2023 Nationals Week 3 Simulation Posted - 40+ 4.5 Men

2ndServe

Hall of Fame
Giving Hunter Emmott a run for his money as the most egregious and embarrassing rating manipulation in the history of the USTA. Everything is just bigger in Texas...
So it would seem someone in the Texas ratings committee is compromised because 2 extreme outliers like this seems unlikely
 

rod99

Professional
i was going to email the TX league coordinator last night about Strecker and how he was able to get a 4.5 rating. i opened the most recent experienced player guidelines and was shocked that the guidelines say that any player ages 41-50 who played division 1 tennis can self-rate as a 4.5 unless they were ranked in the top 125 in the nation (as an individual, not the team). it's hard to find data on whether or not strecker was in the top 125 so it appears his rating is legit. in the previous version of the guidelines he would have had to rate as a 5.0. in my opinion, the current guidelines are way too lenient. you could have a whole team of 40 year old former division 1 players who played high in the lineup in college, as long as they weren't in the top 125. that's a way higher level player than the average 4.5 hacker.

https://www.usta.com/content/dam/usta/pdfs/10013_experience_player_ntrp_guidelines.pdf
 
Last edited:

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
i was going to email the TX league coordinator last night about Strecker and how he was able to get a 4.5 rating. i opened the most recent experienced player guidelines and was shocked that the guidelines say that any player ages 41-50 who played division 1 tennis can self-rate as a 4.5 unless they were ranked in the top 125 in the nation (as an individual, not the team). it's hard to find data on whether or not strecker was in the top 125 so it appears his rating is legit. in the previous version of the guidelines he would have had to rate as a 5.0. in my opinion, the current guidelines are way too lenient. you could have a whole team of 40 year old former division 1 players who played high in the lineup in college, as long as they weren't in the top 125. that's a way higher level player than the average 4.5 hacker.

https://www.usta.com/content/dam/usta/pdfs/10013_experience_player_ntrp_guidelines.pdf
ITA Ranking archives are here. These rankings are actually easy to look up.


Up until 2000, they only publish top 100, not top 125, but starting in 2001, it goes to 125. Strecker is not listed in the top 100/125 for any of the years 1999-2002.
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
So it would seem someone in the Texas ratings committee is compromised because 2 extreme outliers like this seems unlikely
In Emmott's case, it was all his and Freeman's doing. He self-rated at 5.5, appealed to 5.0, and played in a non-advancing fall doubles league where he was (just coincidentally, of course...) only matched against 4.5s and lost every match like 6-2 6-1 (all while he was winning open level tournaments against 5.0 level competition at the same time). He got a 4.0 C rating from those league matches and (shockingly) showed up on Freeman's 4.0 nationals roster the next year and got double bumped to 5.0 C at the end of the year. That team lost in the finals to an even cheatier team from SoCal in the finals. It was one of the only times I was actually glad to see the cheatiest team win.
 

schmke

Legend
In Emmott's case, it was all his and Freeman's doing. He self-rated at 5.5, appealed to 5.0, and played in a non-advancing fall doubles league where he was (just coincidentally, of course...) only matched against 4.5s and lost every match like 6-2 6-1 (all while he was winning open level tournaments against 5.0 level competition at the same time). He got a 4.0 C rating from those league matches and (shockingly) showed up on Freeman's 4.0 nationals roster the next year and got double bumped to 5.0 C at the end of the year. That team lost in the finals to an even cheatier team from SoCal in the finals. It was one of the only times I was actually glad to see the cheatiest team win.
That SoCal had had (sampling):

4.0C who'd been a 4.0S the prior year and didn't tank (went 6-0!) to get the 4.0C, got the double bump and hasn't played league again

A 2012 and 2013 4.0 who got bumped up to 4.5 and has only played one more league match since (2016)

4.0S who had three losses at Nationals, still bumped up to 4.5 and hasn't played since

4.0S that went 1-1 at Nationals got bumped up to 4.5 and hasn't played since

2012 and 2013 4.0 who got bumped up and hasn't played since

A 2012 4.5 who got bumped down to 4.0 and then got bumped up again and has gone back and forth since. There were a lot of lopsided losses in 2013, and then again in some subsequent years to the point of almost being a 3.5, but got back to 4.5 again after.

A 4.0 who was bumped up to 4.5 and stayed there for years, did appeal down in 2019.

A 2012 4.5 with lopsided losses in 2013 to get bumped down.


That is just a sampling, others look more benign. What is interesting is how many of these basically stopped after the 2014 championship.
 
That is just a sampling, others look more benign. What is interesting is how many of these basically stopped after the 2014 championship.
Beating up on rec players just to get a meaningless 4.0 trophy (while spending time and money to travel) is kind of a waste of time. I guess that after doing that for a year, some of those guys had no particular desire to keep playing league tennis, since that was their only experience with it.
 

schmke

Legend
Beating up on rec players just to get a meaningless 4.0 trophy (while spending time and money to travel) is kind of a waste of time. I guess that after doing that for a year, some of those guys had no particular desire to keep playing league tennis, since that was their only experience with it.
Which begs the question, if these players don't stick around and continue playing league, why should the USTA not crack down on them? It isn't like they continue to maintain and grow the membership.
 

Klitz

Rookie
Which begs the question, if these players don't stick around and continue playing league, why should the USTA not crack down on them? It isn't like they continue to maintain and grow the membership.
Maybe they just wanted to go out on top, like Sampras?

Are you going to post simulations for 18+ 4.0?
 

Vox Rationis

Professional
Maybe they just wanted to go out on top, like Sampras?

Are you going to post simulations for 18+ 4.0?
Yep, probably tomorrow.
Based on UTR strength my strongest teams are Middle States, Southern, Midw3st and Texas in some order. Next batch is So Cal, Florida, Eastern, Nor Cal and maybe PNW.

But strength of schedule always plays a big factor. Of my contenders I have Middle States, Midw3st, Florida and Mid Atlantic as having easier schedules. With Southern and Eastern having potentially much harder schedules amongst the contenders. How that all shakes out will be interesting. Curious to see how your ratings compare to their UTRs.
 
Last edited:

schmke

Legend
Based on UTR strength my strongest teams are Middle States, Southern, Midw3st and Texas in some order. Next batch is So Cal, Florida, Eastern, Nor Cal and maybe PNW.

But strength of schedule always plays a big factor. I have Middle States, Midw3st, Florida and Mid Atlantic as having easier schedules. With Southern and Eastern having potentially much harder schedules. How that all shakes out will be interesting. Curious to see how your ratings compare to their UTRs.
Spot on on the strongest teams, full roster averages I have show the same four teams leading the way. Top-8 averages it changes a bit.

Schedule strengths are in close alignment too on the easiest, toughest I have different with Caribbean, MOValley, and New England having the toughest.

We'll see who shows/plays for each team though, it is rare we see each with bring/play their best across the board.
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
That SoCal had had (sampling):

4.0C who'd been a 4.0S the prior year and didn't tank (went 6-0!) to get the 4.0C, got the double bump and hasn't played league again

A 2012 and 2013 4.0 who got bumped up to 4.5 and has only played one more league match since (2016)

4.0S who had three losses at Nationals, still bumped up to 4.5 and hasn't played since

4.0S that went 1-1 at Nationals got bumped up to 4.5 and hasn't played since

2012 and 2013 4.0 who got bumped up and hasn't played since

A 2012 4.5 who got bumped down to 4.0 and then got bumped up again and has gone back and forth since. There were a lot of lopsided losses in 2013, and then again in some subsequent years to the point of almost being a 3.5, but got back to 4.5 again after.

A 4.0 who was bumped up to 4.5 and stayed there for years, did appeal down in 2019.

A 2012 4.5 with lopsided losses in 2013 to get bumped down.


That is just a sampling, others look more benign. What is interesting is how many of these basically stopped after the 2014 championship.
I did this research at the time. There was a core of 5 or 6 players on that team who were bumped down from 4.5 the previous year after all playing on a last place team. Their 4.5 record the previous year was something utterly ridiculous and impossible like 3-70 (while still winning non-counting mixed matches, mind you...). During their championship run, they also played in doubles-only leagues where they lost every match (badly) ... until they got back from Nationals and the date cutoff for YE passed then they suddenly won the rest. That was the biggest coordinated team-wide ratings manipulation I've ever seen. It put even Freeman to shame (and beat him in the end, too). Freeman tends to look for a couple of absurdly out of level ringers to add to a core of strong 4.0 level players. This team got an entire team of 4.5s to tank at once.
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
Based on UTR strength my strongest teams are Middle States, Southern, Midw3st and Texas in some order. Next batch is So Cal, Florida, Eastern, Nor Cal and maybe PNW.

But strength of schedule always plays a big factor. I have Middle States, Midw3st, Florida and Mid Atlantic as having easier schedules. With Southern and Eastern having potentially much harder schedules. How that all shakes out will be interesting. Curious to see how your ratings compare to their UTRs.
I am not personally familiar with the Middle States team as I am when the Philly or NJ teams advance, but that team beat some really strong teams at sectionals, so they should be formidable.
 

Vox Rationis

Professional
Spot on on the strongest teams, full roster averages I have show the same four teams leading the way. Top-8 averages it changes a bit.

Schedule strengths are in close alignment too on the easiest, toughest I have different with Caribbean, MOValley, and New England having the toughest.

We'll see who shows/plays for each team though, it is rare we see each with bring/play their best across the board.
Oh I should have mentioned I left out teams that I didn’t consider contenders. Essentially my S.O.S. only compares teams I thought had a decent chance of winning. So some of the lower rated teams will naturally have higher strength of schedules than the two I mentioned. I did note MoValley as having the toughest schedule out of all the teams I looked at.

New England, Southwest, and Northern I didn’t look at their S.O.S. because they seemed too weak on paper to make a difference (sorry guys best of luck to you!). Hawaii and Caribbean I never look too deeply into because they play in a bubble. I just assume anything can happen with them haha.
 
Last edited:

onehandbh

G.O.A.T.
i opened the most recent experienced player guidelines and was shocked that the guidelines say that any player ages 41-50 who played division 1 tennis can self-rate as a 4.5 unless they were ranked in the top 125 in the nation (as an individual, not the team).

https://www.usta.com/content/dam/usta/pdfs/10013_experience_player_ntrp_guidelines.pdf
I just read the guidelines and I can self rate as a 3.0.
Anyone with a 3.0 team looking to add another player?

I am ready for 3.0 glory.
 

atatu

Legend
It is effectively one break of serve. Had they gotten one more and tied on games, Florida did win 1D so still would have won it.

I wonder how close the two match tie-breaks were?
The tiebreaker that Florida won on 2d was 10-8. Apparently it was 8-8 and one of the Texas players poached and hit a good volley but the Florida guy reflexed a volley winner back and that was the difference.
 
Top