DQ'd player impacts state championship...

[ajmack]

Played in a 4.0 state tournament two weeks ago where the winning team had a player get disqualified following the event. I assume he was self-rated and received his "third strike" during the tourney, though I don't know this for sure. The player is simply listed as DQ'd on the state association's web site, but his team's match results haven't changed.
The player in question went 11-1 during the season and 4-1 during the state tournament, so the disqualification appears legitimate.
I'm curious as to what will happen and what people think should happen in determining a champion.
If losses counted in all his matches, which I assume they will, his team would have lost several league matches and failed to advance to the state tournament. At the states, his team would still have won its pool despite his two victories turning to losses. However, he won his individual matches in the semi-finals and finals. His team won the semi's 3-2 and the finals 4-1.
So, does the team in question simply advance to the sectionals without the disqualified player? Does the runner-up advance even if they would not have won the title match with help from the disqualification match?
Does the semi-final team that beats the champ with the disqualification match have a valid claim to the championship?
However odd it may seem, should the semi-final team and the runner-up schedule a new championship contest?
I tried contacting the state tennis association for details on how this would be resolved, but haven't received a response.

[bruintennis]

If he was DQ'd AFTER the event, then all matches may stand, but he won't be able to play at the 4.0 level any more this year.

I could be wrong, so let's see what you find out.

[Jack the Hack]

The answer depends on the USTA Section because each Section is given the ability to handle disqualifications differently. It used to be that self rated players that struck out had all of their match scores reversed. I believe that is still the case in my USTA Section (Pacific Northwest). However, players with ratings based on NTRP tournament play or mixed doubles league results from the previous year, or those that had successful appeal (including medical) only have their last match reversed if they strike out. Therefore, if the player had an A, T, M, rating, and the Section where this player was from only disqualifies the last match, then his team would advance. If he was self rated, all of his matches could possibly be reversed, but the championship would likely stand because he team would have won 3-2 even after his DQ.

The FAQ's found here could shed some light:

http://assets.usta.com/assets/1/USTA...s/NTRP_FAQ.pdf

FAQ #27 states that each Section determines which matches will be reversed in local play. It also states that a Section must determine one of two methods of DQ for championships:

1. Run the ratings after the conclusion of a tournament, and let the matches of a DQ'ed player stand (but he is not allowed to advance to Nationals).

or

2. The ratings are run after the tournament and the last match of the DQ'ed player is reversed to 0-6, 0-6.

In both cases, it would seem to indicate that the team you described will advance beyond the state tournament despite the player's dynamic disqualification, but that they will obviously be without him at the next level of playoffs. However, it also depends on whether the Section handles the state playoff as a "championship" or an extension of local league play.

By the way, I had a friend that was on a team that won their state playoff 3-2. The matches were tied at 2-2, and their #1 singles player won 13-11 in the third set tiebreaker after saving 4 match points. The team celebrated, everybody got the trophies for winning, and they started making plans for Sectionals. However, one week later, they were notified that their singles player had gotten his third strike in that final match, and that their entire team win had been reversed! That was very hard to take, especially when the two singles players were obviously so competitively matched.

[ncgator]

Had this happen recently in North Carolina State Championships (Southern Section). The self-rated player was DQ'd and bumped from 4.0 to 4.5, but the match results were not changed. He cannot advance to Sectionals with his team that won States, and obviously cannot play any further matches at the 4.0 level (mixed or combo doubles).

[polski]

I have never seen a DQ enforced retroactively in the southern section, but admittedly i haven't seen it all. it usually just impacts the player's ability to compete at the next event.

[NLBwell]

Originally Posted by Jack the Hack

By the way, I had a friend that was on a team that won their state playoff 3-2. The matches were tied at 2-2, and their #1 singles player won 13-11 in the third set tiebreaker after saving 4 match points. The team celebrated, everybody got the trophies for winning, and they started making plans for Sectionals. However, one week later, they were notified that their singles player had gotten his third strike in that final match, and that their entire team win had been reversed! That was very hard to take, especially when the two singles players were obviously so competitively matched.

