Blog

Will Beach Volleyball Eliminate the Six-Person Game?

A year ago at this time, Americans were glued to their television sets watching the 2012 London Olympics. Women volleyball fans enjoyed a double dose of winning as the American women’s team captured a silver medal and Misty May-Treanor and Kerri Walsh-Jennings slipped past teammates April Ross and Jen Kessy to win gold and silver medals for the United States.

The dominance by the American women drew greater attention to the sport and will likely cause girls and young women to pursue the sport.  In the book Talent and the Secret Life of Teams, Terry Pettit discusses the future of beach and team (six-person) volleyball.

The following excerpts from the chapter, “Make Room for the Beach” describes where he thinks the sport is headed. (Note: the book was written in 2008.)

The possibility that women’s beach volleyball could become a sanctioned NCAA sport is intriguing to me because the results of such a decision could impact indoor volleyball in ways that we haven’t imagined. Never underestimate the attraction of an environment where scantily clad coeds can be watched without the threat of arrest or restraining order. If you could add a ten-minute halftime show where fraternity lads blow up cats wearing the opponent’s school colors, we might finally attract undergraduates to a non-revenue sport.

I believe that with the arrival of women’s beach volleyball there is a good chance that the indoor six-person game might go the way of six person women’s basketball, meaning that there may be a few outposts in Nebraska, South Dakota, and areas of the country with a significant Amish population that would continue to play it, but it would be deader than keeping one foot on the floor on date night at the collegiate level. ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

Why? Beach volleyball has one significant advantage over the indoor game. The biggest challenge in indoor volleyball is that we had too many people on the court. In basketball there are five players and 5000 square feet to cover. In volleyball there are six people and 900 square feet. Player can’t take three steps without running into a teammate standing up in her base position.

Athletic directors and coaches might favor beach volleyball over indoor volleyball because they mistakenly believe their team would have the opportunity to be more nationally competitive in the two woman game. They’re thinking would go like this: we aren’t able to recruit the explosive 6’4″ players that are required to advance to a Final Four; we have a better chance of landing those 5’9″ kids who are great ball handlers.

They would be wrong. How many truly great liberos have you seen in the past five years? Just because someone is less then 5’9″ tall, plays volleyball , and is explosive does not guarantee she can handle the ball any better than the kid bagging the ice cream on top of your bread at your local Piggly Wiggly. While junior volleyball has impacted technical skills, bracelets and T-shirt sales, and the pocketbooks of qualifier hosts, it has not done much to teach court awareness and a sense of the game. The few extraordinary ball handlers available are going to be recruited by the same schools that are getting commitments today from the kids blessed with vertical jumps and arm speed.

Each university can choose the type of sand it plays on. The texture can vary from heavy river sand in the upper Midwest to pea gravel in southern Illinois to the ground microscopic snails of Hawaii’s north shore. City universities can play on chipped asphalt and glass, and Ivy League schools on anything you can compost.

Fans admitted to a beach volleyball event would have their fingerprints scanned upon entry, making it easier to identify and locate the stalkers and sex offenders who are less likely to purchase season tickets to women’s sports where the athletes are covered with armor, like fencing and lacrosse. 

Finally, every host school is allowed to say over the beach public address system when the matches begin, “Welcome to the Beach!” Even if the nearest ocean is the one where the ice is melting faster than the coach can signal for a sub after a shanked serve.

Without a doubt, beach volleyball will continue to increase in popularity, but will it be the format of choice in years to come?  The industry is too entrenched in the six-person game, i.e. from a business perspective that seems unlikely.

Click here for additional information about Pettit’s book.

<img< a>

 

Denver Makes Top 10 Sports List (The Wrong Top 10)

Denver loves its sports teams and is the proud home to professional football, baseball, basketball, hockey, lacrosse, and soccer teams. Locals are quite vociferous when cheering for the home town team to win and they are not bashful about cussing them when they lose.

Residents have painted their houses blue and orange and sported only a barrel to lead cheers for the home team.  In the past, state leaders made exorbitant bets with other state leaders when their home town teams faced off in the playoffs.  Much to the chagrin of local leaders, they usually lost.

You couldn’t ask for a better sports town than Denver.  What else can you want?

The answer is simple, “A world championship!”

CU Football Ranked

It was with great disdain that Coloradans learned on July 31, that Forbes had ranked Denver as one of America’s most wretched sports cities (“America’s Most Miserable Sports Cities” by Tom Van Riper).

The common theme among teams on the list is their inability to win the big one.

