Latest Posts

Ultimate Stocking Stuffer List for Tennis Players (2024 Edition) Secrets of Winning Tennis The USTA Encourages Double Dipping The Speed Ladder Tennis Beyond the Headlines: November 18, 2024 A Balanced Diet: Healthy Tennis Engagements A Balanced Diet: Better Nutrition for Better Tennis

Based on recent posts appearing in the Facebook group of active tournament players in Texas, there is some consternation over the new qualification rules that the USTA recently published for NTRP Nationals. A lot of the angst seems rooted in some “edge cases” for how player selection will be performed.

An “edge case” in computer programming describes the unique circumstances that can lead to a bug or error. The same term is used for (theoretically) rare conditions when a process breaks down. When a system has a lot of edge cases, it can be a sign of poor design. On the other hand, sometimes accommodating all the edge cases itself contributes to poor design.

Each USTA Section is assigned a quota of players/teams guaranteed to be selected for each division of NTRP Nationals. I tend to use the antiquated term “endorsement” for this because that is what it was called back in my junior playing days. That allocation of guaranteed playing spots is allegedly based on NTRP tournament participation.

I say allegedly because there hasn’t been a lot of transparency on exactly how the calculation is performed. There are 17 USTA Sections and each is guaranteed a minimum of one endorsement in each division. An apparent target draw size of 32 leaves 15 endorsements to be divvied up based on NTRP tournament participation.

I suspect the total number of “automatic” endorsements may exceed 32. Most Sections don’t publish their allocation, but I know that Texas gets 3, Mid-Atlantic gets 2, and Southern gets so many that they host open Automatic Qualifying (AQ) tournaments where players from other Sections can win their endorsements, so I am assuming at least 3. That would account for over half of the “extra” endorsements. For the sake of transparency, I would love to see a full allocation list published each year.

Texas has historically used rankings lists to determine who receives the endorsements. I recently confirmed with the Texas Section office that there will be no change to that method for 2024 NTRP National bids. However, players from Texas can also travel to other Sections to play in AQ tournaments, and they are doing so with increasing frequency.

This is where the edge cases start to roll in. Someone has to determine not only if a player has an endorsement but also how many. Additionally, it needs to be determined which endorsement a player is using when selected for the event. This may create a significant workload for the people responsible for managing each Section’s allocation.

In open AQ tournaments, there is no apparent restriction for doubles partners to be from the same Section. Recently a player from Texas traveled to Atlanta, where he won an NTRP endorsement partnered with a player from Southern. The endorsement they won is clearly against Southern’s allocation. It isn’t clear that those two players are required to play together at NTRP Nationals. If one or both decided that they would prefer to play the event with a different partner, who “owns” the endorsement?

To complicate matters, that same player from Texas holding the half (maybe) endorsement from Southern is sitting atop the NSL that his home Section uses to determine their allocation of spots. He will likely still be at or near the top when Texas pulls their qualifiers off that list.

This requires the coordinator in Texas to be aware of players that have multiple endorsements and establish clarity on which Section’s allocation each of those players counts against. I’m going to go out on a limb to say that ServeTennis doesn’t have automated support for that.

Another new caveat for 2024 applies to players that received bumped-up NTRP ratings at the end of the year. Players who earned an endorsement to NTRP Nationals either on the basis of the NSL or AQ events are allowed to play at the next higher level without counting against their Sectional allocation. Once again, this is something that ServeTennis probably doesn’t have support for either.

In previous years, self-rated players were not allowed to compete in NTRP Nationals. I am aware of a couple of players who were denied endorsements after competing all year as a self-rate who had received a “T” or “C” rating at the end of the year.

I would think that since tournaments at the first of the year now count toward advancement, any player who earned a valid computer rating at the previous year’s end would now be eligible. I would advise any player who might be in that situation to check with their local Section office before entering a lot of tournaments based on that assumption, however.

I might be reading too much into it (it’s what I do), but I have the impression that once the automatic spots are allocated, the draw will now be filled by alternates who entered the event. I believe that the selection will be on the basis of the NSL at the time. That means that anyone who is on the NSL who wants to play should submit an entry.

Finally, dates and sites for the 2024 tournaments have yet to be announced. Since those details are still being worked out, I would also lobby for having large setbacks in the entry deadlines and player selection for these events. For National tournaments, players typically have to purchase plane tickets and arrange lodging in unfamiliar areas. To be equitable, alternates should be selected at least one month before the event.

If not, the alternates selected and able to play would be dominated by players who live relatively close to the venue. That would not be an issue if the NTRP National Championship event moved around frequently. However, the tournaments tend to be conducted at the same venues every year.

As we say in Texas, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” These changes are a clear sign that despite all the propaganda that the NTRP National Championships are a smashing success, the USTA recognizes the need for improvement. I see every tweak that was made this year as a step in the right direction.

Ironing out all the edge cases will take a while in the interim. The player community needs to be patient as the USTA continues to move forward on this initiative.


  1. About NTRP National Championships, USTA Informational Page, viewed August 16, 2023.
  2. Friend at Court: The Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations, USTA, 2023

3 thoughts on “New Qualification Rules for NTRP Nationals

  1. Erica says:

    When are the AQ’s notified and what is that cut off date?

    1. Teresa Merklin says:

      It isn’t clear to me. I plan to write about the new qualification rules on January 12 and hope to have a better handle on it by then.

  2. Alli Berry says:

    The dates and locations are actually announced as of yesterday afternoon. The About NTRP Championships page has it now. Your point is obviously still valid that knowing where and when doesn’t mean people know if they have qualified or not.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *