PDA

View Full Version : USTA Norcal Cheats


beststringer
08-29-2010, 12:09 AM
There are a few big clubs out here that cheats with self-rated players. The USTA office here laughs at my complaints. Basically, their committees all come from those clubs. Do you have the same problems in your areas? USTA is fun but is full of cheats.

dizzlmcwizzl
08-29-2010, 03:00 AM
Here I rarely find consistent cheaters. Occasionally a couple players will poorly self rate, but it is not the same captain every year.

The middle states appear to be policing this pretty well. This past weekend we were playing at sectionals and there were 2 players DQ'd mid-sectional. Another couple of players were DQ'd before the event began. While players from these other districts might believe there were cheaters in their leagues during the regular season, by the time they advanced to districts and sectionals the offending players had been removed.

When it was all said and done the best team advanced. They had no self rated players.

beststringer
08-29-2010, 09:59 AM
It's good to know that some other regions are monitoring this. Watch out when you guys play against the Norcal teams with the self-rated players. The Norcal office don't do nothing to enforce the rules on them at all.

JLyon
08-29-2010, 10:35 AM
NorCal is also the home of the infamous 4.0 Team that went to Nationals and used ineligible players and all USTA did was slap them on the wrist, after initially handing out long bans. Until the USTA and Sections decide to do something about the rampant cheating it will continue on until Captains say F'It and start questioning everyone that Self-rates.

OrangePower
08-29-2010, 12:48 PM
There are a few big clubs out here that cheats with self-rated players. The USTA office here laughs at my complaints. Basically, their committees all come from those clubs. Do you have the same problems in your areas? USTA is fun but is full of cheats.

NorCal is also the home of the infamous 4.0 Team that went to Nationals and used ineligible players and all USTA did was slap them on the wrist, after initially handing out long bans. Until the USTA and Sections decide to do something about the rampant cheating it will continue on until Captains say F'It and start questioning everyone that Self-rates.

I've played Norcal leagues for several years, first 4.0 then 4.5. In my personal experience I've never come across any blatant cheating. I heard the stories about the infamous Nationals team but that was in a different area. In my area, the captains all know each other, and none of the captains would be willing to soil their reputations with stuff like that. I think that's the key - the real cheating will happen in areas where there are many new captains that don't know each other and are willing to do anything to win, whether in Norcal or anywhere else.

Now, a few times I have played self-rated players that may have rated too low... in each of these cases I really think it was not a malicious attempt to cheat; but just underestimating how quickly they would get back in the groove after a layoff. And honestly I don't care - I'm in it to get some good matches, and as long as it's not blatant deliberate cheating, if I lose to someone that is maybe really a level higher, so what? Good tennis is good tennis.

mutantducky
08-29-2010, 01:03 PM
I don't know too much about the 4.0 and below. I know that there were some players who had been playing 5.0 in the past and even had winning or even records but somehow got bumped down to 4.5. But of course the team with the 5.0 players ended up losing in the playoffs. :twisted: Still that team which was stacked last year as well got whipped by another team in sectionals which had even more 5.0 guys. Other than that things have been fine though.

dafox
08-29-2010, 01:04 PM
What are the teams that you are calling out in Nor Cal? I know some of the 4.5 guys at the sectionals this weekend and they are VERY strong and honest. I think cheating is more evident at the 3.0/3.5 levels???

decades
08-29-2010, 01:23 PM
if you go in assuming that in your 4.0 league you will mostly playing 4.5 and 5.0 players, your expectations will be geared correctly and you won't be surprised disappointed or angry about it.

beststringer
08-29-2010, 02:01 PM
I've played Norcal leagues for several years, first 4.0 then 4.5. In my personal experience I've never come across any blatant cheating. I heard the stories about the infamous Nationals team but that was in a different area. In my area, the captains all know each other, and none of the captains would be willing to soil their reputations with stuff like that. I think that's the key - the real cheating will happen in areas where there are many new captains that don't know each other and are willing to do anything to win, whether in Norcal or anywhere else.

Now, a few times I have played self-rated players that may have rated too low... in each of these cases I really think it was not a malicious attempt to cheat; but just underestimating how quickly they would get back in the groove after a layoff. And honestly I don't care - I'm in it to get some good matches, and as long as it's not blatant deliberate cheating, if I lose to someone that is maybe really a level higher, so what? Good tennis is good tennis.

We don't need to argue with perceptions. Just logon to Norcal's USTA's site and see all the teams that are going to the playoffs, districts, and etc. See how many "self-rated" players they have and how many matches those self-rated players have won. It's all there. No need to argue.

OrangePower
08-29-2010, 02:40 PM
We don't need to argue with perceptions. Just logon to Norcal's USTA's site and see all the teams that are going to the playoffs, districts, and etc. See how many "self-rated" players they have. It's all there. No need to argue.

That's an interesting idea. So following your suggestion, I looked at the 4.5 teams playing sectionals this weekend (since I know many of these guys), and here's what I found:

Fremont: 12 players participated in sectionals (so far). NONE are self rated.
Millbrae: 9 players in sectionals. NONE self rated.
Broadstone: 9 players in sectionals. NONE self rated.
Foster City: 10 players in sectionals. 1 self rated.
Foothills: 10 players in sectionals. NONE self rated.

Since they are competing in sectionals, its fair to say that these are the best teams in Norcal, and in total, there is exactly 1 out of 50 self rated players.

So as you said - no need to argue. When it comes to teams at the 4.5 level, which is what I previously posted about, you are clearly wrong.

PS. I posted actual team names since this is freely available info.

beststringer
08-29-2010, 03:56 PM
That's an interesting idea. So following your suggestion, I looked at the 4.5 teams playing sectionals this weekend (since I know many of these guys), and here's what I found:

Fremont: 12 players participated in sectionals (so far). NONE are self rated.
Millbrae: 9 players in sectionals. NONE self rated.
Broadstone: 9 players in sectionals. NONE self rated.
Foster City: 10 players in sectionals. 1 self rated.
Foothills: 10 players in sectionals. NONE self rated.

Since they are competing in sectionals, its fair to say that these are the best teams in Norcal, and in total, there is exactly 1 out of 50 self rated players.

So as you said - no need to argue. When it comes to teams at the 4.5 level, which is what I previously posted about, you are clearly wrong.

PS. I posted actual team names since this is freely available info.

2009 Adult League Mens 4.5 CUESTA TC M4.5C had 2 self-rated players and their records were 14 - 0. They won Sectional S-300 3-0.

There are a lot more cheating at 4.0 and lower. Agreed.

I am just telling the other region's players that if they ever face a Norcal team in the nationals, they should be aware that Norcal teams cheat with self-rated players and their Norcal offices condone this type of behaviours.

OrangePower
08-29-2010, 04:40 PM
2009 Adult League Mens 4.5 CUESTA TC M4.5C had 2 self-rated players and their records were 14 - 0. They won Sectional S-300 3-0.

There are a lot more cheating at 4.0 and lower. Agreed.

I am just telling the other region's players that if they ever face a Norcal team in the nationals, they should be aware that Norcal teams cheat with self-rated players and their Norcal offices condone this type of behaviours.

Honestly I think you have sour grapes for some reason. Did your team get knocked out by a team that you suspect was cheating?

You are making it seem much worse than it is, and the data does not support your claim. You ignore the 2010 sectionals info I posted and instead you're complaining about a team in 2009. Aren't you a year too late?

But ok, since you bring it up, let's look at the 2009 Cuesta team. Yes, they had 2 self-rated players. Out of a roster of 22! One of the self-rated players did not play AT ALL post season. The other one played, but not in sectionals (which this team won, as you pointed out). None of the 10 players who actually played at sectionals was self rated.

This to me does not look like a team trying to cheat. You're own example doesn't even back up your point.

Sorry I don't mean to make this personal but I don't like people complaining about 'rampant cheating' just because they lost or something. And you are trying to diminish the achievement of every Norcal team that makes it to Nationals.

beststringer
08-29-2010, 06:43 PM
Honestly I think you have sour grapes for some reason. Did your team get knocked out by a team that you suspect was cheating?

You are making it seem much worse than it is, and the data does not support your claim. You ignore the 2010 sectionals info I posted and instead you're complaining about a team in 2009. Aren't you a year too late?

But ok, since you bring it up, let's look at the 2009 Cuesta team. Yes, they had 2 self-rated players. Out of a roster of 22! One of the self-rated players did not play AT ALL post season. The other one played, but not in sectionals (which this team won, as you pointed out). None of the 10 players who actually played at sectionals was self rated.

This to me does not look like a team trying to cheat. You're own example doesn't even back up your point.

Sorry I don't mean to make this personal but I don't like people complaining about 'rampant cheating' just because they lost or something. And you are trying to diminish the achievement of every Norcal team that makes it to Nationals.

Cheating is rampant.

max8176
09-01-2010, 01:04 AM
Honestly I think you have sour grapes for some reason. Did your team get knocked out by a team that you suspect was cheating?

You are making it seem much worse than it is, and the data does not support your claim. You ignore the 2010 sectionals info I posted and instead you're complaining about a team in 2009. Aren't you a year too late?

But ok, since you bring it up, let's look at the 2009 Cuesta team. Yes, they had 2 self-rated players. Out of a roster of 22! One of the self-rated players did not play AT ALL post season. The other one played, but not in sectionals (which this team won, as you pointed out). None of the 10 players who actually played at sectionals was self rated.

This to me does not look like a team trying to cheat. You're own example doesn't even back up your point.

Sorry I don't mean to make this personal but I don't like people complaining about 'rampant cheating' just because they lost or something. And you are trying to diminish the achievement of every Norcal team that makes it to Nationals.

It's always convenient for people to leave out important evidence to make their own point more attractive.

Are you from OP?

OrangePower
09-01-2010, 09:13 AM
It's always convenient for people to leave out important evidence to make their own point more attractive.

Are you from OP?

By OP you mean Orange Park? No, I'm in the east bay. My team didn't even make playoffs, but I just don't like to see successful teams being bashed and assumed to be cheaters just because they did well.

Delano
09-01-2010, 12:22 PM
By OP you mean Orange Park? No, I'm in the east bay. My team didn't even make playoffs, but I just don't like to see successful teams being bashed and assumed to be cheaters just because they did well.

On a related note, I don't like to see unsuccessful teams being bashed and assumed to be cheaters because they play from the same public park or club that is currently or was at one time the home base of notorious sandbaggers/cheaters/etc.

I actually get a lot of this. Oh, you play for <welllet'sjustgoaheadandleaveitunspoken>? Man, I hate playing those guys, bunch of sandbaggers.

