dizzlmcwizzl
Hall of Fame
Just to be clear ... I don't actually expect more people to materialize and start playing tennis ... what I expect is that there will be a significant jump in people who play both age divisions.
NEW USTA League Structure
- Thread starter jchamilt
- Start date
Just to be clear ... I don't actually expect more people to materialize and start playing tennis ... what I expect is that there will be a significant jump in people who play both age divisions.
dizzlmcwizzl
Hall of Fame
It was 19 until just a couple years ago ... then it was reduced to 18.
Angle Queen
Professional
Yep. I think the Word was on The Street.
Interesting to see how the different areas divide things up. For us, Winter is all but dead...with only (regular) Mixed going on.
Spring has adult league (with a daytime ladies and weeknight mens league as well). And I think the Super Seniors plays then too.
Summer has Mens/Womens Combo, Singles, Tri-Level and Seniors.
Fall is Mixed Combo.
That must mean y'all have a lot of indoor courts. Here, our club has to be careful we don't over-commit on the number of teams we allow based on the number of courts we have/are willing to give-up(commit to league play) on the "weekends." We only have 4 indoor courts and try to leave at least one court available for members or instruction at all times. Outdoors is a different story. There, we have 12 courts (hard court and clay)...so we can allow more teams to register. Still, it can be a tight scheduling exercise for our staff. I'll be extra curious to see how yet another "division" might affect non-league court availability.
I would note: we do not "pay" for court time. That time is included as part of our memberships dues...and is part of why we have the desire to leave one court open for "general membership" (read: non-USTA) play.
We're crammed full in the Summer. When it's HOT. D a m n HOT. And they wonder why they can't get the older crowd to play. :-?
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
Yes, that is very different from our situation.
My team (and most USTA league players around here) are nomads. The teams are not affiliated with particular clubs, usually. Teams are groups of players who decide to form a team.
Court time is provided by the league. The league buys as much indoor time as it needs from local clubs that are willing to sell unused court time. The designations "home" and "away" mean nothing and simply designate things like who spins the racket at the beginning of the match.
That means matches are almost always indoors, at $17/player/match. It means matches are during times regular members didn't want (so late nights, often).
But it also means no dues, so even those on a tight budget can afford to participate. It also means decent weather, even in summer.
It all comes out in the wash, I guess.
Yes, the basic information about the age breakdown has been out for awhile. But no information has been given to Local & District Coordinators about new league ending deadlines, when the District, Sectional & National Championships will be held and whether the events will combine the Adult & Adult 40+ at the same championships, etc. League planning begins with the National calendar and works backward. So there will be some growing pains the first year or so.
penpal
Semi-Pro
As a 44-yr-old who was just bumped to 4.5, this change gives me some hope. As it was, I was likely not going to be garnering much interest from the local 4.5 men's teams. But with a new 40+ division, it could prove difficult for them to fill up the spots on their teams should they decide to put a 40+ team together and suddenly I might be a more valuable (though probably still not "hot" 
) commodity.
) commodity.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.
Why not just add a 40 and over group and leave everything else the same?
Could you tells us who gave you the survey and a little about the survey. I didn't get a survey. It would be interesting to see the breakdown in answers by age group.
OrangePower
Legend
I think your first question has already been addressed by a few posters. Just adding the 40+ league (in addition to current Senior and Super Senior) would result in too many leagues, causing scheduling issues and diluting the potential participation in each league.
The survey was an online questionnaire, that anyone with a USTA number could access and respond to. Respondents were solicited via several channels, including direct emails to people, and links from the USTA leagues web pages. Answers were also made available after the survey period was over. I forget the name of the market research company that USTA contracted with, but I don't think it matters. There were several threads on this board about it at the time so if you're really interested, do some searching.
I don't know that they are doing away with age leagues for 55 and over, just making them local leagues. In NorCal last year there were seniors, super senior 60s, super senior 65s, and super senior 70s. I'm not sure which, if any, of those super senior leagues went to Nationals.
