Big changes for USTA tournaments in 2011

[justinmadison]

There have been several changes announced for USTA junior tennis starting in 2011. The shocker for me is the reduction is draw size for National Opens. Level 2 National Opens are reducing their draw sizes from 64 to 32.

For those who do not know there are 4 Level 2 tournament dates per year. On each date there are 4 simultaneous tournaments spaced across the country. This allows access to high level tennis without everyone in the US having to meet at one location.

The most obvious ramification of this decision is a fewer high level national matches for US juniors. That seems bad for US tennis.

If you are a junior ageing up in the next few months you are at an enormous disadvantage. Under the new system it will be much more difficult to get national points. The kids ahead of you have already benefited from the old system and have enough points to qualify for Level 1 and Level 2 tournaments. Now you will have to get your points from sectional play. Just to get an idea of how bad this is if you enter one of the SoCal “designated” tournaments, which will probably have a draw of at least 256, and you amazingly win 6 rounds you will receive 56 national points. The kids before you who lost their first round in the Level 2 National Open, won one round in the back draw, and then lost will receive 65 points. You have no chance of advancing past them and qualifying to play in a National Open, and thus no chance of playing in any of the Level 1 tournaments.

In the future it will be very difficult to advance to Level 2 or 1 tournaments during your fist year in an age division. I am at the National Open in Long Beach this 4th of July and have been watching play. It seems like most of the kids who are losing in the first couple of days are first year 14s that are learning how things are different in the new age group. They will go back home and tell their coaches and friends how much harder you have to hit the ball and how much more consistent you have to become. It is good they are seeing this now and can learn and adapt. In the future they will not qualify to play and will not have this experience.

How can this be good for USTA tennis? I know a bunch of people on this board do not think much of the people making decisions for USTA junior tennis. The general opinion seems to be they cannot make any worse decision then they have. Well, they have proved you wrong once again, they can make worse decisions.

 

[cmb]

I love the way the USTA has no problem changing formats like this. I then ask why change? If they are going to change, eliminate all of the age group tournaments for national level juniors. Make every tournament a open tournament...regardless of location/prestige, count for a US national ranking. Do away with the points system, and calculate it on your quality of wins. After that, each section has a tournament, limited to the best 64 rankings that sign up, and the semi finalist players from each section get to play at Kalamazoo. And have only 1 national junior championship. After that, you play local tournaments for your ranking. It would reduce the travel expenses for many kids, and give them better matches. One day you could be playing against a kid, the next round u play against a teaching pro, or college player, and maybe a lawyer that has a weekend free.

USTA just has no brain at all

 

[amtennis]

This is really bad. It was hard enough for the kids to try and get into these tournaments. In fact, I was hoping that the level 3 nationals would open up to a round of 64. Where did you read this?

 

[chalkflewup]

It's too early to tell, but I think I like the decision. By design, it should be difficult to get into Level 1 and Level 2 tournaments. There are way too many national tournaments today and too many people traveling across the country to chase national points. I'd rather see more lower level tournaments closer to home so juniors can play more and travel less.

 

[amtennis]

It's too early to tell, but I think I like the decision. By design, it should be difficult to get into Level 1 and Level 2 tournaments. There are way too many national tournaments today and too many people traveling across the country to chase national points. I'd rather see more lower level tournaments closer to home so juniors can play more and travel less.

How are they suppose to get national points if they can't get in?
I realize the local higher level tournaments offer national points but
not that many. Thoughts?

 

[chalkflewup]

Only the best players should get in the national events anyways. There are too many false positives out there today because the system can and has been played by traveling to less competitive national events in order to obtain wins/points/rankings.

My recommendation is to focus on developing your game and playing tournaments close to home and everything will take care of itself.

 

[amtennis]

Only the best players should get in the national events anyways. There are too many false positives out there today because the system can and has been played by traveling to less competitive national events in order to obtain wins/points/rankings.

My recommendation is to focus on developing your game and playing tournaments close to home and everything will take care of itself.

Ok - interesting thoughts! Thanks

 

[cmb]

thats why the local competition sucks, because the local kids are all out chasing points at weak nationals. So they are buying their rankings. Thats one of the things about the point systems, even in the ATP...

 

[chalkflewup]

I may be in the minority but I like the change for many reasons. And CMB is correct that people work the system at all levels but eventually it does work itself out (even at the ATP level).

