At the Miami Open there was a booth from the IMG Academy, formerly Nick Bollettieri’s, near Sarasota. For $60,000 per year they will take a child as young as age 8 and give him or her five hours of private school per day then four hours of sports instruction (they are most famous for tennis but now they have some other sports). Children can live on campus starting at age 12. If it sounds expensive, keep in mind that most graduates end up getting athletic scholarships to college.
Even for an 8-year-old there is a minimum of coordination and athletic ability required for entry. The school wants kids to come to one of their camps first and/or for a video to be sent with an application.
What do readers think? Let’s assume that a typical child cannot become a successful pro athlete. However, presumably a typical graduate of this academy would be one of the world’s top 1000(?) tennis players and that would be a valuable lifelong skill and source of pride and fun. Is it better for a kid to (1) go to a high-grade suburban public school or expensive academically oriented private school and then fight all of the world’s crammers for an Ivy League admission or (2) to become a great athlete via coaching at IMG and meet a whole world of successful people through tennis? At a minimum, one would think that the school+tennis program would keep a child from getting sucked into the virtual world of screens.
Personally I wish that I had studied tennis in elementary school rather than learning all of the state capitals by heart. Google knows almost everything that I learned in public school, but can’t help with my pathetic one-handed backhand (“I’m not an ambi-hitter”).
[Note that the private school at IMG is probably at least above-average by feeble American standards. The place is packed with international students, an advantage in a globalized economy, and claims to have “nearly a dozen AP courses” available. Graduates have gone on to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc. (none have been dumb enough to choose M.I.T.!). Perhaps this public school in Dallas that requires a minimum of 11 AP courses to graduate would be better academically, but most people don’t live in Dallas.]
Related:
- Andre Agassi’s autobiography, in which he describes life at the IMG Academy apparently critically (discussion)
- John McEnroe’s less intensive camp
I am shocked that you didn’t mention the number of female tennis stars who did really well by marrying someone who made more money than they did and/or having a child with same. That is, obviously, the real advantage offered by this system to a daughter.
And, in my experience, I would much rather have a dinner or business meeting with someone who knew things that someone able to hit a ball with a stick (of whatever shape). People who honed their tennis game tend to be a lot more boring. You may keep better company, though.
@Colin women need never hit a ball to make money from pro tennis http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-201347/Becker-cupboard-moment.html
just a different kind of “pro”
Boris Becker. What an idiot.
Petraeus. Schwartzenegger. Ethan Hawke. Ben Affleck. The list goes on…
In the end it just proves – the power of the pussy is indisputable.
Easy to use male contraception is still far into the future: http://blogs.plos.org/thestudentblog/2016/04/15/malebc/
To complement the thread, Bill Burr’s “Epidemic of Gold Diggers” comedy skit:
@philg: At a minimum, one would think that the school+tennis program would keep a child from getting sucked into the virtual world of screens.
Or from getting sucked into the real world of drugs, crime, and delinquents.
“Gold Digger” is now “Single Mother”
@SWotI Rich kids use drugs too.
Our daughter is very athletic and we knew this by age 3. She walked at 8 months and was climbing out of her crib at 10 months. We started her in gymnastics at 3 and she did that for 2ish years and they wanted to start her with the Olympic prep group. We said no due to the intensity and we worried about long term issues. So we moved her to ice skating at age 6ish. She loved it and was good at it. So for the rest of her childhood we took her skating 5+ days a week for 12 years. She became very good at it and was nationally ranked. She skates very good. She spent about 2 hours per day from age 12-18 on the ice. She did well in school and managed her time well enough to do a few other things like cheer leading. She quit competitive skating after high school when she went to college for various reasons. But she still has the good skills and glides over the ice like a pro and she still can jump and dance. Doing this eliminated her spending lots of time goofing off. She did not have any spare time.
The down side is she has big muscles in her legs and back side as an adult. She gained weight when she quit skating hours per day. Her devotion to skating caused her to miss out on some neat stuff (like music and theatre) in high school. She does not skate much as an adult. She switched to playing volleyball at the beach. It is cheaper and she did not want to coach skating to pay for ice time.