So there is something to this I think. I haven’t heard many people say well I’m going to play 3.5 instead of 4.0 because of it, but that doesn’t mean it won’t happen. Actually I don’t hear his name much in 3.5 circles. But everyone complains about that captains teams. I heard one captain suggest all the teams forfeiting their matches against him so no one could qualify, this was more of a joke.
Yeah I agree with this. I think when all we have to look at is on paper it can be hard as well. Like there can be things that on paper look like cheating but if you had the full story there could be a reason for that. Ex. Someone has a set of 3 bad matches in a row against someone they should easily beat. that could look like game or match throwing. But what if they are playing injured or have something in their personal life that makes them lack focus or effort. I think you have to see the overall patterns. Which means you usually have to watch captains over a period of years.
Yeah the self rating guidelines are not really good, but I don't think this can be used as an excuse. Because it's rare that new players acting in good faith have nothing else to rely on other than the self rating guidelines. Typically new players would have had the opportunity to hit with others before deciding they want to play USTA and have to self rate. So they would have a pretty good idea of where they are at relative to other players who already have a rating.
I think I may disagree a little. Ive seen a lot of these high school kids who turn 18 and want to keep playing start playing league or tournaments and really have no idea where they belong. The whole NTRP is just foreign to them. No I’m sure tons of captains are telling them you can/should rank as a 3.5 when really they would be better suited to 4.0. But again that’s something I put more in certain captains than the players.
Here in Utah we actually have a decent amount of people who on their own reach out to try and find a team. It’s actually how I started playing. Now I was familiar with USTA as lots in my family have played before. I also do work for our local USTA outreach committee. We usually get a decent list of people looking to join USTA and those are the ones who do this on their own. With all these players I think the majority end up in the right level. There are some that underrate but I’ve seen plenty that overrate as well.
computerratings.blogspot.com
Of course he did! So from that it looks like the self rating works fairly well overall. Like he mentioned you’re going to have some bump ups based on natural progression but it doesn’t look like an outrageous amount.Do USTA League self-rated players self-rate correctly? Do men sandbag and women over rate?
2016 USTA League Nationals are going on in full force, and unfortunately that means a few cases of questionable self-rated players comes up...
Yeah, but that’s just what’s going to happen with any self rate, or even have someone watching them play would. Your margin of error is going to be bigger just because there is a lot less data. With C players you would hope you algorithm works well enough that it will level off and be more stable.
Maybe, a lot depends on who you’re beating as well. Last year I won 68.7% of my 3.5 matches and I wasn’t bumped. Now during league I usually played D1 and we had a few captains who would just throw that match so I would win fairly easily but agains week opponents. So yes 80% might be extreme. But there is going to be a wide range through out the levels. I believe the NTRP algorithm assumes a 3.50 would beat a 3.01 0-0. That’s a big gap where both people are playing at level, but one side is going to be enjoying it a lot more than another. Wanting to be at a level where you win more than loose is understandable. So it’s hard to say someone was unconsciously cheating. It’s more like there are confused of where they should be. I’m not sure many self rates would even know they could get bumped up if they weren’t close to winning all there matches. It’s a system issue more than anything, and it’s a system some decide to take advantage of.
And of course the big thing is, you have no idea what percentage you’re going to win until you start playing. For a lot of people it’s a guess. I’ve had people ask me where they think they should self rate. But they never have played competitive matches. I tell them answer the questions truthfully and go from there. Same say they are worried they will be rated to low and they won’t get good competition, most of those tend to overrate themselves, and other ms worry they won’t be good enough at that level to win.
Isn't this the quintessential example of cheating? When you're choosing to win versus playing where it's fair?
I don’t think so. I think cheating is purposefully doing something that is against the rules. Being deceitful or straight up lying. Picking between two options that according to guidelines you fit is not cheating. Some people would say losing 80% of matches isn’t fair to them and they where out into to hard of a level.
Here is the definition just for fun.
Except the guidelines say to err on picking the higher level as one is likely to improve.
Not entirely true.
But I would think if you are a 4.5 and self rating as a 3.5 that is egregious. If your a low 4.0 player self rating as a 3.5 that’s more of the over all system issue. I mean no matter what is done the true cheaters will find a way around them. I was speaking more that I think a good amount of underrated players do so with no I’ll intentions
It’s true. But I guess what should players expect when they are new? Should the expectations be you are at the bottom half of your level? Should that be described better to new players?
I think you should look more into this. This shows Texas as a really high outlier. But then you showed a random Oregon league and Florida would have been towards the bottom of that league but made semis. Which leads me to believe that Florida made it with out “cheating”. It would be interesting to see what an average shenanigans score would be nationwide. Also looks like it will vary greatly based on locality and what is deemed as normal there.
Yeah, that's how handicapped competitions work. The system works better if they start out on the lower end and earn their success. That's the problem with people like Fowkes. This is recreational tennis. The system works best when everyone gets an opportunity at the fun. The system isn't fun when the same people win every year and the same people lose every year. If we truly want just the best of the best to win, that's what open level play is for.
@ServeAces&Lime Check out the 24 pages on the thread "Will there be a three-peat league national champion at 18+ 4.0M?"
I guess this is the fault of USTA. If that many people can’t figure it out something needs to be done. If everyone truly thinks their doing their best is not a cheating problem it’s a system problem
I agree with this. I prefer to be towards the bottom and work my way up. However I don’t necessarily fault someone who may want to start higher up. This actually make me want to work harder so I can beat them fair and square.
I don’t agree with this. I mean they are both at fault. But people purposely trying to manipulate the system is worse to me. I think that the underrated will eventually not be an issue, maybe it takes two or three years. But people playing the game will just keep doing it indefinitely at the same levels for 5+ years. Again this is assuming the underrate doesn’t also do that other stuff.
And I completely agree with this. There are definitely a handful of captains that are “cheating”. Those ones going year after year for sure. Odds are that’s not legit.
In addition many, if not most, the self-rates we see at nationals don’t actually continue playing after getting bumped up.
Either that or they join the crew of permanent nationals-goers by managing scores from that point forward.
Which is true. I always seem to find 1-2 every year. But I guess that’s what I’m just used to seeing. It never has really bugged me. 1-2 of those guys even on the same team has really don’t much to change how my league turns out. Now a whole team like that is a different story. Outside of the Utah captain, I haven’t seen many teams that have done much more than 3-4. That’s just me and what I have noticed locally. I’ve always seen it as a challenge to beat those guys.
Alright, I’m back in.
What is "Fairly"?
This is a really important point. Just letting things slide by USTA not only pushes people out who are fed up, it makes it harder for future newbies to USTA league tennis to take it seriously due to the junk going on. It's so engrained in the system. The commonsense definition of "fair" becomes skewered in USTA league tennis.
It's like crossing someone off your list who makes bad line calls. Either the benefits are worth playing with the person despite the bad line calls, or they are not. With USTA leagues, some people are fed up with the bad administrative calls and choose to play with others. It is what it is. Still, it's a shame. USTA league is not really that cheap even if just playing in one league per year.
Just as a point of fact, I meant 1-2 in the whole league not per team and I don’t think they have been severely underrated. I was talking with some friends and we came up with one person we played (excluding the Fowkes team) that was just way underrated, playing 3.5 where he probably could have been a low 4.5.
You are on to a few things, but I don't shenanigans warp the perceptions or accuracy of the perceptions within the cities , like Houston 3.5 players aren't now considered 4.5 level skills within Texas by people in Texas. I doubt it impacts people outside Texas or UTah etc.
No, but I'm going to be at Men's 55's 9.0 Nationals in October if you know any older guys who will be there
.
Writing a blog post now, will show up shortly.
computerratings.blogspot.com
