They say :
Extreme Tennis Professional training is a world renown high performance center with an unparalleled reputation for excellence. Our small scaled program has been responsible for the success of many Professional, junior, and college players and aspiring professionals around the world. Headed by Diego Dominguez who has worked and helped develop more top players in USA and around the world than most academies in 14 years of experience, a proof of great results that sets Extreme Tennis Academy apart from the rest.
The Players:
They have an impressive list of past and present players, they are a little bit undefined about what is the bottom line of the age group that they accept. It's impressive that students come from more then 20 different countries.
Their Credo:
" We are not a factory, we are not a Resort, at Extreme Tennis Academy we develop Tennis Champions"
I say:
It's refreshing to see a Tennis Academy from Florida that is not led by over 70 years old "Guru" who knows everything. Also it's nice to know that this Academy is not "living in the 80's" where resorts were ruling the world of wannabe tennis players. However their co- director Giorgio Carneade claims that he was involved in developiing Serena and Venus Williams which makes me really tired. I have now counted all coaches and Managers who were involved in Serena and Venus' life and their years spent with them. So I have come to the "revelation" that Serena and Venus are training for at least 80 years respectively.
Their name "Extreme Tennis" is a little bit extreme but once that you hit the homepage of their website and hear their horrendous music and see the photos of the people involved you realise that they are desperate to be funky or edgy? I'm not sure which one!
They really don't have to do that because their good work speaks for itself.
Contact:
http://www.extremetennisacademy.com
Extreme Tennis Academy
Printable View
-
02-03-2009, 06:07 AMjtasExtreme Tennis Academy
-
08-12-2009, 11:25 AMtennisking1
Is that the Zoolander School of Tennis? You are right about the name dropping with their website. They coached a person who knew the grandmother of a friend who once passed Sampras in the mall parking lot. Geez........ The only guy I knew was Rudy Rake. Maybe if I bleach my hair and wear some hemp/shell necklaces, I could coach there...........:p
-
08-12-2009, 05:06 PMBubo
[QUOTE=jtas;13111][B]
] However their co- director Giorgio Carneade claims that he was involved in developiing Serena and Venus Williams which makes me really tired. I have now counted all coaches and Managers who were involved in Serena and Venus' life and their years spent with them. So I have come to the "revelation" that Serena and Venus are training for at least 80 years respectively.
I cannot understand how so many tennis people like to take credit for something they never done.This is present on any level of tennis play.
There are some tennis coaches who write in their resume that they coached somebody whom they never saw in their life.
All Russians who came in my country at the beginning of 90¨s said that they coached Medvedev;it does not matter whether according to their age was even theoreticaly possible.There is saying,"Lie repeated many times becomes truth."
I really hate this because I think that coaching is very honored and difficult job and as such should be treated.People (coaches) should be recognized by their deeds not words.
When you catch somobody braging about something he/she neved did the best answer is to turn away.
www.mytennistory.com
In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations -
08-12-2009, 08:15 PMtennisking1
[QUOTE=Bubo;16086]
Hey Bubo, where are you from? I am interested as I may know some players from your home country.Quote:
Originally Posted by jtas
-
08-13-2009, 08:19 AMBuboIt does not matter the age of the tennis coach;the only things which matters is how close to their capacity he can bring players.Quote:
Originally Posted by tennisking1
Every tennis coach who improves players performance is success.This may seem as something quite normal.Why in the world would you go to a tennis coach if he/she cannot improve your performance.In many instances not that coach does not improve player¨s performance, but player is worse than before or even quit tennis completely.This scenario is unfortunately very often.
Very good coaches are the ones who improve their players performance time after time.To do that one has to be very knowledgeable, and be able to use this knowledge in practical way because with every player is different problem so in many situation coach has new issues to deal with.This is only possible if a coach is very educated in tennis technique and tactics , sport sciences(physiology, psychology padagody, nutrition, injury prevention, physical conditioning etc.), and is able to apply this knowledge in praxis.
There are very few coaches who posses these qualities.To acquire them one must study different segments of tennis game (ongoing education), and experience to be able to use theoretical knowledge in praxys.For all this, time is needed so it is not usual to see young quality tennis coach.Tennis coach are compared by improvements of their players not how hard they are able to hit the ball.
So one should never misunderstood tennis coach for hitting partner.Tennis coah job is intelectual:he has to diagnose a problem, prescribe medecine, implement this medicine, and see the results of action, and base on it make necessary adjustments.Tennis coach bear all responsibility.Hiting partner is physically imvolved.He is not there to think, but to implement orders in a way to help the player he is hitting against.
www.mytennistory.com
In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations -
08-13-2009, 09:36 AMtennisking1Good point to a degree. However, the biggest problem I have with all of this coaching talk is that the player must learn to think for him or herself. The coach is not out there playing. There are a lot of coaches out there who really don't know the game of tennis and talk a big game. Talk is cheap. You have to understand the high level of tennis that is being played. A coach can't just talk about doing this and that. He must understand it. As a hitting partner and a coach, I can account for that. Sampras used a high level coach in Wilkerson and later Annacone. Both coaches and hitting partners. Higueras did the same with Courier. They were high level players who had similar traits to their players. Both of Sampras' coaches had similar styles to Sampras and had played professionally. Same with Higueras and Courier. Agassi didn't break through big time until he had Brad Gilbert. Also a former pro who was able to hit with Agassi. I think it takes a mixture of both. By the way, don't think that Nick Bollettieri can't get out there and hit. He can. He did for years. So can "Red" Ayme. Tony Roche was the same way. Talking is great, but you have to have been there to take someone else down that road. The only coach I knew that couldn't get out there and hit with his player was Thomas Muster's coach. To be a great coach, you can't just be a hitter, but at the same time, you can't just be a talker either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubo
-
08-15-2009, 10:42 AMBuboCoaching a tennis player from the start to as close as possible to his/her potential is a long process.As player matures as a person coach has to adapt his style of coaching.At the beginning a coach is authority per se, and later on the authority is built on knowledge and behaviour.Quote:
Originally Posted by tennisking1
As player goes through phases of having fun, learning tennis, playing tennis and winning tennis so does coach/player relationship go through certain phases.At highest levels they are partners who openly discuss all issues.Normaly , this is not going to come all of the sudden.What one as a coach does early on, so one has to build on.
