2023 Nationals Week 1 Simulations Posted - Texas 3.5 at it again

[Klitz]

This is for new self rated players. When someone isn’t new to USTA I don’t really worry about it. But I don’t track players ratings. Mostly we put people our teams based on if we would want to get a beer with them after. Now we are the “young” team in the league, so we have lots of young athletic players who are looking to get better. So most of them are working on getting better, going to clinics and playing a lot. Our top players are all looking to get moved up. So we tend to do pretty well in league.

Many posting in this thread have spoken with absolute certainty regarding the history/ability of the Texas players.

Does anyone have any info regarding their age(average)?

 

[Moon Shooter]

Meanwhile I'm over here hustling and scrapping in my 4.0 matches fighting to get any wins at all, which are few and far between. And what do I get for my efforts? I try to see earning that 4.0C three times (soon to be four I think) in a row as an accomplishment, but I also get "rewarded" with a heaping pile of L's, low playing time on better teams, one-and-done in tournaments, and nearly zero chance of playing in playoff matches.

How easy would it be to lay off the gas for a couple of months and then get to be a coveted 3.5 player? I've resisted the temptation, partly because I'm convinced I can become a good 4.0 player with more work, but maybe I'm delusional. Anyway, even if I was a 3.5 player right now going to Nationals, I'd probably be getting smoked by these guys, who sound like they are all better than my entire low-end 4.0 team.

USTA is entirely focused on these level based national championships.

USTA should post peoples dynamic rating and best match performance rating every quarter. That would give normal people actual healthy goals and records of achievements.

As for the main jist of this thread:
Self rates do not seem to be the main problem with the Texas Team. The main problem seems to whether players are throwing games. And there simply is no way USTA can reasonably prevent that. USTA needs to stop having players overly focus on winning nationals as some sort of achievement and start focusing a bit on their ratings as achievements. They should keep nationals as they are fun, but the emphasis is way out of whack.

 

[Klitz]

USTA is entirely focused on these level based national championships.

USTA should post peoples dynamic rating and best match performance rating every quarter. That would give normal people actual healthy goals and records of achievements.

As for the main jist of this thread:
Self rates do not seem to be the main problem with the Texas Team. The main problem seems to whether players are throwing games. And there simply is no way USTA can reasonably prevent that. USTA needs to stop having players overly focus on winning nationals as some sort of achievement and start focusing a bit on their ratings as achievements. They should keep nationals as they are fun, but the emphasis is way out of whack.

I disagree,

If ratings were based on wins/ losses instead of margin of victory, it would eliminate the problem stated.

 

[schmke]

I think Chalkdust nailed it. The fact that it’s level based basically means the system is set up for failure. The only thing I’ve really heard that might helped is the suggestion that usta arbitrarily changes the ratings brackets to different dynamic rating ranges each year unexpectedly. If 4.0 one year is 3.5-3.99 and the next it’s 3.35-3.84 and the next it’s 3.6-4.09 then you can’t manage ratings as easily. Or you can but your efforts may not land you where you think it would.

The "dynamic" ranges is something I've thrown out from time to time and it would help combat the tankers, but it is also very hard to do logistically and affects all the other established players and teams that would be forced to change from year to year.

 

[Tiafoe]

I disagree,

If ratings were based on wins/ losses instead of margin of victory, it would eliminate the problem stated.

That's how ATP does it. Or so @Tiafoe has been told.

 

[Moon Shooter]

I disagree,

If ratings were based on wins/ losses instead of margin of victory, it would eliminate the problem stated.

They are taking a year to tank their ratings. And they don't even need to do that. They can just play on a few different teams during the same season. There is no reasonable solution if people remain motivated to do this. Remove the motivation. Offer some other goals and achievements beside "winning nationals" and the culture would change.

 

[Tiafoe]

You guys are way overstating the amount of people in USTA that know/care about sectionals and nationals and make it their primary motivation.

A lot of players are just motivated to get better and improve their rating, rather than play down a level, manipulate scores, and win a rec championship.

 

[ServeAces&Lime]

You guys are way overstating the amount of people in USTA that know/care about sectionals and nationals and make it their primary motivation.

A lot of players are just motivated to get better and improve their rating, rather than play down a level, manipulate scores, and win a rec championship.

This is so true. Also does USTA really push that winning a national championship is the goal or is that what people do on their own? I have had plenty of newer players have no idea about post season play. And if you only play mens league and are under 40 you rally only have one league that even has a post season.

 

[ServeAces&Lime]

I think it's obvious that you're in denial and I'm sure if I knew which team you were I would figure out who within a few minutes.

What am I in denial about?

 

[Tiafoe]

This is so true. Also does USTA really push that winning a national championship is the goal or is that what people do on their own?

Well considering USTA doesn't do **** for teams that make it to nationals largely because they don't have the funding, I don't think it's really promoted. No expenses are paid for, in most years (as far as I'm aware of) the participants don't get anything more than a t-shirt. Hell, you don't even get a parade!

