Fiend at Court Unplugged
The USTA sent an email out to a subset of adult members this week announcing the publication of Adult and Senior “Shadow Rankings” for 2020. These rankings lists are being used to give players a feel for how the new system will work. At the same time the USTA is using these rankings to evaluate whether there should be any changes to the rankings tables across the 7 Levels tournament framework.
After taking a first look at the Shadow Rankings lists, it is an illustration of just how messed up 2020 was from a tournament participation perspective. When I first wrote about the imminent publication of the Shadow Rankings last Monday, I expressed the opinion that I don’t see how any reasonable assessment of how the new framework can be done using 2020 data. This is due to the fact that there were so many tournament cancellations. Now that the lists are out, I am galvanized into that position.
The first question in the USTA “Adult Shadow Ranking FAQ” page takes this fact head on by indicating that the organization is aware that 2020 is not the best source of data for evaluating the system. The same document also indicates that the decision was made that providing the tennis “consumer” with some data is better than no data. Hopefully, that is also a sign that the USTA recognizes that it would probably be a bad idea to make changes on the basis of the Shadow Rankings for that same reason.
As a personal example of whacked out results for 2020, I appear in the Women’s 50 and over singles Shadow Rankings at #19 with 1061 points. Those points came from a grand total of one match. Additionally, I would have received those 1061 points regardless of whether or not I had won the match. My contention is that the system should not be adjusted on the sole basis that this situation or (other similar situations) transpired.
It is absurd that a player can land in the Top 20 by playing — and potentially losing — a single match. The fact that might have occurred had the new system already been in place can be chalked up to anomalous participation in 2020. Additionally, players were not yet incentivized to play the smaller tournaments for a points system that did not yet exist. My contention is that the new framework will motivate Senior players to enter and participate in these regional and local events.
The Shadow Rankings lists can be used to reverse engineer the expected 2021 level assignment for tournaments that were conducted in 2020. For example, my one match came at the “Metroplex Super Senior and Senior Major Zone” in Arlington Texas. From my points total in the Shadow Rankings list, it is apparent that the Metroplex Senior Major Zone tournament is currently slotted as a Level 5 tournament in 2021.
That Level assignment is the same as the NTRP Major Zone tournaments in Texas that I wrote about yesterday. It is probably reasonable to assume that all the existing “Major Zone” tournaments in Texas will come in at Level 5 as well.
Until the full tournament schedule is published for 2021, I will probably continue to eagerly overthink every thing the USTA publishes about the new framework. Each shred of information reveals a little more about what we have in store for us. In a way, it is like shaking the boxes under the Christmas tree. I can’t wait to see what we ultimately receive.
- 2020 USTA Adult Shadow Rankings, https://www.usta.com/en/home/play/rankings.html#tab=adult, viewed 11/13/2020
- Adult Shadow Ranking FAQs, https://customercare.usta.com/hc/en-us/articles/360051797771, viewed 11/13/2020.
- 2021 USTA Adult Tournaments Ranking System, https://www.usta.com/content/dam/usta/2020-pdfs/2021-USTA-ADULT-TOURNAMENTS-RANKING-SYSTEM.pdf, viewed 11/13/2020.
