IOSC Recap; 12s and 14s Easter Bowl Finals Set for Tuesday; First Round Action Begins in Easter Bowl ITF; Korda Among Four US Men Advancing at Miami Open
©Colette Lewis 2021
San Diego CA--
One week down and one week to go for me at the Barnes Tennis Center, with one tournament, the ITF Grade 1 International Open of Southern California, now in the books. I wrote my recap of that tournament for the Tennis Recruiting Network yesterday, and it's available on that site now, with details on the singles titles for Alexandra Yepifanova and Ethan Quinn and the doubles titles for Kimmi Hance and Reese Brantmeier and Sebastian Gorzny and Nathan Cox.
The semifinals in the Easter Bowl 12s and 14s were held today, and players from the Southern California section will be playing for titles in both age divisions.
In the girls 12s, Thea Frodin, from Woodland Hills California, will meet No. 4 seed Shannon Lam of New Jersey for the girls title. Frodin beat fellow No. 9 seed Meghan Rowley 6-1, 6-2 in the semifinals, while Lam eliminated unseeded Kori Montoya 6-3, 6-1.
The boys 12s final will feature No. 4 seed Sebastian Bielen of New York against No. 9 seed Kimi Basamakov of Thousand Oaks California. Bielen posted a tough 6-4, 6-4 decision over No. 7 seed Jack Kennedy, also from the Eastern section, while Basamakov prevented an all-Eastern final by defeating David Clarke, a No. 9 seed, 6-1, 6-3.
Basamakov, who has yet to be forced into a third set tiebreaker that 12s play in lieu of a third set, was pleased with his performance, which took place on Stadium court.
"I played a really solid match," Basamakov said. "I played someone who hit the ball hard and I was able to maintain consistency. I'm liking my mental game right now, I'm not getting frustrated at all, and I'm hitting some pretty good shots."
As a resident of Thousand Oaks, Basamakov is familiar with the great players that come from that city, including former Easter Bowl champions Claire Liu, Marcos Giron and Sam Querrey, although he has yet to meet any of them, naming Taylor Fritz as the pro that he has actually spoken with, at a clinic at the USTA Training Center in Carson. But he is looking forward to adding his name to the list of Easter Bowl champions from Thousand Oaks, putting it on the tennis map "again."
A Southern California champion is assured in the girls 14s, with San Diego's own Elena Zhao, a No. 9 seed, facing unseeded Iva Jovic of Torrance. Zhao had the tougher match, needing three sets to defeat No. 3 seed Christasha McNeil 6-4, 1-6, 6-0, while Jovic beat unseeded Tianmei Wang 6-3, 6-0.
Jovic, who just turned 13, was not expecting to go quite this deep in the tournament.
"I knew that I could go far," said Jovic, who trains with former USC coach Peter Smith and Rylan Rizza at the Jack Kramer Club in Los Angeles. "but maybe not exactly this."
Jovic, who lost her first set of the tournament, but has not dropped one since, was happy with her performance in the semifinals.
"I think I played pretty well," Jovic said.
I was being aggressive and smart when I needed to; my backhand was really good today."
I was being aggressive and smart when I needed to; my backhand was really good today."
Top seed Cooper Woestendick advanced to his second Easter Bowl final with a 6-1, 6-0 win today over No. 4 seed A Filer. Woestendick, who lost in the boys 12s final in 2019 to Abhishek Thorat, will play unseeded Jimin Jung for the title on Tuesday.
Jung's 7-6(3), 7-5 win over unseeded Ian Bracks was a contentious affair, with Jung getting a game penalty for hitting a ball in anger after failing to serve out the set at 5-3 in the second, having received a warning and a point penalty earlier in the match. With the score at 5-5, Jung clarified with the chair umpire that the next code violation would be a default, not loss of a set, after the chair had warned him previously that the next instance of misconduct would be a default.
Brack took most of the loud shouts and celebrations from Jung in stride, but he did calmly speak with the umpire about Jung's behavior after Jung had directed a taunt at Brack. After two good returns with Brack serving at 5-6 deuce gave Jung the break and the match, he did not approach the net for a racquet tap (correction: Jung did tap racquets with Brack; I didn't see it, but Brack confirmed that acknowledgement at the end of the match) saying that he needed a more challenging match. Although with covid regulations, no handshake with the chair umpire is permitted, Jung did join Brack in thanking the chair umpire.
