P-Mac responds to Donald Young!!!!
- Thread starter Bones08
- Start date
Eviscerator
Banned
Cfidave said:
Roddick played challengers such as the USTA WAIKOLOA VILLAGE CHALLENGER and won a few before going on tour. I agree with P-Mac in general and feel he would be better served in the lower tier events until he matures more.
Wrong. Roddick got WCs when he first turned pro. Of course he played challengers as well, but he got WC'd into the US Open, and tournaments like the Legg Mason Classic. When he beat Sampras at the Lipton, I'm pretty sure it was as a WC.Eviscerator said:
It's amazing to me how many people throw out comments without really knowing what they're talking about.
And as for DY thinking he's all that, he know's he's not competitive at the tour level yet, he says it's a learning experience, and it is. And don't everybodt start chiming in about the double bagel. **** happens. Sharapova got db'd last year, so did Gaudio. Should they drop down a level? When Henman or Srichaphan get drilled on clay, should they just avoid the surface?
Cavaleer said:
I like what you have to say. Seems very even-keeled. You've been around the block a few times, huh? As I've posted, I too wish that he would go to college, but he might not be able to compete since he is now a "pro". Heard he pretty much had his pick of scholorships, but they might be invalid now.
simi said:
When you're 16 or whatever age and have million $$$ plus contracts in front of you why wait 3-5 years to go pro? Alot can happen in 3-5 years. That's why Bobby Reynolds and James Blake left elite educational insitiutions to pursue tennis. They where 19 or 20 years old and did not win the NCAA's. They left with no guarantee they would make it in the pros. Heck Bobby has yet to break through. They also know that with those millions in endorsement contracts in the bank that if they failed on the pro tour they could go back to college. Chang went pro when he was 16 or 17 for much the same resons DY is. If DY fails he'll have more than enough money to pay for his own college and then some.
I agree DY's parents are defensive. They need to understand the spotlight they have chosen and deal with it. Will they re-think how he is approaching the pro side of tennis or stay the course? Is how he is being handled going to work or is another plan better? Can anyone offer him a gauranteed path to pro tennis greatness at his age of 16? Only time will tell.
Cavaleer, sorry I called you an idiot. Times are different from the 70's and even the 80's. No male has ever been 16 and finished the year #1 except for DY. DY and his parents are navigating unchartered waters. Comparing him to those from the past is not very fair.
Should he do things different being 0-9 on the ATP level. Probably. Over the last 6 months he as I said before is playing more Futures and Challenges with somewhat better results than his ATP ventures.
Give the kid a break.
Volly master
Semi-Pro
enough said..
he cant handle the current pro level.
im not saying he sucks., he could probally beat most, if not all of us here, but he needs to gain some confidence and work on his game at the challenger level first.
VamosRafa
Hall of Fame
Rob_C said:
The difference is Roddick got wildcards and did something with them.
http://www.atptennis.com/en/players...p?year=2000&query=Singles&player=R485&x=8&y=2
In 2000, he got wildcards into Delray and Miami -- primarily because he grew up in Southern Florida. Got to the second round in Miami, and then got to the quarters in Washington, losing to Agassi.
He got his butt kicked a couple times, as the so-called learning experience (no double bagels on the menu, though), but did win a set at the US Open against Costa. And then he won a couple challengers, got to the finals in another, and then set himself up for the next year, which was his breakthrough year on Tour.
After winning Houston and Atlanta, and having a run to the quarters in Miami, he no longer had to worry about wildcards. And he went from losing in the first round at the USO in 2000 and getting the quarters a year later. I don't see a correlation yet between the two in terms of wildcard abuse.
Volly master
Semi-Pro
aye aye..i agree..
roddick was pure talent from the start.
DY is like a used bottle of tooth paste, you wonder if there is anything inside of it that it is good.
roddick was pure talent from the start.
DY is like a used bottle of tooth paste, you wonder if there is anything inside of it that it is good.
Fee
Legend
michaellashan said:Tommy Ho would be a better example than Justin Gimelstob.
Yes, he would be. Justin wasn't hyped nearly as much as DY is being, and he wasn't as successful as a Junior (rankings wise). He won Kalamazoo because Jan-Mike retired with cramps. A few degrees change in tempature that day and the result might have been different. I don't think Justin was even the Top college recruit that year.
By the way, I don't think anyone in this thread is really bashing DY, the criticism is being directed at his team and their decision making process. I wonder if he would listen if Tommy Ho called him. He really was in DY's place once upon a time (so I've been told, my memory doesn't even go there).
andfor said:
I just hate to see this early hype and exposure ruin a kid emotionally and mentally. Tennis is difficult enough as it is, being a solo sport and very physically gruelling, without the added pressure of being in a fish-bowl every time you step on the court.
I say, let him develop gradually without so much chatter from his parents and from the media mill, like Nike et al.
