Tomic Beats Wang; Tampa Futures
With his first round win in Australian Open men's qualifying (draws here) over Yeu-Tzuoo Wang, 15-year-old Bernard Tomic has assured himself even more media coverage in the coming days and weeks. There's been plenty of hyperbole since his Orange Bowl win last month, with one widely circulated Australian Associated Press story calling him "far and away the world's best 15-year-old", which would come as a surprise to Ryan Harrison and Yuki Bhambri, who are that age and just behind Tomic in the ITF junior rankings and Filip Krajinovic, who beat him soundly at the Eddie Herr just six weeks ago. Another story called him "world junior champion" which is, of course, the exclusive property of Ricardas Berankis and Urszula Radwanska at the moment.
Entitled Teen shows Lleyton how it's done, this story is more sensible, with both perspective and a lot of comments by Hewitt about the insignificance of junior wins. I don't share his scorn (and Nadal did play some junior tennis), but it's a point of view that deserves some consideration.
But the main thing I like about this story is the recognition of that special quality of finding a way to win when losing is a real option. Tomic displayed it at the 2006 Junior Orange Bowl, when he saved a match point in the final, he did it at the Junior Davis Cup against Giacomo Miccini, when he won the third set 13-11 and he did it again yesterday, saving five match points in a 28 point second set tiebreaker. All the beautiful forehands in the world don't amount to much if that's missing.
Tomorrow we head back to Florida for junior tournaments the next two weekends, the first one in Tampa, and perhaps we'll have a chance to look in on the Futures tournaments being held in Wesley Chapel. Last year, the men's and women's tournaments were at the same site as the Florida 18s designated, but the pros have moved north. After the first round, there are plenty of current and former collegians still in the men's draw, but no juniors. A few high profile junior girls are through to the second round--Anastasia Pivovarova, U.S. Open Junior Champion Kristina Kucova (a qualifier) and Ksenia Pervak. Kim Couts, Audra Cohen, Angela Haynes and Alexis Gordon are the U.S. women who advanced. For complete draws, see the USTA Pro Circuit page.
22 comments:
Also Juacamo Miccini beat Tomic soundly at the US Open Jr. qualies in Sept. The next year will be interesting. As far as results though Tomic probably has the lead.
Also...Filip Krajinovic just lost to Maksim Tikhomirov at the Price Cup last month, two weeks after he beat both Tomic and Harrison at Eddie Herr. And for that matter Harrison just lost to a WC at an ITF G1 in Australia. All this tells us is that all these young men can compete at a very high level on the ITF junior level, nothing more or less but to say that anyone of these kids is the future of men's tennis is taking a big leap and getting hung up on a few players. Who is the best is a moving target at best. That said, Tomic is the first to win a round at the ATP level, or the first one to take the next leap.
Colette,
You need to understand that, here in Australia, while junior sport is given an enormous amount of support at the local and national level, junior sporting success is almost completely ignored. Unlike some countries we don't fawn over high school athletes and our collegiate sports are kept decidely low-key. The only success which is given any significant emphasis comes at the senior level.
Tennis, over the past 30 years, has been the one sport to have broken that mold and tried to exhalt its junior players. Now it would appear the perspective is shifting back into line with our other sports which is that junior sport is a stepping-stone to senior/open sport and not an end in itself. That jibes with comments made by several former players, such as Pat Rafter, who believe our players have been spending too long in junior ranks before fully testing themselves on the main tour. Subsequently, they've been both stalling their progress and developing a reputation which isn't necessarily commensurate with their ability to 'make it' on the pro tour.
agree with andrew about placing juniors on pedistals. This blog in particular spends too much time gushing over a few junior players which is why i dont read it much
would have to give krajinovic the nod in the world 92s at the moment with his easy win over tomic and close win over harrison at eddie herr. miccini handled tomic easily at usoj qualies and vanoverbeek just beat miccini. agree with "florida" and "andrewd" that all this really means is that these kids are very high level juniors. the rubber will meet the road in 2 or 3 years if any or all of them move up the ATP ranks.
