Lower rated player playing line 1 singles

[goober]

Your first mistake was assuming there was a code of honor among captains. Your second mistake was thinking if there was one, that captains would actually follow it.

The reality is this stuff happens all the time. Teams play random order and stack and some don't and play straight up. Complaining to the LC will fall on deaf ears. No rules were broken. No code of honor real or imagined was violated. If you want to improve your rating like you suggest, you should play up. That is probably the fastest way to raise your rating to 3.5 assuming your are at least somewhat competitive.

[schmke]

Originally Posted by Ipster

I'm glad the team won the match. You hit the nail on the head understanding where I was coming from. I was frustrated because I've been working hard and hoping to improve my dynamic rating this year and this stuff just doesn't help.

Like I said earlier, this single match, especially early in the year, is not going to make or break your getting bumped at the end of the year. You did win 2 & 0 which even against a 2.5 (unless they are a low to mid 2.5) will be a decent result.

Just keep improving and play your best in matches, and your rating will take care of itself. If you really are a 3.5, your scores will indicate that regardless of who you play.

And I can sympathize with you too, I didn't like playing against two players playing up, but I did get bumped up at the end of that year so it didn't hurt me that much either.

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by Mauvaise

As a captain myself if I were to receive this email from an opposing team member (not even the opposing team captain), I would roll my eyes while laughing and forward it to my co-captain so she could laugh also. I doubt I would even reply to you. I might forward it to your captain and ask them to keep a tighter rein on their team members.

Sad to say it, OP, but +1.

The only tweak I would make to Mauvaise's remarks is that I might also forward the message to my entire team so everyone could have a good laugh.

An opponent has no right whatever to complain that an opposing player should be on a different court. I understand your frustration, but you are way out of line.

You don't know the reasons the captain had to put the 2.5 on S1 and for you to be this het up about it signals (as someone up-thread mentioned) a long season for you.

Yes, exactly. Perhaps their stronger player was nursing an injury and hoped to have an easier match on Court Two. Or maybe she is just afraid to play you. Or maybe the strong player was running late, captain wasn't sure she would arrive on time and put her on Court Two for that reason. Or maybe the stronger player is one of those people who gets a little nervous being on Court One, or the weak player wanted a challenge.

Honestly, I do not see why you would complain about having to face such a weak opponent. Did you double-bagel her? If not, then you could have played the match better.

I remember my last match at 3.5 singles. (I do not play singles much). The opponent was a 3.0 playing up, a friend. She has horrible strokes and horrible movement. No challenge for me at all. Still, beating her -0 and -1 was a good experience. I got practice dealing with a pusher, continuing to hit my strokes the way they should be hit despite the oddball stuff she was producing, and closing out a match I was supposed to win.

Next time, hide your disappointment not to have drawn a stronger opponent, beat your inferior opponent senseless, then rally with her and practice a few things.

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by OrangePower

They specifically mention in several places that the line/court assignments have no meaning and do not correlate to strength.

And then of course they contradict themselves also! (By mandating that defaults be taken from the bottom up, and by requiring that higher rated players in the new '+' leagues play at line 1.)

FWIW, I think USTA should make a national rule change to deal with this.

The change should simply be that no lower-rated player may play on a higher court than a higher-rated player. For doubles, the combined rating of a pair on a higher court cannot be lower than the combined rating of a pair on a lower court.

The current rule about defaulting from the bottom would be discarded. 'Cause it is pointless and stupid.

This rule change would be so great. It would increase the chance that players would have competitive matches.

I remember a time when I was playing 6.5 combo, Court One. Opposing team fielded two 3.5 players, two 3.0 players and two 2.5 players. They put the two 2.5 players onto Court One against me (3.5) and my partner (3.0). We destroyed them, and it wasn't any fun.

Under the rule I propose, their captain would have lots of line-up options, but the one option that would be illegal would be a 5.0 pair on Court One and two 6.5 pairs on Courts Two and Three.

[gmatheis]

Originally Posted by Ipster

Wow...nice. I am going to play up this year. Guess you didn't read the part about how I've been working hard to get better and that is why this was frustating?

And you missed the part about how little this affects your ability to move up or play up and therefore is hardly worth coming to the boards to whine about.

[Govnor]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

FWIW, I think USTA should make a national rule change to deal with this.

The change should simply be that no lower-rated player may play on a higher court than a higher-rated player. For doubles, the combined rating of a pair on a higher court cannot be lower than the combined rating of a pair on a lower court.

The current rule about defaulting from the bottom would be discarded. 'Cause it is pointless and stupid.

This rule change would be so great. It would increase the chance that players would have competitive matches.

I remember a time when I was playing 6.5 combo, Court One. Opposing team fielded two 3.5 players, two 3.0 players and two 2.5 players. They put the two 2.5 players onto Court One against me (3.5) and my partner (3.0). We destroyed them, and it wasn't any fun.

Under the rule I propose, their captain would have lots of line-up options, but the one option that would be illegal would be a 5.0 pair on Court One and two 6.5 pairs on Courts Two and Three.

