PDA

View Full Version : USTA Survey - Age Divisions


damazing
12-14-2009, 05:39 PM
I didn't see a thread on this, but I recently received an email from the USTA asking if I would take a survey.

What I divined out of the survey were two things -

1. They may want to adjust the titles for the Seniors/Super Seniors divisions

2. They may want to change the ages for the Masters (my preferred new name for the division)/Senior divisions.

I would hope that someone at the USTA could crunch the numbers to find the optimal ages for these two brackets. There were many good players on my Adult team that also played on a Senior division team and pretty much ruled the roost. Someone should be able to figure if they moved the ages down/up how many people would join the Adult and Senior/Masters/Super Senior divisions as well.

What are your thoughts? Should the Senior level be moved down to 40? 45? And should the Super Senior be moved to 65? If you play adult now at 40/45 years would you join a Masters division also if it was available?
(I would probably just so I could play more tennis)

Cindysphinx
12-14-2009, 06:11 PM
Aw, man.

I was looking forward to playing seniors in 2011. I hope they don't change it.

Geezer Guy
12-14-2009, 07:12 PM
I took that survey as well. I like having Seniors start at 50 but voted to have the next level start at 65 instead of 60.

I also voted to have Singles played in at least the 50+ age group.

Geezer Guy
12-14-2009, 07:14 PM
And, for what it's worth, I'm not a fan of the "Masters" title. A - not sure it applies to women, and B - just because you're old doesn't mean you've mastered anything.

cak
12-14-2009, 08:25 PM
I suggested 50s and 65s. Mostly because here in NorCal there is SS60 and SS65. I believe the 65s are a local league. I'm hoping the ages stay either as they are, or 50 and 65.

Kick_It
12-14-2009, 08:50 PM
If this is in the context of leagues that could be a good thing.

As a 43 year old - it's hard to hang with a 19 or 20 year old in 4.5+ singles. If I'm playing someone 35 or older it's easier as we face similar court coverage and free time to play tennis issues ;-)

BreakPoint
12-14-2009, 11:07 PM
I voted for 45 and 60, and suggested 65 as an option instead of 60.

I like the name "Masters" for the 45 league. It sounds like you're a pro if you say you're playing in the "Masters". :)

OrangePower
12-14-2009, 11:26 PM
I would definitely play in a 40+ league if it was offered. I'm not old enough for Seniors but have many friends / team-mates who are... and I get jealous that they get to play an extra league season! Also as a previous poster mentioned, it's tough to play singles against guys in their 20s.

So in addition to the regular adult league I would have:

40+ singles and doubles
50+ doubles and maybe singles (I think feelings would be mixed on this)
60+ doubles

10sguy
12-14-2009, 11:51 PM
I have to think the biggest problem will/would be court availability to accommodate the extra leagues.

cak
12-15-2009, 07:20 AM
I believe they weren't intending to make extra leagues, they were just thinking of moving the age range for what is presently called seniors and super seniors.

Cindysphinx
12-15-2009, 07:33 AM
I think the term "Masters" is confusing, as it refers to high-level ATP events.

I see nothing wrong with "Seniors."

raiden031
12-15-2009, 08:25 AM
Its stupid to have so many senior leagues, and it takes away court time from the rest of the playing population. NTRP is supposed to remove the age disadvantage. A 60 year old 4.0 should still whoop a 20 year old 3.5 player....

Fedace
12-15-2009, 08:41 AM
I just filled it out. i supported 40 and 60 divisions. and supported having only 1 singles and 1 extra doubles...

OrangePower
12-15-2009, 08:46 AM
Its stupid to have so many senior leagues, and it takes away court time from the rest of the playing population. NTRP is supposed to remove the age disadvantage. A 60 year old 4.0 should still whoop a 20 year old 3.5 player....

Maybe, maybe not. Since NTRP does not differentiate between singles and doubles. And many older players specialize in doubles becuase of mobility and fitness issues. So I'd agree that in general a 60 year old 4.0 would be much better than a 20 yo 3.5 in doubles. But that same 20 yo 3.5 might actually be able to easily beat the older 4.0 in singles because of conditioning, ability to run, etc.

As it stands right now there is no league where older players can get to play singles against other older players.

JavierLW
12-15-2009, 08:46 AM
I didn't see a thread on this, but I recently received an email from the USTA asking if I would take a survey.

What I divined out of the survey were two things -

1. They may want to adjust the titles for the Seniors/Super Seniors divisions

2. They may want to change the ages for the Masters (my preferred new name for the division)/Senior divisions.

I would hope that someone at the USTA could crunch the numbers to find the optimal ages for these two brackets. There were many good players on my Adult team that also played on a Senior division team and pretty much ruled the roost. Someone should be able to figure if they moved the ages down/up how many people would join the Adult and Senior/Masters/Super Senior divisions as well.

What are your thoughts? Should the Senior level be moved down to 40? 45? And should the Super Senior be moved to 65? If you play adult now at 40/45 years would you join a Masters division also if it was available?
(I would probably just so I could play more tennis)

I think they should leave the ages alone.

If they move the "super seniors" up to 65, that's really uncool..... (and it makes that division a lot smaller)

If they move the seniors to a younger age that makes it bigger, but it's really uncool for the existing seniors..... That would be one of those decisions that the league likely makes to gain more registrations versus actually caring about the quality of that division and it's existing participants.

As far as the titles I thought that was funny. Here in our city there is a Renegade League for 50 and over called "the Masters", so that's probably an appropriate name. (these guys get mad actually when you refer to them as a senior division)

As far as 60 and over, I suggested "Legends". We have a 60 and over Renegade league here as well and that's what it's called. (again they hate to be called "seniors" and "super seniors" was a real goofy name, it sounds like they are going to fly around or something, perhaps they are all taking MTM lessons.....)

raiden031
12-15-2009, 09:06 AM
Maybe, maybe not. Since NTRP does not differentiate between singles and doubles. And many older players specialize in doubles becuase of mobility and fitness issues. So I'd agree that in general a 60 year old 4.0 would be much better than a 20 yo 3.5 in doubles. But that same 20 yo 3.5 might actually be able to easily beat the older 4.0 in singles because of conditioning, ability to run, etc.

