Mixed league playoffs criticisms, is this normal?

[Vilgan]

Hi all,

Just wrapped our 2023 Mixed league playoffs. There were some things that seemed really weird for our section (NW Washington) and curious if it's normal.

1) Bracket was split into a Winners and a 2nd place bracket, both single elim with the exception that the 2nd place in winners played the winner of 2nd place bracket for the second spot to sectionals. This seems super weird to me from the viewpoint of trying to pick the best two teams. You can be in the winner's bracket, play the best team, and immediately get eliminated. Only time I've ever seen this bracket approach used.
2) With 5 groups in 7.0, both brackets had 5 teams. Shouldn't this be 1 bracket of 16 teams?
3) Year end ratings were in well before playoffs happened, but we still used the old ratings. There is usually 1-2 teams that are put together by a club and then are completely loaded with players that are getting bumped up. The team in our group had over 50% of its players get bumped, and IIRC 4 of the 6 people in our match against them got bumped. Not surprisingly, they coasted through playoffs and are off to sectionals. However, they will be an almost non factor in sectionals because all the people they liked to play are a level higher now. Wouldn't it be more normal/better to have playoffs used the updated ratings so that 1) teams that didn't stack have more of a chance and 2) we send more competitive teams to sectionals?

Anyway, not a huge factor as we are a group of friends and aren't frequently in playoffs, but the whole thing seemed kinda weird so curious if it's common across USTA or something particular about our area

 

[schmke]

1) Our district started doing this several years ago. I too think it is a bit odd and in some cases I'd rather be the best second place team than the worst first place team for the reason you highlight. But it was done to make the final meaningful.

In the past, if there were four sub-flights, the top two from each flight would go into a single elimination draw with 1st place teams playing 2nd place teams (not from the same sub-flight) and things would advance on to a final. But once you got to the final, because Northwest Washington got two spot at Sectionals, both teams knew they were advancing and the final was somewhat meaningless as going to Sectionals as the district winner or wildcard doesn't really matter.

With this new format, the 1st place teams final has meaning, the winner goes on, but being a 1st place team is in theory better than being a 2nd place team as once you make the 1st place final, you have a chance to get the wildcard if you lose, while the 2nd place teams are a true single elimination. So it makes both the 1st and 2nd/wildcard draw finals meaningful.

I see the reason for this new format, but in an odd sub-flight scenario like you ask about in #2, it is kind of unfair to the worst 1st place team making them play an extra match.

2) Not sure what you mean. The top-2 from each sub-flight advance, that is 10 teams. With the old format, the five 1st place teams would get byes as would the top 2nd place team, and the other four 2nd place teams would play to fill in the spots in an eight team draw and it would play out single elimination from there. With the new format, there are two five team draws with the top-three in each getting a bye while the bottom-two play to get into the four team draw.

3) Our section doesn't allow bumped up players in early start leagues to play at their old level at Sectionals, but since these local playoffs are just a week or so after ratings are published, our district has decided to let the play at their old/lower level in local playoffs. The thought is it is too tight a turn-around to ask teams to figure out altered pairings/line-ups and local playoffs is kind of just an extension of the regular season, so let them play at their rostered level. I disagree with this and think players should play at their new level immediately, doing anything else means a team that wins local playoffs but loses players to a higher level ends up being a different team at Sectionals and it isn't really fair to the teams they beat in local playoffs.

Regarding #1/#2, PNW may be unique in using this format.

Regarding #3, every section can handle this as they see fit. Some require players to play at the new level immediately, some give a grace period through the end of the calendar year, and some let them play at their old/lower level through Sectionals, which just pushes the issue down the road as they aren't eligible at their new level at Nationals, so it can end up being a different team there.

 

[Vilgan]

To clarify on 2, it seems weird to cut it down to just two teams per group and then make weird brackets. If more than 8 teams, a normal bracket is 16 so why not make a normal 16 team bracket bringing in other high finishers? If there are 10 teams in a group, only taking the top 2 seems pretty restrictive. There were multiple groups with a 2 or 3 way tie for 2nd that was decided by tie breakers, so including more of them in playoffs seems more fun and inclusive.

1 and 3 seem like the bigger "this is weird" issues, 2 just seems like something to change so more people get to have fun at the end of the season.

When you say 1/2 PNW is unique, is that something the organizer is deciding? Curious why the PNW would be unique instead of having a fairly standard approach. My main tennis partner is an AD that has been running sporting events/creating brackets for 25 years and thought the 1st team and 2nd team brackets was the weirdest thing she'd ever seen.

 

[schmke]

A 16 team bracket means more matches to have to schedule and play, and if done across all the level is a pretty significant increase.

And some areas only take the sub-flight winners to playoffs. If you take 3 or more, that reduces the meaning of the regular season.

 

[Nostradamus]

A 16 team bracket means more matches to have to schedule and play, and if done across all the level is a pretty significant increase.

And some areas only take the sub-flight winners to playoffs. If you take 3 or more, that reduces the meaning of the regular season.

does the records in mixed leagues affect your usta ratings in regular adult leagues ?? or is it completely separate ?

 

[Connor35]

[deleted] commented before I fully understood the setup.
Will revisit

 

[Purestriker]

does the records in mixed leagues affect your usta ratings in regular adult leagues ?? or is it completely separate ?

Only if you just played Mixed. Then you would get an M rating.

 

[Moon Shooter]

Only if you just played Mixed. Then you would get an M rating.

And you will only get a M rating if you played in mixed doubles ending in .0. The mixed doubles results in .5 I believe is completely ignored. You can play as much .5 mixed as you want and never lose your self rating because they only care about nationals and there is no nationals for .5 leagues.