Thursday, August 19, 2010

USTA Participation

I apologize to Cap't Fantastic for posting right after his post, but he made me wonder about USTA Participation numbers and what the trends were for Men's tennis after the massive bump ups. I will attempt to use as little space as possible to keep the 4.0 thread inside the page fold. Spring League measured only.

39 comments:

  1. So participation dropped by over 200 players from 2009 to 2010. Not suprising given how shady and unethical league play has become.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have been editing this back and forth, to get my stupid graph right in this blog, so I apologize if you read it wrong previous poster (and my graph is still not great), but my raise does not depend on how great this thing looks...but actually participation has gone up every single year in Dallas with 2009 being the biggest jump. 2010 there was an ever so small increase from prior year. I did not have time to grab 2007 data, but it would be interesting to see how big of a jump that was upwards. It appears that tennis is catching on. This measures Dallas only, but I would assume the other cities are the same?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I wonder why the upward trend? Is it through promotions by USTA? Is it because people are looking for less expensive activities to play? Is it because of "how shady and unethical league play has become?"

    That reminds me of my favorite stats class lecture many many moons ago.

    There is a 100% correlation between the number of new churches built and alcohol sales in a city.

    It just happens to be a correlation only, but not a dependent correlation. The real answer is an increase in city population causes both new churches to be built and alcohol sales to increase. So, correlations in trends does not mean that one has anything to do with the other.

    I don't know what the answer is, but I too was surprised by the amount of participation on 2010 v 2009 considering the amount of people upset with the bump ups.

    I am beginning to think that USTA was correct to move everyone up, because if we have had that much new participation, then we have to have some place for these new players to move without getting crushed our outclassed at the next stage upwards.

    We all know the Prather's, the Molina's and several others were they were great at one level, and not even competitive at the next. (assuming that they tried somewhere along the way)

    Maybe some of these moves they made will allow for people to continue to be able to enjoy themselves while still being somewhat competitive at the next level instead of taking a complete beat down one level up.

    So, was the USTA move justified? After a year is it working out okay and not as horrible as people thought it was going to be?

    ReplyDelete
  5. 1322 is the 2007 number

    ReplyDelete
  6. Now to see the move from 4.5 to 5.0 and an improvement in the 5.0 league format to encourage participation.....

    great work BMO! Any idea how this looks in Houston & San Antonio?

    ReplyDelete
  7. No, I was kinda hoping that H-Town Hacker would come on here and check things out for his city.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This is a most interesting topic. I do not believe the change is statistically significant. I don't think one can conclude anything by the slight increase. Looking at it, the 4.0 and 4.5 ranks increased some. But all other levels decreased. So more players coming into the system does not seem to hold. I also think another year or two analysis will be needed to really know the effect. All those last year bump ups that spent a year taking big beat downs may decide to opt out this year. Or maybe not.

    It would also be very interesting to know the tournament participation levels across years. My impression is this may be way down. But that is anecdotal and the thought of myself doing the actual research makes me want to take a nap instead. But whereas recent bump ups may be willing to drive across town to play a league match where they take a beat down, I'm not sure they were as willing to drive to another city to play a one and done tournament.

    Only one thing is certain and constant. The USTA rating system sucks!!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think the blog helped to increase USTA tennis population. It keeps people's interest just a little more (when its not people just being shitty or petty). I would bet that USTA particpation has not increased in other cities as much as this city.

    ReplyDelete
  10. My impression is that there are a lot of weekend warriors that are now playing tennis rather than other sports in their leisure time. Just based on how difficult it is to get an early morning court on the weekends at some of the public facilities.

    ReplyDelete
  11. League play is up

    ReplyDelete
  12. Tennis and USTA membership is up across North America.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "I think the blog helped to increase USTA tennis population"

    WTF???

    The blog is mostly people complaining about sandbaggers, tankers, cheaters and general whining about getting beat. "Anyone who beats me must have cheated."

    I suspect this has little or no impact on participation levels.

    ReplyDelete
  14. 4.0 went up by about the same amount 3.5 went down. There may be some correlation there.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Mike Kelly assumed the identities of more than 1200 unsuspecting people and signed up for USTA leagues to inflate these statistics.

    ReplyDelete
  16. what are the statistics on the
    a. tankers
    b. cheaters
    c. whiners
    d. disinterested

    ReplyDelete
  17. Kelly was flagged at sectionals, look for a loss sometime soon...maybe as quick as this weekend if his 8.0 mixed team has it wrapped up....

