Somdev Devvarman in 2009? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Somdev Devvarman in 2009?

HattonWBA
12-30-2008, 08:18 PM
Somdev is a 2 time NCAA singles tennis champion and turned pro in July of 2008, i have seen him several times and he seems to have a nice variation of shots, however needs to improve to copmpete very well at ATP tour level due to lack of main weaponary, however i was wondering what you guys think he could do in 2009, and what his main goals and targets should be.

He current lacks experience and getting into main draws could be a problem for him outside of India where he will recieve wild card entries. He is currently ranked 204 and is 23 years old.

My aims and targets for him would be to stay healthy and try to get into the top 100 however this is unlikely and getting into the top 150 may be more realistic through ranking his point accumilation proberbly coming from challengers and qualifiers most of the time.

Henry Chinaski
12-30-2008, 08:36 PM
His results suggest top 100 is an attainable goal. Not sure about how much weight his status as double NCAA champion will hold but it should be good enough to get him a few wildcards in MM US hardcourt events. Isner got plenty but then he's American so it's not exactly the same situation

finishingmove
12-30-2008, 09:52 PM
he should definitely go up next season.

i'm not sure how the new ranking system will affect that, but we'll see

fast_clay
12-30-2008, 10:17 PM
i am gonna enjoy watching this guys progress...

CooCooCachoo
12-31-2008, 10:32 AM
I was a little bit disappointed by his results in Challengers this year, but am looking forward to what he can do in 2009. I have a soft spot for college players, as they don't put tennis before everything.

ImmzB
12-31-2008, 11:53 AM
He suprised as he took Almagro to 3 sets in Romania on Clay!
Hope he has a good 2009!

KaiserT
12-31-2008, 12:06 PM
He also got utterly dominated by Hanescu in Romania in the Davis Cup on clay :(

Vic won about 90% of his service points :rolleyes:

cobalt60
12-31-2008, 02:27 PM
Definitely someone to watch :yeah: Hope he does not go the way of many other college players before him though. Needs a top coach to make him use what he has and he needs a better serve to play with the ATP.

gusman890
12-31-2008, 02:51 PM
He gets to every ball, but doesn't have much weopens other than his legs to beat guys consistantly on the ATP.

He could be a challenger player for sure, but lets face it, what success in college garentees anything on the ATP?

HattonWBA
12-31-2008, 03:48 PM
http://www.tennistalk.com/en/news/20081230/Roddick_has_Devvarman_ready_for_Chennai

The fact that he is training with Roddick is very encouraging.

TankingTheSet
01-01-2009, 02:06 PM
His results suggest top 100 is an attainable goal. Not sure about how much weight his status as double NCAA champion will hold but it should be good enough to get him a few wildcards in MM US hardcourt events.

Last year there was no evidence of any respect to him in the US -- he got no wildcards at all (zero), was denied a US Open qualifying wildcard etc. Whereas historically kind of player (multple NCAA champion etc) would get wildcards.

And it's not like his early Pro results weren't encouraging, he won 27 consecutive matches from the start of 2008, winning three US futures with scorelines like 6-1 6-2 and then qualifying for and winning his first challenger (Lexington).

Henry Chinaski
01-01-2009, 03:26 PM
he should fire his agent

Winnipeg
01-01-2009, 03:35 PM
Top 150 player....enough said.

TMJordan
01-01-2009, 03:37 PM
He can't hurt any of the top 100 players with him game. He was gammed pretty bad against a shitty Kunitsyn...enough said.

CooCooCachoo
01-01-2009, 03:44 PM
http://www.tennistalk.com/en/news/20081230/Roddick_has_Devvarman_ready_for_Chennai

The fact that he is training with Roddick is very encouraging.

Thanks for that link :yeah:

TankingTheSet
01-01-2009, 04:20 PM
he should fire his agent

Maybe, I don't know who his agent is or was, but indeed the mentioned facts (zero wildcards even down to futures or challenger level) suggest that people that were supposed to defend his interests were grossly incompetent, unable to communicate to basic standards or entirely absent.

cobalt60
01-01-2009, 04:29 PM
Could his not getting WC's into Northern American tournaments have to do with the fact that he plays for India and lists himself for that country?

Spes
01-01-2009, 04:51 PM
He is in pretty good physical shape but if he puts in the time during the off-season and gets stronger and works on his serve he can make Top100 but it will take a considerable effort to go higher than that.

