PDA

View Full Version : NTRP Year-End ratings?


Caswell
11-14-2006, 06:28 AM
OK, silly question - when are the year-end ratings released? One would think that it would be at the end of the year, but some of the other discussions seem to indicate they're released before hand.

My section has released early start league ratings, but I didn't generate enough dynamic results to change my self-rate (four doubles matches, but only one singles match against another self-rated player).

migjam
11-14-2006, 06:31 AM
I believe that it is at the end of November. But, it may be up to the section that you live in.

Ace
11-14-2006, 07:03 AM
The Kentucky USTA website
( http://www.kentuckytennis.com/usta/ntrp_ratings.htm ) posted this:

"2006 NTRP Year-End Ratings are expected to be pubished the week of November 27. If we get them sooner, we will publish them as soon as received. "

I remember last year it was in November. I believe once the National Championships are finished (Mixed Doubles is Nov. 16-19th), the rating calculations will be run. Though USTA always says mixed doubles ratings arent included in your rating unless you play mixed doubles exclusively. But maybe they want them all to come out at the same time.

Its a National Rating from a National Database, so I can't see it being different from section to section.

cak
11-14-2006, 09:04 AM
Its a National Rating from a National Database, so I can't see it being different from section to section.

If you are looking them up on Tennislink it all comes out at the same time. I understand around November 21st. If you are looking them up from your local area site that doesn't link directly to tennislink (say from the NorCal database) it might be a week later.

Ace
11-14-2006, 10:26 AM
Ok, I didn't know that not everyone used TennisLink.
How come NorCal doesn't use TennisLink? Did they just already have a website/database in place before TennisLink came along?
How do they keep both databases synchronized?

tennis-n-sc
11-14-2006, 12:47 PM
Here in the Southern Section they usually appear around Thanksgiving.

DANMAN
11-14-2006, 01:27 PM
The date given by my local league coordinator is next Tuesday November 21,

jack mckinney
11-14-2006, 02:57 PM
november21 for the midatlantic

Ash Doyle
11-20-2006, 08:50 AM
Go ahead and check you rating today. For my section, not all players have been updated yet, but some already show in the system with their new rating.

bleach
11-20-2006, 09:06 AM
I'm in the Southern Section (AL) and most of the ratings have been updated for the End of the Year. They must have come out today.

Jack the Hack
11-20-2006, 01:18 PM
My section (PNW) has not posted the ratings yet, but if you dig into TennisLink, the 2006 EOY ratings are in there. Try looking up your name here:

http://national.usta.com/leagues/reports/NTRP/FindRating.asp

atatu
11-20-2006, 02:59 PM
Wow, that's right. I got bumped to 5.0, not such great news, the 5.0 guys in Austin are mostly young former college players, and I'm a 44 y.o pusher....

goober
11-20-2006, 03:29 PM
Wow, that's right. I got bumped to 5.0, not such great news, the 5.0 guys in Austin are mostly young former college players, and I'm a 44 y.o pusher....

I would appeal. It wouldn't hurt unless you really think you can compete at 5.0.

GRANITECHIEF
11-20-2006, 03:40 PM
Wow, that's right. I got bumped to 5.0, not such great news, the 5.0 guys in Austin are mostly young former college players, and I'm a 44 y.o pusher....

Just keep the ball deep, don't give em too much pace, and run like heck. You shouldn't have any problem.

Ace
11-20-2006, 03:40 PM
I would appeal. It wouldn't hurt unless you really think you can compete at 5.0.

bah....challenge yourself! show those college punks a thing or two! :)

approachshot
11-20-2006, 03:45 PM
So if the rating says that it ends with 12/31/2006 then that is your rating for the 2007 year?

Ace
11-20-2006, 04:44 PM
So if the rating says that it ends with 12/31/2006 then that is your rating for the 2007 year?

That is correct.

Caswell
11-20-2006, 05:26 PM
I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry. I'm a "benchmark" 3.0. I guess if you go to regionals that's what happens?

I was hoping to get rated at 3.5, so that I could get out of playing in the 3.0 leagues... not a whole lot of competition at that level anymore. I've been playing (and winning) as a 3.5 in USTA tournaments and leagues.

I'm sure my club will expect me to play on the 3.0 men's team next spring (as well as the 3.5 "B" team). I guess my best bet is to tell them I want to play singles and go for the dynamic DQ.

Ace
11-20-2006, 05:52 PM
I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry. I'm a "benchmark" 3.0. I guess if you go to regionals that's what happens?


Not necessarily. How did you do at regionals?

Were your 3.0 wins against people who won other matches, or did they lose all their matches?

