PDA

View Full Version : Interesting Rule on when you can file a self rate grievence


JavierLW
01-07-2009, 05:42 PM
Thought this was interesting, from the 2009 League Rules:

2.02E(5) Self-rate grievances may be filed at any time up to forty-eight (48)
hours after the conclusion of a self-rated player’s Section Championships. No self-rate
grievances will be accepted at National Championships.

Something to keep in mind.

(keep in mind though if you base it on player history and have proof it has a better chance of winning, versus "i think he's too good" or "he beat so and so", etc....)

raiden031
01-09-2009, 10:45 AM
Thought this was interesting, from the 2009 League Rules:

2.02E(5) Self-rate grievances may be filed at any time up to forty-eight (48)
hours after the conclusion of a self-rated player’s Section Championships. No self-rate
grievances will be accepted at National Championships.

Something to keep in mind.

(keep in mind though if you base it on player history and have proof it has a better chance of winning, versus "i think he's too good" or "he beat so and so", etc....)

I heard you couldn't file a self-rate grievance at nationals, but it makes no sense to me. If someone who played D-1 college tennis shows up at Nationals at say 3.5 level, there is nothing you can do about it?

Their rule states something like a self-rate grievance can be filed if they are "at the top of the next skill level up from what they're playing", but in most cases there is no way to prove this other than when they lie about previous competitive experience such as college or playing at a high NTRP level a few years ago. I'd say in most cases they will throw it out if you can't back it up with solid evidence.

JLyon
01-09-2009, 11:04 AM
it is a good rule because any clear ringers should have been busted by Nationals and if not then start blaming the captains at the local/district/sectional level for not policing their leagues. Besides more than likely said player would also be DQ'ed in many instances.

raiden031
01-09-2009, 11:44 AM
it is a good rule because any clear ringers should have been busted by Nationals and if not then start blaming the captains at the local/district/sectional level for not policing their leagues. Besides more than likely said player would also be DQ'ed in many instances.

If captains hide them in doubles, then opposing captains may not think they should do a background check on the player. Then when Nationals comes the 'bagger plays singles and crushed everyone. Then someone gets suspicious and does a background check and finds they played D-1 college but can't do anything because its too late. Thats crap. If someone lies about their experience, it should be punishable at any time.

JavierLW
01-09-2009, 12:03 PM
I heard you couldn't file a self-rate grievance at nationals, but it makes no sense to me. If someone who played D-1 college tennis shows up at Nationals at say 3.5 level, there is nothing you can do about it?

Their rule states something like a self-rate grievance can be filed if they are "at the top of the next skill level up from what they're playing", but in most cases there is no way to prove this other than when they lie about previous competitive experience such as college or playing at a high NTRP level a few years ago. I'd say in most cases they will throw it out if you can't back it up with solid evidence.

You are right.

Ive seen one of these filed before a season started, and it won (in 2007).

Player registered for a 3.5 team. Just a simple search in tennislink showed he was playing 5.0 league tennis 6 years prior. He didnt win any matches, but had several close game scores and even won a set.

Another captain filed a self rating grievence, the reasoning being that he consulted well known teaching pros in the area and there is no way a 3.5 player would have those sorts of results in 5.0 even if they did happen to lose every match. (the team with the 3.5 player would get crushed unless he ducks out of the way and has a 6.0 player for a partner or something)

The grievance by rule went to the sectional grievance committee. Someone from the committee itself happened to of played at the very same club that this guy plays at all the time, and added that:

1) He was ranked #2 in doubles in the state in HS in the 70's. Some of our top high school tennis teams are better then a lot of mediocre college teams.

2) He plays ALL the time, so it's not like he's just returning to the game.

From his last stint at 5.0, he got moved down to 4.5 from then. So they reasoned that he's at least a 4.5, which puts him over the top of the next level (for 3.5), so they gave him a 4.0 rating and he was DQ'ed from the team.

The team went on to take 4th place in Nationals, and 2 other players got DQ'ed along the way via DNTRP (one of which didnt even play a match at 3.5 because he only played 4.0).

The other players didnt have such an obvious player history issue. (if they did the same other captain would of filed a fair play grievance on them as well)

The reason why I posted this rule is I think a lot of us had the idea that once the season started we couldnt do much about it because the player would of already generated a DNTRP rating. (Ive seen that posted here by people, and I sort of guessed that mysefl) What's cool is apparently that's not the case.

(but anyway the point you are right about is that you have to find evidence of player history and it has to conclude that they are at the top of the next level or higher. Say it's the 3.5 league, and you find some dirt on someone and it leads to the idea that they should be just 4.0... That's probably not good enough)

However they cant just throw it out like they can with other grievances by rule. (if you are basing it on player history evidence. If you are just saying "so and so looks too good", then I think they can throw it out since that's not what the self rating is based on for players with experience)

JavierLW
01-09-2009, 12:21 PM
If captains hide them in doubles, then opposing captains may not think they should do a background check on the player. Then when Nationals comes the 'bagger plays singles and crushed everyone. Then someone gets suspicious and does a background check and finds they played D-1 college but can't do anything because its too late. Thats crap. If someone lies about their experience, it should be punishable at any time.

That's a good point.

I think this was just a compromise that was made. There are elements that run the league that tend to worry too much about not disenfranchising the minority (including the cheaters).

What's funny is in my example, nothing was done with the captain anyway, although if you look at the 2007 3.5 national championships he had the only team with 3 DQ'ed players on it.

raiden031
01-09-2009, 12:45 PM
jaview,

Interesting story. The only good story I have is at 6.0 Mixed Nationals this year, there was a player who was rated at 3.5 (partnered with a 2.5) and easily won all of his matches (they ended up winning overall) including a match against a pair on my team, where the our guy ended up getting a double-bump to 4.0, yet lost to this other guy in mixed. Someone on my team discovered that the guy had junior college experience and after a grievance, he was DQ'd from 3.0 earlier in the season and placed at 3.5 (still too low according to USTA guidelines). So our captain tried to file a grievance about him only getting bumped to 3.5, but that failed so the results stood.

JLyon
01-09-2009, 01:00 PM
If captains hide them in doubles, then opposing captains may not think they should do a background check on the player. Then when Nationals comes the 'bagger plays singles and crushed everyone. Then someone gets suspicious and does a background check and finds they played D-1 college but can't do anything because its too late. Thats crap. If someone lies about their experience, it should be punishable at any time.

Again I will respectfully disagree. I maybe be crazy, but I always examine the rosters of teams I'll be competing again and file greivances as I see fit since so much info is available online. If the player makes it to nationals then he/she should be untouchable because a smart captain would have already nailed the player more than likely at Districts or Sectionals at the latest.
In 2007 I nailed one player in local league and one at Districts.

raiden031
01-09-2009, 01:10 PM
Again I will respectfully disagree. I maybe be crazy, but I always examine the rosters of teams I'll be competing again and file greivances as I see fit since so much info is available online. If the player makes it to nationals then he/she should be untouchable because a smart captain would have already nailed the player more than likely at Districts or Sectionals at the latest.
In 2007 I nailed one player in local league and one at Districts.

So you have time to google search all 18 or so players on a team? I don't think that should be expected by a captain. Why should they be untouchable at Nationals? If they want to cheat and risk getting caught and getting a National win overturned, thats their choice. Just like you can lose a gold medal years after winning an Olympic event if new evidence arises that you cheated.

JLyon
01-09-2009, 01:52 PM
Well it is not like you have to search every player, the cheaters will be self-raters, so look for new faces that you do not remember, simple search on USTA Site will tell you if they are a Self-rate. Forget about Computer rated players as they are now untouchable. So out of 18 players you should only have to look at maybe 6-8 max.

kylebarendrick
01-09-2009, 01:53 PM
I guess one reason not to DQ at nationals would be that, frankly, it wouldn't really affect anything. There are no additional playoff rounds after that and nobody outside of the players really cares who wins. It may also be due to the fact that nationals are used to normalize ratings across the sections, so you can expect to see some discrepancies there.

Either way, I agree that lying about your previous experience should be cause for an immediate DQ at any playoff level (including nationals). I'd throw a 1-year suspension into the mix as well - for both the captain and the player.

raiden031
01-09-2009, 03:26 PM
Well it is not like you have to search every player, the cheaters will be self-raters, so look for new faces that you do not remember, simple search on USTA Site will tell you if they are a Self-rate. Forget about Computer rated players as they are now untouchable. So out of 18 players you should only have to look at maybe 6-8 max.

new faces? Do you know every player in your section? I still don't think a captain at Nationals should have to rely on other captains at districts/sectionals to file the grievance.

Either way, I agree that lying about your previous experience should be cause for an immediate DQ at any playoff level (including nationals). I'd throw a 1-year suspension into the mix as well - for both the captain and the player.

Yep. I guarantee if captains were banned for self-rating former college players at rediculously low levels, then that practice would stop real quick.

JavierLW
01-09-2009, 04:11 PM
Again I will respectfully disagree. I maybe be crazy, but I always examine the rosters of teams I'll be competing again and file greivances as I see fit since so much info is available online. If the player makes it to nationals then he/she should be untouchable because a smart captain would have already nailed the player more than likely at Districts or Sectionals at the latest.
In 2007 I nailed one player in local league and one at Districts.

I agree that maybe you can catch players.

But that is still a weak argument for why it should be allowed at nationals if someone's made it that far.

The other teams at nationals are getting cheated. So they should get cheated just because none of the captains at any other level prior to that didn't do anything? Im sorry but that doesn't make any sense.

And the fact that nationals is used to normalize player ratings around the country is even more reason to kick out players who make it this far.

Cheating should not be tolerated at any level. It's like any other sport if you make it far enough where you receive the ultimate reward and it's found that you cheated then that's bad for the sport.

But like I said, I think the REAL reason why they dont do it is there are elements of USTA leadership that if they had it there way would have no fair play grievances, so this is just a compromise to them.