This shows the silliness of the system. It was not possible for your friend's team to win if it came down to that match. If he wins, even closely, he is DQ'ed and the team loses. If he loses, the team of course loses.
The only possibility of the team winning would be to throw the match badly and hope it would be a third strike against the opponent. The opponent would be DQed and your friend's team would win.

A sorry Catch-22.

[polski]

Originally Posted by NLBwell

This shows the silliness of the system. It was not possible for your friend's team to win if it came down to that match. If he wins, even closely, he is DQ'ed and the team loses. If he loses, the team of course loses.
The only possibility of the team winning would be to throw the match badly and hope it would be a third strike against the opponent. The opponent would be DQed and your friend's team would win.

A sorry Catch-22.

Probably a good reason that you can't see your (or your opponent's) DNTRP before a match. Yes, I would assume that no matter who won that match would have cost their team the overall win. Funny how that worked.

[Z-Man]

In Georgia, the matches stand but you can't advance to sectionals. Last year they went nuts with the DQs and booted players off of the winning and runner up teams at most levels. A few years ago they had verifiers walking around who could hand out DQs on the spot. This was silly because the verifiers had now way of telling who was really good and who wasn't.

It's all very unfair because at sectionals and nationals the states that are aggressive with DQs have no chance.

[JavierLW]

Originally Posted by Z-Man

In Georgia, the matches stand but you can't advance to sectionals. Last year they went nuts with the DQs and booted players off of the winning and runner up teams at most levels. A few years ago they had verifiers walking around who could hand out DQs on the spot. This was silly because the verifiers had now way of telling who was really good and who wasn't.

It's all very unfair because at sectionals and nationals the states that are aggressive with DQs have no chance.

That just means that the USTA should expect that everyone is aggressive EVERYWHERE, instead of letting all of these State Tennis Associations make up their own criteria.

I wonder if certain states even bother to run the DQ program during the season, and I know of at least one case where a state coordinator told some captain that a player had a 2nd strike even though that's not allowed.

I can see where you might like to build a team and want to advance year after year after year, or even if it's just for one year you want to go far.

But in some areas the league actually enables this, and they really need to just follow the rules and be consistant when handling these things. (but instead in some cases they get involved, they love it when some captain makes some sort of "SuperTeam" or "All Star Team" and they bend over backwards to help them because they feel they get brownie points then and they claim all of the other states are cheating as well...

[storypeddler]

