Yucatan Word Cup 2006 - ITF Grade 1.

Salmon · Tennis legend

RE: Yucatan Word Cup 2006 - ITF Grade 1.

johnnylad · Tennis legend

It seems a fairly educated judgement, even if a little cynical/harsh.

I'm sure you're probably right.

Still, training with the top tier must be good for Dyce's game!

RedCabbage · Club Coach

I don't anyone but the extraordinarily rich will fork out that sort of money (and, of course, their offspring) without some degree of investigation, so I don't think Nick is in any way swindling them, but I agree that the inclusion of British "talent" might give someone the idea of shooing their progeny across the Atlantic in the first place.

Salmon · Tennis legend

Nick certainly doesn't swindle them.
People like McDuffee are actually millionaires who just want to learn tennis. Don't think that he ever thinks himself as a future top 100 player. He just wants to have the fun.

Unofficial reports say that he is actually a great entertainer.

Dyce is pretty talented himself. But he will need to work really hard to get to the level he is rated at. Best of luck to him for that.

And definitely don't write him off. You must remember that at Junior levels, people are trying new things every single match. Things can change rapidly within the space of a few months. Upsets are much more common here than at higher levels. A good example is Jonathan Eysseric of France, who began 2006 ranked around 380, but he will most probably become the world number one during the first week of 2007! You don't see anything like that on the big stage.

Styles change, body structures change, coaches change, everything alters very fast. Even Andy Murray is changing pretty fast, and he is 19.

Remember that he has had great results. If tomorrow Alan Mackin defeated JMDP on clay and say Zverev on indoors, we would know that Mackin is capable of some high quality tennis. Dyce has defeated better players, and that's a good sign for sure.

Dyce has a very good chance of becoming a top player if he works really hard.

Salmon · Tennis legend

Dyce and Heliovara won their first two matches 63 62 and 61 60.

Now that's some high quality tennis.

Sheddie · administrator

RedCabbage wrote:

I agree. Maybe he's just a bit fragile. Bad players can't play good tennis, but good players most certainly can play bad tennis.

I think him and Jade Curtis must be related!

Graeme and Jade have been travelling to these recent tournaments together, maybe she's been giving him some tips

Seriously though, that's a pretty poor result against Gery who's nothing to write home about from looking at his results. Gery hasn't done better than 4 quarters in G4s and G5s this year

Sheddie · administrator

I think Dyce's inconsistency this year has been largely due to injury, after those great results at the start of the year he was forced to take 4 months off which really set him back and curtailed the progress he'd made. Then it was 3 clay events followed by the grass season which is probably his worst surface.

He then found form in July in G4s and G5s but injury kept him out for the whole of August. Since making the final of that G1 in September, I don't know why he hasn't played that much but I think it's mainly due to a long training spell at IMG rather than injury.

It's very difficult to maintain form and consistency from tournament to tournament as a teenager, that's a widely accepted fact. It's even harder when you keep getting injured. Hopefully Dyce can have an injury free 2007 and then I'm pretty sure he'll be in the top 30 at least, but I do want to see him play more senior tournaments aswell, next year will be his final one on the junior circuit.

Greenleaf wrote:

RedCabbage is pretty right. Jade and Dyce suffer from similar problems.

He has had a few great wins this year - Berankis on clay, Rhyne Williams on hard, and also Jose-Roberto Velasco and Dennis Lajola on hard. Berankis and Rhyne could well become stars in the future.
But lately, he has become terribly inconsistent.

He had a brilliant start to 2006, as he played some great tennis on South American clay, the same stage which Andy Murray used when he was 16. But since then he has played tennis of a standard way below his ranking - all due to a mix of injury problems and some bad performances.

Hopeful y he will have a good start to the next year in Australia. The courts being made faster doesn't suit his style that much, I guess, but he is still a hard court player, and can do well if he finds form.

Sheddie · administrator

I agree with you about Nick taking a special interest in Dyce for economic reasons, however I do believe that it's also because he thinks that Dyce has considerable talent. That can be seen from his results, he's beaten some of the world's best juniors and done well in South America which is the toughest place to play on the planet.

Not all the top grade players in Dyce's group are as good as Elias. Most of them are around the same level. Just because Dyce is in the same elite group as Elias doesn't mean he's being overrated, it means that he's being stretched tennis-wise which can only be good for him. You can only benefit from practising with players of that quality on a daily basis.

I wouldn't say that Naomi is being overrated. OK, it's a little ridiculous to rate Naomi alongside Sharapova and Vaidisova as pros training at the academy but Naomi is one of the elite juniors and her progress in the last 12 months has been simply spectacular. From unranked to the top 350 seniors and top 30 juniors at just 17 is incredible and she's also given a top 20 player [Sugiyama] a close match and come close to beating another top 100 player at Birmingham. Only 7 players in the top 30 juniors have higher senior rankings.

Greenleaf wrote:

You must remember that all this is my personal viewpoint and nothing is official here.

The reason for Nick rating Dyce's results so highly is because of the great economic prospect he is.
The case of Naomi Cavaday being named alongside Sharapova, Vaidisova and other established pros in the same list is similar. Honestly.... is Naomi a top junior? I'm afraid that she isn't. There must be loads of players of her level training at IMG this winter. Yet she is the only one who gets mentioned.

Mind it, not for a moment am I saying that Naomi isn't a talented player!! I am a huge fan of hers.

In my opinion, IMG usually has three types of students -

The first lot are the top ones who study for free. Former students of this type are people like Agassi, Sharapova, Boris Becker and too many of such big names. These players join/are made to join through excellent scouting, applications or emotional mindgames.

Current top grade ones are people like Gastao Elias (only 1990 born player to have played Tour tennis), Michelle Larcher de Brito (won Eddie Herr 16s at the age of 12), Tamaryn Hendler (highest ranked 1992 born girl in the world), Tara Moore (good enough to win matches in 10Ks at the age of 14), Kei Nishikori (ranked 598 in the world at the age of 16) and many other names. Players of this level are all future stars.

Dyce is rated as being as good as them. Publicity is always good, but overrating isn't.

The second lot is made up of the ones who join with limited scholarships and careers which are less impressive, but are good prospects even then. They aim to get more funding by improving their results. This is where Dyce stands, as he got limited scholarship when he joined.

The third lot are rich kids who will most probably never see the top 1000. They are deluded that Nick is some kind of a magician who can turn you into a great tennis player. They don't receive any funding and need to cash out sums in excess of 40,000 $ per term. This money helps run the academy, as this is the very money which goes into funding people like Tara and Elias. A classic example is Kevin McDuffee.

http://www.itftennis.com/mens/players/activity.asp?player=100005153

By rating Dyce and Naomi above their level, IMG can generate a lot of publicity in Britain.
We are a crazy country.... all excited about a so called 'Scottish revolution' in tennis started by the rise of Andy Murray. Hence the next young Scot is sure to be a big cash cow.
We are seriously deprived of female talents, and as Naomi is our best prospect of her age and older by some margin, people are naturally curious about her.

As a result, parents may flock to get their kids to train at the world's most famous academy, not knowing that their little cherubs may end up having a career high of 1428 after spending a few millions.

Sorry for the essay!

-- Edited by Greenleaf at 11:43, 2006-12-15

Salmon · Tennis legend

Hmmm.... I wouldn't call Naomi a top Junior. A good way is comparing her ranking to others of her age group. Agnieszka Radwanska has a career high of 53 and has wins against people like Venus Williams and Dementieva. Paszek has a WTA title and she was fifteen till a few days ago. And there are at least ten others like that. Most top players quit Juniors by the age of 17.

I'm afraid that none of our girls playing 18s can be compared to the best of their age group except Tara.

We shouldn't rebuke Dyce because of this single result. Info at this level is really scarce and it could be that he lost due to no fault of his own - he could have been sick, maybe the line calling was biased due to the linesman having a Canadian mother.... anything.

RedCabbage · Club Coach

The problem with the women's game is that they seem to peak really young, so if you're not in the top 100 at 17 you probably won't ever be a world-beater. I'm sure there's plenty of examples of this not being true, but it's the impression I get!

But, given the recent state of british women's tennis, I would be happy for Naomi to just become a WTA tour regular. If she peaks at #75 with a couple of WTA finals in her career and maybe a grand-slam QF then I'll be happy. It will be enough to get women's tennis in the headlines for the right reasons and pave the way for Tara Moore and the Rens.

Salmon · Tennis legend

RedCabbage wrote:

The problem with the women's game is that they seem to peak really young, so if you're not in the top 100 at 17 you probably won't ever be a world-beater. I'm sure there's plenty of examples of this not being true, but it's the impression I get!

But, given the recent state of british women's tennis, I would be happy for Naomi to just become a WTA tour regular. If she peaks at #75 with a couple of WTA finals in her career and maybe a grand-slam QF then I'll be happy. It will be enough to get women's tennis in the headlines for the right reasons and pave the way for Tara Moore and the Rens.

Very true, I guess. Flipkens is a great example. She played Juniors till after her 18th birthday, winning Wimbly and USO Juniors in 2003. Pavlyuchenkova on the other hand won the AO at the age of 14. There is little doubt about who has a greater chance of becoming a top 10 player....

All the federations should get together and make the age limits 17&U, 15&U, 13&U and 11&U for the girls. That will ensure that players of that age group play there to a greater extent.

I won't be happy unless Naomi cracks the top ten, but that isn't an easy task at all. But she is fast improving and that's a good sign.

-- Edited by Greenleaf at 21:24, 2006-12-16

Salmon · Tennis legend

Doubles semifinals:

Dyce/Heliovara defeated eighth seeds Inzerillo/Piro by 76 76.

This is a superb win. Inzerillo and Piro partner each other very regularly, so are a very good team.
And Inzerillo is definitely world class, he was the number one in Europe as a 14 year old. He was a doubles winner at Tarbes in 2004 and at the Orange Bowl 16s last year, so that tells something about how good he is...

Dyce and Heliovara are the only seeded team left in the last four! Dyce will get ahead of his previous career high of 98 if he makes it to the finals. A title should get his ranking into the top 90.

Salmon · Tennis legend

They won their semis but lost in three sets in the finals.

A very good run even then.

johnnylad · Tennis legend

So a career high!

Not bad for someone I was slagging off earlier in the thread

Salmon · Tennis legend

Hmmm... we were not slagging Dyce in that sense. It's more of an attack on the media and Nick.

And I made some sort of serious blunder in the calculations.

Dyce moves up to 102, while his career high is 98. Oops....