New Ranking System

Discussion in 'Junior League & Tournament Talk' started by jonkras, Jan 13, 2012.

  1. jonkras

    jonkras New User

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    Messages:
    38
    Another great job by the USTA in informing people about the new ranking system. I am as plugged into this stuff as possible and I had no idea about it.

    You can debate the pros and cons of the change -- I think it was done to get the academy kids higher rankings. What's done is done -- my issue is that as of right now the 2012 rankings are based on tournament results in 2012 (with generally lower points for a given result) and 2011 rankings (with higher ranking points). So if you have a lot of points in 2011 this works to your advantage in a big way. It makes it almost impossible to work your way into a National Open because you just cannot get enough points from local tournaments.

    Does anyone know anything more about this? I sent emails to USTA but of course did not get an answer.
     
    #1
  2. tennis5

    tennis5 Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Messages:
    1,290
    Those are the changes for 2012.
    My section still has not notified me...
     
    #2
  3. thepastord

    thepastord New User

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Messages:
    91
    The updated point chart is there.


    Junior Competition
    Changes for 2012 to USTA National Junior Ranking Point Tables


    In 2004, the United States Tennis Association adopted a Point Per Round Ranking System (PPR) to rank American juniors. Ranking Point Tables contain the points earned for wins at National Ranking Tournaments, which include all tournaments on the National Junior Tournament Schedule (NJTS) as well as 12 Section tournaments designated by each USTA Section. While minor adjustments have been made to the Point Tables periodically since 2004, effective January 1, 2012 the Tables will be substantively changed.

    The new Tables, which were unanimously approved by the USTA Junior Competition Committee in September with the support of the USTA Player Development Staff, have been revised in two significant ways:

    • The point distribution has changed so that ranking points are awarded in a more
    progressive manner. Players who advance to the later rounds of a tournament will receive
    substantially more points than players who lose in the earlier rounds.

    • The total points earned for winning a Level 1 National Ranking tournament, such as a
    USTA National Championship, have been significantly increased. The points earned for
    winning Level 4 and Level 5 tournaments have been reduced slightly, but remain higher
    than when the PPR system was introduced in 2004.

    Click here to download a PDF of the new ranking point tables that will be used beginning January 1, 2012.


    JUST GOOGLE :

    usta new ranking system for 2012~~~~~~~~~~~~~ You will see it!
     
    #3
  4. thepastord

    thepastord New User

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Messages:
    91
    Looks like the winner of a level 5 Florida Designated only gets 50 points....... Seems pretty horrendous. Can this really be accurate? Jeepers, it wasn't worth the travel expense before, now it definitely isn't. Glad we stopped traveling a few years ago!:shock:

    I tried to copy and paste the chart, but it didn't work.... The points are horrible............
     
    #4
  5. jigglypuff

    jigglypuff Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    318
    The question here is not about academy or non-academy kids whatever that means... but rather kids that just aged up this year vs. kids that aged up last year. By 2013, those kids would have moved on and the field would even up. Not really sure what the hoopla is about.
     
    #5
  6. tennis5

    tennis5 Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Messages:
    1,290
    The hoopla over these changes is small compared to what is coming.

    But, for those concerned about this year, 2012, the changes hurt the players who are aging up.

    Not sure what academy kids has to do with this.

    But, let's change the word to USTA kids.

    Ok, so they age up, and don't have the points to get into the nationals.

    No problem for them, they just get the wild cards.

    Rigged game.

    So, there is some hoopla here for the kids aging up.

    It is not fair.

    How about the kids who age up this year, and are juniors and want to be noticed by the college coaches.

    Guess not.
     
    #6
  7. thepastord

    thepastord New User

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Messages:
    91

    It was already bad when they changed the draw numbers. I really feel sorry for people........... This is going to hurt the USTA participation even more than 2011. Absolutely horrendous. I'm glad my daughter is a senior and we are done with all of this nonsense.:)
     
    #7
  8. HIGH-TECH TENNIS

    HIGH-TECH TENNIS Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2010
    Messages:
    146
    Just re-read a blog post after our first experience with the 32 Draw at National Open. :(

    "Everyone has a right to an opinion...and they must all be copying from each other because they're all singing the same tune.

    We’ve been going to national tournaments for the past 4+ years. We normally see players coming in from everywhere in the country…and there are always a few that just barely got in to their first national tournament. Wow, those parents and coaches are so proud and so happy for the player – before they’ve even hit a single ball! And how about the kid who was on the alternate list and then got a last minute call to say that someone had withdrawn…there was a slot for them - could they get there in time? Those are great stories to hear because that kid is a winner at the moment he picks up his first t-shirt that says “NATIONAL TOURNAMENT”.

    We saw none of those things. We saw players who had already played in a national tournament, we saw that NO players withdrew. We saw that they all came from Florida and the Southern section (with just a few from the Mid-Atlantic section). We know these same kids played each other in the last national and they'll probably play each other again in the next.

    This was good competition right off the bat (or should we say off the racquet). But no win for players...

    The talk amongst the parents around the tournament site about the 32 draw was one of puzzlement. No one, NO ONE was in favor of the change. One parent said he could understand it somewhat but liked it the way it was. According to another: "If the USTA wants the kids to get more experience by playing more matches, then why did they limit the draw to 32?"

    We saw more tournament staff, volunteers, court sweepers, and officials than there were players.

    A 32 draw meant the tournament director had to do the same amount of work for 1/2 the entry fee. I'm sure there are many TDs this week who are wondering whether it was really worth it to host a tournament with a 32 draw.

    Bottom line: You'd like to think TDs run tournaments for the love of the game and for the good of the kids but as you may well know, many TDs do it just for the money. Some break even, but I can't think of many who will run a tournament and lose money. No winners here..."

    In the year since I wrote that, the changes just keep coming...and if the USTA is hearing even a fraction of the *****ing we're hearing at tournaments, they are getting an EARFUL - but I'm not so sure it's making a difference. Wish I knew what they were trying to accomplish... :(
     
    #8
  9. tennis5

    tennis5 Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Messages:
    1,290
    Great post!!!

    32 draw does not build the game.

    It is a discouragement.

    Parents talk.

    All younger parents look to parents with older kids for the ins and outs.

    Just like we are doing here.

    If they are looking for a grand slam champion, there need to be thousands of players out there to get the needle in the haystack.

    But, are they trying to grow the game?

    How do you grow a game if no one can play??????????

    Wait till the 64 Super Nats.

    64 kids for a gold ball.

    Wow, college coaches are going to have that less fewer kids to look at.

    Perhaps all they are doing is protecting their turf, their salary, their job by saying look
    most of our high performance kids are in the small tournament.
    Of course, they are there by wild card.
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2012
    #9
  10. treeman10

    treeman10 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    514
    -------------------
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2012
    #10
  11. jonkras

    jonkras New User

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    Messages:
    38
    I am glad my post mostly validated my own thoughts on the new system through comments by others. The change was really not well thought out and not well advertised (like the change for the National L2). The people at the USTA have no clue about how to make changes in the junior tournament system. It is 2012 and there are things called Facebook and email. They should come up with some ideas and then establish a forum for people to comment. They could invite, via email, everyone who has registered for a tournament in the last year to come and express their opinion. Instead they take a Boss Hogg type of approach, where a few insiders (that are well represented by USTA performance and academy people) make the decisions. While this may be good for elite players, it is not good for junior tennis overall, so I think they are making changes against their own self interest but they don't realize it. (Sounds like politics, doesn't it?)

    And the rules do not even solve the problem they were attempting to fix. Although it gives fewer points to sectional play, it does not eliminate the variance in the quality of play between the sections. We just can't change the geography of the US, or where tennis is more popular. There are always going to be strong players, for instance, from SoCal that are ranked lower than kids they can beat from Montana. I just don't know how you get around that, without having an all national system, which is impractical.

    Like some others have said, this change will:

    * Cause smaller draws in sectional tournaments
    * Make it harder for mid-tier kids to play nationals and get noticed by colleges
    * Make a terrible year in 2012 for kids who are aging up or just aging up

    I'm glad my kid is a senior and this won't affect us all that much (although I think it will make it very hard now for him to get into a National L2, and because of that he might not make the summer nationals).
     
