U.S. Players in Winnetka Challenger Defend Their Brethren
There's aren't many tennis events this week in the U.S where it's possible to avoid the topic of "what's wrong with American tennis?" Certainly a $50,000 Challenger outside a major media market like Chicago won't escape the scrutiny of a reporter determined to chime in on the subject.
This Chicago Tribune story quotes Scoville Jenkins, Phillip Simmonds, Amer Delic and Sam Querrey. Querrey, by the way, has reached Saturday's semifinals. Eliot Teltscher of the USTA High Performance program also has plenty to say. (One thing he says I most certainly do NOT agree with--that Michael Jordan would have been the best tennis player in the world if he had started in tennis not basketball. Jordan may have been a formidable tennis player, but as he's shown in golf and in his brief foray in minor league baseball, skills in one sport don't always translate to similar excellence in another.) Even Donald Young is pulled in to the scene, although quoted indirectly.
But perhaps there has been too much piling on by the media on this subject. And if you are looking for the contrarian view, here's a good one, by Bruce Jenkins of the San Francisco Chronicle. It's entitled American tennis in down period, but so what?
17 comments:
"if Michael Jordan would have got into tennis, he would be the best tennis player in the world". I am shocked that this is the USTA's thinking!! No wonder their track record is what it is..and eventually they probably will find a good player that they will take 100% credit for! The poor kid most likely made it DESPITE the USTA! Maybe Lebron James would have been smaking Federer by now, if only the USTA had found him at an early age. Have they ever heard of hand-eye coordination? That has nothing to do with young black boys (or girls) with quick feet, who seem like good athletes. What about Dinara Safina? Is she a great athlete, or perhaps has she just had good coaching? The whole USTA is a joke, and it is very unfortunate that they have all this insane amount of money, but as another poster said.."a bunch of ex-touring pros who have no clue" as our national coaches. Its actually quite comical, I would bet ESPECIALLY for other countries to see!
Yes, the USTA has a bunch of journeymen ex-touring pros controlling high performance tennis. The current wisdom is to go younger and find the athlete and teach him how to play tennis from the baseline. With all their experience, they think they actually have to find the next "Michael Jordan!" For one thing, you don't know what you have until you're 16-18 years old. They never had 12's national until only a few years ago and this emphasis on winning at such a young age is creating a plethora of pushers. And let's get rid of the Level 3 Nationals where money buys points in the new system! So many kids are traveling to these Level 3 less competitive tournaments (regionally based but carry national points) to boost their national rankings. They are gaming the system and buying their rankings. They become ranked in the top 30 nationally while they can't get through 2 rounds at the Easter Bowl or Kalamazoo, the Level 1 truly competitve national events. Many other kids are ranked 50th in their sections but are ranked in the top 200 nationally by gaming the system the same way. Then they get double-bageled in th first round at the Zoo. If the can't compete in their own section, they should not be allowed to buy their way into the Level 1 National Championships. USTA, I know you want the kids to compete more often but PLEASE shut down this sham!!!
I applaud the recent addition of BJ King, C. Evert and M. Chang to the high performance commitee. They are true champions and can help the effort. I agree with BJK that the top players avoid each other whether sectionally or nationally because they are afraid to lose their ranking position when they lose. This is especially true when there are ways to get your points elsewhere by gaming the system.
I think both the comments above make good sense.
When winning at an early age becomes too important, you end up with players staying at the baseline to win -- thinking that someday they will incorporate net play into their game, when they have perfected their volleys and overheads. It never happens. You learn the attacking game and the all-court game buy PLAYING them.
Sampras had to pay a painful price (in losses) to ditch his two-handed backhand. But it was worth it.
How many juniors will do something like that, when their ranking is all-important? Not many, I'm afraid. Can you blame them?
Even so, there are BOUND to be periods when the best players in the world include few Americans. Just as there are BOUND to be times when Americans are over-represented among the best players in the world. There's no reason to think it's the end of American tennis though.
All that's needed is to fix these counterproductive elements in the system and then wait a minute or two for the next American star to come along.
