2023 Nationals Week 2 Simulations Posted - 18+ 4.5

[schmke]

I just posted the men's and women's 18+ 4.5 Nationals simulations on my blog.

The 4.5 men has been a popular discussion topic and the Intermountain team falls into the contender category but not a favorite. And there is a big group of five likely to be contending (Eastern, Intermountain, Mid-Atlantic, Middle States, Missouri Valley) behind three favorites (New England and both California sections). Likely a big group of teams at 3-1 with tie-breakers deciding who advances.

 

[Vox Rationis]

I’m pretty surprised your simulations have the schedules so even. That’ll make for a good tournament. There are some guys whose UTRs far outweigh what their dynamic NTRPs would suggest. So will be interesting to see if certain individuals far outperform their ratings.

 

[schmke]

Yeah, the schedule strength range of 4.37 to 4.44 is reasonably smaller than is often seen. It is usually over 0.10 and this time just 0.07.

That contributes to there being 8 teams that are favorites or contenders, should be a tight fight for the last spot or two.

 

[schmke]

With 16 teams having played their first, NE's upset loss (due to playing a weak line-up) leaves them work to do to advance. SoCal also played a not so great line-up and lost so they have work now too. NorCal still on track.

Southern now a contender and Northern may be too.

 

[Vox Rationis]

Question is did they underestimate their opponents or did their best players not make the trip? Second set of matches will be pretty revealing.

 

[schmke]

Question is did they underestimate their opponents or did their best players not make the trip? Second set of matches will be pretty revealing.

Yep, I can't really know who will be there or who will play when doing my simulations. I use the best information available, and what the team has done in playoffs as a proxy for what they'll do at Nationals, but it doesn't always match.

 

[Snarf]

Question is did they underestimate their opponents or did their best players not make the trip? Second set of matches will be pretty revealing

Yep, I can't really know who will be there or who will play when doing my simulations. I use the best information available, and what the team has done in playoffs as a proxy for what they'll do at Nationals, but it doesn't always match.

Is there a way to see who has registered if you are not a participant?

 

[schmke]

Is there a way to see who has registered if you are not a participant?

The USTA shares a registration list with captains, and some captains have been kind enough to share the link with me, and I could probably find them all if I put the effort in, but even with the list of who is registered, you still don't know who will actually play or how many times.

 

[jdawgg]

So called favorite teams: New England 0-2 and SoCal 1-2.

 

[Vox Rationis]

It looks pretty clear by now that a lot of the on paper favorites didn't bring their best. It looks like So Cal is missing 4 of their top 6. Middle States is missing their two stud singles players who were their clear best two players. New England is missing 2 of their top 3 which includes their big college ringer singles guy who was like a high UTR 10 and their best doubles player. Availability makes all the difference.

 

[schmke]

It looks pretty clear by now that a lot of the on paper favorites didn't bring their best. It looks like So Cal is missing 4 of their top 6. Middle States is missing their two stud singles players who were their clear best two players. New England is missing 2 of their top 3 which includes their big college ringer singles guy who was like a high UTR 10 and their best doubles player. Availability makes all the difference.

This.

My simulation looks at eligible players, but can't know who isn't coming or who is/isn't going to play. That, and match-ups on a given day are why they play it on the courts.

 

[Vox Rationis]

This.

My simulation looks at eligible players, but can't know who isn't coming or who is/isn't going to play. That, and match-ups on a given day are why they play it on the courts.

While some of those guys, mainly the MS and NE guys, have no business being 4.5s... I do kind of wish they were there just so they could have faced the Intermountain team.

 

[Creighton]

Wow intermountain drops a third set tiebreak to go to 2-1. Will one of the 3-0 teams lose and give them a chance to get back in it?

 

[schmke]

Wow intermountain drops a third set tiebreak to go to 2-1. Will one of the 3-0 teams lose and give them a chance to get back in it?

One of the Balls brothers lost a singles match as well.

Every court went as expected except Middle West pulled a minor upset on 2D, where the super tie-break was.

The simulation now says 4 teams have a 68-79% chance of making the semis, just 3 of them get to go.

 

[schmke]

Wow intermountain drops a third set tiebreak to go to 2-1. Will one of the 3-0 teams lose and give them a chance to get back in it?

Southern and Eastern play each other in the last time-slot, so one of the 3-0 teams will lose opening the door for a 3-1 team. IM is the best 2-1 team right now so has the inside shot at it unless some sort of perfect storm tie occurs.

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

This is actually entertaining, I'd watch some if I could. USTA should stream it next year, why not? Great reports @schmke

 

[schmke]

This is actually entertaining, I'd watch some if I could. USTA should stream it next year, why not? Great reports @schmke

Yeah, there is usually a fair amount of drama in the last matches. The USTA could do a lot more to promote/cover it including streaming video.

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

Yeah, there is usually a fair amount of drama in the last matches. The USTA could do a lot more to promote/cover it including streaming video.

And it would cost them nothing really, maybe someday.

 

[schmke]

And it would cost them nothing really, maybe someday.

For events at the National Campus where they have video on all/most courts, I have watched some Nationals in the past.

 

[Creighton]

Yeah, there is usually a fair amount of drama in the last matches. The USTA could do a lot more to promote/cover it including streaming video.

At some point the USTA needs to put this guy in charge of recreational adult tennis.

 

[schmke]

At some point the USTA needs to put this guy in charge of recreational adult tennis.

ROTFL. Not sure that will ever happen.

 

[Grizzfan]

Southern and Eastern play each other in the last time-slot, so one of the 3-0 teams will lose opening the door for a 3-1 team. IM is the best 2-1 team right now so has the inside shot at it unless some sort of perfect storm tie occurs.

Southern team eeked it out. Pulling for them tomorrow, will be interesting to see how they do. They already beat 1-2 of the teams in the semis

 

[jdawgg]

Tons of drama, PNW in the semifinals

 

[schmke]

Tons of drama, PNW in the semifinals

Nice wins by them. I predicted their most likely record to be 2-2, but they did have a 30% chance of 3-1 and came through. As a bonus for me perhaps, I played against this team and while I lost in a super tie-break, one of my opponents has gone 3-1 at Nationals so far and raised his rating a full tenth this weekend.

 

[jdawgg]

Yes, he was 4.3 on tennis record last I checked, yet 8.9 utr in singles and 8.6 utr in doubles. That dynamic rating does not pass the sniff test at all.

There are some players in particular on another team who we played in sectional finals who are new to the area and dynamics likely don’t match the level of play. I’ve been told in the past, due to the low volume of matches we have in the PNW (compared to other sections), the dynamics can be slow to catch up.

 

[jdawgg]

PNW beats #1 seed and “favorite” NorCal. We are in the finals!! Southern and ******* tied 2-2 with grinding singles match

 

[jdawgg]

Southern wins

 

[Jack the Hack]

PNW beats #1 seed and “favorite” NorCal. We are in the finals!! Southern and ******* tied 2-2 with grinding singles match

Isn't it the second trip to the 4.5 National championship final for you?

If I've guessed right, you were on a National championship team about a decade ago. I'm from the PNW and captained the best team I ever had assembled that year from my district, but we had unlucky timing because the Sectionals that year were loaded and the eventual National champions were amongst the teams.

Anyway, good luck in the finals and go PNW!!!

 

[jdawgg]

Isn't it the second trip to the 4.5 National championship final for you?

If I've guessed right, you were on a National championship team about a decade ago. I'm from the PNW and captained the best team I ever had assembled that year from my district, but we had unlucky timing because the Sectionals that year were loaded and the eventual National champions amongst the teams.

Anyway, good luck in the finals and go PNW!!!

Haha that’s right. Craziness to be back. Thanks!!

 

[jdawgg]

Lost 2-3 to Southern. Well played by them. 2nd place not too shabby

 

[Jack the Hack]

Lost 2-3 to Southern. Well played by them. 2nd place not too shabby

It was a great run, especially considering that you guys had to win a 3rd set superbreaker to win 3-2 in the finals of Sectionals to even make it to Nationals.

What is the trophy like this year?

Is it a silver plate, crystal paperweight, or something different?

 

[jdawgg]

It was a great run, especially considering that you guys had to win a 3rd set superbreaker to win 3-2 in the finals of Sectionals to even make it to Nationals.

What is the trophy like this year?

Is it a silver plate, crystal paperweight, or something different?

Yes it was a great run. It’s all about the journey.

You get a silver plate that’s actually plastic and has a made in china sticker on the bottom, haha.

The crystal trophies of the past were much better.

 

[J_R_B]

It looks pretty clear by now that a lot of the on paper favorites didn't bring their best. It looks like So Cal is missing 4 of their top 6. Middle States is missing their two stud singles players who were their clear best two players. New England is missing 2 of their top 3 which includes their big college ringer singles guy who was like a high UTR 10 and their best doubles player. Availability makes all the difference.

The Middle States team was a core of players that have been playing together for a couple years. It looks like this year, once they became contenders, it looks like they added a couple of mercenary ringers (one of whom was DQd at sectionals), but the mercenaries weren't on the nationals trip, so more of the old core players played. They have always been a good 4.5 level team, but they aren't a national contender without the late added players that weren't there.

 

[ChaelAZ]

Bah, missed getting up this weekend. Aside from 4.0, the 4.5 is always good matches to get out and spectate.

 

[Snarf]

A theme of this board is whether teams have to cheat to win a National title. I know a couple of the guys on southern. I haven’t gone through their roster with a fine toothed comb, but it doesn’t appear there was anything shady done. (I don’t count playing as a 4.5A unless you manage your scores to avoid strikes) Congrats to them.

 

[schmke]

A theme of this board is whether teams have to cheat to win a National title. I know a couple of the guys on southern. I haven’t gone through their roster with a fine toothed comb, but it doesn’t appear there was anything shady done. (I don’t count playing as a 4.5A unless you manage your scores to avoid strikes) Congrats to them.

Using my Shenanigans Score (mentioned in an earlier thread here and just blogged about it) for the 4.5 men, Southern is actually pretty high, third overall with a total of 12 and a score of 0.80. Middle States and Mid-Atlantic were ahead of them with scores of 0.84 and 1.15 respectively.

Southern had 3 self-rates, an appeal down from 5.0, 5 that had been 5.0C in the past, one that had been a 5.0S, and 2 that had been DQ'd in the past. Any of these single events in isolation doesn't necessarily mean there were shenanigans going on, but the higher the score, the more you go hmmm.

 

[Unforced Terrors]

It looks pretty clear by now that a lot of the on paper favorites didn't bring their best. It looks like So Cal is missing 4 of their top 6. Middle States is missing their two stud singles players who were their clear best two players. New England is missing 2 of their top 3 which includes their big college ringer singles guy who was like a high UTR 10 and their best doubles player. Availability makes all the difference.

So Cal was missing their best dubs line (they had set vacation plans) and their best singles player.

 

[Creighton]

So Cal was missing their best dubs line (they had set vacation plans) and their best singles player.

Tough when the captain wants it more than the players.

 

[schmke]

Tough when the captain wants it more than the players.

Some of this is the captain not telling players in advance important dates so they don't schedule things during Nationals, but some of it is also people having lives outside the USTA and prioritizing that over Nationals. Nothing wrong with that, just a choice they make.

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

Using my Shenanigans Score (mentioned in an earlier thread here and just blogged about it) for the 4.5 men, Southern is actually pretty high, third overall with a total of 12 and a score of 0.80. Middle States and Mid-Atlantic were ahead of them with scores of 0.84 and 1.15 respectively.

Southern had 3 self-rates, an appeal down from 5.0, 5 that had been 5.0C in the past, one that had been a 5.0S, and 2 that had been DQ'd in the past. Any of these single events in isolation doesn't necessarily mean there were shenanigans going on, but the higher the score, the more you go hmmm.

This makes a little more sense to me, the ratings history, because I know most of them and some of them are very very very good, maybe the best 4.5s I've been around including in TX. Good enough to think wow, you are 5.0 level sharp, no weaknesses, super athletic. I will say one of the ex 5.0s is a legit 4.5 bc of age, but yeah, the big guns they relied on are good. I just figured someone else was going to be better or be "hiding" better players that tanked on purpose. I will say 100% none of them tanked to get to 4.5, I can understand the appeals though, no 5.0 teams exist near Memphis.

 

[chatt_town]

This makes a little more sense to me, the ratings history, because I know most of them and some of them are very very very good, maybe the best 4.5s I've been around including in TX. Good enough to think wow, you are 5.0 level sharp, no weaknesses, super athletic. I will say one of the ex 5.0s is a legit 4.5 bc of age, but yeah, the big guns they relied on are good. I just figured someone else was going to be better or be "hiding" better players that tanked on purpose. I will say 100% none of them tanked to get to 4.5, I can understand the appeals though, no 5.0 teams exist near Memphis.

I think I pointed out in another thread. I watched these guys play the sectional final against GA. GA had a squad and had at least one match point to go to nationals before eventually losing it. It went down to the singles guy. One of the guys plays with my mixed team in Atlanta and helped anchor us to a Alta championship about a year or so ago. They end up winning the nationals and they showed a lot of courage at the sectionals. MS had the guy's line I know down a set and 5-1 and they walked them down in the semis before beating GA. I'm really happy for those guys being a TN player myself. I think that ATL team has stamped their card back to the state tourney for next summer to. So whoever is going to state in GA 4.5...if you do win it, it will likely go through them. I know their captain and keeps a great squad. It was hard to pull for either of them once I saw the two guys I knew for the Memphis team. Congrats and way to rep TN and add the southern section.

 

[Snarf]

Using my Shenanigans Score (mentioned in an earlier thread here and just blogged about it) for the 4.5 men, Southern is actually pretty high, third overall with a total of 12 and a score of 0.80. Middle States and Mid-Atlantic were ahead of them with scores of 0.84 and 1.15 respectively.

Southern had 3 self-rates, an appeal down from 5.0, 5 that had been 5.0C in the past, one that had been a 5.0S, and 2 that had been DQ'd in the past. Any of these single events in isolation doesn't necessarily mean there were shenanigans going on, but the higher the score, the more you go hmmm.

lol. I was going to go through the roster to try to defend my position, but it didn't take me very long to get to CC. He played 4.5 in 2016, 2017, and 2018. I'm guessing he got bumped to 5.0 in 2018 and is one of the 5 former 5.0Cs @schmke identified (how do you figure that out if they sit out three years instead of playing at their new level?). CC did indeed sit out three years and was allowed to self-rate 4.5. He joined a 2023 early start league (run by this captain) and had 3, shall we say, surprising match results, generating a 2022 4.5C. My search for a clean national champ continues.

 

[schmke]

lol. I was going to go through the roster to try to defend my position, but it didn't take me very long to get to CC. He played 4.5 in 2016, 2017, and 2018. I'm guessing he got bumped to 5.0 in 2018 and is one of the 5 former 5.0Cs @schmke identified (how do you figure that out if they sit out three years instead of playing at their new level?). CC did indeed sit out three years and was allowed to self-rate 4.5. He joined a 2023 early start league (run by this captain) and had 3, shall we say, surprising match results, generating a 2022 4.5C. My search for a clean national champ continues.

Well, I don't show CC got a 5.0C. He has a 2018 year-end 4.5C (I had him really close to a bump up) so his 4.5S was in-line with his most recent C rating. His ESL results weren't great, but 1-2 and his losses were competitive doesn't scream tanking. And he did lose in a super tie-break in the Nationals final. Certainly bumped up to 5.0 I'd think, but on paper at least not blatantly underrated as a 4.5.

 

[Snarf]

Well, I don't show CC got a 5.0C. He has a 2018 year-end 4.5C (I had him really close to a bump up) so his 4.5S was in-line with his most recent C rating. His ESL results weren't great, but 1-2 and his losses were competitive doesn't scream tanking. And he did lose in a super tie-break in the Nationals final. Certainly bumped up to 5.0 I'd think, but on paper at least not blatantly underrated as a 4.5.

Hm. Who were the previous 5.0 Cs? I see that GT and SM were last computer rated 5.0s in 2018 and 2021, respectively, but IM, RC, and TC just played 5.0 as 4.5s and did not generate 5.0 ratings by doing so. Does the shenanigans score make that distinction?

 

[schmke]

Hm. Who were the previous 5.0 Cs? I see that GT and SM were last computer rated 5.0s in 2018 and 2021, respectively, but IM, RC, and TC just played 5.0 as 4.5s and did not generate 5.0 ratings by doing so. Does the shenanigans score make that distinction?

TC was a 5.0C at 2019 year-end. IM was a 2022 year-end 5.0C and appealed down. GP was a 5.0C at 2019 year-end.