I don't really understand why this isn't the rule anyway. I might be in the minority here, but surely tennis at our level is about having competitive matches, not about "winning as a team"? It's actually laughable the amount of thought that seems to go into these things. Like it's the Davis Cup or something.

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by Ipster

Wow...nice. I am going to play up this year. Guess you didn't read the part about how I've been working hard to get better and that is why this was frustating?

A word of encouragement (well, I hope it will read like encouragement).

I started as a 2.5. I am now a 4.0. I have captained continuously since 2006.

One of my pet peeves as a captain is what I will call "rating ambitiousness." Most of my tennis pals are 4.0, but a few remain 3.5s. They have as a goal getting a 4.0C rating.

As a result, they complain about weird things. "I had to play someone who was playing up -- that's not gonna help me get to 4.0!" "I don't want to play Court Three, it won't help me get to 4.0!" "I don't want a weak partner, I'm trying to get to 4.0!" "I don't want to play combo because combo doesn't count toward my rating and I want to get to 4.0!"

Good lord. Stop worrying about the computer and just work on your game play with whatever opponent or partner shows up. There is no way to "trick" the computer into moving you up other than winning matches at your level convincingly or being truly competitive at the next level. And if you do move up before your game genuinely justifies it, you will be miserable and will get bumped back down anyway.

If the ladies spent as much time working on their game as trying to game the computer, they would play better tennis. Isn't that what the journey is all about?

[spot]

Originally Posted by Govnor

I don't really understand why this isn't the rule anyway. I might be in the minority here, but surely tennis at our level is about having competitive matches, not about "winning as a team"? It's actually laughable the amount of thought that seems to go into these things. Like it's the Davis Cup or something.

I'd think its because they don't want to deal with whining from players like the OP. SO they just say that all the lines are equal and to deal with it.

Maybe its to give captains a little more flexibility. If someone's line 1 singles player knew they were going to be late, letting them play #2 singles is a way to get more tennis in.

Personally I think it would be a good rule and would encourage teams to have all players at the same level.

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by Govnor

I don't really understand why this isn't the rule anyway. I might be in the minority here, but surely tennis at our level is about having competitive matches, not about "winning as a team"? It's actually laughable the amount of thought that seems to go into these things. Like it's the Davis Cup or something.

An additional reason to have the rule is that it would discourage captains from loading their teams with people playing up.

As a captain, once you know that taking on lower-rated players would limit your line-up options, you might think twice about whether the lower-rated player really has the skills to be playing up.

Why isn't this the rule already? 'Cause no one listens to me.

[tennismonkey]

couple of random thoughts.

1 - women care a lot more than guys about the rating number (3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5) than winning.

2 - men want to play at the lowest rating level they possibly can while not being completely bored and winning 75% - 100% of their matches. higher being better.

3 - playing up is the fastest way to get bumped up but nobody at the higher level wants to play someone who is playing up.

4 - OP wants a competitive match with someone so she can hopefully move her dynamic rating high enuff to eventually get bumped up to 3.5 ....

BUT doesn't want to play someone who is playing up and is also trying to raise her dynamic rating high enuff to get bumped up to 3.0.

[dizzlmcwizzl]

I believe the reason that the USTA does not want the lines to represent strength is that they dont want to publish more accurate ratings and furthermore they do not want hear complaints about stacking.

People complain that defaulting line 3 first indicates it should be the weakest or by forcing + players to play line 1 indicates line strength ... but it does not. These are arbitrary decisions so that full strength teams can plan accordingly.

The USTA could have just as easily decided that line 1 forfeits first or that + players must play on Line 2. In this way, everyone would know where the special courts were ... ie the courts you likely would win by default or likely lose because you dont have a + player.

[dizzlmcwizzl]

Originally Posted by tennismonkey

4 - OP wants a competitive match with someone so she can hopefully move her dynamic rating high enuff to eventually get bumped up to 3.5 ....

BUT doesn't want to play someone who is playing up and is also trying to raise her dynamic rating high enuff to get bumped up to 3.0.

When combined with the picture ... this is the quote of the day.

[Govnor]

Can someone explain "stacking" to me?

[Ipster]

Originally Posted by tennismonkey

couple of random thoughts.

BUT doesn't want to play someone who is playing up and is also trying to raise her dynamic rating high enuff to get bumped up to 3.0.

2011 this woman was self rated 3.0 and won 12 games in 6 matches. She was bumped down to 2.5 in 2012. She won 27 games in 8 matches in 2012. I don't think this was an issue of her trying to get her dynamic rating high enough to get bumped to 3.0. If she was 2.5 and winning matches and moving up then it might have been a competitive match. I think that is all most tennis players want.

[spot]

Originally Posted by Govnor

Can someone explain "stacking" to me?

Look at doubles lines and think about how you would order them. Lets say that there is an equal team where if both teams played straight up every line would be a coinflip.

1 vs 1 = coinflip
2 vs 2 = coinflip
3 vs 3 = coinflip

Instead one team decides to stack the lineup and dump line 1.

3 vs 1 = loss
1 vs 2 = win
2 vs 3 = win

Just trying to guarantee 2 wins for your team.

The fact that USTA goes by team wins in the regular season contributes to this since the team doesn't care if they lose 2 lines as long as they win the 3 others.

