2021 18+ 4.0M USTA League Nationals Predictions

Creighton

Semi-Pro
1) Having people play matches and using the scores of those matches to determine their rating (beyond a questionnaire based floor)
is the same as
2) Having people just say what their rating is (beyond a questionnaire based floor).

Let's just agree to disagree.
No there is no agreeing to disagree. You’re simply wrong. Your proposal does nothing to improve the process. At some point you have to be an adult and admit when you’re wrong.
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
No there is no agreeing to disagree. You’re simply wrong. Your proposal does nothing to improve the process. At some point you have to be an adult and admit when you’re wrong.
It's actually quite comical seeing someone with no experience with USTA at all lecturing with such tenacity a group of people who have been playing for years on the way the league should be run without any perspective on how wrong he is the whole time.
 

ACTG

New User
Late to this fun but is there any reason USTA can’t work wins and losses into the algorithm along with games won and lost? I get you need the games to make it work, but also when someone wins 4 and 4 like 50 times something going on there. Nobody cares how many games they lose. I never walk off the court going “man that three set win was awesome but I lost more games than I won!”
 

Moon Shooter

Semi-Pro
It's actually quite comical seeing someone with no experience with USTA at all lecturing with such tenacity a group of people who have been playing for years on the way the league should be run without any perspective on how wrong he is the whole time.

Good I am glad you are entertained. I also find this thread amusing. We get the captain from Southern coming here in order to mostly complain about the Utah captain that beat him at nationals. And he is "gonna shoot [me] straight" on how it is very different than how his team easily beats every 4.0 and under team in Georgia. But he
1) can't find a single rule that was broken by the Utah coach.
2)Admits everyone at nationals was out of level,
3)says "I may even have had guys who were not 100% transparent on their self rates"
4)Complains grown ups were following him around watching his team while in the same thread says more people need to do that against that rotten Utah captain.
5)Claims that the Utah captain was "coaching [his team] on how to beat the system." But when asked what exactly he was coaching them to do and or what he means by not 100% transparent the response is: gotta go! y'all have a great winter season!

I simply suggest that perhaps the rules should be more objective and transparent and you guys attack me as a know nothing. I have played USTA which if you read my responses you would know that, but it is irrelevant. The woman that runs the USTA rating system is not even a tennis player. Perhaps some of you have been wallowing in your own BS so long you can't even smell the stink. But yes this thread is comical.

Again you’re refusing to admit your suggestion does nothing. So if the matches won’t lower my rating, it’s no different than the current process.

You refuse to address anything that points a flaw in your argument.

The current system works fine those who do it in good faith. Nothing about your system changes it for the bad faith actors.
1) Having people play matches and using the scores of those matches to determine their rating (beyond a questionnaire based floor)
is the same as
2) Having people just say what their rating is (beyond a questionnaire based floor).

Let's just agree to disagree.

All it does is put an unnecessary impediment in the way, which is scheduling a bunch of non-league matches with random people before you can start, up to FIVE if you're a doubles player.
That is not all it would do. It would give you an actual rating based on actual match scores rather than one you pull from your rear end.

I know many tennis players that actually like playing matches. Many of the new players and existing players looking to join a league agree to pay USTA extra money so they can play matches. I played 2 matches last weekend with 2 different people just because I like playing tennis matches. I guess where you and creighton come from playing tennis matches is a burden and an "impediment."

Why do you join USTA if you don't like playing tennis matches?
 

Moon Shooter

Semi-Pro
Late to this fun but is there any reason USTA can’t work wins and losses into the algorithm along with games won and lost? I get you need the games to make it work, but also when someone wins 4 and 4 like 50 times something going on there. Nobody cares how many games they lose. I never walk off the court going “man that three set win was awesome but I lost more games than I won!”
They might do that already. They also might consider using games won and lost as an earlier tiebreaker. Schmke has some good thoughts on the pros and cons of different tie breaks.


IMO what would be most informative is if USTA was transparent and published the full dynamic rating that way you could see if certain players tend to gain rating points when they play stronger players in need to win situations but "somehow" often underperform when they play much weaker players. So for example players that lose rating points because they should have beaten an opponent 6-0 6-0 but somehow they only won 6-3 6-3 causing them to lose rating points.

You can see this to some extent with UTR. I looked a bit at this and found the player that played with Justin from Utah on the doubles team always seemed to perform at his level win or lose. That player also had someone with the same last name on the utah team that also seemed to perform at the same level win or lose. That definitely wasn't the case with everyone I checked. I am not saying I would accuse any particular individual of throwing games based on this, because I don't think UTR is that great when it comes to adult rec tennis, and some people may indeed may play up to their competition better than they can deliver a beat down, but it is *some* actual data that we could track this pattern with. Most of what we hear here is subjective complaints by someone that is upset they lost.
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
That is not all it would do. It would give you an actual rating based on actual match scores rather than one you pull from your rear end.

I know many tennis players that actually like playing matches. Many of the new players and existing players looking to join a league agree to pay USTA extra money so they can play matches. I played 2 matches last weekend with 2 different people just because I like playing tennis matches. I guess where you and creighton come from playing tennis matches is a burden and an "impediment."

Why do you join USTA if you don't like playing tennis matches?
This is yet another incredibly asinine conclusion for you to come to, but that's par for the course. I love playing, obviously, but I also have a career and a family that demand a lot of my time, and I'm on several USTA teams. During the season, I don't have time for a lot of non-USTA tennis, and having to schedule matches with random jamokes to get them a rating would certainly be a burden, especially if it takes 5 matches to get them qualified to even play in a league. People don't want that hassle. They want to sign up and play. You clearly don't understand how it all works, and that is evident every time you regurgitate the same garbage.
 

Moon Shooter

Semi-Pro
This is yet another incredibly asinine conclusion for you to come to, but that's par for the course. I love playing, obviously, but I also have a career and a family that demand a lot of my time, and I'm on several USTA teams. During the season, I don't have time for a lot of non-USTA tennis, and having to schedule matches with random jamokes to get them a rating would certainly be a burden, especially if it takes 5 matches to get them qualified to even play in a league. People don't want that hassle. They want to sign up and play. You clearly don't understand how it all works, and that is evident every time you regurgitate the same garbage.
It would be before the season. If your team is going to have at least 12-15 people I would think a few people can play him a few matches. If you are on multiple teams then you likely know over 20 people that could play a few matches with a new unrated person.

I don't understand your bit about how you love USTA matches but any non usta match is a burden. USTA matches are tennis matches just like any other tennis match. And by definition it would likely be someone you never played before which is a big reason to play in USTA.

I never said it had to be 5 matches. I think USTA gives someone a computer rating after 3 matches. So people can already play 3 matches and sandbag to a low computer rating now if that is what they want to do. I happen to think the vast majority of players do not throw games but many new players genuinely and honestly are not sure what level they go in and this would work very well for them.

But that's fine I am not the one who gets all upset when Utah wins nationals with a team full of self rates. In fact, I find all the impotent rage on these forums amusing.

You and Creighton can spew your **** and vinegar at me for trying to offer some ideas to make the rules objective. In the mean time I love the idea that someone is going to come and disqualify people just from watching them! "Aha! did you see that backhand!? No way a 4.0 could ever hit a backhand like that! He is disqualified!" Great Idea! That won't cause any controversy. Hmmm I wonder why USTA stopped doing that?
 

jmnk

Hall of Fame
@Moon Shooter - since these discussions go in circles how about a little excessive. I'll ask you a question - and you respond _only_ yes or no. At the end you will see why the current system is as good as one get hope for given the fact that:
  • majority of players are honest,
  • it needs to be easy for new players to join.
So. First question. regarding your idea " Having people play matches and using the scores of those matches to determine their rating (beyond a questionnaire based floor) ". If a player A plays such 'ranking establishing match outside a normal league play' - is it possible for him to deliberately play _below_ his normal level in that match if he wanted to? yes or no?
 

Moon Shooter

Semi-Pro
@Moon Shooter - since these discussions go in circles how about a little excessive. I'll ask you a question - and you respond _only_ yes or no. At the end you will see why the current system is as good as one get hope for given the fact that:
  • majority of players are honest,
  • it needs to be easy for new players to join.
So. First question. regarding your idea " Having people play matches and using the scores of those matches to determine their rating (beyond a questionnaire based floor) ". If a player A plays such 'ranking establishing match outside a normal league play' - is it possible for him to deliberately play _below_ his normal level in that match if he wanted to? yes or no?
Yes, yes and yes

Here are some yes or no questions for you:

The majority of self rated players that played at nationals are honest?
People who are new to USTA leagues often have an inaccurate view of what their rating should be?
Honest new players shouldn't have to worry about USTA disqualifying them mid season?

I answer yes to those as well. How about you?
 

CosmosMpower

Hall of Fame
I'm sure you've seen plenty of players cheat by self rating 3.5 when they had no business being there. LT's record speaks for itself. He was unbeaten at 3.5 and 4.0 nationals. He was a 4.5 that self rated as a 3.5 and cheated the system.

There is no point in trying to defend it.
Dang I can't imagine being a 3.5 and running into a buzzsaw of a true 4.5 player.
 

jmnk

Hall of Fame
@Moon Shooter [...]
So. First question. regarding your idea " Having people play matches and using the scores of those matches to determine their rating (beyond a questionnaire based floor) ". If a player A plays such 'ranking establishing match outside a normal league play' - is it possible for him to deliberately play _below_ his normal level in that match if he wanted to? yes or no?
second question. Let's assume that Player A in question _does indeed_ deliberately play below his normal level. His score will therefore be worse than what would normally be expected. Do you agree that ranking based on such score will be lower than it should have been, and as such _will not_ reflect actual ability of player A?
 

jmnk

Hall of Fame
[...]

Here are some yes or no questions for you:

The majority of self rated players that played at nationals are honest?
yes

People who are new to USTA leagues often have an inaccurate view of what their rating should be?
no.

Honest new players shouldn't have to worry about USTA disqualifying them mid season?
yes

a caveat. Not sure what you mean by 'worry'. Being disqualified mid season because you unknowingly self-rated too low is not something to be 'worry' about. If it happens it is a normal correction, not a criminal offense :). You just accept it and move on. If you mean it in the sense 'honest self rated players should never be disqualified' - then no, I do not agree. I would also say it is close to impossible to be honest on self-rating _and_ be disqualified anyway.
 

Creighton

Semi-Pro
yes


no.


yes

a caveat. Not sure what you mean by 'worry'. Being disqualified mid season because you unknowingly self-rated too low is not something to be 'worry' about. If it happens it is a normal correction, not a criminal offense :). You just accept it and move on. If you mean it in the sense 'honest self rated players should never be disqualified' - then no, I do not agree. I would also say it is close to impossible to be honest on self-rating _and_ be disqualified anyway.
As @J_R_B stated, it’s interesting why he feels so confident on explaining to us how to make the league ratings work better. Considering “us” includes people with vast experience at the highest levels of USTA play from nationals and sectionals.

The current system works fine for people who operate in good faith. It’s so hard to get dynamically disqualified that it’s a rare occurrence. Anyone who gets disqualified would have had a captain who knew the player was out of level.

@Moon Shooter is actually on the other side of the spectrum. He doesn’t want to cheat. What he really wants is a vanity rating. He would rather be a very bad 4.0 and claim he’s a 4.0 instead of being a decent 3.0.
 

Moon Shooter

Semi-Pro
second question. Let's assume that Player A in question _does indeed_ deliberately play below his normal level. His score will therefore be worse than what would normally be expected. Do you agree that ranking based on such score will be lower than it should have been, and as such _will not_ reflect actual ability of player A?
You are asking a compound question. If new player A deliberately throws games under my system to lower his rating, he will play at the exact same level he would play under the current system. So he would play at exactly the same level we would "expect" in the current system. It may or may not be the level he "should" be at. It depends on how much he tanks the games and how good he is. It is possible he will tank games even though if he played his best he would have been at that same level anyway.

Do you agree with these statements:

If a self rate is unethical enough to throw games he can easily tank some games and manipulate his rating to avoid a DQ?

It is the self rates that refuse to throw games and always play the best they can that might get DQed the fastest and most often?

You say you think most of the self rates that played in nationals are honest. But you do not think new players often have inaccurate ideas of where they should be rated.

Do you think most of the self rates that played in nationals are out of level?

You say a dq is nothing to worry about. But

If you are disqualified it may mean your team can not count on you to play at scheduled matches anymore correct?

If you are disqualified in some sections all your prior games are counted as losses correct?

Don't you think some reasonable people will feel they are letting their team down if that happens?
 
Last edited:

Moon Shooter

Semi-Pro
As @J_R_B stated, it’s interesting why he feels so confident on explaining to us how to make the league ratings work better. Considering “us” includes people with vast experience at the highest levels of USTA play from nationals and sectionals.

The current system works fine for people who operate in good faith. It’s so hard to get dynamically disqualified that it’s a rare occurrence. Anyone who gets disqualified would have had a captain who knew the player was out of level.
Ok so since JOGA87 captained a team that someone was dynamically DQed on, you are saying he acted in bad faith right? Do you agree with Creighton on that JRB?


@Moon Shooter is actually on the other side of the spectrum. He doesn’t want to cheat. What he really wants is a vanity rating. He would rather be a very bad 4.0 and claim he’s a 4.0 instead of being a decent 3.0.
I would rather be a low level 4.0 than a "decent 3.0" because an honest low 4.0 will be a better tennis player than an honest "decent 3.0." Is it "vanity" that I would rather be a better tennis player rather than a worse tennis player? If you say so.
 

jmnk

Hall of Fame
You are asking a compound question. If new player A deliberately throws games under my system to lower his rating, he will play at the exact same level he would play under the current system. So he would play at exactly the same level we would "expect" in the current system. It may or may not be the level he "should" be at. It depends on how much he tanks the games and how good he is. It is possible he will tank games even though if he played his best he would have been at that same level anyway.
[...]
I hope you see that this should end the discussion. That is the very point - that _under your system_ (i.e. where a player is required to play some number of ranking-establishing matches) a player can easily, on purpose, end up at the level too low for his true abilities, just like it can happen today. Which means what a number of posters here try to explain to you - that system of yours solves no problem.

There are in general three types of players:
  1. player knows his level but wants to win and intentionally self rates too low. Your system does not prevent it as that player can, and you agreed, play well below his true level in those ranking-establishing matches. And USTA-assigned ranking based on those matches that are not played in good faith is going to be too low.
  2. player knows his level and can and does correctly self-rate. Your system does nothing for this player. He doesn't need to play any matches to rate correctly. For this player having a rule that mandates that he plays some pre-qualifying matches is unnecessary burden.
  3. player does not know his level and wants to honestly self-rate. That player can just play some matches against potential teammates to see where he fits. Which any reasonable unsure player _should do today already_. USTA does not prevent that by any means, does it?
Of course playing some practice matches is better than answering questionnaire. But _mandating_ such pre-qualifying matches is unneeded for the reasons #1 and #2 above.
 

jmnk

Hall of Fame
[...]

Do you agree with these statements:

If a self rate is unethical enough to throw games he can easily tank some games and manipulate his rating to avoid a DQ?
yes

It is the self rates that refuse to throw games and always play the best they can that might get DQed the fastest and most often?
yes

You say you think most of the self rates that played in nationals are honest. But you do not think new players often have inaccurate ideas of where they should be rated.

Do you think most of the self rates that played in nationals are out of level?
if by most you mean >50% then no

You say a dq is nothing to worry about. But

If you are disqualified it may mean your team can not count on you to play at scheduled matches anymore correct?
yes

If you are disqualified in some sections all your prior games are counted as losses correct?
yes

Don't you think some reasonable people will feel they are letting their team down if that happens?
no. Any reasonable teammates/captain would know after first practice if a given self rated player is rated so way out of level that he has a good chance of being disqualified. If they went along with that player's rating then they have no rights to feel being 'let down'. Which is exactly what @Creighton is telling you as well
[...]
The current system works fine for people who operate in good faith. It’s so hard to get dynamically disqualified that it’s a rare occurrence. Anyone who gets disqualified would have had a captain who knew the player was out of level.
[...]
 
Last edited:

Moon Shooter

Semi-Pro
I hope you see that this should end the discussion. That is the very point - that _under your system_ (i.e. where a player is required to play some number of ranking-establishing matches) a player can easily, on purpose, end up at the level too low for his true abilities, just like it can happen today. Which means what a number of posters here try to explain to you - that system of yours solves no problem.
No we disagree about what the main problem is. You think the problem is mainly from dishonest players that start out in USTA willing to throw games. I do not think that is the biggest problem. I think the bigger problem is new players that are not sure what level they should play in and then having captains or others tell them they should start low.

I agree my proposal will not solve anything if the new player is ready to cheat right off the bat by throwing games. But it will solve the problem where new players are not sure which level to rate themselves between two but captains or others tell them to self rate at the lower level.

Wouldn't you agree that is much more common than someone that is new to USTA wanting to cheat by throwing games right off the bat?



There are in general three types of players:
  1. player knows his level but wants to win and intentionally self rates too low. Your system does not prevent it as that player can, and you agreed, play well below his true level in those ranking-establishing matches. And USTA-assigned ranking based on those matches that are not played in good faith is going to be too low.
  2. player knows his level and can and does correctly self-rate. Your system does nothing for this player. He doesn't need to play any matches to rate correctly. For this player having a rule that mandates that he plays some pre-qualifying matches is unnecessary burden.
  3. player does not know his level and wants to honestly self-rate. That player can just play some matches against potential teammates to see where he fits. Which any reasonable unsure player _should do today already_. USTA does not prevent that by any means, does it?
Of course playing some practice matches is better than answering questionnaire. But _mandating_ such pre-qualifying matches is unneeded for the reasons #1 and #2 above.
No that may be a theory in your head but it is not reality. In reality there is a huge category of new players - especially at the lower levels - that are not sure where they should play between two levels. They talk to their captain or others in USTA and they are told to rate low that way more teams will want you and can take you. So the new players rate low. Then they learn about DQs and get introduced to the whole rating management schtick. Under rated self rates is obviously a great way to win as shown by the nationals discussed here. Even teams other than Utah used them to get here. Having them play rated matches to get a rating before they play in a league that is meant to be rating restricted would change much of that.

Do you agree the vast majority of new players would honestly play as well as they can in these matches and thus the vast majority would therefore be placed at the correct level instead of just going with the lower level?

Do you agree that players new to usta are less inclined to want to cheat to win than players that have been doing USTA for long periods of time?



if by most you mean >50% then no
Ok so I do think the majority of self rates that played at nationals were out of level. I guess we can look and see what percentage of self rates that play at nationals end up getting bumped. But whatever that percentage is they are playing out of level so they either are dishonest, just improved like crazy over that period of months or didn't know right?

Playing some matches would correct all those that didn't know.



no. Any reasonable teammates/captain would know after first practice if a given self rated player is rated so way out of level that he has a good chance of being disqualified. If they went along with that player's rating then they have no rights to feel being 'let down'. Which is exactly what @Creighton is telling you as well
I did not ask whether the captain would feel the player is letting them down I asked "Don't you think some reasonable people will feel they are letting their team down if that happens?" "They" would be the players that self rated and got DQed. Maybe the captains know better but the new players probably don't.


And Creighton is saying if someone is DQed they are so out of level that they - or their captain was not acting in good faith. Do you agree with Creighton?
 

Creighton

Semi-Pro
Ok so since JOGA87 captained a team that someone was dynamically DQed on, you are saying he acted in bad faith right? Do you agree with Creighton on that JRB?
I watched his team play twice in person. I think he knows his entire doubles lines were filled with 4.5 guys playing 4.0. I was surprised he didn't have a stud singles player though.

No we disagree about what the main problem is. You think the problem is mainly from dishonest players that start out in USTA willing to throw games. I do not think that is the biggest problem. I think the bigger problem is new players that are not sure what level they should play in and then having captains or others tell them they should start low.

I agree my proposal will not solve anything if the new player is ready to cheat right off the bat by throwing games. But it will solve the problem where new players are not sure which level to rate themselves between two but captains or others tell them to self rate at the lower level.

Wouldn't you agree that is much more common than someone that is new to USTA wanting to cheat by throwing games right off the bat?
No. This literally isn't an issue in league play. Your hypothetical player will know within 1-2 times playing with his teammates if he's among the best players on his team or not. If he chooses to stay at that level, he's culpable for his action and isn't this innocent clueless player you're portraying him as.
 

Moon Shooter

Semi-Pro
player does not know his level and wants to honestly self-rate. That player can just play some matches against potential teammates to see where he fits. Which any reasonable unsure player _should do today already_. USTA does not prevent that by any means, does it?
I think the vast majority of new players are not sure what level they should be playing at. It is interesting that you also suggest they should play some matches to see where they fit.

So JRB (and Creighton seemed to agree by liking the comment) thought this would be such an unreasonable burden to have people try to schedule such matches. But you think it is not unreasonable that players on the team would make time even though these matches are not required.

But this is the problem for your proposal. Even if you win or lose you won't know the dynamic rating of the person you played. They may actually be out of level themselves and just not bumped or dumped yet. Only USTA knows what their full rating is. But I would agree that this would not be as big of an issue if USTA published the full rating. Then I think people could be expected to self rate fairly accurately after a match or two. If you know the person you beat 6-4 6-2 is a 3.99 then sure you know you should be a 4.5. But when you don't know and USTA is very clear third party sites are not accurate - then it is hard to know what you should make of that match. When you play a doubles match it is even worse. USTA would know much better than your guess.
 

Creighton

Semi-Pro
I think the vast majority of new players are not sure what level they should be playing at. It is interesting that you also suggest they should play some matches to see where they fit.
This isn't true at all. The vast majority of players are rated correctly. The issue of self rating only seems to be a problem with the teams that win.

The rare times someone self rates incorrectly on a weak team, that one player isn't big enough to make a difference for the quality of the team.
 

Moon Shooter

Semi-Pro
I watched his team play twice in person. I think he knows his entire doubles lines were filled with 4.5 guys playing 4.0. I was surprised he didn't have a stud singles player though.



No. This literally isn't an issue in league play. Your hypothetical player will know within 1-2 times playing with his teammates if he's among the best players on his team or not. If he chooses to stay at that level, he's culpable for his action and isn't this innocent clueless player you're portraying him as.

Ok just to be clear because I think you may be dodging the question. You said "The current system works fine for people who operate in good faith. It’s so hard to get dynamically disqualified that it’s a rare occurrence. Anyone who gets disqualified would have had a captain who knew the player was out of level." Since JOGA had a player DQed he is not acting in good faith correct?

Playing with his team mates? I thought you liked the comment from JRB claiming I was clued out for thinking people would play a match with their teammates. No one has time for that. Do you mean playing other teams in league play? It is a bit late then isn't it? I mean then you are likely too late to join a different team. Why are you so against playing a few USTA rated matches against your potential team mates before you join the team so you know you belong at that level?
 

Moon Shooter

Semi-Pro
This isn't true at all. The vast majority of players are rated correctly. The issue of self rating only seems to be a problem with the teams that win.

The rare times someone self rates incorrectly on a weak team, that one player isn't big enough to make a difference for the quality of the team.
So do you think it is "rare" for a self rate to get bumped or dumped the next rating cycle?

It is certainly interesting how many teams that make it through state and regionals rely on at least one self rate isn't it?
 

jmnk

Hall of Fame
@Moon Shooter - so you honestly believe that the biggest problems with current USTA system are:
  1. new players not knowing how to rate properly, and
  2. them listening to others advising them to rate too low, which they then do in good faith, and
  3. them not realizing after 2-3 matches/practices that they are vastly out of level, and
  4. them then feeling bad when disqualified because it adversely affects (via reverting wins to losses) the teammates/captains that advised him to rate low.
Well, I'll tell you, I have never been a captain, nor I have vast experience with USTA league - but judging from common sense and others posts I would have to disagree. This is not really brain surgery we are talking about. _any_ honest player can rate himself properly within current system - whether by practicing with others or watching videos of recreational players, or, perhaps mainly, by listening to the little man inside otherwise known as conscience.

there are countless experienced posters explaining to you what happens in practice - yet you, the person that has never played in a league yet alone captained, keep finding those non-existing issues. You have some sort of unhealthy obsession with insisting on USTA publishing dynamic ratings even though that is detrimental to keeping the league fun (because it would give dishonest players another tool making cheating easier), nor useful (since on average adults play so rarely that dynamic rating on a given day based on just 1-2 matches is completely irrelevant).
 

jmnk

Hall of Fame
I think the vast majority of new players are not sure what level they should be playing at. It is interesting that you also suggest they should play some matches to see where they fit.
I mean it does not take a genius to realize that to see how you stack up against other players is to actually _play_ against those players.

So JRB (and Creighton seemed to agree by liking the comment) thought this would be such an unreasonable burden to have people try to schedule such matches. But you think it is not unreasonable that players on the team would make time even though these matches are not required.
there's a huge difference between arranging some practice match, perhaps just few games, in some less-than-formal setting vs having to play a regular 3 set match against computer rated players.

But this is the problem for your proposal. Even if you win or lose you won't know the dynamic rating of the person you played. They may actually be out of level themselves and just not bumped or dumped yet. Only USTA knows what their full rating is. But I would agree that this would not be as big of an issue if USTA published the full rating. Then I think people could be expected to self rate fairly accurately after a match or two. If you know the person you beat 6-4 6-2 is a 3.99 then sure you know you should be a 4.5. But when you don't know and USTA is very clear third party sites are not accurate - then it is hard to know what you should make of that match. When you play a doubles match it is even worse. USTA would know much better than your guess.
please. If you want to join 3.5 team, and you are about even with 2 players on that team and worse than 3 others - you are 3.5. There's no need to know if you are 3.21 or 3.17.
 

Moon Shooter

Semi-Pro
@Moon Shooter - so you honestly believe that the biggest problems with current USTA system are:


  1. new players not knowing how to rate properly, and
  2. them listening to others advising them to rate too low, which they then do in good faith, and
  3. them not realizing after 2-3 matches/practices that they are vastly out of level, and
  4. them then feeling bad when disqualified because it adversely affects (via reverting wins to losses) the teammates/captains that advised him to rate low.
Well, I'll tell you, I have never been a captain, nor I have vast experience with USTA league - but judging from common sense and others posts I would have to disagree. This is not really brain surgery we are talking about. _any_ honest player can rate himself properly within current system - whether by practicing with others or watching videos of recreational players, or, perhaps mainly, by listening to the little man inside otherwise known as conscience.

there are countless experienced posters explaining to you what happens in practice - yet you, the person that has never played in a league yet alone captained, keep finding those non-existing issues.
No I am not talking about the USTA system as a whole just mainly the self rate part of it. And the problem there is that it is too subjective.

I see and hear what happens in practice in my own area. I also read many contradictory views about whether these players and captains are being deliberately dishonest or just mistaken here in the forums.

If you and Creighton answered the yes or no questions I put to you, I think you would see what I mean. I also think that is why you decided to stop answering those questions.
 

Moon Shooter

Semi-Pro
I mean it does not take a genius to realize that to see how you stack up against other players is to actually _play_ against those players.
Then we agree! Play some matches and have USTA give a rating.

there's a huge difference between arranging some practice match, perhaps just few games, in some less-than-formal setting vs having to play a regular 3 set match against computer rated players.
Oh you mean don't even play a single match? I don't think you will learn very much about where you should be ranked unless you happen to know exactly where your opponent is ranked and you happen to land in the middle of a level if you just play a few games.

please. If you want to join 3.5 team, and you are about even with 2 players on that team and worse than 3 others - you are 3.5. There's no need to know if you are 3.21 or 3.17.
Sure if you play matches with them before you join. I have only met a couple of people on one of the teams I would join and have not played any matches with them. The team I am on all have self rated 3.0 men except one guy with a 3.5C. I haven't seen him play because I am playing matches at the same time he is and never played with him in clinics or otherwise. I seem to be competitive with some people that are said to be 4.0, 3.5 and 3.0 in clinics. But I have found playing a match is different. So I think playing some matches would more easily sort this out.

I think perhaps you live in an area where there are more established rated players in the tennis community. My area has very few. We have players that play in clinics with these ntrp numbers attached but 95% of the men I play with don't actually have ratings and never have had them. I have played clinics with only one person that has an established rating that I know of. He is listed as a 3.5A. I honestly have very little idea how I would do against him in a match. I might get blown out or I may be able to edge him out. I do know there is no way I would blow him out. The other men I have played with in clinics or matches have all been unrated or self rated as far as I know.
 

Creighton

Semi-Pro
Then we agree! Play some matches and have USTA give a rating.



Oh you mean don't even play a single match? I don't think you will learn very much about where you should be ranked unless you happen to know exactly where your opponent is ranked and you happen to land in the middle of a level if you just play a few games.



Sure if you play matches with them before you join. I have only met a couple of people on one of the teams I would join and have not played any matches with them. The team I am on all have self rated 3.0 men except one guy with a 3.5C. I haven't seen him play because I am playing matches at the same time he is and never played with him in clinics or otherwise. I seem to be competitive with some people that are said to be 4.0, 3.5 and 3.0 in clinics. But I have found playing a match is different. So I think playing some matches would more easily sort this out.

I think perhaps you live in an area where there are more established rated players in the tennis community. My area has very few. We have players that play in clinics with these ntrp numbers attached but 95% of the men I play with don't actually have ratings and never have had them. I have played clinics with only one person that has an established rating that I know of. He is listed as a 3.5A. I honestly have very little idea how I would do against him in a match. I might get blown out or I may be able to edge him out. I do know there is no way I would blow him out. The other men I have played with in clinics or matches have all been unrated or self rated as far as I know.
You just need to do everyone a favor and understand your local area isn’t representative of the USTA as a whole.

Sorry your local area sucks, but your suggestions are idiotic for everyone with a developed league structure.
 

Creighton

Semi-Pro
Ok just to be clear because I think you may be dodging the question. You said "The current system works fine for people who operate in good faith. It’s so hard to get dynamically disqualified that it’s a rare occurrence. Anyone who gets disqualified would have had a captain who knew the player was out of level." Since JOGA had a player DQed he is not acting in good faith correct?

Playing with his team mates? I thought you liked the comment from JRB claiming I was clued out for thinking people would play a match with their teammates. No one has time for that. Do you mean playing other teams in league play? It is a bit late then isn't it? I mean then you are likely too late to join a different team. Why are you so against playing a few USTA rated matches against your potential team mates before you join the team so you know you belong at that level?
What really blows my mind is this idea you think playing matches to get a rating from your teammates wouldn’t be completely corrupt.

That idea is so idiotic at this point there is zero chance you’re arguing in good faith.
 

Moon Shooter

Semi-Pro
You just need to do everyone a favor and understand your local area isn’t representative of the USTA as a whole.

Sorry your local area sucks, but your suggestions are idiotic for everyone with a developed league structure.

My area is fairly representative of the country as a whole.


What really blows my mind is this idea you think playing matches to get a rating from your teammates wouldn’t be completely corrupt.

That idea is so idiotic at this point there is zero chance you’re arguing in good faith.
I think you should realize not everywhere is as corrupt as your area. You are in the same area as JOGA87 right? Yep, that's not how most tennis players around the country are.

JMNK it would be nice if you answered the other questions but here are a few take aways from what you answered so far:

1) We both agree that neither the current system with self rate and DQs, or a system where people will play matches to get a rating, will prevent people that will throw games right from the start. People that corrupt will be unaffected one way or another by the proposal I made.
2) We agree that tennis players are by and large honest people.
3) We both agree that of the the players that do self rate too low - the most likely to be DQed in the current system are honest players that play their best every game.
4) We disagree whether that should be treated as a negative but we do agree it can likely mean you are kicked off the team and have your season cut short (with no refund?) it may also mean all your games count as forfeited.
5) I said I think new players are less likely to deliberately try to throw games to manipulate their rating than players that have been around USTA for longer periods of time - JMNK didn't say if he agrees.
6) I believe most new players are unsure which rating class they belong in. He seems to disagree. This may be an matter of the tennis communities we are in. But even in places with strong USTA presence I certainly hear people claim they were not sure when they end up dqed. Maybe they are lying I don't know.
7) We both agree that if you are unsure of your rating you should play a few matches with someone with an established rating.
He said people should just do that on their own. I think that would not be effective (because we don't know the dynamic ratings) and I would also point out it would be awkward to contact a captain and team you don't know and ask him to have some of his teammates play you so you can determine your rating. Given Creighton's and JRBs response how they would really be put off by some "Jamoke" asking this even if it was required, let alone when it wasn't required, I think I am justified in saying that may be getting off on the wrong foot. Of course if it was required that would be different. You would contact the captain and the captain would say great if you want to play you will need to play some matches to get a rating. If you give me some dates I can let some guys with established ratings know and we can see if you are a good fit. Not a big deal at all everyone knows the rules and no one is put out.
8) We disagree that most the self rates that play at nationals are out of level but JMNK hasn't said what percentage he believes are. But in any case USTA puts considerable effort into promoting nationals and I think - even if JMNK disagrees - most of those players including if not especially the self rates - are very often out of level. So USTA is promoting how they reward people for playing out of level.
9) My view is that by having players get an objective rating before they play a league it takes the entire notion that they can "decide" to be a certain level out of their mind. Currently USTA starts players off on the wrong foot. They basically say you should be able to "choose" what level you want to play in. People can argue the small print somewhere buried on the USTA site but by and large that is true. They then continue this mind set by allowing people to appeal and then allowing them to re-self rate after 3 years. This whole mindset that people should have some say in what their rating is (as opposed to people just being given a rating by USTA based on their scores) leads to the sort of BS we heard JOGA87 complaining about but it may be what he does as well.
10) My own view: JOGA87 posts show that when you wallow in the same BS long enough you may lose your ability to detect the stink. But lot's of people who are not into USTA smell it and steer clear. Objective rules and transparency would greatly help here.
 

jmnk

Hall of Fame
JMNK it would be nice if you answered the other questions but here are a few take aways from what you answered so far:

1) We both agree that neither the current system with self rate and DQs, or a system where people will play matches to get a rating, will prevent people that will throw games right from the start. People that corrupt will be unaffected one way or another by the proposal I made.
yes

2) We agree that tennis players are by and large honest people.
yes

3) We both agree that of the the players that do self rate too low - the most likely to be DQed in the current system are honest players that play their best every game.
yes

4) We disagree whether that should be treated as a negative but we do agree it can likely mean you are kicked off the team and have your season cut short (with no refund?) it may also mean all your games count as forfeited.
yes. With the caveat that an honest player would not self-rate so out of level that he would be DQ later.

5) I said I think new players are less likely to deliberately try to throw games to manipulate their rating than players that have been around USTA for longer periods of time - JMNK didn't say if he agrees.
sure, I agree.

6) I believe most new players are unsure which rating class they belong in. He seems to disagree. This may be an matter of the tennis communities we are in. But even in places with strong USTA presence I certainly hear people claim they were not sure when they end up dqed. Maybe they are lying I don't know.
a player wants to self-rate because he wants to play on USTA team. That team has members/captain that can easily tell the said player what his approximate ranking is so he is not going to be disqualified.

7) We both agree that if you are unsure of your rating you should play a few matches with someone with an established rating.
He said people should just do that on their own. I think that would not be effective (because we don't know the dynamic ratings) and I would also point out it would be awkward to contact a captain and team you don't know and ask him to have some of his teammates play you so you can determine your rating. Given Creighton's and JRBs response how they would really be put off by some "Jamoke" asking this even if it was required, let alone when it wasn't required, I think I am justified in saying that may be getting off on the wrong foot. Of course if it was required that would be different. You would contact the captain and the captain would say great if you want to play you will need to play some matches to get a rating. If you give me some dates I can let some guys with established ratings know and we can see if you are a good fit. Not a big deal at all everyone knows the rules and no one is put out.
so, you want to play on a given team, you want the captain to play you in actual matches - but it is 'awkward to contact a captain and team you don't know and ask him to have some of his teammates play you so you can determine your rating.'? How does it make any sense? You somehow want to join a team _without_ contacting the captain? And like show at the match time at the facility and expect the captain that has never seen you or heard from you to play you? Why are you making it harder than it is? You contact the captain, you ask if they are interested in a new player, if so you show up at the practice/something, someone on that team will hit with you, they will know if you are right fit for that team's level, you self rate then. There's _no problem_.
And it would not be different if _required_ by USTA. Like what is USTA going to do - _require_ that a given dude plays with you so you have that rating-establishing match? And if the dude does not want/does not have time USTA is going to suspend him? Banned him for life? please.......

8) We disagree that most the self rates that play at nationals are out of level but JMNK hasn't said what percentage he believes are. But in any case USTA puts considerable effort into promoting nationals and I think - even if JMNK disagrees - most of those players including if not especially the self rates - are very often out of level. So USTA is promoting how they reward people for playing out of level.
players at Nationals are out of level _because they are the best players at a given level_. It is expected that they are at the very top or a bit over the edge for a given level. That is expected and not a problem. The problem are players that self rated way, way below the level, and managed not to get DQ during the year.

9) My view is that by having players get an objective rating before they play a league it takes the entire notion that they can "decide" to be a certain level out of their mind. Currently USTA starts players off on the wrong foot. They basically say you should be able to "choose" what level you want to play in. People can argue the small print somewhere buried on the USTA site but by and large that is true. They then continue this mind set by allowing people to appeal and then allowing them to re-self rate after 3 years. This whole mindset that people should have some say in what their rating is (as opposed to people just being given a rating by USTA based on their scores) leads to the sort of BS we heard JOGA87 complaining about but it may be what he does as well.
none of it applies to honest players. USTA allows re-self rate and appeals to address folks that had legitimate reasons to do so: injury, being out of game for years, etc. It is assumed that folks act in good faith and don't abuse it.

10) My own view: JOGA87 posts show that when you wallow in the same BS long enough you may lose your ability to detect the stink. But lot's of people who are not into USTA smell it and steer clear. Objective rules and transparency would greatly help here.
judging from the discussion here it is fairly obvious that 'Objective rules and transparency would NOT greatly help here'. You started this post with a statement that the main problem is with honest new players not knowing how to rate. But ended with an example of a team that has players with 25 years of USTA experience, that know very, very well all the rules. You need to make up your mind as to what you are arguing.
 

Brian11785

Hall of Fame
so I suppose this is why people are doing whatever is necessary to win USTA - to get this kind of recognition:
from https://houstontennis.org/community/newsletters/on-off-the-court/
I'm not sure if this is why they play, but you bring up a good point. City orgs love to brag about this team and that team winning Sectionals/Nationals. It is one of the perverse incentives at play here.

I worked at a University for over a decade. Never underestimate a non-profit's willingness to brag about things that make them look good, even if 3/4 of the room know it's BS.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
I'm not sure if this is why they play, but you bring up a good point. City orgs love to brag about this team and that team winning Sectionals/Nationals. It is one of the perverse incentives at play here.

I worked at a University for over a decade. Never underestimate a non-profit's willingness to brag about things that make them look good, even if 3/4 of the room know it's BS.
And districts and sections want to brag about how their team does at Sectionals or Nationals, so this also creates an incentive for them to look the other way, or at least not go out of their way to DQ players, so the team that advances is as strong as possible. It isn't nearly as fun to say "we sent a legit 4.0 team to Nationals and they went 1-3 and finished 14th, yea!"
 

Brian11785

Hall of Fame
And districts and sections want to brag about how their team does at Sectionals or Nationals, so this also creates an incentive for them to look the other way, or at least not go out of their way to DQ players, so the team that advances is as strong as possible. It isn't nearly as fun to say "we sent a legit 4.0 team to Nationals and they went 1-3 and finished 14th, yea!"
Yep. That was my implication.
 

syshy111

New User
I watched his team play twice in person. I think he knows his entire doubles lines were filled with 4.5 guys playing 4.0. I was surprised he didn't have a stud singles player though.



No. This literally isn't an issue in league play. Your hypothetical player will know within 1-2 times playing with his teammates if he's among the best players on his team or not. If he chooses to stay at that level, he's culpable for his action and isn't this innocent clueless player you're portraying him as.
Granted the strength of our team was our doubles lines, we did need to win 6 3rd set TB at sectionals to make it to Nationals. If we are 4.5s then so are the teams that could have easily beaten us. Same at Nationals yet very few of them got DQ’d
 

Vox Rationis

Semi-Pro
Granted the strength of our team was our doubles lines, we did need to win 6 3rd set TB at sectionals to make it to Nationals. If we are 4.5s then so are the teams that could have easily beaten us. Same at Nationals yet very few of them got DQ’d
They are all 4.5s FYI. Most of the players that were competitive against your doubles lines will absolutely get bumped up at years end. My friends team had about 5 or 6 low to mid 4.5s (guys that were literally beating local 4.5s in practice consistently) and they finished with a losing record at your sectionals. Granted every match for them was basically 3-2 or 2-3.
 

Anonuncle

New User
Hello anonuncle. I think you and the recently departed joga both think I am some sort of usta hack. Both you and joga seem most interested in coming in here and defending players on the 4.0 southern team (nothing against syshy but how would you know his tennis looks like fairly rated 4.0 based on comments?) and bashing that dirty rotten Utah captain! Because he …. he….. well he did something and whatever it was it was something worse than I ever did! And you both think usta should go and watch him.

Gotcha but neither you or that other guy, joga, are mad. And I’m not amused. Bye now! And remember what that joga guy said, look at the big picture, it’s rec tennis.
@moonshooter I didn’t realize I was being dismissed..my apologies for being a newbie and not keeping up with the thread. I don’t think JoGA or I care at all about you lol.

Syshy gave us his record at 4.5 and described his experiences. If he is who I think he is, he definitely is more of a 4.0 than a 4.5 from seeing him play.

As far as bashing, I was giving you facts based upon information that was provided to me. That’s not really bashing or at least not where I’m from. I didn’t say USTA should go watch them, I said that they should empower employees at nationals to take action if something is so blatant and everyone present has two eyes to see it as well. Having 5 teams lined up…c’mon now.

I’m certainly not mad at all. You also are indeed a hack, you have all the answers. I refer to that as a cheat code instead of a hack though. I thought I saw you mention you don’t even play USTA, why so many opinions then? I honestly wish you nothing but health and happiness. No need to bring me down or think I’m a bad person for doing what this forum is for. The Utah captain is a **** for the record though. Stay strong internet warrior and maybe what you say will hold weight one day
 

JOGA87

New User
Derailing people from crying about the Utah captain is the last thing I want to do. By all means get back on that track if you would like.
Honestly I like you a lot less than Utah’s captain. If you must know. I hate that I had a teammate say I needed to look through this again because you couldn’t stop bad mouthing me specifically - but you’re clearly infinitely more obsessed with me than I am team Utah. Not a good look: and inferring everything I said is a complaint or in anger is hilarious. Bud, we finished 2nd at nationals when we went in expecting to get bounced in the round robin play. I’m good. But for the last time: we played comparable teams the whole tournament, except Utah - for the guys at 4.0 it’s fair for them to understand unless they’re recruiting kids who want to play college tennis, they’re playing for second at that level.

I’m horribly sorry my team hurt your ego, but then again I’m really not. I came here without anonymity to provide honest constructive criticism of the things I saw as someone who hasn’t played a ton of USTA (unless 4 seasons counts as “accepting my own stink”). You’re hiding behind an anonymous account to constantly criticize a stranger. Projection is ugly. Have a good one. Go Dawgs.
 

Creighton

Semi-Pro
Honestly I like you a lot less than Utah’s captain. If you must know. I hate that I had a teammate say I needed to look through this again because you couldn’t stop bad mouthing me specifically - but you’re clearly infinitely more obsessed with me than I am team Utah. Not a good look: and inferring everything I said is a complaint or in anger is hilarious. Bud, we finished 2nd at nationals when we went in expecting to get bounced in the round robin play. I’m good. But for the last time: we played comparable teams the whole tournament, except Utah - for the guys at 4.0 it’s fair for them to understand unless they’re recruiting kids who want to play college tennis, they’re playing for second at that level.

I’m horribly sorry my team hurt your ego, but then again I’m really not. I came here without anonymity to provide honest constructive criticism of the things I saw as someone who hasn’t played a ton of USTA (unless 4 seasons counts as “accepting my own stink”). You’re hiding behind an anonymous account to constantly criticize a stranger. Projection is ugly. Have a good one. Go Dawgs.
I disagree with 95% of what @Moon Shooter says, but this post is proving him right on this one. This is an incredibly thin skinned comment on your part.

The real irony of USTA is, you always run into someone who cheats better than you unless you're the eventual national champion. And I say that as a guy who took a team to sectionals with 7 players in my lineup that were out of level.
 

JOGA87

New User
I disagree with 95% of what @Moon Shooter says, but this post is proving him right on this one. This is an incredibly thin skinned comment on your part.

The real irony of USTA is, you always run into someone who cheats better than you unless you're the eventual national champion. And I say that as a guy who took a team to sectionals with 7 players in my lineup that were out of level.
I disagree with 95% of what @Moon Shooter says, but this post is proving him right on this one. This is an incredibly thin skinned comment on your part.

The real irony of USTA is, you always run into someone who cheats better than you unless you're the eventual national champion. And I say that as a guy who took a team to sectionals with 7 players in my lineup that were out of level.
Maybe my man, but when none of the commentary is really personally laced with “bad faith” and criticism directed at an individual rather than a system, I’m at liberty to take issue with it.

Especially from someone who allegedly “doesn’t play” USTA. I don’t buy that for one second - as I believe this person has played our team directly. Fowkes does a good job beating the system. It’s not against the rules: I’ve already stated that. It is what it is.
 

ChaelAZ

G.O.A.T.
Let's give props where props is due for winning nationals at least. What will be interesting to legitimize things though is, do these players move up and continue at the higher level with more average records, or do they "somehow" end up doing so bad again they end up back down, or just appeal down for the W/L stats. Two side of the coin with SR's and then sandbagging.

And now...we wait....

 

Brian11785

Hall of Fame
Especially from someone who allegedly “doesn’t play” USTA. I don’t buy that for one second - as I believe this person has played our team directly. Fowkes does a good job beating the system. It’s not against the rules: I’ve already stated that. It is what it is.
The plot thickens!
 

Creighton

Semi-Pro
Let's give props where props is due for winning nationals at least. What will be interesting to legitimize things though is, do these players move up and continue at the higher level with more average records, or do they "somehow" end up doing so bad again they end up back down, or just appeal down for the W/L stats. Two side of the coin with SR's and then sandbagging.

And now...we wait....

The real problem is if the USTA doesn’t do anything to stop it, what Utah is doing is just going to become the new norm.

The Tennessee 4.0 team that @JOGA87 beat in the sectional finals did the same thing as the Utah team. He had two young 5.0 singles players. Ironically, the TN captain was actually on the GA team that went to the nationals.
 

Vox Rationis

Semi-Pro
Let's give props where props is due for winning nationals at least. What will be interesting to legitimize things though is, do these players move up and continue at the higher level with more average records, or do they "somehow" end up doing so bad again they end up back down, or just appeal down for the W/L stats. Two side of the coin with SR's and then sandbagging.

And now...we wait....

Option C: they don’t play league too often going further because they were always just meant to be short term mercenaries
 
Last edited:
Top