Just curious....I know its supposed to be a complex algorithm that takes into account your dynamic point spread and your performance against other benchmarks....but sometimes I see ratings that look like they were a cross between "how many fingers am I holding up" and "pick a number between 1 and 10". :)

dpfrazier
11-20-2006, 06:05 PM
Wow, that's right. I got bumped to 5.0, not such great news, the 5.0 guys in Austin are mostly young former college players, and I'm a 44 y.o pusher....

What's up with this? I also got bumped to 5.0 in Norcal, and I'm a 47 year-old Laver wannabe with bad knees...

Maybe the USTA is picking on Norcal and Texas because of the shenanigans at Nationals...

Ash Doyle
11-20-2006, 06:31 PM
I know that for 'Rating Type', a "C" mean it's a computer rating, and an "S" means self-rated; but what does a "T" mean?

goober
11-20-2006, 06:56 PM
I know that for 'Rating Type', a "C" mean it's a computer rating, and an "S" means self-rated; but what does a "T" mean?

Tournament rating perhaps? I played only tourneys this year and no league.

Ronaldo
11-20-2006, 07:32 PM
This completely sucks ostrich eggs. I sign up and play up as a freakin' favor to our captain and now stuck with a 4.0 rating. Only won two matches out of five, go figure.

DRtenniS1112
11-20-2006, 07:42 PM
I got bumped up this year. I am playing on a combo mixed team and the new rating puts me over the limit in combo. Can I finish out the fall mixed league or do I have to find a new partner?

TriCitiesTennis
11-20-2006, 08:11 PM
I went 18-1 as 3.0 in tournaments. I went 3-3 in league play.

The guys I lost to in league play, I ended up beating later in the season in tournament play.

Now I am the last of the group to get a bump up. Every person who beat me is now a 4.5.

The "T" as asked earlier, stands for a player who has played more tournament matches then league matches. Therefore, the USTA takes a rating of that player based on players within those tournaments.

This "T" rating is actually the top rating in the USTA to the best of my knowledge.

The rating scale is as follows:

T
B - Benchmark player (This players performance against an opponent will be weighed the next season for the opponent's rating).
C- Computer rated. This player generally played enough matches to qualify for a bump, however they did not seem to perform at the higher level.
M- Mixed Exclusive - This player played only Mixed Doubles, which is not weighted when it is the only league you play
S- Self-rated - I think we all refer to this as a sandbagger or first year player.

Caswell
11-20-2006, 08:37 PM
...The "T" as asked earlier, stands for a player who has played more tournament matches then league matches. Therefore, the USTA takes a rating of that player based on players within those tournaments...

I agree that the "T" is a tournament rating, but from what I can tell it's a rating for players who only played in tournaments.

I had one singles result and four doubles results for league play. I had six singles results from tournament play. I got a "B" rating.

To answer Ace's question... I did OK at regionals. Won both of my doubles matches, including our match against the team that advanced to sectionals. I choked during my one singles match at regionals, and got beat 6-0, 7-6 by another self-rated player who was moved to 3.5 in the early start ratings published earlier. That 6-0 set probably sealed my fate.

If you really want to take a look at my results, just search for "Casey Haddock" in TennisLink.

No worries I suppose. I wouldn't have been let onto my club's "A" 3.5 team anyway, so at least I'll get my "B" team 3.5 league matches and probably go to regionals again with the 3.0 team.

goober
11-20-2006, 08:58 PM
This completely sucks ostrich eggs. I sign up and play up as a freakin' favor to our captain and now stuck with a 4.0 rating. Only won two matches out of five, go figure.

Well if you won 2 matches out of 5, why wouldn't you think that you are a 4.0 player? A legit 3.5 player would have won zero or maybe taken at most 1 match with very close scores.

TriCitiesTennis
11-20-2006, 11:37 PM
I have a "T" rating and I am not tournament exclusive.

I have been informed that because 75% of my matches came in tournament style play that I am "T" rated.

jagsv650
11-21-2006, 04:24 AM
I was just told if you're a "B" rated player your exempt from being moved up or down for two years. Can anyone confirm that?

Ash Doyle
11-21-2006, 05:21 AM
Is this "T" Rating new for this year? It doesn't show up in their own legend for Rating Types. I played nothing but tournaments last year, but still ended with a "C" type rating.

ChipNCharge
11-21-2006, 05:55 AM
Is this "T" Rating new for this year? It doesn't show up in their own legend for Rating Types. I played nothing but tournaments last year, but still ended with a "C" type rating.

I asked our USTA league coordinator what a "T" rating meant. He replied and said, "Maybe it stands for Terrific. Haha. I don't know what it means."

Ronaldo
11-21-2006, 06:10 AM
Well if you won 2 matches out of 5, why wouldn't you think that you are a 4.0 player? A legit 3.5 player would have won zero or maybe taken at most 1 match with very close scores.

Goob, the 2 doubles matches we won were against, IMHO, 3.5 players playing up. And my dubs partner is 70 yrs old. And we won in straight sets.

ps, hell to the nah, my partner is still rated 3.5, whatupwitdat?

tennis-n-sc
11-21-2006, 06:24 AM
I was just told if you're a "B" rated player your exempt from being moved up or down for two years. Can anyone confirm that?

This is not true. You can up or down based on your play results. The B designation is based on the previous year's results and is used to rate other players competiveness during the upcoming year.

bleach
11-21-2006, 06:36 AM
The "B" Benchmark rating means that the player went to Regionals or Sectionals and, thus, played a wider range of players than a player that only played local leagues. The "idea" is that if player A goes to sectionals and plays 5 matches, how other (local league players) do against him (the benchmark) should be measured against players from other local leagues (in theory anyway). Playing a benchmark player holds more weight in the dynamic ratings than a non-BM. It's the old "common opponent" method of rating.

As to being exempt for having a benchmark, I have not found that to be true. I know several folks that were benchmark 3.5's last year (went to regionals) and now got bumped to 4.0 (as a benchmark).

cak
11-21-2006, 06:53 AM
I do know that it's tougher if not impossible to appeal a "B" rating, as that was assigned by a verifier.

SunDog
11-21-2006, 06:57 AM
Benchmark means only two things -

1. That you played in a USTA competition beyond the local league. That includes playing in a local playoff or going to a district tournament.

2. Your year end rating is slightly more accurate than folks with a C, M, or S designation. It is deemed more accurate since half of your year end rating is supposedly based on your dynamic rating and half is a benchmark rating that flows down from the players who competed in the national tourney. Kind of the transitive property of tennis ratings. People who went on to play in championsip rounds are deemed to have been closer to the nat players in degrees of separation. Everybody's computer rating, except probably those of M and S players, has a benchmark component in it.

It has nothing to do with your designation as a quality player. That is a myth that won't seem to die - no matter how many times it is explained. Witness - a 3.0 player from 2006 who played in a local playoff or went to state and got bumped up at the end of 2006 will be a 3.5 B for 2007. Results vs a benchmark player may seem "weighted" but in reality there is no weighting component for playing a B in the Dynamic calculation. The B players tend to have higher ratings - because it takes good players to advance beyond the local comp. Therefore if you beat one, or play one close - the rating differential between the opponents tends to be greater and therefore when compared to the match score differential - the dynamic rating adjustment will seem more pronounced.

There is no protection from bumping either way with a B.

atatu
11-21-2006, 09:52 AM
Can a benchmark player appeal ?

TriCitiesTennis
11-21-2006, 10:15 AM
The "B" Benchmark rating means that the player went to Regionals or Sectionals and, thus, played a wider range of players than a player that only played local leagues. The "idea" is that if player A goes to sectionals and plays 5 matches, how other (local league players) do against him (the benchmark) should be measured against players from other local leagues (in theory anyway). Playing a benchmark player holds more weight in the dynamic ratings than a non-BM. It's the old "common opponent" method of rating.

As to being exempt for having a benchmark, I have not found that to be true. I know several folks that were benchmark 3.5's last year (went to regionals) and now got bumped to 4.0 (as a benchmark).

This is the best explanation of a "B" - Benchmark player I have seen in quite sometime.

TriCitiesTennis
11-21-2006, 10:17 AM
Can a benchmark player appeal ?

It is my understanding that any ranking may be appealed. However, I have been told that "B" ratings are harder to get appealed unless for medical reasons. No proof other than just word of mouth.

goober
11-21-2006, 03:46 PM
Is this "T" Rating new for this year? It doesn't show up in their own legend for Rating Types. I played nothing but tournaments last year, but still ended with a "C" type rating.

Hmm I only played tourneys this year and got a T rating. The mystery deepens :)

Dr. Van Nostrand
11-21-2006, 04:00 PM
I play in Norcal and after browsing around some teams and players that I am familiar with it appears that there are quite a few mistakes that will need to be fixed in the next few days. Typically there are corrections made in the first few days after the new ratings hit the websites. There is no way some of these people should have been moved up based on my experience playing against them or watching them play. I did not see anybody in my local area that had their rating go down which is somewhat unbelievable. Unless Norcal teams have been doing extremely well at the National playoffs (which I don't think is the case) and there is a general all round upward adjustment of people's ratings.

momwendy
11-21-2006, 08:23 PM
Here's what is posted on USTANorcal.com:

Q: What are benchmark players?
A: A benchmark player is a player whose rating has been determined by the computer using a combination of his dynamic rating and his match results, and to whose record other records are compared, directly or indirectly, to derive ratings for a large number of players. Generally speaking, playes who participate in USTA League Tennis National, Section and/or area championships, and disqualified players, are benchmarks.

