USTA League play is already suspended in some areas, what are the chances 2021 leagues are played to completion and Nationals is played?

 2020 has been a strange year in many ways, including its impact on USTA League play.  Leagues were suspended in the Spring leading to many not resuming and Nationals being canceled.

Some areas did resume play over the Summer, at least with alternate/secondary leagues, and some areas begin 2021 season play with Early Start Leagues as they've always done taking advantage of play resuming in their respective sections, but some sections have never resume league play and with the rise of COVID-19 numbers, league play is being suspended once again in other areas.

All of this begs the question, what might happen in 2021?  Might leagues be suspended/canceled again?  If so, at what point are 2021 Nationals in jeopardy of being canceled?

One way to look at it is to look at when leagues are normally played across all the sections, and correspondingly what impact any suspensions or delays in play will have.  Using the 2019 league year as the benchmark, here is when matches were played by month for the 18 & Over division.

We see the bulk of the matches are played in March and later, but a good number are played in the first two months of the year as well as September thru December of the prior year, and even some played back in May and June thanks to Early Start Leagues in Georgia.

And for the 40 & Over division.

A similar story here, but March is the busiest month by far, and January and February are as busy as the Spring and early Summer months.  There is also some Early Start League activity in the last few months of the prior year but not as much as for 18 & Over.

What does this all mean?

The short story is that while the bulk of league play occurs March or later and may not be impacted by any continued or new suspension of play as we move into 2021, there is a fair amount of play in January and February, and there may be play from ESLs that have not started or finished as we move into 2021, that has been or will be impacted if play is suspended at the start of the year.

I'm sure sections and districts have some flexibility with scheduling and can absorb a month, or perhaps two months, of delay and still find a way to get league play complete, but you can see that if any possible suspension of play continues into March on top of that, it becomes more difficult to get all the matches in.

Now, as we know, restrictions regarding playing tennis and league play have not been consistent through the country.  Based on local COVID-19 statistics and capacity of the healthcare system to take on the sick, and how conservative the respective state governments are regarding playing it safe and shutting more down or for longer, some areas may not have any restrictions while others. may be restricted and unable to play for an extended period of time.  This may lead to a situation where some sections complete play through playoffs and Sectionals and are ready for Nationals, while other sections do not.

In the past, even without a pandemic, not every section sends a team at every level, so I doubt that one or even two sections not having teams to send would cancel Nationals.  But what if three or four don't send teams?  At what point does National decide to cancel?  Or would they carry on if at least half the sections send teams, and perhaps even open up wildcards for runners up from Sectionals to advance to Nationals?

Let's all hope it doesn't come to that and the restrictions preventing play in some areas are lifted soon and everything can go on more or less as planned.

USTA establishes new manual appeal criteria for 2020 year-end in lieu of publishing year-end ratings

The coronavirus pandemic has wreaked havoc on everyone's life, including tennis players, in various ways.  For those that play USTA League, play was suspended and ultimately seasons canceled, Nationals were canceled, the decision was made to not publish year-end ratings, and even where play resumed, it has been suspended again in some areas.

On the subject of year-end ratings, from surveys I've done, most people wanted some form of year-end ratings to be published, but the USTA elected not to.  I wrote about the pros/cons of this, in my opinion there were a lot more cons, and offered suggestions on what should have been or could be done.  Others have written letters and contacted the USTA with their own suggestions.

Where this was in response to anything I or other wrote, I don't know, but somewhere along the way, the USTA's coronavirus FAQ was updated to reflect some modified appeal rules.  Specifically, this now appears:

Q: I have been playing matches during 2020 and believe that my match results reflect a different level of play.  Can I request a review of my rating based on my play history from 2020 play? 

A: Yes, players that have had at least 3 matches during 2020 and have generated at least 3 dynamic ratings may contact their Section to request a review.  The Section will review player details and send eligible players to National for review and processing.  It is important to note that players who request an appeal of their rating will receive an A rating type and will therefore be subject to Dynamic Disqualification or Promotion.  The eligibility guidelines for Appeals are proprietary, objective, and will be applied to all players submitting such Appeal requests.

