2013 BNP Paribas Open...Indian Wells, CA

[don_budge]

Stefan Koslov is in the qualifying tournament as a Wild Card entry. Big time tournament tennis is already gearing up for this ones arrival. He's still a boy growing into the skin of a young man. His type of game will take a few more years to mature and evolve but he is well groomed and was meticulously coached. He has become his own person for some time now and his style is exactly that...his own. He buys into the notion that control is power.

His body is immature for the kind of tennis that he is capable of playing. Best not to rush things and just let nature take its course. I wonder if it wouldn't be prudent to hold him back a bit...but that is probably too old fashioned of an idea. Nowadays you got to get the product out there in the field to get the marketing mechanisms going. Be that as it may...I hope to see his match against the 22nd seed in the qualifying...Samuel Groth of Australia.

I am particularly interested in the service motion and I hope that it is evolving into something of real substance...something special.

One other thing that really interests me above and beyond the scope of the actual tournament...guess what that is? The speed of the courts. The inevitable engineering is looming on the horizon. The implications are huge...to alter the paradigm once again will mean big bucks for the machine. It also spells havoc for the current coaching paradigm.

[worldsbesttenniscoach]

don_budge, do you think Indian Wells might have relatively faster courts? or relatively slower courts? I have been busy, & I have not read anything about upcoming change in speed of courts.

[stotty]

The courts...

Indian Wells has used Plexipave for the last fifteen years. It's a textured surface that grips (and shreds) the ball. Indian Wells is considered one of the slowest hard courts of the season. I have not heard they are changing the court set up. Why would they? It's one of the best attended ATP tournament of in the calendar.

Nadal said: "The ball and the court is a little bit different here," "The ball gets a lot of topspin so that helps me a little bit here. I would say the conditions are better for me here."

Be interesting to see if they are any changes made to speed up the surface, but I think it unlikely.

[don_budge]

One dozen Americans...out of 300 plus million

don_budge, do you think Indian Wells might have relatively faster courts? or relatively slower courts? I have been busy, & I have not read anything about upcoming change in speed of courts.

There WERE exactly one dozen Americans in the draw of 128 tennis players at the 2014 Paribus Open at Indian Wells, California. Six of them drew fellow Americans as opponents in the first round. Tom Smyczek defeated Jack Sock 6-4, 1-6, 6-4 in a rather boring display of tennis. Even though Jack Sock has reputedly the biggest forehand in men's tennis as quantified by RPM's and MPH's. So much for these "important" quantifiers...I have never put much stock in these numbers. Nice to have but totally unnecessary and possibly irrelevant...but not necessarily so. Sam Querrey defeated Alex Kuznetsov in an equally if not more so boring display of tennis by the score of 6-3, 6-3. Perhaps more interestingly and not necessarily as boring or more exciting either for that matter...Michigan native and George Russell's son Mike Russell defeated Donald Young 4-6, 6-1, 6-2. I saw bits and pieces of the first two American snooze-fests but missed the last entirely.

Mike Russell seems to have experienced a bit of a resurgence of late as he is throwing his 5' 8" tall and 155 pound, 35 year old body around with the resolve of someone substantially younger. Impressive stuff...defying the laws of gravity. Perhaps it helps to have a personal trainer as a wife. It sounds like a great idea actually. Eat red beets and marry a personal trainer...turn back the hands of time. But at any rate...American tennis is not showing any signs of resurgence. Such a shame...hard to understand considering the wealth of talent we have in the way of development coaches...not to mention coaching technology. Corporate coaching...one size fits all. What a shame...what a pity.

It looks to be a great tournament but as usual we have to wait a couple of rounds before anything of note or substance happens. I think that this is due to a diluted pool of talent and a lack of real style on the tour these days. Not to mention personalities or charisma. A possible matchup Stanislas Wawrinka and Roger Federer in an all Swiss quarterfinal may be a crowd pleaser though they have some work to do to get there.

The top half of the draw seems to be substantially stronger than the bottom half. Three of the traditional "Big Four" including Nadal, Murray and Federer are in the top half. Throw in Wawrinka...the projected quarters would be Nadal and Murray and the Swiss pair. The bottom half projects to Berdych vs. Gasquet and Del Potro vs. Djokovic...a different and tamer proposition. But nearly everyone is there among the top professionals in the world along with the top videotographer in the world...our very own John Yandell.

