In the past 12 months, I have played on teams representing four different cities (CTAs) in Texas. In fact, one of my opponents at Tri-Level Sectionals who used the new USTA App for electronic scouting of the players on my team remarked that the scroll through my playing history just keeps going.. and going.. and going.
Despite the fact that I identify primarily as a tournament player, my current reality is that I am playing a lot more League matches than tournaments. Additionally, many of my local League matches fall outside of sanctioned USTA League play. Those matches don’t show up in my playing history at all.
Way back in 2020 “USTA League Double Dipping” shared the embarrassing cornucopia of tennis opportunities for players in the Dallas / Fort Worth area. I am one of the many people who play on teams in both cities. Additionally, League rules allow for participation in flights that are conducted on different days. There are times that I am on the rosters of 4 teams that are competing to advance to the same Sectional Championship.
However, the playing opportunities don’t stop there. I also participate in two non-sanctioned Leagues that play both fall and spring seasons. Additionally, sometimes 40+ and 55+ USTA Leagues overlap with 18+ USTA League play. It is a lot to keep track of.
You might be wondering what all this has to do with the roster sizes of USTA League teams. As it turns out, a lot of people in the DFW area also double, triple, and quadruple dip in League Tennis. The USTA actually incentivizes this and highlights the “superior” performance of the cities that garner the largest numbers or increases in registrations. Every person that joins a USTA League team is money in the bank for the organization. Even if it is the same person joining multiple teams.
The fact that so many players are registered on these potentially overlapping teams means that match times frequently conflict with each other. The local League culture is built on the expectation that in any given week the majority of the players on the roster will probably not be available to play. A lot of the time it is because they are elsewhere in the metroplex competing for one of their other teams.
I am told that the same phenomenon occurs in Houston where the Houston Tennis Association and North Houston (NoHo) overlap. There is also common ground in the 50 mile radius between Austin and San Antonio around New Braunfels, which not coincidently is also a tennis hotspot.
In engineering control theory, this is called a self reinforcing loop. Team captains build large rosters based on the expectation that many of their players will not be available on any particular week. Players register on multiple teams based on the expectation that they will usually not be in the starting lineup for their teams. It’s a never ending cycle where each behavior encourages the other.
I also play on USTA League teams in my childhood hometown of Wichita Falls where I am currently living part time. It is a small market city (CTA) that struggles to find enough players to form a single team at any level. Sometimes teams are formed with the intent of traveling to Sectional qualifying events. Occasionally the qualifying events don’t happen because no other cities registered a team. Scrambling for a path to qualifying matches for Sectionals is how one of my teams from Wichita Falls came to represent Abilene last year.
One of the comments that sparked this series of posts on USTA League roster size observed that it is an advantage at Sectionals to have a large roster. Having competed at Sectionals within the last year on both Mega-sized and bare minimum rosters, I can attest that each have their unique advantages and drawbacks.
I personally prefer to go to Sectionals with a small roster where everybody has to play every match because there are no subs. Then again, “More tennis is always the answer” is one of my personal mottos. Unfortunately, those teams are one injury or illness away from defaulting lines.
Larger roster sizes come with complicated social dynamics. Hard feelings can erupt over playing time and partner preferences at any moment. When roster sizes are large, there is a lot of space for second guessing the captain’s lineup decisions.
I seriously doubt that most players have fully considered the ramifications of whole team defaults of one of these massive rosters. “Harsh Consequences: Team Defaults at Texas League Sectionals” described that in Texas all players on the roster are disqualified from advancing to the Sectional Championships in all divisions for 12 months. If you read the regulations carefully, appeals for extenuating circumstances can only be filed at the team level. There is no individual recourse.
I have never been told this myself, but I have played on teams where the captain told players that the only way they would play at Sectionals is if the team was out of contention. Personally I would not make the trip if that was said to me. Players on large rosters who don’t travel to the Sectional Championships could be disqualified if there is a team blowup that results in a whole team default at the event. It is non-negligible risk when you think about the full social dynamics of those large rosters.
In addition to chronic overthinking, this site is known for throwing out a crazy idea from time to time. Tomorrow I am going to outline a potential solution to significantly reduce teams with mega-rosters. I believe it could result in increased opportunities for League play in both the large and the smaller cities in Texas. As a bonus, it might even free up a little time for players to compete in some tournaments on the side.