I think he'll definitely mature by playing up but it's a potentially dangerous situation when you play up AND you have everyone examining you under a microscope.
Just because we haven't seen that type of situation with men doesn't mean it can't happen as it has with a few women. Besides, the money isn't going anywhere, especially not if his game improves. But it's difficult to turn down a gift horse, I suppose.
All said, I wish him well. Our American tennis is looking a little thin at the moment.
Cavaleer
simi said:
I grew enormously in college and after, and my point is that you learn so many things about yourself at college: being away from everything that is familiar to you, encountering people and situations you've never known before, making close friends, succeeding, failing, growing.
They, the college years, are a once in a lifetime opportunity, and given the micro-managing of his parents he'll always be a mama's boy at this rate.
And if he can't handle a tough class, or an a**hole professor, or a broken heart, how will he handle serious defeats on the tennis court, serious public defeats, defeats that may require him to rethink his entire game, like Roddick is now experiencing?
But you're right, he wouldn't be able to compete anyway because he's a professional.
Let's wish him luck and wish his parents some restraint.
Cavaleer
VamosRafa
Hall of Fame
Fee said:
I agree, Fee. And also, we've already made the comparison to Andy, but I thought maybe comparing Gasquet and Nadal to Donald at the same age could be interesting. What's interesting is that Gasquet and Nadal were born in June 1986, and Donald in August 1989, so there is just about 3 years between them. And I'm picking them because, other than Murray, they've been the most hyped young guys on Tour over the past few years (maybe I'll check Murray later).
So if you take Donald's last year from the ATP in 2005, when he was 15/16, it pretty much corresponds to what Gasquet and Nadal were doing in 2002, in terms of their age, but not in terms of opportunities:
Comparison -- ATP results only (not junior events):
2005; Donald Young: All first round losses in 7 wildcard ATP events (including two Masters and the U.S. Open), plus a first-round challenger loss, and quarters result in a Futures event.
http://www.atptennis.com/en/players...?year=2005&query=Singles&player=Y124&x=11&y=5
2002; Richard Gasquet: Second round in Monte Carlo (I believe he qualified for that, but not sure) -- but he won his first main draw ATP match at 15. He did lose in the first round at RG, and likely had a wildcard there. Won two futures events, and a challenger, and reached a final in another challenger. Three first-round losses in ATP events (in which he likely had wildcards), but one was to Safin and all were respectable results, including a three-set loss at Queen's.
http://www.atptennis.com/en/players...?year=2002&query=Singles&player=G628&x=14&y=3
2002: Rafael Nadal: More off the radar screen than Gasquet, but he gets wildcard into first ATP event at age 15 in Mallorca, and wins first-round match against Ramon Delgado. No more wildcards, but wins six futures events in Spain, and has good results in most of the others. Beating guys like Calatrava and Montanes. Not playing juniors. His parents wanted him to have a normal school life, so they rarely let him leave Spain for tournaments, although he did have opportunities. They would never let him play the Roland Garros juniors because it interfered with his studies, but they did let him play the Wimbledon juniors.
http://www.atptennis.com/en/players...p?year=2002&query=Singles&player=N409&x=9&y=2
By the next year (2003), where Donald is now (2006), Richard and Rafa were basically beyond the futures and playing more challengers, winning them or getting to the finals, and also winning more ATP matches on Tour, and then earning more wildcards. And Rafa's parents finally, that spring, gave up on keeping their kid in school, although they pretty much kept him in Spain (and mostly in Mallorca) before then.
Both paths are so different from Donald's. And a lot of it is because Donald in the next US hopeful, and at that time Gasquet was one of a number of good French players, and Rafa was one of even a greater number of good, and a couple great, Spanish players.
But you have to wonder which path may be better for the player's future, if he really is THAT good.
Eviscerator
Banned
Rob_C said:
I find it amazing how people like yourself are so quick to pronounce that someone else is wrong, when you yourself are wrong. I never said that he was not given any WC's, but rather pointed out that he in fact played challengers prior to playing on the main tour full time. Nothing in my statement is "wrong", and I defy you to prove otherwise!
Roddick was willing to pay his dues and it helped him in the beginning. Hopefully DY will do the same and become a better player for it.
Great post....Finally some perspective......
This is the sort of comparison I've been wondering about since I read this thread. These two young phenoms both had success in a few early pro matches then had even more success and maturation in challengers and satellites. PMac's logic is proven.
The part I especially like about Nadal is his parents keeping him in school and in Spain but not micro-managing him.
Great work!
Cavaleer
VamosRafa said:
This is the sort of comparison I've been wondering about since I read this thread. These two young phenoms both had success in a few early pro matches then had even more success and maturation in challengers and satellites. PMac's logic is proven.
The part I especially like about Nadal is his parents keeping him in school and in Spain but not micro-managing him.
