The USTA has been on a mission over the last 7 years to essentially do to junior tournament tennis what it has already done to USTA league and Adult tournament tennis. First the USTA implements a new match format in USTA adult league tennis, the intended purpose being to reduce the court time per match of each individual and team match, thus allowing the USTA and the facilities they use to cram more people on the court, maximizing their own profits. After they see that adults are still playing despite receiving less of the actual product they're paying for, they then implement that format or rule change into junior tournament tennis for the identical reasons, and under the same guise of "player protection." The rub is, they look at Junior Tournament tennis at the sectional level as purely recreational rather than competitive.
Now, the ITA, the intercollegiate tennis association is also utilizing shortened match formats under the guise of player protection. Again, players get to participate less in the competitive activity they train for, and seemingly no one cares or sees the harm these decisions are doing to the end product, which is player development.
While in Alaska on vacation, I discussed with my brother, an ardent USTA adult league player for many years in North Carolina, my two theories about the evolution of the game and the fitness level of players.
My first theory is that if you take a 14 yr old player from 1984, and put him through two, two out of three set matches, every day for three days, and then put a 14 yr old from 2014 through the same rigor, with each player playing within their own time period, the player in 1984 would be able to last through that rigor, while the player today could not. The reason the player in 2014 cannot, is because we are not demanding that they be able to do that. Instead, we have lowered the demands of the player to only be able to last through two sets and a match tiebreak.
Of course, at the pro level, there are no match tie breaks in singles. However, throughout a player's junior development through USTA tournaments in Florida, regardless of age, we keep our formats to two sets and a match tie break. Players train for that less rigorous demand, and thus fitness levels suffer.
My theory is that the as the game has evolved to become more physical, athletes have become, bigger, stronger, faster. An athlete today can do far more than the athlete of yesterday, in part because the game is more rigorous physically. The human body adapts over time to meet the physical demands of the sport. I suggest that there is no reason to lessen the demand on players as juniors. They are more than capable of going through the same rigor in match format as players did 30 years ago.
If you raise or lower the standards of excellence for players, they will adjust their training appropriately to meet those demands. Right now, we are in this phase of lowered standards for physical fitness, because the match formats are not challenging enough. I submit a player in 1984 would be more tired in his time after a long two out of three set match, then a player today after a two set and match tie break match. Yet back then they got one hour between matches, and today they get two hours after less of a match. We have created players that are more concerned about amount of rest, rather than players who are fit enough to simply keep playing if necessary. Look no further than the designated tournament we host here in Tallahassee every July. Players are more concerned about getting their two hours even if the match was a 50 minute 6-0, 6-0 match. It has gotten absurd.
So here is my plan to restore USTA junior tournament tennis to a system that promotes and demands that our players be more physically fit, and have the mental toughness to go three full sets.
10 and under
Format: Two sets and a match tiebreak (no ad scoring)
Rest period between matches:
Duration of match dependent.
If match time is between 0-90 minutes, player must be ready to play again in one hour
If match time is greater than 90 minutes, player must be ready to play in 90 minutes
Maximum matches per day singles per singles event: 3 matches per day
12 & under
Format: Two out of three sets, regular scoring
Rest period between matches:
Duration of match dependent.
If match is 60 minutes or less, player must be ready to play in one hour
If match is 61-120 minutes, player receives 90 minute break
If match is greater than 2 hours, player gets two hour break.
Maximum matches per day singles per singles event
Depends on results.
If player plays 5 sets or less in two matches, must be ready to play a 3rd match.
If player plays 6 sets in two matches, he may not play a third match.
14 & under
Format: Two out of three sets, regular scoring
Rest period between matches:
Duration of match dependent
If match is 90 minutes or less, must be ready to play in 1 hour
If match is over 90 minutes, player must be ready to play in 90 minutes
Maximum matches per day singles per singles event
Depends on results.
If player plays 5 sets or less in two matches, must be ready to play a 3rd match.
If player plays 6 sets in two matches, he may not play a third match
16 & under, 18 & under
Format: Two out of three sets, regular scoring.
Rest time between matches
Duration of match dependent
If match is two hours or less, must be ready to play in one hour
If greater than two hours, player must be ready to play in 90 minutes.
Maximum matches per day singles per singles event
Depends on results.
If player plays 5 sets or less in two matches, must be ready to play a 3rd match.
If player plays 6 sets in two matches, he may not play a third match
Other Necessary Changes
Allow players to play two singles events where applicable.
In Florida, this is ONLY allowed in locals in Region 1, and is banned for all other tournaments in the state. It should be noted it was banned to make tournament directors' lives easier. Get rid of the ban at ALL local and super series level tournaments in the state.. This encourages players to play more matches, challenge themselves at the higher level, while going for wins at their own level. It builds confidence and stamina. Players choosing to play two events, would only be given a max of 60 minutes between matches, regardless of outcome.
Eliminate the 12 hour rule for 12 and under and up.
The 12 hour rule mandates that a player must receive 12 hours of overnight rest between the time his match on day 1 ends, and his match on day 2 begins. This is another rule that should be match dependent. There is no reason a player needs 12 hours if their match was only an hour long. 10 hours is sufficient. If the match is between 1-2 ours, then an 11 hour break would suffice. If greater tan two hours, then and only then would the player get 12 hours.
Stop having doubles at tournaments, except as stand alone events.
This would allow the cumulative physical toll to lessen some, as players would not have to play extra matches on top of singles. In addition, eliminating doubles would allow time for players to play two events in singles. Plus, doubles is the first draw to get eliminated, and is always fraught with problems such as, pull-outs, walkovers, and directors constantly having to hold players over while they wait for people to finish, infuriating the players and their parents who get irritated when they don't know when they play next. At the Florida state closed doubles, these problems do not exist because everyone is there to play doubles. Simply schedule more doubles-only tournaments to promote doubles.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So there you have it. My "common sense" approach to Junior Tournament Tennis if I were ever elected King of USTA for the day.
Thursday, July 31, 2014
Wednesday, July 23, 2014
Should you stretch before, or after a match?
There is a common misconception regarding stretching and preparing yourself to play a match. The misconception is that static stretching is warming up, and a secondary misconception is that static stretching right before you go on court has any positive benefit to you whatsoever.
First lets discuss what static stretching actually does to your body when you engage in the activity. When you do static stretches, the effect on your ligaments, tendons, and muscles is much like what happens to a rubber band when you stretch them. Once the stretch is released, your muscles, ligaments, and tendons react exactly like the rubber band, by getting shorter, which is why immediately after static stretching you are LESS loose than you were prior to the stretch. Unlike a rubber band, your muscles, ligaments and tendons do not then instantly return to their original size.
So, if you static stretch right before a match, physiologically you are actually making yourself tighter. Certainly this is not what you want to achieve in order to get ready for your match.
Secondly, the activity of static stretching does not constitute a warm-up in any shape or form. A proper warm-up will not only get your heart rate up slowly to prepare you for the upcoming physical activity, it will also get your muscles, ligaments and tendons LOOSER for the identical goal.
The key to this type of warm-up is low impact activities like jogging, shuffling, and skipping. Also important in this process is dynamic stretching. Dynamic stretching consists of activities that engage your muscles ligaments and tendons constant movements. Check out he link below to see Novak Djokovic doing a dynamic stretching routine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VWtVQmJTXk
So dynamically stretch before your match in order to warm-up. Eliminate the static stretching before your matches. Save the static stretching for after your matches have ended. The benefits of static stretching are not immediate, but will show up over time, as you will become more flexible. Static stretching workouts both after matches and as a daily routine are the best way to prevent injuries in the long term.
First lets discuss what static stretching actually does to your body when you engage in the activity. When you do static stretches, the effect on your ligaments, tendons, and muscles is much like what happens to a rubber band when you stretch them. Once the stretch is released, your muscles, ligaments, and tendons react exactly like the rubber band, by getting shorter, which is why immediately after static stretching you are LESS loose than you were prior to the stretch. Unlike a rubber band, your muscles, ligaments and tendons do not then instantly return to their original size.
So, if you static stretch right before a match, physiologically you are actually making yourself tighter. Certainly this is not what you want to achieve in order to get ready for your match.
Secondly, the activity of static stretching does not constitute a warm-up in any shape or form. A proper warm-up will not only get your heart rate up slowly to prepare you for the upcoming physical activity, it will also get your muscles, ligaments and tendons LOOSER for the identical goal.
The key to this type of warm-up is low impact activities like jogging, shuffling, and skipping. Also important in this process is dynamic stretching. Dynamic stretching consists of activities that engage your muscles ligaments and tendons constant movements. Check out he link below to see Novak Djokovic doing a dynamic stretching routine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VWtVQmJTXk
So dynamically stretch before your match in order to warm-up. Eliminate the static stretching before your matches. Save the static stretching for after your matches have ended. The benefits of static stretching are not immediate, but will show up over time, as you will become more flexible. Static stretching workouts both after matches and as a daily routine are the best way to prevent injuries in the long term.
Sunday, July 13, 2014
Ten USTA League Changes I'd Like To See
USTA Leagues in all forms has long since obliterated Adult tournament tennis. There has been a steady decline in tournament play as the proliferation of league tennis has exploded to incorporate the entire calendar year.
However, the over-saturation of USTA league is not the only part of league tennis that, in my opinion, should be addressed at the national/state/local levels. Below are a list of ten changes I'd like to see in USTA League Tennis, to both improve the overall product, and compliment other parts of the game.
1) Eliminate the 40 & over Leagues
Your rating determines your playing ability. Age is but one minor factor in determining that level. By having yet another age denomination that counts towards your rating, NTRP ratings get more skewed than they already are with senior league matches counting. The whole point of the NTRP is that your age has zero effect on the result of the match. If you are 70 and cannot win at 3.5 adult league, then you are not a 3.5. You are likely a 3.0.
It is normal for a player's skill level to decline as they advance in age, because their athleticism wanes and the ability to move decreases. The age divisions eliminate this from being factored in to your ability level, thus skewing everyone's results. I understand someone's desire to keep their 3.5 rating well into their 50s and 60s. However, at some point we all must face the facts that we just aren't the same player we were in our 30s and 40s. We have to play a level or two down to remain competitive.
Another solution to the skewed ratings would be to not have the age division ratings count toward your rating at all, or have them ONLY count within your age division. If you played normal 18 and up Adult league, that would be the true standard of playing level, and if one played 18 and up AND the age division leagues, ONLY the 18 & up would count toward the rating.
2) Shorten the League Season(s)
Shorten the league seasons to September through November and March through May. Combine all the Adult/Age division Leagues in the spring, and have combo and mixed doubles in the fall. All sectional and national events must also be played within these windows. The remaining windows (December-February, and June-August) are used to promote TOURNAMENT USTA tennis, as well as encourage players to utilize those off segments for game improvement classes. I think players will get better more quickly, and tournaments can schedule events without fear of league conflicts.
3) Get rid of the "Mixed Only and Tournament Only" rating
Why give someone a computer generated rating that doesn't count when they play adult league? If you are adamant that mixed doubles should have zero effect on one's rating, then simply don't count them, and leave self-rated individuals as self-rated. Too many times players receive a mixed only or tournament only rating, only to play USTA adult league, and get disqualified, which screws everyone up. Either mixed doubles and tournaments count, or they don't, no gray areas necessary.
4) Make National and Sectional League Events FREE to every competitor.
Frankly, since you pay your CEO $9 million a year, it is clear your non-profit is rolling in the dough. Help the people that help you make enormous sums of money, by making the sectional and national events FREE. Participants already have to pay for hotel and food and travel, at least make the events no charge.
5) Every State should have the identical rules for Combo
Some states allow a 1.5 level difference while others require a .5 difference. I believe the structure should be a 1.5 level difference in Florida. Southern section uses this format.
What this would mean is that for a hypothetical 7.5 combo team, you could have a 4.5 and a 3.0 play together. While some may scoff at that, I will submit that our current format allows a 3.0 to play with a 3.5 in 7.5 combo despite their combined rating being an entire level below.
If the goal is competitive matches, then we must either allow the 1.5 level differential or restrict registration to combo leagues to specific levels - ie 3.0 and 3.5 ONLY for 6.5, 3.5 and 4.0 ONLY for 7.5 etc.
6) Mandate that local leagues must be played on the same surface as the sectional and National events
Surface consistency would be a great thing. It is silly to have a local league that is played on clay, when the sectionals are played on hard. Simply alternate each year between men and women with the surface. So if, for example, in 2014 women's' 3.0 is on hard for all league competition, and men's 3.0 is on clay for all league competition, then in 2015 the women get clay and the men get hard. I understand that in some locales clay is not an option, but in places like Tallahassee where you have options, keeping things consistent would benefit our winners when they go to the next level. There is a reason each major at the pro level has a warm up series of events on the SAME surface. USTA leagues, were possible, should follow that example.
The sectional level events should be identical to the National level events as far as surface as well.
7) Reduce warm-up time to 5 minutes in local leagues.
I played in the District tournament for 4.5 four years ago. The officials give you 5 minutes. Here at the local level your "time" that is allotted for your match is essentially 1.5 hours. If you warm-up, as some do, for 15-20 minutes, there is no way on God's green earth you will finish in 1.5 hours from the time you walk on court. It just isn't mathematically possible. The 5 min warm-up should be strictly enforced by simply have someone from each time starting a timer on each court when you hit the first ball. When the alarm goes off you must begin play.
Another solution to this problem, which invariably pushes the matches of the second league group coming to the facility, is to ask for 2 hr blocks of time, which would allow the league coordinator to actually schedule the matches in a more time efficient manner, where fewer people would have to wait 30 minutes to an hour for their court to open up. Of course this would increase your league fees by 33%. Right now, everyone is paying for 1.5 hours despite playing much much longer than that.
8) Use Tom Brown Park and Winthrop Court more for non-senior (18 and up, 40 and up) leagues
Most people, I believe, are extremely neurotic when it comes to planning and knowing what time to set aside each week for their tennis. Having worked at the front desks at Forestmeadows as well as in my time at William & Mary, I can tell you that people HATE when they can't get a court at the time they normally play. It's like someone shot their dog, or perhaps it more closely resembles how one might react to an imminent apocalypse.
My point is people like to know that their league is a 6. Not 6 one week, 730 the next, etc. Mixed doubles in the past has had matches at either 5:30, 6, 7:00, 7:30,or 8:30. And you could be playing at all of those times during the course of the league. Hard to have a life that way.
The issue in the past has been not using the hard courts that the city has around town to offer. Sure, most people want clay courts, but people also like consistency in scheduling times. You love it for personal reservations, why wouldn't you love it for your once or twice a week league play? Of course you would. Easier to get a babysitter every Tuesday at 7, or every Friday at 6, rather than trying to lineup babysitters for a different time every Friday night. I don't even have kids, and that sounds exhausting.
In order to make the usage of clay courts fair, simply rotate teams around so every team (to the best of the coordinator's ability) plays on clay the same number of times, while playing on hard courts at Tom Brown or Winthrop for the other matches. Understandably, this may not be logistically possible for adult league, but it is feasible for mixed doubles on Friday nights. After all, with only 3 courts needed per match, you have 12 at Tom Brown and 6 at Winthrop which gives you 6 mixed matches at every time slot in addition to the 12 clay courts you currently use at Forestmeadows. That means at any time slot, you can schedule 10 mixed matches. Just food for thought.
9) USTA National should have an online match lineup app that takes the player inputs from the captains, and then spits out the line-ups based on STRENGTH.
This would be very easy for USTA to come up with, they already have everyone's dynamic NTRP ratings in their computer database (which you are not allowed to see). A captain would input their lineup, designating who is playing singles, and who are doubles partners. The program could then do an instant comparison and list who your #1, and #2 singles players are for the match based on strength, as well as compare all 3 doubles teams and rank them 1,2,3 based on strength. This would have three effects.
First, every team match would be strength vs strength, the same way a college match is strength vs strength. Second, the practice of "sacrificing" would be eliminated. Third, you would always have the most competitively possible matches based on players' actual dynamic ratings. No more gamesmanship lineup garbage? I think that's a big plus.
10) Eliminate a player's ability to appeal their computer generated rating
There are two reasons this should be done away with. One, either you believe in your system or you don't. Two, when you grant an appeal to play down a level, their rating is NOT a computer rating, and the person is subject to the three strikes and you're out policy. This by its very nature is unfair both to the player, their team, and the teams that play them.
Essentially, even if a player is injured, they have the choice to play at their computer generated level, sit out a season to heal if necessary, and let the system adjust their rating based on results. Anytime you are adjusting ratings based on emotion, you are looking for trouble.
However, the over-saturation of USTA league is not the only part of league tennis that, in my opinion, should be addressed at the national/state/local levels. Below are a list of ten changes I'd like to see in USTA League Tennis, to both improve the overall product, and compliment other parts of the game.
1) Eliminate the 40 & over Leagues
Your rating determines your playing ability. Age is but one minor factor in determining that level. By having yet another age denomination that counts towards your rating, NTRP ratings get more skewed than they already are with senior league matches counting. The whole point of the NTRP is that your age has zero effect on the result of the match. If you are 70 and cannot win at 3.5 adult league, then you are not a 3.5. You are likely a 3.0.
It is normal for a player's skill level to decline as they advance in age, because their athleticism wanes and the ability to move decreases. The age divisions eliminate this from being factored in to your ability level, thus skewing everyone's results. I understand someone's desire to keep their 3.5 rating well into their 50s and 60s. However, at some point we all must face the facts that we just aren't the same player we were in our 30s and 40s. We have to play a level or two down to remain competitive.
Another solution to the skewed ratings would be to not have the age division ratings count toward your rating at all, or have them ONLY count within your age division. If you played normal 18 and up Adult league, that would be the true standard of playing level, and if one played 18 and up AND the age division leagues, ONLY the 18 & up would count toward the rating.
2) Shorten the League Season(s)
Shorten the league seasons to September through November and March through May. Combine all the Adult/Age division Leagues in the spring, and have combo and mixed doubles in the fall. All sectional and national events must also be played within these windows. The remaining windows (December-February, and June-August) are used to promote TOURNAMENT USTA tennis, as well as encourage players to utilize those off segments for game improvement classes. I think players will get better more quickly, and tournaments can schedule events without fear of league conflicts.
3) Get rid of the "Mixed Only and Tournament Only" rating
Why give someone a computer generated rating that doesn't count when they play adult league? If you are adamant that mixed doubles should have zero effect on one's rating, then simply don't count them, and leave self-rated individuals as self-rated. Too many times players receive a mixed only or tournament only rating, only to play USTA adult league, and get disqualified, which screws everyone up. Either mixed doubles and tournaments count, or they don't, no gray areas necessary.
