NEW USTA League Structure

jchamilt · Dec 28, 2011

Today I received an email with an explanation of the New USTA League Structure. I have heard rumors about this, and now that I can read the supposed explanation, I have a lot of questions, I feel this is the best place to get answers and have a discussion. You might think I should pose my questions to someone at the USTA, but my experience is they do not bother to answer specific questions that ask what was your thinking in doing this. You will see that when I quote from the email I got that their thinking does NOT make any sense. It reminds me of reading the book 1984 by George Orwell, a novel about a society (USTA League Players) in a repressive and controlled state (USTA), often under the guise of being a utopian society.

The NEW structure in the email divides the age groups into:
1) Adult 18 to 39
2) 40 to 54
3) 55 and over

The OLD structure was:
Adult 18 to 49
Senior 50 & over
Super Senior 60 & over

Let me quote some of the explanation for the change and why I do not think it makes sense. Also I would like to hear others think on this subject and if anyone was asked by the USTA what they thought about the change.

Quoting from the email "Gone will be the monikers "Senior" (50 & over) and "Super Senior (60 & over), replaced instead with more representative groups." Just to focus in on this last sentence, How does having most of the current Senior players (50 & over) now playing with playing with players 40 to 49 make this group "more representative groups."? Why do we have age groupings?

A similar questions is how does having current Super Senior (60 & over) playing with those 50 to 54 "more representative..."

Another quote from the email "We all know the adage, 'If it ain't broken, don't fix it.'" says David Schobel, Director, Competitive Tennis, USTA. Also we didn't want to stand pat, and miss an opportunity to make a great league even better -- and grow the sport of tennis in the process."

It is not clear to me how this will grow the sport of tennis in the process. Do those Seniors 50 to 54 want to play in a league with players 40 to 49? The same goes to those Super Seniors. Do Super Seniors (60 & over) want to play with players 55 to 59?

I honestly feel this is a solution looking for a problem. Those in the know, please explain to me how this grows the game and why these new groups are more representative. If more representative means having no age groups or larger age groups, I do not feel that is the way to grow the game.

storypeddler · Dec 28, 2011

Well, I see your point, but there is another side to be considered, too. The way it was, the inequities were equally as great for players who were early middle-aged. For example, if you were a singles player, until you hit the seniors at age 50, every year you were playing younger and younger studs who were (usually) stronger and faster and quicker, etc. I have often seen league teams where #1 singles featured a man 46 or 48 years of age trying to play against some guy about 21. Yes, NTRP ratings should mean if they are both 4.0, then the match is an equal one, right? But clearly it doesn't. All that means is that WHEN THE MATCH BEGINS these two guys are playing roughly at the same level. But check out how they are performing an hour and 45 minutes into the match. An NTRP rating measures basic skills and ability but has nothing factored into it to account for age differences and how that affects endurance, athleticism, etc. I would think that now, with the bottom age division being pared down some (ages 18-39), there is far greater likelihood for matches to be decided based on play and not simply wear and tear due to age. Point is, within ANY NTRP division, there are few 50-year-olds who can consistently hang with 20-year-olds who have the same level of talent. That 30 years is just too much edge to give away. Think the intent here was to try to even up the size of the age divisions a little. I like the idea. Better for a 61-year-old to play against 57-year-olds than for a 48-year-old to be playing against 19 and 20-year-olds.

OrangePower · Dec 28, 2011

jchamilt said:
It reminds me of reading the book 1984 by George Orwell, a novel about a society (USTA League Players) in a repressive and controlled state (USTA), often under the guise of being a utopian society.

Eh, I think that analogy might be just a tad over the top

Early in the year, USTA conducted a major survey of USTA league players to canvass opinions. There was discussion about it on the board back then - do a search. Some of the questions were specifically about where the age boundaries should be set and whether the senior league should include singles.

Now let's look at the real impact of the change and who it affects:

(a) 60 yo and over players still get to have a doubles-only league, except that now 55-59 yo players can play in it also. No big deal.

(b) Players from 55-59 still have a doubles-only league they can participate in. It also includes players 60 and over. This is no difference from before (since 60 and over player were always allowed to play in regular senior league, and most of them did).

(c) Players from 50-54 are the only group who are potentially impacted negatively. They can no longer play with the 'older' crowd and now have to compete against 40 yo players. Maybe for a few this is a problem. However, from my experience, most 50-54 yo players actually play in regular adult league as well, and so playing 40 year olds is not going to be an issue. On the plus side, they now have an opportunity to play singles in the 40+ league.