As it stands right now there is no league where older players can get to play singles against other older players.

Given that there are no singles for senior players anyways, what is the point in separating them from adults in doubles play as well?

Also if they want to have one senior division, fine, but what is the point in having like 3 or 4 divisions (senior, super senior, super duper senior, etc.)? Basically I pay membership to use my club's facilities, yet all summer long (after adult league ends) every weeknight they have senior matches using up the courts. Its not like they only play during the day when normal adults are working...

GeoffB
12-15-2009, 09:22 AM
Its stupid to have so many senior leagues, and it takes away court time from the rest of the playing population. NTRP is supposed to remove the age disadvantage. A 60 year old 4.0 should still whoop a 20 year old 3.5 player....

I still think senior leagues are a good idea for some age ranges. A 65 year old playing 4.0 tennis might actually posses many of the skill characteristics of a 5.0 level player, and the type of match they would play against comparably skilled people in the same age range may have more of the characteristics of a high quality match than against 25yo 4.0 who makes up for skill with fitness, speed, and strength.

I wouldn't go too far with this, though. I don't doubt that I've lost a step at age 38, but obviously I should be able to find an NTRP level that works for me. I think the system's actually pretty good as it stands, with age-related ntrp levels starting around age 50, and age-related open tournaments starting around 30.

OrangePower
12-15-2009, 12:17 PM
Given that there are no singles for senior players anyways, what is the point in separating them from adults in doubles play as well?

My point was that there *should* be singles for senior players, because they in general would not be competitive at singles in regular adult league against youger players at the same NTRP, even though they are competitive in dubs. Currently there is no league where seniors can play singles against other seniors, and senior vs young guy in singles is no fun. (Generalizing of course)

Also if they want to have one senior division, fine, but what is the point in having like 3 or 4 divisions (senior, super senior, super duper senior, etc.)? Basically I pay membership to use my club's facilities, yet all summer long (after adult league ends) every weeknight they have senior matches using up the courts. Its not like they only play during the day when normal adults are working...

I kinda agree and kinda disagree. It's great for seniors that they get to play more than one mens / womens league per year. I would like to have that option also! Your point is valid regarding the fairness of that option being extended only to seniors given the impact on court usage etc. So the solutions are either to curb the senior leagues, which is going to cause a lot of complaints from those used to playing them, or go the other way and create additional 'senior' leagues with lower age limits so that more players can take advantage of additional league seasons.

Spokewench
12-15-2009, 01:06 PM
When you get older, you will see the reason for senior or age grouped leagues. I'm pretty lucky that my fitness and speed is still pretty good for a 49 year old (to turn 50 next year); but not everyone is that lucky or fit.

As I get older, I find the injuries that I have racked up over the years do affect how I play and my mobility a bit; and I am sure that this will continue to go downhill.

I raced road bikes and mountain bikes and we had age grouped categories within the ability categories so that older folks could compete against more like competitors. i.e. I raced in the 40 year old and 45 year old expert divisions before I retired from mountain bike racing . There is no way I was competitive against 25 year old experts (that were good) cause of my age.

So, you may have the skills, but may not be able to play enough due to injuries or need for your body to recover more often and thus, you may not be as sharp as you would want to be due to these limitations. I think senior leagues are a good thing and are important to the sport of tennis at the recreational competitive level.

spoke

darrinbaker00
12-15-2009, 10:03 PM
My point was that there *should* be singles for senior players, because they in general would not be competitive at singles in regular adult league against youger players at the same NTRP, even though they are competitive in dubs. Currently there is no league where seniors can play singles against other seniors, and senior vs young guy in singles is no fun. (Generalizing of course)
Why not just play age-group tournaments? That's what I do.

raiden031
12-16-2009, 03:52 AM
When you get older, you will see the reason for senior or age grouped leagues. I'm pretty lucky that my fitness and speed is still pretty good for a 49 year old (to turn 50 next year); but not everyone is that lucky or fit.

As I get older, I find the injuries that I have racked up over the years do affect how I play and my mobility a bit; and I am sure that this will continue to go downhill.

I raced road bikes and mountain bikes and we had age grouped categories within the ability categories so that older folks could compete against more like competitors. i.e. I raced in the 40 year old and 45 year old expert divisions before I retired from mountain bike racing . There is no way I was competitive against 25 year old experts (that were good) cause of my age.

So, you may have the skills, but may not be able to play enough due to injuries or need for your body to recover more often and thus, you may not be as sharp as you would want to be due to these limitations. I think senior leagues are a good thing and are important to the sport of tennis at the recreational competitive level.

spoke

Funny how many of the seniors battling injuries are playing in twice as many leagues as the younger adult (Adult, Adult mixed, Senior mixed, Senior, Super senior, etc.), playing in all of them.

I will buy OrangePower's point that a senior will decline in Singles much faster than they will in Doubles, so it makes sense to have Singles for Seniors. I can even buy having a senior league for the social setting to give retired folks an opportunity to play with others the same age. I just think there are too many senior divisions and its really unnecessary.

But still for a doubles player that is declining with age, NTRP can handle that by simply downgrading them to a lower level. Sure they might take a hit to the ego, but its just a game and as long as they are getting competitive matches, thats what matters. Everyone wants to avoid being stuck at the bottom half of a particular skill level, but it happens to adults just as well. At least for seniors they are also playing against other declining players. A younger adult could get bumped to 4.0 or 4.5 and sit at the bottom for 10+ years because they don't have time to practice and improve.

Romeo
12-16-2009, 05:45 AM
For Adults you have the Adult division including 18 to 50 year olds. No 49 year old woman wants to go out and play singles with some 18 year old girl that shows up in pig tails and can run wildly all of the court in 105 degree heat. Neither does the 18 year want to play with some "old lady".

I voted for: Adult 18, Senior/Master 40, Super Senior 60. I thought that divided up the age groups better so that players could have more fun and play more with their peers which is why we play tennis anyway, to play with our friends.

