Search results

I see 24 matches for you from May through September.

I agree with FYB you can't hand pick the results you want to make your case. Over the past few years you do have some losses and some close wins. More importantly, while you have gone 5-0 this year, by my ratings, your opponent's average rating is just 3.63, so below the 4.0 mid-point on...

I forgot another measure of close, whether the match goes three sets or not. That number is 49.9%. Adding these to the 7-6, 7-5, 6-4, or 6-3 grouping inches that up to 95.8%.

They must have some metric about the number of people that have been safe sport trained and this is their bright idea to boost those numbers with all the 50+ league players.

Agree, excellent page looking at the math of it. I happen to like the simulations as I can record the different ways one gets to winning a match and look at all of those very easily. You could do every scenario with the mathematical approach too, but that would be a lot of work looking at all...

I did a million iteration simulation of best 2 of 3 set matches between two players with 50% point win percentages. Overall there were 1,470 different score combinations Some observations about the matches being close: 27.8% had at least one set that was 7-6 27.9% had at least one set that...

So, I clicked on the link, and there appear to be three courses and taking any one checks the box. They are: Parent’s Guide to Misconduct in Sport Abuse Prevention for Adult Athletes SafeSport for Volunteers So it does appear the training isn't solely focused on juniors.

Actually, I think it just means he is suspended.

Yeah, this is a best a bit odd to be creating an incentive for league players that have little to no role with situations where safe-sport training comes into play to go through the training. But then again I haven't gone through the linked training to see what it is, perhaps it is somehow...

I don't know for sure, but suspension points perhaps makes sense.

Sure, you can hand pick two set results to compare and make a true statement, but I don't think that reflects the whole. Yes, 6-2 slots in a little higher than 7-6, but that is simply because 7-6 requires threading the needle to be tied at 6-6 to have the tie-break. With even players, there...

It is worth noting that in your scenarios, while averaging the points won percentage for each server comes out to 0.55, the points won/lost doesn't necessarily come out to 55% due to there being more/fewer points played on each player's serve in the different scenarios. Going back to using...

I can do that! I have an option to not use tie-break sets. Just for fun, I did a simulation where each server won 90% of their service points. The results vary, but hundreds of games to even thousands occur in the set in some cases. At 80% each there are a few normal looking sets but quite a...

You are right, any differences I noticed are in the statistical noise. If I do more runs of a simulation the slight variation between them is basically the same. But yes, the more interesting part is the most likely score does change as you'd expect.

I couldn't help myself and had to join the party and wrote my own simulator for games/sets/matches. My approach is to do a simulation with many (typically a million) iterations to see how things play out on average. My simulation allows for any number of formats (single set, best of 3, best of...

What happens with the DQ'd player's prior matches depends on the section and what option they elect to use. From the regulations: 2.04E(1) Local. In the event of an NTRP Dynamic Disqualification from a particular level of play, the Section shall determine and publish in its regulations what...

I expect it will be 11/10 this year, but not confirmed.

Depending on the strength of your opponents and your scores, you are likely a strong 4.0 to border-line bump up to 4.5. But one really can't say based just on records. Your WTN is quite good for a 4.0 so that might be an indication you are on your way to a bump up, but then again there isn't...

Looks to be an Elo based algorithm, and done on a scale consistent with the old International Tennis Number (ITN) which is what the ITF had before they introduced the WTN.

Ahhhh, I see your point, and you are correct, sections get to choose which leagues count.

I could be wrong, but I don't think that is true. The cut-off date is established by National and is traditionally when the last Nationals event is, which this year is 11/10. I have not confirmed that though.

Good point. Some other local rule notwithstanding, that is the date after which you must play at your new rating. I still think it is confusing given that they are not transparent about what the rating year/period is. They seem to think keeping things a secret will somehow prevent the...

Yes, in some areas there are court constraints as play in the Fall/Winter/Spring is all indoors. Trying to fit all the leagues into the calendar year in these areas would be a huge challenge if not impossible.

Also, in my area 18+ Mixed is an early start league and if players are bumped up at year-end, they have to play at the higher level at Sectionals. That can wreak havoc with line-ups so the teams that have playoff aspirations, meaning they may have players that could be bumped up, have to...

Yes, but you can conjure up scenarios where that doesn't work. You your men available are your 4.5s and two 4.0s, and your women available are your 4.5 and three 4.0s. To the OP's question, to guard against these scenarios you may need a larger roster, especially more 3.5s to give yourself the...

In my area, it is usually availability. When you have both men and women and players of different levels where you have to get legal pairings, it takes a larger roster than an at-level same gender team. For example, while Mixed is just three courts so six players, you can't fill the line-up...

Yep, ratings are calculated for the "rating year" which lately has started/ended about the 2nd weekend of November. The USTA chooses to confusingly give year-end ratings a rating date of "12/31" but yes, the matches played after the rating year cut-off in November/December will be included in...

Longer than it would take for an S rate :) The S rate would get strikes from every 4.30 while the A would require several 4.30s to bring the calculated/averaged rating above the strike threshold.

The second point is more about the USTA getting to offer an additional league which means more money to them. Your argument may be they could actually make more money by offering just another season of 18+ because they'd get more players than they do with 40+, and in fact some areas do have...

Two reasons. First, whether it is valid or not, some older players don't want to play the young kids, so a 40+ or 55+ league gives them an opportunity to play league but know they will avoid those players. Second, and perhaps the bigger reason for the USTA, is it gives them an opportunity to...