Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Marcus Willis


Club Coach

Status: Offline
Posts: 606
Date:
Marcus Willis


From my facebook news feed it looks like it was Marcus' stag do in Dublin this weekend, with a who's who of former and current British tennis players joining him.

__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 33029
Date:

I don't know if this has been put or referenced on another thread but it's worth reading:

www.telegraph.co.uk/tennis/2016/10/10/marcus-willis-determined-to-prove-he-is-not-a-one-hit-wonder/


Interesting about his food/weight/body/health approach - has lost 7% body fat - been wearing a mouthguard to correct his posture etc. etc.

__________________


Futures qualifying

Status: Offline
Posts: 1530
Date:

Seen this in another thread CD. Certainly belongs in the one as well though.

edit - not in another thread actually but in this one on the previous page! Steven posted it smile



-- Edited by Priesty on Sunday 30th of October 2016 12:21:29 PM

__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 34716
Date:

Coup Droit wrote:

Interesting about his food/weight/body/health approach - has lost 7% body fat - been wearing a mouthguard to correct his posture etc. etc.


I mentioned the mouthguard in a post on the previous page after reading about it in an interview he gave James Gheerbrant of The Times on 11th October.



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 33029
Date:

Priesty wrote:

Seen this in another thread CD. Certainly belongs in the one as well though.

edit - not in another thread actually but in this one on the previous page! Steven posted it smile



-- Edited by Priesty on Sunday 30th of October 2016 12:21:29 PM


 

Thanks, Priesty - thought it must be somewhere but couldn't find it ... no



__________________


Grand Slam Champion

Status: Offline
Posts: 4714
Date:

So that would make him about 88kg for someone listed at 191cm which at last is beginning to get not only into the ball park but onto the diamond. He really needs to be boasting about achieving his target optimal body fat if he is going to play until he is 34 (on the pro tour), but a 7% loss can't be bad start given where he started.

Like Evo he is a talent, and I have got an immense amount of time for both in that respect but I am sure any quietness is in part related to the fact that he didn't have the discipline to optimise it. Being a top 100 talent and not really fat will get you to about 200 perhaps 150 the rest is grunt, discipline and grinding out any competitive advantage you can seek.

Let's hope now he is no longer footloose and fancy free it focuses the mind and he puts himself in a position to be successful. If not he can always reflect on the fact he must have carried one of the highest % body fat to a challenger semi final.

I love the fact his new girlfriend knew he was into tennis but thought he was the equivalent of a keen Sunday footballer until her brother pointed out er..... No he is actually extremely good indeed the fattest man in the world top 500 for some time,!

__________________


Futures level

Status: Offline
Posts: 1882
Date:

Born2WinTennis wrote:

From my facebook news feed it looks like it was Marcus' stag do in Dublin this weekend, with a who's who of former and current British tennis players joining

 

 

I wonder if this is funded by the LTA.  Generation fail,  Cox, Willis, Rice, love LTA handouts.  Let me guess, Josh Goodall was the stag organiser???? 

Need to stop reporting on generation fail or at least create a new  section on the forum away from men's tennis, called 'retired'.  

Back in the day, when we only had Andy, I could understand giving oxygen to these guys, but now we have Evo and Kyle doing well, no need to even give these guys time. Agreed? 

 



__________________

World renowned expert in Nordic tennis. 



All-time great

Status: Offline
Posts: 5683
Date:

Come, come, Vandenburg. You know it wasn't funded by the LTA. And you're just taking another excuse to have a potshot at numerous players whom we support (and whom, as you are well aware, the LTA hasn't funded in years.) And even if it were true - which it isn't - that they had failed, it wouldn't justify using such derogatory language.

And no. Marcus Willis, having realised what he needs to do, seems prepared to start doing it - and his summer outings can hardly be described as failure. (Or if they were, you'd have tennis players queuing up to fail in that way). And Dan Cox and David Rice have worked hard, on their own, and done well - far better than most of us will do in our chosen careers. I'd be quite happy to have a career high of being the 206th best person in the world at a highly competitive endeavour. If you don't want to read about them, you can simply skip these threads.


__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 34716
Date:

Spectator wrote:

Come, come, Vandenburg. You know it wasn't funded by the LTA. And you're just taking another excuse to have a potshot at numerous players whom we support (and whom, as you are well aware, the LTA hasn't funded in years.) And even if it were true - which it isn't - that they had failed, it wouldn't justify using such derogatory language.