(d) Players from 40-49 now have another league they can play in, in addition to regular adult. This is where the real gains come in, when USTA talks about growing leagues. Think about how many players fall into this age group, and now think of them playing two leagues each rather than just one. In addition, these players can now get some playing time at singles (whereas it's hard for older guys to get singles matches in regular adult, where many of the singles players are younger).

All in all I think these changes are very positive and will yield a net increase in league participation.

catfish · Dec 29, 2011

OP, Who sent you the email? USTA National? District Leagues Administrator? Local Coordinator?

dizzlmcwizzl · Dec 29, 2011

jchamilt said:
Quoting from the email "Gone will be the monikers "Senior" (50 & over) and "Super Senior (60 & over), replaced instead with more representative groups." Just to focus in on this last sentence, How does having most of the current Senior players (50 & over) now playing with playing with players 40 to 49 make this group "more representative groups."? Why do we have age groupings?

A similar questions is how does having current Super Senior (60 & over) playing with those 50 to 54 "more representative..."

The only thing they are claiming is more representative is the naming of the groups. Calling the group the 40+ age group identifies these folks better than calling them all seniors.

The reason we have and / or need age groupings is two fold ...

1) Give the USTA the ability to collect more money
2) Provide more painless opportunities for us to play ... because if you are a 65 year old guy that only likes playing line 1 singles against former college players you can still do that. But you also have the chance to play singles against 40 year old weekend warriors or dubs with similar aged guys.

dizzlmcwizzl · Dec 29, 2011

I like the new age alignments. I am 43 so next year I will get to play in the 40+ age group. This will be good for me as I will get to play more often and against players with the same aches and pains as I have.

However, it occurs to me that having watched my friends play seniors for a couple years that in the senior group there is very little sandbagging. Essentially it is my belief that by the age of 50 self rates are not around and the matches are more consistently even. In the last two years I went to sectionals to finish as the best team without out-of-range self-rated players. I am hoping that this will give me a better chance at moving on to the national championships since I am well past sandbagging as a self rate.

dizzlmcwizzl · Dec 29, 2011

catfish said:
OP, Who sent you the email? USTA National? District Leagues Administrator? Local Coordinator?

This is essentially the e-mail information.

AR15 · Dec 29, 2011

As a fit, 50 year old, I think I will like the change. I will often play singles on my teams, and no longer having to play 24 year olds will be nice.

On the flip side, with the old system, I think 50 was to young to be playing "seniors" or to be called a "senior". The word "senior" should be reserved for people drawing Social Security, or 65 and older.

catfish · Dec 29, 2011

dizzlmcwizzl said:
This is essentially the e-mail information.

Right. I have seen the information on the USTA website, but I was curious who sent the OP the email.

AR15 · Dec 29, 2011

catfish said:
Right. I have seen the information on the USTA website, but I was curious who sent the OP the email.

I received a USTA email yesterday, that had a link for the new changes. It was one of the emails you constantly get when your on the USTA mailing list.

catfish · Dec 29, 2011

AR15 said:
I received a USTA email yesterday, that had a link for the new changes. It was one of the emails you constantly get when your on the USTA mailing list.

Oh, OK. Thanks for the info. I haven't gotten anything yet. I'm sure I will soon. Our section has not given much information about the re-structuring. They will be giving additional information to Districts and Local coordinators in late Jan or Feb.

Jon Hampton · Dec 29, 2011

I'm disappointed by the new structure. I live in a city where the people who play tennis are older ( between 35 and 60 ) and I am younger ( 28 ). Now I'll either have to convince my older buddies to play down a division so I can play, or I'm done with USTA until the rules change.

Additionally, there is a huge difference between an 18 year old and someone in their later thirties. I'd like to see an:

1. 18 to 29 division (young adult)
2. 30 to 49 division (adult)
3. 50-59 division (senior)
4. 60+ division (super senior)

Thoughts anyone?

Nostradamus · Dec 29, 2011

OrangePower said:
Eh, I think that analogy might be just a tad over the top

Early in the year, USTA conducted a major survey of USTA league players to canvass opinions. There was discussion about it on the board back then - do a search. Some of the questions were specifically about where the age boundaries should be set and whether the senior league should include singles.

Now let's look at the real impact of the change and who it affects:

(a) 60 yo and over players still get to have a doubles-only league, except that now 55-59 yo players can play in it also. No big deal.

(b) Players from 55-59 still have a doubles-only league they can participate in. It also includes players 60 and over. This is no difference from before (since 60 and over player were always allowed to play in regular senior league, and most of them did).

(c) Players from 50-54 are the only group who are potentially impacted negatively. They can no longer play with the 'older' crowd and now have to compete against 40 yo players. Maybe for a few this is a problem. However, from my experience, most 50-54 yo players actually play in regular adult league as well, and so playing 40 year olds is not going to be an issue. On the plus side, they now have an opportunity to play singles in the 40+ league.

(d) Players from 40-49 now have another league they can play in, in addition to regular adult. This is where the real gains come in, when USTA talks about growing leagues. Think about how many players fall into this age group, and now think of them playing two leagues each rather than just one. In addition, these players can now get some playing time at singles (whereas it's hard for older guys to get singles matches in regular adult, where many of the singles players are younger).

All in all I think these changes are very positive and will yield a net increase in league participation.

Many guys in 40-49 actually wants to play doubles only. so actually, this is not a good thing. They may have problems finding singles players in this league.

Nostradamus · Dec 29, 2011

Just one other thing, is there really enough players to make this work ?

dizzlmcwizzl · Dec 29, 2011

Jon Hampton said:
I'm disappointed by the new structure. I live in a city where the people who play tennis are older ( between 35 and 60 ) and I am younger ( 28 ). Now I'll either have to convince my older buddies to play down a division so I can play, or I'm done with USTA until the rules change.

As an aside around here ... almost every person that plays seniors (50 +) also plays adult tennis. With the age re-alignment I expect nothing to change I expect more people playing in both leagues.

Nostradamus · Dec 29, 2011

dizzlmcwizzl said:
As an aside around here ... almost every person that plays seniors (50 +) also plays adult tennis. With the age re-alignment I expect nothing to change I expect more people playing in both leagues.

Not. many people that play senior does not play the regular division anymore. maybe due to time constraints. these 50+ guys often play mixed doubles too and playing in 3 different leagues seem to be too much for them

dizzlmcwizzl · Dec 29, 2011

Nostradamus said:
Many guys in 40-49 actually wants to play doubles only. so actually, this is not a good thing. They may have problems finding singles players in this league.

Finding singles players will be the challenge ... but this is always the challenge in team tennis. I know that our team has 3 or 4 guys in their 40's that play dubs for our adult team, but would like the chance to play singles against guys their age.

I think the smart teams will be lining up their 40+ lineups now.

dizzlmcwizzl · Dec 29, 2011

Nostradamus said:
Not. many people that play senior does not play the regular division anymore. maybe due to time constraints. these 50+ guys often play mixed doubles too and playing in 3 different leagues seem to be too much for them

Fortunately for us, winter is for mixed and summer is for adult/senior/ super senior exclusively. So in our district getting players to commit to a couple different levels is not very hard.

Cindysphinx · Dec 29, 2011

I'm 50 and played seniors for the first time in 2011. I will play seniors again in 2012. Then I am out of seniors for three years.

Eh. I guess I don't much care. The new system deprives me of one playing opportunity and replaces it with another. Now I will have to play younger players, but I am a doubles player so I don't care.

I don't feel like younger players my level have much of an advantage over me in doubles. They tend to be fitter and faster, but they tend to be wild or very inexperienced in doubles. I can't think of a time when I lost a doubles match to a significantly younger player and thought "Darn whippersnappers!" They do tend to look better in their tennis dresses, though . . .

The interesting thing will be what happens in the 18+ and 40+ brackets. I plan to captain 40+ because every single one of my players is 40+. I think all of the other captains will do the same thing, though.

The real fun would be captaining 4.0 at 18+. If you could find four young people to play singles and then load the team with high-end doubles players, you could probably get to the post-season pretty easily because the 18+ league will likely be much smaller.

I will go on record now to predict that there will be no league of a meaningful size at 2.5 or 3.0 for 18+ (or it will just be the same older players). It will be much too hard to find singles players at 2.5-3.0 in that age group.

Fuzzy · Dec 29, 2011

If i'm not mistaken you can play down a level...so for players that don't want to change...they don't have to.

If you're an older player and want to play against more players your age you have new divisions to help do that.

Hoping the changes won't be as severe as everyone thinks they may be.

Maui19 · Dec 29, 2011

I don't see this being a big deal. On a very local level, there may be some instances where you can't team up with someone you used to play with, but overall I suspect these cohorts are better aligned with league playing population. The USTA certainly has better information than we do.