So, the player will think for himself (take full responsibility for his actions) if his coach was developing him not only physically, game wise, but as human being as well.
Unfortunately, there are were very few coaches who are willing and able to do it because:
- they do not have this kind of knowledge and experience
- they are too self centered so they think that they are the most important.They cannot see their players surpass them
To conclude:
A coach keep his player in the dark for two reason:
- out of fear because of lack of knowledge
- out of personal problem.Coach thinks that he is above his player.
Good coaches has very strong ego (as well as good players), but coach must understand that he is here because of player, and bringing a player as close as possible to his natural abilities, and at the same help him to develop in healty human being is his most valuable inner reward.
www.mytennistory.com
In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations -
08-15-2009, 01:10 PMtennisking1Correct. You are spot on with your assessment. I have seen many coaches who really think they are the center of the world. That is what I mean by training the player to think for him/her self. Coaches should suggest things with a smile and then ask the player what he or she thinks. Let them learn to coach themselves. They have to in a match. They are the only ones out there. Coaches who are too controlling lose all credibility with a player when they tell their player they must do this and then they do it and the player still loses. I have found in my time that working scenarios with players and then asking them what they think the best thing to do is is the best thing to do. That way when they are in a tough match, they can think for themselves in any situation. It's called maturing as a player. Learning to think for oneself on the court is really the key to the maturation of a player. Jose Higueras was the greatest at this. He didn't tell Courier what to do. He made suggestions and then allowed Courier to make decisions. When Courier lost, he blamed himself and didn't make excuses or look to blame his coach. He knew the final decision on the court was his own. I never once saw Courier look up into the stands and have that "what do I do" look. They worked on situations in practice and Higueras gave suggestions (not orders) and when Courier came across situations in matches, he used his head and played according to what he thought was best as they had worked on every situation possible in practice. Higueras was/is a class act and one of the best coaches ever in my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubo
-
08-16-2009, 12:25 PMBuboQuote:
Originally Posted by tennisking1
This is what I am saying for long time.There is huge difference between quality coaches and the ones who call themselves coaches.Quality coaches do understand the essence of tennis and can bring a player close to his/her potential.The other group does not.How can one teach, coach something to somebody if one does not understand himself.That is the reason that there are just very few quality coaches like just very few quality players.
Coaching is high quality production, not marketing.
www.mytennistory.com
In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations -
08-19-2009, 09:58 AMBuboIt must be drawn distinction between hitting partner and a tennis coach.I talked about it before, but I will say again.Hitting partner is physical job, and a coach is intellectual job.Hitting partner has to be good tennis player (so that he/she can control and place a ball where he/she is told).Tennis coach is intellectual job.Except being knowledgeable in tennis technique, and tactics, he has to be knowledgeable in sport science (biomechanics, physical conditioning, physiology, psychology, nutrition, injury prevention, pedagogy etc).Except that tennis coach has to have general education (foreign language, decisions in everyday situations not stricly related to tennis), leadership (tennis coach is the main person who leads this project of nurrturing a child to professional tennis), excellent teaching skills, and at the same time he has to psychologist to his player.Quote:
Originally Posted by tennisking1
To illustrate difference between tennis coach, and a hitting parner I will use formula 1 car racing as an example.Here hitting partner is a person who changes tires or refill gasoline, and a tennis coach is director of a racing team who organize and lead whole operation.
www.mytennistory.com
In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations -
08-21-2009, 08:05 AMBuboIn my thread professional coaching I stated to be former very good tennis player is prerequisite (the other conditions being the same) for being high level tennis coach.Quote:
Originally Posted by tennisking1
I do not agree with you when you call these coaches the hitting partners.They all were former world class players, and as such they can hit well, but they are not hitting partners.They are high level tennis coaches.All these players besides them had hitting partners.
As I said tennis coach has to be former very good tennis player;one of the reason is that he can hit with his player, but not to be hitting partner.Coach hits with his players in following cases:
- when he teaches them new tennis stroke (menthal and practice stage if)
- by beiing en face with your player coach can notice better how his player plays tactically and technically
- to warm up his player before a match (in special situations)
- while on the road and there is nobody to hit against
In all the other cases is unproductive;being otherwise all these coaches would not coach their players, but would rather play on the tour.
www.mytennistory.com
In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations -
08-21-2009, 09:16 AMtennisking1I guess we all have our different opinions. I can still hit with the tour players and coach them at the same time. My level of tennis got that high. So did Higueras, Annacone, Gilbert, Bruguera, Meligini, Cahill. So the way one coach works it isn't always the way another one works it. I prefer to coach both ways. By being on the other side of the net and then being on the same side of the net as well. It has just worked best for me and the players I have worked with. There is no one set way to get a player to the top. It isn't up to the coach, it's up to the player. Ask Federer, he has no coach. He's tried it three times and he lets them go after a short time. It just doesn't work for him. As for Sharapova, she needs someone to tell her when to breathe and chew her food. It all depends on the player. I know and have coached players that wouldn't have even stepped on the court with me if I hadn't had a world ranking. It was a prerequisite for them. At the same time, there are players who could not care less if their coach played. It just kind of has to fit the player. Neither one of us is wrong in this situation. It's kind of what makes tennis such a neat game.........Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubo
-
08-22-2009, 11:03 AMBuboI will support my point by giving few examples.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubo
To my daughter besides being a father, coach, I was hitting partner, driver, conditioning coach, psychologist, nutricionist, masseur etc.This is exception which just confirms the rule.I did all that because I had tremendous drive to bring her to professional tennis on one hand, and I did not have money to pay all that on the other hand.To try to bring someone to professional tennis this way minimizes his/her chances and produces additional stress .
In normal situation I would stay her tennis coach, but all other posts would be filled with adequate people.
I could hit with my daughter when she was young, or I was teaching her new strokes or improving old ones, but under normal conditions would be very inefficient that coach is a hitting partner too.Tennis coach is the head of operation, and as such he has enough to do.Being a hitting partner would make him more innenficient coach because he would use his energy on hitting with a player instead being concentrated on coaching duties.
I started with my daughter when she was 6 year old so I could hit with her for long time.At the moment when she could beat me , I would hit with her because I did not have other choice (I organized sparring matches, and paid hitting partners, but latter was on and off), or I would like to feel first hand how she reacts in certain situation, or when I would teach her new stroke or improve the old one.
