Adult Tennis Tournaments in 2021: Update

Tennis News You Can Use

Last week the USTA sent not one — but two — emails to its adult members on the new adult 2021 tournament structure. One subject line posed the question on whether the members are “Up to Date” on the coming changes. The other was titled along the lines of “The Top Things to Know.” This may be the start of a new informational blitz in preparation for the rollout 2021. It is also an opportunity to revisit my previous coverage of this topic in light of the new information that has emerged in those two communications.

Every time I receive anything from the USTA on the new 2021 tournament structure, my hopes are raised that the organization has reversed course regarding the elimination of mixed doubles from NTRP tournaments in 2021. Alas, despite the fact that the USTA continues to favor picturing mixed doubles on every web page summarizing the changes, there are still no plans to conduct NTRP mixed events in 2021.

There is a link to new(-ish) video on YouTube where the details of the upcoming changes are excruciatingly detailed. At first glance, I thought that the link pointed to a repeat of the webinar which I wrote about previously on this site. However, it is an updated version from that initial communication. It was posted some time ago so there is a very good chance that I overlooked the communication when the video was previously circulated to the USTA membership.

Bottom Line Summary

It may seem strange to write about my current bottom line outlook near the top of a post, but it makes the most narrative sense to me at this juncture. The recent spate of communication included an updated chart that summarizes the tournament structure.

What it boils down to is that tournaments will have consistent naming, points structure, and time duration measured in days. However, there is a high degree of flexibility provided to tournament organizers as to the draw type and scoring format at those events. Contrary to current assertions made in the communications, players will not know what to expect until reading each individual tournament announcement. In other words, essentially the same way that players learned the details of events from the soon to be retired system.

Until the 2021 tournament calendar emerges, it is not possible to fully analyze any impacts of the new system. The Fiend at Court household is eagerly awaiting the tournament schedule and details for next year. To be completely transparent, that doesn’t make that much of a material difference from previous years.

That previous paragraph is the logical end of this post. However, I have some additional tangential observations offered as post scripts below.

---

---

Fiend at Court on Innovation

Previously I wrote that I was having a visceral reaction every time the word “Innovation” is used in conjunction with the new structure. I finally was able to put my finger on the source of that reaction. What it boils down to is that I think “Innovation” is being used when a more appropriate word is available.

My definition of the word, which was confirmed through consultation with the Merriam-Webster dictionary, is that innovation is a new idea or an introduction of something new.

For example, “Innovation” is used to describe the new tournament structure. However, a more appropriate word to describe what is occurring is “Consolidation.” To be clear, I am in total agreement with the idea that consolidation is necessary.

Another context where “Innovation” is used is in describing the menu of options for draw type and scoring formats offered to tournament organizers. In that case, the appropriate word is “flexibility.” Tournaments can make selections from a defined set of parameters. They cannot come up with something new or depart from the list. Flexibility is not the same as innovation.

Potential Impacts of the New Structure

There are two separate but related impacts being bandied about with respect to the new structure.

• The new structure will create new competitive opportunities at the local level.
• The new structure will conjure up new players.

In Texas, I think we have been looking at the situation through our current framework of competition structure. With the exception of the elimination of mixed, which I am expecting to have a depressive impact on participation, I don’t think there will be that much of a difference. We already have small local tournaments and playing options across all levels. Sort of.

As an example of an eye-roll moment for me, the new(-ish) USTA video explicitly states that 5.0 players will have more opportunity to play at smaller tournaments at the local level. I want to buy in to that fantasy, but the numbers don’t give me much optimism.

As a sanity check, I pulled the 5.0 women’s ranking lists from all 17 USTA Sections in 2019… when they existed. Only three sections have a rankings list for last year. Northern Cal has a list with two names and the Pacific Northwest had a list with a single player. My home section of Texas had the most activity at that level, with 10 people on the rankings list. Double digits!

In my immediate context as a 5.0 woman player in Texas, we don’t have a tournament accessibility problem, we have a player participation problem. I want to buy into the idea that the new format will conjure up new players. I just can’t muster the optimism required to do so. The plan may be workable at other levels and ultimately may rebuild the pipeline of players required to sustain tennis at all levels. That would be ultimately good. It will just take a while for the flow through effect to occur.

---

1. “Adult Tournament Structure Top Things to Know,” USTA National Web Site, viewed 10/12/2020.
2. “USTA Adult Tournament Changes for 2021,” USTA National Web Site, viewed 10/12/2020.
3. “2021 USTA Adult Tournament Changes,” United States Tennis Association (USTA) Official YouTube Channel, posted June 9, 2020.
4. “innovation,” Merriam-Webster online dictionary