Men's 3.5 National Champs = self raters??

[vizsla]

Someone sent out the ratings showing that most of the team which won Nationals at 3.5 this year were mostly self-raters. Can someone repost this info? Thanks.

It looks like three guys got bumped a whole to 4.5!!

[lostinamerica]

I think the 3.0 National Champs had 4 players get bumped 1.0. Maybe the USTA is trying to send a message... What that message is, I don't know. If you win Nationals we will punish your team??

[Swissv2]

Originally Posted by lostinamerica

I think the 3.0 National Champs had 4 players get bumped 1.0. Maybe the USTA is trying to send a message... What that message is, I don't know. If you win Nationals we will punish your team??

If you win Nationals then you should be plenty good to play at a much higher level

Maybe its a message to future sandbaggers.

[JavierLW]

Originally Posted by lostinamerica

I think the 3.0 National Champs had 4 players get bumped 1.0. Maybe the USTA is trying to send a message... What that message is, I don't know. If you win Nationals we will punish your team??

it's not a message, that's how the computer calculated their results.

[JavierLW]

Originally Posted by vizsla

Someone sent out the ratings showing that most of the team which won Nationals at 3.5 this year were mostly self-raters. Can someone repost this info? Thanks.

It looks like three guys got bumped a whole to 4.5!!

I believe it because the 4th place 3.5 team consisted of a bunch of self-raters (that were hidden for most of the year).

I doubt you can win 3.5 Nationals by just getting 4.0 players to play on your team. Maybe you'll make it to sectionals that way.

[kevhen]

The 3.5 team we played in the finals of sectionals a few years back ended up having 8 guys get bumped to 4.0 after they went to nationals. They didn't even do all that well at nationals and were a loaded team. I was the only one on my team to move to 4.0 that year and that final was the only loss I had that year. I am 4.5 now after 4 more years of tennis.

[benh2023]

I was on the 2006 NorCal 3.5 Men's team that won the nationals. On paper we had a 25 person roster but several guys dropped out over the course of the season. We had 4 self rated payers and the rest were computer rated with a couple of adjusted ratings. After we won the overall title most of our players got bumped up to 4.0 for 2007. We did, however, have several players that participated at the national level and still kept their 3.5 ratings in 2007. I'm assuming that was because they lost their matches during the nationals?. I had always heard that if you actually play a match at the national championships then you got bumped up but that turned out to be bad info. Ben/San Jose Ca.

[raiden031]

Originally Posted by benh2023

We did, however, have several players that participated at the national level and still kept their 3.5 ratings in 2007. I'm assuming that was because they lost their matches during the nationals?. I had always heard that if you actually play a match at the national championships then you got bumped up but that turned out to be bad info. Ben/San Jose Ca.

The reason that players that play Nationals usually get bumped up is because they are usually good players to begin with, otherwise how would the team even make it there without several really good players? There are some players who are mediocre but on a solid team and so they may not do well against a solid player at Nationals and will not get bumped up.

The only significance of being a National benchmark player is that your rating is weighted more heavily by your play in the playoffs and also that it is used as a way to level out the NTRP levels across the country, by comparing all the league players against the benchmark players either directly or indirectly.

[lostinamerica]

Regardless, if a team wins Nationals... they need to be bumped up. On its face it is fair to say that team is the best at that division and needs to try the next division. I understand if some player plays there and is beaten (6-0, 6-0) every match then you might look closer but if a team wins the whole thing that probably did not happen.

[Keruchina]

Originally Posted by raiden031

The only significance of being a National benchmark player is that your rating is weighted more heavily by your play in the playoffs and also that it is used as a way to level out the NTRP levels across the country, by comparing all the league players against the benchmark players either directly or indirectly.

A national rating is also visually verified. There are verifiers watching the matches, especially the final four matches, and they determine your rating based on your computer rating from all of your match results and then those ratings get tweaked based on the visual verifications. I'm pretty sure that the full level bumps were largely based on visual verifications in an effort to combat the overall trend in the computer system of excessively low computer ratings.

[AndrewD]

Originally Posted by lostinamerica

Maybe the USTA is trying to send a message... What that message is, I don't know. If you win Nationals we will punish your team??

Isn't getting moved up a reward, not a punishment?

[lostinamerica]

Originally Posted by AndrewD

Isn't getting moved up a reward, not a punishment?

Not when you get moved a full 1.0 when you are not ready. I know a couple of players that went to Nationals and got a 1.0 bump and they could not find a team to play on the next year. Also, they were not ready for a 1.0 bump. When they do play at their new level they are getting beaten pretty bad.

[JavierLW]

Originally Posted by lostinamerica

Not when you get moved a full 1.0 when you are not ready. I know a couple of players that went to Nationals and got a 1.0 bump and they could not find a team to play on the next year. Also, they were not ready for a 1.0 bump. When they do play at their new level they are getting beaten pretty bad.

So what? You learn more from losing, then you do from winning....

And they couldnt appeal down even one rating? They must of really clobbered some guys if that was the case. Even if they are getting "beaten badly", I doubt that it's not competitive.

[lostinamerica]

Originally Posted by JavierLW

So what? You learn more from losing, then you do from winning....

And they couldnt appeal down even one rating? They must of really clobbered some guys if that was the case. Even if they are getting "beaten badly", I doubt that it's not competitive.

When you play a match at nationals, you cannot appeal your rating.

I guess I do not know your definition of competitive but these players are getting beat 6-0, 6-0 (or similar scores). You do not learn more from a 6-0, 6-0 loss than a 6-4, 7-5 win. Getting your brains beaten is not a learning experience. On the flip side, those players will get moved down at ESR and probably at the end of the year.

[raiden031]

Originally Posted by Keruchina

A national rating is also visually verified. There are verifiers watching the matches, especially the final four matches, and they determine your rating based on your computer rating from all of your match results and then those ratings get tweaked based on the visual verifications. I'm pretty sure that the full level bumps were largely based on visual verifications in an effort to combat the overall trend in the computer system of excessively low computer ratings.

This is what someone told me as well. But some people on this board claim there is absolutely no visual verification to determine new ratings after National championship play.

[kylebarendrick]

I saw no signs of visual verifiers in my matches at Nationals last year. I believe their presence is either very spotty or simply a myth.

[Keruchina]

This website offers the clearest description that I have seen of how the national benchmark ratings are calculated.

According to Bob Greene USPTA, USTA Certified Verifier & Chairman of USTA NTRP Computer Sub-Committee:

Annually each Section of the USTA will send up to twenty teams at all levels and genders to USA League National Championship Events. Those teams will play against each other in four flights of four or five teams in each flight. The draw is done at random. One event may be Florida, Texas, New England and Hawaii ... the next Eastern, Southern, ******* and Northern California. Before and during these matches, no less than four of the most experienced NTRP Verifiers from different areas of the country will research the players match result history, multi-year rating history and player profile information. They will then observe the players competing against several different teams over a period of three days. All match results are entered into the NTRP Computer during the events. The Verifiers are observing and are more specifically looking for lopsided match results, disparity of level between doubles partners and player improvement over the course of a season. The players who emerge from their respective flights to the semifinal and final rounds are given "absolute ratings". That rating is a number that is static for the purpose of comparison against other players. These "Benchmark Ratings" are entered into the NTRP Computer and the computer program is run calculating ratings for all of the players who competed at the event. Although the NTRP Computer has an excellent track record of being correct, the National Verifiers makes a few adjustments based on reasons stated above. All of these players are National Benchmarks and their Ratings are deemed not changeable by regulation. These National Benchmark Ratings are entered into the NTRP Computer and will filter down in each respective USTA Section and all players competing in NTRP audited and regulated venues will receive a rating if they played two or more matches. The primary goal and purpose of this methodology is to create and maintain uniformity in ratings on a nationwide basis. No matter what the picture appears to be from the bottom looking up, it is painted from the top down.

I believe that the full 1.0 bumps are made in an effort to keep the system from getting too distorted because of fast-improving players, which makes sense. I started playing tennis a year ago and started the season as a legitimate, strong 3.0. I ended the season as a strong 3.5. I got bumped up a full 1.0 after 3.0 nationals. I am currently getting my *ss handed to me on a regular basis by 4.0 players. It's not fun, but I understand why they bumped the fast-improving players: they don't want us screwing up the whole computer system and making it less fun for everyone else. All in all, I think that the people organizing the rating system do an admirable job with a difficult task.

[Keruchina]

I definitely saw verifiers at the semifinal and final matches. They had clipboards and USTA polo shirts.

[Alexio92]

Isn't it obvious the people who will win the 3.5 nationals will be high end 3.5's therefor that is why they win and would be close to a 4.0. I dont know much because I live in britain but just suggesting that may be the case.

[JavierLW]

Originally Posted by lostinamerica

When you play a match at nationals, you cannot appeal your rating.

I guess I do not know your definition of competitive but these players are getting beat 6-0, 6-0 (or similar scores). You do not learn more from a 6-0, 6-0 loss than a 6-4, 7-5 win. Getting your brains beaten is not a learning experience. On the flip side, those players will get moved down at ESR and probably at the end of the year.

They are going to see some of those players when they get moved down anyway. In that way it's a learning experience.

I dont care if you are getting beaten 6-0, 6-0, it's always worth something (unless you are just losing 6-0, 6-0 because you figure you will lose and you dont even try), and they went all the way to nationals to get to that point, so they cant be all that upset.