Q: Can a Benchmark player appeal his rating?
A:A National Benchmark player cannot appeal his rating for 12 months. There is no appeal restriction on a District or Section or Area (local league) Benchmark player.

p.s. This was also confirmed by NorCal: A National Benchmark player is one who actually PLAYED in National competition (not merely on the roster). Also, medical appeals can be made regardless of classification -- even benchmarks. (However, not sure on success rate.)

And yes, it appears a lot of people were bumped up in Norcal...

dpfrazier
11-21-2006, 08:40 PM
Here's what is posted on USTANorcal.com:

Q: What are benchmark players?
A: A benchmark player is a player whose rating has been determined by the computer using a combination of his dynamic rating and his match results, and to whose record other records are compared, directly or indirectly, to derive ratings for a large number of players. Generally speaking, playes who participate in USTA League Tennis National, Section and/or area championships, and disqualified players, are benchmarks.

Q: Can a Benchmark player appeal his rating?
A:A National Benchmark player cannot appeal his rating for 12 months. There is no appeal restriction on a District or Section or Area (local league) Benchmark player.

p.s. This was also confirmed by NorCal: A National Benchmark player is one who actually PLAYED in National competition (not merely on the roster). Also, medical appeals can be made regardless of classification -- even benchmarks. (However, not sure on success rate.)

And yes, it appears a lot of people were bumped up in Norcal...

This is the best post on ratings I have ever read...

Welcome to Talk Tennis, MomWendy!

max8176
11-21-2006, 09:56 PM
I agree with Dr. Van. I think the latest Norcal rating is ridiculous. Some of the people who got moved up do not even have a winning record; not to mention some players did not even win one matches. I know that you do not have to win matches to move up but still it's unbelivable. Some of the players were actually moved down during ESR period and they have not played any matches that will affected their rating and their YER still move up. Is this a scam for Norcal to earn extra cash from appeals if they move these people up on purpose. LOL

Geezer Guy
11-22-2006, 07:06 AM
Almost half my 3.5 team (7 players) got bumped up to 4.0.
One of the guys hadn't played any matches, and one had only played 1 match (and lost). The rest of us all had winning records at least - I was the only undefeated player that got bumped up, I think.

Our captain wants us to appeal, but I worked too hard to get to 4.0. No way I'm going to appeal. Anyway - I'll probably get computer-bumped back down after a season of getting my butt kicked in the 4.0 league.

Ash Doyle
11-22-2006, 07:12 AM
Our captain wants us to appeal, but I worked too hard to get to 4.0. No way I'm going to appeal. Anyway - I'll probably get computer-bumped back down after a season of getting my butt kicked in the 4.0 league.

This is what I like to hear. Too many people see being bumped up as almost a punishment, and fight to stay at their old level. Forget that! I too worked hard this past year to improve, and getting bumped up was the reward. Now the challenge begins again next year.

dpfrazier
11-22-2006, 07:31 AM
This is what I like to hear. Too many people see being bumped up as almost a punishment, and fight to stay at their old level. Forget that! I too worked hard this past year to improve, and getting bumped up was the reward. Now the challenge begins again next year.

I agree --- stick with the rating that the system gives you.

However, one somewhat-acceptable reason I can think of for appealing is if your new rating takes you to a level where there aren't sufficient members at your club at that level to form a team.

This happens at our club at the 4.0 level for both men and women (it used to be the 3.5 level for women, but they have done so well at sectionals/nationals that they all got bumped up!)

If you get rated above 4.0, then there aren't enough players to form a 4.5 team. (In fact, on the men's side we have taken the drastic measure of forming a 5.0 team instead, since you only need 1 singles and 2 doubles for 5.0...)

volklite
11-22-2006, 12:01 PM
Here in Mississippi we have the same 4.0 team make it to sectionals every year, they go and lose terribly so they are not bumped up, not one of them. Some of them went undefeated through local league and at state, not bumped up. Last year this happened to me and I watched it happen to 2 more people this year. I lost 3 matches last year and did not advance to state and was bumped up. How is that?

Oh yeah, I formed a 4.5 team and there were 3 teams, we finished 2nd. We advanced to state, we are all now benchmarks, for what its worth. Its a broken system here where only 4 people you bumped to 4.5. Our state and local league is doing nothing to grow these leagues. I don't have a fair answer, just venting a frustration.

bleach
11-23-2006, 06:30 AM
This time I decided to appeal my 4.0 rating (it was accepted, so I'm 3.5 again). The reason I appealed this year was from experience last year. I was bumped last year and did not appeal. So I played at 4.0 Spring, Combo and Mixed seasons. Being a lower end 4.0 limits your value (at least in my area) to being selected for a team. If you play 7.5 combo, you have to play with a 3.5 (who may be the better player). As a result of playing at the higher levels I got bumped down for the mid-year early start ratings.

I went back to playing 3.5 leagues (also played 4.0, 0 wins) in the Fall (counts for '07). I have not lost yet at 3.5 this Fall season. Because the early start rating only applies to league play, I had to play 4.0 in all tournaments this year. I did OK, 2-4 overall in match play. So the end of the year I get bumped back to 4.0. I didn't want another year like this year. This time I thought, if I truely belong at 4.0 my appeal would be denied (which it wasn't). I am a little disappointed, and may only play 4.0 next season anyway. But it's nice to have the 3.5 options...

I wish that they would do away with the appeals process, everyone (at least here) appeals everytime. So why not just raise the bumping level and do away with appeals. But since that is not the case, why not play within the rules as much as possible?

timmbuck2
11-27-2006, 09:00 AM
This time I decided to appeal my 4.0 rating (it was accepted, so I'm 3.5 again). The reason I appealed this year was from experience last year. I was bumped last year and did not appeal. So I played at 4.0 Spring, Combo and Mixed seasons. Being a lower end 4.0 limits your value (at least in my area) to being selected for a team. If you play 7.5 combo, you have to play with a 3.5 (who may be the better player). As a result of playing at the higher levels I got bumped down for the mid-year early start ratings.

I went back to playing 3.5 leagues (also played 4.0, 0 wins) in the Fall (counts for '07). I have not lost yet at 3.5 this Fall season. Because the early start rating only applies to league play, I had to play 4.0 in all tournaments this year. I did OK, 2-4 overall in match play. So the end of the year I get bumped back to 4.0. I didn't want another year like this year. This time I thought, if I truely belong at 4.0 my appeal would be denied (which it wasn't). I am a little disappointed, and may only play 4.0 next season anyway. But it's nice to have the 3.5 options...

I wish that they would do away with the appeals process, everyone (at least here) appeals everytime. So why not just raise the bumping level and do away with appeals. But since that is not the case, why not play within the rules as much as possible?


wait....you are undefeated at 3.5 this fall....went 2-4 at 4.0 tourneys this year....and you appealed to go back to 3.5? I think the 2 biggest problems the USTA has with ratings are self-raters, and appeals that are WAY too easy. What was your reason for appealing? If you can win matches at the 4.0 level and are not losing at all at 3.5, why would you want to play 3.5? Not attacking or calling names, I am just curious.

TB2

ohplease
11-27-2006, 09:28 AM
wait....you are undefeated at 3.5 this fall....went 2-4 at 4.0 tourneys this year....and you appealed to go back to 3.5? I think the 2 biggest problems the USTA has with ratings are self-raters, and appeals that are WAY too easy. What was your reason for appealing? If you can win matches at the 4.0 level and are not losing at all at 3.5, why would you want to play 3.5? Not attacking or calling names, I am just curious.

TB2

He appealed because there's a structural flaw built-in to this system. He wants to play in USTA leagues. USTA league teams want him to play at 3.5, where he'll win, and want nothing to do with him at 4.0, where he won't win. The USTA is not giving him, or anybody else for that matter, any incentive to continue taking losses at the higher level.

VIDEO GAMES do a better job at this than the USTA. You level up in a video game, you don't stop playing, and you certainly don't keep hanging around at the previous level. Why? Because there's no reason to. Can we say the same thing about USTA tennis? No - and that's the problem.

Ash Doyle
11-27-2006, 09:43 AM
The flaw isn't with the USTA. Players should want to compete at the level where they can have the best competition, not hang around at lower levels and beat-up unfairly on lesser players. If you can finish a season undefeated at 3.5, then most likely, you should NOT be playing at 3.5. Maybe if the majority of the matches ended in close three setters I could see that maybe you're a good 3.5 that was having a good year. However, if those matches were quick two setters then you should not be at 3.5. Appealing to stay at 3.5, in my eyes, would be attempting to cheat.

You should want the competition. NOT winning for the sake of winning in a mismatched competition against lesser players.

Ronaldo
11-27-2006, 10:07 AM
You can win matches at a higher level only because others are playing up. They are 3.5 players too. But if you beat them handily and only lose to 4.0 teams by close scores, then you need to move up.

Ace
11-27-2006, 10:09 AM
Being a lower end 4.0 limits your value (at least in my area) to being selected for a team.

Can't you start a new 4.0 team with your 3.5 teammates? Or some other 3.5's?

ohplease
11-27-2006, 10:22 AM
The flaw isn't with the USTA. Players should want to compete at the level where they can have the best competition, not hang around at lower levels and beat-up unfairly on lesser players. If you can finish a season undefeated at 3.5, then most likely, you should NOT be playing at 3.5. Maybe if the majority of the matches ended in close three setters I could see that maybe you're a good 3.5 that was having a good year. However, if those matches were quick two setters then you should not be at 3.5. Appealing to stay at 3.5, in my eyes, would be attempting to cheat.

You should want the competition. NOT winning for the sake of winning in a mismatched competition against lesser players.

How do you define "the best competition?" More importantly, how does a team captain define it? Regardless of what any individual player might want to do - why should a *team captain* take on someone transitioning to the next highest level? Why should that team captian play that person?

How about in tournament play - when should the matches be competitive? In the first round? In the final?

Appealing to what players "should" do is no incentive at all - it's hoping for the best and it's consequently no surprise that things play out as ridiculously as they do in USTA play when titles and trophies are on the line.

bleach
11-27-2006, 12:44 PM
I do have a 4.0 team and it's mostly made up of 3.5 players. We never win a team match and have hardly won any individual matches, I enjoy playing 4.0 and will continue to do so. My 4.0 wins in tournaments have been against "4.0" players that would be weak 3.5s in league play (that's a fact), my losses were against player that would be low 4.0s.

At first, I was not going to appeal (in fact last year I did not). I was the only player in my local league that was bumped from 3.5 to 4.0 that did not try to appeal. I changed my mind this season after getting hammered as a 4.0 (playing adult, combo and mixed) then getting bumped back to a 3.5 anyway. I don't mind lossing as long as it's competitive. The USTA allows players to appeal based on a threshold in your dynamic rating. Everyone else is taking advantage of these rules.

Do I feel guilty for winning the appeal back to 3.5? Not one bit. I play to win every match and try to win every point. I would consider being DQ'd or a denied appeal a "badge of honor". I might not even play 3.5 Adult in the Spring. But it will be better to be a 3.5 for Combo and Mixed.

Also my 3.5 season ain't over yet...I may still drop a few.

timmbuck2
11-27-2006, 01:19 PM
I would consider being DQ'd or a denied appeal a "badge of honor".

Boy, I really don't understand this comment. DQ'ed for playing below your level would make you feel good?

I can't accept the excuse "everyone else is doing it"...that is what has brought us to this low level.

Jack the Hack
11-27-2006, 01:44 PM
Boy, I really don't understand this comment. DQ'ed for playing below your level would make you feel good?

I can't accept the excuse "everyone else is doing it"...that is what has brought us to this low level.

If I understand the system correctly, bleach has a computer generated rating that lies somwhere between 3.51 and 3.55, which would mean he is technically a 4.0 (because they round up anything beyond the half point). From his own admission, he seems to compete well with players with a true computer generated 3.5 rating, but does not compete favorably with true 4.0 rated players.

I understand the comments that he should want to challenge himself at the next level. However, there is a big difference between a 3.51 and a 3.90+... so much so that he would probably struggle to get games in a set. Given that, if his whole goal is to participate and have fun, he might have a hard time finding a 4.0 team to play on (which is what he's indicated).

I don't really have a problem with the type of situation that bleach is talking about. If you are playing tons of matches, do not cheat the system (ie, you play to win every time), and you have a computer generated rating, you are what you are. In that sense, with the DQ comment, he was saying "if the system really thinks I am a 4.0, then that is great."

My problem with the NTRP is when a player self rates drastically below their true level or cheats by purposely throwing matches or games in order to trick the system into a lower rating. It doesn't sound like bleach is doing either of these... but I can give you several examples of true cheating if you want to discuss.

jack mckinney
11-27-2006, 03:01 PM
there was a player in our league not lose a match at 4.5 and they moved him back to 4.0.... got him on our team now.. but go figure how they did that

timmbuck2
11-27-2006, 04:24 PM
If I understand the system correctly, bleach has a computer generated rating that lies somwhere between 3.51 and 3.55, which would mean he is technically a 4.0 (because they round up anything beyond the half point). From his own admission, he seems to compete well with players with a true computer generated 3.5 rating, but does not compete favorably with true 4.0 rated players.

I understand the comments that he should want to challenge himself at the next level. However, there is a big difference between a 3.51 and a 3.90+... so much so that he would probably struggle to get games in a set. Given that, if his whole goal is to participate and have fun, he might have a hard time finding a 4.0 team to play on (which is what he's indicated).

I don't really have a problem with the type of situation that bleach is talking about. If you are playing tons of matches, do not cheat the system (ie, you play to win every time), and you have a computer generated rating, you are what you are. In that sense, with the DQ comment, he was saying "if the system really thinks I am a 4.0, then that is great."

My problem with the NTRP is when a player self rates drastically below their true level or cheats by purposely throwing matches or games in order to trick the system into a lower rating. It doesn't sound like bleach is doing either of these... but I can give you several examples of true cheating if you want to discuss.


don't get me wrong, I am not accusing him of cheating! He is playing by the USTA rules, flawed as they are. I just have different goals, that's all.

bleach
11-27-2006, 06:48 PM
Is the rating system flawed? It sure is... Is it flawed because I decided to play within the rules use the tools that are provided (appeals). No way!

Everyone wants to get to the next level, whether the next level for them is Sectionals/Nationals or 4.0/4.5... The dynamic rating system has given people a way to see how they are advancing. I am honored to see my rating get bumped up. But with the appeals process, you can't truly feel like you have advanced unless you have your appeal denied. The system has just created this situation. Last year, I did not appeal and felt like I didn't really belong. I knew without a doubt that I would win an appeal if I tried.

For the first time ever, this season I'm playing on a team that has hopes to go beyond local league play (last season team went to sectionals-- not with me). I decided to play and make to goal to go as far as possible.

I really think that it is funny that you (or someone) is questioning my morals because I decided to appeal within the rules. In three years I have played over 100 league matches, I have been bumped 4 times (3 up/1 down) and have appealed once. If we are going to rely on a computer to determine the rating we play under, then let the computer decide.

Geezer Guy
11-28-2006, 05:59 AM
If I understand the system correctly, bleach has a computer generated rating that lies somwhere between 3.51 and 3.55, which would mean he is technically a 4.0 (because they round up anything beyond the half point). From his own admission, he seems to compete well with players with a true computer generated 3.5 rating, but does not compete favorably with true 4.0 rated players.

I understand the comments that he should want to challenge himself at the next level. However, there is a big difference between a 3.51 and a 3.90+... so much so that he would probably struggle to get games in a set. Given that, if his whole goal is to participate and have fun, he might have a hard time finding a 4.0 team to play on (which is what he's indicated).

I don't really have a problem with the type of situation that bleach is talking about. If you are playing tons of matches, do not cheat the system (ie, you play to win every time), and you have a computer generated rating, you are what you are. In that sense, with the DQ comment, he was saying "if the system really thinks I am a 4.0, then that is great."

...

I'm not bagging on bleach - he appears to be playing by the letter of the law (if maybe not the spirit). Howere, he said he was UNDEFEATED in 3.5 play and has a 2-4 record against 4.0 players. That tells me that with just a LITTLE improvement he could be 3-3 against 4.0 players, and who knows HOW much better he would get playing against the big boys? But, he chooses to stay at 3.5 where he can rack up the easy wins. He would certainly be in for tougher matches in the 4.0 league and he'd have to suffer some losses, but it might be better for his game.

I understand how he feels though - it's no fun going from being one of the best guys on the team to someone who's just trying to MAKE the team.

Ronaldo
11-28-2006, 06:08 AM
Come on, you could win your serve at 3.5 just by getting it in and WALKING OFF the court, the return is in the net or out. Return the ball to the server and LEAVE, he will miss the 1st volley or half-volley. Taken bets on how quickly the matches are over. Lost the bet, ours took 35 minutes.

Geezer Guy
11-28-2006, 06:24 AM
That is usually not true of a match between two 3.5 players.
That would only be true if one or the other was either WAY above or WAY below the 3.5 level.

bleach
11-28-2006, 09:17 AM
Ok let me explain myself one more time....

I do push myself and want to advance. I'm a 4.0 team captain, I put myself (undeservingly) at singles against "big boys", I'm not afraid of losing. If I was, I would have died by now. My goal is to make it to a true 4.0 player, not a border-line player. I also have a goal to help my team (3.5) win the local-league, regional, sectionals.... To do this you (as well as your teammates) have to rack up lots of wins (some easy, some not). With a lot of wins, you end up getting bumped up. To keep your team together, you appeal. Again it's what your goals are. I commented to helping my team advance (win), to do that I need to be on the team, but only using legal, ethical, moral means of doing so.

Again I don't understand the "not playing by the spirit of the law" comment. If I was hiding out, playing #3, sitting out against better players or not doing my best everytime you could accuse me of that... and easy wins... yeah I keep waiting for one of those!

Jack the Hack
11-28-2006, 11:09 AM
Ok let me explain myself one more time....

I do push myself and want to advance. I'm a 4.0 team captain, I put myself (undeservingly) at singles against "big boys", I'm not afraid of losing. If I was, I would have died by now. My goal is to make it to a true 4.0 player, not a border-line player. I also have a goal to help my team (3.5) win the local-league, regional, sectionals.... To do this you (as well as your teammates) have to rack up lots of wins (some easy, some not). With a lot of wins, you end up getting bumped up. To keep your team together, you appeal. Again it's what your goals are. I commented to helping my team advance (win), to do that I need to be on the team, but only using legal, ethical, moral means of doing so.

Again I don't understand the "not playing by the spirit of the law" comment. If I was hiding out, playing #3, sitting out against better players or not doing my best everytime you could accuse me of that... and easy wins... yeah I keep waiting for one of those!

Bleach,

As I have mentioned before, I don't have a problem with computer rated players that have long records and do not dodge matches (or otherwise mess with the system) like yourself.

I don't think that there is anything ethically wrong ("spirit of the law" or otherwise) with what you are doing. You are on the borderline between 3.5 and 4.0, and under the system, if you are between 3.51 and 3.55, you automatically qualify to stay at 3.5. Players in the 3.01 to 3.39 range will gripe because you likely are more consistant than them, but you should have tough matches with those in the 3.4 to 3.5 range like yourself. Another way of looking at it would be that if you played nothing but fellow players in the 3.4 to 3.5 range, your record would probably be around the .500 mark.

(That's why the "unbeaten in 3.5" claim doesn't concern me; you might have played nothing but weak 3.5ers, or 3.0 players playing up. Also, the 4.0 players you played might have been on the low end of the spectrum, or were also really 3.5ers like yourself.)

As for winning districts, sectionals, and nationals, the fact is that you could load your entire team roster with players that are on the borderline between 3.5 and 4.0 like yourself, and you still probably wouldn't go to nationals (much less win there) because of unethical teams that outright cheat with one of these methods:

1.) Recruiting self rated players that are 1-3 levels higher, and hiding them in doubles, only using them for the minimum amount of time before playoffs. (Usually requires players to lie on the self evaluation form, which happens quite often with former college players.)

2.) Purposely throwing matches to avoid strikes or to game the system to generate lower ratings. (Some teams plan their national championship runs years in advance and game the system in their favor to build a team.)

3.) With advanced planning, have a player self-rate 3 or more levels below their true level, play a year at the low level, and then get the computer rated bump to the next level (even if it is still 2 levels lower than where they should be.) For example, recruit a 5.0 player to play at 3.5 for a year. The computer or three strikes system should catch him, but it will not bump him up more than one level. Viola! Now he has a "legitimate" 4.0 computer rating, even if he is really a 5.0.

I have personally seen all of these tactics used in the past two years from teams that have gone to nationals from the section I live in. If you were one of those types on here trying to justify yourself, I would certainly be leveraging a lot of criticism also!

Ronaldo
11-28-2006, 12:39 PM
That is usually not true of a match between two 3.5 players.
That would only be true if one or the other was either WAY above or WAY below the 3.5 level.

Geez, that happened this year in a 4.0 dubs match and one of our opponents was rated 4.0. And my partner is over 70! On clay! On a cool evening! No sun! No wind! Free beer if you win or lose! Only griping because it is hard to break into our 4.0 team line-up, only play when we travel.

Jack the Hack
11-28-2006, 03:05 PM
Geez, that happened this year in a 4.0 dubs match and one of our opponents was rated 4.0. And my partner is over 70! On clay! On a cool evening! No sun! No wind! Free beer if you win or lose! Only griping because it is hard to break into our 4.0 team line-up, only play when we travel.

Well, as the opposite of some of the people who cheat, there are some players that are living on old, expired, over-inflated ratings from years ago... or self rate much higher than they really are. They do not play enough to have the results effect their rating either way, and they just hang on for years at the wrong level to have a chance to say they are on a good team or have a good rating.

I'm at the lower end of the 4.5 spectrum right now (and was rated 4.0 last year), but there are several players on my club's 4.5 and 5.0 teams that I absolutely destroy in singles (or doubles for that matter). Almost any solid 4.0 singles player would beat these guys easily, but they have been rated 4.5 or higher for years and the system will never drop them because they only play a couple sanctioned doubles matches per year. On the other hand, I've played over 100 matches in the past two years between a combination of tournaments and league play and have a 76-29 record. If you are seriously playing a lot of matches, you are going to have a huge advantage over the pretenders that only show up occassionally, regardless of relative rating levels. I'm betting that the two guys you thumped in doubles were pretenders...