Is this DQ in process?? USTA League

[darkblue]

Scenario:

Player "A" has only 1 year record (2007) in Tennislink and is listed as a 4.0. Because the rating is effective for 3 years, and Tennislink has been in service since 2001(?), the "4.0" rating is a self-rate.

All matches described below is a 4.0 Men's USTA League matches.

Match No.1 #3 Doubles (W) 6-0, 6-2
Match No.2 #2 Singles (W) 6-1, 6-2
Match No.3 #1 Singles (W) 6-3, 6-1
Match No.4 #1 Singles (W) 6-2, 6-3

Opponents of Match 1 are 4.0 (1-7 record) and 3.5 (4-6 record)
Opponent of Match 2 is a 4.0 (4-4 record)
Opponent of Match 3 is a 4.0 (4-3 record)
Opponent of Match 4 is a 4.0 (4-6 in 4.5 league play + 8-2 in 4.0 play)

It is likely that DNTRP would flag Match 4, but three strikes?? I don't know
if Match 2 & 3 would warrant strikes. (or did someone file an appeal?)
As per USTA definition of DNTRP, if a 3.01 rated player played a 3.49 player,
a typical match score would be 0-6, 0-6.

As of today (and not yesterday), player "A" is listed under Tennislink at 4.5
and not a 4.0. (but without the "DQ" next to the player name) Does this mean that his team must forfeit the matches he played at the score of 0-6 0-6? Or does this simply mean that DNTRP has 3x strikes on this player and is pending the official DQ process??

Thanks!!

 

[Ace]

if he is now listed in tennislink as a 4.5, he got bumped up.

what matches got DQ'd are a section level rule, i think....look at the matches and see if any were reversed. the "score" isn't reversed, but the match will count as a win for the loser"

 

[darkblue]

if he is now listed in tennislink as a 4.5, he got bumped up.

what matches got DQ'd are a section level rule, i think....look at the matches and see if any were reversed. the "score" isn't reversed, but the match will count as a win for the loser"

the matches scores are as i posted in my initial post (not reversed). as far as i know, when the matches are OFFICIALLY reversed, Tennislink shows "DQ" next to the match scores.

What i'm wondering is, if this is IN PROCESS of happening.
I would think that the player/team in question has no idea that this is happening (maybe they do...) right now, as this is probably a reflection of last night's match.

volleyman, i hope u get to keep this player for the sectionals.

 

[Cindysphinx]

My observation is that the DQ goes up automatically for all matches that are going to be forfeited. Did you look him up to see if he's computer rated? If he's computer rated, he might not have to forfeit any matches, or only the last.

 

[Cindysphinx]

Oh, and is he playing up? Or are these his only results?

 

[darkblue]

My observation is that the DQ goes up automatically for all matches that are going to be forfeited. Did you look him up to see if he's computer rated? If he's computer rated, he might not have to forfeit any matches, or only the last.

I thought that it was automatic as well... that is why I'm puzzled, that he now shows up as a 4.5 (as opposed to yesterday) but his matches don't yet have "DQ" next to it, and team win/loss record is not yet modified/updated.
In the Tennislink NTRP database, this is what comes up:

Name Gender City State Year End Rating Year End Date Rating Type
**** * * * 4.5 6/7/2007 D

Ok - so I guess this answers one of my questions - that this was actually a 3 strikes thing rather than an appeal process (which I suspected).
But looking @ the results (only 4 matches, as noted in my initial post), I can hardly see the 3 strikes!!!!

For this player, 2007 is the ONLY year in the Tennislink database - so I have a good reason to believe that he entered this season with a 4.0 self-rate. (instead of a computer rate)

 

[darkblue]

Ok - investigating further I see:

* the opponent of match 4 is a "benchmark" 4.0 player.
* the opponents of match 2 & 3 are computer rated 4.0 players.
* the opponents of match 1 are computer ranked 4.0 and self-rate 3.5.

If beating a "benchmark" player 6-2, 6-3 DQ's a player, this DNTRP thing is #$%% crazy, in my opinion.

Could it be that "self-rate" is more sensitive to the DNTRP formula??

 

[volleyman]

We're aware of what's happening. At this moment, it's a DQ in process, according to what the USTA has sent us.

Fortunately, we won every match he played in at least 4-1, so no overall match results will be reversed and we get to keep the league championship.

And yes, these are his only results. He's not playing in another USTA league, and he's played no tournaments (which supposedly don't count in Southern this year, but just anticipating the question).