4) Make National and Sectional League Events FREE to every competitor.
Frankly, since you pay your CEO $9 million a year, it is clear your non-profit is rolling in the dough. Help the people that help you make enormous sums of money, by making the sectional and national events FREE. Participants already have to pay for hotel and food and travel, at least make the events no charge.
5) Every State should have the identical rules for Combo
Some states allow a 1.5 level difference while others require a .5 difference. I believe the structure should be a 1.5 level difference in Florida. Southern section uses this format.
What this would mean is that for a hypothetical 7.5 combo team, you could have a 4.5 and a 3.0 play together. While some may scoff at that, I will submit that our current format allows a 3.0 to play with a 3.5 in 7.5 combo despite their combined rating being an entire level below.
If the goal is competitive matches, then we must either allow the 1.5 level differential or restrict registration to combo leagues to specific levels - ie 3.0 and 3.5 ONLY for 6.5, 3.5 and 4.0 ONLY for 7.5 etc.
6) Mandate that local leagues must be played on the same surface as the sectional and National events
Surface consistency would be a great thing. It is silly to have a local league that is played on clay, when the sectionals are played on hard. Simply alternate each year between men and women with the surface. So if, for example, in 2014 women's' 3.0 is on hard for all league competition, and men's 3.0 is on clay for all league competition, then in 2015 the women get clay and the men get hard. I understand that in some locales clay is not an option, but in places like Tallahassee where you have options, keeping things consistent would benefit our winners when they go to the next level. There is a reason each major at the pro level has a warm up series of events on the SAME surface. USTA leagues, were possible, should follow that example.
The sectional level events should be identical to the National level events as far as surface as well.
7) Reduce warm-up time to 5 minutes in local leagues.
I played in the District tournament for 4.5 four years ago. The officials give you 5 minutes. Here at the local level your "time" that is allotted for your match is essentially 1.5 hours. If you warm-up, as some do, for 15-20 minutes, there is no way on God's green earth you will finish in 1.5 hours from the time you walk on court. It just isn't mathematically possible. The 5 min warm-up should be strictly enforced by simply have someone from each time starting a timer on each court when you hit the first ball. When the alarm goes off you must begin play.
Another solution to this problem, which invariably pushes the matches of the second league group coming to the facility, is to ask for 2 hr blocks of time, which would allow the league coordinator to actually schedule the matches in a more time efficient manner, where fewer people would have to wait 30 minutes to an hour for their court to open up. Of course this would increase your league fees by 33%. Right now, everyone is paying for 1.5 hours despite playing much much longer than that.
8) Use Tom Brown Park and Winthrop Court more for non-senior (18 and up, 40 and up) leagues
Most people, I believe, are extremely neurotic when it comes to planning and knowing what time to set aside each week for their tennis. Having worked at the front desks at Forestmeadows as well as in my time at William & Mary, I can tell you that people HATE when they can't get a court at the time they normally play. It's like someone shot their dog, or perhaps it more closely resembles how one might react to an imminent apocalypse.
My point is people like to know that their league is a 6. Not 6 one week, 730 the next, etc. Mixed doubles in the past has had matches at either 5:30, 6, 7:00, 7:30,or 8:30. And you could be playing at all of those times during the course of the league. Hard to have a life that way.
The issue in the past has been not using the hard courts that the city has around town to offer. Sure, most people want clay courts, but people also like consistency in scheduling times. You love it for personal reservations, why wouldn't you love it for your once or twice a week league play? Of course you would. Easier to get a babysitter every Tuesday at 7, or every Friday at 6, rather than trying to lineup babysitters for a different time every Friday night. I don't even have kids, and that sounds exhausting.
In order to make the usage of clay courts fair, simply rotate teams around so every team (to the best of the coordinator's ability) plays on clay the same number of times, while playing on hard courts at Tom Brown or Winthrop for the other matches. Understandably, this may not be logistically possible for adult league, but it is feasible for mixed doubles on Friday nights. After all, with only 3 courts needed per match, you have 12 at Tom Brown and 6 at Winthrop which gives you 6 mixed matches at every time slot in addition to the 12 clay courts you currently use at Forestmeadows. That means at any time slot, you can schedule 10 mixed matches. Just food for thought.
9) USTA National should have an online match lineup app that takes the player inputs from the captains, and then spits out the line-ups based on STRENGTH.
This would be very easy for USTA to come up with, they already have everyone's dynamic NTRP ratings in their computer database (which you are not allowed to see). A captain would input their lineup, designating who is playing singles, and who are doubles partners. The program could then do an instant comparison and list who your #1, and #2 singles players are for the match based on strength, as well as compare all 3 doubles teams and rank them 1,2,3 based on strength. This would have three effects.
