In efforts to enhance the overall flow of tennis matches, the Division I Men's and Women's Tennis Committee will recommend to the Division I Championships/Competition Cabinet that both championships use a 3-6 format (three doubles matches followed by six singles matches) starting in 2002. The decision came during the committee's annual meeting July 10-13 and is intended to enhance the student-athlete's experience, make matches shorter and more fan-friendly, and to preserve doubles play in collegiate tennis.

Currently, NCAA women use a 6-3 format. Often times doubles play is forfeited after a team seals a victory in singles play. Of the 63 matches played at this year's Division I women's championships, 43 of them excluded doubles play. According to Intercollegiate Tennis Association (ITA) statistics, 36 "doubles specialists" were denied play due to stopped matches.

Claire Pollard, the women's subcommittee chair, said such instances were motivating factors in recommending a change. "We feel the 3-6 format will increase student-athlete participation. It will allow for doubles to be played," she said.

Pollard said the women's subcommittee also took into account student-athlete welfare in deciding to recommend a common format. With the 6-3 format, matches can last as long as six hours. "There usually is an hour or so of dead time with the 6-3 format. The 3-6 eliminates that dead time and helps with the flow of the match," she said.

With shorter playing time, she said, student-athletes have more time to rest and possibly avoid injury.

If approved, the format still could be modified based on feedback from the membership and from coaches at the ITA coaches convention. Pollard said she expects the change to be generally well-received.

"I think it's very positive. Everyone knew it was coming," she said.

With a unified championships format, the joint Division I committee then looked to develop a common formula for interpreting selection criteria. The committee removed "consistency of lineup" as a criterion. because it rarely is considered during the selection process. The committee also agreed to take into consideration home and away matches when evaluating a team's significant wins and significant losses.

In further moves to align the selection process, the women's subcommittee eliminated the secondary status of three criteria components and elevated them to primary status so that the women will share the same eight criteria components as the men. The men's subcommittee in turn voted to adopt the women's interpretation of selection criteria.

Betty Werner, chair of the men's subcommittee, said, "The women's committee has done an exceptional job at making the selection process as perfect as possible; the men's committee has struggled a bit. We think what they're doing is great."

She said she expects the new interpretations to make the men's selection process easier for the upcoming year -- and also easier to defend.

With this common formula in place, the NCAA can provide the ITA with a way to make its rankings a better indicator of what teams will be selected to participate in the championships. The NCAA and the ITA will continue working on this alignment.

Another work in progress for the committee is the improvement of the current results collection system. The committee discussed the possible requirement of electronic transmission of results to a common Web site for the 2000-01 academic year. The results would then be put into a database for the output of rankings. A decision will be made by September 1.

As a whole, Werner said, "I think the decisions made at this meeting will have a positive and exciting impact on women's and men's intercollegiate tennis in this country."

Division II actions

To make data collection more efficient for evaluating teams for the championship, the Division II Men's and Women's Tennis Committee also discussed electronic transmission of results for its ranking system and will continue to look into the feasibility of results collection. If adopted, all participating Division II institutions would be required to submit results electronically.

The committee will send a letter to conference commissioners informing them of weekly results deadlines during the regular season. Conference championships results that occur after the April 23 deadline will not be considered in championship selection.

For the championship, the committee will recommend that the regional championships that take place before nationals be renamed "first and second rounds." The committee felt these terms allow people to identify regional competition with the championship.

The committee also recommended that times for first- and second-round play should not be determined by the committee unless the host institution and the participating teams cannot decide on a start time. The committee believes that because of the time of season the championship takes place (for example, during commencements, final exams and other events), institutions should be given autonomy to establish dates for the regional. However, if it appears an institution is gaining a competitive advantage, the committee reserves the right to establish the start time.

With regard to championships sites for 2002, the committee is looking for a new host. West Florida has hosted the last two championships and will again host next year, but its contractual agreement expires after 2001. With the location of the 2002 championships venue pending, the committee determined specifications for the new site. If institutions are interested in hosting, they should contact Troy Arthur, NCAA assistant director of championships, at the national office.

In other actions the Division II committee:

Reviewed how institutions were evaluated in relation to the .500 winning-percentage rule against Division II opponents and agreed that enhanced monitoring is needed to ensure institutions are eligible for the championships.

Enhanced its policy and procedures for notification of teams for the championship.

Recommended the membership be surveyed to determine if a third-place match should be played at the championship.

Recommended changing quarterfinal match times at the championships from 2:30 p.m. to 2:15 p.m.

Recommended the tournament director be an administrator and not a coach of the host institution.

Discussed the possibility of having an online regional ranking for Division II tennis. The ITA agreed to discuss the issue and possibly pilot the regional ranking for the upcoming season.

Met with David Benjamin, executive director of the ITA.

Division III actions

In Division III, the men's and women's tennis committee learned the regional realignments it had recommended from last year's meeting were approved and will go into effect for the 2000-01 season. The realignment served two purposes: to align the men's and women's regions and to make the regions more balanced and therefore more competitive. The four regions will be the West, Midwest, Northeast and Atlantic South.

As a result of the action, the state of Texas was moved to the West region and Pennsylvania was moved to the Atlantic South. Both Fairleigh Dickinson University, Madison, and Drew University will move to the Atlantic South and Allegheny College will stay in the Midwest because the majority of their conferences are in those respective regions.

In other actions the committee:

Recommended that the final eight teams be reseeded at the championships site after regional championships play has concluded.

The women's subcommittee recommended the women's championships be held one week earlier. For example, in 2002, the regionals would be held May 3-5 and the championships May 10-15.

Heard a presentation from the ITA regarding alignment of ITA regions and NCAA regions.