Great work!
Cavaleer
The tennis guy
Hall of Fame
Cfidave said:
No, you are wrong. Roddick did play future, and also won matches when given wildcard.
Women are different.
The tennis guy
Hall of Fame
andfor said:
Gasquet finished as #1 junior in 2002 as 16 years old. He already won matches on ATP master event as 16 years old. This DY is in unchartered waters is really silly.
This is also misleading because the likes of Agassi, Chang, Hewitt, Becker, and many more had already had success on ATP as 16 years old, so they abandoned junior all together.
Eviscerator said:
Eviscerator said:
There's your original post. Nowhere does it mention full time.
And the 'amazing' comment wasnt directed at you, I should have specified that. It was directed at all the posters who say stuff like DY should go to college, He can't. Or stuff like Dy should play Futures, He is.
eLterrible
Rookie
young kinda reminds me of those people on american idol that are ok, but cant accept that they're just not good enough.
that's why scoville jenkins is so much better.
that's why scoville jenkins is so much better.
VamosRafa
Hall of Fame
Cavaleer said:
Thanks, but I did a site for Roddick until 2003, and then have done one for Rafa since then, so I have all that history and general stats in my head. So it wasn't a lot of work (the ATP has the stats at the ready).
When I started the Rafa site, Richard was already the "next big thing." And he had more results than Rafa at that point. But they both were working hard to prove themselves, playing challengers, going through qualifying and such.
And I already knew Andy Roddick's history from doing his site.
So this whole Donald Young thing has perplexed me, because he is getting much more of a "free ride" than any of them did.
And maybe someone much earlier than them did as well, but I think this is unprecedented. Maybe Nike and Young's agent is taking a "flier" on this, or maybe US tennis is that desperate, but it is unusual, and could be counterproductive to Donald's development. And I think that is Patrick McEnroe's concern.
Yes, he and everyone else in the US wants Donald to do well and perhaps represent the US in Davis Cup, but do we lose credibility by giving him opportunities that really should be given to others? We've all seen in the past where qualifiers, or wildcards, get to the later rounds of events, gain confidence and then move on. Is Donald depriving other more developed players from making better use of these opportunities?
We'll never know, but perhaps for the time being, others should be in the running for these wildcards. Or, Donald should be given a freebie into the qualifying event for these events. If he comes through qualifying, I don't think anyone would question his right to be there.
As for Rafa's development, it is very unorthodox. I can elaborate more for any of you who are interested. But Rafa pretty much played both tennis and soccer until he was 12, and then he had to choose. He chose tennis, but his family didn't want him to leave Mallorca to train. He was invited to train in Barcelona, but they declined, as they wanted to keep him in school, so he trained in Mallorca, with Uncle Toni, for the most part, and when he did travel for events, it was rarely out of Spain.
The major key to his success may be traced to Carlos Moya, who would regularly train with Rafa when he was home in Mallorca. So when he was 13 or 15, he was Carlos's regularly sparring partner in Mallorca. And for a guy that age to train with a Top 5 player was huge, and to this day, he credits Carlos with his success.
Its not just Richard and Rafael's early success but also their game styles. I saw Gasquet at 16 in Miami and while he had a lot of physical problems competing at that age it was immediately apparent he was playing a pro's game but in the handicap of a boy's body. Also it must be mentioned that Gasquet was dominating Spanish satellites at a very young age which are extremely competitive.
Nadal is fortunate enough to have developed physically early and have a pro game to match hence his incredible success.
Every time I've seen DY I've seen a skinny little kid with a weak "quick serve", soft groundies, and worst of all seems to have poor body language and attitude.
Two more prospects who are probably worth keeping track of more than Donald Young are:
Korolev qualified for Monte Carlo this year age 18
http://www.itftennis.com/mens/players/player.asp?player=100042998
and Juan Martin del Potro
http://www.itftennis.com/mens/players/player.asp?player=100036002
Nadal is fortunate enough to have developed physically early and have a pro game to match hence his incredible success.
Every time I've seen DY I've seen a skinny little kid with a weak "quick serve", soft groundies, and worst of all seems to have poor body language and attitude.
Two more prospects who are probably worth keeping track of more than Donald Young are:
Korolev qualified for Monte Carlo this year age 18
http://www.itftennis.com/mens/players/player.asp?player=100042998
and Juan Martin del Potro
http://www.itftennis.com/mens/players/player.asp?player=100036002
The tennis guy said:
Whatever, there's no predetermined path to tennis greatness. The tennis road is littered with talented roadkill who never made it big. The Young's will do what ever they think is best, liked or not. They have a few years to see if they DY can develop and make it. He's still just a kid.
The tennis guy
Hall of Fame
andfor said:
If that is the case, then don't make those false claim that he is the first 16 year old to finish as #1 junior.
