USTA "Dynamic Disqualification" of Computer Rated Players

[awlmostpersuaded]

Excerpt from www.ustapetition.com

During the 2006 League Season, USTA's "three strikes and you are out" - "Dynamic Disqualification" system, which was devised to prevent "Self Rated" players from "Self Rating" themselves too low, began to be widely used against COMPUTER RATED PLAYERS, especially at Regional and Sectional Championships.

The USTA Dynamic Rating System overview and League FAQ's on www.USTA.com state that the Computer Rated player should begin the League Season at the rating assigned by the computer, and that the Disqualification of a Computer Rated player should be "very rare".

But, there have been more "Third Strike" Dynamic Disqualifications of Computer Rated players each year since the test program in 2002.

USTA has now added USTA League Rules Section 3.04A(2)a, which allows each USTA Section the option to Dynamically Disqualify Computer Rated players DURING Sectional Championships and reverse all their wins and take away the team points that were earned, in "good faith" and at the correct level, in an apparent attempt to control what they perceive as "sandbagging".

All through USTA Regulations and the "Code", "all points and games etc stand" if played "in good faith" - but, someone has apparently forgotten what "in good faith" means.

We believe the USTA League system is going in the direction, and has now reached a point where its present policy actually encourages "sandbagging" among the Computer Rated players who never would have thought of such a thing, and who detest the whole idea of not playing your best in every point.

USTA National League Rules Section 3.04A(2)a, is now forcing every player that wants to play good and advance to post season play, to play the "sandbagging game" and try to keep their rating from getting high enough to be DQ'd.

Post season play should be a meeting of the "best of the best" and to see if you can win under pressure, and, if so, move to the next level for the following year!

Please go to www.ustapetition.com and sign the petition against USTA National Rules Section 3.04A(2)a, which allows each USTA Section the option to Dynamically Disqualify Computer Rated players DURING Sectional Championships and reverse all their wins and take away the team points earned.</U>

www.ustapetition.com also has links to all the National USTA League rules and to the League Rules of all the 17 USTA Sections, and how each Section chose to handle Sectional Championships.

Be informed, and let USTA know that "Dynamic Disqualification" of Computer Rated players - who have played by all the rules, and who are guilty of nothing more than improving, and playing their best - is unacceptable!

We believe USTA Leagues are "self destructing" under the present policy of Dynamic Disqualification of Computer Rated Players during the League season - and especially Dynamic Disqualification of Computer Rated Players during Sectionals - right when their quality of play is "peaking" - and reversing all their wins, even the wins earned, in good faith, playing at the level directed by the USTA League Rules and the USTA Dynamic Rating System.

We also believe that there will be a tremendous increase in player participation if National USTA League Rules Section 3.04A(2)a is eliminated.

We also welcome your comments.

 

[tykrum]

Well, personally I think the formula they use for the dynamic rating is crap, especially if you are just starting. Our 4.0 team's #1 player got DQed after his first three USTA matches ever just because he won 6-2 6-3 against some okay guys. There were other players almost or just as good as him in the league, but they had been playing longer and had a loss mixed in here and there.

 

[travlerajm]

It sounds like someone is bitter after getting busted for sandbagging. Wake up folks - winning at nationals in an NTRP-restricted league or tourney is more about the art of sandbagging than it is about being the best competitor.

Sit back and enjoy the competition. It's not worth complaining about the system. Just find some ringers for your team, and then strategically place them in your lineup so that they won't play against anyone good until it counts.

 

[tennis-n-sc]

It sounds like someone is bitter after getting busted for sandbagging. Wake up folks - winning at nationals in an NTRP-restricted league or tourney is more about the art of sandbagging than it is about being the best competitor.

Sit back and enjoy the competition. It's not worth complaining about the system. Just find some ringers for your team, and then strategically place them in your lineup so that they won't play against anyone good until it counts.

Couldn't agree more. I have no problem with the system. It doesn't affect the earnings I get from league tennis. And with all the complaining, no one yet has put forth a reasonable and manageable alternative. Watching some of these 3.5 - 4.5 league matches, you would think that they think the next stop for them is Roland Garros. Where is the joy in Mudville?

 

[cghipp]

I do have a problem with the rule change. The USTA has had the opportunity every year for the past fifteen years to bump me up at the end of the year after all my results are in. Not bumping me up means that, in their opinion, I am still at the same level. If I were to get disqualified at that level in the championships the following year, then in my opinon the system is worthless. It looks like the rule change may catch some people who are trying to cheat the system, but it's more likely that it will penalize regular players who are playing at the level the USTA tells them they are at.

In addition, I haven't seen that much sandbagging in my area. When it happens, it's usually by players who are getting older and may have lost a step, but get bumped up because they are very good all-around players. They appeal because they can't win as easily at the next level. I find that irritating, but I have only seen a few instances of it. In my opinion, the new rule should only apply to self-rated players or players who have appealed their rating.

 

[tennis-n-sc]

I do have a problem with the rule change. The USTA has had the opportunity every year for the past fifteen years to bump me up at the end of the year after all my results are in. Not bumping me up means that, in their opinion, I am still at the same level. If I were to get disqualified at that level in the championships the following year, then in my opinon the system is worthless. It looks like the rule change may catch some people who are trying to cheat the system, but it's more likely that it will penalize regular players who are playing at the level the USTA tells them they are at.

In addition, I haven't seen that much sandbagging in my area. When it happens, it's usually by players who are getting older and may have lost a step, but get bumped up because they are very good all-around players. They appeal because they can't win as easily at the next level. I find that irritating, but I have only seen a few instances of it. In my opinion, the new rule should only apply to self-rated players or players who have appealed their rating.

Well, it is dynamic, meaning current. So, if you improve at a greatly accelerated rate since the last ratings, your current rating will reflect as much. I'm not sure this a rule change, either. I'm very active in the local USTA and I haven't heard a thing about it. Nor have I ever heard of a computer rated player being given the three strikes in such a manner, especially in SC. Now self-rated players are a different story.

 

[Geezer Guy]

I don't think that players with valid computer-generated ratings should be bumped up in the middle of the season. I have no problem with players be adjusted as necessary at the end of the season.

 

[raiden031]

Winning a championship based on NTRP rating is worthless. It is completely arbitrary and bias towards different regions. There's no way to ensure that a 4.0 in California is the same as a 4.0 in Maryland. And there's no way to ensure that the best 4.0 is not really a 4.5. Tournaments should be based on age, gender, and accomplishments. Accomplishments could include excluding former college or pro players or accomplished junior players who would have an advantage.

 

[Geezer Guy]

If that were true, we'd see the same region winning Nationals every year. I don't believe that's the case.

I agree that age divisions are a lot more objective than NTRP levels, and the USTA -does- have age level tournaments as well as Open tournaments. The only way to get a Gold Ball is through an age-level tournament, I believe.

The advantage of the NTRP levels is that it lets a lot more people compete on an even playing field against other similarly skilled opponents. Most of us are happy to play and compete every week, and if we can win even 75% of our matches we feel pretty good. I've been playing USTA for nearly 10 years, and our team only went to Sectionals once (we came in second). Going to Nationals is pretty unlikely, but man I'd love the chance.

 

[Kevo]

I know a guy who is a good 4.0. Solid all around player with pretty good strokes, but he's very consistent. He has been bumped up to 4.5 and back down to 4.0 about 4 times now. It seems to me they should just leave him at 4.0 and accept that he is a good 4.0. So what if he wins 85% of his 4.0 matches. Maybe he should be the guy that 4.0s try to beat on their way to 4.5. At this point the way the system is run it looks like he is just going to be bouncing back and forth until he gets too old to be a good 4.0. Doesn't seem quite right.

 

[awlmostpersuaded]

Thanks for the USTA "Dynamic Disqualification" Replies!

Well, it is dynamic, meaning current. So, if you improve at a greatly accelerated rate since the last ratings, your current rating will reflect as much. I'm not sure this a rule change, either. I'm very active in the local USTA and I haven't heard a thing about it. Nor have I ever heard of a computer rated player being given the three strikes in such a manner, especially in SC. Now self-rated players are a different story.

Three of the 17 USTA Sections chose in 2006 to Dynamically DQ AFTER the Sectional Tournament instead of DURING (reversing all wins and taking away all team points):
Southern Section,
Northern Section,
and Missouri Valley

These 3 sections comprise 1/3 of all USTA League Players.

So, Tennis is Good in South Carolina

National USTA Rules give the Sections a choice:

3.04A(2) Championship NTRP Disqualification. The section shall choose one of the following options at each championship level:
3.04A(2)a Run dynamic calculations and produce ratings throughout the championship. Through the conclusion of the championship event notify and disqualify those players that meet the criteria for NTRP disqualification and reverse appropriate matches played.
3.04A(2)b Run dynamic calculations following the conclusion of the championship, calculate dynamic ratings and disqualify those players that meet the criteria for NTRP disqualification.

Running the Computer numbers at the end of each day and DQ'ing DURING the Championships, and reversing the wins, in effect DQ's a whole team. The Computer Rated player and whole team are penalized for NOT sandbagging!

The 3 USTA Sections that DQ AFTER the Championships don't DQ the whole team, the DQ'd player cannot advance to Nationals, but the team can, if they can win Sectionals - at least that's more fair.

Choosing to DQ DURING the Sectional Championships forces players to sandbag instead of preventing it.

We are only asking National USTA to standardize the Sectional Championships - Nation Wide - by removing National rule 3.04A(2)a, so all the Sections DQ AFTER the Sectional Championships. www.ustapetition.com

 

[awlmostpersuaded]

Sandbagging?

It sounds like someone is bitter after getting busted for sandbagging. Wake up folks - winning at nationals in an NTRP-restricted league or tourney is more about the art of sandbagging than it is about being the best competitor.

Sit back and enjoy the competition. It's not worth complaining about the system. Just find some ringers for your team, and then strategically place them in your lineup so that they won't play against anyone good until it counts.

No "bitterness" Travlerajm, and no complaining, just suggesting an improvement - standardize the National Rules - by removal of one sentance - 3.04A(2)a - so all 17 USTA Sections conduct their Sectional Tournaments the same.

And "busted for sandbagging"? How about the opposite. We are seeing players rated by the computer at the same level for 4 years, and then suddenly DQ'd during Sectionals, - that's DQ'd for NOT sandbagging.

National Rule 3.04A(2)a gives the Sections a choice to DQ DURING Sectionals and reverse all wins and remove all team points, in effect DQ'ing the whole team.

I would hate to think that League Tennis has sunk to the depths you describe )-:

 

[oldguysrule]

Thanks for the heads up about the petition. I signed it because a.) I think that the rules should be standardized across the country; 2.) A computer rated player is not a sand-bagger. He is playing where he should be playing and he should get to finish the year at that level.

I play USTA league tennis because I enjoy the competition and the camaraderie (sp?) of the team concept. I did not see any evidence of sandbagging at sectionals and our representative at nationals were competitive there. If you work for a living and have kids, you are lucky to get in 1-2 matches a week. I value the NTRP levels competitition because it gives me a chance to compete with other players at my level and get a taste for playing when it counts.

 

[tennis-n-sc]

Hey Awlmost-

Very informative and I agree with you if that procedure does, in fact, apply to computer rated players and not just self-rated players. If that is the case, then I couldn't agree with more. Thanks for the heads up.

 

[awlmostpersuaded]

Thanks for the heads up about the petition. I signed it because a.) I think that the rules should be standardized across the country; 2.) A computer rated player is not a sand-bagger. He is playing where he should be playing and he should get to finish the year at that level.

I play USTA league tennis because I enjoy the competition and the camaraderie (sp?) of the team concept. I did not see any evidence of sandbagging at sectionals and our representative at nationals were competitive there. If you work for a living and have kids, you are lucky to get in 1-2 matches a week. I value the NTRP levels competitition because it gives me a chance to compete with other players at my level and get a taste for playing when it counts.

Amen OldGuysRule! We're not knocking USTA League Tennis, we love it, but have you ever seen anything that couldn't be improved?

 

[awlmostpersuaded]

Hey Awlmost-

Very informative and I agree with you if that procedure does, in fact, apply to computer rated players and not just self-rated players. If that is the case, then I couldn't agree with more. Thanks for the heads up.

You're welcome Tennis-In-SC. Dynamic DQ for Self Rated players is a must.

This "Dynamic DQ of Computer Rated players during Sectionals, reversing all wins and removing all team points earned" is a new animal.

AND WITHOUT ANY VISUAL VERIFICATION!!!!!

We just want National Rules:

3.04A(2)a Quote: "Run dynamic calculations and produce ratings throughout the championship. Through the conclusion of the championship event notify and disqualify those players that meet the criteria for NTRP disqualification and reverse appropriate matches played".

ELIMINATED so all the 17 Sections will follow 3.04A(2)b and Dynamically DQ AFTER Sectional Tournaments. (The DQ'd player has to move up, but the team, if it can win, can advance to Nationals)

If they just have to DQ a Computer Rated Player because of "3 strikes", so be it, but the 14 Sections that chose Rule 3.04A(2)a DQ'd the whole team by reversing the DQ'd players wins and removing the team points earned "in good faith" and at the correct level", in previous day's play.

 

[stichmo]

An opposing view

Excerpt from www.ustapetition.com


Be informed, and let USTA know that "Dynamic Disqualification" of Computer Rated players - who have played by all the rules, and who are guilty of nothing more than improving, and playing their best - is unacceptable!

We believe USTA Leagues are "self destructing" under the present policy of Dynamic Disqualification of Computer Rated Players during the League season - and especially Dynamic Disqualification of Computer Rated Players during Sectionals - right when their quality of play is "peaking" - and reversing all their wins, even the wins earned, in good faith, playing at the level directed by the USTA League Rules and the USTA Dynamic Rating System.

We also believe that there will be a tremendous increase in player participation if National USTA League Rules Section 3.04A(2)a is eliminated.

We also welcome your comments.

As someone who has played USTA tennis for the past 6-7 years, including playing on a 3.5 team that went to Nationals, I feel that the proposed rule change would cause more problems than it solves. The DQ of previous matches in a round robin format at Sectionals is not a new rule this year. An opposing player and his team had the rule enforced against them at the 2005 Eastern Sectionals. How the rule was enforced didn't affect their chances of going to Nationals, but it did change the chances for the other teams at that Sectional.

To suggest that "there will be a tremendous increase in player participation" if 3.04A(2)a is eliminated is ridiculous. Frankly, almost no USTA players are aware of the rule. Most USTA players participate for the joy of playing some tennis and never get past the early playoff rounds. The rule just doesn't affect them. Only a few of us routinely fantasize about going to Nationals.

That said, the proposed change, and the three Sections using rule b, opens up new sandbagging possibilities, because most sections allow players to play at Sectionals with as few as one played match (and two forfeits). There is no chance for those players to be DQ'd prior to Sectionals. A team that has an easy qualification for playoffs can hold back their best players until Sectionals--and a few more for Nationals. I don't know about the rest of you, but I still know a few former Division I players with 3.5 computer ratings. We already have no DQ's at Nationals. Giving them no DQ's at sectionals as well just seems to be asking for new abuses of the system.

 

[awlmostpersuaded]

Thanks Stichmo for your view

There probably are many viewpoints within USTA Sections and individuals within Sections. I trust yours is valid from what you see.

The Dynamic DQ Rule for Sectionals was not new for 2006, but, it was used against so many computer rated players that most everybody we talk to knows someone who was DQ'd in 2006.

We also talk to player after player and many captains also that have played the Adult USTA Leagues for years and say they will not play or captain again because of the fiascos at Sectionals.

We've even talked to teams who WON Sectionals because of a Dynamic DQ on the OPPOSING team, and they were ALL upset by it.

I've played the USTA Leagues for eleven years, and it has been my experience that those "middle of the road players" who "play for fun" - if they keep playing - they eventually find themselves in a position to go to Sectionals. We don't want to see all the "the joy of playing some tennis" wiped off their faces because they "improved too much" and got DQ'd.

We think there must be a way for Adult/Senior players who have "paid their dues" and have a solid "Computer Rating" (X number of matches) to not be subject to Dynamic DQ at all, but be allowed to play all the way to Nationals, with no limit on how much they can improve.

Help us think of a way to separate those who are intentionally "playing significantly below level" from the honest player who abides by all the rules and who should not be penalized for improving.
Thanks

 

[TDK V1]

Sandbagging?

Sandbagging has and always will go on no matter whether the dynamic rating system is in place or not. I have personal experience of protesting a player on another team that had won the city Combo 9.0 and had self rated as a 4.0 It turned out he played college tennis, challenger tournaments, & had a few ATP points.:evil: Yes, he was eventually DQ'ed, all wins were changed to losses, and my team moved on to sectionals as we should have. The USTA had roving umpires at the city level several years ago but that didn't stop the sandbagging either. The umpires at sectionals didn't stop it either. When the umpires would come by, players simply didn't play their best and when they moved on, they would start blistering the ball again. I'm still trying to figure out how anyone might think the dynamic rating system hurts the leagues or encourages sandbagging any more than when we didn't have it. My answer to the puzzle is simply to play both my level plus a level up (4.5 & 5.0) and play my best every time. Many players do this and if you aren't worried about getting bumped, it's time to step up and play your best and let the results speak for what your rating should be.

The system isn't perfect but I think it's better than what we had before.
I'm sure there may be a few tweaks that could make what we have a little better but it looks like sandbagging will always play a part in whatever
system there is. It's just a broader art of how a Capt. fills out his lineup for a particular match. A fact; the USTA will never make everyone happy.

It really doesn't matter whether it's tennis, horse shoes, or hand grenades...if there's a way to cheat, some people will find a way
and then whine about it when they get caught...