The USTA quietly unveiled a new mission statement earlier this year. Since that time, it has been steadily weaving its way more and more into the fabric of the organization’s communications. It was also a featured topic at the last USTA Texas Semiannual Meeting in July. For those deeply invested in the sport, this new mission statement is more than just words. It encapsulates the aspirations, priorities, and philosophies of the USTA for growing tennis. The USTA doesn’t just influence the sport in the United States. It defines where the organization wants things to go.
| Previous USTA Mission Statement | New USTA Mission Statement |
| To promote and develop the growth of tennis. | Growing tennis to inspire healthier people and communities everywhere. |
I think there is tremendous value in the new purpose-driven focus of the USTA’s mission statement. However, I am concerned that the emphasis on promoting the health benefits coupled with the language of growth and communities could remove focus and attention from vital corners of the competitive tennis framework necessary for the overall health of the sport. Success in promoting tennis isn’t just about attracting new players. It is also about retention, which relies on keeping people interested and engaged. Ignoring the importance of vital playing populations critical to the sport’s overall health risks undermining participation in the broader community. That will ultimately limit growth.
The reason I am touching on this topic this weekend is due to my recent NTRP ratings elevation and successful appeal. The USTA’s new mission statement and the importance of supporting and sustaining competitive tennis opportunities for older Adults with high-performance levels are slated for a lengthy series in the coming year. However, these topics are highly relevant to the opportunity cliff I was just exposed to and stepped away from.
There is a ratings inflection point within the NTRP system that divides players who can meaningfully engage in competitive tennis from those whose opportunities are extremely limited. While there is regional variation in where that point occurs, since I returned to competitive tennis a decade ago, I have observed that the ratings level where that happens consistently trends downward. There is a fine line between those who can maintain competitive engagement and others who wind up on the outside looking in. Sadly, becoming really good at the sport one day leads to exclusion. It simply shouldn’t be that way.
Since ratings were published a couple of weeks ago, I have been thinking about and talking to many people about NTRP ratings management. During that time, I realized that there is no singular motivation that drives that behavior. While many people curate their performance for ratings purposes, it isn’t accurate to say that everyone who does so is strictly after an unfair competitive advantage. At the higher end of the tennis performance spectrum, survival in the sport becomes a significant factor.
The USTA should undoubtedly focus on attracting and retaining players in the middle of the performance bell curve. However, it’s equally important to recognize the significance of retaining and supporting players at the upper echelons. A critical mass of players at the highest performance levels is vital for providing playing opportunities for others who are approaching that same level of performance. These are the players who allow the overall bell curve to grow. It is incredibly short-sighted to believe that just because the high-performance playing population is small, it is not important for growing the sport. The opposite is true.
In the past couple of weeks, I have engaged with people within and adjacent to USTA adult tennis as I have grappled with how I was going to respond to my elevated rating. Some of those interactions were extremely helpful, but others were tone-deaf. I think everyone agrees that ratings management happens and also that it is impossible to identify or substantiate instances. Tennis is a game of high-performance variance, and for that reason alone, defining the problem in terms of detecting and punishing ratings manipulation is a “gravity problem.” It cannot be solved.
This is a time to take a broader perspective. If the objective is to reduce the incentives that lead to ratings manipulation, that is a much more solvable issue. One of my least controversial ideas for doing that is to develop and support a place to play for tennis players whose performance has transcended the level of NTRP competition available in their local area. Unfortunately, with limited exceptions, the prevailing attitude I have encountered is that those players do not matter to the USTA because there are relatively few of them.
Players who tumble off the opportunity cliff I just teetered on have limited options. Many choose to manage their ratings. Others have the resources and motivation to solve the problem with their checkbooks. Those players spend a lot of money traveling to national tournaments to find competitive match play. Unfortunately, many who are unable to otherwise solve their exclusion from the sport go on to find another hobby. Tennis loses when that playing population drops out.
Tennis thrives when all levels of players—from beginners to high performers—have a meaningful place to play. The USTA’s new mission statement offers an inspiring vision of growth and inclusivity, but its success depends on execution that embraces the diversity of competitive needs across the tennis community. Ignoring the upper echelon of players risks creating a hollow foundation where opportunities diminish and participation stagnates. For tennis to truly grow and flourish, every player must feel they have a place to play, improve, and compete—no matter where they fall on the performance spectrum.