Many times because I had no other choice I would do certain drills with her, that is work on automatic stage.That was innefective twofold:
- for me:I would get very tired, and my knees would hurt me, and in last period my wrist because her ball was too fast for me, and I was late hitting the ball (no bandage would help)
- for her:my ball was too slow so she was hurting too because she did not get the ball she had to face on pro tour.
So, there is clear distinction between tennis coach, and hitting partner.This does not mean tha coach does not hit with his/her player, but doing it on daily basis is inneffective for both:tennis player and tennis coach.
Tennis coach is a head of operation and he could hit with his player sporadically.It would be very innefficient and innefective that he does job of a hitting partner on daily basis even if he could.On the other hand hitting partner is not qualified to be a tennis coach.
www.mytennistory.com
In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations -
08-22-2009, 11:22 AMtennisking1You confirmed my point when you said you were her hitting partner and coach. A coach needs to be able to do all of these things or I don't really consider them a coach. I never gave massages, but the rest was just part of the job. That is why I had an issue with all of these parents calling themselves coaches. I never said that you weren't as you play the game. A parent can be a great coach, but many of them either don't know the game or are not about the player, but about themselves. That is a problem with many of the academies. If they were truly about the player improving, the money would come regardless. There would be no need for lies or false promises. Most parents can see when the coach is putting forth effort and caring about their child. They tend to be willing to pay for it when they know the real effort is there. Obviously you have seen some troubled academies in your time as have many of the parents on here. The best thing to do is to scout them out personally and identify a coach that you would like for your child to work with. I'm sure Extreme has some good coaches, but I have to laugh at the Zoolander like model faces being put on by the head guy on their website. Is there a catwalk leading to their courts where he does runway modeling? That would be a different twist! Extreme Modeling and Tennis Academy!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubo
-
08-22-2009, 05:34 PMBuboTo continue to prove my point about necessary distinction between tennis coach and hitting partner.By this I do not want to minimize the role of hitting partner, but to put role of each in proper perspective.As I said tennis coach is the director of operation, and hitting partner is one of operatives.Hitting partner has certain role which nobody else cannot accomplish but good hitting partner.Quote:
Originally Posted by tennisking1
I will support this by an example.
In 1975 my country played in Davis Cup against Soviet Union.National tennis federation was in bad shape as is today so players who pllayed for Davis Cup had to organize their own practice for match against Soviet Union.In the club where I played was one of the player.He organized his practice by taking three of young boys for hitting sessions.One was in the morning, I was at noon, and one was in the afternoon.He told us what to do, and we would do it.We were hitting partners.With each of us he would stay on the court for 1.5 hours each day.This was going for two weeks.The name of the player is Boro Jovanovic (number 8 ranked professional at the time, and Wimbledon double finalist).
The weather was hot, but I was in good shape because I paid very much attention to my physical conditioning, and Boro Jovanovic passed his prime (36 years old at the time).During my first practice session 11.30 - 13:00h I felt very weak (it was sunny day, and to mee everything became dark), and I told him that I have to go to bathroom.I did not have to go to bathroom, I went to bar and ordered water, limon, and sugar to try to recover.I could not so he came to see what I am doing so long in bathroom.
Each new day I felt better and better.What happened first day ? My CR (control rating )was way below his;in plain English his ball was too fast for me.Even three of us were good young tennis players we were not adequate hitting partners to Boro Jovanovic although he was not in his prime time.So, he did not have adequate preparation for Davis Cup.On the other hand, I was from day to day adapting more and more to his ball speed so after 14 days being as hitting partner I played tournament , and bit a player who till then bit me every time.This time his ball seemed somehow slow to me.
What this example illustrates?As coach has to be qualified to coach so hitting partner has to have quality to be hitting partner to someone.In other words what I am saying is that the coaches cannot be hitting partners to their world class players because they do not have CR which correspodents to CR of their players.If these two do not match then this is waste of time;the same as being coached by so called coach.
So high class tennis coaches (Annacone, Gilbert, Roche, Higueras etc.) are not hitting partners, but coaches who are able to hit because they used to be world class tennis players.They are not hitting partners because their ball is much slower than ball on the pro tour.The main reason for that is that they are not in physical shape they used to be, and tennis is very physical sport.If it would be otherwise they would not coach, but play.
Can anyone imagine Tony Roche hitting on daily basis against Ivan Lendl or Roger Federer?He would have to leave a tennis court using walking stick, and still the players would not benefit from his sacrifice.So he was not their hitting partner, but their tennis coach.
For example,Sampras as young player was Lendl¨s hitting partner at one time or another.This is how it works.
www.mytennistory.com
In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations -
08-23-2009, 04:16 AMBuboQuote:
Originally Posted by tennisking1
Nick Bollettieri can hit very well for someone who did not play competitve tennis, but it would be waste of time and even dangerous that he hits against the players he coached.
At one point ,at his academy were world¨s best male talents who reached professional heights by hitting against each other (the one who survived became one of the best tennis players in the world;one who did not had to quit the game because of injuries).
Can anyone imagine Nick being on the court with Jimmy Arias and being his hitting partner?Jimmy would take his arm off!
www.mytennistory.com
In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations -
08-23-2009, 05:21 AMBubo
Even better example to prove my point is if we turn to boxing.There,coach/trainer will do some shadow boxing with his boxer, but when it comes to real sparring/hitting will hire sparring partner.
Quite logical!
Coach used to be somebody¨s sparring/hitting partner, and sparring/partner may one day become a coach, but distinction between the two is very clear.
www.mytennistory.com
In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations -
08-23-2009, 09:21 AMBuboQuote:
Originally Posted by tennisking1
It is not important that tennis coach has similar playing style as his player.I already illustrated this when coach taught her player continental grip for forehand and ruined her long term chances in professional tennis.
For tennis coach is important that he is experienced and knowledgeable so based on players¨s capabilities and predicted environment in professional tennis, can make quality decisons which will bare long term fruit for the tennis player.This can only do very few quality tennis coaches.
www.mytennistory.com
In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations -
08-23-2009, 12:16 PMBuboQuote:
Originally Posted by tennisking1
Talking is great if it has some meaning.Talk will have some meaning if tennis coach has experience and knowledge, otherwise will sound like broken player;the same thing all over again.