And no. Marcus Willis, having realised what he needs to do, seems prepared to start doing it - and his summer outings can hardly be described as failure. (Or if they were, you'd have tennis players queuing up to fail in that way). And Dan Cox and David Rice have worked hard, on their own, and done well - far better than most of us will do in our chosen careers. I'd be quite happy to have a career high of being the 206th best person in the world at a highly competitive endeavour. If you don't want to read about them, you can simply skip these threads.


Well said, Spectator.   If the so & so keeps it up, I'll delete the offending posts.  He makes a lousy devil's advocate! disbelief  



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 33029
Date:

Spectator wrote:

Come, come, Vandenburg. You know it wasn't funded by the LTA. And you're just taking another excuse to have a potshot at numerous players whom we support (and whom, as you are well aware, the LTA hasn't funded in years.) And even if it were true - which it isn't - that they had failed, it wouldn't justify using such derogatory language.

And no. Marcus Willis, having realised what he needs to do, seems prepared to start doing it - and his summer outings can hardly be described as failure. (Or if they were, you'd have tennis players queuing up to fail in that way). And Dan Cox and David Rice have worked hard, on their own, and done well - far better than most of us will do in our chosen careers. I'd be quite happy to have a career high of being the 206th best person in the world at a highly competitive endeavour. If you don't want to read about them, you can simply skip these threads.


 

Beautifully said, Spec.

Although I wouldn't delete him, SC, everyone has the right to be a bit 'provocative' - within limits.

And if he hadn't posted it, then Spec's words would not have seen the light of day,



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 30663
Date:

The posts speak for the man. Well left.

__________________


Intermediate Club Player

Status: Offline
Posts: 257
Date:

Vandenburg makes a very fair point. All the players he has named, and you can add in Milton, Marsalek, Gabb etc have only played financially loss making tennis through their entire career. Rice was recently seen begging on a funding website for donations ( it was posted on here) and if rumour is to be believed Josh Goodall's parents re-mortgaged their house twice to support him.

The LTA have thrown a fortune at these guys and have had virtually nothing back, they are clearly not good enough yet many of you on here still think they should be funded to play at futures level - amazing!

I can't believe that Spectator thinks these people have done well in there careers, if they had been cleaners or dustmen ( no disrespect intended ) they would be financially far better of. How can playing loss making tennis for years make you a success - logic says it doesn't.

There are a few people on here who think they own the forum and don't like people who have alternative views but I notice there are far less people following / commenting on our guys in their mid 20's now than there were a couple of years ago, because they know it's a waste of time, says a lot really.

I am desperate for all our players to succeed but we need to be realistic, if you have played for 3 or 4 years and are not making money you need to accept it's not for you and pack it in, Ward - Hibbert for example.

Cox might still come good again if he can sort his head out and Marcus could be an interesting one but he has to many personal distractions now, but lets see.

__________________


All-time great

Status: Offline
Posts: 5683
Date:

Mark, thanks for your post, which makes an argument, rather than just using derogratory language. While I may not agree with the argument, it's the derogatory language, setting up of straw men, and suggesting that people on this forum are wrong to care about some of the GB players that I did and do object to most in the previous poster. The players are, as we all know, people - and speaking about people in a way that's needlessly derogatory and uncivil is getting our country (and others) into enough difficulty without our engaging in it on a sports forum!

In terms of the arguments: my own view is that there are many reasons for doing things, of which financial gain is one, but not the only one. So while Dan Cox, say, may not have benefited hugely financially, he has still been highly ranked at a competitive sport at the highest level. So yes, I do think he has been a success. But I accept that if you equate 'success' and 'financial viability' it's hard to argue that any other than the very top players are successful.

In terms of their careers, it seems to me that no one from 'outside' can tell people what they should do: they and those near them need to work it out for themselves. With careers stretching on, and people reaching their career highs ever later, I should think it's actually quite a difficult decision at present. Do you pack it in and spend the rest of your life with a big "What if?" Or keep trying to make a go of it as long as you can, in the hopes that things will pay off. Very complex: there are probably quite a few people who would have advised Jamie Murray at various points to get out while his career was stalling, for example. And we've seen an interesting 'test case' in Colin Fleming, who indeed left for energy trading after a few decent but not stellar years on the futures tour. I've always assumed, rightly or wrongly, that he returned after he saw Jamie Murray, whom he knew as an equal, win the Wimbledon mixed doubles. But whatever the reason, he returned to a career that saw him reach the highs of being an alternate for the World Tour Finals. Who would have predicted that from his first few years? So I prefer to hope that people and those around them are being realistic - and recognise that what appears realistic to us and what appears realistic to them may be different, and that they may have information we don't.

As for thinking anyone owns the forum, I don't think that's the case. Indeed, my objection was to the suggestion that the other members of the forum were wrong to continue supporting GB players ... which in itself suggest the right to arbitrate what forum members should and shouldn't do.



-- Edited by Spectator on Saturday 5th of November 2016 12:16:34 PM

__________________


Intermediate Club Player

Status: Offline
Posts: 257
Date:

Spectator wrote:

Mark, thanks for your post, which makes an argument, rather than just using derogratory language. While I may not agree with the argument, it's the derogatory language, setting up of straw men, and suggesting that people on this forum are wrong to care about some of the GB players that I did and do object to most in the previous poster. The players are, as we all know, people - and speaking about people in a way that's needlessly derogatory and uncivil is getting our country (and others) into enough difficulty without our engaging in it on a sports forum!

In terms of the arguments: my own view is that there are many reasons for doing things, of which financial gain is one, but not the only one. So while Dan Cox, say, may not have benefited hugely financially, he has still been highly ranked at a competitive sport at the highest level. So yes, I do think he has been a success. But I accept that if you equate 'success' and 'financial viability' it's hard to argue that any other than the very top players are successful.

In terms of their careers, it seems to me that no one from 'outside' can tell people what they should do: they and those near them need to work it out for themselves. With careers stretching on, and people reaching their career highs ever later, I should think it's actually quite a difficult decision at present. Do you pack it in and spend the rest of your life with a big "What if?" Or keep trying to make a go of it as long as you can, in the hopes that things will pay off. Very complex: there are probably quite a few people who would have advised Jamie Murray at various points to get out while his career was stalling, for example. And we've seen an interesting 'test case' in Colin Fleming, who indeed left for energy trading after a few decent but not stellar years on the futures tour. I've always assumed, rightly or wrongly, that he returned after he saw Jamie Murray, whom he knew as an equal, win the Wimbledon mixed doubles. But whatever the reason, he returned to a career that saw him reach the highs of being an alternate for the World Tour Finals. Who would have predicted that from his first few years? So I prefer to hope that people and those around them are being realistic - and recognise that what appears realistic to us and what appears realistic to them may be different, and that they may have information we don't.

As for thinking anyone owns the forum, I don't think that's the case. Indeed, my objection was to the suggestion that the other members of the forum were wrong to continue supporting GB players ... which in itself suggest the right to arbitrate what forum members should and shouldn't do.



-- Edited by Spectator on Saturday 5th of November 2016 12:16:34 PM


 Your point re Fleming and Murray is a fair one but these two are exceptions to the rule and it must be remembered that neither would have made a living playing singles, because as tennis players they are simply not good enough.

I have said on here before that more of our guys should play doubles as this is their best chance of success, Corrie ( a challenger tour winner with Smethurst) is a perfect example of someone who should be playing dubs every week but hardly plays at all.  David Rice's career peaked when he was having his success with Thornley and sadly started to go down hill when this partnership fell apart.  I know O'Mara was focusing on doubles ( two successive ITF wins - well done!) and I firmly believe that this is the way for Marcus to go.

Sadly though I feel that 'tennis' does not want doubles, the most entertaining format of the game and that it will go one day - how I hope I am wrong!

As regards players peaking later, yes, they are but the likes of Ferrer etc were not ranked as low as 600/700 hundred when they were in their mid 20's. It is difficult knowing how long to give it but very few go on to 'make it' after struggling for 3/4 years on tour, most coaches will tell you that the bad habits are entrenched by then.



__________________


Tennis legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 33029
Date:

I also do not think the LTA should be directly funding a pack of 26 year-olds who are ranked 350 in the world, say.

I do not know of any other country that does either.

But the problem with this argument, Mark, is that it fails to take into account other factors in those other countries.

Using France, as I always do (for obvious reasons) but also knowing that Spain and Italy (and others?) are very similar, the problem is that the LTA fails to provide a tennis industry in this country.

And so the GB tennis players are exposed, with no possible alternative supplementary funding system.

If you had a thriving club system, with large numbers of the public playing competitive tennis, so needing coaches, and attracting sponsors, and everything else that goes with it, then tennis becomes just about viable for your 25 year-old ATP 350 guy and he has a choice.

With the LTA doing none of this, the British 25 year-old has basically no choice.

So, in my mind, it is true what you say about the LTA having thrown a huge amount of money at a small groups of players with no return.

But that is the LTA's fault, and a bad business model. It does not mean that the players should not be supported but that it should be done in an indirect way.

And if this is impossible in the near term, then a temporary system as a stop-gap may well make sense.

__________________
«First  <  1 2 3 4 510  >  Last»  | Page of 10  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard