View Single Post
Old 08-05-2010, 06:39 PM   #6
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 449

Originally Posted by klu375 View Post
L3 National tournaments are not the "highest level". L2s and L3s with 64 draw sizes are now used extensively by the rich point chasers to beef up the national ranking with the hope to be seeded at the follow-up events. Do you know if USTA will start awarding more National points for the local events - then the whole thing will make more sense. The problem is that in the weaker sections kids are playing against the same competition all the time. I guess it is not a problem in the Southern section that probably should be split anyway. And kids in the stronger sections will have harder time qualifying for the SuperNats.
I know L3 tournaments are not the “highest level” I did not say that nor did I mean to imply that.

I think we worry too much about point chasers. If a kid is not good enough to beat good players that problem will work itself out in the long run.

The USTA is not going to change the points tables for section tournaments. From what I have seen I am not sure it would be a good idea to give out more points for section play. It would seem to favor the weaker section players and award points for beating lower ranked players. Just go to tennis recruiting and look at the section play and how kids will win section tournaments playing kids that are ranked lower than 450 in their graduating class.

In my opinion one of the ways to help kids improve is to have them play the highest level of competition in which they can be successful. If you are in a weaker section you need national tournaments to find better competition. If you are in a strong section you need national tournaments to give you a chance to get points by beating the top kids from a weaker section.

All in all, more tennis at a high level is good for juniors. Less tennis at a high level is bad for juniors. The point chasing and the monetary problems are bad but limiting competition is worse.
justinmadison is offline