But my only question is this. What about the speed of the courts? Indian Wells has the reputation of having among the slowest courts in the world. I don't expect that to change more than incrementally this year. Even though they did some monkeying around at the 2014 Australian Open it doesn't necessarily mean that the rest of the tour is going to follow suit. The Australian Open experiment was kept largely away from the prying eyes of the tennis world way down under but you can be certain that the ITF brain trust is hard at work trying to salvage some life from the dying art of playing tennis. Actually there is no art left in the sport as it has largely become a couple of different carbon copies of sameness throughout. Style being a thing of the past. Just as whole entire facets of the original game of tennis are now obsolete. Luckily the tennis audience is now too young and poorly informed and educated to know the difference. Otherwise they might be clamoring for something nearer to the real thing.

There are those that will tell you that there is nothing wrong as a matter of fact. Well...it is difficult to see with eyes wide shut. Isn't it?

[stotty]

But my only question is this. What about the speed of the courts? Indian Wells has the reputation of having among the slowest courts in the world. I don't expect that to change more than incrementally this year. Even though they did some monkeying around at the 2014 Australian Open it doesn't necessarily mean that the rest of the tour is going to follow suit. The Australian Open experiment was kept largely away from the prying eyes of the tennis world way down under but you can be certain that the ITF brain trust is hard at work trying to salvage some life from the dying art of playing tennis. Actually there is no art left in the sport as it has largely become a couple of different carbon copies of sameness throughout. Style being a thing of the past. Just as whole entire facets of the original game of tennis are now obsolete. Luckily the tennis audience is now too young and poorly informed and educated to know the difference. Otherwise they might be clamoring for something nearer to the real thing.

There are those that will tell you that there is nothing wrong as a matter of fact. Well...it is difficult to see with eyes wide shut. Isn't it?

Ever enjoyable your posts, don_budge. You're such a fine, characterful writer. When you write that book, I'll the first in the queue for a copy. Just let me know if you need a forward or a testimonial. I'll be there in a jiffy.

Sadly I cannot speak so highly of Chris Kermode, the ATP chairman. More of the same would seem to be his stance on the issue of speeding up the courts. The public wants more of the same he says. How he comes to that conclusion is perplexing to say the least.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/25773438

There is a blog somewhere out there on the internet that deals with the convergence of court surfaces, and its author has set about proving the point by showing aces and service games won at given tournaments around the world. If I can ever find the blog again I will post a link to it in the thread.

I know Wimbledon has no plans to lower the bounce to favour net players. They favour longer rallies and think the spectators do too.

You'd think a guy like Ellison could pilot any court surface change he chose. Do something different. Anything. Of course the players won't like something they aren't used to...but why should it be down to them? They are the gladiators. It's we the people who should be doing the thumbs up or thumbs down business.

A tournament in the Colosseum...now that's an idea.

[GeoffWilliams]

The people don't care about tennis. See the empty stands for most matches? Cal. tournaments gone bankrupt? Paying women to play 2-3 the same as men 3-5 sets? Political correctness gone haywire. People only want to see/hear of/experience allegiance to: the winner.

[don_budge]

Last night...I saw some tennis.

The people don't care about tennis. See the empty stands for most matches? Cal. tournaments gone bankrupt? Paying women to play 2-3 the same as men 3-5 sets? Political correctness gone haywire. People only want to see/hear of/experience allegiance to: the winner.

I could hardly believe my eyes. Real tennis! Played at the 2014 Paribas Open in Indian Wells no less. Serve and volley. Half volleys. Chip returns of service. Overheads too!

Fooled you didn't I? Actually it was...doubles with the Swiss Maestro's. Roger Federer and Stanislas Wawrinka. The were playing a first round match against the sixth seeded team, neither of the names I recognized. Obscure doubles players. Interesting how they entice the top players to play doubles at Indian Wells.

It looked like great practice for both of the Swiss players though. Time to practice those facets of the game that have been relegated to the mulch pile. But what better way to hone your singles game...getting a bit of practice in the doubles draw. It's not so tough...should things get a bit dicey and you split sets you only have to realize it is only a tie-breaker that is going to decide the shooting fest.

Shooting fest it is. The points are blazing fast. No wonder the doubles game has been deemed obsolete...whereas the play was highly entertaining in the past now it is so darned quick if you blink...you miss. Some great points and reflexes...good hands too around the net. Of course these guys can do it...they are super talented. It is only that the powers that be have sold the game down the river...the smart money was betting on the equipment money to say nothing of the politics involved.

How could the USTA have gone along with it? Some big money must have changed hands...that's how. It wasn't as if there was a vote among the common tennis players...should we or shouldn't we?

[don_budge]

Court speed and tennis politics...toeing the company line drone style.

Sadly I cannot speak so highly of Chris Kermode, the ATP chairman. More of the same would seem to be his stance on the issue of speeding up the courts. The public wants more of the same he says. How he comes to that conclusion is perplexing to say the least.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/25773438

He is a bona fide company drone. He will stonewall to toe the company line. His verbal testimony about the state of the sport drug policy and standing is naive at best...at worst he is a serial liar. I suspect the latter.

His assessment of the sport is just boring. Typical British...no offense meant. Staid...stuck in the mud. How do you get things to go forwards? The last ten years have been so great? Says who?

You see...tennis is the biggest dog and pony show going. Even on this website you see the follow the leader mentality. Dissent is treated as a cancer. Just imagine the upper echelon of tennis administration. No wonder John McEnroe was going postal his entire career. Every time he turned there was another "Mr. Incompetent" in his path. This fellow has taken the mantle and is running with it.

1980 style indoor hardcourt tennis...1980 Stockholm Open Final Björn Borg vs. John McEnroe

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9p_98ZODqw

Nadal is so predictable and self serving. Federer is on the money. No surprise there. The Great Impostor and PED cheater vs. the last remaining link to classic tennis and tennis etiquette.

Federer tonight against Paul-Henri Mathieu...another French musketeer. Possible all Swiss match up looming for the quarterfinals. Albeit some work to be done along the way. Some really good potential matchups in the round of 32. The speed of the courts keeps the excitement dialed down however. Boring tennis. Complete absence of net play or otherwise sophisticated tactics. Drones. Carbon copies. Equals snooze fest.

[hockeyscout]

I really hate to say it ...

I really hate to say it, but where tennis went bad is when the federations decided to ban the young kids turning pro early. Especially in the woman's game. I really think this "developmental program" set tennis back twenty years, and killed the kids motivation to be great, and put in the necessary hours at a young age. I kind of shake my head at people saying, well, we don't train to hard today because we are focused on the end goal or 19 or 20. You know, the old generation was urgent and focused in their goal of climbing to the top. I don't see that good desperation with this up and coming group of players. They all appear to want it the easy way, and I wonder if this group of kids practices the amount of hours Sampras or Williams practiced. I'm not sure how long it'll be until we see another Venus Williams, Roger Federer or Rafa Nadal! Everyone says tennis is more physical now, and all this BS, however if you look at hockey, with each and every passing year the younger kids are better, bigger, stronger, faster and making the grade against older competition than in the past. I understand it makes the federations more money when everyone's held back in Junior's, and coaches can make money off the teenagers who are 14-15-16-17 who haven't shown pro upside (don't worry, stick with it kid, you will make it, its a long process line). Their's such a lack of urgency, and I can't really get to excited about these new up and coming stars like in the past when you had these young, motivated, hungry kids coming up raising hell and making the sport more interesting. I think it'll be a long time before we see generational talents again. I do disagree a bit with Don Budge, I think urgency is important in development, and I think the WTA rule spells that out. As well, I might point hockey, hockey hit a golden age in talent when they turned the pro rule from 20 to 18, as did basketball. Tennis really needs to take a look at that rule again!

[hockeyscout]

Actually, US Tennis hasn't done so well since that Capriati rule have they? I think their's a direct correlation!

[stotty]

His assessment of the sport is just boring. Typical British...no offense meant. Staid...stuck in the mud. How do you get things to go forwards? The last ten years have been so great? Says who?