My personal experience is people are willing to commit to up to two teams per season. If they can schedule such that leagues don't overlap too much, they might indeed get the same people playing on more teams. To do that they would need to shorten the seasons, no more 15 week schedules with 4 additional weeks of local playoffs. That may be a good thing, as often interests wanes toward the end of the season.
My personal experience is people are willing to commit to up to two teams per season. If they can schedule such that leagues don't overlap too much, they might indeed get the same people playing on more teams. To do that they would need to shorten the seasons, no more 15 week schedules with 4 additional weeks of local playoffs. That may be a good thing, as often interests wanes toward the end of the season.
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
Right, but it isn't a 40-54 league. It's a 40+ league, I believe.
TommieF
Rookie
Correct.. 40+
g4driver
Legend
The USTA had the survey last year. I received the survey in an email from the USTA. Then I saw a thread on here about it it. About a week or so after I had completed the survey,
our local USTA sent out an email with the link.
You asked "Why not just have a 40 to 49 league?"
The USTA knows their membership numbers. They know the ages of the players and just how many people play the current leagues of Adult, Senior and Super Senior.
18 to 49 is a 31 year gap (this gap was clearly too large)
50 to 60 is a 10 (ten) year gap (this gap was clearly too small)
60+ is not measurable. So for sakes, let's just called it a 60-75 year group (a 15 year gap)
So the current USTA Leagues were set with a 31 year span (so folks age 49 to 18 can only play here). Yet the 50 to 60 year olds can play Adult and Senior. While the 60+ folks can, and yes some do play Adult, Senior, and SS. The USTA clearly saw that many folks who play Senior also play Adult, yet guys like me at 45 and my friends at 40-49 have limited opportunity with only Adult.
So you think a 18+, 40-49, 50-59, and 60+ would have been better? I don't and neither did the USTA. Why? You as a 50+ year old had more opportunity than the 40 to 49 year old crowd, and the 40-49 year olds wanted more opportunity. When you squeeze an inflated balloon, the air is simply moved from one spot to another. That is the analog I see with the new League structure. Limited court availability will determine how many leagues could be supported. The USTA knows this. Logistics are a factor. So, 18+, 40+, 50+, 60+ wasn't seen as the best solution. Time will tell. But I think the USTA got it right.
If the USTA did it your way, there would be too many brakets, Adult, 40+, 50+, 60+ and more cannibalization of players. If there were a 40 to 49 year group, and a 50 to 59, and 60+ group, when would all those leagues play? The logistics would be more complicated. Teams would be more splintered. Right now, all the USTA did was simply include the 40 to 49 crowd and allow them to play with the 50-54 crowd. Is that such a terrible thing? 54 to 40 is 14 year spread. Most 54 year olds I know are pretty fit and can play with any 40 year year. I hit with plenty of 60+ guys in singles and they hold their own. Now the 50-54 crowd can play with 40+ and play singles if they like.
Here's the new brackets by year spread:
18 to 40 (22 year spread)
40 to 54 (14 year spread)
55+ (20 year spread) Let's call it 55 to 75 (20 year spread) even though there will be 75+ year olds playing
Questions for you:
1)How old are you?
2) Do you only play tennis with guys within a specific age bracket for fun? 50-60, 60 to 65? I hit with people from 14 years old to 70+ year old guys. I don't judge players by their age. If they can hit, they can hit. I play mostly with guys ranging from 40 to 60. Why? Because there's a ton of them and they are available to hit.
IMO our local tennis lacks two things: courts and people willing to Captain. Currently our Senior and Super Seniors play on weekends, and Adult League plays Mon-Thurs. I don't see this changing due to court availability. The Adult Leagues in my area will stay Mon-Thurs evening.
Here's my prediction: The Senior League will simply morph into the 40+ League and the Super Senior will morph into the 55+ League. The only change is you will see more 40 year olds playing now with two singles courts added. That's it. More inclusion, less exclusion. The USTA put out a well thought out survey and guys like me responded. I hope you don't feel slighted, or somehow betrayed. I don't think that was the intent of the USTA so much as the USTA listened to guys like me who wanted to play more league tennis.
