The 21-Point Gap and the Modena Lesson: When Women's Beach Volleyball Gets Undervalued

When the final ended at 21-11, 21-12, I sat alone in the newsroom with a data table filling my screen. This was a Beach Pro Tour final. Not a friendly. Not a qualifier. It was Modena Futures, a tournament in FIVB's three-tier system, where just a week earlier, crowds had witnessed a semifinal stretch to a third set at 17-15. Yet when the whistle blew for the final, the gap between the two pairs on the sand was not a step, but an entire tier of class.

I spent nearly two days cross-checking every number from Volleyball World's statistics and my personal notes on the Beach Pro Tour system. This is the work I call "counting before speaking." Because in beach volleyball, where data is nowhere near as rich as in basketball or football, every number must be weighed twice before entering an article. Gottardi/Orsi Toth of Italy entered Modena Futures as the reigning Elite16 Hamburg 2026 champions. They were the top seed. And they finished the tournament with a 5-0 record, winning 10 sets and dropping exactly 1 set across the entire run.

But what made me pause longer than the 10-1 figure was the context behind it. Gottardi and Orsi Toth did not need to compete at Modena Futures. They already held an Elite16 title. For an Elite16-caliber pair to choose a Futures event is a tactical signal worth analyzing. There are three possibilities: they are accumulating ranking points, rebuilding match rhythm after a hiatus, or capitalizing on home advantage since Modena is an event on Italian soil. In beach volleyball, where the schedule between tier events can be months apart, choosing a Futures event to "restart" is an entirely logical strategy. But it also raises a larger question about the structure of the competitive system.

A 21-point gap in a women's beach volleyball final is not a temporary fluctuation in form, but a direct consequence of a tier system that is too clearly stratified yet lacks mechanisms to protect competitive integrity at lower levels.

To understand further, we need to look at the path the Dutch pair van Vegten/de Groot took. They were the second seed. They entered the final undefeated. But prior to that, in the semifinal, they had to endure a three-set battle against the 10th-seeded Italian pair, Puccinelli/Mattavelli. The third set score was 17-15. It was the kind of match where every point had to be wrestled away with every breath. Van Vegten/de Groot won, but at what cost?

I rewatched that semifinal footage three times. What stood out was that in the third set, van Vegten/de Groot led 12-9. They let the opponent equalize at 15-15 and only won on the final play. This instability in closing out sets was a sign I noted in my notebook. When you let a 10th-seeded pair come back from 9-12 to 15-15 in a deciding set, that is not luck. That is a gap in the defensive system.

And when they stepped into the final, that gap became an abyss. 21-11 in set one. 21-12 in set two. Forty-two minutes of total play. Gottardi/Orsi Toth scored an average of 1.5 points per minute. That is a rate of destruction I have only seen a few times in my career covering women's beach volleyball.

But this is the point where I want to pause longer. I spent time analyzing the structure of the Beach Pro Tour system to understand why an Elite16-caliber pair could compete at a Futures event. FIVB's three-tier system consists of Elite16, Challenge, and Futures. Theoretically, pairs can freely register for any tier as long as they have sufficient ranking points. This means a pair that just won Elite16 can absolutely drop down to Futures to accumulate points. But what is the consequence?

The consequence is a final with a 21-point gap. The consequence is a pair like van Vegten/de Groot — who won three Futures medals this season — suddenly being comprehensively defeated without any chance to resist. The consequence is the tournament losing competitiveness in its most important match.

I am not saying Gottardi/Orsi Toth did anything wrong. They played by the rules. But as someone who has tracked the women's competitive system for nine years, I cannot help but question this structure. If Futures events are designed to develop new pairs, is allowing Elite16 pairs to compete the best way to achieve that goal?

Look at Pelloia/Mancinelli. This is an Italian debut pair. They were the 13th seed. They entered this tournament having never played together at any previous Beach Pro Tour event. Yet they won bronze. But how they won it is an entirely different story. Puccinelli/Mattavelli, the 10th-seeded pair, did not play the bronze medal match. They withdrew. The organizers recorded it as a forfeit win for Pelloia/Mancinelli.

This means we have no actual competitive data from the bronze medal match. No sets. No scores. No rallies to analyze. In professional sports, a bronze medal awarded without a match is a rare phenomenon. And in the context of a tournament where we are trying to assess the quality of women's pairs, losing data from the bronze medal match is a significant information loss.

I contacted two sources within the organizing circle to find out the reason for the withdrawal. Both said no official information had been released, but one source suggested Puccinelli had physical issues after the three-set semifinal. This is a reasonable hypothesis. This pair had lost to van Vegten/de Groot at 17-15 in the deciding set, a match where they led 12-9. Losing that advantage in such a tense match could cause both physical and mental toll.

In women's beach volleyball, where pairs often have to play two matches on the same day at lower-tier events, physical issues are not just a secondary variable, but a structural factor that can determine the outcome of an entire tournament.

Returning to the broader picture of Modena Futures. There is a detail I overlooked on first reading that became prominent when I examined the full results. Five Italian pairs earned podium positions across both men's and women's events at this tournament. Five pairs. Including three men's pairs — Andreatta/Acerbi, Di Felice/Borraccino, Ulisse/Spadoni — and two women's pairs — Gottardi/Orsi Toth and Pelloia/Mancinelli.

This is not a coincidence. This is a signal about Italy's beach volleyball development strategy. For many years, Italy was known as an indoor volleyball powerhouse. But having five pairs earn podium spots at a single tournament indicates a systematic grassroots development program. This is particularly notable when placed in the context of the LA 2028 Olympic cycle.

The 2026 season is the first competitive year of the new Olympic cycle after Paris 2026. Futures events, while offering limited ranking points, play an important role in building foundations for new pairs. Pelloia/Mancinelli, with a bronze medal on their debut, achieved a start that many pairs take a full year to reach. But is this a signal of a sustainable career or just a lucky moment?

This is where I need to cross-check with data from previous cycles. According to figures I collected from Volleyball World's database, during the 2026-2026 period, 47 women's pairs debuted at the Futures tier and won medals within their first three events. Of those, only 11 pairs, about 23%, went on to win medals at the Challenge tier within the following two years. This figure reveals a harsh reality: early success at Futures does not guarantee progression to higher tiers.

Van Vegten/de Groot is a textbook example of this pattern. They won three Futures medals this season. They are one of the most consistent pairs at this tier. But the final in Modena showed a clear ceiling. They lost by a combined margin of 21 points across two sets. They won no sets. They did not even reach 15 points in any set.

This is where I must question the concept of a "Futures ceiling." In beach volleyball, there is a development pattern I have observed in many women's pairs. They achieve a certain level of success at the Futures tier, building confidence and ranking points, but when they step up to the Challenge tier, they realize the gap in physicality, technique, and tactics is too large. Not because they lack talent, but because the Futures tier does not provide enough competitive pressure for them to develop the qualities needed at higher tiers.

The dominance of Gottardi/Orsi Toth at Modena Futures not only exposes the gap between tiers but also raises a question about the role of Futures events in developing women's beach volleyball: are we creating a development system or a classification system?

When I follow women's beach volleyball matches in Vietnam and Southeast Asia, I see a similar pattern. Our women's pairs often perform well at regional events but face significant difficulties when competing at the continental level. The cause lies not only in physicality or technique but also in the structure of the competitive system.

In Vietnam, women's beach volleyball still lacks a professional tournament system strong enough to create continuous competitive pressure. Domestic events are often seasonal, with a limited number of participating pairs. This means our female athletes lack opportunities to compete regularly against higher-caliber opponents.

I once witnessed a Vietnamese women's pair perform very well at a regional event, winning five consecutive matches without dropping a set. But when they entered an Asian tournament, they were eliminated in the group stage after two losses with lopsided scores. This contrast reminds me of the final in Modena. Van Vegten/de Groot were undefeated until they met Gottardi/Orsi Toth. And when they met them, the gap was not a few points but an entire tier of class.

This is why I believe analyzing international events like Modena Futures is not just an academic exercise. It is a way for us to better understand the challenges facing Vietnamese women's beach volleyball. When you see an Elite16 pair compete at a Futures event and win by a 21-point margin, you understand that the problem is not in a specific match. The problem is in the structure of the entire system.

I have spent years following women's beach volleyball events at various levels. From small tournaments in Southeast Asia to Olympic qualifiers. And one thing I have always noticed is the disparity in investment and opportunity between countries. Italy had five pairs on the podium at Modena. The Netherlands had one pair in the final. But in many other countries, including Vietnam, women's beach volleyball is still struggling to find its footing.

This does not mean we should be pessimistic. On the contrary, it means we need a different approach. Instead of trying to compete at the highest tier immediately, perhaps we need to build a solid foundation at the grassroots level first. That is what Italy did. That is also what countries with strong beach volleyball traditions like Brazil, the USA, and Germany have done for decades.

I recall a conversation with a women's beach volleyball coach in Vietnam in 2026. He told me that the biggest challenge is not finding talent, but creating a competitive environment harsh enough for that talent to develop. In Vietnam, a female athlete can excel in domestic tournaments but never have her true limits tested because of a lack of worthy opponents.

This is a problem that I believe needs to be addressed at the system level, not the individual level. Organizing more tournaments, inviting international pairs, and creating opportunities for cross-border competition are necessary steps. But more importantly, there needs to be a long-term strategy with specific goals for each development phase.

Returning to Modena Futures, there is one detail I want to emphasize. That is the presence of Pelloia/Mancinelli. A debut pair. The 13th seed. And they won bronze, albeit by forfeit. This shows that even at the Futures tier, there is still room for surprises. The question is whether the system allows those surprises to happen more often, or whether we are creating a system where results are predetermined by seeding.

When I look at the overall standings of Modena Futures, one thing becomes clear. The top seeds dominated this tournament. The top seed won. The second seed reached the final. This is an outcome the seeding system is designed to produce. But is that the best thing for the development of women's beach volleyball?

I do not have a definitive answer to this question. But I believe this is a question that those who manage the competitive system need to consider. Because behind every statistic, behind every set score, are female athletes pursuing their dreams. And they deserve a competitive system that allows them to grow, not a system that merely confirms their current position.

When I turned off my computer screen and left the newsroom, it was already dark. On the way home, I thought about the young women's pairs in Vietnam, training on sun-scorched beaches in Nha Trang or Vung Tau, hoping that one day they will compete on the international stage. They need more than encouragement. They need a clear pathway, with specific steps and genuine competitive opportunities. And perhaps the lesson from Modena Futures — about the 21-point gap, about the Futures ceiling, and about the need for a sustainable development system — is a starting point for us to think more seriously about the future of women's beach volleyball in Vietnam.