I also voted for singles in just the adult division. Very few older women want to play singles and in the area we live we have a hard enough time finding enough players for doubles let alone singles.

Dave Mc
12-16-2009, 05:58 AM
When I took the survey, it asked me to enter the age divisions that I thought were appropriate. But when I tried to type in the text box it was disabled. Not sure if it's a javascript problem on their page, or a browser problem (IE 7 on Vista).

I was going to suggest they start the league minimum age at 21 instead of 18. Regardless if the state can trial you as an adult at 18, if you can't legally drink beer with your teammates, and have to get permission from your parents to go to sectionals, then you're still a boy, and don't belong in a men's league.

raiden031
12-16-2009, 06:44 AM
For Adults you have the Adult division including 18 to 50 year olds. No 49 year old woman wants to go out and play singles with some 18 year old girl that shows up in pig tails and can run wildly all of the court in 105 degree heat. Neither does the 18 year want to play with some "old lady".


What difference does this make if they are both singles players at the same NTRP level?

raiden031
12-16-2009, 06:47 AM
I was going to suggest they start the league minimum age at 21 instead of 18. Regardless if the state can trial you as an adult at 18, if you can't legally drink beer with your teammates, and have to get permission from your parents to go to sectionals, then you're still a boy, and don't belong in a men's league.

Seems pointless to me. Not everyone drinks anyways. Also, how is it different than having to ask your wife for permission to go to sectionals?

jmnk
12-16-2009, 07:07 AM
I was going to suggest they start the league minimum age at 21 instead of 18. Regardless if the state can trial you as an adult at 18, if you can't legally drink beer with your teammates, and have to get permission from your parents to go to sectionals, then you're still a boy, and don't belong in a men's league.
This actually makes a lot more sense than I initially thought.

Cindysphinx
12-16-2009, 07:08 AM
I'm surprised that folks would challenge the idea of senior's league.

I mean, we have separate leagues for juniors? Why? Lots of reasons, I would guess. Personally, I have no interest in playing a match against someone 35 years younger. They will hit the ball harder and be faster and it is simply not a level playing field. I would imagine seniors would feel the same way playing against someone who is 30.

As for the idea of having singles as part of a seniors league . . . the senior woman who is willing and able to play singles is a rare beast indeed. I know just two women who play seniors and also play singles. It's just way too much pounding for the rest of us. Maybe if they changed the rules to make the matches shorter (pro sets), but not if you have to play singles for two hours.

Consider this, though. In one thread, we have two people insulting older women as slow, past their sell by date, and having unattractive skin. And in this thread we have someone questioning why seniors might want their own league. Maybe so they can be treated with respect.

Romeo
12-16-2009, 07:20 AM
What difference does this make if they are both singles players at the same NTRP level?

I probably should have said "no one around here wants to play ...". The women I play with are from the ages of 39 to 66 with most being over 50 and are playing for fun with friends and exercise. It is just not a lot of fun to most of them to play with someone 30 years younger than they are. Being the same NTRP level makes no difference.

I am sure that you might find a few women that like to play someone that could be close to their granddaughter's age but that would be the exception.

Someday you may feel the sameway and will then understand.

raiden031
12-16-2009, 07:27 AM
Consider this, though. In one thread, we have two people insulting older women as slow, past their sell by date, and having unattractive skin. And in this thread we have someone questioning why seniors might want their own league. Maybe so they can be treated with respect.

I think I'm the only one challenging senior leagues. Because its unfair that I can never find a court at my club (where I'm a paying member) because of all the senior leagues going on during the summer.

I don't see how this is disrespectful in any way, shape, or form. I think its disrespectful that senior players would feel that I'm not qualified to play with them even though we may be competitive simply because I'm still young and I have nothing in common with them socially.

I mean again, if you are the SAME NTRP LEVEL as someone 20 years younger than you, how is the playing field unlevel?

It is just not a lot of fun to most of them to play with someone 30 years younger than they are. Being the same NTRP level makes no difference.


Proof that the elder like to discriminate against the young when it comes to tennis. Playing in the adult league, I have no choice as to the age of my opponents. Most of them happen to be between the ages of 45 and 60 anyways.

Romeo
12-16-2009, 07:38 AM
I think I'm the only one challenging senior leagues. Because its unfair that I can never find a court at my club (where I'm a paying member) because of all the senior leagues going on during the summer.

I don't see how this is disrespectful in any way, shape, or form. I think its disrespectful that senior players would feel that I'm not qualified to play with them even though we may be competitive simply because I'm still young and I have nothing in common with them socially.

I mean again, if you are the SAME NTRP LEVEL as someone 20 years younger than you, how is the playing field unlevel?



Proof that the elder like to discriminate against the young when it comes to tennis. Playing in the adult league, I have no choice as to the age of my opponents. Most of them happen to be between the ages of 45 and 60 anyways.

We are not talking just 20 years we are talking up to 31 years, 18 to 49. I am fine with the 20 years. That's why I think they should be 19 to 40, 40 to 60, and 60 and above.

raiden031
12-16-2009, 07:44 AM
We are not talking just 20 years we are talking up to 31 years, 18 to 49. I am fine with the 20 years. That's why I think they should be 19 to 40, 40 to 60, and 60 and above.

So you're saying the adult league should exclude seniors? It would be a little more fair than to say seniors get to play everything, but then they can exclude younger adults at will.

But still I don't see why younger and older adults need to be separated. I have no problem playing a 60 year old, and in fact I welcome it because they are going to show me a different style than someone my own age. I'd rather play a variety of opponents than play people who are all exactly like me.

I'm for having NTRP divisions that are more open to age, as well having age divisions that are more open with regards to skill. If you want to play with people of the same skill, play NTRP, if you want to play against people of the same age, play age group. Seems very pointless to combine the two.

TenniseaWilliams
12-16-2009, 07:53 AM
I think the leagues would be better with an "open" rather than an adult league. No lower age limit. Maybe if the grandparents show up to watch I can hang out with them later!

Other than that I agree with the current age limits, I doubt there is much proof that NTRP doesn't work well for most people into their 50's. It is not a flattering process, however.

