positive v negative when looking at the big picture.
justinmadison
Semi-Pro
Very true.
Similar threads
