The Women’s 4.5 division at the 2022 USTA 18+ NTRP Doubles National Championships had exactly 12 teams in the final entry list. That number provides a lot of options on how to divide the players into round robin groups. The ultimate decision was to conduct the first round robin stage as two six team pools. The downstream side effects on this one are pretty wild.
More Tennis is Always the Answer
Lately I have been (literally) rolling around wearing T-shirts emblazoned with my new “More Tennis is always the answer” guiding principle. The reason for that is because… follow me closely on this… I sincerely believe that any decision on tennis initiatives should be informed by an understanding that more tennis is a better outcome than anything that results in less tennis.
From that “More Tennis” perspective, I generally like larger preliminary round robin groups because that provides players with more guaranteed matches. When I look at the results from the round robin pools in the Women’s 4.5 doubles last week in Surprise, I become insanely jealous over the amount of tennis that was played.
Less Ranking Points is Rarely the Answer
The second phase of the tournament carried 6 teams into the Championship Bracket. That means that the top three teams from each preliminary round robin group was advanced into that draw. (See? I can still do math.) That also means that the two teams that performed the best and “won” each preliminary pool were “rewarded” with byes in that 8 team bracket.
The following image is a clip that summarizes the ranking points that should be awarded for a Level 1 tournament that uses a two stage round robin format. (Note: some email readers block images based on privacy settings. If you don’t see the picture it is best to view this post through a web browser.)
Each preliminary Round Robin win is worth 231 points and the total for that stage is capped at 693. The math on that reveals an assumption that the preliminary round robin stage will be 4 teams that each play three matches. From a rankings point perspective, once a team achieves 3 wins, they have capped their ranking points for that stage. The following two tables capture the rankings points for each team following the round robin group phase.
| Team | W-L | # | Pts |
| Vutam, C / Remeza, K Garland, TX/Austin, TX | 3-2 | 3 | 693 |
| Zhong, M / DiFazio, L Pasadena, CA/Los Angeles, CA | 1-4 | 5 | 231 |
| Tellis, B / Solanki, D Centennial, CO/Centennial, CO | 2-3 | 4 | 462 |
| Marum, C / Condit, J Canton, CT/Cheshire, CT | 5-0 | 1 | 693 |
| Chang, G / Abolt, K Sioux Falls, SD/Sioux Falls, SD | 0-5 | 6 | 0 |
| Raimond, J / Kamel, A Chicago, IL/Chicago, IL | 4-1 | 2 | 693 |
| Team | W-L | # | Pts |
| Kirschenbaum, A / Smith, K Birmingham, MI/Royal Oak, MI | 2-3 | 4 | 462 |
| DAVIS, T / Veitzer, C Scottsdale, AZ/Elkhorn, NE | 5-0 | 1 | 693 |
| Pietz, B / Harbert, R Los Angeles, CA/Santa Monica, CA | 2-3 | 3 | 462 |
| Campbell, K / Ruiz, E Waco, TX/San Antonio, TX | 1-4 | 6 | 231 |
| Ross, K / Wootton, A Littleton, CO/Littleton, CO | 4-1 | 2 | 693 |
| Nielsen, C / Wallace, R Olympia, WA/Olympia, WA | 1-4 | 5 | 231 |
Taunya Davis and Christine Veitzer ultimately won the Championship. They were “rewarded” with a bye in the first round of the Championship bracket. That means that they only had the opportunity to play two matches during that stage. Each of those wins are worth 762 points for a total of 1524. When combined with the first stage, their grand total ranking points was 2217 for the event.
It is an interesting contrast to the second place team, Christy Vutam and Kristin Remeza. Despite only going 3-2 in the preliminary round robin phase, they still received the maximum points with those three wins. Since they did not receive a bye during the Championship stage, they had to win two matches to reach the finals. Each of those wins are worth 762 points for a total of 1524. When combined with the first stage, their grand total ranking points was 2217 for the event.
In other words, the first and second place teams received the exact same number of ranking points. Neither team received the points they actually should have received based on order of finish in any other draw format in the USTA Adult Tournaments Ranking System Tables.
As another interesting side note, Courtney Marum and Julie Condit received a walkover in the 3rd-4th place playoff match, which should have been worth 231 points. However, they only received points for their preliminary round robin wins. I believe that to be an error in the rankings calculation software.
The team that finished 4th received significantly more points than the 3rd place team, even had the omission of the points for the 3rd place match not occurred. That illustrates the negative effects of the byes. The point differential is tragically bad.
The following point table reflects the actual order of finish for each team in this division based on their performance in the Championship and Consolation Brackets. The number of points that the USTA ranking system actually awarded each team is in the next column. The Order of Finish column (OOF) is based of the points that would have been awarded for that same performance had the tournament been played as a FICQ. That is the first point table in the USTA Adult Tournaments Ranking System.
| # | Team | Points (USTA) | Points (OOF) | Difference |
| 1 | DAVIS, T / Veitzer, C | 2217 | 3000 | -783 |
| 2 | Vutam, C / Remeza, K | 2217 | 2100 | +117 |
| 3 | Marum, C / Condit, J | 693 (924) | 1800 | -1107 (-876) |
| 4 | Ross, K / Wootton, A | 1455 | 1500 | -45 |
| 5-6 | Pietz, B / Harbert, R | 462 | 1200 | -738 |
| 5-6 | Raimond, J / Kamel, A | 693 | 1200 | -507 |
| 7 | Kirschenbaum, A / Smith, K | 738 | 900 | -162 |
| 8 | Zhong, M / DiFazio, L | 507 | 900 | -393 |
| 9-10 | Chang, G / Abolt, K | 138 | 750 | -612 |
| 9-10 | Tellis, B / Solanki, D | 462 | 750 | -288 |
| 11-12 | Nielsen, C / Wallace, R | 231 | 750 | -519 |
| 11-12 | Campbell, K / Ruiz, E | 231 | 750 | -519 |
Based on these results, I am declaring that my friends Christy Vutam and Kristin Remeza are the big winners from the tournament last weekend. Not only did they receive the same number of rankings points as the team that won the Championship, they are also the only team in the bracket that received more rankings points than their order of finish would have earned them in any other bracket format.
Additionally, to the best of my knowledge, Christy and Kristin are the only two players in this draw that read this blog. I can’t guarantee the other players that following Fiend at Court will improve future ranking point performance, but it couldn’t possibly hurt.
- Level 1: USTA 18+ NTRP Doubles National Championships, April 8-10, 2022.
- 2021 USTA Adult Tournaments Ranking System, USTA Resource, effective January 1, 2022, viewed April 8, 2022.