In Adult tennis, the USTA has completely failed to stop the 18 to 19 year olds from graduating high school then sandbagging at 3.5 and 4.0 before going to college for many. It is a known problem in the Adult League. Then once they are done with college, they come back and sandbag again. The USTA could ban self-rated players from playoffs, but they don't have the guts to do that. The USTA algorithm is broken and the USTA did a survey this fall on a new rating system. Expect either a completely new NTRP system, or more tweaking of by the USTA. If they simply hired folks who had more than a basic understanding of math, they could make their system better. There isn't much you can do about sandbaggers other than, keeping your integrity and character. The sandbagging at 50+ is vastly smaller. So for me, as a 45 year old, I love playing Adult tennis, but it will be nice to play 40+ and in ten years from now 55+
I would encourage you to try playing with some 40 to 49 year olds. Heck, if you are ever near Charleston, SC, please send me a private message. I will go hit with you. Ever 50+ year old on my team likes to hit with the 40somethings at our club, so I doubt you would be any different if you wanted to join us.
Many folks like me wanted to play more USTA tennis and the USTA granted me and us that wish. The USTA survey clearly asked in the survey what players wanted. The survey was well worded and let players provide their own inputs. I think it was something like 30 to 50 questions. I'm not bagging on you, just trying to explain it from someone who wanted to play more tennis, but someone who understands the lack of courts will dictate the number of leagues and when those leagues will play. Hope my view helps you and others understand why the USTA made the changes they did.
v/r
Last edited:
OrangePower
Legend
^^^^^
Good analysis. Spot on.
Good analysis. Spot on.
g4driver
Legend
Thanks OrangePower.
Just found this link by doing a google search. Look at the numbers and the forecast the USTA got back from 25,000 survey replies.
Clearly the 18+, 40+, 55+ brackets made the most sense. 16% forecast increased in the number of total players to 534K from 460K from the current system.
Look at the 40+ numbers alone: 170,500 players forecast to play 40+
The biggest shock I see is the forecast drop in the 18+ League from 356.7K to 271.1K. So clearly, more 40+ folks are glad to leave the 18+ League and only play with people closer to their own age. I am not in that category. Our 40+ band of hackers will field two nearly identical teams. One at 18+ and another at 40+ as we only have two players younger than 40.
When the Mixed comes along I suspect we will see more of the same demographic shifts. The two mixed teams I played on last year, were all 40+ players.
Here's the USTA link:
http://assets.usta.com/assets/536/15/Age Restructuring - USTA Leagues 2013.pdf
Just found this link by doing a google search. Look at the numbers and the forecast the USTA got back from 25,000 survey replies.
Clearly the 18+, 40+, 55+ brackets made the most sense. 16% forecast increased in the number of total players to 534K from 460K from the current system.
Look at the 40+ numbers alone: 170,500 players forecast to play 40+
The biggest shock I see is the forecast drop in the 18+ League from 356.7K to 271.1K. So clearly, more 40+ folks are glad to leave the 18+ League and only play with people closer to their own age. I am not in that category. Our 40+ band of hackers will field two nearly identical teams. One at 18+ and another at 40+ as we only have two players younger than 40.
When the Mixed comes along I suspect we will see more of the same demographic shifts. The two mixed teams I played on last year, were all 40+ players.
Here's the USTA link:
http://assets.usta.com/assets/536/15/Age Restructuring - USTA Leagues 2013.pdf
Last edited:
Thanks for all of the great dialogue on this interesting subject. As a 54 yo in 2012, I am looking forward to 55+ next year!
Speaking of 55+, I see that the levels for that age group are listed as 6.0, 7.0, 8.0 and 9.0. Does this mean teams will be able to field players with a range of NTRP? For example, could a 3.5 and a 4.5 play together in a 8.0 match?