People resist change. This is a classic example of that.

cak · Dec 29, 2011

I'm curious what will happen around here. I'm thinking it's doubtful our little club will be able to come up with 40+ teams on the women's side if it means they need singles players. We really scramble, including recruiting non club members to play singles in the 18+ league. I don't think any of the singles players were in their 40s.

The last few years there have been a ton of people at the smaller clubs dropping out of USTA play, so little clubs in our area are combining teams to get enough players to field teams. Folks who are really into USTA tend to join the big tennis center clubs, where they can recruit and have a chance at Nationals. The days of social USTA teams (play and then sit and have drinks and appetizers with tennis players from other clubs) have pretty much gone away. I suspect that is where USTA is losing members, they are losing the social players.

When I started playing tennis in my 40s, I looked forward to seniors because they played during the day, and had cookies...Now seniors (50 and over) play week nights and weekends, so it's pretty much the same as regular adult league. Maybe they were hoping by bumping it 5 years they would be back to a league for retired folks?

Now I hear the real fun begins at the 65+ league. You have to play during the day. And since there is no nationals there are no teams willing to "do anything" to get there.

purple-n-gold · Dec 29, 2011

Nostradamus said:
Just one other thing, is there really enough players to make this work ?

I think the re-structure will hopefully work 2 ways:

hopefully get a younger crowd interested by making the entry age 18

the average age of league players is 40+

dizzlmcwizzl · Dec 29, 2011

purple-n-gold said:
I think the re-structure will hopefully work 2 ways:

hopefully get a younger crowd interested by making the entry age 18

the average age of league players is 40+

The entry age is already 18 .... and players can play at 17 as long as they turn 18 sometime in that calendar year.

volleygirl · Dec 29, 2011

Maui19 said:
I don't see this being a big deal. On a very local level, there may be some instances where you can't team up with someone you used to play with, but overall I suspect these cohorts are better aligned with league playing population. The USTA certainly has better information than we do.

People resist change. This is a classic example of that.

Did you assume thje execs at Coka Cola had better info than the rest of us when they insisted on NEW Coke?

jchamilt · Dec 29, 2011

storypeddler said:
The way it was, the inequities were equally as great for players who were early middle-aged. For example, if you were a singles player, until you hit the seniors at age 50, every year you were playing younger and younger studs who were (usually) stronger and faster and quicker, etc. I have often seen league teams where #1 singles featured a man 46 or 48 years of age trying to play against some guy about 21. Yes, NTRP ratings should mean if they are both 4.0, then the match is an equal one, right? But clearly it doesn't. All that means is that WHEN THE MATCH BEGINS these two guys are playing roughly at the same level. But check out how they are performing an hour and 45 minutes into the match. An NTRP rating measures basic skills and ability but has nothing factored into it to account for age differences and how that affects endurance, athleticism, etc. I would think that now, with the bottom age division being pared down some (ages 18-39), there is far greater likelihood for matches to be decided based on play and not simply wear and tear due to age. Point is, within ANY NTRP division, there are few 50-year-olds who can consistently hang with 20-year-olds who have the same level of talent. That 30 years is just too much edge to give away. Think the intent here was to try to even up the size of the age divisions a little. I like the idea. Better for a 61-year-old to play against 57-year-olds than for a 48-year-old to be playing against 19 and 20-year-olds.

Why not add a 40 and over and leave everthing else the same. It was mentioned in other posts that this is where most of the players who are dropping out are at. As was mentioned why fix something that is not broken. It seemed to me that the Senior and Super Senior program was good and I think that was implied by if it is not broken don't fix it.

jchamilt · Dec 29, 2011

OrangePower said:
Eh, I think that analogy might be just a tad over the top

Early in the year, USTA conducted a major survey of USTA league players to canvass opinions. There was discussion about it on the board back then - do a search. Some of the questions were specifically about where the age boundaries should be set and whether the senior league should include singles.

Now let's look at the real impact of the change and who it affects:

(a) 60 yo and over players still get to have a doubles-only league, except that now 55-59 yo players can play in it also. No big deal.

(b) Players from 55-59 still have a doubles-only league they can participate in. It also includes players 60 and over. This is no difference from before (since 60 and over player were always allowed to play in regular senior league, and most of them did).

(c) Players from 50-54 are the only group who are potentially impacted negatively. They can no longer play with the 'older' crowd and now have to compete against 40 yo players. Maybe for a few this is a problem. However, from my experience, most 50-54 yo players actually play in regular adult league as well, and so playing 40 year olds is not going to be an issue. On the plus side, they now have an opportunity to play singles in the 40+ league.

