The disqualification process in USTA League tennis is broken. Today I am enumerating why I think disqualification ultimately hurts the tennis ecosystem. Additionally, disqualification is one of many factors that make it hard to attract and retain players in underserved tennis communities. It probably sounds like another one of my crazy ideas, but hear me out.
Let’s start with an excerpt from the 2022 USTA League Regulations.
Players who are good athletes or intend to spend a great deal of time taking lessons and practicing should be aware that their improvement may be significant enough to surpass their original self-rating during the local league season or championship play. To avoid NTRP Dynamic Disqualification, these players should enter at a higher NTRP level of play at the beginning of the local league season.
USTA League Regulations, 2022.
The first sentence grates on my sensibilities because it seems to imply that tennis is primarily played by people who are not good athletes. The rest of the recreational sports world actually tries to attract and retain the best talent. In tennis, apparently we barely tolerate that. I challenge you to name any other sport that actively punishes people for becoming too good too fast. Tennis should be welcoming to the best athletes.
I am frequently regaled with tales of disqualification. Some are DQ nightmares, similar to Rafa’s story in yesterday’s post. Others seem to be more justifiable. Peeling back the details on those latter accounts, it almost always boils down to wanton disregard of the USTA’s self-rating guidelines.
I do think that the USTA needs to modify the self-rating process so that information pertinent to NTRP ratings guidance is submitted via attestation. A player that fails to disclose recent collegiate playing experience or junior rankings to enable self-rating at a lower NTRP level should be administratively disqualified. The league regulations have some words to this effect, but in reality it is seldom enforced.
The simple fact of the matter is that dynamic disqualification doesn’t work at all. The self-rating scoundrels with carefully curated playing histories somehow always seem to elude accumulation of strikes. In my experience, well intentioned people are disqualified at a much higher rate than people who purposely game the system.
In TennisLink, the players with matches vacated by disqualification are branded with a “DQ” next to their name in their permanent playing record. The way it is represented evokes embarrassment and shame. Even the USTA seems aware of the stigma and uses the alternative word “promotion” in official communication with the player. In addition to the indignity of being disqualified, bearing the scarlet letter “DQ” is another contributing factor to negative player experience.
Self-ratings exist because players new to the tennis ecosystem require an initial NTRP setting. By the very definition, self-rated players are either new or newly returned to the USTA ecosystem after a long absence. Consequently, players who are newest to USTA tennis are the ones who are most likely to experience disqualification. It is a bit inhospitable, which is odd for a sport allegedly trying to build participation.
In Rafa’s story yesterday, I shared how he was disqualified via a strike earned in a loss to a computer rated player with a higher dynamic rating. It is absurd to me that a player with a higher dynamic computer rating is protected from disqualification while the person they defeated incurs a strike. Being new to tennis isn’t a sin, but the USTA League system seems to regard it as such.
Disqualification exists because the USTA is worried that teams with egregiously self-rated players might dominate the League National Championships. Sadly, there seems to be considerably less concern that a number of teams filled with grizzled veterans accomplish the same thing through NTRP ratings management and manipulation. I am dismayed that the USTA takes a hard line disqualification stance against players new to the sport, only to blithely turn a blind eye to serial offenders.
Players (and teams) in local leagues with a lot of match play have significant opportunity to manage their rating. They compete in many matches that simply do not matter. For example, in Dallas players routinely play in more than one flight in the same league. In that case, it is not unusual that the primary team’s matches are the only ones the player really cares about.
Disqualification predominately impacts new tennis players who lack guidance from a well seasoned captain that understands and is inclined to game the system. It also disproportionately impacts players from underserved tennis communities with limited match play that precludes ratings management. A low number of matches greatly increases the mathematical odds of generating disqualification strikes.
It is time for disqualification to be DQ’d. Overall, it would be good for the tennis ecosystem.
- USTA League Regulations, 2022, downloaded February 5, 2022.
