The American Dream Dying?

2 American men made the top 10 of the mens rankings for the first time since November 2007. At 9 and 10 respectfully we have Mardy Fish and Andy Roddick. Both men are certainly in the autumn stages of their careers with Fish at 30 and Roddick at 28. Looking beyond them the next players are Sam Querry and John Isner and it is difficult to see them making the top 20 in the world. Andy Roddick being the only male to have made the quarters of slam since the US Open in 2006. With Sampras and Agassi long retired. Roddick being the only American mens slam winner since both Sampras and Agassi. In the future will we see American mens tennis go in to a long hibernation?

Its very odd when you think about it. America has such a great history in tennis but it seems as if they are not producing great players anymore.

Something appears to have gone wrong or something lags behind with the various systems in the US. No sure what it is, but you can be sure here a lot of discussion about it at various level. 300 million pool to get players from in a rich country - hardly any young guys punching above their weight.

What is quite amazing is the spread of nationalities we do have in the top 20. i guess France is the country doing best with Monfils, Gasquet, Simon all top players, if not world beaters.

On the Womens side, is it still the Russians having dominance?

The Aussies are also a country with a great history that are going through an extreme barron phase.

Though they have an up and coming youngster in top 100 in Bernard Tomic.

Looking ahead, Young and Harrison arent breaking through yet, and may never do so. Young is overrated in my opinion, Harrison may become a solid top 30er.

A key insight is this - McEnroe (Patrick) said: too many young Americans have learned to strike the ball but not to play the game. To combat that, he and his team are pushing the clay-court game, which they see as one of the foundations of Europe's success in that it demands point construction, stroke variety, patience and endurance.

The issue isnt a lack of players but a lack of success due to them not being grounded well in the game due to the preponderance of hardcourts which encourage flat hitting with little variety and lack of development of defensive and transitional skills which all the top players need. The older fashioned Bolletieri approach of drilling shots on hardcourts isnt working anymore.

And if you look at the current crop of highest players:

Nadal - grew up on clay
Federer - grew up on clay
Djokovic - grew up on clay
Murray - took game to higher level through clay training in Barcelona
Del Potro - grew up on clay

This is what McEnroe is alluding to - being trained on clay produces the best current crop of players as it skills you in all areas needed to succeed in todays game.

Great insight there lydian. I did wonder if someone could provide an insight to the USTA and what could be failing. I was hoping socal could provide more in depth on this and what the USTA are doing to make sure they can produce players of the calibure of Connors, McEnroe, Sampras, Agassi.

Thanks LK. To be honest all those guys you mention were better faster court players due to the US hardcourt, and even grass, tradition. As the courts have generally universally slowed down a new approach is needed (as recognised by P.McEnroe) so they need to change their approach to produce the calibre of the guys you mention - but they wont produce guys quit like those again as the game has changed.

Another issue is that since Pete and Andre retired there has been less interest in tennis and as US TV produces such huge revenues there is literally less money going into the game and other sports have taken over or increased in popularity and now compete for cash share.

It is interesting from the point of view that Connors won the US Open while it was a clay event and Ashe did too. I think it is a shame that players like Fish, Isner, Querry haven't reached the quarter finals of the hardcourt slams.

I think they need to change their strategy, It is amazing to think that the Americans see it as a failure not to have a top 10 player in world rankings and yet I would be over the moon to get a Brit player in top 100!

Yes, isnt it just. I guess they have a much stronger history of tennis than us (as usual we invent the game and others excel at it...lol) and a larger population to draw from, plus a better climate and probably better and more even funding!

But they may be seeing the effect of sports like American Football, baseball and basketball increasingly dominate on US TV, like we have with football, rugby and cricket. Tennis is getting less and less of a look in and the ATP also need to do something to promote the game more at grassroots and through initiatives with local TA's.

Legend, in the US tennis isn't even as popular as televised poker and lumberjacking contests. I mean American Football is the king in terms of Tv revenue and ratings, followed by baseball, basketball, Nascar, golf, mixed martial arts, hockey etc. Tennis is maybe somewhere around the top ten in terms of TV viewership and media attention. College football is a way bigger sport with a bigger fan base than tennis. Hell in some states high school football draws bigger crowds and tv ratings than professional tennis. The best athletes just don't move in that direction and the players that we do have are just not that goood. Harrison is promising but who else do we have other than him?

I haven;t read all the posts but I know clay is mentioned. But the main point is that both the game becoming more physical and the conds being slowed down (helping again the rallyers) made the S&V game (90% of US players) redundant and gave those who developed their game on clay a serious advantage.

Tenez wrote:gave those who developed their game on clay a serious advantage.

Yes such as the current top 5 players! (of which I include Del Potro)

But tenez in the US they haven't been producing S and V guys, since the mid 90s the US players have been power baseliners, they all invariably have a big serve and a big forehand. S and V as a principal strategy has died out everywhere. There seems to be almost an over emphasis in the US on players with big power in those two departments.

Agree socal, guys like Querrey, Isner really espouse that approach. Because most of the USA is covered in DecoTurf II, with its low bounces and skidding through dynamics, it encourages flat power hitting at the detriment of other keys parts of players games. If you can make easy winners off fast HCs you dont need to develop defensive, movement or tactical skills. Then when these guys go to other surfaces they struggle more.

This is what Patrick McEnroe is getting at when he realises that the clay grounding Federer, Nadal, Nole, Murray and Delpo had is what has made them more complete players who can challenge across all surfaces.

As you say lydian, while movement has always been a part of the game it is quite clear that speed kills in modern tennis. Similar to what has happened in other sports. Pace is the be all and end all know in most modern athletics, whether it be rugby,american football, regular football, or tennis. If you look at all of the top 4 players all of them are great movers. In fact even going back to Hewitt the top guys have all been great movers and I don't think regardless of your power you are going to be able to dominate without great movement. Clay also helps you develop in point construction things like drop shots, lobs, hitting behind players, working for an opening instead of taking the first ball you see and cranking it as hard as humanely possible. The guys with speed, fitness, and with craft tend to do better on clay courts and on the tour in general nowadays.

socal do you think more funding is required for the USTA to bring their training programmes forward?

If I can also answer that too LK, and respect socals answer in due course, I think the USTA need to invest in red clay courts (not that green shaley stuff Houston has) or send elite prospects over to Spain to their well established training academies.

legendkillar it isn't in my mind a matter of funding really. More clay courts would help but that isn't the only answer. In the 80s mac and connors brought a lot of young talent into the sport, they made tennis a big deal in America. In many ways it surpassed golf for awhile in popularity and maybe was the most popular sport in the country after the big three. I think its a matter of interest and someone making tennis cool again for the kids. There is a huge amount of courts and public courts in the states so accessiblity is there, good coaching is there. But tennis just doesn't get the best athletes and kids dont' go down to the public courts like I did after school. Instead they play pick up basketball. I don't know frankly what can reverse the trend, it has been a steady decline really since the early to mid 90s.

Lydian the green clay I have played both on green clay and the red clay is very similar, I mean you are talking about a minute difference. i maybe am one of the few people that have played on both American green clay and red clay. Red clay is a tiny bit boucier, but really a very tiny bit. And that little bit of difference could be as a result of the difference in altitude in the two courts I have played on. i have played red clay tennis at high altitude and green clay tennis on slightly above sea level

Thanks socal, I had heard the US clay courts were generally much faster than the EU ones, which again also encouraged big shot making from the US players - for example Roddick got to the finals of the Houston event 5 years running (2001-2005). Yes Roddick on clay! If that's not a sign of a quick court I dont know what is...

lydian, that is because no real clay court players show up for Houston. You have a couple of south americans and the yanks play on clay courts not particularly impressive stuff.

Actually thats fair comment socal!

I see Ryan Sweeting won the champs this year in Houston...maybe the US guys have got another potential good player after all...

Lets hope so, the American market is crucial for tennis as the buying power, and tv revenue in the states can add a lot to the game. But well if the states don't come around I'll still be watching.

Yep socal, they just need that 'next' player to burst through to raise the profile of the game again in the US. After all, if UK didnt have Andy Murray right now lord knows what state tennis would be in. You could argue Henman, Rusedski (lesser degree) and Murray have kept mainstream tennis interest going in the UK singlehandedly for 12-13 years now. Shows how vulnerable tennis is though, if we dont find a replacement for Murray then it will drop off a cliff. Guys like Ward winning the odd match at Queens isnt going to sustain it. At least the US has guys in the Top 50 still...there;s some hope!

Lydian, they have a number of decent players. This harrison kid looks in my mind to be a very well polished young player with a good serve, good forehand (surprise surprise) but with a bit more variety to his game than the Roddick, Querrey, and Isner group of guys. I think in the next 2-3 years he could be top ten guy. I mean it really is a shame there are so many courts here, and they are so affordable, and so many good academies and coaches. Its not a matter of resources in the least. It really is a matter of interest. I lived 2 years ago in a town in southern california a real hotbed of tennis, population of about 300,000, there was at least 200-300 tennis courts in this town. Currently I live in Tehran with a city with at least an 8 million population and there is maybe 60 tennis courts in the whole city.

Agree re: Harrison, lost a close match at Queens to Michael Berrer too.
Yep, agree its mainly an issue of popularity in the US - they had it so good for so long with Connors/Mac/Courier/Chang/Sampras/Agassi...where's the next top 5er and slam winner coming from. Cant see it being Harrison, although he's good, we may have to wait a few years now...

Well we will have to see they say his younger brother is a better junior than he is, and I think he is only 18 or 19 so he has a lot of room for growth. But I agree I would be surprised if he does become a top 5 player or grandslam winner.

Socal
"Currently I live in Tehran with a city with at least an 8 million population and there is maybe 60 tennis courts in the whole city. "

But at least the skiing is better than in southern California.

Has it been a USTA policy over the last decade or so to look for really tall and slightly heavy players (i.e. basketball physique), or is it just a coincidence that Isner and Querrey are so big?

It does seem a bit peculiar to me though that after the success that Sampras (serve and volley) and Agassi (aggressive baseline counter-hitter on both wings) had, the current US pro ranks is dominated by Roddick copies (as you say, big serve, big forehand but not that much else).

Is there still much high quality tennis played in the collegiate system, or is the lure of the pro circuit such that it has undermined the development role that the colleges used to play?

dummy half, the skiing is better here but I am not much of a winter sports kind of guy. But southern california has ski slopes an hour and a half away from LA up in the mountains as well. Dummy I don't think there is any specific policy to produce Roddick clones. I think like lydian pointed out on a fast deco turf courts its easier to succeede with a big serve and a big forehand, the courts the kids play on since they are very young just requires a lot of power and not much else, and favors attacking play. I don't think producing serve and volleyers will help, S and V as a principal style of play. Roddick is a product of the American hardcourts were not surprisingly he has always played his best. I personally don't like to watch big servers who hit loads and loads of aces its not the style that I prefer. I was always a connors and before that an Agassi fan.