How big are the sandbags?

Discussion in 'Adult League & Tournament Talk' started by lostinamerica, Oct 8, 2007.

  1. lostinamerica

    lostinamerica Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 16, 2007
    Messages:
    565
    Location:
    Galt's Gulch
    I have never been to Nationals. How bad is the sandbagging? If your team is at Nationals, it is presumed you have ringers who have no business in that flight. That is a given.

    For those who have been to the big dance... how bad is the sandbagging? Is a 4.0 a 4.5 or a 5.0? Is a 3.0 a 3.5 or a 4.0 or even a 4.5?

    I am curious to see how big the differntial actually is. For those who really have seen the big dance, what is it like?

    Thanks
     
    #1
  2. JLyon

    JLyon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,369
    Location:
    AR
    last year at 4.5, you had a guy get bumped to 5.5 from FL, and the TX player split sets with him, after beating several 5.5s in tournament play.
    Plan on a few who are easily 1.0 or better than level.
     
    #2
  3. javier sergio

    javier sergio Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    Messages:
    924

    do you know the name of this guy in Florida?
     
    #3
  4. Cindysphinx

    Cindysphinx G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    15,092
    They should stop giving trophies to the winners.

    They should give pillowcases filled with sand.
     
    #4
  5. goober

    goober Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,491
    I played with a guy who went to 3.0 Nationals and told me he deliberately did things during the seasons to keep his ratings down so he would not get DQ'ed like keeping matches close, losing matches if they were meaningless, ect. He immediately starting playing 3.5-4.0s tourneys after he was done "helping" his team. He was a weak 4.0. He went through several 3.5 tourneys without dropping a set but usually lost early in 4.0 tourneys.
     
    #5
  6. KFwinds

    KFwinds Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,319
    Yep, that's about right. I went to Nationals last year, and went to Sectionals this year. The top 4-6 players on the best teams are at least .5 better than their listed rating indicates, while the best overall players are about 1.0 better than their listed rating.
     
    #6
  7. WBF

    WBF Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    1,970
    Location:
    Somewhere in NY
    It's a tough situation.

    You will have players like those Goober is discussing, absolute trash...

    But then there are plenty of odd circumstances that might lead to sandbagging... For instance, let's say someone is a 5.0 or 5.5. When they hit their 50's and their ranking gets bumped down but their play level does not, what should happen?
     
    #7
  8. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,917
    It sounds like you need a handful of players who are at least two levels ahead to make it to Nationals.

    But I only know of one team that's played there (the Mid_West 3.5 Men's "SuperTeam").

    From the way someone on here is describing themselves at 2.5, that definately seems like the case there also. (I think that's Men's 2.5 but not sure, I have no idea about Women's 2.5. We dont have Men's 2.5 in my district)
     
    #8
  9. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,917
    Why would their rating get bumped down because of their age?
     
    #9
  10. cknobman

    cknobman Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    6,204
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia
    You dont get to nationals unless you have a team of sandbaggers. Everyone is a minimum of .5 level higher than rated, several 1.0 higher, and a few even higher.
     
    #10
  11. burosky

    burosky Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,035
    Location:
    CA
    In most cases, this may be true. However, there are still teams that go and win Nationals that are at the appropriate level or at the cusp of the next level. Being at the cusp of the next level doesn't make a player a sandbagger. It only means they are at the very top of their level. At most, on the verge of advancing to the low end of the next level.

    Case in point, the 2005 3.5 Women's National Champions from Hayward, CA. They went undefeated the whole way up to the Nationals but if you look at their match scores through out, you will see a lot of 3-2 wins with lots of tie-breakers and supertie-breakers and very few lop sided wins. Most of the players who played the post season matches got bumped over to 4.0 the following season while the others stayed at 3.5. However, there were also some who got bumped to 4.0 that year who were bumped down to 3.5 this past season.

    To make a blanket statement that you have to have a team of sandbaggers to win a National Championship is not right. It is quite unfair for those who did it the right way such as the team I mentioned.
     
