View Single Post
Old 09-21-2012, 01:54 PM   #34
10s4US
New User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 28
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alohajrtennis View Post
I agree.

I think most of the objections to the changes revolve around couple areas, such as,

The draw sizes are just too small. Increase the draw sizes. Recognize that all ranking systems are imperfect, that there are inequities between sections, etc., so err on inclusivity not exclusivity. You shouldn't have to be best player in a three state area to got to to the next level.

Acknowledge the birth day problem. All Levels 1 are in summer now, except for the elite tea parties. Let them have there tea parties, but bring back winter nationals, or keep Easter bowl as full size event, not an elite 32 event.
Yes,
Follow the USTA mission statement to grow the game of tennis
Give everyone a chance to compete at multi levels, nationally as well, fairly
by earning it.
The existing structure is OK and can be improved by going back to 64 draw Nat opens or do qualiies for
or use Level 4's or 3's for qualies or way back to qualifying locally
Ther are Good New ideas moving forward such as sweet 16's, masters, and add training workshops for more kids than just the elite elite, increasing sectional quotas within section strength factors, fine but utilize reasonable wild card #'s and factors with specific accountable guidelines based on his level like the kid is a succcessful highly ranked ITF player doing only a few NAts/locals now or was injured and top ranked before, top ranked in lower age playing up etc which is the current criteria..,
In general try a few new adjustements without drastically limiting nat'l opportunities. Let our kids play.
10s4US is offline