Denver was on a roll between 1996 and 2001. In the bookend years, the Avalanche won two Stanley Cups. The Broncos won back-to-back Super Bowls in 1998 and 1999; however, they lost four Super Bowls prior to that.  The Rockies and Nuggets have been 0-for-their existence. The minor sports don’t matter.

The list of most miserable sports cities includes:

  1. Seattle
  2. Atlanta
  3. Phoenix
  4. Buffalo
  5. San Diego
  6. Cleveland
  7. Kansas City
  8. Houston
  9. Washington, D.C.
  10. Denver.

There is always next year!  Hopefully Denver won’t be on the list in July 2014.

 

 

The Green Dot Ball – A Well-Intended, but Bad Mandate

This year the USTA mandated that 12U Satellite/Challenger and Junior Team Tennis players had to play with the green dot ball (GDBs) in competition.  The following 10 reasons explain why the GDB should NOT be mandated in USTA junior tennis play. These comments are based on countless hours of discussions with parents and coaches while watching their sons, daughters, and students play with both the GDB and real tennis balls.
1. For many years, some teaching professionals have advocated the use of “dead” tennis balls as a training tool.  As a commercial product, low compression balls  (LCBs) have been in existence for 25-30 years. GDBs are a more recent phenomenon. Many parents view the GDB mandate as a gimmick by the manufacturers to sell more products.

Many years ago the teaching profession informally endorsed LCBs as an excellent teaching tool, along with shorter and lighter racquets, and smaller courts. If the teaching professionals had felt that LCB tournament play would have benefitted the sport, they would have developed LCB junior circuits many years ago. The LCB mandate is the USTA’s way of saying to teaching professionals that they are not knowledgeable about the sport they teach.

2. The quality control for the LCBs does not appear to be as good as it is for real tennis balls, i.e. some balls bounce better than others in match play.

By design, the balls are lighter and not as lively. As a result, they don’t play well in the wind or at temperatures below 50 degrees.

It is common for satellite players, particularly girls, to develop incorrect strategies when they use GDBs. For example, it is common for girls to swing hard on service returns and hit shots that barely clear the net and bounce in the middle of their opponent’s service court. More often than not, the returns do not carry to the service line and go for a winner.

3. In a similar light, satellite players, especially girls, have difficulty putting the GDBs away. They learn that an effective strategy is to hit the ball back and forth down the middle of the court until the other person misses, gets bored and goes home, or they turn 13 and become too old to finish the match. Frequently, these long, pointless rallies feature bad footwork and many poorly executed strokes. It is easier for some beginning players to get by with sloppy strokes and bad strategy when they use GDBs.

4. The LCBs seem to be better suited for players who are physically stronger or more coordinated, i.e. boys. They are more capable of having longer rallies that include spin, pace, placement and side-to-side movement, and reasonable technique. The use of GDBs with strong athletic boys brings back memories of the days when Jimmy Arias, Harold Solomon, and Eddie Dibbs were the top American players.  They were great players, but their style of tennis was so boring that the industry quickly ended the “slow-court experiment” that was in place at the time and began building courts with faster surfaces.

5. Most parents don’t like the GDBs. At the tournaments early in the season they wondered why tournament directors were having their kids play with “dead” balls. Although parents pay for the racquets, balls, and lessons they have been vilified for questioning the GDB mandate.  Many parents regard the ball as a short-term necessary evil that is not worth addressing. Others avoid dealing with the GDB by having their kids play in the 14U division, an option that is not always in the best interest of the player.

6. When given a choice to play with GDBs or real balls, most 12U kids choose to play with real tennis balls.

7. Real tennis balls often bounce too high for shorter boys and girls. LCBs are a great teaching tool that address that challenge, particularly when players are younger or in the early stages of learning.  It is ironic that juniors are taught to use semi-western and western grips to deal with high bouncing balls on the forehand side, yet they are mandated to play with balls that aren’t lively and don’t have a high bounce.

8. GDBs have a low bounce and are not lively. As a result players have to hit a lot of “lunge” groundstrokes. The contact point on many shots is often at a height between the player’s ankles and knees (that is very low for a short 11 year old girl).  These shots are hit less frequently when real tennis balls are used.

The grips of choice (western and semi-western) do not work well for “lunge” or “ankle” groundstrokes.  In short, LCBs eliminate some problems and introduce others which mean they may help some players while hindering others.

9. When younger players, or players who are not as strong, play with GDBs, they may not be rewarded for hitting clean strokes. As well they may not be rewarded for hitting with spin. On the other hand, stronger and more accomplished players can hit GDBs with excessive spin and make the ball dance like a whiffle ball.  For many players, playing tennis with GDBs is a different game than playing with real tennis balls.

