How To Make Your Child A Tennis Superstar!

HOW TO MAKE YOUR CHILD A TENNIS SUPERSTAR

There are a lot of tennis parents out there who are wondering, “How can my child become the next Agassi?” Well first of all, they can’t. Agassi was the best player ever. So give up on that dream right now. But if you want to know how your kid can become the next Roddick (not so good) or Jankovic (even more not so good) then read on. Being a tennis pro for nearly 15 years, I find it hilarious when a parent whose child takes a whopping two classes a week is surprised when, after a year, their budding superstar still can’t beat Willy, the best friend who took four lessons 2 years ago and plays with a racketball racket. “What gives?”, they ask. “Why can’t my son beat Willy?” Well first of all, I hear Willy’s pretty good. But really, it comes down to the two “T’s”. Time and talent. The less one has of one, the more they better have of the other. Let me put it to you plainly. While your child is taking two group lessons a week, some other child is taking four group lessons a week. Assuming all else is equal, who do you think is going to be better?

But in Willy’s case it might be as simple as the kid having talent. I see athletic kids come in all the time and destroy my extremely *unathletic* lesson who I’ve been teaching for two years. It used to demoralize me. But then I realized – talent trumps all. A few years ago they had a serve station at the U.S. Open where you could measure the speed of your serve. Some rando walked up who had never played tennis before and blasted a 145 m.p.h. serve. That’s as fast as Andy Roddick. The Sportscenter hosts rightly questioned, if some rando can serve as fast as Andy Roddick, how hard can this sport be? Well, of course we don’t know if that serve went in (the station was a booth) and I’d be surprised if this guy could hit even 2 out of 100 145 mph serves anywhere near the court. But it teaches a great point. Talent trumps all.

This leads to the classic conflict of a tennis parent: Seeing your child for who they are verses seeing them for who you want them to be. Rarely have I met a parent who can accurately judge the talent level of their child. They see only their child’s killer drop shot (while ignoring the previous fifteen backhands that went into the net). This results in parents constantly pressuring pros to move their children into more advanced classes. If there’s one thing that I can tell you about tennis pros, it’s that they’re pretty good judges of talent. When they believe somebody is ready to move up, it’s usually the right time. Parents have to understand that moving a kid into a class undeservedly has a trickle down [up?] effect. Parents of kids in this higher class now believe that the level of the class has diminished, and they then demand to have THEIR kids moved into a higher class. This continues all the way up to the top, where if too many undeserved kids get in, then the top kids, aka the ranked players who sell the program, jet off to another facility. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen this happen. So the next time you ask a pro to move your kid up, you better be damn sure he/she can handle it, or else you’re going to get a lot of crooked stares from me or the pro you’re dealing with.

So then what should you do if your kid isn’t good enough to move up? It’s very simple. Do as many of these three things as possible:

1) Practice more outside of class.
2) Take a private lesson(s).
3) Play tournaments.

All three of these things prove to a pro that your child is dedicated. And it is almost impossible not to improve under a regimen that includes them. I promise you, tennis pros aren’t cruel (well, most of them aren’t anyway). They see things for what they are. If a child is consistently dominating a class, we’re not going to keep them there just to spite you.

So this brings us back to our original question: How can your child become the next Roddick? Well lucky for you, I’m going to break it down for you into one simple paragraph. So get out your pencils (or your printers) and take note. Follow this regimen and you’re going to get the most of your child’s talent (if they have any that is). Here goes: First, start your child at around age 5 or 6. Put them in one or two group classes a week. After a year, add a half-hour private lesson. In six months, make it an hour private lesson. When they hit 8, try to have them in 3 to 4 group lessons a week, as well as one private lesson. At 9, have them play their first tournament. Aim for about five tournaments that year. At ten years old, they should be playing six days a week, 8-10 tournaments a year, and *at least* one private. At 11 or 12 is when things begin to get serious. If you really want to compete at the highest level, you will have your child playing at least 12 hours of tennis a week, plus 15-20 tournaments a year. His/her ranking will improve and the tournaments will get tougher. Set up practice sets with other highly ranked players in addition to his group/private tennis schedule. At 14 they should also add a regimen of 2-3 hours of off-court activity a week. Running, weights, cardio, whatever. Try to get your child in the best training programs in the city. If he/she is the best in the program, you’re not at the right facility (be honest though – are they *really* the best?). From there, if your child really has talent, good coaches will take over. They’ll begin to structure your child’s schedule for you. They can then determine if they’re good enough to go straight to the pros, or if college is the more logical route. Top tennis players practice at least 4 hours a day and include a daily off-court workout routine. These days, that’s par for the course. Still interested in your child becoming the next Roddick? Well, then go for it. But if I may suggest – don’t push a child who doesn’t want to be in the sport. It almost never works out. Keep it fun, set achievable goals, and always support them. It’s not your life. It’s theirs. Who knows, one day you might be sitting at Wimbledon holding up a sign that says, “I told you so!”

