which wins... three strikes dq vs. a default?

Discussion in 'Adult League & Tournament Talk' started by BlueTennis, May 30, 2010.

  1. BlueTennis

    BlueTennis New User

    Joined:
    May 29, 2010
    Messages:
    9
    i just discovered this message board, and as a captain am very glad I did! Hope you are all enjoying the holiday weekend.

    I have a question for you all: if a player receives a three strikes disqualification mid-season (during adult league), but one of his prior wins was a singles default due to a no-show, who wins the match?

    if the team win comes down to this result, im guessing one of two things would happen.... sets won would determine the winner, or the match would have to be replayed between two eligible players.

    which would it be? I've had a good look through the rulebook but cannot find an answer. Thanks for any information!
     
    #1
  2. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,901
    Ive never seen that happen, but Id think the most logical outcome would be a double default.

    Same as if nobody from either team shows for that position.

    Double Defaults do occur. We had a division last year that only consisted of two teams and the first place team had a "losing" individual record for awhile due to a lot of double defaults. (our area uses individual wins to determine who's in first)

    (double default means both teams get a loss for that match, if you're going by the team wins count system and it makes a 2-2 tie then it probably throws that match down to a tiebreaker which most likely is "least sets lost")
     
    #2
  3. GMay

    GMay New User

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    90
    Actually I think that you may still be able to go in and change the player that is the "winner" of the default to a different player on your team. I have seen this done before. Try it and then you don't have to count it as a default.
     
    #3
  4. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,901
    You usually cant re-enter the score once you've already put it in and it's been confirmed. It usually requires a league coordinator's help.

    It's probably a good thing anyway, it might keep people from getting 37 different players on their team and hiding people just for the playoffs.
     
    #4
  5. polski

    polski Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 27, 2010
    Messages:
    633
    Location:
    Florida
    It would be worth a very friendlycall to the league coordinator. However, don't hold your breath on a favorable outcome. The coordinator probably won't find much sympathy for a captain of a sandbagger.

    I assume the best result you can hope to get is a double default. I wouldn't be totally surprised if they made a decision that the defaulting team gets a win just to make a point in your area.

    Karma gets you sometimes
     
    #5
  6. ProgressoR

    ProgressoR Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2010
    Messages:
    2,005
    Location:
    No Man's Land
    This is dis-honest. Have you no morals?
     
    #6
  7. J_R_B

    J_R_B Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,632
    Location:
    Newtown, PA
    #7
  8. catfish

    catfish Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    Messages:
    791
    This is not something that is left up to the discretion of a local league coordinator. When a player is DQ'd, TennisLink changes all of their wins to losses. In this case, the team that defaulted would get a win. DQ and DQ Reviews are handled by the Sectional office. Local coordinators have no involvement.
     
    #8
  9. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,901
    Wow, you are right. That's kind of screwy. It would be more fair if it's a double default.

    You shouldnt be able to win without even bringing a player to the match. (think about it, if both teams were missing a player it would be a double default)

    It must be part of the programming when it encounters a DQ, that's pretty poor.

    And as far as any coordinator feeling ill toward someone getting a DQ, that's silly.

    The person just happened to be in the wrong level and the computer managed to take care of that. They are DQ'ed from the team and they could lose all of their matches.

    They wouldnt need some frowny face nit picky coordinator to feel anything ill about it beyond that.....
     
    #9
  10. Cindysphinx

    Cindysphinx G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    15,067
    #10
  11. J_R_B

    J_R_B Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,632
    Location:
    Newtown, PA
    It is a pretty screwy results, but I didn't make the algorithm, I just report on it.

    It was really an unfortunate situation all around. This guy self-rated at 3.5 in order to join a team his brother was on. Then, he joined a 4.0 team, too, without realizing that doing so would definitely get him DQ'd from 3.5. As soon as he played his 3rd 4.0 match, he was (unsurprisingly...) DQ'd and his 3.5 results were overturned, which actually cost his brother's team in a tight race for the playoffs.
     
    #11
  12. 86golf

    86golf Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Messages:
    607
    Location:
    Carolinas
    This has to be a bug in the system. A default is a default. I've never tried it, but can you record a default without a winning players name and just leave it blank?
    Another league that we play in NC will allow you to record defaults and just leave the winning team blank, but I haven't tried it on Tennislink.
     
