Europeans dominating the men's and women's game, Fedex and Nadal in the men and the Russians, Belgians and Mauresmo in the ladies. What is the future of American tennis?
2006-09-25 01:12:30 · 5 answers · asked by kjn 3 in Sports ➔ Tennis
Russia does fit into the equation. There are currently 4 Russian
men in the top 40 in the world in the ATP Tour rankings for September 25, 2006 . There are 3 US players in the top 40.
http://www.atptennis.com/3/en/rankings/entrysystem/
There are 6 Russian women in the top 15 in the WTA Tour's latest
rankings, and 1 US player as of right now.
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/2/rankings/singles_numeric.asp
The USA will bounce back at some point. They go in down cycles, but bounce back at some point. They were asking this question, when Connors and McEnroe were in decline in the mid to late 1980s, and then Agassi, Chang, Sampras and Courier
emerged to help the US men achieve their greatest era of success ever. I don't think that will happen, but I think the US will have a bonafide contender. ARod will have to improve significantly to keep up with Federer. He doesn't stand a hope of beating Nadal and other claycourters at the French Open as of right now. Andy Roddick did something smart, by hiring Jimmy Connors, a player who overacheived in his career, because he was good and talented, but he overacheived because of his desire to win. I think Connors can only help Roddick against Nadal and Federer. Andy Roddick will be one of the contenders Down Under and Wimbledon and the US Open, but I still have my doubts about him at the French Open, even with Connors in his corner.
James Blake is a very good hardcourt player, but I don't know if he can win a Slam unless there is a path of upsets along the way. He shows he can compete with Federer at a high level, but he can't beat him when it counts the most yet.
USTA should stop trying to take credit when it did nothing or
very little. The private tennis academies need to step it up, since
it is obvious that's where the champions are being produced, not
publicly funded programs like the USTA development leagues. If
you want recreation or want to be a good college player and get an education, the USTA will be suffice. If you want to become a
Grand Slam contender and a top-level pro, going the private route
is the way to go.
2006-09-25 06:11:18 · answer #1 · answered by Answerer17 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well technically Russia does not fit into that equation. However, men's singles tennis is pretty convincingly dominated by europeans at the current moment. However, Blake and Roddick are both making tremendous progress. The better's odds would definitely be on the EU, but at some level I think it is a little unfair to compare one country to an entire continent's worth of players.
2006-09-25 04:53:30 · answer #2 · answered by nsacmercury 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i agree it is unfair to compare the us against of whole continent who is rich in tennis players, as in most of the top ten mens and womens. american tennis gets a bad rap because too many compare it to the connors, sampras, chang, agassi combo. they were phenomenal, never gunna be anyone better, so just get over it!
2006-09-25 11:48:44 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
you don't need Ryder cup in tennis..we have Davis cup and US just lost to Russian, not even as the European team..just one Russian team..they will be in a raise..Roddick and Blake..for sure..but..
2006-09-25 23:01:49 · answer #4 · answered by khutswe 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They can win plus we have the Bryans playing Doubles
2006-09-25 03:22:02 · answer #5 · answered by messtograves 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