I believe this change will keep a lot of the great players closer to home which is fantastic for the local events and the checkbook! Let the elites slug it out at the nationals.

 

[SoCal10s]

USTA are trying to fish out the real top kids ,they want only the elite class of kids so this is their feeble attempt to do it .. look at those level 2 Nat'ls, the real top players still don't really play in them anyways .. those kids are USTA grooomed are in Boca and getting a free ride playing ITFs all around the world and then end up going to college tennis anyways so who cares.. America's next pro player aren't going to come from USTA program ..they will come from a tennis academy who play only ITFs... USTA are still gasping for that needle in the haystack and they won't find one..

 

[cmb]

the thing is, we need try to get the elites playing locally as well. The only way to get them to play local is to tie the national ranking into the local tournaments.....but if its only juniors playing eachother the elites game will suffer...thats where have 1 ranking for everyone would come into play.
Lower ranked atp pros, college players, teaching pros, juniors...all playing for the same national ranking.

 

[EP1998]

if you have everyone playing for the same rankings as cmb suggests you get some amazing matches. tennis would get a lot more popular.

 

[cmb]

thats how the european countries have programmed it. Then the kids who are the highest ranked are selected to play in the National championship. Probably why the Euros have progressed passed the US is because from 14-17 they are playing against adults, rather then the us where they are playing against other juniors who dont use their head on the court.

 

[EP1998]

thats how the european countries have programmed it. Then the kids who are the highest ranked are selected to play in the National championship. Probably why the Euros have progressed passed the US is because from 14-17 they are playing against adults, rather then the us where they are playing against other juniors who dont use their head on the court.

yeah i can tell where you are hanging out, the land of the classement!!!

 

[TennisCoachFLA]

Some great points made on this thread. chalkflewup nailed it very well. cmb also has great ideas to attempt to go for a more European system. And socal10s is right on about where the next American champ is most likely to come from.

I look at our tennis club in Sarasota-Bradenton, one of several all within 10 miles of each other. There are USTA tournies for kids, for adults, for seniors of various levels. The kids never even know the adult or senior players.

The better system would be for these local clubs to promote more open tournaments where the best 13 year olds battle the hard hitting 40 year olds and the crafty seniors. The kids would learn so much more instead of flying all over the country chasing ranking points. Imagine the advantage a kid would have after years of playing against adults who know every trick in the book and have a wide variety of shots developed, it would cut the learning curve dramatically and produce players with more court sense.

 

[momtogrif]

It's too early to tell, but I think I like the decision. By design, it should be difficult to get into Level 1 and Level 2 tournaments. There are way too many national tournaments today and too many people traveling across the country to chase national points. I'd rather see more lower level tournaments closer to home so juniors can play more and travel less.

I think you're right in saying it's too early to tell, but I can tell you that we're already tired of playing local tournaments. My kid sees the same kids all the time. We don't have a huge division like SoCal or Florida or Texas so our kids see eachother over and over again. The reason we traveled to 2 Level 3 tournaments this year is so my kid could play other kids that he's never seen before. As always, I truly wonder who's making decisions at the top at the USTA?

 

[tennis1970]

Many of the open draws don't even fill. Some even extend the deadline and get kids into the draw that shouldn't probably be there. Folks don't want to travel for a noncompetitive match. Fewer in the draw I think is a good change

these changes come about after input from each section. If you want changes you have to bring it up in your section for them to take it to the national office. Every year I fill out a survey in our section regarding proposed changes and I'm just a parent who doesn't even play tennis. I agreed with those changes. One proposal that didn't approve is more compass draws (guaranteed four matches instead of two).

 

[papatenis]

I've had two kids go through the USTA junior system. Here are my thoughts.

I feel that there are too many level 2 and 3 national tournaments.
They should cut the number of national tournaments down to half of what they have now, increase the draw size and the length of the tournaments ( number of days).

At most level 2 and 3 nationals, once kids lose in the main draw, they cite an injury (withdraw) and go home (get back to school). So in the backdraw and doubles draw, there are many unplayed matches.

If you limit the number of nationals, then they become more important, so hopefully the kids will play out the tournament.

Each section should hold local tournaments that give points for national rankings, and limit those tournaments to the juniors in that section only.
This would stop the points chasers.