+1 to Raiden that any exclusive league sucks when courts are hard to find.

LuckyR
12-16-2009, 08:18 AM
The USTA's survey can't be answered correctly without the information about the popularity of the age divisions. Without that info you don't know what "problem" the USTA is trying to solve by fiddling with the divisions. Are there too many seniors, too few? Too many seniors not playing in the senior divisions?

Romeo
12-16-2009, 08:21 AM
I just gave my opinion about the survey that's all it is, an opinion. Everyone has one.

I think of the "Adult Division" just like an "Open Division" at a tennis tournament. Everyone regardless of age or ability can play. Just like in a regular tournament the other divisions have been formed because the general population of 50 to 60 year old tennis players can not compete with 20 year old players.

This is just league tennis to play with your friends and peers.

The USTA has divided Jr. Tennis into age groups 10, 12, 14, 16, and 18 so that 10 year olds do not have to play 18 year olds. They have regular tournaments all of the country every weekend that are divided up by age, ratings, sex, yet they still have an open division for everyone.

In tennis they have developed divisions. Some of the divisions have been made by age and some ability. They have never, to my knowledge, banned a player for playing above their level or their age group. They have, however, tried to keep them from playing below their level.

I see it like a hill. The Juniors are climbing up, The Adults in both Leagues and Tournaments are on the top of the hill and the Seniors are climbing down.

raiden031
12-16-2009, 08:28 AM
I just gave my opinion about the survey that's all it is, an opinion. Everyone has one.

I think of the "Adult Division" just like an "Open Division" at a tennis tournament. Everyone regardless of age or ability can play. Just like in a regular tournament the other divisions have been formed because the general population of 50 to 60 year old tennis players can not compete with 20 year old players.

This is just league tennis to play with your friends and peers.

The USTA has divided Jr. Tennis into age groups 10, 12, 14, 16, and 18 so that 10 year olds do not have to play 18 year olds. They have regular tournaments all of the country every weekend that are divided up by age, ratings, sex, yet they still have an open division for everyone.

In tennis they have developed divisions. Some of the divisions have been made by age and some ability. They have never, to my knowledge, banned a player for playing above their level or their age group. They have, however, tried to keep them from playing below their level.

I see it like a hill. The Juniors are climbing up, The Adults in both Leagues and Tournaments are on the top of the hill and the Seniors are climbing down.

So you don't even play USTA adult league....I see. My whole point is that an adult league 3.5 player is competitive with senior 3.5, super senior 3.5, and super duper senior 3.5 players, so there is no reason to have 3 or more 3.5 senior divisions, taking away opportunities from younger adults. I could understand having ONE senior division at each level for the people who insist on playing with others their age, but thats it.

Orange made a point that if a senior player plays both doubles and singles, than their singles game is likely to be inferior to their doubles game, which is a valid point. However for singles and doubles specialists, this is not a factor.

Jim A
12-16-2009, 09:21 AM
Raiden, I thought you self-rated at 3.0 and then proceeded to win a National Championship and get bumped up 2 levels? Maybe I'm wrong on that info?

raiden031
12-16-2009, 09:27 AM
Raiden, I thought you self-rated at 3.0 and then proceeded to win a National Championship and get bumped up 2 levels? Maybe I'm wrong on that info?

Yes you are incorrect.

I self-rated at 3.0 in 2007 and went 4-4 in singles, and can't remember if I played any doubles that year without looking it up.

In 2008 I was a much better player and as a computer-rated 3.0, made it to Nationals...

But whats the relevance to this thread?

Romeo
12-16-2009, 09:35 AM
I really was not going to continue, however, I must.

I played both Adult and Senior mostly because they can not find enough to play the 3.5 Adult Women's team in our town and I want them to have a team. Last year I told them I would play but I thought the younger players should play the singles since we were playing on their team so that they could play. Not the thing that happened. I played singles twice. The first time I played out came a girl that had just graduated from college where she played on the Div II team. She had played league before she was in college so when she graduated she was able to play 4.0. She had played twice in 2008 and lost in a close tie break to a player that was bumped to 4.5 and lost to another in two close sets that was also bumped to 4.5. Somehow at the end of 2008 her rating went back to 3.5?? She went strongly undefeted in 2009 until her third match at Sectionals when she lost to a much weaker player when it was known the team would not advance. She was a nice girl and I had fun playing her but that is not what I joined a league for. The second match I played a girl was probably 25 years younger it was 105 degrees and no shade.

I joined the team to play with my friends and have fun, played those two matches for the team but I was upset the whole time. Since last summer I have started playing singles and have gained the confidence I need so that if I am put in that position next year I will have the ammunition I need.

You will have more people going out for leagues not less if they know they will be playing in groups they are going to enjoy. We have had to default lines because someone refused to play singles knowing they were going out to the same conditions I did.

raiden031
12-16-2009, 09:41 AM
I really was not going to continue, however, I must.

I played both Adult and Senior mostly because they can not find enough to play the 3.5 Adult Women's team in our town and I want them to have a team. Last year I told them I would play but I thought the younger players should play the singles since we were playing on their team so that they could play. Not the thing that happened. I played singles twice. The first time I played out came a girl that had just graduated from college where she played on the Div II team. She had played league before she was in college so when she graduated she was able to play 4.0. She had played twice in 2008 and lost in a close tie break to a player that was bumped to 4.5 and lost to another in two close sets that was also bumped to 4.5. Somehow at the end of 2008 her rating went back to 3.5?? She went strongly undefeted in 2009 until her third match at Sectionals when she lost to a much weaker player when it was known the team would not advance. She was a nice girl and I had fun playing her but that is not what I joined a league for. The second match I played a girl was probably 25 years younger it was 105 degrees and no shade.

I joined the team to play with my friends and have fun, played those two matches for the team but I was upset the whole time. Since last summer I have started playing singles and have gained the confidence I need so that if I am put in that position next year I will have the ammunition I need.

You will have more people going out for leagues not less if they know they will be playing in groups they are going to enjoy. We have had to default lines because someone refused to play singles knowing they were going out to the same conditions I did.

