What does it take to get bumped in USTA?

[beernutz]

I played and lost to a guy in 3.5 who was playing up this season in USTA. I was curious about him so I looked him up in tennis link. Apparently he self rated as a 3.0 last year as there is no record of him before that and his team went to Districts where he was 2-1 in singles and 0-1 in doubles. Before Districts he was 3-0 (two doubles and one singles win). The guy he lost to in singles at Districts got bumped to 3.5.

That said, this is his record this year:

http://img10.imageshack.us/i/ustauk.jpg/
1-0 in 3.5 doubles
4-1 in 3.5 singles
2-0 in 3.0 singles
I am not counting the default at 3.5 doubles.

I applaud the guy for playing up as he is clearly not a 3.0 but wonder why he is still playing 3.0 matches and why the USTA algorithm hasn't bumped such a player up to the level where they clearly (imo) belong.

 

[J_R_B]

Is he currently C-rated or S-rated in the computer (i.e. did he get a YE 12/31/2010 computer rating)? If he is C-rated, he'll be bumped at the end of 2011. If he's S-rated, then he should be pretty close to 3 strikes, although it's obviously impossible to tell for sure.

 

[beernutz]

Is he currently C-rated or S-rated in the computer (i.e. did he get a YE 12/31/2010 computer rating)? If he is C-rated, he'll be bumped at the end of 2011. If he's S-rated, then he should be pretty close to 3 strikes, although it's obviously impossible to tell for sure.

How could I tell?

 

[dizzlmcwizzl]

How could I tell?

You cannot unless you are tight with someone at the district level who is willing to tell you things they should not ... the USTA does not publish that type of information for a variety of reasons.

 

[gameboy]

I am hoping dizzl was just joking...

Just go to http://tennislink.usta.com/Leagues/Common/Default.aspx

Type in the name of the player and do a search. You should see a list with his name and the code for his rating (s for self and c for computer).

 

[J_R_B]

How could I tell?

Tell if he is C-rated? Go to TennisLink, click on the USTA league tab, and type in his name in the Find NTRP Rating Info box. That will bring up a list of everyone in the USTA db with that name. Find the exact person you are looking for in the list and the Rating Type column will say S, C, B, T, M, or A.

If you mean how can you tell how many strikes he has, then you can't unless/until he gets 3.

 

[beernutz]

Tell if he is C-rated? Go to TennisLink, click on the USTA league tab, and type in his name in the Find NTRP Rating Info box. That will bring up a list of everyone in the USTA db with that name. Find the exact person you are looking for in the list and the Rating Type column will say S, C, B, T, M, or A.

If you mean how can you tell how many strikes he has, then you can't unless/until he gets 3.

He is type B.

 

[J_R_B]

He is type B.

B is benchmark. B and C rated players cannot be DQ'd during the year, although almost certainly, he will be rated up at the end of the year unless all those 3.5 guys he beat really stunk.

 

[beernutz]

B is benchmark. B and C rated players cannot be DQ'd during the year, although almost certainly, he will be rated up at the end of the year unless all those 3.5 guys he beat really stunk.

Thanks. I guess he has a free pass this year at 3.0. Interesting system.

 

[J_R_B]

Thanks. I guess he has a free pass this year at 3.0. Interesting system.

Yes, but only because he played enough matches last year that the computer was able to determine with sufficient credibility that he ended last year in the 3.0 rating range (2.51-3.00). In other words, if someone self-rates and dominates, then the computer can determine that they sandbagged and DQ them but if they play a year and end at a certain level, then they "earned" the right to play at that level the next year without having to worry about DQ.

In principle, I think that's fair enough. The system, of course, is not perfect. For one, there are questions about whether it gets the ratings right (in other words, should this guy have been rated up based on last year's results?). And of course, it is open to manipulation, but it takes a larger degree of effort. A player has to sandbag a self-rating, and then throw matches for a whole season to get a C rating at the lower level. If people are willing to go to those extremes to cheat at a recreational sport, it's going to be hard to stop them.

