Will USTA League participation grow in 2022?

The USTA recently sent an e-mail out with the headline "Tennis is Surging!" and I couldn't help but take a look and comment on it.

The full story cites a few statistics to back up the headline, one being the Physical Activity Council's (PAC) participation report resulting from surveys performed that monitor more than 120 sports and activities, and according to this report, 22.6 million people took to the courts in 2021, up 4.5% from 2020.

The other statistic is one from the Tennis Industry Association (TIA) that shows racquet sales (units) were up 22.7% in 2021.  It is interesting that the 3.4 million units sold is not an all time high as it is noted that this is the most since 2010, which means it was higher then and we are just getting back to that level.

I don't know the methodology of the survey and how they arrive at the 22.6 million number, but don't doubt that more people have started playing tennis the past few years as tennis, an outdoor activity for many, became a reasonably safe sport as an alternative to other indoor activities during the pandemic.  I find it interesting though that the unit sales growth is five times the participation growth.  Why might this be?

First, I think it shows that surveys are not perfect and are just estimates or best guesses made from a sampling of a particular audience.  It is certainly possible that the survey underestimates the participation growth, and it is really greater than 4.5% and the unit sales is more indicative of the growth.  On the other hand, it is possible, and I'd say more likely, that the unit sales was spurred by existing players have more disposable income due to the curtailing of other activities and the government stimulus checks, and chose to upgrade their racquets earlier and/or more often than normal.  This type of behavior is good for tennis, but perhaps not indicative of participation growth.

The counter to this growth is the participation in USTA League the past few years.  The pandemic obviously wreaked havoc with league play, with Nationals and many local league canceled in 2020, and perhaps a slow recovery in early 2021.  Here is the chart I made for that post at the end of 2021.

We see the slow but steady decline over the years (and it is primarily with younger players if you look at the details), and dramatic drop in 2020 due to canceled leagues, and a recovery in 2021 but not nearly back to 2019 levels.

The question at hand is, will this general participation growth the PAC and TIA stats show result in the continued recovery and perhaps even growth of USTA League participation?

I certainly expect participation to increase over 2021 levels as more players return to the game.  But it is also possible that the forced time off resulted in some players finding other activities or avenues to playing tennis and may not come back to league play.  What will be interesting is if this growth in general tennis participation offsets that effect and the overall steady decline and we see growth over 2019 levels.  I'm hopeful it happens, and will start to do more analysis as we get farther in to 2022 and can look at the statistics.

What do you think of the growth numbers from the PAC and TIA?  What do you think will happen to league play in 2022?

A new tennis facility is planned for Mid-Atlantic

The Mid-Atlantic section of the USTA is one of the more active sections with league play taking place across the greater DMV and Virginia areas.  Apparently demand is so high, a new facility is needed.

Plans have recently been announced for a 44 court facility in Loudoun County likely near Leesburg.  It will include 20 outdoor tennis courts, 16 indoor, 8 youth/pickleball courts, and be open to the public sometime in 2025.

To my readers in Mid-Atlantic, congrats on having what appears to be a great facility coming soon!

New Survey from the USTA

I got an e-mail this morning with a survey from the USTA and thought I'd post a few observations.

First, the e-mail says it is just a four question survey, but they commissioned a third-party research firm to conduct it.  Seems a bit overkill to use an external firm for such a short survey, but I guess the USTA doesn't have folks on staff to do it in-house.

Second, it positions the survey as providing "critical information to help the USTA understand what we're doing well and how we can improve".  Sounds very interesting, they can accomplish this in four questions?  Let's get on to the survey itself.

In the survey itself, there is boilerplate legalese that seems overkill given the nature of the questions (see below), but after that it quickly gets into the questions.

The first being why you are a member, the options being you are individually a member or parent of a child.

Next it asks my current engagement, including the type of player/parent/instructor I may be.

Next as the third question, it asks what section I play in most often.

Then, after three questions, it tells me the questions are starting?  I guess the first three were classification questions, but still it was billed as a four question survey.

The actual questions are:

• How satisfied are you with the USTA
• How likely is it that you'd recommend a friend
• How do you feel about tennis

After that, just three questions, or is it six, it says it is going to ask a few questions for classification purposes that include gender, age, working status, education, marital status, income, ethnicity, and whether there are children at home.  But the first three sorta felt like classification questions too.

This survey feels no different than earlier surveys the past few years, the questions may even be identical and frankly it is a little underwhelming if this is the "critical information" they need to see how they can improve.

The three (not four), or was it six (?), actual questions just indicate satisfaction (or not) and I'm not sure how it helps tell the USTA "how we can improve", but only tells them how they are doing.  Perhaps the research firm can somehow derive the how to improve from these three simple questions.  I hope so!

Did you get the survey?  What did you think?

