first?

"Think he'll have a chance there in London come June?"

He may, but let's remember that having a solid game on HCs and grass-like attributes (big serve, solid volleys, or both) in said game doesn't necessitate an easy transition to the AE Club. To give one example, Tsogna seems like a player whose game would transition well to grass, but thus far he has not duplicated his HC efforts on the softer surface.

Pete, I get what you're saying, but why do you think John Isner has succeeded out of college when most people don't? My guess is that it's due to physical gifts and hard work which maybe most of his college peers don't have...but I do think some young players would have been helped by going to college rather than hitting the pro tour young.

Lovin' the title :)

Thanks Pete. I certainly look forward to the article in the Aug/Sep Tennis mag on Izzy. I have been backing this guy for a while...including thinking he had a shot that year against Robo-Federer at the USO in 07 when he managed to take a set off of him before bowing like most do.

If Izzy makes it to the Qtrs of any clay court tourney, more power to him. One would think he would be a Wimby title contender. I hope he sticks to the serve/volleying and doesn't try and be a backboard like he settles into some times. He's only going to wear himself down like that...as Pete noted. It will be interesting to see if he can rocket the FH off the slick/quick-ish grass not noted for being bouncy.

Tsonga is different as he is primarily a baseliner....and a net player as an afterthought. Movement on grass is tricky as well.

Go IZZY!!!!

Nice one Pete. The first time I met Isner was during Arthur Ashe Kids day in 1997? I always volunteer for Kids day. I was stationed on one of the outer courts and Isner was not scheduled to participate but came onto the court to help out with the activities which included having the children volley. One scene which be be forever in my memory is that of Isner squatting and bending down to "high five" a 6 year old. Too cute! It was his intention to stay on the court for only a few minutes because he had practice time scheduled, but he stayed for a couple of hours!

GVgirl, 1997? Do you mean 2007? Wasn't he himself a child then? He would only have been 12 then..

2007 LOL Thanks crazyne. LOL

LOL Crazyone, thanks it was 2007. Boy is my mind going. ROFL

His sangfroid also help him with his serve...I love his fluent serve!

So Tsonga lost to De Bakker????

And what happened to all clay courters like Nastase, Borg, Panata?

Well maybe:

a) there aren't enough courts and events.

b) those guys lose too much on hc with their more passive style? (And the new equipment lets people rip the balls even more so imho)

....the clay game was re-invented by Rafa....most haven't caught up yet.....or maybe hijacked is a better descriptor. One shouldn't be able to move that nimbly on that surface AND create such pace and angles. Goodnight Irene.

"Take heed, ladies, this one may not be wholly as innocent as that choir-boy face, good manners, and soft-spokeness suggests."

Pete: I tossed aside any idea of Isner-as-innocent when I saw him blatantly flirting with Tennis Channel's Cari Champion as she did her best to interview him near the IW practice courts this year. It was very funny -- and cute.

I can't help it. I've always rooted for the success of players like Isner and Paul Goldstein and Patrick McEnroe and Kevin Kim -- all players who spent a lot more than a couple years attending college. I have nothing against those players who jump from high school (or home school) into the pro scene, but I just like the idea of a player's attending college and even graduating before taking the plunge -- even if it's not the preferred path to success in professional tennis.

I predict Big John Isner to win the US OPEN within the next 5 years.

....success in professional tennis is fleeting....

Seems like it would be worth it to spend 4 yrs in D-One college if you can IMO as opposed to scraping together some scratch if you are not sponsored by some business entity that will drop you in a second when you don't become a star in 3 months.

Even if they just spent two years in school....I think that would be helpful...and just way more fun.

Great piece, Pete, on my fellow Georgia Bulldog. I think he he'll have a shot one day soon at Wimbledon or the U.S. Open if the courts are fast and the serves and forehands are hitting the lines. I just hope he doesn't wear that ugly goldish-yellow Georgia Tech looking shirt Nike has draped on him a few times -- put the big man in the red and black!

Good one about the big dude, Pete.
I can certainly understand why he wasnt too eager to leave college:)
About the benefits of playing tennis in college, i dont have any knowledge about the college tour. It could very well be that it worked for John because his game is in fact big and works in the main tour, and it could be said that he would have gotten where he is regardless. But being part of a team, having the pressure of a number of teammates depending on your result, teahces you to win under pressure, and i'm assuming it's also a healthier kind of pressure that the one put on certain very young players by a particular type of parents and coaches, quite numerous in the tour.
His serve should give Isner points on clay, but not as many as on HCs probably, and i dont see him having a game as steady as Roddick's, so i'm not sure how well he will do on clay. I had more expectations for Roddick, but he doesnt seem that much into it, since he's skipping Rome to be in Hawaii with Brooklyn (i cant blame him for that, though).
As for Wimbledon, his serve should be a huge weapon, but i dont know if he has the kind of movement needed to be succesful on grass.

