Should a DQ at PNW 40 & Over Sectionals have changed who is going to Nationals?

The primary USTA League Adult Sectionals are complete in the PNW and someone brought to my attention a player that was disqualified at the 40 & Over Sectionals this past weekend.

The player in question was a 3.5S and played on the men's 3.5 team that made it to and won the final, and the player played in all four of the team's matches going 4-0 without dropping a set and giving up a total of 13 games across the four matches, the equivalent of about 6-2,6-1 each match.

Going in to Sectionals, the player was 12-0 including going 6-0 playing up at 4.0 and not dropping a set in any of those matches.  Interestingly he had dropped four sets earlier in the year playing 3.5 but managed to win all four match tie-breaks.

Now, most people know you don't get DQ'd based on your win/loss record, it matters who you play (and play with in doubles) and it is entirely possible to go undefeated and not get strikes if you happen to play weak opponents or have really close scores.  But on the surface, this player was well above level and the DQ very well may have been justified and perhaps was even overdue.  But that isn't what I'm writing about.

Instead, the topic is how PNW allows out of level players to play through the completion of Sectionals and only be DQ'd and promoted after the event, letting all results stand.  Since the scenario happened this weekend, I wanted to walk through the implications of it and how it affected the other teams and who qualified for the final and advanced to Nationals.

I've written about this before, one time when the rule in PNW changed for 2022, and then it came up again earlier this year when National went the other way and will administer DQ's during Nationals starting in 2027.

So, back to what happened at Sectionals.  The player very well could have had one, maybe even two strikes going in to the event, and almost certainly had at least two of his matches at Sectionals recorded as strikes, but perhaps all four is possible.  But let's go through some scenarios.

Conservatively, he got this third in the final at Sectionals and if strikes were checked during Sectionals, he would have been DQ'd and his match reversed, and because this was a 2-2 win for his team, this would have become a loss and instead of going to Nationals, the opponent would be going instead.  That is a pretty big shift.

But let's consider if he would have gotten his third during the round-robin play.  If it were in the last match, then all three of his wins would have been reversed, and the 2-2 tie would be a 3-1 loss, and the two 3-1 wins would have become 2-2 losses, and instead of going 3-0 the team would have gone 0-3 and a different team would have advanced to the final and had a chance to go to Nationals.

If the third strike would have been from the second round-robin match, then the first two would have been reversed, but the team could have played a different player in the third, so they could have possibly gone 1-2, but still another team would have gone to the final.

Had the third strike been from the first match, then there is a chance they go 2-1 and still make the final, but that would have been really hard considering they would have replaced him with a significantly lower rated player and would have had a 6-0,6-0 loss contributing to the standings tie-breakers.

So, was this fair to the other teams?  In virtually no scenario does his team advance to Nationals if strikes were administered during the event.  And now that he is DQ'd, his the team going to Nationals is effectively not the same team as they are weaker without him, and arguably the section is not sending the strongest team possible.

Now, one of the arguments for only administering the strikes/DQ after the event is that players have paid money to travel and take time off and you don't want to ruin the trip for them after just one match.  Well, what about all the other team's players who also traveled and took time off and were forced to play an out of level player, or have their team take a team loss because of playing an out of level player, and lose their opportunity to go to Nationals because of it?  Should the priority be to be fair to those 40-50 players instead of worrying about the one out of level player getting to keep playing?

It seems clear that National has had a change of heart and feels it is better and more fair to all the opponents to administer strikes during the event, and Nationals is almost certainly a bigger investment from a travel and time standpoint.  So if National feels that way, shouldn't Sections follow suit?

What does your section do regarding this rule in playoffs, and what is your view on it?  Should strikes be administered during championships with results reversed?  Or should it only happen after the event letting matches played stand?

PNW 40 & Over Sectionals are done - Who is going to Nationals?

It is late August, which means PNW Sectionals for the 18 & Over and 40 & Over divisions have been played, so it is time to take a look at who is going to Nationals.

The 18 & Over was played a few weeks ago, here is who made the final and advanced for the 40 & Over.

• 2.5 Women - NWW-BTA-Hsu and NWW-AYTC-Tibbetts each won their flights 3-0, then BTA-Hsu won the final 3-0.  Note this is not a Nationals event.
• 2.5 Men - NWW-ETC-Box won the flight going 4-0.  Note this is not a Nationals event.
• 3.0 Women - N OR-MAC-Nguyen and SWW-TLTC-Paul each won their flights 3-0 before MAC-Nguyen won the final 4-0.
• 3.0 Men - NWW-WSC-Shen and NWW-STC-Wood won their flights each 3-0, then WSC-Shen won the final 3-1.
• 3.5 Women - N OR-PTC-Hill and SWW-LRC-Hudson won their flights 3-0 and 2-1 respectively, then PTC-Hill won the final 3-1.
• 3.5 Men - N OR-CRRC-Johnson and SWW-JTC-Severns won their flights 3-0, then CRRC-Johnson won the final 2-2 coming down to a 2 game differential to break the tie.
• 4.0 Women - N OR-MPRC-Huynh and SWW-TLTC-Simonson won their flights 3-0, then TLTC-Simonson won the final 3-1.
• 4.0 Men - N OR-PTC-Greenberg and SWW-JTC-White won their flights 2-1 and 3-0, then JTC-White won the final 2-2 by eight games in the tie-breaker.
• 4.5 Women - NWW-EDG-Allen and NWW-NTC-Wilson won their flights 3-0, with NTC-Wilson winning the final 3-1.
• 4.5 Men - N OR-PTC-Borosky and N OR-CAC-McGarity won their flights 3-0, then CAC-McGarity won the final 3-1.

