View Single Post
Old 08-12-2011, 09:14 AM   #56
HitItHarder
Semi-Pro
 
HitItHarder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: SC
Posts: 623
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tennis_tater View Post
Looks like Georgia ended up beating Alabama in the finals, 4-1, to win the men's 4.0.

As far as teams "working the system," again, seeing the players play in 4.0 this past weekend, I didn't really feel like there were under-rated players playing. However, I do think that the teams from Bama, and Georgia as well, may have a slight advantage over some of the other teams as both teams had a number of guys who are computer rated 4.5's following the Nov. 2010 year end ratings. However, b/c both Bama and Georgia do some sort of "early start" league's in the Fall, they are able to sneak some 4.5 guys into the championship levels. I'm not sure why Bama (or Georgia) needs to do some sort of early start league in the fall since the neither state has much of a winter. It looks like Bama even has a spring league. If the other states in the Southern section don't get the benefit of having 4.5's, Bama, and maybe Georgia, and whoever else does the early start, should send the teams that win the spring leagues who are playng under the current ratings. Looking at the results from both the first and second session, it looks like Alabama teams, as a whole, did extremely well....maybe having players a .5 level up gave them the slight advantage in some of these levels:

M 2.5 - Bama champion
M 3.0 - Bama champion
M 3.5 - Bama runner-up
M 4.0 - Bama runner-up
W 3.0 - Bama runner-up
W 4.0 - Bama champion
The Bama M 3.0 team was in our group at Sectionals. Honestly, they were just a solid team on all courts. All of their players would be what I consider competitive 3.5 level players or better, based on skill level. But only one of them has an early start rating of 3.5. Of course, there were around 3 self rated players (3.0 or lower) on the team that were awful good. But that is part of the game, especially when you get to the sectional level. I would say talent-wise, these guys were the best we played all year. They are a good team. Hope they do well at Nationals.

To compair, our team at sectionals were all computer rated 3.0s, and most of us have been playing together around three years. How the computer has left us all as 3.0s, I'll never know. We all are competitive in 3.5 matchs. We regualrly practice with with 4.0s without a real problem, at least in doubles and the level of our team as a whole is far above 3.0.

So I am not sure the early start leagues had much to do with the Alabama 3.0 M team win. But it is interesting that Alabama did so well overall across the NTRP level. Probably a coincidence, at least in our case, as they were (in my opinion) the best team on our level at Sectionals.
HitItHarder is offline   Reply With Quote