USTA League Plus flights gone for 2021

[schmke]

I just wrote a blog entry on the new USTA League regulations document that was published in July, the most notable change being that plus flights are gone. So no more 5.0+ for 18+ and no 4.5+ for 40+.

This means the issues with non-competitive matches when 5.5s played weak 5.0s or even 4.5s, or 5.0s played weak 4.5s or even 4.0s are gone, but the extra playing opportunities for these plus players is gone now too.

 

[OnTheLine]

It just seems that USTA sometimes finds ways to restrict playing opportunities more than they work to expand them. 2 years in a row of shrinking league play.

In many areas of the country I would think that the 40 year old 5.0 is now relegated to tournaments only.

 

[Nostradamus]

Lets break up and form out own league. It will be called Amateur players tennis association of america. APTAA. who's with me ?

 

[Mongolmike]

Lets break up and form out own league. It will be called Amateur players tennis association of america. APTAA. who's with me ?

Or call it Tennis Amateur Players Association, or TAPAs for short...cuz tapas are tasty!

 

[Jack the Hack]

I was pretty vociferous about my opposition to the 4 court format change for 40+, writing to our Section coordinator and contacts at Nationals, as well as blasting them in surveys. In addition, I pledged to sit out of league altogether in 2020, which turned out to be meaningless because of the pandemic. Unfortunately, none of that mattered as the USTA is still sticking with that stupid format. And now, they are ruining the 40+ product even more but eliminating 4.5 Plus, which completely strands 5.0 players over the age of 40, many of which no longer play 18+ or tournaments.

I'm not surprised, but completely bemused about how idiotic and tone deaf the USTA continues to be. As I understand it, players over 40 represent the largest number of league participants, so why alienate any part of this group, especially at the higher levels?

As I have said before, the only way I know how to vote in this is with my dollar, and it looks like I'll be sitting out 2021 as well. I'm just so happy that I was able to be a part of back-to-back Nationals teams in 40+ 4.5+ before they ruined the product.

If we do get a clearing of the pandemic next year, I'll be doing more tournament play instead, which is pretty much all I cared about with tennis before being pulled into league by some friends a few years back.

 

[BallBag]

Is there really a big difference between 18+ and 40+ at the 5.0 level?

 

[schmke]

Is there really a big difference between 18+ and 40+ at the 5.0 level?

Sure, there can be. At any level there are multiple ways to be at that level, two typical ones are pusher with no power who just gets balls back vs attacking player who hits winners but lacks consistency. This exists at the 5.0 level too, and there may be a 50 year-old who has great anticipation, placement, and doesn't miss and is a legitimate 5.0, but would like to not have his only league option be to have to play 20-something 5.0s who hit huge serves and heavy topspin groundies, and the 40+ 4.5+ flights gave him the alternative to the 20-something opponents.

 

[Jack the Hack]

Sure, there can be. At any level there are multiple ways to be at that level, two typical ones are pusher with no power who just gets balls back vs attacking player who hits winners but lacks consistency. This exists at the 5.0 level too, and there may be a 50 year-old who has great anticipation, placement, and doesn't miss and is a legitimate 5.0, but would like to not have his only league option be to have to play 20-something 5.0s who hit huge serves and heavy topspin groundies, and the 40+ 4.5+ flights gave him the alternative to the 20-something opponents.

Exactly.

For an example, we had 4 guys bumped from 4.5 to 5.0 from our 40 and Over Nationals team last year. One guy was our 4.5 singles specialist who is 56 years old, weighs about 150 lbs, and runs marathons for fun. I wouldn't call him a pusher, but he doesn't really have any weapons, and he wins with hustle and extreme consistency. One of the other guys is in his mid-40s and is also in really good shape - no weapons again, but is clutch under pressure and is one of those amiable guys that can play anywhere (singles or doubles with anyone on the team). The other two players that were a doubles team in their mid-40s that just clicked together - individually, they are decent 4.5s (not really singles players though) but as a doubles team they were rock solid and won a ton of big matches. All 4 of these guys are borderline, sitting in that grey area at the top of 4.5 and the bottom of 5.0 - with enough fitness and consistency to win a lot at 4.5, but not enough power or weapons to win much at 5.0. When they played 5.0 league at the beginning of this year before the shutdown, they had a collective 4-11 record between them, with all 4 of the wins they had coming against 4.5 players that were playing up on a 5.0 team. And there is a massive difference between these guys and a solid 5.0 in their 20s or early 30s that can crush the ball.