Just a couple of finals came down to 2-2 ties, but quite a few more in round-robin did.

As far as what area won the most, the tallies are:

• NOR (Portland) - 5
• NWW (Seattle) - 4
• SWW (Tacoma/Olympia) - 1

More balanced than 18 & Over was.

Congratulations to all the Sectional Champs!

PNW 18 & Over Sectionals are complete - Who is going to Nationals?

It is late August, which means PNW Sectionals for the 18 & Over and 40 & Over divisions have been played, so it is time to take a look at who is going to Nationals.

The 18 & Over was played a few weeks ago, here is who made the final and advanced.

• 2.5 Women - NWW-ETC-Hsu and NOR-IRV-Sebastian each went 3-0 in their flight and then NWW won the final 2-1.
• 2.5 Men - Two NWW teams, HBSQ-Reda and MI-Chang won their flights 3-0 and HBSQ-Reda won the final 3-0.  Note that 2.5 men is not a Nationals event so they are not headed there.
• 3.0 Women - NWW-RBW-Chau and NWW-AYTC-Tong each went 3-0, and in the final AYTC-Tong won 4-1.
• 3.0 Men - EW-PC-Bjella and NOR-THPRD-Kadam/Udyavara each won 3-0 with NOR winning the final 4-1.
• 3.5 Women - NWW-WSC-Hashimoto and NWW-ETC-Zhu won their flights 3-0, then ETC-Zhu won the final 3-2.
• 3.5 Men - NWW-WSC-Yue and NOR-SHC-Lumetta won their flights each 3-0, then WSC-Yue won the final 4-1.
• 4.0 Women - SWW-TLTC-Mettler and EW-IND-Rose each won their flights 3-0, with TLTC-Mettler winning the final 4-1.
• 4.0 Men - NWW-TUK-Newman and NWW-WSC-Low went 2-1 and 3-0 respectively, with TUK-Newman winning the final 4-1.
• 4.5 Women - NOR-VTC-Mikalatos and NOR-THPRD-Ly went 3-0 each, then VTC-Mikalatos won the final 3-2.
• 4.5 Men - EW-PFC-Griner and NWW-TCSP-Liu each went 3-0, with TCSP-Liu winning the final 5-0.
• 5.0 Women - NOR-PTC-Kowalewski won the single flight going 3-1 and beating out NWW-AYTC-Kohrs on the courts tie-breaker.
• 5.0 Men - NWW-MI-Condiotty won the single flight going 4-0.

It is interesting that only in two cases did a flight winner not go undefeated, and one of those the flight win was mostly wrapped up before the loss, and in the other the flight winner just needed one court in their last match.  Also, just three of the ten finals were won by one court.  So I'm sure there was some drama in individual matches, but in the standings and finals, not so much.

As far as what area won the most, the tallies are:

• NWW (Seattle) - 8
• NOR (Portland) - 3
• SWW (Tacoma/Olympia) - 1

That is pretty typical for 18 & Over that Seattle wins the most.

Congratulations to all the Sectional Champs!

World Tennis Number (WTN) algorithm changes coming

I saw a mention of an email sent out from World Tennis Number about algorithm changes, but I hadn't seen it, so I went and visited their site and in the news section is a story on World Tennis Number Algorithm Enhancements 2026.

Many of you probably don't follow your WTN, as for USTA League players it is largely meaningless other than it being a rating you can track.  But it doesn't directly relate to your NTRP rating or dynamic rating, nor is it used for anything related to leagues.  I'm a ratings geek so I do follow mine, and if you follow yours too I'd be interested in hearing from you or leaving a comment about your experience with it.

If you have followed along with WTN news, you will be aware that this isn't the first time there have been changes.  At a minimum there were changes in 2024 to try to have WTN ratings represent a player's ability more quickly, and widespread adjustments in 2023 to redistribute players along the 40:1 scale.  You can see all my WTN posts here.

So, this isn't the first change, what is changing now?  A quote from the article is the changes will "improve rating accuracy, reflect real match performance, and support player development at all levels of the game".  Here are some highlights from the news article above:

• Changes go into effect for the calculations on August 12th
• There will be a rolling 3-year rating window where older results gradually drop out of the calculations
• The algorithm will use game-level scores, not just who won the set
• Ratings may be "gently adjusted" based on age, time since last match, and "typical development patterns"

The biggest news to me is the move from only looking at who won a set to factoring in the score of the set.

Up to this point, if you won 7-6,7-6 the WTN algorithm would treat that the same as if you won 6-0,6-0.  In my opinion, there were pros and cons to this.

On one hand, winning sets, and the match, is what matters, how you do it doesn't really matter, so if someone had a track record of winning close matches, they should be rewarded for that.  The algorithm was also a little simpler and easier to understand (or reverse engineer?) and less prone to being gamed by someone managing scores.  If someone played enough and against stronger and weaker players and accumulated wins and losses, their rating would settle it and represent their level.