    #11
  12. tennis5

    tennis5 Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Messages:
    1,290
    I've been a member of the USTA for years...

    I was not asked to participate in any survey.

    My section hasn't even told me about the new rule changes for 2012, thankfully, I read this board.

    The changes for 2013 were told to me by a guy who owns a couple of tennis centers.

    He said everyone was opposed, but the USTA just crammed it down everyone's throat.

    Their mandate.

    Is the USTA trying to get rid of the mid level kids from playing college tennis?

    The limited 64 Super Nats means only 64 kids will be seen by college coaches.

    I spoke to a college coach at the Winter Nats this year.
    I was surprised he said he didn't care about USTA rankings or TRN rankings, what was important to him
    WAS SEEING THE KID PLAY IN A NATIONAL TOURNAMENT.

    Well, that now cuts out all the mid level kids.

    I guess the foreigners can fill those spots too now.

    Tell me again, how the USTA is trying to grow the game of tennis IF NO ONE CAN PLAY, EXCEPT 64 KIDS.
     
    #12
  13. TennisFan2Day

    TennisFan2Day Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    174
    I agree that this would be a great idea but the truth is that they really don't care what parents or players think. They are not going to put something out there because they know how much backlash they would get.
     
    #13
  14. hound 109

    hound 109 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2010
    Messages:
    382
    We discussed this topic back in Oct. when it was announced.

    A few of us offered opinions on how it would play out. (fairly accurately):

    http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=401304


    Those who were ranked (say) # 20 or lower nationally (last year) will be at huge disadvantage this year if it's their first year of age up. (Those in their second year of age up still have 2011's larger points in their bag).

    The top 20 dudes were probably playing up (in all but the L1s) anyway, so they're good. But the 4 & 5 star guys who played in their own age group last year (& are in the first year of aging up) are gonna be SOL when it comes to attending any National tourneys this year (except for the July L3).

    .
     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2012
    #14
  15. TennisFan2Day

    TennisFan2Day Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    174
    Not only do they want to lower the Super Nats to 64, they also asked that the wildcards to be increased. This is so they can take a few more players from the 16s and put them in the 18s Super Nats. That means 1 out of every 6 players is going to be from the USTA HP Program. Those are pretty good odds that your players are going to go deep. It's a way of making your program look better than it actually is.

    This means unless your child is in the top 55 in the country they will never play a Super again after this year.

    I believe they are lowering the numbers because they have one USTA HP kid losing to another USTA HP kid and at least one of them makes it farther. The same thing they are doing by wildcarding them into the ITF tournaments.
     
    #15
  16. tball2day

    tball2day Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    603
    ...........................
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2012
    #16
  17. justinmadison

    justinmadison Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    Messages:
    525
    I started a thread on this August 2010.

    http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=341746

    If you read though the thread you will see that it had 6,100 views and 86 entries. Looking back I think I did a good job predicting what would happen. All it took was a spreadsheet and the last year’s results.

    I sent multiple emails to everyone on the junior competition committee trying to find out what they were thinking. No one bothered to reply.

    I think I was the only person on the thread arguing against the changes.

    The people making these changes only care about their jobs and “power”. Limiting play and increasing wildcards makes the USTA training centers and coaches more important. Under the old system many kids were successful training with private coaches and playing the many national tournaments. For long stretches of time the training centers would be almost empty. Hard to justify your coaching staff and salaries if everyone is off at a national tournament getting plenty of quality matches somewhere else. Now, with limited national play and the need for wildcards when you age up you had better do exactly what the national coaches say and stay in the center so they can look important. (and keep their jobs)

    I have always said when you cannot understand why someone in power is making a decision you must think about how that decision directly helps them. Don’t think about what they are saying, don’t think about what they are “supposed” to do. Think about how it directly helps their pocketbook today. There you have the answer.
     
    #17
  18. seminoleG

    seminoleG Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Messages:
    473
    To all. I am a dad of a recent 9yo. We called USTA Florida and after several conversations were told the "Path" to take. So we joined, and started the trek. Rokkie events, locals, Super series, Designated, Sectionals. Climbed into top 20 then they eliminate 10U.

    Ok we regroup and start again, then they adjust draws.

    We regroup again then they adjust points down for the only events we can get into.

    So now what? I asked about 10U academy's no answer. I asked about the 11U format no answers. I ask,ask,ask and nothing.

    So we have decided to do what's needed until 13 and save,save,save for ITFs.

    Just can't commit the $$$$ to a moving target. I asked, listened, and did with no support. These folks may be tennis people but after my 2 years in their system I'm convinced the emperor has no clothes.

    I feel for the TDs, the Pros, the moms and dads as this system will drive lots away.

    I owe it to My daughter to craft a letter to Mr. McEnroe and just say it. Whether it means something or not to him,I feel I'll do it to make my peace.

    Even the top ranked kids parents don't feel these changes are best for junior tennis.
     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2012
    #18
  19. tennis5

    tennis5 Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Messages:
    1,290
    I caught the tale end of your posts. Yes, you did predict it all.

    But, the 2013 changes are worse.

    100% agree with you on why the changes are being done.

    If the 64 super Nat draw is mostly their kids, they look like heroes and THEY GET TO KEEP THEIR JOBS, LAVISH SALARIES, AND PERKS.

    I would now advise anyone to join their regional USTA center ( Boca, Carson, NY) so that you can get the wild card and be in the system.
    Of course, the flip side, is the coaches there are a revolving door,
    and the kids get all injured due to what looks like in NY as gross negligence.
     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2012
    #19
  20. seminoleG

    seminoleG Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Messages:
    473

    WE ARE ALL IN VIOLENT AGREEMENT!!

    So what do we do?????
     
    #20
  21. tennis5

    tennis5 Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Messages:
    1,290
    I don't know...

    I saw all the complaints in the the justinmadison thread, and all the predictions that came true.

    Some here on this board said back then, so what, "The best will play."

    But, it is not true.

    This summer at the Hard courts in SA, I saw a kid who was really low down on the alternate list.

    He got a WC in, over much better players.

    And he just did ok at the hard courts, if you are going to get a wc, I think you should do spectacular.

    TCF, always said the problem was you can't vote these people out.

    You know, I am in trouble, when I am quoting TCF.

    And ITF's are not the answer for thousands ok kids who can't fly to another country and can't afford to miss a week of school.
     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2012
    #21
  22. hound 109

    hound 109 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2010
    Messages:
    382
    you don't get it.

    a player could win every Sectional & half the L3s & L2s (if they could get in....which they can't)......& older players with points from 2011 will have more points.

    Points earned in 2011 are 2-4 times higher than 2012. Those aging up in early 2012 are SOL. Not complaining....just stating fact.

    I'll be using 2012 to prepare my soon to be 13 y/o for 16s. Traveling & tennis expenses will go WAY down. 14s will just be transitional. He's had his national & sectional wins....don't mean squat as he ages up, might as well prepare for the next level until the USTA decides what they want to do in 2013 or 2014.

    I'm sure as heck not going to travel more than an hour to play a national L2 or L3 if even winning doesn't get you into an L1 though. Too bad. Tucson was a fun week & a good experience.
     
    #22
  23. seminoleG

    seminoleG Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Messages:
    473
    We entered a Regional and were preparing to travel to Waco next week. I just felt something was amiss so we withdrew. Then we are accepted in Regional in Coral Gables! That just wasn't possible until I found out why. Parents who saw the new PPR system pulled out. I now see that if she wins 2 rounds it ain't worth squat so why pay other than its local, and good competition? But the cost? To travel and fees just prohibitive.

    Man, eliminate 10s, shrink draws, now reduce points someone is telling us something.
     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2012
    #23
  24. treeman10

    treeman10 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    514
    ---------------------
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2012
    #24
  25. thepastord

    thepastord New User

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Messages:
    91


    Definitely, If you have a daughter, play "Volleyball" instead! lol~~~

    I live in Florida, and I can tell you, we saw over two years ago, how bad it was going to be. My daughter is a senior now, we stopped the travel BS, she focused on practice and just local play. We marketed her ourselves to the types of colleges that were a "Good" academic fit. It was the smarted thing we did! I have been telling people for months how this should be approached, but a lot of folks just have learn the hard way.:shock:
     
    #25
  26. thepastord

    thepastord New User

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Messages:
    91
    WRONG~~~~

    They won't listen, so don't waste your time, money, and sanity... Learn how to work around it. That is the solution. A tennis pro in my area told me I should start running a program to parents. He was amazed at what we got done with just decent coaching and marketing our own kid!
     
    #26
  27. thepastord

    thepastord New User

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Messages:
    91
    That is a program to help educate the parents on the traps of tennis....
     
    #27
  28. justinmadison

    justinmadison Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    Messages:
    525
    The people making the rules for junior tennis have an inherent conflict of interest. Their mission is to promote the growth and success of junior tennis but their self-interest tells them to increase reliance on the USTA high performance program to ensure jobs.

    Under the old system juniors had plenty of opportunities. They could train at their local club and have access to great competition with the many national tournaments available to them. This was a problem for the USTA hi-po program. Looking back at 2010 there were lots of top juniors who had absolutely no interest in the USTA program. They felt like with the revolving door of coaches and mandated training and competition schedule the program did not meet their needs. With the new system the USTA is taking away opportunities for juniors in order to force them into the USTA centers.

    The changes to USTA competition are designed to take away opportunities. That is why they make no sense to the people on this forum and make perfect sense to the people making the rules. I think we should send emails to the powers that be but the truth is they know exactly what that are doing.
     
    #28
  29. Dadof10s

    Dadof10s Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    Messages:
    83
    I think you have cut right to the heart of it.
     
    #29
  30. jonkras

    jonkras New User

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    Messages:
    38
    I for one, think that doing nothing is not an option. I will guarantee that if most of the parents (And coaches -- don't forget that there are lots of great coaches out there that are training national level players. This is a direct threat to their livlihood) found out about this, they would be outraged.

    I would encourage everybody to:

    (a) Send emails to everyone in USTA you can (Can someone post a list of email addresses).
    (b) Talk to your regional USTA staff. This is bad for them too.
    (c) Tell parents about this when you see them at tournaments and get them to complain.
    (d) Talk to your kids coach and get them to complain.

    The only constituency that is in favor of these rule changes are the high-performance USTA centers, which represent a small fraction of the people involved in junior tennis.
     
    #30
  31. thepastord

    thepastord New User

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Messages:
    91

    That is the other sad thing.......... There are a lot, and I mean a lot of local area coaches who produce top players. This is horrible for them! I think many are going to be seeking other types of employment (can you imagine loving and coaching tennis for 10-20-30 years) and it all ends because the USTA has made a mess of "Opportunities". Many great players from Florida come from those types of places..........

    I don't know what it is going to take, but it may be a loss of 5-10 years of good players being missed/lost. Athletic kids like that, will move on to different sports................. Bottom line, they will move on.:evil:
     
    #31
  32. dallasoliver

    dallasoliver Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2007
    Messages:
    297
    Hey gang -

    While TennisRecruiting.net has no formal relationship with the anyone from USTA Junior Competition, several of us at TRN have gotten emails from people - including some folks on this message board - asking what we can do to address these recent rules changes.

    I don't want to have a huge discussion about the role of TRN here, but I am planning on asking the USTA to comment on questions and remarks from people like you.

    What I am looking for is a set of tight, well-written statements and questions that we can present to our contacts at the USTA for comment. Here are some examples:

    1) "Limiting play and increasing wildcards makes the USTA training centers and coaches more important. Wildcards will go primarily to players from the USTA High Performance programs."

    2) "There is a transition problem with the new PPR table in 2012. Points earned in 2011 are worth two-to-four times as much as in 2012. Older players with points from 2011 will have unfair advantages for many months."

    I would love to get some thoughtful and respectful suggestions from this group. Thoughts? Suggestions?

    Best regards,
    Dallas
     
    #32
  33. tennisforlife77

    tennisforlife77 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2011
    Messages:
    102
    Dallas - That would be great. I wonder if Jay Berger would be willing to do an on the record interview with you for a TRN feature which could be based on some of the questions and suggestions you get. It would be very telling.
     
    #33
  34. justinmadison

    justinmadison Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    Messages:
    525
    Here is a copy of the letter I sent to each member of the junior competition committee and every director at the USTA. (July 2010) Not a single person even bothered to acknowledge receipt much less put together a coherent reply. I believe my analysis in this letter was spot on. I also believe the USTA was not only aware of the situation but this is exactly what they wanted to happen.

    I will extract a couple of compact bullet points if Dallas would like to use them.

    The new system limits the amount of national play available to juniors. We believe national play is essential for the development of junior players. How does it help the junior tennis community to limit this exposure?

    An important aspect of the junior tennis ranking and competition system is to allow players a smooth transition through age groups. We believe the limited draws available at the national level eliminate any overlap in abilities for adjacent age groups thus creating a system where players are excluded from nation play their first year after ageing up. This exclusion has a negative impact on development. Why would the USTA support a system with this negative impact?

    The USTA’s current 17 section alignment does not allow for strength of section when awarding national points. Under the old system this was alleviated by the availability of Level 3 tournament where players from any section could compete for points. The current proposals do not address this issue. Why did the USTA eliminate the Level 3 tournaments that mitigated this issue?

    The USTA has made the claim these changes are for the benefit of junior tennis players. I have taken informal surveys at multiple Level 3, Level 2, and Level 1 tournament. The overwhelming majority of players, parents, tournament directors, section heads, and coaches I spoke with are absolutely against the current system. Has the USTA surveyed its members to determine if the changes are viewed favorably? If so what was the result?

    Why does the USTA continue to increase the wild cards available in each tournament. The obvious answer is to make sure the USTA high performance players are not negatively affected by all of the issues I have communicated in my emails and in these questions. Do you believe it is fair for the USTA to craft a system that is inherently flawed for everyone and then give itself wildcards to solve problems for the few players they select?



    Letter sent to all members of the JCC and the USTA directors. ( July 2010)

    Mr. Brewer,

    I am unhappy with the decisions made by the USTA Junior Competition Committee reducing national tournament competition. These changes will have long term negative effects on junior tennis in the US.

    I have read the rationale put forth by the committee and believe, while the intentions may be good, the effects will actually be the exact opposite of those anticipated. The four reasons put forth are, cost savings, less school time missed, improved strength of field, and more time for training. Interestingly, one of the negative aspects of the current system mentioned by the committee is having players with lower national rankings entering the draws. Allowing a larger draw eliminates the requirement that players travel to many tournaments in order to establish a high national ranking. When you reduce the number of spots in the draw you increase pressure to spend money on travel because a player cannot make the draw if he/she does not play more national tournaments.

    My suspicion is these changes are being driven by the high performance player development department and their desire is to keep the HP kids from traveling in order to provide more time for coaching and development. This may seem like a good idea, and will probably have some short term benefits. The net long term result will be negative for all US junior players and thus will have a negative long term effect on the HP players as well.

    Exposure to national play is essential for junior players to develop the skills necessary to compete at the highest level. As you reduce the opportunities to compete at this level you will have a negative impact on junior development. These changes will drastically reduce the number of players that can compete at the national level. The current plan reduces the number of dates for L3 tournament from 19 in 2010 to 4 in 2011; reduces the of the number of entries in L2 tournament from 1024 in 2010 to 384 in 2011; and finally reduces the number of entries in L1 tournaments from 704 to 384.

    Local tournament play is a necessary, but not sufficient, part of junior development. Playing and winning local tournament is good for confidence and exposure to different levels of play. Playing up at local tournaments can provide some benefit to competitors but does not have the necessary components to develop the skills to win long term. Playing against older and stronger opponents creates different problems than playing against opponents with the same physical abilities. Players develop point construction, shot tolerance, aggressive and defensive skills playing competitors with their same physical and high technical abilities.
    This drastic reduction in exposure at the national level will result in an overall lowering of the level of tennis played by US juniors.

    An important aspect of junior tennis is providing a path for players to move through the age divisions, improving their level of play and staying engaged and excited about tennis. Did the committee perform an analysis of the proposed changes and how it will effect player advancement? My guess is they did not. There are two important components in aging up. You must be able to qualify for tournaments at the next level, and you must be able to win some matches in the draws you qualify for. With the new tournament formats this will be a difficult challenge.

    Looking at L2 tournaments in SoCal for boys 16s the 32 draw cutoff will require a national ranking of 250. Looking at the July 2010 National Open in SoCal the next person on the alternate list was ranked 464. This presents a real problem for players trying to move up in age group. Number 250 on the national list for 16’s is a four star junior on tennisrecruiting and the players immediately around him are a five star sophomore and a three star senior. Just as a reminder this is the bottom of the entry pool under the new system. Number 464 on the national 16s list is a four star freshman and the people around him are a four star freshman and a three star sophomore. The result of this analysis is you have created a system where there is almost no overlap between the best players of the younger age group with the lowest entry point into national play at the next level. Looking at the national 14’s list there are probably less than 20 players that will have any chance of winning a single match in the reduced draw size 16’s as they age up. This will create a system where large groups of players will only have the ability to compete at the national level ever other year. The year when they are the “older” group. This is not a good system and will lead to discouragement and dissatisfaction of players. Ultimately, it will lead to less developed and less skilled players at every level.

    Just as a side note how you could decide to eliminate the Easter Bowl is a complete mystery. To quote from their web site. “For the past 43 years the Easter Bowl has been synonymous with junior tennis …Name a Grand Slam champion from the U.S. over the past 40 years and chances are they got their start with exposure at the Easter Bowl. McEnroe, Sampras, Agassi, Chang, Austin and Davenport all played at the Easter Bowl, the only nationally televised junior tennis tournament. There is simply no junior tournament like it. … No junior tournament in the world gets the press coverage the Easter Bowl receives each April and this year will be no different.”

    These changes are ill advised and short sighted. To add to the massive issues you are causing the communication of the changes has been dismal. Looking at the current USTA website there is no mention of the massive changes you are making. It is almost like you are trying to hide what you are doing until the last minute because you are fully aware of how poorly it will be received.

    Thank you for your time

    Justin Madison
     
    #34
  35. HIGH-TECH TENNIS

    HIGH-TECH TENNIS Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2010
    Messages:
    146
    We certainly don't have any answers but we know there's a growing problem for sure.

    As I posted elsewhere, if the USTA is hearing even a fraction of what we're constantly overhearing from ANGRY PARENTS, they are hearing a ton.

    Hang in there, everybody...It's just tennis and they're just children, after all.
     
    #35
  36. treeman10

    treeman10 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    514
    -----------------------
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2012
    #36
  37. treeman10

    treeman10 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    514
    ----------------------
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2012
    #37
  38. Dadof10s

    Dadof10s Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    Messages:
    83
    We all saw how they swelled with pride when Jack Sock was at the US Open and they even had one of their coaches go work with him before the match even though that coach had not been his developmental coach. We have a federation who feels the need to produce a USA top player and is trying to rig the system so any top kid will have little choice but to play ball. If they get all the top kids in their program yet still grow the game among the mere mortals with quickstart who fill the stands they win on both counts. The USTA thinks they are in competition with the tennis academies and wonderful independent coaches instead of just getting more children to play tennis. They need to realize the odds of the investment paying off and a top USA player being the result is very small. I would bet the next USA champion comes from a very independent parent who maybe even takes them to Europe as children and trains outside the normal establishment in the USA. This video shows the thinking that if a child has any trouble serving just keep making it easier and easier but I wonder if that is going to make children better players or just not work on anything that is hard to do? By the end of the video he has the child just throw the ball over. Should our children really be playing rally tennis if they can not do anything but throw the balls over as a serve? That seems to be putting the cart in front of the horse.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dT2K97FLOf4
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2012
    #38
  39. chalkflewup

    chalkflewup Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    Messages:
    1,697
    I've read that parents want larger draws at national tournaments in order to give a larger pool of kids exposure to the college coaches. Chances are colleges ain't lookin' at your kid anyway. That's the bigger problem. Why? Google a few college tennis teams and check out the team roster. The number of foreign kids occupying slots on college tennis rosters is staggering. In my opinion, it's anti-American what college tennis has become.
     
    #39
  40. Misterbill

    Misterbill Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2011
    Messages:
    671
    I think college coaches are looking and not liking what they see from levels below the top four stars.

    In April lets see how many top four stars and above don't have a good scholly, or an Ivy/DIII opportunity of their choosing.
     
    #40
  41. Dadof10s

    Dadof10s Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    Messages:
    83
    As long as college coaches are paid and hired or fired based on wins they will stack the roster with the players they think they can win with no matter if they come from USA or elsewhere so any limits on overseas players would have to come from the NCAA.
     
    #41
  42. chalkflewup

    chalkflewup Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    Messages:
    1,697
    Each year hundreds of Americans are deprived the opportunity to participate in tennis at the college level at the expense of foreigners. In my opinion, that's just wrong. College rules need to be revamped in a manner where Americans come FIRST and not LAST. Charity begins at home.
     
    #42
  43. Dadof10s

    Dadof10s Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    Messages:
    83
    The new rule making kids go to college within 6 months of their high schools proper graduation date might help, at least 23 year old foreign players will not take scholarships from 18 year old USA kids like before unless I do not understand the new rule.
     
    #43
  44. andfor

    andfor Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Messages:
    4,862
    Can someone please name a deserving American college tennis prospect that was denied all tennis scholarships due to foreign tennis players getting scholarships before he did? When you do this show us this mythical college tennis prospect, be sure to show us how all the tennis scholarships in the U.S. were used up please.
     
    #44
  45. Misterbill

    Misterbill Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2011
    Messages:
    671
    There can be no deprivation without there first being entitlement.

    I don't think anyone is entitled to a college scholarship because he/she plays tennis....regardless of their place of birth or domicile.

    I think the attitude that there is such entitlement, wherever it exists, can be expected to dilute the pool of talented players.

    Getting back to the thread, I am not sure what level of player is hurt most by the new USTA rules. Tentative opinion right now is the high-3-star caliber TRN player. Am I right or wrong about this?
     
    #45
  46. Dadof10s

    Dadof10s Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    Messages:
    83
    andfor you are correct, there are about 8000 total tennis roster spots in the USA (3500 Division 1) and a good number are not used each year. Kids can get various academic scholarships at the lower level schools while they play tennis.
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2012
    #46
  47. andfor

    andfor Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Messages:
    4,862
    You don't understand the rule. A 23 year who graduated H.S. at 19 still has a year left of D1 eligibility. That means a coach who can find a great 23 year old tennis mercenary for 1 year can bring them on the squad.

    I'm sure someone will have a mythical story about how they know a kid who was bumped off a college tennis roster due to this all to common scenario. Sarcasm alert....
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2012
    #47
  48. Dadof10s

    Dadof10s Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    Messages:
    83
    Really? The way it was explained to me they had to enroll within 6 months of their classes graduation date. So how can coach find a 23 year old who did not enroll within that 6 month period? Do kids have to actually enroll or not? I also read that foreign players lose 1 year of eligibility for every year they do not enroll after the 6 month grace period so wouldn't the 23 year old have lost all eligibility?
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2012
    #48
  49. andfor

    andfor Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Messages:
    4,862
    Really? Yes.

    The way it was explained to me they had to enroll within 6 months of their classes graduation date. That's when the eligibility clock starts ticking.

    So how can coach find a 23 year old who did not enroll within that 6 month period? They look for and find someone who just happens to fit this scenario. As I joked, it would be unusual.

    Do kids have to actually enroll or not? See #2, the clock starts ticking after 6 months of H.S. graduation.

    All this depends on the player being 19 or 20 at the time of H.S. graduation. A 23 year old D1 freshman would be a borderline case age wise. Most D1 coaches would not take them for 1 year of eligible play.
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2012
    #49
  50. Dadof10s

    Dadof10s Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    Messages:
    83
    Yeah but if they do not enroll within that 6 month period they lose 1 year of eligibility for each passing year. So by 23 that player would have burned through all 4 years.
     
    #50

Share This Page