 

[schmke]

Well considering USTA doesn't do **** for teams that make it to nationals largely because they don't have the funding, I don't think it's really promoted. No expenses are paid for, in most years (as far as I'm aware of) the participants don't get anything more than a t-shirt. Hell, you don't even get a parade!

Hey, sometimes you get a towel or a hat! And that plastic trophy if you make the semis!

Note, some sections do help defray the cost of the registration for their Sectional champ, but I'm not sure if all do it or how much it really helps. The travel and accommodations are the far bigger expense.

 

[ServeAces&Lime]

I think one of the big things is if your looking for a cheater you can look at numbers and “find” one. But in reality there are lots of things just the numbers can’t show. Was it managing or only a bad match? Was the person injured or had something else going on in their life? Was someone just having an incredible match that day? Also as long as you can’t see the USTA ratings it can be hard to know if you’re even looking at the right numbers. There are some obvious cases.
Like playing D3 all year and then all of a sudden playing S1 at nationals. But I think too many people are just assuming everyone is cheating. If a self-rated player wins 80% at 3.5 and 20% at 4.0, is that person out of level? Maybe, where the wins blowouts or close, how good were the opponents. I think there is just so much we can’t truly know.

 

[Creighton]

I think one of the big things is if your looking for a cheater you can look at numbers and “find” one. But in reality there are lots of things just the numbers can’t show. Was it managing or only a bad match? Was the person injured or had something else going on in their life? Was someone just having an incredible match that day?

This is exactly how the Texas captain/team will justify what their players did. The same way you justify the actions of what got your team to nationals. It's just strange to me that some would say it's ok to call Texas cheats but not the other teams who are doing similar things just on a smaller scale.

 

[ServeAces&Lime]

This is exactly how the Texas captain/team will justify what their players did. The same way you justify the actions of what got your team to nationals. It's just strange to me that some would say it's ok to call Texas cheats but not the other teams who are doing similar things just on a smaller scale.

I don’t captain a team going to nationals, I’m on one. But not sure what you think we did. I think we only have 3 self rated and one only played one match. we have 3 3.5 players as well. According to TR I think we only have 3 players that are currently rated high enough to get a bump.

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

You guys are way overstating the amount of people in USTA that know/care about sectionals and nationals and make it their primary motivation.

A lot of players are just motivated to get better and improve their rating, rather than play down a level, manipulate scores, and win a rec championship.

Very true

This is so true. Also does USTA really push that winning a national championship is the goal or is that what people do on their own? I have had plenty of newer players have no idea about post season play. And if you only play mens league and are under 40 you rally only have one league that even has a post season.

Well, there is the tennis facility banners, mild pride thing.

One motivation I've seen , mostly mixed really, is the opportunity to travel out of town and party/hook up. No, this isn't people who are really attractive, lol, but I've seen some crazy stuff from even married people in post season play.

Men's captain psych profile is usually: 100% no college tennis, so usta is a thing for them instead of a mild joke (why usually it's 3.5 and 4.0 that are the playground). Usually not a big family. Not a demanding career hours-wise or retired. Multiple teams. 100% social media posts with "national champs" or "nationals" without the level listed, usually a group photo without the banner and just nationals champs.

 

[ServeAces&Lime]

This is exactly how the Texas captain/team will justify what their players did. The same way you justify the actions of what got your team to nationals. It's just strange to me that some would say it's ok to call Texas cheats but not the other teams who are doing similar things just on a smaller scale.

And this is what I’m talking about. You don’t even know what team I’m on and you’ve already decided we cheated to get there.

 

[Roforot]

In my 3.5 league, we played a team that was full of 3.0 self-rated players who happen to be going to Nationals (for 3.0), but this is some crazy dedication. Our "3.0" opponents were probably legit weak-strong 3.5 players. Didn't get the sense they were tanking and most likely they'll be middle of the pack next in 3.5 if they stick together.

Schemke's analysis though is inspiring in the dedication and energy some people put into tennis. Imagine losing a whole year just to go back to 3.5?

 

[Creighton]

And this is what I’m talking about. You don’t even know what team I’m on and you’ve already decided we cheated to get there.

Because it’s the reality, you just can’t make it to nationals without some underhanded conduct. The whole discussion is what level of underhanded conduct hits the breaking point of being business as usual and blatant cheating?

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

Because it’s the reality, you just can’t make it to nationals without some underhanded conduct. The whole discussion is what level of underhanded conduct hits the breaking point of being business as usual and blatant cheating?

I'll do a quick and dirty assessment, please don't nitpick it though .

1. Lose on purpose to go down, cheated. A group in Dallas did this too at 4.5 in 2 seasons, but still failed to win 4.0 texas.
2. Strangers playing together or teammates who wouldn't normally naturally play at the same courts or clubs, no penalty here if new to a city
3. Recruited players who are guided through the selfrate process by someone else with impure intentions
4. Anyone who once had a C rating 2 levels above their current level without a serious injury, old doesn't count, they play age bracket leagues
5. Anyone only playing 2 matches per season on purpose and not because of availability or "not good enough " to crack the starting lineup.
6. Any team under 4.5 from Texas at nationals lol

And never use business' as usual to describe it, the fact one might have to join in to have a chance to win doesn't excuse it.

None of these rules will be put into place, so it will be fun to track the future tricks of the trade so to speak.

 

[TennisOTM]

Is there any hard and clear evidence that the Texas 3.5 National Champs broke any written rules? I'm still not clear on that, but I suspect not. If so, then I think it's kind of useless to lay blame on the captain or the players. They might arguably *deserve* blame, but it doesn't accomplish anything. The fact that a team of players that strong could successfully make it to Nationals without any enforceable evidence of breaking a rule is a failure of the system. There are rule changes and rating algorithm changes that could solve this problem - some of them mentioned on this thread and others.

 

[ServeAces&Lime]

Because it’s the reality, you just can’t make it to nationals without some underhanded conduct. The whole discussion is what level of underhanded conduct hits the breaking point of being business as usual and blatant cheating?

See and I just don’t believe it’s everyone at nationals doing it 2-3 teams maybe. And they will probably win it. But I don’t think making it to nationals means you did anything underhanded. A lot is going to depend on your district and your section. But just because someone is “out of level” doesn’t mean they cheated to get there. Especially if you look at lower levels where improvements tend to happen faster and can be more dramatic.

I think what really sticks out is when it’s the same captains doing it year after year with all new players. They likelihood of that happening just seems way to high. You are going to get teams who hit a sweet spot. Their top players just missed getting bumped up and then the competitions team get hit hard by bumps. People move out of a state or section or stop playing. There can be a new batch of players who start to come up and they change the balance of power in a section. You don’t have to cheat to get to nationals, does it help, obviously. Do you have to do it to win, probably. But a blanket statement that every team at nationals are cheating just isn’t true

 

[schmke]

Is there any hard and clear evidence that the Texas 3.5 National Champs broke any written rules? I'm still not clear on that, but I suspect not. If so, then I think it's kind of useless to lay blame on the captain or the players. They might arguably *deserve* blame, but it doesn't accomplish anything. The fact that a team of players that strong could successfully make it to Nationals without any enforceable evidence of breaking a rule is a failure of the system. There are rule changes and rating algorithm changes that could solve this problem - some of them mentioned on this thread and others.

Exceptionally vague, but:

1.04E(4) Player Agreement. All players participating in the USTA League, as a condition of said participation, agree to abide and be bound by the USTA Constitution and Bylaws; the USTA LEAGUE REGULATIONS; the FRIEND AT COURT - The USTA Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations including THE CODE and Wheelchair Rules of Tennis (unless modified by these USTA LEAGUE REGULATIONS); and the standards of good conduct, fair play and good sportsmanship.

Then regarding grievances, basically the same language:

3.02A General Grievance. Any grievance, other than those defined in Regulation 3.02B Administrative Grievance, 3.02C National League Grievance, 3.02D Eligibility Grievance and 3.02E NTRP Grievance, alleging a violation of (i) the USTA Constitution and Bylaws; (ii) the USTA LEAGUE REGULATIONS; (iii) the FRIEND AT COURT – The USTA Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations including THE CODE and Wheelchair Rules of Tennis (unless modified by these USTA LEAGUE REGULATIONS); or (iv) the standards of good conduct, fair play, and good sportsmanship, shall constitute a General Grievance.

 

[Creighton]

See and I just don’t believe it’s everyone at nationals doing it 2-3 teams maybe. And they will probably win it. But I don’t think making it to nationals means you did anything underhanded. A lot is going to depend on your district and your section. But just because someone is “out of level” doesn’t mean they cheated to get there. Especially if you look at lower levels where improvements tend to happen faster and can be more dramatic.

I think what really sticks out is when it’s the same captains doing it year after year with all new players. They likelihood of that happening just seems way to high. You are going to get teams who hit a sweet spot. Their top players just missed getting bumped up and then the competitions team get hit hard by bumps. People move out of a state or section or stop playing. There can be a new batch of players who start to come up and they change the balance of power in a section. You don’t have to cheat to get to nationals, does it help, obviously. Do you have to do it to win, probably. But a blanket statement that every team at nationals are cheating just isn’t true

I clicked on your profile and it says you're from Utah. If you're on the intermountain 4.0 team, I know you just have to be trolling me at the moment lol.

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

Is there any hard and clear evidence that the Texas 3.5 National Champs broke any written rules? I'm still not clear on that, but I suspect not. If so, then I think it's kind of useless to lay blame on the captain or the players. They might arguably *deserve* blame, but it doesn't accomplish anything. The fact that a team of players that strong could successfully make it to Nationals without any enforceable evidence of breaking a rule is a failure of the system. There are rule changes and rating algorithm changes that could solve this problem - some of them mentioned on this thread and others.

People should self police themselves a little. No rules can be put into place to cover everything. Social pressure should come into play too, I can't imagine if my 4.5 level friends tanked to get a 3.5 trophy, omg we would bust out laughing everytime we saw them.

USTA can always adjust the rules, but it takes cooperation of the players to maintain the spirit of the game.

And now, I'm pretty sure that point system includes losing on purpose. Or something close to that.

But anyway, I bet if rules are tightened someone will fake an injury to get bumped down, how do you make a rule against that, what I am saying is that rules can't morph faster than silliness.

 

[ServeAces&Lime]

I clicked on your profile and it says you're from Utah. If you're on the intermountain 4.0 team, I know you just have to be trolling me at the moment lol.

Why, good old Fowkes is doing 4.5 this year.

 

[Creighton]

Why, good old Fowkes is doing 4.5 this year.

And one of your best players is a former Fowkes player...

He also conveniently beat a 4.5 6-2, 6-4 at sectionals

 

[esgee48]

One rule change I would like to see is if you’re a S rated player, you must play 4 matches to qualify for post season. The same would apply for Appeal Downs and Bump downs. Make it harder to hide players to prevent strikes. You could probably still game the system, but many more team captains will be aware of it.

I sometimes wonder if a requirement for total matches played USTA and number of matches per season would help to filter out self rates.

 

[ServeAces&Lime]

And one of your best players is a former Fowkes player...

He also conveniently beat a 4.5 6-2, 6-4 at sectionals

Well I’m assuming you are taking about a doubles match where there was a DQ player.

How does that mean he cheated? There are 3 other players on the court that factor into the overall score.

 

[Klitz]

One of the most popular threads has been "WILL THERE BE A 4PEAT AT NATIONALS...."

As an outsider following along, it is my understanding that a man in Utah has been winning 18+ 4.0 nationals uncontested for 3 years in a row by utilizing underrated 20yr olds....? And that at the beginning of this year, most felt he would win again...

Now, in this current thread, folks are beside themselves that some old guys from Texas "allegedly" determined that they were overrated and manipulated their ratings to get to 3.5.

It would appear that based on the previous 3 years[data points i.e. a trend] that folks could reasonably conclude that they were in fact not 4.0 level players based on Utah and USTA letting it continue year after year.

TLDR: Using the previous 3 years of 4.0 nationals winners as a baseline, could logically lead players to feel like they should be 3.5 vice 4.0.

 

[ServeAces&Lime]

Well I’m assuming you are taking about a doubles match where there was a DQ player.

How does that mean he cheated? There are 3 other players on the court that factor into the overall score.

Also according to TR that win wouldnt be close to a strike. His overall record is 23-18 so it’s not like he’s just out there killing guys.

 

[Creighton]

Well I’m assuming you are taking about a doubles match where there was a DQ player.

How does that mean he cheated? There are 3 other players on the court that factor into the overall score.

He's guilty by association. The beating a 4.5 is just icing on the cake for evidence. As I said, in less than 10 minutes once I found your team it was easy to identify someone that cheats. Likewise, your captain comes from the Fowkes system.

Add in that you beat one of the biggest cheating the last two years in NV 5-0 at sectionals. All the evidence is against you guys.

 

[ServeAces&Lime]

One of the most popular threads has been "WILL THERE BE A 4PEAT AT NATIONALS...."

As an outsider following along, it is my understanding that a man in Utah has been winning 18+ 4.0 nationals uncontested for 3 years in a row by utilizing underrated 20yr olds....? And that at the beginning of this year, most felt he would win again...

Now, in this current thread, folks are beside themselves that some old guys from Texas "allegedly" determined that they were overrated and manipulated their ratings to get to 3.5.

It would appear that based on the previous 3 years[data points i.e. a trend] that folks could reasonably conclude that they were in fact not 4.0 level players based on Utah and USTA letting it continue year after year.

TLDR: Using the previous 3 years of 4.0 nationals winners as a baseline, could logically lead players to feel like they should be 3.5 vice 4.0.

Yeah I think you got it. I know the Utah captain used to do it at 3.5 before that. This year he is doing a 4.5 team.

Once he didn’t do a 4.0 team this year it left the local league wide open. Lots of players have been trying to beat him for years. Most people around here arent really big fans of his and don’t like what he does. So beating him is something people strive for. There were 3 super competitive teams. And district was super close.

 

[ServeAces&Lime]

He's guilty by association. The beating a 4.5 is just icing on the cake for evidence. As I said, in less than 10 minutes once I found your team it was easy to identify someone that cheats.

Add in that you beat one of the biggest cheating the last two years in NV 5-0 at sectionals. All the evidence is against you guys.

Guilty by association is dumb, how many years ago did he play for that captain?

That 5-0 win was a 4-1 win but they had a guy DQ’d and they tried to throw a match to get someone DQ’d (this was witnessed by officials)

But honestly it doesn’t matter what happens you aren’t even open to the idea that some people are just working on getting better and play a lot. That sometime there can be upsets because someone has a good day or someone has a bad day.

Again I agree that cheating happens, but on a small level. I don’t think everyone getting to nationals are cheaters. Some i. here have posted some really good insights using data and trends. That can help pick up the big outliers. More than saying one time this player beat someone who should be better than them.

I’m sorry you feel like USTA is just full of cheaters. I tend to enjoy playing and try and get better. I worry about my local league before advancing. It’s way more fun to have a two month competitive league than cheating to win nationals.

 

[Creighton]

But honestly it doesn’t matter what happens you aren’t even open to the idea that some people are just working on getting better and play a lot. That sometime there can be upsets because someone has a good day or someone has a bad day.

You were the one chance to prove me wrong and give me hope that I could some day go to nationals without cheating. I was really hoping you were from some random league like Northern and could prove that you were just a bunch of bros who got lucky and got to nationals.

But you turned out to just be Fowkes retreads Just proving me right.

 

[ServeAces&Lime]

You were the one chance to prove me wrong and give me hope that I could some day go to nationals without cheating. I was really hoping you were from some random league like Northern and could prove that you were just a bunch of bros who got lucky and got to nationals.

But you turned out to just be Fowkes retreads Just proving me right.

Ok last I’m going to say about this. I’ve never played for Fowkes or talked to him. I know some people who have played for him. But he definitely has nothing to do with this team. I wish he did so I didn’t have to pay to go to nationals, would save me a lot of money.

And I want to give some defense to people who played for him. Lots of people he recruits don’t know what NTRP is or what self rating is. They are promised going to nationals and tons of practice for free. And that this may help prep then for college tennis. Then they learn it’s not exactly what they signed up for. The learn that the competition they are playing isn’t going to make them better.

I’m sure some people are all for it as well and that’s on them. I know the people I tend to play with want to be competitive and get better. Winning will happen along the way sometimes we might advance and other times not. I’ll be happy if we do but definitely don’t expect to.

 

[Racquet Scientist]

Ok last I’m going to say about this. I’ve never played for Fowkes or talked to him. I know some people who have played for him. But he definitely has nothing to do with this team. I wish he did so I didn’t have to pay to go to nationals, would save me a lot of money.

And I want to give some defense to people who played for him. Lots of people he recruits don’t know what NTRP is or what self rating is. They are promised going to nationals and tons of practice for free. And that this may help prep then for college tennis. Then they learn it’s not exactly what they signed up for. The learn that the competition they are playing isn’t going to make them better.

I’m sure some people are all for it as well and that’s on them. I know the people I tend to play with want to be competitive and get better. Winning will happen along the way sometimes we might advance and other times not. I’ll be happy if we do but definitely don’t expect to.

This is really interesting insider information to me about what the players on his teams are thinking. Thanks for sharing. I find it hard to believe that they are naive enough to believe his teams would help them prep for college tennis though. I mean, his guys are young, but not that young. If they really are mislead to sign up, then it's exploitative. That these captains are living vicariously through their players is sad. As you note, the 4.0 competition is not going to help make them better. I could see how young players (23ish) could be pretty oblivious to it all.

 

[Tiafoe]

This is really interesting insider information to me about what the players on his teams are thinking. Thanks for sharing. I find it hard to believe that they are naive enough to believe his teams would help them prep for college tennis though. I mean, his guys are young, but not that young. If they really are mislead to sign up, then it's exploitative. That these captains are living vicariously through their players is sad. As you note, the 4.0 competition is not going to help make them better. I could see how young players (23ish) could be pretty oblivious to it all.

An old rec tennis super captain dangling gifts and free club memberships to college aged kids. Nothing creepy about that at all.

 

[ServeAces&Lime]

This is really interesting insider information to me about what the players on his teams are thinking. Thanks for sharing. I find it hard to believe that they are naive enough to believe his teams would help them prep for college tennis though. I mean, his guys are young, but not that young. If they really are mislead to sign up, then it's exploitative. That these captains are living vicariously through their players is sad. As you note, the 4.0 competition is not going to help make them better. I could see how young players (23ish) could be pretty oblivious to it all.

Yeah I have heard a lot of things, both good and bad. Like he is basically running a tennis academy for those teams so your tennis is definitely going to improve.

But yeah a lot of the guys he’s getting played in high school then left for a two year mission then when they come back he will start recruiting.

Honestly over this whole thing I was only trying to say I think 95% of people play and rate themselves the right and fair way. There are bad eggs and a lot of that stems from captains who take this stuff way too seriously.

 

[Creighton]

Honestly over this whole thing I was only trying to say I think 95% of people play and rate themselves the right and fair way. There are bad eggs and a lot of that stems from captains who take this stuff way too seriously.

I think 95% is too generous, but I actually agree that most people are playing fair and rate themselves the right way. It's just that the teams with playoff ambitions tend to have people self rate incorrectly far above what you would see from a normal distribution.

I played one guy this year who went unbeaten in the local league this year. He took down me and every other ringer in a third set tiebreak. Should he have self rated as a 4.0? Probably. Do I think he did it in bad faith? Absolutely not. He was on the very worst team and won 5 of the 7 courts they won the entire season. He either didn't have a good idea of what the ratings were or he just wanted to play with his friends. No harm, no foul. Those guys will naturally spread out amongst the leagues.

What I see far too common is guys like on your team. A guy gets promoted to 4.5 in 2019, then doesn't play for 3 years and self rates a 4.0 and heads back to nationals. Then you have another self rate that TR has as a 4.16. Then you have a couple recent self rates who probably were rated lower than they should based on the deflationary ratings that exist with the Fowkes shenanigans. So Fowkes not only encourages your guys to self-rate lower than they should so you can compete with them, but also lowers their ratings by beating them.

I don't think you're a bad person at all. I just really think the USTA needs to get a handle on the situation because it seems like it's only getting worse in my decade of playing USTA.

 

[schmke]

Exceptionally vague, but:

1.04E(4) Player Agreement. All players participating in the USTA League, as a condition of said participation, agree to abide and be bound by the USTA Constitution and Bylaws; the USTA LEAGUE REGULATIONS; the FRIEND AT COURT - The USTA Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations including THE CODE and Wheelchair Rules of Tennis (unless modified by these USTA LEAGUE REGULATIONS); and the standards of good conduct, fair play and good sportsmanship.

Then regarding grievances, basically the same language:

3.02A General Grievance. Any grievance, other than those defined in Regulation 3.02B Administrative Grievance, 3.02C National League Grievance, 3.02D Eligibility Grievance and 3.02E NTRP Grievance, alleging a violation of (i) the USTA Constitution and Bylaws; (ii) the USTA LEAGUE REGULATIONS; (iii) the FRIEND AT COURT – The USTA Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations including THE CODE and Wheelchair Rules of Tennis (unless modified by these USTA LEAGUE REGULATIONS); or (iv) the standards of good conduct, fair play, and good sportsmanship, shall constitute a General Grievance.

Also, the suspension points system (https://www.usta.com/content/dam/us.../USTALeagueSuspensionPointSystem202292321.pdf) lists:

Unsportsmanlike Conduct/Violations of The Code (e.g.,
intentional/retaliatory bad line calls, refusing to call out the
score, "quick" serving, stalling, feinting, grunting, tanking/not
using best efforts to win; obscene/profane language or
gestures)

This entails 2-4 points.

Under self-rating:

Self-rating lower than true playing ability 2 - 5
Failure to self-rate in accordance with the Guidelines, or omission of information regarding player’s tennis history 8 - 10
Any USTA League player, or Captain, who knowingly assists or condones of another player’s inaccurate or inappropriate self-rating (including guiding that player to omit information) 10

The problem with any of these is it requires someone to file a grievance, and when 10 points is required for a suspension and some violations are only 2 points, it requires several grievances be filed, and won.

 

[ServeAces&Lime]

I think 95% is too generous, but I actually agree that most people are playing fair and rate themselves the right way. It's just that the teams with playoff ambitions tend to have people self rate incorrectly far above what you would see from a normal distribution.

I played one guy this year who went unbeaten in the local league this year. He took down me and every other ringer in a third set tiebreak. Should he have self rated as a 4.0? Probably. Do I think he did it in bad faith? Absolutely not. He was on the very worst team and won 5 of the 7 courts they won the entire season. He either didn't have a good idea of what the ratings were or he just wanted to play with his friends. No harm, no foul. Those guys will naturally spread out amongst the leagues.

What I see far too common is guys like on your team. A guy gets promoted to 4.5 in 2019, then doesn't play for 3 years and self rates a 4.0 and heads back to nationals. Then you have another self rate that TR has as a 4.16. Then you have a couple recent self rates who probably were rated lower than they should based on the deflationary ratings that exist with the Fowkes shenanigans. So Fowkes not only encourages your guys to self-rate lower than they should so you can compete with them, but also lowers their ratings by beating them.

I don't think you're a bad person at all. I just really think the USTA needs to get a handle on the situation because it seems like it's only getting worse in my decade of playing USTA.

Yea something has to be done. I think something in the self rating has to change. Because there is just too much variation that can happen based on the questions. Hopefully WTN can help with that in the future.

An example of a self rating issue. If you answer you didn’t play tennis in high school it won’t ask if you played in college. Well what if you were training at an academy and didn’t play high school and didn’t play on the Junior Circuit but then ended up playing college. You could probably still answer questions legitimately and be able to rate as a 4.0. This is obviously and extreme example

 

[Tiafoe]

Not gonna lie @ServeAces&Lime, when @Creighton found out you're on a Utah team going to Nationals, it definitely was a plot twist. Didn't see that coming.

14-1 at sectionals and only 1 set dropped in those 14 wins? That's the kind of stuff that raises eyebrows.

 

[schmke]

I'm toying with a way to identify questionable teams/rosters by looking at a number of factors including self-rates, appeals, players who have held a higher rating in the past, players who self-rated at a higher rating, and players that have ever been DQ'd. Total up the score from this and divide by the size of the roster and you get a "shenanigans score".

For this past weekend, Texas led the way with a score of 1.25 due largely to having 10 of the 16 eligible players having held a 4.0C or above in the past, but also having 4 self-rates, an appeal, and some players that had to self-rate higher or had been DQ'd in the past.

Other teams also had reasonably high scores but the closest was Middlewest at 0.79 and Southern at 0.77. Middlewest had a bunch of self-rates and Southern had a number of 4.0C or higher in the past, but didn't get close to what Texas had looking across all the categories.

The lowest was Florida at 0.13 as they had just 2 eligible self-rates, everyone else was a C and none had been above 3.5 in the past.

The semi-finalists were:

Texas - 1.25
SoCal - 0.47
Florida - 0.13
Caribbean - 0.62

From all reports, Texas was head and shoulders above the rest which correlates here, but it is interesting that Florida with the lowest score made the semis. However, Florida had the easiest schedule of all teams which is likely what allowed them to make the semis.

Thoughts?

 

[Tiafoe]

I'm toying with a way to identify questionable teams/rosters by looking at a number of factors including self-rates, appeals, players who have held a higher rating in the past, players who self-rated at a higher rating, and players that have ever been DQ'd. Total up the score from this and divide by the size of the roster and you get a "shenanigans score".

For this past weekend, Texas led the way with a score of 1.25 due largely to having 10 of the 16 eligible players having held a 4.0C or above in the past, but also having 4 self-rates, an appeal, and some players that had to self-rate higher or had been DQ'd in the past.

Other teams also had reasonably high scores but the closest was Middlewest at 0.79 and Southern at 0.77. Middlewest had a bunch of self-rates and Southern had a number of 4.0C or higher in the past, but didn't get close to what Texas had looking across all the categories.

The lowest was Florida at 0.13 as they had just 2 eligible self-rates, everyone else was a C and none had been above 3.5 in the past.

The semi-finalists were:

Texas - 1.25
SoCal - 0.47
Florida - 0.13
Caribbean - 0.62

From all reports, Texas was head and shoulders above the rest which correlates here, but it is interesting that Florida with the lowest score made the semis. However, Florida had the easiest schedule of all teams which is likely what allowed them to make the semis.

Thoughts?

That's good, but would it cover what Fowkes did? For a lot of those players, you had to do some digging to find out they were great juniors and/or have high UTR rankings. Then you'd have to factor in that they self rated low, played a couple matches, and were locked in as C-rated for the next year. But, maybe the number of teams outside of Utah using that formula is pretty low?

 

[BallBag]

I'm toying with a way to identify questionable teams/rosters by looking at a number of factors including self-rates, appeals, players who have held a higher rating in the past, players who self-rated at a higher rating, and players that have ever been DQ'd. Total up the score from this and divide by the size of the roster and you get a "shenanigans score".

For this past weekend, Texas led the way with a score of 1.25 due largely to having 10 of the 16 eligible players having held a 4.0C or above in the past, but also having 4 self-rates, an appeal, and some players that had to self-rate higher or had been DQ'd in the past.

Other teams also had reasonably high scores but the closest was Middlewest at 0.79 and Southern at 0.77. Middlewest had a bunch of self-rates and Southern had a number of 4.0C or higher in the past, but didn't get close to what Texas had looking across all the categories.

The lowest was Florida at 0.13 as they had just 2 eligible self-rates, everyone else was a C and none had been above 3.5 in the past.

The semi-finalists were:

Texas - 1.25
SoCal - 0.47
Florida - 0.13
Caribbean - 0.62

From all reports, Texas was head and shoulders above the rest which correlates here, but it is interesting that Florida with the lowest score made the semis. However, Florida had the easiest schedule of all teams which is likely what allowed them to make the semis.

Thoughts?

Do you have a Shenanigans Score for some random teams that never made it out of local league?

 

[schmke]

That's good, but would it cover what Fowkes did? For a lot of those players, you had to do some digging to find out they were great juniors and/or have high UTR rankings. Then you'd have to factor in that they self rated low, played a couple matches, and were locked in as C-rated for the next year. But, maybe the number of teams outside of Utah using that formula is pretty low?

Not really. From what I recall, Fowkes didn't really do any obvious tanking, which to me is most egregious. He certainly had self-rates that skirted the self-rate guidelines (but apparently were ok) and were clearly above level by year-end, but he had a fair number of C rates where none (or nearly so) had been higher in the past, and I don't think any had a history of DQ's.

 

[schmke]

Do you have a Shenanigans Score for some random teams that never made it out of local league?

Well, for the flight Texas came out of in local league the other teams were:

0.83
0.63
0.53
0.50

Keep in mind these teams know what they are going up against and are probably pushing the envelope themselves to compete.

Then I randomly picked one of three flights of 18+ 3.5M in Portland, OR:

0.54
0.41
0.38
0.25
0.19
0.18
0.17
0.06

 

[Klitz]

I'm toying with a way to identify questionable teams/rosters by looking at a number of factors including self-rates, appeals, players who have held a higher rating in the past, players who self-rated at a higher rating, and players that have ever been DQ'd. Total up the score from this and divide by the size of the roster and you get a "shenanigans score".

For this past weekend, Texas led the way with a score of 1.25 due largely to having 10 of the 16 eligible players having held a 4.0C or above in the past, but also having 4 self-rates, an appeal, and some players that had to self-rate higher or had been DQ'd in the past.

Other teams also had reasonably high scores but the closest was Middlewest at 0.79 and Southern at 0.77. Middlewest had a bunch of self-rates and Southern had a number of 4.0C or higher in the past, but didn't get close to what Texas had looking across all the categories.

The lowest was Florida at 0.13 as they had just 2 eligible self-rates, everyone else was a C and none had been above 3.5 in the past.

The semi-finalists were:

Texas - 1.25
SoCal - 0.47
Florida - 0.13
Caribbean - 0.62

From all reports, Texas was head and shoulders above the rest which correlates here, but it is interesting that Florida with the lowest score made the semis. However, Florida had the easiest schedule of all teams which is likely what allowed them to make the semis.

Thoughts?

Not really. From what I recall, Fowkes didn't really do any obvious tanking, which to me is most egregious. He certainly had self-rates that skirted the self-rate guidelines (but apparently were ok) and were clearly above level by year-end, but he had a fair number of C rates where none (or nearly so) had been higher in the past, and I don't think any had a history of DQ's.

No one has addressed my statement that if Fowkes teams were perpetually kicking everyone's butts, then people could logically conclude that they were not competitive at 4.0 (%0.0 chance of winning) and would have an opportunity to win at 3.5?

What better way to measure one's self than comparison to the 3peat winners?

 

[Creighton]

No one has addressed my statement that if Fowkes teams were perpetually kicking everyone's butts, then people could logically conclude that they were not competitive at 4.0 (%0.0 chance of winning) and would have an opportunity to win at 3.5?

What better way to measure one's self than comparison to the 3peat winners?

This is exactly what I feel has happened in my current section. Their idea of what a certain level should look like is based on people who are competing at nationals and ignoring how that just pushes everyone down half a level.

 

[ServeAces&Lime]

Not gonna lie @ServeAces&Lime, when @Creighton found out you're on a Utah team going to Nationals, it definitely was a plot twist. Didn't see that coming.

14-1 at sectionals and only 1 set dropped in those 14 wins? That's the kind of stuff that raises eyebrows.

I mean I wasn’t trying to hide it or anything. I was a little surprised as well, as was our team. But some of those wins also come from other teams having players DQ’d. Colors only brought 8 guys and a player was DQ’d early so they had to forfeit a line going forward. And all our players have been playing all year, we didn’t “save” anyone for sectionals.

I mentioned earlier that our districts matches were much closer. And I didn’t feel like all the others team were doing anything funny. But maybe I’m just used to that being how the competition is. Who knows

I'm toying with a way to identify questionable teams/rosters by looking at a number of factors including self-rates, appeals, players who have held a higher rating in the past, players who self-rated at a higher rating, and players that have ever been DQ'd. Total up the score from this and divide by the size of the roster and you get a "shenanigans score".

For this past weekend, Texas led the way with a score of 1.25 due largely to having 10 of the 16 eligible players having held a 4.0C or above in the past, but also having 4 self-rates, an appeal, and some players that had to self-rate higher or had been DQ'd in the past.

Other teams also had reasonably high scores but the closest was Middlewest at 0.79 and Southern at 0.77. Middlewest had a bunch of self-rates and Southern had a number of 4.0C or higher in the past, but didn't get close to what Texas had looking across all the categories.

The lowest was Florida at 0.13 as they had just 2 eligible self-rates, everyone else was a C and none had been above 3.5 in the past.

The semi-finalists were:

Texas - 1.25
SoCal - 0.47
Florida - 0.13
Caribbean - 0.62

From all reports, Texas was head and shoulders above the rest which correlates here, but it is interesting that Florida with the lowest score made the semis. However, Florida had the easiest schedule of all teams which is likely what allowed them to make the semis.

Thoughts?

I like this idea. I would love for you to run it on the Utah 18+ 4.0 league. Maybe my perceptions are just all messed up because of how our local leagues operate