Moveforwardalways
Hall of Fame
I think there may be a disconnect here
USTA league discourages improvement.
- Thread starter J011yroger
- Start date
raftervolley
Rookie
I have played on 4.5 usta teams in the past, but not currently. I have won usta tournaments at the open level, 4.5 level, and age levels such as 35 and up. I dont play on teams any more because I have many people to play singles and doubles with who are at my level or better nearby.
Moveforwardalways
Hall of Fame
It’s not surprising that someone who has won open tournaments cannot imagine what it is like to be a 3.0 or 3.5 player with marginal athletic ability attempting to enjoy recreational tennis. Maybe try taking some perspective.
It may not have been true in the year you played, but I've absolutely seen former D1 players self rate at 4.5 and play on teams. I've also seen guys who played post college, in satellites and futures while in their 20s. The USTA even lays out guidelines for these guys. The 40 year old, still in great shape, recreational player with a D1/futures/satellite tour background is the gold mine of many great 4.5 league teams. And before anyone says "Well yeah 40 years old is old!" Ummm no. I hit with a couple diff guys who are 40+ and in fantastic shape. Age is simply a number. They move just as well as the others. Recovery might be different, but when fresh...
Guidelines:
jdawgg
Semi-Pro
I’ve been to 4.5 nationals three times. What you’re saying is still false.
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
I'm of the same mindset. There is one team in the area that does heavy recruiting among the ex-Div III schools and I've run across some great players when we play their team. I relish the opportunity to face someone that good, even if I get my clock cleaned. When would I otherwise have that opportunity?
Something similar happened to me in volleyball. I was playing in a rec coed 6 tournament in the top pool and the other team's 3 guys all played for the US National B Team [not quite Olympic caliber but pretty darn good]. As they were lining up to serve, the 2 guys in the front row [6' 4"+] are trying to block our vision of the server. Legal and accepted at high levels [as long as you don't move after the ref blows the whistle]. But in a rec tournament? Against non-collegiate rec players?? I took it as compliment: we're enough of a threat that they had to pull out their A game. But I found it amusing also.
Are you calling the USTA rating guidelines false? Bc they absolutely lay out the scenario for how a former D1 player can self rate 4.5. It also lays out the rules for how a former satellite/futures tour player can self rate 4.5. See link I posted/
Or are you calling me a liar?
I can't tell, bc either would make you obtuse to the reality of 4.5 league play.
You playing at nationals 3 times has absolutely nothing to do with the USTA rules that allow a blending of former D1/pro players with current recreational 4.5 play.
I said it earlier in this thread, and I'll say it again: If you're a mens 4.5/5.0 player (like myself) and you want to test your skill set against someone of that tennis pedigree, then an open tournament draw is a great place to do that. League play is not, and should not be the place for it.
FuzzyYellowBalls
Legend
I've had the same experience, there are a lot of D1 guys playing 4.5 tennis in Dallas, they don't make nationals often though, they don't really form a super team which would be absolutely necessary to get out of Texas. In areas like that there are so many 4.5 teams the players are all spread out. Some, not all, but some of the better 4.5s play in maybe 1 team with friends, but play many more tournaments. Not scientific, but I'm not sure how often the best 4.5 players in Texas go to nationals.
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
I’ve come across a few ex D1 players in 4.5 league. But it seems pretty rare. I’m in PNW, which has the highest per capita nationals wins of any section.
I think it's fine that the USTA isn't about improving.
Leave that to the kids. People who want to get real good at tennis probably need to do so in their teens and 20s, and they can go for futures or college tennis or whatever.
People in their 40s, 50s, 60s who play a few times a week aren't gonna become 5.0s. Or even 30s, really - I don't think there's a lot of people who couldn't be 5.0s in their 20s who suddenly get real good later. And USTA is targeting lifelong players.
Leave that to the kids. People who want to get real good at tennis probably need to do so in their teens and 20s, and they can go for futures or college tennis or whatever.
People in their 40s, 50s, 60s who play a few times a week aren't gonna become 5.0s. Or even 30s, really - I don't think there's a lot of people who couldn't be 5.0s in their 20s who suddenly get real good later. And USTA is targeting lifelong players.
MyFearHand
Professional
This is why I’m a big fan of open tournaments over leagues. If enough people sign up for an open tournament then the lower level players do get a chance to play other lower level players. It’s true that sometimes you pull someone in the first round who destroys you, but if there were no leagues people would play more tournaments and get used to that.
The idea of USTA leagues has always been strange to me. Creating these tiny bands of players so in theory you can always get a competitive match. That doesn’t happen anyways. I think it’s better to just have a brackets and b brackets and be done with it.
Ultimately though, people don’t want to actually get better. There are so many players that I see spending many hours on court a week and if they simply changed the way they practiced they couldn’t help but improve. I understand recreational tennis is for fun and everyone has their own motivations, but it’s hard for me to wrap my head around playing tennis 4-5 days a week and not trying to improve aspects of your game as efficiently as possible.
I have a pretty large number of people who will hit but only 2 people who will happily drill with me. And many of the drills I want to do have a score line attached to them, I don’t just mean hitting 100 crosscourt balls.
Most people just like to play sets and sets are probably one of the most inefficient ways to improve. The amount of time you spend in a set not hitting a ball is insane and we don’t realize it until we watch an uncut video of us playing. People are often also unwilling to work on things during sets because they don’t want to risk losing. (Of course I understand you do need match practice to improve as well.)
Tl;dr people’s motivations are complicated and a lot of people don’t actually care about improving. I think it would be difficult to incentivize most of these people.
schmke
Legend
Tl;dr needs to go at the start, I read the whole thing first
You are right that motivations are complicated and not everyone wants to improve, or perhaps rather many would like to be better but aren't willing to put in the work to accomplish it. They just want to play and compete (and win).
Right or wrong, USTA League gives many of these people a venue to play tennis, and it grew as a result and in all likelihood cannibalized from tournaments in doing so. Hard to put that genie back in the bottle and tell people to go play open tournaments. Particularly when open tournaments simply don't work for 75+% of players.
Most TDs will do some sort of seeding of a draw which means the top players don't play each other first round, and increases the chances a lower rated player who enters the event will play a seed or stronger player. Getting blown out in one match is not a good use of either player's time and at the prices of tournaments now, why would a lower rated player do it? They don't. Even if you have a tournament format where first round losers get a second match, it still is likely the 3.0 or 3.5 level player is going to get blown out twice.
Don't believe my 75% number? Here is a chart showing the ratings distribution for league players.
So if 4.0s and above enter open tournaments, they really are not very inviting events to a large number of players who want value for their tennis dollar. Leagues aren't perfect, but do give a reasonable expectation of a "compatible" opponent that is near your level, and one can usually play a good portion of a season for less than a single tournament.
Last edited:
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
A lot of players I know played league because it was fun to be part of a team especially if the team socialized during/after practices and after matches. If you belong to a private club, you maybe don’t need that as you have a set social environment already. But, if you go around playing on different public courts, it is fun to have a set group that you compete with and hang out with on weekends - beer is often involved. Outside of this forum, I haven’t met too many players complain about sandbagging being a big issue and it certainly hasn’t for me either.
Most adults plateau within a couple of years of starting tennis and after that they play to have fun and compete with their friends. There are very few that continue to take lessons regularly after a couple of years. Even if they go and hit with their friends instead of playing matches, it is rarely to improve specific technique or footwork with purposeful drills - they end up playing points with feeds instead of serves/returns and call it practice.
Most adults plateau within a couple of years of starting tennis and after that they play to have fun and compete with their friends. There are very few that continue to take lessons regularly after a couple of years. Even if they go and hit with their friends instead of playing matches, it is rarely to improve specific technique or footwork with purposeful drills - they end up playing points with feeds instead of serves/returns and call it practice.
Not a fan of tournaments because of the unpredictability of the schedule. I like league because I know in advance what time the (one) match per week is and can schedule around that.
As far as I can tell, tournaments would mean unpredictable match times, and probably multiple matches in a weekend. I don't want that, as as far as I can tell I'm not alone.
It's easy to settle the dispute. Why don't you just name few of those
since they played on teams and the teams rosters are publicly published, there's nothing wrong with providing few examples.
Last edited:
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
The most egregious self-rate example I’ve encountered in a 4.5 usta league match was a player with initials TG, who won the state high school title multiple times.
He was one of the most talented junior players ever to come out of WA state. He had the type of world class magic hands that don’t exist in 4.5 leagues or even 5.0. It’s fair to say he was a 6.0 player in his college days. A smaller version of Brad Gilbert. Even if it’s true that he hardly touched a racquet in the 15-20 years after college, it was still very surprising to see him across the net from me as a 4.5 self-rate. He was playing dubs with his brother, who was a legit 4.5. But doubles is of course a strongest link wins sport, so it wasn’t quite fair with having a guy with his talent level on the court.
He looked quite embarrassed when I mentioned across the net before the match that I remembered him from high school and juniors. In fact, that embarrassment of getting recognized might have caused him to hang it up and retire from league play after that.
Last edited:
Moveforwardalways
Hall of Fame
Open tournament that includes both 3.0’s and open level players = half of all players get blown out in the first round by a clearly stronger player after paying an entry fee. No one benefits, no one learns anything useful. Terrible idea.
MyFearHand
Professional
So I've actually seen this in action and the key here is to give the seeded players a first round bye. I agree if the the unseeded players immediately play really good players then that wouldn't work well.
MyFearHand
Professional
Yeah, I know you're right that the predictability of matches for leagues are a reason many people like them.
MyFearHand
Professional
Tl;dr needs to go at the start, I read the whole thing first
You are right that motivations are complicated and not everyone wants to improve, or perhaps rather many would like to be better but aren't willing to put in the work to accomplish it. They just want to play and compete (and win).
Right or wrong, USTA League gives many of these people a venue to play tennis, and it grew as a result and in all likelihood cannibalized from tournaments in doing so. Hard to put that genie back in the bottle and tell people to go play open tournaments. Particularly when open tournaments simply don't work for 75+% of players.
Most TDs will do some sort of seeding of a draw which means the top players don't play each other first round, and increases the chances a lower rated player who enters the event will play a seed or stronger player. Getting blown out in one match is not a good use of either player's time and at the prices of tournaments now, why would a lower rated player do it? They don't. Even if you have a tournament format where first round losers get a second match, it still is likely the 3.0 or 3.5 level player is going to get blown out twice.
Don't believe my 75% number? Here is a chart showing the ratings distribution for league players.
So if 4.0s and above enter open tournaments, they really are not very inviting events to a large number of players who want value for their tennis dollar. Leagues aren't perfect, but do give a reasonable expectation of a "compatible" opponent that is near your level, and one can usually play a good portion of a season for less than a single tournament.
Yeah, I mean I've seen it work fairly well if you have the seeded players have a first round bye. I agree though at current tournament prices it's still probably not worth it for lower level players.
Moveforwardalways
Hall of Fame
The team aspect is also a big draw for leagues.
Moveforwardalways
Hall of Fame
Honestly if leagues did not exist, and there was no team or social aspect, I would not be playing tennis. Tournaments over and over would be boring.
schmke
Legend
Giving seeds first round byes is certainly a good way to try and ensure lower rated players can have a meaningful first round match, but that puts requirements on draw sizes for that to work well. If you have 16 or 32 sign-up, those naturally fill a draw with no byes, you need to have something like 12 or 24 to give 4 or 8 top seeds byes.
MyFearHand
Professional
Yeah that's true as well.
MyFearHand
Professional
I've seen some interesting team tournament formats. Like teams of 3 players playing 3 lines of singles at once and whoever wins 2/3 wins. So basically similar to summer singles USTA leagues that exist in some regions but in a tournament format.
Moveforwardalways
Hall of Fame
Maybe we should get rid of high school tennis matches. After all, they are arbitrarily limited by age, student status, and who is at what high school. While we are at it, eliminate college tennis too. College tennis is all about recruiting the right players, but artificially limited to exclude pro players. Hmmm… recruiting players for a tennis team but arbitrarily limiting it so really good players cannot play in their leagues. What does that sound like?
That would be so much fun.
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
I don’t recall high players whining about sandbagging when they had to go up against the nationally ranked kid. They took their beatings and learned from it.
Moveforwardalways
Hall of Fame
If a player with ATP points who had earned $$ from tennis winnings took the court for a US D1 college (this is currently not allowed), would the opposing college teams file a grievance with the NCAA because they wanted to win? Or would they play it out because it’s no big deal? If they let it slide, do you think that eventually UCLA (or any other college) would be recruiting from the ex-pro ranks to field their team? Would you look down on them for doing so?
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
The Olympics used to ban pros. Now all Olympic athletes get paid. Times change.
Similar threads