On the other hand, ignoring the score is ignoring valuable data.  Clearly, winning 6-0 is different than 7-6 and ignoring that seems foolhardy.  If someone plays a strong opponent and keeps it close, they don't get rewarded for that, and if that player happened to always play strong players and lose, their rating could perhaps inappropriately keep getting worse.  Using the score in a set would allow for rewarding a player for keeping it close.  And if someone didn't play a lot of matches, their rating could inappropriately go up or down based on very few matches with limited data, and using the game score would fill in some gaps.

Now, in the algorithm to date, winning sets in a given match was not treated equally, but how much it helped your rating depended on your rating and the rating of your opponent.  Win a set against a much weaker opponent and your rating would improve very little.  Win a set against a stronger opponent and that would raise your rating a lot.  So some of the cons were mitigated a bit and there would be some limit on what a player's rating could get to by only ever playing weaker players and winning.

So, is this change a good thing?  I think so, but it will depend on exactly how it is implemented.  I don't know of anyone trying to game their WTN, but using game scores opens the door to that.  But if that is a rare occurrence, WTN ratings may become a little more representative of a player's ability.

What do you think?

2027 USTA League regulations published - DQs at Nationals?

We are in the heart of 2026 USTA League season with leagues in many areas in full flight and some districts are getting ready for playoffs, and some sections will even have Sectionals soon.  So why am I writing about the 2027 regulations?

Well, this is the time of year they get published as some areas (Georgia) have Early Start Leagues for the 2027 championship year starting soon, and the regulations need to be published in order to administer the leagues.

You can see the whole 2027 USTA League Regulations document if you like, but I've given it a quick read and here is a summary of changes.

The big news is highlighted as #4 in the major changes for 2027 and is this:

Players may now be dynamically disqualified through National Championships 2.04B(2)

Does this mean what it sounds like?  Reading that paragraph of the regulations, the answer seems to be yes.  Specifically:

Players who are NTRP dynamically disqualified during National Championships shall be notified by the National staff, who shall follow 2.04B(2)a and 2.04C(2)

What is 2.04B(2)?  It is the option where dynamic ratings are calculated throughout the event and disqualify players that meet the criteria, and reverse their matches.

This is a big change.  In the past players could get disqualified as a result of matches at Nationals, but it was calculated and checked only at the conclusion of the event and notification done post-event with no matches reversed.  With this change, it is possible a team could make the semis only to have a player disqualified and matches reversed and fall out of the semis as a result.

It appears sections will still have the option to enforce strikes during playoffs or only at the conclusion, but National has changed what they are electing to do.

Is this a good change?  I think so, as a strategy some teams would employ would be to hide players in the regular season, and use them just enough in playoffs to advance, and once they made it to Nationals they wouldn't need to worry about strikes and could go all out.  And yes, every year there would be some players disqualified after Nationals, so it did happen.  Now, it didn't happen a lot, so this really probably only affects those few scenarios, but when it did happen, observations were it was pretty egregious seeing the level of play exhibited.

Now, one can argue that every team has above level players at Nationals and that is generally true, but the strike thresholds are high enough that to get strikes you really have to be clearly above level and this rule change may help combat the tactic I describe above.  Also, one could make the case it isn't fair to a player to travel to Nationals and potentially get disqualified after one match, but it also isn't fair to at level players to have to play a clearly out of level player, and it seems the USTA is perhaps now putting the interest of the other players ahead of the out of level self-rate.

What do you think?

But there are other changes in the regulations as it relates to dynamic ratings and disqualifications.

A subtle change is that Mixed exclusive players are now eligible to be dynamically disqualified.  Astute readers may ask, didn't this already happen?  Yes, the 2026 regulations state that participants in Mixed leagues can already be dynamically disqualified, but those are for self-rated or appealed rating players playing Mixed.  The change for 2027 seems to be that players that get a Mixed exclusive M rating are still subject to strikes and disqualification unlike players that get a C rating from Adult play.  This is probably a good idea but perhaps begs the question, why not do it for C rated players too?

Another change is that dynamic ratings will now be calculated for Adult 65 & Over and Mixed 55 & Over leagues.  In the past, it was just Adult 18/40/55 and when Mixed was added the 18/40 divisions, but now really all the Nationals/Invitational leagues will be included.  Another good change in my opinion.

One non-rating related change is that electronic line calling may now be used for USTA League play.  Specifically, sections can declare if they will allow it and establish procedures for it.  I haven't played with electronic line calling so can't offer an opinion on how accurate or useful it is, but an unbiased line calling mechanism seems like a good thing in those tight matches when players are sometimes seeing the ball land where they want and not where it really landed.

There are some miscellaneous other changes, but I think I hit the big ones.

Do you like these changes?  Are there others you'd like to see made?

Pacific Northwest / Northwest Washington ESL playoffs this weekend - Follow along!

I live and play in the Seattle area and we have a few leagues run as early start leagues (ESLs) and those leagues have their local playoffs this weekend, the leagues being Adult 55 & Over and Mixed 18 & Over.

Something cool that our League Coordinator has done before and is doing this year to make it easier to follow along is to have a Google Sheet that will show results (that one for 55+) as they happen to make it easier for folks to follow along that aren't at the event, or even are at the event.

I've advocated for awhile for doing more to make these events easier to follow so it is great to see this being done.  Thanks Jill!