    #11
  12. Cruzer

    Cruzer Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,273
    Location:
    Leafs Nation
    Extremely naive comment. As mentioned previously the players on the teams that reach the National playoffs are pretty much at the top of their level and some, but not all get moved up one level. From the Norcal teams that have won the National playoffs in recent years a minority of players from those teams get the rating changed upward.

    Completely inaccurate. The number of players I know of that have been moved up two levels I can count on one hand. I have never heard of anyone moving up more than two levels.

    It is amazing the amount of misinformation that gets posted on these boards about USTA league tennis. One person comments about one person or team in their league and suddenly it is extrapolated to condem all of USTA league tennis. If USTA league tennis is as bad as is portrayed on these boards on one would want to play.
     
    #12
  13. raiden031

    raiden031 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,997
    Last year, a men's 3.0 team from my league went to Nationals but was 3rd place. 16 out of 20 of those players got bumped to 3.5. I have played against several of them in either doubles or singles and didn't find them all that strong as 3.5s. So yeah they were no more than 0.5 above level during their run at Nationals.
     
    #13
  14. kylebarendrick

    kylebarendrick Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,042
    Location:
    Northern California
    My experience at 3.0 last year was that most teams had a combination of good at-level players and several players that were .5 above level. I saw a few players that were clearly 1.0 above level, but generally no more than one on any given team.

    I played against the team raiden031 is referring to. I'd agree that they were mid-level 3.5s. FWIW, they beat as 4-1.
     
    #14
  15. Z-Man

    Z-Man Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Messages:
    984
    I think sandbagging might be worst at the 4.0 level. Having been to (and lost) in the GA state finals, I can say that to win, you need one or two 5.0s, two or three 4.5s, and a few really good 4.0s. You also need good luck with matchups / stacking, and you need to have your good players available for state and sectionals. My team made it to the finals because we were deep, but that just wasn't enough. You need more than one player who is guaranteed to win. A few years ago we had a guy who played some at Auburn on the team, and we still lost in the finals. The next year at state I was beaten 0-1 by a guy from Brazil who is now winning most of his matches at 5.0. I was unbeaten at the time and was bumped to 4.5.

    The bottom line is, everybody needs to lighten up and realize that this is just for fun. You've got to go to state because you want to play some tennis and hang out with your team. It's not going to get you paid, and it's not going to get you laid.
     
    #15
  16. lostinamerica

    lostinamerica Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 16, 2007
    Messages:
    565
    Location:
    Galt's Gulch
    This sounds like this is not as bad as I have read. It appears most teams are really about .5 off level. I can live withe that amount of sandbagging but those who are 4.5/5.0 playing 3.0 seems silly. I know a former D1 player who played at 4.0. He was in his 40s and had injuries but he was still pretty salty on a doubles court.
     
    #16
  17. Raiden.Kaminari

    Raiden.Kaminari Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2006
    Messages:
    744
    You nailed it.

    What's the big deal about Nationals, besides getting to meet players from a few Sections?
     
    #17
  18. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,917
    He meant that they belong two levels above skillwise, not that they will end up there.

    Obviously if you are on one of those teams you'll dispute that because you think you are just "on the top of your level".

    I dont know all the teams, perhaps there is a team in the nationals that isnt full of appealees and self rated new hidden players.

    The one team I did know about got to the final 4, so I have to assume that most of the teams didnt sandbag enough compared to them, although they lost to the final two teams.

