DQ'd player impacts state championship...

Discussion in 'Adult League & Tournament Talk' started by ajmack, Jul 1, 2011.

  1. ajmack

    ajmack New User

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2009
    Messages:
    23
    Played in a 4.0 state tournament two weeks ago where the winning team had a player get disqualified following the event. I assume he was self-rated and received his "third strike" during the tourney, though I don't know this for sure. The player is simply listed as DQ'd on the state association's web site, but his team's match results haven't changed.
    The player in question went 11-1 during the season and 4-1 during the state tournament, so the disqualification appears legitimate.
    I'm curious as to what will happen and what people think should happen in determining a champion.
    If losses counted in all his matches, which I assume they will, his team would have lost several league matches and failed to advance to the state tournament. At the states, his team would still have won its pool despite his two victories turning to losses. However, he won his individual matches in the semi-finals and finals. His team won the semi's 3-2 and the finals 4-1.
    So, does the team in question simply advance to the sectionals without the disqualified player? Does the runner-up advance even if they would not have won the title match with help from the disqualification match?
    Does the semi-final team that beats the champ with the disqualification match have a valid claim to the championship?
    However odd it may seem, should the semi-final team and the runner-up schedule a new championship contest?
    I tried contacting the state tennis association for details on how this would be resolved, but haven't received a response.
     
    #1
  2. bruintennis

    bruintennis Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Messages:
    450
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    If he was DQ'd AFTER the event, then all matches may stand, but he won't be able to play at the 4.0 level any more this year.

    I could be wrong, so let's see what you find out.
     
    #2
  3. Jack the Hack

    Jack the Hack Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Messages:
    1,803
    The answer depends on the USTA Section because each Section is given the ability to handle disqualifications differently. It used to be that self rated players that struck out had all of their match scores reversed. I believe that is still the case in my USTA Section (Pacific Northwest). However, players with ratings based on NTRP tournament play or mixed doubles league results from the previous year, or those that had successful appeal (including medical) only have their last match reversed if they strike out. Therefore, if the player had an A, T, M, rating, and the Section where this player was from only disqualifies the last match, then his team would advance. If he was self rated, all of his matches could possibly be reversed, but the championship would likely stand because he team would have won 3-2 even after his DQ.

    The FAQ's found here could shed some light:

    http://assets.usta.com/assets/1/UST.../Leagues_and_Tournaments/Leagues/NTRP_FAQ.pdf

    FAQ #27 states that each Section determines which matches will be reversed in local play. It also states that a Section must determine one of two methods of DQ for championships:

    1. Run the ratings after the conclusion of a tournament, and let the matches of a DQ'ed player stand (but he is not allowed to advance to Nationals).

    or

    2. The ratings are run after the tournament and the last match of the DQ'ed player is reversed to 0-6, 0-6.

    In both cases, it would seem to indicate that the team you described will advance beyond the state tournament despite the player's dynamic disqualification, but that they will obviously be without him at the next level of playoffs. However, it also depends on whether the Section handles the state playoff as a "championship" or an extension of local league play.

    By the way, I had a friend that was on a team that won their state playoff 3-2. The matches were tied at 2-2, and their #1 singles player won 13-11 in the third set tiebreaker after saving 4 match points. The team celebrated, everybody got the trophies for winning, and they started making plans for Sectionals. However, one week later, they were notified that their singles player had gotten his third strike in that final match, and that their entire team win had been reversed! That was very hard to take, especially when the two singles players were obviously so competitively matched.
     
    #3
  4. ncgator

    ncgator New User

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    57
    Location:
    Concord, NC
    Had this happen recently in North Carolina State Championships (Southern Section). The self-rated player was DQ'd and bumped from 4.0 to 4.5, but the match results were not changed. He cannot advance to Sectionals with his team that won States, and obviously cannot play any further matches at the 4.0 level (mixed or combo doubles).
     
