Tuesday, September 7, 2010

Novikov Upsets No. 7 Seed To Join Four Other American Boys in Round of 16

©Colette Lewis 2010--
Flushing Meadows, NY--

The five wins by American boys in Tuesday's second round action ran the gamut. There was a 38-minute blowout, a come-from-behind victory, a second set reversal, a long two-setter and a retirement.

Dennis Novikov was leading No. 7 seed Duilio Beretta of Peru 2-6, 7-6(5), 4-1 in the final set when Beretta retired.

"In the third set, I got up pretty quick, broke him first game, held, then at 4-1 deuce, he retired due to cramping," Novikov said, admitting to a little surprise when Beretta could not continue. "In the third set he was kind of slowing down a little bit, not getting to as many balls as he did in the first and second sets."

Novikov, who recently began training at Bollettieri's Academy in Bradenton, put his level of play at 8, on a scale of 1 to 10.

"I didn't play my best. In the first set, my first serve wasn't great, but I picked it up in the second and third, served really well."

Prior to the match, the 16-year-old received some advice from the legendary coach who is now overseeing his training.

"He said don't be so nervous, and play for fun," Novikov said. "Last year I played here and lost a tough match to (Tiago) Fernandes, but this year I'm better, doing better, playing well, so I'm here to win even more matches."

He will play unseeded Yasutaka Uchiyama of Japan in Thursday's third round.

Evan King had the quick match, with the unseeded wild card beating Mate Delic of Croatia 6-0, 6-0. No. 10 seed Denis Kudla came from behind for the second straight match, this time defeating Kevin Krawietz of Germany 4-6, 6-4, 6-2. The longtime friends and junior tennis rivals will play in the the third round on Thursday.

Mitchell Frank, the No. 16 seed, took the first set from the powerful but erratic Oliver Golding of Great Britain 6-4, but Golding looked more determined to eliminate the unforced errors at the start of the second set. He broke Frank, and serving at 2-1, had a 40-0 lead, but he lost that game and the next four in a row. Frank will now play No. 2 seed and Wimbledon boys champion Marton Fucsovics of Hungary, who for the second straight match, lost the first set but pulled out a win. Fucsovics ended the run of qualifier Alexios Halebian 3-6, 6-1, 6-3.

Andrea Collarini again needed nearly an hour for each set, but unlike Monday, when it was three sets, the U.S. wild card beat unseeded Guilherme Clezar of Brazil on the Grandstand in two, 7-6(1), 6-3. He will play Filip Horansky of Slovakia on Thursday.

The only two U.S. girls advancing on Tuesday were those who played a compatriot. Qualifier Robin Anderson beat wild card Kyle McPhillips 6-3, 6-0, and wild card Sachia Vickery defeated qualifier Brooke Austin 4-6, 6-3, 6-2. Wild card Caroline Price put up a spirited fight against No. 1 seed Daria Gavrilova of Russia, but came out on the losing end of a 6-2, 2-6, 6-1 score.

Qualifier Chanelle Van Nguyen had the opportunity to play on the Grandstand court against No. 8 seed Laura Robson, but she fell short of extending the 2008 Wimbledon girls champion to a third set, losing 6-3, 7-6(3). Anderson is Robson's third round opponent.

Although the U.S. girls couldn't pull off the upsets, there were two big ones today. 2010 Wimbledon girls champion Kristyna Pliskova, the No. 7 seed from the Czech Republic, lost to Caroline Garcia of France 7-5, 6-4. Ons Jabeur of Tunisia, the 2010 Roland Garros girls finalist, repeated her win in Paris over No. 3 seed Irina Khromacheva of Russia 6-3, 6-3.

It wasn't a good day for No. 2 seeds in doubles. Seconds seeds in the girls draw, Kristyna and Karolina Pliskova, were defeated by (and this will take me a while--thank goodness I don't have to pronounce it, just type it) Ganna Poznikhirenko of Ukraine and Zarah Razafimahatratra of Madagascar 7-6(4), 6-3.

Boys No. 2 seeds Renzo Olivo and Agustin Velotti of Argentina lost to the unseeded U.S. wild card team of Collarini and Jack Sock 6-2, 6-0. Collarini and Sock have never played doubles together prior to today.

For Tuesday's complete results and order of play for Wednesday, see usopen.org.


getreal said...

Considering the cost of an Ivy League education is over $60,000 a year when travel and other expenses are factored in, only the very rich and those who qualify for financial aid can afford to go, and usually that means the middle class gets left out as these schools offer no academic or athletic scholarships. Very few families could save that kind of money irrespective if the kid played tennis or not

been-there said...

There is just something wrong with those Princeton sanctions.