    Who gets rated up at the end doesnt even figure into it, because of how benchmark ratings work, winning matches at nationals doesnt cause you to get rated up and in some cases it could help you keep your existing rating. (because half of your rating is based on your highest level of play, and at the highest level of play, you probally finally got to play someone close to comparable)
     
    #18
  19. cknobman

    cknobman Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    6,204
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia
    You could say that but Ive seen enough first hand to think otherwise. We went to sectionals this year and lost in the final match to a team of sandbaggers.
    Throughout the tournament this team had 3 players disqualified because the officials determined without a shadow of a doubt they were sandbagging.
    The coach was caught instructing players to intentionally drop games, lines, sets so it would appear that the players were at that level. In the tournament his players were winning matches 0-0, 1-0, then suddently loosing 0-2. A little to obvious.
    In the final match his teams were just toying with us, running us around like rats. In my line and one of our singles lines the players only lost a game when they double faulted it away (Yes they double faulted 2 games away at love) and those were the only games we won.
    Even though only 3 were disqualified after the tournament going back and looking at season records for the team it was obvious his whole team was did the same thing. For the entire team every player throughout the season had 1 loss and won the rest of their matches with scores of 3-3 or better, no tiebreaks no third sets.
    Maybe your reading this and saying "bs", but it happened and its a fact.
    Maybe other sections in the Nation are not as bad as my section but Im sure we arent the only place in the nation where this takes place.
     
    #19
  20. lostinamerica

    lostinamerica Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 16, 2007
    Messages:
    565
    Location:
    Galt's Gulch
    I believe you but which section and level was the team doing this? How did they do at Nationals? (assuming they have played)
     
    #20
  21. Cruzer

    Cruzer Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,273
    Location:
    Leafs Nation
    I think players that get defeated handily at a post season event are too quick to jump to the conclusion that they played a bunch of sandbaggers. Maybe the reality is the other team is just flat out better than you. I have been to the district playoffs several times and sectional playoffs three times and the quality of play is clearly much higher than some of the crappy matches you have in local league play. I have never had an easy match at any district or sectional playoff and I would never expect to have one. There is one guy who coaches several teams in our area that appears to have players self rate too low whenever he can and he generally has pretty successful teams. But you know what? I don't care. His teams are still beatable and when we do beat them it is all the more satisfying.

    Not all leagues and sections are created equal. A team from a smaller local league that wins their league may be completely overwhelmed when they go to district playoffs and play against teams from larger leagues. Are they up against a bunch of sandbaggers? In the vast majority of cases no, these teams are just a lot better. I am sure the same applies at the National playoffs. Who is to say a 4.0 from Norcal has about the same skills as a 4.0 from Mid-Atlantic? Since we never play anyone from other sections until the National playoffs it is not at all surprising that there can be discrepancies between the different sections when they play each other for the very first time.

    At the 3.0 and 3.5 levels particularly players can improve their skills significantly during a season of play. They take lessons, attend clinics, work at improving their game and by the time they reach post season play they are much better than they were at the start of the season. Are these people sandbaggers? No, sandbagging implies deliberate cheating and that is not what improving players are doing. They simply want to get better at playing tennis.

    Assuming the entire system is corrupt because of the actions of one or two over zealous team captains is taking a very narrow, inaccurate view.
     
    #21
  22. kevhen

    kevhen Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    4,405
    Location:
    Auckland, New Zealand
    I like the idea of giving the winners at Nationals sandbags.

    When I played in 3.5 sectional finals to go to Nationals, I lost the final match badly and had not lost all season and everyone on my team thought that guy must be 4.5 to beat me so badly but I was exhausted from an earlier match while he had rested. Many guys at sectionals are a level higher and I would guess many guys at Nationals could be two levels higher.

    In that final we lost, 8/15 members of the opposing team did get bumped to 4.0. I was the only one on my team to get bumped up.
     
    #22
  23. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,917
    Um, this doesnt make any sense. It's a "SKILL" level, it's not some sort of ranking. So ya, 4.0 players in Arizona should have relatively the same skills as 4.0 players in North Dakota. They are all 4.0 players.
     
    #23
  24. cknobman

    cknobman Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    6,204
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia
    You would think that, but a large part of what a person is rated depends on what the competition in their area is like. If you live in an area where the tennis is extremely competetive and there are many good players then you will find more skilled players at all levels(than what the usta description of that level claims).

    I know that our 3.0 team from north texas was without a doubt playing at a much higher level than the teams from east texas. When we met in the state tournment for play and won(quite easily) they openly admitted that our 3.0 team, if moved to east texas would be playing at the 3.5 level.
     