(d) Players from 40-49 now have another league they can play in, in addition to regular adult. This is where the real gains come in, when USTA talks about growing leagues. Think about how many players fall into this age group, and now think of them playing two leagues each rather than just one. In addition, these players can now get some playing time at singles (whereas it's hard for older guys to get singles matches in regular adult, where many of the singles players are younger).

All in all I think these changes are very positive and will yield a net increase in league participation.

Our society is living and being active longer. As we get older our ability to play with younger people becomes more difficult. Why impact 60 + and 50-4 negatively when you could just add a 40 and over group?

jchamilt · Dec 29, 2011

catfish said:
OP, Who sent you the email? USTA National? District Leagues Administrator? Local Coordinator?

It was sent from USTA Member Services.

jchamilt · Dec 29, 2011

dizzlmcwizzl said:
The only thing they are claiming is more representative is the naming of the groups. Calling the group the 40+ age group identifies these folks better than calling them all seniors.

The reason we have and / or need age groupings is two fold ...

1) Give the USTA the ability to collect more money
2) Provide more painless opportunities for us to play ... because if you are a 65 year old guy that only likes playing line 1 singles against former college players you can still do that. But you also have the chance to play singles against 40 year old weekend warriors or dubs with similar aged guys.

I completely agree. The way to do this is just add a 40 and over group. This will promote items 1 and 2 above.

jchamilt · Dec 29, 2011

dizzlmcwizzl said:
I like the new age alignments. I am 43 so next year I will get to play in the 40+ age group. This will be good for me as I will get to play more often and against players with the same aches and pains as I have.

However, it occurs to me that having watched my friends play seniors for a couple years that in the senior group there is very little sandbagging. Essentially it is my belief that by the age of 50 self rates are not around and the matches are more consistently even. In the last two years I went to sectionals to finish as the best team without out-of-range self-rated players. I am hoping that this will give me a better chance at moving on to the national championships since I am well past sandbagging as a self rate.

What do you think of just adding a 40 and over group and not negatively impact the Seniors and super senior?

jchamilt · Dec 29, 2011

catfish said:
Right. I have seen the information on the USTA website, but I was curious who sent the OP the email.

USTA Member Services sent me the email. So I think it was a national thing.

OrangePower · Dec 29, 2011

Nostradamus said:
Many guys in 40-49 actually wants to play doubles only. so actually, this is not a good thing. They may have problems finding singles players in this league.

True, many 40-49 will want to play dubs only. These are the same guys that play dubs in today's regular adult. But there are also enough 40-49 guys that would like to try singles, but right now can't get playing time at singles in regular adult, because they are competing for the spots with 18 year olds. Since at 40-49 you know you will be facing players your own age, I think filling the singles slots will not be a problem.

dizzlmcwizzl said:
As an aside around here ... almost every person that plays seniors (50 +) also plays adult tennis. With the age re-alignment I expect nothing to change I expect more people playing in both leagues.

Same in my area.

jchamilt said:
Our society is living and being active longer. As we get older our ability to play with younger people becomes more difficult. Why impact 60 + and 50-4 negatively when you could just add a 40 and over group?

Just adding 40 and over in addition to existing leagues would just be too many leagues - too difficult to schedule in a way that minimizes overlaps, and will have the effect of diluting the leagues too much.

timmbuck2 · Dec 29, 2011

I wonder how the tennis clubs and courts will handle all the extra leagues? My home court has 10 indoor courts and 20 outdoor courts, and some nights is a tough scramble to get all the matches in. This could potentially double the amount of weeknight leagues...

Rumruner · Dec 29, 2011

NEW USTA League Structure
It reminds me of reading the book 1984 by George Orwell, a novel about a society (USTA League Players) in a repressive and controlled state (USTA), often under the guise of being a utopian society.

In my area the Adults play on Saturday mornings and the Seniors play on Sunday afternoon. My team and I will enter the Saturday morning division (18 and up) regardless of the age groups. We range in age from 24 to 67. No one on the team wants to play on Sunday.

KoaUka · Dec 29, 2011

Jon Hampton said:
I'm disappointed by the new structure. I live in a city where the people who play tennis are older ( between 35 and 60 ) and I am younger ( 28 ). Now I'll either have to convince my older buddies to play down a division so I can play, or I'm done with USTA until the rules change.

