Zootennis

Sponsored by IMG Academy

Thursday, August 14, 2008

US Open Junior Wild Cards Named

Thanks to analyst for alerting me that the wild cards for the US Open Junior Championships were posted in today's acceptance list update. They are as follows:
MAIN DRAW:
Girls:
Kristie Ahn
Julia Boserup
Gail Brodsky (automatic)
Lauren Davis (automatic)
Christina McHale
Asia Muhammad
Sloane Stephens
Coco Vandeweghe

Boys:
Jordan Cox (automatic)
Alex Domijan
Christian Harrison
Evan King
Austin Krajicek (automatic)
Denis Kudla
Raymond Sarmiento
Bob van Overbeek


QUALIFYING:

Girls:
Nicole Gibbs
Kyle McPhillips
Grace Min
Chinami Ogi (trade with Japan)
two reserved

Boys:
Sekou Bangoura
Sean Berman
Kosaku Hirota (trade with Japan)
Junior Ore
Nathan Pasha
Rhyne Williams


88 comments:

confused said...

I am fine with all of the girls wildcards. However I'm surprised that sachia vickery didn't get one. On the other hand the boys list is a diaster. Christian Harrison main draw?? He won 1 match at the boys 16 Easter bowl. Rhyme williams qualies?? The guy made quarters of 18s kalamzoo. I also don't understand Sean Berman. The USTA is putting a lot f time and money into him so let's hope that he pans out to something. Biggest snubs: Kandath and Seal. Both guys had good kalamazoo's and deserved wildcards.

kiwipower said...

i'm really pleased rhyne williams received a qualies wild card. sean berman is also a good pick, although i can see why some people might have preferred some of the american kids. i would love to see rhyne and sean square off in the first round of qualies.

tennisjunky said...

raymond saremento one word...favoritism . the 92 coach just lost a of of credibility

john said...

Guess I'm confused. Thought the winner of the G/B 18's got a wildcard into the main draw of the US Open (not juniors)?

wonderwhy said...

What happened to Sundling ? He's one of the USTA boys. How come he didn't get a WC ?

Colette Lewis said...

If you win the 18s and are ITF age eligible, you receive a wild card into the USO main draw AND into the junior draw if you need it.

Manoftennis said...

Wow these wildcards amaze me every year. Sarmiento harrison main draw over kids like kandath, sundling, mcmorrow, seal, lipman, noble, kevin king, the list goes on and on of people who definately deserved one into main over those to for sure. The qualies are always a joke i mean at least hand out wc's to some kids who could qualify and do damage. The only one that has some potential to do well in qualies is rhyne williams. I thought the names i listed earlier would easily make the qualies wc list. Also sundling used to be a USTA kid but decided that he needed to work on his game with his own coaches and in his own environment and the usta did not like that. Last year he won the 16s doubles at kzoo and didnt even get a wc to the doubles. The usta is such a pathetic organization it blows my mind.

abc said...

The reason why Sarmiento got a wildcard is because he is representing the US in the Jr. Davis Cup held in Mexico. Note-all 3 boys and girls received wildcards.

kiwipower said...

why would sarmiento be representing the US in junior davis cup? that makes no sense whatsoever. he's a nice enough kid, but come on. he is certainly no better than the 6th best 1992. i can't believe that all of the kids ahead of him declined to represent us in davis cup. something doesn't smell right about this.

vayacondios said...

kiwipower-why the obsession with sending our best players to represent the USA at junior davis cup? while it is true you could send several stronger players than sarmiento, he has worked a long time with the coach of the team and it is reasonable to give the chemistry of that relationship some value.

Believer said...

The U.S.T.A.'s philosophy is pretty consistent each year. They help the younger kids with the wildcards till they're 17 and then if they can't make it on their on by then they no longer get help and they shouldn't. They are looking for future PROS not marginal 17 and 18 year olds who are going to college and never get above 400 in the world. The Sean Berman thing puzzles me however since he is not even a U.S. citizen. Christian Harrison is understandable to me. He is young so he is up and down against the older boys but the guy he beat in the Orange Bowl from France is ranked in the 60's in the world and is in the main draw and win or lose he has a great future. Yes, he won 1 match at the Easter Bowl but the week before he WON the International Spring Championships in 16's against a lot of the very same guys. He is also the unquestioned best 14 year old in the world. Even if he doesn't win a match thats about what the other names I have seen on this list would do so why not go with the younger ones with a brighter future.

abc said...

Kiwipower-

The only person that declined to go for Jr. Davis Cup was Ryan Harrison. The USTA decided that the third person would be Sarmiento. It came down to a very tough and nail-biting decision, and at the time of the decision, it was between Sarmiento and Cox, and I do believe that Sarmiento may have had that little edge.

andwewonderwhyustennissucks said...

christian harrison is a great talent, but is still not at the level of the jr. us open. main draw for sure. even qualies is a stretch. the usta seems to go exclusively by the year players were born. current level seemingly has nothing to do with their selection process. why give wildcards to 13 year olds that havent proven themselves at that level when other players are competing and winning at a much higher level! let the christian harrisons and sean bermans wait a year until they have a real shot and actually winning a match before giving them wildcards. this seems to be a recurring problem with the usta and their decision making processes...

Doubles? said...

The decision should not be Cox or Sarmiento. Before the Zoo nobody would have picked Cox over Sarmiento. One good tournament at the right time(COX) should not take precedent over a better body of work over a longer period of time(SARMIENTO). The issue to me is why wouldn't Kudla play doubles with King instead of Sarmiento. Would be a better team. This team is strong and could win it without Harrison. By the way why would Harrison even consider playing 16's after what hes been doin. That would be crazy.

tothebeliever said...

THE USTA'S SYSTEM IS OBVIOUSLY NOT WORKING. Its because they dont give the 17 18 year olds chances when they are physically and mentally ready to compete and soak in everything these tournaments have to offer. They need to start handing wc's out to the older kids and the younger kids can have them if they a truely better at the time.

goblue said...

Suggestion - the USTA should give the WC to Michael Phelps, for a sure gold ! End of discussion .

McLovin said...

wonderwhy, Sundling left the USTA High Performance a while back when he noticed that he wasn't getting better in their system. The USTA took one of the best naturally aggressive talented all court players and turned him into a baseline grinder making 1000 balls. Sundling won 14s Easter Bowl singles and doubles, Clays, and Hardcourts basically dominated the field and then went into the USTA system. Pat Harrison is smart to keep his boys away from the USTA system and keep them in the Newcombe all court attacking system. Formentera was another tenacious ball striker who won the Easter Bowl 16s over Seal. He went to USTA Evert and came back a grinder. I worry about Christina McHale, another tenacious ball striker in he 14s and a great kid. The last time I saw her play, she was grinding away at the baseline. High Performance never helped her with the one element she needs to add, the ability to come in and close off points. That's why Lilly beat her at the Spring Nationals. WHy don't they teach the girls to come in? Just my $0.02.

lacy said...

I have no idea why Rhyne Williams only received a Qualifying Wild Card!

tennisparent said...

Tennisjunky was on target that Sarmento would get a main draw WC. its no secret that Sarmento has been picked for every international event since the 12s and I mean every single one. rodidi has a reputation for playing favorites w/him and that is no secret among the 92s and rubs a lot of people the wrong way. (has nothing to do w/ raymond, he is very well liked) its a conflict of interest for a usta coach to show such blatant favoritism when the third davis cup spot should have gone to van Overbeek or cox based on recent results. that was clear as the sky is blue. It is way to premature
for the UTSA to gave a main draw wc to christian harrison but they have tagged him as the future of us tennis and that may be if he grows, but main draw, give us a break. Sock got royally snubbed but not surprised as the USTA never includes him in anything except one of rododi;s feel good camps where he invites ten/12 players to spread good will . Can understand berman and pasha getting a qualy WC as both have had some very good results lately but i did not think berman was a us citizen, Williams with his atp points should be maindraw over christian harrison . glad fowler got into the qualies on his own . yes know he had a bad zoo but has done very well in high level itfs and I was rooting for him to get into the main . Seal got a main draw WC last year as did lawrence formienta, both played jr davis cup, again, both snubbed by the USTA because results have bot bee n great this year . not surprised by Kandath because he plays with two hands on both sides and that would be tough on the pro level . someone mentioned he works with rodidi but ins't he a 91 and should be with vandalen ? the open will be interesting w/ all the us kids to see how we stack up against the worlds best juniors...

Frank said...

Big deal. Who needs the USTA or Pat Mac? Just do it on your own. This is life where many things aren't fair. For all those who didn't get wild cards just do it on your own. Yes, some people get it handed to them and others have to work for it. The lack of a wild card doesn't mean you can't be successful. The most successful people in life went to public universities and not the ivies. So who cares. Stop the belly aching already. Victory is much sweeter when you do it on your own.

kiwipower said...

ABC, i think you're pulling my leg about sarmiento playing davis cup. he got tooled at clay courts. he just got routined at the zoo by a kid with a bad wheel. besides beating sarmiento both of these kids had stronger tourneys at both clays and hards. you also have the two finalists at the zoo. even if harrison declined, sarmiento has 4 kids clearly ahead of him. finally, i really doubt the USTA is going to repeat the mistake that cost us the world junior tennis finals two years ago. then again, maybe that's why harrison declined.

vayacondios said...

ABC, you don't need to try to defend the indefensible. sometimes the choices are neither reasonable nor fair. in the younger age groups the coach can pick whoever he wants to pick. KIWIPOWER, just because a kid suffered from nerves two years ago in the czech republic doesn't necessarily mean he will cost us a title again in junior davis cup this year. and even if it costs the team, how else is he supposed to learn. besides, our 92s might be strong enough this year to win without sending our best team.

seemsobvious said...

to ABC, first of all, if you are selected to go to the Junior davis cup, that DOES NOT ATOMATICALLY MEAN YOU WILL RECIEVE A WILDCARD. last years example, FRANK CARLETON did not recieve one and he played for the us in junior davis cup.

2nd of all, it was definitely not down to sarmiento and cox only for the 3rd position for junior davis cup. harrison kudla and king wouldve been the team, harrison declines. so the next logical choices would be, cox, vanoverbeek, and sarmiento. and as stated, sarmiento got tooled by king at clays, followed by a bad backdraw performance, followed by a loss at kalamazoo to vanoverbeek(not selected to junior davis cup, due to sarmientos salection) who also was playing with a bad leg. vanoverbeek then procedes to lose to cox(who is also not on the junior davis cup team, due to sarmientos selection) who goes on to win the tournament.
tennisjunky is dead on, the choice for sarmiento was definitely a biased decision by the david roditi. not that its a surprise as roditi seems to love to choose sarmiento to any international competition.

just for all who dont know, 2 years ago at the 14 and under world championships them team was, ryan harrison, shaun bernstein, and RAYMOND SARMIENTO. the day after bernstein and sarmiento were selected to go, king and cox defeated both of them in the semifinals in a tournament in europe they were on with roditi.

also, the boys 14 and under team that went did not do very well at all. i think most people agree harrison is a good selection, and bernstein went 3-0 on this trip. yet somehow the US did very poorly....

sameolsameol said...

im also wondering why the usta made it such a point to select the team BEFORE kalamazoo. they had plenty of time after kalamazoo to choose the team and then the team would definitely not have sarmiento, so there would be no discussion about the unfairness of it. as he came in 5th of the 92's at kalamazoo. just incase the USTA needed it to be ANY MORE OBVIOUS on why he should not be going.

expectations said...

does anybody think that the 93 boys(egger, novikov, berman, mccall, decoster) are even close in potential to the 92 boys(harrison, king, kudla, cox, vanoverbeek, sarmiento) ? not to mention depth. the 92 boys also have solid people behind those 6(ore, frank, pasha, sock, etc..)

the reason i bring this up, is that the 93 team who went to the boys 14 world championships came in 3rd place(along with 94 christian harrison) and the 92 boys came in 7th or 9th. the US 92's depth wise should be taking home the junior davis cup this year. there is no country who can beat our team this year. tomic, miccini, bhambri, and biryukov for example all top 60 itf are not playing for there countries unless something has changed. our team of king kudla and sarmiento should be able to bring the championship back to the US, even without our strongest team(harrison isnt playing, sarmiento is playing ahead of cox vanoverbeek). but i still believe that we have the best team that will be there.

GOOD LUCK TEAM USA

tennisperson said...

whats the point of awarding the wc into the jr open for winning zoo when guys just had to get to semis or win backdraw (vanovrbeek,sarmiento,etc) to get one?.. and then also i think the davis cup team is unfair.. king deserves and also kudla but sarmiento?.. just cuz him and king play doubles "well" (barely won zoo).. its unbelievable..

Plotinus said...

As for the 93's, it's a bit of a shame that Spencer Newman didn't get a qualifying wildcard, because he's had a very good year.

As for giving wildcards to younger players who aren't as good as their older counterparts (matched now head-to-head), that's an argument against the USTA's development philosophy. Rather than picking on individuals, you should explain why you disagree with that general policy.

pdb1991 said...

anyone else think that maybe mitchell frank deserved a qualifying wc. he had a good summer, 5th at clays and 6th at zoo, with wins over sock and bangoura.....just a thought

tennisjunky said...

To
Plotinus .. Spencer Newman is a good 93 no doubt about that but does not play at that level. He got slammed by Saramento in the main in 16s and and in the back draw by Brasseaux. His Fowler win was more about Fowler not dealing with the pressure of being numero uno, but a win is a win. Not ready yet. But sill, williams in the qualies and Harrison (christian) in the main, whatever.....

Bystander said...

"Manoftennis said...
Wow these wildcards amaze me every year. Sarmiento harrison main draw over kids like kandath, sundling, mcmorrow, seal, lipman, noble, kevin king, the list goes on and on of people who definately deserved one into main over those to for sure. The qualies are always a joke i mean at least hand out wc's to some kids who could qualify and do damage."

Well one things for sure, if you choose college, your USTA wild card days are over! They want you to mainline a direct rute to the pros. Once the kids in the 18s start thinig that they will spend a year or two in college they are off the preferred USTA list. Shhhh, don't list any colleges on your tennisrecruiting profile or they will know that you won't give up your life and worship their god!

agree said...

pdb 1991, i totally agree with the idea that frank shouldve recieved a qualifying wildcard

COACH6060 said...

HA! USTA girls only eh? Ellen Tsay wins Easter Bowl and gets to semis of hardcourts as number one seed. Not given a qualy card because she works with daddy and not USTA coaches. Nepotism reigns, as always. Min and Gibbs have done squat in the last 6 months but since they train at the national training centers, apparently they MUST BE THE FUTURE--or else the USTA would be wasting dollars (an we all know that would never happen!) Idiots.

abc said...

To everyone that basically attacked me-

I'm not denying the fact that there's favoritism involved with the Jr. Davis Cup picks. Of course, Roditi and Sarmiento are close, considering they've known each other since the 12s.
But also, you also have to consider good doubles teams because Sarmiento would not be playing too many singles matches. Sarmiento and King are very comfortable playing doubles with each other, they have both told me themselves.
Someone asked why Kudla and King don't play together, and I'm not sure. Maybe they're not comfortable playing with each other. I have no idea.

pdb1991 said...

yea the guys who finished 1-5 in the 16s zoo all got maindraw WCs but frank doesnt even get a qualifying wc by finishing 6?????

are you serious? said...

coach6060-

The reason why Ellen Tsay did not receive a wildcard is (to put it bluntly), nobody likes her game. The USTA does not want a pusher to be the face of girl's tennis. People will be asking, "Why did they give Ellen Tsay a wilcard? She's such a pusher!" She didn't even win Hard Courts, so there was not thorough domination for her. As for her #1 ranking, USTA rankings mean "squat" as you like to say. If you play enough tournaments and get lucky a few times, your ranking will be extraordinarily higher. And even if she did work with the USTA, she still wouldn't have received a wildcard IMO. The USTA is smart enough to give wildcards to players with decent gamestyles. Both Grace and Nicole are developing their games in the right direction and it would be interesting to see how they do in the qualies.

McLovin said...

The last time I saw Gibbs playing at the Easter Bowl, she was moonballing like crazy, has she changed?

xyz said...

coach6060, 1 thing about Gibbs, same age year as Tsay, won the same tournament, girls 16's easter bowl, the previous year. min is a 94 and possibly one of the best junior girls in all of the itf's with her net game. not that it counts for anything, but she is amazing at doubles and has better hands than a lot of the guys, her age and older.
also, where are you finding that gibbs and min are training at the USTA centers?? they are most certainly not at the real usta center in boca raton. i dont know where you are getting your information.

gibbs fan said...

mclovin

Yes, Nicole has improved her game a tremendous amount. She makes a good amount of errors now, but she is striking the ball really well as opposed to a bit ago. She also has added variation to her game, coming up to nets, still making some bad selections, but nevertheless, the effort is there. I watched her play against Christina McHale in Berkeley, and she was hitting the ball harder than Christina, and Christina hits the ball very well now as well. The difference was a few more errors from Nicole at crucial times.

Lacy said...

Mclovin, when I saw Gibbs play at Berkeley, she was not moonballing whatsoever. She was playing aggressively and attempting to put balls away at the net.

tennisparent said...

anyone have an idea why sock was snubbed for the open? as for rodidi he has known all these boys since the 12s so does anyone have an idea why the blatant favoritism for sermento? do they live in the same town? relatives? godfather? family friends? just don't get it because rodidi has been chosen him for every event and for the 14 davis cup over king who had much better results even back then. As for dubs, king and cox play all the time so saying that sermento and king are more comfortable playing doubles another ridiculous excuse for picking sermento. what is disappointing is USTA coaches should be more professional, it should be a requirement. i agree with tennisjunky that rodidi lost a lot of credibility bit it was probably a long time coming... i dont thing rodidi is alone. from what i understand the 91 coaches only look at chase buchanan and jamere jenkins (90) and ryan harrison (92) and bradley klahn (90 and treat the rest of the 91s like they dont exist. a
pattern here

TennisEdu said...

Coach6060,

I'm sorry to diminish what it means to do well in the Girl's 16 Nationals but everyone of the best 15 & 16 year olds that are eligible to play in San Diego, played the 18's in Berkekey. Vandeweghe, Gibbs, Stephens, and Ahn could have played in San Diego but opted to play with the big girls and they all did pretty well. Remember, whoever wins the 16's will never beat all of the best girls that could potentially play there because the best 16 year olds are going for that big WC in the main draw of the Open. That doesn't mean that winning the 16's isn't an accomplishment, it is, it's just that it will always have an asterix next to the winners name.

And about Nicole Gibbs not doing "squat" in the last 6 months; she got to the round of 16 in two $10,000 USTA circuit events in July, she just got to the round of 16 in Berkeley last week and beat Allie Will and Alexa Guarachi in the back draw before losing a close match to Mallory Cecil. Plus, she helped the US win the 14's world championships last year so she is going to be rewarded for that as well as what she did in the last couple of months.

Sorry to put what Ellen did by getting to the semis but it isn't the same without the other top 16 year olds participating.

observer said...

sock lost to bangoura at the zoo 1,5 and berman at clays 1,2 so I don't think that he got snubbed.

byoboy said...

Coach6060, Keep your idiotic comments to yourself if you don't have the facts. This site is becoming a joke with the ignorance displayed here. Grace has always trained in Atlanta so all your comments are irrelevant if you cant get the simple facts correct. The USTA has nothing to do with producing players, its up to the players and their individual coaches. A wildcard into the US Open has nothing to do with a players future, if you cant get there on your own getting a wildcard aint gonna do it for you anyway. Look at Scoville Jenkins, this must be his 4th WC and he still cant make the maindraw on his own, so has it made him a better player???? Cant believe everybody gets their knickers in a knot over the WC selections

seenthemall said...

As far as the '91 coaches only looking at Buchanan, Jenkins, Harrison and Klan I don't know that Klan has ever traveled with the U.S.T.A. Domijan does his on thing by choice and the only other one who would be of interest is Bo Seal. Why they don't look at him I don't know. Devin Britton could be good in doubles but he would have to learn to quit hanging his head and looking defeated all the time to tap into his talent. Jenkins has to learn to win by some other way than just bombing the ball. When hes on hes dangerous but how often is that. Harrison and Buchanan have the talent and confidence to make it professionally but may have to learn to not be their on worst enemy and grow up to have a chance.

Get Real said...

I hope that after this event, the USTA will sit back and evaluate the kids they are putting their hopes on. I think the USTA will be better at predicting the track of hurricanes then the predictions of the young kids. In most major sports, the great ones do not break out and turn pro until 18 and over. To say a 15 year old is going to be a great Quarter back and give him a opportunity to play in a pro game is just stupid. He will be to small, to immature and does not hav the experience yet. You do not build a house from the roof down, and it is not built over night. These kids are not special enough to hande this yet, and they might never be. I think the USTA is not producing anyone because they are in a hurry. They need to sit back and let the pot come to a boil when it is ready to. This is not brain surgery. Will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Great comments, maybe someone from the USTA will take time to read some of these comments. Probably not

gettingthefactsstraight said...

Everyone seems to be having a fun time ripping the usta with their wildcard selections. Of course, some of the usta coaches reads these blogs. If everyone who blogs here can't agree on wildcard selections, what makes you think the usta is going choose them so everyone is happy?!? I haven't read someone give their lists on here. Why? Because everyone would be blogging in the same manner with it. There are 2 automatics in the juniors main draw. Everyone has a chance to earn them. If you don't, then you leave it in the hands of someone else.

Hi Haters said...

First off, everyone who recieved main draw wc's in the juniors deserved it. Christian Harrison has proved that he can play with the best on the junior level. I wouldnt be surprised if he went a couple rounds deep in the main.
You can argue that the top 5 92's got wc's because it is their turn. What is all of this critisism towards sarmiento? He beat King in Carson and took a set off of Jarmere Jenkins a top 30 ITF player. I saw that match and he looked nice. In the zoo he had one loss (identical to kudla, king, and van overbeek) to Van Overbeek and Bob could be a force not to be messed with at the open.

As for the davis cup selections, no matter who was picked there would be chaos. Theres cox, kudla, sarmiento, king, van overbeek, pasha, ore and others to choose from. Theres a good argument for each one of them to get chosen. So stop hating on Roditi for making a tough but in my opinion the correct choice for davis cup. They have the perfect build to take the title. No egos, no potential problems. Great chemistry. GO USA!
Bye Haters

nadalforgold said...

Last I heard, Gibbs works with Wade Mcquire (USTA Coach) at Carson USTA facility. Regarding Tsay's style of play, was thinking of another very good player with a comparable game, Lily Kimball. Won the Orange Bowl 16's in Dec. Both players IMO not thought of very highly by USTA. Guess they feel there is no room for Martina Hingis types in their program. They would much rather find the offspring of accomplished athletes. Sorry, just a exaggeration, but they do have their agenda as far as who they "think" will pan out. While on the subject of girls wildcards, what about Cako. Has beat Sloane twice this year, and has been on fire lately. I would venture to say that her age (17) works against her, and probably the USTA's opinion of her ultimate prospects. I am sure they feel Sloane is heading for top 50 at least.

gibbs fan said...

nadalforgold,

Wade got fired from the USTA in case you haven't heard. So she is no longer working with him, and is instead working with the only women's coach left in Carson, Ray Ruffles.
And to compare Ellen Tsay to Hingis is absolutely absurd. The level of play and intelligence are on two totally different levels. And Tsay and Kimbell have to different games as well. Lilly does not lob or play moonball tennis. In fact, she comes up to the net so often, that moonballs don't tend to work on her as they would against some other people.

just_some_thoughts. said...

I am also a little tired of the rodditi ripping as well as the ripping on sarmiento...cox and van overbeek are both as deserving as sarmiento is, but that doesnt make it a bad choice. Sarmiento in fact, in my opinion, has been playing his best tennis this year comapred to others in the past. No one has mentioned that he had two extremely impressive wins (back to back) over ruben gonzalez who played a mostly #2 and some #1 for university of illinois, as well as teddy angelinos who played #6 for an extremely good university of virginia team, by the way angelinos didnt lose one match all year at that position...pretty tough to do. Lets give sarmiento a break for a second and see how he performs, and more importantly how well he competes the rest of the year.

tennis said...

nadalforgold, lilly kimbell also won hardcourts 16's last year and lost 1st round of the us open juniors. she is a 91 girl who does not have much game at all if you have watched her play. she is the same age as cako, who is good yes, but for her age not very good at all. both kimbell and cako are the same age as other US players such as: Melanie Oudin, Gail Brodsky, Coco Vandeweghe, Allie Will, Laurenn Embree, Julia Boserup, Mallory Burdette, etc. Cako and Kimbell have a ways to go before getting deserved attention from the USTA.

to seenthemall, many things wrong with your post.
1, klahn last year in europe was with the usta to the itfs and roland garros and wimbledon juniors.
2. domijan gets plenty of attention from the USTA as he gets plenty of wildcards.(2 years in a row into jr us open)
3. bo seal recieved a wildcard into the jr us open last year, and he traveled with ryan harrison to osaka with the wildcard the USTA swapped with the japanese players the Us open jr does every year.
4. devin britton may be a very good double player, but that doesnt mean he should recieve any sort of singles wildcard.
5. jenkins does not just bomb the ball i do not know where you are getting this..?? he is very agressive on his return of serve(one of the reasons he is a very good double player) and he likes to go to net but he doesnt simply bomb the ball as you put.
6. the usta is definitely not even close to only looking at klahn, they look at buchanan and jenkins and harrison (roditi looks at all 92's, mostly sarmiento)

1 thing i will agree with is that the USTA is way too obsessed with chase buchanan.

officials.are.garbage said...

On a completely different note..anyone see James blake get royally done over by another poor officating job? On one of James' match points against Gonzalez in the semis James hit a forehand which knicked gonzalezs' racket and flew long. But it was never called! James argued but to no avail and replay does confirm that the ball did touch the racket of Gonzalez. Is nobody else even a little upset about this? I really havent even seen this mentioned anywhere.

tennisman said...

I agree with nadalforgold about cako. She has been playing very well and I think that she deserved a wildcard. I always thought that kimball played the way the kids at newks were taught. Get to net. I think that kimball should have definitely gotten a wc. Isn't tsay more of a counterpuncher? I'm surprised they didn't give lauren herring a wc considering that she trains in boca. Does anyone know what it means when a wc is reserved?

nadalforgold said...

"Gibbs Fan" I am going to try and refrain, but this post may indeed come across in the same tone as yours. I was unaware that Wade Mcguire got fired. Ray Ruffels is a great guy, and very knowledgeable. Also, zero "attitude" which is refreshing. Both Ellen Tsay and Kimball are unusual, in comparison with other successful USTA junior girls, as is the style of Martina Hingis, in comparison to other successful WTA players. Crafty, counterpunching types, not afraid of the net, and with limited natural "physical" ability. I realize Lily attacks as well. So anyway, I do not feel the comparison is as "absurd" as you think. Lily with her excellent backhand down the line (Hingis), or Tsay with her excellent tennis mind (also Hingis). BTW, IMO Ruffels will be a huge upgrade for Gibbs.

Knowthemall said...

Tennis, Know your facts. First of all Bo Seal did not get the wildcard from the U.S.T.A. in Japan last year. He got it from the I.T.F. who asked I.M.G. to send them a couple of good players to the tournament. Bradley Klan may have gone with the U.S.T.A. last year to the French and Wimbeldon but not this year which was inferred in the post before. Domijan has gotten a few wldcard but has nothing to do with the U.S.T.A. He does his on thing at Saddlebrook. Devin Britton was ranked in the top 50 in the world lasy year. Jarmere Jenkins does in fact kill every ball just about. As for Lilly Kimball you haven't seen much tennis if you don't realize she is one of the best athletes of the bunch who can change speeds, attack, play the net and do more than one thing to win a match unlike most girls. You're a very poor judge of talent and potential judging from what you wrote about the players you mentioned. In the future state facts and stick with things you know for sure. Your comments were way off base for anyone who knows the people you mentioned.

Enoughalready said...

Knowthemall - I agree with Tennis. You apparently don't know them as well as you think you do. Get your facts right. You are wrong on almost every count. Klahn did indeed travel with the USTA to the French and Wimbledon and their lead-in tourneys THIS YEAR. He was with Buchannon, Harrison and Jenkins. Wrong about Jenkins as well. Most view him as an aggressive all-court player, not a banger as you say.

tennisjunky said...

To tennisparent, enjoyed the humorous comments on Rodidi.

To get real. You hit the nail when you said, “ I think the USTA is not producing anyone because they are in a hurry”, except for their chosen few, such as Sarmiento (sorry David, but the facts speak for themselves). The USTA picks up and drop players based on current results. Last year Lawrence Formentero seemed to pop threw with his 16s Easter Bowl win and instantly became the USTA player to help, WC in Open Jr. maindraw, Jr. Davis Cup trip to Italy and now, less than a year later, nothing. Yet the USTA ignores players who have had solid results in older age groups for years. Both strategies are flawed and why there is such a crises of confidence in both USTA High Performance and all its coaches.

To gettingthefactsstraight…Picking players for development is the mission of USTA High Performance and the last ten years their track record has been miserable. If the USTA were a publically traded company their stock would be at $0 right. Leaving WC picks to the USTA you get a WC to a very talented 14 year old who has yet to win a level 5 ITF. Could see a WC to the qualies, but the main draw, that does not make sense even from a development standpoint. Putting Williams who has ATP points in the qualies and Sermento in the main, the decision making process here is on the other side of the looking glass. Hard not to criticize.

To Hi Haters

Roditi does not make tough when it comes to Sarmiento. The facts speak for themselves. For all the USTA trips BAR NONE, 14 davis Cup qualies and main, Les Petits, 16 Davis Cup qualies and Main, Sarmiento has been picked to be on the team and he is NOT the best 92. If he were that would make sense but he is not. The only one who has that track record is Ryan Harrison who opted not to play. So what if he had a few good wins, all these players have god wins. Bob VanOverbeek , whose results are as good or better, has never been asked to represent the USA. If that is not favoritism tell me what is!

tennisdebater said...

To: Tennisjunky...

