Usta Weighs In On Sandbagging

[SlapShot]

Originally Posted by penpal

Here's my issue with the USTA FAQ ... it seems like the powers that be have themselves forgotten the purpose of the NTRP rating system.

As I understand it, the NTRP rating system's ONLY purpose is to ensure, as much as possible, that people who play tennis can easily find opponents who are roughly comparable in skill level so as to promote more competitive, hence fun, matches. If they've devised an algorithm whereby a match between two people with the same rating should result in a 6-0, 6-0 *** whoopin' they've obviously failed to meet the goals the rating system was designed to achieve.

Agreed completely. There is no instance in which two players at the same rating level should result in a 6-0, 6-0 blowout if the algorithm is supposed to match up players of equal ability.

Edit: I also can't understand the "glory" of winning nationals at 3.0 - you're still seen as a 3.0, despite winning nationals. Maybe it's just me, but I want to have a 5.0 next to my name at some point in my life. I'd rather have that than a 3.0 national championship, to be honest.

[lostinamerica]

Originally Posted by SlapShot

Agreed completely. There is no instance in which two players at the same rating level should result in a 6-0, 6-0 blowout if the algorithm is supposed to match up players of equal ability.

Edit: I also can't understand the "glory" of winning nationals at 3.0 - you're still seen as a 3.0, despite winning nationals. Maybe it's just me, but I want to have a 5.0 next to my name at some point in my life. I'd rather have that than a 3.0 national championship, to be honest.

In fairness, you must start somewhere and nobody starts at 5.0.


As for me, I want a 7.0... but that is not going to happen.

[johnny ballgame]

Originally Posted by penpal

If they've devised an algorithm whereby a match between two people with the same rating should result in a 6-0, 6-0 *** whoopin' they've obviously failed to meet the goals the rating system was designed to achieve.

Agree, well said.

[SlapShot]

Originally Posted by lostinamerica

In fairness, you must start somewhere and nobody starts at 5.0.


As for me, I want a 7.0... but that is not going to happen.

Yes, that's true, but the evidence of people self-rating at 3.0 or 3.5 and being a full level better is overwhelming. I would rather have a successful season at 4.0 or 4.5 than take nationals at 3.0, but that's just me, I guess.

[lostinamerica]

Originally Posted by SlapShot

Yes, that's true, but the evidence of people self-rating at 3.0 or 3.5 and being a full level better is overwhelming. I would rather have a successful season at 4.0 or 4.5 than take nationals at 3.0, but that's just me, I guess.

I agree with what you are saying but also the evidence is overwhelming that players are self-rating at 4.0 or 4.5 and being a full level better too.

[Backboard]

beerNUTTY,

I'll try to be nicer if you try to be smarter.

[Joeyg]

Backboard is obviously trying to further his agenda. I guess his being a sandbagger makes up for his lack of ethics.

Too bad the USTA really doesn't care about anything but the $$$. Oh, and Backboard? I'll try and be nicer the moment you quit being a shill for the USTA and their ridiculous attempts to "grow the game".

[Backboard]

Joeyg,

It is always easier to critize the winners than to be successful in your own right. Throw away your crying towel and focus on improving YOUR game. If the USTA needs your help they will call you.

[Joeyg]

I have had a winning record at 4.5 for a long time. However, it is morons like you that are ruining league tennis, pal. Good luck to you and the rest of your low life sandbagging buddies.

[Backboard]

Joeyg,

You maybe a 4.5 but you still are a whiner. Most decent people learn in 2nd grade to congratulate the winners and not sling mud. I bet you think the whole world is out to get you! If League Tennis is ruined don't play. The League will get along just fine without you. But in any case, crying won't help.

[Joeyg]

All of your deflecting isn't fooling me buddy. The problem exists and people like you are ruining what once was a good thing. I haven't played USTA in over a year because of my principles. I imagine someone having principles like that is quite foreign to you. Once again, good luck to you and the other scumbag cheaters.

[HowardH]

I'm a NTRP rated 3.0 player. Last year I played league tennis for the first time and had only been playing less than a year. Since then I've begun taking private lessons and have played extensivly, every week. I have a 3.5 forehand, a 3.5 serve and I'm working on getting a my backhand and volleys well grounded.
I also play on the 3.5-4.0 challenge ladder and can win.

If I go back this year and play 3.0 league tennis I would probably win most of my matches 6.0, 6.1 since I've improved so much but NTRP hasn't seen my improvements yet.

This is the same with other friends I play with. We are 3.0 but have improved quite a bit and can win at 3.5. If we play each other in a 3.0 match our scores will be close so I wonder if just doesn't even out.

