Talk Tennis

Talk Tennis (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php)
-   Junior League & Tournament Talk (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/forumdisplay.php?f=36)
-   -   Usta Regional Tournament Segments (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=359618)

beast22 12-05-2010 01:35 PM

Usta Regional Tournament Segments
 
What are these? Like national opens??? I'm confused

justinmadison 12-05-2010 01:43 PM

They are Level 3 tournaments taking the place of the Copper Bowl, Dunlop etc. They are held 4 times per year with 8 concurrent tournaments of 32 draws.

Players qualify using their national rankings and can plan at any location.

chalkflewup 12-05-2010 03:22 PM

I like it. We needed to reduce the distance traveled for all of these national tournaments. The reduced draw size will reduce the number of early round blowouts as well as shorten the length of time away from home. I see it as a positive adjustment.

justinmadison 12-05-2010 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chalkflewup (Post 5239542)
I like it. We needed to reduce the distance traveled for all of these national tournaments. The reduced draw size will reduce the number of early round blowouts as well as shorten the length of time away from home. I see it as a positive adjustment.

Certainly there are some positive elements to the new plan and I think you hit on the top two.

Just out of curiosity, and I am not trying to infer anything negative by this question, but are you a current junior player playing national tournaments or a parent? I have talked too many of both at tournaments and have not found any support for the changes. I am sure there are some of both who do support the changes. I just have not run into any.

Not trying to start an argument or claiming that my opinion is correct or the only thing that is valid. Just curious.

chalkflewup 12-05-2010 05:12 PM

I'm a parent and I'm OK with disagreements as long as everyone remains respectful. I'm sure there are pros and cons to the changes. I'm just offering my perspective. Thanks.

justinmadison 12-05-2010 05:23 PM

I have wondered if the parents and players in SoCal are not representative of the overall feelings about the changes. I am speculating, but it might be that SoCal had a disproportional number of Level 3 tournaments and easier access to Level 2 tournaments. Anyway, the mood here has not been one of support. At least the effort to eliminate the Easter Bowl failed.

gully 12-06-2010 03:43 AM

I guess we'll see how the year goes. My kid did well enough, I think, to qualify for any of the revised events. But no parent I've talked to is feeling sanguine that their travel will be reduced. Those in the middle tier (ranking of 100-500) feel obligated now to play the level 3s to have a chance to qualify for the L2s -- which certainly was not the case before, as one could often qualify for a Nat. Open with hardly any ranking at all.

SoCal10s 12-06-2010 05:47 AM

I guess the USTA wants everyone to have the experience of real pro or ITF tennis ... lots of traveling and lots of disappointments early.. chasing points at this stage for more kids and parents ... I'm glad I don't have to keep on doing this ... it's a sad life really...
think about it.. Thanksgiving day playing a Nat'l open
Christmas day,traveling to AZ for winter Nats..
the only places I really liked ... Hawaii got canceled and Florida clay is a good summer vacation but my kids hate clay courts tennis..
Kalamazoo is an awesome experience for anyone who loves tennis ,it breathes with excitement ..

hound 109 12-06-2010 06:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by justinmadison (Post 5239361)
They are Level 3 tournaments taking the place of the Copper Bowl, Dunlop etc. They are held 4 times per year with 8 concurrent tournaments of 32 draws.

Players qualify using their national rankings and can plan at any location.

Agree with those above who say that the USTA Regional Tournament Segments basically replace.... & is another name for last year's Level 3 Tournaments.

I definitely like the idea of the Level 3 (& the level 2) tournaments running concurrently. I also like the more "regional" aspect of it. (but jeez.....who selected the out in the middle of nowhere site of Midland TX.....& two months in a row?? ugh)

I don't think i have a problem with lowering the draw size to 32 for the level 3s....since there will be 8 tournaments running concurrently. 8 X 32 = 256


But i'm thinking that the Level 2 tournaments (with only 4 sites running concurrently) are going to see ALOT of great kids left out now that they've reduced the draw size to 32. Especially kids from the stronger sections who could be better than 1/2 the field (at least the on kids who rack up easy national points in weak sections, or sections with easy point systems in place).

Only 128 total kids will be playing on those Level Two tournament weekends. & these will be huge point gathering tournaments (that those left out won't get squat for national points). We'll see how it shakes out after the first L2 tournaments are played in Feb.

awesomexbp 12-06-2010 06:26 PM

hey mr. madison im just guessing jareds your son im good friends with garret... i was looking at next years schedule and didnt see zonals are they taking that out also?

LeftyServe 12-07-2010 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by justinmadison (Post 5239767)
I have wondered if the parents and players in SoCal are not representative of the overall feelings about the changes. I am speculating, but it might be that SoCal had a disproportional number of Level 3 tournaments and easier access to Level 2 tournaments. Anyway, the mood here has not been one of support. At least the effort to eliminate the Easter Bowl failed.

