Is Hunger the Problem?
I read Lisa Raymond's "Trouble on the Homefront" on SI.com a few days ago and waited to post it until today, so I could have some time to think about the "trouble", which is basically that the U.S. culture doesn't encourage making a tennis career a life-and-death struggle, while Eastern Europeans, inevititably hungrier given their recent history, have the advantage of disadvantage.
I think it's much more complicated than that, and I will say, for perhaps the fiftieth time on this site, that I believe every champion is an exception. Ana Ivanovic was hitting balls in an empty Serbian swimming pool, Andy Roddick was hitting balls in a club in Boca Raton, but both have turned out to be among the world's best tennis players. If there's an advantage to desperation, there's also one in having resources and opportunity. Do some American juniors squander those? I imagine some do, but most never get them to squander them.
Over at Savannah's World, she discusses Lisa Raymond's piece and has her own perspective on what's missing. I don't think there's an answer to the "trouble" on the home front, but the questions are certainly worth asking.
15 comments:
pointless article. Assumes players develop because they want money.. Misses the point of true player development
She's absolutely right, tennis in America is too expensive a sport that only the affluent can afford and the affluent aren't hungry enough to persist.
Too expensive? A $20 used racket from Craig's list, a $3 can of balls and a $100 annual pass gets you as much tennis as you want to play in New York City -- public courts similar to those that created great champions like Zina Garrison and the Williams sisters. The city offers free lessons to beginners, and I hardly think we're the exception. I think there are all kinds of reasons the U.S. tennis is a bit down right now, but cost is not among them.
Too expensive a sport that only the affluent can afford? Then how did Venus and Serena make it? Maybe because someone( Rick Macci) took care of them at an Academy starting at the age of 9. Please don't say another thing about Richard Williams coaching them. He couldn't teach Lassie to bark. Rick Macci made them. How did John McEnroe make it since he came from a well to do family? It simply doesn't matter what background you come from if you have the drive and determination to succeed along with the talent you will. American tennis will be back on top in a couple of years when a few of the hungry juniors have time to develop.
Aron,
aside from those 3 wonderful players, can you name anyone else?
BTW, the Williams' sisters really didn't playe in public parks after the age of 9. They went to Ric Maci Camp in Florida. They were so good that Maci put them up for free and gave them lessons, court time and traveled with them for free- with the hope of eventually being their full time coach when and if they made it.
Lo and behold the Williams sisters dumped him when they were about 14 or 15.
So in real life it is only Zina and she had a coach who was her benefactor also- not quite on the scale of Maci.
If you believe it can be done in the public parks with little money you are sadly mistaken.
Travel alone can cost upwards of $2,000 per week per tournament, and they would play about 10 -15 tourneys per year..
It takes about $50,000 -$150,000 per year to raise a top tennis player. It just depends on who is paying (private, USTA, Foreign federation, sponsor or parent).
The days of a public park player like Arthur Ashe making it are long gone.
Aron, I'm not talking abut being a recreational tennis player. To be a pro, you have to play the national tournament schedule to get enough points to move onto the next stage playing ITF's then the futures, etc. This takes $$$ for travel and entrance fees. In other coutries after you prove yourself against your peers, the national federatio will sponsor you with travel cost. Here in the enormous USA the USTA hand picks rightly or wrongly who they want to sponsor which won't include the many who want to give it a go. So how does one afford the enormous $$$? The William sisters were marketed shrewedly by their dad which led to sponsorship by Rick Macci. Sharapova, Ivanovic, Hass and many others were sponsored by IMG Bolleterri. If you think it doesn't require $$$, you are being too naive!
Moon, You made my point for me. even lower income kids(especially lower income kids can make it because if they show any promise at all someone will foot the bill for them as Macci did).The U.S.T.A. will take care of any and all expenses for lower income kids if they show any promise at all. Hence the Multi-Cultural fund. They have a far better chance of making it than middle class kids because the middle class has to foot their own bill. Upper class has a chance if they have the drive and talent because they can afford to pay their on way. (Lori McNeil also grew up in the public parks as well).
Without a doubt it takes a lot of money but i think the point anon. was making is that lower income children will not have to worry about these expenses because if they can play a little bit those expenses will be picked up by an Academy or the U.S.T.A. which i have to say is probably true. I agree with anon.
You can count the public park kids on 1 hand in the past 30 years.
"SHOWING ANY PROMISE" AS YOU SAY IS NOT GOING TO DO IT.
There are thousands and thousands of kids who try and frankly unless they are off the chart who is going to pick the kids up on a regular basis.
NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!!!
Hunger is definitely the problem ... with tennis commentators.
They aren't hungry enough to delve into the complexity of the issue.
So they go for the easy answers.
Perhaps Tennis magazine should hire more journalists from Eastern Europe.
Colette,
I think that one of the key factors, which rarely seems to get a mention, is choice. In the United States, as in other affluent countries like Australia, girls/women have a large range of sporting pursuits open to them. As a result their numbers are spread across golf, soccer, netball (in commonwealth countries), softball, basketball, hockey, athletics, etc, etc. Added to that are the wide range of endeavours in which a person may choose to express themselves artistically or academically. All of that works to dilute the talent pool for any one sport. Less affluent nations, on the other hand, can't offer their young people the same options. As a result, a greater percentage of their total number enter a smaller group of pastimes.
Andrewd
I agree 100% with what you are saying and I also have said that for many years.
However, the USA has ALWAYS had those advantages of choice, be it academic, artistic, financial, etc.
But why NOW- is the USA falling behind in the great race to produce world class tennis players?
Hunger is not the problem. There are plenty of kids out there that are hungry. The problem is in the "Wildcards". Two things happen when wildcards are issued and neither is good. First, the protected player never has to compete at a lower level to qualify for a big tournament. This prohibits the growth of the other players because they don't get to play against the so called "top dogs", but even more important, those players are not placed in situations where they have to compete against a player that the USTA deems less qualified. That means the better players are not placed in matches where they have everything to lose and nothing to gain, against a player that can give them a go on a good day. It is that type of match that separates the men from the boys.
Jeff, That is insane. For the kids who get thru the qualies it is often times an advantage to have played a couple of matches and gotten used to the surroundings and the altitude and things and they are more match tough by this time. The hardest matches of alot of tournaments are the early rounds. The better players find a way to get the job done no matter what in the end. Nobody is protected by getting a wildcard. If the player wins some matches it is justified and if they don't then they won't be getting too many wildcards for very long.
I'd like to address something that I have heard many times and is not true. Aron (and many others )state that the Williams sisters played and developed on public courts so why can't anyone else do it. The FACT is that while they played some on public courts until 9 and 11 yrs, they were then picked up by Macci who he and an investor footed the bill to the tune of $250,000 for 4 years to cover hitting partners. They had a condo rented for them and of course got racquets and clothing sent to them by potential sponsors set up by macci - I know some of the hitting partners that hit with them and my son went to maccis for a good while. And while I do think that tennis has become an issue of spending big bucks for travel and training - I don't think it can be totally blamed for the lack of players at the top. The lack of players at the top is simply due to the many many opportunities that America offers, tennis is just another one of the many. Lets stop America bashing and see what happens in the next few years.
I see quite a few prospects out there, were the Serbians Serbia bashing before the current champs were out there? I don't it.
Post a Comment