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?

Are some districts/states not sending teams to USTA League Southern Sectionals?

It is that time of year when Sectionals are being played across the country.  Sectionals is where teams from the various districts in a section all come together to play to see who will win and represent the section at Nationals.

Not all districts send teams to Sectionals at every gender and level as some areas/district just don't have critical mass for enough teams at every gender and level.  But the main levels are generally represented by each district.

In the Southern section there are 11 districts and these align with 11 states, those being Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee.  Thus a full flight would be 11 teams representing each state.

In taking a look at some flights, it appears not all states are represented, and not just at the genders/levels on the fringes.

At the 18 & Over Southern Sectionals, ignoring the 2.5 and 5.0 levels where it is common for some states to be absent:

• 3.0 women - Only 6 teams listed, Arkansas, Georgia, and South Carolina are missing
• 3.0 men - Only 8 teams listed, North Carolina is missing
• 3.5 women - Only 8 teams listed, Georgia is missing
• 3.5 men - Only 6 teams listed, Alabama, Kentucky, and South Carolina are missing
• 4.0 women - All states listed
• 4.0 men - Only 6 teams listed, Georgia, South Carolina, and Tennessee are missing
• 4.5 women - Only 8 teams listed, Alabama missing
• 4.5 men - Only 8 teams listed, Mississippi missing

That is only one gender/level where all 9 states are there!  And three where three teams are missing!  So this isn't just a state missing here or there.  And some states are missing that are considered hot beds of tennis.

Note that the 3.0 and 4.0 levels are taking place this weekend so those teams are certainly set, while the 3.5 and 4.5 levels are next weekend, and I believe the deadline for entry has past so I doubt any teams are going to be added, but perhaps TennisLink is just not up to date and more teams will be there for 3.5 and 4.5.

The 40 & Over Southern Sectionals is also going on this weekend and next weekend:

• 3.0 women - 10 teams are listed!  They are sending two from Mississippi, not sure why
• 3.0 men - Only 6 teams listed, Kentucky, Georgia, and North Carolina missing
• 3.5 women - 10 teams are listed!  They are sending two from Alabama
• 3.5 men - Only 8 teams are listed, Alabama missing
• 4.0 women - 10 teams are listed!  Georgia gets two at this level
• 4.0 men - All states are listed
• 4.5 women - Only 6 teams are listed, Arkansas, Louisiana, and South Carolina missing
• 4.5 men - Only 8 teams are listed, Kentucky is missing

Interestingly, this is not quite as bad as 18 & Over with four flights having full representation, and for some reason the Section has elected to have wildcards and 10 teams for the 3.0, 3.5, and 4.0 women.

One would actually think there are more teams and players at 18 & Over compared to 40 & Over, so there would be less chance of states skipping out.

Note that at 40 & Over the 3.0 and 4.0 levels are next weekend while the 3.5 and 4.5 are this weekend.  So they are staggered from 18 & Over so if players were on teams going to both, they would be able to.

So why are some states not sending teams?  And why is 18 & Over less represented than 40 & Over?

I can think of a few reasons, so I'll throw them out here, but I'd love to hear from folks in Southern if they know what is going on.

Going to Sectionals is a sizable commitment from a time and money perspective and perhaps some aren't willing to take it on.  This can especially be the case in Southern where depending on where the event is held, there can be a bunch of travel.

This year 18 & Over is being held in Mobile, AL on the back to back weekends while 40 & Over is in Rome, GA.  There is no perfect location for all states, but these are reasonably central locations and have been used on a regular basis so aren't new.  And the states skipping some events are not far from these locations at all, so it can't be just this reason.

Players could be on teams qualified for both 18 & Over and 40 & Over and are just picking one to attend.  I haven't done analysis of this, but I don't think the schedule is significantly different from prior years so if this were the reason, we would expect to have seen it in the past.

Teams could feel they have no shot at winning, perhaps due to knowledge or history of super teams from some states, and so don't want to go knowing they are likely to lose.  While this is possible, history tells us that super teams have come from nearly all of the states in Southern including some of those skipping events this year.

Are there other reasons?  Those from Southern, what is the inside scoop on what is going on?

But even if any of the above reasons are true and the States winner from some states opts out, why wouldn't the state send the runner up from States so they are represented?  I imagine in some cases if the winner opts out late and the members of the runner up have already made other plans, the runner up may also opt out.  But it still seems odd for so many teams to be missing.

FWIW, last year there were some events with just 8 teams, but only one with less than that and that was the 18 & Over 4.5 women, compared to a full five with just six teams this year.  So this year definitely has more teams missing.

What do you think?  Why is this happening this year?

Unflighted Round-Robin Format - USTA Southern gets it!

I've written several times over the years how the Southern California section has deployed the unflighted round-robin format in less than ideal ways where undefeated teams can be left out of advancing to the semis/final, and it has happened, most recently just a month ago.

Well, I happened to be looking at how the Southern section uses the format and am pleased to acknowledge that Southern does it right!

The challenge SoCal has is they have too many teams, and too few matches.  Some of SoCal's flights have 18 teams, and then each one only plays three matches, which is a recipe for disaster.  SoCal isn't alone as Florida has deployed the format where two teams got left out, and even at Nationals where there are fewer teams (no more than 17), National makes sure the teams play four matches each which mitigates the risk of having too many undefeated teams, although a fifth has happened a couple times.

Southern on the other hand has no more than 9 teams, and even with half the teams SoCal may have they get each team four matches!  That accomplishes several things:

• Gets each team more matches and more playing time for players
• More fairly identifies the top teams as more teams play more opponents
• Virtually eliminates the chance of an undefeated team being sent home

When there are 8 or 9 teams in the flight, Southern takes the top-4 teams into a draw starting with semifinals and in this format, there is virtually no way of having a fifth 4-0 team.  But if there are fewer than 8 teams the take just the top-2 teams to a final.

In this latter case, there may be the potential for a third 4-0 teams in extreme cases, but instead of sticking their head in the sand and hoping it doesn't happen, Southern has a clause in the rules to handle it!

The clause reads:

In the rare instance that there are more undefeated teams than allowed in playoffs, an additional playoff match may be added to accommodate the extra undefeated team. (For example, there are three undefeated teams in a partial round robin group of seven teams after four team matches against randomly selected opponents. A playoff match between the #2 and #3 team, based on standings, may be added to determine which team is placed in the final playoff against the #1 team.)

I think this is perfectly reasonable, and is something I've written about and suggested to National staff be implemented, so am pleased to see Southern doing it.  Yes, it creates an extra match that has to be fit in somewhere, but I think that is eminently more fair than telling a 4-0 team, that may have gone 4-0 with the toughest schedule of the 4-0 teams and lost out on a courts, sets, or games tie-breaker as a result, that they don't advance.

To my knowledge, even National has not adopted a clause like this to address the possibility of sending an undefeated team home, so well done Southern for leading the way.

What do you think?  Should National and all sections adopt language like this in how they implement the format?

And it happened again - An undefeated team is sent home at SoCal Sectionals

I wrote yesterday about the possibility of an undefeated team missing out on making the semi-finals and being sent home at 40 & Over SoCal Sectionals, and indeed it happened.

The 3.5 Women's flight had 18 teams and they played unflighted round-robin with each team playing just three matches.  This is ripe for problems and it has happened before and yet SoCal continues to use the format.

This time, there were six teams that were 2-0 after day one and none of them played each other in their 3rd match so it was possible that there would be six 3-0 teams and two sent home, but only five won leaving them all 3-0.  With just four spots for the semis, the 5th place 3-0 team is sent home.

As of right now, the four semi-finalists aren't populated, but standings show:

1. OC - RCI - 3-0 / 10-2 / 20-8
2. LA - WC - 3-0 / 9-3 / 18-6
3. SDNC - Fairbanks Ranch - 3-0 / 9-3 / 18-8
4. SD SDTRC - 3-0 / 8-4 / 19-9
5. LLW - Bake - 3-0 / 8-4 / 17-10

Tough luck for LLW.  They didn't lose a match, won the same number of courts as SD SDTRC, but lost one more set so they miss out.

This is known beforehand I assume, so teams should know it might happen and what they need to do to avoid it, but it is still a terrible format and way to decide the teams to advance to the semis.

What do you think?

Is USTA Southern California at it again?

It is that time of year when some sections start to have playoffs and Sectionals, and that means it is time to see what flawed formats get used.

USTA SoCal has a history of using the unflighted round-robin format in questionable ways, specifically having too many teams and not enough team matches leaving the door open to a team going undefeated in round-robin and missing out on making the semis.

Last year the 2024 40 & Over 3.5 Women had a 3-0 team go home, and worse, they got the raw end of the deal on the broken standings tie-breakers.  And it has nearly happened several times before.

Well, they appear to be consistent if nothing else, as they are doing the same format with the same issues this weekend, but at least only for one flight.  The 40 & Over 3.5 Women again have 18 teams and each playing just three matches.

Will a team go undefeated and be left out of the semis?  There is no guarantee, but there is a really good chance of it.

Has USTA Florida botched the random round-robin format again?

In 2022 at Florida 18 & Over Mixed Sectionals, a disaster happened where two undefeated teams were sent home in the 9.0 flight.  Might it happen again?

This happened because the unflighted round-robin format was used with 10 teams with two sets of five teams on each side playing four teams on the other side.  This means in theory if all the teams on one side win, there could be five 5-0 teams, and they only took two teams to a final.  It is all explained here.

What is worse is they had five strong teams on one side and five weaker teams on the other, and sure enough four teams went 4-0 and two were sent home.

You would think an event like this happening would be a great learning opportunity and steps would be taken to prevent it from happening again.  Well, sort of.

This year, again at 18 & Over Mixed Sectionals, there are again 10 teams at both the 6.0 and 9.0 levels, and unflighted round-robin is being used with each team playing four matches.  The good news is it appears they will take the top-4 to semis instead of just the top-2.  Phew, we are safe then right?