At first glance, the new schedule would seem to disfavor the kids from the stronger/deeper sections like SoCal, Southern, Texas, Florida; that is, sections where the national points available from sectional play might be more difficult to come by...I'm not sure - my kid's almost 11 and just about to embark on his first year of national play so we have no experience with the old schedule.

beast22 12-19-2010 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by justinmadison (Post 5239645)
Certainly there are some positive elements to the new plan and I think you hit on the top two.

Just out of curiosity, and I am not trying to infer anything negative by this question, but are you a current junior player playing national tournaments or a parent? I have talked too many of both at tournaments and have not found any support for the changes. I am sure there are some of both who do support the changes. I just have not run into any.

Not trying to start an argument or claiming that my opinion is correct or the only thing that is valid. Just curious.

I'm a junior, and I like it. In the past, one would have to go to the likes of Arizona, Texas, etc. for L3s, and now I can just drive somewhere (relatively) local.

SoCal10s 12-19-2010 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beast22 (Post 5265662)
I'm a junior, and I like it. In the past, one would have to go to the likes of Arizona, Texas, etc. for L3s, and now I can just drive somewhere (relatively) local.

don't worry your section will be invaded by point chasing rich kids from SoCal.. who can't get into the local ones here..

justinmadison 12-20-2010 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCal10s (Post 5265666)
don't worry your section will be invaded by point chasing rich kids from SoCal.. who can't get into the local ones here..

LOL, so true. Should make for some interesting threads

justinmadison 12-20-2010 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by awesomexbp (Post 5241979)
hey mr. madison im just guessing jareds your son im good friends with garret... i was looking at next years schedule and didnt see zonals are they taking that out also?

Hey, i am Jared's dad.

Zonals are still in.

jmdlaw 12-21-2010 05:48 AM

Won't these changes force better players to play in their sections designated and sectional tournaments? Some in the mid rankings don't play these anymore, they just wait for the Nationals, they may not be able to get in now forcing them to play locally. This would provide for better tennis locally and/or make those more difficult to get into. My kids aren't old enough or ranked high enough to get into the Nationals anyway so I'm still deciding if I like the changes. Would like input on this thought from other players and parents. Thanks.

BSPE84 12-21-2010 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by justinmadison (Post 5239767)
I have wondered if the parents and players in SoCal are not representative of the overall feelings about the changes. I am speculating, but it might be that SoCal had a disproportional number of Level 3 tournaments and easier access to Level 2 tournaments. Anyway, the mood here has not been one of support. At least the effort to eliminate the Easter Bowl failed.

JM, I remember talking to you about the change in Long Beach back in July. At the time, I was not in favor of it. Now that I see that there are actually TWO level 3's in January within reasonable travel distance (Vegas and Tucson), I'm not so sure the change will be that big of a deal. Any kid on the West Coast with a reasonable ranking should be able to get into either one of those. And unless he goes really deep, he can conceivably finish the tourney Sunday and make it back to school the next day. This I believe was a stated goal of the USTA - which I support, assuming the weather cooperates of course!

BTW, CA Bowl officially canceled - and no mention of refund.

justinmadison 12-21-2010 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BSPE84 (Post 5268031)
JM, I remember talking to you about the change in Long Beach back in July. At the time, I was not in favor of it. Now that I see that there are actually TWO level 3's in January within reasonable travel distance (Vegas and Tucson), I'm not so sure the change will be that big of a deal. Any kid on the West Coast with a reasonable ranking should be able to get into either one of those. And unless he goes really deep, he can conceivably finish the tourney Sunday and make it back to school the next day. This I believe was a stated goal of the USTA - which I support, assuming the weather cooperates of course!

BTW, CA Bowl officially canceled - and no mention of refund.

I am definitely spoiled at this point. Vegas is 6 hours for me with no traffic, LOL, more like 8. Tucson is 10. Entry will not be a problem until after July, and then entry is less of a problem then ability to win matches. :)

Looking at the California Bowl you had to have a b16s ranking above 509 to get in. My guess is it will take above 200 for L3ís next year. What is your guess?

BSPE84 12-21-2010 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by justinmadison (Post 5268105)
I am definitely spoiled at this point. Vegas is 6 hours for me with no traffic, LOL, more like 8. Tucson is 10. Entry will not be a problem until after July, and then entry is less of a problem then ability to win matches. :)

Looking at the California Bowl you had to have a b16s ranking above 509 to get in. My guess is it will take above 200 for L3ís next year. What is your guess?

JM, if you think about it in the context of the Copper Bowl last year, now you have another choice that's somewhat closer in Vegas... Still 64 kids playing between the two sites closest to us.

Don't follow the 16's much but it seems to me that your math is on target ... My son got in Winter Nats ranked 261 (10th alternate) so 8 tournaments (256 kids total vs. 128 for WN) would give a target of around 500 to qualify. At any one site, it seems to me that a kid close to the median ranking of 250 would have a good shot to get in. FWIW.

gully 01-01-2011 06:04 AM

It'll be interesting to see if the changes have the desired effects. I haven't looked at all of the segments, but just glancing at the Kansas City G18s, most of the applicants are from the *******, Northern, and Missouri Valley sections, but more than a third are from the others, many of them from the east and west coasts.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:32 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2006 - Tennis Warehouse