First, every team match would be strength vs strength, the same way a college match is strength vs strength. Second, the practice of "sacrificing" would be eliminated. Third, you would always have the most competitively possible matches based on players' actual dynamic ratings. No more gamesmanship lineup garbage? I think that's a big plus.
10) Eliminate a player's ability to appeal their computer generated rating
There are two reasons this should be done away with. One, either you believe in your system or you don't. Two, when you grant an appeal to play down a level, their rating is NOT a computer rating, and the person is subject to the three strikes and you're out policy. This by its very nature is unfair both to the player, their team, and the teams that play them.
Essentially, even if a player is injured, they have the choice to play at their computer generated level, sit out a season to heal if necessary, and let the system adjust their rating based on results. Anytime you are adjusting ratings based on emotion, you are looking for trouble.
Sunday, July 6, 2014
Reader Suggested Topic - Why Are No US Men or Women competing for Slam Titles?
The last American man to win a Grand Slam singles title was Andy Roddick in 2003 at the US Open. Mind you he was greatly assisted in winning that title by the weather delays that year, which caused numerous players, including his finals opponent Juan Carlos Ferrero, to play 3 best 3 of 5 matches back-to-back-to back. Meanwhile, the USTA ensured Roddick got his days off, and played every one of is matches at night. Be that as it may, after this generation of tennis fans passes away, no one will remember anything other than Andy Roddick was the 2003 US Open Men's Singles Champion.
The last American female NOT named Venus or Serena to win a major was Jennifer Capriati at the 2002 Australian Open. Venus is done as far as winning majors, and once Serena hangs up her racquet, tennis will be dominated by foreign players like the men's side. There are no upcoming American players ready or able to take the leap to the next step.
Why? Why can't a country of 350 million people produce any top contenders in the men's or women's games? Numerically speaking, we should have far more players than Spain, France, and the like.
The common issues reported by the media as to why are as follows:
1) Our best athletes don't play tennis - instead they are playing football, basketball, and baseball.
This has always been the case. Even when American tennis dominated the game from the 30's through the mid 80s and again with Sampras and Agassi in the 90s, the United States' best athletes were always playing football, baseball and basketball. However, the game was not as phtsically demanding as it has become, and with modern technique and the power of the game, better athletes will be better at tennis. To counter that argument, I submit athleticism evolves with the game, and better athletes are being developed as we speak. The US athletes playing tennis today are far superior to the athletes of yesteryear (save Isner).
2) It is too expensive to play tennis, thus minorities don't have the same opportunity to play.
This has also always been the case, even when we were a dominant country. The only remedy to this "problem" is to offer free tennis training, and pay the coaches who give it salaries, which goes against every capitalistic bone in our collective bodies. However, this will also not solve the problem, because it isn't the core issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to understand what has transpired, you must first examine the changes the professional game undertaken over the past 20 years. First, the court surfaces have gotten slower, with more clay court events, slower, higher bouncing hard courts, and slower higher bounce grass courts. In previous iterations of American tennis, it was a style of quick points, big serves, serve and volley, and hit the forehand big. That won our players lots of majors over time, because those styles of play suit lower bouncing, faster courts. Those styles do not work on slower, higher bouncing courts, where your footwork, movement and fitness now play a major role in you're ability to win and lose. We must change how we teach the game to our kids, because the game itself has changed.
Second, the world caught up to us, and surpassed us as far as developmental coaching. In almost all other countries the government funds/supports developmental programs for tennis. They pay coaches salaries, and those coaches follow that country's system of instruction. The fact that their coaches aren't trying to make tons of money, means they devote their time to actually teaching the kids "correctly" within the framework of that country's system. It also frees them to focus on one child that is a star, without fear they won't make any money. This also eliminates the family's need to pay the coach for their time, because it is free.
Other countries have a system of development, not a loosely defined pathway like the USTA. They have actual systems for what to teach, when to teach it, for how long, and in proper progressions. America does not have such a system. One coach may have one, but go online and try to find a system of teaching the game. You won't find one. In France and Spain, as an example, no matter what tennis club a child goes to, they WILL be taught from the same exact system. Pro selection comes down merely to personality match. In the US, there is no universal system, either by consensus or by force of government. One might argue capitalism should promote the creation of such a system, and even a better one than these other countries have. In theory this may be true, but what is also true, is that in a capitalistic society, it's every man for himself, and sharing such information is bad for business. If I came up with the best system in the world, why would I share it and help you compete against me?
