The ones being punished are the kids who are too advanced for quick start but are forced to play quick start tournaments.We are not in this for junior points and trophys and easy wins.Im trying to develop a world class player.Im sure i will be called a crazy tennis dad but why not shoot to be the best?If my little girl is having fun and loves to play everyday why not?
Shame on the U.S.T.A
- Thread starter ga tennis
- Start date
GATennisMom
New User
Totally agree ga tennis!!! See other places in the country have both - they still have the 10s in fact some have the 8s full court and they have quickstart so they are not as impacted yet as us being the first section to go to this format only. Also will let you know that my sons academy is going to try and put some 10s tournaments on after this happens they just will not be sanctioned by the USTA and invite the kids that are playing the 10s now.
You are so right there are some really really good 10 and under players in Georgia!
Certainly an admirable goal. When a developing athlete has a material program conflict with the national governing body for their sport it doesn't bode well for anyone. Personally, I am not a big fan of the USTA and I think they are a factor that makes the sport less attractive to parents who have a lot of choices these days.
Still missing a connection here. Wouldn't the wins be even easier in the more difficult format since fewer athletes can master it well enough to be competitive? Isn't more competitive experience better, even if one wins all the time? (hence the trophys and points)
Last edited:
What academy do u guys train out of? We train out of Macon.
How is the junior tennis up there in Jersey? Do u have kids that play?
Junior tennis below 12s is fairly nonexistent here in my part of New Jersey. I can only wish there was something I could get my kids into. I played hs, college intramural, and I play 5 days a week now, but my kids are all under 8 and there is really no competitive opportunity in tennis so I've got them in other sports: swimming, track, gymnastics, football, baseball, soccer. I simply can't put a lot of time and effort into training my kids for a sport that offers no competitive program at their level.
I went to a big athletic university and I live in what would have to be considered a highly athletic area, but unfortunately, jr tennis and tennis in general is pretty hard to find.
I am very interested on other parent's experiences and I would hope that there is something here (in tennis) that I can interest my kids in at later age. I assure you that of the several national sport organizations we pay into, USTA does little for me and pretty much nothing for my kids at this point.
I went to a big athletic university and I live in what would have to be considered a highly athletic area, but unfortunately, jr tennis and tennis in general is pretty hard to find.
I am very interested on other parent's experiences and I would hope that there is something here (in tennis) that I can interest my kids in at later age. I assure you that of the several national sport organizations we pay into, USTA does little for me and pretty much nothing for my kids at this point.
Last edited:
MordredSJT
Rookie
I know that Nick Saviano is a very accomplished coach, and I am not going to argue against something passed along from him second hand because he is not here to expound and engage in the discussion. However, I would like to add here that I believe that not giving a child a good amount of repitition serving by not allowing them to serve, limiting their exposure to it, or allowing them to serve with improper technique is very detrimental to serve development long term. This is especially true if the child is not engaging in any crossover sports that involve overhead throwing motions. With fewer and fewer kids being exposed long term to baseball in the US, I think this is a major issue. I grew up playing baseball, I can't even remember not knowing how to throw properly. So when I picked up a racquet, I served with a correct arm motion immediately. Someone nudged me towards a continental grip and I took care of the rest myself. That does not happen as often these days I feel. That is why every kid that I teach personally learns how to throw properly (I use nerf footballs usually). I've recently come across some information that just reinforces this, because apparently if kids get significant repetition in overhead throwing motions between the ages of 8-13, it affects the skeletal development of the shoulder and allows them to externally rotate more and faster than people who are not exposed to that stimulus at those ages. This was in the context of baseball development...but I would assume it holds quite true for tennis players as well. I doubt Andy Roddick would have his serve if he did not play baseball when he was a kid...he was also most assuredly blessed with good genes and good coaching along the way.
You can wait for kids to grow into the skill at 10 or 12...or you can give them a shorter racquet, lighter ball, and shorter distance to hit over the net and teach them proper technique sooner. And I don't mean teach them to softball it in...I mean teach them to smack it. As they grow, they can use a longer, heavier racquet, a heavier, harder ball, and a longer court. The skills will translate.
I am not really going to disagree with the contention about exploding into the ball. I always, always emphasize acceleration and aggressive swings within the context of good technique. I don't just teach kids to roll balls back and forth nice and easy. They learn to hit through the ball, and impart lots of spin. I tell them they can swing as hard as they want and as long as they put enough spin on the ball it will go in. Spin is control, and more racquet speed means more spin. My question really then is...why can't they go out and use their great strokes and amazing power on a 60' court? Why can't they learn to play with those strokes at the same time? I've seen some of our kids absolutely murder balls and get them in on a 60' court.
I think the fact that you bring up Macci is interesting, because I definitely have to respect the work he has done, and I know that he worked with Roddick when he was a kid. Roddick is a good example of what I see as the failing of this kind of philosophy though. He didn't really develop the full range of skills until he was already a professional player. When he first broke on the scene he was a huge serve, huge forehand, athleticism...and not a lot else. Now he is a much more complete player because he has clearly worked on his skills the past few years, but he still looks kind of awkward sometimes.
How good could he have been if he had started that work much earlier in his life, while still learning to smack the hell out of the ball? It's a hypothetical, but an interesting one to me.
A little PS here...I would also like to add that I think the USTA is a horrible organization. They barely ever get anything right, and when they do it is usually by accident or against their better judgement.
Last edited:
Pro_Tour_630
Legend
OK my turn,
Just a quick history on my background. Even though I have been a “professional” tennis instructor for a few years now, I do know a thing or two about tennis.
I have been playing tennis since 1978 when I was 10 (for over 30 years). I was #1 in Jr's in my country but our main concern then was patching up our courts after they were constantly being bombed, we were playing with 3/4 grip 13oz wooden frames with white balls and thats what was available. I developed my skills at New Port Beach country club during my teens, I went on to NB academy for three summers during the mid 80's and was #1 on my HS tennis team for three years. I then went on to play few years in a D1 college. I played in open tournaments in my section during the mid 90’s. I have been into customizing frames/strings ever since stepping into Bosworth shop next door during the mid 80's. I have been teaching my niece since she was 11, she was captain of her tennis team and played #1 for 4 years in HS, she went on to play college tennis but not on a scholarship (she could have but excelled at academics/arts/music as well). I have been teaching my son since he was 2 (five years now), he is 7 years old and plays USTA U10 for four months.
I do not consider myself an expert on tennis development but I know a thing or two about tennis racquet development. My niece picked up my frames which were player frames and started tennis right away on a full court. She was able to handle the full size adult frame as a very mature and developed 11 year old. OTOH my son started at 2 with a babolat ball fighter that was under 19inch with regular balls only they were very soft/flat with little fuzz on them (ball machine left overs). He went on to play 21 inch frames then 23 then 25 then 26 on mini tennis courts. Our main concern was the proper grip size and the frames being flexible so he will not hurt his arms using the same regular soft balls. As he grew and developed by age 5-6 he was able to handle a full size frame but I wanted him to stay with a 26 inch frame. His shots were not as powerful as with a full size but his serve motion was sound and he could hit a decent serve with a 26 as well as volley better. He was not hitting powerful shots with a 26 from the back court. . By the time he turned 7, we were now playing full court with normal inflated balls I knew I was keeping him back by having him play with a 26inch. We bought a full size adult Babolate pure drive lite with a zero grip and his shots were very explosive and powerful. He was swinging out with full speed on both ends and can rally from all sides of the court. He could now handle volleying and serve with ease with a 27inch.
I could not see my son going back to 26 or lower since he is not allowed to play with a 27 on a quick start format. His swing/motion will change and get in the way if he goes back to 26 or below. If he was in GA he would not be able to play in the U12 since he will get crushed and it will be devastating if he only had losses. He can not play in the U10 QS since it will be of no benefit and might be too boring. What do we do in this case!?!?!?! See the point. He will not be exposed to tournament play at least for another few years until he grows and can handle U12, which will/might set him back.
My second son is following the foot steps of his older brother and wants to be better than him since he is always trying to catch up. He is four and has been playing for two years (two times a week in clinics) on mini tennis. We are going with the QS format with him since he is not as advanced as his older brother. OTOH, he is an introvert thinker (thinking four to five steps ahead) who is very coachable and can absorb instruction very well at a very young age (nobody can beat him at connect 4, he plays chess and is not allowed on the chess club until 7 even though he can beat kids twice his age) We did not teach him this skill, god gave it to him. So you see it is up to the individual and every kid is different with different focus and attention span. If the older brother were to do QS he will check out and lose interest very quick.
Time will tell who is going to be the better player by age 16-18. Who knows they might stop tennis all together. I got my wife to play tennis for 10 years, now she competes in USTA, she is also involved in our kids tennis development. This way if and when the kids hate tennis it will not only be my fault
. Right now our kids play soccer (spring/fall), swimming (winter/summer) as well as roller blading in the summer and ice skating in the winter as a cross sport. Any information and tips are welcome.
TCF as well, anything I am doing wrong and what to lookout for is much appreciated.
Thanks
Last edited:
RED ALERT RED ALERT ! My sister and I were training at the USTA and we saw the Baughmans ,yes notennis' favorite player he has never watched in person but knows all about him yes 'Deiton" They were there training on the courts next to all the national coaches , Mr. Baughman if you are on here reading this thought you said the USTA was not the place for Deiton? Whats up with that and does anyone know why they are there?
Last edited:
Yes but what I recall on these threads was a condescending attitude about the High Performance center and the coaches.
TennisCoachFLA
Banned
So let me understand the Pat Mac and Higueras strategy to find the next great American champion as they have vowed to do. Seems to me they could have gone one of two ways.
Option 1.....build tons of clay courts and also make USTA tennis and tournaments affordable to 1000000 kids. Then let the cream rise and let the private coaches and academies refine the eventual champions from this huge pool of players.
Option 2.....see a boy go to the Easter Bowl, beat the 29th ranked boy, then lose to the 4th and 5th ranked boys in straight sets....and have your highly paid head coach of player development personally invite this boy to Carson for more intensive training, never minding that every great coach says trying to predict what a 12-13 year old boy will be in tennis is impossible.
Oh yeah....option 2 sounds like the way to go.....and after that we can all quit our jobs and put all of our life savings into playing Powerball. We would have about the same chance of hitting it big as this USTA strategy does.
Option 1.....build tons of clay courts and also make USTA tennis and tournaments affordable to 1000000 kids. Then let the cream rise and let the private coaches and academies refine the eventual champions from this huge pool of players.
Option 2.....see a boy go to the Easter Bowl, beat the 29th ranked boy, then lose to the 4th and 5th ranked boys in straight sets....and have your highly paid head coach of player development personally invite this boy to Carson for more intensive training, never minding that every great coach says trying to predict what a 12-13 year old boy will be in tennis is impossible.
Oh yeah....option 2 sounds like the way to go.....and after that we can all quit our jobs and put all of our life savings into playing Powerball. We would have about the same chance of hitting it big as this USTA strategy does.
One thing I see about him is he does not play a lot of tournaments but when he does he's deep into the draws so maybe they see something they like, I'll keep you posted on what I see I'm there everyday.
As Tennessee is part of the Southern Section, then yes, QS is mandatory from 2011.
The article on the Southern Section web site is here.
This will make southern tennis the best in the country. HA-HA im being funny!
TennisCoachFLA
Banned
Ha, I just love the USTA. John McEnroe asks to be involved and they tell him "there is not a lot of money". Yes, spending tons on sending a few kids to Spain and a few kids to train in Boca and Carson is a much better way to spend the money. McEnroe might actually be able to show some of these kids how to volley and how to set up points....what a novel idea! The awful truth is that Pat McEnroe is a smooth talker who has never developed anyone and has no clue how to do so.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/08/sports/tennis/08tennis.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/08/sports/tennis/08tennis.html
Last edited:
GATennisMom
New User
Great Article TennisCoachFLA, I would put money that Johnny Mac will find more of the future US talent than his brother and the USTA!
dannythomas
Semi-Pro
I was told by the head of talent development that the USTA only has funds to support the top 2% of juniors at each age level ! How they assess who those top 2 are is beyond me !
chalkflewup
Hall of Fame
Why didn't you ask?
justinmadison
Semi-Pro
TennisCoachFLA
Banned
Wow...you picked out 4 boys among the boat loads of USTA high ranked 10s and 12s and 14s that go no where. Thanks for the meaningless stats.
How about all the boys ranked 80th and 90th or unranked in the USTAs who do better than the 80-90 boys ranked above them at 10 and 12 and 14?
You USTA supporters crack me up. There is NO correlation between a boys success in USTA rankings at 10-14 and playing D-1 or pro tennis...none. Sekou Bangoura??....I watched him train every day for the last few years until he went to U of FL. His dad, a former IMG man, trained him every day. He hit with former touring pros. His success has NOTHING to do with his USTA rankings and the USTA has nothing to do with his success. He played better practice matches against former and current pros or college guys that helped him 1000 times more than any USTA tourny.
In fact, Sekou is the best example of why USTA rankings are silly. He would practice against great players then pop over to a USTA tourny and beat boys who played tons of USTA tournies. Some years he would have played 10-12 tournies and be much higher ranked than boys who played 25 tournaments.
So a boy's parents get him to play mediocre USTA tournaments every week and he plays 30 tournies a year and gets a high ranking....yes, he must be the best player! Give me a break.
For every 4 success stories you find, there are hundreds of others who were highly ranked at 10-14 and went no where.
Last edited:
drakulie
Talk Tennis Guru
same could be said about the thousands of kids that go thru Img, Newcombe, macci, saviano, evert, Solomon, extreme, etc
justinmadison
Semi-Pro
Do you understand the word "correlation"? The current top 4 players in USTA were all top 10 players in boys 12’s Your stipulation is that there is “NO correlation”
You say Sekou did not play USTA, ... The facts say he played over 100 USTA matches in a single year in boys 12’s.
You say Sekou did not play many USTA tournaments to improve his ranking. The facts ... He traveled all over the US playing 18 USTA national tournaments in a single year in boys 12’s.
Where are you facts?
Katlion
Semi-Pro
The Quickstart tennis is good for 8 and under but it shouldn't be for everyone in the 10s. You should have your daughter play in the 12s, but keep reassuring her that there is no pressure, and even when she loses make sure to tell her how well she did. This will help her confidence. Good luck
dannythomas
Semi-Pro
I felt so sorry for them having so little money that I didn't want to upset them further.
Dont want to speak for TCF here but I understood his post to mean that it wasnt the USTA Player Development (specific program) that developed Sekou, he wasnt talking about Sekou's USTA tournament play in the USTA tournament system (different than USTA Player Development). I think there have been some different discussions about player development and tournament play that are getting mixed together.
Last edited:
justinmadison has shown that there is a clear correlation between being a top 18 and being a top 12. He did not cherry-pick data.
TCF's comment that I quoted relates to a separate matter - whether success at 12s is a good predictor of success at 18s. I would agree that many players who are successful in 12s do not translate that to success in 18s, so the correlation is smaller than for 18s who were successful at 12s. But we can see that top 18s were all successful at 12s.
Similar threads
- Poll
