It will be very interesting to see how Dalma goes, obviously massively under ranked purely because of her age. As a surrogate how does her junior high translate. Top 150?

I find this hard on the ladies side, the junior side really only seems to be relevant when under 16 as the girls mature physically so much quicker and the best girls seem to be transitioning when 16/17 to the senior game.

Boys top 200 as teenagers generally make a good living from the game as ATP touring pros. Is there a ladies equivalent?

Sorry I meant a boy senior rank of 200 before they are 20: so Kyle would be the only recent example.

I agree it statistically unlikely that a junior rank of greater than 10 will translate into a fiscally rewarding senior career. James Ward is a phenomenal exception for the success of aptitude, attitude and ability over hot house junior coaching on the costa or in the IMG academy in North Dakota. 

My my question was what would be a correct surrogate senior rank for Dalma who is under ranked purely by the fact that she is so young and hardly played any senior tennis based on her junior pedigree and junior high of 3 ( probably at 16?) 

Thanks AliBlahBlah

There are so many other confounding factors that needed to be adjusted for but if one was to do a meaningful statistical analysis of what was meant to be a very general statement but would probably be very robust if the appropriate test was used ie looking at medians as opposed to means to account for outliers and adjustments were made for

Players too good for juniors who transitioned very early

For countries that don't take ITF juniors that seriously and have other mechanisms by which players can progress; France, juniors can be chucked into domestic senior competition and US has such strong domestic junior competition on which college progression is based, ITF junior rank is less important and only chased by the super elite.

Players with junior rankings related by their performance in doubles unless they were the dominant partner

A lot of these confounding factors can be eliminated at a stroke by just looking at British Juniors, CD provided a pretty convincing list of active and retired players under 26 which is fairly consistent with the statement that players with a junior ranking greater than 10 are unlikely to make a fiscally rewarding career as an ATP touring pro and then there is the legend that is James Ward who despite not getting in the top 1000 juniors still puts food on his plate, although not much caviar!

The trouble with looking at a list of purely the British leading juniors may be that questions have been asked before about how well generally the British juniors transition.

It may be that players from some other nations even if actually concentrating quite a bit on ITF juniors ( so a realistic junior ranking ) might have / have had more chance of coming through from outside the junior top 10.

My instincts are that junior 10 is a very high threshold to consider that outside that players are necessarily unlikely to make a fiscally rewarding career as an ATP touring pro ( what senior ranking might that be considered to roughly represent ? )

And yes it is all a bit confuddled by numerous factors, not least all players being individuals.