10. As players become more accomplished it may be easier to have longer rallies with GDBs than real tennis balls. That is not justification for mandating the use of GDBs in competition. When players can consistently hit with spin, pace, and placement it is time to switch them to the balls they really want to play with – real tennis balls.  GDBs are a wonderful teaching tool, but players should be weaned from them based on their ability, not their birthday.

Over the years, the USTA has done many wonderful things for the sport of tennis, mandating the use of GDBs is not one of them.

 

Strong Performance by American Girls at Wimbledon Juniors – Weak Showing by the Boys

The finals matches of the Wimbledon junior championships illustrate how tennis has become a strong international sport.  An Italian defeated a Korean in the finals of the boys’ singles and Switzerland’s top player defeated an American in the girls’ finals.

The performance of the American boys at Wimbledon was nearly as dismal as their counterparts in the mens’ event.  Spencer Papa, Noah Rubin, and Luca Corinteli fell in the first round.

Stefan Koslov fared slightly better; he won three matches before losing in the quarterfinals.  Overall the boys won three matches and lost four.

Of the five American girls, only Louisa Chirico (15) and Taylor Townsend (5) were seeded.  Overall the five girls won 12 matches and lost five.  Dasha Ivanova and Johnise Renaud lost in the first round. Jamie Loeb won three matches (3-1) before losing in the quarterfinals, Louisa Chirico won four matches (4-1) before losing in the semifinals and Taylor Townsend won five matches (5-1) before bowing out in the finals.

This was the second consecutive strong showing for Chirico and Townsend. Chirico lost in the semifinals and Townsend lost in the quarterfinals at the French Open.  The U.S. girls are likely to have a strong showing at the U.S. Open in late August. Stay tuned!

 

Hot Dog! Chestnut Sets World Record

On July 4th, Joey Chestnut celebrated the nation’s birthday by capturing his 7th consecutive hot-dog eating championship in front of a crowd of 40,000. He set the world’s record at the Coney Island event by downing 69 franks in 10 minutes.

The title was never in doubt as his nearest competitors were in the mid-40s. In a post-competition interview Chestnut indicated he was hoping for 70. He attributed his success to good tasting dogs, great weather, and his ability to maintain a consistent pace. He added that his body was working for him and things just happened to come together.  While some of Chestnut’s sound bites were similar to Rafael Nadal’s post match interview, seven hot dog championships is a far cry from Nadal’s eight  French Opens.

Sonya Thomas, aka the Black Widow, successfully defended her title as women’s champion by inhaling 36+ dogs. She was disappointed that her totals weren’t higher and stated that even though she felt great, the hot dogs were cooked in water that was hotter than she was used to which made her slow down.

While the accomplishments of Chestnut and Thomas are mind boggling, the nutritional value of 69 hot dogs is even more astonishing. The following information is derived from the website of Nathan’s Famous Frankfurters, event sponsors, www.nathansfamous.com (site numbers are  multiplied by 69 to determine the nutritional value of the hot dogs consumed by Chestnut):

  • Serving size – 8,211 grams
  • Calories – 24,150 grams
  • Calories from fat – 13,110 grams
  • Total fat – 1,518 grams
  • Saturated fat – 552 grams
  • Trans fat 69 grams
  • Cholesterol 3,105 milligrams
  • Sodium 60,030 milligrams
  • Total carbohydrates 1,656 grams
  • Sugar 276 grams
  • Protein 966 grams

Based on a 2,000 calorie diet, the Percent Daily Value (PDV) of the Total fat was 2,385%, Saturated fat 2,760%, Cholesterol 530%, and Sodium 2,480%.  In other words, the 69 hot dogs consumed by Chestnut in 10 minutes contained the PDV of sodium for 25 days.

Wimbledon 2013 – Upsets or Changing of the Guard

Most sports enthusiasts expected the Cubs to win the World Series before either Marion Bartoli (seeded 15th) or Sabine Lasicki (seeded 23rd) reached the finals of Wimbledon 2013.  Based on their seeds they were projected to exit the tourney in the round of 16 and 32.

With due respect to both players, the consensus was that the Jamaicans would win the Olympic bobsledding gold medal before Bartoli would reach the finals at the All England Lawn Tennis Club in the same year as Lasicki.  Their presence in the finals raises the question, “Were the upsets at Wimbledon 2013 an anomaly or were they a sign that a new era of women were joining the top ranks?”

