Reconsideration of USTA Junior Competition Changes - Page 3

tennis5 · 09-23-2012, 02:47 PM

Has anyone read the letter that the USTA lawyers wrote.........

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0By9s.../preview?pli=1

I tried to copy it in here, but guess what, this letter can not be copied.

Statements like,

"There has been no representation, implicit or explicit, that changes will be made."

make we wonder if there will be anything changed back that will be meaningful....

HIGH-TECH TENNIS · 09-24-2012, 10:03 AM

Raise your hand if you're surprised...

10s4US · 09-24-2012, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tennis5

Has anyone read the letter that the USTA lawyers wrote.........

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0By9s.../preview?pli=1

I tried to copy it in here, but guess what, this letter can not be copied.

Statements like,

"There has been no representation, implicit or explicit, that changes will be made."

make we wonder if there will be anything changed back that will be meaningful....

For full context....
The letter from USTA execs, current chair and incoming chair to Jr Committee
continues.......

"However it is certainly possible modifications may be appropriate and or that parts of the schedule of implementation may need to be adjusted.
The goal of everyone is to work towards a system which we can align behind as we look to the future with many times the #'s of participants as we have today."

So here the USTA execs are positioning that there are no changes that will be made(guaranteed)or(committed to yet)
However "Modifications" might be appropriate
and or parts of "schedule of implementation" an opening for timeline "pause"

They are positively acknowledging the universal goal of a system where we can support a future of more participation than today.

So the # of nat'l opportunities charts were and are being heaviliy considered
and is a primary centerpoint.

hound 109 · 09-27-2012, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alohajrtennis

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.

I agree with this.

(my only other major beef is the arbitrary "regional" tournaments which prevent my kid from competing in Little Rock (6 hours away but in a different region) & instead playing in Minn or Ohio (which are IN our goofy arbitrary region).

Alohajrtennis · 09-27-2012, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hound 109

I agree with this.

(my only other major beef is the arbitrary "regional" tournaments which prevent my kid from competing in Little Rock (6 hours away but in a different region) & instead playing in Minn or Ohio (which are IN our goofy arbitrary region).

True. If they are going to stay with the principle of you have to play within your own region, I think they need a minimum of six regions(3 sections per region except one 2 section region), or preferably eight(2 sections per region except two that have three sections. Then they can keep the 'principle' of advancing from section to region to national, but with more regions you can make some geographical sense, although there will always be cases of people who live on the 'edge' of ther region. The same thing happens now with sections.

tennis5 · 09-28-2012, 11:40 AM

THIS IS A LETTER ON ZOO TENNIS....

( Is JB really PMac?)

JB said...
This is my first attempt to “blog” so please excuse me if I make do not write in the correct format. I have been involved with this issue for many years--as a director of a junior academy, as an NCAA Division One coach, and as a tournament director for a National Championship. I am not yet a parent of a national junior, but I am a parent and I understand the passion we all feel in regards to our kids. So, in other words, I feel I have a good grasp of the issues surrounding this proposed schedule and I would like to throw in a few thoughts:

1. Some of the postings I have read have acted as if the USTA didn’t ask for or listen to parents, coaches and players before they came up with this proposal. That is 100% untrue! There have been taskforces, committees, town hall meetings & open forums, etc. for over 10 years regarding the tournament structure.

2. I think everyone realizes that the tournament system is not efficient and it is not producing the number and quality of top players that all of us would like to see. When 90% of the USTA’s operating revenue comes from the US Open and top Americans sell tickets & sponsorships, this is important!

3. The USTA, whether you like them or not, is the governing body of our sport. Everything they do is to promote the sport and to grow the sport. Nobody on the staff or on USTA committees is trying to force decisions, they are simply trying to make the system better!

4. Lastly, unless something changes with the USTA bylaws and structure, this new tournament proposal can’t be “paused” or thrown out. There might be ways to slow the implementation or to alter a few things, but instead of trying to get this stopped, why don’t we all try and add some constructive comments and build a new tournament structure that will produce results!

My quick thoughts for improvement of the structure are as follows:

1. The best argument for keeping the 192 draw can be made for the 18’s. These kids have grown up with the current structure and it is wrong to change it on them in their last year of juniors. Plus, college coaches need to have an opportunity to watch players compete, and the National Championships have always been their best place to do that. So, leave the Boys and Girls 18’s as is for now.

2. For all of the other National Championships, keep the 128 draw. There needs to be consistency throughout all of the age divisions, eventually even the 12’s. If the 10 and Under initiative that the USTA is championing works, then they are going to need 128 draws in the 12’s in the near future.

3. The idea of a qualifying tournament, to me, does not make a lot of sense. It is just keeping the same format and calling it something different. With the new structure, Sectional Championships will qualify one player and then each Section can decide how to distribute their other quota spots. If a Section would like to hold a qualifier then they can, but we don’t need to have players flying in to these National Championships for a chance of qualifying.

4. On the Winter Nationals, I agree. There has always been a national tournament that time of year and there is no reason not to offer something when kids are out of school. I like USTA team event concept, so keep that, but then run the Winter Nationals for the others.

5. Having 6, or even 8 regions I agree makes more sense. Kids need to have opportunities to compete against players outside of their section but shouldn’t have to travel so far to do it. And make these Regionals a big deal, so kids feel as if they are playing a National event!

Lastly, we need to all step back and look at the big picture here. We all want the same thing. For one reason or another, we love the sport of tennis, we love the positive impact it has had on us and our kids, and we want our kids to have the best opportunity to succeed! Let’s all agree on that and have some positive exchanges of ideas!

Mitch Bridge · 09-30-2012, 11:30 AM

1. Some of the postings I have read have acted as if the USTA didn’t ask for or listen to parents, coaches and players before they came up with this proposal. That is 100% untrue! There have been taskforces, committees, town hall meetings & open forums, etc. for over 10 years regarding the tournament structure.

2. I think everyone realizes that the tournament system is not efficient and it is not producing the number and quality of top players that all of us would like to see. When 90% of the USTA’s operating revenue comes from the US Open and top Americans sell tickets & sponsorships, this is important!

3. The USTA, whether you like them or not, is the governing body of our sport. Everything they do is to promote the sport and to grow the sport. Nobody on the staff or on USTA committees is trying to force decisions, they are simply trying to make the system better!

Comment on #1. I have traveled extensively with tournament kids locally, sectionally and nationally for 20 years. I have taught over 100 nationally ranked kids and been to 20+ tournaments a year. I have raised two sons that have played extensively all over the US, and I heard of these changes only after they were finalized. It had to be very secretive for me to not have heard ANYTHING about these changes talking endlessly to parents, coaches, officials and players in the states that we competed in: California, Nevada, Colorado, Arizona, Texas, South Carolina, Florida, Utah, Idaho, Illinois, Michigan, New Mexico, South Dakota, Alabama, DC, and others I am sure.

#2. Tournament systems aren't here to produce top champions at a national level. The tournament system that was in place did a much better job at giving young juniors a system to compete in that put the US kids back on track with the top tennis countries by eliminating the start system. This doubled the amount of matches kids played by chasing points, which is how the pros and ITF systems are set up. The US needs top players, but in the men's game we don't attract top athletes, so we won't have top players until we can steal some talent from football and basketball. More Americans will watch with more American men stars, but the Open is gaining in success year over year, so we still watch the stars even if they are European. Tennis is the 5th largest viewing sport in US and 4th globally, so we are in the right game!

#3. It appears that board members are trying to put their STAMP on significant changes in the tournament system that they are not incredibly familiar with. There can be a grandiose mentality of helping a problem-in this case "save US tennis-by creating even bigger problems by not being in touch with your subject matter on a daily basis.

treeman10 · 09-30-2012, 12:49 PM

[--------------------

tennis5 · 10-05-2012, 04:29 PM

Open Letter to the United States Tennis Industry:

http://tennisinsiders.com/?post_type...d_story&p=1323

As many of you know, significant changes were made to the USTA National Junior Tennis Tournament schedule earlier this year, changes that are scheduled for implementation in the near term. As you likely know, those changes were not enthusiastically received by many constituencies within the US tennis industry and a large group of people from various sectors of the American tennis world, both USTA and non-USTA, have come together to discuss these changes.

Last month, various industry executives representing this group met with USTA executives on numerous occasions to reexamine the changes. The USTA and its Junior Competition Committee invested a significant amount of time, money and effort into their plan and were gracious to allow these meetings to take place. Despite the large investment to get the plan designed and approved, these top USTA Executives were truly concerned with making sure that people from the tennis industry at large were heard and their opinions were vetted.