Not so fast ...

Both levels appear to have had the short-sighted "two sides of five teams each" approach to scheduling, so there still remains a chance of five undefeated teams!

Here is what it looks like for 6.0 flight if you visually look at the schedule.

Yep, there are clearly two groups of five teams, the top row plays the bottom row, and it is possible either row could go 5-0.

And for the 9.0 flight.

We see the same thing here.

Now, will it happen?  The chances are probably low, but the mere fact the format is used in a way that allows for it to happen when it could easily be avoided is a gaffe.  All one has to do is actually make a random schedule instead of constructing a schedule that explicitly allows for the worst case scenario.

I don't know if anyone from the USTA Florida reads my blog, but if so, I volunteer my services for free to review your unflighted round-robin schedules in the future so this can be avoided.  I would prefer to nip this sort of thing in the bud before it is rolled out and can't be changed.  It isn't fair to the players involved.

Let's hope the worst case doesn't happen for the players' sake.  If the disaster is avoided, that doesn't mean the format is ok, it just means they got lucky.

Even the National format with 17 teams and a schedule that actually appears random has a chance of sending an undefeated team home and it has happened (also here).

Good luck to all the teams involved.  Make sure you smash your opponent lest you go 4-0 and lose out on the standings tie-breaker.

Pacific Northwest USTA League Sectionals / Playoff Update

This is a busy time of year for USTA League tennis as the current year has a flurry of playoffs, Districts, States, and Sectionals, and in those areas with Early Start Leagues, those are about to get started.  This is happening across all 17 sections, especially with Sectionals for 18 & Over and 40 & Over being completed or played very soon, and the PNW is no exception.

Over the past few weeks there has been just in my area/section:

• 18 & Over Sectionals in Portland two weeks ago
• 40 & Over Mixed local playoffs in Seattle a week ago
• 55 & Over Mixed local playoffs in Seattle a week ago
• One Doubles local playoffs in Seattle a week ago
• 40 & Over Sectionals in Portland this weekend

I was fortunate to be on teams involved in three of those, and had friends/family playing in all of them, a busy few weekends.

The weather did play a part in some of the events.  18 & Over Sectionals had great weather with sun and 80s or even 90s, but last weekend there was some rain Sunday causing some disruption to matches and scrambling to find indoor courts, but the USTA and volunteer staff did a great job of getting everything in.

I was at 40 & Over Sectionals this past weekend and the forecast looked ominous as we neared the event with a good chance of rain Friday.  Thankfully the USTA planned ahead and had enough indoor courts available that they were able to make the call to play pro-sets and juggle the schedule a bit to get all of the Friday matches in.  There was rain early in the morning, and then a few showers so while some play could have occurred outside, it would have been interrupted and hectic while the adjusted indoor schedule went smoothly.  The rest of the weekend was fine with just a short delay Saturday morning as the courts had to try from a brief overnight shower.

What areas won Sectionals this year?

For the 18 & Over we had:

• 2.5 women - Eastern Washington/Deery beat Northern Oregon/Shin 2-1 in the final
• 2.5 men - Northwest Washington/Li won the round-robin going 4-0
• 3.0 women - NWW/Kim beat NOR/Agrawal in the final 3-2
• 3.0 men - NWW/Box beat NWW/Wang 5-0 in the final
• 3.5 women - NWW/Hawkins beat NWW/Lee 4-1 in the final
• 3.5 men - NWW/Powers beat NWW/Mar 4-1 in the final
• 4.0 women - Southwest Washington/Mettler beat Alaska/Welch 3-2 in the final
• 4.0 men - NWW/Maki beat NWW/Low 3-2 in the final
• 4.5 women - NOR/Affentranger beat NOR/Graham 3-2 in the final
• 4.5 men - NWW/Huang beat NWW/Liu 3-2 in the final
• 5.0 women - NOR/Donato won the round-robin going 3-0
• 5.0 men - NWW/Condiotty beat NWW/Purohit 3-0 in the final

So NWW took 8 of the 12.

In the 40 & Over this was the result:

• 2.5 women - SWW/Oie beat EW/Brown 2-1 in the final
• 2.5 men - NWW/Li won the round-robin 3-0
• 3.0 women - NWW/Perret beat NOR/Lee 2-2 on the games tie-breaker (4) in the final
• 3.0 men - NWW/Wang beat NWW/Khullar 3-1 in the final
• 3.5 women - NOR/Cowling beat NWW/Holland 3-1 in the final
• 3.5 men - NOR/Larsen beat NWW/Agrawal 2-2 on the sets tie-breaker (1) in the final
• 4.0 women - Southern Oregon/Kelly beat NOR/Huynh 3-1 in the final
• 4.0 men - NWW/Sharma beat NWW/Robey 3-1 in the final
• 4.5 women - NWW/Corsano beat NWW/Lao 2-2 on the sets tie-breaker (1) in the final
• 4.5 men - NOR/Borosky beat NOR/McGarity 2-2 on the games tie-breaker (3) in the final

Here NWW took 5 of the 10.

And yes, our section still uses 1 singles and 3 doubles for 40 & Over so we have to deal with the 2-2 ties.  And some of the 3-1 wins were exceedingly close with match tie-breaks being two of the wins where either going the other way would have reversed the result with the 2-2 tie going to the other team on the games tie-breaker.  Very close!

And there are more Sectionals coming up with Mixed 40 & Over and Mixed 55 & Over in just over three weeks.

Congratulations to all that played, competed, and won!

Unflighted Round Robin - SoCal is at it again in 2024

The USTA began using the unflighted round-robin format for Nationals quite a few years ago now, and a number of sections began using it for Sectionals along the way.  Unfortunately, it has been used inappropriately in some cases leading to situations where undefeated teams were left out of advancing on to the semis or finals.

It has even happened at Nationals, twice in fact, as while the use of the format there has a low chance of it happening, it is possible.

It has happened in NorCal, and I believe they have changed their format to avoid the issue.

The Southern California section has flirted with disaster in the past, more than once, as they insist on having on the order of 18 teams in a flight use the format with just three matches played, a recipe for disaster.  Well, they continue to do it in 2024.

SoCal has a varying number of teams in the one large flight and then they generally have them play three matches with the top-4 in the standings advancing on to the semis.  If there are enough teams, generally around 14 or more, it is not only impossible to have a schedule guaranteed to avoid more than four undefeated teams, but the chances of it happening are real.

Last weekend they had:

• 40 & Over 3.5 women - 18 teams, a real chance of five undefeated teams, but some upsets only had three.  Still, seven teams tied at 2-1 for the questionable tie-breakers to decide.
• 40 & Over 4.5 women - 12 teams and they did three flights which is sensible, although you then are picking one second place team to advance.

This weekend they have:

• 40 & Over 3.0 women - 14 teams, not a big chance but it could happen.
• 40 & Over 4.0 women - 18 teams again, a real chance it could happen.

I understand that to get to 18 teams, the section may have even awarded wildcards to teams that didn't win their area or flight.  If so, exacerbating the problem just to give wildcards also seems questionable.  No wildcards and 16 teams reduces the risk with unflighted round-robin, or with 16 teams you can have four flights of four.

I'm not sure why SoCal keeps doing this, it will bite them at some point.

Pacific Northwest Local Playoff Survey - Change the format?

A few weeks ago, the league coordinators in the Northern Oregon (Portland) and Northwest Washington (Seattle) areas sent out a survey on the playoff format used for local playoffs.

This is a topic because 4 years ago the playoff format was changed from a traditional single elimination draw to having a "first place" draw and "second place" draw where the first place draw final loser got a second chance of advancing to Sectionals by playing the second place draw winner to determine the wildcard.

Note: The teams advancing to local playoffs are the top-2 teams in each sub-flight, thus the first and second place teams noted.

The reason this was done is because both areas send two teams to Sectionals and in the prior traditional single elimination format, both teams that make the final know they are going to Sectionals making the final somewhat meaningless.  In an effort to make the matches all have meaning, the new format was introduced.

Some weren't fond of the format and apparently enough gave feedback to the coordinators that a survey with three options was offered to get feedback.  The survey is now closed, but the results and decision have not been published yet.  Still, I thought it would be useful to look at the options and do some analysis of them.

The survey had a link to a description of the options so take a look at that for all the details.  But a summary of the options is:

• Option A - Current format, first place teams draw, winner goes to sectionals, loser plays winner of second place teams draw for wildcard
• Option B - Alternate multi-draw format where just top-two (in the example) or four teams (presumably if applicable) go into the first place teams draw to avoid having byes to deal with, but otherwise the same as option A.
• Option C - Traditional single elimination draw as it used to be.

I thought it would be useful to do some analysis to see what the real (dis)advantage was for each team.

The issue with option A is that when there aren't two (or four) first place teams, both draws end up having team(s) that get a bye, e.g. in a three sub-flight situation there are three first place teams (and three second place teams) each draw has one team with a bye which is perhaps not equitable as two first place teams have to play a first match while the highest seeded second place team gets a bye.  Here is an example draw.

So, would you rather be the #2 or #3 seeds (2nd or 3rd first place team) having to play a first place team and win to stay in it, or the #4 seed (1st second place team) with a bye and getting to play the winner of two second place teams?

I created a simulation with the draw scenarios, and as a baseline first said all the teams were equal and there was a 50% chance of any team winning head to head.  When this is done, the chances of advancing to Sectionals was:

• #1 seed - 75%
• #2 and #3 seeds - 37.5%
• #4 seed - 25%
• #5 and #6 seeds - 12.5%

So it is better to be the #2 or #3 seeds simply because if you win the first match, you do get the second chance at advancing if you lose the first place final.  But it is somewhat close to the #4 seed getting the bye.  And there is a clear advantage to being the #1 seed.