    #4
  5. polski

    polski Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 27, 2010
    Messages:
    633
    Location:
    Florida
    I have never seen a DQ enforced retroactively in the southern section, but admittedly i haven't seen it all. it usually just impacts the player's ability to compete at the next event.
     
    #5
  6. NLBwell

    NLBwell Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    Messages:
    7,112
    This shows the silliness of the system. It was not possible for your friend's team to win if it came down to that match. If he wins, even closely, he is DQ'ed and the team loses. If he loses, the team of course loses.
    The only possibility of the team winning would be to throw the match badly and hope it would be a third strike against the opponent. The opponent would be DQed and your friend's team would win.

    A sorry Catch-22.
     
    #6
  7. polski

    polski Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 27, 2010
    Messages:
    633
    Location:
    Florida
    Probably a good reason that you can't see your (or your opponent's) DNTRP before a match. Yes, I would assume that no matter who won that match would have cost their team the overall win. Funny how that worked.
     
    #7
  8. Z-Man

    Z-Man Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Messages:
    984
    In Georgia, the matches stand but you can't advance to sectionals. Last year they went nuts with the DQs and booted players off of the winning and runner up teams at most levels. A few years ago they had verifiers walking around who could hand out DQs on the spot. This was silly because the verifiers had now way of telling who was really good and who wasn't.

    It's all very unfair because at sectionals and nationals the states that are aggressive with DQs have no chance.
     
    #8
  9. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,916
    That just means that the USTA should expect that everyone is aggressive EVERYWHERE, instead of letting all of these State Tennis Associations make up their own criteria.

    I wonder if certain states even bother to run the DQ program during the season, and I know of at least one case where a state coordinator told some captain that a player had a 2nd strike even though that's not allowed.

    I can see where you might like to build a team and want to advance year after year after year, or even if it's just for one year you want to go far.

    But in some areas the league actually enables this, and they really need to just follow the rules and be consistant when handling these things. (but instead in some cases they get involved, they love it when some captain makes some sort of "SuperTeam" or "All Star Team" and they bend over backwards to help them because they feel they get brownie points then and they claim all of the other states are cheating as well...
     
    #9
  10. storypeddler

    storypeddler Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2005
    Messages:
    565
    Location:
    Hickory, NC
    I believe the player who made the original post (as well as Jack the Hack who responded) are referring to the NC state championships. I, too, played at Pinehurst in the same District tournament a few weeks ago and have been following this storyline since. Seriously, though, I don't think there is a perfect way to handle this other than what the state people did---which was to DQ the player and let the team advance to Sectionals without him playing. No other solution is fair to all involved. You clearly can't go back and replay local league matches, even though they would not have won their league without his wins. This is just one of the no-win scenarios you occasionally get when players rate themselves and get DQ'ed. The officials run matches through the USTA computer after the tournament and take the appropriate actions and I don't know what else you could do. I captained a team that actually played in the same pool this team (the eventual 4.0 District winner) advanced out of and our #1 singles player lost to him 6-2, 6-4. After the DQ, match results were reversed and our player got the win, though it made no tangible overall difference. We were 3-1 in our pool, losing only to that team. If that player's matches were reversed all the way back through local league (and they were), and you had to refigure the effects, they would not have won their league. Had that happened, we would have faced a different team at district instead. Maybe we would have beaten another team and advanced to the finals round and won the championship ourselves. Who knows? But there is no way to reasonably untangle something like this and be fair to everyone who had a complaint along the way. A few years ago I played on a 4.0 men's team that was runner-up in the District tournament to a team from Winston-Salem, NC. That team beat us in the final and then, after Districts, had 3 players DQ'ed from further 4.0 play. Did we feel somehow cheated? Yeah, probably---and in one respect we were, but so was every other team that might have been there had these players been taken out of the equation from the beginning. No way to fix that for other teams after the fact. You can't un-ring the bell. The problem has always been here because the USTA has not found a perfect way to keep out the ringers---those players without a USTA rating who are clearly and knowingly rating themselves well below their correct playing level to help a team win. There probably ISN'T a perfect way to catch them. It is unfair and it is unethical and it is wrong. And it is virtually unstoppable, at least entirely. Every few years the USTA tries to change or tweak the rules to better correct this. And every time, all those captains who have done this a while examine the new rules and figure out how best to circumvent them to get and use "ringers" on their way to a local league or district or sectional or national championship. There are a multitude of ways to do it and every year some captains do. I mean, if nothing else, you simply round up a half dozen true "ringers" to complement the other 9 true-level players you have, and you use all of them twice each in local league to qualify them for the next level. You spread them around and even have them sandbag when a match win is already locked up. You get to the end of the season undefeated and move on to districts where you repeat the process. Maybe you will eventually have some DQ'ed along the way to nationals, but you still get there, likely with some still intact. Maybe at year's end you lose them all, so next year you simply reload with 6 new young studs/hired guns and make another run at it. And for those who think I'm making this up, I have seen this done over and over in larger cities where captains have access to a large talent pool. The USTA does the best it can to police it and regulate against it and DQ the wrongdoers, but honestly, this happens in all walks of life. Tax attorneys make huge dollars to look at the tax code and find every possible means to help their clients avoid paying any taxes---even when they should rightfully pay them. Criminal defense attorneys get paid to get their clients set free---regardless of their guilt. I hate it in our legal system and I hate it is taxes and I hate it in tennis. But the fact is that we will probably always have some captains and players who worship winning AT ANY COST and rules be damned. That's just the way it is.
     