Nice one Pete! Interesting how he feels the leftover confidence from all those college wins. We see so often that players let a match slip away because not because they can't take it, but because they're nervous that they'll blow it.

College may not be the best option for everyone, but its nice to see John demonstrate its not an automatic career killer to spend a few years at school.

looking forward to reading the whole article , Pete
he does seem like such a great young man
and I think college tennis did him some good , not to mention the degree and the coeds :)
nothing like match play - and match wins - to give you the confidence to succeed.

Thanks Pete,

I was impressed with John in his game against Rafa.He seems to have a good work ethic as well.I admit his court movement lets him down.Though being such a tall guy and young he can improve in that area.Having played college tennis in a way prepared John for the riggers of life on the Atp tour.Good luck John.

I like John Isner very much.
Shame his height is impairing his progress, but everything else aside, a first-class chap!

I think that Isner is somewhere near the middle of his pro-career learning curve. He's not exactly a young buck, having spent so much time in the college ranks before turning pro in '07, but he's still young enough from the perspective of ATPO matches played. So, he still has much he c an learn and improve, but time is not exactly on his side. And at 24 lbs. or thereabouts, he might be prone to injury of the legs, hip and back. He's smart to grasp his physical limitations and to craft a game built around not only his obvious strengths, but also his less obvious ones -- fighting will, tactical intelligence, and philosophy of dictating points on his terms. These traits should bode well for him over the next two to three years, in which I think we''ll see him reach a peak level. I wouldn't be at all surprised if his ranking peaks in mid-summer each year, somewhere in the top 15, and then again in the indoor season, dipping each year (except this year) to the mid-20's during the European clay-court swing. If, however, he's able to get himself into the top 10 around the time of the U.S. Open and after, he's a guy who could rally challenge some folks for a spot in the Masters Cup YEC, where he would be a nightmare for anyone to face.

Go, John! Go, 'Dawgs!

Geesh... that was supposed to be "at 245 lbs." ... I simply cannot put fingers to keyboard.

no, because you need to be able to return well on grass (not his strenght) and he needs a true bounce for those big windups.

I definitely have a soft spot for "Big John" Isner. Maybe it is his hat on backwards, his big serve and his soft-spoken manner. I always say to my husband, "I know exactly what he looked like when he was six years old." What a sweetheart!

Hope to see more great things from him this year.

Who cares!!! My boyfriend thinks the same with me. He- is eight years older than me, lol. We met online at an age gap dating site[_www. A G E R O M A N C E com_]---a nice and free place for Younger- Women and Older Men, or Older Women and Younger Men, to interact with each other. Maybe you wanna check out or- tell your friends

Pete great article. Not surprising the kid showed you the respect he did. I think his potential is limitless. If Potro can win a slam why can't big John? I think he should model his game after Potro. I mean work on his footwork and develop his overall game and not just focus just on his serve. I think he can easily become as good or better than Portro or Roddick from the backcourt, and once he does that watch out! Love his mental game and think that in itself maybe his biggest strength.

I love Isner, but his backcourt will never be as good as Delpo. Delpo has that huge flat reverse finish Sampras-esque running forehand. As well as all types of variety. I like the fact that Isner is willing to Serve-Volley and I love his willingness to keep points short.
He can play on all surfaces as you saw him take Novak to 5 in DC.

Why? The last 10 years in tennis (corresponding with the demise of Americans at the top of the game) seem to loudly demonstrate that a foundation built on clay provides a better platform for success on the various surfaces than does a foundation built on HC. Roddick is the only current member of the top 10 who's game was not substantially formed on clay (I think Soderling is no exception, but he's the player in the top 10 who's formative years I know least about). And this, notwithstanding the fact that a number of the current top 10 players either prefer or play better on HC (Delpo, Murray, Verdasco, Tsonga, Soderling). Even Murray, born in Scottland, was, as he says, based in Barcelona during his formative years. Murray also says, I think correctly, that spending those years on clay significantly improved his ability to think on court. This is obvious as one must rely less on the boom boom quick points that can be won on HCs and, more often, on one's ability to construct a point. So, while I love John and wish him the best, I think the greatest asset to the development of American tennis is not for more players to spend more time in college. Rather, it would be either the importation of more European red clay courts, or the emigration of more American players to spend their formative training years (e.g., 12 or so to 17) training in Madrid.

