2018 YE Ratings Hype Thread

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
And, if I were to believe TR 100% ... then in Nevada
20% of 4.0 women will be bumped down
only 3% of 3.5 women bumped up
10% of 3.0 women bumped to 3.5.

3.5 leagues will be bursting at the seams!
 
Why are the last estimated dynamic rating and the projected year end rating so different for a lot of people. There's a 4.5 guy I play with who's estimated dynamic is 4.10 but his projected year end is 3.92. There were no matches played from the date of his last dynamic rating and when the projected year end came out. Can anyone make sense of that?

Edit: In his case I just realized they weighted his two district matches witch he did very poorly in. But what are the reasons for non playoff playing people to have differences like that? I'm seeing differences of up to a 0.10 from inaction.
 
Last edited:

Zman

New User
Why are the last estimated dynamic rating and the projected year end rating so different for a lot of people. [...] what are the reasons for non playoff playing people to have differences like that? I'm seeing differences of up to a 0.10 from inaction.
Even non-playoff players get their ratings adjusted at year's end, based on how they did against players who played in the playoffs, combined with how those opponents did in the playoffs. This helps calibrate the ratings at different parts of the country, so that ultimately just about everyone's rating gets adjusted by the scores in the shortest sequence of matches connecting them to the national champions.
 
Even non-playoff players get their ratings adjusted at year's end, based on how they did against players who played in the playoffs, combined with how those opponents did in the playoffs. This helps calibrate the ratings at different parts of the country, so that ultimately just about everyone's rating gets adjusted by the scores in the shortest sequence of matches connecting them to the national champions.
Don't know why that slipped my mind. I guess I didn't expect adjustments to be all that big.
 
The real question is how wrong does the site need to be for people to stop wasting their lives staring at it?

At best, TR might have 35% correct and that's of their projections for a bump or dump. That's not including all the ones they're not projecting either way who will move. Furthermore, if all the people getting promoted simply because they played up and had no "at level" results to pull them down and all the no brainers were removed, their overall accuracy rating will drop to likely under 15-20%. (That's strictly looking at the total projected to move and those they miss - not all those that stay at level.)
 
The real question is how wrong does the site need to be for people to stop wasting their lives staring at it?

At best, TR might have 35% correct and that's of their projections for a bump or dump. That's not including all the ones they're not projecting either way who will move. Furthermore, if all the people getting promoted simply because they played up and had no "at level" results to pull them down and all the no brainers were removed, their overall accuracy rating will drop to likely under 15-20%. (That's strictly looking at the total projected to move and those they miss - not all those that stay at level.)
I mean I stare at it because I like stats. I think by now a lot people that go on there aren't in it for the projections. The rest of the website is pretty good.
For example TR showed me I was averaging more games per first set than second set so I spent the year really trying to focus during my second sets and I upped my average games won by a good amount. It's not always about the ratings.
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
I mean I stare at it because I like stats. I think by now a lot people that go on there aren't in it for the projections. The rest of the website is pretty good.
For example TR showed me I was averaging more games per first set than second set so I spent the year really trying to focus during my second sets and I upped my average games won by a good amount. It's not always about the ratings.
I did something similar at end of last year ... I really hate tie-breakers and was playing a lot of them.
Stats showed I was getting slow start in the 1st set, coming in strong in 2nd set and then the 3rd breaker.

So put my focus on starting faster ... it worked: won many more first sets by wider margins. And now having 2nd set let downs and still playing a lot of 3rd set breakers .... just a head case I guess
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
I did something similar at end of last year ... I really hate tie-breakers and was playing a lot of them.
Stats showed I was getting slow start in the 1st set, coming in strong in 2nd set and then the 3rd breaker.

So put my focus on starting faster ... it worked: won many more first sets by wider margins. And now having 2nd set let downs and still playing a lot of 3rd set breakers .... just a head case I guess
You like to play more tennis, nothing wrong with that ;-)
 

am1899

Hall of Fame
This is incorrect. Starting with 2017 year end ratings, players with 10 matches could appeal successfully. Naturally it's very rare.
I suspect they’re taking about auto appeals. Are you saying that the 10 match rule is no longer in effect for auto appeals? Source?

You are clearly a man and not a 3.0 woman. lol
Definitely not funny, and not a great way to make a good first impression as a new user.
 

Zman

New User
Are you saying that the 10 match rule is no longer in effect for auto appeals?
There are many examples of players who played more than 10 matches in 2017 and then successfully auto-appealed. For instance, James Jantz played 16 men's matches between January and August 2017 that were part of the 2017 season, and on Dec 1 2017 he was bumped up from 4.0 to 4.5, but he then auto-appealed down to 4.0.
 

J011yroger

Talk Tennis Guru
I just need to be the player that the club can blame for why the courts are backed up later in the day.

Oh, court 12 is an hour behind schedule? yeah, that is because OnTheLine was playing at 8am and went 2.5 hours again.
That's how it was when I ran XC. The whole team would be in the van waiting for Jolly to finish the race.

J
 

DailyG&T

Rookie
Can someone explain the difference between Tennis Record's 2018 estimated dynamic rating and 2018 projected year end rating? Why are these two numbers different? For instance for me, my 2018 estimated dynamic rating is higher than my projected year end rating. TR predicts a bump up for me but then there's a green arrow with "bump probability low," yet players with lower projected year end rating than me have medium or high bump probability. I know I could just wait a week and find out what really is going to happen but I prefer to torture myself with wondering:)
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
The projected year end rating includes weighting and adjustments made for those matches you played either in play-offs (e.g. districts, sectionals, nationals) or against players who did. If you did really well in those matches, there is an adjustment up, if you did poorly an adjustment down.

the probability arrow ... yeah, no idea ... I think it can mean anything you want it to mean
 

sphinx780

Hall of Fame
Not sure if anyone shared this yet or how it will coordinate with other sections: Northern sent an email out stating that ratings would be up 11/29.
 

Max G.

Legend
Heh. I'm 99% sure my rating is going to stay where it was. Definitely not going to go up, and probably not going to go down since I won a match at districts and the losses I had this season were pretty close and to top teams.
 

Nostradamus

Bionic Poster
Color me shocked. LOL

Played friendly sets with a group of 5 others today ... all are completely stressed out ... as if the entire world will end if they don't have the YE rating they want.
https://tennisfiles.com/8-reasons-why-usta-ratings

LOL,,, I had NO idea people were so obsessed................... WOW. I always had been middle of the 4.5 and never really thought about this but,,,,,,,,,,,LOL

If people didn’t obsess about USTA ratings, there would be:
  1. No tanking matches
  2. No staying up until 2am to see the year-end rankings
  3. No 80 comment-deep facebook posts about ratings
  4. Everyone would focus more on improving their tennis games
  5. More players would play at the level they really should play at
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
Notice the guy expressly stated that HE was a 5.0 but YOUR rating doesn't matter.

J
says the guy who wants to be a 5.0, right?

I am hoping that none of my teammates stroke out before the end of the week. Some of my favorite people/players are in a state of complete panic. This is in spite of sharing schmeke ratings with them showing that they are nearly all "fine".
 
I'm definitely not obsessing over it, but I'd be lying if I said the idea of having to find new teams and tournament partners doesn't give me some anxiety.
 

leech

Rookie
I'm pretty certain what my rating will be (thanks to @schmke), but as a captain, I'm anxious about a handful of players that are on the cusp. Will be a frenzy of activity the morning after ratings come out, as captains and players scramble to make sense of the impact of the ratings surprises.
 

J011yroger

Talk Tennis Guru
says the guy who wants to be a 5.0, right?

I am hoping that none of my teammates stroke out before the end of the week. Some of my favorite people/players are in a state of complete panic. This is in spite of sharing schmeke ratings with them showing that they are nearly all "fine".
Will be nice not to have to worry about my rating anymore.

J
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
I'm pretty certain what my rating will be (thanks to @schmke), but as a captain, I'm anxious about a handful of players that are on the cusp. Will be a frenzy of activity the morning after ratings come out, as captains and players scramble to make sense of the impact of the ratings surprises.
LOL, I already have my list of players to contact on Friday (or Thursday night) ... rosters for 40+ have to be complete by Dec 12th
 

ShaunS

Semi-Pro
The real question is how wrong does the site need to be for people to stop wasting their lives staring at it?

At best, TR might have 35% correct and that's of their projections for a bump or dump.
Well, two things... I don't think they're nearly that bad at calling bumps, but then I'm not sure how you're selecting the group of people.

The second, as previously mentioned, they've got a well designed site that makes accessing your tennis results simple. It's easy to filter your matches by a number of categories (tiebreakers, playoffs, doubles, etc), but then you get into the more obscure data like games won per set:


Is this making me a better player? Hard to say, but I just love the numbers. If you asked me a few years ago I would've told you that I'm at my best late in the match, but the data suggests my opponents were catching up. I'm still losing almost 1/2 game more in second sets, but at least I'm dragging my opponents down with me.

I can completely understand if that sort of analysis isn't interesting to you, but I expect that's what a lot of people enjoy about TR.


In the end though, it's a pretty subjective call to differentiate between the "waste of life cost" of looking at that site compared to posting on this one :D.
 

CosmosMpower

Hall of Fame
TR is weird, they had my rating at 3.4891 at the cutoff for matches counting. Now their site says my projected year end is 3.5108 as a 4.0C Medium (Appeal Available). What does that even mean? I didn't think a 3.51 was even in the range of an appeal.

Meanwhile my teammate was 3.5129 at the cutoff but somehow with a projected year end of 3.5020 as a 4.0C Medium with no appeal available. How is a 3.5020 not appeal eligible if a 3.5108 is?
 

Zman

New User
Is anyone here from NorCal? If so, could you check your NorCal Player Page to see whether the post "2018 year-end ratings" at

https://www.usta.com/en/home/stay-current/northerncalifornia/YearEndRatings.html

is actually saying that 2018 year-end ratings for NorCal players were available 5 days ago? The title and date of the post imply that, but the text talks about December 1 in the past tense, so it seems like something got mixed up. It would be strange it one section had ratings before others...
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
TR is weird, they had my rating at 3.4891 at the cutoff for matches counting. Now their site says my projected year end is 3.5108 as a 4.0C Medium (Appeal Available). What does that even mean? I didn't think a 3.51 was even in the range of an appeal.

Meanwhile my teammate was 3.5129 at the cutoff but somehow with a projected year end of 3.5020 as a 4.0C Medium with no appeal available. How is a 3.5020 not appeal eligible if a 3.5108 is?
The appeal available is just whether you played over or under 10 rated matches ... that is it. Has nothing to do with the number itself.
 

Jim A

Professional
Is anyone here from NorCal? If so, could you check your NorCal Player Page to see whether the post "2018 year-end ratings" at

https://www.usta.com/en/home/stay-current/northerncalifornia/YearEndRatings.html

is actually saying that 2018 year-end ratings for NorCal players were available 5 days ago? The title and date of the post imply that, but the text talks about December 1 in the past tense, so it seems like something got mixed up. It would be strange it one section had ratings before others...
Looks like they have the page ready to go and it wasn’t supposed to be “live” yet. Nice find.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
Looks like they have the page ready to go and it wasn’t supposed to be “live” yet. Nice find.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That is what I think happened. They copied the page from last year, started (but didn't finish) making changes to it to prep for the ratings being published, and accidentally made the page live. Nice false alarm.
 

downs_chris

Professional
https://tennisfiles.com/8-reasons-why-usta-ratings

LOL,,, I had NO idea people were so obsessed................... WOW. I always had been middle of the 4.5 and never really thought about this but,,,,,,,,,,,LOL

If people didn’t obsess about USTA ratings, there would be:
  1. No tanking matches
  2. No staying up until 2am to see the year-end rankings
  3. No 80 comment-deep facebook posts about ratings
  4. Everyone would focus more on improving their tennis games
  5. More players would play at the level they really should play at
From the article:

"
Several of my friends have had the following seemingly illogical ratings determinations:
  1. Went 9-0 in sectionals and nationals and stayed a 4.5 "
haha...my friend (who runs this site) - was talking about me last year...maybe i can stay 4.5 again, since i didn't go to nationals...

also, i heard ratings will be out Thursday or Friday (maybe thursday midnight?)...
 

Nostradamus

Bionic Poster
From the article:

"
Several of my friends have had the following seemingly illogical ratings determinations:
  1. Went 9-0 in sectionals and nationals and stayed a 4.5 "
haha...my friend (who runs this site) - was talking about me last year...maybe i can stay 4.5 again, since i didn't go to nationals...

also, i heard ratings will be out Thursday or Friday (maybe thursday midnight?)...
USTA knows that if you are bumped to 5.0, you will have very few teams to play on and that will be detrimental to USTA spirit. so by letting you stay on 4.5 rating, you can do whatever you want, stay 4.5 or play on 5.0 team. USTA is for freedom and rights of people/players, and they are American spirit 100 %
 

winchestervatennis

Hall of Fame
From the article:

"
Several of my friends have had the following seemingly illogical ratings determinations:
  1. Went 9-0 in sectionals and nationals and stayed a 4.5 "
haha...my friend (who runs this site) - was talking about me last year...maybe i can stay 4.5 again, since i didn't go to nationals...

also, i heard ratings will be out Thursday or Friday (maybe thursday midnight?)...
I heard you’re getting bumped back up to 5.0.
 
Top