U.S. Juniors Have Mediocre Showing at Wimbledon

After solid performances in the French and Australian Opens, the American juniors had a disappointing performance at Wimbledon. Through the first three Grand Slams, the two strongest performers have been Mitchell Krueger and Taylor Townsend.

The girls and boys singles events were won by a pair of Canadians. Eugenie Bouchard defeated Elina Svitolina (Ukraine) in the finals of the Girls’ singles. In the Boys’ event Filip Peliwo upset Luke Saville of Australia.

Eight Americans Boys represented the U.S. in singles. Their results are listed below.

Round of 64
The boys had a combined record of 3-5 in the first round.
Winners: Thai-Son Kwiatkowski, Stefan Kozlov and Mitchell Krueger.
Losers: Noah Rubin, Alexios Halebian, Connor Farren, MacKenzie McDonald, and Spencer Papa.

Round of 32
The boys had a strong second round, 2-1.
Winners: Thai-Son Kwiatkowski and Mitchell Krueger.
Loser: Stefan Kozlov.

Round of 16
The boys split their matches in the third round, 1-1
Winners: Mitchell Krueger.
Losers: Thai-Son Kwiatkowski.

Quarterfinals
Only Krueger advanced to the semifinals, 1-0.
Winner: Mitchell Krueger.
Loser: None.

Semifinals
The journey ended in the semifinals for the boys, 0-1.
Winner: None
Loser: Mitchell Krueger.

The boys had a combined record of 7-8 at Wimbledon. Krueger, the top American, also lost in the semifinals of the French Open. At the French Open, the American Boys were 9-6. Down Under they were 4-3, and McKenzie McDonald led the way, bowing out in the semifinals.

Eight girls represented the U.S. in the singles draw. Their results follow.

Round of 64
The girls had a modest showing in the first round, 4-4.
Winners: Taylor Townsend, Alexandra Kiick, Sachia Vickery, and Kyle S. McPhillips.
Losers: Christina Makarova, Catherine Harrison, Chalena Scholl, and Jennifer Brady.

Round of 32
The girls had a solid second round, 3-1.
Winners: Taylor Townsend, Alexandra Kiick, and Sachia Vickery.
Loser: Kyle S. McPhillips.

Round of 16
The girls had a disastrous third round, 0-3.
Winners: None.
Losers: Taylor Townsend, Alexandra Kiick, and Sachia Vickery.

Overall, the girls had a disappointing showing at Wimbledon, with 7 wins and 8 losses. At the French Open the American girls had 10 wins and 7 losses, although nobody advanced past the round of 16. Down Under, the American girls had 18 wins and 6 losses. Taylor Townsend won the event and Krista Hardebeck was ousted in the semis.

There will like be a larger contingency of American juniors at the U.S. Open. With a little luck and some good home cooking, a strong showing should be on tap.

With the Exception of Serena, Americans Have Mediocre Performance at Wimbledon

Tennis at the 2012 Wimbledon tournament was fabulous, with a surprising mix of results.

None could be more bizarre than the third round match between Sara Errani, French Open finalist, and Yaroslava Shvedova. Errani didn’t win a point in the first set.

From the American perspective Serena Williams demonstrated that she continues to be a dominant player when she is healthy. She captured her fifth singles title, set a record with 102 aces in singles, and won the doubles title with her sister Venus. Her win also begs the question, “What happens when she and her sister finally get too old to win tournaments?”

There are about a half dozen American women under the age of 24 who have demonstrated they can win Grand Slam matches. Unfortunately, they demonstrated that they are only capable of winning one or two rounds. The most impressive are Sloane Stephens and Taylor Townsend. Stephens is 19 and Townsend is still playing juniors.

Hopefully, Serena and Venus can stay healthy for a long, long time.

