First, here is the 18 & over division.
The trend here is similar to the overall trend, the drop here being just over 3% since 2013.
Here is the 40 & over division.
An explanation for this might be that as some of the 38 and 39 year olds have turned 40, they've elected to only play 40 & over and there have not been enough new under 40 year-olds joining to fill the void. And those that turn 55 seem to continue to play 40 & over. Also, the 40 & over division was new for 2013 so perhaps it took some a year or two to get on board with it.
Let us see if the trend continues in 55 & over.
Sure enough, the trend continues. This group is up over 4% since 2013. As the 53 and 54 year olds have turned 55, they keep playing at a higher rate than they get too old or injured and stop it would appear.
Given all this, it would be interesting to see what the average age of these players is. Alas, I don't have that data, but I would hypothesize that the average age is increasing which would indicate that existing players keep playing as long as they can, but the new younger players are not joining and playing USTA League enough to replace the older players that do end up not playing at some point.
What do you think?
Based strictly on observation, I think your conclusion is correct. Our 18 and over league has women in their 40s, 50s and 60s, and very few in their 20s and 30s. The 40 and over leagues seem to be largely the same teams as the 18 and overs, minus the women under 40, of course. The existence of 40 and over means fewer opportunities for younger players, not a good way to grow the game.
ReplyDeleteTo be fair, the existence of 40+ has not resulted in fewer opportunities for younger players than before. 18+ is still there just as before so the opportunities for the younger player are the same. What has changed is there is now more opportunities for those 40-50 that have the additional league to play in.
DeleteDepends on what you mean by 'fewer opportunities' - in our section the over-18 men's leagues are shorter, with only 8 matches. The seasons used to be longer but now are not to make room in the calendar for the over-40s. Fewer matches for the same team entry fee, so the same opportunities to join a team, but fewer to play a match.
DeleteYeah, I'm trying to look at matches played to see what the trends are there too.
DeleteAs an under 40 player at a large club, I have to respectfully disagree. I struggle to find a team in the fall when all the teams go 40+ because they only have 1-2 <40 year old players. Now that I am in the 4.0 range it is worse than it was at 3.0 or 3.5. Next fall I may not have a team and may have to figure it out during that time period. Id imagine at a smaller club it would be even worse.
ReplyDeleteFair point. If the existence of 40+ causes players to not play 18+ to the point that a team can't be fielded, that will result in fewer opportunities. But that also sounds like a scheduling issue, they shouldn't try to run 18+ and 40+ at the same time, that is shooting themselves in the foot.
DeleteI was looking for a newer analysis. Just played state in South Carolina combo . 8 teams in my flight and 1 captain told me we were the only team that resembled an 18+ team.
ReplyDelete