How do you follow playoff events in your area?  Do you just click refresh on TennisLink incessantly hoping scores get entered?  Is there another app/site/page used to provide updates?  Is social media used to push real time updates out?

Analyzing 2025 USTA NTRP year-end ratings - Bump rates by level and gender

The 2025 year-end NTRP ratings have been published and that means we get to take a look at how ratings have changed.

In this post I'll take a look at bump rates by level and gender.

First, here are the overall bump rates by level for 2025.

2025 Bump Rates by Level

For comparison, here was last year.

2024 Bump Rates by Level

The rates are not dramatically different, but 2025 bump ups are perhaps a little lower with about 12.5% of 3.0s being bumped up compared to nearly 15% in 2024.  At the 3.5 level also slightly lower at 7% versus 7.5%, but 4.0s are right about the same and 4.5s perhaps a little higher.

But doing it by gender is more interesting, here are the women in 2025.

2025 Bump Rates by Level - Women

And for comparison, 2024.

2024 Bump Rates by Level - Women

Similar, at 3.5 and below the bump up percentage is down a bit, but at 4.0 and 4.5, perhaps slightly higher.

And then the men.

2025 Bump Rates by Level - Men

And 2024.

2024 Bump Rates by Level - Men

Again, similar here.

So at the lower levels, while bump rates remain higher there than at higher levels, the bump rates are trending down slightly from last year.

2025 USTA NTRP Year End Ratings Are Out!

The year-end NTRP ratings were published last night, a little earlier than expected at around 9pm EST, and with that players are rabidly checking their rating and determining what that means for what teams they can join and how captains can form their teams.

I'll try to post some analysis shortly, but my quick observation is that there seems to have been fewer bumps up and down than normal.  I haven't run across many surprising bump ups, but quite a few surprises where players perhaps should have been bumped up and weren't.

Stay tuned for more.

Simulating 2025 USTA League Nationals - 40 & Over 3.5 Women

USTA League Nationals for 2025 continue this weekend!  The schedule is slightly less compressed this year being played in five instead of four weekends, but still more compressed than past years where it was seven weekends.

This weekend has three events, 18 & Over 3.0 in Scottsdale, 40 & Over 3.5 in Surprise, and 40 & Over 4.5 in San Diego.

I've been doing simulations since 2018 and have found that the four semi-finalists are usually in the top six to seven projected teams, and more often than you might think, I project the four semi-finalists perfectly.  There are surprises sometimes and a mid-pack team overachieves and advances, that is why the matches are played on the courts and not on a computer.  Still, it is interesting to do these simulations and see how the projections do.

Why do these simulations you ask?  The primary reason is that the format for USTA League Nationals is now a flight-less random round-robin where each team plays four other random opponents.  This introduces significant variations in schedule strength, the possibility of an undefeated team not making the top-4, and teams vying for the top-4 perhaps not having played head-to-head and unfortunate tie-breakers being used.  The simulations aim to educate folks on how it all works and look at what may happen.  Also see this write-up for some things to know about Nationals.

Because of the fairly compressed schedule, I likely won't have the time to do previews/simulations of all events, but will try to do a few.  Let me know which you'd like to see!

Like I did last year, I'll be primarily just giving the data from the simulation and not writing a bunch of words.  Most of it is self-explanatory, but the favorites and contenders will be listed in alphabetical order.  The strengths are based on played averages.  Contact me if you want to learn more.

On to the projections from the simulation, here is the 40 & Over 3.5 women.

Teams: 17

Chance of 3 undefeated: 13%
Chance of 4 undefeated: 1.3%
Chance of 5 undefeated: <1%

Chance of 6 undefeated: <1%

Chance of tie for last spot / most likely size: 90% / 4
Strongest / weakest team strength: 3.63 / 3.37
Toughest / easiest schedule: 3.58 / 3.48
Favorites: Florida, Intermountain, Southern
Contenders: Eastern, Middle States, Midwest, New England, NorCal, SoCal

Have a chance: Caribbean, Mid-Atlantic, MOValley, Southwest

Just three teams are favorites, but there are a bunch that are contenders for the last spot and more that have a chance.  I have just four teams without a realistic chance of making the semis.  When looking at most-likely record, 5th place is 2-2 so it will be really competitive to see who steps out of the 10 teams projected to finish 2-2 and try to get a semi-final spot.  Or could we have our first 2-2 semi-finalist?

Given how competitive it may be, there is little chance of four 4-0 teams, but there are still scenarios where there could be five or six.

What do you think?

Simulating 2025 USTA League Nationals - 40 & Over 3.5 Men

USTA League Nationals for 2025 continue this weekend!  The schedule is slightly less compressed this year being played in five instead of four weekends, but still more compressed than past years where it was seven weekends.

This weekend has three events, 18 & Over 3.0 in Scottsdale, 40 & Over 3.5 in Surprise, and 40 & Over 4.5 in San Diego.

I've been doing simulations since 2018 and have found that the four semi-finalists are usually in the top six to seven projected teams, and more often than you might think, I project the four semi-finalists perfectly.  There are surprises sometimes and a mid-pack team overachieves and advances, that is why the matches are played on the courts and not on a computer.  Still, it is interesting to do these simulations and see how the projections do.

