Stuck playing in a flex league I'm too good for.....

[spot]

Honestly- I think the single best thing that Ultimate tennis does is that they level people very well. You get a good match every week because it is tough to move up a level and you really have to be at the next level to do so. (At least in Atlanta where there are a lot of people at every half-level.

I like that they require extenuating circumstances to bump someone who didn't win in their league. This OP has a perfect example of someone that I don't think they should bump. Earn you way up- the league is better for it. Too many people have grossly overrated themselves and the ultimate tennis methodology does a good job of separating people within a couple seasons in my experience. For me the only people I really see who are out of level are the self rates.

[jaybear1909]

Originally Posted by spot

Honestly- I think the single best thing that Ultimate tennis does is that they level people very well. You get a good match every week because it is tough to move up a level and you really have to be at the next level to do so. (At least in Atlanta where there are a lot of people at every half-level.

I like that they require extenuating circumstances to bump someone who didn't win in their league. This OP has a perfect example of someone that I don't think they should bump. Earn you way up- the league is better for it. Too many people have grossly overrated themselves and the ultimate tennis methodology does a good job of separating people within a couple seasons in my experience. For me the only people I really see who are out of level are the self rates.

But 7-0 (6-0 and 1 default) isn't good enough for a bump up why? Yes, UT has many good characteristics, but they're a little harsh on the move-up givings. In my opinion they should grant move-ups to players that (a.) win their division or (b.) drop the requirement down about half a point. There really is no harm in bumping someone up half a level when they dominated their division.

And the OP's situation: Why would he want to play 3.0 when he successfully plays 3.5 in other leagues? He has to waste his money to prove to UT that he is capable of 3.5, when he already knows he is? Not to mention, what if he has one bad day and squanders his rating?

[omega4]

Originally Posted by Brian11785

There actually are a good number of wives who come along for these matches. Imagining giving some guy a beatdown, then, as I'm walking away, asking his girl "You leaving wit' me or him?"

There was a GREAT "Seinfeld" episode along those lines, except it was the tennis pro that wanted Jerry to throw the match so that the pro could impress his wife.

I agree with JRB: crush your opponents, drive them before you, and hear the lamentations of their women.

[spot]

He has to waste his money to prove to UT that he is capable of 3.5, when he already knows he is?

Lots of people KNOW they are better even though their results show otherwise. He THINKS he is better- make him prove it and the league is better off.

[fleabitten]

Goddamn, the egos on TW.

[omega4]

Originally Posted by spot

Lots of people KNOW they are better than their results show otherwise. He THINKS he is better- make him prove it and the league is better off.

Maybe the OP KNOWS he's better than his results but doesn't want to come across as an egotistical jerk and get called out for it by some members on this forum who have a predilection for doing so.

So he does the SMART thing and writes that he thinks he's better than his results instead.

[spot]

Originally Posted by omega4

Maybe the OP KNOWS he's better than his results but doesn't want to come across as an egotistical jerk and get called out for it by some members on this forum who have a predilection for doing so.

So he does the SMART thing and writes that he thinks he's better than his results.

His exact quote of why he thinks he is better.

In the months after that season, I took a few lessons, worked on some weak areas, improved my strengths and found a racquet/string setup that gave me a lot of confidence. Hence, the turn-around and 4-2 record in the fall season of LeagueTennis 3.5. And I think I'm now better than I was in the fall.

HIS words were that he thinks he is better. That simply isn't nearly enough to move someone up. A few lessons, "working" on weak areas, getting a new string setup, and more confidence are not nearly enough for me.

I say this as someone who has experience running a big Round Robin. People use ridiculous grade inflation when they assess their own levels. They want to play against better players because they want to think of themselves as a better player. If they move down from where I start them it doesn't affect their perception of how good they are.

If the OP had said he was winning at 4.0 in a lesser league then I'd be on his side.Going 4-2 in peach tennis in atlanta at 3.5 would likely mean he would have trouble moving up at 3.0 in Ultimate tennis. Given the evidence that the OP presented I would have done just what ultimate tennis did and tell him to go out and earn the promotion because I would have no reason think he was actually out of level.

We shall see how out of level the OP was. I will be impressed if he pulls off the 10.0 rating of an average 6-2 to 6-2 score and I will absolutely admit he was right if he pulls that off.

[jaybear1909]

Originally Posted by spot

Lots of people KNOW they are better even though their results show otherwise. He THINKS he is better- make him prove it and the league is better off.

His results do show he is better... He went 6-1 at 3.0 while losing badly at 3.5. After lessons etc, he goes from losing badly at 3.5 to winning majority. This means he got better. Not that he THINKS he got better.

I guarantee you sandbaggers lose more money for UT than people playing up do.

[omega4]

Some people want to play better players because they enjoy a challenge. It's win/win for them. If they lose, then there's nothing lost as they were defeated by a superior opponent. If they win, then they can revel in the knowledge that they beat a superior opponent.

Not every person feels the need to underestimate their capabilities to ensure an easy victory or overestimating their current proficiency.

