I'm in Middle States. We played at Veterans Park outside Princeton. NJ district in Middle States won the men's 40+ in 3.5, 4.0, and 4.5.
2012 4.0 Nationals. Who's going?
- Thread starter kelawai
- Start date
I'm in Middle States. We played at Veterans Park outside Princeton. NJ district in Middle States won the men's 40+ in 3.5, 4.0, and 4.5.
tennis_tater
Semi-Pro
Isn't Houston stacked every year?
Nostradamus
Bionic Poster
That is illegal. those guys should be immediately bumped up to 4.5 and never allowed to play 4.0 ever again.
Pretty much. Some years better than others. This is a better than others years. If all their horses make the trip, they will be a tough out.
tennis_tater
Semi-Pro
Houston lost in the finals in 2011, and really should have advanced out of their bracket last year. Had they done so, they probably would have made it to the finals like the Utah team they beat in bracket play did. Some believe this is their best team yet.
Hawaii finished 4th in 2011 and has 6 players back from that team and 4th last year and has 3 players back from that team. They look pretty stacked as well.
Hawaii and Houston in the semi-finals looks like a sure thing. The only question is whether the winner of that match up will be able to dethrone the 5.5's from Puerto Rico.
I think Houston 4.5 is really strong this year too. Freeman put some work into this year. He captains a 4.0 and a 4.5 team to Nats and both are up uber strong. The 4.5 Fort Worth team they dismantled in the finals was incredibly strong.
Last years 4.0 Houston team that went was a step down from this team. I was on a Dallas team that lost to them in the sectional semis. We had our opportunities (i.e. serving for the match... twice to advance to the finals) and we were not extremely strong. We would have been smoked by this years Houston team.
Dallas was really down this year. We were down and 4.0 and 4.5. It is getting harder and harder to find the ringers. Freeman definitely has a system in place.
Curious which team you are referring to? Eastern Section?
Nostradamus
Bionic Poster
who won this ? and how many 4.5-5.0 guys were on the team ?
Ronaldo
Bionic Poster
Semis Sunday at 7:30 am, Finals at 9:30 am And you are kidding? These are the real 4.0 players. All else are less than 4.0
Nostradamus
Bionic Poster
I heard Socal team had Steve Johnson disguised as old man playing on the team.
I just looked at some of the results from today. The #1 singles for Houston is a ridiculous ringer who has no business at all playing 4.0. None. He was a junior and high school star up here in the Delaware Valley who was regularly beating 5.0 guys in open tournaments 5 or 6 years ago. If you look at his record, it looks like he self-rated at 4.5 for a fall league last year and then threw matches until he was bumped down to 4.0, and now he's dominating nationals. I'm glad they lost. It's REALLY shady having a guy like that on the roster.
schmke
Legend
It looks like he played #1 in the first match but then #2?
The 2012 results do look suspicious. This appears to be some of the legendary Texas Fall league match throwing we hear about.
He does have some losses in 2013, ... although they are in Open doubles/singles and two 4.5 doubles matches. At 4.0, he is undefeated and my numbers say he is closer to a 5.0 than a 4.0.
The 2012 results do look suspicious. This appears to be some of the legendary Texas Fall league match throwing we hear about.
He does have some losses in 2013, ... although they are in Open doubles/singles and two 4.5 doubles matches. At 4.0, he is undefeated and my numbers say he is closer to a 5.0 than a 4.0.
I know you're a numbers wizard, but this is a case where it looks like the numbers may be manipulated, and my experience is from seeing him play seeing his results on the court. He's wasting his time at 4.0. I can see 4.5 because other teams have 4.5 ringers like him, but really he's a 5.0 player.
I don't have any numbers but I've seen him play and he is closer to 5.0 than 4.0. He won't embarrass himself at 5.0. The Dallas player he beat at sectionals played 4.0 a couple of years ago and went to nationals and was double bumped to 5.0. He didn't play the following year and somehow the computer double bumped him back down to 4.0. Houston's player handled him without too much pain. If a guy gets the double bump... He is already out of level himself.
lidoazndiabloboi
Hall of Fame
Florida beat Eastern and Northern, but lost to SoCal today.
Topaz
Legend
mikeler
Moderator
Like I said....
Mid Atlantic won 5.0s too.
Topaz
Legend
You know, Lynchburg used to be an area that nobody took seriously at districts (in my experience)...they've become a contender the past few years. Wow!
lidoazndiabloboi
Hall of Fame
Congrats to Mid Atlantic for beat us (SoCal) today. They were just too tough of a team.
Mid Atlantic won last year, too. Obviously, the best tennis in the country is in MD and VA, and not in relatively weak tennis regions like FL and TX.
Topaz
Legend
lido, you were there? Congrats on making the final!
I don't think you can necessarily make that assumption though...because there are plenty of really good players that never go to Nationals or may not even play USTA. Mid-atlantic is a strong area, yes, but so are other areas.
mikeler
Moderator
We will be playing your 4.5, 40+ team in 11 days. I think that will be our toughest match in the flight.
schmke
Legend
Mid Atlantic was a very strong team. Through Sectionals, I had 9 of their players rated over 4.0 and they had 2 more at 3.98 and another at 3.95.
I'm not from Mid Atlantic, I'm from Middle States. I just like poking fun at the regional snobs that think tennis is only played in FL and CA and everywhere else is second rate, even in NTRP where it's been disproven repeatedly.
mikeler
Moderator
I should have been more clear. We play Middle States in 11 days. The only thing it proves is that sandbaggers exist all over the country.
I should have been more clear. We play Middle States in 11 days. The only thing it proves is that sandbaggers exist all over the country.
Yes indeed. LOL. Good luck. I don't know a lot about that team, although they are definitely good. They've been playing together for many years and have gone to nationals in Adult in the past, too.
mikeler
Moderator
Our team went to Nationals without the 40+ restriction last year. Should be a good battle. Right now it is looking like temps will be in the 90s that day and we play them at 3 PM. That will hopefully work in our favor since we are used to the heat.
Good one JD!
Ronaldo
Bionic Poster
Where are you playing?
mikeler
Moderator
Indian Wells
Nostradamus
Bionic Poster
These guys are over the hill and testestrone level declining, how good can they be ?
JoelDali
Talk Tennis Guru
I had my T tested and it was above 1500.
My doc asked me f I was on supplements. I told her I inhale 4 scoops of UpYourMass Fudge Brownie 3 times a day.
She said that stuff won't increase T levels. And that I must be taking something else. I said no, just the powder and occasional Cortex injections.
tennis_tater
Semi-Pro
Just received an email from USTA for a survey regarding Nationals experience. Here was one question included in the survey regarding a proposed new regulation which I thought was interesting. Just curious if anyone would be in favor of this? Would really seem to benefit a team like a So. Cal who somehow managed to have Steve Johnson playing singles for them in Tucson last weekend.
Would you be in favor of a new regulation requiring individual matches being weighted at Championships to discourage the ability to stack line-ups? For example, the #1 singles position would count more than the #2 singles and the higher doubles positions would count more than the lower doubles positions. Flight winners would be determined by the total number of weighted individual match points won and the team with the most points in the round robin competition would advance to the semi-finals or finals.
Would you be in favor of a new regulation requiring individual matches being weighted at Championships to discourage the ability to stack line-ups? For example, the #1 singles position would count more than the #2 singles and the higher doubles positions would count more than the lower doubles positions. Flight winners would be determined by the total number of weighted individual match points won and the team with the most points in the round robin competition would advance to the semi-finals or finals.
mikeler
Moderator
Steve Johnson the guy who competes currently on the ATP tour?
That would be interesting
2 pts, 1pt for singles
3 pts, 2 pts, 1 pt for doubles
So becomes a 9 point match versus 5 pt.
Like that idea. Total pts determines league winner
Brian11785
Hall of Fame
I'm confused. Wouldn't this system just encourage captains to find one or two ringers whose weighted matches could basically carry the whole team?
schmke
Legend
What seems like a good idea can have odd side effects.
With weighted matches, you have the one you describe. A deep team would no longer be rewarded as they could get beat by a team with 2 ringers. Now one could argue that captains are already finding ringers and can play them on any court today leading to mis-matches, so giving more weight to certain matches would encourage captains to play both ringers on the same court leading to more competitive matches.
Another change the USTA made this year was to have plus leagues. These seem like a good idea to get the high end players more opportunities to play, but you have the issue of teams without a plus player playing a weak opponent on court 1 to throw a match and that effect on the plus player's rating. This could result in these plus players getting bumped down and becoming ringers at the lower level next year.
schmke
Legend
I've always thought an interesting way to preclude line-up stacking would be to require that the higher rated players play on the lower numbered courts. Since captains have no way of knowing for sure who is higher rated due to the USTA not publishing ratings, you could have captains put their line-up in to TennisLink and it spews out which player(s) should be on which courts.
This should in theory result in more competitive play and also in some cases make it harder for a good player to manage their rating down by playing lower rated opponents.
schmke
Legend
I like the idea of encouraging captains to play their best on certain courts as this will lead to the best match-ups. But with the specific weighting you are suggesting, like Brian11785 said, this has the drawback that a team with one singles stud and one doubles stud playing with a good partner (so just 2 ringers) can win 5 of the 9 points in each team match. But since the cumulative points in the flight are being looked at, perhaps this isn't a bad thing.
Let's look at a scenario. Four team flight (A, B, C, D) with A being a 2 or 3 player ringer team, B being a good deep team, and C and D being weaker but a few good players. The matches may go as follows (focusing on A and B since C and D won't factor in for flight win):
A wins 1S and 1D over B with their ringers but loses the others because of B's depth. A-5, B-4
A does the same against C and D, their other players aren't that strong and C and D "reverse stack" to ceded the big point courts and win the others. A finishes with 15 points.
B's takes the approach to load up their depth on doubles and wins 6-3 against C and D taking their total to 16.
Despite A having the 2 or 3 ringers and "winning" every team match, because of team B's depth they managed to win the flight.
So this weighting doesn't necessarily tip the scales in favor of a team with just a few ringers like you might think.
mikeler
Moderator
This is an interesting idea. I do like the strategy component of who to play on which line though.
schmke
Legend
I think it is more likely the USTA would just tell you what your line-up has to be like I suggested than that they would publish the ratings. But same idea.
anubis
Hall of Fame
The simple fact of the matter is, there's no way to shape and cook the cookie dough and not result in a cookie. Whether you steal from Peter to pay Paul, it still has the same results: any system of handicapping can be taken advantage of if you have enough gall/money/influence.
The NTRP score is just a handicapping system. No matter what you do, there's always going to be a rising 3.5 that can beat most 4.0s, and who is still stuck in 3.5-land... and all the top captains are going to be gunning for him to be the "wrecking ball" and win them a title.
You're also always going to have a bunch of hot shot college players who took the proverbial "five years off to go jump in a lake" and now all of the sudden want to pick up a racquet again. They ask their tennis friends where to self-rate at, and by golly it's always WAY under what they should be.
Lastly, you will always have pockets of tennis areas where the talent is just so big that they skew the statistical results and diverge from the average so greatly that they are anywhere from a half to one full NTRP point above everyone else.
And, that's just the most obvious stuff. I'm sure there's more subtle sandbagging going on all over the country.
Point is, this is all happening all of the place, in every corner of the country, and in every sport that is handicapped. You can't stop it, but you -- USTA -- can acknowledge it. USTA claims to be all about player development. Well, gaming the system, stacking the teams and abusing the handicapping system runs counter to player development, so they would (in effect) be helping players all over the country by taking a more public stance against it.
Because from my viewpoint, right now it's nothing more than a popularity contest, where the "sexiest" sandbaggers win -- and all the rest of the amateurs be damned.
/end rant
The NTRP score is just a handicapping system. No matter what you do, there's always going to be a rising 3.5 that can beat most 4.0s, and who is still stuck in 3.5-land... and all the top captains are going to be gunning for him to be the "wrecking ball" and win them a title.
You're also always going to have a bunch of hot shot college players who took the proverbial "five years off to go jump in a lake" and now all of the sudden want to pick up a racquet again. They ask their tennis friends where to self-rate at, and by golly it's always WAY under what they should be.
Lastly, you will always have pockets of tennis areas where the talent is just so big that they skew the statistical results and diverge from the average so greatly that they are anywhere from a half to one full NTRP point above everyone else.
And, that's just the most obvious stuff. I'm sure there's more subtle sandbagging going on all over the country.
Point is, this is all happening all of the place, in every corner of the country, and in every sport that is handicapped. You can't stop it, but you -- USTA -- can acknowledge it. USTA claims to be all about player development. Well, gaming the system, stacking the teams and abusing the handicapping system runs counter to player development, so they would (in effect) be helping players all over the country by taking a more public stance against it.
Because from my viewpoint, right now it's nothing more than a popularity contest, where the "sexiest" sandbaggers win -- and all the rest of the amateurs be damned.
/end rant
schmke
Legend
Thinking about this a bit more, what if A were to win 2S or 3D in one match and tie at 16 points? I imagine head-to-head would be the appropriate tie-breaker and then the ringer team does get rewarded for just having 2 or 3 ringers and managing to eke out one other court win.
Note also that I just went with the 2,1/3,2,1 points that JLyon suggested. I don't know that that is the best option, as it puts a lot more weight (6 to 3) on doubles than singles. Perhaps that makes sense, as you don't want to reward a team with being able to accumulate too many points out of just one or two players, but you could also do a 3,1/3,2,1 and 10 point total approach to make the court 1s worth the same. And 10 is a nicer round number than 9 is
Another thought to still reward winning courts would be to give an extra point to the team that wins the most courts. This might work nicely with the 2,1/3,2,1 scoring to again make the total points available 10.
In this latter scoring format, A would still total 15 (never won more courts) in the original scenario while B would now get to 19, a clearer margin. This would mean even if A were to have scraped out an extra 1 point they'd only get to 17 and the tie-breaker wouldn't come into play. They'd have to scrape out the extra point twice to tie at 19 and win on the head-to-head tie-breaker.
Similar threads
