We need a USTA Nationals Tournament

[HunterST]

I think it's awesome that tennis is one of the few sports that provides ways for people to play competitively after college. However, while playing USTA tournaments, I sometimes feel like there is no bigger opportunity to be working towards. The possibility of achieving a big goal is a big part of what drives players.

High school players can work toward winning state.
College players want to become NCAA champions.
Top juniors can get into tournaments like The Orange Bowl and Kalamazoo

The USTA League Nationals is a good attempt at providing this for rec players, but many people are in areas where leagues are not available. Also, I personally like to compete as an individual.

I think a National tournament could provide a goal for USTA players to work toward. If it was held at fun places like Indian Wells, it would probably boost entries into tournaments as well.

Winning a local USTA tournament is fun, but I think for people to really be excited about a sport, there needs to be the promise of a truly thrilling win. Something on par with a state title for a high school player. Maybe a National tournament could provide this.

 

[Lefty78]

But the USTA hosts national championships on 4 different surfaces for Open and Age Divisions.

 

[HunterST]

But the USTA hosts national championships on 4 different surfaces for Open and Age Divisions.

I've heard about those a few times. How do they work, exactly? Aren't most of the players former ATP ranked pros? That would be exciting to win, but very few people would have a realistic shot.

I was thinking of a national NTRP tournament.

 

[HunterST]

How about this: An open national tournament (there would be districts, sectionals, etc.), but to compete, you can not have ever held an ATP ranking or competed above the Division II level in college.

 

[goober]

I've heard about those a few times. How do they work, exactly? Aren't most of the players former ATP ranked pros? That would be exciting to win, but very few people would have a realistic shot.

I was thinking of a national NTRP tournament.

No, you get very few former ATP ranked pros. Mostly ex college, teaching pros and a lot of rec players. Just because something is labelled "national" doesn't mean the best players in the country show up. You get a minority of nationally ranked players that will travel across the country with a heavy dose of local rec and ranked players.

A national NTRP tourney would be a farce IMO. The top 3.0 in the country would be a 4.0 that still was carrying a 3.0 rating (like our poster raiden) and so on up the line.

 

[spot]

Isn't this exactly what the US Open National playoffs are?

 

[HunterST]

No, you get very few former ATP ranked pros. Mostly ex college, teaching pros and a lot of rec players. Just because something is labelled "national" doesn't mean the best players in the country show up. You get a minority of nationally ranked players that will travel across the country with a heavy dose of local rec and ranked players.

A national NTRP tourney would be a farce IMO. The top 3.0 in the country would be a 4.0 that still was carrying a 3.0 rating (like our poster raiden) and so on up the line.

Oh, I just remember watching a video online that was men's 40s and both players had been around 200 in the world.

You're right, the NTRP thing would lead to too much sandbagging.

How about the idea for a National tournament, but no players who had an ATP point or a played DI can are eligible?

 

[goober]

Oh, I just remember watching a video online that was men's 40s and both players had been around 200 in the world.

You're right, the NTRP thing would lead to too much sandbagging.

How about the idea for a National tournament, but no players who had an ATP point or a played DI can are eligible?

I don't see the USTA ever doing this. If you have a legitimate NTRP rating they will let play in leagues and tournies, regardless of background. Why would they stop you from playing in this specific show case tournament?

 

[HunterST]

I don't see the USTA ever doing this. If you have a legitimate NTRP rating they will let play in leagues and tournies, regardless of background. Why would they stop you from playing in this specific show case tournament?

For the same reason they made the NTRP levels: to give people who aren't elite players an opportunity to compete.

From what I've seen, the age division national events are just giving another opportunity to players who have ALREADY had great experiences in tennis: former DI players, former ATP ranked players, etc.

There should be some opportunity for people who are truly recreational players. The possibility of advancing to a national event would add a lot of excitement to tennis just as the League Nationals does.

 

[navigator]

For the same reason they made the NTRP levels: to give people who aren't elite players an opportunity to compete.

From what I've seen, the age division national events are just giving another opportunity to players who have ALREADY had great experiences in tennis: former DI players, former ATP ranked players, etc.

There should be some opportunity for people who are truly recreational players. The possibility of advancing to a national event would add a lot of excitement to tennis just as the League Nationals does.

Just my view but this seems unnecessary. Not all of the players who play seniors national tournaments are former ATP and D1 players although many are (particularly the latter), and virtually all of the folks who get to the quarters and beyond fit into this group. If you're a "truly recreational player" then what value is there in winning anything at the national level? You beat some other so-so (truly recreational) players? That would be meaningless to me, although again that's just my view. I view the whole recreational/NTRP thing as a great way for folks of average-to-decent ability to play competitive tennis locally. But to expand this to the national level seems, again, unnecessary. Play locally, have fun, get fit... isn't that enough?

 

[HunterST]

Just my view but this seems unnecessary. Not all of the players who play seniors national tournaments are former ATP and D1 players although many are (particularly the latter), and virtually all of the folks who get to the quarters and beyond fit into this group. If you're a "truly recreational player" then what value is there in winning anything at the national level? You beat some other so-so (truly recreational) players? That would be meaningless to me, although again that's just my view. I view the whole recreational/NTRP thing as a great way for folks of average-to-decent ability to play competitive tennis locally. But to expand this to the national level seems, again, unnecessary. Play locally, have fun, get fit... isn't that enough?

No, not really. I think that's part of the reason there aren't huge turn outs to many local tournaments. People need a bigger goal and more motivation than just winning a local tournament with 8-12 entrants per section to really get involved in a sport. Moreover, they see that, as adults, there really isn't much reason to play other than just for fun, and people can do that for free at local courts.

I see what you're saying about a win in a tournament that bans ATP and D1 players being less meaningful. However, look at at high school state tournaments. They have awesome players and winning means a ton to those kids. However, almost no elite players (future D1 or ATP ranked) play high school tennis.

The kids going for a state title don't view it as meaningless just because the best players don't play. I think the same could be true for this type of tournament.

 

[Bionic slice]

It would be great, they should have a road to national championship sectional tournament for NTRP, The Top Finalist and Semifinalist from each section go to the national for the national championship tournament.
Requirements:
You cannot be a self rated player.
You must have competed some sanctioned and major zone tournaments in your section.
Let's say minimum of 300 points earned..
any thought?

 

[HunterST]

It would be great, they should have a road to national championship sectional tournament for NTRP, The Top Finalist and Semifinalist from each section go to the national for the national championship tournament.
Requirements:
You cannot be a self rated player.
You must have competed some sanctioned and major zone tournaments in your section.
Let's say minimum of 300 points earned..
any thought?

Sounds pretty good! They could even adjust it so ratings could be changed prior to the tournament. That way, if there was a player who had won every tournament he played in with blow out scores, he would get bumped and not be able to compete in that division.

Another important point is that the current USTA national events are scattered around the country. To compete, people would have to take off work, travel hundreds of miles, and probably lose first round. That's just not feasible for the vast majority of people.

With the method being discussed here, players could competing toward a national title just a few miles from home. Many, many more players could get involved. Then, if they made it, they could have an event similar to the league national's at Indian Wells.

I think it would be pretty exciting.

 

[darrinbaker00]

I've heard about those a few times. How do they work, exactly? Aren't most of the players former ATP ranked pros? That would be exciting to win, but very few people would have a realistic shot.

I was thinking of a national NTRP tournament.

http://www.npptc2014.com/

 

[HunterST]

http://www.npptc2014.com/

That's cool and definitely the right idea. However, I think the thing missing is a play-off or qualification system.

Imagine if there were district championships, then a sectionals tournament, and the winners from that qualified to play in that tournament. Maybe even throw in some cool prizes for the winners and finalists.

 

[dkmura]

I remember competing in a Western States NTRP Championships tourny back in 2005. It was held in Palm Springs and invitations to the top NTRP players from several states filled out the entry. They used the compass tounament format and seemed to be successful and fun!

 

[maggmaster]

Truthfully I find "nationals" even at the league level to be a bit strange. 3.0 nationals is like saying, " I am the best mediocre player in the country". If I am going to win a national, I want it to be either open or age group. I am not good enough to do that yet but who knows? That is just my opinion.

 

[tennis_ocd]

Truthfully I find "nationals" even at the league level to be a bit strange. 3.0 nationals is like saying, " I am the best mediocre player in the country". If I am going to win a national, I want it to be either open or age group. I am not good enough to do that yet but who knows? That is just my opinion.

exactly. And fwiw the USTA does provide a national tourney and one qualifying spot to the US Open qualifiers for a rec "champion."

 

[navigator]

I see what you're saying about a win in a tournament that bans ATP and D1 players being less meaningful. However, look at at high school state tournaments. They have awesome players and winning means a ton to those kids. However, almost no elite players (future D1 or ATP ranked) play high school tennis.

The kids going for a state title don't view it as meaningless just because the best players don't play. I think the same could be true for this type of tournament.

Thank you for making my point for me. You're saying that these high school state tournaments are meaningful for the kids that play in them... even though it's not a national tournament (as you would propose)... something similar isn't good enough for you? It has to be at the national level to be meaningful? I don't follow.

Also, all of my experience suggests you're wrong about who plays high school tennis. Here in Southern California lots of top players play high school tennis. Taylor Fritz, who just got to the semis at Junior Wimbledon, plays on a local public high school tennis team - most of the top players play high school tennis. This is totally normal here in California. Half of my public high school team (in Virginia) went on to play D1 tennis, two were ultimately ranked in the top 150 in the world, one of which was a two-time finalist in the NCAA tournament. So, perhaps you're right, but I personally haven't seen any evidence of this.

 

[navigator]

Truthfully I find "nationals" even at the league level to be a bit strange. 3.0 nationals is like saying, " I am the best mediocre player in the country". If I am going to win a national, I want it to be either open or age group.

Yes, exactly my point. This seems like an outgrowth of the self-esteem movement, or Garrison Keillor's Lake Wobegone where "all of the children are above average."

 

[HunterST]

Thank you for making my point for me. You're saying that these high school state tournaments are meaningful for the kids that play in them... even though it's not a national tournament (as you would propose)... something similar isn't good enough for you? It has to be at the national level to be meaningful? I don't follow.

Also, all of my experience suggests you're wrong about who plays high school tennis. Here in Southern California lots of top players play high school tennis. Taylor Fritz, who just got to the semis at Junior Wimbledon, plays on a local public high school tennis team - most of the top players play high school tennis. This is totally normal here in California. Half of my public high school team (in Virginia) went on to play D1 tennis, two were ultimately ranked in the top 150 in the world, one of which was a two-time finalist in the NCAA tournament. So, perhaps you're right, but I personally haven't seen any evidence of this.

What is the "something similar"? There isn't anything that I know of. We have local tournaments, but they're not related in any way and they're usually around 8 players per division. Don't get me wrong, they're fun, but most people aren't going to get too excited about winning an 8 man tournament.

It doesn't "have" to be a national tournament. That's just one idea. I just think we need something a little bigger to shoot for that isn't virtually impossible.

Most high school players won't make it to state. However, a good number of varsity players (who are often only around the 4.5 level) have a decent shot at qualifying for the tournament. It's a somewhat feasible goal that they would view as a big accomplishment.

On the other hand, adult players, at best, can sign up for a national tournament that is likely hundreds of miles away and will likely face a former ATP ranked player in the first round and lose 0 and 0.

There doesn't seem to be a realistic goal for adult players to set their sights on. I know it's great to just compete and have fun, but I, and I think a lot of other players, would like the idea of having an exciting long term goal that is at least somewhat realistic.

 

[goober]

What is the "something similar"? There isn't anything that I know of. We have local tournaments, but they're not related in any way and they're usually around 8 players per division. Don't get me wrong, they're fun, but most people aren't going to get too excited about winning an 8 man tournament.

It doesn't "have" to be a national tournament. That's just one idea. I just think we need something a little bigger to shoot for that isn't virtually impossible.

Most high school players won't make it to state. However, a good number of varsity players (who are often only around the 4.5 level) have a decent shot at qualifying for the tournament. It's a somewhat feasible goal that they would view as a big accomplishment.

On the other hand, adult players, at best, can sign up for a national tournament that is likely hundreds of miles away and will likely face a former ATP ranked player in the first round and lose 0 and 0.

There doesn't seem to be a realistic goal for adult players to set their sights on. I know it's great to just compete and have fun, but I, and I think a lot of other players, would like the idea of having an exciting long term goal that is at least somewhat realistic.

I assume you are not a big team guy so that avenue of aiming for something bigger is out of the question?

Just some random thoughts-

Many districts have NTRP master tournaments at end of the year for the top point finishers in tourneys through the year. You got a small of points just for entering and more and more depending on how far you went in the tourney. We got prizes at the end of the year. Some sections also have NTRP rankings so you could shoot for being the #1 ranked player in your section. One of those flex leagues (non usta) also offers a national tournament in Florida each year for all the local level winners.

 

[navigator]

What is the "something similar"? There isn't anything that I know of. We have local tournaments, but they're not related in any way and they're usually around 8 players per division. Don't get me wrong, they're fun, but most people aren't going to get too excited about winning an 8 man tournament.

The problem might be one of perspective. I took 27 years off before starting to play again a year ago so I don't really know what's normal or what goes on in other parts of the country where tournaments are concerned. I don't play in the NTRP divisions, but the last two tournaments I did play in (I play over-45s) here in Southern California had Mens 4.0 draws of 38 and 26 players, and Mens 4.5 draws of 31 and 51 players, respectively. That seems like a lot of players to me - and pretty competitive. And there's probably at least one tournament like this every month, plus plenty of smaller ones. So, admittedly, the "problem" you identify (tiny NTRP draws) may in fact exist in your area and I just don't see it because of where I'm located. But it does raise a question: Are you winning these small draw tournaments? If not... you're probably not going to do well in a national event anyway.

On the other hand, adult players, at best, can sign up for a national tournament that is likely hundreds of miles away and will likely face a former ATP ranked player in the first round and lose 0 and 0.

I didn't even play college tennis and have only been back playing for a year. I've made it to the semis of my first three local O45 tournaments (granted, I started in the round of 16 in each one! Ha!). I'll probably play either the national grass court or national clay court O45 tournament this year. If I can win one match in the main draw and a match in consolation I would consider that success. But I fully expect to get my a** handed to me early in the tournament. But I'd rather compete with and lose to excellent players in my own age group than beat up on not-so-good players. But that's just me - different strokes for different folks.

 

[Compete10s]

New for 2015, there will be an NTRP National. Each Section will send their 2 highest ranked players from different NTRP singles and doubles divisions. I believe it caps out at 4.5. We were told about it in April at our Section's semi-annual board meeting.

 

[HunterST]

I assume you are not a big team guy so that avenue of aiming for something bigger is out of the question?

Just some random thoughts-

Many districts have NTRP master tournaments at end of the year for the top point finishers in tourneys through the year. You got a small of points just for entering and more and more depending on how far you went in the tourney. We got prizes at the end of the year. Some sections also have NTRP rankings so you could shoot for being the #1 ranked player in your section. One of those flex leagues (non usta) also offers a national tournament in Florida each year for all the local level winners.

I'd love to go to nationals with a team, but I'm about an hour away from any leagues. It's tough to get a team together when we'd have to drive at least an hour to play every match.

Those are some good ideas. It also occured to me that most states have a "state games" for adults. That would be a fun thing to shoot for.

The problem might be one of perspective. I took 27 years off before starting to play again a year ago so I don't really know what's normal or what goes on in other parts of the country where tournaments are concerned. I don't play in the NTRP divisions, but the last two tournaments I did play in (I play over-45s) here in Southern California had Mens 4.0 draws of 38 and 26 players, and Mens 4.5 draws of 31 and 51 players, respectively. That seems like a lot of players to me - and pretty competitive. And there's probably at least one tournament like this every month, plus plenty of smaller ones. So, admittedly, the "problem" you identify (tiny NTRP draws) may in fact exist in your area and I just don't see it because of where I'm located. But it does raise a question: Are you winning these small draw tournaments? If not... you're probably not going to do well in a national event anyway.



I didn't even play college tennis and have only been back playing for a year. I've made it to the semis of my first three local O45 tournaments (granted, I started in the round of 16 in each one! Ha!). I'll probably play either the national grass court or national clay court O45 tournament this year. If I can win one match in the main draw and a match in consolation I would consider that success. But I fully expect to get my a** handed to me early in the tournament. But I'd rather compete with and lose to excellent players in my own age group than beat up on not-so-good players. But that's just me - different strokes for different folks.

So Cal probably has the best tennis scene in the country, so you can't really use your opportunities as a good sample like you acknowledged.

You mention that you're going to go play a national 45's event and that it will be enough competition for you. That's great, but keep in mind that that is just another benefit of being in a strong tennis area. To play in those events, people in other areas of the country would have to take off work, fly out there, get a hotel room.

So, maybe things are just fine for adult players in So Cal and they don't need any kind of national event. Fine. But people in other areas of the country do.

New for 2015, there will be an NTRP National. Each Section will send their 2 highest ranked players from different NTRP singles and doubles divisions. I believe it caps out at 4.5. We were told about it in April at our Section's semi-annual board meeting.

Haha. Really?

 

[tenniscasey]

New for 2015, there will be an NTRP National. Each Section will send their 2 highest ranked players from different NTRP singles and doubles divisions. I believe it caps out at 4.5. We were told about it in April at our Section's semi-annual board meeting.

I hope you're joking. The sandbagging that would go on in the 3.0-4.0 divisions to get to the nationals would be nothing short of epic.

I could see this sort of working if self-rates were not allowed to qualify for the national tournament. Otherwise, it would destroy NTRP.

 

[ECUmedford]

As long as computer ratings continue to move sandbaggers up the ladder I don't see the big deal. You can only sandbag for so long before it catches up with you.

 

[HunterST]

I hope you're joking. The sandbagging that would go on in the 3.0-4.0 divisions to get to the nationals would be nothing short of epic.

I could see this sort of working if self-rates were not allowed to qualify for the national tournament. Otherwise, it would destroy NTRP.

I don't see why they can't just bump the sandbaggers up immediately instead of waiting until the end of the year (for tournaments).

There was a guy that won every 4.0 tournament around here and the scorlines were ALL in the 6-1 6-2 neighborhood. After 2 or 3 tournaments like that, he should get bumped and have to play 4.5. Not finish out the year at that rating.

 

[schmke]

I don't see why they can't just bump the sandbaggers up immediately instead of waiting until the end of the year (for tournaments).

There was a guy that won every 4.0 tournament around here and the scorlines were ALL in the 6-1 6-2 neighborhood. After 2 or 3 tournaments like that, he should get bumped and have to play 4.5. Not finish out the year at that rating.

I agree. But my understanding is the USTA doesn't calculate dynamic ratings and thus check for strikes/DQs for tournament play, only for league play during the season. Adding in tournaments to your rating or calculating T ratings only occurs at year-end. I don't know why doing it during the year shouldn't be possible though.

 

[West Coast Ace]

I don't see why they can't just bump the sandbaggers up immediately instead of waiting until the end of the year (for tournaments).

There was a guy that won every 4.0 tournament around here and the scorlines were ALL in the 6-1 6-2 neighborhood. After 2 or 3 tournaments like that, he should get bumped and have to play 4.5. Not finish out the year at that rating.

2 or 3? I'm all against the USTA and their (apparent) lack of caring about sandbagging. But if you take any Statistics class you'll know that's not nearly enough data points to declare someone a sandbagger.

I hope you're joking. The sandbagging that would go on in the 3.0-4.0 divisions to get to the nationals would be nothing short of epic.

It would be awesome. I have visions of guys with wigs (or shaved heads playing the 'recovering from Cancer' card), using mother's maiden names, wearing various braces or covered in that new tape, speaking with really bad fake accents ("I am Guenther; just arrived from <small country name here>; I love America! No, that wasn't me who captained the <Big D1 School name here> team. I very lucky.")

 

[navigator]

You mention that you're going to go play a national 45's event and that it will be enough competition for you. That's great, but keep in mind that that is just another benefit of being in a strong tennis area. To play in those events, people in other areas of the country would have to take off work, fly out there, get a hotel room.

Just as a point of clarification, I will have to travel across the country if I want to play the grass court nationals (Philadelphia) or the clay court nationals (Florida). So, where national tournaments are concerned I'm in the same boat as everyone else.

 

[HunterST]

2 or 3? I'm all against the USTA and their (apparent) lack of caring about sandbagging. But if you take any Statistics class you'll know that's not nearly enough data points to declare someone a sandbagger.

Eh, I disagree. I'm talking tournaments here, not matches. To win a tournament, you'd have to win an average of at least 3 matches. So, for three tournaments, that would be 9 lopsided victories over legit 4.0s (or whatever rating). I'd say that's solid enough evidence to bump them up. Obviously only the victories against players at that NTRP would count, not anyone playing up. They could also appeal if they thought there was a legitimate explanation.