I should also add that Bernard Tomic lost today, to Prakash Amritraj 3-6, 2-6. He wasn't completely outclassed and certainly wasn't hit off the court. However, Amritraj just hit with a bit more weight and was able to sneak a few more cheap points (especially on serve) than Tomic, at present, can muster.
Regardless, I'm very surprised this is even an issue as, surely, people haven't forgotten the long but ultimately fruitful journey Donald Young took to the pros. Tomic is in the same position; a kid whose talent for the game is more precocious than his physicality. As a result it won't be until the end of his 17th year that any meaningful assessment can be made.
To the Observer...and Fowler beat Miccini at the orange bowl last month and just saw he got the quarters of the GA Mexico City and the next week in Costa Rica. What we are seeing is that all these kids can play at the junior level, but agree with Florida that Tomic is the first to win a match at a slam, even if it was in the qualies. Colette, has a US junior has done that in recent years at age 15?
I completely agree with tennis 1234. I just hope the kids that are always being talked about, understand juniors is not in anyway the future of their success as adults in tennis. There have been alot of juniors that were talked about and had won Eddie Herr and Orange Bowl. Where are they now?
About time someone has common sense about juniors. Very refreshing
I agree with above posters.
This blog is way too much about specific players. There are so many world class potential players that just don't have enough money to travel to all the tournaments and get noticed. I mean Harrison, Krajinovic, and Tomic are good players, but i mean cmon .
Tennis has an interesting future, and I can't wait to see what it becomes, and who is the next Sampras.
There have been numerous players born in 92 who were mentioned besides Harrison, Tomic, and Krajinovic. The reason some players are discussed more than others is because there results are the best at the moment, therefore people consider them pro prospects. To some it is interesting to track the success of junior players, and monitor their transition into the pros. I think it is a great website, and can guarantee that many of the players discussed on these blogs will succeed at the senior level.
One question about US tennis if anyone knows. Noticed that very few junior US players made the trip to Australia. Does the USTA reimburse travel expenses for anyone who gets into a slams or just thier chosen few. It would be such a valuable experience for any of our our players who qualifies to have the opportunity to play Australia and the 2 G1s leading up to it but the flight is very pricy. Just trying to get a sense why so few players decided to make the trip. ONly 3 US players in main, all the ones i the qualies w/drew. Our juniors need this exepience and the USTA should make sure that anyone who qualifies gets the opportunity to play it. ALl the top tennis countries seem to be well represented. ANyt comments?
To Tennis 1234, the topic seemed to be the 92s--which i understand is very arbitrary...my bad. As to how high the bar is set, Nadal was ATP Top-50 at 16. unlike the women, the men's pro game bears very little resemblance to the juniors just because of the strength factor and the ability to generate and handle pace and heaviness on the balls both off the ground and on the serve.
agree that this is a waste of time spending so much time discussing junior results. even at this age you can tell the kids who won't make it and the kids who have enough weapons that they have a chance, but nobody knows which of these kids, if any, will make it. i would be very interested in the thoughts of current top 30 ATP or WTA players and their parents and coaches. what are their thoughts and ideas on how to give kids the best shot?
florida, good question about the USTA helping US kids going to australia. my kid was one of the AO Junior qualie kids who withdrew. i have no idea how much, if at all, the USTA helps. i've talked to the parents (plural)of kids (plural) who played various junior slams in both 2006 and 2007 and there doesn't seem to be a defined program from slam to slam, year to year, or player to player. i agree that it would be a great developmental experience for our juniors and one of the areas where the USTA could be a great help. our blog host should be able to get us some good information....
tennis dad said...am I correct...From what you said your player qualified for the Australian juniors but did not get any support from the USTA to make the trip. This is black eye for the USTA because if any American junior qualifies for a grand slam, the pinnacle of junior competition, that player should be able to play and be supported by his federation whether he is on the national team or not. It is inexcusable that is not the case in this country and another poignant example of what is wrong with player dev in here. The USTA will spend senseless $$$ to send bunch of 12 year olds to Canada this summer for the most meaningless of tournaments and not step up to the plate for when it really counts. The UTSA should have a written policy for the grand slams that who-ever qualifes gets at least the flight paid for. WIth all thier resources that is a minimium reasonable expectation. I just dont get it.