    #24
  25. ohplease

    ohplease Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,173
    Speaking as someone who moved from one part of the country to another, this simply isn't true.

    You'll find that some teams simply don't have to do very much to get to district competition, if only because they play in a geographical location with relatively few players, and therefore teams. In geographically overpopulated parts of the country, especially where tennis is popular, certain teams may represent the best team out of 20 or more teams at their level, with multiple flights, local playoffs, etc.

    The end result is that the larger the number of teams competing for the lone district spot, the worse the sandbagging - and that's just for the right to get to districts. Not sectionals. Not nationals.
     
    #25
  26. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,917
    It sounds like we are really on the same page, but probally just not communicating well.

    I said that there is no reason that there "should" be a diffrence. Again, those are skill levels, not rankings.

    If you are talking about diffrent areas being bigger sandbaggers, or even diffrent areas being more effecive at WINNING, then you might have something.

    But if you say one area should be more skilled then another within the same SKILL LEVEL, then that's silly.

    And besides, it's not like that anymore. Diffrent areas are popping up all the time in nationals, where it used to be that certain states would never get past sectionals and those sections usually got clobbered in nationals.

    It's true that in the bigger areas, there probally is more sandbagging to be able to compete, but I see the smaller areas doing things sometimes that are far more undesirable in an attempt to out do them. (at least in the bigger areas Id make the excuse that they are just simply doing what they have to do to compete at their own level)

    So when you have one team that's finding 4.5 players to play in a 3.5 league just to compete with who they've seen beat them in sectionals last year, that's going way too far. You cant say that a 3.5 in one area of the country is a 4.5 somewhere else.

    I will agree though that for all the whining we do, the system is never going to be perfect, that's just the way it goes when you try having divisions that are based on a certain skill level.

    However if they killed appeals, continued to improve the self rating process, and actually stopped looking the other way and enforced their own rules for those few cheaters that are out there, we'd have a lot less to complain about.

    I think outside of that, it's probally better now then it used to be. (except for those people who are used to winning all the time, now they probally will complain if they cant continue at whatever level they are playing at)
     
    #26
  27. jamauss

    jamauss Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2006
    Messages:
    1,752
    Location:
    https://goldenslam.com
    What is the highest level for USTA Nationals? 4.5?
     
    #27
  28. LuckyR

    LuckyR Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2006
    Messages:
    6,404
    Location:
    The Great NW
    Talk about extremely naive... if a team wins Nationals, they may not make the definition of the term "sandbagger" according to one individual's understanding of that word. But, they will have beaten teams that are made up of sandbaggers, or the teams that have beaten sandbaggers. In my way of looking at things: if you beat a team of sandbaggers, I don't care what rating you have individually or get after the season is over, you are a sandbagging team, since you beat one.

    Example: if I am a "legitimate" 4.0 playing on a 4.0 team and I beat a 4.5 masquerading on a 4.0 team, then I am not a legitimate 4.0... I am a sandbagger, just like, or worse than, the guy I beat.

    The only way a team could win Nationals and not be a sandbagging team, logically, would be if there was not a single sandbagging team, nationwide. Who's naive again?
     
    #28
  29. WBF

    WBF Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    1,970
    Location:
    Somewhere in NY
    Do you honestly believe this? Have you never gotten a good match up against a better player before? I know I've beaten better players, and I've been beat by worse players. I think the NTRP is a bunch of crap because of whiners like the one's here, but I'd say within .5 in either direction you could have a good day and win, 1.0 in either direction and if you match up well (e.g. lefty against guy who hates lefties, pusher vs. someone who hates pushers, topspin hitter vs, someone who likes low balls, and so forth) you might get lucky every so often.

    You can't take every match as a defining match. It's wrong.
     
    #29
  30. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,917
    Anyone who is a good tennis teaching pro would disagree with you. The levels are not really that close together.

    Especially when you are talking about two levels apart, unless someone is injured there is no way a real 4.0 is losing to a 3.0. If you believe that, then you have a gross misunderstanding about skill levels.

    If any team can win on any given day you wouldnt have so many players who happen to win every single match out there. (until they happen to run into a even bigger sandbagger)
     
    #30
  31. WBF

    WBF Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    1,970
    Location:
    Somewhere in NY
    This is why I prefaced it with the fact that they would need to match up well, *and* get lucky (for the 1.0 differences). It can definately happen...
     
    #31
  32. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,917
    No 3.0 matches up well against a 4.0, it's not going to happen. If they do somehow then they are DEFINATELY not a 3.0.

    And that's where the proof is for me, 2.5 and 3.0 are the beginner levels for some yet you find people in there that "match up well" with 4.0 players. Well guess what? They were not really 3.0 players then.

    The proof for me as to whether someone is a 3.0 or player or not is usually a 3.0 player has a big enough flaw that if you figure that out, you will win. I dont care if Im having a bad day, (and Im only a 3.5) unless Im grossly injured, they are not going to win that match once I figure out their weakness.

    They are skill levels, not rankings, it's all about what you can do and how big are your strengths compared to your weaknesses. Without getting into the whole details of the chart, a real 3.0 player has a lower ratio of strengths to weaknesses. (they usually lack consistancy, or a few have consistancy but they dont have any weapons)

    Also there are TONS of players playing 3.5, so even within that specific level you will find groups of players who can beat every player in another group of player (in the same level). It's a huge level and it's definately wrong to think that 3.0 / 3.5 / 4.0 are really all that close together. (I will agree there is some overlap between them, but to jump up two levels is a big deal)

    This is why a lot of the self rating rules talk about the diffrence between claiming someone is TWO levels ahead or ON THE TOP OF THE NEXT LEVEL, where if you are simply trying to say someone is one level ahead, they dont worry about it as much.

    I know of at least one player (from the 3.5 Mid_West "SuperTeam") who was DQ'ed out due to a fair play grievence before the season even started because it was proven that he was at least on the top of the next level. (top of 4.0)

    Otherwise like I said in the other post. I agree we are complaining a lot, but I think if they simply abolished appeals (if you finally get rated up, you should play up), and continue to fix the self rating process, then we would have far less to complain about.

    Im sure someone would complain anyway (players who are used to winning all the time for one) because no system based on skill is perfect, but at least I wouldnt complain. (because I happen to think the situation is getting better except for those two things)
     
    #32
  33. raiden031

    raiden031 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,997
    Self-rated players should not be allowed to participate in Nationals. That is probably the best solution to this problem.
     
    #33
  34. LuckyR

    LuckyR Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2006
    Messages:
    6,404
    Location:
    The Great NW
    Yup, for the well appreciated reason that JavierLW stated.

    Certainly, within my rating. I might imagine it for someone above my rating (although it has never happened before) but 2 above? No way!

    We all have plenty of times, within our true rating. The chance of beating someone a half step above (not just hitting with them shot for shot) is so much less likely than running into a sandbagger, that to compare the two is ridiculous.
     
    #34
  35. Cruzer

    Cruzer Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,273
    Location:
    Leafs Nation
    If you truly believe that the teams that make it to the National playoffs are chock full of sandbaggers/cheaters you shouldn't be playing USTA league tennis. You will not enjoy it since you will be convinced that if you lose a match badly whether it be local league play or post season play that your opponent is a sandbagger/cheater.
     
    #35
  36. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,917
    In most cases we are not talking about the team/player who just occasionally wins or beats someone badly.

    We are talking about the teams/players who happen to win every single time for years until they meet another team that is doing the same.

    Take 3.5 for example. I didnt look at every single team, but is there one out there that doesnt have:

    - appealees

    - self rated players

    As long as you have either of those the jury is going to be out on the sandbagger theory.
     