[New Kid On the Block]

Lets face it, teams are always exploiting the edge. But when a guy gets bumped two levels there is something wrong.

Here are my suggestions to make the USTA a much better league.

1. LET THE Computer do its job. When the computer is fed information it ultimetely gets it right 95% of the time.

2. NO APPEALS other then medical appeal that has permanant injury that would change ones game. NO OTHER APPEALS. if a player is going to get bumped down they need to make the computer bump them down if they have a bad year at the higher level.

3. USTA watch self raters more closely. This should limit the amount of players that really need to be monitored.

If the USTA follows these fairly simple rules they would have a great league.

[raiden031]

Originally Posted by SlapShot

Agreed completely. There is no instance in which two players at the same rating level should result in a 6-0, 6-0 blowout if the algorithm is supposed to match up players of equal ability.

There is evidence that the USTA believes that players with a rating differential of less than 0.5 (possibly as low as 0.35) can compete with a score of 6-0, 6-0. With that said, if they were to change their system so that each level was designed for matches to rarely to be less competitive than say a 6-2, 6-2 score, then chances are that there would probably be 10+ different skill divisions within any league. Do you think that is feasible to have that many skill levels? I mean we already have alot of skill divisions as it is, probably more than any other sport in existence.

Edit: I also can't understand the "glory" of winning nationals at 3.0 - you're still seen as a 3.0, despite winning nationals. Maybe it's just me, but I want to have a 5.0 next to my name at some point in my life. I'd rather have that than a 3.0 national championship, to be honest.

The way I see this is to be honest when self-rating and let the computer do its job. I would never appeal downward, but I don't care if others do it because I don't think they are any more of a threat than someone self-rating too low, which are a dime a dozen anyways. Also it doesn't really matter what number is next to your name, because your skill level is what it is regardless of what the number says.

[raiden031]

Originally Posted by New Kid On the Block

2. NO APPEALS other then medical appeal that has permanant injury that would change ones game. NO OTHER APPEALS. if a player is going to get bumped down they need to make the computer bump them down if they have a bad year at the higher level.

I just don't agree with this. The NTRP algorithm is far from perfect because it doesn't take into account player style matchups. It is based on a FAR too small a sample of any player's matches throughout a year, and there is FAR too much time between when the rating data (match scores) is collected, when the rating is granted, and when the next season starts.

There are so many people who get bumped up because they were paired with a strong partner who carried them. It is pointless to have them go winless the next season and discouraged when the sport is already hurting for players as it is.

[JavierLW]

Originally Posted by raiden031

I just don't agree with this. The NTRP algorithm is far from perfect because it doesn't take into account player style matchups. It is based on a FAR too small a sample of any player's matches throughout a year, and there is FAR too much time between when the rating data (match scores) is collected, when the rating is granted, and when the next season starts.

There are so many people who get bumped up because they were paired with a strong partner who carried them. It is pointless to have them go winless the next season and discouraged when the sport is already hurting for players as it is.

It's not pointless, it's called improving and getting better competition.

It's funny how some people say that it's okay that there are certain players in a particular level that are pretty much unbeatable because "you'd want the better competition". Yet when those same players are forced to play in the next level, it's somehow "discouraging" that they may not win every single time anymore.

I still say if they get rid of appeals, they will gain more players, not less.

Sure, they might lose some of the weird people who only are in it for the thrill of a cheap victory, but they'll gain way more players on the bottom levels who now have a chance to at least compete at some level (who may move up eventually as well).

No matter who you are, if you are only have fun if you win and you are constantly "discouraged" otherwise, then you really truely do not enjoy playing anyway.

If you get moved up, there is no reason why you shouldnt just work on your game so you can be more successful in your new level, rather than worrying more about going back down.

[JavierLW]

Originally Posted by New Kid On the Block

Lets face it, teams are always exploiting the edge. But when a guy gets bumped two levels there is something wrong.

Here are my suggestions to make the USTA a much better league.

1. LET THE Computer do its job. When the computer is fed information it ultimetely gets it right 95% of the time.

2. NO APPEALS other then medical appeal that has permanant injury that would change ones game. NO OTHER APPEALS. if a player is going to get bumped down they need to make the computer bump them down if they have a bad year at the higher level.

3. USTA watch self raters more closely. This should limit the amount of players that really need to be monitored.

If the USTA follows these fairly simple rules they would have a great league.

I agree with all of these. About half of the national commitee agrees with getting rid of ALL APPEALS, even medical ones. (45% of all players who filed a medical appeal in 2006 went to some form of playoff, I myself had a captain that bragged about filing one for someone because they were "old")

[tfm1973]

Originally Posted by raiden031

There is evidence that the USTA believes that players with a rating differential of less than 0.5 (possibly as low as 0.35) can compete with a score of 6-0, 6-0. With that said, if they were to change their system so that each level was designed for matches to rarely to be less competitive than say a 6-2, 6-2 score, then chances are that there would probably be 10+ different skill divisions within any league. Do you think that is feasible to have that many skill levels? I mean we already have alot of skill divisions as it is, probably more than any other sport in existence.

i agree raiden. the goal of the rating system is not to make sure we get 6-4, 4-6, 1-0 matches every single time we hit the court with another person of the same rating. it's to make sure we have competitive matches. scores do not necessarily indicate how competitive a match was. i can lose 0-6, 0-6 to roger federer and 0-6, 0-6 to that old man in my league who pushes and slices everything. i guarantee i at least had a shot with that old pusher. same score but not the same.

i also prefer letting the computer do its thing. no appeals - appeals to me. that's my new slogan.

[raiden031]

Originally Posted by JavierLW

It's not pointless, it's called improving and getting better competition.

It's funny how some people say that it's okay that there are certain players in a particular level that are pretty much unbeatable because "you'd want the better competition". Yet when those same players are forced to play in the next level, it's somehow "discouraging" that they may not win every single time anymore.

I still say if they get rid of appeals, they will gain more players, not less.

Sure, they might lose some of the weird people who only are in it for the thrill of a cheap victory, but they'll gain way more players on the bottom levels who now have a chance to at least compete at some level (who may move up eventually as well).

No matter who you are, if you are only have fun if you win and you are constantly "discouraged" otherwise, then you really truely do not enjoy playing anyway.

If you get moved up, there is no reason why you shouldnt just work on your game so you can be more successful in your new level, rather than worrying more about going back down.

Any player that is unbeatable should not be within the appeal range. The ones who have over-inflated ratings because of fluke wins or being paired with a strong doubles partner are the ones who suffer next year when they get crushed by everybody at the next level up. I don't see why the system has to be accepted as completely error free (by eliminating appeals) when it isn't.

There are some people who have reached their peak ability because of health limitations or lack of desire to really work hard to improve. If they are not blowing out all their opponents, I don't see why they should be forced to play at the next level up when they can still have competitive matches at the next level down.

[JavierLW]

Originally Posted by raiden031

Any player that is unbeatable should not be within the appeal range. The ones who have over-inflated ratings because of fluke wins or being paired with a strong doubles partner are the ones who suffer next year when they get crushed by everybody at the next level up. I don't see why the system has to be accepted as completely error free (by eliminating appeals) when it isn't.

There are some people who have reached their peak ability because of health limitations or lack of desire to really work hard to improve. If they are not blowing out all their opponents, I don't see why they should be forced to play at the next level up when they can still have competitive matches at the next level down.

Well players that are unbeatable are within appeal range for the most part. Check out the stats sometime, over 75% of everyone who is rated up is elligible to appeal, and you'd be hard pressed to find a whole lot of them that are in the specific instances that you are describing.

So you cant have appeals because that system is by far not perfect either. (you only have to be within 5% over to get your appeal, it's rare to go over that)

It is extremely hard to carry a weaker player in doubles unless you are a good full level ahead of whatever you are playing in. So if that's the case, that's the price you pay for playing with such a player. (and it probally doesnt happen a whole lot percentage wise)

And there is no such thing as a "fluke" win. There are only wins. You cant have a system that worrys about whether a win was a "fluke" or not because that would be silly.

Listen to yourself. Your talking about "being forced" to play a level up. Or how they "will get crushed by everyone". Who cares?

Why are they even playing tennis if that's all they care about? Most normal people want to improve and they take getting rated up as a compliment, and if they are losing they will want to find a way to better themselves so they win. Why devise a whole system which it's only purpose is to be concerned with going back down?

Even if they have reached their peak ability or they dont want to improve, it doesnt matter if they play in the higher level. They are playing tennis, they dont have some special right to only play in a level where they can win all the time.

There are people who are in their own level, who complain about sandbagging all the time, accusing people of it anytime they lose. They arent happy and their sole concern is "these people dont belong in my level because they can beat me".

These appealees are just as bad, because they are afraid of losing. If they werent afraid of losing and they were in it to actually play tennis and do their best, then they wouldnt cry so much about how they have to be able to move back down.