Speaking of 55+, I see that the levels for that age group are listed as 6.0, 7.0, 8.0 and 9.0. Does this mean teams will be able to field players with a range of NTRP? For example, could a 3.5 and a 4.5 play together in a 8.0 match?
dizzlmcwizzl
Hall of Fame
Yep ... exactly like Super Seniors is now structured
rainman007
Rookie
i think age is a number and there should be an adult age division of 18 and up
but thats less money for the usta..
if your 70 you can play doubles unless you want to play singles..
the ratings will take care of themselves despite how old or young you are.. just my opinion..
i guess you could argue that their shouldn't be a mens/womens division with this logic but why not just have 1 age division the format is 2 singles and 3 doubles on the adult team.. it should just create a lot more teams by having 1 division..
i could see maybe an 80 year old who has no mobility but can hit good strokes vs a 20 year old (in doubles) not really being fair but you would think with a ratings system the player that won easily would just be rated higher regardless of age.. thoughts about that?
but thats less money for the usta..
if your 70 you can play doubles unless you want to play singles..
the ratings will take care of themselves despite how old or young you are.. just my opinion..
i guess you could argue that their shouldn't be a mens/womens division with this logic but why not just have 1 age division the format is 2 singles and 3 doubles on the adult team.. it should just create a lot more teams by having 1 division..
i could see maybe an 80 year old who has no mobility but can hit good strokes vs a 20 year old (in doubles) not really being fair but you would think with a ratings system the player that won easily would just be rated higher regardless of age.. thoughts about that?
Last edited:
Angle Queen
Professional
Finally, someone else who sees it like me. Either it's NTRP or age/&/or/gender (sic).
Will they have more "play"? Probably...but mostly from the same (majority) demographic (40-55ish, kinda like me, ugh!) but I seriously doubt many new folks of the younger, casual or new-to-tennis set will join up.
My comments are in blue and at the end.
If you look at the graph of the number of players playing USTA leagues you will see that there are many 50+ That is why the SS and SS have worked for players, maybe not the USTA. Players would be happier playing people of their own physical ability. I have not heard a complaint about a match being too close. Who has the MOST fun when the match is one sided. No one.
This is an issue where a very large number of USTA members (50+) are getting a raw deal. Even though biology indicates that age groupings should be smaller as they were when USTA leagues started (S and SS) They are getting larger for the 50+ Not good for those dues playing members. This new structure is good for the 40+ at the expense of the 50+ That is why I propose just adding a 40+ and I know there will be no problem with splintering , cannibalization or lack of close / fun matches, the S and SS groupings have shown that. The problems is the clubs and USTA may have to serve their members and not worry about making more $. Courts can be found during the summer or non private or semi-private courts can be used. I am sure private clubs would love this. Remember this should be for the players not the clubs or the USTA. The clubs and USTA should be there to SERVE the players. Look at all the 50+ on the graph that are paying USTA dues and are getting screw due to larger age groups that defy biology. Just add a 40+ group and courts will be found, but maybe not at the club that was usually used.
If you look at the graph of the number of players playing USTA leagues you will see that there are many 50+ That is why the SS and SS have worked for players, maybe not the USTA. Players would be happier playing people of their own physical ability. I have not heard a complaint about a match being too close. Who has the MOST fun when the match is one sided. No one.
This is an issue where a very large number of USTA members (50+) are getting a raw deal. Even though biology indicates that age groupings should be smaller as they were when USTA leagues started (S and SS) They are getting larger for the 50+ Not good for those dues playing members. This new structure is good for the 40+ at the expense of the 50+ That is why I propose just adding a 40+ and I know there will be no problem with splintering , cannibalization or lack of close / fun matches, the S and SS groupings have shown that. The problems is the clubs and USTA may have to serve their members and not worry about making more $. Courts can be found during the summer or non private or semi-private courts can be used. I am sure private clubs would love this. Remember this should be for the players not the clubs or the USTA. The clubs and USTA should be there to SERVE the players. Look at all the 50+ on the graph that are paying USTA dues and are getting screw due to larger age groups that defy biology. Just add a 40+ group and courts will be found, but maybe not at the club that was usually used.