Originally Posted by spot

I say this as someone who has experience running a big Round Robin. People use ridiculous grade inflation when they assess their own levels. They want to play against better players because they want to think of themselves as a better player. If they move down from where I start them it doesn't affect their perception of how good they are.

[Buford T Justice]

Originally Posted by jaybear1909

But 7-0 (6-0 and 1 default) isn't good enough for a bump up why? Yes, UT has many good characteristics, but they're a little harsh on the move-up givings. In my opinion they should grant move-ups to players that (a.) win their division or (b.) drop the requirement down about half a point. There really is no harm in bumping someone up half a level when they dominated their division.

No....7-0 is not automatically good enough for a bump up. What if all those wins were 7-6, 6-7, 7-6?

That's the point of the UT rating system. You can't just win....you have to win on average by a certain amount to prove to them you are significantly better than the others in the league.

Basically, all that's required to move up is to win all matches on average 6-4, 6-4. That will give one a season rating of +6 and a bump up. (In reality, all one has to do to end with a +6 is to win all matches 7-6, 7-6 as UT caps the points for a loss at 8 and awards 14 points for a straight sets win.) What's so unrealistic about that? Those are not exactly scores that indicate domination of a league, but they still show consistent performance that is slightly better than the opponent, so a bump up is awarded.

IMO, if UT grants move ups any more easily, the levels will get diluted and there will be too many people getting bageled an breadsticked. Most guys that play don't want to go out and annihilate their opponent. Granted, some do like the easy 14 points, but most are playing to have good matches.

[spot]

Originally Posted by jaybear1909

But 7-0 (6-0 and 1 default) isn't good enough for a bump up why?

If someone has 6 grueling 3 set matches that they win then they are at the right level because every match is competitive. For me the time someone should be moving up is when they are starting to have non-competitive matches at the level where they are at. You have 4 grueling 3 setters and also win a couple other matches 6-2 6-2 then the system does move you up which I think is completely fair.

People here act like its a virtue to want to play better players but ignore people in the higher league who also want to play better players. Once you let people play against higher level players just because they wish they could have that challenge then the system becomes worse for everyone else. Go out and show you don't belong at that level. If you aren't getting any straight set victories at your current level you obviously have a lot you can still learn there.

[beernutz]

Originally Posted by jaybear1909

His results do show he is better... He went 6-1 at 3.0 while losing badly at 3.5. After lessons etc, he goes from losing badly at 3.5 to winning majority. This means he got better. Not that he THINKS he got better.

I guarantee you sandbaggers lose more money for UT than people playing up do.

I would say he did not necessarily get better just because his win loss record improved as it matters a great deal WHO he played. If you let me cherry pick my opponents, I am positive I could pick out a large number of local players who are computer rated at my level who could not take a set off me in ten tries. Conversely, there are a number of players at my level who I am probably even money or worse against, so we'd each likely win about five of those ten tries.

My point is that depending on their mix of opponents, someone could easily not get better but still dramatically improve their win/loss record against players of a particular rating level.

[Buford T Justice]

Originally Posted by spot

If someone has 6 grueling 3 set matches that they win then they are at the right level because every match is competitive. For me the time someone should be moving up is when they are starting to have non-competitive matches at the level where they are at. You have 4 grueling 3 setters and also win a couple other matches 6-2 6-2 then the system does move you up which I think is completely fair.

People here act like its a virtue to want to play better players but ignore people in the higher league who also want to play better players. Once you let people play against higher level players just because they wish they could have that challenge then the system becomes worse for everyone else. Go out and show you don't belong at that level. If you aren't getting any straight set victories at your current level you obviously have a lot you can still learn at that level.

I think this post summarizes the UT methodology.

[Buford T Justice]

Originally Posted by beernutz

I would say he did not necessarily get better just because his win loss record improved as it matters a great deal WHO he played. If you let me cherry pick my opponents, I am positive I could pick out a large number of local players who are computer rated at my level who could not take a set off me in ten tries. Conversely, there are a number of players at my level who I am probably even money or worse against, so we'd each likely win about five of those ten tries.

My point is that depending on their mix of opponents, someone could easily not get better but still dramatically improve their win/loss record against players of a particular rating level.

And I have heard that, in theory, using the NTRP system, that the top rated player of a given level should double bagel the lowest rated player of that same level? I dont believe that will happen in UTs system as a rule. Of course, it DOES happen in reality once in awhile.....as I can show you all with one of my doubles match results last year! Hint hint......me and my partner were the ones eating the carbohydrates. We didnt get the pleasure of offering them to our opponents At least these same guys went on to win the championship in 6.0 that season, and the season after, so it was obvious they deserved it. In fact, the next time we played them, I swear I played the best tennis of my life, and we lost 2 and 3, yet my partner and I both were happy with it

But, these types of oddities aside, overall the UT system seems to work pretty well IMO.

[Brian11785]

Originally Posted by beernutz

I would say he did not necessarily get better just because his win loss record improved as it matters a great deal WHO he played. If you let me cherry pick my opponents, I am positive I could pick out a large number of local players who are computer rated at my level who could not take a set off me in ten tries. Conversely, there are a number of players at my level who I am probably even money or worse against, so we'd each likely win about five of those ten tries.

My point is that depending on their mix of opponents, someone could easily not get better but still dramatically improve their win/loss record against players of a particular rating level.

I'll say again that I understand Ultimate's rationale in not bumping me up and am beginning to look forward to the challenge. I am not claiming that the ratings system is flawed or that my ego is damaged by having to play what I consider most likely down (regardless of how inflammatory my thread title was.) I just felt kind of bummed about having to play a bunch of matches that (aside from hopefully one or two) probably won't be very close and the potential of people getting ****y. Again, it isn't an ego thing.....I mean, it'd be pretty silly to come here bragging about how I'm really a 3.5 (you know.....the upper echelons of the game.) and above the peons at 3.0.

But I did beat a guy 7-6, 6-3 in the fall 3.5 league that had beaten me two months earlier 6-2, 6-1.

Edit: I got an email from one of the guys I've played with a bunch in flex leagues and hit with outside of them that he made and was denied the same request. I have never lost to him, but it is always close. So at least I know he'll be in there.

[omega4]

Originally Posted by spot

People here act like its a virtue to want to play better players but ignore people in the higher league who also want to play better players. Once you let people play against higher level players just because they wish they could have that challenge then the system becomes worse for everyone else. Go out and show you don't belong at that level. If you aren't getting any straight set victories at your current level you obviously have a lot you can still learn there.

Especially when compared with players who want to play weaker opponents in league tennis, tennis playoffs, and tournaments via sandbagging, it IS a virtue to want to play better players and challenge oneself. To say that it isn't a virtue is just delusional. It's the whole premise of "challenge ladders" where players challenge higher ranked players on a ladder in order to climb up the ladder.

I do think that there's merit to playing challenging matches where the scores end up being close though. So perhaps the best solution is to set a range limit as to how high a level a lower level person can compete against.

At some point in time, everyone ends up playing someone below them in skill level.

[omega4]

Is it possible to just quit and start a new "account" with Ultimate and self rate yourself higher?

Originally Posted by Brian11785

I'll say again that I understand Ultimate's rationale in not bumping me up and am beginning to look forward to the challenge. I am not claiming that the ratings system is flawed or that my ego is damaged by having to play what I consider most likely down (regardless of how inflammatory my thread title was.) I just felt kind of bummed about having to play a bunch of matches that (aside from hopefully one or two) probably won't be very close and the potential of people getting ****y. Again, it isn't an ego thing.....I mean, it'd be pretty silly to come here bragging about how I'm really a 3.5 (you know.....the upper echelons of the game.) and above the peons at 3.0.

But I did beat a guy 7-6, 6-3 in the fall 3.5 league that had beaten me two months earlier 6-2, 6-1.

Edit: I got an email from one of the guys I've played with a bunch in flex leagues and hit with outside of them that he made and was denied the same request. I have never lost to him, but it is always close. So at least I know he'll be in there.

[omega4]

Does Ultimate allow players to "cherry pick" their opponents?

Originally Posted by beernutz

I would say he did not necessarily get better just because his win loss record improved as it matters a great deal WHO he played. If you let me cherry pick my opponents, I am positive I could pick out a large number of local players who are computer rated at my level who could not take a set off me in ten tries. Conversely, there are a number of players at my level who I am probably even money or worse against, so we'd each likely win about five of those ten tries.

My point is that depending on their mix of opponents, someone could easily not get better but still dramatically improve their win/loss record against players of a particular rating level.

[spot]

Especially when compared with players who want to play weaker opponents in league tennis, tennis playoffs, and tournaments via sandbagging, it IS a virtue to want to play better players and challenge oneself.

I don't think that you get the difference between the incentives involved for flex league vs tournaments and team play. I haven't ever known any player who manipulated their rating to stay down a level in Ultimate Tennis to have a better chance of winning in playoffs. In USTA or tournaments then absolutely people do this. But I haven't ever seen anyone try and not get bumped- everyone wants to move up in Ultimate Tennis. (More common are people who simply default playoff matches if the drive is too far)

Once again I'm rather sure you haven't ever played Ultimate Tennis so your opinion of how the league should work is pretty meaningless.

In a flex league the purpose is to try and put everyone at a level where they can play competitive matches- people playing up at a level they don't belong is a huge problem in many leagues so I greatly appreciate Ultimate Tennis trying to make people prove it on the court that they do not belong at their current level. Pretty much EVERYONE wants to play as high as they can in Ultimate.

The only people I have ever seen manipulate the season are people who self rate too low and then will try and find the magic number where they make playoffs and move up but also where they are eligible for the postseason. I've seen people strategically default a match because they wanted to keep their rating at a certain level so that they could move up. I haven't EVER seen someone try and make sure they avoided a bump up.

[Buford T Justice]

Originally Posted by omega4

Does Ultimate allow players to "cherry pick" their opponents?

No. The only time someone can pick their opponent is if a sub is needed (i.e. a player cant play for whatever reason, and that player chooses not to provide the sub, or if someone defaults the season (due to injury, etc). In those two cases, a player may choose their opponent, but that opponent must be from the same level.