Zootennis


Schedule a training visit to the prestigious Junior Tennis Champions Center in College Park, MD by clicking on the banner above

Wednesday, August 22, 2007

US Open Junior Wild Cards Announced

Thanks to David for letting me know that the wild cards have been posted at usta.com.

Boys Main Draw:
Dadamo Jeff
Domijan Alex
Formentera Lawrence
Harrison Ryan
Sandgren Tennys
Seal James "Bo"
Thacher Ryan
Trombetta Ty

Boys Qualifying:
Carleton Frank
Egger Emmett
King Evan
Kudla Denis
Katayama Sho
WC RESERVED

Girls Main Draw:
Glatch Alexa USA
Kimbell Lilly USA
McHale Christina USA
Muhammad Asia USA
Riske Alison USA
Vandeweghe Coco USA
Weinhold Ashley USA
WC RESERVED

Girls Qualifying:
Embree Lauren
Gibbs Nicole
Stephens Sloane
Ogi Chinami
WC RESERVED
WC RESERVED


90 comments:

Anonymous said...

This is shocking egger got a wc also denis kudla? So do sundling and ngyuen just go for doubs main draw since they get a doubs wc automatically for winning the zoo. IS thacher gonna be back for juniors. Is mcclune to cocky to play juniors?

Anonymous said...

colette, what about melanie oudin? I know she has a qualifying wc for the main draw, but what about juniors?

Colette Lewis said...

I would expect that they are saving that last main draw for her if she doesn't get in (she's four spots out right now).

Anonymous said...

It would be unfair to everyone else if Donald Young played US Open Juniors. He would annihilate all of them.

Anonymous said...

so lipman and britton didnt make it? dont get it

Anonymous said...

donald just went 75 in the 3rd with davydenko i think youre right

Anonymous said...

The players (most of them) that played the world junior tennis competition, and thus did not play the national hardcourts are IMO promised a wild card for the junior qualies. If not promised, then strongly considered. Egger on the boys side, and Gibbs and Stephens on the girls side are examples of this.

Anonymous said...

Lipman and Britton will get in from where they are on the alternate list which is why they didn't waste a wild card on them. the only real surprise to me is that Wil Spencer has not gotten a wildcard.

Anonymous said...

the usta is not giving kzoo 16s doubles champions any kind of a wc. said they never give one for 16s and don't know why everyone at kzoo thought they did. curious though that many tournament officials as well as one of the usta coaches wished the guys good luck in NY. maybe that's why. probably would have been different if one of the higher seeded teams had actually won.

Anonymous said...

I do not understand the girls wildcards for qualifying. To give it to Sloane Stephens and nicole gibbs is an absolute joke. There are other girls in the alternate list, who have earned the their rankings and experienced playing ability.

Anonymous said...

The issue is really, Why aren't there more US players that earned a spot in either qualifying or main on their own. Out of the 72 (excluding wildcards) there were only 8 Americans that qualified on their own... by actually winning matches at the level they needed to win to get in the tournament. That's sad! With that in mind... Devin, Jarmere and Bradley should have gotten a main draw wildcard as a reward and because they actually have a chance of winning matches (as per their record) They should actually be proud of themselves not disappointed, as I am sure they are!

Anonymous said...

Wild cards should be reserved for those who really deserve it. Or I should probably say have worked for it. Giving kids wild cards just because they are on some kind of list in the long run is a big mistake. Success is really about hard work and not about giving you things on a platter. I'm not saying that you have to have perfect results or you can't have a bad day on the court. This includes actually being allowed to have a match where you tank. Having to play matches to get into the qualifier or into a main draw is a good thing. It's like having to work really hard in school and then being successful. Those of you who aren't handed a wild card should not be discouraged. Forget about the wild cards and just earn your spot the hard way.

Anonymous said...

I guess one question is whether wild cards should go to who has the best chance to win right now or who has the best chance to develop long term. For example, I think Egger would get killed by Wil Spencer but people may view Egger as having more upside, given his age, than Spencer, so let's give Egger the development opportunity. I would be more of a fan of an egalitarian / who deserves it right now approach, I think, but I can certainly see both sides.

Anonymous said...

To the two posts above:

1) Kellen Damico would have been a direct entrant, but he withdrew. Also, Ryan Lipman is the first alternate, so he may be a 9th.

2) Guys like Michael McClune and Ryan Thacher would easily qualify if they played ITFs. I suspect that some of the other '89s like Jung, Dadamo, and Spencer would qualify as well if they payed more ITFs.

3) It's very debatable as to whether Britton, Klahn, and Jenkins would have a better chance of winning matches than most of the wild card recipients.

4) Not having a good ITF ranking doesn't mean you don't deserve a wild card in my view. Some of our best players don't play many (if any) ITFs. Would you suggest excluding these players from consideration?

5) Having a low ITF ranking also doesn't mean that you don't work hard. As I said, many don't play ITFs, and others are still very young.

6) To the last person, it almost sounds like you're opposed to wild cards altogether. After all, any time a player receives a wild card, he's being handed something that, in a way, he didn't earn. Should these tournaments do away with wild cards in your view?

Anonymous said...

The last comment about earning your spot is so true. In my opinion there shouldn't be such a thing as wildcards. You either obtain the ranking to get in the tournament or you don't. It's very frustrating when you are spending the time and a fortune to send your kid to tournaments all over the world and they are doing well and barely miss the cutoff and then some kid that isnt even close gets a wild card. The USTA gets more political as the years go by. They are not doing the kids any good. Make kids earn their spot in the big tournaments. In the long run they will be the better player.

Anonymous said...

I think there is to much politics in giving the wild cards. The girls wildcards are a joke. Sloane stephens and Nicole gibbs deserve the wild cards? What about Allie Will and Chelsey Gullickson. Gullickson and Will are worlds above. Explain that

Anonymous said...

