Postings

Posted on February 12, 2001 at 22:42:20

After witnessing the dearth of funds that are thrown at junior tennis programs it is about time that all the adults get together and demand their fair share of the pie. A classic example would be our local tennis USTA sponsored asssociation that is supposed to represent all the tennis players in our area. This year, at $10 per person, the adults will contribute approximately $50,000 to the general operating fund. Over 80 per cent of that total will then go toward junior programs, special teams and coaches to send them to National junior team tournaments and to defray their individual travel expenses when they go to individual tournaments. But if the adults want to share in the bounty, for a tournament or travel, they are put off as if they are asking for a child's last Happy Meal. The resounding response is that the juniors are going to be the future of tennis and they will save the local clubs in the future due to their patronage. In the fifteen years that I have been watching this charade I can think of maybe two dozen members now in their twenties or thirties that were recipients of this association largesse over the years. The rest of the juniors quit playing tennis the moment they hit 18 or had to start paying for their court time. Lets use the money for adult programs and rewards; since they are the ones paying the bills.

In the March 16, 2001 issue of the Columbus Dispatch was a big article on tennis (by Lisa Dillman of the LA Times). While it mentioned growth in the sport, most of the article was about the ATP Tour's marketing firm (ISL) wanting out of their deal because they over-extended worldwide. It also focused on the lack of endorsement opportunities for the tennis stars but briefly mentioned that other sports were down in terms of player endorsements too. It seems that the author had that anti-tennis mentality going in and by focusing on anything negative, she reinforced that notion to the general public. What if Dillman had focused on the WTA Tour instead?

In the most recent meeting with USTA officials, the captains meeting for the USTA Adult Leagues, it was announced that at the State and Sectional level this year there will be no more third sets. In lieu of playing a third set, when the match is tied at one set each, we will now be forced to endure that unwanted bastard of all times, the match tie-breaker. No longer do you have to be in shape or have great stamina, the match tie-break will set you free instead of playing a third set. First one to 10 points, with a margin of two, is the winner. Is this a crock of bovine excrement or what? I couldn't belive it last year when I saw the results in the paper of the Harvey Beahm's US Amateur Hardcourts that were at Ohio State in July, 2000. They were told it was an experimental program but were forced to use it none the less. Now it is an official policy of the USTA. Does this mean that the US Open will stop at three sets in the men's division and they will play 2 match tie-breaks instead of playing the match out. How many great comebacks have we seen in five set matches; Conners in 1991, Agassi and Sampras in many of their matches. Why are we not granted the same chance to make a grab for immortality? Time to show some outrage. Email the USTA, the Midwest section, and all the local bureaucrats and give them hell. I will be back on with all their email addresses shortly. This is but one of the few things the people in the ivory towers in New York have in store for us.

In Reply to: USTA cretins forcing unwanted changes posted by Arnie Jones on January 12, 2002 at 23:08:53:

I totally agree Arnie, I'm sorry I didn't make it to that meeting, I'm sure I'd have a found a few choice words to share. It takes all the fun out of a good tennis match. Bunch of honkey bureaucratic bastards ! ! ! Oh, by the way, I'm not a fan of the rating committee either. But that's a whole different thing and I can't really say it's not fair hehehe> let's go everyone, hop on board

Title IX Strikes Again!

Now you have got me shaking my head. This may take a while, but I will relate it back to the travesty of BGSU, and Miami among others, dropping their men's tennis. For my full commentary, follow this link: http://www.tennisfax.com/comment.htm

Just got word, and just checked on the website, that the USTA has shafted us again. They raised the yearly dues $10, from $25 to $35 without telling anybody. Hopefully all you guys had signed up for long term memberships in the past few years, and realized the savings. Not that $10 is going to push anyone into receivership, but USTA upper management really has their head up their ass. It is the principle of the whole thing. Are we getting 40% better service from the USTA for the 40% increase in dues. Hell no. From my perspective we should be getting a rebate. They sit there in their big offices in New York and plan the next "national executive meetings" in Cancun or The Bahamas, where the national fat cat committees will have "great meetings" with "meaningful discussions" always described as "productive". Yet nothing ever changes except dues increases and another group of rich guys that will get all that free wine and cheese in the private USTA boxes at the US Open. All expenses paid by the USTA. And the funny thing is they can't figure out why all we country bumpkins, that are picking up the tab, are upset with their miserable performance. Classic example - the bastardized match tie breaker in place of the third set at District, State, Sectional and National Championships. All because they are too lazy to run a competitive championship; "it is too hard on the administrators and volunteers". Then hire more. Teams work for six months to get to the Districts and then get shafted in a ten minute replacement set. Did anyone ask us? Hell no. We are the ones competing. The administrators just want to get back to their hotel suite, pop some more brie, swill some vino and call in their report, that matches were "productive" and "communication was good." Anybody ready to force some change? Throw the bums out? Any one had enough yet?

Re: Screwed by the USTA again

Hey man sign me up, when do we start two-a-days to start training for the great battle! I watched a 85 and over tournament at Oglebay a year ago and they did not even play a third set tiebreaker!

The USTA has pulled the wool over the eyes of the USTA Adult League tennis populace and shows no signs of shame or remorse whatsoever. Their supposed brain storm is the match tie break, a bastard child of demonic proportions if there ever was one. And the entire reason for it's existence is to make life easier for the tournament administrators and upper level management. The poor little things are so overworked that they need to cut down on the time that they have to spend sitting behind the desk.

Dave Schoebel, our resident version of the devil incarnate and moving force behind this travesty, has been trying to sell this fecund program for years, claiming that it will make tennis more exciting. What balderdash and folderol. Mr. Schoebel managed to slide the program in the side door, selling it to the administrators and management while hoping that no one, especially not the players for goodness sake, would notice. Mr. Schoebel must think that everyone in the United States is an idiot or brain dead. Here we have another typical hidden rules change made by people that don't even participate in the Adult League program, except to push pencils.

This bastardized version of tennis called the "match tie break", substitutes a tiebreaker, first to win 10 points by 2, in place of a full third set if the match is tied at one set each. Mr. Schoebels erroneous assumptions that this would make people happy could not be farther from the truth. He further assumes, through some convoluted logic, that by shortening matches in full competitive combat, ready to enter the third set, that this will "make tennis better". How did this guy ever get this job?

To lay Mr. Schoebels arguments bare and expose him for the dufus that he is, let us refute the meager sophistry he usually expouses to justify this aberration of tennis tradition. The following points are succinct.

1. The match tiebreak cheapens the sport of tennis. Mr. Schoebel claims in his infamous memo on the USTA website from 4 years ago, a copy of which I still have taped to my wall, "Imagine how exciting it will be to replace the third set with a 10 point match tiebreaker". He must be brain dead or a non competitor. Two opponents or teams that have fought for up to two hours, to the point to where a third set is required, just don't want the match settled on one fluke point. The first one to 10 points is usually barely three games, and one lucky point can decide a match. My personal experience from last year is where both teams hold serve to get to 7-7 in the match tiebreaker, and a let cord winner gives one team a break point and they serve out the match. That is ridiculous. It violates the basic tenet of fairness and sportsmanship in tennis. In the match just described, after holding serve and equally trading points back and forth, we would have still been on the fourth deuce in the first game. Yes, it may have gone on for 45 more minutes. So what. The match would have been decided on the field of battle, fairly and with honor, not with one fluke point. If the desk people don't want to wait another half hour, get another job.

2. It removes toughness, the will to prevail, stamina, the "never give up" spirit and determination from the game. It is almost un-American. Why be in really good shape any more? I was just watching a new teaching video from a resort teaching pro who was giving match strategy advice to a group of players, "If you lose the first set, hang on and try to win the second, because then you can luck out and win the match tie break and the match. It's only 10 points and even if you are tired you can hang on for that. You don't have to play a whole third set." I couldn't believe it. The match tie break takes the game away form the players in really good shape and rewards marginal players. Not that I am a purist, but this alone should make the founding players of tennis spin in their grave.

I agree with Arnie.

It's a joke...a complete joke. I've only been playing since April of this year. We pay our money for tournaments and, darn it, I expect to play the complete match. Perhaps the USGA will stop a golf match at the 12th hole--it would make about as much sense. I say that when you walk out to the court with your opponents, ask for an agreement up front that if you tie sets you will ignore the silly match tiebreak and play a third set. The USTA seems to be nothing more than a marketing/social engineering organization. Anything to save themselves $$ and time; and at the expense of the payer's experience.