Additionally, there is a huge difference between an 18 year old and someone in their later thirties. I'd like to see an:

1. 18 to 29 division (young adult)
2. 30 to 49 division (adult)
3. 50-59 division (senior)
4. 60+ division (super senior)

Thoughts anyone?

We're in the same boat here...
I believe this impacts our age group the most negatively.
I like the idea of a 30-49 division.
And as for convincing our older buddies (40-54) to play down... Well possibly if the two leagues (18-39 and 40-54) aren't going on at the same time (does anyone know?). If they are, it would be difficult due to scheduling, injuries, etc.
Most 40-54 yr olds still work for a living. Currently I play in 4.0 & 4.5 adult and the match schedules overlap quite frequently.

OrangePower · Dec 29, 2011

KoaUka said:
We're in the same boat here...
I believe this impacts our age group the most negatively.
I like the idea of a 30-49 division.
And as for convincing our older buddies (40-54) to play down... Well possibly if the two leagues (18-39 and 40-54) aren't going on at the same time (does anyone know?). If they are, it would be difficult due to scheduling, injuries, etc.
Most 40-54 yr olds still work for a living. Currently I play in 4.0 & 4.5 adult and the match schedules overlap quite frequently.

I believe the regular adult and new 40+ leagues will be scheduled at different times of the year. At least in my section (Norcal).

There should be no impact on regular adult league - I expect most players 40 and older that in the past played adult league will continue to do so. Only now there is an additional league for them to play in, during a different time of year.

The overlap in scheduling between 4.0 and 4.5 adult is quite different because in this case they are both part of the same league season.

Rjtennis · Dec 29, 2011

I know many 40+ singles players who out duel their younger teamates for singles slots by using a strategic all-court game that some of us younger guys dont have. Additionally, people who are in good shape move great well into their 40's. Also, I dont think foot speed is the ultimate difference maker in most doubles matches. In the end everything will work out just fine. I am just bummed that some of my teamates will likely move into the 40+ division.

OrangePower · Dec 29, 2011

Rjtennis said:
I know many 40+ singles players who out duel their younger teamates for singles slots by using a strategic all-court game that some of us younger guys dont have. Additionally, people who are in good shape move great well into their 40's. Also, I dont think foot speed is the ultimate difference maker in most doubles matches. In the end everything will work out just fine. I am just bummed that some of my teamates will likely move into the 40+ division.

True; probably depends on the level. At 3.5 and 4.0, experience and strategy can overcome athleticism and endurance. At 4.5 and higher though, it gets progressively harder for older players because the younger guys at those levels don't have many weaknesses to exploit, so often the athleticism is a decisive factor.

And I don't think your teammates will leave your team to move to the 40+ division - the 40+ league will be played at a different time of year and so they will still play on your team, and then on a 40+ team in addition to that.

Maui19 · Dec 29, 2011

volleygirl said:
Did you assume thje execs at Coka Cola had better info than the rest of us when they insisted on NEW Coke?

Umm...what?

I can tell you they no doubt had very strong research that showed, in blind tests, that people liked the new Coke better than the original formula. But since people are so resistant to change--even change for the better--they browbeat the company into killing the new formula.

Personally, I think it is kind of obvious that the USTA has better information about league participation than some people on a message board.

athiker · Dec 29, 2011

As someone in my late 40s my only complaint is its not starting until 2013!

I believe 50 is too young for seniors so 55 is more appropriate. I also think, similar to someone's comments earlier about currently less sandbagging in seniors, that adult 40 and over will be a bit of a respite from sandbagging which seems to revolve mostly, not 100%, but mostly around younger players.

Remember the new sections are not 18 to 39, 40 to 54, etc. but 18 and over, 40 and over and so on...so it provides more opportunities for those in their early to late 40s to play...not less. My area is like Cindy's...most...not all...but most of the players are 40 and over. These players can now form 2 teams and play more often without having to "play up".

It may turn out to be New Coke but I hope it works out. Even though age-wise I think 55 and over is a more descriptive senior bracket, I know our area struggles to fill many senior teams as it is...so this is a concern.

Cindysphinx · Dec 29, 2011

cak said:
I'm curious what will happen around here. I'm thinking it's doubtful our little club will be able to come up with 40+ teams on the women's side if it means they need singles players. We really scramble, including recruiting non club members to play singles in the 18+ league. I don't think any of the singles players were in their 40s.

The last few years there have been a ton of people at the smaller clubs dropping out of USTA play, so little clubs in our area are combining teams to get enough players to field teams. Folks who are really into USTA tend to join the big tennis center clubs, where they can recruit and have a chance at Nationals. The days of social USTA teams (play and then sit and have drinks and appetizers with tennis players from other clubs) have pretty much gone away. I suspect that is where USTA is losing members, they are losing the social players.

When I started playing tennis in my 40s, I looked forward to seniors because they played during the day, and had cookies...Now seniors (50 and over) play week nights and weekends, so it's pretty much the same as regular adult league. Maybe they were hoping by bumping it 5 years they would be back to a league for retired folks?

Now I hear the real fun begins at the 65+ league. You have to play during the day. And since there is no nationals there are no teams willing to "do anything" to get there.

Interesting, CAK. What area are you in?

I'm not in touch with the club scene, as I'm not a member of a club. So I'm always curious.

I do think one advantage of seniors (under the old or new structure) was the lack of sandbagging. I would guess that most folks who I saw at senior ladies for sectionals and nationals were computer-rated. I didn't run across anyone I thought was out of level.

Where the real sandbagging happens is mixed at all age groups. Even then, it is the men who seem to sandbag. I don't think I have ever had a mixed match where I thought the female was sandbagging. I have witnessed matches with teaching pros competing at 4.0 level in 7.0 mixed at sectionals and destroying everyone.

g4driver · Dec 29, 2011

dizzlmcwizzl said:
Finding singles players will be the challenge ... but this is always the challenge in team tennis. I know that our team has 3 or 4 guys in their 40's that play dubs for our adult team, but would like the chance to play singles against guys their age.

I think the smart teams will be lining up their 40+ lineups now.

As a 45 year old guy who plays USTA Adult both Singles and Doubles, USTA Singles Leagues and in a local singles ladders, I am happy for the chance to play singles against guys near my age, as well as those half my age. The 40+ folks will get more opportunity, and our 40+ team is already being built for next fall 2012 when our local area will introduce it before the 2013 League start date. Our Fall 2012 40+ will simply be a trial run for our local USTA folks to work out as many kinks as possible.

To the OP, the biggest change is for the 40+ guys who couldn't play in the old 50+ "Seniors", who now have the chance to play both Adult and 40+.

I filled out the USTA Survey along with many other 30 and 40 something aged players that I know. Our comments were heard. If you don't want to play Adult or 40+, think about how a 47 year old felt when his only options was USTA 18+. This gives the 40 to 49 year old crowd more opportunity. There is nothing wrong with that IMO.

Most of the seniors (50 to 60+ years on my Adult team), play both Adult and Senior, and several play 18+, 50 and 60+. They are happy about it. Now, the 55-59 year old guys will play 18+, 40+, and 55+ since they don't have to wait another five years to hit 60.

Of the four singles players on my Adult team, the youngest is 35, with me at 45, another guy who is 54, then we have a 63 year old. The 63 year old does quite well at the Adult Level at #2 Singles. He will do even better at the 40+ League, when he doesn't have to play 22 year old Self-Rated guys just out of college.

But that is a different subject.

g4driver · Dec 29, 2011

My comments are in red italicized font.

jchamilt said:
It is not clear to me how this will grow the sport of tennis in the process. Do those Seniors 50 to 54 want to play in a league with players 40 to 49?

In my area, yes, otherwise I would not have 13 players over 50 on my 18+ Adult team. 13 of the 13 50+ year old guys also play either Senior, or Senior and Super Senior. They also don't mind playing with the 35 year old on my team.

The same goes to those Super Seniors. Do Super Seniors (60 & over) want to play with players 55 to 59? Well, the four 60 year olds on my Adult team seemed to want to play not only with the 55 to 59 year olds, they call the 35 to 49 year olds to hit too, so maybe it is just you and a few other vocal people who aren't happy with this change.

I honestly feel this is a solution looking for a problem. Those in the know, please explain to me how this grows the game and why these new groups are more representative. Well, my 40+ friends can now play 18+ , and 40+. That grows the game by adding more leagues.

The guys on my team that are 50+ and 60+ have never once called me or another player on my team and said "Hey, I'm looking to play with a 60 year old tomorrow? Are you at least 60 and available?"

Angle Queen · Dec 29, 2011

It's interesting to see this discussion now that things have been formalized. We took stabs at it this summer in this thread.

I'm still a fence-sitter on whether it's good or bad for the tennis community as a whole. Here locally, I've heard little discussion of it and when mentioned, usually by me, I get the "you gotta be kiddin' me" look. Remember, I'm in the Richmond Metro Area where change, of ANY kind, is inherently frowned upon.

I am not convinced you'll see more new people participating but rather, and only perhaps, the same folks playing more and paying more.

catfish · Dec 29, 2011

timmbuck2 said:
I wonder how the tennis clubs and courts will handle all the extra leagues? My home court has 10 indoor courts and 20 outdoor courts, and some nights is a tough scramble to get all the matches in. This could potentially double the amount of weeknight leagues...

This is a very good point. I think most players will continue to play in the Adult league, and many of the 40+ players will also play in the 40+ league. The vast majority of USTA league players are 40 +. Since both leagues will be 2 singles & 3 doubles, that could potentially be 2 huge leagues running concurrently that require 5 courts per match. Local Coordinators who formerly handled smaller "Senior" leagues could potentially get slammed by a 40+ league double or triple the size of their former Senior League. I expect some serious logistical problems at the local levels.

Cindysphinx · Dec 29, 2011

catfish said:
This is a very good point. I think most players will continue to play in the Adult league, and many of the 40+ players will also play in the 40+ league. The vast majority of USTA league players are 40 +. Since both leagues will be 2 singles & 3 doubles, that could potentially be 2 huge leagues running concurrently that require 5 courts per match. Local Coordinators who formerly handled smaller "Senior" leagues could potentially get slammed by a 40+ league double or triple the size of their former Senior League. I expect some serious logistical problems at the local levels.

I think our league has been moving in a direction to be able to accommodate this for a number of years. Maybe they had a heads up?

The spring has spring adult league, of course.

The summer has senior mixed and perhaps tri-level; I can't recall.

The fall has ladies day, mixed and combo only.

The winter, however, is loaded with a huge number of leagues. Winter has ladies day, mixed, mens and ladies combo, ladies senior and men's senior. All this at a time when demand for indoor courts is at its highest.

I guess our area can handle a lot of extra leagues for the spring.

It's a shame that so much is crammed into the winter. In winter 2011, I played on five teams, which was way too much. Then for spring I was on just two teams.

jchamilt · Dec 29, 2011

dizzlmcwizzl said:
As an aside around here ... almost every person that plays seniors (50 +) also plays adult tennis. With the age re-alignment I expect nothing to change I expect more people playing in both leagues.

Not clear to me why more people would play. Does that mean there would be more teams? If so, why?

jchamilt · Dec 29, 2011

Maui19 said:
I don't see this being a big deal. On a very local level, there may be some instances where you can't team up with someone you used to play with, but overall I suspect these cohorts are better aligned with league playing population. The USTA certainly has better information than we do.

People resist change. This is a classic example of that.

Not clear to me what is meant by these cohorts are better aligned with league playing populations. I am assuming that this means there are lot of 40 to 50 year old players. If this is the case, set up a 40 to 49 league. In that way we will not fit something that is not broken.

I am wondering how long has the USTA been promoting leagues and what has changed that requires a new alignment? If anything the population of tennis players are getting older, just like society. We have now just removed the oldest age group (Super Seniors) from leagues. How does this make sense given the aging of our population?

jchamilt · Dec 29, 2011

purple-n-gold said:
I think the re-structure will hopefully work 2 ways:

hopefully get a younger crowd interested by making the entry age 18

the average age of league players is 40+

I think the entry age was always 18

If the average age is 40+ it indicates to me we could have a 40 to 49 age group and leave everything the same. There would be lots of players for that age group and we would not have to fix something that is not broken like the Senior and Super Senior groupings.

jchamilt · Dec 29, 2011

Maui19 said:
Umm...what?

I can tell you they no doubt had very strong research that showed, in blind tests, that people liked the new Coke better than the original formula. But since people are so resistant to change--even change for the better--they browbeat the company into killing the new formula.

Personally, I think it is kind of obvious that the USTA has better information about league participation than some people on a message board.

Why don't they share it? What is the secret? It would help answer questions and maybe get to the real answer. I will be surprised if this information is shared with the league players.

NEW USTA League Structure

Rookie

Semi-Pro

Legend

Professional

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Professional

Professional

Professional

Professional

Rookie

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Rookie

Hall of Fame

Professional

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Rookie

Rookie

Rookie

Rookie

Rookie

Rookie

Rookie

Legend

New User

New User

Rookie

Legend

Hall of Fame

Legend

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Legend

Legend

Professional

Professional

G.O.A.T.

Rookie

Rookie

Rookie

Rookie

Similar threads