An engineer overthinks tennis in a daily journal.
Last Sunday I described a request I made to the USTA Adult Competition Committee to update the glossary in the USTA Adult and Family Tournament, Ranking, and Sanctioning Regulations. Today I want to step through the process for how that actually occurs. To keep this topic from being as boring as it… Well, actually is… I am going to unapologetically leverage the linguistic style of the Schoolhouse Rock classic, “I’m just a Bill.”
Yesterday I described an ambiguity in the USTA Adult and Family Tournament, Ranking & Sanctioning Regulations document that impacts how ranking points are awarded at tournaments. This has prompted me to explore the process for proposing updates to that document. The specific change will be a clarification of how rankings points are assigned for players/teams that do not win a match in Round Robin pool play. Like any good bureaucracy, the USTA has a process for updating their regulations.
2 responses
Last weekend the post “Points Illustrated: An Example of Rankings Inequities,” contained an example where a winless team was awarded 615 ranking points in a Level 4 round robin bracket. In the USTA legacy digital platform, players had to win a match in a tournament to receive anything more than participation points for the event. The fact that the new digital platform awarded those points is a great backdrop for exploring what the USTA regulations actually say.
1 response
The December challenge for the USTA Champions Program is to donate two tennis “Quick Start” kits to promote tennis in the local community. After exploring my options in the Wichita Falls area, I decided to donate the sets to the Angel Tree operated by the Salvation Army.
2 responses
There is an error in how the new USTA Digital Platform calculates order of finish in Round Robin pools. I stumbled across it when building the comparison data set used in yesterday’s post. I deferred talking about it until today because it is an issue that merits dedicated attention.
1 response
In “When a USTA Level 4 Tournament… Isn’t” three weeks ago, I repeatedly emphasized the phrase: “The draw format of a tournament should not materially alter the rankings point allocation for the players.” The reason for belaboring that foundational truth is that it is key to understanding the ongoing player frustration over the USTA tournament rankings points allocations. In the intervening time, I continue to wonder if the policy makers have fully accepted or internalized that feedback. Perhaps an example will help.
In the spirit of the holiday season, my mind inevitably turns to all the gifts I have bestowed on my opponents this year on the court. Nobody likes to give away free points, but almost all of us do from time to time. Usually those donated points are mundane affairs, double faults, missed sitters, and poor shot selection based on nothing other than absence of concentration. All of those dot my personal competitive landscape. However, across the myriad of points I have donated over the years, one stand out above all others. I remember it like it was yesterday.
Twas the night before bump ups, new ratings pronounced;
Not a player was resting… Here’s my account;
The impact of the pandemic has raised the public consciousness on the importance of supporting small locally owned and operated businesses. The retail pro shop attached to clubs or tennis centers are firmly in that category. If you are considering giving someone the gift of tennis, the pro shop at your local tennis center is an obvious first start.
This year’s list has the most items ever carried on this annual traditional Black Friday Post. They are divided into categories for convenience.
2 responses