3 doubles lines and 2 singles? Should be 3 singles and 2 doubles RANT

[Tennis Aloha]

Let's first attack the obvious. Tennis is a sport that's best enjoyed one v one.

I know doubles players are going to have a fit at this words, but come on ya'll, let's keep it a thousand. No one ever gets crazy good and passionate about this game if they don't play singles at all. Doubles, yeah, it's fun, and it's tennis, but it ain't the sauce baby.

I don't think I have to back up this point with a rant of evidence and logical proof. But let's just start from that fact. Tennis is singles, doubles is extra.
Is like if you order a milkshake, tennis is the actual shake, doubles is the whipped cream and mixed doubles is the cherry on top. You wouldn't order just the whip cream on a glass, would you?

Lots of people would, and they did. And unfortunately USTA listened. They realized the demographic of players was getting older each year, and they realized that many of the recreational players could not, or would not play singles for a variety of reasons. Hence they installed the format of 3 doubles lines and 2 singles lines for USTA League format.

That means, each team needs 8 players each match, and 6 of them should be doubles players and only two of them singles. This has greatly impacted what tennis has become for the recreational player. It also means being good at tennis now means being good at doubles, singles is just a plus or reserved to a minority of players, the younger ones, the ones with "legs".

What do you actually get as a result? Well, it has become harder to be honest about one's level when each player always has a partner and 2 opponents. So now you have the USTA levels all scrambled up and screwed up where people are either playing up or down, without having a direct correlation to an individuals own level of play.

You also see a lot of players who barely move on the court. They set up one front, one back without much strategy or knowledge of why they're setting up in this way. It is my opinion that when players only play doubles, they don't learn court coverage or basic positioning/recovery strategies as well as singles players do. Furthermore, Doubles players tend to be more "afraid" of the ball and so they are more likely to get as close to the net as singles players do.

And then, to top it off. you have the precise demographic that the USTA made this change for (the older, doubles only player who doesn't move all that well) having a mid life crisis, watching themselves get out of shape and all of the sudden saying "I want to start playing singles in the league matches because I want to get a better workout". Come on, bro, there's only 2 spaces for singles players and now you want to play singles too???

I am biased in all of this because I myself would always prefer to play singles than doubles. But now I'm forced to play doubles for my team simply because of the numbers game. We have 12 players in my team and at each given match, about 4 of them want play singles. I am now forced to play doubles and pretend to enjoy it more than I do. I also get frustrated with partners who are not at my or my opponents level, don't move, don't cover the court well, and at the end of the match don't realize they are the reason we lost the match.

End rant.

 

[ShaunS]

Lots of unsupported assertions here. So much that I feel like maybe you're trolling for an argument?

With that in mind I'll keep this brief. My understanding is that the USTA plays the distribution they do because of where the overall interest lies. It's possible they've over-exposed, and I'm guessing that's why I'm getting to play in a Singles League State Invitational this weekend. I actually think singles only leagues are a phenomenal way to deal with the challenge of singles / doubles because my experience is almost every team has more trouble finding quality singles players.

Singles and Doubles require different strategies, but they both require it. Doubles often presents less margin for error, and Singles demands better big picture execution.

I don't wish this to sound insulting, but if you genuinely believe the things you say... I'd suggest you're missing a lot of the depth of doubles tennis.

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

OP you are correct about singles, while @ShaunS is right about the USTA.

And yes while doubles has depth, without singles play, it's kind of just dabbling in tennis.

I voted doubles bc I usually get stuck anchoring doubles for teams and get better singles competition anyway in tournaments.

 

[TennisOTM]

I love singles and tend to agree that it's the ultimate pure expression of the game, but the way you phrased the poll question, "if you could only choose one forever," I have to take doubles. One of the best reasons to take up tennis is that it can be life-long sport well into old age, and that's because of doubles. I know I'm going to age out or "injure out" of singles someday, maybe sooner than I'd like to think about, and that will be sad, but doubles will always be there to keep me happy.

 

[Slicehand]

I like doubles, just that i will always play singles if i can

 

[cks]

Let's first attack the obvious. Tennis is a sport that's best enjoyed one v one.

I like both singles and doubles. And both have pros/cons just like any recreational hobby that competes for my time.

I got back into tennis in my late 40s playing doubles. I doubt I would have been "sucked" into tennis again if I started playing singles right out of the gate.

because my experience is almost every team has more trouble finding quality singles players.

+1
I play on two (2) USTA teams, and my captain struggles to find players willing to play the singles lines. No problem finding players to make our three (3) lines of doubles.