Hasn't the mission statement of the usta over the past 5-6 years been "supplemental"?? Only since the usta opened their academy in Boca last year have they switched to "primary" coaching. From my understanding, the usta selects players from those who have applied. So "Picking players for development" is NOT the mission of USTA High Performance.

You make it seem like Lawrence Formentero was at the usta facility the entire year. Didn't he leave after 2 months? So it could have been more of a home-sick, too-much-too-soon for him. He is a tremendous player and person, but don't college athletes also transfer from schools, because it isn't the right fit, not because the program is flawed.

In putting Williams in the main draw, you would be rewarding someone whose development and ranking (ATP,ITF,and USTA)have declined over the past year, as well as his behavior. And yes--he does have atp points, actually 12, and 5 of those is from a first set retire, so it's not like he has 20 or 30, like last year.

Like I said before, everyone has a chance to make it into the US Open Jrs by winning the toughest all-american junior tournament, Kalamazoo. Or you can earn enough ITF points by great results in Easter Bowl, Spring Championships, Tulsa, Kentucky, Orange Bowl, etc.

Plotinus said...

There are clearly many observers who feel that the USTA coaches play favorites.

Whatever one believes on that issue, even the USTA should grant that the coaches develop special relationships with the high-performance players, which can, in turn, raise conflicts of interest. The potential for favoritism is there.

One way to rectify the problem is to assign coaches to ages, rather than to birth years. That way, a coach would manage players for only 1-2 years, before passing them on to another coach.

Under the current system, each coach gets to shepherd his crop of players from the early juniors up to the pro ranks. This may have some advantages: personal relationships, stability...

But the USTA should consider the drawbacks. There is the aforementioned accusation of favoritism. Even if the claim is false, there is the mistrust and enmity the current system generates. And there is also the question whether the USTA asks too much of its coaches by demanding that they remain with a birth-year cohort from the early juniors to the pros.

I would argue that the system should be changed in favor of specialization. The job of coaching 11-12 year olds is very different from the job of coaching 17-18 year olds. Under the current system, each coach is required to train every stage of development, alternating with the age of his players. Even if the coaches knew how to train every stage well (consider the experience necessary to do that!), wouldn't the coaches excel even more if they focused on just one stage of development?

Moreover, even if the coaches are excellent judges of talent, they are individuals. They have their own subjective viewpoints, with their inherent biases. They are fallible. If only one coach is assigned to assess a birth-year, he's liable to fall into error.

Wouldn't the USTA analyze talent better if all the coaches participated? Under the current system, even if all the coaches meet to discuss the players, the opinion of the particular coach assigned to a birth-year has inordinate weight over that group.

I ultimately think that the USTA has an excellent group of coaches but that it could improve its high-performance system. And that's what we should expect, since the system hasn't been in place that long.

The Dude said...

This may be the only forum in the USA that calls to question USTA High Performance's accountability to it's constituency. Congratulations, Collette for hosting a great public forum. Perhaps the powers-to-be will be reading this forum and modify their WC policies to invite juniors who can currently make a dent rather than a venue for hoisting younger players for developmental exposure. In a sense, giving the younger kids WCs is a is a copout by the USTA because these kids are not expected to win. Sending older kids into the USO and losing would invite the criticism- is that the best the USTA can do? So much of what the USTA is bureacratic CYA mentality. They don't trust the process that the cream will rise to the top. They always try to jury rig the process without success.

steven s said...

Does anybody know the circumstances regarding the High Performance woman's coaches at Carson? Indeed, after an earlier message mentioned this, only one coach remains?

Jeremy said...

To plotinus -

Though in theory your solution of having coaches per ages seems fine, but you begin to run into the problem of the high performance players switching coaches every 2 years. Many coaches teach many different things. Young or old if a relationship develops between a player and a coach, they should stick together since that is what works.

Who's to say the high performance kids won't like the 6th coach in 10years? Would they just have to deal with it, even if they don't get along at all?

When a player and coach find a certain chemistry together they reach an understanding of committment that goes far beyond anything that a talented player could do with a hated coach.

I agree that ages are a big difference in games, maturity, etc. but if you've started coaching a kid when he was 9 or 10, then you would know the insides and outsides of his/her game and ultimately get them to the next level. If a 17 year old young man/woman shows up at a coach's doorstep, its a lot harder to determine whether or not that relationship will work out or if that coach can even help him/her at all since he knows nothing about him/her.

Taking out the father portion of their relationship look at Pat Harrison - his boys have become star athletes through ONE coach, him, not from switching coaches every other year.

tennisdebater said...

To The Dude--

The BEST usa juniors are in the main draw of the US Open Juniors: Harrison, Buchanan, Jenkins, Klahn, Trometta, and Sandgren. Then add Krajecik and Cox for winning Kalamazoo. These gentleman are the best because they did the best at the best tournaments. These guys should do the most damage at the US Open Jrs.

I'm confused with the your thought process, and please help me figure it out; The players you feel got left out, how come they didn't do damage in the lesser quality tournaments this year, like Easter Bowl/Spring Champs, amongst others?

Along with your "nothing-but-criticism" blog of the usta WC policies, why don't you offer a solution. It's pretty easy to argue but alot harder to write a solution. So it must be that the sun was in your eyes or you got a bad line call.

Plotinus said...

To Jeremy,

I entirely agree that a player needs one primary coach for his development, ideally one and the same coach for his entire junior career.

But if the USTA coaches are only supposed to be "supplemental" and are responsible for so many players, I don't see the concern you raise as a problem.

Know for sure said...

Enoughalready, You are wrong again as was i a little bit. Klan did not go with the U.S.T.A. to the French and the warm up tournaments as you said. He went with his mom but Mike Cell let him warm up with the other guys when needed. He did however go with them to Wimbeldon. As for Jarmere Jenkins that is a matter of opinion and I've never seen him do anything but kill the ball and that is about 20 or 30 times I've seen him play. Any body that knows much about tennis would agree with that assessment 100%. As for the Bo Seal situation I noticed you didn't bring that up again since you were way wrong throwing that false info. out there.

Anybody? said...

Anyone have any idea when the qualifying draw/times come out?

vincent chase said...