David, in response to your question, I am not opposed to wild cards in general. I see a difference between awarding a wild card to a player who would have earned enough ITF points had they played enough events (i.e. Thacher, Klahn), and a younger player who likely wouldn't have been able to earn enough ITF points on their own but has a great potential for the future (i.e. Egger). I can definitely see the rationale to the first and potentially to the second argument, but I'm not sure the matter of fairness is as relevant to the second point.

To the second to the last 'Anonymous' poster, if a parent is chasing their child around the world to ITF events with the sole hope of getting into Junior Grand Slams, I'm not sure that makes a lot of sense. If there is a documented record of an ITF-light player being better than a ITF-heavy player within a USTA context (head to head vs. other top players), the ITF-light player should get the nod.

Anonymous said...

I'm not sure how issuing wild cards to ITF events( 18 and under) for 13 and 14 year olds encourages player development. It really makes no sense. If you look at the ITF rankings, there are lots of kids who have decent rankings because the USTA has given these kids wild cards into minor ITF events. They all get wild cards inorder to start the ranking process. Other kids need to play 3 or more matches inorder to get into the main draw. Everyone needs to start from the bottom and work their way up. What's wrong with that? Sometimes getting through the qualifier is tougher than the first matches of a main draw. The view really needs to be that playing the qualifier is good for your gain as opposed to viewing it as a detriment.

Anonymous said...

David and Brent,

I have enjoyed both of your e-mails.

I am in favor of wild cards -that's the easy part - the awarding part is a little tricky and it depends on who you are, if you think the system is fair or not.

It is not like the NFL, MLB, NBA where there is a specific mathamatical formula determining the Wild Cards for the playoffs.

It is more like the NCAA's where there is ALWAYS DISAGREEMENT on MARCH MADNESS- (do you take the 6th or 7th team from a POWER leauge (ACC,BIG EAST, BIG 10) or the number 2 or 3 school from a smaller conference. BTW -there will always, forever be disagreements on the picks for the NCAA'S, as long as they use the same system.

I can see why tournament directors (in the pros) give wild cards to up and comers (ie. Isner) and why the USTA or Tennis Austrailia give WC's either to established juniors or up and coming juniors.

This debate can go on forever, depending where the player is ranked that year, who your kid is, or who you coach -- and can change from year to year depending on your point of view!!

Anonymous said...

the girls wild cards are a joke. its that simple

Anonymous said...

Look people, this is the USTA's doctrine, and it will remain to be so: The younger you are, the more attention you will get. And for these players with the "attention", the pressure is on, to keep getting the results, although it would be extremely difficult not to, given the training oppurtunities, the international competition, and subsequent confidence that goes along with this. These younger players are kept on this "train" by the USTA in hopes of hitting a jackpot with an Agassi/Sampras, or Davenport. And next year, it will be the same. If Egger and friends should falter, then the next crop of younger players will be favored, even though Egger and friends could all become great players with a rotten year. THIS, the USTA does not believe. Every single kid who is in their younger High performance camps is right on the list to be given every chance at good competition, and they will be chosen over most kids older with better results. They may even replace the current crop! Its the USTA's version of "Vegas"..lets roll the dice, and perhaps come up with a winner...a "lottery ticket" with all the numbers correct! Many could argue the virtues of their thinking, but I feel it does not reward good ol fashion hard work, it does nothing to instill confidence in a kid who may develop later, and for the kids on this "train"..whether the parents or kids will admit this or not, it gives them a false sense of already "making it", and a elitist attitude that most every one of you readers have seen from them. (Although Egger is a really nice kid) Maybe this will help them win USTA Gold Balls, and yes, even a PRO career, but top 50 or better? "If" the USTA really wants to gamble, then why not expose more players to the high level training and competition? Lack of money? I dont think so. Narrow-minded thinking? Perhaps. And the unbreakable etched in stone thinking that 13-14 for girls, and 16-17 for boys HAS to be the time when they make their "moves" in the USTA's eyes..this is crazy. If a kid loves tennis, and wants/continues to improve, this is NOT what the USTA, or anybody else for that matter needs to be encouraging. And anybody who would argue this would be the parents of the kids on this USTA "train". Just hope that your child stays on!

Anonymous said...

I agree that Egger getting a w/c is unbelievable. I don't care about any promises made by the USTA...but what are the parents thinking??? If this 14 yr old kid gets an opponent like Arsenov,Roy, Pospisil, Jenkins, Devin or Tomic, it is an absolute embarassment. These guys are serving HUGE and Egger will be obliterated. A wonderful US Open experience, huh. Not to mention an easy $5000 trip.

The politics need to be put aside and the USTA needs to give w/c's to kids that can win a match. Its so simple.

Anonymous said...

what happened to lauren herring? didnt she get second at the hardcourts and doesnt that qualify you for a quali wc?

Anonymous said...

I happen to agree with anon.

The players who can WIN NOW should be given the
WC's and if the up & coming player is that good at 14, he will even be better at 15, 16, 17.

Let the best players play, NOW!!!

Anonymous said...

I have read all of the comments made. It seems everyone does favor working hard and earning the wild card. The usta is extremely desperate, they lost site of looking for talent. It is not about the youngest. It is about having it all (bigger,faster and stronger physically and mentally).Yes, some kids mature quicker than other and by 16 have peeked and are going down. They need to have patience and good coaching. You need to look at the player and the family. Is the mom and dad short and fat are they a liability od assest? To do all that and nurture a champion is time an patience not pullin the triger to soon. I am just glad that no of them are my children, because as parent you do what is in the best interest of the child. The parnts should step in and say this may give my child false hopes

Anonymous said...

honestly all of you guys are spending way too much time worrying about this stuff...get a life

Anonymous said...