Finally, I think that you see this sort of situation where a player is winning at both his computer rating level and the one above it much more often at lower levels (i.e. 3.0 and 3.5) due to the simple fact that there are more people rapidly improving at lower levels than higher levels. For example, if this guy just started playing 2 years ago, maybe he really was 3.0 last year and is a top 3.5 this year. That's not unusual to improve that much in a season if you are a beginner with some natural ability who plays a lot. It's not fair to that player to DQ them and overturn their results (and punish not only them but their team) because they are practicing and getting better quickly. For this player, his rating will just lag a year behind his ability and he will be able to dominate lower levels until his rate of improvement levels off. It's much more unusual to see this happen at higher levels. I would be shocked to see someone play as a legitimate (i.e. non-sandbagging) 4.5 one year and be a top level 5.0 the next. At that level, people are just simply not improving that quickly any more.

 

[Nellie]

Think of it from the perspective of a player who starts as a legitimate 3.0. If that player then practices, takes lessons, gets experience, etc. to improve to become a solid 3.5, do you want to punish them? Essentially, you get one pass at success before you get moved up.

 

[cknobman]

Id say winning all your matches is a good way to get bumped, regardless of your rating "type".

 

[rdis10093]

when to many people start to wine, then hellow 5's

 

[dizzlmcwizzl]

I am hoping dizzl was just joking...

Just go to http://tennislink.usta.com/Leagues/Common/Default.aspx

Type in the name of the player and do a search. You should see a list with his name and the code for his rating (s for self and c for computer).

I assumed he wanted to know about strikes ... not rating ... my error since a later post said he was a Benchmark 3.0

 

[beernutz]

when to many people start to wine, then hellow 5's

Is this supposed to mean something?

 

[beernutz]

Think of it from the perspective of a player who starts as a legitimate 3.0. If that player then practices, takes lessons, gets experience, etc. to improve to become a solid 3.5, do you want to punish them? Essentially, you get one pass at success before you get moved up.

Assuming a player started as a legitimate 3.0 that would be true, but what if they were a legitimate 3.5 when they started? Would it still be punishment then? Note, I am not suggesting that the player did anything wrong as a new player may not know what level they are actually at.

 

[ryan sc]

I would think if your a 3.0 the only place to go is up and improve. Isn't 3.0 for people that just started? I don't play golf and never have so that would put my handicap at say 100 then i start to play golf 2 times a week and after a year my handicap is 50 . Its pretty simple

 

[heninfan99]

Well, it's not just the record its also the games won and lost AND against whom. In fact a higher up in the USTA told me point blank that records don't matter. Did he serve you begals & breadsticks?

I'm actually starting to miss the old days when entire teams played a level down. Nostalgia. Not playing against them as much as watching those captains really work the system with mastery.

 

[goober]

Thanks. I guess he has a free pass this year at 3.0. Interesting system.

The system was changed several years ago after numerous teams complained about getting C and B players DQ'ed in sectionals/nationals. There was even a huge online petition. The argument was that it was unfair to have a player who played in good faith and did everything by the book by playing at the level assigned to him at the end of the year could get DQ'ed in playoffs.

 

[egn]

I would also say the player seems quite aware that he is better than 3.0, he has played more 3.5 singles matches than 3.0 most likely for a reason. I am going to agree with the he is just rapidly approving and no reason to penalize him. Besides it is not like he has 10 matches against 3.0 and is winning 6-0, 6-1. He will most likely though be bumped up but not necessary to DQ the guy. The USTA system still has tons of holes in it sadly.

In terms of why he still plays a few 3.0 matches, he probably enjoys playing tennis a lot and plays what he can get.

 

[J_R_B]

I would also say the player seems quite aware that he is better than 3.0, he has played more 3.5 singles matches than 3.0 most likely for a reason. I am going to agree with the he is just rapidly approving and no reason to penalize him. Besides it is not like he has 10 matches against 3.0 and is winning 6-0, 6-1. He will most likely though be bumped up but not necessary to DQ the guy. The USTA system still has tons of holes in it sadly.

In terms of why he still plays a few 3.0 matches, he probably enjoys playing tennis a lot and plays what he can get.

He has 2 3.0 level matches, or exactly the amount necessary to qualify for post-season play. Coincidence?