Fiend At Court Unplugged
Yesterday I described the national and international implications of earning rankings points competing at tennis tournaments. Today we are shifting the focus closer to home to the USTA sectional level. Specifically, how ranking points motivate entries into local and regional events.
There are three fundamental ways that rankings points can motivate play. 1) Rankings points are used as selection criteria for events with limited capacity for players. 2) Seeding in tournaments is almost always done off the rankings lists. 3) Some players just enjoy seeing their name in print on the rankings list.
Ranking Points as Selection Criteria
One of the most profound impacts of ranking points on player motivation is when those points are used to select players to tournaments that have a limited number of playing slots available. That may be the primary reason why the USTA created the concept of the individual NTRP National Championships.
A player must earn an endorsement from their section to be selected to play the NTRP National Championship tournament. Examining how each section selects players for that endorsement is like “A Tale of Two Cities.” Some sections select players straight off the rankings list. In order to have a rankings list, tournaments have to exist at the sectional level.
Not all sections have enough tournaments to drive rankings lists. Consequently, events advertised as “NTRP National Qualification Tournaments” have popped up in some sections. Though necessary in some cases, it is a sad vestige of what tournament tennis should be.
One of the reasons that my home section of Texas has a relatively vibrant tournament culture is because there is a tournament held at the end of each season known as “The Masters.” In fact, that tournament is being played this very weekend. I have been lamenting my decision to not play this year.
Any player in Texas can enter the Masters, but only the top 8 on the rankings lists who entered will be selected for play. Reaching the Masters is viewed as an accomplishment. I have seen players at team Sectional events strutting around with their Masters towels draped over their shoulders, invariably with the Masters logo facing out.
It is a fact that tournament players in Texas chase points for the opportunity to play the Masters. Player behavior for that particular tournament may be the most valuable data point for evaluating rankings points as a motivating factor in USTA tennis. Texas has a much larger, richer, and more complex data set associated with event qualification than any other I have managed to find for any other section.
Tournament Seeding
Rankings lists are also used for seeding in tournaments. It follows that for it to work as a motivator, that there has to be some minimal number of tournaments being conducted.
Almost all tournament directors in my USTA section create the seedings lists straight off the rankings lists. The reason for this is because it is easy to do and they avoid having to explain seeding decisions to players who would inevitably be unhappy with their placement.
Sometimes seeding can be a definite advantage. A seeded player has a greater opportunity to earn a bye than a non-seeded player. That means that they are likely to be playing their second round on fresh legs against an opponent that already had to expend energy to reach that point.
On the other hand, the rankings points system highlights how being seeded can be a disadvantage. In order to earn “front draw” points, a player has to win a match. Players who win first round matches are, by definition, never the worst player in the bracket. A seeded player usually has a tougher match to win ranking points than if they had been paired with a weaker opponent in a first round match.
I will likely do a whole post on the fallacy of seeding at some point in the future.
The Joy of Rankings
A couple of weeks ago, I confessed that seeing my name on the rankings list — with the names of other players above me — was a consequential factor that nudged me down the slippery slope that was my return to competitive tennis. In fact, I regard the rankings lists printed in the Sectional inserts of the official USTA magazine as the only useful part of that publication.
The simple fact of the matter is that I personally rarely look at the rankings lists anymore. There are so few tournament players active at my level that I am not in danger of not reaching the Masters. Additionally, the only way I would anticipate playing NTRP Nationals ever again would be if I had the opportunity to play the same event as the Fiend at Court Spousal Unit. That isn’t going to happen, due to USTA age group segmentation.
It should also be noted that the Fiend at Court spousal unit is hyper-obsessed with the rankings lists. I don’t have to look at my own ranking because that topic comes up at the breakfast table. A lot. Repeatedly.
Coming Tomorrow
Tomorrow I will relay a fun story about my historical whoring about for USTA rankings points. Additionally, I plan on touching on some observations I have made about how the rankings points structure has shaped player participation in my home section.
- 2021 USTA Adult Tournaments Ranking System, USTA website hosted document, viewed 10/29/2020.