But if the three sub-flights aren't really equal (they never are) and the #4 seed is actually a very strong team and just happened to be beat by another really strong team in their flight to be in second place, and the #3 seed came from a weak flight where the #3 team isn't that strong, a reasonable scenario plays out as:

• #1 seed - 79.9%
• #2 seed - 46.1%
• #3 seed - 28.5%
• #4 seed - 29.7%
• #5 seed - 7.9%
• #6 seed - 7.9%

Here the #4 seed has a slightly better chance than the #3 seed.

The other perhaps inequitable aspect of this format is that the #1 seed could be #1 simply because they had a weaker flight compared to the #2 seed so has a better standings record, but they get a huge advantage and can even lose their first match and not be eliminated.  Every other team has to win their first match.  This doesn't seem quite fair.

Option B aims to address this last point by putting the #1 and #2 seed on equal footing so just one team doesn't have the huge advantage.  This is how that looks.

This avoids any byes which seems like a good thing, but it is a big disadvantage to be the #3 seed.  This is a first place team and perhaps is the #3 seed simply because they were in the toughest flight.  But they will be required to win three in a row despite being a first place team, while the other two first place teams get a huge advantage of only having to win one match and not being out of it if they lose their first match.

Here is the equal chance of each team winning advance percentages:

• 1st and 2nd seeds - 75%
• 3rd thru 6th seeds - 12.5%

This is a huge difference and advantage to being the top-2 seeds.  To me that seems too extreme, particularly for the #3 seed to be shunted into a draw with no built-in advantage over a bunch of second  place teams, one of which the #3 seed had to play and probably beat in their sub-flight already.

Last, option C is a traditional single elimination draw with byes for the top-2 seeds, but no second chance if they lose.  This is what it looks like:

Here is how the advance percentages play out with an equal chance of each team winning a match.

• 1st and 2nd seeds - 50%
• 3rd thru 6th seeds - 25%

Being a top-2 seed has a built-in advantage, but it is not nearly as big as for option B.  This seems more equitable to me and doesn't penalize the #3 seed nearly as much.

Of course option C has the original issue (if you consider it one) of the final not having any impact on advancing.  It only decides who the local champion is, and ensures the winner won't be in the flight at Sectionals with the other main area winner, i.e. the Sectionals flights always have the Seattle winner in a flight with the 2nd place Portland team, and Portland winner in a flight with the Seattle 2nd place team.

I think there are two ways to address this issue.

First, just accept it doesn't have much meaning and play it anyway, or perhaps don't even play the match which saves having to schedule the finals which reduces the demand for courts (a good thing for facilities).  If it isn't played, flip a coin to determine Sectionals flights.

Second, create more incentive to win the final.  It could be monetary, something like waiving the team fee for local playoffs for the winner, or a more significant trophy for being the winner, or be creative coming up with something else.

What do you think?  What would you, or did you vote for and why?

I voted for option C, and while not asked, would advocate creating more incentive to win to make the final meaningful.

2024 Seattle Area 40 & Over Playoffs - Any 4-court 2-2 ties?

The past two weekends saw the Seattle area 40 & Over local playoffs take place.  While the National format for 40 & Over has gone back to a 5-court format (1 singles and 4 doubles), the Pacific Northwest Section is sticking with the prior 4-court format for this year at least.

That means we continue to live with the possibility of 2-2 ties, and with playoffs, important matches that decide who will advance are being decided by the tie-breakers.  How many did we have the past few weekends?

There were a total of 46 team matches played over the two weekends, and of those, 14 (30%) were tied on courts.  Of those 14, five (36%) were tied on sets.

Taking a look at those five:

• Women's 3.0 - Each team won a match in straights and a match in a super tie-break.  There was a single game difference, a 6-2 vs a 6-3 set.  Had both of those been 6-3, it would have gone to the court 1 doubles winner and the team win would have swapped.
• Women's 3.0 - All courts in straights, two for each team, singles won 6-1,6-1 which resulted in a 6 game difference.
• Women's 4.0 - All courts in straights, two for each team, one team (A) had a 6-1 set, the other (B) had a 6-0 set, but the 6-0 set wasn't enough for team B as they had a 7-6 set vs team A having a 6-3 set to counter it, one game better for team A and the win.  Had team B won one more game, it would have gone to the court 1 doubles winner and team B would have won.
• Women's 4.0 - Each team won a match in straights and a match in a super tie-break.  Singles was won 6-1,6-1 by one team and that contributed to a three game difference giving them the win and a spot at Sectionals.
• Men's 4.0 - Each team won a match in straights and a match in a super tie-break.  Team A had an advantage in the straight set comparison being a game better, but team B won a 6-0 set and a 6-1 set to contribute to a four game difference and the team win.  This match decided the wildcard winner and a spot at Sectionals.

Some very close matches, two were just one game away from the result being reversed.  And two of these 2-2 ties were for a spot to advance to Sectionals.

Sectionals will continue to use the 4-court format, we'll see how things go there.

