View Single Post
Old 01-23-2013, 08:34 AM   #26
goober's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,491

Originally Posted by jmnk View Post
I also really appreciate your opinions here. So I was thinking - what would you do differently if you were designing an USTA ranking system from scratch. I can see separating singles and doubles, perhaps add some 'points' for win (so 06 76 76 win is still a winning result even though one lost more games) - but other than that I have hard time figuring out how you can improve on what they have now.
Singles and doubles should not be seperate rankings. Even though in theory it would make sense, but from a practical standpoint it would be a logistical nightmare. You know how hard it would be to have team that was filled with players that have different ratings for singles and dubs?

These are the changes I would like to see:

I would like to see a larger emphasis on matches played at sectionals and Nationals. There should be a much lower threshold to bump these players then what there is currently.

I think there should be slightly more emphasis on win-loss. The current thinking is that someone can be 10-0 or 0-10 against the same set of opponents and still have similar ratings if the guy who lost all the time had close matches and the guy who won all the time but barely won. The truth is the guy who won all the time is better because he knows how to pull out close matches and that should be worth something.

No ESR bump downs only bump ups. This prevents current loophole of bumped players playing some spring matches losing them and then rejoining their old team in the fall.

To prevent tanking. End of year calculations: High rated players who lose to low rated players (especially if they are a full level below) should have that result thrown out. If the low rated players continue to win and show they are actually at a higher level, the scores could be kept.
goober is offline   Reply With Quote