As Jordyn Flows

[This essay emulates the muckrakers objective in the Progressive Era, which was to expose the corruption of unsanitary labor conditions in factories. Today, investigaters continue to uncover the dirt and "rake the muck" about numerous issues such as political corruption. I decided to exploit a system that I am very familar with, The United States Tennis Association (USTA) point system].  

The 21^st Century Muckraker

Leveling the Court 

In 2004, the United States Tennis Association (USTA) developed a point-based ranking system called “Points per Round.” The main objective of this current point system is to help junior tennis players (“juniors”) reach their full potential by promoting match play. In the USTA National Junior Ranking System, the USTA states that the new point system “…assigns regulations that encourage our juniors to compete often, and puts the emphasis on advancing through the draw” (www.usta.com). Essentially, “competing often” enables junior players to accumulate points in order to build or maintain a national or sectional ranking. Prior to 2004, the USTA ranked their juniors according to the “Star System,” a point system which enabled highly ranked juniors to compete in the bare minimum of tournaments to protect their high ranking. The flaw in the “Star System” system served as an incentive for creating the “Points per Round,” a point system which advocates active participation from all players (whether a player is ranked 1 or 1000). “Points per Round” is a biased point system as well hinders players that have a limited amount of money and time.

The point system sets a requirement for tennis players of all levels to frequently play in tournaments and thus raise the level of competition in tournaments as well as the skill of junior tennis players. Though the USTA had good intentions in their development and objective of “Points per Round,” this system is also inherently inequitable since it favors players that can afford the time and money to continuously compete and exploit the system. Evidently, the USTA jumped from one extreme to the next. Like the “Star System” the “Points per Round” caters to only a specific group of tennis players.  The USTA’s attempt to create an inclusive system for all players has backfired and is instead more exclusive than ever. 

Despite the laudatory goals to change the point system, my experience with the “Points per Round” system as a junior tennis player has led me to believe that some of the system’s effects were not well anticipated. Unfortunately, the point system’s emphasis on junior’s enrollment in tournaments around the nation poses a conflict for players who do not have the financial support to travel around the country. Tennis players can accumulate the highest amount of points in national tournaments, which are located in different locations throughout the country. The cost of airfare, renting a car, and hotel accommodations create a large economic burden on junior’s families.  A number of juniors whose families lack the financial means may default due to the overwhelming personal expenses from playing in one tournament.

The system’s focus on constant play offers an advantage to juniors that can pay for the cost. As a result, junior’s who do not have any financial pressures have more opportunities to travel, win matches, and gather points. Therefore, this increases these junior’s odds to improve their ranking. When I was playing in Girls 16’s, the fourth highest ranked player (for anonymity reasons I will call her Sally Orbits) in my section (Middle States) was home schooled and thus traveled to many tournaments. In 2006 Sally Orbits held a record of forty-three wins, but had lost a total of twenty-one matches. Many of the players that Sally Orbits lost to were ranked beneath her in Middle States. Sally is a valid example of a player that is ranked according to her opportunities. Her ranking does not reflect her victories, but instead is a reflection of her unlimited time and money. The USTA’s belief that their system, “…establishes a fair value for accomplishments” (www.usta.com) is partially inaccurate since a junior’s economic advantages and disadvantages may play a role in determining their ranking.

Furthermore, the vast majority of junior tennis players are full time students. Although the “Points per Round” system helps juniors reach their full potential as tennis players, the system prevents juniors from reaching their full potential in academics. Often juniors are absent on a Friday (the day a tournament starts) and Monday (the day a tournament ends). The unexcused absences create an issue between the student and his or her school. Some competitive juniors even take a year off from school. Instead, these players are educated with online classes or are home schooled. Juniors and their families view these types of alternative education as an opportunity to travel to as many tournaments as they desire without the restriction of the school week. Also, coaches believe that more free time enables junior players to practice many hours throughout the school day.

The trend to no longer attend school would not be as popular if the USTA did not emphasize the importance of competing in tournaments on a weekly basis throughout the school year. The key to gaining the most amounts of points in this system can be accomplished with money and time. Juniors would not feel that it is necessary to sacrifice their education without the pressure of the USTA’s point system. Unlike many seasonal sports, the USTA tournaments are played year round. The constant need to perform at a high level throughout the duration of the year has influenced juniors, parents, and coach’s outlook towards traditional education. The numbers of players that are no longer attending school in order to increase their performance on the court far exceed the few Americans that will become the next James Blake (who is currently ranked 7^th in the world, but once attended Harvard University). 

Having dealt with these two different point systems as a junior, I believe there is a solution to make the “Points per Round” system more equitable.  The USTA, a non-profit organization, could raise additional funds to subsidize juniors who are at an economic disadvantage. Juniors who perform at a high level and fulfill their academic requirements should be entitled to utilize these funds. This stipend would enable juniors to travel to appropriate USTA tournaments, encourage academic performance, and create a more balanced point system.

I propose that all travel itineraries be downloaded into the USTA’s computer system to know how and when children travel to tournaments. This would monitor the efficacy of the funds given to eligible children. Ultimately, this funding will allow more economically disadvantaged children to pursue their dream of becoming the next Arthur Ashe. From a student that has an intense academic schedule to a child that can barley afford buying a new racket, modifying the “Points per Round” system would benefit a variety of players.

 Citations"United States Tennis Association." USTA National Junior Ranking System. Feb 7 2006. USTA. 21 Feb 2007 <http://www.usta.com/juniors/fullstory.sps?iNewsid=135572>.