get real, you sound like a very frustrated individual with all your negative comments. what is that all about? this website is about tennis...juniors, pros college or whatever. people like to discuss the up and coming juniors so what. the juniors talked about on here like harrison, tomic and krajinovic would beat 99% of the college players already. thats a fact. its great to track their progress and see how they are coming along and discuss it so people relax and bring up other questions and topics to discuss if you want to.
casual observer, I was not commenting on college tennis nor to i care to. I do not follow college tennis. My statements are about the Usta and how to much attention is on the 12s,and 14s. If you noticed i was commenting on they are way to young to even think they will hit a pro level yet. Maybe you are one of those parents that is living a dream for your child and not letting your child just play and then see where it goes.
From Get Real
florida, i appreciate your thoughts and let me clarify. my son was accepted into qualies for the australian open junior, not for the main draw. i am not familiar with the USTA travel assistance or tournament support programs, if any, for the junior slams for main draw or qualies but i would be very interested to know. i realize i'm biased, but your plan for the lead in tournaments and junior slams would be of great value. on another note, none of us know the ideal path for player development, but all of the 1992s are fortunate to have ryan harrison leading the way. he gives the boys someone to chase, expands their minds as to what is possible and gives them a tournament road map. there are four US 1992s in the ITF top 100. without ryan, there might not be any.
To the casual observer…. What has happened with this blog is too much hype is focused on too few players, maybe four or five junior boys, when there are so many other players that have potential. To name a few 16 orange bowl finalist jose Silva from Latin America, David Souto Vargas, another 92, from Venezuela who was a finalist at the Orange Bowl in both 12, and 14 age groups etc....to name a few. Lets try to separate the forest from the tress here. With USTA development. A big issue with USTA tennis is the lack of financial support to help juniors play the junior grand slams. That is just incredible. The key question here is how to develop US players to be more competitive. Any comparisons with a Nadal type player is counterproductive at best. In 2002, at 15 Nadal won his first ATP match, defeating Ramon Delgado in Mallorca to become the ninth player in the open era to win an ATP match before his 16th birthday. In 2003, at 16, Nadal became the second-youngest player to be ranked among the world's top 100 singles players. He finished the year in the top 50, winning two Challenger titles. At his Wimbledon debut, Nadal, then 17, became the youngest male player to reach the third round since 16-year-old Boris Becker. No current junior seems to be on that track…
To casual observer...for your reference my son is D1college and was never at the level to play the jr slams. So I am looking at this from a purely objective point as it has no impact on my kid. That said, the USTA with all its resources should have a written policy that ANY US player that qualifies for a junior grand slam be be awarded a stipend to cover travel and lodging for the qualies. And they should send a coach there to organize the players so parents dont have to spend the money to accompany players. And, and this is important, that policuy should be made public so any parent or player knows that this support is avaialable. The program would haveno merit if it were not made public. If that were the case, this trip would be affordable for anyone instead of perhaps $7,000 (that is a guess) to send a kid and a parent to one slam in Australia. It is a black eye for USTA tennis that so few junior boys made the trip to Australia and my sense is that is because there is no support from the USTA. The goal here should be to support every US junior who has the ability to compete at that high level. Isn't that the essence of player development? What is concerning here if the USTA cant get it together to have a policy to support qualified US players to the slams how this organization even pretend to know what it takes to develop players. I dont think I am being too harsh or too critical here. The organization is way to insular and I agree with Pat Harrison that there are some qualified coaches but they never look beyond thier own backyard.
Collette, what is your opinoin on this?
The U.S.T.A. does allow a $1,500 grant for the kids who qualify for the main draw at the Aussie Open and a $1,000 grant for the main draw of the French Open and Wimbledon. This is listed on the U.S.T.A. website under grants but I don't believe they do anything for the kids in the Qualifying. This may help a little but not much for kids of that caliber. $1,500 doesn't even cover 1 plane ticket to Australia much less accomodations or a 2nd plane ticket if a coach or parent goes with that child so I would say it is at least a $7,000 trip and probably more if you play the 1 or 2 warm up tournaments before.
I'll be commenting on the USTA grants for Grand Slams in the next few days, when I have more time.
Post a Comment