Uh, who? Dude, we haven't had a winning season in three years. Do you think the other team's cheatin' ways seep into the court and slowly enter the blood stream of all who set foot upon it through osmosis?

beststringer
09-02-2010, 08:41 AM
Big clubs usually have 3 types of teams:

1. Cheaters
2. Wanna be's
3. Friends

dafox
09-02-2010, 09:12 AM
Big clubs usually have 3 types of teams:

1. Cheaters
2. Wanna be's
3. Friends

LOL...yes so very true....that's why you should only play tourneys...the true test of a tennis player...you can't pass the buck to someone else.

ebrainsoft
09-02-2010, 09:53 AM
I've been playing Nor Cal, USTA for several years and I agree it's full of cheaters and sand baggers. I'm, admittedly, a sand bagger but in Nor Cal, sand bagging is more for survival than cheating!

beststringer
09-02-2010, 10:00 AM
I've been playing Nor Cal, USTA for several years and I agree it's full of cheaters and sand baggers. I'm, admittedly, a sand bagger but in Nor Cal, sand bagging is more for survival than cheating!

very well put!!!

JoelDali
09-02-2010, 10:02 AM
No sandbaggers = no tennis

No tennis = :(

tennis tom
09-02-2010, 10:57 AM
Big clubs usually have 3 types of teams:

1. Cheaters
2. Wanna be's
3. Friends

LOL...yes so very true....that's why you should only play tourneys...the true test of a tennis player...you can't pass the buck to someone else.


True on all counts!

West Coast Ace
09-02-2010, 05:33 PM
I've been playing Nor Cal, USTA for several years and I agree it's full of cheaters and sand baggers. I'm, admittedly, a sand bagger but in Nor Cal, sand bagging is more for survival than cheating!We have found The Honest Man on TW! That virgin in the maternity ward can't be far away... If you're ever in So Cal I'll buy you an Adult Beverage. I just won't play you for money... :)

if you go in assuming that in your 4.0 league you will mostly playing 4.5 and 5.0 players, your expectations will be geared correctly and you won't be surprised disappointed or angry about it.That's sad. But probably true. Too many guys who are 'coming back to the game' or 'coming back from a near death injury' - and want to have a solid winning record. Instead of just practicing until they regain their form. And the USTA is more than happy to take their money and hose the people who don't want to sandbag.

armstrong
09-02-2010, 06:27 PM
I have to say, I played this past weekend in 4.5 NorCal sectionals and disagree with the OP. Some players are stronger than others, and those players will get bumped. I found all the matches to be competitive.

djnemo
09-03-2010, 11:18 AM
I play Norcal USTA, and I have no problem with sandbaggers as long as they don't throw games. I expect my opponent to try to win every point, and if they lose even one game on purpose then I consider that to be cheating and poor character. As long as sandbaggers try to win at all times, they will eventually be bumped...

(Players throw games in Norcal all the time, including my some of my friends)

beststringer
09-03-2010, 03:15 PM
I play Norcal USTA, and I have no problem with sandbaggers as long as they don't throw games. I expect my opponent to try to win every point, and if they lose even one game on purpose then I consider that to be cheating and poor character. As long as sandbaggers try to win at all times, they will eventually be bumped...

(Players throw games in Norcal all the time, including my some of my friends)

true, there was one match I saw where the sandbagger lost the first set 0-6, and came back to win 6-2, 6-1. It's so funny because the first set loss was so fake.

max8176
09-12-2010, 11:19 PM
By OP you mean Orange Park? No, I'm in the east bay. My team didn't even make playoffs, but I just don't like to see successful teams being bashed and assumed to be cheaters just because they did well.

Yeah, I thought you are from Orange Park.

diadorakuerten
09-13-2010, 06:24 PM
I witnessed some cheating at the 5.5 and 5.0 levels but not 4.5. Brad Weston, who played on the tour and was as high as 583 in Singles and 303 in Dubs ATP is rated a 5.5. He lost to Jan-Michael Gambill 7-6 6-3 this year. How is Weston a 5.5??

Same thing was Chris Harrison (Weston's club mate) who was rated a 4.5 at the beginning of the season and is now a 5.0. He won a set off Brad Weston in singles. How is he a 5.0??

Tyler Browne, who played at Cal is rated 5.5. He won the Moraga Open this year, beating Weston in the finals in straight sets, Motevassel (ex top 200 ATP) in straights, etc. This guy is no 5.5.

When you win countless Open tournaments you should be rated at least 6.0. Tyler Browne won 9 Open tournaments (singles and doubles), Brad Weston won 36 Open tournaments. Greg Lee won 23 Open tournaments and is also a 5.5.

I think the USTA should redo the whole ranking system. It is very poor compared to other countries. For example, in France, you can calculate the number of points you have and you know how many rated players you need to beat in order to access to the next ranking. Here, you have no idea what your rating will be the following year. It's kind of a lottery. The whole rating system needs to be revised. It makes no sense to me.

tennis4josh
09-13-2010, 09:00 PM
I've played Norcal leagues for several years, first 4.0 then 4.5. In my personal experience I've never come across any blatant cheating. I heard the stories about the infamous Nationals team but that was in a different area. In my area, the captains all know each other, and none of the captains would be willing to soil their reputations with stuff like that. I think that's the key - the real cheating will happen in areas where there are many new captains that don't know each other and are willing to do anything to win, whether in Norcal or anywhere else.

