Week 29 - USA F20 ($10,000) - Tulsa, OK (Hard)

Oakland2002 · All-time great

RE: Week 29 - USA F20 ($10,000) - Tulsa, OK (Hard)

Priesty · Challenger level

Oakland2002 wrote:
I agree as number 1 seed by some margin he should win but that also carries with it significant pressure, winning consistently at ITF level is a decent step up the ladder really pleased for him this week hope he finishes the job today. There are just not enough Tarquins in elite professional sport.

Absolutely, and credit to you for Tarquin the time to point that one out wink

Bob in Spain · Tennis legend

Liam broken early. Currently 0-2* down

paulisi · Tennis legend

Match has just started.

paulisi · Tennis legend

Not sure what's going on in Tulsa, but Liam's match is not following the script. Liam 1-5* down

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

First set down the pan by 2-6. cry

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

And he quickly goes a break down in the second: 0-2*. hmm

Priesty · Challenger level

I don't recall him being particularly good at comebacks either cry

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

Final: Mitchell Frank (USA) WR 833 defeated (1) Liam Broady WR 382 by 2 & 1 bleh

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Oakland2002 wrote:
Fingers crossed for another futures win, and doing well in a tournament you are expected to win. Still feel Andrew Harris would have been a more competitive opponent had he not opted for the mollycoddled shamateurrism of collegiate tennis.

He wasn't a random choice in the ITF v college debate as his junior background is not that different from that of our promising clutch of 20 yr olds. Ranked 330-600. I just hope he comes away with a good degree although looking at his holiday schedules he seems to still have an eye on being a player on the ATP tour.

Let's hope Liam continues his development tomorrow and starts sticking together a run of ITF wins that shows he is ready to be competitive at Challenger level.

Given the score today for Liam against the college boy, one might say that maybe Liam would have been a more competitive opponent had he not opted, at 18, for the no-hoper, languish, going nowhereism of futures tennis.

NB I'm not actually saying that - after all, Mitchell is 15 months older (although that's not that much really) and, as has been pointed out, having an excellent run at college level these past couple of years. Just that there is no 'one-size-suits-all' career path.

Oakland2002 · All-time great

Great shame I was hoping for Liam to see them both off but.... Let me take the bait .. They are both too good for college but by being there they are doing our boys a favour, spending 2/3rds of the year playing against America's future tennis coaches and accountants

Mitchell Franks and Andrew Harris are the golden boys of collegiate tennis and as you point out Mitchell is 18 months senior to Liam at which point one would hope Liam should be competitive at challenger level, with 120 NCAA colleges all offering scholarship I feel he is treading water in shameteur college tennis, we really need to throw everything at players of Liam's talent level although Mitchell as an academic all American may as they say be a champion in something other than sport, British tennis need the Liam's of this world to be earning a good living in and around the ATP tour if British tennis is ever going to more than 2 weeks at the end of July.

The Optimist · ATP qualifying

As we know, Liam received a great deal of support from the LTA in his early years and then, after the well publicised falling out, his father remortgaged or sold the family house to pay for his children's tennis. I know nothing of the background of Mr Harris and Mr Franks but very few youngsters receive the level of support from their national association that the Broadys did during their younger years and few families are wealthy enough or prepared to risk financial stability to fund a budding tennis career.

College tennis provides an affordable way for the less well funded but talented to develop to the point that they can make a go of a tennis career. Clearly if provided with a quality travelling coach and endless funds for a good tournament schedule, talented players would move faster as full time players on the circuit rather than trying to fit in studies as well. Unfortunately VERY few are in that lucky position.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

I know that Oakland and I could chew the cud over this one till the cows come home . .. :)

The problem with his/her argument, in my view, is that it assumes that if 'we throw everything at players of Liam's talent level' which, he claims, we 'really need to do', then this will yield the right results.

Wind the clock back a few years. We had plenty of other players who were, broadly, of a similar level to Liam. Who the LTA did indeed give major support to. And who did not achieve anything really at world level in tennis.

'Throwing everything' at Liam will certainly help Liam. But it will not guarantee that he becomes a top-100 player. And it will cost the LTA a lot of money. Now, obviously, there are no guarantees whatever you do, but history says that it hasn't worked before and I'm not really sure why it should work now, unless you (a) get lucky, or (b) they've changed something else that has a major impact.

It could be argued - and I've no idea how the numbers stack up - that the LTA should say that all 18 year-olds should go and do a couple of years of college, save the LTA a whole heap of money that they can use elsewhere, get the kids an excellent (free) two years worth of coaching/experience etc. etc. and then the LTA will pick up the tab once they see who's worth it, come 20 or 21.

(Now obviously this isn't really feasible as lots of the players drop out after GSCEs or don't want further education anyway but even that is a debatable issue).

I certainly agree with Oakland that there are a whole load of lower scholarship programmes that are worth nothing on a world tennis level. But that's like saying there are a whole load of British Tour players, or even 10k futures players, who are trying but will achieve nothing on a world tennis level.

It's all a question of money really. The LTA has a lot of it. Their results over the past decades have been pretty unsuccessful/downright awful (depending how generous you're feeling). Throwing money at 18 year-olds hasn't worked up to now.

Spectator · All-time great

Oakland2002 wrote:
Great shame I was hoping for Liam to see them both off but.... Let me take the bait .. They are both too good for college but by being there they are doing our boys a favour, spending 2/3rds of the year playing against America's future tennis coaches and accountants

Mitchell Franks and Andrew Harris are the golden boys of collegiate tennis and as you point out Mitchell is 18 months senior to Liam at which point one would hope Liam should be competitive at challenger level, with 120 NCAA colleges all offering scholarship I feel he is treading water in shameteur college tennis, we really need to throw everything at players of Liam's talent level although Mitchell as an academic all American may as they say be a champion in something other than sport, British tennis need the Liam's of this world to be earning a good living in and around the ATP tour if British tennis is ever going to more than 2 weeks at the end of July.

But that's just not accurate. As noted earlier, Andrew Harris was not on a par with Liam Broady in his singles junior career (his successes were all in doubles) ... and he's ranked 62nd in the final ITA singles rankings, which hardly makes him a "golden boy of collegiate tennis." So you're postulating a slide because of his choices when the evidence really isn't there: he's just somebody who had a good junior career and is now having a good university career ... in which one can only wish him well. Mitchell Frank is interesting - he had a CR of 5 as a junior, but looking it up now, it was mostly because of success in Grade 1s ... he didn't go better than the Round of 16 at Slams. But he seem to have done very well at university and gained in confidence.

And agree with CD's (and The Optimist's) comments.

RJA · Hall of fame

philwrig wrote:
I was shot down a couple of weeks ago when I suggested Liam's results were on the upgrade, during this run of American tournaments. I'll try it again, encouraging progress shown by Liam this week, playing close to his best tennis it would seem.

Until Liam starts beating players in the top 300 I don't see how anyone can seriously argue that he is making progress. It is clear that he is capable of having decent runs at weak futures and beating lots of players outside the top 500 so doing that doesn't indicate any real progress.