    ReplyDelete
  18. Let me put this to rest before I am lit up on this blog up for tanking, disinterest, dropping points, too old and whatever because I know its coming. I was outplayed today, much to the delight of most in attendance (can't say I blame them). My mixed partner Elizabeth was superb all weekend in mixed playoffs and I could not have asked for more. She was very solid. I, however, was outplayed today by Jean N. and his partner Laura E. and they deserved the win. Congrats to those two and please DO NOT do an injustice to them on this blog or elsewhere or the High Point team by saying I "let them win" as they played well all weekend and were very deserving of their accomplishments.

    Mike Kelly

    ReplyDelete
  19. ok, you never hit at the woman and failed to hit that other gear because you wanted to win? knowing you had the playoffs basically wrapped up...hmmmmm

    ReplyDelete
  20. Mike - for the record, care to comment on whether you tanked any of those 5.0 matches over the last couple of years?

    ReplyDelete
  21. Let's talk about something besides Mike Kelly. Thanks. That issue is warn out.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Mike, just ignore the blog and the talk about you will go to someone else.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Sorry, if Mike decides to come on here and pick and choose which losses of his he wants to defend, he opens himself up to the criticism.

    ReplyDelete
  24. just when the blog had died down about kelly...then he comments himself. doesn't make sense that he appears now. his 8.0 mixed partner must really be sensitive about the loss???? solid-right....touched a nerve??
    mike- why even bring it up? the majority on here don't even know or care there is mixed??

    ReplyDelete
  25. It is obvious some dilusional mentally challenged Ass is making all of these posts himself about Kelly. It is no longer entertaining and you are like the poster who bantered amongst himself about Getz.

    GET A LIFE !!!!

    You ruin the blog for everyone.

    Klamecki - can you get rid of this A-hole??

    ReplyDelete
  26. Getz did call bad lines. Thats a fact.

    ReplyDelete
  27. no need to "defend" your 8.0 partner - we know in 8.0 you have 90% of the court

    ReplyDelete
  28. Speaking about 8.0 mixed playoffs this past weekend, did anybody else notice the blatant "hooking" that was going on in some of those matches! Wow, some people really have some gall to make some of those line calls!!! You know who I am talking about! Either get your eyes checked, get some glasses or get a referee! You should be ashamed of yourself!

    ReplyDelete
  29. Ft Worth total numbers were
    2010 = 787
    2009 = 717
    2008 = 546

    About the same change in USTA play. Interesting. The change happened after Spring of 2009, correct?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Are you talking about Laura E.?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Mike Kelly posed as someone posing as Mike Kelly and posted above, just to throw you off.

    ReplyDelete
  32. So Mike Kelly comes on the blog to tell us how "solid" and "superb" his 3.5- 8.0 mixed partner is -lol. Mike Kelly in 8.0 mixed-playing against 3.5 women - lol. It is clear who controls the winning and losing there.

    ReplyDelete
  33. God you are OBNOXIOUS!!!! Go away. You are the new Mike Getz hater of 2010. Congratulations. You are the person we hate to see post the most.

    ReplyDelete
  34. to 8:39 poster-don't confuse me with other posters-I am not a "hater". I made ONE and done observation on prior posting so no need to be confused & hateful. Try to get back to tennis.
    from 7:59 poster

    ReplyDelete
  35. Mike, thanks for the compliments, but I would think those beers during the match didn't help your game much. But thanks for offering me one. Next time we play, I prefer Sake.

    Hollywood

    ReplyDelete
  36. They did the massive bump ups, and there was a lot more recruitment by teams to get unrated players into the USTA system. INTERESTING

    ReplyDelete
  37. Gee, no comment from Mike on his 5.0 loses...what a shock. Only one even trying to defend him is the loser with nothing better to do than read the blog every few minutes and then post about how lame it is.

    ReplyDelete
  38. umm...don't know why you would be waiting for comments from Mike on 5.0 losses...guess you got nothing better to do...umm..
    The only reason why he commented on his 8.0 mixed loss and then "praised" his partner is so he could take the "blame" for the loss...HA!HA!HA! anyone that has played 8.0 mixed against him (like me) knows he doesn't even need a 3.5 on the court! He could win at 8.0(if he wanted to) playing singles! (& would be faster & less double faults). Say what you want about how he manipulates wins and losses - you have to admit he is good. Unless you are one of those whining losers...

    ReplyDelete
  39. of course he's good....that's the point

    ReplyDelete