I have seen this with my own two eyes: At both Carson and Key Biscayne, High Performance is providing countless hours of free coaching for many of these so called next "Michael Jordan", or Williams sisters. They size up the parents as well, finding out if they were athletes themselves, and then figure; give them tons of attention, lots of balls to hit, and maybe a small handful, or one or two can come through their system like what they percieve some other countries have done. Kuznetesova, parents were bikers. Clijsters, dad was a rugby star etc..And then they throw them into tournaments, and if they dont do well, they are forgotten, and new kids enter the picture, and so on and so on. Two problems with this strategy. One, it is a HUGE crapshoot, that as others have noted, does not allow the USTA money to perhaps be used to fund other kids that show promise, not "discovered" by them! Secondly, look who is coaching these so called genetically gifted kids! The ex-touring PRO's they have hired. What do they know about TECHNICAL instruction? Can anyone imagine what progress would be shown in development if say, Robert Lansdorp was involved. And if not him, I would bet many other "technical" instructors are out there?! They should get as many of these types of instructors on board, thoughout the country, and let THEM decide, and suggest who may show promise, and who's parents may not be able to afford the coaching, and even parents who do pay!? Many families make sacrfices. They dont take that vacation they wanted, or live in as nice a home. They relocate. But if these kids show as much or more promise than the kids THEY (USTA) have deemed prospects, shouldnt they be helped as well?
It just that the USTA, as a bureaucracy, is arrogant in it's approach. They think they can pick winners when they have had little success in the past. This leads to a narrowly defined exclusionary approach where their efforts are for a select few. They should broaden their approach and allow the cream to rise to the top rather than impose their opinions, otherwise they are doom to fail once again.
As a parent and coach of 2 of the would be U.S.T.A. kids I strongly disagree with alot of the comments being made on these subjects. First of all my kids have all around games and love coming to the net as often as possible and even serve and volley a fair amount of the time. they are barely 12 and 14 years old and are by no means considered baseliners or pushers. the U.S.T.A. has taken my oldest son Ryan over to Europe to play and gain valuable experience on red clay and indoors on 3 different occasions. Financially speaking since he was traveling with the 91 group that has been talked about receiving as much as 50,000 per child in all expenses througout the year that is absolutely absurd.the 3 trips over there and a little grant money that we received for travel within the U.S. couldnt get near 10,000 much less 50,000. Granted there are some of those kids who are now playing Futures and getting all of those expenses taken care of. These kids have earned the right with past results rankings and their current level of play to be helped by the U.S.T.A. Are there some other kids who may develop later and get to that level that are not currently being helped by the U.S.T.A. I would think and hope so but until you prove yourself with consistent results then how do you expect to be noticed. I dont always agree with some of the things done but then everyone has a different opinion on what is right and wrong but I can honestly say that everytime I have called Elliott, Rodney, Jay or David they have always listened to my opinions and observations. When other coaches have developed these kids to the top of the national level their job is to help try and get them to the top of the pro level not develop them even if it is through financial support or practice facilities or whatever. As for the person who thinks they just started ranking the 12 and unders a few years ago they actually ranked the 10 and unders and 12 and unders when American tennis was in its prime.They quit doing this for about 10 years until restarting it 3 years ago when they realized the majority of these great champions were great at a very young age. The only thing I will say on the Michael Jordan issue is that the Bulls did make it to the Final Four in the year following his 1st retirement. he had alot of help from Pippen and Rodman and on nights when he shot 8 for 30 from the field they still won because he had such a good supporting cast. In tennis if you have that kind of night you are out of the tournament. People please sign your names if you want to give an opinion and quit hiding behind Anonymous.Thank you Pat Harrison
Why would people want to give their name if they have/had a somewhat negative opinion of how the USTA is handling things? Have you ever heard of "not burning your bridges"? Especially since most of the opinions seem to lean that direction! I applaud Colette for providing a forum where one can give OPINIONS, not HARMFUL information that would translate into perhaps not "hiding behind anonymous", and providing your name with facts. By the way, Michael Jordan was the closest thing to a one man show in the history of basketball, in the Bulls "non-playoff" years, he was almost like a tennis player out there!
Mr Harrison, was wondering: if your two boys were never coached by you, but instead discovered by the USTA when they were age 8-10 or so, do you think they would have the all-court games that you have instilled in them? Maybe your kids were just born this way, and it wouldnt matter who coached them? I think that is what the topic on this thread is about:Are the USTA coaches qualified to discover, and be primary coaches for prospects. Your boys are fantastic players, but the type of game, and risk they take is the exception, not the norm as far as American junior tennis. Kudos to you for teaching them well. Does the USTA have your resume?!