I think one thing that seems to get lost in the shuffle is that the USTA and their coaches (who are quite talented but obviously their impact has been limited until now due to the nature of supplemental coaching) have to project who will be pros. So who is the "best" 15 or 16 yr old is not necessarily relevant to who will be the best at 19 or who will have the best chance to have a pro career. the fact that support is withdrawn due to poor results is a way of holding players accountable in the short term but when looking big picture its a little contradictory but perhaps the only way to make sure players put out.

The Dude said...

Tennisdebater, wow, such an acrimonious reply? "I'm confused with the your thought process, and please help me figure it out; The players you feel got left out. Along with your "nothing-but-criticism" blog of the usta WC policies, why don't you offer a solution."

You are confused in general. Let me make it easier for you. Thatcher, El Mihdawy, and Rhyne Williams were not offered main draw WCs. They finished higher than Domijian, Sarmieto and others. Harrison, Buchanan, Jenkins, Klahn, Trometta, and Sandgren made it on their own in the ITF rankings. They are NOT relevant to the WC debate. Kandath should have gotten a WC into qualies over Bangoura, Sean Berman, Ore because he is better and can do more damage. He is the same birth year as Bangoura who he double bageled in the FL open. My solution is for the USTA to allow the process to play out. The cream rises to the top so pick those players who have performed the best which they clearly have not. They continue to play favorites.

"So it must be that the sun was in your eyes or you got a bad line call." So you can further understand,I am not a junior player. I am a parent whose kid was never in contention for a WC so this is not sour grapes. Understand now?

tennisbuff said...

Let me throw a kink in the comments. Let's just pretend for a minute that there were no wildcards available. Except maybe the automatic ones. If that was the case the only American that would have gotten in "qualies" that received a wildcard would have been Overbeek. Britton and Seal would have also gotten in.
So who really "deserves" to be playing? These guys worked all year to get a ranking to play this event, but because of politics... two of them will possible be excluded. How is this right? Plus, Britton was 47 in the world, and I understand had a family issue and lost several months of tournaments in which he could have gained points. Seal was out 3 month but is still a great contender. He did well in Japan. Britton lost the same round as Domijan in Kalamazoo, but he hung around for the back draw, losing to the eventually back draw winner.

mike said...

To: The Dude

The reason why Thacher and El Mihdawy didn't get WC's into the Juniors are because THEY AGED OUT. They are 89's, and therefore are not eligible to play ITFs from this year forth.

Colette Lewis said...

The qualifying draws should be out at 6 p.m. EDT Monday. See usopen.org.

gettingthefactsstraight said...

To the Dude--

First--my apology for my harsh reply. I do get a little "fired up" when talking about wildcards. In a perfect world, I wish wildcards didn't exist. But they are around, and will always cause controversy.

Secondly--Thacher and ElMihdway cannot play the US Open jrs because the are too old. They were 3rd year players at Kalamazoo, like Steven Johnson, Dennis Nevolo, Drew Daniel, Wil Spencer, etc.

Thirdly--Matthew Kandath, who is a solid player, could have played the 16s at Kalamazoo, like Fowler, and tried to win it, if he truly wanted to be in the US Open Jrs. Instead, he played the 18s and lost in the rd of 64. He also lost first round at the Easter Bowl, the rd of 16 at Spring Champs, semi's of grass courts and quarters of a National Open in Feb. I'm not saying that he couldn't do damage at the US Open jrs, but he truly didn't help himself at Kalamazoo or his results in 2008.

Fourthly--Historically, Seal will get into the qualifying with his ranking.

Fifthly--Rhyne Williams could have played Easter Bowl and Spring Championships, which would have earned him enough itf points to get into the main draw of the us open jrs. However, he elected not to play, so must not have been that important to him.

Sixthly--Britton elected to play a challenger in Mexico, instead of playing the Easter Bowl, which are huge itf points to be earned, if he wanted to play the us open jrs.

There are pros and cons for every selection. I love studying the selection process. The US Open Men's main draw or qualifying never goes straight down the rankings either. Wildcards are tricky, because they can go to anyone if a player doesn't earn entry on his own. A great lesson in life--don't leave it in the hands of someone else.

gettingthefactsstraight said...

To the dude--

FYI--the apology from gettingthefactsstraight comes from the tennisdebater.

USTAparent said...

To all of you who complain that this or that player is being overlooked by the USTA I want to let known that the impact of their support is very very very overrated unless you are one of their handpicked two or three players in each age group. My son (a 92) has had the “privileged” of being invited to several USTA training camps by the 92 coach over the years. The reason I say “privilege” is that is how they make you feel, but the reality is these camps are no better than training options at home if the player has good hitting on a daily basis. Because the camps are infrequent, it’s supplemental and doesn’t really add to their development because the coaches see these kids so rarely they are not in the position to change anything technical and don’t take the time to make recommendations to these kids’ coaches on what they need to work on. So, as far as the camps, you are not missing much, believe me. A lot of top kids don’t even go.

To Plotinus. Rodidi’s favoritism to Sarmiento has become pretty much a standing joke, which was again confirmed by his choice for Jr. Davis Cup over Van Overbeek and Cox. My pick would have been VanOverbeek because all these kids are equally good and VanOverbeek has never been asked to represent his country. He would have valued a lot from the experience and the goal of player development should be to give the most kids possible the experience of playing for their country, not just one kid, Raymond Sermiento, when his results do not put him above the pack. Agree 100% a way to rectify this blatant favoritism would be to “assign coaches to ages, rather than to birth years. That way, a coach would manage players for only 1-2 years, before passing them on to another coach.” And to all those who advocate the one coach approach (which I agree with) this would have no impact on the 92s player development because USTA coaches do not have much input into a player’s development anyway: USTA coaches don’t work on the technical improvements; have no real input to tournament schedules; don’t really have relationships with most of their players because they don’t spend that much time with them to development relationships. It’s the kid’s individual coaches (except the few that train at Boca) that are responsible for that. So changing USTA coaches every other year would be a good thing because it would be a fresh approach instead of the same old BS.

In short, I have never really understood what the USTA coaches do with their time outside of the occasional camp and tournament trips, which are few and far between. They certainly are not in contact with parents or the player’s individual coaches with suggestions. Rather than being accessible they put up a Chinese wall which no-one really challenges or complains about because none of us want to offend these coaches.

gettingthefactsstraight said...