The USTA is also part of the problem. On their website they strongly discourage the goal of playing professional tennis. In fact they promote college tennis as the proper pathway for American kids. This is also backwards from how the rest of the world views competitive player development. You may have seen US National Soccer Team Coach Jurgen Klinsmann make this exact argument as to why US soccer is behind the rest of the world. He said, and I'm paraphrasing, that the US sets high school and college scholarships as the developmental goals for the kids, rather than professional soccer. This attitude in soccer, and unfortunately, tennis, is partially to blame for a lack of top professional players. You are always limited by the goals you set for yourself. In other countries, the goals are to produce professional players, and those who don't cut it, get college scholarships. It is a mindset, and this country does not have it.
We must change our attitudes collectively if we want to be a nation that dominates tennis again. We seem to take our greatness as a nation for granted, and then get surprised when things aren't working out they way we would hope. To win at the highest levels, you must have a commitment to be the best above all other things. The countries that dominate now have set their goals, and their developmental pathway and teaching systems flow logically from the stated goal to put out the best players in the world. We would be smart to follow their lead, although the likelihood of a government funded elite tennis program that would be free to the participants is highly doubtful. Save for that, everything else the rest of the world is doing, can easily be transferred and incorporated here.
The last American female NOT named Venus or Serena to win a major was Jennifer Capriati at the 2002 Australian Open. Venus is done as far as winning majors, and once Serena hangs up her racquet, tennis will be dominated by foreign players like the men's side. There are no upcoming American players ready or able to take the leap to the next step.
Why? Why can't a country of 350 million people produce any top contenders in the men's or women's games? Numerically speaking, we should have far more players than Spain, France, and the like.
The common issues reported by the media as to why are as follows:
1) Our best athletes don't play tennis - instead they are playing football, basketball, and baseball.
This has always been the case. Even when American tennis dominated the game from the 30's through the mid 80s and again with Sampras and Agassi in the 90s, the United States' best athletes were always playing football, baseball and basketball. However, the game was not as phtsically demanding as it has become, and with modern technique and the power of the game, better athletes will be better at tennis. To counter that argument, I submit athleticism evolves with the game, and better athletes are being developed as we speak. The US athletes playing tennis today are far superior to the athletes of yesteryear (save Isner).
2) It is too expensive to play tennis, thus minorities don't have the same opportunity to play.
This has also always been the case, even when we were a dominant country. The only remedy to this "problem" is to offer free tennis training, and pay the coaches who give it salaries, which goes against every capitalistic bone in our collective bodies. However, this will also not solve the problem, because it isn't the core issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to understand what has transpired, you must first examine the changes the professional game undertaken over the past 20 years. First, the court surfaces have gotten slower, with more clay court events, slower, higher bouncing hard courts, and slower higher bounce grass courts. In previous iterations of American tennis, it was a style of quick points, big serves, serve and volley, and hit the forehand big. That won our players lots of majors over time, because those styles of play suit lower bouncing, faster courts. Those styles do not work on slower, higher bouncing courts, where your footwork, movement and fitness now play a major role in you're ability to win and lose. We must change how we teach the game to our kids, because the game itself has changed.
Second, the world caught up to us, and surpassed us as far as developmental coaching. In almost all other countries the government funds/supports developmental programs for tennis. They pay coaches salaries, and those coaches follow that country's system of instruction. The fact that their coaches aren't trying to make tons of money, means they devote their time to actually teaching the kids "correctly" within the framework of that country's system. It also frees them to focus on one child that is a star, without fear they won't make any money. This also eliminates the family's need to pay the coach for their time, because it is free.
Other countries have a system of development, not a loosely defined pathway like the USTA. They have actual systems for what to teach, when to teach it, for how long, and in proper progressions. America does not have such a system. One coach may have one, but go online and try to find a system of teaching the game. You won't find one. In France and Spain, as an example, no matter what tennis club a child goes to, they WILL be taught from the same exact system. Pro selection comes down merely to personality match. In the US, there is no universal system, either by consensus or by force of government. One might argue capitalism should promote the creation of such a system, and even a better one than these other countries have. In theory this may be true, but what is also true, is that in a capitalistic society, it's every man for himself, and sharing such information is bad for business. If I came up with the best system in the world, why would I share it and help you compete against me?
The USTA is also part of the problem. On their website they strongly discourage the goal of playing professional tennis. In fact they promote college tennis as the proper pathway for American kids. This is also backwards from how the rest of the world views competitive player development. You may have seen US National Soccer Team Coach Jurgen Klinsmann make this exact argument as to why US soccer is behind the rest of the world. He said, and I'm paraphrasing, that the US sets high school and college scholarships as the developmental goals for the kids, rather than professional soccer. This attitude in soccer, and unfortunately, tennis, is partially to blame for a lack of top professional players. You are always limited by the goals you set for yourself. In other countries, the goals are to produce professional players, and those who don't cut it, get college scholarships. It is a mindset, and this country does not have it.
We must change our attitudes collectively if we want to be a nation that dominates tennis again. We seem to take our greatness as a nation for granted, and then get surprised when things aren't working out they way we would hope. To win at the highest levels, you must have a commitment to be the best above all other things. The countries that dominate now have set their goals, and their developmental pathway and teaching systems flow logically from the stated goal to put out the best players in the world. We would be smart to follow their lead, although the likelihood of a government funded elite tennis program that would be free to the participants is highly doubtful. Save for that, everything else the rest of the world is doing, can easily be transferred and incorporated here.
Tuesday, July 1, 2014
Better Shape = Better Tennis
In an ideal world, every player would focus on their body's fitness first, especially if they're going to be playing singles frequently.
First there is your aerobic fitness. Your body needs to be able to last for 2-3 hours if you're an adult. If you are a junior player, your body needs to be able to last 2-3 hours, fully recover within 1.5-2 hours and be able to again last 2-3 hours for a second match. Consult a physical trainer regarding what specifically you would need to do to achieve the physical requirements from a cardio perspective. It will likely entail running, an elliptical machine, and/or biking. How often and for what duration will depend on your baseline physical condition.
Second is your anaerobic fitness. Your body must be able to recover from point to point without being exhausted. Tennis is a series of short bursts. You must be able to fully recover within 25 seconds point to point. Much of the work necessary to improve your anaerobic fitness can be done on court with your tennis professional. By increasing over time the number balls you hit before a break, limiting that break to 25 seconds, and taking 90 second breaks after every segment, you will see your ability to recover point to point improve, even when points become very physical. Anaerobic fitness can be measured - the measurement is called VO2 max.
Coinciding with your work on your aerobic and anaerobic fitness should be some sort of strength training. The frequency, duration, and intensity will depend on your baseline physical fitness, your age, and your goals. A good generic plan is to first train your muscles for endurance/power by doing low weights (60% of your max strength) and high reps (20) for a set period of time. Follow that by training your strength for a few weeks with reduced reps (8-12) at higher weights (80% of max). The strength training will help your muscles withstand the physical punishment of a tennis match, by maintaining their strength throughout the match. It is comforting to know your hard work will allow your serve to keep the necessary MPHs for domination. Consult a physical trainer to set up an individualized program suitable for your needs and goals.
Your physical fitness directly impacts the quality of your movement, which directly impacts your ability to execute shots over the course of a match. The less fit you are, the earlier your game will deteriorate during the course of a match. Don't get trapped into thinking better technique will improve your game if you're getting tired after set one. If your opponents can outlast you, they just need to survive long enough for your body to break down. Reverse your thinking. First work on your physical fitness, then work on the technique and/or tactics.
Once you tackle your physical fitness, you can begin to tackle problems in the rest of your game.
First there is your aerobic fitness. Your body needs to be able to last for 2-3 hours if you're an adult. If you are a junior player, your body needs to be able to last 2-3 hours, fully recover within 1.5-2 hours and be able to again last 2-3 hours for a second match. Consult a physical trainer regarding what specifically you would need to do to achieve the physical requirements from a cardio perspective. It will likely entail running, an elliptical machine, and/or biking. How often and for what duration will depend on your baseline physical condition.
Second is your anaerobic fitness. Your body must be able to recover from point to point without being exhausted. Tennis is a series of short bursts. You must be able to fully recover within 25 seconds point to point. Much of the work necessary to improve your anaerobic fitness can be done on court with your tennis professional. By increasing over time the number balls you hit before a break, limiting that break to 25 seconds, and taking 90 second breaks after every segment, you will see your ability to recover point to point improve, even when points become very physical. Anaerobic fitness can be measured - the measurement is called VO2 max.
Coinciding with your work on your aerobic and anaerobic fitness should be some sort of strength training. The frequency, duration, and intensity will depend on your baseline physical fitness, your age, and your goals. A good generic plan is to first train your muscles for endurance/power by doing low weights (60% of your max strength) and high reps (20) for a set period of time. Follow that by training your strength for a few weeks with reduced reps (8-12) at higher weights (80% of max). The strength training will help your muscles withstand the physical punishment of a tennis match, by maintaining their strength throughout the match. It is comforting to know your hard work will allow your serve to keep the necessary MPHs for domination. Consult a physical trainer to set up an individualized program suitable for your needs and goals.
Your physical fitness directly impacts the quality of your movement, which directly impacts your ability to execute shots over the course of a match. The less fit you are, the earlier your game will deteriorate during the course of a match. Don't get trapped into thinking better technique will improve your game if you're getting tired after set one. If your opponents can outlast you, they just need to survive long enough for your body to break down. Reverse your thinking. First work on your physical fitness, then work on the technique and/or tactics.
Once you tackle your physical fitness, you can begin to tackle problems in the rest of your game.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
