The race is on for the youngsters

42 Tomic, Bernard (AUS) 1,016 4 23
44 Johnson, Steve (USA) 971 -2 26
45 Young, Donald (USA) 964 11 26
46 Vesely, Jiri (CZE) 958 -2 26
47 Thiem, Dominic (AUT) 942 1 25
49 Janowicz, Jerzy (POL) 905 -2 24
====================
Ok some are considerably older than others but there is a good concentration of them in the 40s ranking.

Maybe we could add the race for "babies", too: Puille, Coric, Zverev...

I was watching Simon Monf final and poor Simon had to cut his trophy photo posing short as he started to feel dizzy...he was utterly dead (after three sets).
Later in the interview he said that the 2nd round match against Coric totally drained his tank for the rest of the tournament, and I thought...yes...we have a baby-road-runner here!

Yep...don't like Coric. Did not know Zverev....then there is kyrgios to ahead of the pack at 37 being 19 only.

Should be interesting.......

I forgot about Kurgios...he is a strange one. Nowhere to be seen after AO. I think it may be the back injury.
Kokkinakis has been playing since, though.

I find it hard to assess youngsters now because the game is so physical.

yep difficult to guess who will be the most successful. There is a good rate which will do no better than Gasquet.

Tenez wrote:yep difficult to guess who will be the most successful. There is a good rate which will do no better than Gasquet

Yes...still, someone's got to win all those tournaments.
The way things are, it seems TDs have no intention of changing anything, so we'll probably have to wait a other two years for someone young or new to win a big title.
Of course, there can be one-offs like Cilic in the meantime.

I must say I cannot see above the rest for now.....but I have not seen them much so far. Kyrgios certainly seems to have the weapons and mindset.

Here is an insightful and very honest interview with Ryan Harrison:

.... "I was way too insecure with myself, with my career, worrying about judgement, about media, about all sorts of things that were not going in the right direction. Instead of reading all the positive articles, I would read every single negative one and look at it as like a criticism that was really letting it affect me to the point where I actually panicked about it.

I felt the need to please people to the point where I was hoping they were saying something good about me on TV, hoping they were writing good stuff about me. ‘I hope people think I’m going to be good,’ all that stuff that you would expect not to think about—and the things you don’t think about when you have security and confidence in the direction you’re going."

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2015/02/ryan-harrison-acapulco-grigor-dimitrov-grant-doyle/54188/#.VPAfC2IgGSM

Imagine now how it must be for players who come from poor and little/no tennis history...

Yes....sport at this level certainly helps a lot understanding oneself.

Yes, that's quite an interesting aspect of pro tennis, where no stone can be left unturned when it comes to knowing oneself.

We all grow during our lives through experiences, but pro tennis players get it all condensed and accelerated.

They all start just practising shots and improving the game and then they hit the brick wall which often is problem of their own...usually some kind of fear or emotional insecurity.

I suppose that's why tennis s is so attractive to watch - we can see their struggles and characters so openly on the court - they can't fake anything there like they do after the match in press conferences.

What surprised me a bit with Harrison (and many other players) is how much they read what media say...that is the very last thing they should be doing!

noleisthebest wrote:What surprised me a bit with Harrison (and many other players) is how much they read what media say...that is the very last thing they should be doing!

Not surprised actually. They are young, they have a normal life like everybody else...and suddenly people, the press, the world start to talk about them. Must be so impressive for a young soul. Their ego must be feeding on this to scary proportions.

Tenez wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:What surprised me a bit with Harrison (and many other players) is how much they read what media say...that is the very last thing they should be doing!

Not surprised actually. They are young, they have a normal life like everybody else...and suddenly people, the press, the world start to talk about them. Must be so impressive for a young soul. Their ego must be feeding on this to scary proportions.

Good point!
When I did some agency work to save up for my course I worked at the Arsenal training ground.
I was serving the pro's food and they were very polite and respectful.
The newly signed youth players (16-18) were rude, arrogant and pretentious. Many drove in in their new cars thinking they owned the place. Very few of them will make it to the senior squad of the 20 or so of them.
I hope their bubble bursts to be frank.

Yep...must have been frustrating but difficult to keep your head in check when you are young. They are excusable to some extend.

