Radical idea? Different USTA team match formats for men and women?

[time_fly]

Both of the men's teams I captain, one 18+ and one 40+, are overflowing with guys who want to play singles. In our area, both leagues use a 1 singles + 3 doubles court format, with an upcoming change to 1 singles + 4 doubles for age 40+ playoffs (18+ uses the standard 2 singles / 3 doubles format). I always hear about how nobody wants to play singles, but every team I know has multiple singles players. On the other hand, I do know a lot of ladies' teams that have only 1 singles player who was painstakingly recruited to cover that court. Would it be reasonable to consider going to 2 singles + 3 doubles for 18+ and 40+ for men only? In our area, USTA matches are played indoors and club size limitations are another reason for the 4 court team matches. Would 2 singles + 2 doubles be subversive?

 

[esgee48]

Interesting idea. Would probably require approval of LLC and other team captains for each match. For clubs with court issues, they should also get in their 3 cents.

 

[atatu]

I've been saying this for years, the reason USTA dropped the extra singles line for the over 40 league is because women's teams were having problems finding two singles players.

 

[Roforot]

I think it'd be great. For guys it'd be 8 people playing vs 9. I don't think that would have a negative impact on team sizes; if anything it would be helpful b/c then more people could play singles. I say this as someone who strongly prefers doubles btw. Is there some bylaw that adult men and women have to follow the same format?

 

[TennisOTM]

My area uses different formats for men vs. women during some of the local leagues. For example, the women might play on days/times when there are more courts availalbe, so they can have an extra line per team match compared to men playing in the same league.

National has done surveys in the past on preferences for league format, like for 40 and over. You'd think they would have the data to see whether men answer those survey questions differently from women?

 

[Moon Shooter]

...
National has done surveys in the past on preferences for league format, like for 40 and over. You'd think they would have the data to see whether men answer those survey questions differently from women?

Do you know if USTA shares the survey data with its members?

My 40 and over team had to default a court post season due to the new requirement to have 9 players.

I know my view is not popular but I stopped playing singles unless it is no ad. The matches just get insanely long when you play deuce/ad - and, for me, it is no longer fun. If the matches were shorter I think more 40 and over players would be ok with playing a singles match.

 

[Roforot]

I much prefer doubles. I don't like fast 4 or no-ad playing in general for either doubles or singles. I'd rather keep 40+ leagues exclusively doubles than compromise to a shorter format. I don't think singles matches last longer than doubles so the timing shouldn't be an issue.

The only thing is we should have 18+ leagues w/ singles available at all times. In my opinion if there's not enough people to do both leagues, I'd rather have the 18+ to encourage more younger players to join the league.

FWIW I am doing the flex singles league this winter as well... despite my preference for doubles.

 

[HBK4life]

I've been saying this for years, the reason USTA dropped the extra singles line for the over 40 league is because women's teams were having problems finding two singles players.

This is correct.

 

[TennisOTM]

Do you know if USTA shares the survey data with its members?

My 40 and over team had to default a court post season due to the new requirement to have 9 players.

I know my view is not popular but I stopped playing singles unless it is no ad. The matches just get insanely long when you play deuce/ad - and, for me, it is no longer fun. If the matches were shorter I think more 40 and over players would be ok with playing a singles match.

I never saw the results of the survey that I received almost exactly two years ago. These were the options given (ranked choice survey):

Option A: 5 court format with 1 singles and 4 doubles
Option B: 5 court format with 2 singles and 3 doubles
Option C: 4 court format with 1 singles and 3 doubles, using sets/games won as the 1st two tiebreak procedures when a match is 2-2
Option D: 4 court format with 1 singles and 3 doubles, using #1 doubles as the tiebreak when a match is 2-2
Option E: 4 court format with 1 singles and 3 doubles, using a Points Per Position format

Apparently option A was the winner of this survey nationally, given that they eventually switched to that format for Nationals, but who knows? Would be pretty illuminating to see these results broken down by area and gender, etc.

 

[socallefty]

What is the reason to have age limited leagues when the leagues are already stratified into NTRP levels and players of like levels play in each league? It seems like the only reason to have a 40+ league is to limit adult players below 40 from playing for part of the year which would seem contrary to the idea of expanding tennis amongst younger players. They should just have 18+ leagues all year long with a mix of singles and doubles.

If you have age group leagues, then they should be Open format leagues and they can run that in parallel to the 18+ NTRP leagues..

 

[schmke]

What is the reason to have age limited leagues when the leagues are already stratified into NTRP levels and players of like levels play in each league? It seems like the only reason to have a 40+ league is to limit adult players below 40 from playing for part of the year which would seem contrary to the idea of expanding tennis amongst younger players. They should just have 18+ leagues all year long with a mix of singles and doubles.

If you have age group leagues, then they should be Open format leagues and they can run that in parallel to the 18+ NTRP leagues..

Two reasons.

First, whether it is valid or not, some older players don't want to play the young kids, so a 40+ or 55+ league gives them an opportunity to play league but know they will avoid those players.

Second, and perhaps the bigger reason for the USTA, is it gives them an opportunity to generate more revenue from the segment of players that they have a lot of, those over 40.

Note that some areas offer an 18-39 league, often played at the same time as the 40+ league, for the younger players to play.

 

[Moon Shooter]

I also think many of the older players think the younger players are more likely to be sandbaggers. I haven't seen the data on it but I suspect they may be right. It could be that the younger players are just improving faster and play a different style of play. Younger players sometimes gun the ball but may be in the lower levels because they are not consistent. It can be a different style of play that may not appeal to some older players. Where as many older players tend to be more consistent and so if they also gun the ball then they are just at a higher level.

 

[socallefty]

Two reasons.

First, whether it is valid or not, some older players don't want to play the young kids, so a 40+ or 55+ league gives them an opportunity to play league but know they will avoid those players.

Second, and perhaps the bigger reason for the USTA, is it gives them an opportunity to generate more revenue from the segment of players that they have a lot of, those over 40.

Note that some areas offer an 18-39 league, often played at the same time as the 40+ league, for the younger players to play.

I get the first reason and can see the need for a 55+ league where seniors play only with each other. But if you are between 40-55, do you really need your own league because you are afraid to compete with younger players? Most regions don’t have the 18-39 league and those young players are just locked out from league play for half the year.

I don’t understand the second reason above as the 40+ players can participate in any 18+ league also and so the USTA can make money from them. Every 40+ player on my 40+ teams in the past also participated in the 18+ league seasons and no one dropped out stating that they didn’t want to play younger players. Is that really going to be such a common occurrence with other teams? On the other hand, my 18-39 players didn’t like the fact that they could not play on our club league team for certain parts of the year.

 

[schmke]

I get the first reason and can see the need for a 55+ league where seniors play only with each other. But if you are between 40-55, do you really need your own league because you are afraid to compete with younger players? Most regions don’t have the 18-39 league and those young players are just locked out from league play for half the year.

I don’t understand the second reason above as the 40+ players can participate in any 18+ league also and so the USTA can make money from them. Every 40+ player on my 40+ teams in the past also participated in the 18+ league seasons and no one dropped out stating that they didn’t want to play younger players. Is that really going to be such a common occurrence with other teams? On the other hand, my 18-39 players didn’t like the fact that they could not play on our club league team for certain parts of the year.

The second point is more about the USTA getting to offer an additional league which means more money to them. Your argument may be they could actually make more money by offering just another season of 18+ because they'd get more players than they do with 40+, and in fact some areas do have multiple seasons of a given age division in a given year so this in fact can be and is done. It is really up to your league coordinator and court availability and interest.

 

[Moon Shooter]

socallefty​

I think you are right about the players 40-55 mostly being fine playing 18 and over. Most do play both leagues. But in my area there are not enough players for most of the 55 and older all men's leagues. So allowing 40 and over makes it easier to form the league.

 

[Roforot]

I kind of object to 55 being called senior league as I'm getting close to that age... in general, I feel the USTA should be more inclusive and make sure that 18-39 years old are encouraged to play and join the league. I'd rather they set leagues up that were doubles only if they want to cater to the older demographics.

Now, the counter argument is to have a league for 18-39 years olds. This may actually be interesting for players. I know that at my local club, they had a social gathering for 21-30 years olds called sip & serve... and well people older than 30 complained and wanted to hit and hang around w/ the cute ladies/hot guys. I think they ended up creating another event for 30+ using "wine" as a joke/pun related to "whining"

 

[socallefty]

I kind of object to 55 being called senior league as I'm getting close to that age

When you are 75, will you still use the same reason to object to 75+ players being called seniors? I’m 56 and have no issue if someone calls me a senior. That is not necessarily a pejorative term in my view and just reflects that I’ve spent more years on Earth than most people.

 

[TennisOTM]

I kind of object to 55 being called senior league as I'm getting close to that age...

Ha, if you've hit 50 then you are already a senior according the World Senior Games, which has an age 50-54 division. Enjoy it!

Huntsman World Senior Games | Huntsman World Senior Games

seniorgames.net

 

[ttwarrior1]

we play two singles and 3 doubles in 18 plus format