Now, a few times I have played self-rated players that may have rated too low... in each of these cases I really think it was not a malicious attempt to cheat; but just underestimating how quickly they would get back in the groove after a layoff. And honestly I don't care - I'm in it to get some good matches, and as long as it's not blatant deliberate cheating, if I lose to someone that is maybe really a level higher, so what? Good tennis is good tennis.

completely agree with everything you said. I would rather fight and loose against a better opponent than win easily.

The people who claim that there is rampant cheating are basically sore losers and I have come across quite a few of them playing in norcal. Generally when someone says sandbagger people think of a self rated player, but thats not right. In my club we get several first time players every year, and they make genuine attempt to self rate correctly. Some of them advance much quicker than rest and by end of the year fit the description of a sand bagger. But that's just a case of underestimating one's ability. The intent is not to cheat. And this happens with may be 1 or at the most 2 players in a group of 15-20.

In my opinion cheating is when:
1. Former college players self rate themselves as low as 3.5
2. People appeal their rating down and play #1 single's at the new lower level and win easily.
3. People who purposely tank matches because they don't want to get bumped up. This happens a lot at 4.0 level. Very few folks can retain the fitness to compete at 4.5 and above and want to stay at 4.0 forever.

I am not implying that everything is kosher in norcal and no one cheats. But I don't think "rampant cheating" is the way I would describe it. In fact its far from that. Every season I see may be like 1 or 2 self rated players who seem better than the level they are playing at.

Interestingly you almost never hear any one complain about sand baggers in the local league. Then once you advance to districts people start whispering about self rated players and at sectionals you get accused of cheating.

Norcal sectionals is a joke. There is a club which is the only tennis facility in the whole area . Typically they have 2 teams from the same club who play like 7-8 times against each other and one of them almost always reaches the sectionals. While other teams like those from the SF bay area overcome stiff competition to reach sectionals and in the process improve a lot. So this lucky team never wins at sectionals and finds solace in calling their opponents cheaters.

tennis4josh
09-13-2010, 09:03 PM
Duplicate Post..

kylebarendrick
09-13-2010, 10:29 PM
I expect that norcal is a lot like everywhere else. Yes, there are people that self-rate too low. Yes, there are people that do everything they can not to get bumped up. Yes, there are captains that tell their players to throw games/sets to avoid DQs. I've played in norcal for years and have personally seen all of the above. I'd be stunned if every section didn't have plenty of the same issues.

At the same time, the vast majority of players and teams are focused on playing well, improving their game, having fun, and meeting/playing new people. I have to admit that I love seeing these teams do well at the expense of a team that is pulling out all the stops to make it to sectionals.

XFactorer
09-14-2010, 02:13 PM
How can we find out if an opponent is a self-rated or computer/benchmarked/other 4.0 player? I don't see it on the regular league section when you can do an over-view of the team on TennisLink

cak
09-14-2010, 02:47 PM
How can we find out if an opponent is a self-rated or computer/benchmarked/other 4.0 player? I don't see it on the regular league section when you can do an over-view of the team on TennisLink

Norcal has its own, better version of tennis link. Ratings always show up with their C/S/B/M designations.

JoelDali
09-14-2010, 03:22 PM
In my town we have an online form you can anonymously fill out to report sandbaggers to the Assembly Council of Competitive Order (ACCO).

jonnyjack
09-14-2010, 05:44 PM
How can we find out if an opponent is a self-rated or computer/benchmarked/other 4.0 player? I don't see it on the regular league section when you can do an over-view of the team on TennisLink

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

darrinbaker00
09-14-2010, 09:17 PM
I witnessed some cheating at the 5.5 and 5.0 levels but not 4.5. Brad Weston, who played on the tour and was as high as 583 in Singles and 303 in Dubs ATP is rated a 5.5. He lost to Jan-Michael Gambill 7-6 6-3 this year. How is Weston a 5.5??

Same thing was Chris Harrison (Weston's club mate) who was rated a 4.5 at the beginning of the season and is now a 5.0. He won a set off Brad Weston in singles. How is he a 5.0??

Tyler Browne, who played at Cal is rated 5.5. He won the Moraga Open this year, beating Weston in the finals in straight sets, Motevassel (ex top 200 ATP) in straights, etc. This guy is no 5.5.

When you win countless Open tournaments you should be rated at least 6.0. Tyler Browne won 9 Open tournaments (singles and doubles), Brad Weston won 36 Open tournaments. Greg Lee won 23 Open tournaments and is also a 5.5.

I think the USTA should redo the whole ranking system. It is very poor compared to other countries. For example, in France, you can calculate the number of points you have and you know how many rated players you need to beat in order to access to the next ranking. Here, you have no idea what your rating will be the following year. It's kind of a lottery. The whole rating system needs to be revised. It makes no sense to me.

It makes perfect sense to me. If the USTA rated the players you mentioned appropriately at 6.0, they're basically limiting those guys to playing Open tournaments. By rating them at 5.5, the USTA is giving them the opportunity to play USTA Leagues and NTRP tournaments, and they're giving themselves the opportunity to get more money out of those guys.

jhick
09-15-2010, 07:58 AM
2009 Adult League Mens 4.5 CUESTA TC M4.5C had 2 self-rated players and their records were 14 - 0. They won Sectional S-300 3-0.

There are a lot more cheating at 4.0 and lower. Agreed.

I am just telling the other region's players that if they ever face a Norcal team in the nationals, they should be aware that Norcal teams cheat with self-rated players and their Norcal offices condone this type of behaviours.

Funny the northern 4.5 team I was on played this NorCal team in the finals last year in Vegas. I didn't witness any blatant cheating, but I did notice that their #1 doubles team was better than any I'd seen previously at 4.5 and I've been playing 4.5 USTA for over 15 years. I think they waxed our team 6-0,6-1.

I will say that throughout the whole national tournament we had a bunch of nailbiter matches that could have gone either way in the win/loss department. Due to a medical appeal, we were able to get a former D1 player at Madison (I think he played #5 or #6 in the early 2000's) on our team. He had some back problems from a bad car accident, but it was hard to tell from watching him play. I guess he did have his back worked on after every match. BTW, the USTA double bumped him from 4.5 to 5.5 afterwards.

atatu
09-15-2010, 09:21 AM
I witnessed some cheating at the 5.5 and 5.0 levels but not 4.5. Brad Weston, who played on the tour and was as high as 583 in Singles and 303 in Dubs ATP is rated a 5.5. He lost to Jan-Michael Gambill 7-6 6-3 this year. How is Weston a 5.5??

Same thing was Chris Harrison (Weston's club mate) who was rated a 4.5 at the beginning of the season and is now a 5.0. He won a set off Brad Weston in singles. How is he a 5.0??

Tyler Browne, who played at Cal is rated 5.5. He won the Moraga Open this year, beating Weston in the finals in straight sets, Motevassel (ex top 200 ATP) in straights, etc. This guy is no 5.5.

When you win countless Open tournaments you should be rated at least 6.0. Tyler Browne won 9 Open tournaments (singles and doubles), Brad Weston won 36 Open tournaments. Greg Lee won 23 Open tournaments and is also a 5.5.

I think the USTA should redo the whole ranking system. It is very poor compared to other countries. For example, in France, you can calculate the number of points you have and you know how many rated players you need to beat in order to access to the next ranking. Here, you have no idea what your rating will be the following year. It's kind of a lottery. The whole rating system needs to be revised. It makes no sense to me.

The USTA should abolish 5.5 and just go from 5.0 to Open.

GucciRogue
09-27-2010, 10:59 PM
Norcal USTA is a joke. Got suspended for 3 months. Hope I never get the urge to play league again.

CrispyFritters
09-27-2010, 11:42 PM
In my town we have an online form you can anonymously fill out to report sandbaggers to the Assembly Council of Competitive Order (ACCO).

The council name sounds like it's straight out of Harry Potter. The Assembly Council of Competitive Order shall gather at Diagon Alley.

benz1
09-28-2010, 12:11 PM
yeah i agree with this

Bedrock
09-28-2010, 01:49 PM
In my town we have an online form you can anonymously fill out to report sandbaggers to the Assembly Council of Competitive Order (ACCO).

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

dafox
09-28-2010, 02:21 PM
Nor Cal Savages .....LOL

Thunderbrat
11-09-2010, 02:34 PM
That was nationals in Hawaii a few years back. They ran through everyone until an official got a call from a player on another Norcal 4.0 team that said he was supprised how good one of the players on a certain team was doing considering he just saw him at a grocery store in Cali. The officials wouldn't investigate until about four team captains (mine included) protested. They asked the Norcal team for photo ids before the final. Their top two players said they didn't bring them and didn't even have them in their hotel. (Pretty hard to fly to Hawaii without soime sort of id.) Turns out they were pros who had played futures/challengers in South America. Norcal was allowed to play in the final anyway albeit without the imposters. They lost to a Texas team we took second to in pool play. The Texas team had two current D2 college players and a nationally ranked junior. The junior bagled our No.1 singles player even though his captain spent the entire second set hand singnaling for him to drop a few games. He would have needed a blind fold to lose a game. Their captain paid for the trip to Hawaii for the junior and his family. The junior made Baylor's team the next year. Pretty good school for a 4.0.

I've since played lots of 4.5 and now some 5.0 tennis and have yet to see anything as bad as what I saw in 4.0.

jdubbs
11-09-2010, 03:18 PM
That's too bad. If anything, I would rather play at a higher level so I could play guys better than me and keep improving. Better than some useless trophy I cheated to get. I play a 4.0 tournament in a couple of weeks, will let you know how it goes.

beernutz
11-09-2010, 04:10 PM
Norcal USTA is a joke. Got suspended for 3 months. Hope I never get the urge to play league again.

That sounds like the beginning of a good story.

spiderman123
11-10-2010, 12:09 PM
That was nationals in Hawaii a few years back. They ran through everyone until an official got a call from a player on another Norcal 4.0 team that said he was supprised how good one of the players on a certain team was doing considering he just saw him at a grocery store in Cali. The officials wouldn't investigate until about four team captains (mine included) protested. They asked the Norcal team for photo ids before the final. Their top two players said they didn't bring them and didn't even have them in their hotel. (Pretty hard to fly to Hawaii without soime sort of id.) Turns out they were pros who had played futures/challengers in South America. Norcal was allowed to play in the final anyway albeit without the imposters. They lost to a Texas team we took second to in pool play. The Texas team had two current D2 college players and a nationally ranked junior. The junior bagled our No.1 singles player even though his captain spent the entire second set hand singnaling for him to drop a few games. He would have needed a blind fold to lose a game. Their captain paid for the trip to Hawaii for the junior and his family. The junior made Baylor's team the next year. Pretty good school for a 4.0.

I've since played lots of 4.5 and now some 5.0 tennis and have yet to see anything as bad as what I saw in 4.0.

What exactly does this get them? Surely bragging rights are no good if you know in your mind that you cheated.

mutantducky
11-10-2010, 01:37 PM
210
http://news.yahoo.com/video/business-15749628/students-busted-for-cheating-22954742

goober
11-10-2010, 02:18 PM
What exactly does this get them? Surely bragging rights are no good if you know in your mind that you cheated.

Well I know this one guy who seems to think the highlight of his tennis life was going to Nationals like 10+ years ago. I play dubs with him about once a month and he invariably always will work into the conversation about how he went to Nationals. While didn't cheat like the Norcal team did he pretty much openly admitted to getting self rated ringers to play below their levels. Funny thing is he is probably the worst player in our group and although he captained the team, he didn't even play. He was basically just a good recruiter.

jdubbs
11-10-2010, 03:40 PM
I don't care about winning tournaments, I just want to play...I would be embarrassed to play down a level and dominate.

Toons
11-10-2010, 04:44 PM
Hi Thunderbrat, just wanted to let you know your story about the 4.0 team in Hawaii is bit flawed. It is always extremely entertaining how stories take on a life of their own. With first hand knowledge, the players that "couldnt find their IDs" were NOT ex touring pros or anything really close to that level, just very solid (even by NorCal standards) 4.5 players. I know is sounds much better if they 'just came off the tour', but that is simply not the case. :)

JLyon
11-10-2010, 06:35 PM
Toons:
Also the TX player did not play at Baylor either, he was a middle of the road super champ, probably not a 4.0 but not quite the super college player others made him out to be.

Jim A
11-11-2010, 08:16 PM
What is everyone's experience in cheating in their own District?

I have limited experience here in Intermountain, however I've not really seen it to date. The 3.5 team that won both USTA/Twilight last year in our flight to advance to playoffs was comprised of some players who somehow weren't bumped to 4.0 in last year's updates and likely should have been.

There are enough people who played locally but never really did the league thing to get bumped that rounded out there squad. There was only one person we played against all season that was a blatant self-rate, and his team didn't even advance.

The problem with USTA at times, outside of the cheating, is that there is a lot of talking by people who are losing or having a poor season. I was a self-rated 3.0 that no one wanted on their squad, since I lacked results and couldn't even get a meet up. In turn, I wound up going 22-1, including 3 tournaments and 2 District matches while losing a total of 6 sets for the season.

When I caught a captain telling his team a bunch of BS about me and my "past" (which included no prior competitive tennis other than a club ladder some 15 years earlier) I just walked up, introduced myself and said it was a shame he never emailed me back or returned my phone calls when looking for a team. What was easier, telling his team that I reached out at least 3x or that I was a sandbagger..hmmm...

Many times the lie is better than the truth, unless your Joel Dali..that guy rocks

JoelDali
11-11-2010, 08:45 PM
Many times the lie is better than the truth, unless your Joel Dali..that guy rocks

Thanks, I'm trying to make a run for the year end tt posting championships but my heart tells me Fedace or Suresh will take it.

http://www.thecityreview.com/cellu11.jpg

HiroProtagonist
11-11-2010, 08:53 PM
My vote is for the dark horse candidate Bartelby, there is a certain poetic quality to his posts that far exceeds the content, I think that's underrated.

Oh and Im still looking for a team in Norcal, Ill play w/ cheaters ;)

Jim A
11-12-2010, 05:26 AM
If we are looking at a full year body of work on all topics, its not even close. Anyone can be big during the Slams and Masters 1000, Joel however brings it even to the 250's worldwide...when it comes to TT Topics

personally I think he's on some sort of PED since there is never a drop in his post quality all while getting direction for Uncle Toni at critical points

Ennismt
11-12-2010, 06:13 AM
What is everyone's experience in cheating in their own District?

Cheating varies from year-to-year in my district, but it's always present. It seems to always be the self-rating method of getting people to play below their level. It has gotten bad enough where teams bring in self-rate players from far away states to play in ours.

I understand USTA's desire to have self-rating. It allows new players entry into leagues. Cheaters are likely to be the minority of self-raters. However, sandbaggers have a huge effect on the leagues and outcomes that is probably not indicative of their numbers. So, something should be done to protect the even greater number of already (computer) rated participants.

From the captains point of view, if one decides they want to go to Nationals, then the obvious question is how do I get there? Sandbaggers (a.k.a. ringers, cheaters are a way to get there and is "allowed" by the USTA. One only has to look at how past teams succeeded to get the recipe.

There needs to be a change in rules to stop this from happening. It does not make sense that you need legit 4.5+ players (i.e, have not bee 4.0 players in the past year) to win the 4.0 league. Not to mention all the tanking, hiding, and sometimes lying it takes to succeed this way. We need to return to talking about the good match we had, rather than did you hear about so and so doing such and such to win. Until the loopholes are fixed, those with the incentive will find the way b/c those with the like mind are doing the same thing.

goober
11-12-2010, 01:18 PM
Cheating varies from year-to-year in my district, but it's always present. It seems to always be the self-rating method of getting people to play below their level. It has gotten bad enough where teams bring in self-rate players from far away states to play in ours.

I understand USTA's desire to have self-rating. It allows new players entry into leagues. Cheaters are likely to be the minority of self-raters. However, sandbaggers have a huge effect on the leagues and outcomes that is probably not indicative of their numbers. So, something should be done to protect the even greater number of already (computer) rated participants.

From the captains point of view, if one decides they want to go to Nationals, then the obvious question is how do I get there? Sandbaggers (a.k.a. ringers, cheaters are a way to get there and is "allowed" by the USTA. One only has to look at how past teams succeeded to get the recipe.

There needs to be a change in rules to stop this from happening. It does not make sense that you need legit 4.5+ players (i.e, have not bee 4.0 players in the past year) to win the 4.0 league. Not to mention all the tanking, hiding, and sometimes lying it takes to succeed this way. We need to return to talking about the good match we had, rather than did you hear about so and so doing such and such to win. Until the loopholes are fixed, those with the incentive will find the way b/c those with the like mind are doing the same thing.

The easiest way to fix this is just to not allow self rated players to play in playoffs or any type of post season play. I think this is fair because they can still play on a team all year, but captains cannot bring them in for the sole purpose of going to nationals. Yes I suppose, captains can have people just tank enough matches in the prior year to get a C rating to make a run the following year, but I doubt players would go along with this.

burosky
11-12-2010, 02:19 PM
The easiest way to fix this is just to not allow self rated players to play in playoffs or any type of post season play. I think this is fair because they can still play on a team all year, but captains cannot bring them in for the sole purpose of going to nationals. Yes I suppose, captains can have people just tank enough matches in the prior year to get a C rating to make a run the following year, but I doubt players would go along with this.

I remember there was a discussion about this fix some time back. The trouble with this is when those self-rated players are the ones that played the matches that allowed the team to advance. If they are not allowed to play, their team will most likely be wiped out. On the surface, it appears to be no harm. However, if you consider the team that could have taken their spot in the playoffs (assuming they don't have self-rate players), it wouldn't seem fair to them.

I think no matter what changes or fixes are implemented, people will always find a way to get around them if they are determined. As much as I don't want to, unfotunately, I have conceded into thinking there simply is no perfect system.

OrangePower
11-12-2010, 07:27 PM
The easiest way to fix this is just to not allow self rated players to play in playoffs or any type of post season play. I think this is fair because they can still play on a team all year, but captains cannot bring them in for the sole purpose of going to nationals. Yes I suppose, captains can have people just tank enough matches in the prior year to get a C rating to make a run the following year, but I doubt players would go along with this.

I'm a big advocate of this proposed rule - good to hear others who also support it. If enough of us get behind it, maybe we can make a difference!

I remember there was a discussion about this fix some time back. The trouble with this is when those self-rated players are the ones that played the matches that allowed the team to advance. If they are not allowed to play, their team will most likely be wiped out. On the surface, it appears to be no harm. However, if you consider the team that could have taken their spot in the playoffs (assuming they don't have self-rate players), it wouldn't seem fair to them.

I think no matter what changes or fixes are implemented, people will always find a way to get around them if they are determined. As much as I don't want to, unfotunately, I have conceded into thinking there simply is no perfect system.

I think that in most cases, self-rated 'under-raters' are encouraged to do so by a captain who wants to build a strong team. In my experience, it's rare that a player will unknowingly under-rate of his/her own accord, and then just happen to end up on a team with other under-raters. These teams are put together by design. So if you take away the incentive (making a playoff run), it is far less likely to occur.

So yes, the scenario you describe could happen, but I bet it would not happen all that frequently since these purpose-built teams stacked with self-rated players will be a thing of the past.

goober
11-13-2010, 07:35 AM
I remember there was a discussion about this fix some time back. The trouble with this is when those self-rated players are the ones that played the matches that allowed the team to advance. If they are not allowed to play, their team will most likely be wiped out. On the surface, it appears to be no harm. However, if you consider the team that could have taken their spot in the playoffs (assuming they don't have self-rate players), it wouldn't seem fair to them.

I think no matter what changes or fixes are implemented, people will always find a way to get around them if they are determined. As much as I don't want to, unfotunately, I have conceded into thinking there simply is no perfect system.

If the team gets wiped out in playoffs without their self rated players so what? All teams will know the rule ahead of time and will not fill their team with these types of players or depend on such players to go far in playoffs. If they do so, they will know the consequences in advance. I think it will dramatically cut down on the number of self rated ringers.

True there is a way around this fix, but it would require people to tank for year prior just to do it and I think most of the self raters are not that committed to cheating to do so. It is mostly the captains who exhibit such behavior.

burosky
11-13-2010, 08:34 AM
If the team gets wiped out in playoffs without their self rated players so what? All teams will know the rule ahead of time and will not fill their team with these types of players or depend on such players to go far in playoffs. If they do so, they will know the consequences in advance. I think it will dramatically cut down on the number of self rated ringers.

True there is a way around this fix, but it would require people to tank for year prior just to do it and I think most of the self raters are not that committed to cheating to do so. It is mostly the captains who exhibit such behavior.

I agree with everything you said. I don't know what the current penalties are nor who gets penalized. I'm not familiar with the whole process. If it isn't being done yet, following what you said, shouldn't both the player and captain (with more severe penalty for the captain) be penalized when they get caught? I know this will not fix it but more of a deterrent. However, I hope it is enough to lessen the incidents of cheating.

Kick_It
11-13-2010, 01:26 PM
I wonder if a solution could be two-tiered league where self-rates essentially play a "qualifier" season - like:

1) Self-rates play against self-rates.
2) Established (computer and/or tournament) rates play against established rates.