Why do these simulations you ask?  The primary reason is that the format for USTA League Nationals is now a flight-less random round-robin where each team plays four other random opponents.  This introduces significant variations in schedule strength, the possibility of an undefeated team not making the top-4, and teams vying for the top-4 perhaps not having played head-to-head and unfortunate tie-breakers being used.  The simulations aim to educate folks on how it all works and look at what may happen.  Also see this write-up for some things to know about Nationals.

Because of the fairly compressed schedule, I likely won't have the time to do previews/simulations of all events, but will try to do a few.  Let me know which you'd like to see!

Like I did last year, I'll be primarily just giving the data from the simulation and not writing a bunch of words.  Most of it is self-explanatory, but the favorites and contenders will be listed in alphabetical order.  The strengths are based on played averages.  Contact me if you want to learn more.

On to the projections from the simulation, here is the 40 & Over 3.5 men.

Teams: 17

Chance of 3 undefeated: 24%
Chance of 4 undefeated: 6.2%
Chance of 5 undefeated: <1%

Chance of 6 undefeated: <1%

Chance of tie for last spot / most likely size: 89% / 4
Strongest / weakest team strength: 3.68 / 3.39
Toughest / easiest schedule: 3.65 / 3.49
Favorites: Caribbean, Southern, Texas
Contenders: Middle States, NorCal, Northern, PNW

Have a chance: SoCal

I list just three favorites, but two of the contenders are a fraction away from being favorites, and the other two are nipping at their heels.  So it feels like 7 teams vying for 4 spots.  All 7 have a better than 11% chance of going 4-0, so it should be very competitive.

There are some ways for there to be five 4-0 teams but it seems pretty slim.

What do you think?

Simulating 2025 USTA League Nationals - 40 & Over 4.0 Men

USTA League Nationals for 2025 continue this weekend!  The schedule is slightly less compressed this year being played in five instead of four weekends, but still more compressed than past years where it was seven weekends.

This weekend has three events, 18 & Over 4.5 in Surprise, 40 & Over 3.0 in San Diego, and 40 & Over 4.0 in Scottsdale.

I've been doing simulations since 2018 and have found that the four semi-finalists are usually in the top six to seven projected teams, and more often than you might think, I project the four semi-finalists perfectly.  There are surprises sometimes and a mid-pack team overachieves and advances, that is why the matches are played on the courts and not on a computer.  Still, it is interesting to do these simulations and see how the projections do.

Why do these simulations you ask?  The primary reason is that the format for USTA League Nationals is now a flight-less random round-robin where each team plays four other random opponents.  This introduces significant variations in schedule strength, the possibility of an undefeated team not making the top-4, and teams vying for the top-4 perhaps not having played head-to-head and unfortunate tie-breakers being used.  The simulations aim to educate folks on how it all works and look at what may happen.  Also see this write-up for some things to know about Nationals.

Because of the fairly compressed schedule, I likely won't have the time to do previews/simulations of all events, but will try to do a few.  Let me know which you'd like to see!

Like I did last year, I'll be primarily just giving the data from the simulation and not writing a bunch of words.  Most of it is self-explanatory, but the favorites and contenders will be listed in alphabetical order.  The strengths are based on played averages.  Contact me if you want to learn more.

On to the projections from the simulation, here is the 40 & Over 4.0 men.

Teams: 17

Chance of 3 undefeated: 37%
Chance of 4 undefeated: 14%
Chance of 5 undefeated: 1.4%

Chance of 6 undefeated: <1%

Chance of tie for last spot / most likely size: 83% / 4
Strongest / weakest team strength: 4.10 / 3.86
Toughest / easiest schedule: 4.01 / 3.91
Favorites: Florida, Middle States, Midwest, Texas
Contenders: Missouri Valley, Southern

Have a chance: NorCal

This event appears pretty top heavy with four pretty clear favorites and thus a decent chance of four 4-0 teams.  The overall favorite to make the semis isn't the strongest team, but benefits from the easiest schedule.  There are a few contenders that could spoil it and there is a 1.4% chance of five 4-0 teams.

What do you think?

2025 USTA League Nationals Week 1 Day 2 Recap

Day two is in the books, and despite some continued delays due to rain in Arizona, semi-finalists are set, and even played in some cases.  Here is a recap.

The 2.5 women saw NorCal, Caribbean, and MO Valley all finish 4-0 and were joined by Southern at 3-1.  The simulation nailed it with those four being the top-4 favorites, although it called for just one to have a most likely record of 4-0.

The 3.5 men had Midwest and SoCal finish 4-0, and were joined by PNW and Florida at 3-1.  Midwest was a surprise being just a contender in the simulation, while SoCal and PNW were contenders, and just Florida was a favorite.

The 3.5 women had two 4-0 teams in Texas and Midwest, and then a 3-way tie at 3-1 / 12-8 for two spots with Mid-Atlantic and Florida taking it over New England on fewer sets lost.  Texas and Florida were favorites, but the other two were just in the have a chance category in the simulation.

The 4.0 men was really competitive with several of the top teams playing each other, the end result was Florida at 4-0, then a whopping seven (!) teams at 3-1 with Texas, Eastern, and Intermountain being the ones to advance.  Note that Texas played Florida and Intermountain, and Florida played Eastern, so there is a good chance of a rematch in the final.  The simulation had all four of these teams as favorites and also predicted a bunch of 3-1 teams.

The 4.0 women had three 4-0 teams, those being NorCal, Southern, and Florida, and then SoCal was the best of three 3-1 teams.  The simulation had NorCal, Southern, and SoCal as the top-3 favorites, and Florida was a contender as the 6th pick, so not bad.

Then the 5.0 men had two 4-0 teams in Southwest and Midwest, then PNW and Intermountain joined them at 3-1.  Midwest was a big surprise, the only team not highlighted in the simulation, but PNW and Intermountain were favorites and Southwest just a "has a chance" team.  And this event already played their semis with Southwest and Midwest advancing with 2-1 wins.

Last, the 5.0 women also had two 4-0 teams in Intermountain and Midwest, and SoCal and PNW were the only 3-1 teams so they joined them in the semis.  All four teams were favorites in the simulation so nailed this one too.  They also played their semis with PNW and Midwest advancing.

Good luck to all the teams on Sunday!

2025 USTA League Nationals Week 1 Day 1 Recap

Day 2 of week 1 of the 2025 USTA League Nationals is about to start, so with that a recap of day 1 is in order.

As I understand it, rain did arrive in the Phoenix area causing some delays in the morning and perhaps briefly in the afternoon, but the move to short sets actually allowed some events to get ahead of schedule to guard against more delays today when more rain is forecast.  I heard of some grumbling that they could have gotten everything in under the normal format, but we'll see if getting ahead was a good idea based on today's weather.

On the courts themselves, the 2.5 women saw the top-5 teams in the simulation remain the top-5 forecast teams after day one, but with the ordered juggled somewhat.  Caribbean, Northern, and MO Valley should be locks, and be joined by Southern, or maybe Midwest or upstart PNW in the semis.  There is a 13% chance of four 4-0 teams.

The 3.5 men saw favorites NorCal, Texas, and Florida struggle, but NorCal still could make the semis with SoCal, PNW, and Midwest being minor surprises.  Look out for New England and Middle States too.  The simulation called for a very competitive event and that appears to be happening with virtually no chance of four 4-0 teams, just a 5% chance of three, and a likely 5-way tie for the last spot.

The 3.5 women has the simulation's top-4 picks all still in the top-6 projected finishers, but they are not locks with a full 7 teams having between a 22% and 42% chance of taking the last two semi-finalist spots.  Look for Southern and Texas to be there, but then, who knows, but PNW and Southwest perhaps have the inside track.  Also very competitive though with no chance of four 4-0 teams and just an 8% chance of three.

Unaffected by whether were the 4.0 events in San Diego where the 4.0 men has the top-4 favorites all still in the top-5, but a few already played each other and more do today.  Still, look for Texas, Florida, Eastern, and MO Valley to move on with Mid-Atlantic and NorCal lurking.  But look for perhaps three 3-1 teams and tie-breakers to be important.

The 4.0 women has the simulation's top-3 favorites nearly locked in for the semis in the same order, and contender Florida looking good for a spot as well.  Hawaii, Mid-Atlantic, MO Valley, and Texas are lurking though.  There is a 5% chance of four 4-0 teams and 32% chance of three.

Back in Arizona, the 5.0 men had projected mid-pack Southwest leap to the favorite category joining favorites PNW, NorCal, and Intermountain as most likely to advance.  Mid-Atlantic and Midwest will try to have a say though.  There is likely a bit tie at 3-1 for the last spot, probably 5 teams but a 26% chance of six of them being tied.

Last, the 5.0 women has four teams running away with it with PNW, SoCal, Midwest, and Intermountain basically locked in to the semis already, due in part to everyone but Florida having played three matches already.  Just Mid-Atlantic has a small shot at playing spoiler.  There may be a tie at 3-1 for the last spot, but Mid-Atlantic is behind on the courts tie-breaker and even with a sweep could be left out.

I hope the rain stays away today, good luck everyone!

Simulating 2025 USTA League Nationals - 18 & Over 3.5 Men

USTA League Nationals for 2025 begin this weekend!  The schedule is slightly less compressed this year being played in five instead of four weekends, but still more compressed than past years where it was seven weekends.

This weekend has four events, 18 & Over 2.5W and 5.0 in Scottsdale, 3.5 in Surprise, and 4.0 in San Diego.

I've been doing simulations since 2018 and have found that the four semi-finalists are usually in the top six to seven projected teams, and more often than you might think, I project the four semi-finalists perfectly.  There are surprises sometimes and a mid-pack team overachieves and advances, that is why the matches are played on the courts and not on a computer.  Still, it is interesting to do these simulations and see how the projections do.

Why do these simulations you ask?  The primary reason is that the format for USTA League Nationals is now a flight-less random round-robin where each team plays four other random opponents.  This introduces significant variations in schedule strength, the possibility of an undefeated team not making the top-4, and teams vying for the top-4 perhaps not having played head-to-head and unfortunate tie-breakers being used.  The simulations aim to educate folks on how it all works and look at what may happen.  Also see this write-up for some things to know about Nationals.

Because of the fairly compressed schedule, I likely won't have the time to do previews/simulations of all events, but will try to do a few.  Let me know which you'd like to see!

Like I did last year, I'll be primarily just giving the data from the simulation and not writing a bunch of words.  Most of it is self-explanatory, but the favorites and contenders will be listed in alphabetical order.  The strengths are based on played averages.  Contact me if you want to learn more.