    #12
  13. Cindysphinx

    Cindysphinx G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    15,067
    I think it is perfectly fair to handle it this way. I think folks who play below level should be penalized in every way possible to discourage sandbagging to the extent we can.
     
    #13
  14. J_R_B

    J_R_B Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,632
    Location:
    Newtown, PA
    These rules actually apparently vary by section. We had a guy DQ'd that played in 2 sections. One section overturned all his results, but the other just DQ'd him and didn't change the results and said that they don't overturn matches that don't generate strikes (all of the strikes were in the other section).
     
    #14
  15. J_R_B

    J_R_B Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,632
    Location:
    Newtown, PA
    It seems like this is probably a programming logic issue and not one that was actually given any critical thought by anyone, but who knows? Don't get DQ'd is the moral of the story.
     
    #15
  16. catfish

    catfish Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    Messages:
    791
    It does seem kind of odd that a default loss would become an individual win as a result of a DQ. I am not sure about this, but my guess is that it is a programming thing in TennisLink. TennisLink is probably programmed to either DQ all of the DQ'd player's previous matches or none of them. (USTA National Regs let the Sections decide which matches become losses. USTA 3.04d.) I suspect that TennisLink's programming may not be able to treat a "Default" win differently from other wins. Maybe no one thought of the default scenario when they created the program. A double default would seem more reasonable.
     
    #16
  17. athiker

    athiker Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,656
    That does seem odd, especially since there is evidently an allowance in the programming for a double default. IMHO it should be changed for a win by default for the DQ'd player to a double default. Since the DQ'd player (if their results are overturned) is basically declared never to have been a member of team they should not keep the win on a defaulted court, that much I agree with. It should be overturned but only to a neutral result. Overturned b/c who knows if he may have been the only one available that night and IF the match had been played and he won it would've been overturned anyway.

    Maybe that's all they care about...IF the match had been played the other team would've been declared the winner regardless of outcome. The facts are though, it was never going to BE played b/c the DQ'd player's opponent never showed...so again...seems to be a bug...a double default should be the result. Though surely they are aware of this, so maybe it is a little, albeit usually pointless, extra little penalty.
     
    #17
  18. Cindysphinx

    Cindysphinx G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    15,067
    Consider this.

    In our area, a player defaults if he/she shows up more than 15 minutes late. You don't start the clock running on the 15 minutes until one player is on the court ready to play.

    Say the match is scheduled for 9 pm. At match time, Sandbagger is standing on the court, ready to play. Opponent is stuck in traffic and arrives at 9:25. By that time, the default will have been taken by Sandbagger's captain.

    Well, if Sandbagger is ineligible because he is playing 3.5 when he is really a 4.0, Sandbagger's team does not have an eligible player standing on the court such that the 15-minute default period can begin to run. So when Opponent shows up at 9:25, Opponent is entitled to win the match if there's no eligible opponent standing on the court at 9:40.

    So there can be good reasons why it shouldn't automatically be a double-default, in our league anyway.
     
    #18
  19. athiker

    athiker Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,656
    Interesting point. I hadn't thought of that circumstance. I'm certainly not going to lose sleep over the DQ'd player's team having to take a loss despite what I wrote above.
     
    #19
  20. BlueTennis

    BlueTennis New User

    Joined:
    May 29, 2010
    Messages:
    9
    #20
  21. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,901
    It's still a Double Default.

    You dont become an illegible player until AFTER that whole occurrence when you later get 3 strikes.

    So at the time the sandbagger was eligible to play so the late player still loses.

    You may go back in time and take that win away from the sandbagger, but you cant travel back in time and say you didnt have a eligible player there.

    A default is a default, either way.... Nobody deserves to win that one.
     
    #21
  22. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,901
    That means there was a double default.

    For whatever reason tennislink scores those like that as well.

    They dont count it as a loss for either team, but it's not a win either, but since you only count wins in the standings, it's as good as a loss....
     
    #22
  23. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,901
    Sounds unfortunate, but it's good because it would be nice if we could keep people from rating below where they should be.

    Especially after the latest supposed "clean up" of the ratings.
     
    #23
  24. amarone

    amarone Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    514
    Location:
    Atlanta
    It is only definite if he proves himself to be a good 4.0 player and therefore should not have self-rated at 3.5. Playing 4.0 does not get you DQed if you are genuinely a 3.5 player - you simply lose most of your matches.

    It sounds like the system worked perfectly - a player self-rated himself too low and got DQed. Nothing unfortunate about that.
     
    #24

Share This Page