No offense taken.

It's a little strange because all the TV tennis pundits (Rusedski, Henman, Lloyd) are calling for change but it's falling on deaf ears. Rusedski is adamant the game would be better for speeding up the courts...stating that today's tennis is just churning out the best of a certain type of player, and that lower ranked players aren't giving themselves a chance by sticking to the same old, same old game-style...it's like trying to lift a heavier weight than a person who is stronger than you...never going to happen.

[hockeyscout]

No offense taken.

It's a little strange because all the TV tennis pundits (Rusedski, Henman, Lloyd) are calling for change but it's falling on deaf ears. Rusedski is adamant the game would be better for speeding up the courts...stating that today's tennis is just churning out the best of a certain type of player, and that lower ranked players aren't giving themselves a chance by sticking to the same old, same old game-style...it's like trying to lift a heavier weight than a person who is stronger than you...never going to happen.

Really? Their are a few young guys on the national team basketball program who are bigger, stronger, faster and heavier than me. Sorry, I can out-lift them all. 20 years training experience, neurology, superior technique, breathing, muscle activation, rhythm and flow are the orders of the game. I often see athletes that looks just great, or can pound superb weight in the room, however, on the athletic front in baseball, hockey or tennis they have no functional athletic strength what-so-ever. A guy like Chris Chelios is one of the strongest hockey player I've ever seen, however, I don't think he can bench press 225 pounds, 10 times (which is a pretty minimal strength level for a pro athlete) these days. So yes, someone who is stronger than you, it ain't to tough to pass them if you've got someone to develop some fundamentals.

[bottle]

How about giving up your wife?

[don_budge]

It seems futile...

...it's like trying to lift a heavier weight than a person who is stronger than you...never going to happen.

I know what you meant...

[hockeyscout]

I know what you meant...

Nothing if futile without a plan my little beavers!

The first key here is you need to understand the theory of Somotypes. The Russian's basically stole this ideal from a Canadian hockey coach Lloyd Percival in the 1950's, and Lloyd stole it from some dude in the 1940's!

Canadians thought Lloyd was crazy when he said Gordie Howe was better than Rocket Richard. Anyways, the Russian's stole all of his training principals (and creativily made them better). The big theory in Canadian hockey at the time was we had was kind of along the lines of "it's like trying to lift a heavier weight than a person who is stronger than you ... never going to happen." Well, we learned better.

In terms of lifting, it's not hard to get someone lifting weight by teaching the correct stances, pull through techniques, wrist engagement, belly button breathing techniques and Descent - Accent mechanics. Trust me, a guy who is stronger than you, won't be stronger than you for long if you work with a strength coach who knows what he's doing. It's the same principals in tennis,

Arnold is stronger than Roger, but Roger hits the ball harder because he's mastered many basic scientific principals.

However, what I never see in weight lifting is coaches who are concerned about identifying body type, meal plans, diet and blood types! In fact, that is their first question. I haven't had a tennis coach talk to me about it as the # 1 priority of the day, which it is.

(a) Perfect technique and (b) understanding body type and (c) understanding blood types, you're improvement in strength and nuerology will be off the charts.

Now, obviously people like Novak, Nadal and Murray have been pioneers in this field, and their doing a bit more than you see (CVAC pod, Biofeedback devices, blood monitoring, some pretty sophisticated enzymes, and AvaCore)! Yet, what they are doing today athletes in other Olympic sports were doing 10-15 years ago, and it's kind of funny people think all of that stuff is "new age of something."

However, it's important to get a few basics, so I will start with the body type and blood, two key basic element.

It's really all about understanding what you are dealing with, endomorphic, ectomorphic or mesomorphic. Anyways, yes, you can take each body type and mold it appropriately (which is what the Russian's did). Next, you need to understand proper nutrition, and feed each group differently, for example I could get an ectomorph unbelievably stronger in a shorter period of time by increasing certain types fat in the diet. They need it! Good fats, as well. A mesomorph I'd train heavy, and get mass and definition, and watch them like hawk at the meal table as their nutorious for bad habits. Mesomorph's are very tricky, however, if you find one they are golden children! The Endomorph I'd make small meals the rule, space out snacks, do whatever I could to speed up their metabolism, carb up in the mornings, do minimal weight training, lots of isolation and just go to town on the water. I'd feed this one more like a mexican - russian.