While it is an accomplishment to be ranked in the top 10, only 5 of the top-ranked women (rankings prior to Wimbledon), have won Grand Slam women’s singles events.  The players and their birth years are:

  • Serena Williams  1981
  • Victoria Azarenka  1989
  • Maria Sharapova  1987
  • Agnieszka Radwanska  1989
  • Sara Errani  1987
  • Na Li  1982
  • Angelique Kerber  1988
  • Petra Kvitova  1990
  • Caroline Wozniacki  1990
  • Maria Kirlenko  1987

On average the top 10 players are 26 years old. While this is young by most standards, some of the upsets at Wimbledon are an indication that about half of the top 10 are closer to the end of their careers than to their peak competitive years and their ability to win a Grand Slam singles title.  Serena Williams and Na Li are both over the 30 while Kvitova and Wozniacki are the youngsters at 23.

The American women have a chance to make their presence felt as the changing of the guard continues to unfold over the next 18 months. The 14 American women Wimbledon entrants and their birth year follow:

  • Serena Williams  1981
  • Alison Riske  1990
  • Mallory Burdette  1991
  • Bethanie Mattek-Sands  1985
  • Madison Keys  1995
  • Varvara Lepchenko  1986
  • Sloane Stephens  1993
  • Jamie Hampton  1990
  • Christina McHale 1992
  • Alexa Glatch  1989
  • Lauren Davis  1993
  • Melanie Oudin  1991
  • Coco Vandeweghe  1991
  • Vania King  1989

Nine of the players lost in the first round:

  • Burdette, Hampton, Davis, Oudin, and Vandeweghe are 23 years old or younger.
  • Mattek-Sands, Lepchenko, Glatch, and King are at least 24 years old.

Most of the first round losers are young and have potential for success in future Grand Slams.

Overall the American women won 12 matches and lost 14. First round winners included Serena Williams, Alison Riske, Madison Keys, Sloane Stephens, and Christina McHale. With the exception of Williams the other four are 18 to 23 years old.  McHale lost in the second round and Riske and Keys were third round losers. Williams was upset in the round of 16 and Sloane Stephens lost in the quarterfinals.

Stephens has demonstrated that she is a force to be reckoned with.  Her losses in the 2013 Grand Slams follow:

  • Australian Open – lost to Azarenka (winner) in the semifinals.
  • French Open – lost to Sharapova (finalist) in the quarterfinals.
  • Wimbledon – lost to Bartoli (winner) in the quarterfinals.

On August 26, the U.S. Open begins.  At that time the next step in the evolution of women’s tennis will be showcased. It will be interesting to watch the role that the American women play in the changing of the guard.

 

USTA Men’s Player Development Missing In Action

Wimbledon 2013 began on Monday June 24, and by Thursday June 27, the 11 American men entrants had been dismissed.

First round losers and their birth years included:

  • Steve Johnson  1989
  • Ryan Harrison  1992
  • Wayne Odesnik  1985
  • James Blake  1979
  • Sam Querrey  1987
  • Alex Kuznetsov  1987
  • Michael Russell 1978

These seven players captured 8 sets while losing 24.

The second round was even more depressing as the remaining four players won only 1 set. Second round losers and their birth years included:

  • Bobby Reynolds  1982
  • Denis Kudia  1992
  • John Isner  1985
  • Rajeev Ram  1984

These 11 American men are tremendous athletes – that is not the issue. Since its inception the USTA has spent millions of dollars on player development without producing any Grand Slam competitors or winners.  A closer look at birth years of America’s top men players shows that most are in the same age range as the current top 10 in the world.  In other words, they are closer to retirement than to winning a Grand Slam.  Querrey and Isner are currently ranked in the top 25 (closer to 25 than 1), but they are not serious competitors for a Grand Slam title.

A look at the top 10 men players in the world and their birth years shows:

  • Novak Djokovic  1987
  • Andy Murray  1987
  • Roger Federer  1981
  • David Ferrer  1982
  • Rafael Nadal  1986
  • Tomas Berdych  1985
  • Jo-Wilfried Tsonga 1985
  • Juan Martin Del Potro 1988
  • Richard Gasquet  1986
  • Stanislas Wawrinka  1985.

Only Steve Johnson, Ryan Harrison, and Denis Kudia provide a glimmer of hope for the future.  Looking further down the food chain, the top American juniors include Noah Rubin (third round loser at the French Open), Stefan Kozlov (second round loser at the French Open), and Spencer Papa and Luca Corentelli (first round losers at the French Open).

The future of American men’s tennis is very clear. The USTA Men’s Player Development has not been ready for prime time for a long time – if ever. That is not likely to change in the months ahead.