The 16s division begins at 8 a.m. on Tuesday, while the first round of the Easter Bowl ITF Grade B1 tournament will conclude with the remaining 12 matches involving qualifiers on the schedule, along with the first round of doubles. Twenty first round singles matches were played today, with IOSC champion Ethan Quinn extending his winning streak on the Barnes courts to seven matches with a 6-1, 6-2 victory over Aman Sharma.
With so much going on here in San Diego, I haven't had the opportunity to follow the Miami Open closely, but I wanted to note that four US men have advanced to the round of 16: unseeded Francis Tiafoe, No. 18 seed John Isner, No. 22 seed Taylor Fritz and unseeded Sebastian Korda. Korda, who beat No. 10 seed Fabio Fognini of Italy in the second round, took out one of the tour's hottest players in the third round today. The 20-year-old defeated No. 17 seed Aslan Karatsev of Russia 6-3, 6-0, and will play No. 5 seed Diego Schwartzman of Argentina Tuesday.
17 comments:
It is in poor taste for Colette Lewis to denigrate a 14 year old (Jung) rather than emphasize some of the amazing sacrifices the young athletes make to put themselves in contention for this title.
Paul, I disagree. She didn't make judgments or come to any damning conclusions that I see. Just reported the facts. So, any negatives should be buried and not presented? Sounds like he is a great player and am sure his behavior will improve with continued maturity development.
What is there to celebrate about what appears to be bratish behavior from a 14year old who has clearly been allowed to get away with it by his parents for a number of years. The publicity should shame them and him. It’s worse coming from a top player.
Paul...were you even there? She reported a fact, not an opinion. It was utterly despicable conduct by Jung, which I witnessed as well.
@everyone....I tend to side w/ Colette's reporting on this (her track record speaks for itself) and sounds like some lessons clearly need to be learned on the player's side...That said, I think there could be a debate to be had as to what the appropriate age is to expose someone's poor behavior. I don't have the answer to that, but pretty sure the comment section doesn't need to pile on with additional comments on an adolescent here.
All facts were reported. Good tennis covered up by some of the worst behavior I’ve witnessed in my 30 year career as a high performance coach. It happened EVERY match in the tourney for this kid. He was overruled match point in doubles as well as coded for too many overrules in the finals of singles (not to mention it happened the point before match point as he just tried anything to stay alive). Wasn’t even mentioned, that he claimed the official was racist due to the overrules.
The official should’ve coded him after the semifinals when he taunted Bracks. Would’ve carried over to the finals. Why officials turn the cheek especially after he wins and does it is a joke. Weak.
Have to say Jung was completely wronged by the referees and his opponent.
David, sounds like you were there? Would be interested in your perspective.
Just saw this comment. Not sure who commented that but that was not me.
-David Saye
Hi, I would like to offer some context and facts surrounding this matter. None of what I will mention is meant to defend Jung’s behavior described in this article. I am hopeful his behavior will mature as he grows older- just as many others have done in their life.
1. When this article was initially published, Ms. Colette Lewis published a false statement about Jung claiming he did not tap racquets with Bracks, for which there is video evidence of this happening. When initially approached about this false statement, Lewis said that she did not see the racquet tap interaction. It is reasonable to assume that the reason why she initially published such a statement, even though she herself could not confirm if said statement was true, was to accentuate a negative portrayal of Jung. Eventually, Lewis corrected this false statement after confirming with Bracks.
2. As covered in this article and in the article regarding the finals, it is true that Jung received 3 overrules. However, there is no mention of any of the overrules received by his opponent in the finals (his opponent received 2), or by his opponent in the semifinals (his opponent received 1, Jung received 1). In junior tennis matches, players are responsible for calling their own shots- a system prone to human error; as miscalls are not uncommon, I do not wish to punish any of these players for these overrules. However, the marginal difference in the number of overrules received by Jung and by his opponents is not reported, and withholding all of the facts to portray a story in a different light is along the same vein as fabrication. From a statistical standpoint, 3 vs. 2 overrules does not nearly provide enough evidence to confidently draw any conclusions. And while of course no article can truly be free of bias, a well-renowned and successful journalist such as Ms. Colette Lewis should understand this concept, and understand that by only publishing Jung’s overrules, she invites her readers to arrive at a conclusion that they may not have otherwise reached had they known the full context.
3. Consider the following statement made by Ms. Colette Lewis: “With the score at 5-5, Jung clarified with the chair umpire that the next code violation would be a default, not loss of a set, after the chair had warned him previously that the next instance of misconduct would be a default.”