I personally don't know whether he is going to succeed or not. However, as a 16 years old, his developement is further behind the likes of Gasquet, Nadal, Agassi, Becker, Change, Kristein, and many more.
By the way, they can do whatever they want on one hand, on the other hand people can criticize him whatever they want for not winning a set in 9 pro matches when accepting wild cards alone.
The tennis guy said:
There might have been other 16 year olds that finished the year #1, but Young is the youngest to have done so, if he's not the only 16 yr old to have done so. I know the ITF site sys he's the youngest, I'm not sure if it says he's the only 16 yr old.
Does anyone know if the WC for the L.A. ATP event is a main draw WC or is it for the qualies.
The tennis guy said:
You make it sound like being a 16 boy and a successful professional tennis player is an everyday occurance.
I have never said a person can't critisize the Young's. Just give the kid a chance to develop. He's only 16. In the meantime if folks get their jollys tearing down a child who happens to be a good tennis player they're sickos.
The tennis guy
Hall of Fame
andfor said:
They are not tearing him down. They are criticizing his handlers.
As a devil advocate to this thread. I personally think DY is rushed by the family/agents/USTA/sponsors or whomever. Obviously his results so far told all spectators that he is not as ready as Nadal/Gasquet/Roddick were when they captured #1 ranking as a Junior. However, on the other hand, All these players turned pro the following years after capturing the #1 ranking, so why can't DY do the same this year after 2005 #1?
DY didn't say not to play futures or chanllengers, so I assume he and his family are aware of the fact that DY needs to play those events to gain REAL match experience in the pro-level. I think they probably know that multiple 45 minute losses in ATP first round probably isn't helping him very much, but admitting to the fact could be hard to do.
But I have to say, attitude is the most important thing for any athlete in any sport. If one of the posters here is right about DY's poor postuer and attitude, then it is really too bad.
DY didn't say not to play futures or chanllengers, so I assume he and his family are aware of the fact that DY needs to play those events to gain REAL match experience in the pro-level. I think they probably know that multiple 45 minute losses in ATP first round probably isn't helping him very much, but admitting to the fact could be hard to do.
But I have to say, attitude is the most important thing for any athlete in any sport. If one of the posters here is right about DY's poor postuer and attitude, then it is really too bad.
sandiegotennisboy
Banned
mr2union said:
amen.
C
crunkestgirl07
Guest
I think the only reason everyone on these sites and others just like this bash Donald Young, Andy Roddick, James Blake, Scoville Jenkins, and sometimes even Robby Ginepri is because we are tired of Federrer. We all want so badly for an American to be the #1 tennis player in the world that we will talk about them until they achieve this and then even if they do, we're still going to find something negative to say.
Donald Young may be getting his butt kicked now but maybe we should give him time maybe when he is 18 or 19 he will shut up his critics and prove that he can do it, play an ATP match (without receiving a wildcard).
Donald Young may be getting his butt kicked now but maybe we should give him time maybe when he is 18 or 19 he will shut up his critics and prove that he can do it, play an ATP match (without receiving a wildcard).
ohh please, how old was becker when he won wimbledon? 16, how old is DY? 16.... gosh, sorry but the ppl here saying the USTA is just using him because hes marketable are correct, this guy isnt all that great, I mean when we see people that are 16 and 17 winning grandslams and masters, this is stupid saying he has the potential to be one of the greatest....Sorry DY I don't have anything agenst you, and if DY can play in master series he sure can fight his own battles, his mom needs to shut up...
Marat Safinator
Banned
I think Mac is right, it wont do anything for young's confidence, getting hammered by mediocre top 150 players.
TennisProPaul
Banned
Jonas said:
donald young's parents are not big. i sadly think he is done growing. unless he puts major muscle on he has no chance.
Cybele
Semi-Pro
interesting article from Tennis Week - and very relevant to the issues discussed in this thread - about the difficulties of no1 Juniors when they move to the Pros - apologies if anyone has posted it before, I've only just come across it
http://www.sportsmediainc.com/tennisweek/index.cfm?func=showarticle&newsid=15672&bannerregion=
http://www.sportsmediainc.com/tennisweek/index.cfm?func=showarticle&newsid=15672&bannerregion=
framebreaker
Semi-Pro
well, if his parents want young to be an atp touring prot at such a young age then they have to put up with the criticism that atp pros have to face once in a while.
you can't have it both ways.
his mother seems to be pretty narrow minded and out of touch with reality.
you can't have it both ways.
his mother seems to be pretty narrow minded and out of touch with reality.
Phillip=Tennis guy
Rookie
Young=future of tennis.
Framebreaker is right.
Framebreaker is right.
helloworld
Hall of Fame
True. It doesn't matter how poor he is doing because he will be a great tennis player some day.Phillip=Tennis guy said:
Similar threads