A poster posted a very interesting graph on 606v2 (biugo's post on this thread):



http://www.606v2.com/t57140p200-2015-250-500-tournaments-thread




The graph shows the number of teenagers in Top 50, 100, 200, 300, 500 (capped at 20 players) over the years.

A lot of posters think that in today's conditions it is very hard for youngsters to break through.  I am not so convinced, and this graph is interesting in that regard.



It shows that the last maybe 5-7 years the number of teenegers totally dried up near the top, but it also shows that this year - all of a sudden - their numbers are pretty much back to the more typical levels.



It is also interesting that both the decline, as well as the current recovery, can be seen not only around top 100, but all the way to top 300 and beyond.



It will be interesting to see if the 2015 bounce back is temporary or whether we are back to more normal levels in terms of successful youngsters.

It is certainly a very interesting graph. IT is however difficult to interpret as we do not have enough "Teens" all along in the top 50 and 100...and lacking the top 5, 10 and top 25 is a bit of a letdown as this would probably be the most important data of this graph. In teh past we had teenager in the top 5, 10....impossible nowadays.
 
I would say top 10 players, even top 5 are more "professional" than ever whereas the lower the ranking the more likely it is going to be like in the past...except that of course the pyramid base is simply "better" than in the past.
 
But even making do with top 50, having suddenly 1 teenager and 2 in the top 100 is not enough information to draw conclusions. In 3 weeks Kyrgios won’t be a teenager anymore and unless others manage to pierce through, the top 50 won’t have any.  What it tells us though is that there are no Teen in the top 25 and top 10….let alone top 5 unlike before our latest “physical” era.
The main conclusion for me is that the knowledge to sustain long rallies was simply passed down the lower ranking players recently. When you see Kokki, Coric and others their main strength is to be able to rally but also pull some good shots.
 
This graph tells me that the youngsters have been made up to date about the way to sustain long rallies. Whatever that is, I won’t go into details but as federer would say, in the past big and tall players were attacking, now they play from the baseline. Let’s not go into details here how those youngsters manage to play long rallies but that is what I noticed from watching them. They have potetntial for great shots but those great shots are not going to pull them through just yet. They need fitness first…which clearly they have now.

I have always said that the current top physical players, despite being called “the great 4” are actually poor shot makers in comparison to the early 2000s as back then you had to be technically sound to pierce through (Coria, Nalby, Blake, Davydenko, Federer, Safin, Gonzo,..) to name a few.
 
The new generation will have both technique and fitness and will be much better than Nadal, Djoko and Murray as they will have both technique and fitness….until maybe another Nadal pushes the physical bar even higher (Coric?).

In the meantime, the top 10 and top 5 players average age increases!


Top 10 Players ages


This link is "Live"!

Good post, T.

Understanding how levels of fitness affect today's tennis is everything.
That's the key to winning now, and it comes with a cost:

Extending  rallies (or keeping the ball in play) for almost as long as needed prevents shotmakers (or potential young players) to put the ball away and win points in current slow conditions (result: dull percentage tennis wins).
Young players simply don't have the physique to compete with older players.
17, 18, 19 year olds generally look like stick insects finding it hard to put muscles and weight on naturally.

If a player is not physically super-fit, he has no chance of winning.

I challenge anyone who disagrees to try playing full-on tennis (hit the ball as hard as they can) with long rallies for half an hour.

I realise my post was long but in short I was saying this graph doesn't not tell us what happens at the very top. Or rather it does say one thing.

Money and knowledge can really make a big impact nowadays as there seems to be more gap between the very top players (top 4 or 10 even) than before. It seems simply impossible for a teen to catch up a top 10 player off guard. Those are nowadays too professional to lose to any youngster, in particular in Bo5.

The only one who suffered that feat since Nadal beating Federer in FO05 is actually Nadal v Kyrgios at Wimbledon.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Ti/F/Frances-Tiafoe.aspx?t=pa

Another one to follow.. Apparently he reached a CH final last week, and was pretty close to win the whole thing.

I suspect he is a grinder but not too sure.

Coric has to be the least likeable, argues alot with umpires and shouts at his coach alot. Trying to be a mini Djokovic obviously.

AceofDeath wrote:Coric has to be the least likeable, argues alot with umpires and shouts at his coach alot. Trying to be a mini Djokovic obviously.

Agree Jeremia! Glad you can still pick the ugly players after 2 more years of V2!