Til then, GO OUT AND HIT!

Aussie Final

Today I watched the final of the Australian Open with my good tennis buddy David Boyd. Jo-Willifreed Tsonga played Novak Djokovic in a battle of two players who had never won a grand slam before. This was such an opportunity for both players because most of the time, when you maneuver your way into a Grand Slam final, you find yourself battling against someone who’s already won one (see Baghdatis vs. Federer circa 2007). As a result, you get in about three games of balls-out go for broke tennis, then become completely overwhelmed by the situation and toasted in straights. Neither of these guys had that to worry about. And both came in feeling like they had a legitimate shot at winning a grand slam. Wow, what that must feel like…

Now because I have sworn off cable from my immediate life (it preys on my inability to concentrate – sucking hours from my day like a baby sucks bottles), I’d never seen Tsonga play. But as soon as I saw him walk into that stadium, I knew he was done. Tsonga simply does not have a tennis player’s body. He’s too thick, there’s too much weight in his legs, and since on top of that, he’s tall, he can’t possibly move well. Now , people had told me he was quick, which threw a wrench into my analysis. But as soon as I saw him I said, “He may be able to scramble for balls in the first set. But let’s see him do it the third”. As it turns out, I was exactly right (humble, I know). The guy was simply too late getting to balls. Easy forehand winners became a preview of Tsonga's next Pilates class as he was stretched into just about every position possible.  Is this tennis or Twister.(note: Chris has never taken a Pilates class - nor does he plan to). 

This led me to ponder why it was so easy for Tsonga to beat Nadal in the semis but upon about 12 seconds of reflection, I knew exactly why he beat him.  Nadal isn’t a guy who hits winners. He’s a guy who wears you down by hitting extremely high and heavy balls (and for anyone who’s played against guys like this – where you’re hitting eye-high balls with the kind of spin that breaks wrists – you know how agonizing it can be). But Tsonga is the perfect player to handle Nadaley. He’s tall and strong. Eye-high for us is shoulder high for him, perfect for crank-forehand-central. And the “heavy” ball doesn’t faze him cause he’s distantly related to Muhammad Ali. Nadaley better pray that the next time they meet, it’s on the red stuff.

And finally, this leads me to Djokovic. Djokovic (whose name is incredibly annoying to spell btw) has started to cause a little uproar in the community because of his arrogance. Well you know what I say? GOOD! It’s about time we have someone saying, “Guess what? I’m not afraid of Federer. Federer should be afraid of me.” (I don’t know if he’s ever said those exact words but it sounds better that way). This in contrast to wussy little Nadaley who offers pearls like – “He such good player. You have play best and you beat him but maybe not cause he most of time beat you. I am so lucky to play on court that he play. Slurp slurp slurp little Spanish accent.” I mean are there any MEN left?? Anyone left to talk the talk and BACK IT UP?? Tennis nuts, let me introduce you to Novac Djokovic – the first player in 20 YEARS not afraid to say what’s on his mind. And you know what I love about it? I love how Federer doesn’t know how to deal with it. He’s so flummoxed by the blatant disrespect and so bound to the “gentleman ambassador” role he’s embraced, that he can do nothing but pretend to be unfazed by it. But during those interviews, boy do his eyes tell a different story. It bothers him. A lot. And I love it. I mentioned something to Boyd’s live-in girlfriendo, Holley, about Federer. Everybody makes such a big deal out of the fact that Federer is so nice. He spends 20 extra minutes talking to the press after matches and is always there when you need him. Well of course he’s always there. HE’S ALWAYS WINNING! I’ll tell you what, I’ll give you the rest of my week if I win a match at the Australian Open. How freaking easy is it to talk about winning? “Oh yeah, I’m great. What can I say?” Times 1000. But what happens when 5 losses a year turns into 10? And the questions switch from “How does it feel to be so dominant?” to “How does it feel to be on the downside of your career?” I’m curious to see how “available” Federer will be then. Cause, you know, everybody just loves to pontificate about the myriad of reasons why they’re losing. [Cue any Roddick post-match interview.]

Now before you flip out, let me remind you that I love Federer. He’s the nerd who overcame the bullies. Who doesn’t like that story? But there’s no question that he needs more competition – and Djokovic is offering that. I’m of the belief that Nadaley will fade. He’s a clay-courter with loopy strokes and those guys are almost always doomed to career-ending injuries before they’re old enough to rent a car (can anyone say Guga?). It’s already starting. Trust me, this guy has maybe one more French in him then it’s bye-bye Nadaley. Which is fine by me cause to be honest, I don’t really like the guy. But I’ll talk about that another time.

Til then, GO OUT AND HIT!