    #10
  11. wrxinsc

    wrxinsc Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,400
    Location:
    Cackalacky South
    ^ holy wall of text post!
     
    #11
  12. rainman007

    rainman007 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    Messages:
    150
    Yeah its kinda like the nuclear arms race.. If you dont load up your dead!! if you nuke someone else is that ethical?

    NO SELF RATED PLAYER SHOULD BE ABLE TO WIN 1 MATCH AT SECTIONALS: If you can you self rated to low and should get an auto DQ and maybe a 1 year ban lol
     
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2011
    #12
  13. goober

    goober Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,491
    This has been said before, but if self rated players were not allowed into playoffs at all, that would solve a lot of problems.
     
    #13
  14. kylebarendrick

    kylebarendrick Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,042
    Location:
    Northern California
    I still prefer to have the sections run the dynamic ratings after the local league is over and immediately "promote" any self-rated player who's rating is out of level.
     
    #14
  15. aggielaw

    aggielaw New User

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2011
    Messages:
    72
    Location:
    Hampton Roads, VA
    LMAO. Very nice. :lol:
     
    #15
  16. storypeddler

    storypeddler Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2005
    Messages:
    565
    Location:
    Hickory, NC
    The problem with that many players will not get their second or third strike until they reach playoffs where they start to beat benchmarked players.
     
    #16
  17. ncgator

    ncgator New User

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    57
    Location:
    Concord, NC
    I agree that the only real solution to this is to not allow self-rated players to play in league playoffs or state championships. Let them play their first year in league play to establish a computer rating only...
     
    #17
  18. JLyon

    JLyon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,340
    Location:
    AR
    I would agree, but all this would do would give them incentive to tank to stay at level or even drop a level.
    One way to stop the tanking would be for a league to use total individual match wins versus team victories, this way every line would count and tanking would then really hurt a team.
     
    #18
  19. rainman007

    rainman007 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    Messages:
    150
    i disagree there would be a few, but a 2 year process to try to make a run 1 year then if you dont win state or sectionals you have to go through a 2 year process again i think it would cut it out drastically..

    you might argue that a new player should have the right to compete at state but they shouldn't be able to win a sectional match if they do they rated to high it would encourage people to rate right.. the only problem would be a true beginners league not a 3.5 self rated 2.5... true beginners should be able to compete at sectionals but not a self rate 3.5 or higher that rolls people..
     
    #19
  20. kylebarendrick

    kylebarendrick Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,042
    Location:
    Northern California
    Not if they were bumped prior to the playoffs - which is what I proposed. You could set the threshold so anyone with a strike would be bumped.
     
    #20
  21. ajmack

    ajmack New User

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2009
    Messages:
    23
    It was the North Carolina state championships. I didn't feel the need to get that specific in my original post, but, yes, that was the tourney.
    ncgator is correct. I received a reply from state tennis officials yesterday stating the rule, which is the case nationally. The team advances to sectionals without the player in question.
     
    #21
  22. gould2000

    gould2000 New User

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2009
    Messages:
    56
    I think what they do in the Eastern Section is they run the stats after each match at each tournament. This way, if any match of a multiple match tournament generates your 3rd strike you are out and previous matches could flip. This impacts the current tournament, and not previous. This system is possible as all of ours are round robin at the regional and sectional level. Almost never a playoffs due to ties at regionals and sectionals as those ties are settled by stats.

    This seems to be a decent compromise to me, but I don't think any system is perfect. One option I would agree is with is to only allow self rates with NO strikes or only 1 strike to advance to post season play
     
    #22
  23. tennis_tater

    tennis_tater Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Messages:
    454
    I saw the field for 4.0 Sectionals has been filled for about a week...with the exception of North Carolina's representative. Is there a chance the team that won will not advance, or maybe isn't going after all?
     
    #23
  24. ncgator

    ncgator New User

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    57
    Location:
    Concord, NC
    I don't think so. My team lost to the team that won and we have not been offered the chance to represent NC at Sectionals, so that tells me the team that won the finals will be going. Guess they are just a little slow in registering...
     
    #24
  25. storypeddler

    storypeddler Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2005
    Messages:
    565
    Location:
    Hickory, NC
    You played on the Lake Norman team, I'm guessing?
     
    #25
  26. ncgator

    ncgator New User

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    57
    Location:
    Concord, NC
    Yes, I played on the Lake Norman team...
     
    #26
  27. Explorer3903

    Explorer3903 New User

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    23
    Gould,

    You are correct about the Eastern Section. They input the results after each match during Sectional play. This happened a few years back where one of the Regions and our team were set to play the final match of Round Robin play. Both teams tied with a 3-1 record and it came down to our match to determine who would go to Nationals (A 3rd team was 3-1 but tie-breaker was not in their favor at that time). Before the match began, the other team was informed by the League coordinator that one of their Singles players was DQ'd and all of his matches during Sectional play were being reversed. Two of their three team wins were 3-2 and thus reversed to 2-3. This then put the third team with the 3-1 record to 4-0 going into their last match. Let's just say it did not sit well with both teams (team with DQ'd player and our team) set to play as that third team just finished and won to go 5-0 after the DQ. Basically our shot at going to Nationals disappeared in a flash. :mad:
     
    #27
  28. gould2000

    gould2000 New User

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2009
    Messages:
    56
    That is a tough pill to swallow. Your team was impacted as a result of a player, that it appears should not have been playing at that level, and was not eve on your team.

    What region or city are you from?
     
    #28
  29. Explorer3903

    Explorer3903 New User

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    23
    Northern Region
     
    #29
  30. storypeddler

    storypeddler Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2005
    Messages:
    565
    Location:
    Hickory, NC
    Agreed. Only reasonable way to handle this problem.
     
    #30
  31. storypeddler

    storypeddler Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2005
    Messages:
    565
    Location:
    Hickory, NC
    Yes, that method could work.
     
    #31
  32. gmatheis

    gmatheis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,572
    Either of these last 2 ideas would make it hard for new players to find teams as no team with any hope of post season play would want them.

    I think making it harder for new players to join league tennis is not something the USTA wants to do.
     