OrangePower
Legend
I still don't get how you arrive at that conclusion. How are the 50+ group getting a raw deal?
I can maybe understand the 50-54 crowd feeling like now they have to compete with 40-49 year olds, whereas previously they were the youngsters of the oldsters. But I don't think that's the 'very large number of members' you're referring to. You're thinking everyone over 50. But there is still a separate league for 55+, so anyone 55 and older is not impacted. In your personal case, since you are 66, you get to play in that league and so don't have to worry about being outhit by a 40 year old.
With all due respect, I think you just want to have your cake and eat it, at the expense of the 40-50 yo crowd. Right now you have two leagues you can play in without facing anyone younger than 50: the Senior 50+ league, and the Super Senior 60+ league. And you want to preserve that for yourself while denying others the opportunity to compete in more than one league.
And please don't try make that same argument again that USTA could just have added yet another league for 40+ in addition to the existing ones. Logistically that just cannot work.
Agreed.
I want some of that cake too... and happy that starting next year I'll have the opportunity to play in two leagues instead of one.
My comments are in red.
Why do you say that? Are you saying is there are not enough tennis courts? Or are you saying that this will be more work for the clubs or USTA, but better for the players. The leagues are for the players not the clubs or USTA. Clubs and USTA should serve the players. Have we forgotten that? If you do not look for courts you will not find them. This might move some leagues out of the private clubs, to semi-private or public courts, but so be it.
Why do you say that? Are you saying is there are not enough tennis courts? Or are you saying that this will be more work for the clubs or USTA, but better for the players. The leagues are for the players not the clubs or USTA. Clubs and USTA should serve the players. Have we forgotten that? If you do not look for courts you will not find them. This might move some leagues out of the private clubs, to semi-private or public courts, but so be it.
g4driver
Legend
My comments are in red.
jchamilt question: Are you saying is there are not enough tennis courts?
g4driver reply: I will not speak for Orange Power, but I will state that aren't enough tennis courts in Charleston, SC for the number of players. You don't want to accept that fact, so why don't you simply contact the LCTA in Charleston and ask our local folks their biggest challenge. Here's a link for you. Please do me and everyone else on here a favor and contact the local LCTA President and ask him. http://www.lctatennis.org/
jchamilt comment: If you do not look for courts you will not find them.
g4driver reply: Don't come on this website and state crap like that about a city you have no data on concerning the tennis population or courts that exist. Your hubris is disturbing, and you are coming off as a grumpy old person at 66. A little young to be a curmudgeon IMO, but hey knock yourself out. What you will find in my local area, is tennis courts packed with tennis players.
jchamilt comment: This might move some leagues out of the private clubs, to semi-private or public courts, but so be it.
g4driver reply: Your answer doesn't work. Why? The public courts in Charleston, SC are more packed than the clubs. Why? They are cheaper. Our leagues play teams whose home courts are private against teams whose home courts are public. We don't have clubs play against clubs, private vs private. Segregation doesn't work in tennis for us. Our courts are packed, public and private. Let's add another twist. Bad economy, so how many new courts/facilities do you guess are being built here and elsewhere? Not many if any.
jchamilt,
I never tried to make the age groups brackets equal, so don't come on here an twist my words. My posts are there for you to reread. I understand Biology and I think you could really use the chance to revisit "Biology", as I think you could really benefit from getting laid once or twice year.
Please get on a bus, a plane, or drive to Charleston, SC. Pick a month other than Dec or Jan. I will be happy to give you a personal tour of this city along with every major tennis facility, private and PUBLIC in the metro area. What you will find is this: There are too many USTA players playing tennis in "The Best Tennis Town in America" given the limited number of courts.
I don't care it it is public or private, the courts are packed with people from 6pm to 10pm and later Monday through Thursday during every league starting in late Jan to early Dec. The ONLY exception is during the 8 to 10 week window in the summer when there are only Mixed Leagues. The current Senior Leagues play on Saturday morning, and Super Senior play on Sunday afternoons. I live in the Bible Belt. You aren't gone to see leagues on Sunday morning in the South, like you aren't going to find grits in Northern California, or Maine. Just a fact. Accept it.