You noticed correctly tha the ones who were there have advantage ove the ones who were not there.This is why I say that all other things being equal, the better coah will be the one who was better player because he saw how thinks look like there, and he can prepare his/her player what to expect.
www.mytennistory.com
In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations -
08-23-2009, 04:35 PMtennisking1
You make sense. When I was talking about the coach should play the same style game, I meant the player needs to hire the coach that played that style of game as he will be able to understand how to get better at it and also give the player some perspectives that he may not have had before. Higueras had Chang and Courier. All were claycourt kings. Paul Annacone was a pretty good all-court player in his day and especially good at serving and volleying. He was perfect for Sampras. I would hesitate to have Thomas Muster be Sampras' or Patrick Rafter's coach. But who knows? I've been fooled many times before. As for Bollettieri hitting......Ha ha ha ha ha ha. I could only imagine him going out their with Courier or Phillipoussis. God knows Phillipoussis might have killed him with a serve. I didn't mean all coaches should be hitting partners. However, if they can get out there and play with their players, they will have the full attention of the player and usually the player is more willing to listen. When I left my coach who was a very good teaching pro to go work with Lawson Duncan, my game skyrocketed. I really listened to him and wanted to learn from him. Mainly because he had been a top 50 ATP player and I knew that he had been there and knew what he was talking about. He hit with me and we drilled together like maniacs and then I played matches against college players and anyone I could find that could give me a match. So, you are right about Bollettieri, but I think maybe you can see where I am coming from in my statement.
-
08-24-2009, 04:47 AMBubo
As a player I grew on clay court so I was counterpouncher;good and consistent ground srtokes, good passing shots, a lot of running and retrieving, and willingness to stay whole day on the tennis court.
My style of play did not stop me that I teach my daughter excellent serve, volleys and overhead smash.
I did not have coach who could teach me as a player these strokes, but that does not mean that I will do the same.
I taught my daughter to be all-around player.
www.mytennistory.com
In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations -
08-24-2009, 08:30 AMBuboQuote:
Originally Posted by tennisking1
This is very relatively.It depends on the player maturity as a tennis player and a person, depends on phase of learning process (mental, practice, automatic), on player personality etc.At he beginning coach is leader, and what he says is law.There is not reason to discuss with a player because he cannot give useful feedback.Good coach is one whose coaching style is such that as a player mature as a person and as a human being has more and more to say.That means that coachning sty le changes from being dictator to being democrat including something in between.Even at the highest level of tennis coach is leader who proposes innovations to a player and he is open for discussion.
By cooperating with and discussing with a player coach does not delagate resposibility to a player.Coach responisbility is to coach to teach and later to coach to perform , and he is judged based on these criterias.
There are many coaches who would like to call themselves coaches but would not take resposibility for his coaching.They come up with different excuses when their player lost (nothing to do with them), and they praise themselves when their player win (very little credit to a player).
There is one so called coach from my country who did not know how to coach to learn so he came with original idea,"Coach duty is just to throw tennis balls, and if a child is talented enough he will learn by himself".
This was his response because he knew nothing about teaching tennis technique, and wanted to be a coach.
The problem is that he did not see himself in the mirror so he even wrote tennis book on tennis technique.Nice title (The energized Tennis Ball) pictures,but content was full of nonsense, useless.
www.mytennistory.com
In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations -
08-24-2009, 01:24 PMteachestennis
I just want to say thanks to both tennisking1 and Bubo for the above great discussion. A lot of great insight can be gleaned from their sharing their respective experiences. I agree with a lot of what was said. Also, as part of my History of Tennis Instruction book that I have partially published online, I have interviewed a lot of coaches, and when I coached in California in 2007, I had a chance to speak several times with Dr. Pete Fischer, who has been coaching Vince, known for changing coaches like shirts since he dumped his father nine years ago. At 34, Vince made it to the 2008 Australian Open quarters then coached by Fischer.
Bubo, I enjoyed your tennis story and read everything and you are correct, taking someone from scratch is very rare like you did. Even Bollettieri admitted in 2007 he had never taken a player from scratch all the way to the pros though the then 7 year old he was taking over was already a phenom when he decided to take her on, so I don't know if she'll count. Dr. Pete Fisher of course, was the primary coach for young Pete Sampras from 8 to 18 though because he was a doctor, Sampras had to go to other coaches to play full time, such as Robert Lansdorp. Interesting that Sampras never credits Lansdorp publicly on his biographies and public interviews, and after I did my research, I think I understand why but I don't want to disparage Landsdorp here because in my book, I am undecided how to portray him, kind of a dinosaur forced to live in the modern age. You guys are funny and right on how coaches who work with a player as a hitting partner or just temporarily are wanting to credit such as for Venus and Serena. Richard used a lot of people to help his daughter I discovered; though he was a marketing genius and played the big three against each other until he got Macci to bite.
Lansdorp takes credit for Tracy Austin, but I've spoken with Pam Austin who gives a different viewpoint given Tracy was from a tennis family of champions and was going to be playing tennis full time from her first steps as a human which explains why Vic Braden wound up with her at 4 and 5. Macci tries to take credit for Capriati but Jimmy Evert was coaching her three times a week and developed her strokes with her father. One coach who worked at Macci's told me when Jennifer arrived there at age 10, she could beat every 18 year old girl there from the baseline if she didn't have to serve. Is Macci responsible for her being a champion or did he just have a hand?
Anyway, Fischer has done something truly unique in the annals of coaching. He takes Sampras at age 8 (Sampras' family had moved from Washington DC)and studies the great pro strokes and biomechanically figures out how to teach Sampras the modern tennis swing because he doesn't have preconceptions to teach something silly like the Standard Method. When Pete becomes famous, the NY Times hires a local California freelance sports writer to interview Fischer as Pete's coach and explain how he did it. This female writer has a tall eight year old daughter who is not that interested in basketball despite her famous bloodlines. She lives 60 miles down the coast from Fischer but asks will he look at her daughter to see if she can learn tennis. The mom/writer winds up driving three times a week and Fischer starts the process all over again, even teaching her to emulate Laver's one handed BH, and this little girl would be coached from scratch and win the 1997 Doubles 18 and unders title at the US Open with one of the hardest serves in all of women's tennis, just like Sampras had an incredible serve. Though Fischer could not coach her at into the pros due to some personal problems, the girl reached the Wimbledon semi's before Davenport crushed her which may or may not have had something to do with that same morning it came out that Alexandra Stephenson was Julius Erving's daughter. Stephenson had back then the third hardest women's serve ever measure, as Fischer taught her the same methodology he used with Sampras. Fischer took two from scratch and should be credited for two top twenty players, one on each tour and one an all time great. Very impressive.