 

[hwtaft]

Exactly.

For an example, we had 4 guys bumped from 4.5 to 5.0 from our 40 and Over Nationals team last year. One guy was our 4.5 singles specialist who is 56 years old, weighs about 150 lbs, and runs marathons for fun. I wouldn't call him a pusher, but he doesn't really have any weapons, and he wins with hustle and extreme consistency. One of the other guys is in his mid-40s and is also in really good shape - no weapons again, but is clutch under pressure and is one of those amiable guys that can play anywhere (singles or doubles with anyone on the team). The other two players that were a doubles team in their mid-40s that just clicked together - individually, they are decent 4.5s (not really singles players though) but as a doubles team they were rock solid and won a ton of big matches. All 4 of these guys are borderline, sitting in that grey area at the top of 4.5 and the bottom of 5.0 - with enough fitness and consistency to win a lot at 4.5, but not enough power or weapons to win much at 5.0. When they played 5.0 league at the beginning of this year before the shutdown, they had a collective 4-11 record between them, with all 4 of the wins they had coming against 4.5 players that were playing up on a 5.0 team. And there is a massive difference between these guys and a solid 5.0 in their 20s or early 30s that can crush the ball.

The reality is sometimes you're the top end of a level and sometimes you're on the bottom end of a level. It's hard to argue guys that won a national championship shouldn't spend a few years at the higher level.

You can't just let the same people win every year, right?

 

[Vox Rationis]

I don't think USTA cares about growing the sport of tennis.

 

[hwtaft]

I don't think USTA cares about growing the sport of tennis.

They're probably expecting this to help grow the 5.0 leagues by forcing the older 5.0s to play 18&over.

 

[Jack the Hack]

The reality is sometimes you're the top end of a level and sometimes you're on the bottom end of a level. It's hard to argue guys that won a national championship shouldn't spend a few years at the higher level.

You can't just let the same people win every year, right?

Well, first of all, the USTA makes you break up your team if you advance to Nationals (even if you get destroyed there). That keeps the same people from winning every year. I have no problem with that rule.

We didn't win Nationals, but we came in 2nd place. Massive over-achievement for us, but we had an amazing group of guys that had great team chemistry, and we took advantage of a very fortuitous draw and clutch play in the Fast 4 format when the weather acted up. We also had a top level 5.0 singles player that was one of the best there - he won all of his matches and we kind of rode his play to the finals. We upset a better team in the semifinal with the match coming down to the 4.5 singles line between our 56 year old roadrunner verses a guy of similar age that moon-balled, sliced, and hardly made any unforced errors. It was like watching two guys that were a mirror of each other. Our guy won in a dramatic third set tiebreaker.

My point is that there are older guys that get bumped to 5.0 that really have no business playing in 5.0 against young bashers with serious weapons. Both of the 4.5 singles guys I mentioned in the 40s 4.5+National semifinal match above win by attrition and are singles specialists. Neither are good enough to compete in 18+ 5.0 singles and they are not suited to win as 5.0 doubles players. Therefore, playing in a 40+ 5.0 league would be appropriate. However, unless the USTA makes a National Championship for 40+ 5.0, I don't think too many players will be interested or take it seriously.

I was texting with my friends about it, and with no Nationals, some were suggesting that many people are going to use 40+ 5.0 league to tank matches and try to get their rating down to 4.5. Maybe we should call that category the "Bernie Tomic" league?

 

[schmke]

I was texting with my friends about it, and with no Nationals, some were suggesting that many people are going to use 40+ 5.0 league to tank matches and try to get their rating down to 4.5. Maybe we should call that category the "Bernie Tomic" league?

