Small Scoring Change in Tennis Serves Up a Controversy : Debate: Giving more weight to results of doubles matches is the single topic of discussion this season.

If basketball can add a three-point shot, and the NFL can add a two-point conversion, then the Southern Section can surely add a third of a point to doubles sets in boys’ high school tennis matches.

Can’t it?

Not so fast, say many of the section boys’ tennis coaches. What seemed to be an innocent attempt to make matches more competitive is creating more controversy than anyone in the normally staid tennis community believed possible.

The new scoring system, which awards one point for each singles victory and 1 1/3 points per doubles victory, was easily passed by the CIF-Southern Section Council in January. The rule’s intent was to prevent teams with two or three talented singles players from winning a match by themselves and to give more weight to doubles because there are six players competing, twice as many as in singles.

For example: Three singles players could sweep their three sets and account for nine of a possible 18 points. With the tiebreaker being game scores, the three dominant players often had enough 6-0 or 6-1 victories to overcome their school’s doubles losses. So three players could essentially beat nine.

Most coaches agree the new system has accomplished its goal--to make matches more competitive and create more upsets.

But not all like the system, which has been in effect for more than a month. Ocean View’s Sean Warner is so unhappy that he has refused to play by the new rules, even after his fellow Sunset League coaches and principals voted 7-1 to implement the system.

On two occasions, Warner told an opposing Sunset League coach that he was going by the old 18-point scoring system. In one instance, he reported his winning score using the old system. The other match was not completed because of rain.

Warner could not be reached for comment, but his star singles player, Jakub Pietrowski, said: “I don’t think it’s a good way to score. If it is in the league constitution, of course we’d abide by the rules. If not, we have a right to play by the old rules.”

But Ocean View is not the only school still playing the old way. The 21-point system is only mandatory during the postseason, not during regular season. Each league can decide which scoring system to go by during the regular season.

The Ocean League in the Los Angeles area, has decided to stay the course. Oddly enough, Beverly Hills Coach Jason Newman, who introduced the new system to the CIF-Advisory Committee this year, coaches in that league.

“That certainly isn’t my choice,” Newman said, “but there’s nothing I can do about it, because the coaches here still want the old system.”

Some coaches are calling for a return to the old system, while others, such as Mission Viejo’s Bill Smith, are hoping yet another can be implemented.

“What I’d like to see is something where we’d have kids play both doubles and singles,” Smith says. “What we’re getting now is incomplete players. We’re doing a terrible disservice to the kids. Every kid you ask will tell you he’d like to play doubles and singles.”

Bill Clark, administrator in charge of boys’ tennis for the section, said every coach was asked what they thought of Newman’s proposal.

“We sent out a questionnaire to all the section’s coaches, and the overwhelming majority was in favor of changing the scoring,” Clark said. “The vote on the council floor was not very close either. At least two-thirds of the leagues supported it.”

So why all the negative feedback?

Corona del Mar Coach Tim Mang, who introduced the new scoring formula some five years ago, isn’t sure. But Mang is pleased people are voicing some kind of opinion.

“Anything in life, as soon as they start debating it, is exciting,” he said. “Things become so stale sometimes.”

And if anything, staleness was the old system’s worst fault.

Coaches with three talented players often had little or any work to do before or during matches. They could line up their best players and tell them to play No. 1, No. 2 and No. 3 singles. No strategy, no excitement and no upsets.

Though the system worked to Corona del Mar’s disadvantage in a loss to University, which fooled Mang and moved its top singles player to doubles, Mang couldn’t be more satisfied with what has been accomplished.

“It’s all about guessing and strategy now,” Mang said. “It’s a real team effort. Now, the coaches have to tell this singles player that they have to work out with that guy in doubles. The kids who aren’t flexible are going to be in trouble. This allows kids to experience different things.”

It also allows tennis coaches to do the same. They are suddenly placed in the role of a baseball manager. Before the match, they must make out their lineup based on what they believe the opposing coach might do.

Will they move all their singles players to doubles? Will they move one singles player to doubles and leave the rest intact? Or keep their singles players in singles but combine their two top doubles players?

“I get less sleep now and think about big matches more,” Mang said.

But Smith, whose Mission Viejo team has struggled because of its lack of depth, believes there’s less thinking involved now.

“It’s not strategy, it’s guessing,” he said. “You have no idea what the other guy is going to do. If you guess right, you’re a hero. If you guess wrong, you’re a flat-out dog. Each match, you’re doing something you don’t want to do.”

And, Smith says, your players are often doing something they don’t want to do.

“I’m wondering if it will chase more good kids out of high school tennis,” he said. “Singles is where the money is. That’s what the colleges are looking for. Dana Hills has a really well-balanced team, but they don’t have a player who will advance to (South Coast) League semifinals in singles.”

Smith added: “I haven’t heard a good word yet about this. Some have said, ‘This is terrible.’ ”

Laguna Beach Coach Bob Walton doesn’t think the new system is terrible, but he had concerns similar to Smith’s.

“Everything is geared toward singles rankings, and doubles is in the background,” he said. “You’re almost telling your best players to play doubles now. I hope we don’t lose some really good players because they have to play doubles all year.

“I already know of some professional coaches who are using this against us. Most pro coaches don’t think high school tennis is good for kids anyway. This gives them that much more ammunition against us.”

Mang responded to Smith’s and Walton’s remarks with some ammunition.

“Any coach who would say that should hang up his sweat socks,” he said. “If they have a superstar, then they’re not coaching anyway. They’re just filling out a lineup and watching him play.

“I don’t care who the superstar is, if he respects the coach, he’ll play anything for him.”

Jason Meyers is University’s superstar and had always played singles until this season. But in the key victory over Corona del Mar, he played doubles and helped University to an upset by scoring four points with three doubles victories.

“I like doubles, but it’s not my favorite thing,” Meyers said. “But if it’s going to help us win, I’ll play doubles. I don’t know if I’d want to play all year, but in certain matches it’s fine.”

However, Mang says, there have been instances where star singles players have sacrificed and played doubles for an entire career.

“Ricky Leach (at Laguna Beach) played with a weaker player for three years,” Mang said. “It helped his team, and it really helped the heck out of his doubles partner’s game.”

Leach played during the early 1980s when doubles sets were worth 1 1/2 points and singles sets were worth one. The old system that awarded one point for singles and doubles sets was passed in 1984.

Mang, known as one of the county’s better doubles coaches, said he’s happy to see doubles getting some recognition again.

“Doubles is a different sport,” he said. “It’s a chess match out there. There’s so many more strategies.

“This gets coaches back into coaching more and it might make them earn their money.”

Said Newman: “I think doubles is healthy, because it gets more kids to the net and has them playing more aggressive tennis.”

As the season winds down and the playoffs approach, expect to see more singles players rotated to the doubles court and more doubles players moved to singles.

Is this what Newman was looking for when he proposed his 21-point system?

“There’s always room to make a system better,” he said. “But any time we look at something, we should ask if it’s going to be about teamwork, balance and equity.”

But for now, even Smith agrees, the 21-point system should be given a fighting chance.

“We do, from time to time, need some experimentation,” he said.

If for nothing else, to create some lively debates.