Results? What results are you talking about? Junior rankings? Please, having "superior junior rankings" in the Boys 12's, especially when receiving "specialized training" does not translate into "pro" material. Remember, eventually every one learns to tie their shoes. How many great kids that play the 12's might have been looked at by the USTA had they not been intimidated by the "antics" of the opponent's parents or by their opponent's questionable calls given that "hey everybody does it". If more knew that before the USTA required proof of birth they could enter tournaments with two different birth years; or even enter under their middle name, instead of their first name, that the USTA wouldn't "catch on" then perhaps they too would have had a lovely record and been chosen by the USTA. Easy tournaments with one name, required tournaments with a different name. What a novel idea! This might result in a better "ranking" than the usual way and perhaps even an "invitation" to train with the USTA. How would they know, they just look at results. Next would come free "high performance training",and trips to the continent and later on more wins against the rest. Yes, those kids would be good. But the cost of this chicanery is far more reaching than you realize. The kids with the "special training"; yes, they're good, (who wouldn't be) but they will never win the "big one". How can they, with their parents behind the scenes manipulating the opponents, the sponsors... How sad that they didn't achieve this "special" status on their own. It doesn't translate into God given talent. The opponents? The ones left behind? I hope that somewhere the US has a kid that will do it regardless of the parents desire to live through them. How about opening up the training centers to kids that are interested? It would enable the USTA to see kids that "want" it for themselves, not just see mediocre kids whose parents "want" it for themselves.
First of all to the person who seems like they were trying out for one of those Bitter Beer commercials. I think you won hands down. Nobody else even comes close. Congratulations: now to touch on many of your clearly uninformed and ignorant points that are trying to attack me personally as well as my children. 12s rankings do often translate into PRO success. I was one of those kids who was ranked in the top 10 in the U.S. in 12s and unfortunately was not one of them that made it big but many of the kids I competed against in 12s did. The reason I didnt make it is pretty simple. I wasnt good enough. The tennis court is the same length and width and the net the same height everywhere in the world. I never had a lesson in my life and still made it to the top 500 in the world because I guess I didnt know the U.S.T.A. was supposed to get me there. I thought I was supposed to find my on practice partners and work at it and earn it myself. How stupid of me. The guys that I competed against in the 12s who did make it big were Jimmy Arias,Ricky Leach,Todd Witsken,Paul Annacone,Jimmy Pugh,Jimmy Grabb, Richey Reneberg to name a few in case I left some out. All made it on the PRO TOUR and all were highly successful in the 12s. Obviously others blossom a little later but far more often kids make it at a very young age. I cant speak for every age group but I can speak first hand about this one. As for the specialized training Im not sure what that is referring to but I do hope you have learned to tie your shoes unless training with their dad is considered Specialized. Intimidating antics and questionable calls another one you will have to be more specific on and try to be accurate with facts instead of made up stories. As for the bit about entering tournaments under 2 different names I can only assume that you are referring to a few years ago when Ryan first got into tennis and some tournaments would list him as Patrick and some would list him as Ryan and they started listing him in the rankings with the results with the 2 different names. The reason was pretty obvious. Since my name is also Patrick and the rankings were done by U.S.T.A. numbers at the time they were listing his ranking as Patrick under my number and listing his tournament under Ryan with his U.S.T.A. number. This was actually hurting his ranking until we discovered it because he wasnt getting credit for a lot of his tournaments since they were being split between 2 different U.S.T.A. numbers. After we called and got it fixed his ranking moved up significantly. How this could be some sort of set up or game in your mind I can only imagine but judging from what youve written your imagination is tremendous. I cant help but wonder if you have kids that have played against my kids and that is what all this bitterness is about. We havent gotten free High Performance training from the U.S.T.A.ever unless you call letting my children go to a few camps provided by them along with numerous other kids for 3 or 4 days at a time twice a year High Performane Training. I will always let them take trips when they are invited or earned as should be stated as would any other parent and I certainly hope their chidren get the oppurtunity to do so. How do you know they will never win the BIG one whatever that is and what sponsors and opponents are being manipulated. Id like to hear this one. Enjoy your Bitter Beer. Sincerely Pat Harrison
I have seen your boys play, and I feel they are not only incredible players, but very humble (as humble as a tennis player should be, after all, between the lines is not about making "nice"!) I am curious about my question to you, which is, Do you feel your boys would have developed their all court games, and tendency to take risk, if you had NOT coached them, but instead were discovered by the USTA, and given the free High Peformance coaching that they are doing with selected kids they deem prospects? I feel the USTA needs more technical coaches like you, and not "Joe Blow" who made top 100 on tour. Yes, they can play, and would have very relevant insight to offer any kid thinking of the PRO Tour, but what are the qualifications of TEACHING? You mention you had no lessons yourself growing up, so some may ask, "what are your qualifications?" The answer is, Ryan and Christian. Their talent and results speak for themselves. Anybody can see that their ability is not just from hitting tons of balls, and IMO the USTA should look closely at bringing instructors such as you on board, no matter what the cost.
I guess we will never know if you would be openly displaying your identity if you had not scratched and clawed your way to top 500 without any coaching, or, if your sons were not having the success they are having. For this I guess you feel you are the credible resource for American Junior Tennis, as you so willingly tell us your identity.