This statement does not add anything to the context of the match -- as Jung did not receive another code violation, he did not get defaulted, and Ms. Colette Lewis mentions the two previous incidents in the sentence previous to this. Although I am sure this was not intentional, this statement’s inclusion appears as an off-handed way to suggest Jung’s behavior was so bad, he almost was defaulted, rather than an additional fact that would add any context to the story.
In a criminal case, an analogous statement might be “If the defendant were to commit another crime, they would be sent to jail.” One can see how this statement does not add any value, and biases the reader towards a negative perception of the defendant for a hypothetical situation that did not even occur.
The purpose of this comment was simply to contextualize the events reported by Ms. Lewis in order to provide a more truthful, less-biased version of the story, which is the ultimate goal of any journalistic piece.
Soo - with respect to point 1, as you said Collette corrected the piece. The negative portrayal of Jung didn't seem to need much accentuation.
With respect to 2, the article hardly dwelled on the number of overrules. Rather the focus was on Jung taunting his opponent and the code violation for ball abuse.
With respect to 3 I felt it did add context. My interpretation was that Jung knew how bad his behavior was and wanted to see how much rope he had left before being defaulted.
I have been around junior tennis, following Collette's excellent reporting, for over 15 years. I've seen kids grow out of racquet smashing, ball abuse etc as they mature emotionally. Taunting an opponent is beyond the pale for me and I don't understand why the USTA has not taken a stronger stance on this kid. There is a big difference between the emotional control of racquet abuse and the abhorrent behavior of taunting or mocking an opponent, or anyone for that matter. I hope for the kids sake his parents begin to instill some values in him above winning at all costs.
Dear tennisforlife - I have read Soo's comments and your response misses the point, which is the bias shown in the article. You are simply piling on more comments on Jung's behavior while not adequately addressing anything said in Soo's comment.
First of all, your response to 1 does not display an understanding of point 1, which is independent of whether or not Colette fixed the article. The point is that she published something that she could not confirm herself. Why a journalist would take such a risk is up for interpretation, but one could assume that it was to add negative bias. If you can think of another reason why she would have done so, please inform me.
Second, you seem to have not read the article about the finals.
Third, you are basically supporting Soo's point here. You have come to a conclusion with no true substance -- speculation based on Jung asking a question to the referee about a hypothetical situation that did not occur.
All you have essentially contributed is a comment on Jung's behavior (which you have already taken the time to do), and if you think the best solution is to provide another comment degrading a 14 year old boy on the internet, that is up to you and I respectfully disagree with your opinion. However, I am more interested in the issue of biased reporting, which has certainly been a pressing issue in today's society. If you do not think biased reporting is an issue, or if you disagree that this reporting was biased, I would love to hear your thoughts on that.
Also, you would think that as a 15 year follower of Colette’s work, you would know how to spell her name correctly. Thank you.
James. Ok. I added an “l” in Co”l” ette’s name. My apologies. It might have been auto correct. Colette reported what she saw and when advised of her error she immediately issued a retraction - good for her. Are you really trying to turn Colette’s report into some “fake news” expose, good luck with that. In terms of the player he seems to have done more enough to degrade himself than I ever could. Hopefully he take this on board. This is probably the most prestigious junior event in the US. If he wants his behavior to fly under the radar screen, pick another tournament.
Also. For clarity Colette did observe the match first hand. She simply missed the racquet tap and corrected that later when she spoke to the opponent, who seemed to have exhibited very good sportsmanship
@Tennisforlife,
It seems that you don’t understand the first point I addressed in my previous posting. So, I’d like to ask some guiding questions so that it might help you better understand. Can you elaborate on what you mean by “Colette reported what she saw?” Does that mean she falsely imagined some scenario in her head, where both players approached the net and neglected to tap racquets? Or do you mean that for whatever reason, she did not witness the racquet tap occurring? I think the latter scenario is much more likely. In that case, would it be right for her to make the assumption that they did not tap racquets? You are reducing this down to a simple error. If a writer is not able to confirm something, they should not publish it.
Also, your statement that she “immediately issued a retraction” makes it clear that you are not familiar with the situation. I can confidently tell you that the correction of the false statement was NOT as smooth, simple, and prompt as you imagined at all.
I think we've relitigated this episode enough. I did not see the racket tap, so I could not report what I did not see. I sought out the person who could confirm that it did happen when I was informed that I was mistaken in my initial reporting. I did that and corrected the record. The other facts are not in dispute, as I understand it, so I will not be publishing anything else on this particular topic.
Post a Comment