If you guys know any stories I should add to the History of Tennis Instruction, published on www.moderntenniscoaches.com in the MTM Library, I will add them or feel free to let me know if you think I misportrayed anything. As noted, a lot of revisionist history goes on in tennis. I have the opinion that Tom Stow might have been the greatest tactical coach who ever lived? Are you familiar with him and the many coaches he developed? (Stefanki Brothers, Doug King, Brent Abel, Jim McLennan, and many more) Also, with pro players, no one has a track record as good as Stefanki, or am I wrong. We don't hear about the ones that Nicky B. couldn't help (with Agassi maybe bashing Nick a little unfairly given Nick did provide a playground for Andre, at least). -
08-24-2009, 02:50 PMtennisking1I think you nailed it. I don't believe anyone who has ever played tennis and made it to the top tiers can credit just one person for getting them there. Bollettieri had Red Ayme who really knew his stuff and did a whole lot of hitting. Stefanki is a great coach. Higueras has a phenomenal professional coaching background as does Bob Brett. Brad Gilbert as well. The more we talk about this, the more I realize that there is just no telling. Look at Thomas Muster. Ronnie Leitgeb couldn't hit the side of a barn with a tennis ball. It truly is up to the player as to whether they make it or not, and even then it doesn't mean they will succeed. What kind of stories are you looking for? I have more than I can say. Some funny, some not........Quote:
Originally Posted by teachestennis
-
08-26-2009, 02:07 PMteachestennisThank you for your comments. I learn a lot from you and Bubo. Here is my entry on Bollettieri and I was curious to see if you think it represents him accurately. I also wonder what was your experience with System 5. I heard it drove Agassi nuts which is why he attacked Bollettieri so fiercely. It was bad enough with McEnroe's claim that Nick didnt' know anything about tennis, and Nick even admitted his faked it his first few years but observed and learned quickly. The System 5 debacle was a mess. I loved it, used it with good results (compared to what I got) but in the end, you can't compress infinity into 25 instantaneouos computations. What was your opinion of System 5, Nick's "legacy" and "gift" which I treat in my 1992 entry on History of Tennis Instruction.Quote:
Originally Posted by tennisking1
Feel free to correct anything below or offer feedback.
In 1978, the Nick Bollettieri Tennis Academy (NBTA) opens at The Colony Beach and Tennis Resort in Florida, with a one year tuition of $12,000. Nick’s philosophy: “When you put good players with good players, you get better players. From better players, you get champions.” Nick's philosophy proved correct. Other than national associations tennis schools, such as existed in Spain, the NBTA was the first full-time tennis boarding school to combine intense training on the court with a custom-designed academic curriculum and would later evolve and set the standard for a world class tennis academy that addressed physical, academic, and mental conditioning for players. John McEnroe stated that Bollettieri 'doesn't know anything about tennis'. What's even funnier is that Bollettieri in his 1995 autobiography admits: 'When I first started coaching, I faked it. I pretended to know more than I did. I bullsh***ed my way through. But I looked and I listened, and I learned.' For ten years NBTA was the only academy where the best players could gather to play fulltime. One of his first year groups included a 14 year old kid from Buffalo, New York named Jimmy Arias who hit a "unique" forehand, jumping off both feet with a strong, semi-western grip followed by a long wrap around follow through around his opposite shoulder. Nick observes this forehand's effectiveness which looks very much like the forbidden aforementioned Tom Okker forehand. After Ivan Lendl appears on the pro scene with a huge "inside out" forehand, within a few years, Nick decides to adopt and market the Bollettieri "Killer Forehand," but Nick, like most coaches, was not able to transit belief into a written formula for the masses. Arias turned pro at 16, reached number 5 in the world, came down with Mononucleosis at 20, and after a layoff from tennis, after 21, never regained his forehand mastery, even though coached by Nick, who blamed it on the transition to graphite racquets from wood. The importance of Jimmy Arias' forehand should be noted because though it was already used by pros before him as well as a growing number of Spanish players, it was the first time American kids got to see the "modern forehand" from one of their own. No one in USA tennis royalty then taught players to hit like this, because Oscar was only recently back from Spain and teaching below the radar in Florida, yet kids all over the USA, including Jim Courier, who reached number one with a full western grip in 1991, credit watching Arias as a primary influence. Arias was brought to Nick after being taught by his father, who just happened to be an engineer, which I find ironic given Oscar applied engineering principles to decide what forehand technique was most biomechanically efficient. Arias no doubt influenced Bollettieri, who admits Arias inspired his "killer forehand" philosophy. In 1981, Nick moved permanently to 34th Street in Bradenton, Florida where to this day, Nick continues to draw the world's top juniors into his sandbox, from which emerges a champion, which of course, he is always personally responsible for. Many people consider him the greatest coach ever in terms of influence on the game, given Nick finally recently reached ten in terms of #1 players he's worked with (Robert Lansdorp would disagree as to who is the greatest coach, but then Lansdorp was seen at a recent US Open walking around with a shirt listing the #1 players he's worked with). Whether Nick's teaching is what actually made those players champions is a subject for another debate as Nick is not without his critics, even among prominent tennis royalty. Arguments will always rage over whether to count achievements of players, like Boris Becker, who only turned to Bollettieri having established themselves as champions, but Nick has earned clout and respect that makes him a key figure in any tennis history. Bollettieri, maybe in order to attract players he might otherwise not, used to give scholarships too freely and was forced for financial reasons to sell to IMG in 1987 run it as part of IMG business. In Jan 2009, IMG fired the three top heads at NBTA and Nick suddenly appeared full time instead of his previous part time committment while he coached players on tour. In the 1992 heading I discuss Nick's personal gift and what he hoped would be his teaching legacy to the game of tennis: System Five. Nick's greatest contribution to tennis was that though tennis schools had existed before his, he redefined the concept of "tennis academy." The success of the academy has given rise to a number of myths. It is not dominated by Eastern European teenagers being groomed or thrown overboard, depending on their tennis ability. It is an elite sports boarding school, housing close to 300 tennis scholars from 70-plus different countries, most of them paying their own way. Anyone can apply, if they can meet the annual fees of roughly $50,000 for a junior boarder for the September to May program which inlcudes room and board. Another myth is that every student wants, or even expects, to be a professional. In fact, around 70 per cent have aspirations no greater than being good enough to win sports scholarships to American universities. That still leaves 70 to 80 students who are dreaming or at least hoping to enjoy a career-sustaining level on the professional tour. 'Our message is always you're more likely not to make it than make it,' says Carolina Murphy, the admissions director. 'I've lost count of the amount of parents who apply for trials or scholarships only to find that their kids were big fish in small ponds back home, but actually average or lower by our standards.' What is certainly not a myth is the Bollettieri work ethic, embodied by long, physically tough days, months of practice, and crucially, competitive action. 'You're not just coming here for a tennis lesson,' says David 'Red' Ayme, one of Bollettieri best known coaches. 'You're here to compete, and competition is at hand, at all levels, 365 days a year.' Courts packed with a mix of youngsters and pros, even in the humid dog day afternoons, prove such. The attention to detail on non-tennis development is staggering, including a mind coaching unit, media and drama department and video analysis suites. And never far away is the founder and figurehead, Bollettieri. -
08-26-2009, 04:42 PMtennisking1
[QUOTE=teachestennis;16427]Thank you for your comments. I learn a lot from you and Bubo. Here is my entry on Bollettieri and I was curious to see if you think it represents him accurately. I also wonder what was your experience with System 5.
