The USTA rating system and self-rated players

Discussion in 'Adult League & Tournament Talk' started by aidenous, Jul 24, 2007.

  1. Ace

    Ace Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Messages:
    444
    Now, now, thats not what I said. I said you shouldn't play up unless you are beating tons of people at your level. If you aren't beating anyone at your level, don't play up. Thats what I said.
    So, if you were there, beating tons of 3.0's, then you should play up.

    I was complaining about the people who lose the majority of their "at level" matches quite badly, but still feel the need to play up.


    (By the way....just so you know I am not totally against "playing up", and a lot of what I have said was said light-heartedly......my original beef stemmed from the fact that I, a decent 3.5, played "up" at 4.0, against a weak 3.5, who had lost ALL of their 3.5 matches, with a weak serve, inconsistent groundstrokes, and no pace. I won that match 6-1, 6-1, and I cannot beat a 4.0....so WHAT was this person thinking??? I really didn't care that much, but I figured I'd whine about it to keep the discussion lively by arguing FOR sandbaggers.)
     
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2007
  2. SB

    SB Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2004
    Messages:
    351
    This reminds me of a time I was dicking around Tennislink, and came across some woman who was I think a 3.0, maybe a 3.5, who had played in a bunch of 4.0 and 4.5 singles tournaments, possibly even an open draw, too -- I noticed her because I kept seeing that she had lost 0 and 0. I looked at her record, and she had played in about 15 matches, losing by the double bagel in almost all of them. She scraped out a breadstick now and again.

    It was weird. I wish I could remember her name, to look her up and see if she's still subjecting herself (or maybe her opponents?) to such torture. Maybe she's doing penance.
     
  3. lostinamerica

    lostinamerica Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 16, 2007
    Messages:
    556
    Location:
    Galt's Gulch
    That is very true. I really do not care if people sandbag. Currently, I have a grievous against me pending. (btw, I do not consider myself a sandbagger). The team filing the grievance was used to hammering everyone and then they got beat at districts so anyone they lost to was obviously sandbagging. When in reality, they were missing three of their sandbaggers. Had they had their number 1 singles and two best double players, they would have won. They have certainly had no problems with beating other teams.... badly. I was shocked none of their team had been DQ'd. They were all self rates and had dished out many bagels and breadsticks.
     
  4. raiden031

    raiden031 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,997
    Ok lets say a player goes like 12-0, and lots of the matches have competitive scores. The computer will probably not move them up despite their dominance. Its pretty certain the following year they will blow out every opponent, so why not move them up before that happens.

    I didn't mean to say that all 3.0 players improve, but rather the top N% will probably improve to be competitive with 3.5 players by the next year.

    My main point is simply to move them up BEFORE they start blowing everyone out rather than waiting til AFTER, to avoid grievances and un-competitive matches.
     
  5. raiden031

    raiden031 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,997
    I live in an area with very competitive USTA league players. In fact we had some teams go to nationals last year. Most of the 3.0 players play year round and do block times and all that stuff. However, most of them will not do practice drills, and most have rudimentary strokes so while they are match tough from so much competition, they are limited in their ability to improve.

    I never said they would go up an entire level, what I am trying to say is that the top N% of the level is close enough to the next level up that they may still play competitive matches with others of the same level, but by the following year they will be improved enough to move to the next level.

    BTW, I am a 3.0 who is above average but probably wasn't successful enough to move up (4-4 record against 3.0s). I just beat a computer-rated 3.5 today 6-3, 6-1. I believe I will be crushing 3.0 players next year due to my focus on improvement and would rather play at 3.5, but I'm going to stick with whatever level the computer puts me in to prove my point.
     
  6. amarone

    amarone Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    514
    Location:
    Atlanta
    I assume this comment is made based on the incorrect belief that benchmark players are some sort of standard for a level. A player is a benchmark if s/he has been to district playoffs or beyond irrespective of how good they are or what their record is. That is because benchmark players are used to correlate rankings across different regions. To do that, you have to use players who have actually played players from other regions.

    If you use local players as a benchmark, how are you going to correlate across regions to ensure a consistent national standard?
     
  7. KFwinds

    KFwinds Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,318

    I also want to make clear to those who don't understand yet: your "record", or wins/losses DO NOT affect your rating in this system. Your rating moves according to the dynamic rating of your opponent in relationship to yours, and the computer knows by what type of score you are supposed to win or lose to another player. For example, I am a 3.5 B (benchmark) which means my dynamic rating is actually around 3.8/3.9. I can beat 3.0's by a score of 6-0, 6-1 and my rating won't budge no matter how many of these type of wins I acheive. I can also beat 3.5's below my dynamic level without moving as long as the scores are not more than about one break per set. Here's the best part: I would have to have at least 3 lopsided victories against other 3.5 opponents to even get ONE strike against me because the computer also takes into account a good-day/bad-day scenario. You need THREE strikes to get DQ'd from your level, or bumped (if you are computer-rated). This is why you see players who continually win year after year and never get moved up. It is true, however, that if you win any matches at the championship level (regionals or nationals) you will almost certainly be moved up for the following season. I actually went to nationals last year, but lost both of the matches I played and never got bumped. Every other player that won at least one match got moved to 4.0. Since the fall season started last October, my match record is 17-1, but am in no danger of being bumped unless our team goes deep in the playoffs again.
     
  8. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,917
    There is nothing wrong with blowing people out. It's going to happen, it doesnt mean necessarily you should be a whole other level then the other guy. That's the general disconnect everyone is having here.

    And you are assuming that if someone wins closely that they will blow everyone out the next year. That is an assumption. I have a friend who was on my 3.0 team, he won much of his matches (all close) for a few years.

    Then he played on my 3.5 team, finally got rated up. Then last year he was rated down. (this should make some of you happy) Now he's back in 3.0 and he's losing most of his matches.

    Dont assume anything. (especially when it comes to 3.0 and 3.5) Not everyone has the time or commitment it takes to even stay where they are supposed to much less get continuously better.

    Again, a lot of you dont see that because you happen to be on teams that are going somewhere at the end of the season which means you probally have an entire team full of top tier players for your level, that's not the experience for the other 95+% of the league.
     
  9. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,917
    You may be right about what you "will" do in the future, but "believing" it and actually doing it are two diffrent things.

    This is a sport, you have to play the matches to prove things, you cant base an entire system on the assumption that anyone is going to potentially do anything.

    That's why it's better to just wait until someone actually does clobber everyeone and then they get rated out. (and hopefully they cant auto appeal which is the real problem nowdays)
     
  10. raiden031

    raiden031 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,997
    In my case, my team isn't that strong but there is a national-calibre team in my league, so I've seen both good and bad players. From my experience, the majority of players seem to do better from one year to the next. I have yet to see a dominating player (winning 80-90% of their matches) not blow out all their opponents the next year if they remain at the level.

    Of course one can say that win-loss percentage means nothing, but I think that is a fallacy. Some people have a hard time blowing others out (mental reasons), yet they could play them 100 times and still win every time, showing that the score is not as important as the emphasis put on it by the NTRP system.

    I think they should take into account win-loss to some extent. I think the system is good, but I also think it could be tweaked to bump up a little sooner than it does. Once again, I like playing tougher players, but I also understand that currently there are lots of grievances because the system isn't fast enough to act.
     
  11. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,917
    In the situation you described where someone can beat another player 100 times but not blow them out, that doesnt necessairly mean they belong on an entirely diffrent rating. (I have a friend like that, he beats me all the time, but I win some matches in League play that he wont win, diffrent styles....)

    You actually cant file a grievance on a computer rated player. (at least not that Im aware of)
     
  12. AP328

    AP328 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    115
    You are correct, except that according to the USTA, a 3.5 actually has a dynamic rating between 3.01 - 3.49.
     
  13. ohplease

    ohplease Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,172
    KFWinds, you've gone 17-1, you've been to nationals - I'm honestly curious why you're not trying your hand at 4.0. What else are you after at 3.5, at this point?
     
  14. Ace

    Ace Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Messages:
    444
    KFWinds, your statement:

    "For example, I am a 3.5 B (benchmark) which means my dynamic rating is actually around 3.8/3.9."

    ...is incorrect. You can be a 3.5 B (benchmark) player and still have a low 3.5 rating. Benchmarks are not at the "top" of their level...it just means they have been to championships and their rating is considered more accurate, and thereby used for comparison at the end of the year to generate other peoples ratings.
     
  15. Ace

    Ace Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Messages:
    444

    He knows his 4.5 sandbagging partners are carrying him..... haha, just kidding.
     
  16. aidenous

    aidenous Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    440
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    Our mixed team lost 1 court to 2 and one court had a self rated player. This guy rated himself 2.5 but he was at least a 3.5. This loss will probably knock us out of a chance to do to districts. We had a shot at finishing 2nd because the top two will go on.

    This is the pattern to win you have to find new players that are really good and have them underrate.
     
  17. 10ACE

    10ACE Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,170
    Question: I thought this was the best thread to post this

    I started last year playing NTRP tourni's at 3.0- won a bunch so I moved to 3.5- then this year I played 4.0 tourni got to the semis - and lost in 3 sets- I am 2-2 at 4.0

    However I want to be at a 3.5 rating so I can play both- I last rated myself at a 3.0- but not sure how to change it?

    For these reasons I am ineligible at 3.5-and 4.0- I would like to be eligible for 3.5 rankings- so I have 2 of those tournaments coming this month- If I complete 5 or more matches at 3.5 will that help make me eligible-I think that's what I have read. not sure

    Thanks
     
  18. amarone

    amarone Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    514
    Location:
    Atlanta
    This is correct. And in addition, a player with a dynamic rating of 3.8/3.9 is a 4.0 player. 3.5 covers the range up to 3.5, not the range above it.
     
  19. J_R_B

    J_R_B Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,639
    Location:
    Newtown, PA
    Not sure why this was bumped, but I love the "no one should be allowed to play up, oh, except for me because I'm great" argument. LOL.
     
  20. Sherlock

    Sherlock Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2010
    Messages:
    192
    Location:
    Minnesota, USA
    I think rankings depend on the section, but generally there is no restriction of what your NTRP rating is to be ranked at some level. I am currently ranked in both 3.5 and 4.0. As you mentioned there may be a restriction on the number of tournaments or matches you have played before you can be ranked.
     
  21. 10ACE

    10ACE Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,170
    nice thanks- I am on the illegible list but I think that will change after this tourni- I'll post back when that changes
     

Share This Page