We didn't even bother with those Ivy League schools. You can't be middle class and afford them. You have to be very poor or very rich to go there. Now, how fair is that? I have heard of situations where one parent quits their job so as to be "poor enough" to go to the school. Is that enough monetary diversity for them?

How about making it so that middle class families can afford to go there too?

Whatever. I was just always glad when my kid kicked the super-rich-kid's-arrogant-rear-end. Skill is a great equalizer.

getrreal said...

Agree with been there… Considering the cost of an ivy and the parameters of need based aid, seems the sanctions against the Princeton player (as I understand them) are particularly harsh. If the player has to pay back the booster’s help towards her tuition for the past two years she and her family will be in instant debt and the player may have made a different choice of college where an athletic scholarship was available. There are a lot of top 20 academic D1 schools – Stanford, Northwestern, Rice, Duke, Vanderbilt, that offer athletic scholarships. Princeton should have been fined but not the player.

Alter Ego said...

What are you two talking about, many middle class families have kids that go Ivy. Close to 70% receive some level of financial aid and if you get aid, they won't cancel it if you quit the tennis team or if you are not top 6 like many athletic scholarships. I don't think it's $60K yet but around $56K which in itself is absurd anyways.

lee levine said...

I'm a college guidance counselor and have sent a number of middle class kids to Princeton over the years. In fact, in 2001 they were the first college to guarantee that no Princeton student would graduate with loan debt. 60% of Princeton students receive at least some financial aid and the average annual grant is $36,000! That should put the lie to the notion that in 2010 Princeton is still an elitist school.

been-there said...

Well, isn't that poor girl tennis player's parents going to be in debt now since they have to repay the 2 years of help from their surrogate father? If no one leaves in debt, why'd she need her parents to pay so much then? Guess they better change their motto to: "no one except this one poor female tennis player graduates in debt".

I don't know about Princeton specifically, but the one Ivy League that we did check out in the beginning told us that the cutoff was $60,000.00. If you made less than that, you did not have to pay. If you made more, there was a sliding scale. We'd have had to pay $20,000.00 per year on our income, which is middle class.

So yes, that is affordable. But it is comparable to just going to a normal college and paying. So I'll be darned if we are going to turn down a full ride from pretty much anyplace else to pay $80,000.00 over the four years.

I appreciate that it is an Ivy League education, but no thanks. I'll send my kid to UNC or Illinois or Texas, and go to Hawaii myself a few times instead.

Man in the Moon said...

been there....


don't make me go into the dissertation of why for a total of $80,000 for 4 years it is better than going to Hawaii, Bora Bora,or Tahiti!!

been-there said...

Actually, I was joking about Hawaii.

I am not joking though about not going into debt/losing retirement money for being able to say your kid went Ivy League instead of just to a good top 20 public college.

Man-in-the-moon, your mindset is why so many of my friends have fancy SUV's and houses but are in debt up to their ears.

Since $80,000.00 is nothing to you, maybe you can please give that poor Princeton tennis player her 2 years of tuition?

Man in the Moon said...

Been There,

you don't have a clue what my mindset is, nor my finances!!

I can tell you that my son had many full college scholarships offers for tennis.

He choose an ivy league school for college and grad school, for his future, which he realized was not going to be in tennis.

and yes, I did pay the $50,000 plus per year for his schooling, without any loans, going into 401 K's, or retirement plans.

His first year out of that Ivy League school he earned double (emphasis added) the amount that it cost me for the four years (emphasis added) of schooling.

So in my son's case, that was better than going to a public university.

He also paid "his" way thru two years of an MBA ($80,000 per year) without asking me for a dime.

BTW -- he did not take a loan - he paid with his own cash, after working for 5 years after college.

Ivy League vs public school-- is like anything else in this world -- if you take advantage of the opportunities it is worth the price.

It is called value for your money.

Illinois,Texas, and UNC are very good schools - but not quite Ivy League

Yes, he played tennis in college and was Academic All Ivy and Academic All American -- but more importantly he made good use of his Ivy education.

For him it was a great choice for college and grad school.

Our family are big believers in "teaching children how to fish, not giving them fish."

So that is my sermon for today --

been-there said...

Man-in-the-moon, I will say "kudos" to you and your son. I mean that very sincerely. It sounds like you have done a great job of creating a super kid with well-balanced morals. I also believe in making a kid earn their way, for sure.

However, I don't think you are a middle class family if you put in $50,000.00 per year without a worry. Maybe by your standards you are, but I don't think so.

Half my little daughter's class (not her) is on the free lunch program. I think the income level there is like $30,000.00 per year to achieve that. So no, I don't think you are middle class.

John said...

