Philosophy of your team/club-- business or pleasure?

[ABtennis]

I'm curious as to the mentality of the various teams/clubs out there. Does your team/club promote a fun USTA environment where everybody plays the same number of matches regardless of skill, rarely practices, and is loosely organized? Or are you on a team where winning is the main motive. This type of team plays the same players week in, week out. The team will have organized, coached practices, and some players won't play the whole year.

Last year, I played for the team at my small home club where it was too casual. The captain insisted on playing everybody the same number of matches, there were no formal practices, and sometimes doubles partners in a match had never played together before. Although we had a skilled team, we finished with a losing record. This season I am going to play on a team from a club where it's win at all costs. This is also a small club but they win a lot. The same players play almost every match, and much of the team sits out the whole season. Ringers are brought in whenever possible. This small club had 3 teams almost win nationals in 2011, with 2 winning and 1 in the semis. We just had a 2.5 hour coached practice last night.

I want to experience both ends of the spectrum to see which I prefer. I have a feeling it'll be something in the middle of these two extremes.

 

[goober]

I'm curious as to the mentality of the various teams/clubs out there. Does your team/club promote a fun USTA environment where everybody plays the same number of matches regardless of skill, rarely practices, and is loosely organized? Or are you on a team where winning is the main motive. This type of team plays the same players week in, week out. The team will have organized, coached practices, and some players won't play the whole year.

Last year, I played for the team at my small home club where it was too casual. The captain insisted on playing everybody the same number of matches, there were no formal practices, and sometimes doubles partners in a match had never played together before. Although we had a skilled team, we finished with a losing record. This season I am going to play on a team from a club where it's win at all costs. This is also a small club but they win a lot. The same players play almost every match, and much of the team sits out the whole season. Ringers are brought in whenever possible. This small club had 3 teams almost win nationals in 2011, with 2 winning and 1 in the semis. We just had a 2.5 hour coached practice last night.

I want to experience both ends of the spectrum to see which I prefer. I have a feeling it'll be something in the middle of these two extremes.

I don't think you are going to enjoy this new team if you are one of the ones riding the pine all season.

Personally my team is mostly made up of people I have known for a long time. We brought in more guys just to fill out the roster, but they are not ringers, most of them were average to some below average. Everybody gets to play, but in important matches I may put the better players in over weaker players.

We have practices, which are really just practice sets, but not everybody attends. We are fairly competitive in the league, but unless I stoop to the tactics the top teams use, I know we won't win the league. But I won't do that since it would totally change the comraderie and makeup of the team.

 

[SweetH2O]

Our better players get more matches, but everyone gets in the lineup at some point. We have a standing night to play practice sets once a week if the weather cooperates, and we're lucky if half the players show up for that. Some players have established playing partners, but you can still get put with anyone at anytime depending on availability. We are usually in the hunt for the playoffs - sometimes we make it and sometimes we don't. But we know we're not built to make a deep playoff run anyway.

 

[dizzlmcwizzl]

If I am one of the better players and we have a competitive team I want the captain to put feelings second and manage to win. We do not need to win at all costs but he should still manage expecting to win every match. This means that dominant players play much more than the second tier but everyone plays some.

Now, if I am not on a competitive team and if I am not among the elite players on the team I encourage fair and balanced scheduling.

However, if I am much better than the rest of the team and we are not a competitive group I will be looking for a new team soon.

 

[Jim A]

I think it depends on the team.

If the team has aspirations the captain has an duty to let team members know that certain players will play in certain situations.

We had a good team that went to District's a couple seasons ago and lost every match 3-2 when we were playing everyone.

This year one of our teams realized we had a good shot to make playoffs and as a team shuffled the roster a bit for the final weeks and we made it to the Championship Match at Districts.

We'll have a solid team next season, on paper at least, and will schedule around the other good teams to have our "A" players while balancing out the rest of the schedule to field competitive lineups each match.

This year I'm probably in limbo, having been a #2 singles player with 2 "#1's# coming on board, and our #1 staying as well. So that means a lot of time playing #2 singles against weaker teams or #3 doubles. However if it means a trip back to Districts I'm all for it.

 

[LuckyR]

Our teams are usually made up of players of various skills (as you mentioned) but also players with variable availability to make randomly timed matches. So "it works out", the captain plays the players that are available for matches he knows we are going to win and for the top teams he really tries hard to have the better players play, if they are available. At the end of the season, it may be that lesser players with more availability played more than better players, but "it works out" since he was able to field the best team he could for the important matches. In the post season, he plays the best team he can field, of course so it may be that lesser players feel slighted, but they probably played more total matches so my guess is they don't complain too hard.

 

[mahgeetah]

My philosophy as a captain is that everyone gets to play an equal amount of matches. Of course due to rounding some people will get less matches than others and I will assign 1 less match to the weakest players. I think it's lame when someone is asked to join a team and only gets to play when the captain is desperate.

I've scheduled this season so that in general the weakest players will play against the weakest teams and I've tried to arrange the schedule so that the strongest players will play the strongest teams. Last season this resulted in a winning percentage below 15% but this season we're at the 40% rate for winning matches as a team as several guys have improved significantly. If subs are needed against the top teams I will ask the top players before the weaker ones. If a weaker player wants more sub opportunities they can earn them by better play on the court.

I'm proud of the fact that we don't have any players who are going to move up a level as it shows that I'm not relying on ringers to win matches for us. I'd like to add another strong player at our level next fall and I think we can move into the 60-65% range for winning matches.

 

[ronray43]

We have both types of teams at our clubs. The better teams recruit the best players and play the best players in order to win locally and advance.

Then we have our "not the best" teams for those of us (including me) who aren't at the top of their particular rating. Everyone gets to play the same number of matches, and winning is secondary to playing a good match and having a couple of beers afterwards.

Both groups of teams have fun, just different skill levels and objectives.

 

[jdubbs]

I played on a "win at all costs" team last year, and now I play on a loose team.

We played our old team a couple of weeks ago and I wanted to win our doubles match so bad, but we lost. Such is life.

More fun to play on a team where you can actually play matches.

 

[yonexpurestorm]

my team went 0-8 this last doubles only season. we only had 7 on the roster and basically always defaulted a line. i hate losing and would really like to be on a winning team, but i like the guys i play with. i think next season we are going to merge with another team and try and do better. also this season i will only be playing singles, which i like. i know i could easily join another team because i am a good singles player and most teams need good singles players. if we dont get something put together then ill find another team. however, losing every week does kind of suck.

 

[J_R_B]

Definitely fun. I was fortunate to have a good group of guys in terms of availability and whatnot, so I was able to put guys in the lineup in a position to win almost every match. Obviously, for the tougher matches, the weaker players didn't play, and for the easier matches, I got guys in the lineup where they could win matches, so almost everyone had a winning record on the team. That was my best accomplishment as a captain last year.

The team came in 3rd in the league at 6-4.

 

[gameboy]

There is no such thing as "business" at this level of competition.

You are playing in a league where you are playing against people who are arbitrarily grouped together. And there are people who are FAR better than you practically everywhere you look, you just don't happen to have them playing in your artificially constructed league.

In that situation, caring too much about wins is kinda sad as it means so little. You should be out there to have fun first, win/lose is really just a by-product.

Seriously, unless you are playing for money, caring too much about win/loss is just dumb.

 

[AutoXer]

I play on all three types of teams. One the whole purpose is to drink beer. We have practices for purpose of drinking beer. On match day everyone starts drinking about 730am for a 9am match. We drink on change overs and after the match. We don't win very often, but it is very fun and relaxing playing with these guys. On the serious team, it's all about winning. A more pressure packed environment, but still alot of fun.

I prefer the happy medium, play to win but still have fun and have a few beers after the match.

 

[slice bh compliment]

Club and park where I play? Really varies. Seems the women are pretty competitive. The guys are all over the place.
As for my "group" of regulars...
We play socially. We drill. We play matches. We have gotten away from league. Just play. Totally loose. Inclusive. Good level, though. Most of us played some college tennis. Couple of teaching pros/former teaching pros. Some play 35/40 and over tournaments or 4.5 and 5.0. Some just get together for laid-back tennis. Sometimes it's 3 of us on a court, sometimes 2, sometimes 4. Sometimes 6 on two courts (my favorite, so we can mix it up, a set of each).

Loving the game into our 30s and 40s. Sometimes a beer or two after tennis is a part of it all. Mostly, we have kids and stuff, so after 2 or 3 hrs of tennis, it's time to be family men.

One of my buds has kids exactly my daughter's age...so they get a court while we play....then we play a set of mixed dubs. Oh, and that's more competitive than our singles, LOL!

Cheers to friendly tennis at a good level.

That said, if I had to play on some team where records mater and the captain is all stressed-out, I am not sure if I'd overachieve or just clam up. Since I do not know, maybe you guys on the winning teams have a good thing going.

But so do I, and I'm thankful.

 

[j00dypoo]

My team is made up of guys that have known each other for a while. It's a neighborhood team that plays for the fun and social aspect. We are competitive each year and may or may not make playoffs. Although lately, we've been down to the bare minimum of players and have had to forfeit some matches.

I prefer having fun over being super serious and competitive. Whenever we play those "giterdone" teams I always cringe at their rudeness and extreme competitiveness in a rec league. Don't throw your fist up and exclaim "COME ON!" when I miss an easy return.

 

[slice bh compliment]

^FYI^
Fistpumps and yelling for errors can only be done below the 3.5 level...or at a higher level if your name is Muzza, SoderJerk or Hatin' Hewitt.

 

[adamX012]

pleasure for me only.

No team club or whatsoever.

Love to join one with a group of wise players...

 

[nkbond]

For me, the point of playing any type of "game" is to win...that's why we keep score.

If I wanted to stay in shape, I'd spend more of my time in the gym, or on the bike...

If I wanted to drink beer with buddies, I'd do just that. Drinking a beer after the match is great, but I've never encountered a good USTA player who drinks during a match (I'm sure others will have differing stories; I've played some decent players who were drinking during the match, I just don't recall ever losing to one).

btw, one tradition at my workplace (where we have four courts) is "drunk tennis", fridays after work during the summer. There is lots of beer, music, etc. It's most fun when people come out who have never or rarely play tennis. It's goofing off, with tennis, so I've got no problems with that. USTA is not goofing off. You pay money to play, it's structured to give you good local competition and has an ultimate goal of a national championship. Doesn't have to be your personal goal, but that is the reason why many play USTA. Same reason any amateur athlete plays competitively, in a structured competitive environment. You can goof off at any time, on your own watch, with your own set of friends. Don't need an organization like the USTA to get that done.

Just "having fun", drinking, staying in shape, etc. are all things I hear from players who typically don't win a lot. they sound like excuses for not winning, IMO.

I think winning is the most fun, but, like I said, that's why I like to play games where the score is kept.

 

[OrangePower]

For me, the point of playing any type of "game" is to win...that's why we keep score.

If I wanted to stay in shape, I'd spend more of my time in the gym, or on the bike...

If I wanted to drink beer with buddies, I'd do just that. Drinking a beer after the match is great, but I've never encountered a good USTA player who drinks during a match (I'm sure others will have differing stories; I've played some decent players who were drinking during the match, I just don't recall ever losing to one).

btw, one tradition at my workplace (where we have four courts) is "drunk tennis", fridays after work during the summer. There is lots of beer, music, etc. It's most fun when people come out who have never or rarely play tennis. It's goofing off, with tennis, so I've got no problems with that. USTA is not goofing off. You pay money to play, it's structured to give you good local competition and has an ultimate goal of a national championship. Doesn't have to be your personal goal, but that is the reason why many play USTA. Same reason any amateur athlete plays competitively, in a structured competitive environment. You can goof off at any time, on your own watch, with your own set of friends. Don't need an organization like the USTA to get that done.

Just "having fun", drinking, staying in shape, etc. are all things I hear from players who typically don't win a lot. they sound like excuses for not winning, IMO.

I think winning is the most fun, but, like I said, that's why I like to play games where the score is kept.

Winning is nice. So I kinda understand where you're coming from. But winning isn't everything. If the only reason you play is to win, then what happens when you can no longer win regularly? Would you stop playing?

Understand that 'winning' in recreational tennis is completely artificial. I don't know what level you are, but for the sake of argument let's assume you are a 4.0. In this case, even if you are the best 4.0 around, you still suck tennis-wise in the grand scheme of things. There are many, many players that you will never have a hope of beating... ever. I'm a 4.5, and I suck. I do ok at 4.5, but I'm not at the top of the level. Of course, if winning meant everything to me, I could contrive to do really badly next season, get bumped down, and dominate at 4.0. But that would not change the fact that I suck - just that I would then be at a level where I suck less relative to the others in the level.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that if you play only because you enjoy wining, then sooner or later you will be promoted to a level where you can no longer win, or else you will get older and not as able within your level as you are now, and then you will give up the game. I've seen this happen and I think it's sad.

 

[nkbond]

I guess what I'm trying to say is that if you play only because you enjoy wining, then sooner or later you will be promoted to a level where you can no longer win, or else you will get older and not as able within your level as you are now, and then you will give up the game. I've seen this happen and I think it's sad.

I think I said the "point of playing" a game where score is kept is to win. I also said I think winning is the "most fun"...hitting a tennis ball is always fun.

I am a 4.0 who has been bumped up to 4.5 on multiple occasions. 4.5 is a level where I can make things interesting, sometimes, but I don't win as much. I am older now (pushing 50) and also have a very compromised ACL-reconstructed knee. I agree with you 100%, in my prime I sucked, and I suck now.

But, in the grand scheme of things, I know how to hit a tennis ball, and I like competition. I will not stop playing. It is not sad.

So, I guess my point is I love to compete, to be on the court when the points mean something (meaning here is relative, not suggesting they mean anything of significance in the cosmic sense). I like being in a match tiebreak at state or sectionals with my team watching, needing a win to go up or win the match. I like the screaming and joy that go along with those matches. I've also lost during some of those moments too. I like the pressure...I don't like to skydive, or bungee, or any other dangerous things, so I guess it's my adrenaline rush...

 

[j00dypoo]

It's not like us social players don't care to compete. We play for competition as well. We just take it for what it is - recreational sport. Of course it's fun to win, no matter the level you play at. But we aren't being televised and making money. We're playing friendly competition for FUN.

 

[nkbond]

That's cool. I play lots of social matches also. USTA certainly isn't the only way to compete.

But, playing on a team where people are depending on your result kicks up the pressure a notch.

You like to compete for FUN; I like to play for fun and always try to win social matches also.

But, try serving at 8-9 in a match tiebreak in the finals of state versus the same scenario playing your old tennis buddy Ralph on Sunday morning at the public hard courts.

I do both...it's a lot tougher when *other* people besides just you are concerned with the outcome. I enjoy both scenarios. I just enjoy it more when other people are pulling for the result and it's all within the USTA team context (well, at least when the result is positive...if it's an L, it can be fairly painful).

 

[tennisee]

I think the balance is different for different people.
Where I play there is no USTA, and we more or less just choose the division we want to play in. So you come across trophy hunters who deliberately play in divs too low, and other delusional (or mistaken) types who play way above their level. It’s a sort of honour system I guess, and it works remarkably well - I’ve had competitive matches nearly every week.
I play for fun, but competition adds to that fun in that you have to work out new tactics and try to find a way to win with different opponents each week. That adds a bit more that just hitting with the same guys all the time. While it’s nice to win, I’d consider that I’m playing to low if I won more than about 60% of matches.
I find exercise like gym and bike really boring, so tennis is my only exercise and I like to play four times a week For a lot of guys it’s a work/family commitment thing, and they can only get out for matches, so part of the trick is finding a team who wants to practise as well as play matches.

 

[OrangePower]

I think I said the "point of playing" a game where score is kept is to win. I also said I think winning is the "most fun"...hitting a tennis ball is always fun.

I am a 4.0 who has been bumped up to 4.5 on multiple occasions. 4.5 is a level where I can make things interesting, sometimes, but I don't win as much. I am older now (pushing 50) and also have a very compromised ACL-reconstructed knee. I agree with you 100%, in my prime I sucked, and I suck now.

But, in the grand scheme of things, I know how to hit a tennis ball, and I like competition. I will not stop playing. It is not sad.

So, I guess my point is I love to compete, to be on the court when the points mean something (meaning here is relative, not suggesting they mean anything of significance in the cosmic sense). I like being in a match tiebreak at state or sectionals with my team watching, needing a win to go up or win the match. I like the screaming and joy that go along with those matches. I've also lost during some of those moments too. I like the pressure...I don't like to skydive, or bungee, or any other dangerous things, so I guess it's my adrenaline rush...

Fair enough. As long as it's the competition that drives you rather than just the winning. A couple of guys on my 4.5 team stopped playing this year because they hadn't been winning much for the last 2 years (both are close to 60); they tried for a couple of years to appeal down to 4.0 but were denied. Folks like that giving up the game is what I think is sad. On the other hand we have a few guys with similar records who still look forward to getting some playing time each season even though they know they are more likely to lose than to win.

 

[OrangePower]

I play for fun, but competition adds to that fun in that you have to work out new tactics and try to find a way to win with different opponents each week. That adds a bit more that just hitting with the same guys all the time. While it’s nice to win, I’d consider that I’m playing to low if I won more than about 60% of matches.

Quoted for truth.

I find exercise like gym and bike really boring, so tennis is my only exercise and I like to play four times a week.

Exact same situation for me.