"get a life" How bout yourself? What are messages boards for? To forever spread goodwill and happiness, or to perhaps express ideas and opinions?...(that perhaps annoy you?)

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous said...
honestly all of you guys are spending way too much time worrying about this stuff...get a life"

Thank you for that very insightful comment. Why don't you just stop reading the comments and mind your own business.

Anonymous said...

why don't you just worry about yourself and stop passing judgement on others.

Anonymous said...

to "get a life" -mind your own business.

Anonymous said...

"honestly all of you guys are spending way too much time worrying about this stuff...get a life"

WHO DIED AND MADE YOU KING?

Anonymous said...

Egger has just about a snowballs chance down below to win matches at the USO Juniors. As anon says, this is typical High Performances' desperate attempt to find the next Sampras, USTA has always focused on ranking and winning and NOT development. Players have to earn the place as they develope. The is way over Egger's head. He's hits high loopy moonballs for crissakes. Give the WCs to the players who can win NOW...this is utterly ridiculous.

Anonymous said...

Just heard Madison Brengle and Ashley Weinhold have turned pro.

Anonymous said...

Ok so if I were the USTA and I had the wonderful opportunity of handing out w/c's for this years US Open here's what I would do.

1) Give better advise to the juniors regarding what tournaments to play so that the appropriate players talented enough to get in on their own can do it!

2) Forget about promises, future development, and who did what 6 months ago.

And with that being said here's my list.

US Open Jr's main
1) Steve Forman
2) Ryan Thacher
3) Nick Meister
4) Tyler Hochwalt
5) Ryan Harrison
6) Wil Spencer
7) Brennan Boyajian
8) Tennys Sandgren

qualis
1) Jeff Dadamo
2) Alex Domijan
3) Frank Carleton
4) Lawrence Formentera
5) JT Sundling
6) Ty Trombetta

OK now heres why...
Steve Forman, '89, a big game with a great game, a years worth of college behind him...he can win.

Ryan Thacher, he can win, he should have played the big US ITF's to be able to get in the mains on his own...bad advise, but he can win.

Nick Meister, good player, game has really improved, has been playing futures, he would be a great competitor, solid. He can win.

Tyler Hochwalt, biggest serve in the juniors, a years worth of futures play, didn't play any ITF's...bad advise. 2 years experience at the US Open, big guy...he can win.

Ryan Harrison, earned his way, gritty competitor, he can win. Loves the stage.

Wil Spencer, another '89, great game, hitting the crap out of the ball, good heart, he's been there before...he'd win.

Brennan, another '89, another super chance for the US to come up with a winning player.

Sandgren, probably my weakest pick, but he did win 16's zoo and he does fight hard. He has a better chance of winning than Bo, so I'll put him in and err on the stupid USTA side.

Qualis...
Dadamo, some spotty results and plays well in the back draw. Great discipline...1st time at the Open, I'd put him in the qualis.

Domijan, 2nd year at the Open, he'd be a great qualifier, Still young, plenty of time to play ITF's and get in on his own for next year.

Frank Carleton, put him in there, great chance of qualifying. Futures experience...he can play the big game.

Formentera... I didn't want to put him in there, but if he hits big and serves big, he can do well. Better him than Bo, Kudla or Egger.

JT...hello...what were they thinking. He needs to serve bigger, but gritty, he would do well.

Ty Trombetta, good summer results, lots of improvement, he'd do well in the qualis, but I'd never put him straight in.

So thats it, the young guys with 60 mph serves have plenty of time to get bigger and stronger and smarter, and they'll have their time there. Leave the winning to the big guys, big hitters and lo and behold, the US would have some nice "w"'s at this years US Open.

Anonymous said...

You made some odd choices given your emphasis on recent results.

You picked Sundling, Carleton, and Formentera, yet are loath to give Seal a wild card. Seal beat Sundling 6-4, 6-1 in Kalamazoo (and Sundling, frankly, has done very little this year). He's beaten Formentera twice in the last month. You said that you don't care about future development, so surely you're reasoning isn't that they're better pro prospects.

Formentera has beaten Meister twice since late June, yet you only relucantly give him a qualifying wild card. Meister, who lost his second main draw match and first consolation match in Kalamazoo, gets a main draw wild card.

Hochwalt didn't exactly tear it up at the Clays and Hard Courts. Boyajian did well at the Clays, but performed poorly in the National Team Championships and Kalamazoo, yet they get in while Trombetta and Dadamo have to settle for qualifying wild cards. Dadamo won the consolation bracket, beating Forman in the process. He did pretty well at the Clays as well. Trombetta beat three '88s in Kalamazoo, including Nate Schnugg, who has the college experience you value so much and who was a favorite to win the tournament before Trombetta took him out.

I can see the Spencer pick, though Domijan beat him in Kalamazoo.

Why are you so reluctant to pick Sandgren? His record this year is tremendous. He's 1-1 against Ryan Harrison this year, and both were close matches, so I don't think there's a big gap between those two.

Also, you keep mentioning Futures and college experience as if it automatically makes you a better player than someone who doesn't have that experience. Yet, strangely enough, you ignore Evan King's Challenger experience. He won two rounds in a Challenger qualifying draw, beating Tyler Cleveland in the process (who is ranked in the 400s I believe). He's also been extremely consistent in the 16s and did well at the Clays in the 18s. This week he beat Sandgren in the International Hard Courts.

Your picks don't seem to logically follow from the criteria you established. At the very least, you're greatly overstating your case with regard to the USTA being "stupid" for making the picks they did.

Anonymous said...

