Playtennis
New User
Atrocious match. 0/0. I had heard that the algorythm doesnt use this for rating because system doesnt understand it. Anyone know?
0/0 loss
- Thread starter Playtennis
- Start date
schmke
Legend
Opinions vary.
Most everyone agrees that that USTA used to not count them at all. But in the past year or so, there have been indications that perhaps they are counted now, although I don't know that this has been conclusively confirmed.
In my opinion, they should be counted when they have valid meaning. What I mean by this is if the expected result of a match is closer than 0 & 0, it should count. But if the player's ratings were far enough apart that the expected result was 0 & 0 or "worse", then it shouldn't count as including it would only hurt the winning player which isn't equitable.
This approach is what my Estimated Dynamic NTRP Reports use.
Most everyone agrees that that USTA used to not count them at all. But in the past year or so, there have been indications that perhaps they are counted now, although I don't know that this has been conclusively confirmed.
In my opinion, they should be counted when they have valid meaning. What I mean by this is if the expected result of a match is closer than 0 & 0, it should count. But if the player's ratings were far enough apart that the expected result was 0 & 0 or "worse", then it shouldn't count as including it would only hurt the winning player which isn't equitable.
This approach is what my Estimated Dynamic NTRP Reports use.
Playtennis
New User
Thanks. So in this case 3.5 plays 4.0 singles 3.5 loses 0/0 ( me). Expected result prob isnt 0/0 so prob counts?
Nostradamus
Bionic Poster
It should count. why would it hurt the higher rated player anyway ?
schmke
Legend
Say a 4.0 that has an actual dynamic rating of 3.9 plays a 3.5 with an actual dynamic rating of 3.1. This is a 0.8 difference that is over a full level (0.5) apart. If an 0 & 0 result gives the better player a match rating the opponent rating plus 0.5, this is going to be lower than his current rating and is new dynamic rating will go down. So yes, because there is no result that would give the better player a high enough match rating, his rating will be hurt.
Nostradamus
Bionic Poster
what if the score was 7-6 7-6. why is this better ?
schmke
Legend
By winning any games at all, the lower rated player makes the match meaningful since he was expected to win no games.
Basically, by winning 0 & 0, the better player has done everything he could and shouldn't be penalized.
But if he wins 6 & 6, he is not as good as his rating indicated, the other player is better, or both, and so this match is meaningful and ratings can be updated based on it.
Nostradamus
Bionic Poster
Yea but the better player will likely lower his rating for giving up so many games to lower player, much lower player. wouldn't this hurt the better player even more ?
Nostradamus
Bionic Poster
ok so the other day, I was playing the 4.5 match against these two decent 4.0's. We were up 3-0 and I rolled my ankle. I had to be real careful since I wasn't sure how bad this injury was. and they took the 1st set 6-4. then my ankle warmed up and felt ok and we won the 2nd set 6-0. then we won the 3rd set Super tiebreaker, 10-4.
So you are saying this is better than if we just blew them away 6-2, 6-0??
schmke
Legend
Yes, the 7-6,7-6 win will hurt the better player's rating more. But you aren't getting the point that a 6-0,6-0 match should not count in this scenario since there is no result that wouldn't hurt the better player's rating. If the better player wins 6-0,6-0, they have done everything they can and shouldn't (IMHO) be penalized simply because the opponent was so weak.
I had just this exact thing happen this weekend. I put up a double bagel in my first singles match of the season, but I was playing a guy who was just rated up from 3.0 to 3.5 then joined a 4.0 team. Once I figured out what was going on, I tried to be somewhat relentless because he really shouldn't be playing 4.0, and I wanted to "encourage" him to join a 3.5 team and pay his dues there...
Nothing wrong with this, people should pay their dues and not waste your time.
I totally understand the need for weaker teams to backfill their roster with players from the next level down and get experience playing up and all that, but they really should be players that are almost ready to move up anyway and can at least play competitively at the next level, not guys just moving into the lower level trying to skip up two levels at once. But whatever, it was a beautiful day to play tennis and our team started off the season with a 5-0 shut out, so it's all good. Plus, my team in NJ had a key match on Sunday against one of other contending teams in our league, so at least I didn't get all worn out on Saturday. LOL.
Last edited:
Playtennis
New User
Schmke---
When you do your report do you factor that 0-0 loss/ win in?
When you do your report do you factor that 0-0 loss/ win in?
schmke
Legend
I factor 0/0 matches in only if they are meaningful. That is, if the match was supposed to be 0/0 or closer, it is counted as the result does tell you something, that the better player met or exceeded what he was supposed to do.
But if the players are rated so far apart that the better player has no way of meeting or exceeding the expectation and their rating can only go down by including the result, the match is not included.
beernutz
Hall of Fame
That's the sensible way to handle them from the winner's perspective imo. An 0-0 win should never make a player's rating go down but could possibly make it go up, based on the expected match outcome determined from the dynamic ratings of the participants before the match.
schmke
Legend
While I wrote the blurb from the winner's perspective, I think it makes sense for the loser too. A 0/0 loss should never make a player's rating go up.
beernutz
Hall of Fame
Absolutely agree.
OrangePower
Legend
lostinamerica
Semi-Pro
I've heard it counts and does not count. Our Section director over the NTRP ratings and I were talking but he would not give me a straight answer. He did make in unequivocally clear that 0&0 can be a strike for DQ but I am not sure if it is included in the year end ratings.
I observed a person put an 0&0 beatdown on someone who was a computer rated player a level down. The winner got DQ'd in 3 matches verifying that was correct. Yet, 1 strike was against against a guy a level below. Another was against someone that belongs a level below and is doing what he can to get back down. His first strike (ala, match 1 was a close win (5&4) against a good but not great player at level).
I've seen some might strange things. I have seen DQs that were not warranted and non-DQs that were. It is what it is...
I observed a person put an 0&0 beatdown on someone who was a computer rated player a level down. The winner got DQ'd in 3 matches verifying that was correct. Yet, 1 strike was against against a guy a level below. Another was against someone that belongs a level below and is doing what he can to get back down. His first strike (ala, match 1 was a close win (5&4) against a good but not great player at level).
I've seen some might strange things. I have seen DQs that were not warranted and non-DQs that were. It is what it is...
Here is the strangest DQ I have seen.
http://tennislink.usta.com/leagues/...&par3=0&OrgURL=../../leagues/Common/Home.aspx
This guy is awful. I am going to also post it in Schmke thread about a strange explanation. This one is really bad.
http://tennislink.usta.com/leagues/...&par3=0&OrgURL=../../leagues/Common/Home.aspx
This guy is awful. I am going to also post it in Schmke thread about a strange explanation. This one is really bad.
Let me try the link again.
http://tennislink.usta.com/Leagues/...RL=http://tennislink.usta.com/Leagues/Common/
beernutz
Hall of Fame
IMO here's one at the opposite end of the spectrum. How does he not get DQed?
http://tennislink.usta.com/Leagues/...nnislink.usta.com/Leagues/Common/Default.aspx
Yeah, that one perplexing too. That guy is playing up and winning and beating everyone at his own level. If he were my player, I would have assumed he was gone by now.
I do not always know what to think. I have wondered if some captains get a little less tolerance but I know the captain on this other guy is about as much a who cares captain as there would ever be. This is a group of guys that mostly should be in 3.0 and nobody that should have been DQ'd.
schmke
Legend
One question is if the Southern section and Alabama district use the Winter league results (sections have discretion over what leagues/seasons count for rating purposes). It is possible only the Spring league is used in which case he only has 4 matches, the first being a close loss. But that loss may be enough to have avoided an early strike.
beernutz
Hall of Fame
I still haven't found a definitive answer to that Kevin and I have asked several captains who are old timers.
The close loss, his only one, was playing up at 4.0 but he and his partner also had a straight set win playing up.
It looks like he finally got the DQ.
beernutz
Hall of Fame
Yes he did, today in fact.
storypeddler
Semi-Pro
Yes---and think about it. If the better player struggled to escape with a 7-6, 7-6 victory, then his rating SHOULD be penalized to some degree. Either his opponent is better than the numbers indicate, or his own game is worse.
rainman007
Rookie
they dont count
Big_Dangerous
Talk Tennis Guru
Nothing like losing to some old guy that makes you feel like ****.
SunshineJS
New User
False... they do. Towards DQs and year-ends. Know for an absolute fact.
Similar threads
