View Single Post
Old 02-09-2012, 12:03 PM   #10
JRstriker12
Hall Of Fame
 
JRstriker12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,353
Send a message via Yahoo to JRstriker12
Default

Thanks for the input AQ. Interesting thoughts.

Yeah, the announcement seemed to be missing details and it's all really strange.

I'm assuming that when they say VA is 57%, they mean people who are registered/live in VA are 57%. IIRC, I don't have to have have a USTA membership in DC to play DC.

I'm also assuming that since they want to limit the vote of any single district, maybe the vote is proportional to membership - thus VA gets more say because they have a larger membership pool.

As for playing in other districts, I'm all for giving players more opportunities to play as long as they pay. (FYI - I played and won a 3.5 singles tourney in DC. It was fun.) I would also think that paying the league fees in that district even if you come from another state would help the district you play in.

What I wouldn't want to see is where out of state teams dominate or take over a local league.

Honestly I guess this is all inside politics that wont impact most players, but I wouldn't want to see some sort of policy or rules implemented that my limit my playing opportunities to help a smaller district with less players (not that is what's happening... just hypothetically).

Also, USTA is ********... when is the last time you sent a letter? They should provide and email or a online form for player input/feedback. If they want verification, ask for your USTA number.... SMH!

Topaz - are you serious? You need about 4 teams to play 2x a week? I joined two teams and seemed like I have more tennis than I knew what to do with... but then again I was also had tennis sessions set up at FRC too.
__________________
Ludacris: My chick bad! Tell me if you seen her. She always brings the racket like Venus and Serena!
JRstriker12 is offline   Reply With Quote