TankingTheSet
01-01-2009, 05:01 PM
Could his not getting WC's into Northern American tournaments have to do with the fact that he plays for India and lists himself for that country?

It's a big factor, but even then it is surprising that he would not even get a single wildcard. For example it is quite common for non-US citizens who play/played college tennis in the US to get wildcards in US tournaments.

Ivanatis
01-01-2009, 05:11 PM
Top100 is possible. I'm not sure about more. It will be a major struggle for him as well that wildcards for US tourneys (where he could probably reach his best results) will not be given to him due to his Indian citizenship.

Deboogle!.
01-01-2009, 11:00 PM
It's a big factor, but even then it is surprising that he would not even get a single wildcard. For example it is quite common for non-US citizens who play/played college tennis in the US to get wildcards in US tournaments.There has been a bit of a backlash against the fact that so many scholarships - especially at our public schools, which are largely government-funded - are going to non-Americans. I think this is one way that the USTA has chosen to handle it. He's Indian and he plays for India. I'm sure he's a great kid and a promising player, but I don't see why simply going to college here means he deserves a wildcard from the USTA.

Chip_s_m
01-02-2009, 12:19 AM
It's a big factor, but even then it is surprising that he would not even get a single wildcard. For example it is quite common for non-US citizens who play/played college tennis in the US to get wildcards in US tournaments.

What Deb said.

Also, not all WC's at Pro Citcuit events (almost all American challenger and futures tournaments) are determined by the USTA, even though the USTA organizes and manages the Pro Circuit. I think 2 are determined by the USTA and the remaining 2 by the tournament director. I'm doing a little bit of speculating here, but my guess is that the USTA exclusively hands out their own wildcards to Americans, which isn't surprising (or unreasonable in my opinion given the nature of the USTA's mission, but others may disagree with me).

Foreigners who receive WC's to these events most likely are granted them by the tournament director. Most of these go to players with a connection to the tournament, and since most of these tournaments take place on college campuses, the players/alumni of those colleges often get them, although other local players do as well. The Champaign challenger (at the University of Illinois) is a great example of this, as WC's are frequently given to current or former University of Illinois players (GD Jones of New Zealand got one this year for example). The tournaments in Knoxville and Nashville work this way too (Alexander Zotov of Belarus and J.P. Smith of Australia got WC's because of their affiliation with Vanderbilt and the University of Tennessee, respectively). However, there are no Pro Circuit events at the University of Virginia, where Devvarman went to school. I think the tournament director of the Dallas challenger posts on MTF occasionally and would probably be able to go into better depth about how WC's are determined. Again, I'm not entirely sure of how this system works. In general, it's unlikely that a WC would just be handed out to a non-citizen unless he had a connection with the tournament/city or his presence would boost attendance or otherwise contribute to the tournament.

It's pretty rare for a non-citizen to get a WC to an ATP-level tournament, though, especially to the USO. The main exception would be if an already established and well-known pro requested one, which happened a lot this year at US Open Series tournaments, although as you know this is pretty standard practice at non-US tournaments, too. Martin Klizan and Uladzimir Ignatik each got WC's to the Washington DC tournament in recent years, but I think they are represented by SFX, which manages the tournament. Somdev has received WC's to this tournament in the past, although I'm not sure why he didn't this year. I'm not sure who manages him, though. I can't remember the last time a non-citizen got a WC to the USO, either main draw or qualifying, with the exception of the winner of the previous year's junior tournament and those resulting from reciprocal agreements.

To be honest, I'm not too surprised that Devvarman didn't get any WC's, although I too am a fan and would've liked to have seen him get one. There is a lot of competition for them, and the USTA execs who determine WC's would have a tough time explaining to USTA board members why they're supporting non-citizens and not young Americans, which is the whole point of the USTA in the first place. Hopefully he'll be able to qualify directly next year for most of these tournaments anyways.

TankingTheSet
01-02-2009, 12:53 AM
OK thanks for the update.

But it's not like he was some random college player, he won the NCAA in two straight years, and then 27 consecutive matches in Pro tournaments in the US.

I will declare my subjective suspicion that one or more racists/xenophobes have risen to a position of power within the USTA or US tennis. Don't even try to comment on this.

Deboogle!.
01-02-2009, 01:09 AM
I will declare my subjective suspicion that one or more racists/xenophobes have risen to a position of power within the USTA or US tennis. Don't even try to comment on this.Oh come on, that's just ridiculous and you know it.

Anyway, it's been several years since the NCAA champ had a guaranteed WC into the USO. It used to be a done deal, but ever since the rise of international Div I athletes, that hasn't been the case and that's across the board regardless of which non-American nationality... Did Devvarman deserve a WC? That is a subjective debate. But at the end of the day, the USTA had no obligation to give one and I think his nationality beyond being non-American is 100% irrelevant. The US has shown strong support to players like Delic, Sweeting, and Levine who have decided to stay here and play for the US, regardless of where they came from. Why are US tourneys the only ones who are supposed to give WCs to international players? I wouldn't expect RG or the AO to give an American a WC just for studying there. Neither RG nor Wimbledon gave devvarman a WC, but where is your outcry there? If he deserved a USO WC based on his college performance, then he should've deserved RG and Wimbledon wildcards too, right? I don't see any need for a USO/US Tournament double standard here simply because he happened to study in this country, in a program that's basically unrelated to the USTA and American ATP events anyway.

Chip_s_m
01-02-2009, 01:18 AM
OK thanks for the update.

But it's not like he was some random college player, he won the NCAA in two straight years, and then 27 consecutive matches in Pro tournaments in the US.

I will declare my subjective suspicion that one or more racists/xenophobes have risen to a position of power within the USTA or US tennis. Don't even try to comment on this.

There's no way I can't I respond to that. Hopefully I can ease your suspicions a little bit. Here are some minorities who received wildcards this year to ATP-level events:

Nishikori (Asian and foreign)
Donald Young (Black)
Jesse Levine (Jewish)
Scoville Jenkins (Black)
Wayne Odesnik (Jewish)
Rajeev Ram (Indian)

Not to mention the female players or challenger/futures wildcards. Obviously there is a possibility that a racist individual is a part of any organization, but I think you're barking up the wrong tree, especially considering all that the USTA, the Williams sisters, James Blake, Arthur Ashe, Althea Gibson, etc., and even non-minorities have done to diversify the sport in the US. The USTA probably has a strong stance on that, and my guess is that anyone suspected of harboring racist attitudes wouldn't get very far. I know the USTA isn't very popular on MTF, but racism isn't one of its faults.

As for Xenophobia, if seeking to support American tennis is xenophobic, then I guess the USTA is, but then again every national tennis association would be too.

finishingmove
01-02-2009, 01:25 AM
so the USTA hates caucasian players.

interesting...

TankingTheSet
01-02-2009, 01:59 AM
Neither RG nor Wimbledon gave devvarman a WC, but where is your outcry there? If he deserved a USO WC based on his college performance, then he should've deserved RG and Wimbledon wildcards too, right? I don't see any need for a USO/US Tournament double standard here simply because he happened to study in this country, in a program that's basically unrelated to the USTA and American ATP events anyway.

Devvarman was basically unranked and unknown around the time of RG and Wimbledon. He was only known in the US as two-time college champion.

far. I know the USTA isn't very popular on MTF, but racism isn't one of its faults.

As for Xenophobia, if seeking to support American tennis is xenophobic, then I guess the USTA is, but then again every national tennis association would be too.

OK, racism may have been the wrong the word, and I apologize. But as some of the previous posts suggested, a 'hard-line' policy seemed to have been instituted last year ('backlash') limiting wildcards for non-US citizens even if they were based in the US.

It just doesn't fit with the etiquette of the sport, the concept of promoting tennis or tennis talents, that a guy like Devvarman who was based in the US and probably barely had the funds to sustain his career and who played his heart out for Virginia for years, would be treated as an alien and get zero/zilch/nothing respect. He got a Q wildcard in ATP Washington in 2007, but then as a two-time NCAA champion on a 27-winning streak in lower-level US Pro tour tournaments he is given the finger?

By the way there has reportedly a big shake-up at the USTA in recent months with the CEO being fired and management changes.

TankingTheSet
01-02-2009, 02:25 AM
BTW. He did get one wildcard in the US 2008, qualifying draw of Washington ATP (just like he did in 2007). He got a main draw WC (!!!) in Washington in 2006...

He also has a WC in Chennai the coming week.