Just looked at Egger's overall recored and he does not have ONE , yes ONE, strong win in a 16 nationail tournament. Hes good for 14s but to give him a WC is a waste. WHen Ryan Harrison was his age and got the WC his win record w/ older players was significantly stronger. That is the waste of a wild card as his record to date does not say much about what his future potentail will be.

Anonymous said...

The WC to Egger is a joke. Egger gets a wild card so High Performance can boast to the other countries, "yeah, we've got some young up and comers!" Whoever is in charge needs to be let go, he doesn't know what he's doing. BTW, if you chose college, then you are NOT aligned with the High Performance agenda. That is why Steve Forman is not on the WC list although he is a good player who knows how to win.

Anonymous said...

David you are picking out the bad results and basing there whole game off of it. Meister is a tough grinder with great volleys who always plays tough. Seal will not win if his opponent is on there game. Sundling did good in winters and seems to of been in a slump but possibly brought him self out with a decent showing at k-zoo. He did pretty good at easter bowl and carson. Egger should not of gotten one.

Anonymous said...

What happened to kyle mccmorrow. I saw him play k zoo and he still looked good to me. Huge forehand and monster serve. If this kid can get his footwork down he will be a great college player possibly do well on the pro tour. They should put some hope in this kid. The USTA should look at kids with the big game like Mccmorrow, David Holland, JT Sundlng, Steve Johnson, and Denis Lin.

Anonymous said...

I think the USTA did such a terrible job of picking the wc's for the girls. Embree deserves it but what about about Gibbs and Stephens? They are only 13 people! Pick someone who could do something with it that can actually get bye a couple of rounds and someone who actually played hard courts and is a rising junior!

Or on the other hand, kids should work for this. It shouldn't be given to them! I think you could all agree with me the USTA has favorites and badly. What if you don't agree with the USTA's philosophy, what they'll will write you off for good? Or don't give out the wc's make kids work for them which I think it could solve alot of problems and anxiety for the USTA and make the juniors find out what the word WORK actually meens...

Anonymous said...

My point in this list is to state that the bigger, older, stronger, wiser, experienced "junior"... essentially young men...will have the BETTER chance of succeeding at the US Open Jr. level. The reason I mentioned the players who have experience playing at the future and challenger level is that because these tournaments are at a WHOLE different level which I believe to be SOMEWHAT comparable to playing in the arena of the US Open juniors. Go watch the pace of the ball at the futures if you don't believe me...you ain't gonna see that 14's Easter Bowl!

I firmly believe that most of the USTA w/c's given to the 92's and 93's are extremely wasteful and ridiculous and I only hope that I am proven wrong...but I believe that a 14 or 15 year old junior who is moderately successful at the national level will not cut it. Not NOW for the 2007 Open. Period.

And whoever said that any of the top juniors "don't know the meaning of the word WORK" must be delusional. These kids work there butts off!!

The USTA uses no logic or consistency from year to year with their decisions. Case in point...why is Donald Young playing juniors?? The guy just went 7-5 in the 3rd against the number 4 player in the world...yeah...great advise.

Anonymous said...

Donald's playing juniors because the USTA makes you agree to do that or they won't give you the Men's main draw wildcard. Nice power play...makes no sense from a development point of view.

Anonymous said...

hi im the guy that said get a life and im not saying there is anything wrong about reading the posts or leaving comments but just skimming over these some are just ridiculously long, there is simply better stuff to do with your lives but hey your choice...and have you ever thought that the kids you talk smack about might be reading the posts

Anonymous said...

If it wasn't August and tennis talk -- I would think it was March Madness and basketball talk.

I truly love all the points made about why 1 player should be a WC and not another, just like the 64 teams in the NCAA's.

Really good string of e-mails, some very valid points and some not -- enjoyable either way.

Anonymous said...

Anon who said:

"and have you ever thought that the kids you talk smack about might be reading the posts".

I hope that the players who read this, have a lot tougher skin than you do ( and if they are top players, you can bet they do).

To be a top player you can't get caught up in the press, media or what people who you don't know-- say about you.

Instead of worrying how long the posts are, or when people should stop discussing a subject, or telling people to get a life-- why don't you just worry about you.

Anonymous said...

Personally, I applaud the kids who received the wild cards. I am sure they are working hard. But, for the 14 & 15 yr olds, I am concerned. I do not think they are mentally and physically ready for the challenge. It takes time to mature as a player. I do not understand the need to rush a player. If the have potential at 14, imagine with time a experience at 17 or 18 where they could be. The need to rush something that could be even better a few years later concerns me. I wish the USTA would explain some of their logic. Most of the wild cards are just kids. Is the USTA looking out for the kids interest or themselves. I think the later. What happens if the kid bombs, then what. Could that affect the growth of the player? The should talk to past champions and find out what the works and doesn't. The USTA needs to learn more about the process through older players and not use the young kids as experiments.

Anonymous said...

There are better things to do in your life than leave a comment, get thoroughly bashed, read those comments and attempt to defend yourself, and get thoroughly bashed again. Just saying, of course, it's your life, your choice.

Anonymous said...

Hey everyone,
I am in the main draw of the juniors and just heard that egger got a WC into the qualies. That's a joke when he can't even beat a top 50 player in the 16s, especially when there are so many good guys still on the alternate list. If I was one of those guys I would call Rodney Harmen or lou Berger and really complain. There is a reason so many top US juniors have no respect for the USTA. Their decisions are made without any logic and this is another example of one of them. And yes, one of the best players to come out of the US Sam Querry, was not on their radar as a junior. So what if Egger had a nice expense paid trip to the Cxech Republic for team tennis, that is a priviledge and the least he could do with all tyhe $$$$ the US has thrown his way. If you loppy game its highly unlikely he will be a force in the pros.