This is nowhere close to actually publishing ratings and addressing all the issues that come with not doing so, but is an olive branch to those players that feel they are playing significantly above/below their level and should be at a higher/lower level for 2021 leagues.  Let's parse apart what exactly was said.

First, players must have played at least 3 matches and generated at least 3 dynamic ratings.  This is more or less what is normally required to get a new year-end rating, so makes sense that this be part of the criteria.

Second, this is not an auto-appeal like you can normally do after year-end ratings are published, but instead a player must contact their section to request a manual review.  See below for why (perhaps) they didn't make this the auto-appeal button on TennisLink.

Third, if a player is eligible after review by the section, it will be sent to National for review.  I think this is important, this is not something a section decides but rather they just determine eligibility and send to National.  Although, by determining eligibility, they can in effect not-grant it if they choose not to forward to National.

Fourth, players whose appeal is granted will be marked as an 'A' and thus subject to 3-strike DQs.  This makes perfect sense.

Fifth, and what I bolded above, eligibility guidelines are proprietary and objective and will be applied to all players.  This makes sense, but what does it really mean?  The proprietary part means they aren't telling us :). But objective and applied to all seems clear but is it?

Note, I believe players could always request a manual appeal and make their case so being able to do so is not new, but having it granted typically required extenuating circumstances or permanent medical issues.

Now, it appears there are specific and objective criteria that will be applied to all players.  If it is specific and objective and applied to all players, I don't know why they couldn't just make the auto-appeal button on TennisLink do it, perhaps it was just to reduce the number of people that do it as it is more work to find out who to contact and do it.  They very well may still have an influx of requests and with reduced staff wish it was an automated system.

However, note the word "guidelines".  That is somewhat at odds with "objective" and "applied to all players" as it sounds like they are just guidelines and the folks at a section can still review and determine which to send to National.  The reason for this is perhaps to weed out edge cases or situations where players have tanked matches and the section has more knowledge about this to know if the appeal should be reviewed by National.

Note, I have no issue with there being a manual review if it is to weed out sandbaggers who shouldn't have an appeal down granted.  I just hope sections and National are prepared for the volume of appeal requests they are going to receive.

Note also, players don't just appeal down, some do appeal up as they have improved and feel the system hasn't kept up and they want the challenge of playing at the higher level.  These players can always play up, but some like the validation of the rating by their name (even with the 'A').

My view is that, for 2020 at least, this is a good thing.  Players that are way out of level, too high or low, are not good for league play and in the absence of just publishing ratings to get the majority of players to the right level, this at least provides a way to get a subset addressed.  Without knowing the criteria, hard to say how well it will work though.

What do you think?  Are these what appear to be new, and perhaps only, for 2020 appeal rules appropriate and fair?  Are you likely to submit an appeal and try it out?

If you do submit an appeal, I'd love to hear from you and what the process is like and what response you get.  As always, I'll share what I learn (anonymously) and also write more as I hear more.

Unhappy with indoor tennis restrictions in Washington? Sign this petition!

Earlier this week, amid increasing COVID-19 numbers, the State of Washington Governor's office reintroduced restrictions on various indoor activities, including closing indoor activities at athletic clubs, meaning folks in Seattle and other parts of Washington are unable to play indoor tennis, and with temperatures in the 40s and periodic rain, we aren't playing outside either.

USTA League play in Seattle was wrapping up with 55 & Over playoffs just finishing in time (completed this past Sunday) but 18 & Over Mixed now having to be tentatively rescheduled for January.

I, among others, use tennis as their primary form of exercise in the winter here and not having it is more than an inconvenience, it can significantly affect one's well being.  The COVID-19 pandemic is certainly something to be taken seriously and certain restrictions may make sense, but evidence seems to show that when managed with the appropriate protocols and social distancing before and after play, tennis can be a safe activity with very low risk of transmitting the corona virus.

If you agree indoor tennis should not be a restricted activity, please express your support for an on-line petition to Allow safe, socially distanced indoor tennis in Washington!  As of this writing, 2,197 supporters have signed this petition and it is growing quickly.

Thanks to Diane Tien for getting this started!  Let's see how many signatures we can get!

How did the new playoff format workout for Seattle Adult 55 & Over playoffs?