Ok so you played a sandbagger and then in 105 degree heat...really that makes it necessary to have a multitude of senior leagues?

I'm 28, I got bumped from 3.0 to 4.0 and went 1-7 in singles. I got bageled probably 2-3 times and breadsticked probably the same number of times. I don't whine that the players had college experience or whatever other way I can say I had a disadvantage. 4 of the players who creamed me got bumped up to 4.5. I'm pretty sure the youngest player who beat me was 30, and the oldest was probably in his 50s.

It might've sucked losing like that, but I realized it was 100% on me to better my game, not find an alternative division that only contains people who can't cream me.

Romeo
12-16-2009, 09:57 AM
Don't think I whined, I said I had fun playing her just not what I want to do. The one thing the seniors start doing is realize they don't have to do what they don't want to just for fun and they do not have to defend their opinions anymore.

escii_35
12-16-2009, 10:35 AM
#1. Lack of singles slots for the older crowd.

This is a huge gripe I hear from the 45-55 set. Each year I send a letter to the USTA asking for a senior singles. Hopefully by the time I get there one will be included.

Cindysphinx
12-16-2009, 10:55 AM
Raiden,

First, I didn't mean to imply that *you* were being disrespectful. Far from it. The problem was with a couple of other young men on another thread.

Second, I do agree with you on one point. In our league, seniors was always in the summer, after adult spring season concluded. Most seniors played in both the adult spring and the subsequent senior season. These senior matches occurred in the summer, when indoor courts went unused anyway.

Now the league has changed things to have the senior season in January. That means January now has seniors, combo and mixed (plus ladies day).

There are two problems with this. One is that you now have more people vying for precious and limited court time for leagues, as you say. The other is that some seniors are skipping combo and mixed and choosing seniors instead, which has made the combo and mixed leagues smaller. Which means I will get less league tennis because there are fewer mixed and combo matches. I wish this change had not been made.

Regarding the idea of having just one NTRP scale for everyone regardless of age or gender . . . some people adamantly do not want to play with some much younger/older or a different gender.

I think it is wise for USTA to accommodate this. As things currently stand, someone like you who doesn't care about age/gender can interact with others who feel the same way (combo, adult, mixed). At the same time, those who do feel differently can seek out only seniors or same gender play.

Please understand that, while you are a Nice Guy, there are plenty of people who are openly disdainful of someone who is female and/or older. Personally, I like to have a nice time when I play, and if my partner or my opponents do not respect me because of my gender or age, I would be grateful if they had options so we are not forced to share a court.

raiden031
12-16-2009, 11:23 AM
Raiden,

First, I didn't mean to imply that *you* were being disrespectful. Far from it. The problem was with a couple of other young men on another thread.

Second, I do agree with you on one point. In our league, seniors was always in the summer, after adult spring season concluded. Most seniors played in both the adult spring and the subsequent senior season. These senior matches occurred in the summer, when indoor courts went unused anyway.

Now the league has changed things to have the senior season in January. That means January now has seniors, combo and mixed (plus ladies day).

There are two problems with this. One is that you now have more people vying for precious and limited court time for leagues, as you say. The other is that some seniors are skipping combo and mixed and choosing seniors instead, which has made the combo and mixed leagues smaller. Which means I will get less league tennis because there are fewer mixed and combo matches. I wish this change had not been made.

Regarding the idea of having just one NTRP scale for everyone regardless of age or gender . . . some people adamantly do not want to play with some much younger/older or a different gender.

I think it is wise for USTA to accommodate this. As things currently stand, someone like you who doesn't care about age/gender can interact with others who feel the same way (combo, adult, mixed). At the same time, those who do feel differently can seek out only seniors or same gender play.

Please understand that, while you are a Nice Guy, there are plenty of people who are openly disdainful of someone who is female and/or older. Personally, I like to have a nice time when I play, and if my partner or my opponents do not respect me because of my gender or age, I would be grateful if they had options so we are not forced to share a court.

The thing that irks me about that whole thing is that people don't like being discriminated against, but don't mind discriminating against others. If adult leagues decided you must be under 50 to play, then the seniors would probably throw a fit because they can't play in the adult league.

I was purposely not bringing in the idea of gender-less rating system and co-ed leagues, because I realize there is a large number of both men and women who would refuse to play against someone of the opposite gender for one reason or another.

But can anyone on this board provide me a reason why it is necessary to have both senior and super-senior leagues?

Geezer Guy
12-16-2009, 01:16 PM
Wow - hot topic! Gotta say, as a Senior (55) myself, I enjoy playing singles against competitors of all ages. I agree with whoever said that within an NTRP division the competition is pretty level. Victory does NOT necessarily (or even usually, maybe) to to the younger competitor. I've beaten players half my age, and been whipped by players 20 years my senior. And, there are plenty of other guys about my age that enjoy singles more than doubles.

I admit that I see a lot more senior men playing singles than I do senior women. Don't really know why that is. You'd think that with women living longer - presumably being in better shape - that it would be the other way around.

And, to answer another question posted, I enjoy playing "adult" level because of the intense competition. While there are occasionally some fun moments, it's often pretty serious stuff. I enjoy playing at the "senior" level because it's pretty much the opposite. Sure, it's competitive, but there's a bit more of friendly trash talking and joking around. The points tend to last a bit longer, and it's fun for once not being the oldest guy on the court.

I could see a point of having the "older" senior league (the 65+ league) play during the day. Most of them would presumably be retired, or at least able to control their schedule to get a certain weekday timeslot off if they still work. I'd think a lot of clubs would be thrilled to rent out 3 or 5 courts on a weekday morning or afternoon consistently.

Cindysphinx
12-16-2009, 02:20 PM
The thing that irks me about that whole thing is that people don't like being discriminated against, but don't mind discriminating against others. If adult leagues decided you must be under 50 to play, then the seniors would probably throw a fit because they can't play in the adult league.

Mmmm, I'm not sure what this means.

Adult league is limited to those over 18; junior league is limited to those under some age or other, and senior is limited to those over 50.