Anonymous said...

does anyone know if linda mushref plays competively anymore

Anonymous said...

COLETTE DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT LINDA MUSHREF BECUASE SHE HAS NOT BEEN PLAYING IN TOURNAMENTS AROURND THE USA

Colette Lewis said...

I'm sorry, I don't have any information about Mushref.

Anonymous said...

To the person concerned about the 14 and 15 yr. olds and thinking this is way over their head. Have you seen these 14 and 15 year olds play. Ryan Harrison is barely 15 and made the quarters of Kalamazoo in the 18's beating some of the best in the country including Nevolo and Hochwalt. Evan King did win 2 rds. in a Challenger beating someone ranked in the top 500 in the world A.T.P. I don't know how Emmett Egger will do but I think he will be far more competitive than you guys give him credit for. I know last year a lot of the same comments were made about Ryan Harrison getting blown out because he was barely 14 and he lost in 3 sets to a seed so give the kid a chance before you crucify him.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said: "If this 14 yr old kid gets an opponent like Arsenov,Roy, Pospisil, Jenkins, Devin or Tomic, it is an absolute embarassment. These guys are serving HUGE and Egger will be obliterated."

I don't people realize that Egger is not much younger than Tomic or Harrison. Bernard Tomic is only a few months older than Egger; Tomic was born October of 1992 and Egger is only a few months younger but since he was born in January of 1993 he appears to be a "star" in international events with that great January of 1993 birthday. Ryan Harrison is only 8 months older than Egger as he was born in May of 1992. Junior Ore and Denis Kudla are also only a few months older than Egger. Egger is a good player but his record isn't in the same league as Tomic's or Harrison's, or Kudla's or Junior Ore's for that matter.

Anonymous said...

It is ALL about "up and comers". To all the kids who may have been in High Performance (and those who have not), but have not been given the international experience, (and insane amount of confidence) that goes with it..do NOT give up your dreams. The usta is not the sole authority on who makes it, and who doesnt. They gave that wild card to Egger and co, (13-14 year olds) because of CONFIDENCE. They KNOW Steve Forman, and others such as them can have a better chance of winning these matches, but telling players like Egger, Gibbs, and Stephens, "you are our A team in your age group", and rewarding them with the chance at U.S Open gives them that all important ingrediant that is sometimes overlooked in tennis discussion. CONFIDENCE. They know Egger has got a long way to go, physically wise, but he is a big fighter, and they think that a bigger game will follow. Not sure about the girls, but probably the same thoughts with them. Believe me, the next time Egger plays any National Event, it is a huge plus to have this confidence that the USTA supports you, the competition you have faced in your own age group has been top notch,(foreign, and domestic)..and now, to be selected to play U.S Open. So what if he loses 0-0..in his mind, he is young, under-developed, and has a long way to go. This is not like Donald Young winning Wimbledon juniors. That is PRESSURE. Anything less than that win, and he would have been slammed as a "has been". These young kids in the USTA fold should be very fortunate, and the one's who are not, should not give up their dreams. Its a much longer process than whatever studies and examples the USTA has chosen to use in thier training/development doctrine. Younes El Annouiy? (sorry bout the spelling!) Talent, hard work, and a big heart should never be overlooked.

Anonymous said...

Why is "Birth Year" and "month" such a huge deal with the USTA (and others)?

Who cares if Egger is a Jan 93, and some schlub is a Dec 92. Perhaps this "schlub" can hit the crap out of the ball, is hitting the back fence and making dents, but is not hitting loopy topspin and winning Gold Balls.
Heck, what if the kid has a 91 birth day!?
The USTA has IMO done research and studies and have determined that certain age kids have little chance at PRO Tennis. This thinking is WRONG. "Wrong" because it is shortsighted, and "wrong" because this is our National Tennis Entity, and this is the message they send out to every hard working, talented kid out there. They get excited about birth year for goodness sakes!! Instead of DEVELOPMENT!

Anonymous said...

We did make noise last year when Harrison got the quali's w/c.

Egger should not be mentioned in the same breath as Tomic.....WORLD's apart.

If he and the other 92's and 93's are such "up and comer's" then they should be plenty ready to play in 2 years...not now.

Anonymous said...

Harrison is a '92 and i dont think hes an up and comer. his results say hes already there.

Anonymous said...

Federer, Nadal, Roddick etc... are "already there", not Ryan Harrison. Even guys like Spadea, Goldstein are making a living. Am I discounting the results that Harrison has shown? Of course not. But everyone should realize that the juniors are just a stepping stone to development, and winning now is not a guarantee of future success. Is he on the right path? Yes. Already there? No. Remember Al Parker?

Anonymous said...

The reference to Harrison was to the junior U.S. Open not professional tennis. I would have thought that should have been obvious but I guess not. The subject was whether or not 14 and 15 year olds should be given wild cards to the JR. Open and the fact that Harrison has certainly proven himself worthy.

Anonymous said...

Nobody here is disputing Harrison's selection, it seems people are "wondering" why the usta gives wildcards to up and comers (in the usta's eyes) instead of older better players who the usta feels have no PRO chances. I mean, how would Egger do against Steve Forman? If Harrison had played someone like Forman last year, I would bet it would have been competitive. Last year, when Harrison got the wild card, his talent was above that of Egger this year. I was not reading this board at that time, but would be suprised if people were disputing his selection. Egger does not have Harrison's talent, but dont think (may be wrong) that Harrison had a Gold ball under his belt last year, as Egger does this year. Basically, I feel Harrison was very deserving last year, but that does not mean that every 14 year old that the usta throws out there is.

Anonymous said...

"Egger does not have Harrison's talent, but dont think (may be wrong) that Harrison had a Gold ball under his belt last year, as Egger does this year."

