Creating good rule and incentive frameworks is a sophisticated process of system design. Establishing the rules, regulations, and guidelines that shape player and administrative behavior is critically important in the competitive tennis ecosystem. A well-designed framework positively inspires and influences actions, while poor design does exactly the opposite. Doing this well requires a deep understanding of psychology, economics, and strategic planning to ensure the system operates effectively and equitably. The rules and incentive framework for tennis should be architected to foster desired behaviors while mitigating unintended consequences.
The decision-makers involved with the USTA’s tennis tournament rules framework must be aware that every rule and regulation implemented is part of a complex system design. Decisions can have far-reaching cascading effects that influence player behavior, competition dynamics, and overall system efficiency. A holistic understanding of system design principles is essential for creating a balanced and effective framework that supports the sport’s growth and fairness. When that is missing, well-intentioned changes might lead to inefficiencies or imbalances.
This weekend, we have been examining the concept of hacking as applied to the competitive tennis ecosystem. It is critically important for organizational decision-makers to be aware that self-interested players, team captains, and organizers will hack the system to create the greatest possible benefit for themselves. Consequently, it is imperative to consider whether rules and regulations are incentivizing the desired behaviors while still encouraging and fostering play.
Put succinctly, as rules and regulations are developed, the USTA must consider not only the use cases where everything goes as expected but also to consider how things might go wrong. That includes understanding how self-interested players might abuse the system for their personal benefit. From my experience and observations of the USTA, anticipating any negative effects and consequences of rules and regulations is particularly challenging. The organization is hardwired to view everything positively, which is a beneficial attribute that can also be a liability.
Bruce Schneier is a highly respected cybersecurity strategist who recently observed on his blog that bad actors will break rules no matter how well they are constructed. More importantly, he described how selfish people will take advantage of insufficient rules. That is fundamentally different from rule-breaking. Self-interested people consider their own benefits but are mindful of others and the long-term implications of their actions. In contrast, selfish people prioritize their own interests with little concern for others or the broader consequences.
As a complicating factor of system design for the competitive tennis ecosystem, the various organizations within the USTA can also be self-interested and sometimes may cross over into selfish. The National USTA League regulations delegate rule-making authority to the Sections, which in turn delegate authority down to the local level. The good intention behind that structure is that organizations at the local level know best how to promote and develop play in their community.
However, rules implemented at every tier must be somewhat consistent with the objectives and requirements of the overall system architecture. Criteria must be established to determine whether rules implemented at each level are consistent with the objectives established by the higher tiers. Additionally, periodic reviews should be conducted to determine if conditions have changed enough to make adjustments necessary.
As an example, USTA Texas has the following rule at the Sectional Level
Texas Regulation: Out of Area Players. A team may have one player outside the 50-mile radius of a large city, Fort Worth, Dallas, San Antonio, Austin, Houston and North Houston. All other cities can have a maximum of two players outside the 50-mile radius from the center of the city. A player is NOT considered out of area if the area where the player resides is without a league/division for the past three years.
2024 USTA National League Regulations and Texas Operating Procedures
This rule is to prevent enterprising captains from assembling a “super team” of the very best players in the Section. It is good in principle because it levels the playing field by requiring all teams to mostly restrict themselves to the players in their area. After all, USTA League is fundamentally intended to encourage play at the local level.
However, this rule can make competing in USTA League challenging for players from low participation areas. For example, my childhood hometown of Wichita Falls rarely musters enough players to conduct a local League. Some people resort to playing their tennis in Fort Worth, which requires a 4-hour round trip for each match.
Unless Wichita Falls conducted a USTA League in their division within the past three years, those players do not count as out-of-area under the 50-mile radius rule. That disincentivizes the players who are making the drive from trying to scrape together enough players in their local area because they run the risk of ineligibility if the League cannot be sustained. The 50-mile radius rule is a barrier to participation for cities with low numbers.
Additionally, the Community Tennis Association (CTA) that runs the league in Fort Worth implemented a local rule that restricts participation from a significant part of their 50-mile playing area. While those players are also within the 50-mile radius of Dallas, it reduces opportunities to play if they prefer the Fort Worth side of the metroplex. Additionally, the rule raises additional barriers for players from small cities with low participation who are willing to make the commute to Fort Worth.
These rules at the Section and local levels are examples of system design decisions. Complex systems will always require trade-offs between competing constituencies. However, a good framework will clearly identify objectives and priorities to guide and evaluate those decisions. Furthermore, a design review should be conducted as new rules are implemented and conditions evolve to ensure that the overall system operates as desired.
Recognizing that rules and regulations are integral components of system design is crucial for the USTA and similar organizations. By adopting a design-oriented approach, decision-makers can create frameworks that not only encourage fair play and participation but also anticipate and mitigate potential abuses. A thorough understanding of system design principles and regular reviews and adjustments can lead to better outcomes for players and administrators alike. This approach ensures that the competitive tennis ecosystem remains balanced, efficient, and inclusive. It is the essence of fulfilling the USTA’s mission to develop and promote the growth of tennis.
Throughout 2024, I am publishing a series of essays imaging how to apply the principles in ‘Designing Your Life: How to Build a Well-Lived, Joyful Life‘ (<- sponsored link), which is a non-tennis book that I have come to believe that everyone should read.
A chronological summary of all posts on this topic is available on the Designing Your Tennis Life summary page.
