Tennis News You Can Use
The draft of the updated USTA League Regulations for 2021 was published back in July. It has been on my radar as a future topics for the Fiend at Court “Tennis News You Can Use” focus which runs every Monday. It just kept sliding down in favor of other items that seemed more urgent or interesting to me at the time.
There really isn’t much of an impact from the updates for the majority of league players. I happen to be in the narrow subset of players for which there is a significant change. I am not sure that explains my lack of enthusiasm about writing about the updates or not.
Part of the delay can be chalked up to the fact that I was trying to decipher if and how the updates are related to the strategic imperative to build participation in tennis. I was also looking for signs that the updates were made in concert with some of the upcoming tournament changes for 2021. At the moment I am thinking that the updates are most likely unrelated to either initiative.
A recurring theme on this site is that USTA League tennis is a significant competitor to USTA tournament tennis. For years, the USTA has treated leagues and tournaments as separate systems. I believe there would be benefit to considering both formats of play as a part of a unified strategy for building participation.
No More Plus Leagues
The USTA provides a summary of the Major Regulation Changes ever year near the front of the League Operating procedures. From my perspective, a fairly significant change was not explicitly and clearly stated on that page. The “plus” format of leagues has been eliminated from league offerings in 2021.
In the summary of changes, the USTA indicated that in 2021 the National championships would be conducted at the 5.0 level. In 2020, that division was conducted as 5.0+, which meant that a roster could include two 5.5 players. Only one 5.5 player could could play in a given team match and only on line 1. All players on a 5.0 team will be 5.0 or below in 2021.
The same change was made in the 40 and over age group at the 4.5 level which was previously designated as a plus division in 2020. In that format each team could have three 5.0s on the roster and one could play in any given week. Same song, second verse. All players on a 40 and over 4.5 team will be at that level and below in 2021.
New Leagues Offerings
When I first caught wind of the elimination of the plus leagues, I experienced a surge of optimism that the change heralded an attempt by the USTA to funnel players at the upper NTRP levels into tournaments at the open and age-group open levels. In other words, with no leagues options for 5.5 players and limiting options for older 5.0 players, those players would have no place to go other than tournaments.
My hopes were dashed with the realization that the elimination of the plus divisions is because the USTA is creating even more leagues. In 2021 there will be a new “Open” league level offered at the local and sectional levels. Additionally, there “may” be a National Championship played. I assume that is predicated on some teams actually forming at that level in enough sections to make it viable.
Additionally, it should be noted that participation in Open is not truly “open” in the sense that anyone can play. The USTA has defined restricted eligibility for Open to players who are 5.0 and above.
Additionally a new 40 & Over age group league has been added at the 5.0 level. There will be sectional championships for the new level with the same caveat that there “may” be a national championship as well.
70 and Over Automatic Appeals
There have always been some age based appeal provisions for older players who are bumped up. In 2021, a player who is 70 or over can automatically appeal their rating down to the next lower level. However, they may still experience dynamic disqualification at that level following the appeal.
40 & Over New Tie Break Criteria
Since there are an even number of matches played at the 40 & Over level, ties are possible. In 2020, the USTA League Operating Procedures added three criteria in the event of a tie for those matches: a) Loser of the fewest number of sets, b) Loser of the Fewest Number of Games, and c) game winning percentage.
There were a couple of issues with that criteria. First, since it is used only on head to head scenarios, I am mathematically challenged to understand how criteria #3 could ever be anything other than a tie if criteria #2 was already established to be a tie. STEM is a dying art, kids.
The other issue with the criteria as published in 2020 is that the match could still end in a tie. This was recognized at my local league level which determined that the winner of line 1 doubles would be added as the fourth criteria. The USTA league operating procedures has adopted the same criteria as an update in 2021.
Additional Observations
TennisLink is referenced throughout the document, which is consistent with the information that the USTA presented at the Tennis Industry forum back in August. While Serve Tennis will be deployed in 2020 for tournaments, that platform isn’t scheduled to roll out for leagues until 2021.
I have previously observed that the word “grievance” is used a lot in the USTA League Operating Procedures. I frequently cite this as evidence that something has gone terribly wrong with the spirit and intent of the league system. It is supposed to be fun. It is not supposed to be litigious.
The good news is that one of the instance of “grievance” has been eliminated from the document in 2021. This brings the total down to a mere 195 mentions. I was unable to figure out where the deletion occurred. It seems to be a change in a positive direction in any case.
I have seen speculation from other sites that the elimination of the plus leagues is a signal that the USTA is considering moving away from the NTRP ratings system to something else. After thoroughly reading the new version of the USTA League Operating procedures, I don’t see any evidence of that.
One of my more unpopular ideas about league tennis is that National Championships should only be conducted at the Open Level. I personally believe that if the possibility of advancement to NTRP Level Nationals was eliminated, that all the rules and regulations around grievances, appeals, and dynamic disqualification could be eliminated. Of course, if you are going to have league championships at the Open level, then the USTA has to conduct leagues at the level. Step 1 is completed on that pipe dream.
For that reason alone, I am very happy to see Open leagues added to the mix.
- 2021 USTA League Regulations, July 23, 2020, USTA National Website.
For the 40+ tiebreaker, game winning percentage only uses games actually played, so defaults do not factor in. The distinction is not well explained in the rules but it is in the system.
My general thought on tie-breakers is that matches should always include an odd number of lines such that head to head tie-breakers are never necessary. The only way sets or games should ever be counted is in round robin multi-team tie scenarios. Counting sets or games is marginally better than flipping a coin.
If defaults do not count in the game tie-break criteria, then a team with a really weak line should default the entire match. It is nuts to have a tie-break criteria (or in this case a method of counting associated with a criteria) for which it is beneficial for a team to default.