As far as this idea that someone is being discriminated against . . . there is nothing wrong or illegal about discrimination unless it is illegal discrimination. If you don't want to rent a car to someone under age 25, you don't have to. There are all sorts of discriminatory decisions in life that are perfectly fine, and deciding to divide tennis players according to age is not at all offensive IMHO.


But can anyone on this board provide me a reason why it is necessary to have both senior and super-senior leagues?

I can't answer as to super-senior, as I've never seen a super-senior match. I know that super-senior is very small, so I don't see why anyone would care if people that age did or did not have a league. Also, I would imagine that the decline in physical ability is quite prounounced when you compare a 50 year old to a 65-70 year old.

Which is a depressing thing when you are pushing 50 and already falling apart.

You know, my county used to have an "ESL" league. This was before I started playing, and I believe it no longer exists. I assume ESL meant English as a Second Language, and a review of the roster showed a high proportion of players had Asian or Latino last names. So perhaps my guess was correct.

I suppose one could see that as discriminatory. Me, I figured it was no skin off my nose. If I had to live in a foreign country where English was not commonly spoken and someone started an "English" league, I would be eternally grateful.

raiden031
12-16-2009, 03:00 PM
Mmmm, I'm not sure what this means.

Adult league is limited to those over 18; junior league is limited to those under some age or other, and senior is limited to those over 50.

As far as this idea that someone is being discriminated against . . . there is nothing wrong or illegal about discrimination unless it is illegal discrimination. If you don't want to rent a car to someone under age 25, you don't have to. There are all sorts of discriminatory decisions in life that are perfectly fine, and deciding to divide tennis players according to age is not at all offensive IMHO.




I can't answer as to super-senior, as I've never seen a super-senior match. I know that super-senior is very small, so I don't see why anyone would care if people that age did or did not have a league. Also, I would imagine that the decline in physical ability is quite prounounced when you compare a 50 year old to a 65-70 year old.

Which is a depressing thing when you are pushing 50 and already falling apart.

You know, my county used to have an "ESL" league. This was before I started playing, and I believe it no longer exists. I assume ESL meant English as a Second Language, and a review of the roster showed a high proportion of players had Asian or Latino last names. So perhaps my guess was correct.

I suppose one could see that as discriminatory. Me, I figured it was no skin off my nose. If I had to live in a foreign country where English was not commonly spoken and someone started an "English" league, I would be eternally grateful.

I think my point about senior leagues is that it negatively effects me because I cannot use the courts so they can have multiple senior leagues.

Cindysphinx
12-16-2009, 03:15 PM
But someone who doesn't play league can have the same complaint. Leagues hog all the playing slots.

raiden031
12-16-2009, 03:52 PM
But someone who doesn't play league can have the same complaint. Leagues hog all the playing slots.

But at least they have the opportunity to play in the league, assuming they are adults. I don't know whats out there for juniors, but I know more of their programs are after school or on weekends and don't seem to interfere as much with evening court time.

I think its silly how there are less playing opportunities for the majority age range of adult players. Or maybe it just so happens that the majority of USTA players are seniors and thats why they do this.

And on the segregation of groups into various tennis divisions, its easy to be for it when you are not a group that is excluded. For example, you're approaching senior age, you can play the ladies day leagues, etc. You have nothing to gain by objecting to these divisions, whereas I would be happy if they created more adult divisions which are open to more players.

Geezer Guy
12-16-2009, 03:53 PM
I think my point about senior leagues is that it negatively effects me because I cannot use the courts so they can have multiple senior leagues.

That should be a complaint addressed to the facility. I could address a similar complaint at my facility, because the courts are taken up with juniors between the hours for 4 & 8 PM.

raiden031
12-16-2009, 04:01 PM
That should be a complaint addressed to the facility. I could address a similar complaint at my facility, because the courts are taken up with juniors between the hours for 4 & 8 PM.

I could, but I thought it was worthwhile to bring up the debate on the board anyways since it was kinda relevant for the thread.

Geezer Guy
12-16-2009, 04:20 PM
I do like your (or someone's) idea of having the "retired people's" league play their matches during weekdays when the clubs are less crowded. Seems like kind of a win-win for both the facilities and the players.

Jim A
12-16-2009, 04:30 PM
oops went in the wrong thread..not sure how that happened...

GeoffB
12-16-2009, 04:46 PM
I think my point about senior leagues is that it negatively effects me because I cannot use the courts so they can have multiple senior leagues.

This is a fair point. The problem is that I do agree seniors have a legitimate reason to want their own league, yet I don't think it would be a good idea to disallow seniors to play in a lower age bracket, since some seniors are still very fit and completely competitive in the younger leagues.

However, this leads to the situation you described - a 35 year old has only *one* league he can play in, where as a 60 year old has *two* - he can play in either one, or both. So you're shut out on court time when the seniors are playing, but they get to join your league. I agree, it isn't fair.

Maybe a good solution for your own club is to tell players that they can participate in senior league or regular adult league, but not both, so that the younger folk aren't disadvantaged where it comes to court time. Or just limit the number of leagues you can participate in each year to a level achievable by all players at that particular facility.

OrangePower
12-16-2009, 09:30 PM
Why not just play age-group tournaments? That's what I do.

Sure, that's an option. But tournaments are not the same as league tennis obviously. I enjoy being part of a team and the social aspect as well.

OrangePower
12-16-2009, 09:44 PM
This is a fair point. The problem is that I do agree seniors have a legitimate reason to want their own league, yet I don't think it would be a good idea to disallow seniors to play in a lower age bracket, since some seniors are still very fit and completely competitive in the younger leagues.

However, this leads to the situation you described - a 35 year old has only *one* league he can play in, where as a 60 year old has *two* - he can play in either one, or both. So you're shut out on court time when the seniors are playing, but they get to join your league. I agree, it isn't fair.

Maybe a good solution for your own club is to tell players that they can participate in senior league or regular adult league, but not both, so that the younger folk aren't disadvantaged where it comes to court time. Or just limit the number of leagues you can participate in each year to a level achievable by all players at that particular facility.

