Latest Posts

Failure is (Sometimes) the Best Option Training for Speed, Agility, and Quickness The Psychology of Rules Versus Requests Child’s Pose Tennis Beyond the Headlines: September 30, 2024 Why is it (almost) always the Singles? Evaluating the Alternatives of Shortened Formats for USTA League Championships

Voluntary consolation is a variation of the First Match Loser’s Consolation (FMLC) draw. In that format, players that lose their first match have the option of signing up to participate in a back draw. Participation is not mandatory and the player has to explicitly opt-in. A significant number of players and organizers believe that voluntary consolation would be a good thing for tournament tennis. They’re wrong. Voluntary consolation is like scratching a mosquito bite. It feels like the right thing to do in the moment, but ultimately it only makes the problem worse.

It has been slightly over a month since my full “Voluntary Consolation” analysis was first published on this site. In the interim, I played in the Westwood Senior Championships where I encountered some of the conditions that misleads people to believe that voluntary consolation is needed. That experience did not change my views on the topic. However, it prompted me to consider how consolation brackets can be implemented more effectively.

One of the drawbacks of voluntary consolation is that byes and walkovers in the main draw create “if necessary” matches in the back. That means that competitors sometimes have to wait around for their back draw opponent to be determined. One way to head that off is to schedule two front draw matches on the first day of the tournament. That practice keeps the back draw players from having to wait around a day (or more) for the consolation bracket to materialize.

It isn’t a perfect solution, as it creates additional demands on court capacity and scheduling for tournament organizers. Additionally, some players don’t want to play two matches a day. However, the primary problem in the Adult tournament tennis ecosystem is actually low participation. That, in turn, is what creates excessive delays in the back draw. Any concern over scheduling issues caused by too many competitors would be a nice problem to have. We should worry about crossing that bridge only when and if we come to it.

If implemented, voluntary consolation will eventually further reduce participation. People enter tennis tournaments to actually play matches. Waiting around to compete in a consolation bracket stinks. However, the real problem is not getting enough matches to justify the time and resources required to play the tournament in the first place. The current implementation of voluntary consolation will eventually bring players to the ultimate realization that they didn’t get enough match play. Having to wait around exacerbates the problem, but it is not the fundamental root cause.

Unfortunately, this is exactly why voluntary consolation is just like a mosquito bite. It is an irritant that demands attention. Scratching the itch caused by waiting for “if necessary” matches by encouraging players to opt out of the back draw seems like it would help. Unfortunately, it actually makes the real problem worse.

The Adult tennis ecosystem desperately needs to fix the participation problem. In the interim, we also need to avoid doing things that exacerbate the situation. Tomorrow’s post shares an idea for an innovative draw format that should be seriously considered as an alternative to the current voluntary consolation format.

One thought on “Voluntary Consolation and Mosquito Bites

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *