time_fly
Hall of Fame
Those of us who are USTA regulars know the struggle with new players. Some new players or their captains are intentionally cheating on self-ratings, lying about playing experience, trying to manipulate match scores, etc. But I think in the overall scheme of USTA that's actually rare, at least outside of some specific repeat-offender captains. Instead, both the captain and new player want to select a level where the newbie will get into lineups and be successful. Overrating a player makes for a very bad experience, so new players are often a little underrated. DQing newbies who are genuinely uncertain about their level is unwarranted and creates a bad experience for the player as well. For that reason, the DQ threshold seems to be set high at the typical league entry levels like 3.0 and 3.5 because the computer can't easily distinguish between cheating, unintentional underestimation, and legitimate player improvement. But on the other hand, there seems to be a swell of players who are in the league for 1 to 3 years and their rating hasn't caught up with them. This is especially common in mixed doubles. The players may not be full-on cheating, but when new people jump in and win a huge number of matches immediately it creates a negative experience for established league members. They may get suspicious of cheating and perhaps feel pressured to recruit their own new "ringers" to compete.
I think there should be a middle ground between throwing down the quick, harsh DQ and letting someone rack up, for example, 20+ wins and 1 or 2 losses in their first year or two. I would propose that the three strike DQ rule remain as it is, but there should be another level with a lower threshold that applies over a larger number of matches. If you get say 5 or 6 "strikes" at the lower threshold, you should get moved up without any other penalties even if it's the middle of the season. This should only apply to "A" and "S" rated players just like the DQ rule of course.
Thoughts?
I think there should be a middle ground between throwing down the quick, harsh DQ and letting someone rack up, for example, 20+ wins and 1 or 2 losses in their first year or two. I would propose that the three strike DQ rule remain as it is, but there should be another level with a lower threshold that applies over a larger number of matches. If you get say 5 or 6 "strikes" at the lower threshold, you should get moved up without any other penalties even if it's the middle of the season. This should only apply to "A" and "S" rated players just like the DQ rule of course.
Thoughts?