That's a great point.

I agree with Raiden that it would be unfair if seniors got that much more court time at the expense of those too young to participate in senior leagues.

So what you're suggesting would address that.

Or else let the club membership decide collectively how many league teams they will allow in each league, and how to ensure that court time is fairly distributed. And if the club is mostly 'old people' and they vote to have most of the court time devoted to senior tennis, then it's time to find a new club. Hey, it's a free country.

In fact I ended up changing clubs for a similar reason, although in my case it was because the club was more focused on junior tennis and the courts were always taken up by lessons, clinics and the like for them.

Spokewench
12-17-2009, 08:21 AM
I do like your (or someone's) idea of having the "retired people's" league play their matches during weekdays when the clubs are less crowded. Seems like kind of a win-win for both the facilities and the players.

So, how many people at the age of 50 (seniors) are retired? Not me, i tell ya, not in this economy!

10sguy
12-17-2009, 10:04 AM
I do like your (or someone's) idea of having the "retired people's" league play their matches during weekdays when the clubs are less crowded. Seems like kind of a win-win for both the facilities and the players.

NorCal has had Super Senior-65 leagues for at least 10 years . . . AND it has always been a weekdays/daytime only league.

Cindysphinx
12-17-2009, 08:23 PM
Wouldn't the easiest solution (assuming you think it important that everyone have the same number of playing opportunities regardless of age) be simply to say that no one person can join more than X teams (say, three).

So Raiden, a young guy, could join men's combo 7.5, men's combo 8.5 and mixed 8.0. A senior would have more options, perhaps, but the end result would be three teams. The least popular leagues would wither and die.

Personally, I don't think it is at all important to keep things "equal" for the sake of it, but there's your solution.

raiden031
12-18-2009, 04:30 AM
Wouldn't the easiest solution (assuming you think it important that everyone have the same number of playing opportunities regardless of age) be simply to say that no one person can join more than X teams (say, three).

So Raiden, a young guy, could join men's combo 7.5, men's combo 8.5 and mixed 8.0. A senior would have more options, perhaps, but the end result would be three teams. The least popular leagues would wither and die.

Personally, I don't think it is at all important to keep things "equal" for the sake of it, but there's your solution.

I don't like the idea of restricting the number of teams someone can play on. I just think it makes more sense to have less pointless divisions (NTRP combined with various age groups), and more divisions that can accomodate more people. In my area there are no adult leagues from June til September, only the senior stuff. I would think adults might want to play tennis during that timeframe other than their own pickup matches on public park courts because the club courts are always full.

cak
12-18-2009, 06:46 AM
I think this really comes down to the sections. In NorCal, mixed season starts in Jan, ends at the beginning of April, when adult season starts, that ends in July, when the combo season starts, that ends in October. So no adult level league during the holidays, but those under 50 have options Jan-October.

Seniors start in September and run through Jan. Senior mixed starts in June and runs through August. Some senior ladies games are on weekdays.

There are both 60 and 65 levels for super seniors here, I'm not sure when the 60s play, but the 65s play during the day in the spring.

My busiest time for scheduling courts is Jan, with the mixed starting up, seniors getting in all the rainouts, and weekday evening matches not all that viable with the cold. We have more teams during the spring, with adult and 65s, but many of the adult leagues play week night evenings. They can usually finish at least 2 of the 5 lines before dark hits and they need the lights.

Note that adult, senior, and mixed are the only national leagues. Combo and 65s are NorCal only, senior mixed goes to some championship somewhere, but I don't think it's national. For USTA, only the national leagues are sanctioned and suggested, anything else is really up to the section. I know some sections have more than one adult season. I've heard some sections have combo mixed season, and other unusual leagues.

Todd6060
12-18-2009, 09:36 AM
You know, my county used to have an "ESL" league. This was before I started playing, and I believe it no longer exists. I assume ESL meant English as a Second Language, and a review of the roster showed a high proportion of players had Asian or Latino last names. So perhaps my guess was correct.


ESL normally stands for Early Start League, meaning the league starts before year-end ratings are published. Special early start ratings are used to determine eligibility.

g4driver
04-02-2010, 02:53 PM
I think its silly how there are less playing opportunities for the majority age range of adult players. Or maybe it just so happens that the majority of USTA players are seniors and that's why they do this.



I realize this a very late reply to this thread, but I whole-halfheartedly agree with your comment about less playing opportunities for the majority of age range players. I want to play on Saturday, but in my area, the only leagues on Saturday are "Senior", so I am excluded as a 43 year old. Why yes, I have thought about playing "Adult" and do, but since I'm 43 and travel for a living during the week, I miss many matches Mon-Thurs, and would simply like the opportunity to play on Saturday in a league, but I can't.

So yes, 18-49 year-olds do have less opportunities to play in leagues, since a 50+ year old can play in both Adult League and Senior, but anyone 49 and under is limited to only the Adult League. Discrimination? Yes. Legal? Yes? Does this make sense? Not to me.

Cindysphinx, makes a great point about discrimination being legal. There are all sorts of legal discrimination daily. The Boy Scouts legally exclude, just as does Augusta National. It's their choice. It is also the the right of the USTA to make their rules, and unless your area that has something like Atlanta Area Lawn Tennis (ALTA), your choices are limited in most communities.

My beef with the current USTA system is this:

I'm 43, and lost two matches last fall to folks older than me (one guy was 62, my hero, and he was bumped to 4.0.) Good on him for being that fast and that consistent. So as a 43 year old, I played and beat every player younger than myself, but lost to two players who were older than myself. So what does this say about age? It's merely a number and not indicative of performance. But according to the USTA, their NTRP rating system isn't enough to "protect" Seniors and Super Seniors from younger players, so the USTA adds an additional level of protection from the younger players would beat and destroy these older players in match play. :rolleyes:

I'm not going to beat a 55 year 5.0 player. So why can't I play in a "Senior" 8.0 Mixed Doubles League that plays on Saturday? Because the USTA is jacked up that's why! So does the USTA computer know the difference between the birthday of two 4.0 men who are 48 and 52, if they have played each other twice (once in the spring, and once in the fall) in 4.0 singles match play, and each one by the exact scores thus have identical records? So in USTA Adult League Play these men are equals, but not on the USTA Senior circuit. The 48 year old is excluded. Why?

My point is this: If the league is a NTRP league, why have an age restriction?

1) Isn't the NTRP the rating or has the USTA inadvertently made a fatal error, and let the cat out of the bag that the NRTP system is grossly flawed? 2)Or is an NTRP rating accurate and the Senior and Super Senior Leagues merely a way to give seniors more playing opportunity at the expense of 49 and younger players? 3)Or maybe a little of both? Maybe it's time to change the math behind the NTRPs and the way the USTA sets up their leagues.

If it is an 8.0 Mixed Senior League, why can't a 48, 43, or 38 year old play in the league? Isn't 8.0 Mixed really 8.0 Mixed. I contend you have a NTRP rating level. Your age doesn't matter, if the NTRP rating is accurate.

So which is more lopsided a 22 year old versus a 49 year old? or a 45 year old versus a 52 year old? The first is 27 years age difference, the latter only a seven year difference. But the 52 year old needs the protection from the 45 year old because equal NTRP ratings isn't sufficient according to teh USTA. :confused:

My suggestion:

1) Fix the NTRP rating system, by hiring some mathematicians to completely overhaul the current system commencing in the fall of 2011. Let the 2011 Fall Ratings only count for the purpose of establishing new ratings and new teams for the Spring of 2012.

2) Adjust the Leagues to Weekday (Days & Nights) and Weekend allowing let anyone who qualifies at a given rating to play in that league. You would still have three leagues. Senior and Super Seniors would be able to play in all three leagues if they wanted to. And very wealthy 18-49 year olds who are independently wealthy and didn't work a day or night job could do the same. :):)

That's right folk! Get rid of Adult, Senior and Super Senior Leagues and simply the USTA format to Weekday Day, Weekday Night and Weekend Leagues. Have your Sectional and State for all three leagues. You open the field of available players and include or exclude based on level of play, not by age.

USTA you can't have it both ways. Either the NTRP are accurate and Senior and Super Seniors don't need their own league, or the NTRP's aren't accurate and the system needs to be overhauled.

Just because it has always been done this way, doesn't mean it's right. Imagine if Rosa Parks had just walked to the back of the bus in Montgomery, AL. It's time the USTA fixed the system.

Spokewench
04-02-2010, 04:40 PM
2) Adjust the Leagues to Weekday (Days & Nights) and Weekend allowing let anyone who qualifies at a given rating to play in that league. You would still have three leagues. Senior and Super Seniors would be able to play in all three leagues if they wanted to. And very wealthy 18-49 year olds who are independently wealthy and didn't work a day or night job could do the same. :):)

That's right folk! Get rid of Adult, Senior and Super Senior Leagues and simply the USTA format to Weekday Day, Weekday Night and Weekend Leagues. Have your Sectional and State for all three leagues. You open the field of available players and include or exclude based on level of play, not by age.




I already stated how I feel about age group divisions in this thread, but in response to your week day, week night and weekend leagues; they don't work in all areas of the country. They may work for people who are in big city, urban areas where there are lots of people to play tennis; but they will not work in rural areas like where I live and play. It takes 1-2.5 hours to travel in the state to get to our competitors and sometimes in bad winter weather. Trying to drive after work, play, drive back would keep most people from playing in an evening league. Week day leagues would turn into 80% senior people anyway, because those are the only people who can get away from work for that long during the day. So, for USTA to set rules that only work for large urban areas would not work in the diverse national setting that USTA represents.

g4driver
04-02-2010, 06:22 PM
I already stated how I feel about age group divisions in this thread, but in response to your week day, week night and weekend leagues; they don't work in all areas of the country. They may work for people who are in big city, urban areas where there are lots of people to play tennis; but they will not work in rural areas like where I live and play. It takes 1-2.5 hours to travel in the state to get to our competitors and sometimes in bad winter weather. Trying to drive after work, play, drive back would keep most people from playing in an evening league. Week day leagues would turn into 80% senior people anyway, because those are the only people who can get away from work for that long during the day. So, for USTA to set rules that only work for large urban areas would not work in the diverse national setting that USTA represents.

Please explain how a weekday day league, weekday night league, and weekend league wouldn't work. If one of these three options don't work for you, do you have a new day of the week that the rest of the world doesn't have? If you live in a rural area where you have to drive 1-2.5 hours to play tennis, when exactly do you play? You've indicated weekday days, and weekday nights don't work, so when do you play? The only option left is: the weekend. You failed to mention when you play, but logic dictates you play on the weekend. So basically, you've made my case for me. A weekend league works for those who can and want to play on the weekends. Nobody would be forced to play on any league, but people would have more options than they have now. I can't play during the week, just as you can't as you don't want to drive 2.5 hours, play and then drive back. I want to play on the weekends, but that option is exclusively for seniors only in my area.

So please explain to me if you already play on a weekend, how a weekend league wouldn't work for you. Your response has me completely baffled like the AFLAC duck shaking his head listening to Yogi Berra.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-EZf56AfYc

How does my proposal prevent or limit anyone from playing? From the most remote towns in the western states to the most populated cities, everyone would have the same access under my proposal. Three leagues, with your NTRP as the only limiting factor. Age would not matter at all: if a 22, 42, and 62 year old were all 4.0s, they would play at the same level 4.0, not Adult 4.0 versus Senior 4.0. In my world a 4.0 would be a 4.0. You would either a 4.0, or you would something higher or lower... not a Senior 4.0 versus a non-Senior 4.0. What a great point you make for my case: Weekday day leagues would be for retirees, and those independently wealthy or non-working folks who want to play during the day. Plenty of those people around the country, although I'm not one of those people nor do you seem to be.

My point is to offer more access to more people, and not to exclude people from playing when they can play. If the USTA would recognize a NTRP rating is the same regardless of age, my plan would work.

If a Senior 4.0 isn't the same as a Adult 4.0, the system is completely broken.