Feel free to correct anything below or offer feedback.
In 1978, the Nick Bollettieri Tennis Academy (NBTA) opens at The Colony Beach and Tennis Resort in Florida, with a one year tuition of $12,000. Nick’s philosophy: “When you put good players with good players, you get better players. From better players, you get champions.” Nick's philosophy proved correct. Other than national associations tennis schools, such as existed in Spain, the NBTA was the first full-time tennis boarding school to combine intense training on the court with a custom-designed academic curriculum and would later evolve and set the standard for a world class tennis academy that addressed physical, academic, and mental conditioning for players. John McEnroe stated that Bollettieri 'doesn't know anything about tennis'. What's even funnier is that Bollettieri in his 1995 autobiography admits: 'When I first started coaching, I faked it. I pretended to know more than I did. I bullsh***ed my way through. But I looked and I listened, and I learned.' For ten years NBTA was the only academy where the best players could gather to play fulltime. One of his first year groups included a 14 year old kid from Buffalo, New York named Jimmy Arias who hit a "unique" forehand, jumping off both feet with a strong, semi-western grip followed by a long wrap around follow through around his opposite shoulder. Nick observes this forehand's effectiveness which looks very much like the forbidden aforementioned Tom Okker forehand. After Ivan Lendl appears on the pro scene with a huge "inside out" forehand, within a few years, Nick decides to adopt and market the Bollettieri "Killer Forehand," but Nick, like most coaches, was not able to transit belief into a written formula for the masses. Arias turned pro at 16, reached number 5 in the world, came down with Mononucleosis at 20, and after a layoff from tennis, after 21, never regained his forehand mastery, even though coached by Nick, who blamed it on the transition to graphite racquets from wood. The importance of Jimmy Arias' forehand should be noted because though it was already used by pros before him as well as a growing number of Spanish players, it was the first time American kids got to see the "modern forehand" from one of their own. No one in USA tennis royalty then taught players to hit like this, because Oscar was only recently back from Spain and teaching below the radar in Florida, yet kids all over the USA, including Jim Courier, who reached number one with a full western grip in 1991, credit watching Arias as a primary influence. Arias was brought to Nick after being taught by his father, who just happened to be an engineer, which I find ironic given Oscar applied engineering principles to decide what forehand technique was most biomechanically efficient. Arias no doubt influenced Bollettieri, who admits Arias inspired his "killer forehand" philosophy. In 1981, Nick moved permanently to 34th Street in Bradenton, Florida where to this day, Nick continues to draw the world's top juniors into his sandbox, from which emerges a champion, which of course, he is always personally responsible for. Many people consider him the greatest coach ever in terms of influence on the game, given Nick finally recently reached ten in terms of #1 players he's worked with (Robert Lansdorp would disagree as to who is the greatest coach, but then Lansdorp was seen at a recent US Open walking around with a shirt listing the #1 players he's worked with). Whether Nick's teaching is what actually made those players champions is a subject for another debate as Nick is not without his critics, even among prominent tennis royalty. Arguments will always rage over whether to count achievements of players, like Boris Becker, who only turned to Bollettieri having established themselves as champions, but Nick has earned clout and respect that makes him a key figure in any tennis history. Bollettieri, maybe in order to attract players he might otherwise not, used to give scholarships too freely and was forced for financial reasons to sell to IMG in 1987 run it as part of IMG business. In Jan 2009, IMG fired the three top heads at NBTA and Nick suddenly appeared full time instead of his previous part time committment while he coached players on tour. In the 1992 heading I discuss Nick's personal gift and what he hoped would be his teaching legacy to the game of tennis: System Five. Nick's greatest contribution to tennis was that though tennis schools had existed before his, he redefined the concept of "tennis academy." The success of the academy has given rise to a number of myths. It is not dominated by Eastern European teenagers being groomed or thrown overboard, depending on their tennis ability. It is an elite sports boarding school, housing close to 300 tennis scholars from 70-plus different countries, most of them paying their own way. Anyone can apply, if they can meet the annual fees of roughly $50,000 for a junior boarder for the September to May program which inlcudes room and board. Another myth is that every student wants, or even expects, to be a professional. In fact, around 70 per cent have aspirations no greater than being good enough to win sports scholarships to American universities. That still leaves 70 to 80 students who are dreaming or at least hoping to enjoy a career-sustaining level on the professional tour. 'Our message is always you're more likely not to make it than make it,' says Carolina Murphy, the admissions director. 'I've lost count of the amount of parents who apply for trials or scholarships only to find that their kids were big fish in small ponds back home, but actually average or lower by our standards.' What is certainly not a myth is the Bollettieri work ethic, embodied by long, physically tough days, months of practice, and crucially, competitive action. 'You're not just coming here for a tennis lesson,' says David 'Red' Ayme, one of Bollettieri best known coaches. 'You're here to compete, and competition is at hand, at all levels, 365 days a year.'
Good write up. It is accurate. The System 5 approach is just another way to break a stroke down. I tended to be with the higher ranked juniors and pros, so I did little teaching in that method. And yes, we were always honest with parents and kids about making it. The tough thing is is that when you are assessing a 12 year old or younger, you have not allowed the time for the hormones to kick in. Some kids would go from the next Jim Courier to the next hormonal maniac just like that. So, it really was hard to say when anyone was going to be the next big thing. I always train kids to work toward a college scholarship. There are numerous colleges out there and they can have 4 years of school paid for. Anything over that is gravy. If you make it into the pros, awesome. If not, get your education paid for. Heck, I thought I was going to be the next great thing. Boy was I wrong. I used to beat Woodruff and Spadea and all those guys, but once I got into the pros, every single match was a battle. No more freebies. What took me off the tour was a nasty heat stroke. Bollettieri is a great coach, but he is really a motivator. Ayme and Brooks are his go to guys. They were the strong hitters. Then add the phenomenal players when he needed to call in a hitting partner. It made the academy strong. Saddlebrook is a great place to train for the established players, but not so much for the learning beginner. Lots of drills and matchplay, but lacking in the teaching department unless you got on the court with Alvero, Jimmy Brown, or myself. Many of the other guys were just knowledgeable in drills and feeding balls. Rene Moller was quite good as was David Taylor, but David got into it with Howard Moore and told him to kiss off. I did the same. Nothing made me madder than to have someone like Ashley Harkleroad or Mardy Fish or someone who was up and coming request me to go with them to a tournament only to be told no so that the corporate boys and the idiots at SFX sports management group could go. They wanted to be seen and at the time, Ashley, Mardy, and some others were brand new on the tour and had no say so in what happened. That's why Saddlebrook can't keep top pro coaches. It's all about them. If I were going to send my kid to an academy, it would be to Bollettieri. Hey, my kid might not make it, but that's just part of it. If he puts in the time, effort, and work ethic, he will by all means become a tremendous tennis player. They offer that to every kid that comes there, but it is up to the kid to put forth the effort. If the player does that, they will be on the top tier courts eventually. No doubt about it. Those coaches (including myself) will not poison a group by adding a talented player who has no work effort or does not want to work. It hurts the entire group. Better to have the less talented worker who really brings some drive to the drills and makes the other players want to play. That is why so many have fallen through the cracks. Many of those kids whose parents claimed that there kids were so good but weren't given the chance at Bollettieri were not watching their kids half ass their way through drills, not show up on time, not put forth any effort. Academies are wonderful things, but it is truly up to the player to take the reigns and ride if he/she wants to be great. All the talent in the world means nothing if you don't work at it. And that was one of Nick's biggest beliefs.............. -
08-27-2009, 04:48 AMBubo
In coaching there too much selling and deceiving.I would like that there is objective algorithm to judge the quality of certain coach;the same as in ATP and WTA.There , one may say that 300 ATP can almost beat everybody, but it is not recommended because such statement show that person as uncompetent.When one is 300 ATP there are good reasons why he is 300, and not 50 ATP.
In coaching such objective criteria does not exist so as I said there are lot of selling and deceiving going on.Actually , most of coaches spend the most time on selling, and nothing on self improvement, and improvement of necessary knowledgeand skills.
Considering that there is not objective criteria, perceived coaches qualities are mostly based on intangibles such as:talk,promises.Coaches are judged and perceived by parents of children who mostly know nothing about the game by the way how they present themselves not what they are actually as coaches (knowledge, experience, results).These categories are beyond parents¨s comprehention.
Paradoxically the same parents who know nothing about the game will make myth out of some coaches, and will burry anothers.
The same is with newsmen.They write about something they know nothing.
There is very poor coach ethic.Do you know any coach who would say thank you, this task is above my head.No, they take on all jobs no matter how unsuitable they are for them.
At the beginning, it is very difficult to make right choice for parents.Righ choice is main ingredient for succes or failure.Later on, everything is obvious, but it is too late because it is impossible to make up for lost time.
www.mytennistory.com
In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations -
08-27-2009, 09:22 AMtennisking1Not all academies and coaches are bad Bubo. You make it seem like there is noone with any ability out there working in the academies. I worked there and I assure you, just ask the players what I can do. I don't talk a big game. I just get results. I was around 300 on the ATP and I stopped because of a heat stroke. I beat Sebastian Grosjean when I was just under 400 in the world. And yes, I have watched Nick Bollettieri tell parents that the task of getting their child into the pros was beyond him. I've done the same thing. That was the great thing about Bollettieri Academy. There were enough students and enough money being made to where you could be honest with them. It's funny how so many people on here have this negative attitude toward academies, but the actual pros train there. They decide where they want to go and guess what, Bollettieri and Saddlebrook are the top 2. There is no one way to get there. It isn't some perfect coach who can make the player get there. It is all in the player. Period. I've been there and done that. Yes, there are academies out there that are sub-standard, but saying that Bollettieri is is just idiotic. If Nick thinks they have it, he gives them scholarships. Otherwise, those kids and parents are honestly told that they probably won't make it. Most parents just can't take it when their kid just isn't good enough. They spend the money and just don't have it. We can talk about how a great coach can make a player great, and I say crap. It's up to the player. I've worked with 7 top 100 ATP tour players, both as a hitting partner and as a part-time coach. I've worked with numerous other ATP players who were outside of the top 100 and I can rightfully say that they had it. They would have gotten there without me. Period. It is all up to the player. All of this Zen and spiritual stuff is great, but in the end, you had better be a soldier as a player and prepare to take it back down to basics and hit the frickin' ball. In the end, that's what it is all about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubo
-
08-28-2009, 09:21 AMBuboQuote:
Originally Posted by tennisking1
In all my posts I was pretty constant in my opinion;in another words I based on my knowledge and experience I have clear opinion on many tennis isssues so I state them as long as I am proved wrong based on arguments:Then, I will apologize, and change my opinion.