Maybe he will mature later tenez for now though it's Rublev and Chung of the younger generation I will enjoy to watch

Sure but this guy is only 17....10 months younger than Rublev I believe and ranked the same.

I was referring to Tiafo....actually he is only 3 months younger than Rublev.

In Rome qualies, Rublev defeated Carreno Busta (again). Chung is in Busan final and if Zverev wins today, there will be four teenagers in top 100.

Wow! Carreno Busta is ranked 60! That's a pretty good achievement.

Tenez wrote:Wow! Carreno Busta is ranked 60! That's a pretty good achievement.

Indeed.  And he had lost to Rublev once already this year, so one has to assume he would have not underestimated him this time.

I have not yet seen Rublev play, but he seems to be collecting some nice results already.

summerblues wrote:

Tenez wrote:Wow! Carreno Busta is ranked 60! That's a pretty good achievement.

Indeed.  And he had lost to Rublev once already this year, so one has to assume he would have not underestimated him this time.

I have not yet seen Rublev play, but he seems to be collecting some nice results already.

Really worth it. very thin and each shot look way too risky...but the vast majority strangely land in.

Chung won Busan and will be somewhere in the 70s (?) in the rankings. He will presumably start playing more main tour events soon.

Chung is now in the Seoul final after beating Lu in the SF.

Lu is a tough cookie.
Those challengers are all fixed by betting mafia, though...

noleisthebest wrote:Lu is a tough cookie.
Those challengers are all fixed by betting mafia, though...

Do you really think so?

They can't turn a donkey into a racing horse....and vise versa.

Yes I do.

That's where pros make their money since $$$ is so trivial in qualies and early rounds of ATP events.

But Pros (tennis pros) are closely followed by the system. I doubt it is plagued with it. On occasions probably ...

And how do you know they are watched closely by the system?
Why shoukd they be watched any more than WADA is keeping tennis clean...

For the same reasons WADA is turning a blind eye on dopers: Money ...and here it is affecting the betting agencies...and they don't like it.

ITF remember guys.

I read somewhere they approach players through Facebook.
I am sure it's rife, an not only in challengers.

Prize money is peanuts below top 100.

But bookers look at irregularites and are swift to raise an investigation. I am sure it happens but I doubt youngsters with potential are targeted.

No, not youngsters, it would've been Lu for tanking.

I had a look...there are so many ways matches can get fixed, set fixing in particular.

But Lu is better off trying to get back in the top 100 don't you think? or not leave it ( I am not sure about his ranking).

Rublev served for qualifying v Nieminen at 5/4 in the 3rd...but failed. 5 all now! nieminen probably twice the age of Rublev.

Rublev winning 7/4 in the 3rd set TB! strong mentally as well! well done!

Did You Know?

Rublev is the first player age 17 or younger to win five or more matches in the same year at different Tour-level events since Rafael Nadal in 2004 (Auckland, Dubai, Indian Wells, Miami, and Milan). The last teen to win five or more first-round matches was also Nadal in 2004.

Tenez wrote:Rublev winning 7/4 in the 3rd set TB! strong mentally as well! well done!

Thpat sounds very promising.

Related to our discussion...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32720777

“And while it can often be young, vulnerable players - who are not earning much yet - who are approached, it might also be a player towards the end of a career looking for one big final payday.”

Yes...I think the older players are targeted more.

It's sad...

They have all worked hard for years.
Some make it to the top, some don't.

They all sell part of their soul along the way.

Some for more, some for less...

But as mentioned in the article, they mostly "spot-fix" (losing a frame, a game, etc...) but might not directly choose to lose.

And again as mentioned because it cost money (instead of making money in the case of doping), the "system" is fighting it very hard.

Yes, that's what I was talking about, too.
It is so easy to fix a match as there are many things to bet on, so it's impossible to prove "lack of effort" as it's the case with tanking the whole match.

I don't see any moral dilemma there: match fixing and doping condoning is the same, but personally I think ignoring doping is worse as it ruins the sport, health..

It's only short term gain for sponsors but terrible long-term consequences for sport.

Match fixing does not affect how the game is played...though it's probably soul-destroying for some.

It's all filthy world of greed where those who do nothing make money off hard-working athletes.

There is another Davydenko on its way....maybe...Nikolay's nephew!

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Da/P/Philipp-Davydenko.aspx