 

Kerri Walsh Jennings and Daughter Scout give Clinic at King of the Mountain Tournament

The 41st annual King of the Mountain Volleyball Tournament kicked off with a junior clinic directed by AVP stars Kerri Walsh Jennings, Angie Akers, Ryan Mariano, Dax Holdren, and USAV Director of Sport Development, John Kessel.

As part of the event, Walsh-Jennings, along with newly born daughter Scout, provided the group with the following words of advice:

  • People ask me what my strength is and I always tell them it is my heart. I take that from my dad.
  • To become a better player it is necessary to play outside your comfort zone. Be vulnerable.  Play smart, but don’t be afraid to make mistakes. When you are learning you have to try hard when you are on the court, try making plays you are not great at, that is how you learn.
  • Walsh indicated that her toughest opponents were the Brazilians and Chinese players.  The Brazilians are very tough, aggressive, and competitive. The Chinese players are young, they’re hungry, and they don’t make mistakes. kerri walsh jennings and daughter scout
  • Learn the fundamentals. Learn the whole game. When I was young the doctor told me I was going to be 5’8″ tall.  I started crying because I wanted to be as tall as my dad. As a result, I learned to set, hit, and pass the ball. I learned all aspects of the game. That made me a much better player.
  • If you want to play like the best, then watch the best and learn from them. I like to watch Kobe Bryant and the way he moves. When I was a junior my idol was Misty May. I learned how to move from watching her cover the court.
  • When you are playing big points where there might be a tendency to get nervous, stay positive, and focus on one thing. At first it can be easy to think about too many things. As I got better I learned to focus for awhile then turn my brain off and let my body take over.
  • To become a really good player, the most important thing you should think about is footwork.
  • There’s a reason you have teammates. When you play poorly, hopefully they will cover your mistakes. And when they are struggling, hopefully you can cover for them.
  • Everyone likes to spike and hit the “fun” shots when they practice.  It is important to practice all the shots you will hit in a match, even the ones some people think are boring. Those are the shots that win you points, games, and matches.
  • When warming up and practicing, remember that every time you touch the ball, it is a chance to get better.
  • Be nice to yourself on the court.  Great athletes are driven and they are often hard on themselves. I was very tough on myself. I was never as tough on my friends as I was on myself. Be kind to yourself.
  • Confidence comes from within. You’re the one who builds confidence in yourself.

These are great words of advice whether you are a world champion or junior learning to play the sport.

Chirico and Townsend Lead American Juniors at French Open

The results of the American juniors at the French Open paralleled their adult counterparts – the boys were subpar, while the girls had a solid performance.

The four boys posted a combined record of 3-4. Only Noah Rubin reached the third round.

The record of the American boys follows:

First round losers (0-1)

  • Luca Corenteli
  • Spencer Papa

Second round loser (1-1)

  • Stefan Kozlov

Third round loser (2-1)

  • Noah Rubin

The four girls fared better as Louisa Chirico lost in the semifinals.

First round loser (0-1)

  • Christina McKenzie

Second round loser (1-1)

  • Jamie Loeb

Third round loser

  • None

Quarterfinals loser

  • Taylor Townsend (3-1)

Semifinals loser

  • Louisa Chirico (4-1).

The performance of both the boys and girls at the French Open was better than the Australian Open.   Here’s to a strong performance at Wimbledon!

 

Serena Williams Leads Field of American Women in French Open

For the first time in years, the American women made their presence known at the French Open. The 15 American women in the 2013 event  won a total of 23 matches, while losing 14. Serena Williams led the way by capturing her second title at Roland Garros.

On a positive note, 10 of the 15 players were born after 1989. In other words, there appears to be a group of talented players waiting in the wings to fill in when Serena Williams retires.

The record and birth year of the American Women follows.

First round losers (0-1)

  • Grace Min, 1994 Coco Vandeweghe
  • Christina McHale, 1992
  • Venus Williams, 1980
  • Coco Vandeweghe, 1991
  • Lauren Davis, 1993.

Second round losers (1-1)

  • Mallory Burdette, 1991
  • Madison Keys, 1995
  • Shelby Rogers, 1992
  • Vania King, 1989
  • Melanie Oudin, 1991

Third round losers (2-1)

  • Varvara Lepchenko, 1986

Fourth round losers (3-1)

  • Bethanie Mattek-Sands, 1985
  • Jamie Hampton, 1990
  • Sloane Stephens, 1993

Finals

  • Serena Williams, champion (7-0), 1981.

On to Wimbledon, where the U.S. women should make an even stronger showing.