Chip_s_m
01-02-2009, 02:25 AM
Devvarman was basically unranked and unknown around the time of RG and Wimbledon. He was only known in the US as two-time college champion.



OK, racism may have been the wrong the word, and I apologize. But as some of the previous posts suggested, a 'hard-line' policy seemed to have been instituted last year ('backlash') limiting wildcards for non-US citizens even if they were based in the US.

It just doesn't fit with the etiquette of the sport, the concept of promoting tennis or tennis talents, that a guy like Devvarman who was based in the US and probably barely had the funds to sustain his career and who played his heart out for Virginia for years, would be treated as an alien and get zero/zilch/nothing respect. He got a Q wildcard in ATP Washington in 2007, but then as a two-time NCAA champion on a 27-winning streak in lower-level US Pro tour tournaments he is given the finger?

By the way there has reportedly a big shake-up at the USTA in recent months with the CEO being fired and management changes.

Are you talking about Arlen Kantarian, the Chief Executive of Professional Tennis? He left, but he certainly wasn't fired. And it wasn't one of those "resign or we'll fire you" type of things. He legitimately just left. I haven't heard any insinuation that this was anything other than just him wanting to move onto something else that suited his goals/interests better. If you can find an article suggesting otherwise I'd love to read it. He has actually been very successful at the USTA, creating the US Open Series, promoting instant replay, increasing attendance at US events, getting US tournaments on TV more often, and increasing revenue. He was even briefly considered to replace De Villiers. Everything I've heard suggests he's very well respected.

TankingTheSet
01-02-2009, 02:31 AM
Are you talking about Arlen Kantarian, the Chief Executive of Professional Tennis? He left, but he certainly wasn't fired. And it wasn't one of those "resign or we'll fire you" type of things. He legitimately just left. I haven't heard any insinuation that this was anything other than just him wanting to move onto something else that suited his goals/interests better. If you can find an article suggesting otherwise I'd love to read it. He has actually been very successful at the USTA, creating the US Open Series, promoting instant replay, increasing attendance at US events, getting US tournaments on TV more often, and increasing revenue. He was even briefly considered to replace De Villiers. Everything I've heard suggests he's very well respected.

Well just google his name and you will find plenty of rumours/suggestions that his exit was not exactly voluntary and there were disagreements within the the USTA. One report said he liked grabbing ever more power with associated excessive monetary compensation. Those reports at the same time do not deny that he accomplished some positive things while at the USTA.

Chip_s_m
01-02-2009, 02:39 AM
As for Devvarman, I can understand where you're coming from. Yea, it's not the nicest story that he wasn't granted any substantial wildcards, but look at the other side. The USTA exists to support American tennis. How would it look if they started handing out resources that would otherwise be dedicated to those they're supposed to be supporting to non-citizens?

Btw, I doubt Devvarman "barely had the funds to sustain his career." Top college players, especially someone so successful as Devvarman, typically take in a hefty signing bonuses once they turn pro. Plus I'm sure he got a ton of endorsements.

Chip_s_m
01-02-2009, 02:45 AM
Well just google his name and you will find plenty of rumours/suggestions that his exit was not exactly voluntary and there were disagreements within the the USTA. One report said he liked grabbing ever more power with associated excessive monetary compensation. Those reports at the same time do not deny that he accomplished some positive things while at the USTA.

I'm not sure what report you're referring to, but I tried a few google searches and didn't find a whole lot suggesting it wasn't a peaceful departure. Tennis Week mentions some problems, but it doesn't sound like it was too bad. Overall it still sounds like a peaceful departure to me.

Rumors of Kantarian's impending departure began to emerge from sources close to the USTA during the US Open. Kantarian's contract expires at the end of this year and there were rumors Kantarian and the White Plains, N.Y.-based Tennis Association were not close on a new deal. There was some speculation that Kantarian might be under consideration for the ATP Executive Chairman post that Etienne de Villiers will depart at the end of the year and that some executives within the organization were wary that Kantarian had become too powerful within the USTA. There was also concern, among some within the organization, that the synergy between the Professional and Community branches of the USTA had become fractured with the Professional division overshadowing Community tennis. However a USTA spokesman told Tennis Week shortly after the Open ended that "negotiations were ongoing" on Kantarian's contract. Another source within the USTA shot down suggestions Kantarian was under serious consideration for the ATP job saying "that absolutely will not happen."

In an interview with Tennis Week shortly after the USTA announced it had purchased majority ownership the Western & Southern Financial Group Masters in Cincinnati — the second-highest-attended summer tennis event in the States after the U.S. Open — Kantarian disputed the notion that there was a divide between the Professional and Community branches of the USTA.

"Actually, it is the complete opposite of what you just said: one feeds off the other," Kantarian told Tennis Week. "The organization has become even more unified with Gordon Smith's work as Executive Director and COO. Yes, it is more than one entity with professional tennis and community tennis, but we've become more unified than ever. The more people watching tennis, attending tournaments and interested in tennis than the more pole will be playing tennis. So we want to feed all aspects because there is clearly a direct cause and effect in regard to player participation. The more people see the sport then the more people play it. So part of our aim is to build bigger, better and stronger tournaments in the U.S. because that helps increase the visibility of the game and increase the number of people who play tennis."

http://www.tennisweek.com/news/fullstory.sps?inewsid=6621560

Chip_s_m
01-02-2009, 02:59 AM
What's Kantarian leaving have to do with Devvarman anyways? He was involved with marketing and business stuff. My guess is that they left choosing wildcards up the guys more familiar with the game itself.

CooCooCachoo
01-02-2009, 03:06 AM
OK thanks for the update.

But it's not like he was some random college player, he won the NCAA in two straight years, and then 27 consecutive matches in Pro tournaments in the US.

I will declare my subjective suspicion that one or more racists/xenophobes have risen to a position of power within the USTA or US tennis. Don't even try to comment on this.

Uhm? The racism/xenophobia comment is very far-fetched. And you cannot just declare that and then say that we should not comment on it.

CooCooCachoo
01-02-2009, 03:09 AM
Very good posts from Chip_s_m, by the way.

TankingTheSet
01-02-2009, 03:16 AM
Uhm? The racism/xenophobia comment is very far-fetched. And you cannot just declare that and then say that we should not comment on it.

Um, you can't take one of my posts out of context, and ignore a partial retraction of my words that I posted later in the thread with further discussion/clarification of my view.

TankingTheSet
01-02-2009, 03:36 AM
What's Kantarian leaving have to do with Devvarman anyways? He was involved with marketing and business stuff. My guess is that they left choosing wildcards up the guys more familiar with the game itself.

Kantarian's appointment as CEO in 2007, which clearly notes his executive leadership of the US professional circuit:

http://www.tennis-x.com/story/2007-10-10/j.php

Report about his resignation:

http://blog.douglasrobson.com/2008/10/30/the-kantarian-era-ends.aspx

Blog that suggests there was some strife within the USTA from inside contacts.

http://blog.douglasrobson.com/2008/12/16/stefanki-begins-with-roddick.aspx

CooCooCachoo
01-02-2009, 03:38 AM
Um, you can't take one of my posts out of context, and ignore a partial retraction of my words that I posted later in the thread with further discussion/clarification of my view.

How did I take it out of context?

And as for the partial retraction, I only read that after I made my post. Since you did not bother to edit your post, you should expect comments on that original post. I did not feel the need to edit or delete my post, as the reaction to your original post still stands.

And even the partially altered version is still not supported. You are using Devvarman's case only to make a case about general USTA policy; while I definitely understand some of your reasoning, I fail to see how Devvarman is a case-in-point. Please tell me what other non-American players were unjustifiably disadvantaged.

Moreover, calling the USTA xenophobic is just bizarre. While the USTA's mission statement is not nation-specific ("To promote and develop the growth of tennis"), this is the American tennis association, and it would be very weird for this association to take to heart the support and development of non-American players moreso than that of the actual players it is supposed to be representing. Even the WC arrangement between the US and French Open has been created with a view to the development of American players. How would you react if the KNLTB, if it had full power in casu the allotment of WCs in Dutch events, started handing out WCs to foreign players?

Furthermore, as other posters have already pointed out, WC choices are not all up to the USTA. Tournament directors often have a say to at least one of the WCs, and in some cases management companies are influential too. Because these are not as wholly invested in the development of tennis on a national level, these WC choices are less constricted. For instance, in Rosmalen Octagon CIS plays an important role. And often these WC choices are heavily criticized (e.g. Gullickson and Cirstea on the women's side), as they take the opportunity away from local players. The same goes for the QWC that the Rotterdam tournament once had for an Indian player, in order to accompany and support ABN/AMRO's increased presence in India.