 

[chalkflewup]

Some great points made on this thread. chalkflewup nailed it very well. cmb also has great ideas to attempt to go for a more European system. And socal10s is right on about where the next American champ is most likely to come from.

I look at our tennis club in Sarasota-Bradenton, one of several all within 10 miles of each other. There are USTA tournies for kids, for adults, for seniors of various levels. The kids never even know the adult or senior players.

The better system would be for these local clubs to promote more open tournaments where the best 13 year olds battle the hard hitting 40 year olds and the crafty seniors. The kids would learn so much more instead of flying all over the country chasing ranking points. Imagine the advantage a kid would have after years of playing against adults who know every trick in the book and have a wide variety of shots developed, it would cut the learning curve dramatically and produce players with more court sense.

Agreed about variety and playing adults. My kid plays matches against an adult 2-3X per week and it's been a great developmental tool over the last 2 years. The drop shots, serve and volley, the moonballs, the change of pace, etc... forces creativity and decision making. It's like playing Andy Murray -- you never know what shot is coming next. And while it may take longer to develop an all court game, it will pay dividends and your kid will have so much fun playing tennis this way.

 

[justinmadison]

At most level 2 and 3 nationals, once kids lose in the main draw, they cite an injury (withdraw) and go home (get back to school). So in the backdraw and doubles draw, there are many unplayed matches. .

We all have our own experiences, but I have not seen this problem. In the back draw of a National Open there are 60 matches played total. I looked at the 4 boys 14 nationals tournaments from this past weekend and there were 3 withdraws … that is out of 240 matches, certainly not “many unplayed matches”

Many of the open draws don't even fill. Some even extend the deadline and get kids into the draw that shouldn't probably be there. Folks don't want to travel for a noncompetitive match. Fewer in the draw I think is a good change .

I have never seen a National Open that did not fill. That does not mean that it has not happened, I just have not seen it. In Long Beach 14s this weekend there were 53 kids on the alternate list. I know a bunch who did not sign up because they knew they could not get in.

I believe this change will keep a lot of the great players closer to home which is fantastic for the local events and the checkbook! Let the elites slug it out at the nationals.

If the objective we are trying to fulfill is to have kids stay home and parents save money then this change will help achieve that. I do not think keeping kids home to play in local events is good for US tennis. My son played and won a local tournament 2 weeks ago. After every match we talk about what he leaned from the match. After the finals I asked the usual question and he responded with …”I learned that playing local matches is nothing like playing national matches, when I play a national match I cannot give away any points, I must stay focused at all times … here it does not really matter … I can hit any shot I feel like and I will probably win anyway”

Being a big fish in a little pond is absolutely horrible for your tennis. Shot selection, shot tolerance, physical conditioning, mental toughness, point construction … nothing is really tested. You cannot learn what works and what does not without being tested. The absolute worst possible result is thinking you are great when you are not even close. The one thing he did know is wining locally tells you nothing.

There were a lot of good ideas put forth on the thread. The only thing that is actually going to happen is less tennis. Not good for anyone who cares about junior tennis in the US.

 

[jigglypuff]

If the objective we are trying to fulfill is to have kids stay home and parents save money then this change will help achieve that. I do not think keeping kids home to play in local events is good for US tennis. My son played and won a local tournament 2 weeks ago. After every match we talk about what he leaned from the match. After the finals I asked the usual question and he responded with …”I learned that playing local matches is nothing like playing national matches, when I play a national match I cannot give away any points, I must stay focused at all times … here it does not really matter … I can hit any shot I feel like and I will probably win anyway”

Being a big fish in a little pond is absolutely horrible for your tennis. Shot selection, shot tolerance, physical conditioning, mental toughness, point construction … nothing is really tested. You cannot learn what works and what does not without being tested. The absolute worst possible result is thinking you are great when you are not even close. The one thing he did know is wining locally tells you nothing.

That is why you play up...

 

[cmb]

when I was 15-18, I had the level to play national tournaments...but I decided that I wanted to give myself the best chance to improve my game the cheapest possible way. I was lucky to live in South Florida during those years. So every weekend I played a mens open tournament, always within 1 hour of my house. I got great matches against college and pro players...One time I played against Andujar. I spent gas money and entry fees, while the top kids in the section were paying to travel all over the country for juniors, I was spending 50 bucks a tournament and playing 80+ matches a year. By the time I was ready to go to college I had beaten 3 guys in the top 20 of 18s nationals and some guys with ATP points, and I got a scholarship to school with that. Now college was a different story, but I will leave that for a different thread.

