Self Rates being watched closely

Blade0324 · 06-01-2010, 11:28 AM

Anyone else see that self rate players are being watched really closely this year. Seems like since the big move up the USTA is really watching to see how captains fill their rosters. I know of 3 people that have been moved up already mid season in our section. One started as a 5.0 self rate but was a computer rated 5.0, 3 years ago and has not played USTA since. One match played and he is DQ'd and moved to 5.5. The second one on the same team is a self rate 5.0 former high school player, played only one match and DQ'd mid season to 5.5. The third is a guy from europe that was playing on our 4.5 team as a self rate 4.5. He is 26 and won 2 matches 6-4,6-4 and then 7-6,6-3. He has also been DQ'd and moved to 5.5 mid season. Both captains have been told that if they have even one more minor infraction that they will be suspended from USTA for a year.
Any one else see this in other sections, we are in Intermountain.

kendall22 · 06-01-2010, 12:29 PM

I just think the play in the levels has been diluted so much by the mass bump-up that self-rates, using the same wording in the questionnaires and charts as before, are comparing to the computer-rateds more favorably.

atatu · 06-01-2010, 01:33 PM

It sounds like these guys did not fill out their self rate forms correctly ? Otherwise I don't see how you can bump a guy after one match...

J011yroger · 06-01-2010, 01:52 PM

I also thought min 3 matches...

J

iankogan · 06-01-2010, 02:11 PM

I'm with poster #3 here. DQ-ing a player based on the results of one match wouldn't make sense. Not that USTA always makes sense but I think something else is at play here. As for the 4.5 self-rated guy beating other 4.5-rated (I assume) players 6-4,6-4 and 7-6,6-3: what's so suspicious about that?

BTW Blade I'm in Intermountain too, though only a 3.5. Never heard of anyone being DQed at my level.

raiden031 · 06-01-2010, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kendall22

I just think the play in the levels has been diluted so much by the mass bump-up that self-rates, using the same wording in the questionnaires and charts as before, are comparing to the computer-rateds more favorably.

I think you're right.

This year in my 2nd year of 4.0 Singles, I got beat 6-3, 6-0 by a self rated 3.5. He just got DQ'd.

I also lost 6-2, 6-0 to a mixed exclusive 4.0, and he just got DQ'd to 4.5.

Lots of DQ'ing going on this year.

J_R_B · 06-01-2010, 04:45 PM

We've had 2 dynamic DQs in our league, including one from my team, but they were both clearly 3 strikes DQs done entirely by computer. There has to be more to the story with guys getting DQd after 1 or two matches. This has to be a grievance situation.

Blade0324 · 06-01-2010, 05:05 PM

I do know of one of the situations where the first 5.0 player I mentioned did have a grievance filed against him when playing a 9.0 mixed match so that could have been the deal for him. The others I don't think that is the case unless the USTA is just having section coordinators doing random checks.

Topaz · 06-01-2010, 05:23 PM

^^^Correct, other than a computer generated DQ, if a grievance is filed and found to be worthwhile, players can and will be moved accordingly.

So, be careful that nobody can find any hint of your college tennis career when you self-rate at 3.0!

JLyon · 06-02-2010, 05:36 PM

hmm interesting at 5.0 typically do not see many grievances filed, since the talent pool is much smaller, as 5.0 Captain I know I could pop quite a few players if I really wanted too, but it is not worth it anymore.

NLBwell · 06-02-2010, 10:55 PM

I didn't know they even had 5.5 in Intermountain anymore. Until this year we could only get draws of 2 or 3 people in most tournaments in Denver in 5.0 and some were high 4.5's. There weren't any 5.5 tournaments (maybe Colo State Open but I don't remember seeing one there). It's stupid to bump people up to where they can't play at all - it happened to a friend of mine a few years ago. No leagues, no tournaments, only a couple Open tournaments a year. At least if he gets bumped up again, he's old enough to play age group tournaments now.

Blade0324 · 06-03-2010, 06:15 AM

NLBwell, good points I hadn't really thought about. You are right there is no 5.5 league and not much in tourneys there either. At that level it either open or age group play and like you said those are quite limited. I don't have a huge problem with what the USTA is trying to do with bringing rating levels more in line, but if that is going to be the case they need to open up some more levels of play.

J011yroger · 06-04-2010, 03:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blade0324

NLBwell, good points I hadn't really thought about. You are right there is no 5.5 league and not much in tourneys there either. At that level it either open or age group play and like you said those are quite limited. I don't have a huge problem with what the USTA is trying to do with bringing rating levels more in line, but if that is going to be the case they need to open up some more levels of play.

My friend and I were talking about this last year when some of the 5.0 guys got moved to 5.5.

We were thinking that the best idea would be to make it 5.0+ and then use the same 2 singles 3 doubles format of the rest of the levels.

So the level would be unlimited, and everyone could play.

Because, just about every team has a dead ringer at the #1 spot anyway who is in no way shape or form a 5.0. And then depth would be a major factor. Where you can't just have your ringer smoke the guy in the singles spot, and hope for 1 of the dubs.

J

86golf · 06-04-2010, 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J011yroger

My friend and I were talking about this last year when some of the 5.0 guys got moved to 5.5.

We were thinking that the best idea would be to make it 5.0+ and then use the same 2 singles 3 doubles format of the rest of the levels.

So the level would be unlimited, and everyone could play.

Because, just about every team has a dead ringer at the #1 spot anyway who is in no way shape or form a 5.0. And then depth would be a major factor. Where you can't just have your ringer smoke the guy in the singles spot, and hope for 1 of the dubs.

J

This would make too much sense. It would need to be more complicated for the USTA to adopt it. Maybe if you add a provision that your birthday has to be in a month that begins with J.

I haven't noticed as many DQ's in our league in Charlotte this year as in years past.

Topaz · 06-04-2010, 04:21 AM

Just noticed a DQ in our league last night...gal who self-rated at 3.0 but playing up and winning at 3.5 singles (most notably against me) got the 3.0 DQ and is now a computer rated 3.5. All her 3.0 wins are now losses.

Cindysphinx · 06-04-2010, 05:32 AM

^ So that was five individual match DQs at No. 1 singles for her team. Which changed the team match outcome from a win to a loss in two matches, taking the team record from 4-3 to 2-5.

No sympathy here.

Topaz · 06-04-2010, 07:02 AM

Oh, trust me, she isn't getting any sympathy from me either!

Thing is, when I played her, I was actually serving for the first set at 5-4...everything went kaplooey after that.

herrburgess · 06-04-2010, 07:12 AM

Guy playing in our local 3.0 league this spring (and winning convincingly at #1 singles) got bumped from 2.0 to 3.5. I think he signed up expecting to be bumped...but only the traditional half a point to 2.5. They certainly seem to not be messing around this year!

J011yroger · 06-04-2010, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 86golf

This would make too much sense. It would need to be more complicated for the USTA to adopt it. Maybe if you add a provision that your birthday has to be in a month that begins with J.

I haven't noticed as many DQ's in our league in Charlotte this year as in years past.

Oh well, if they ever did anything smart, we would find something else to ***** about right?

J

gunnd5000 · 06-04-2010, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 86golf

This would make too much sense. It would need to be more complicated for the USTA to adopt it. Maybe if you add a provision that your birthday has to be in a month that begins with J.

I haven't noticed as many DQ's in our league in Charlotte this year as in years past.

AHAHAHA the USTA are on par with the LTA for missuse of funds and disorganisation

06-01-2010, 01:52 PM	#4
J011yroger G.O.A.T. Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 11,442	I also thought min 3 matches... J __________________ I'm your huckleberry...

06-01-2010, 05:23 PM	#9
Topaz Legend Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 6,648	^^^Correct, other than a computer generated DQ, if a grievance is filed and found to be worthwhile, players can and will be moved accordingly. So, be careful that nobody can find any hint of your college tennis career when you self-rate at 3.0! __________________ What would you do if you knew you could not fail?

06-02-2010, 05:36 PM	#10
JLyon Hall Of Fame Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: AR Posts: 2,294	hmm interesting at 5.0 typically do not see many grievances filed, since the talent pool is much smaller, as 5.0 Captain I know I could pop quite a few players if I really wanted too, but it is not worth it anymore. __________________ Dunlop Bio 300 48/53 lbs. A cruel joke by USTA putting my 4.0 butt at 5.0 for future butt kickings

06-04-2010, 04:21 AM	#15
Topaz Legend Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 6,648	Just noticed a DQ in our league last night...gal who self-rated at 3.0 but playing up and winning at 3.5 singles (most notably against me) got the 3.0 DQ and is now a computer rated 3.5. All her 3.0 wins are now losses. __________________ What would you do if you knew you could not fail?

06-04-2010, 05:32 AM	#16
Cindysphinx G.O.A.T. Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 14,082	^ So that was five individual match DQs at No. 1 singles for her team. Which changed the team match outcome from a win to a loss in two matches, taking the team record from 4-3 to 2-5. No sympathy here. __________________ -- Random Error Generator, Version 4.0 -- Master Moonballer