Helen40 wrote:

---

Jaggy1876 wrote:

---

Andy Murray, Rafa Nadal, Michael Chang etc. Jeez your guys are getting a bit carried away here. Next you will be saying Kyle Edmund is a top 10 player.

One thing we can be certain of is some preferential treatment for Jack over many as Im sure Daddy will sort a never ending list of Wild Cards and other perks that wont be afforded to similar players of his age and ability.

---

 I thought Jack and his dad were pretty estranged?

---

Yes. Certainly that's what came across. More on Jack's part, from what he said. 

Many noticed that Roger wasn't present at the final of Junior Wimbly.

There's a lesson there, really; after all, whatever money/prestige/reputation you may have, to have your own son not want you to attend his final, it can't be pleasant.....

Jaggy1876 wrote:

---

Bit harsh on the bile there Stircrazy, but to be expected from you I guess. Its the other side of the coin and perspective. Winning a few weak fields ITFs at the end of the season is hardly comparable the runs of Rafa Nadal in challengers and Andy Murray (who was injured at a similar age) who also played in tougher tournaments.

Its clever scheduling which is to be applauded especially with the changes coming next year. So whilst encouraging lets not get carried away. For every Andy Murray and Kyle Edmund there are the failed careers of Oli Golding, Luke Bambridge, Eleanor Deans etc.

---

 I think the bile bit referred to your comments on the wildcards.     As it turns out inaccurate as they are totally estranged.   The huge advantage Jack has had in his life is from his mother who is a tennis coach, rather than from his father.

Even if Jack were still in contact with his dad, would "Daddy" still have any influence over who gets WCs anyway?

And as I recall, he had to qualify for the events that first got him a senior world ranking rather than being awarded WCs.

There is a common theme, similar to football (or most other sports, to be honest) coverage:

(1) Sort players into two piles: those that you like, and the rest.
(2) Praise (when they win) and make excuses for (when they don't) those in pile 1, and belittle, ridicule and criticise those in pile 2, regardless of their results. e.g. If a favourite plays and wins in outer-nowhere-stan, it is wise scheduling, if someone from the other pile does it, it is "gaming the system".

Number 1 is something that I think we all do, and then it is really hard to resist the temptation to do number 2. So to speak.

I confess to not really liking young Mr Draper, as on the only occasion that I have seen him he came across to me as a self-important entitled arrogant young jerk, and it was easy to notice his surname (and thus heritage) and put two and two together. But he has done rather well for himself, and I think that I will find that I follow him through is doubtless meteoric rise with some interest. He may even persuade me that my first impression was wrong, and I may come to like him. (Although historical precedence of folk such as Mr Kyrgios suggests otherwise).

It is also really easy to get mad at people that are doing number 2 having made different decisions at number 1: i.e. criticising your favourites and praising your pet hates, but that is what makes us all such a wonderful diverse lot!!

christ wrote:

---

There is a common theme, similar to football (or most other sports, to be honest) coverage:

(1) Sort players into two piles: those that you like, and the rest.
(2) Praise (when they win) and make excuses for (when they don't) those in pile 1, and belittle, ridicule and criticise those in pile 2, regardless of their results. e.g. If a favourite plays and wins in outer-nowhere-stan, it is wise scheduling, if someone from the other pile does it, it is "gaming the system".

Number 1 is something that I think we all do, and then it is really hard to resist the temptation to do number 2. So to speak.

I confess to not really liking young Mr Draper, as on the only occasion that I have seen him he came across to me as a self-important entitled arrogant young jerk, and it was easy to notice his surname (and thus heritage) and put two and two together. But he has done rather well for himself, and I think that I will find that I follow him through is doubtless meteoric rise with some interest. He may even persuade me that my first impression was wrong, and I may come to like him. (Although historical precedence of folk such as Mr Kyrgios suggests otherwise).

It is also really easy to get mad at people that are doing number 2 having made different decisions at number 1: i.e. criticising your favourites and praising your pet hates, but that is what makes us all such a wonderful diverse lot!!

---

 I like this post ChrisT, it is very nicely said. Only thing I would add is that at 16 many of us (particularly where we have had some success in early life in a sporting context) tend to be a little on the arrogant and jerkish side. Not that I ever did but I have come across many. And many of those do turn out to be fine people later in life!  

On your two piles, ChrisT, I think most of us probably have 3, with a big neutral pile in the middle, and then a third with the (usually few) players we view with some antipathy, for whatever reasons.
Andy was brattish too (though never self-entitled or arrogant). Young Jack seems already to be maturing, and will need to if he wishes to make the transition to serious pro successfully. Having confidence and self-belief is essential though, and the lines can be fine at that age. Even if it is his mum as coach who has helped him the most, the privileges he has gained through his name are undeniable, but he now needs to work through that since the higher he goes, it is his qualities as a player that will count not his name.

-- Edited by Michael D on Monday 15th of October 2018 10:15:26 AM

Absolutely, JonH!  Very few individuals are the "finished article" when they are just 16.  Teenagers are always going to have the occasional teenage moment, even if they live in the world of grown ups.    In elite sport, I think a certain degree of arrogance is essential. Learning how to come over as confident but not arrogant is tricky for most people, so I'm absolutely prepared to cut  a teenager some slack.  

I wonder what his mind set is right now?  I think youngsters often handle the spotlight better than their elders, I like the term "the fearlessness of youth".  With three Futures victories in four tournaments at the tender age of 16, it is hard to argue that he won't have a career as a pro tennis player.    It is a shame that he and his Dad don't speak, but unfortunately family break ups are common.  

I haven't looked at the stats a a whole lot, but at times his 1st service % was really poor, and this was commented on by other members of the board.  I have every confidence he'll get this sorted in short order.   An excellent prospect for the Challenger circuit next year!