At the moment I still play tennis for a living, while almost all of the kids who were traveling and playing nationals have finished up their tennis. I spent about 10000$ total during those 3 to 4 years of tennis, including rackets and strings too.

I realize you cant do this in every part of the country, but the USTA does not even try to program our system like that.

 

[justinmadison]

That is why you play up...

Playing up is definitely the only real option. In my opinion it is not an optimal option. The physical difference between a barley 13 year old and an almost 17 year old is usually large. When two opponents are similar in physical ability you truly test the traits I mentioned above. What I have seen in matches like this is a not very good 17 year old will just hit for the fences trying to hit the little guy off the court. If he can get enough balls in the score can look tight. The little guy tries to play a normal game hitting, for him, aggressive rally balls, but they never really have any long points, one way or the other.

when I was 15-18, I had the level to play national tournaments...but I decided that I wanted to give myself the best chance to improve my game the cheapest possible way. I was lucky to live in South Florida during those years. So every weekend I played a mens open tournament, always within 1 hour of my house. I got great matches against college and pro players....

This is a great option for that skill level and age. Were we live there is a big gap in skill level between the collage players/teaching pros and the regular adult players. I don’t understand all the reasons but it seems like if a person is in his 20s or early 30s and played tennis through juniors he is very good. If he picked it up later in life or is older he cannot play tennis with younger juniors. The older, ex collage, players seem to have converted to doubles. Anyway, for us it is difficult for a national ranked junior to find equivalent talent in the adult ranks. My son is a 14’s player and can beat most of the NTRP 4.5’s around and cannot beat the 5.0’s and up. We have a few 4.5’s and very few 5.0’s , the 5.0’s we do have charge $50/hour. It is too bad he cannot play in the 4.5 division. Anyway, I guess it will not be long before he can play in the Adult Open tournaments and win some rounds. It looks like that will be the plan.

 

[TennisCoachFLA]

when I was 15-18, I had the level to play national tournaments...but I decided that I wanted to give myself the best chance to improve my game the cheapest possible way. I was lucky to live in South Florida during those years. So every weekend I played a mens open tournament, always within 1 hour of my house. I got great matches against college and pro players...One time I played against Andujar. I spent gas money and entry fees, while the top kids in the section were paying to travel all over the country for juniors, I was spending 50 bucks a tournament and playing 80+ matches a year. By the time I was ready to go to college I had beaten 3 guys in the top 20 of 18s nationals and some guys with ATP points, and I got a scholarship to school with that. Now college was a different story, but I will leave that for a different thread.

At the moment I still play tennis for a living, while almost all of the kids who were traveling and playing nationals have finished up their tennis. I spent about 10000$ total during those 3 to 4 years of tennis, including rackets and strings too.

I realize you cant do this in every part of the country, but the USTA does not even try to program our system like that.

Great post.

justinmadison....perhaps you can try this angle also. Since your local kids tournies are lame, what about looking for adults and set up mock matches? Or men's opens? If you look outside the typical juniors maybe your kid can gain experience without all the expense and travel. The things you want tested such as shot selection and tolerance and mental toughness might be better achieved vs local college and adult men.

 

[TennisCoachFLA]

Oops, I see you were addressing my questions in your last post. Since he can not beat the 5.0s maybe thats what he should be doing, playing as many of those guys as you can find...of course $50/hour isn't cheap!

 

[papatenis]

We all have our own experiences, but I have not seen this problem. In the back draw of a National Open there are 60 matches played total. I looked at the 4 boys 14 nationals tournaments from this past weekend and there were 3 withdraws … that is out of 240 matches, certainly not “many unplayed matches”QUOTE]

This problem occurs in the upper age divisions where kids that attend junior or high school need to get back to school as soon as possible, so they don't fall behind in their classes.

There are so many level 2 and 3 nationals, they have to decide which tournaments to complete and which to default out of.

 

[tenniscrazed]

Forget the points, if you prove your value at the sectional and designated levels by winning your matches you'll get in, if you don't... you won't Simple as that.

 

[chalkflewup]

Forget the points, if you prove your value at the sectional and designated levels by winning your matches you'll get in, if you don't... you won't Simple as that.

Thank you!