View Single Post
Old 09-08-2012, 08:49 AM   #43
dizzlmcwizzl
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: DE
Posts: 2,149
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmverdugo View Post
There are other cases where the computer keeps bumping up a guy to 4.5 by mid season, he gets creamed at 4.5 and then is bumped down to 4.0 where he wins every match, although I think this last case is more about the guy getting use to 4.5 pace, what I am trying to show that difference of level within a single rating point (basically the difference between good 4.0s and low 4.0s).
Our team, and me personally, have gone to and played well at sectionals for the last three years. I believe I am among those at the top of the 4.0 band and my results have shown that.

My experiences support what jmverdugo says here. I have clobbered lower tier 4.0s in our league and they have complained that I should be up. However, against top computer rated 4.0's in our league, at districts and sectionals I am merely one of the better players ... clearly not dominant. I have never complained when a player with an established computer rating, as defined by the USTA, has beaten me ... and it has happened plenty.

Every year at sectionals almost every match featuring computer rated players is competitive. However, what irritates the snot out of me is that the non-competitive matches almost always involve a self rated player crushing a computer rated player. Furthermore, the teams that have advanced every year come with at least a few of these self rated difference makers.

What this tells me is that the USTA algorithm does a pretty nice job of putting players where they need to be ... but the players not vetted by the USTA throw the balance of power to captains that know how to game this system.
__________________
"You should be playing linebacker, not singles."
dizzlmcwizzl is offline   Reply With Quote