View Single Post
Old 02-02-2008, 06:39 PM   #8
Applesauceman
Semi-Pro
 
Applesauceman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Michigan
Posts: 657
Default

We find some disparity within our own state. This occurs mostly due to what you've already mentioned...more competitors and greater competition. For example, in Northern Michigan there are approx. 3 Men's 3.0 teams, with approx. 15 players on each team, all competing for a chance to go to state. In Western Michigan there are approx. 8 Men's 3.0 teams, with approx. 15 players on each team, all competing for a chance to go to state. In Southeastern Michigan there are approx. 40 Men's 3.0 teams, with approx. 15 players on each team, all competing for a chance to go to state. So the winning team in NM is the best of 3 teams (45 players), WM is the best of 8 teams (120 players), and SEM is the best of 40 teams (600 players). This is like having Class A, B, and C schools playing each other for the state championship, which doesn't happen because Class A schools would have a larger talent pool (more students living in their district) to choose from over Class B and C schools. The same holds true for Class B schools over Class C schools. Also, if you are a 3.0 player, the USTA computer rating is only comparing you to other 3.0 players in your league, not to other 3.0 players in your state, or other 3.0 players in your section, unless you make it to the state level or beyond. This is not an excuse by any means, but simply shows how a 3.0 player in Michigan can be weaker than a 3.0 player in New York. It's not that the USTA is doing anything wrong either, it's just the disparity in players due to regions. There are, of course, exceptions to the rule, and it's not impossible for teams from smaller talent pools to defeat teams from larger talent pools. Please understand that these numbers are approx. and for reference and example only, and merely to show how there can be a disparity.
Applesauceman is offline   Reply With Quote