I believe the player who made the original post (as well as Jack the Hack who responded) are referring to the NC state championships. I, too, played at Pinehurst in the same District tournament a few weeks ago and have been following this storyline since. Seriously, though, I don't think there is a perfect way to handle this other than what the state people did---which was to DQ the player and let the team advance to Sectionals without him playing. No other solution is fair to all involved. You clearly can't go back and replay local league matches, even though they would not have won their league without his wins. This is just one of the no-win scenarios you occasionally get when players rate themselves and get DQ'ed. The officials run matches through the USTA computer after the tournament and take the appropriate actions and I don't know what else you could do. I captained a team that actually played in the same pool this team (the eventual 4.0 District winner) advanced out of and our #1 singles player lost to him 6-2, 6-4. After the DQ, match results were reversed and our player got the win, though it made no tangible overall difference. We were 3-1 in our pool, losing only to that team. If that player's matches were reversed all the way back through local league (and they were), and you had to refigure the effects, they would not have won their league. Had that happened, we would have faced a different team at district instead. Maybe we would have beaten another team and advanced to the finals round and won the championship ourselves. Who knows? But there is no way to reasonably untangle something like this and be fair to everyone who had a complaint along the way. A few years ago I played on a 4.0 men's team that was runner-up in the District tournament to a team from Winston-Salem, NC. That team beat us in the final and then, after Districts, had 3 players DQ'ed from further 4.0 play. Did we feel somehow cheated? Yeah, probably---and in one respect we were, but so was every other team that might have been there had these players been taken out of the equation from the beginning. No way to fix that for other teams after the fact. You can't un-ring the bell. The problem has always been here because the USTA has not found a perfect way to keep out the ringers---those players without a USTA rating who are clearly and knowingly rating themselves well below their correct playing level to help a team win. There probably ISN'T a perfect way to catch them. It is unfair and it is unethical and it is wrong. And it is virtually unstoppable, at least entirely. Every few years the USTA tries to change or tweak the rules to better correct this. And every time, all those captains who have done this a while examine the new rules and figure out how best to circumvent them to get and use "ringers" on their way to a local league or district or sectional or national championship. There are a multitude of ways to do it and every year some captains do. I mean, if nothing else, you simply round up a half dozen true "ringers" to complement the other 9 true-level players you have, and you use all of them twice each in local league to qualify them for the next level. You spread them around and even have them sandbag when a match win is already locked up. You get to the end of the season undefeated and move on to districts where you repeat the process. Maybe you will eventually have some DQ'ed along the way to nationals, but you still get there, likely with some still intact. Maybe at year's end you lose them all, so next year you simply reload with 6 new young studs/hired guns and make another run at it. And for those who think I'm making this up, I have seen this done over and over in larger cities where captains have access to a large talent pool. The USTA does the best it can to police it and regulate against it and DQ the wrongdoers, but honestly, this happens in all walks of life. Tax attorneys make huge dollars to look at the tax code and find every possible means to help their clients avoid paying any taxes---even when they should rightfully pay them. Criminal defense attorneys get paid to get their clients set free---regardless of their guilt. I hate it in our legal system and I hate it is taxes and I hate it in tennis. But the fact is that we will probably always have some captains and players who worship winning AT ANY COST and rules be damned. That's just the way it is.

[wrxinsc]

^ holy wall of text post!

[rainman007]

Originally Posted by storypeddler

I believe the player who made the original post (as well as Jack the Hack who responded) are referring to the NC state championships. I, too, played at Pinehurst in the same District tournament a few weeks ago and have been following this storyline since. Seriously, though, I don't think there is a perfect way to handle this other than what the state people did---which was to DQ the player and let the team advance to Sectionals without him playing. No other solution is fair to all involved. You clearly can't go back and replay local league matches, even though they would not have won their league without his wins. This is just one of the no-win scenarios you occasionally get when players rate themselves and get DQ'ed. The officials run matches through the USTA computer after the tournament and take the appropriate actions and I don't know what else you could do. I captained a team that actually played in the same pool this team (the eventual 4.0 District winner) advanced out of and our #1 singles player lost to him 6-2, 6-4. After the DQ, match results were reversed and our player got the win, though it made no tangible overall difference. We were 3-1 in our pool, losing only to that team. If that player's matches were reversed all the way back through local league (and they were), and you had to refigure the effects, they would not have won their league. Had that happened, we would have faced a different team at district instead. Maybe we would have beaten another team and advanced to the finals round and won the championship ourselves. Who knows? But there is no way to reasonably untangle something like this and be fair to everyone who had a complaint along the way. A few years ago I played on a 4.0 men's team that was runner-up in the District tournament to a team from Winston-Salem, NC. That team beat us in the final and then, after Districts, had 3 players DQ'ed from further 4.0 play. Did we feel somehow cheated? Yeah, probably---and in one respect we were, but so was every other team that might have been there had these players been taken out of the equation from the beginning. No way to fix that for other teams after the fact. You can't un-ring the bell. The problem has always been here because the USTA has not found a perfect way to keep out the ringers---those players without a USTA rating who are clearly and knowingly rating themselves well below their correct playing level to help a team win. There probably ISN'T a perfect way to catch them. It is unfair and it is unethical and it is wrong. And it is virtually unstoppable, at least entirely. Every few years the USTA tries to change or tweak the rules to better correct this. And every time, all those captains who have done this a while examine the new rules and figure out how best to circumvent them to get and use "ringers" on their way to a local league or district or sectional or national championship. There are a multitude of ways to do it and every year some captains do. I mean, if nothing else, you simply round up a half dozen true "ringers" to complement the other 9 true-level players you have, and you use all of them twice each in local league to qualify them for the next level. You spread them around and even have them sandbag when a match win is already locked up. You get to the end of the season undefeated and move on to districts where you repeat the process. Maybe you will eventually have some DQ'ed along the way to nationals, but you still get there, likely with some still intact. Maybe at year's end you lose them all, so next year you simply reload with 6 new young studs/hired guns and make another run at it. And for those who think I'm making this up, I have seen this done over and over in larger cities where captains have access to a large talent pool. The USTA does the best it can to police it and regulate against it and DQ the wrongdoers, but honestly, this happens in all walks of life. Tax attorneys make huge dollars to look at the tax code and find every possible means to help their clients avoid paying any taxes---even when they should rightfully pay them. Criminal defense attorneys get paid to get their clients set free---regardless of their guilt. I hate it in our legal system and I hate it is taxes and I hate it in tennis. But the fact is that we will probably always have some captains and players who worship winning AT ANY COST and rules be damned. That's just the way it is.

Yeah its kinda like the nuclear arms race.. If you dont load up your dead!! if you nuke someone else is that ethical?

NO SELF RATED PLAYER SHOULD BE ABLE TO WIN 1 MATCH AT SECTIONALS: If you can you self rated to low and should get an auto DQ and maybe a 1 year ban lol

[goober]

Originally Posted by rainman007

Yeah its kinda like the nuclear arms race.. If you dont load up your dead!! if you nuke someone else is that ethical?

NO SELF RATED PLAYER SHOULD BE ABLE TO WIN 1 MATCH AT SECTIONALS: If you can you self rated to low and should get an auto DQ and maybe a 1 year ban lol

This has been said before, but if self rated players were not allowed into playoffs at all, that would solve a lot of problems.

[kylebarendrick]

I still prefer to have the sections run the dynamic ratings after the local league is over and immediately "promote" any self-rated player who's rating is out of level.

[aggielaw]

Originally Posted by wrxinsc

^ holy wall of text post!

LMAO. Very nice.

[storypeddler]

Originally Posted by kylebarendrick

I still prefer to have the sections run the dynamic ratings after the local league is over and immediately "promote" any self-rated player who's rating is out of level.

The problem with that many players will not get their second or third strike until they reach playoffs where they start to beat benchmarked players.

[ncgator]

I agree that the only real solution to this is to not allow self-rated players to play in league playoffs or state championships. Let them play their first year in league play to establish a computer rating only...

[JLyon]

Originally Posted by ncgator

I agree that the only real solution to this is to not allow self-rated players to play in league playoffs or state championships. Let them play their first year in league play to establish a computer rating only...

I would agree, but all this would do would give them incentive to tank to stay at level or even drop a level.
One way to stop the tanking would be for a league to use total individual match wins versus team victories, this way every line would count and tanking would then really hurt a team.

[rainman007]

Originally Posted by JLyon

I would agree, but all this would do would give them incentive to tank to stay at level or even drop a level.
One way to stop the tanking would be for a league to use total individual match wins versus team victories, this way every line would count and tanking would then really hurt a team.

i disagree there would be a few, but a 2 year process to try to make a run 1 year then if you dont win state or sectionals you have to go through a 2 year process again i think it would cut it out drastically..

you might argue that a new player should have the right to compete at state but they shouldn't be able to win a sectional match if they do they rated to high it would encourage people to rate right.. the only problem would be a true beginners league not a 3.5 self rated 2.5... true beginners should be able to compete at sectionals but not a self rate 3.5 or higher that rolls people..

[kylebarendrick]

Originally Posted by storypeddler

The problem with that many players will not get their second or third strike until they reach playoffs where they start to beat benchmarked players.

Not if they were bumped prior to the playoffs - which is what I proposed. You could set the threshold so anyone with a strike would be bumped.