But if they are all tanking against each other ...

 

[hwtaft]

My point is that there are older guys that get bumped to 5.0 that really have no business playing in 5.0 against young bashers with serious weapons. Both of the 4.5 singles guys I mentioned in the 40s 4.5+National semifinal match above win by attrition and are singles specialists. Neither are good enough to compete in 18+ 5.0 singles and they are not suited to win as 5.0 doubles players. T

But at the end of the day you can make this argument about people at every level and at some point you have to bump people up, right?

I get that it's no fun to lose, but after winning so much the past few years don't you think it's fair some of you guys lose a little?

 

[Vox Rationis]

They're probably expecting this to help grow the 5.0 leagues by forcing the older 5.0s to play 18&over.

Yet on the other hand I've known USTA to decline 5.0s from having a local league and send them straight to districts. Even when they worked hard to put together 3 teams and begged to have a regular season.

 

[Jack the Hack]

But at the end of the day you can make this argument about people at every level and at some point you have to bump people up, right?

I get that it's no fun to lose, but after winning so much the past few years don't you think it's fair some of you guys lose a little?

I'm not disagreeing with you at all!

My reply was backing up Schmke's response to this comment:

Is there really a big difference between 18+ and 40+ at the 5.0 level?

I'm saying yes... there is a difference between a 56 year old guy with no weapons that wins at 4.5 due to attrition and is bumped to 5.0 verses a 25 year old that played D1 tennis and has a huge serve and forehand that can blow people off the court. So yes, there should be an 18+ and a 40+ 5.0 league, and both should have a Nationals tournament if 4.5+ is going away.

 

[Jack the Hack]

But if they are all tanking against each other ...

Hahaha... I was thinking the same thing! Like watching keystone cops seeing who can play worse to throw the matches!

 

[BallBag]

My feeling is that any change is going to be good for some and bad for others. I think the 40+ 5.0s still have a place to play, even if its not ideal. Do 5.5s have anywhere to go now? What's the highest combo level?

 

[J_R_B]

However, unless the USTA makes a National Championship for 40+ 5.0, I don't think too many players will be interested or take it seriously.

I was texting with my friends about it, and with no Nationals, some were suggesting that many people are going to use 40+ 5.0 league to tank matches and try to get their rating down to 4.5. Maybe we should call that category the "Bernie Tomic" league?

I guess I don't understand this mentality. I captained a team to the 4.0 national finals and a bunch of us were bumped up. At that point, there obviously *is* a 4.5 national championship but there is no chance in hell any of us were ever going to sniff it. If you have a league at the next level, but there is no national championship, what difference does it make? Just play at the next level and challenge yourselves to win a couple matches. If your team is a national contender at the next level up, you shouldn't have ever been playing at the lower level in the first place.

 

[iNeverSlice]

Is there really a big difference between 18+ and 40+ at the 5.0 level?

It's been my experience that there is definitely a difference.

 

[QuadCam]

I see this creating even more self rated sandbaggers.

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

Do all 40+ 5.5 players know each other already?

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

I guess I don't understand this mentality. I captained a team to the 4.0 national finals and a bunch of us were bumped up. At that point, there obviously *is* a 4.5 national championship but there is no chance in hell any of us were ever going to sniff it. If you have a league at the next level, but there is no national championship, what difference does it make? Just play at the next level and challenge yourselves to win a couple matches. If your team is a national contender at the next level up, you shouldn't have ever been playing at the lower level in the first place.

I congratulate you, but for those teams that do make it to nationals you are kind of in the minority in my opinion. Personally I enjoy playing better players than me, being tense, and really on edge every point, I would rather have that match on a regular local court than nationals. But, I've seen it, there are a ton of people who want the win, it wouldn't matter who they were playing and moving up to play more challenging matches without a hope of "winning" a title isn't fun for them, so much so that losing on purpose is a strategy.

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

I'm not disagreeing with you at all!

My reply was backing up Schmke's response to this comment:



I'm saying yes... there is a difference between a 56 year old guy with no weapons that wins at 4.5 due to attrition and is bumped to 5.0 verses a 25 year old that played D1 tennis and has a huge serve and forehand that can blow people off the court. So yes, there should be an 18+ and a 40+ 5.0 league, and both should have a Nationals tournament if 4.5+ is going away.

Yes, and for sure the fitness level would be really accentuated between 20 year olds and 40+ high level players.

 

[socallefty]

Why do we need a 40+ age group league at any NTRP level in the first place? Why can’t we play 18+ leagues throughout the year in addition to the senior leagues like 55+? The NTRP ratings are supposed to be independent of age group and purely based on playing level - so, why does there need to be a league season when players between 18-39 cannot play during the 40+ season? The USTA should try to encourage the participation of young adults and not shut them down for part of the year from playing NTRP leagues as happens in the Winter when there are only 40+ leagues.

I am in my fifties and relish the competition with younger players in both singles and doubles and think this is true for most players on my league team. Everyone on my 40+ team plays in the 18+ league season, but my players aged 18-39 cannot play when there are only 40+ leagues. In doubles, I don’t think age plays much of a part in results and in many cases, the older players are better and play higher-% doubles. At the pro level, the best doubles players are often over 35 to 40 and it is true at club level also in many cases.

Singles players who are 18-39 might be more fit and have more endurance than 40+ players but if they are at the same NTRP rating, the 40+ players are usually better strategically and able to compete with the younger players. Some 40+ singles players might get bumped down a level if they play only in 18+ leagues, but that’s where they belong anyway if they don’t have the fitness or power to compete with younger players at the higher level.

The USTA has many age group tournaments for all ages and also senior leagues for 55+ and I think they don’t need to carve out a season with an adult 40+ league which prevents 18-39 age players from competing. I thought there are complaints that tennis is not popular with young people in the US as much as it used to be thirty, forty years ago and the USTA should not be doing anything that prevents younger adults from playing. 40+ age leagues are specifically designed to protect the egos of unfit 40+ players from having to compete with young adults - I think tennis should be a physical, athletic competition at all levels and the USTA shouldn’t be preventing 18-39 year olds from competing with older players.

 

[g4driver]

We don't need anything other than food, water, shelter and perhaps a way to live protected from predators.

Everything else are perks to enhance life. Most of us like perks. That is why many of us work... to get more perks. [emoji6]

The 18+ , 18-39, 40+ and 55+ leagues create a revenue stream for the USTA which creates jobs and a business opportunity for companies like TW.

Playing on three teams 18+, 40+ and 55+ produces triple the revenue of playing on one 18+ team

 

[Conrads]

Why do we need a 40+ age group league at any NTRP level in the first place? Why can’t we play 18+ leagues throughout the year in addition to the senior leagues like 55+? The NTRP ratings are supposed to be independent of age group and purely based on playing level - so, why does there need to be a league season when players between 18-39 cannot play during the 40+ season? The USTA should try to encourage the participation of young adults and not shut them down for part of the year from playing NTRP leagues as happens in the Winter when there are only 40+ leagues.

I am in my fifties and relish the competition with younger players in both singles and doubles and think this is true for most players on my league team. Everyone on my 40+ team plays in the 18+ league season, but my players aged 18-39 cannot play when there are only 40+ leagues. In doubles, I don’t think age plays much of a part in results and in many cases, the older players are better and play higher-% doubles. At the pro level, the best doubles players are often over 35 to 40 and it is true at club level also in many cases.

Singles players who are 18-39 might be more fit and have more endurance than 40+ players but if they are at the same NTRP rating, the 40+ players are usually better strategically and able to compete with the younger players. Some 40+ singles players might get bumped down a level if they play only in 18+ leagues, but that’s where they belong anyway if they don’t have the fitness or power to compete with younger players at the higher level.

The USTA has many age group tournaments for all ages and also senior leagues for 55+ and I think they don’t need to carve out a season with an adult 40+ league which prevents 18-39 age players from competing. I thought there are complaints that tennis is not popular with young people in the US as much as it used to be thirty, forty years ago and the USTA should not be doing anything that prevents younger adults from playing. 40+ age leagues are specifically designed to protect the egos of unfit 40+ players from having to compete with young adults - I think tennis should be a physical, athletic competition at all levels and the USTA shouldn’t be preventing 18-39 year olds from competing with older players.

what level do you play at? the age thing is really 5.0 and up. its why age groups are there in tournaments. high level tennis (singles especially) puts alot of physical demand
on the body. my thought was the original point of the 4.5+ leagues was to let the older 40 and over crowd (the 5.0s specifically i think be able to play singles). Those older 5.0s
usually were stuck at doubles on the 18 and over 5.0 teams

I know here in Atlanta i know of only 1 over 40 guy that can compete with any of the really good young 5.0s. Basically you have to be an ex pro or very high level d1.

 

[Jack the Hack]

I guess I don't understand this mentality. I captained a team to the 4.0 national finals and a bunch of us were bumped up. At that point, there obviously *is* a 4.5 national championship but there is no chance in hell any of us were ever going to sniff it. If you have a league at the next level, but there is no national championship, what difference does it make? Just play at the next level and challenge yourselves to win a couple matches. If your team is a national contender at the next level up, you shouldn't have ever been playing at the lower level in the first place.

Well, speaking of my former teammates, they all did play 18+ 5.0 this year to challenge themselves. As I mentioned, they were a cumulative 4-11 and were not on any teams that were contending for Sectionals or Nationals when the pandemic shut things down.

That said, most of the 4.5 and 5.0 guys I know are primarily motivated by competition and like the idea of being a part of a contending team. The former 4.5 stars that we had would be bench-warmers on a 40+ 5.0 contender team, but they would probably still like to be a part of it (much like I was as a bench-warmer on our 2nd place Nationals 4.5+ team).

From a practical standpoint, in 2015, we did have a 40+ 5.0 league in my Section, which was an experimental thing our Section Coordinator was doing to gauge interest. Part of the reason behind this was because the 18+ 4.5 team from our Section won Nationals in 2014 and there were a ton of people that got bumped from 4.5 to 5.0 across the Section, even if we weren't contenders. In fact, my team that year did not even win the local league, but we had 11 out of 12 players bumped to 5.0, almost all of which were over 40. Anyway, I formed one of the 40+ 5.0 teams and we won that experimental local league and qualified for Sectionals in that category. Overall, I think there were about 30 teams in our Section, so it wasn't as popular as 18+ or 40s 4.5+. Unfortunately, most of the guys on other teams didn't give a rip and over half of our matches ended up as defaults. The Sectionals for that category was canceled because only two teams were interested in going. There was no reason to put in the time and expense when there was no Nationals to compete for. Maybe that's not a big motivator to some people, but that was the prevailing comment I heard from almost everyone. The results of the experimental 40+ 5.0 team with no Nationals was so bad, they haven't had it since. (And by the way, many of the over 40 guys that got bumped to 5.0 in 2015 ended up dropping out of tennis altogether. They could never get playing time on an 18+ 5.0 team, and with tournament draws dwindling, a lot of them have gotten into running, biking, or pickleball instead, which is a real shame.)

 

[dannywilliams10s]

Is there really a big difference between 18+ and 40+ at the 5.0 level?

There can definitely be a pretty substantial difference in the two especially from a physical and athletic standpoint. The weapons tend to be bigger etc. The 40+ 5.0 guys (thats me) rely on being really solid, in the right position most of the time and making the best decision as much as possible to make up for our lack of comparative fire power. I have a pretty good level of success in singles at 40+ but would get ran over by a lot of the 18+ singles guys. In doubles, I do pretty well in 18+ just by taking away the net more often than the young guys who love to try to just bang it through me

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

 

[McLovin]

Is there really a big difference between 18+ and 40+ at the 5.0 level?

There can definitely be a pretty substantial difference in the two especially from a physical and athletic standpoint. The weapons tend to be bigger etc. The 40+ 5.0 guys (thats me) rely on being really solid, in the right position most of the time and making the best decision as much as possible to make up for our lack of comparative fire power. I have a pretty good level of success in singles at 40+ but would get ran over by a lot of the 18+ singles guys. In doubles, I do pretty well in 18+ just by taking away the net more often than the young guys who love to try to just bang it through me

^^^ what he said ^^^

As an example, our pro is 58. He's a solid 5.0, plays some tournaments, even lost in the finals of the 45s in the Grass Court Nationals a few years ago. However...

He played our previous pro (who also happens to be a 5.0, as well as his student as a junior) in our club championships final a couple of years ago. He was maybe 34 at the time. The younger 5.0 beat the older 5.0 3 & 2, and in reality, it wasn't even that close.

 

[hwtaft]

^^^ what he said ^^^

As an example, our pro is 58. He's a solid 5.0, plays some tournaments, even lost in the finals of the 45s in the Grass Court Nationals a few years ago. However...

He played our previous pro (who also happens to be a 5.0, as well as his student as a junior) in our club championships final a couple of years ago. He was maybe 34 at the time. The younger 5.0 beat the older 5.0 3 & 2, and in reality, it wasn't even that close.

This is going to be true at every level, especially singles. The guys in better shape are just naturally going to do better over the course of a singles match.

 

[J_R_B]

This is going to be true at every level, especially singles. The guys in better shape are just naturally going to do better over the course of a singles match.

It will be true to a certain degree at every level, but it's going to be amplified at higher levels (i.e. 5.0). 5.0 is a VERY high level of tennis and there will be serious athletes in the ranks of the younger 5.0s (i.e. NCAA varsity tennis players). If there is someone with college varsity level athleticism like that playing 3.5, it is someone learning tennis late in life and will have other major exploitable weaknesses by an older craftier player (or else they wouldn't be 3.5). That's not true at 5.0.

 

[CHtennis]

Do we know why they changed this? (Surely not, while the USTA does do some things well, communicating why it does things is not one of them)
I dont love the constant change of the 40+ leagues, 2 major changes in the last 2 years, this is not the worst change in my area. However, I hate the change of no 5.0+. How do college players start playing in the USTA (d1 specifically)? What happens to a 5.0 who gets rated out? Can they basically never play again? Will there be a push for 5.5 leagues?

Who was complaining about the 5.5s? Was there really a need to do this? I dont like that change at all and would love to know why they did it. The rating discrepency and those problems dont feel like a big enough reason to change this, but what do I know.

 

[EP1998]

I can see getting rid of the +. What I don't understand is why the USTA abandoned the 40+ 5.0s. It's not that hard to add 40 and over 5.0 division.

 

[OnTheLine]

How many districts/sections/regions could field a 5.0 league at 40+? My guess is very very few. They are just kicking these players out of leagues.
For that matter how many can field a 5.5 league at 18+ ... my guess is that is an even smaller number ... if it is even measurable.

In the 18+, how many 5.5 players would be effected here? There can't be that many.

Why create a rule to change something that probably isn't a big problem, which then also takes players out of your leagues altogether?

 

[BallBag]

How many districts/sections/regions could field a 5.0 league at 40+? My guess is very very few. They are just kicking these players out of leagues.
For that matter how many can field a 5.5 league at 18+ ... my guess is that is an even smaller number ... if it is even measurable.

In the 18+, how many 5.5 players would be effected here? There can't be that many.

Why create a rule to change something that probably isn't a big problem, which then also takes players out of your leagues altogether?

They still 18+ 5.0. To be honest I don't buy into the 40+ leagues being needed to make fitness less of a factor. If you cant hang on to your rating unless you only play in 40+, then its not your rating anymore. I can understand the social argument that 40+ is for older ladies and gentlemen to get away from the "kids". I don't think its a good thing but I can see it being a thing.
5.5s just wont have a place to play league anymore. Its a shame but there are also about 1000 5.5s. If you can find yourself a 5.5 to play on your 5.0+ team then it seems like you will cruise though your season. I'm guessing that's why they nixed it.

 

[MaxTennis]

Do we know why they changed this? (Surely not, while the USTA does do some things well, communicating why it does things is not one of them)
I dont love the constant change of the 40+ leagues, 2 major changes in the last 2 years, this is not the worst change in my area. However, I hate the change of no 5.0+. How do college players start playing in the USTA (d1 specifically)? What happens to a 5.0 who gets rated out? Can they basically never play again? Will there be a push for 5.5 leagues?

Who was complaining about the 5.5s? Was there really a need to do this? I dont like that change at all and would love to know why they did it. The rating discrepency and those problems dont feel like a big enough reason to change this, but what do I know.

They'll just play Open tourneys.

 

[BallBag]

They'll just play Open tourneys.

But they don't have a way to legitimately bump down to 5.0. I guess only if they let their rating expire. I think after 3 years?

 

[MaxTennis]

But they don't have a way to legitimately bump down to 5.0. I guess only if they let their rating expire. I think after 3 years?

Yeah. Not sure how much fun a D1 player would have, though, dominating 5.0 leagues when they can play tournaments that are more similar to the competition they've experienced their whole lives.

In the Bay Area, all the ex-D1 players are either burnt out or they're just playing money tournaments/trying to qualify for ITFs.

 

[CHtennis]

They'll just play Open tourneys.

Sure, but some just play for the team aspect. We have had 3 former Ohio State players (within 5 years of graduating) come into our league (I dont really know how that works, I thought from the chart that they would be 6.0's but I dont know that much about it) as 5.5's. One played very well and moved to another area and I dont know if he is playing. One played a good bit and got rated down to 5.0 and plays fairly often in the matches, usually wins but is pretty close. Another did not play but a couple matches before the shutdown, but said he liked the team aspect. These players cannot get into a 5.0 league so would likely never play until they are 40 or something

 

[socallefty]

^^^ what he said ^^^

As an example, our pro is 58. He's a solid 5.0, plays some tournaments, even lost in the finals of the 45s in the Grass Court Nationals a few years ago. However...

He played our previous pro (who also happens to be a 5.0, as well as his student as a junior) in our club championships final a couple of years ago. He was maybe 34 at the time. The younger 5.0 beat the older 5.0 3 & 2, and in reality, it wasn't even that close.

At every level, the players at the very top of the level are supposed to easily beat (bagels and breadsticks) the players at the bottom of the level. Maybe there are more younger players at the top of the 5.0 and 5.5 levels, but isn’t that the way it should be as tennis is supposed to be a physical and power sport at the highest levels? Young people don’t have too many endeavors in life where organizations give them an advantage - at least sports should not handicap their physical advantage.

 

[schmke]

Do we know why they changed this? (Surely not, while the USTA does do some things well, communicating why it does things is not one of them)
I dont love the constant change of the 40+ leagues, 2 major changes in the last 2 years, this is not the worst change in my area. However, I hate the change of no 5.0+. How do college players start playing in the USTA (d1 specifically)? What happens to a 5.0 who gets rated out? Can they basically never play again? Will there be a push for 5.5 leagues?

Who was complaining about the 5.5s? Was there really a need to do this? I dont like that change at all and would love to know why they did it. The rating discrepency and those problems dont feel like a big enough reason to change this, but what do I know.

From the conversations I've had, the complaints were from:
- Teams that didn't have a plus player and felt they couldn't compete
- Plus players who ended up playing sacrificial lambs, even a 4.5 playing up in a 5.0+ flight or 4.0 playing up in. a 4.5+ flight, when team didn't have 5.0s available or chose to play them in doubles and thus couldn't play one in singles and would just throw that court.

 

[J011yroger]

Great, now 2022 won't be my year either.

J

 

[CHtennis]

- Teams that didn't have a plus player and felt they couldn't compete

This feels like complaining that I dont have top level singles players. Yes, if you dont have players at the top of the level you cant compete, if you want to compete you will need to find those players.

- Plus players who ended up playing sacrificial lambs, even a 4.5 playing up in a 5.0+ flight or 4.0 playing up in. a 4.5+ flight, when team didn't have 5.0s available or chose to play them in doubles and thus couldn't play one in singles and would just throw that court.

So the plus players complained about having to play bad players but were still playing so we told them you cant play any more? If it is that bad for them, then they can individually decide if they would like to play, dont get rid of the whole level.


Again, there could be some good reasons that I dont know about, like the numbers say it was pushing down participation in 5.0 if people might have to play a 5.5 or something, but with the USTA they will likely never tell us and I dont really trust them to have thought this through that much.

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

You are expecting logic from most of these decisions, that might be a false assumption.

 

[schmke]

From the conversations I've had, the complaints were from:
- Teams that didn't have a plus player and felt they couldn't compete

This feels like complaining that I dont have top level singles players. Yes, if you dont have players at the top of the level you cant compete, if you want to compete you will need to find those players.

- Plus players who ended up playing sacrificial lambs, even a 4.5 playing up in a 5.0+ flight or 4.0 playing up in. a 4.5+ flight, when team didn't have 5.0s available or chose to play them in doubles and thus couldn't play one in singles and would just throw that court.

So the plus players complained about having to play bad players but were still playing so we told them you cant play any more? If it is that bad for them, then they can individually decide if they would like to play, dont get rid of the whole level.

I didn't say they were good reasons, just reasons I'd heard.

Now, the USTA introduced a new self-imposed complaint in 2020 in 40+ where the reduction to 4 courts meant just one plus player could play, which perhaps was an attempt to distribute the 5.0s around more so all teams could have one, but with the change to one singles court had the side-effect of teams often playing their 5.0 in singles, effectively killing 4.5's opportunity to play singles unless they wanted to play a 5.0. This was just the USTA shooting themselves in the foot, the 2020 40+ disaster will continue into 2021, but I guess they figure this part of the issue "goes away" by getting rid of plus flights.

 

[EP1998]

They still 18+ 5.0. To be honest I don't buy into the 40+ leagues being needed to make fitness less of a factor. If you cant hang on to your rating unless you only play in 40+, then its not your rating anymore. I can understand the social argument that 40+ is for older ladies and gentlemen to get away from the "kids". I don't think its a good thing but I can see it being a thing.
5.5s just wont have a place to play league anymore. Its a shame but there are also about 1000 5.5s. If you can find yourself a 5.5 to play on your 5.0+ team then it seems like you will cruise though your season. I'm guessing that's why they nixed it.

It would be nice to have multiple options. The 18 and over and a 40 and over. For the 40+ 5.0s that play age group tournaments it would be nice to have something besides the September event.

 

[EP1998]

Assume they are keeping the 40+ open event?

 

[EP1998]

Sure, but some just play for the team aspect. We have had 3 former Ohio State players (within 5 years of graduating) come into our league (I dont really know how that works, I thought from the chart that they would be 6.0's but I dont know that much about it) as 5.5's. One played very well and moved to another area and I dont know if he is playing. One played a good bit and got rated down to 5.0 and plays fairly often in the matches, usually wins but is pretty close. Another did not play but a couple matches before the shutdown, but said he liked the team aspect. These players cannot get into a 5.0 league so would likely never play until they are 40 or something

It's also an organized competition without having to spend a weekend playing a tournament.

 

[J_R_B]

Do we know why they changed this? (Surely not, while the USTA does do some things well, communicating why it does things is not one of them)
I dont love the constant change of the 40+ leagues, 2 major changes in the last 2 years, this is not the worst change in my area. However, I hate the change of no 5.0+. How do college players start playing in the USTA (d1 specifically)? What happens to a 5.0 who gets rated out? Can they basically never play again? Will there be a push for 5.5 leagues?

Who was complaining about the 5.5s? Was there really a need to do this? I dont like that change at all and would love to know why they did it. The rating discrepency and those problems dont feel like a big enough reason to change this, but what do I know.

They changed it because Jolly is turning 40 and it just wouldn't be fair to let him play against 4.5s again.