[tennismonkey]

the way i see it -- in a perfect world, you want to play competitive and fun matches. but the usta, like life, isn't perfect.

i remember when i was a very young tennismonkey getting beat viciously by my elders in league matches. many of whom wore leg braces and had artificial hips and saw 3 times as many winters. it didn't matter that i could run for days and days and could blast the ball faster than they drive their cars. tennis ball don't lie. so i licked my wounds and steadily improved. fast forward 20 years and now i'm the elder league guy and i see it as my mission to beat down the 20-something snots with my old man game honed from years of league play.

it's the circle of life. oppa gangnam league style.

[beernutz]

Good lord this old argument about stacking, AGAIN? Honestly OP if you think you are actually 3.5 level and this player struggled to win games at 3.0 to the extent they got bumped down to 2.5 then I'd worry more about why you dropped 2 games to them and focus on that.

I think another reason the USTA doesn't prohibit stacking is that if they didn't then the captain would be required to make a documented assessment of the relative strength of his players/teams when setting lineups which could lead to some hurt feelings. Since line 1 does not mean you are the best player or team the captain is let off the hook here.

My first match his season the opposing captain reverse ordered his #1 and #2 singles putting his self-rated 3.0 as #1 and his self-rated 3.5 as #2. His #1 got killed 1 and 0 but #2 won 4 and 0 over a decent computer-rated 3.5.

However, opposing captain has been around the block and entered the score for #2's match as 4 and 1 in an apparent attempt to avoid a strike but our captain was equally wise and challenged the score and got the actual score entered.

FWIW, opposing team won the match 3-2 but because their #2 now has two 6-0 set wins this season (he got another the next week) he is in danger of his third strike and we might end up winning that match after all if he defaults.

Moral of the story is be careful when stacking self-rated players or it may come back to bite you in the butt.

[Govnor]

Originally Posted by spot

Look at doubles lines and think about how you would order them. Lets say that there is an equal team where if both teams played straight up every line would be a coinflip.

1 vs 1 = coinflip
2 vs 2 = coinflip
3 vs 3 = coinflip

Instead one team decides to stack the lineup and dump line 1.

3 vs 1 = loss
1 vs 2 = win
2 vs 3 = win

Just trying to guarantee 2 wins for your team.

The fact that USTA goes by team wins in the regular season contributes to this since the team doesn't care if they lose 2 lines as long as they win the 3 others.

Thanks. So this is essentially what happened to the OP, right (she assumed she'd be playing the better player at line 1)?

I guess people will find ways to game whatever the system is. It's just funny to me that people that play tennis at a recreational level go happily along with this because they want their team to win, more than they want a competitive match.

[dizzlmcwizzl]

Originally Posted by Govnor

Thanks. So this is essentially what happened to the OP, right (she assumed she'd be playing the better player at line 1)?

I guess people will find ways to game whatever the system is. It's just funny to me that people that play tennis at a recreational level go happily along with this because they want their team to win, more than they want a competitive match.

The other part of this is that if you are a good, but not excellent, you want to frequently adjust your lineup to keep others from stacking against you.

By changing who your line 1 singles or dubs players are from match to match you make it harder to have someone else stack the lineup against you.

Unless your team is lock to win till sectionals then it is in your best interest to be unpredictable.

[chatt_town]

It's always hit or miss in these leagues. Also take this into consideration. Maybe the 2.5 player has the same type of goals you have. Maybe she is trying to get better and test where she is. You don't want people to judge you when you go and play say 3.5 and get the same wax job as this 2.5 may be getting at 3.0. Whether you play line 1 or 2 shouldn't matter. You could very easily run into a team that have to kick @$$ 3.5 singles players. They could say the same about you if you get mopped up. So be careful about judging the other teams because it sounds like your intent is to play 3.5 and get better. The 2.5 may be doing the same thing.

Originally Posted by Ipster

Yesterday I played my first USTA match of the 2013 season. I am a 3.0 player in my 4th season and my goal is to be 3.5 next year. I'm close but I have to have a good year this year. I'm going to play a few matches at 3.5 but my plan is to play 18+ and 40+ at 3.0 at singles. I've been taking lessons the past few months to work exclusively on my singles game and I've been playing practice matches vs. strong 3.0 players and a few 3.5 players.

Yesterday I knew the other team only had one real singles player and I played her two years ago and lost twice so I was excited to see where I was at this point. The other team player her at line 2 and played a 2.5 rated player at line 1. This 2.5 rated player was 0-9 playing singles the last two years. She has never won a set and has won only 24 games in those 9 matches. I was very upset. I am not captain of this team but I've been a captain for my team for 3 years and I think this is completely against the code of honor for USTA captains. It wasn't fair to me, my opponent or the other singles players. In the end I'm most upset about the fact that I didn't even get a chance to help my dynamic rating.

I emailed the coordinator and complained. The captain of the other team wasn't there so I didn't get a chance to express my displeasure with her.

I understand you can stack line ups in USTA but I think a lower rated player who plays up on a team shouldn't be playing line 1.

I don't have a question I am just still ticked.