The National Tennis Rating Program (NTRP) revolutionized Adult recreational tennis in the United States. The system for classifying players according to skill level fueled the “tennis boom” of massive participation growth in USTA League during the 1980s. It isn’t an exaggeration or hyperbole to say that the Adult tennis ecosystem simply wouldn’t be the same without NTRP.
Over the years, the implementation of NTRP has evolved significantly. Some adaptations were made to address challenges that emerged as it was initially used. For example, at first, player ratings were set by “rating verifiers,” and disqualifications would frequently be levied at the playoff and Sectional Championships. If a player appeared to be playing significantly above level, a rating verifier could disqualify them on the spot. That apparently happened with great regularity, as tennis is a game of high variance, and skill level is a subjective assessment. Rating abuses were rampant, fueled both by players “sandbagging” their play during verification clinics and sometimes also by rating verifiers with a vested interest in seeing a team at his club perform well.
In response to those inherent challenges, as well as advancements in technology, the computer-generated NTRP algorithm was adopted by the USTA in an attempt to create a more accurate and fair system. Using the mainframe technology of the day, statistical analysis of match results was calculated to determine each player’s “skill level.” USTA League match scores from all over the country were fed into the NTRP computer, and new ratings were published once a year. That implementation made perfect sense during the pre-internet era when information about ratings and ranking was distributed via the US Postal Service.
In the intervening time, the NTRP system has come to dominate Adult tennis in the United States. However, the massive growth of participation enabled by the computer algorithm was not without consequences. Specifically, the USTA League culture eclipsed Open and Age-Division tournament tennis to the point that those vital parts of the tennis ecosystem are at risk of extinction. Eventually, the USTA apparently decided that the NTRP system was the key to fixing tournament tennis. However, that implementation was hampered by a bunch of tournament-specific stipulations. It is arguably time to reconsider those initial decisions.
I have long bemoaned the inescapable fact that USTA League play has grown so large it has effectively crowded out space for other formats of Adult tennis. One of the primary root problems is that there is simply too much USTA League being played. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be any appetite within the USTA for reducing the number of League format permutations offered each year. After all, the organization measures its success by the number of registrations in USTA League. Anything that might reduce that is naturally perceived as risky.
The decline in overall tournament participation for Adults has also left a gaping hole in the USTA competitive ecosystem. Players whose skill level exceeds the levels of Leagues offered in their local area simply do not have a place to play. In a “chicken or the egg” tragic irony, while those players should flock to tournaments, the tournaments don’t exist and/or attract registrations. While this impacts higher NTRP-rated players, the NTRP cliff can be relatively lower in small-market tennis areas.
I have recently started to regard the NTRP system as a potential part of the solution rather than the root of this particular problem. There is no better time than the present to take a step back and look for opportunities to update the NTRP implementation to better serve the overall competitive tennis ecosystem. Until very recently, I thought stewardship of NTRP fell under the National USTA League committee. As it turns out, I was wrong about that. The USTA has chartered an NTRP Advisory Group that is independent of Adult Competition (Tournaments) and USTA League. In other words, an existing USTA Committee is chartered with the explicit scope and purpose of enhancing the NTRP system to improve tennis.
The following excerpt from the 2024 USTA Yearbook outlines the mission of the NTRP Advisory Group.
NTRP Advisory Group
Works in collaboration with the USTA Sections, USTA National Staff and tennis industry stakeholders to support the NTRP Operations Team with research, analysis and cross-functional perspectives to ensure the NTRP apolication alians with and supports program goals. The NTRP Advisory Group has the general responsibilities set out below in accordance with the policies (e.g. Rule, or Regulations) approved by the USTA Board of Directors. The group will also evaluate the effectiveness and achievement of the below goals/ responsibilities:
USTA Yearbook NTRP Advisory Group, USTA Yearbook 2024
- Support and enable the development and implementation of NTRP-related enhancements in Serve Tennis and TennisLink, including the year end rating process;
- Track and analyze ratings-related data points;
- Support all committees within the Adult Tennis Council regarding NTRP issues and communicate with them on a regular basis; and
- In conjunction with the NTRP Operations Team, develop a policy and procedure document for rule changes that impact the committees within the Adult Tennis Council.
I temporarily started down a path of exploring when the NTRP Advisory Group was first stood up, but that quickly turned into an exegesis of the demise of the Senior Tennis Committee, which is a topic for another day. In any case, combing through old USTA Yearbooks suggests that the NTRP Advisory Committee did not exist during the boom of USTA League Tennis in the 1980s. I am still trying to pin down how long this committee has existed, but it’s not brand new.
The existence of an independent group chartered to take a holistic view of the NTRP system to better align it with the broader goals of USTA Adult Tennis is incredibly exciting. That means that the USTA has likely already realized that the NTRP system needs to be implemented with an eye toward more than just its use within USTA League programming.
The NTRP Advisory Group has the explicit mission to identify enhancements that will benefit the adult competitive ecosystem. In other words, that committee should be actively identifying and evaluating potential innovations necessary to rebalance the landscape of adult competitive tennis.
If they’re looking for ideas… I have some. That is the topic of tomorrow’s post.