Seattle area teams sweep PNW 2023 18 & Over Sectionals

The 18 & Over Sectionals for Pacific Northwest were held this weekend, and remarkably the Seattle area teams (Northwest Washington) pulled of the clean sweep and in fact in most cases both finalists were from Seattle.

The 2.5 women saw two Seattle teams make the final, but WSC did it with a 2-1 record winning the tie-breaker over a Portland team at 2-1, and Mercer Island won the final 2-1 to punch their ticket to Nationals.

The 2.5 men had just four teams so just played round-robin and Seattle teams took first and second, ETC ahead of Columbia Silver Lake.  There is no Nationals at this level however, so just a Sectionals title.

The 3.0 women found Seattle teams ETC and Mercer Island in the final, each winning their flights with 3-0 records, and ETC took the title with a 4-1 win.

The 3.0 men also had Seattle teams in the final with TCSP and ETC meeting up having both gone 3-0, and TCSP took the 3-2 win to be heading to Nationals.

The 3.5 women had the first non-Seattle team in a final with Portland's MAC facing off against AYTC from Seattle, and AYTC won 5-0.

The 3.5 men was back to two Seattle teams with Forest Crest winning over Mill Creek 3-2 in the final.

The 4.0 women saw Southwest Washington (Tacoma/Olympia) make an appearance in a final facing off against AYTC from Seattle, and AYTC won 3-2.

The 4.0 men found two Seattle teams in the final, RBW who went 2-1 in their flight against BETC who went 3-0, and RBW came out on top with a 4-1 win.

The 4.5 women had Southern Oregon make a finals showing facing off against NTC from Seattle, and NTC won 4-1.

The 4.5 men had two Seattle teams play in the final with WSC taking the title over AYTC.

For the 5.0 women, there was just one flight and round-robin play where AYTC from Seattle won over SHC from Portland.

Last, the 5.0 men was also round-robin and had perhaps the most competitive event with Mercer Island, the sole representative from Seattle vs three from Portland, being tied with THPRD from Portland tying at 2-1 and 5-4 on courts with the other two Portland teams at 1-2 and 4-5 on courts.  But Mercer Island won the head to head match with THPRD and took the title.

Congratulations to all the winners.  Good luck at Nationals!

How did 2023 Florida 18 & Over Sectionals play out?

I wrote Friday about a potential issue with the use of the unflighted round-robin format at 18 & Over Florida Sectionals, but then heard they would be adding a final after all, but they didn't add the final to TennisLink until late Sunday so to outside observers there was some drama.

It turns out the drama was not because round-robin play finished with two undefeated teams (which was possible and the brewing issue), but because three teams finished 3-1.  Had they not introduced a final between the top two teams, they would have been picking a winner to go to Nationals where three teams were tied and two of them hadn't even played each other.

Here are the standings at the end of round-robin play:

• Miami - 3-1 / 14-6
• Hills - 3-1 / 12-8
• Broward - 3-1 / 11-9

Broward had beaten Miami 3-2, but then Hills beat Broward 3-2, but Hills lost to Orange 3-2 (who finished 5th of 7 teams at 2-2 / 9-11).  Miami and Hills did not play.

Had they just taken the top team in the standings, Miami would have advanced never having to play Hills.  But even with the final, you have to pick two of these teams and Broward got left out despite beating the top team in the standings.  But taking the top two teams to a final still solves the major problem.

In the final, Hills came out on top winning 3-2, so a very close competition, Hill ultimately beating both of the other two top teams to punch their ticket to Nationals.

I'm glad it all worked out in the end, congratulations to Hills!

Update: Unflighted Round-Robin may work out ok at Florida Sectionals

I just wrote about what appeared to be a potential unflighted round-robin issue at Florida Sectionals, but a reader on Facebook said a team dropped out late causing the change from two flights to unflighted seven teams and there is a final planned.  I guess it just doesn't show up on TennisLink yet so the fears may be unfounded.

I did think it would be interesting to visually see the schedule, so here it is.

If indeed there is a final, it could be the nice resolution to two undefeated teams, but it is perhaps more likely that it will be a rematch of a round-robin match.  That is the possibility with this format and one can argue it is good or bad.

On the good side, it means a team with a tough schedule that loses early can still have a chance to advance.  This keeps some drama and excitement, and perhaps keeps the teams more engaged through the end of the event.

On the bad side, it means a team could have to beat the same opponent twice to win the event.  If there are two top teams and they play in round-robin, pulling out the stops to win that match may just mean you get to play them again in the semis or final.  That can lead to the round-robin match perhaps being meaningless, especially if it is the last one and the teams know already they will both advance.

In general, I think unflighted round-robin is better than the most alternatives, as long as it is implemented correctly.  Hopefully there is a final for the 4.5 men this weekend.

USTA Florida may be botching the unflighted round-robin format once again! (false alarm, phew)

The unflighted round-robin format was introduced by USTA National a number of years ago for use at Nationals so that all teams could play four matches and the format would be consistent regardless of the number of sections that sent teams.  Some sections have adopted the format for section or even district championships, some smartly, and some not so smartly.

A few of the gaffes include NorCal having too many teams (22) and too few matches (3) leading to undefeated teams not advancing, SoCal doing something similar, and Florida using a mindless implementation of it (missing the "random" part) also leading to two undefeated teams being sent home.

It appears Florida may be at it again, this time having the 18 & Over Sectionals with what appears to be some flawed unflighted round-robin set ups.

Specifically, the 4.5 men this weekend appears to have seven teams all playing four matches, so every team doesn't play every other team, and they are only taking the top team as the Sectionals winner!  If every team doesn't play all the others, obviously two teams could go undefeated, and if you only take one team as the winner ... duh?

Hopefully what I'm seeing on TennisLink is wrong, but for every other flight going on this weekend, it shows flights/round-robins and then a finals to be played, but for the 4.5 men there is just the round-robin with no final.

If they do indeed take just the top team in the standings as the winner, they may luck out as the top teams do play each other.  Still, it is possible, and using such a format is just plain dumb.

I also see the 2.5 women with 10 teams and no final, but I don't think that event is this weekend so perhaps TennisLink just isn't fully populated.  Similarly the 4.0 men and women don't show finals, hopefully those get fixed.

Updated: I've been told there is indeed a final between the top-2 teams that just hasn't been added to TennisLink yet.  Apparently there was a late withdrawal and change to seven teams and unflighted.  Phew!  See this update.

Day one update on Florida Mixed Sectionals - Still a great chance of an undefeated team being sent home

I wrote yesterday about the potential for an unflighted round-robin fiasco at Florida Mixed Sectionals, and then added a diagram showing the issue this morning.  After day one, the worst case scenario has already been averted, but we aren't out of the woods yet.

In today's matches in the 9.0 flight, each of Miami, Hills, Sarasota, and Broward all won, but Alachua lost 2-1 to Orange when there was an upset on one court.  So there are four 2-0 teams, and none of them play each other tomorrow.  But we won't have five 4-0 teams.

Here again is the visual description of the schedule.

So you can see the four 2-0 teams are all in the bottom row (the row I said was the "good" pod) and none of them play each other.

My simulation now says there is a 16% chance all four teams go 2-0 tomorrow and finish 4-0, and there is a 39% chance three teams do so, together that means there is a 55% chance three or more teams finish 4-0 and one of them doesn't advance and is sent home.

Now, there is a 45% chance it doesn't happen as well, but that is lower than it was at the start of the event.

In a way, I hope it doesn't happen as it really wouldn't be fair to the teams that are sent home.  But then I'm hoping teams lose which seems wrong.

On the other hand, if it does happen it will help highlight the issues with the format and hopefully educate folks on when not to use it, or how to use it correctly.

A diagram illustrating the unflighted round-robin problem at Florida 18 & Over Mixed Sectionals

I wrote yesterday about the possibility of there being five undefeated teams for two advancing spots at this weekend's Florida 18 & Over Mixed Sectionals in the 9.0 flight.

I think it was pretty clear the issue, that having two pods play matches against other pods but not within the pod is a recipe for disaster.  But I've created a diagram to explicitly show it.

You can see there are clearly two groups of five teams that play against the other five, but not each other.

While this is a simple format to create, it clearly won't select the top two teams very well.  Since none of the top group or bottom group play each other, it is possible for all the teams in one group or the other to end up 4-0, and thus my simulation saying that is possible.

Now, if there are strong teams in both pods, the chances of it occurring may not be that large, but if you have the strong teams all in one pod, it can be very likely to happen.

In this case, the top row has, by my ratings, four of the bottom five rated teams while the bottom row has four of the top five rated teams.  Thus the fairly high likelihood that three or more teams finish 4-0 and one or more of them get left out.

I don't know if someone at Florida came up with this way of doing "random" opponents, or if this was what National advised, but it clearly isn't the best way to do things.

Another unflighted round-robin disaster in the making at Florida Mixed Sectionals

A reader gave me a heads up (thanks!) about the Florida 18 & Over Mixed Sectionals this weekend, specifically that one of the flights has the "random" round-robin format perhaps not so random.

In the 9.0 flight there are 10 teams and the teams are playing four matches each.  There should be no problem with this.  USTA League Nationals have 17 teams and the play four matches, and while there is a chance that five (or more) teams could finish undefeated, the chance is usually small, so having just 10 teams there should be no issue right?

Well, Florida is as I understand it taking just the top-2 teams while Nationals takes the top-4 teams.  But worse, if you botch the random opponent assignments, things can go really bad.  And it appears that may be the case for the 9.0 flight this weekend.

I've run the event through my simulation there astoundingly there is a chance that five teams could finish undefeated.  At Nationals with 17 teams the chances of five undefeated teams are always non-zero, but usually less than 1%.  For this Florida Sectionals with just 10 teams, the chance of five undefeated is over 1%.  Since they are taking the top-2 to the final, this means it is possible that three undefeated teams could be sent home!

Ok, but it is just over 1%, that is unlikely, what is the big deal?