Interesting article Pete. It seems to me, though, that after it's all said and done, we'll end up saying that Isner's route to professional tennis (namely, that he attended college for four years) is as inimitable as that of the Williams' sisters. First, only a tiny handful of top players have ever emerged from that path and, it seems, that number is decreasing, not increasing. Furthermore, if the question is re the efficacy of four years of college tennis, I cannot think of a single top ten player in the past 20 years who spent that long in the minors.

Part of the problem is the global nature of the game. In college, you're simply not playing the world's best at your age. At 18, the world's best are already approaching the top 50 on the ATP tour. And their path prior to that was not one in line with a college degree. They either trained at a top tennis academy, excelled on the international junior circuit, or both. Finally, while it's a nice story-line that a kid has gone from success in college tennis to success at the ATP level, I believe American players would benefit FAR more by spending a greater number of their formative years at a European tennis academy (say,in Spain) than almost any amount of time spent in college.

Why? The last 10 years in tennis (corresponding with the demise of Americans at the top of the game) seem to loudly demonstrate that a foundation built on clay provides a better platform for success on the various surfaces than does a foundation built on HC. Roddick is the only current member of the top 10 who's game was not substantially formed on clay (I think Soderling is no exception, but he's the player in the top 10 who's formative years I know least about). And this, notwithstanding the fact that a number of the current top 10 players either prefer or play better on HC (Delpo, Murray, Verdasco, Tsonga, Soderling). Even Murray, born in Scottland, was, as he says, based in Barcelona during his formative years. Murray also says, I think correctly, that spending those years on clay significantly improved his ability to think on court. This is obvious as one must rely less on the boom boom quick points that can be won on HCs and, more often, on one's ability to construct a point. So, while I love John and wish him the best, I think the greatest asset to the development of American tennis is not for more players to spend more time in college. Rather, it would be either the importation of more European red clay courts, or the emigration of more American players to spend their formative training years (e.g., 12 or so to 17) training in Madrid.

Sorry for the redundant post. My comment was cut in half by the internet demons.

And before someone comments on it, of course I realize that not every future top 20 or top 10 player is approaching the top 50 by age 18. Just a little hyperbole to make my point about where players who will ultimately fill out the top ranks of the game are at age 18.

Barcelona Semifinal.

Ferrer-Verdasco 7-6 5-7, now 0-1 in the third set for Verdasco.

Is there anybody around? Or are we posting somewhere else?

Robin playing quite well in the first set. Going back to watch the stream.

I think we must be posting here as DC thread is not working. Typepad are you having a long weekend.

Nice article Pete,

I like Isner and I wish the best for him, but I don't see him stepping up that one extra notch that it takes to become a top ten. In other news, Soderling is into the Barcelona final!!!!!!!!

I thought that some of you might like to read this article about Neha Uberoi who has returned to princeton after 6 years on the WTA Tour:

http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/04/22/25958/

Before I got kicked out of the club, I used to wear my shirt backwards like Andre Agassi.

I look forward to Isner being the Number 1 American. It would be great to have someone with good manners in that position, to make us feel well represented throughout the world.

Go you hairy dawg!

He'll have a chance in London, but it seems that the more experienced players are having more success of late at Wimbledon. So Isner better be serving lights out and he better be playing the type of clutch tennis that he is most definitely capable of.

I don't think he'll be able to return too well on the grass, so tiebreakers will more than likely be his ticket.

I am very much looking forward to reading the details of this interview. Isner is a special kid who seems to thrive under pressure. This, imo, is what will set him apart from Mr. Querrey in the long run. That being said, I've got a lot of hope for both of 'em.

P.S. I had an interesting interview with Jason Riley of Saddlebrook (the athletes compound) who has done a lot of strength and conditioning work with John, and most of the convo was about the challenges Mr. Isner faces with his height.

Here is is: http://elementznutrition.com/tennis/tennis-week-interview-jason-riley-2

Isner and Wimbledon? Playing on grass requires knowledge of, and respect for, grass. Isner will have to prove that he has both.

Look no further than Ernest Gulbis, who might hit the fastest ball (on groundstrokes) in tennis, and has one of the biggest serves. He goes nowhere on grass, because it requires knowledge of, and respect for, grass, and Gulbis has neither.

So, work is cut out for Isner.

Any chance to ban the phrase on "house money" for a year? Nobody in tennis has house money. The sport is just too unpredictable. Federer and Nadal, and others, earn every single match out there.