Finally, how are tournament directors in states other than Virginia xenophobic for not giving a WC to Devvarman? He played for the University of Virginia, that is where is allegiance is and that is the only place that I feel should in any way feel obliged to support him. Why should Indianapolis, San Jose, Memphis, Delray Beach, Los Angeles, Indian Wells, Miami, Washington, Houston, Cincinnati, Newport, New Haven give him a WC? What is Devvarman's link to these events? In fact, I am not even sure there is that much of a direct link between the USTA and the NCAA. In other words, none of the parties involved even have a moral obligation to give Devvarman a WC, and to call them xenophobic or racist is just a blatant exaggeration.

TankingTheSet
01-02-2009, 04:01 AM
How did I take it out of context?

And as for the partial retraction, I only read that after I made my post. Since you did not bother to edit your post, you should expect comments on that original post. I did not feel the need to edit or delete my post, as the reaction to your original post still stands.


I've noticed you doing this before, replying to a post in a discussion thread without reading the rest of the thread. I think it can lead to confusion. It's just basic etiquette.


Furthermore, as other posters have already pointed out, WC choices are not all up to the USTA. Tournament directors often have a say to at least one of the WCs, and in some cases management companies are influential too. Because these are not as wholly invested in the development of tennis on a national level, these WC choices are less constricted. For instance, in Rosmalen Octagon CIS plays an important role.

I understand that. And indeed Dimitrov's premature WC at Rosmalen seems to be an example. Another example could be that Uladzimir Ignatik received a main draw wildcard in Washington at the expense of Devvarman (who only got the Q wildcard).


In fact, I am not even sure there is that much of a direct link between the USTA and the NCAA. In other words, none of the parties involved even have a moral obligation to give Devvarman a WC, and to call them xenophobic or racist is just a blatant exaggeration.

What I am referring to is that when an upcoming player starts to play on the Pro circuit with a 27-match winning streak, in a historical context you would expect a few wildcards coming his way. In his case he only got the Q wildcard at Washington. Note that he also wasn't given wildcards for challengers. I don't know the details, and maybe it's an exaggaration if I say xenophobic without evidence, but as others posted there have been some political factors involved.

Here are the foreign WCs in the US summer circuit:

Prakash Amritraj (IND) Main draw wildcard to Newport
Tommy Haas (GER) Main draw wildcard to Indianapolis
Fabrice Santoro (FRA) Main draw wildcard to Indianapolis
Marat Safin (RUS) Main draw wild card to Cincinnati
Denes Lukacz (HUN) Qualifying wild card to Cincinnati
Uladzimir Ignatik (BLR) Main draw wild card to Washington
Somdev Devvarman (IND) Qualifying wild card to Washington
Xavier Malisse (BEL) Main draw wild card to LA
Cecil Mamiit (PHI) Qualifying wild card to LA
Ivo Karlovic (CRO) Main draw wild card to New Haven
Ricardas Berankis (LTU) Qualifying wild card to the US Open

I think he was unlucky not to get any main draw WC.

BTW. I am not even sure that he will be a consistent higher-ranked player, he showed signs of weakness and fitness concerns with some losing runs after the initial success. And his playing style may not allow great consistency of results.

Chip_s_m
01-02-2009, 04:33 AM
Kantarian's appointment as CEO in 2007, which clearly notes his executive leadership of the US professional circuit:

http://www.tennis-x.com/story/2007-10-10/j.php

Report about his resignation:

http://blog.douglasrobson.com/2008/10/30/the-kantarian-era-ends.aspx

Blog that suggests there was some strife within the USTA from inside contacts.

http://blog.douglasrobson.com/2008/12/16/stefanki-begins-with-roddick.aspx

Thanks, especially for that last link. That did not reach the mainstream news at all. I'd be surprised, though, if the WC procedures change with the new leadership.

CooCooCachoo
01-02-2009, 05:56 AM
I've noticed you doing this before, replying to a post in a discussion thread without reading the rest of the thread. I think it can lead to confusion. It's just basic etiquette.

I really fail to see how it leads to confusion if the post I quote is also mentioned in the quote itself. It cannot be any more obvious to what statement I am referring, really. If you make such big retractions, I expect posts to be edited. What's more, I did not know there was a guide to basic etiquette on MTF; I have been posting here for years and never had any problems so far.

I understand that. And indeed Dimitrov's premature WC at Rosmalen seems to be an example. Another example could be that Uladzimir Ignatik received a main draw wildcard in Washington at the expense of Devvarman (who only got the Q wildcard).

I forgot about Dimitrov, but he would indeed be the perfect example, moreso than Cirstea in the same year.

What I am referring to is that when an upcoming player starts to play on the Pro circuit with a 27-match winning streak, in a historical context you would expect a few wildcards coming his way. In his case he only got the Q wildcard at Washington. Note that he also wasn't given wildcards for challengers. I don't know the details, and maybe it's an exaggaration if I say xenophobic without evidence, but as others posted there have been some political factors involved.

Here are the foreign WCs in the US summer circuit:

Prakash Amritraj (IND) Main draw wildcard to Newport
Tommy Haas (GER) Main draw wildcard to Indianapolis
Fabrice Santoro (FRA) Main draw wildcard to Indianapolis
Marat Safin (RUS) Main draw wild card to Cincinnati
Denes Lukacz (HUN) Qualifying wild card to Cincinnati
Uladzimir Ignatik (BLR) Main draw wild card to Washington
Somdev Devvarman (IND) Qualifying wild card to Washington
Xavier Malisse (BEL) Main draw wild card to LA
Cecil Mamiit (PHI) Qualifying wild card to LA
Ivo Karlovic (CRO) Main draw wild card to New Haven
Ricardas Berankis (LTU) Qualifying wild card to the US Open

I think he was unlucky not to get any main draw WC.

BTW. I am not even sure that he will be a consistent higher-ranked player, he showed signs of weakness and fitness concerns with some losing runs after the initial success. And his playing style may not allow great consistency of results.

I understand, and agree with you, that it is strange or questionable, but I just wanted to point out that it is not xenophobic, nor a lower-grade version of it.

These WCs can all be explained:

- Amritraj is the son of a three-time winner of the Hall of Fame Tennis Championships
- Haas, Safin, Malisse and Karlovic are all established players
- The same goes for Santoro, who also just came off his Newport win
- Ignatik and Berankis are promising juniors
- Lukacs won a play-off/tournament (Fluitt Invitational) to land himself the Cincinnati QWC
- Cecil Mamiit hails from LA

Devvarman does not have famous ancestors in tennis, is not an established name, has no ties to the local community of cities that are home to any events and did not fight his way through any play-off events. Of course he would have been a legitimate choice for a WC, all of the above reasons might legitimately be allotted more importance. I do not think Devvarman was unlucky; I am sure tournament directors considered him, but considered other factors to be more important. I doubt there are political factors involved in that, but we will never know for sure. As for your suggestion that his agent might have underperformed, I suspect that there might be a certain truth to that.

Henry Chinaski
01-02-2009, 08:44 AM
What sort of the relationship does the USTA have with college tennis and the NCAA? Is it even under their jurisdiction at all?

Wouldn't it help grow the game as a whole in the US if the USTA contributed to college tennis by giving the 2 time champ a bit of serious promotion? Given the immense popularity of college sports in general it could be an untapped resource for US tennis.

It's not something I know a whole lot about and I'm pretty much thinking out loud so feel free to shoot me down....

CooCooCachoo
01-02-2009, 09:02 AM
What sort of the relationship does the USTA have with college tennis and the NCAA? Is it even under their jurisdiction at all?

Wouldn't it help grow the game as a whole in the US if the USTA contributed to college tennis by giving the 2 time champ a bit of serious promotion? Given the immense popularity of college sports in general it could be an untapped resource for US tennis.

It's not something I know a whole lot about and I'm pretty much thinking out loud so feel free to shoot me down....

I was wondering the same thing. I've searched around a bit, and I cannot find anything that denotes a direct linkage. Browsing on the USTA site only results some NCAA mentions in articles, but nothing on any organizational stuff.

kensan
01-02-2009, 09:43 PM
Getting back to Somdev, for me the bar is Donald Young. If Donald can get to seventy something in the world with no real weapons, so can Somdev. I would even guess Som has better legs, but I don't feel that strongly about that.

I say top 100, kinda like The Don. As previous people said, to reach higher than that he needs weapons beyond legs.

Deboogle!.
01-02-2009, 11:18 PM
What sort of the relationship does the USTA have with college tennis and the NCAA? Is it even under their jurisdiction at all?

Wouldn't it help grow the game as a whole in the US if the USTA contributed to college tennis by giving the 2 time champ a bit of serious promotion? Given the immense popularity of college sports in general it could be an untapped resource for US tennis.

It's not something I know a whole lot about and I'm pretty much thinking out loud so feel free to shoot me down....

I was wondering the same thing. I've searched around a bit, and I cannot find anything that denotes a direct linkage. Browsing on the USTA site only results some NCAA mentions in articles, but nothing on any organizational stuff.As far as I am aware, there is no relationship whatsoever, at least on an official basis. Yes, it would help tennis in the US if the USTA and NCAA worked together. But considering how many of the best tennis school teams are almost entirely composed of international students, I'm not sure why our government-supported and non-profit institutions would want to support someone who isn't from here and would never play for the US and stuff. And like we said, when the NCAA champ was typically an American, he basically was guaranteed a USO wildcard. At the end of the day, tennis is pretty low on the NCAA's radar, unfortunately :( all the money comes from football and basketball.

Cilic
01-03-2009, 03:13 AM
Somdev should have gotten a wild card into the MAIN DRAW of the U.S. Open

the fact that he did not even get a wc into the QUALIFYING cannot be explained; not by anyone

Ivo#1Fan
01-03-2009, 04:21 AM
Getting back to Somdev, for me the bar is Donald Young. If Donald can get to seventy something in the world with no real weapons, so can Somdev. I would even guess Som has better legs, but I don't feel that strongly about that.

I say top 100, kinda like The Don. As previous people said, to reach higher than that he needs weapons beyond legs.

I don't think it's the legs that separate Somdev and Donna Young, I think it's more a difference in what they've got between the legs and also what's in their heads. Somdev should certainly pass Donna in the rankings by the end of the year.

The_Nadal_effect
01-11-2009, 03:29 PM
He should be into top 150 now.
:D...Which then means that the next logical argument to start is will he break into the top 100 in the first half of the year?
Lets remember, that's when its loaded with his favourite court surfaces. I dont think his pushing style of tennis will help him come the fast hardcourt/ indoor season. He still isn't aggressive enough, and though fast, his body seems apt to break down soon -- lack of Nadalesque training entourage, I suppose.

Also, how many feel he will qualify for AO now? :devil:

malisha
01-11-2009, 03:37 PM
Also, how many feel he will qualify for AO now? :devil:

maybe this week he gave his best so wont be mentaly preperd for another big event...but he sholud win some matches this year on challengers and hopfully ATP...he is a fighter with better attitude than many top 100 players

Byrd
01-11-2009, 03:37 PM
He's a counterpuncher, but lacks power to actually counterpunch..., against challenger type players this will work as they won't be consistent with their shots, but against players in the top 100 he'll get owned. He needs to build up some power, he has everything else, reminds me of Murray a few years back.

Snowwy
01-11-2009, 04:05 PM
He's a counterpuncher, but lacks power to actually counterpunch..., against challenger type players this will work as they won't be consistent with their shots, but against players in the top 100 he'll get owned. He needs to build up some power, he has everything else, reminds me of Murray a few years back.

Riiiight, because Ivo and moya are challenger players...:wavey:

Byrd
01-11-2009, 04:19 PM
Riiiight, because Ivo and moya are challenger players...:wavey:

Ivo's hit and miss at the beginning of the season, and Moya's finished :kiss:

Action Jackson
01-11-2009, 04:22 PM
Well he definitely needs to get stronger, but not to the point where it takes away from his speed.

CooCooCachoo
01-11-2009, 05:23 PM
He should be into top 150 now.
:D...Which then means that the next logical argument to start is will he break into the top 100 in the first half of the year?
Lets remember, that's when its loaded with his favourite court surfaces. I dont think his pushing style of tennis will help him come the fast hardcourt/ indoor season. He still isn't aggressive enough, and though fast, his body seems apt to break down soon -- lack of Nadalesque training entourage, I suppose.

Also, how many feel he will qualify for AO now? :devil:

I actually expect that he will not qualify, but we'll see.