To tennisparent--

I only think the "overlooked" complaints come from wildcard selections and Jr. Davis Cup teams, rather than training camps and coaching. There are plently of incredible coaches and tennis programs across the US for our juniors, that some the invitations to USTA camps is just a way of training with different players for a couple days, and not be a transformation of the player's game.

I would certainly hope that any coach, in any sport, who doesn't see a player frequently wouldn't change a thing in that player's game, but give him/her a healthy, competitive environment to train in. And if you want to seek advice and or any feedback, then I'm sure you can ask, if you don't get it first from the coach.

And in your last paragraph, that is a strong accusation as to the work ethic of a usta national coach. I know some of them, and happen to see what they do on a day-to-day basis. So you if do not know, then ask them. They ARE accessible. I saw them everywhere at Kalamazoo.

gettingthefactsstraight said...

To tennisparent--

I only think the "overlooked" complaints come from wildcard selections and Jr. Davis Cup teams, rather than training camps and coaching. There are plently of incredible coaches and tennis programs across the US for our juniors, that some the invitations to USTA camps is just a way of training with different players for a couple days, and not be a transformation of the player's game.

I would certainly hope that any coach, in any sport, who doesn't see a player frequently wouldn't change a thing in that player's game, but give him/her a healthy, competitive environment to train in. And if you want to seek advice and or any feedback, then I'm sure you can ask, if you don't get it first from the coach.

And in your last paragraph, that is a strong accusation as to the work ethic of a usta national coach. I know some of them, and happen to see what they do on a day-to-day basis. So you if do not know, then ask them. They ARE accessible. I saw them everywhere at Kalamazoo.

plain and simple said...

Just putting this thought out there.

Maybe, people should really stop depending so much on the USTA. I heard someone say, "the USTA can't continue someone who consistently shows good/better results than everyone else."

And that has been proven with none other than Melanie Oudin. She does not train in Boca or Carson, but in Georgia with her personal coach. However, she has shown good results, and the USTA cannot ignore her. She is just too good to pass up, and therefore, they support her.

So, to those of you who are complaining that there is too much favoritism, well this is all I gotta say:
1. If you're a player, suck it up. Train harder, and your time will come if you are really that good.
2. To the parents, stop complaining about favoritism. So what if another kid got picked? It's not the end of the world, and sure, maybe it is the USTA's fault. But just complaining about it won't make it any better, and it certainly won't make your child any better. And if he/she is better than the few selected, then prove it to the USTA with results.

ustaparent said...

To gettingthefactsstraight

No argument that the USTA coaches were all over the Zoo, I saw them as well, but that is NOT the same as being accessible on a regular basis and communicating with or giving suggestions to parents/coaches and players on development. That does not happen with exception of a few. So we also agree that the USTA coaches don’t see players frequently, it’s not their mission to change anything because of that (which I agree). So if they are not accessible to parents/coaches and players are a regular basis for guidance/advise than what is their roll? Curious? I have not been impressed.

get real said...

Getting the facts straight,
It appears that you are the type of person who can not get the facts straight. The parent of the usta player was telling you first hand her experience with the usta. Yet, you still found fault in what he or she was saying. Obviously you should read with an open mind and see what her point was. I think the way to a top junior or more is do the opposite way the usta does. My point of view.

gettingthefactsstraight said...

To ustaparent--

I feel like I'm always playing devil's advocate and supporting the usta, because no one else seems to, but in response to your blog, the usta coaches are accessible. Have they not returned any of your phone calls or e-mail's? Have they said your son/daughter can never come for training? Have you asked for scheduling or training advice and not received it? Did you talk with any of them at kalamazoo?

From my understanding, the east coast usta coaches are private coaches to those players who train and live at their academy in Boca. So their mission would be to coach those players that are assigned to them. However, they can also assist other players in their assigned birth year. Every scenerio is different and certainly you can't expect the usta to faciliate the 1000 or so players that play in each birth year, and if they did, i'm sure the 1,001st player would be angry he/she didn't get help and would be trashing the usta on here. I'm not sure what is going on at the Carson center.

Since you think the usta coaches don't work hard, then they should have plently of time to assist you.

duh said...

to ustaparent--

if you want the usta to be accessible, it's called using a phone.

ustaparent said...

To get real said...
Agree, it's just my opinion/experience and gald you took it as no more than that.

To Duh...If it were so easy just to pick up the phone and make a call and get a USTA coach on the other end willing to talk/give advise with you that would be great but that does not happen. Neither myself or my wife had have that experience.

breathethruyoureyelids said...

i have consistently found the coaches receptive and willing to offer advice via both email and telephone calls (as well as in person) on scheduling as well as technical stuff for the player i coach.
i often initially feel a bit like a pest in constantly reaching out for feedback but have never been made to feel that way by them.
in fact i get the feeling that they wish more people would use them as a resource.

Nothing to Hide said...

To TennisParent:

I am sorry you have had such a bad experience as a 92 parent. I would love to speak with you about your son. My email is roditi@usta.com
Thank you.
Coach Roditi

dare to come out said...

im really curious to find out who this usta parent is because as far as i can tell they are spending way too much time being bitter and negative and more on being positive and helping thier kid get better with what they have. so ustaparent, dare to come out and say who you are?

Bystander said...

To dare to come out...the junior tennis world is very small. You cannot expect someone to list their real name in a critical public forum. The are repurcussions to this as action. You are naive to think otherwise.

Plotinus said...

To Tennis Parent,

Although I agree that the potential for favoritism is there, given the personal relationships coaches develop with their players, I wouldn't want to judge any particular case.

For example, regarding Sarmiento, I'm confident that the coach had very clear reasons for picking him over other players. He's choosing the best players for a *team* competition, which involves several underappreciated factors: the absolutely crucial doubles point (Sarmiento is an excellent doubles player), team chemistry, positive attitude, sportsmanship, behavior, commitment to playing for the U.S. when asked, etc.

Since you don't know the coach's reasons for selecting Sarmiento, how can you be so confident in your accusations?

Man in the Moon said...

take a look at my comments on the above story: Building an American Nadal" which will fill in some of the blanks about junior tennis and the ATP.