Latest Posts

2027 Fort Worth USTA League Regulations: What Changed? New Year, New Rules: What Changed in Dallas USTA League Tennis for 2027 Rules Are Better Tested Before They Become Rules Will the US Open Ever Produce Another Anniversary Book Like This? The Code, Principle 14: From Replay to Concession Quadruped Hip Circles: My Favorite Exercise for Hip Mobility Tennis Beyond the Headlines: September 7, 2026

Errata and Running the Numbers

On By Teresa Merklin

There is a cap to the number of tournaments that count toward a player’s USTA ranking under the current cumulative tournament performance ranking system. The primary purpose of this post is to correct a misstatement I made about that on this site a couple of weeks ago. Additionally, it is a perfect opportunity to preview my emerging thinking on how to structure tennis tournaments to build the robust participation needed for a healthy competitive ecosystem.

What, me worry? (NTRP and the World Tennis Number)

On By Teresa Merklin

The USTA has been busy filling my inbox with announcements heralding the imminent deployment of the World Tennis Number. The messages are infused with reassurances directing players to not “worry” that the NTRP system might go away. I have been trying to find someone who is actually concerned about that happening. If I could find such a person, I could try to pinpoint the root causes of the fear. So far I have failed in that endeavor.

Yes I Am! (Going to League Nationals)

On By Teresa Merklin

My 55+ 9.0 NTRP USTA League Team qualified for the National Championships last weekend. In related news, I have a history of asserting that elimination of NTRP “National Championships” would eliminate the majority of unsportsmanlike behavior that plagues the USTA League system. Additionally, I have also railed at the absurdity of conducting NTRP competition with age based restrictions. Will I make the trip with my team? Absolutely.

2 responses

USTA Scheduling Guidelines

On By Teresa Merklin

The USTA Friend at Court contains a table of guidelines for the maximum number of daily matches for a player within a division in a USTA tennis tournament. Per the tennis triple constraint model that was the subject of yesterday’s post, the various scoring methods in that table are the qualitative aspects of match play that constrains the calendar time and schedule for the tournament.

2 responses

Tournament Triple Constraint Model

On By Teresa Merklin

A popular joke about project management goes like this: “All projects can be done well, fast, and cheap. Pick two.” That joke is based on the triple constraint theory of project management. It is elegantly conceptualized as a triangle that represents the trade-offs between scope, cost, and time. The idea is that changes to any of those vertices forces adjustment in one or both of the other two. I recently had the revelation that I had been unconsciously using the triple constraint model as I have been ruminating on tournament scheduling, draw formats, and ranking systems.

1 response

FICQ for More Tennis

On By Teresa Merklin

It is no secret that Feed in Consolation through the Quarterfinals (FICQ) is my favorite draw format. It is commonly used for Junior Sectional championship tournaments as well as Level 1 tournaments for both Junior and Adult competition. This “double elimination” format is the gold standard for tournament competition when the stakes are high.

Voluntary Consolation

On By Teresa Merklin

Voluntary consolation is a variation of the First Match Loser’s Consolation (FMLC) draw. In that format players that lose their first match have the option of signing up to participate in a back draw. Doing so is not required. When the USTA unveiled the 7 tier unified national tournament system, the voluntary consolation draw was explicitly included as an option at every tier of competition. Today’s post outlines the case for why the format arguably shouldn’t be used.

1 response

The FMLC Mullet

On By Teresa Merklin

The “mullet” hairstyle is a combination of short and long hair colloquially described as “business in the front, party in the back.” With that definition, the First Match Loser’s Consolation (FMLC) draw is the “mullet” of tournament formats. Ranking points are awarded on a “order of finish” basis in the front draw but switches around to a “points per round” system in the back draw. I don’t have the official stats from the USTA, but I would be stunned if FMLC wasn’t the most commonly used format for USTA sanctioned tournaments by a mile. Unfortunately, that draw format directly contributes to player disengagement from tournament play.

4 responses