Meanwhile, just down the road in Cary, there's 4.0 guy who is undefeated at the 4.0 level in singles and doubles, and has been winning matches at the 4.5 level in singles and doubles, and doesn't have a bad loss in the 4.5 level matches he's dropped. He hasn't been bumped, but our guy has. How?

 

[darkblue]

We're aware of what's happening. At this moment, it's a DQ in process, according to what the USTA has sent us.

Fortunately, we won every match he played in at least 4-1, so no overall match results will be reversed and we get to keep the league championship.

And yes, these are his only results. He's not playing in another USTA league, and he's played no tournaments (which supposedly don't count in Southern this year, but just anticipating the question).

Meanwhile, just down the road in Cary, there's 4.0 guy who is undefeated at the 4.0 level in singles and doubles, and has been winning matches at the 4.5 level in singles and doubles, and doesn't have a bad loss in the 4.5 level matches he's dropped. He hasn't been bumped, but our guy has. How?

yeah... the mystery of DNTRP...
are you talking about JH ? btw, i think he was a computer rated 3.5 in 2005 - funny, i only see his 2006-07 results on Tennislink now...

i just can't see 4 matches can DQ you - esp. with these scores!!

 

[volleyman]

Yep, JH is my comparison guy. Looking at his league results,I can't see how the computer hasn't bumped him yet.

 

[darkblue]

Yep, JH is my comparison guy. Looking at his league results,I can't see how the computer hasn't bumped him yet.

he dealt me one of the worst losses of my tennis career
...and i was playing rather well too...

are captains somewhat more immune to the bump, i wonder... (he is the team captain)

i don't see extensive "score-making" like some others in the area like DJ or TB with JH either...which makes me wonder even more...

* self-rate more sensitive to DNTRP?
* team captains have some kind of un-announced protection from DNTRP
DQ until the end of the season?

 

[Raiden.Kaminari]

For the player that got disqualified, match 1, 2, and 4 were the ones he generated strikes.

For the other player (JH?), the Win/Loss record doesn't matter. Only match differentials.

The matches the player has been winning at 4.5 may have been against 4.0 players, in which the computer won't do much.

However, if he's winning against 4.5 level players, then you can suppose each of those matches has brought his DNTRP near the strike zone. Three matches in the strike zone, and the DQ is generated.

 

[kylebarendrick]

I believe that the DQ comes from USTA national, but that the actual match disqualifications are handled by your section. I've seen this with players here (Norcal) as well. It can take a few days after the DQ for the matches to be reversed.

 

[DrewRafter8]

You guys think this is bad, you ought to check out some of the stuff happening in the Downeast section. There's two guys on two different teams who are haven't lost a set in 4.0. I've heard more then one person talk about how these guys are throwing games. Each one of these players have won around five singles matches. Stuff like this just happens. Doesn't bother me, I just keep working on my game and that way I can give these guys a fit myself.

 

[darkblue]

For the player that got disqualified, match 1, 2, and 4 were the ones he generated strikes.

For the other player (JH?), the Win/Loss record doesn't matter. Only match differentials.

The matches the player has been winning at 4.5 may have been against 4.0 players, in which the computer won't do much.

However, if he's winning against 4.5 level players, then you can suppose each of those matches has brought his DNTRP near the strike zone. Three matches in the strike zone, and the DQ is generated.

i don't think that makes any sense.
Match 1 should not result in a strike!
- opposing player #1 is a very low computer rated 4.0 with 1-7 record paired with a 3.5. USTA says that when a 3.01 plays with a 3.49, a typical match result would be 6-0, 6-0. BTW, this is the first match EVER recorded in the Tennislink for the DQ'd player. I'd understand that this match would have a measurable effect to the DNTRP, but a strike?? I'm not sure about that.

Match 3 - this is questionable, too.. so you can't beat a benchmark player 6-2, 6-3? This is ridiculous...
The week before, I played this "benchmark" player and won 7-5, 6-2 - but I was up 4-1 in the first set and had many chances to win the set at 6-1 or 6-2... thank god I double faulted enough to keep it close! (or otherwise, I could have been DQ'd? Afterall, my record is 9-0 this season)
Simply put - the "benchmark" player was in a slump... but this is enough to throw a self-rated 4.0 into 4.5 after only 4 matches?? I think this is a good example that DNTRP does not work properly...

BTW, the other player: Most of his matches @ 4.5 were with 4.5 computer rated players, or 4.5 players that are in top 50 of the Section (singles rankings)

 

[darkblue]

You guys think this is bad, you ought to check out some of the stuff happening in the Downeast section. There's two guys on two different teams who are haven't lost a set in 4.0. I've heard more then one person talk about how these guys are throwing games. Each one of these players have won around five singles matches. Stuff like this just happens. Doesn't bother me, I just keep working on my game and that way I can give these guys a fit myself.

No.. this is NO news to me. We have those too... They carefully play close matches with low rated players to actively manage their DNTRP.

I started this thread only because I think it's STUPID that DNTRP DQ's a self-rated player after 4 matches. (if u want to see the scores, check post #1)

I also think that beating a benchmark player 3 and 2 resulting in a strike is a ridiculous formula. Who would want to play one of these benchmark players in a slump? or just plain off that day??

 

[volleyman]

For the player that got disqualified, match 1, 2, and 4 were the ones he generated strikes.

He generated a strike for beating a guy 6-2, 6-3? That's tough. Especially since I thought that benchmark only meant that you had been on a team that went to the state tournament the year before. Or does beating a benchmark affect your DNTRP more than beating some other computer-rated player of the same level?

For the other player (JH?), the Win/Loss record doesn't matter. Only match differentials.

The matches the player has been winning at 4.5 may have been against 4.0 players, in which the computer won't do much.

Nope, he's beating 4.5 players, or playing them tough: losing in the match tiebreak after splitting sets, or 7-5, 7-5.

However, if he's winning against 4.5 level players, then you can suppose each of those matches has brought his DNTRP near the strike zone. Three matches in the strike zone, and the DQ is generated.

See, this what I don't get. Beating a 4.5 player brought his DNTRP <i>near</i> the strike zone, but doesn't count as a strike? Whereas my teammate beat a 4.0 player and got a strike? Sorry, that doesn't make any sense.

The annoying thing is that this what you get when you have a computer handling all the rankings, without having a human back up to catch those patterns that computers stink at seeing. For example, a human review of the records of some of the guys mentioned in this thread for managing matches to avoid getting bumped would quickly uncover their attempt to game the system.

Likewise, any human looking at JH's record, would quickly conclude he was a 4.5 player.

It would be easier to accept my teammate's disqualification if the NTRP system were working better. However, it clearly has flaws. Combine that with the black box nature of the system, and the results seem to arbitrary and capricious. And nobody likes having their fate determined that way.

I don't want the NTRP system tossed. But I do want it to work fairly and it's got a long way to go before it reaches that point.

 

[Raiden.Kaminari]

Darkblue and volleyman, unless you post links to the actual players, I can not examine the data to see what you're saying.

There may be additional reasons why one player was disqualified, and another hasn't been yet.

I doubt anyone here will say the current DNTRP algorithm is perfect. There are multiple flaws to it. And as long as there is an incentive for these players to cheat by playing down, they will.

Most USTA Sections have players (and employees) requesting visual verification to be brought back. Unfortunately, Nationals won't do anything (since they're fully committed to their DNTRP algorithm) until they see population for a particular section dropping.

Nationals is attempting to fix the DNTRP though by preventing all benchmark players (players reaching Districts) from appealing.

 

[volleyman]

Raiden, first let me say thank you for taking the time to attempt to explain how this works. I really do appreciate it.

My teammate's record is here: http://tinyurl.com/3dhd8s

Our comparison player is here: http://tinyurl.com/2ofpfy

 

[volleyman]

And one more for the comparison. This guy has been destroying the Raleigh USTA league in Singles, winning all but one of his 12 matches far more convincingly than my teammate did, and so far, no bump.

http://tinyurl.com/38mtos

 

[lostinamerica]

And one more for the comparison. This guy has been destroying the Raleigh USTA league in Singles, winning all but one of his 12 matches far more convincingly than my teammate did, and so far, no bump.

http://tinyurl.com/38mtos

I do not know a thing about the DNTRP algorithm. Yet, if this guy does not get bumped, the computer cannot be paying attention.

 

[lostinamerica]

One thing I notice about the teammate, is the team. The team is pretty much running roughshod over everyone. 14-0 and only a few 3-2 wins. Most are 4-1 or 5-0. I am unsure if that triggers anything or not but that team is obviously strong.

 

[volleyman]

We are strong, compared to the rest of the league. Compared to other league champions from around the state, I'm not sure. I know most of the guys on the Raleigh league champions, for example, and I'd say a match between us would likely be 3-2, but I'm not sure which way.

 

[darkblue]

i've heard from tarheeljohn that when you self-rate, your DNTRP is at the cusp of being promoted to 4.5.

this explains why DQ occured with just 4 matches - if it is true.

the other players we've talked about JH (being promoted from 3.5, 2 years
ago), CP (computer rated), DJ (computer rated) are not self-rate and were probably much farther away from the "cusp" before the start of the season....

i wish that someone (from inside USTA) would confirm the self-rate=cusp thing.

 

[darkblue]

volleyman,

there's a player in the GSO area who was a self-rate 4.0 w/o any prev
USTA data who got DQ'd 4 matches into the season...
i think the scores are less convincing than PK..

player's name is mike luu

this seems to be in line with self-rate = cusp.

 

[Raiden.Kaminari]

Thanks for posting the links, it will take a while to review the players' past records, etc.

No such thing as a cusp, unless you self-rate and have to appeal what the computer automatically set you at.

Otherwise, when you self-rate, you're a blank slate. Your first match against computer rated opponents determines your first DNTRP. Your initial baseline DNTRP rating is set after three matches.

The strikes occur when you're above the strike zone, usually .20 into the next level.

 

[tarheelbornjohn]

It is my understanding that Mike Luu had been a 4.5 player, did not play for several years, came back, self rated at 4.0, won all matches and got DQ'ed.

No matter what the formula, if you self rate, you can get bumped much faster than compurated.

If you bring in a ringer, have him self rate, and as a captin do not make sure that he is reasonable at where he self rated, you run the risk of getting some matches DQ'ed. Kind of silly to bring in a ringer and have them drop sets or games to stay safe. We have gotten team wins the last two years like that.

 

[JLyon]

Your comparision is Apples to Oranges because he was already in the Computer with a 2006 rating. your teammate self-rated and detsroyed everyone he played. Pretty self-explanatory to me. I think the computer works fine. At least he got DQ'ed early and not at state or sectionals.

 

[lostinamerica]

I do not understand the computer. I hope someone can fill me in. (What I am about to say is not what I agree one should do but just an observation from one uneducated in the NTRP computer world).

The best I can tell, if you are a first year league player, you should lose all matches to players rated by the computer. Even if they have lost all of their matches (6-0, 6-1). When sectionals come around, if you are having a great day, you should give opponents some games. If you are having a bad day and losing, you should hope your opponents are computer rated.

Admittedly, I do not know how quickly people get DQ'd. I really do not know how the process works. I understand that a self rated player is more likely to get hit with the DQ than the computer rated. Yet, I know some computer rated players who are clearly in the wrong league. Yet, others get DQ'd who may (or may not) be in the wrong league because they are self rated.

With this post, I am not advocating sandbagging (which I am sure someone will take it that I am). I am just observing that having a good day (or a good run over two to three weeks) against the wrong opponent could get you a DQ when you probably belong in the league you are in. I know that I have gone 2 or 3 weeks and been playing outstanding and then go 3 or 4 weeks and been much less than stellar.

 

[kylebarendrick]

The difference between a computer rated player and a self-rated player is that the one with a computer rating has some "weight" behind their rating. If they have a great day and blowout a great player, that score only gets averaged in (by whatever method is used by the computer) to their existing rating - no harm done.

A self-rated player, though, has no weight. Their dynamic rating is determined by their first few matches. So if someone self-rates as a 4.0 and proceeds to easily beat a strong 4.0 in their first match, the computer will give them a rating in the 4.5 range - and put them at or close to the strike mark. From there generating strikes is pretty easy.

If I was trying to game the system, I'd probably try to get my self-rated players to drop their first match - preferrably against a middle of the level player. Of course, that would be cheating...

 

[lostinamerica]

If I was trying to game the system, I'd probably try to get my self-rated players to drop their first match - preferrably against a middle of the level player. Of course, that would be cheating...

Thanks... Then I am not too far off from being right.

 

[Raiden.Kaminari]

What Kyle posted was correct.

The computer averages the differentials and applies it to the baseline (weighted) rating. When someone is self-rated, they have no baseline rating.

Telling someone to intentionally lose their matches in order to control their rating is cheating.

 

[TriCitiesTennis]

Chanson Pak's stats are unreal for a player at his level. 4.0 level players are better than that.

This guy got missed in the system his first self rate 4.0 year and has reaped the rewards by winning easily with no penalty. Goes to show how much the computer rating will protect you.