Murray lifted the spirits of Brits who have been humiliated recently by Barclay’s LIBOR rate fixing scandal and Rupert Murdoch’s less than ethical behavior. Despite Murray’s loss to Roger Federer, who won his 17th Grand Slam, the Brits can take solace in knowing they are slightly more fortunate than the Chicago Cubs (Fred Perry was the last British man to win the title in 1936 and the Cubs last won the World Series in 1908).

The win by Federer makes this the 33rd out of the last 37 Grand Slams to be won by the big three.

The American men had their strongest Grand Slam performance of the year as 30-year old journeymen Mardy Fish and 27-year old Brian Baker bowed out in the round of 16. Nine of the 12 American players who contended at Wimbledon are 25 years old or older. That means they are the same age or older as Nadal and Djokovic. While they are wonderful players, they have demonstrated they are not consistent “world-beaters” and they are not likely to win a Grand Slam event as long as the top three are at the top of their game.

Ryan Harrison is the most promising up-and-coming player along with junior Mitchell Krueger and McKenzie McDonald. In other words, the dry spell in American men’s tennis is likely to continue for awhile.

 

The singles results for Americans are listed below.

U.S. Men’s Results
Round of 128
The 12 U.S. men players had strong start – 8 wins and 4 losses.
• Winners – Ryan Harrison, Michael Russell, Ryan Sweeting, Andy Roddick, Sam Querrey, Jesse Levine, Mardy Fish, and Brian Baker.
• Losers – James Blake, John Isner, Donald Young, and Wayne Odesnik.

Round of 64
Half of the remaining American players lost in the second round – 4 wins and 4 losses.
• Winners – Andy Roddick, Sam Querrey, Mardy Fish, and Brian Baker.
• Losers – Ryan Harrison, Michael Russell, Ryan Sweeting, and Jesse Levine.

Round of 32
At the Australian Open 1 of 11 American men made it to the round of 32, while none of 8 American men made it to the round of 32 at the French Open. At Wimbledon, the remaining four American men split their matches – 2 wins and 2 losses.
• Winners – Mardy Fish and Brian Baker.
• Losers – Andy Roddick and Sam Querrey.

Round of 16
Both players lost in the round of 16.
• Losers – Mardy Fish and Brian Baker.

At Wimbledon, the 12 American men won 14 matches and lost 12.
At the French Open, the 8 American men won 3 matches and lost 8.
At the Australian Open, the 11 American men won 7 matches and lost 11.

U.S. – Women’s Results
Round of 128
The 10 U.S. women players had a comparatively weak first round – 5 wins and 5 losses.
• Winners – Sloane Stephens, Christina McHale, Jamie Hampton, Serena Williams, and Varvara Lepchenko.
• Losers -. Vania King, Venus Williams, Melanie Oudin, Coco Vandeweghe, and Irina Falconi.

Round of 64
The women fared well in the second round – 4 wins and 1 loss.
• Winners – Sloane Stephens, Christina McHale, Serena Williams, and Varvara Lepchenko.
• Losers – Jamie Hampton.

Round of 32
With the exception of Serena Williams, the American women lost – 1 win and 3 losses.
• Winners – Serena Williams.
• Losers – Sloane Stephens, Christina McHale, and Varvara Lepchenko.

Round of 16
Serena William remained on the winning track – 1 win and 0 losses.

Quarterfinals
Serena continued to play well – 1 win and 0 losses.

Semifinals
Serena won a tough two-set match against Azarenka – 1 win and 0 losses.

Finals
Serena wins in three sets – 1 win and 0 losses

The 10 American women won 14 matches and lost 9, although Serena won half the matches.

At the French Open the 12 American women won 15 matches and lost 12. At the Australian Open, the 10 American women won 9 matches and lost 10.

Additional results and discussion about the performance of American players is available at posts summarizing the French Open and Australian Open tournaments.

This year there is a bonus. The Olympics will be played between Wimbledon and the U.S. Open. We can only hope for the best for the red, white, and blue in these upcoming events.

Jay Berger will be coaching the men’s team. Singles players will include Andy Roddick, John Isner, Ryan Harrison, and Donald Young. If Roddick or Isner get hot or lucky, they might be in line for a medal. The two doubles teams will feature Bob and Mike Bryan and Isner and Roddick. The Bryan Brothers should be medal contenders.

Mary Joe Fernandez will be coaching the women’s team. Singles players will include the Williams sisters, Christina McHale and Varvara Lepchenko. If Serena remains healthy she will be favored to win a singles medal. Both doubles teams, Liezel Huber/Lisa Raymond and the Williams sisters are medal contenders.

Tennis became an Olympic medal sport in 1988. Since then, U.S. players have graced the award podium on 17 occasions. It will be disappointing if four additional medals aren’t added at this year’s event.

 

U.S. Juniors Have Solid Outing at French Open

At this year’s French Open, the American Men failed to advance a player out of the round of 64. The women fared better with Varvera Lepchenko and Sloane Stephens advancing to the round of 16.

Fortunately, the results were better on the junior side. In total the 13 American boys and girls posted combined winning records.

At the French Open, the Williams sisters showed that they were on the downhill side of their careers with Serena exiting first round and Venus following in the second round. Some of the other players showed that there is reason to be optimistic that replacements are on the horizon.

Six Americans Boys represented the U.S. in singles. Their results are listed below.

Round of 64
The boys had a combined record of 3-3 in the first round.
Winners: Spencer Papa, Noah Rubin, and Mitchell Krueger.
Losers: MacKenzie McDonald, Thai-Son Kwiatkowski, Alexios Halebian.

Round of 32
The boys had a strong second round, 3-0.
Winners: Spencer Papa, Noah Rubin, and Mitchell Krueger.
Losers: None.

Round of 16
The boys had a solid third round, 2-1
Winners: Noah Rubin, and Mitchell Krueger.
Losers: Spencer Papa.

Quarterfinals
The boys split the quarterfinal matches, 1-1.
Winner: Mitchell Krueger.
Loser: Noah Rubin.

Semifinals
The journey ended in the semifinals for the boys, 0-1.
Winner: None
Loser: Mitchell Krueger.

The boys had a combined record of 9-6.

Seven girls represented the U.S. in the singles draw. They built on their strong showing at the Australian Open. Their results follow.

Round of 64
The girls had a strong showing in the first round, 5-2.
Winners: Taylor Townsend, Jennifer Brady, Kyle S. McPhillips, Alexandra Kiick, and Chalena Scholl.
Losers: Sachia Vickery and Krista Hardebeck.

Round of 32
The girls had a solid second round, 3-2.
Winners: Taylor Townsend, Alexandra Kiick, and Chalena Scholl.
Losers: Jennifer Brady and Kyle S. McPhillips.

Round of 16
The girls had a solid second round, 2-1, although #1 seed Townsend was upset.
Winners: Alexandra Kiick and Chalena Scholl.
Loser: Taylor Townsend.

Quarterfinals
The girls bowed out in the quarters, 0-2.
Winners: None
Losers: Alexandra Kiick and Chalena Scholl.

Overall, the girls had a respectable showing with 10 wins and 7 losses.

Combined the boys and girls won 19 matches and lost 13. At the Australian Open they were 22-13 and Taylor Townsend was the winner. With a little luck, a strong showing should be on tap for Wimbledon.

 

Three Reasons the U.S. Fails to Dominate Men’s Tennis

If you were asked to list three reasons the United States does not dominate men’s tennis what would you say?

The politically charged response is, “The USTA is doing a horrible job with player development, America’s best athletes play other sports, and American kids choose to be well-rounded, rather than focused on individual sports.”

A less controversial response to the question is, “Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, and Novak Djokovic.” The 3 Ss – (Swiss, Spaniard, and Serbian) have had an unprecedented death grip on the Grand Slam trophies since 2004. And they have a lot at stake in the upcoming French Open.

• If Federer captures the top prize, he will become the third player to complete a double career Slam. A win at Roland Garros would up his total of Grand Slams to 17.

• If Rafael Nadal wins he will surpass Bjorn Borg with seven French titles.

• Djokovic currently holds three consecutive Grand Slam titles. A win would make him the second player of the Open Era to hold all four titles at once. The only other player to do that was Rod Laver.

The following results show the dominance of Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic in Grand Slams since 2000. (Each name is followed by a fraction. The top number represents the number of Grand Slam wins through that tournament and the number on the bottom is the total number of career Grand Slams won by the player. Players with only one win do not have a number listed by their name).

Australian Open
2000 Andre Agassi (6/8)
2001 Andre Agassi (7/8)
2002 Thomas Johansson
2003 Andre Agassi (8/8)
2004 Roger Federer (2/16)
2005 Marat Safin (2/2)
2006 Roger Federer (7/16)
2007 Roger Federer (10/16)
2008 Novak Djokovic (1/5)
2009 Rafael Nadal (6/10)
2010 Roger Federer (16/16)
2011 Novak Djokovic (2/5)
2012 Novak Djokovic (5/5)
Since 2004 the trio has won every Australian Open except 2005. Federer has won four Australian Opens.

French Open
2000 Gustavo Kuerten (2/3)
2001 Gustavo Kuerten (3/3)
2002 Albert Costa
2003 Juan Carlos Ferrero
2004 Gastón Gaudio
2005 Rafael Nadal (1/10)
2006 Rafael Nadal (2/10)
2007 Rafael Nadal (3/10)
2008 Rafael Nadal (4/10)
2009 Roger Federer (14/16)
2010 Rafael Nadal (7/10)
2011 Rafael Nadal (10/10)
Since 2005 Nadal and Federer have won every French Open. Nadal has won six total wins.

Wimbledon
2000 Pete Sampras (13/14)
2001 Goran Ivanišević
2002 Lleyton Hewitt (2/2)
2003 Roger Federer (1/16)
2004 Roger Federer (3/16)
2005 Roger Federer (5/16)
2006 Roger Federer (8/16)
2007 Roger Federer (11/16)
2008 Rafael Nadal (5/10)
2009 Roger Federer (15/16)
2010 Rafael Nadal (8/10)
2011 Novak Djokovic (3/5)
Since 2003 the trio has won every Wimbledon tournament. Federer has won six.

U.S. Open
2000 Marat Safin (1/2)
2001 Lleyton Hewitt (1/2)
2002 Pete Sampras (14/14)
2003 Andy Roddick
2004 Roger Federer (4/16)
2005 Roger Federer (6/16)
2006 Roger Federer (9/16)
2007 Roger Federer (12/16)
2008 Roger Federer (13/16)
2009 Juan Martín del Potro
2010 Rafael Nadal (9/10)
2011 Novak Djokovic (4/5
Since 2004 the threesome has won every U.S. Open. Federer has won five U.S. Opens.

Beginning with Wimbledon in 2003 through the Australian Open in 2012, Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic have won 31 of 35 Grand Slams.

Although American purists may long for the days of Sampras vs. Agassi or Connors vs. McEnroe, the remaining 2012 Grand Slams will be tennis at its finest. In three months we will know if the 3Ss continue their stranglehold on the sport and make it 34 of 38 Grand Slams.

 

Weak Showing by American Singles Players – Australian Open

This past weekend, Victoria Azarenka and Novak Djokovic were crowned Men’s and Women’s Champions at the Australian Open. The showing by the American players was dismal – with Serena Williams reaching the round of 16 and John Isner the round of 32. While they are wonderful players, neither Williams (30) nor Isner (almost 27) are in the prime of their careers.

The lack of success of the top players, in yet another Grand Slam event raises a number of questions.
• Many of the top players in the world train and practice in the United States. We have great coaches and great facilities, why don’t we have more of the top players? Why can foreign players come to the U.S. and become elite and the same doesn’t happen with American players?
• During the time the USTA Player Development Program has been in place there have been few successes, as measured by Grand Slam singles wins. There are roughly 25 million U.S. tennis players. With hundreds of millions of dollars invested in player development, why hasn’t the USTA program produced more elite players?
• Are American youth really interested in playing tennis at a highly competitive level? Are they willing to dedicate themselves to tennis between the ages of 8 and 18 or would they rather participate in a variety of activities while they are growing up?
• Has the sport become too structured with lessons, leagues, drill sessions, camps, and tournaments? Are players participating in these activities without learning how to practice or to tactically and mentally play the sport?
• The day of riding your bike to the park and playing all day is gone. Back in the day, players learned from playing pick-up games and adults. Was that possibly a better way to learn the sport?
• Is it too expensive for America’s youth to become elite tennis players? Are there too few clubs or recreation facilities where they can afford to learn to play?
• Are youth too consumed with computers, television, game boys, social media, and the electronic age to play tennis?
• Tennis is a challenging sport to master. Has the age of instant gratification made tennis less appealing?
• There are a number of sports options, including extreme sports. Is tennis too boring or is it perceived to be too boring?
• Is tennis properly marketed to America’s youth? Are introductory programs engaging youth or are they turning them off to the sport?
• Are America’s best athletes playing team sports where they can receive greater notoriety?
• Has the level of competition risen to the point that it is unrealistic to expect the U.S. to dominate the way they once did? If so, why are the Russian and Eastern European players having such success?
• Is the lack of success a sign that Americans have lost their drive to excel?
• Just as the U.S. is not the top country in sports such as cricket, does it really matter anymore that we no longer dominate tennis?

The results for Americans are listed below.

U.S. Men’s Results
Round of 128
The ten U.S. men players had a promising start – 6 wins and 5 losses.
• Winners – Andy Roddick, Ryan Sweeting, Mardy Fish, Sam Querrey, John Isner, Denis Kudia, and Donald Young.
• Losers – Michael Russell, Ryan Harrison, Jesse Levine, and Alex Kuznetsov.
Round of 64
The American players were not up to the task in the second round – 1 win and 5 losses.
• Winners – John Isner.
• Losers – Andy Roddick, Ryan Sweeting, Mardy Fish, Sam Querrey, and Donald Young.
Round of 32
The lone American player lost. NO AMERICAN MEN ADVANCED PAST THE ROUND OF 32 – 0 wins and 1 loss.
• Losers – John Isner.

The 11 American men won 7 matches and lost 11.

U.S. – Women’s Results
Round of 128
The 10 U.S. women players broke even in the first round – 5 wins and 5 losses.
• Winners – Christina McHale, Serena Williams, Sloane Stephens, Jamie Hampton, and Vania King.
• Losers – Varvara Lepchenko, Irina Falconi, Bethanie Mattek-Sands, Alison Riske, and Madison Keys.
Round of 64
The remaining American women posted a winning record in the second round – 3 wins and 2 losses.
• Winners – Christina McHale, Serena Williams, and Vania King.
• Losers – Sloane Stephens and Jamie Hampton.
Round of 32
Competition was tougher in the round of 32 – 1 win and 2 losses.
• Winners – Serena Williams.
• Losers – Christina McHale and Vania King.
Round of 16
This was the end of the tournament for the American women.  NO AMERICAN WOMEN ADVANCED PAST THE ROUND OF 16 – 0 wins and 1 loss.
• Loser – Serena Williams.

The 10 American women won 9 matches and lost 10.

The U.S. had 21 singles entrants – 16 wins 21 losses. Only John Isner (2-1) and Serena Williams (3-1) had winning records.

American tennis fans can only hope for a better showing at the French Open in 4 months.

 

Sports Illustrated Vault – Top Women Covers

Which female athlete has most frequently adorned the covers of Sports Illustrated?

The answers can easily be found in the SI Vault (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/). The website includes a database that allows sports enthusiasts to conduct searches on articles, covers, galleries, and swimsuit issues. These searches provide an interesting perspective on what has been important in sports since SI began publishing in 1954.

The purpose of the following analysis is to identify the female athletes who most frequently adorned the SI covers and to look for other interesting trends. In December, 40 female athletes were selected for analysis. Their names, as listed in the charts below, were placed in the advanced search engine (exact phrase). Note that slightly different frequencies occurred when the names were placed in the general search box. It was also necessary to be aware of multiple athletes with the same name. As well, there were challenges associated with identifying tallies for women who played their sport under maiden and married names.

Keep in mind, the purpose of this analysis is not to identify the best athlete; rather the intent is to point out the athletes that adorned the SI covers most often. Athletes such as Suzanne Lenglen passed away before SI began publishing, so her coverage is minimal compared to current players. There are a number of factors that can determine whether an athlete makes the front cover or just receives mention in an article or picture gallery. The following questions address these factors:
• When did the athlete play?
• Did they participate in a team sport or an individual sport?
• How long has their sport been in existence, for example snowboarding is a relatively new sport?
• Did the athlete play in a major sport or a minor sport?
• Did the athlete play in a small market or a major market? Did they compete internationally?
• Who did the athlete have as sponsors and how well were they marketed?
• Was the athlete a flashy player who drew attention, such as Anna Kournikova, or were they a steady performer like Mary Jo Fernandez?
• How has the interest level in their sport changed over time? Are people as interested in that sport as they once were?
• Were there lockouts or strikes during an athlete’s career that prevented additional exposure?
• Did the athlete experience injuries that reduced media coverage?
• Were there other events that were more significant or overshadowed the significance of an athlete’s performance?
• Was it a “slow sports day”, which allowed for certain athletes to receive greater coverage?
It is interesting to note who has been on the cover most frequently, but it can be equally as intriguing to consider the factors that may have caused or prevented greater coverage.

The data suggests that there are a handful of athletes who might be considered media icons. While the men had media icons such as Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, and Muhammad Ali, no women received the same level of coverage as they did. Jordan was on the cover of SI 58 times, yet Martina Navratilova filled the spot only 9 times. The results also showed that only 10 of the 40 women in the sample appeared on the SI cover more than twice.

It is particularly interesting to note that 8 of the top 12 spots are filled by women’s tennis players. Would that be a function of the WTA’s efforts to market their women players and the sport or was that a result of a weak field on the men’s side?

It is also interesting to note that none of the 40 women were mentioned in articles more than 1,000 times. Half of the 50 men were mentioned more than 1,000 times.

In 1972 Title IX was put in place to give women an equal opportunity to participate in sports. Clearly, playing and coaching opportunities for women have increased drastically since then. Right or wrong, this basic analysis suggests that media coverage of men’s and women’s sports occurs at significantly different levels.

Analysis of the SI database is included in the December 2, 8, and 20 blog posts. The three discussions identify the sports, major sporting events, male athletes, and female athletes to most frequently adorn the front cover.

 

Stay Focused on the Present

The University of Colorado Women’s Volleyball team completed its inaugural season in the PAC-12 with a 1-21 record. On November 18, the Buffs captured their only conference win in a thriller against Washington State 3-2. Despite their dismal win-loss record, the team improved in key areas – teamwork, court coverage, spirit, and a more balanced offense. As well, many of the players elevated their skills.

With that in mind I asked Assistant Coach Tom Hogan, what he did to keep the spirits of the players up during the extended winless drought and how he raised the performance of the team despite their record. His answer was simple, “We worked hard in practices and matches to stay focused on the present. When you focus on the past or the future, your performance drops off. That is what we did and we were able to do it better than in years past.” It is important to note the emphasis on the words, “worked hard.”

These words of wisdom apply to any sport. For example, when a tennis player enters a tournament he/she should stay focused on the match at hand, rather than thinking about who they might play in the second or third round of the tournament. They should concentrate on the things they can control, such as how hard they try, proper hydration, staying focused on the present, and what they must do to maximize their performance. At the same time they must disregard the factors they cannot control, such as the weather, temperature, bad line calls, or crowd distractions.

As illustrated by Coach Hogan’s comments, the basics of sport are simple. As anyone who has coached or played a sport can testify, consistent execution during good times and bad is the challenge.

 

Markovian Chains – Helping You Stay Focused on Each Point

Have you ever played a tennis match and come off the court with the feeling that you could have been the victor with a point here or there? That gut feeling is founded in the mathematical theory, Markovian Chains, discussed below. (The discussion is basic so keep reading).

Tennis has a unique scoring system. The ultimate outcome, or the match, is based on the number of sets won. A set is the first to win 6 games and be ahead by two, while a game is the first to 4 points and win by two.

The probability of winning a point, game, set and match are substantially different. For example, a player has a better chance of winning one point against Roger Federer or Maria Sharapova than they have of winning a game, set, or match.

It is possible to use Markovain chains and basic probability theory to explain the amplifying effect in going from point probabilities to match probabilities.  The size of the amplifying effect quantifies the difference in the probabilities for points, games, sets, tiebreaks, and matches.

To save you the hassle of learning the mathematical theory, the table below provides the probabilities for you. In that table you will see the following three scenarios:

• It should be intuitive that if a player wins 50 percent of the points, that player will win 50 percent of the games, 50 percent of the sets, and 50 percent of the matches (column I).  There is no amplifying effect.

• The impact of the amplifying effect can be seen when a player increases the percentage of points won from 50% to 54% of the points (column V).  A player winning 54% of the points will win 59.9% of the games, 76.3% chance of the sets, and 85.9% of the matches. In non-mathematical terms, this means that by finding a way to increase the percentage of points won from 50% to 54%, or 4 percentage points, a player theoretically has increased the chances of winning the match by 36 percentage points.

• The amplifying effect is even greater if a player can increase the percentage of points won from 50% to 60% of the points (column IX). This increase in points won translates into a 73.6% probability of winning the game, a 96.3% probability of winning a set, and a 99.6% probability of winning the match. By finding a way to increase the percentage of points won from 50% to 60%, or by 10 percentage points, a player theoretically has increased the chances of winning the match by almost 50 percentage points.

By developing a discipline in which a player focuses on each point, it will suddenly become very easy to pick up several points a set – and these points will be enough to make the difference in a match.

 

QuickStart Gets Kids in Swing of Tennis

Recreation is big business. It is important for sporting goods companies, recreation programs, commercial sports facilities, coaches and instructors, and sports physicians to bring new players into their respective sports, make the sport easy to learn, and keep them hooked for life. They are all promoting a healthier form of addiction than being a workaholic, eating too much chocolate cake, or consumption of illegal substances.

Skiers scoffed when short skis were introduced – they were thought to be impure and would prevent skiers from mastering the sport. Tennis players cringed when the oversize Prince racquet was introduced – only little old ladies who played doubles would use them. In time, other sports have followed suit, there are short golf clubs, smaller softballs, and light volleyballs.

Most recreation participants are kids and weekend warriors – they are not the masters of the moguls or tennis players with 130 mph serves. They are the players who benefit from oversized racquets, short skis, and light volleyballs.

On June 19, 2001, the Broomfield Enterprise featured an article entitled, “QuickStart gets kids in Swing of Tennis.” The city recreation program adopted the QuickStart program for select junior programs. In some form, the short court, light balls, shorter racquets, and altered scoring that was recently adopted by the Broomfield recreation group has been the standard for the past 20+ years.

Advantage Broomfield Recreation Department! Advantage tennis! Hopefully the change will serve as encouragement to  more juniors to gain a true appreciation for what a great sport tennis is.