Old Business: In the Matter of Dr. Ray Brown vs. United States Tennis Association

Dr. Brown failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as a member of the USTA making a complaint. That was basis #1 for the USOC dismissing the complaint. There was no need for USOC to go any further. Other court cases said, don't allow skipping adminstrative remedies because it "preserves the administrative process and discourages disregard of the NGB’s grievance procedures."

IF, he was before USTA, USOC, ITF or IOC he would have lost on the merits as his argument was that the USTA should not or was improperly following ITF global rules changes. It is fine and dandy to be fundementally against ROGY for kids 10 and under, but if you truly intend to enlighten people on the issue USTA wrongheadness then sell Dr. Brown's tennis neurology based arguments to teach non tennis playing parents that the former status quo of teaching kids is the still preferred and better option for joy and ultimate competitiveness. It's possible but inefficient and perhaps preferred for the tennis knowledgable family, but for future teaching pros and kids who are receptive it's just not the future.

For those interested I encourage you to read all of Dr. Brown's statements of beleive regarding the fundemental nature of the USTA as well as his coaching belief system regarding use of modified equipment and courts for kids 10 and under playing tennis. I fundementally disagree with Dr. Brown regarding the efficacy of the 10 and under competitive changes that have occurred globally. I also believe that Dr. Brown deserves to be treated with a high degree of respect for his teaching options and should be fully engaged in debating the merits of his beliefs regarding ROGY or ten and under 10.

 http://goo.gl/WopFXt http://goo.gl/Sg7OaG http://goo.gl/kzMm01

Post by Martennis Jr & Parent Centered Competitive Resource Center.