In Charleston, women start play at 6 pm , with men scheduled to start at 730 pm. Men don't normally start at 730p, since most women's matches go late. This is a fact. In 2012, our local leagues will play a 10 pt TB in lieu of the 3rd set, to speed up play.
You seem completely wrapped around the axel and spun up tighter than a top about having older players play with younger players due to "Biology" Let it go. 25000 USTA members spoke up. You had your chance and you missed it. Even had you had completed the survey, your opinion would be in the minority as evidenced by the stats the USTA showed. I don't hear or see the local 50+ crowd I hit with complaining.
It isn't about the money at all. It is about guys like me who wanted to play more tennis. You had that chance with 18+, 50+, and 60+ Guys like me had one chance at 18+. So the 50-54 year olds now have to play with some 40 to 49 year olds, and the 60+ folks have to play with some 55-59 year old folks. And your big argument, is these older players are at a disadvantage due to "biology" since you get slower and lose strength as you age? Is that it? Welcome to life. Instead of crying in your beer, get off the fricking keyboard, and get outside and hit some tennis balls. Two nights ago I play with two people over 55 and one 60+er. Three sets. Fun tennis.
Last night, I had two 60 year players call me and ask me to play. I was already hitting with two 40 year olds and a 60 year old, so I called two 30 something 4.0s and set up the 60+ guys to hit with the 30 something 4.0s. After the match, one 30 year old went home, along with one 60 year old, while one of 30 year olds, three 40 year olds and two 60 year olds went out for beer and pizza. We had a blast. This is what tennis is about. We hit, had fun and then went out. My 18+ team has four players over 60. They aren't complaining at all. Neither are the nine guys over 50. They will play 18+, 40+, and 55+.
OrangePower was right.
Last edited:
OrangePower
Legend
There are several logistical reasons, including lack of courts.
League matches need to be scheduled, and courts reserved. In some leagues/areas (not mine), USTA assists with making court reservations for a league. But mostly, and this is the case in my area, team captains are responsible for arranging, scheduling and reserving courts. Let me ask - have you ever been a captain? I have, and scheduling is not an easy job, especially during times of year when there are multiple leagues going on. You talk about public courts and so on, but in most cases these can't be scheduled or reserved, or are limited in terms of how many courts can be reserved. It's not like when you and some buddies want to play, and you go to the local park and hope to find an empty court. That does not work for league.
The other logistical consideration is having enough players on a team, and enough teams participating in each flight such that there are sufficient matches to be played. Diluting leagues by adding another age bracket in addition to existing ones might be spreading things too thin. This is part of what the USTA determined via their survey and research, but possibly, you have access to better information :-?
I don't know court situation in Charleston SC, but I can talk about the court situation in Ann Arbor, MI; Coachella Valley, CA where I live half the year and Whittier, CA where I grew up and visit often. Let me talk about each one of these locations and address the court situation.
Ann Arbor, MI Population 110,000
This is a university town and the university just built (6 years ago) 20 NEW courts, 8 inside and 12 outside. This new facility has started having some USTA league matches, maybe 4 teams not a full compliment of USTA age brackets. Because the university wants to make money they make arrangements to allow these courts to be used for a fee. These courts are blocked off 2 to 6 PM M-F (varsity practice), matches and tournaments. These dates of use are known long in advance so possibly more USTA teams could play there.
There are three private clubs in Ann Arbor with both indoor and outdoor courts. Although it is for the private clubs benefit to schedule as many USTA league teams as possible, I know that one of the clubs does not have a full set of teams while another has many teams even in the same division such as 2 or even 3 men's 4.5 teams.
There are three high schools in Ann Arbor. Each high school has a minimum of 8 courts. These courts are occasionally reserved by the city rec department for lessons. I am sure the rec department would love to make money renting out these courts for USTA team matches.
My experience is that not all these tennis courts (university, private clubs, high school) are being used and could be scheduled for USTA matches.
