Revisiting 18-39 USTA League Play

Back in 2021, I was triggered by a USTA Facebook post looking for players in the 18-39 age demographic to survey. That prompted me to write an essay with one or two harsh statements that no longer reflect my current thinking. In particular, I stated that “The USTA addition of an 18-39 league is probably the dumbest idea that ever saw its way to implementation.” The full context of the original diatribe is in “Overthinking a recent USTA Social Media Survey “

I now have a more nuanced viewpoint. While I stand by many of the points outlined in that original post, it was based on the assumption that the USTA was trying to attract players by creating an age-specific product for that demographic. However, if you come at it from the standpoint that the USTA was trying to separate younger players away from certain people in the tennis ecosystem, 18-39 leagues make a lot more sense.

Immediately after my original post ran, a couple of local players in my orbit who participated in the 18-39 leagues told me that it was a lot of fun. I heard similar stories at the USTA Texas Section meeting last weekend. However, when you peel back a layer or two of the onion for more details, an interesting reason why the younger players like that format emerges. I have been repeatedly told that the 18-39 leagues were much more chill and lacked the typical league drama.

I am not unfamiliar with abhorrent behavior toward younger players. “NTRP Horror Story” details a first-hand experience I had. Unfortunately, there are a lot of jackasses in tennis and the league ecosystem tolerates those that also happen to be pretty good. After all, Sectional and National Championships are on the line.

18-39 Sectional Championships does not appear on the 2023 calendar for USTA Texas. I didn’t do an exhaustive search for 2022 local leagues but my spot check convinced me that many divisions don’t attract enough participation to be held. It has been my experience that tennis is considerably more chill when Championship advancement isn’t on the line.

That last observation actually supports a recurring theme on this site that the quickest path to change the culture in USTA League play for the better is to eliminate National Championships. Unfortunately, the same point also supports the idea that participation is lower in the absence of National Championships. There really isn’t enough data either way to draw a conclusion, but it would make for an interesting study.

The way certain older league players behave toward younger and strong new players just entering the league ecosystem is terrible. While separating those two constituencies from each other is certainly one solution, it doesn’t address the most important problem. League culture should not tolerate unwelcoming and abusive behavior. Walling off a group of players to isolate them from the bad apples doesn’t fix the problem. If anything it actually exacerbates the sense of entitlement in those that are unsportsmanlike.

Even though my viewpoints have changed considerably since that original post, I still don’t love the 18-39 divisions. However, it now falls more closely in line with my general dislike of NTRP age divisions in general. Separating NTRP play by age in either league or tournament tennis should not be necessary if all the claims about the accuracy of the NTRP algorithm are true.

It is hard to find space in the tennis calendar to schedule events because the year is already chock full of continuous permutations of league play. It is killing tournament tennis. I also think that too much league play is one of the root causes behind the officiating shortage.

In any case, I no longer believe that “The USTA addition of an 18-39 league is probably the dumbest idea that ever saw its way to implementation.” Ironically, I do not regret the original statement. It led to some great conversations that helped me view the problem from a different angle. I feel like I have grown a little bit as a result.