I first of all want to congratulate Pat Harrison on the way he has raised his children. I have heard many people disagree with his methods when the kids were younger, but I must be honest I feel many of them were probably jealous. I have been to many tournaments that his son Ryan is participating at, and I must say Ryan is one of the most respectful kids I have seen in many years. He seems not to let his traveling with the USTA Team go to his head as others have.
The person that keeps asking if Pat's kids would have been as good if they were coached by the USTA at age 8, the simple answer is no. Pat had a relationship with his children that can't be duplicated by a coach that has to look over 8 other kids in an age group. I have been coaching for over 17 years and was also a top rated junior not only in the USA but in the ITF rankings (#3). I have also coached 5 kids to #1 US rankings of which 2 of them (#1 16 & 18)I coached since they were 10 years old.
I have two concerns for US Tennis, #1 I'm afraid that 10 years from now we will not recognize anyone who wins the Winter, Clay, or some of the other Super Nats, #2 for the kids traveling on the USTA traveling teams. I was a 3 time member of the US National Team and I fell into many of the same pitfalls many of the kids seem to be falling into these days. At tournaments I have heard them talk about all the partying and great social experiences they have had especially on overseas trips. They feel they are untouchable. I know the feeling. The USTA must understand that they are developing not only future prospects for the Pro Tour but also great citizens of the future.
To Anonymous, To answer your question is difficult because I dont know if I left them in the hands of the U.S.T.A. which coaches they would be working with on a regular basis. Without question most of them would be able to teach them the technical aspects of the game as far as strokes, strategy and court positioning but I dont know if they would be willing to feed them hoppers of balls to make sure the slice backhand was just right or the volleys down the line{the most difficult to time without pushing them wide}or the half volley all parts of the transition game that are very difficult to get and need a lot of time. I spend a lot of time feeding balls in this area because that is what I believe will give them confidence to move to the net without fear of having to play the midcourt shots with no hesitation when they have their opponents off balance. I believe these coaches would discuss this with them but when it is your children or children you teach privately you will spend the x-tra time to make sure they get it right. These coaches may very well be willing to do this who knows. I think the purpose of them joining with Everetts is to get as many of these kids as possible down to Everetts as often as possible to train where they feel like they would have more input in these technical areas. Right now they dont see these kids often enough to have that type of influence on their games. I think Joey hit it right when he said I have a special relationship with my boys in that they have total confidence in what I say and while I look after many other peoples kids games as well those kids dont go home with me at the end of the day and get to talk as father and son. Pat Harrison
Very interesting discussion! As a coach, I have developed a player from beginner to reaching a Top 10 WTA ranking. And my feeling is that the USTA is doing things backward. Rather than having a National Training Center to develop players, I believe they would be off to take the money and give it to help those who really develop the players, whether it be a parent like Pat Harrison, or a coach like Robert Landsdorp, etc. The USTA should be helping and sponsoring not developing. As for Pat Harrison, who I have never met and whose kids I have never seen, he is like the parent/coach/mentor of many of the players who have had success, whether it be Chris Evert, Pete Sampras, Andre Agassi, Justine Henin-Hardenne, Martina Hingis, Maria Sharapova, etc. They did not come out of 'programs,' but from the work of someone who took a special interest in their development. The people who developed these players were able to have special relationships with the players that a program or National coaches can not. We need to support these people and make them the basis of the program, not the facility and/or a team of national coaches who, no matter how qualified, will never have the proper all-encompassing, relationship (emotionally, long-term development, technical skills, match preparation, etc.) that it takes to help someone to be a world class athlete.
How do you put your "time" into your children if you are not wealthy, AND do not have the tennis expertise of Mr Harrison, who actually dabbled on the tour, and is a very accomplished coach? I believe their are talented players out there in this situation, who are indeed getting the family support and "mentoring", but not the adequate TENNIS support.
I noticed the word 'pusher' used through different threads - it does carry a negative connotation; as emphasis is put today on attacking and aggressive style of play. The style, however, is very much dependent on the physical size of the player, and especially in the 14s the difference in the size of the players in a match can be probably as high as 12 inches. The smaller players are naturally inclined to play more defensive style of play, for the lack of power and size. They, however, as I observed, posses often much greater variety of shots (i.e. the slice much more often), and play 'smarter' matches than ones relying of the brute force and pounding each ball for a winner. This does not mean that they are 'bad' as 'pushers', the term is often used by a 'force' players out of frustration stemming from their inability to win against smaller/weaker/defensive players.
In addition, I suppose the 'defensive' players can perhaps do better in longer tournaments, as they preserve more of their ebergy and stamina for further rounds. I would like to think that small pushers have a potential of becoming excellent players as the develop their size and strength.
There are 'puhers' on the pro level as well, the ultimate being Nadal...
Post a Comment