 

[J_R_B]

Your poll results definitely back up your point. I assume the lone vote for singles is yours. LOL.

 

[atatu]

Sounds like maybe you aren't one of the top singles guys on this team ? Get better, then you won't have to worry about it anymore, if not on this team then get on another team.

 

[ChaelAZ]

I had always been the singles guy, but did get put in dubs often too. The last few years with getting out of shape and a few other things, I played mostly dubs and only a few "official" singles matches (thought that is the majority of my practice matches), and I did get a much better appreciation for dubs.

So to me, I can't say either way. Personally I have advocated for an ALL singles league, but you know the USTA and clubs want to maximize court presences, so having 4 people instead of just two on court at any given time is their preference. Flex leagues kinda fit the singles bill, but are the Who's line is it anyway of tennis, where the matches don't count and the ratings are made up. I want an official, 3 lines of singles league.

 

[kevin qmto]

I only play singles in USTA unless my captain says he needs me in doubles as a last resort.

but considering my team (a mens 4.0 18+), and other teams I’m familiar with are always looking for someone to play singles for them, because the whole squad would rather just play dubs, speaks volumes. That’s great for me, but it’s clear to me the league is made for dubs players. And most of the guys in my local league are in their 40s-50s.

 

[Tennis Aloha]

You guys all brought fantastic points and I really appreciate the feedback. i agree that there are more players wanting to play doubles than singles, and that tennis league teams struggle more to find singles players to complete lines.

But I'd like to suggest that if leagues were formatted 2 doubles lines and 3 singles, 1: it would be more tennis appropriate to grow the sport for the younger generation, 2: Players would get significantly better being forced to play singles every now and then to meet the line requirement, which means, doubles players would be forced to play more singles and therefore improve their game overall. 3: It would be easier to meet the 7 players requirement than the current 8. and 4: Singles would be more encouraged for recreational players as a whole.

Last point, I really think the argument of "I can't play singles because I'm too old" is BS. I've seen 80 year old singles players at a 4.0 level who are in great shape. One of my favorite players in my hometown is a 55 year old rated a 9 UTR singles player and he kicks college players butt on a weekly basis. So, without trying to insult anyone, if you're not fit enough to play singles, you are not fit enough to play tennis. What's happening is that some are playing doubles half assing it, and if someone is willing to admit that they are not in good enough shape to play doubles but they still play just to be out there, then fine. But don't tell me you're a sensational doubles player or even a basic one if you cannot handle a singles match.

Tennis is a sport that requires a certain level of fitness, and that remains true for doubles as well.

 

[Tennis Aloha]

By the way, the current poll results are 6 doubles to 2 singles. which completely destroys my arguments and supports the current state of affairs.

 

[ChaelAZ]

I really think the argument of "I can't play singles because I'm too old" is BS. I've seen 80 year old singles players at a 4.0 level who are in great shape. One of my favorite players in my hometown is a 55 year old rated a 9 UTR singles player and he kicks college players butt on a weekly basis. So, without trying to insult anyone, if you're not fit enough to play singles, you are not fit enough to play tennis. What's happening is that some are playing doubles half assing it, and if someone is willing to admit that they are not in good enough shape to play doubles but they still play just to be out there, then fine. But don't tell me you're a sensational doubles player or even a basic one if you cannot handle a singles match.

Tennis is a sport that requires a certain level of fitness, and that remains true for doubles as well.

This just comes off as angry and belittle folks.

 

[Anni.Angel]

I played doubles twice in my life, that was more than enough for me. Never again.

 

[Max G.]

If I could only choose one forever? Doubles for sure.

From what I see, there's an upper age limit to competitive league singles. I haven't hit it yet, but my body is definitely starting to give signs that remind me that limit exists, and in another 5-10 years I will strongly prefer doubles. Since the question is "forever", doubles is the easy choice.

 

[TennisOTM]

Last point, I really think the argument of "I can't play singles because I'm too old" is BS. I've seen 80 year old singles players at a 4.0 level who are in great shape. One of my favorite players in my hometown is a 55 year old rated a 9 UTR singles player and he kicks college players butt on a weekly basis. So, without trying to insult anyone, if you're not fit enough to play singles, you are not fit enough to play tennis. What's happening is that some are playing doubles half assing it, and if someone is willing to admit that they are not in good enough shape to play doubles but they still play just to be out there, then fine. But don't tell me you're a sensational doubles player or even a basic one if you cannot handle a singles match.

Tennis is a sport that requires a certain level of fitness, and that remains true for doubles as well.

I think it's mostly about the legs. Many, many people develop leg problems and injuries in older age, and healing gets slower and slower. Some can avoid that, through some combination of hard work and luck, and still dart around a court in old age, but the numbers tell us that it's pretty rare.

It's true that someone who can't run much due to leg problems is not likely to be a sensational doubles player, but a "basic one" - why not? Most shots in doubles are not more than a step or two away from one of the two players.

 

[g4driver]

The simple answer is for you to play more non-USTA singles and less USTA 18+ leagues. If you don't want to play doubles on an 18+ USTA team, don't. No one is forcing you to play doubles in USTA leagues. It is much easier to play singles if you actually put in a tiny amount of effort. Played singles only for a long time and now play singles and doubles. Being the best singles player and the best doubles player on a USTA team makes that player the most valuable player to a Captain/team looking to win.

my .02: stop ranting about the USTA 18+ format and put forth the effort to play singles outside of USTA 18+ leagues. Ladder matches, singles leagues. Does the USTA need to change to accommodate your lack of effort to find single opponents? Nope.

No sympathy whatsoever to anyone who can't find singles opponents. It simply takes a small amount of effort rather than blaming a system. But I get it. You're a victim. Congrats!!!

 

[Chalkdust]

90+% of my tennis is singles... But I don't play league.
I have no need for it - I can always arrange competitive singles matches for myself.
I think league works better for dubs because the logistics of arranging a variety of competitive dubs matches on your own is much harder.

 

[NTRP_3.75_Patrick_Rafter]

I am not old but I am not young either though I think I am probably more 'physically' blessed than most in terms of athleticism. That said, I don't work out or exercise much and playing tennis is really the only exercise I get. I played 3 sets of doubles with a 4.5 and a 3.5 on Tuesday and I am still kinda dragging ass and it's Thursday. If I played 3 sets of singles I can't imagine how I'd feel. I want to be able to play singles, I am mentally and physically willing, particularly in cooler weather but yeah, in my experience finding guys to do it for captains is a royal pain in the ass.

I do wish there was a singles option here (Columbia, SC). For whatever reason I think the area is well represented on the board. If there are any options I'd love to hear about them as it can be a great way to sharpen your game in doubles. It doesn't really work the other way.

 

[Tennis Aloha]

Your poll results definitely back up your point. I assume the lone vote for singles is yours. LOL.

Check it again

 

[nyta2]

i play alot of dubs... and kinda agree with OP.
i'd prefer to play singles (typically do outside of usta league/practice/etc...), but when i got bumped to 4.5, i realized i wasn't good enough to consistently play singles (because folks on my team were very strong), and realistically, i couldn't compete against the top singles players (on my or other teams) at 4.5 (they are typically bouncing back and forth between 4.5 and 5.0), and i'm definitely not close to 5.0.
so i basically had 4 options:
(a) create/captain a weak 4.5 team, and put myself at singles (which i did for a few years, but captaining is time consuming, and i was getting beaten fairly consistently at singles)
(b) learn to play doubles, and play singles occasionally
(c) continue to get better/good enough to play singles (with a high winning %) for my team(s) - (still hasn't happened for me yet as our singles players are mostly weak5.0)
(d) play singles outside of usta league (which i do: ladders, practice, tourneys, etc...)
based on how the OP is describing dubs though... i'm guessing he's a 4.0 or lower... because 4.5+ dubs is still alot of activity (back/forth/poaching/etc...)
3.0-weak4.0 dubs is basically cross court singles... and like me, i'm guessing the OP isn't good enough to to play singles regularly (with a high % of winning) for his team

 

[winchestervatennis]

I am not old but I am not young either though I think I am probably more 'physically' blessed than most in terms of athleticism. That said, I don't work out or exercise much and playing tennis is really the only exercise I get. I played 3 sets of doubles with a 4.5 and a 3.5 on Tuesday and I am still kinda dragging ass and it's Thursday. If I played 3 sets of singles I can't imagine how I'd feel. I want to be able to play singles, I am mentally and physically willing, particularly in cooler weather but yeah, in my experience finding guys to do it for captains is a royal pain in the ass.

I do wish there was a singles option here (Columbia, SC). For whatever reason I think the area is well represented on the board. If there are any options I'd love to hear about them as it can be a great way to sharpen your game in doubles. It doesn't really work the other way.

I was easily able to find plenty of guys at the 4.5 level to play singles with when I moved to Cola. It helped that plenty of grads hung around so late 20’s were willing to play singles.

 

[WYK]

By far, the most fun I had in college, besides sex and drugs, was playing college doubles tennis.
Actually, it was better than drugs.

 

[socallefty]

I prefer playing singles socially, but also like playing doubles in USTA team leagues. USTA league tennis is a team sport for me and I like the camaraderie of playing doubles with a partner.

Once our league coordinator said she wanted to start a singles league and I signed up a team. Unfortunately, I was the only captain who registered a singles team at 4.5 and so, she had to cancel the singles league.

 

[serveandvolE]

Although I casted my vote for singles I don't see dubs in the same light as the OP. I like to play singles more than dubs because for me it's more physically exerting and I enjoy the strategy involved in developing points. However, dubs has its own game strategy and skills to master and I totally respect that. Singles ability doesn't always transfer to dubs transparently and vice versa. I've seen it where strong singles players on league teams aren't sought after dubs partners as the singles player's game is better versed at the baseline.

Regarding the other point of changing the lines to 3s 2d- I'd hate to see anything drop in general. When 40+ dropped to only one singles line I really thought about not doing leagues. More lines means more opportunities to play. With that said, sure, I'm for increasing singles but not at the expense of dropping a dubs line (and yes, I do understand the court availability issue).

 

[J_R_B]

Although I casted my vote for singles I don't see dubs in the same light as the OP. I like to play singles more than dubs because for me it's more physically exerting and I enjoy the strategy involved in developing points. However, dubs has its own game strategy and skills to master and I totally respect that. Singles ability doesn't always transfer to dubs transparently and vice versa. I've seen it where strong singles players on league teams aren't sought after dubs partners as the singles player's game is better versed at the baseline.

Regarding the other point of changing the lines to 3s 2d- I'd hate to see anything drop in general. When 40+ dropped to only one singles line I really thought about not doing leagues. More lines means more opportunities to play. With that said, sure, I'm for increasing singles but not at the expense of dropping a dubs line (and yes, I do understand the court availability issue).

While I think the 2s/3d format in USTA is ideal, switching to 3s/2d wouldn't be terrible, either. The thing that makes the 40+ 1s/3d format possibly the dumbest decision ever made by an organization fraught with a lot of unthinkable stupidity is the even number of courts, completely unnecessarily putting critical matches in the hands of arbitrary tiebreakers like fewest sets or games lost. We can all argue the merits of 2s/3d vs 3s/2d, but at the end of the day, ANY 3, 5, or 7 court format is better than 4 or 6.

 

[Jst21121]

At the end of the day, you can just choose to not play if they place in you in doubles. I made it a point to my team leader/coach that I only play singles and that's it. I'm not a diva, but my time is precious and I when I take time off from the wife/kids to go play a match for 3 hours- I want to do - what I want to do. Not doubles.

If I'm not needed for the singles game because it's filled with the starters- then I don't mind sitting home and coordinating with my hitting buddies to go play a rec singles match at the local courts.

You don't have to waste your time playing doubles.

No offense to doubles but I just choose singles.

 

[cks]

but at the end of the day, ANY 3, 5, or 7 court format is better than 4 or 6.

100% agree.

 

[J_R_B]

At the end of the day, you can just choose to not play if they place in you in doubles. I made it a point to my team leader/coach that I only play singles and that's it. I'm not a diva, but my time is precious and I when I take time off from the wife/kids to go play a match for 3 hours- I want to do - what I want to do. Not doubles.

If I'm not needed for the singles game because it's filled with the starters- then I don't mind sitting home and coordinating with my hitting buddies to go play a rec singles match at the local courts.

You don't have to waste your time playing doubles.

No offense to doubles but I just choose singles.

As a captain, I ask for this type of feedback every year. If you don't want to play doubles at all, tell me. You may (will) end up playing less, but that's better than playing in a match you really don't want to play. I appreciate the people who are 100% honest, and I don't discriminate or judge people for their preferences.

 

[winchestervatennis]

By far, the most fun I had in college, besides sex and drugs, was playing college doubles tennis.
Actually, it was better than drugs.

These three items dont have to be exclusive of each other.

 

[WYK]

Although I casted my vote for singles I don't see dubs in the same light as the OP. I like to play singles more than dubs because for me it's more physically exerting and I enjoy the strategy involved in developing points. However, dubs has its own game strategy and skills to master and I totally respect that. Singles ability doesn't always transfer to dubs transparently and vice versa. I've seen it where strong singles players on league teams aren't sought after dubs partners as the singles player's game is better versed at the baseline.

Exactly. We have people at our club that are just great at singles, but worthless at doubles, and vice versa. And, of course, those that are great at both and terrible at both Some folks just don't have the reactions or volleys or accuracy or team work or strategy sense for doubles and just find it frustrating. It is a completely different game. So, of course, some will not like it.
What confuses me is the hate for it. I mean, we all grow up looking at a tennis court with doubles lines on it. That's what a tennis court has always been for all of us. Why act surprised when people use them? Makes no sense.
I mean, even when I was in junior high being coached in tennis, we learned and played doubles. It was just part of tennis. I always enjoyed the different games greatly.
In college tennis, the doubles often go first. I actually preferred this as it allowed me a warm up for singles. And even to this day I will play in one of the social doubles matches at the club on their designated days and use it as a warm up for a singles afterwards. In our floodlit leagues, this is often how it goes as well.
But, man, the greatest thing ever is winning matches as a team. I always cherish those moments more than a singles win. My team won the spring doubles tournament this year, with my wife and a few friends showing up for the finals. Just a great feeling being part of a team and coordinating it and winning in front of that crowd.

 

[WYK]

Let's first attack the obvious. Tennis is a sport that's best enjoyed one v one.

I know doubles players are going to have a fit at this words, but come on ya'll, let's keep it a thousand. No one ever gets crazy good and passionate about this game if they don't play singles at all. Doubles, yeah, it's fun, and it's tennis, but it ain't the sauce baby.

I don't think I have to back up this point with a rant of evidence and logical proof. But let's just start from that fact. Tennis is singles, doubles is extra.
Is like if you order a milkshake, tennis is the actual shake, doubles is the whipped cream and mixed doubles is the cherry on top. You wouldn't order just the whip cream on a glass, would you?

Lots of people would, and they did. And unfortunately USTA listened. They realized the demographic of players was getting older each year, and they realized that many of the recreational players could not, or would not play singles for a variety of reasons. Hence they installed the format of 3 doubles lines and 2 singles lines for USTA League format.

That means, each team needs 8 players each match, and 6 of them should be doubles players and only two of them singles. This has greatly impacted what tennis has become for the recreational player. It also means being good at tennis now means being good at doubles, singles is just a plus or reserved to a minority of players, the younger ones, the ones with "legs".

What do you actually get as a result? Well, it has become harder to be honest about one's level when each player always has a partner and 2 opponents. So now you have the USTA levels all scrambled up and screwed up where people are either playing up or down, without having a direct correlation to an individuals own level of play.

You also see a lot of players who barely move on the court. They set up one front, one back without much strategy or knowledge of why they're setting up in this way. It is my opinion that when players only play doubles, they don't learn court coverage or basic positioning/recovery strategies as well as singles players do. Furthermore, Doubles players tend to be more "afraid" of the ball and so they are more likely to get as close to the net as singles players do.

And then, to top it off. you have the precise demographic that the USTA made this change for (the older, doubles only player who doesn't move all that well) having a mid life crisis, watching themselves get out of shape and all of the sudden saying "I want to start playing singles in the league matches because I want to get a better workout". Come on, bro, there's only 2 spaces for singles players and now you want to play singles too???

I am biased in all of this because I myself would always prefer to play singles than doubles. But now I'm forced to play doubles for my team simply because of the numbers game. We have 12 players in my team and at each given match, about 4 of them want play singles. I am now forced to play doubles and pretend to enjoy it more than I do. I also get frustrated with partners who are not at my or my opponents level, don't move, don't cover the court well, and at the end of the match don't realize they are the reason we lost the match.

End rant.

Hey, do you watch the tennis ninja channel from Hawaii? Wow, that's some great doubles play there. Just amazing to watch.

 

[cks]

But, man, the greatest thing ever is winning matches as a team. I always cherish those moments more than a singles win. My team won the spring doubles tournament this year, with my wife and a few friends showing up for the finals. Just a great feeling being part of a team and coordinating it and winning in front of that crowd.

+1

Team wins are great. And like you, I enjoy team wins more than wins playing singles.

 

[Max G.]

I just played some doubles after playing basically only singles for almost a year… man, doubles is so fun. I love it, it’s great.

 

[Dartagnan64]

Let's first attack the obvious. Tennis is a sport that's best enjoyed one v one.

Pretty sure only sociopaths think this way. At the rec levels, team sports are always far more popular than individual sports.