I never said that all tennis academies are bad , and that there are not quality coaches who work there.I said that that generally speaking tennis academies will not improve tennis player if his/her parents are paying.Tennis academies are good if they choose somebody to sponsor because they estimated that a player has good potential to become world class player, and they will make multiple return on investment in the future.
They are good just in this case, and there are just few academies which have quality staff who is able to do that.In all the other cases tennis academies are just money machines;one does not get in return what he paid for.
My conclusion is based on personal experience, and on the experience of the players I coached
www.mytennistory.com
In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations -
08-28-2009, 09:49 AMtennisking1I hate to say this, but regardless of how good one is as a coach, if the player doesn't have it, they won't make it. There are plenty of players who paid full price at those academies that are phenomenal players and have gotten a lot better. That is my experience. Why don't you come on over to the states and spend a week training? You might just learn something and it might change your opinion. Have you ever trained or worked with any of these academies? I mean, what do you base your statements on? Very few get scholarships are given and most of those players seem to come back year after year and they paid to go there. Take a week and enter yourself into Nick's academy and then make an educated statement. Many players bad mouth when they don't get what they want or just aren't good enough to go to the next level. It's a pride thing. I will leave this post alone from now on, but Nick is a personal friend of mine as is Martina Hingis. You have made some statements that have absolutely no factual basis and you don't know these people and have not spent any time around them. After you or one of your players spends a week with Nick or one of his coaches and then you or your daughter plays Martina a best two out of three, I'll be glad to discuss things. Otherwise, it's pointless and you are just offering an opinion.........Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubo
-
08-28-2009, 11:45 AMBuboQuote:
Originally Posted by tennisking1
I am generally talking about tennis academies, not specifically about any of them except if I have first hand experience.
First, I mentioned three of them in which my daughter was enroled.She was there from couple of days to few month.I do not have to mention that she came back worst off than she left.
What can you expect from people who present 400 that is 300 WTA player who was there few days as their own product.Very poor ethic, and these people should not be called tennis coaches.How these people can work with children/young people?
Nick Bollettieri will always have his very high place in tennis coaching history, and I do not have enough information to compare his cons and pros.I can just tell about certain actions or behaviour which I dislike to any tennis coach, so Nick Bollettieri.
Good tennis coah differ from others that he can make educated guess which is more probable to go through than guessed by uncompetent person.This quality have just the very best.With this quality goes along respect and responsibility.If one has this quality many parents will come for advice.Responsibilty is on the person that if his guess is far off he looses credibility.Let illustrate this:when I was in Spain, I talked with some quality domestic coaches and they told that it is no problem for a player to get sponsors if he/she is recommended by recognized tennis coach, but if recommedations greatly differ from actual outcome, one¨s credibility is gone.So, they are careful.
Nick for one player from my country (that player came to me few month later) said that he is world class potential, but put him in z - group.He knew for sure that the player is no potential at all (he could not pass qualification in his age grup back home), but obviously he read his father mind.This is very wrong, and this is abuse.I do not like this kind of behaviour from any tennis coach especially world class.So this experience contradict with what you say about praxis in academy.
In this case Nick was personally involved, not his staff.
There another case with this academy where player did not see Nick at all.
Pretty good player from my country (I know because he would hit against player I coached) went to Nick¨s academy.One day his father called me home.He was so excited so he had to share his excitement.They told (in academy) they never seen somebody hit as hard as his son.Right away did not smell good.He played well , but not so well that somebody would state something like that.I asked his father how did they come to this conclusion, and he said that they would put against his son 2 ball machines (250 balls each), and he would hit , and hit , and hit.Everything was clear to me.This was sheer quantity, no quality, and could not lead to success.
Epilogue:the player came home, and he was hitting hard, but his balls were dispersing - had not direction, and depth.He had false hopes that he was better while he was much worse player than at the time when he went to the academy.Obviously nobody paid any attention to his tennis.
These are reasons why so many people who were in one of tennis academies (not just specifically Bollettieri¨s )speak against them.These are honest people.Some would recommend in spite of own bad experience.
To conclude:tennis academies are generaly bad:
- for anyone who wants to start tennis on right foot
- for players who are not good enough to sign with one of the management groups who invest in them, and manage their tennis career
Tennis academies are good for:
- mature tennis players who are actually their own coaches and need a lot of sparring
Word class players or potential world class players who are in tennis academies or come periodically are just formally there.Former ones come with their own staff and use just facility, and latter ones have completely different treatment than the rest of the students.
Good illustration for that would would be racket bought in tennis store, and the same brand of racket with which one of the world class players plays.They have very few things in common - brand,name (facility).So is the case with ordinary students, and these two groups.
Once again, tennis academies are money machines so they do not need good tennis staff.There are few exceptions, but their are not there for ordinary students.
www.mytennistory.com
In Depth Description of Bringing a Child Up a Competitive Ladder with Advices and Recommendations -
08-28-2009, 01:12 PMtennisking1First of all, we never used ball machines at Bollettieri. I never even saw one the entire time I was there except when the new S.A.M. was being brought about. #2, everyone comes to the academies thinking they are going to be the next big thing. I don't believe that Nick told anyone they were going to be world class and then put them in the weaker groups. If he did, he saw potential, but sometimes you have to work your way up. It is inevitable. Just because someone has a 125 mile an hour serve at 15 doesn't mean he or she has anything else. It takes everything to make it. World class players were built from the ground up quite often at Bollettieri. Maybe with a little patience, the kid would have seen things come to fruition like Nick said (or supposedly said), but everyone wants immediate gratification. That isn't how it works there. You come in and you had better find a way to work your way up. Never expect to just be in the top group. You have to earn that. The competition there is very high and sometimes it is best to not get into the high groups until you become comfortable. If Nick actually did say anything, I am sure he said that the player had the potential. I never heard him once say that the player was a shoe in to make it. He has to see your work ethic first. He never said that to Courier, Agassi, or any of those guys. He told them if they worked hard and really gave their all, they could be world champions. Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear from tennis parents who are angry because things didn't go like they planned. Brad Gilbert had to work his butt off when he was at Bollettieri. Nick used to tell him he might want to find a job. Now, I know that there are plenty of weak academies out there, but there are plenty of good ones too. Bollettieri is one of the best and he has the track record to prove it. The only ones I ever heard complain were the players who went from being a big fish in a small pond to being a small fish in a big pond.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubo
