The USTA Adult ranking system awards different points for equivalent order of finish across various draw formats. For example, the second place finisher in a four player First Match Losers Consolation (FMLC) bracket will receive more points than if a Round Robin is played. That disparity is encoded directly into the USTA Ranking System policy document. Apparently some on the USTA Adult Competition Committee (ACC) don’t regard this as an issue. This may have been the most important question from the “Tennis Tournament Ranking System Player Survey” that this site recently conducted.
The survey question posed was kind of long because it is a complex situation.
The USTA Ranking System currently awards different values of ranking points for the same order of finish based on the draw format. (e.g. a round robin bracket awards different points for equivalent finish in an FMLC draw). Select the option that most closely aligns with your views on ranking point consistency.
73% of the people in the survey selected “The ranking points awarded to competitors should be consistent based on order of finish regardless of the draw format used.” That’s a pretty strong statement. However, I was surprised that 19% checked “It is OK to have variance in ranking points based on the draw format selected. (No change).”
Filtering the survey data based on the answer to this question produced a clue about where people who hold that position might be coming from.
 73% opposed to the variance. |  19% OK with the current system. |
The players who oppose ranking point variance in the draw formats have played significantly more Level 4 and Level 5 tournaments than people who are OK with the current point allocations. The inverse is true for Level 1 and Level 2 tournaments.
My theory is that people who don’t see the need for change have probably not been personally exposed to the point disparities. That issue has mostly been highlighted by people embroiled in rankings points races for scarce slots at events like the Texas Masters and the NTRP National Championships. Those endorsements are largely based on performance at Level 4 and Level 5 tournaments.
There is a lot more data in the survey and I will be working on a full report. (It will take some time to produce because the day job will keep me really busy over the next month.) In the meantime, I am planning on launching a quick survey next week to capture player preferences for scheduling three day tournaments which is the predominate length of Level 4 and 5 tournaments in Texas.
In a confession that should shock no one, I genuinely enjoy geeking out on this kind of data.
- 2021 USTA Adult Tournaments Ranking System, USTA Resource, effective January 1, 2022, viewed April 8, 2022.
I understand the consensus of players in the level 4 and 5 tournaments because I am one of those. However, I would think that the people who do not feel strongly about the problem would be players of lower level tournaments rather than higher level tournaments. Have to think on that one….