Yes, but that's because Harrison has played way above his age group for the past several years whereas it took Egger to finally win his first gold ball two weeks before he aged out of his age group. In contrast, Harrison won his first gold ball with a full year left in his age group. Harrison would have 10 gold balls right now had he played anywhere near his age group.

Anonymous said...

agree 100%...again, I was not suprised, nor in disagreement with the usta's selection of Harrison last year..(and of course this year!)..I am just (as Commodus said in "Gladiator") "vexed" that Egger was selected this year. Nothing wrong with a 14 year old getting these wild cards, but the usta should NOT make this some "yearly" routine, in that they HAVE to give these out to the youngsters. Give them to deserving players!..does this HAVE to be the usta's doctrine.. "Play 14's international competiton, miss hardcourts, get automatic wild card in U.S Open qualies?"..again, your last post was right on, but the usta doesnt see things this way I guess?

Anonymous said...

Boy I would love to know exactly who at the USTA are making these ridiculous WC awards. The Egger decision is going to haunt them for sometime and heads should roll! Billie Jean King and Michael Chang should be more involved in the process. We have a bunch of journeyman ex-players running High Performance and turning these kids into grinders! The lunatics and running the asylum. We need the ex-champions guiding the process. Players should be given WC's based on their ability to win, not on whether they grinded their way to a gold ball in the 12s and 14s for crissakes!

Anonymous said...

excellent reading guys, keep it up.

very worthwhile comments, really enjoying it.

Anonymous said...

No offense to Michael Russell, or Vince Spadea, but yes, your comment about "grinders" is right on. (with the exception of a few, mainly Harrison) The usta cares about winning, and winning now. Grinders win. The usta says grinders bulid mental toughness, fine, but what about weapons? What about top 10 potential, and striving for that? Unless your parent is a tennis instructor, and is drilling you day in and day out on aggressive attacking tennis, how can a U.S junior become a player like this, with the usta rewarding grinding style of play that win's 14's gold balls? And then guy's like Querrey come along, and BOOM, he is all over the player development webpage Soon Isner will be there too.. they will probably even imply that they taught him how to be 6'9!

Anonymous said...

By the way, Forman would tatoo Egger...

Anonymous said...

A bit off subject of "wild cards", but I have an idea: Special stealth usta development program: Find willing, athletic players, 9-14 years of age. ERASE the "winning now" mentality with these players, and keep them secretly hidden in some isolated tennis facility. (with parents nearby, but sworn to secrecy) Identify the players that have a aggressive nature, and determine which one's prefer to hit the tar out of the ball from the baseline, and which one's have a talent, and inclination to attack the net. Get Bolletteri and Lansdorp involved. Get John Mcenroe involved. Give them all a blank check, and have them fill in the amount. Anybody that plays pusher tennis, send them back to the general population ie, regular High Performance Camps, or various tennis academy's, or just back to their own hometowns. No usta tournaments for these kids in stealth division. Just have them play each other, and perhaps bring in outsiders that will keep things quiet. Again, stress attacking tennis. Insist on using transition game. Encourage errors as doing the right thing, instead of not winning the point.

After 3-6 years of intense training, unleash these players on the ITF circuit, and see how they do against mentally tough as nails grinders with Gold Balls on their shelf. There is always that chance that they will lose to these types right off the bat because of lack of tournament toughness, but STILL encourage them for playing the right way. In 4-6 months, after getting their feet wet in tournament play, compare this stealth group with the others, and see who may have top 20 potential.

Instead of some tennis PRO parent, or some innovative private coach doing this, the usta should do this!

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous said...
By the way, Forman would tatoo Egger...

8/28/2007"

Actually, that was an understatement. You were being too kind. It would be a double bagle. Forman already won a gold ball in B16s over a year ago, so why does some young kid who just barely won the national B14s get the WC over him? What a joke! If the USTA can't be fair, can it at least preserve the "appearance" of fairness?! The answer is apparently "no."

By the way, Egger arguably isn't even top 5 in the World for his 14 year old age group. He got beat second round at Teen Tennis and then got beat handily at Les Petits As in the quarters by a guy that lost 1 & 0 in the next round.

Anonymous said...

I dont think you guys have seen Egger play in a while because he has developed his game quite nicely. He has learned to serve and volley and does so about half the time now. He is a far better player than you guys give him credit for and no longer just pushes the ball. No he would not beat Steve Forman but he does have a bright future. I dont believe that any of the current crop of older American juniors has a snow balls chance in hell of being decent pro players. Damico, Schnugg,Kecki, Hamui,Hochwalt could be top 250 at best in singles. The next crop with Rhyne Williams, Ryan Harrison, Chase Buchanan, Bo Seal, Tenys Sandgren, Lawrence Formentera,Evan King,Denis Kudla,Junior Ore and probably a few more seem to have a better attitude toward work and wanting to be great players and not so content being good players who think they are great. The group after that with Emmett Egger, Christian Harrison('94)Mika DeCoster, Sean Berrman is a good looking bunch with solid all around games(except maybe DeCoster who still stays at the baseline and pushes). I think you will see the next generation of great Americans come out of those 2 groups.

Anonymous said...

This is to the 2nd to last anonymous. I think the USTA needs you. About time someone who thinks its not about the wins, right now. I agree about everything.

Anonymous said...

I totally agree with the last comment and 3rd to last! I think the USTA should learn and teach these kids its not all about winning! Plus, the preasure isnt good for them.

Even some academys make you keep a high ranking so you don't have to pay for the academy. I just dont think its fair. The kids are going to lose some and they will also win some, but thats just the game of tennis. You don't see Roger Federer winning every single match, do you? And personaly he's the best player that i've seen in years!

Anonymous said...

I have not seen Egger play for a while, but I will accept what you have said in that he is a much better player, who does not push the ball as much. But why does the usta send the message out to older players that they have no chance at PRO Tennis, when it is just a crapshoot anyway, younger players included? You are admitting Forman can beat Egger, and the usta knows this as well. What is the benefit of giving Egger (or other 14 year olds who are not ready) over players that are better? Who is the usta (and as another poster said, "which particular individuals") make the verdict that Steve Forman (example) cannot make it as a PRO? The kid goes to College, is getting an education..and is still improving and working on his game. And he is BETTER than Egger. I guess the usta would never hire me, because it seems like a no-brainer. Giving these wild cards to undeserving kids only inflates their ego's (and the parents), and gives them what I feel an unfair advantage over kids in their own age groups that do not get this preferential treatment. It gives them confidence..and the oppurtunity to go against a much stronger player in international competition. Then when they play usta National events, they have that swagger that goes with this. Its fine if they deserve it (Harrison last year)..as I said, had he played some of the kids that he beat out for this last year, he would not have been blown away, and in fact, may have won against some..but in this case, the usta see's potential in Egger, and is rewarding that, because they have seen other kids, older and better that have not taken the "fast track", and have lowered the gauntlet that they have little chance at future success. Not sure of Isner's story, but was he one of these usta High Performance kids? If not..an example of how one can develop late. Its just insane to put anybody in a tournament like this that is not deserving. Unless the ex-pro's at carson/key biscayne have a crystal ball, then why do it?

Anonymous said...

To anon...

you are a genius. Exactly what I have been trying to say. I really need to know how Steve Forman should not have had a chance at the US Open Juniors...somebody, pleeze!!!

Only a couple of days until we get to see the results of this crapshoot the USTA has thrown. The only chance these 92's and 93's have ("cept Harrison) is if they play each other, but what a terrible thing the USTA has done.

Anonymous said...

Can you imagine if the tennis God's are watching over Egger, and he happens to win a round this week!?

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the support, I would like the chance to play there but at this point it is irrelevant because I did not get the wildcard and I have my own fall tournaments I need to focus on. I wish ALL the U.S players best of luck in the open.
-Steven Forman

Anonymous said...

It sounds like you got this whole journey down pat..keep focusing, and ignore everything else. Classy..best of luck to you in the future!

Anonymous said...

I don't know why people think that Evan King doesn't have a chance to win a match. Those who think that must feel that Sandgren, Formentera, and Seal don't have a chance as well. Heck, maybe Dadamo should be included in that group since King beat him at the Clays. I suppose they would also think that Tyler Cleveland wouldn't have a chance to win a qualifying match since he lost to King 7-5, 6-0 in the qualifying draw of a Challenger.

Anonymous said...

Yes, I saw Egger push and moonball at the Clay Court Nationals 16s in July. He looked like he was playing the 12's and he's a tall kid. If High Performance is looking for Pete Sampras, they're looking in the wrong place.

Anonymous said...

i hope gail brodsky plays the us open junior. has she been injured? i know easter bowl was 4 months ago and that it'd not hard courts, but she did beat a pretty nice field. she won some qualie rounds at legg mason. now she's getting good results at the canadian open. she hits the ball, but with enough consistency to win. she and coco vandweghe seem to have some nice upside.

Anonymous said...

I think the real question is whether the USTA should give WC's to players who can't win now, based upon their potential. I grant that Egger can't win now, at his age.

As for those who question Egger's potential, the USTA coaches would humbly disagree with you. And I would too. He's a tremendous (and underrated) athlete, has excellent serve and volley ability for his age, superb touch, he's going to be a big kid, and he has outstanding competitive drive and work ethic. As for the claim that he pushes, did you ever see Andy Roddick play when he was a junior?

Anonymous said...

Annonymous said: "[Egger]'s a tremendous (and underrated) athlete, has excellent serve and volley ability for his age, superb touch, he's going to be a big kid, and he has outstanding competitive drive and work ethic."

Nice try. "Tremendous athlete" is a huge stretch. While I will agree that he's a great competitor, he's merely a pretty good athlete. He is not a "tremendous" athlete by any stretch. In fact, I can name numerous U.S. kids that are about his age and who are much faster and better athletes. Some examples: Evan King (only one year older); Ryan Harrison (only 8 months older); Spencer Newman (several months younger); Jeremy Efferding (younger); Shane Vinsant (younger); Mika DeCoster (younger); Raymond Sarmiento (6 months older and way faster); Denis Kudla (only 4-5 months older); Junior Ore (only 4-5 months older); Wyatt McCoy (4-6 months older); Christian Harrison(much younger, but much faster even before he's started to mature).

Anonymous said...

"As for those who question Egger's potential, the USTA coaches would humbly disagree with you."

Excuse me but have the USTA coaches ever spotted and produced a US champion in ylessingours and my lifetimes? Validation by the USTA coaches may be a curse and not a blessing!

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous said...
"As for those who question Egger's potential, the USTA coaches would humbly disagree with you."

Excuse me but have the USTA coaches ever spotted and produced a US champion in ylessingours and my lifetimes? Validation by the USTA coaches may be a curse and not a blessing!"

Yes. I agree. Doesn't the original poster understand that we KNOW that the USTA likes Egger. That was the whole premise of most of these 82 posts; the point was that they have overrated Egger by giving him an undeserving wild card at the expense of much better players just because they are older or show an interest in college.

It was those same "geniuses" at the USTA who ignored Sam Querrey for similar reasons until Querrey blew by all of the USTA's "chosen" players. Then they had to re-group and chase Querrey down to jump on his bandwagon.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous #407 said:

"Nice try. "Tremendous athlete" is a huge stretch. While I will agree that he's a great competitor, he's merely a pretty good athlete. He is not a "tremendous" athlete by any stretch. In fact, I can name numerous U.S. kids that are about his age and who are much faster and better athletes. Some examples: Evan King (only one year older); Ryan Harrison (only 8 months older); Spencer Newman (several months younger); Jeremy Efferding (younger); Shane Vinsant (younger); Mika DeCoster (younger); Raymond Sarmiento (6 months older and way faster); Denis Kudla (only 4-5 months older); Junior Ore (only 4-5 months older); Wyatt McCoy (4-6 months older); Christian Harrison(much younger, but much faster even before he's started to mature)."

First, I said "athlete," not "fast."

Second, Egger compares favorably, in terms of athleticism, with most of the players you listed.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous #408 said:

"The point was that they have overrated Egger by giving him an undeserving wild card at the expense of much better players just because they are older or show an interest in college."

Do you get the point of MY post, though? The point was that we should distinguish two questions: whether Egger deserved the wildcard and whether Egger has potential.

I concede that other, older players were more deserving of the wildcard (e.g. Matthew Kandath, who won the backdraw of the Zoo 16s). I actually think it's a bad policy on the USTA's part, because it takes away an opportunity for another player to have a major breakthrough.

As for whether Egger has potential, I think he does.

As for the USTA, I wouldn't question their judgment so much as their effectiveness in taking kids with potential and helping them.

Anonymous said...

the usta is too concerned about "birth year", and junior results, instead of just plain ol talent and desire. In addition to the kids passed over that could destroy Egger right now (THEY deserved the wild-card, not Egger) what about kids out there who Egger could beat, but any tennis expert could tell you, that if you are talking about top 20 potential, these kids have the physical gifts to get there, just not the proper tennis instruction ($$$), or tennis pro daddies guiding them. So on one hand, you have the usta giving wild-cards to undeserving players, and on the other hand, you have them ignoring talent out there. They need to adjust their thinking, and not only reward rankings, but seek out players that they can help DEVELOP.

Anonymous said...

What kids are you talking about that have the physical gifts but not the proper tennis instruction. People come on here all the time criticizing and talking about these talented kids but where are they and who are they. Are these just the parents of average kids who think their kids are better than they are or what. Give names instead of making random statements.

Anonymous said...

"give names instead of making random statements" ..the "names" cannot be given, because nobody knows who these kids are. They are probably so far down in the rankings, in the 12's/14's, that they would never be considered worthy of help by the usta. "parents of average kids, who think they are better than they are". Again, just because Daddy the tennis pro has fed his kids thousands of balls over the years, and subsequently given them every single oppurtunity available to play top notch competition..does not mean other kids are out there, who the tennis pro's kids would obviously destroy right now, but in putting them side by side, would pale in the athleticism department. Suppose Andy Roddick's parents did not do what they obviously did for him growing up? He would not be the player that he is, but would he be any less the athlete? He, along with many other's in the top 20 have the "package". The "package" being the footspeed/racquet head speed. You dont believe there are players like this out there, getting beat in the juniors, but obviously lacking good instruction? Players without tennis pro "daddie" feeding them balls since the age of 3 The usta has the $$ to do this, but again, instead of DEVELOPMENT, they use the $$ to help the kids that are already there, like maybe your kids? Nothing wrong with that, but lets not be so egotistical to think that there are no other talented/willing kids out there that could use the good fortune of yours?

Anonymous said...

Give names but "nobody knows who they are" then how do you find them if nobody knows. There are tons of great athletes out there that could never make it in pro sports even if they are physically gifted enough. They may not deal with pressure well, they may not like competition(good practice players are a dime a dozen) they may be very lazy, they may have bad attitudes that don't allow them to reach their potential, they may have bad work habits,the list is a mile long as to why so many physically talented players may not make it so why would you not go with the ones who have proved that they have a lot of these qualities already. Obviously there will be some late bloomers but until they show the desire to get to the top level and the ability to perform under pressure how do you find them and where are you supposed to look for them. Who is tennis pro "daddie". How many of these top kids could have tennis pros for dads. It sounds like you have a child or children who are not getting the attention of the U.S.T.A. and that it is making you very bitter. Richard Williams marketed his daughters to Rick Macci at the age of 9. Mike Agassi did the same with Andre to Nick B. If you think your child is that good then teach them the game as their parents did and when and if they are good enough they will be noticed. Their results will speak for themselves. Like most people have a tendency to do you seem to be blaming others for your problems when the answer is right there in the mirror.

Anonymous said...

Who comes across as egotistical? Someone suggesting that in the lower rankings, there may be talented kids out there who could use good instruction? Talented kids, who in addition, have desire to improve? Or the fellow who suggests that until they show a "desire to get to the top level", and "ability to perform under pressure", then the player/ or parent should just "look in the mirror" to find the answer to their problems!

You know, I must admit, I am starting to agree with this last anon (the egotictical sounding one). Most likely every talented kid out there in the juniors, who has not proven themselves in National events is not worthy of any "looksee" from the usta. The usta's job is to take players that are already great, and give them the best possible chance to become greater. Through International competition, and through various camps..which in turn will give them exposure to other great players etc..Every parent out there that thinks there kids are so great should indeed, do what Mike Agassi did, or Richard Williams!! They were not tennis player parents, and look what they did for their children? And I dont think they were even rich! I know Williams wasnt. Whoever this anon that is complaining about the usta, indeed, please look in the mirror. Go buy a shopping cart full of balls! Tell your Boss, I quit! Tell your wife, and other children, "there are going to be some changes around here, and we may not be home for dinner some evenings" Go to the Library, and buy some instructional books for goodness sakes. And most importantly, STOP crying to the usta to help DEVELOP your child. Become innovative, or have your kid play Basketball.