Local playoffs for the Seattle area 55 & Over league were played this past weekend and were the first to use a new playoff format that put all the 1st place teams in one draw and the 2nd place teams in another draw.

I've written up my thoughts on the format that gives the 1st place draw final loser a second chance to make the playoffs by beating the 2nd place draw winner, so it makes sense to take a look and see how things played out and if any 2nd place draw teams were able to advance.

At the 6.0 level, the women had TCSP beat Lower Woodland in the 1st place draw, then Lower Woodland had a second chance to advance by beating HBSQ, but HBSQ came through with the win for the 2nd place draw winner.

The 6.0 men had AYTC beat CAC/SL in the 1st place final, AYTC then played ETC who won the 2nd place draw and again, the 2nd place draw winner won with ETC advancing.

The 7.0 women Lower Woodland beat HBSQ-Cho in the 1st place final, and they face HBSQ-Vitcovich who won the 2nd place final, and this time the 1st place final loser came through with HBSQ-Cho advancing.

The 7.0 men had three teams in each draw, and CAC/SL with the bye in the 1st place draw won their final over TCSP, but TCSP got a second chance to advance by playing STC who had the bye in the 2nd place draw and won that final, and TCSP came through notching another advancement for the 1st place draw final loser.

The 8.0 and 9.0 levels for men and women had just one flight, so the top-2 teams automatically advanced and there were no local playoffs.

So, with a limited sample size, we see the wildcard spot went to the 1st place draw loser twice, and to the 2nd place draw winner twice.

This format will be used for Mixed 18 & Over (when we manage to get those playoffs in) and I believe it will be for Adult 40 & Over as well, so we'll get more data from those.  Stay tuned.

Update on Seattle area Adult 55 and Mixed 18 Playoffs - So close!

In many of the districts in the Pacific Northwest section, several leagues are played in the Fall as Early Start Leagues.  In Seattle, these are the Adult 55 & Over and Mixed 18 & Over leagues.

In 2020, getting any league in has been a challenge in most areas, but with the relaxing of restrictions over the summer and clubs open for indoor tennis, we were optimistic that these Fall league could be played to completion including local playoffs.

In most years, the league runs from September thru November, with local playoffs typically the first two weekends in December.  This year, our League Coordinator Jill anticipated that COVID-19 would claw its way back in the fall and made the smart move to schedule matches more aggressively and have the regular season and local playoffs done before Thanksgiving.

Well, we almost pulled it off!  55 & Over playoffs were this past weekend and 18 & Over were scheduled to be played this coming weekend, but alas the Governor in Washington announced that due to increasing testing and hospitalization statistics, a number of restrictions would be reintroduced including closing indoor athletic facilities and unfortunately tennis clubs are included in that.  And with temperatures in the 40s with rain, outdoor play isn't really an option.

Jill and our section office are lobbying the Oregon and Washington Governor's offices to allow indoor tennis to be played, or at least first on the list of activities to have the restrictions lifted, but for the next month at least in Washington, we are shut down and indoor tennis can't be played.

As a result, our 18 & Over Mixed playoffs are postponed, tentatively until January.  The current plan is:

• 6.0 level will be played out of Columbia Athletic Club/Silver Lake 1/8-1/10/21
• 8.0 level will be played out Tennis Center Sand Point 1/7-1/10/21
• 7.0 and 9.0 will be late Jan/early Feb - more details to come

All of this assumes restrictions will be lifted enough for play to resume.

For those following along, you are probably wondering about Adult 40 & Over which is due to start in January, and I'm sure that league is also subject to the restrictions being lifted as it is scheduled to start play 1/8.

PNW Seattle giving new playoff format another shot for 2021 18 & Over Mixed

Before COVID-19 ended our 40 & Over season in the Seattle area, we were working our way towards a new local playoff format.

I wrote much more at the time, but the short story is in a league where the 1st and 2nd place team in each sub-flight advance to playoffs, the new local playoff format places all the 1st place teams in one draw and all the second place teams in the other.  The winner of the 1st place team draw advances to Sectionals, while the loser of that match plays the winner of the 2nd place team draw for the chance to advance to Sectionals as a wildcard.

I wasn't terribly fond of the format then, and while we didn't get a chance to see it in practice yet, I'm still leery of it for the simple reason that it doesn't seem to reward 1st place teams enough.  While by making the final of the 1st place bracket they assure themselves of an extra shot at advancing even if they lose that final, they still have to make it to the final by winning one or two matches and do so against other first place teams.  One can almost make the argument that it may be easier to win two matches in the 2nd place bracket against 2nd place teams to make that final, and the have to play only one first place team, and that being one that could be playing their 4th match of the weekend at that point.

What do you think?

It is 2020, anything could happen, could the NTRP as we know it be going away?

Preface: This post is highly speculative, but is based on a little reading of the tea leaves and I think could happen, so it is worth the speculation to think about.

The NTRP system has been around for many years, far longer than I've been playing USTA League, and has gone through a variety of algorithm changes and periodic mass adjustments, but in general has worked very well for promoting competitive adult recreational competition.

But in the last few years, NTRP has been under increasing pressure from UTR, particularly with junior, collegiate, and lower level pro tournaments.  This is where UTR started and is strong, and while the USTA introduced the Junior NTRP, it is different and not connected to Adult NTRP and it appears has not gained the traction UTR has, at least in this segment.

The U in UTR is "Universal" and to be truly universal one has to have results from all matches, and UTR is aiming to do that and for the past few years has been scraping USTA matches from TennisLink and including them in their calculations.  This is where UTR is differentiated from NTRP, in that it calculates ratings for USTA League players plus all the juniors and collegiate players it always has, and includes ATP, WTA, and other pro tour matches, and I'm sure more.  One can debate how well UTR accomplishes a single universal rating with what are almost certainly disconnected populations of players, but the USTA with NTRP doesn't even attempt to incorporate matches outside of USTA play.

Perhaps in response to UTR, the International Tennis Federation (ITF) along with other governing bodies from the United States (USTA), England (LTA), and France (FFT) launched plans for the World Tennis Number (WTN) about a year ago.  I wrote my observations on the WTN after that.  The original press release called for WTN to be live in late 2019 and launched in participating organization's countries in 2020, but the WTN site still says "Coming Soon ...".

Another interesting connection here is that the ITF has contracted with Club Spark to build the platform for WTN, which happens to be the same company working on what is believed to be the replacement for TennisLink (and more).  What appears to be some of the "and more" is even live today at https://playtennis.usta.com.

So, if participating countries are to be adopting it soon, what about the USTA and NTRP?

With the same company that is implementing WTN also building the new TennisLink, it might seem easy for the USTA to perhaps decide to give NTRP a "make over" and just switch to using the WTN.  With the WTN being on a completely different scale (40 to 1 rather than effectively 2.0 to 7.0) this would seem to be a pretty radical change and a risky thing to do with a large population of adult league and tournament players used to the NTRP system.

It is possible the USTA would phase the WTN in, either publishing in parallel or using it for various segments of play, perhaps starting with juniors, then moving on to collegiate players and lower level pro-tour events, all to be aligned with the ITF and other countries and their use of the WTN.  In this scenario, it might find its way to USTA league and tournament players later, or again published in parallel to get people used to it.

This is where it gets interesting though.

As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated cancelation of many USTA leagues, nearly every Sectionals, and Nationals, the USTA decided to not publish year-end NTRP ratings for 2020.  I understand there may have been some within the USTA that wanted to go ahead and publish, but they were overruled.  In fact, rumor has it some changes have been made regarding the group responsible for NTRP ratings oversight within the USTA so changes appear to be afoot.

As part of this change, is it possible the USTA didn't want to publish 2020 year-end ratings because a switch to use WTN is coming in 2021 and it would be confusing to players to have just published year-end ratings in 2020 when rolling out a new system in 2021?  By not publishing 2020 year-end ratings might we see WTN rolled out by the end of 2021 and league play in 2021 while be NTRP's swan song?

I obviously don't know the answer, only those at the USTA do and perhaps even the USTA hasn't made final decisions on if and when changes are made.  But we've been waiting for a new TennisLink for years, and it just feels like it finally arriving, the launch of WTN, and the same company doing both, we could have a big bang of change coming in 2021, perhaps for 2022 league play.

What do you think?  How would you receive a change to the rating system used for tournament and league play?