The Russian's in the 60's - 70's understood these factors, and they're hockey programs reflected it.

Next, if you want to be stronger than the next guy, it's super important to know what types of food fit your body type and what foods fit your blood type! A type O don't do to well with wheat! A type O will be strong in aerobic running if the diets managed. If that diets off, and if the trainer doesn't know how to work with that kids body type, well, all bets are off, and the kid will be laxidasical. Likely that kid'll be written off! Type A blood, god, this one is a killer, you got to be so careful with this one because if they aren't on a perfectly manager vegatarian diet I'd say all bets are off. This group you need to coach like your the Karate Kids coach or a YOGA guru. Type B's are the greatest, put em on some digestive enzymes to enhandce their greatness and they'll survive through WW3, Chernobyl and whatever else you put them through! Then their's the AB, which in my opinion hasn't been figured out just yet. Their's a lot of science here to learn, however, Olympian's today are realizing this is where losses - wins happen, in the blood, and in the pee. The Australians Federations new set up is years ahead of it's time, I think are testing, testing and testing all day, and getting it right down to the mark, and god, who wants to know what the Chinese are doing as I think their completely and absolutely nuts, and off their rockers.

However, I'm not sure one will have much success as a coach with an athlete who's not being looked after correctly "the other 23 hours of the day" you don't have them. You can't beat diet. Results simply won't come. All the fancy strokes, best coaching in the world, and Rick Maccism's won't help you much unless "You've got the food house in order", and especially, the athletic GAIT set up right.

I'm not sure why their's not more emphasis in this area from day one.

Now obviously USA Tennis has gone downhill since the days of the "Capriati rule", however, another interesting point to consider may be the diets. I consider myself pretty informed in these areas, and I am sorry to say, the food we're buying in the stores is questionable and it's getting worse and worse by the day. It's tough to teach, when the young one's are not fed correctly, and really, for us coaches that's the next. I cannot tell you how much time my family spends hunting and gathering trying to find the right food! Man, we have to order in food from Germany, and my wife who is just the greatest gal in the world literally goes to the chicken farm 45 minutes down the road in the village, finds the chicken she likes, see's how the animals are looked after and kills it herself.

I believe many, many, many kids have the talent to be great in a lot of fields, however, we must not divorce ourselves from certain "all-around" sports science basics like all-around sports based technique, scientific based brain traing, blood - body type diets, psychology, inspiration, recovery, perfect storms and most important kid centered training.

Hard work, commitment and desire is great, however, Mister Krickstein who Don Budge speaks highly of, had some real substance, and a plan for their kids to succeed in whatever field that kid wants to persue (sports, academics, social) ect. I'm not really sure anyone will get their without some sound all-around understandings. I think as a society we've really lost touch with our hunter - gather routes, and are to rushed for time, and to get everything at it's lowest cost denominator!

You know, I love this site. Its great. John puts in the moving photos to teach a teaching point. Great. However, would it not be great to have a John Yandell type of site that caters to 8-9-10-11-12-13-14 year old kids, or learning applications (how in hell do these federations not have IPhone apps like Angry Birds, Candy Crush which are related to say, hmmm, tennis)!
Macci's video is great, interesting stuff, some great nuggets, but lets face it, it's applicable to us adults. It's coached based. My big thing in development is allowing th kid to take "ownership" of everything they want to do. You guys were talking about how happy you were to watch the whole video, however, shouldn't we ask ourselves, "okay, now how do we get a 6-10 year old" to watch that video, retain, take ownership and go an invent his "new - next" thing? What benefit is this video really to us? Great, it's playing in our head 24-7. It's how we're wired. The question, what is the next to get it in the kids head 24-7 like Angry Birds and Candy Crush? When we do that, then we'll see progress in our students! That's where the magic is at I think! I often wonder why their hasn't been a more intensive study on the success of the Gretzky's, Navratilova's, Graf's, Kricksteins, William's ect, because I really believe those parents were # 1 parents with incredible talents we have yet to truly understand.