    #32
  33. J_R_B

    J_R_B Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,638
    Location:
    Newtown, PA
    You would probably start seeing clubs field two teams more often. A championship team with all of the best C & B rated players eligible for postseason, and a feeder team made up of guys moving up from the lower level, self-rated ringers instructed to do what they have to to make sure they get a C rating the next year, and other lesser players not good enough for the championship team. The self-rates go for a year on the feeder team, "manage" their match scores for a year, and move up to the championship team the following year.
     
    #33
  34. maggmaster

    maggmaster Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,750
    Was it ever determined if 0 and 0 scores actually do effect your rating?
     
    #34
  35. gmatheis

    gmatheis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,572
    Very few clubs can field enough players for 2 teams at each level. I mean you need a minimum of 8 people for a team but 12 people is a more reasonable number to make sure you have 8 available for a match. Do the clubs in your area have 24 3.5's , or 24 4.0's (and that's 24 that will all sign up for league). The ones around me don't.

    Also the "feeder" teams would most likely be tanking matches anyway to make sure they dont get bumped, and the following year these players would have "C" ratings and would not have to worry about generating strikes.

    Every system has loopholes that people can exploit. But it seems to me that the current USTA system is still better than any suggestions I have heard of. Remember the system has to not only try to be fair , but it has to encourage people to join as well. You can't sacrifice one for the other or things will start to fall apart.
     
    #35
  36. maggmaster

    maggmaster Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,750
    We have 3 3.5 teams and 2 4.0 teams but no 4.5 team. Our 5.0 team is almost all 4.5s, weird right?
     
    #36
  37. cknobman

    cknobman Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    6,087
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia
    Here in Texas we have already had a dq in our local 4.0 league.

    Every match he played was reversed and it actually cost the team 1 entire match against another team.

    Of course playoff have not started and no one has gone to sectionals.

    Not sure what would have happened in those cases.
     
    #37
  38. Orange

    Orange Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    Messages:
    209
    After extensive research, I have concluded that 0 and 0 scores do not affect a player's dynamic NTRP rating but can generate a strike.

    FAQs on Atlanta's USTA website say:

     
    #38
  39. JLyon

    JLyon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,340
    Location:
    AR
    Typically you see DQ and reversal in local league as numbers are run weekly, but Districts and Sectionals DQ's occur after play and no matches get changed. There is no good way of doing it unless you run numbers immediately after Pool Play.
     
    #39
  40. J_R_B

    J_R_B Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,638
    Location:
    Newtown, PA
    Some sections run strike reports at the conclusion of every match at Sectionals and DQs are immediate with reversals for the matches played in the Sectionals. I know Eastern does this, and I think Middle States does, too.

    Eastern and Middle States generally only reverse the 3 matches that generate the strikes, but not always.
     
    #40
  41. Orange

    Orange Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    Messages:
    209
    The proposal to ban self-rated players from post-season play would disqualify every 2.5 team in our local league, the largest local league in the state, as 80% of all 2.5 players are self-rated. My spring team of 11 players had only 3 who were not self-rated: 1 A, 1 B and 1 C. Yet, as I see it, 2.5 players have the widest range of abilities and are most susceptible to self-rating abuse or inability-to-judge-true-ratings.

    I think that proposal is unworkable, but I can't say I have a better one.
     
    #41
  42. goober

    goober Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,491
    Umm just make the proposal only applied to 3.0 teams and above? 3.5 might be a better cutoff since in many areas there are no 2.5 teams and 3.0 is the entry point.
     
    #42
  43. floridatennisdude

    floridatennisdude Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2012
    Messages:
    1,968
    Haha, yea I don't see too many guys gloating about how sweet their 2.5 team is. Let me cheat like crazy for that prize at 2.5!
     
    #43
  44. goober

    goober Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,491
    You would be surprised. I saw some guy wearing around Nationals Tshirt that was in tatters- probably 10+ years old. First time I met him he starts talking about how he went to nationals way back when. Later on I found out it was 3.0 nationals. He wasn't a very good player so evidently he didn't progress much since then.
     
    #44

Share This Page