Coachella Valley (from Palm Springs to Indian Wells), CA
I am guessing, but I would bet there are close to 20 gated communities with tennis courts. I get invited to play at two of these and belong to one "tennis club" in a gated community and live at another gated community with tennis courts. All of these communities could have USTA league teams, few do. It just takes one member of these gated communities to schedule courts for a USTA team. Most tennis in the valley is played in the morning. I have had no problem getting a court at 11 AM or later. League matches are scheduled at noon. There are many communities that have lighted courts, but few people play at night, at least in the winter months when I am here.
Whittier, CA
In Whittier there are tennis courts at Whittier College (a private college), Palm Park and Whittier Narrows Tennis Center, Rio Hondo Junior College and Whittier High School. I have played tennis at each of these locations and I know that not all have USTA league teams. Although I have not contacted Whittier College or Rio Hondo JC I am wondering why they would be any different than the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. That is they want to defray some of their costs for their tennis facilities by renting them out.
All I am saying is I think courts can be found if you look around. I am wondering do other communities have gated developments with tennis courts, high schools or public parks with tennis courts or colleges with tennis courts? My experience is all of these could possibly be used. What is unique about these three city that makes me think there are courts available?
I have been a captain of 3 USTA league teams. The USTA does the scheduling. Certain division play on certain days, so courts have to be available at that time. If I had a team and didn't belong to a private club, I would have to talk to someone at the university, college, city rec department or parks department to see if courts could be reserved for a certain time each week or every other week if I wanted my team to play. If I knew someone on my team in a gated community with tennis courts, I would talk to that person to see if courts could be reserved. My experience indicates that this is not impossible. I do think that the private clubs would not like this. What do you think?
My experience on dilution of teams related only to Ann Arbor, MI and Coachella valley. By just adding a 40+ group and leaving everything else the same, it would give more 50+ players a chance to play down. I do not sense a problem only a plus. That is it is easier to play down if one wants to, into a smaller age group. Most USTA league players are in the 40 to 50 age group so I expect more people would play. What I think, and I may be wrong, is that some private clubs are too busy to add another bracket. Not every club has to have every level in every age bracket. In Ann Arbor and Coachella valley I could play on teams at 4 different locations. I actually drive further than I need to to play on a specific team. So if dilution were a problem in Ann Arbor, and I do not think is would be, I would play on a team at a different club that had enough players to make a good team. Teams in Ann Arbor may drive as far as an hour (St. Clare Shores) away or as close as 10 minutes (other clubs in Ann Arbor).
OrangePower
Legend
I've captained teams both club teams and unaffiliated teams. I'm in CA, in the SF Bay Area.
For the non-club teams that I've captained, I've had to organize courts. Much harder than you'd think. Many universities and schools will not allow reservation and use of their courts for league, even though I'm sure they could use the money. Maybe it has to do with liability issues, maybe with a policy of keeping courts available for their students or other uses, I don't know. Same goes for rec /park department courts. Bottom line is that running a team out of non-club facilities can be done, and I've done it, but it does take significant effort on the part of the captain, and not everyone is willing to do it.
With club teams, clubs will not allow more than a certain number of league matches per week to be scheduled. This is so that there is sufficient court time available to members for non-league purposes - social, lessons, etc. I think this is reasonable.
Running a club team out of alternate facilities is an issue, even assuming you can find alternate courts, because someone would have to pay extra for use of those facilities. You can't expect the club to pay for that. And the members of the team will complain at having to pay extra when they are already paying for club membership. Been there, done that.
Bottom line is, at least in my area, I don't think it's feasible to add a brand new league from a court usage point of view. Perhaps your experience is different in the areas you play out of. But remember that USTA is national and so has to accommodate every area.
I disagree, I don't think there is a huge difference between 18 and 36 37 year old guys. I played 4.0 usta when I was 36 and was by far the strongest singles player on my team and I only lost a couple of matches all year. when I hit 40 though my knees starting to hurt and so I couldn't compete with a 18 yea old even at my same skill level. so for me, 40 is a good cut off.
Similar threads