Mid-Atlantic rules at 2022 USTA Tri-Level Invitational

The 2022 USTA Tri-Level National Invitational was held this weekend in the California desert, and Mid-Atlantic came through winning both the men's and women's events.

The event uses a similar format to Nationals with a single round-robin flight with each team playing four matches against random opponents and the top-4 teams in the standings advancing to the semis.

For the women, three teams, New England, Texas, and Mid-Atlantic, went 4-0 and Midwest was the best 3-1 team based on the best court record.  New England and Mid-Atlantic won their semis, and Mid-Atlantic took the final.

The men also had three teams, Mid-Atlantic, Florida, and Caribbean, go 4-0, and Midwest was the best 3-1 team to make the semis.  Mid-Atlantic and Florida won each semi 2-1, and Mid-Atlantic took the final 2-1.

Congratulations!

Intermountain (Colorado) takes a stand against pickleball lines on tennis courts

Pickleball has been growing in popularity the last few years, and at some facilities, pickleball gets played on tennis courts, sometimes with temporary lines, but some courts have painted lines for pickleball.  There does not appear to be a standard for how/where these lines are placed, some are a single pickleball court using the same net position as the tennis court, while perhaps more common is to have two or even four pickleball courts perpendicular to the tennis court.

Regardless of how the pickleball court is laid out, the lines can't perfectly align with the lines for tennis, and are often offset in some way, meaning there is an introduction of radically different lines on the court.  Depending on the color and width of the lines, these can be a minor to significant distraction to tennis players when judging if a ball will go in or not or in calling lines.

Here are some examples.

Just laying a single pickleball court on a tennis court.

We see the the pickleball baseline and tennis service line are close to each other which can make calling serves hard, but this is not the way it is commonly done as it only gets one pickleball court and there is lots of unused space.

There are lots of ways to get more pickleball courts placed, I won't go through them all but this gets two.

If the no volley zone line aligns with the service line, this isn't terribly confusing, but I also show how different colors can look.

But I think it is common to try to get four courts placed, which can look like this.

I've shown different orientations and colors, and I wouldn't expect this variation to show up on a single tennis court, but you can see how the lines look for each option.  This can get quite confusing.

As a result of what I'm sure many tennis players have issue with, the Colorado district in Intermountain has apparently introduced a rule requiring the home team to provide courts without pickleball lines.  If they can't do so, the visiting team is entitled to take a default win.  Here is the full text.

5.02A Match(es) Played on Unapproved Courts. If a home team is unable to provide the minimum number of required courts (See 4.02) without pickleball lines, the visiting team may refuse to play on the unapproved court(s) and claim a win by default for the impacted line(s).  If the players agree to play on an unapproved court, the points played will stand.

This is the first I've heard of a USTA League instituting a rule like this.  Is anyone aware of a rule like this elsewhere?  If you are from Colorado, what do you think of the rule?

What is interesting is that the USTA appears to have made a suggestion for pickleball to use the lines that some tennis courts already have for the smaller 60 foot court used for new players and juniors.  Tennis players are probably familiar with these lines as courts used for teaching often have them.

The blue lines show the normal 60 foot baseline and sidelines, but show the addition of a line seven feet from the net for the pickleball no volley zone.  The idea is that this is a small change to tennis courts that already have 60 foot court lines or would be adding them for junior tennis or lessons.

The result is a "pickleball" court that is 42 feet from baseline to baseline (using the tennis service line as the baseline) and 21 feet wide (the width of a 60 foot tennis court), which is very close to pickleball's 44x20 court dimension.  Apparently USA Pickleball is ok with this 42x21 court being used for recreational pickleball.  I'm pretty sure a sanctioned tournament couldn't be played on this court and I doubt pickleball is going to change their official court size to this anytime soon either.

This idea certainly seems less intrusive than actual pickleball court lines being added to a tennis court as I showed above, especially if that is being done on top of a court that already has 60 foot tennis court lines.  But it also gets only a single pickleball court which doesn't use the space well.

Some facility or clubs feel compelled to address the pickleball segment by adding lines to tennis courts, and to be fair, if doing this can increase court utilization and revenue, it is hard to argue against, but what is the best way to do it?

What do you think?  Are any extra lines on a tennis court off-limits?  Are the 60 foot court lines acceptable and don't annoy you as a tennis player?  Or are you even ok with perpendicular court lines if it can create an additional revenue stream for a facility and keep it open?

Update: A reader shared that a similar rule has been in place in the Southern regulations.  Specifically the rule reads:

1.04D(6): Courts for Local League Play. “Home teams” will have the choice of court surface for which they wish to play their home matches. Court surface must be the same surface for all individual lines unless prior agreement between both captains. The use of tennis-related blended lines are permitted on courts used for local league matches. The use of other lines for another sport, such as Pickleball, are not permitted on courts used for local league matches.