While these discussions were going on, we asked those in the tennis industry who were frustrated by the changes to hold off on the public negativity that had become commonplace. That ”pause period” ends today, but, unfortunately, the discussions with the USTA are still not complete. Both sides have worked in earnest during this time period and although there is nothing to report in terms of a pausing the changes to the national tournament calendar or any amendments to the plan, both sides have agreed to meet again in person in Chicago on October 21st. That meeting will involve a group of the top executives of the USTA and some of the signatories to this letter, a diverse group of “tennis people” who have been involved for months in these discussions and who are dedicated to doing their best to represent the many opinions that exist.

We believe that the management of the USTA truly wants what’s best for tennis and for kids who play competitively. We therefore respectfully request that this pause in speaking negatively about the changes, the USTA and the Junior Competition Committee continue. Of course, we live in a free country, but we truly believe that headway is being made and that it is in the best interests of tennis for everyone to be patient. We believe that by the beginning of November we will have something to share, whether that may be a “pause” to the changes, an amendment to the approved plan or an effort to reach out to a larger constituency to further discuss the future of junior tennis competition in the United States.

We understand that many of you may feel compelled to take action because this has been such a sensitive matter for so many, for so long. We thank you in advance for listening and for being patient as we try to help make sure the industry at large is heard in the matter. If there is anything we have learned during this process, it is that everyone seems to have the best interests of the game in mind; it is just that sincere opinions differ on the best solutions.

Sincerely,

Steve Bellamy

Kevin Kempin

Robert Sasseville

Sean Hannity

Antonio Mora

ZOO TENNIS: ( Letter above cited below in Zoo article).

http://tenniskalamazoo.blogspot.com/

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 5, 2012
Update on USTA Junior Competition Changes

The "pause button" that has been discussed regarding the USTA Junior Competition changes passed last March is still a possibility, but there is no official word from the USTA about any specific alterations after the two-week period mentioned in the initial release from the tennis industry group leading the discussion with the USTA.

Steve Bellamy, the founder of the Tennis Channel and parent of four junior players, has been among those discussing the changes, and he asked me to pass along this update, which includes another USTA meeting date later this month, in this signed letter on the Tennis Insiders website.

Bellamy added:

"The USTA went through a lot to decide on this new format and we are appreciative and respect the amount of time and energy they put into this," he said. "But not everyone is going to agree on everything and there were a significant amount of players, parents, coaches, tournament directors, officials, agents, tennis media and tennis insiders in the US tennis industry who were ardently opposed to the changes.

An unhealthy paradigm started to evolve so Kevin, myself and a few others with existing relationships at the USTA volunteered to broker discussions to see if the shared perspectives from all the constituencies in tennis could not be more included in the final outcome for the kids. We are a fragmented industry with diverse opinion. USTA Executives have been incredibly respectful to listen to the industry at large balanced against respecting all the time and effort that went into their plan. Looking forward to the 21st."

09-23-2012, 02:47 PM	#41
tennis5 Professional Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 1,261	Don't pop the champagne yet........ Has anyone read the letter that the USTA lawyers wrote......... https://docs.google.com/file/d/0By9s.../preview?pli=1 I tried to copy it in here, but guess what, this letter can not be copied. Statements like, "There has been no representation, implicit or explicit, that changes will be made." make we wonder if there will be anything changed back that will be meaningful.... Last edited by tennis5 : 09-23-2012 at 02:51 PM.