At ~ 75% or end of season - hold a tournament to see how successful self rates stack up against established players - to determine how/where at least successful self rates should have an established rating for the following season.

Initial thought would be a tournament where successful self rates at level and + 0.5 play against computer rates at level to see the scores. At first I thought just at level - but there wouldn't be much incentive for established rates - hence the +0.5.

Additionally unsuccessful self-rates could basically do the same - but at level and -0.5.

Just a thought. Kinda like a qualifying or walk-on season.

Did that sufficiently stir up a hornet's nest? K_I

Ennismt
11-14-2010, 07:38 AM
I think a solution needs to include a change in the self-rate guidelines. In particular, I think that former college players (Div 1, 2, 3 and NAIA) should all self-rate as 5.0 if 30 and under FOR LEAUGES (minus the top ranked 75 at div. 1 remaining at 5.5). You would shift the self-rates for 4.5 accordingly. Let them prove they can't play 5.0 rather than prove they can beat everyone at 4.5 (or 4.0) and affect all the other people playing those levels as well. There is so much overlap between levels in college tennis that I think the play at all levels can be quite high. Former college players maybe could self-rate differently for tournaments and develop a rating through playing them. Maybe they'd have to play 2 or 3 tournaments prior to playing league to get a rating other than 5.0 if appropriate. At least enough investment in time and money that sandbagging in tournaments would limit the effect on leagues.

I am picking on recent college players and the 4.0-5.0 levels but maybe this concept could be altered for other levels as well?

Jim A
11-14-2010, 07:52 AM
the self-rate issue is tough because you wind up penalizing the honest players...when a self-rate player wins, he is a sandbagger...if he loses no one wants him....could I have played 3.5 my first year..probably..however I didn't win a match against a decent 3.5 player that winter before league started..and barely a set...a lot of 4-6, 5-7...so that told me i wasn't ready to compete

If you are new to USTA Leagues unless you play out of a club or have spent a year playing tournaments to get results it is tough to find a team.

You can make whatever rules people want, unfortunately cheating will still exist. Teams will just have a self-rate sandbag for a year and take losses so they can make a run the following.

At the top end there just appears to be a big dropoff after 4.5 so there is a lot of self-rate issues...why not just eliminate 5.0 and make it Open.

If you are guilty of self-rate cheating, the captain/player should have a 3 year ban, any other USTA violation would be permanent

hutennis
11-22-2010, 10:14 PM
I feel a bit silly chiming in as a 2.5 (everyone's talking 4.0+)... but this being my 2nd year playing tennis and with the USTA, I've come to see "stacking" and "sandbagging" as not only a local/regional thing, but a national thing as well. This past run for both our Men's 2.5 and Mixed 2.5 teams met players at Nationals that could easily compete if not take down our local 3.0-3.5 teams.

We have a local team that complains about us underrating occasionally, but yet the players that they complained about can barely hold their own at Nationals. I feel like our progression then moves further and further away from what the USTA Rankings define, and it all becomes more subjective based on our experience and perception of "realistic rankings" to remain competitive on the National level.

HookEmJeff
11-22-2010, 10:26 PM
I think a solution needs to include a change in the self-rate guidelines. In particular, I think that former college players (Div 1, 2, 3 and NAIA) should all self-rate as 5.0 if 30 and under FOR LEAUGES (minus the top ranked 75 at div. 1 remaining at 5.5). You would shift the self-rates for 4.5 accordingly. Let them prove they can't play 5.0 rather than prove they can beat everyone at 4.5 (or 4.0) and affect all the other people playing those levels as well. There is so much overlap between levels in college tennis that I think the play at all levels can be quite high. Former college players maybe could self-rate differently for tournaments and develop a rating through playing them. Maybe they'd have to play 2 or 3 tournaments prior to playing league to get a rating other than 5.0 if appropriate. At least enough investment in time and money that sandbagging in tournaments would limit the effect on leagues.

I am picking on recent college players and the 4.0-5.0 levels but maybe this concept could be altered for other levels as well?

Totally agree. Self-rated players should be required to play more matches in a season to qualify for Nationals. I say a minimum of six matches to qualify throughout the season - and they must play at least one at the Section championships.

Jeff

kylebarendrick
11-23-2010, 08:38 AM
I agree with you Jeff. I don't like the idea of just banning self-rated players from the post-season, since it would unfairly impact the vast majority of people that self rate appropriately. I do like forcing self-rated players to complete more matches (6 may be tough) to qualify for playoffs. This would give the computer a chance to DQ them rather than let them hide during the local league.

OrangePower
11-23-2010, 12:01 PM
I agree with you Jeff. I don't like the idea of just banning self-rated players from the post-season, since it would unfairly impact the vast majority of people that self rate appropriately. I do like forcing self-rated players to complete more matches (6 may be tough) to qualify for playoffs. This would give the computer a chance to DQ them rather than let them hide during the local league.

I disagree with the bolded part, since in general only a small percentage of league players are on teams that make the playoffs. I once did the calculation for my area, and it worked out that 15% of players at my level played on playoff-bound teams. So assuming an even distribution, 85% of self raters would not be impacted at all.

kylebarendrick
11-23-2010, 01:14 PM
Yeah, I thought about that as I hit "post". They would still be impacted, though, in that they would lose the ability to even attempt to make the playoffs.