On to the projections from the simulation, I already did the 18 & Over 4.0 men, 3.5 women, and 4.0 women, next up, the 18 & Over 3.5 men.

Teams: 17

Chance of 3 undefeated: 10%
Chance of 4 undefeated: 1%
Chance of 5 undefeated: <1%

Chance of 6 undefeated: <1%

Chance of tie for last spot / most likely size: 92% / 4
Strongest / weakest team strength: 3.83 / 3.51
Toughest / easiest schedule: 3.73 / 3.61
Favorites: Florida, NorCal, Texas
Contenders: Caribbean, Eastern, Middle States, Northern, PNW, SoCal, Southwest

Have a chance: Midwest, Southern

The simulation likes three teams above the others, and one of those a near lock to make the semis, just that one having a most likely record of 4-0 (62% chance).  And in a very rare occurrence, the last semi-finalist is projected to be 2-2 with 10 teams having that record.  Now, it is likely that with so many teams having a most likely 2-2 record, one steps up and finishes 3-1, but clearly this is a close competition for that last spot.

What do you think?

Simulating 2025 USTA League Nationals - 18 & Over 4.0 Women

USTA League Nationals for 2025 begin this weekend!  The schedule is slightly less compressed this year being played in five instead of four weekends, but still more compressed than past years where it was seven weekends.

This weekend has four events, 18 & Over 2.5W and 5.0 in Scottsdale, 3.5 in Surprise, and 4.0 in San Diego.

I've been doing simulations since 2018 and have found that the four semi-finalists are usually in the top six to seven projected teams, and more often than you might think, I project the four semi-finalists perfectly.  There are surprises sometimes and a mid-pack team overachieves and advances, that is why the matches are played on the courts and not on a computer.  Still, it is interesting to do these simulations and see how the projections do.

Why do these simulations you ask?  The primary reason is that the format for USTA League Nationals is now a flight-less random round-robin where each team plays four other random opponents.  This introduces significant variations in schedule strength, the possibility of an undefeated team not making the top-4, and teams vying for the top-4 perhaps not having played head-to-head and unfortunate tie-breakers being used.  The simulations aim to educate folks on how it all works and look at what may happen.  Also see this write-up for some things to know about Nationals.

Because of the fairly compressed schedule, I likely won't have the time to do previews/simulations of all events, but will try to do a few.  Let me know which you'd like to see!

Like I did last year, I'll be primarily just giving the data from the simulation and not writing a bunch of words.  Most of it is self-explanatory, but the favorites and contenders will be listed in alphabetical order.  The strengths are based on played averages.  Contact me if you want to learn more.

On to the projections from the simulation, I already did the 18 & Over 4.0 men and 3.5 women, next up, the 18 & Over 4.0 women.

Teams: 17

Chance of 3 undefeated: 28%
Chance of 4 undefeated: 6.3%
Chance of 5 undefeated: <1%

Chance of tie for last spot / most likely size: 89% / 4
Strongest / weakest team strength: 4.18 / 3.91
Toughest / easiest schedule: 4.07 / 3.95
Favorites: Missouri Valley, NorCal, SoCal, Southern
Contenders: Florida, Hawaii, Intermountain, Midwest

Have a chance: Mid-Atlantic

The simulation likes three teams above the others, all having a most likely record of 4-0, but a fourth still just qualifies as a favorite.  Three of the contenders do have a better than 10% chance of going 4-0 as well, so there could be a good competition for the last spot with four teams having a most likely record of 3-1 for that spot.

There is a decent chance of four 4-0 teams but just a slim chance of five of them, and a minuscule but possible chance of six. 

What do you think?

Yes, there could be six undefeated teams for 18 & Over 3.5 Women too!

I just did my simulation for the 18 & Over 3.5 women, and like I did for the 18 & Over 4.0 men, I noticed that there is a chance of six 4-0 teams!  In fact, there are two different ways it could happen!

Here are the two diagrams showing how it could happen.

One can clearly see two different scenarios where there are six teams, and different ones in each scenario, that all don't play each other and so they could each go 4-0.  Now, it is pretty unlikely it happens, but still it is possible.

I'll try to keep an eye out for this for other events and post the visualization for them too.

Simulating 2025 USTA League Nationals - 18 & over 3.5 Women

USTA League Nationals for 2025 begin this weekend!  The schedule is slightly less compressed this year being played in five instead of four weekends, but still more compressed than past years where it was seven weekends.

This weekend has four events, 18 & Over 2.5W and 5.0 in Scottsdale, 3.5 in Surprise, and 4.0 in San Diego.

I've been doing simulations since 2018 and have found that the four semi-finalists are usually in the top six to seven projected teams, and more often than you might think, I project the four semi-finalists perfectly.  There are surprises sometimes and a mid-pack team overachieves and advances, that is why the matches are played on the courts and not on a computer.  Still, it is interesting to do these simulations and see how the projections do.

Why do these simulations you ask?  The primary reason is that the format for USTA League Nationals is now a flight-less random round-robin where each team plays four other random opponents.  This introduces significant variations in schedule strength, the possibility of an undefeated team not making the top-4, and teams vying for the top-4 perhaps not having played head-to-head and unfortunate tie-breakers being used.  The simulations aim to educate folks on how it all works and look at what may happen.  Also see this write-up for some things to know about Nationals.

Because of the fairly compressed schedule, I likely won't have the time to do previews/simulations of all events, but will try to do a few.  Let me know which you'd like to see!

Like I did last year, I'll be primarily just giving the data from the simulation and not writing a bunch of words.  Most of it is self-explanatory, but the favorites and contenders will be listed in alphabetical order.  The strengths are based on played averages.  Contact me if you want to learn more.

On to the projections from the simulation, I already did the 18 & Over 4.0 men, next up, the 18 & Over 3.5 women.

Teams: 17

Chance of 3 undefeated: 13%
Chance of 4 undefeated: 1.7%
Chance of 5 undefeated: <1%

Chance of tie for last spot / most likely size: 87% / 4
Strongest / weakest team strength: 3.70 / 3.43
Toughest / easiest schedule: 3.63 / 3.49
Favorites: Florida, SoCal, Southern, Southwest, Texas
Contenders: Intermountain, Missouri Valley

Have a chance: Eastern, Mid-Atlantic, Middle States, Midwest, PNW

The simulation likes five teams for four spots, all having a better than 40% chance of making the semis, and as a result not a lot of contenders, but a big group of teams that have a chance.  The five favorites all have a most likely record of 3-1, but one has a 41% chance or 4-0 and three more have better than a 20% chance.

The tie-breakers will be important as teams 3, 4, and 5 are all projected to have 12-8 individual court records, so one good team is going to be left out of the semis.

What do you think?

There could be six undefeated teams at USTA League 18 & Over 4.0 men's Nationals!

In looking at the details of the projections from my simulation for the 18 & Over 4.0 men this morning, I noticed that it said there was a chance of six 4-0 teams!  This has happened before, but I thought I'd take a deeper look this time.

I had posted a visual diagram of the schedule earlier, but hadn't taken a close look to see what was possible, but the simulation highlighted it.  Here is the same diagram with the potential 4-0 teams in this scenario highlighted in green.

One can clearly see there are six teams that all don't play each other and so they could each go 4-0.  Now, it is pretty unlikely it happens as Hawaii and Northern are not even in my list of teams that have a chance to make the semis let alone go 4-0.

I'll try to keep an eye out for this for other events and post the visualization for them too.

Simulating 2025 USTA League Nationals - 18 & Over 4.0 Men

USTA League Nationals for 2025 begin this weekend!  The schedule is slightly less compressed this year being played in five instead of four weekends, but still more compressed than past years where it was seven weekends.

This weekend has four events, 18 & Over 2.5W and 5.0 in Scottsdale, 3.5 in Surprise, and 4.0 in San Diego.

I've been doing simulations since 2018 and have found that the four semi-finalists are usually in the top six to seven projected teams, and more often than you might think, I project the four semi-finalists perfectly.  There are surprises sometimes and a mid-pack team overachieves and advances, that is why the matches are played on the courts and not on a computer.  Still, it is interesting to do these simulations and see how the projections do.

Why do these simulations you ask?  The primary reason is that the format for USTA League Nationals is now a flight-less random round-robin where each team plays four other random opponents.  This introduces significant variations in schedule strength, the possibility of an undefeated team not making the top-4, and teams vying for the top-4 perhaps not having played head-to-head and unfortunate tie-breakers being used.  The simulations aim to educate folks on how it all works and look at what may happen.  Also see this write-up for some things to know about Nationals.

Because of the fairly compressed schedule, I likely won't have the time to do previews/simulations of all events, but will try to do a few.  Let me know which you'd like to see!

Like I did last year, I'll be primarily just giving the data from the simulation and not writing a bunch of words.  Most of it is self-explanatory, but the favorites and contenders will be listed in alphabetical order.  The strengths are based on played averages.  Contact me if you want to learn more.

On to the projections from the simulation, first up, the 18 & Over 4.0 men.

Teams: 17

Chance of 3 undefeated: 11%
Chance of 4 undefeated: 1.0%
Chance of 5 undefeated: <1%
Chance of tie for last spot / most likely size: 92% / 4
Strongest / weakest team strength: 4.16 / 3.96
Toughest / easiest schedule: 4.11 / 4.03
Favorites: Eastern, Intermountain, Mid-Atlantic, Texas
Contenders: Florida, Missouri Valley, NorCal, Southern

Have a chance: Middle States, Midwest, SoCal

The simulation likes the top team a lot due to an easy schedule but still just 38% chance of 4-0.  But then there is a group of four teams with a 33% to 60% chance of making the semis, and five more with a better than 12% chance.  Overall five teams have a most likely record of 3-1 and then eight are at 2-2, so a competitive event it appears so court records and the tie-breakers will be important.

What do you think?

Will it rain on the first weekend of 2025 USTA League Nationals?

2025 USTA League Nationals is starting in a few days, and with that we need to do our weather checks.

Several events are in the greater Phoenix area (Surprise and Scottsdale), and the current forecast calls for showers and a heavy thunderstorm on both Friday and Saturday.  That sounds ominous, but I'd think the courts should dry quickly so hopefully they get all the matches in without having to alter the format.

The other site this weekend is San Diego, and there is a chance of a shower Saturday morning, otherwise sunny and pleasant, so I'd think everything will be fine there.

Stay away rain!