09-28-2012, 11:40 AM	#46
tennis5 Professional Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 1,261	Foreshadowing of what is to come? THIS IS A LETTER ON ZOO TENNIS.... ( Is JB really PMac?) JB said... This is my first attempt to “blog” so please excuse me if I make do not write in the correct format. I have been involved with this issue for many years--as a director of a junior academy, as an NCAA Division One coach, and as a tournament director for a National Championship. I am not yet a parent of a national junior, but I am a parent and I understand the passion we all feel in regards to our kids. So, in other words, I feel I have a good grasp of the issues surrounding this proposed schedule and I would like to throw in a few thoughts: 1. Some of the postings I have read have acted as if the USTA didn’t ask for or listen to parents, coaches and players before they came up with this proposal. That is 100% untrue! There have been taskforces, committees, town hall meetings & open forums, etc. for over 10 years regarding the tournament structure. 2. I think everyone realizes that the tournament system is not efficient and it is not producing the number and quality of top players that all of us would like to see. When 90% of the USTA’s operating revenue comes from the US Open and top Americans sell tickets & sponsorships, this is important! 3. The USTA, whether you like them or not, is the governing body of our sport. Everything they do is to promote the sport and to grow the sport. Nobody on the staff or on USTA committees is trying to force decisions, they are simply trying to make the system better! 4. Lastly, unless something changes with the USTA bylaws and structure, this new tournament proposal can’t be “paused” or thrown out. There might be ways to slow the implementation or to alter a few things, but instead of trying to get this stopped, why don’t we all try and add some constructive comments and build a new tournament structure that will produce results! My quick thoughts for improvement of the structure are as follows: 1. The best argument for keeping the 192 draw can be made for the 18’s. These kids have grown up with the current structure and it is wrong to change it on them in their last year of juniors. Plus, college coaches need to have an opportunity to watch players compete, and the National Championships have always been their best place to do that. So, leave the Boys and Girls 18’s as is for now. 2. For all of the other National Championships, keep the 128 draw. There needs to be consistency throughout all of the age divisions, eventually even the 12’s. If the 10 and Under initiative that the USTA is championing works, then they are going to need 128 draws in the 12’s in the near future. 3. The idea of a qualifying tournament, to me, does not make a lot of sense. It is just keeping the same format and calling it something different. With the new structure, Sectional Championships will qualify one player and then each Section can decide how to distribute their other quota spots. If a Section would like to hold a qualifier then they can, but we don’t need to have players flying in to these National Championships for a chance of qualifying. 4. On the Winter Nationals, I agree. There has always been a national tournament that time of year and there is no reason not to offer something when kids are out of school. I like USTA team event concept, so keep that, but then run the Winter Nationals for the others. 5. Having 6, or even 8 regions I agree makes more sense. Kids need to have opportunities to compete against players outside of their section but shouldn’t have to travel so far to do it. And make these Regionals a big deal, so kids feel as if they are playing a National event! Lastly, we need to all step back and look at the big picture here. We all want the same thing. For one reason or another, we love the sport of tennis, we love the positive impact it has had on us and our kids, and we want our kids to have the best opportunity to succeed! Let’s all agree on that and have some positive exchanges of ideas! Last edited by tennis5 : 09-28-2012 at 11:42 AM.

09-30-2012, 11:30 AM	#47
Mitch Bridge Rookie Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Irvine, CA Posts: 143	1. Some of the postings I have read have acted as if the USTA didn’t ask for or listen to parents, coaches and players before they came up with this proposal. That is 100% untrue! There have been taskforces, committees, town hall meetings & open forums, etc. for over 10 years regarding the tournament structure. 2. I think everyone realizes that the tournament system is not efficient and it is not producing the number and quality of top players that all of us would like to see. When 90% of the USTA’s operating revenue comes from the US Open and top Americans sell tickets & sponsorships, this is important! 3. The USTA, whether you like them or not, is the governing body of our sport. Everything they do is to promote the sport and to grow the sport. Nobody on the staff or on USTA committees is trying to force decisions, they are simply trying to make the system better! Comment on #1. I have traveled extensively with tournament kids locally, sectionally and nationally for 20 years. I have taught over 100 nationally ranked kids and been to 20+ tournaments a year. I have raised two sons that have played extensively all over the US, and I heard of these changes only after they were finalized. It had to be very secretive for me to not have heard ANYTHING about these changes talking endlessly to parents, coaches, officials and players in the states that we competed in: California, Nevada, Colorado, Arizona, Texas, South Carolina, Florida, Utah, Idaho, Illinois, Michigan, New Mexico, South Dakota, Alabama, DC, and others I am sure. #2. Tournament systems aren't here to produce top champions at a national level. The tournament system that was in place did a much better job at giving young juniors a system to compete in that put the US kids back on track with the top tennis countries by eliminating the start system. This doubled the amount of matches kids played by chasing points, which is how the pros and ITF systems are set up. The US needs top players, but in the men's game we don't attract top athletes, so we won't have top players until we can steal some talent from football and basketball. More Americans will watch with more American men stars, but the Open is gaining in success year over year, so we still watch the stars even if they are European. Tennis is the 5th largest viewing sport in US and 4th globally, so we are in the right game! #3. It appears that board members are trying to put their STAMP on significant changes in the tournament system that they are not incredibly familiar with. There can be a grandiose mentality of helping a problem-in this case "save US tennis-by creating even bigger problems by not being in touch with your subject matter on a daily basis. __________________ Director/Head-Coach Southern California Tennis Academy

09-30-2012, 12:49 PM	#48
treeman10 Semi-Pro Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 514	[-------------------- Last edited by treeman10 : 10-25-2012 at 12:45 PM.

10-05-2012, 04:29 PM	#49
tennis5 Professional Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 1,261	Latest Update: Open Letter to the United States Tennis Industry: http://tennisinsiders.com/?post_type...d_story&p=1323 As many of you know, significant changes were made to the USTA National Junior Tennis Tournament schedule earlier this year, changes that are scheduled for implementation in the near term. As you likely know, those changes were not enthusiastically received by many constituencies within the US tennis industry and a large group of people from various sectors of the American tennis world, both USTA and non-USTA, have come together to discuss these changes. Last month, various industry executives representing this group met with USTA executives on numerous occasions to reexamine the changes. The USTA and its Junior Competition Committee invested a significant amount of time, money and effort into their plan and were gracious to allow these meetings to take place. Despite the large investment to get the plan designed and approved, these top USTA Executives were truly concerned with making sure that people from the tennis industry at large were heard and their opinions were vetted. While these discussions were going on, we asked those in the tennis industry who were frustrated by the changes to hold off on the public negativity that had become commonplace. That ”pause period” ends today, but, unfortunately, the discussions with the USTA are still not complete. Both sides have worked in earnest during this time period and although there is nothing to report in terms of a pausing the changes to the national tournament calendar or any amendments to the plan, both sides have agreed to meet again in person in Chicago on October 21st. That meeting will involve a group of the top executives of the USTA and some of the signatories to this letter, a diverse group of “tennis people” who have been involved for months in these discussions and who are dedicated to doing their best to represent the many opinions that exist. We believe that the management of the USTA truly wants what’s best for tennis and for kids who play competitively. We therefore respectfully request that this pause in speaking negatively about the changes, the USTA and the Junior Competition Committee continue. Of course, we live in a free country, but we truly believe that headway is being made and that it is in the best interests of tennis for everyone to be patient. We believe that by the beginning of November we will have something to share, whether that may be a “pause” to the changes, an amendment to the approved plan or an effort to reach out to a larger constituency to further discuss the future of junior tennis competition in the United States. We understand that many of you may feel compelled to take action because this has been such a sensitive matter for so many, for so long. We thank you in advance for listening and for being patient as we try to help make sure the industry at large is heard in the matter. If there is anything we have learned during this process, it is that everyone seems to have the best interests of the game in mind; it is just that sincere opinions differ on the best solutions. Sincerely, Steve Bellamy Kevin Kempin Robert Sasseville Sean Hannity Antonio Mora ZOO TENNIS: ( Letter above cited below in Zoo article). http://tenniskalamazoo.blogspot.com/ FRIDAY, OCTOBER 5, 2012 Update on USTA Junior Competition Changes The "pause button" that has been discussed regarding the USTA Junior Competition changes passed last March is still a possibility, but there is no official word from the USTA about any specific alterations after the two-week period mentioned in the initial release from the tennis industry group leading the discussion with the USTA. Steve Bellamy, the founder of the Tennis Channel and parent of four junior players, has been among those discussing the changes, and he asked me to pass along this update, which includes another USTA meeting date later this month, in this signed letter on the Tennis Insiders website. Bellamy added: "The USTA went through a lot to decide on this new format and we are appreciative and respect the amount of time and energy they put into this," he said. "But not everyone is going to agree on everything and there were a significant amount of players, parents, coaches, tournament directors, officials, agents, tennis media and tennis insiders in the US tennis industry who were ardently opposed to the changes. An unhealthy paradigm started to evolve so Kevin, myself and a few others with existing relationships at the USTA volunteered to broker discussions to see if the shared perspectives from all the constituencies in tennis could not be more included in the final outcome for the kids. We are a fragmented industry with diverse opinion. USTA Executives have been incredibly respectful to listen to the industry at large balanced against respecting all the time and effort that went into their plan. Looking forward to the 21st." Last edited by tennis5 : 10-05-2012 at 04:32 PM.