Been There - Thanks for a balanced post on the topic. Along those lines, the average Ivy League starting salary level for 2010-2011 is approximately $60k vs. the $400k that MITM mentions. Is he making a case, or patting himself on the back again?

American Pride said...

I was not at the Open this year, but it seemed like ALOT of the American's did really well this year. Congrats to Sock for winning and Kulda on Final. Also looks like Novikov played well to beat Beretta, and it could be his best win beating the World NO.5 Player. Colette did you watch the match between Novikov and Beretta? If so what did you think of it?

Colette Lewis said...

@American Pride:
No, I didn't see any of that match. With so many Americans in the draw, it was impossible to see everyone. I did watch quite a bit of Novikov's match with Fucsovics, and though his play was up and down, he did play some of the best tennis I've seen from him in stretches.

Man in the Moon said...

If you are going to make snide comments, at least read what I wrote.

and I quote "and yes, I did pay the $50,000 plus per year for his schooling, without any loans, going into 401 K's, or retirement plans.

The remark about the $400,000 was what my son EARNED in his first year out of an Ivy school>

and I quote " His first year out of that Ivy League school he earned double (emphasis added) the amount that it cost me for the four years (emphasis added) of schooling."

I could make a comment about your reading and comprehension skills, but I won't.

Been there -- thanks for your thoughts and good luck to you and your family, on and off the court.

Man in the Moon said...

a correction to my last post--

my son graduated 10 years ago when Wall Street was paying out huge end of year bonuses, signing bonuses and ridiculous starting salaries.

I do not know what the starting salaries of Ivy graduates today are -- however it depends on what job they are working in. Private Equity / investment banking / finance jobs do not pay what was paid 10-15 years ago.

You can nit - pick whatever you want about my comments, however, I know what my son earned - and you don't.

John said...

MITM - I was just pointing out that you make a good case for the value of an Ivy education using your son as an example.

I had the math right in that you paid $200k and he earned double that in his first year. We all get it, he earned $400 bills.

Reality is that his situation (then and now) is an outlier, well above the average for what an Ivy-leaguer earns.

So my point was, were you really trying to make a good (valid) case, or use this platform to tell your story again (and again)?

getreal said...

To been there ect

I know of bunch of Ivy League graduates including my wife. Some have been extremely successful and others not at all. But the way need based financial aid is based it’s not cut and dry at all according to friends who had to make that decision. If you make $60,000 or less for a family of four with assets under $100,000 it’s free. But let’s say a family of four has a $200,000 a year household income with a net worth of over $900,000 you get zip financial aid. When you fill out those financial aid forms they include the value of your house, cars etc. plus savings, stocks. And I assure you even at $200,0000 household income and $900,000 savings it’s hard to afford paying $60,000 a year in after tax dollars, unless you are still young enough to save a lot for retirement. And that’s just for one kid. My own take is education is a lot like tennis, if you got it will be successful, and going to Harvard or being a USTA golden boy throughout your development is not a sure guarantee, especially when there are other good options for the very bright student at schools that award academic scholarships. TO man in the moor, if your son made $400,000 his first your out of college that is pretty exceptional for a graduate from anywhere. If he is that talented he probably would have been successful no matter where he went. And if you could afford the $50,000 without loans etc you don fit the definition of middle class. And as for your remark “they are not an ivy” is from someone who never went to an ivy. Anyone I know who with an IVY degree would say the opposite, they are great schools for the right kid and a disaster for someone who is not a good fit. Those school are filled with kids in the top 10% of their class and once they get there 90% get grades they are not used to and for some that can be pretty devastating.

Man in the Moon said...

get real and John

I don't want to argue anymore.

Correct, I am not an Ivy League graduate - although I attended very good public schools for college and MBA - my wife also went to very good public schools for college and a graduate degree.

As I re-read both of your comments we have similar thoughts--- on many points - although, we say it in slightly different ways.

my comment of and I quote -- "Ivy League vs public school-- is like anything else in this world -- if you take advantage of the opportunities it is worth the price.

It is called value for your money."

is very similar to your thoughts, John.

Of course, the trick is to find the right school, job, spouse that is a good fit for you.

And that is true whether it is Ivy or not.

To carry it one step further, there are thousands and thousands of junior tennis players in the USA that are trying to make it to the pros.

How many of them really achieve that goal. .0001 maybe.

If you take out the top 15 -20 players in the world, yes the world -- they probably don't earn that $60,000 average, that going to college will get- either public or ivy.

Last point, I really don't consider myself as rich -- really just upper middle -- and of course --- rich, poor - middle, upper middle are all very relative terms - in the eye of the beholder.

What one person might perceive as rich another person might think of as poor.

Come on guys, can't we all just get along!!