    #36
  37. Ronaldo

    Ronaldo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    14,315
    The teams that get to Nat'ls are not full of sandbaggers. Only 17 teams get to Nat'ls out of over 4000. By then they're the best at that level, of course those teams are giants in a room full of midgets.
     
    #37
  38. goober

    goober Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,491
    They have open Nationals with current and former pros playing.
     
    #38
  39. kylebarendrick

    kylebarendrick Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,042
    Location:
    Northern California
    There's a difference between people who are self-rated or have appealed ratings and the people who:

    1) Only play enough matches during league play to qualify for the post season
    2) Hide on weak lines against weak teams for those qualifying matches
    3) Drop a few games, sets, and even matches to keep their ratings down
    4) "Manage" their scores during post-season play, now either playing singles or #1 doubles
    5) Apply bagels and breadsticks at #1 singles at sectionals and nationals.

    These guys are easy to spot by anyone except the computer.
     
    #39
  40. ohplease

    ohplease Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,173
    Is there really? I recently checked on the guys that were bumped at my level in my local area (about 20 teams) that I knew were bumped up in the the ESRs. To a man, they had all been given adj ratings, which I presumed were the results of appeals.

    These fellows had winning percentages around 80-90%, so it's not like they'd be toast at the next level up.

    I say why waste our time? Let's just skip to the logical conclusion and merge the 2.5 and open levels and be done with it.
     
    #40
  41. kylebarendrick

    kylebarendrick Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,042
    Location:
    Northern California
    I wouldn't mind doing away with the appeals, since they have the net affect of slipping all the ratings by .05. At they same time, though, the appeals are reasonably fair. If you are within the appealable range, then they get granted. If not, they don't.

    I'd deal with self-raters by requiring they play a larger number of matches to qualify for playoffs, say 4 or 5 with no credit for defaults. This would generate enough dynamics to create a rating for them at playoff time. You could then DQ any self-rated player from the post-season if their rating is above a certain threshold, I'd use the .05 range from appeals for this one. This would allow people who self-rate correctly a chance to play in the postseason. It would also weed out many of those who self-rate too low and punish their captains for using them.
     
    #41
  42. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,917
    The appeal system sounds fair, but it is not. Some 80% of everyone that gets moved up fall within that .05 range.

    Not to mention that of the people who do get rated up, there probally are more than could of but dont because no rating system is perfect.

    What I see happening is certain states allow more appeals then others on top of it by having various diffrent appeal deadlines (or none in our case), and some states encourage it, while others discourage it (by forcing you to pay a fee).

    It's a bad system, like many of the tweaks the USTA makes, what's the point of moving it up .05?? It's just to make it sound good and to appease those who happen to get to nationals.

    The worst part Ive seen from this in our local league is that since the top teams appeal everyone, it means that our teams have to as well otherwise we wont be competitive in our league. The problem with that becomes more apparent at 2.5 and 3.0 where your REAL 2.5 and 3.0's have no chance of competeing in their own level. (in fact a lot of those players wont even find a team, which is NOT player friendly)

    Whenever someone wants to complain about how people are under-rated the league likes to say "dont worry about it, just HAVE FUN". Yet when said people finally do get rated up, it's okay to bend over backwards to let them appeal, rather than just let them play a level higher and HAVE FUN.

    (and dont get me wrong, I dont think there is anything wrong nowdays if someone appeals, in the current system, you probally have to, but I think for the long term and to encourage more players to play, the league should do away with it)
     
    #42
  43. Z-Man

    Z-Man Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Messages:
    984
    I agree there is a huge difference in levels. A 3.5 will seldom get a set off of a 4.0, and a 4.5 will seldom lose a game to a 3.5. That's how you know the relative levels of two players. Good day, bad day, whatever--none of that really matters when you actually know your level from tournament and league play.

    That's also how I know I've played some serious sandbaggers at state. I'm a mid-to-low 4.5 singles player playing at 4.0. My friend who is a 5.0 beats me something like 6-3, 6-3. Every now and then I get a set off of him. Three years ago at state I played out of my mind and lost 6-1, 6-1 to a guy from Brazil. Clearly, that guy was better than my 5.0 friend, but he was playing at 4.0. He was DQ'd. He was as good as the kid I played from the Van Der Meer Academy (top 250 in the nation in 18s) who beat me 6-0, 6-1 in a tournament. I had a similar experience this year at state, but the guy let up a bit and gave me a few games. I see now that guy has lost some matches in the summer league. I think he's trying to save his record for another run at sectionals. He ran into some bad luck at sectionals--was beaten by a guy who won the NC state tourney in doubles at 4.0. There's always a bigger sandbagger out there.

    It's just like someone said, when you are sandbagging a bit yourself and you get blown out, you know you've just encountered a bigger sandbagger. I think there are some 4.0s playing 3.5, but there are certainly 5.0s playing 4.0. I'm guessing the sky's the limit at 4.5.
     
    #43
  44. MSL

    MSL New User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    87
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    So, why are you playing 4.0?

    -Matt
     
    #44
  45. RoddickAce

    RoddickAce Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2,472
    If you sandbagged, and that happened to you, would you complain about the huge sandbagger? Cuz that would be awkward.
     
    #45
  46. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,917
    Unfortuanlly most people do. That's why in some sections like mine, they try like mad to continue to play down. (and the league encourages them to in some cases)

    I think the jist of it for me is that is just wrong. Even if it's true that diffrent areas are diffrent, you should polute your local league just for the sake of what happens over a few weekends at the end.

    They should focus MORE on the local league and less on the playoffs, if you happen to make the playoffs in any given skill level it's just a fluke anyway.

    (because you are lucky to be at the top of any given defined level, if you were any better you'd be on the bottom of another level, but since most of us are just in this to play tennis and compete and get better, you'd survive)
     
    #46
  47. Z-Man

    Z-Man Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Messages:
    984
    There is no 4.5 League in my area. When I was bumped to 4.5, I started playing ALTA. Away matches are an hour and a half drive away. Also, I've been to state enough times to know that being a low-to-mid level 4.5 means I'm average for a singles player at the 4.0 state tournament. If I was playing 4.5 at state, I'd get blown out by a bunch of 5.0+ players. Sandbagging puts downward pressure on every level. Is this starting to make sense?
     
    #47
  48. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,917
    That's what I was getting at as well (about the downward pressure).

    Which is why we shouldnt necessarily waste our time complaining about the players themselves (at least the ones who are abidding by the rules which are available to them and are only trying to be competitive).

    But we should complain about the people who run the league (national and local) who constantly:

    1) Encourage appeals and make rules to counter their other rules which otherwise are fairly adjusting the system.

    2) Dont go after people who cheat the system enough. (ie... fake ID's, dishonest self rating, captains who knowingly encourage players to under-rate)

    They seem to be making the self-rating system a little better every year, they just need to enforce it more. Otherwise dumping these automatic appeals would go a long way to stop the trend of trickle down sandbagging.
     
    #48
  49. LafayetteHitter

    LafayetteHitter Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,954
    Location:
    Lafayette, Louisiana
    There is much sandbagging at the 3.0 level here in Louisiana. Baton Rouge is notorious for it and I could only laugh when I saw (I think) a BR team going to Nationals at 3.0 level. I must admit that if I ever found myself with the desire to sandbag for the purpose of winning social League matches I would seek therapy. These must be the guys who can't get women and also feel that if they buy a sports car at 45 they are cool again. I prefer to play up a level and get pushed. I cannot see the point of training with the objective of playing down so you can win. It's like buying a high end flat panel HD tv and then connecting only a rabbit ears to it. I know a guy who has played 3.0 league for 15 years. I actually told him that if I had been playing league for 15 years and was still a 3.0 the desire to take up a different sport/hobby would be a must.
     
    #49
  50. Ronaldo

    Ronaldo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    14,315
    Did he then show you 15 yrs of USTA Adult League trophies?
     
    #50

Share This Page