Well, the chances of four undefeated teams is 9% and three is 25%!  That means there is a 35% chance that at least one undefeated team is sent home without a chance to advance to Nationals.

How can this happen?  While it is possible a truly random schedule would result in this, it would seem that somehow the stronger teams don't play each other, but each one plays all of the weaker teams.  For example, if you had the five strongest teams in one "pod" and the five weaker teams in another, you could create a schedule where each of the teams from the strong pod play four teams in the weak pod but never play each other.  I have no idea if this is what was done or not, but if so, someone seriously dropped the ball as that is a worst case scenario for this to happen.  If there is any kind of disparity between the stronger/weaker teams, there is a real chance the strong pod all goes undefeated.

This sort of thing has happened before.  Southern Cal Sectionals earlier this year had a 10 team flight playing just three matches and three teams finished undefeated and only the top-2 advanced.  And a few years ago Northern Cal Sectionals had 22 teams only playing three matches and while they took the top-4 to semis, there were five undefeated teams.  I'm pretty sure it has happened elsewhere too.

This is a call out to National to educate the sections on how to properly do unflighted round-robin.  And this is also a call out to the sections to think about what you are doing the vet the schedule that is spit out of whatever random selection it is doing.  If it doesn't make sense, do it over.

An undefeated team does not advance at SoCal 18 & Over Sectionals

A couple weeks ago I wrote about the Southern Cal 18 & Over Sectionals and some scenarios where the use of the un-flighted round-robin format was liable to cause some issues.  Specifically, the use of it with too many teams and/or not enough matches can lead to more teams being undefeated than there are to advance to the semis/final.

I had focused on the 3.5 women, where going into the last match it was possible for six teams to be undefeated and only four would advance.  But the USTA was bailed out by two of the teams losing so it was just four undefeated teams.

What I failed to highlight sufficiently was the 4.5 women where there were only 10 teams, but for this flight they only played three matches and just the top-2 advanced.  My simulation said there was an 18% chance of three undefeated teams, and indeed it did happen.

Here were the standings:

• SD Peninsula TC - 3-0 / 12-3
• SD Barnes TC - 3-0 / 11-4
• SFV Let's Play - 3-0 / 10-5

Note that the team that finished third did, by my ratings, have a tougher schedule than the first place team.  So SFV goes to Sectionals and doesn't lose a match, playing a reasonably hard schedule, and doesn't get to advance.  Meanwhile, the team that finished second had the easiest schedule.

This doesn't seem terribly fair.  What do you think?

2021 Southern Combo Sectionals are this weekend - Get a simulation report!

While USTA League Nationals are over, and ratings are due out in days, USTA League playoffs continue, and in the Southern section is holding it's Combo League Sectionals this weekend.

More and more sections are adopting the unflighted round-robin format and it appears it is being used for Combo Sectionals, which makes it fun for me as that is when my simulation reports are useful and give an idea how balanced the schedules are and who is most likely to advance to the semis.

I've already done one simulation report for one of the levels at the event, if you are interested in getting one yourself, let me know!

Wanting to follow Northwest Washington (Seattle) 40 & Over playoffs? Don't use TennisLink!

The saga of the USTA's technology challenges as it relates to leagues and tournaments seems to be continuing.

Local playoffs for the 40 & Over league in Seattle are going on this weekend, and I went to TennisLink to see how some friends had done in the matches.  Let's ignore for now that TennisLink is terrible as trying to follow along with local playoffs like this as there is no central place to see the schedule or get to draws, you more or less have to find a player or team and then find their championships and navigate to the draw where you can see only that draw.  Want to see other draws or NTRP levels?  Prepare to search and navigate a bunch more.  But I said I'd ignore that for now, so moving on.

I found the draw I was after but no score had been recorded yet.  But my wife got a text from a spectator saying our friend's team won and I refreshed the draw and indeed I saw the match was now recorded ... except the draw said the other team won!

Confused, I clicked on the match, and court by court our friend's team had won 3 courts to 1, but going back to the draw, it showed the other team winning 3-1.

Thinking this was perhaps a TennisLink web-site issue, I went to the iPhone app but it too showed a draw with the other team winning and advancing.

Clearly something is amiss with TennisLink, perhaps the issues in the new Serve Tennis/Play Tennis site have found their way into TennisLink, and it turns out our League Coordinator knows, as she is using a Google Docs spreadsheet to keep track of playoffs and pointing folks to it!  And it is even linked to from the Northwest Washington page on USTA.com.

Kudos to Jill for recognizing the issue and coming up with a solution, but it is sad she has to do that.  She is effectively having to do double work to enter results in the spreadsheet and eventually go get them in TennisLink.

But going back to it being hard to follow events like this, it is doubly bad when TennisLink is messing up as I don't think it is well known that a Google Docs spreadsheet is being used so fans don't know to look there and may look at TennisLink and get incorrect information it appears.

So, if you are trying to follow playoffs this weekend, don't head to TennisLink, but instead go here and click on the 2021 A40 Playoffs sheet where you can see a much nicer than TennisLink schedule for the whole event in one place and all the results.