2025 USTA League Nationals match schedules are out

By the way this is always my favorite thread of the year. People who are all outraged at how he cheats to win such a meaningless trophy, but care enough to be outraged that he is winning it. People have weird hobbies and choose to spend their money in odd ways. The truth is at Nationals at every level every team is some version of the teams he puts together. Sure there are exceptions and "Cool Runnings" teams that suddenly make a run out of nowhere with all computer rates that have played together for years but most of the teams winning are constructed by someone. Whatever the rules are someone will figure out a way to put together a team around them to make a run at Nationals. I look forward to continuing to be entertained by threads just like this.
I love the thread too, it's almost as good as the old Dallas Tennis Blog, but that thing was 200 times more interesting than this including the famous Hitler video etc.

But, there's a nuance here. People from Texas teams will freely admit to "everything", like no big deal, they will say they are sandbagging etc. etc. And I know of only one Texas 4.5 team that hired someone to play on their team, they essentially paid a teaching Pro all the money he would have made teaching on a weekend to play at sectionals for them. And, they told everyone.

The nuance here is UTAH won't admit to what he is doing, that's the fascination, the mental hoops he jumps through are astounding. His own players brag about being paid to play for him, but he won't admit it, that's just amazing! Anyway, that's the interesting part for me. Not much outrage though.
 
The nuance here is UTAH won't admit to what he is doing, that's the fascination, the mental hoops he jumps through are astounding. His own players brag about being paid to play for him, but he won't admit it, that's just amazing! Anyway, that's the interesting part for me. Not much outrage though.
"The only thing more dangerous than ignorance is arrogance." We don't appreciate the arrogant BSing. We would respect honesty and humility.

We could just take the posts here by the captain and show it to USTA and ask, "Is this what you want for 'recruited' self-rates (with past high state championships, etc.) and appeals?" Most of us know that it is not even worth the hassle as USTA has shown it will not do much of anything; USTA is OK being bullied. So, we just focus on the entertainment. It is what it is.
 
Last edited:
The dead giveaway is the strong playing history that technically falls into the 4.0 guidelines.

How many 4.0s under 40 do you think have any real playing history other than playing high school tennis or some local junior tournaments?
 
I've read through some of the old posts. Good stuff. Never saw the Hitler video meme. Bet it was excellent.
It was, it was that crazy movie where Hitler goes off on his generals in the war room and it was re-subtitled to include every captain and inside joke you could think of, a masterpiece.
 
How are division 2/3 players being handled?

They are being allowed to appeal down to a proper level I assume?

THe guidelines for college players are incredibly strict given the level of many d3 players or d2 benchwarmers. Yet players with actual 5.0 level results in high school or juniors can self rate lower
 
Here it is:
It's a good one for like general nationwide USTA, but the Dallas one was a little better and a lot more snarky even mentioning specific captains names and a few more jokes that were more over the top and hilarious even if you didn't know the captains names.

I just wish it all still existed, the blog had fake characters that would post often like Bif Wellington who was a satire of rich country club teams lol etc. The greatest usta tennis joke creation ever.

 
It's a good one for like general nationwide USTA, but the Dallas one was a little better and a lot more snarky even mentioning specific captains names and a few more jokes that were more over the top and hilarious even if you didn't know the captains names.

I just wish it all still existed, the blog had fake characters that would post often like Bif Wellington who was a satire of rich country club teams lol etc. The greatest usta tennis joke creation ever.

The Dallas one was a lot better IMHO. This one is entertaining, but almost comes across as done by the USTA to try to tell people to just go out and play.
 
A few questions:
  1. Can you explain how you have 9 out of 18 players as self rates?
  2. Did you know they were self rated?
  3. Is it your position that they were all truly low-level 4.0 rated players that your program got up to 4.5 level?
  4. Were the two appeals medical appeals or end-of-year auto-appeals?

I want to give you the benefit of the doubt and hear your explanation. As you can imagine (and have read on here), it appears as if you have recruited players who haven't played league/tournaments before or waited 2 years until they could self rate, knowing they were very talented and then protected them from strikes all season in dubs. I come from a 2023 team that did very well in Nationals. We are not naive, when we find a new guy or two that is self rated, we know it will look bad. More importantly, we know their true talent. Most of our guys only train with 4.5 players or former 4.5 players (bumped back down). We also do high-level clinics and play tournaments to train against tougher competition. Regardless, this is all context, and I am willing to listen to your explanation--if you provide one.

i have always said that self-rated players shouldn't be able to play in the post-season. it would eliminate most of the shenanigans. you should have to have a C or an A rating to play in the post-season.
 
i have always said that self-rated players shouldn't be able to play in the post-season. it would eliminate most of the shenanigans. you should have to have a C or an A rating to play in the post-season.
That would be tough. Teams would be very reluctant to bring on new players if they knew they wouldn't be able to play in the post-season.

I think a more practical approach would just be to allow dynamic DQs during post-season. That is, matches at sectionals and nationals would be overturned if a player gets DQd
 
That would be tough. Teams would be very reluctant to bring on new players if they knew they wouldn't be able to play in the post-season.

I think a more practical approach would just be to allow dynamic DQs during post-season. That is, matches at sectionals and nationals would be overturned if a player gets DQd
Or just limit self rates to 1 or 2 per team.
 
That would be tough. Teams would be very reluctant to bring on new players if they knew they wouldn't be able to play in the post-season.

I think a more practical approach would just be to allow dynamic DQs during post-season. That is, matches at sectionals and nationals would be overturned if a player gets DQd
The Utah 4.0 and 3.5 men's captains just have their players throwing games to avoid strikes. It's obvious and embarrassing to watch.
 
Not sure how the cowards in other sections treat this session. But a bunch of cowards here on a super team that all should be rated higher find a hapless team that doesn’t know any better and tank.
 
Hey guys, this is the Utah Captain. I noticed that a few people have speculated that somehow I, or my team, must have cheated in some way to win Nationals. That is absolutely false.

Here is the truth of what we did to win Nationals:

We started training in early January. My team roster included 18 players of all age ranges, including 7 players ages 55+. The oldest player on our team who played at Nationals this year was 68. At the beginning of the year, every player started out well inside the 4.0 level (excepting 2 appeal players—both age 55+, who were right on the 4.5 border).

Starting in early January, we held 4 practices each week. This included 2 team practices, 1 professional singles instruction, and 1 professional doubles instruction.

Starting in the Spring, we also added in a 4.0/4.5 tennis ladder, and many of our players played additional matches each week in the ladder.

We also held our own in-house 4.0/4.5 tournaments. (Note: A key strategy is that we always invite 4.5 guys to our practices and tournaments. Many of them played for me in the past, and are willing to help us improve.)

I organized various scrimmage matches as well. We even played against the BYU women’s tennis team! Most of our match play during the year was actually outside of the USTA league.

I have an app that keeps track of every match played by every player on our team. One of our players played over 100 matches! This player started out the year at about mid 4.0 level and finished well into the 4.5 level because of his 100+ matches and all the professional training. He has a wife, a child, and a full time job. This is not cheating...this is dedication, hard work, and sacrifice. How many other USTA league players played over 100 matches between January and October? Lots of matches + professional instruction is the basic formula for success.

Our team goal is to get everyone up into the 4.5 level before Nationals. At 4.0 Nationals you must be into the 4.5 level to be competitive. Some of you have claimed that being above level is a form of cheating…but if that were the case…every single player who ever moved up a level in the USTA leagues would be “cheating” before the end-of-year ratings came out—because technically they were above level at some point in the year. So you can’t really make a good argument that working hard and legitimately progressing above your current rating level is cheating.

What about sandbagging? I am very much against sandbagging. Several years ago, I stopped telling my players about strikes and Dynamic Disqualification because I didn’t want any chance of tanking games or matches. Because of this, I know my players are always playing fair and to the best of their abilities.

What about my player who got dynamically DQ’d after Nationals? We train hard, and sometimes my players improve too much. But he was still competitive at Nationals. He played 5 matches and only won 2 of them. ALL my players were competitive at Nationals, and several of our matches went to tie breakers. We even lost 1-4 to Texas! Frankly, it was all the practice and training that allowed my players to crawl back from that loss to eventually win Nationals. I was very proud of them. Nationals was very competitive and very close. Texas, Florida, or Eastern could have easily won instead of us.

We worked hard and sacrificed a significant amount of time away from family, work, and our other obligations to make this happen—so please don’t dismiss this win as “cheating” somehow. Nothing could be further from the truth. We earned this Nationals win. If any other captain or team worked harder than us during the year—then maybe they deserved to win instead.

In addition, I enjoy spending hours working on stats and numbers. I know the stats of my players and every player we compete against—I know all the “most likely lineups” of my opponents, possibly even before they do! I try to win every match on paper before we ever play it.

It’s been really fun and fulfilling to build up these teams over the years and do all the numbers. But I’m a year and a half away from age 60 now, and starting to wear out. It is seriously so much work. It’s like having another full time job, and then some. I feel like maybe I need to take some time off from captaining. But first, I need to accomplish one more thing:

A couple years ago, I captained a 4.5 team. At 4.5 Nationals we finished with only a 2-2 record. The 4.5 players did not experience as much improvement in my program as the 4.0 players. Maybe it’s because they are closer to their ceiling? On average, I can increase a 4.0 player’s level by about .36 throughout the year. But I can only increase a 4.5 player’s level by about .21. Example: If a mid 4.0 player starts the year at 3.75, I can generally get him up to 4.11 before Nationals (on average)....some a little more, some a little less.

This is a graph from the app I have, which shows the singles results of the player who was DQ’d after Nationals. These are his singles results from January to June practices (there is a different graph for doubles). You can see he started at 3.60 and eventually hit the 4.5 level by June. He continued to improve and was eventually DQ’d. You can see his improvement trajectory.

IMG-8929.png


However, 4.5 players are different. Last time, I could only take a 4.5 player up .21 on average. However, I have some new training ideas I’d like to try. So I’m thinking about captaining another 4.5 team this next year and taking one more shot at 4.5 Nationals! It’ll be a good challenge!
I’ve heard the ‘we train so hard’ thing a bunch of times with these types of teams.
You seem to chart and graph a bunch.
The real question is what percentage of your wins came from self-rates this year?
 
Every year he's putting a bunch of self-rates who aren't 4.0 on his 4.0 team, and he knows they're not 4.0.

Everything else is noise, and he's happy when critics are distracted by the noise ("how many self rates is too many," "did they play the key matches," "were they really that good and they got hidden, or did they train to get that good," etc etc etc)

Every year he's putting a bunch of self-rates who aren't 4.0 on his 4.0 team, and he knows they're not 4.0. He's a cheater. Critics shouldn't mince words or get distracted from calling it out directly.
 
Every year he's putting a bunch of self-rates who aren't 4.0 on his 4.0 team, and he knows they're not 4.0.

Everything else is noise, and he's happy when critics are distracted by the noise ("how many self rates is too many," "did they play the key matches," "were they really that good and they got hidden, or did they train to get that good," etc etc etc)

Every year he's putting a bunch of self-rates who aren't 4.0 on his 4.0 team, and he knows they're not 4.0. He's a cheater. Critics shouldn't mince words or get distracted from calling it out directly.
I'd counter that critics shouldn't get distracted by name-calling and instead call for solutions to the situation they are criticizing. Calling someone a cheater without real evidence of a broken rule doesn't solve anything, other than perhaps feeling satisfying to the name-caller. If we don't want self-rates to be key players on national championship teams, there are plenty of ways USTA could act to change that situation.
 
I'd counter that critics shouldn't get distracted by name-calling and instead call for solutions to the situation they are criticizing. Calling someone a cheater without real evidence of a broken rule doesn't solve anything, other than perhaps feeling satisfying to the name-caller. If we don't want self-rates to be key players on national championship teams, there are plenty of ways USTA could act to change that situation.
There might not be a rule for self rates but there is evidence. 9 out of 18 players were self rates. 2 more were appeals. So this team arguably only had a legitimate roster of 7 players.
 
Every year he's putting a bunch of self-rates who aren't 4.0 on his 4.0 team, and he knows they're not 4.0.

Everything else is noise, and he's happy when critics are distracted by the noise ("how many self rates is too many," "did they play the key matches," "were they really that good and they got hidden, or did they train to get that good," etc etc etc)

Every year he's putting a bunch of self-rates who aren't 4.0 on his 4.0 team, and he knows they're not 4.0. He's a cheater. Critics shouldn't mince words or get distracted from calling it out directly.
I agree with you--what you are pointing out is so obvious to many. However, at this point, I am asking why we should even care. The product USTA is selling right now is awful. USTA and captains like this deserve each other. There are many changes USTA could make, and it does not. They have policies/guidelines/rules in place, but they do not enforce them. Things happen for a reason. These postings are really just for entertainment.
 
Last edited:
There might not be a rule for self rates but there is evidence. 9 out of 18 players were self rates. 2 more were appeals. So this team arguably only had a legitimate roster of 7 players.
Are other rosters with self-rates or appeal players also not legitimate? Or is it only the scope or degree it is taken to in this case that is the issue?

I agree there should be tighter controls in many different ways, but in the absence of those, and with other teams doing the same thing, perhaps just not to the same degree, it is a level playing field of sorts. I would like to see the level playing field more attainable for more players/teams though.
 
Did everyone get this email? Nationals going to have electric line calling for 40+ this week.
Yeah they had it in Surprise for 4.5 last weekend. No live line calling, it is for challenges only. My team lost a match when an out call was overturned on a challenge. There were varying opinions on it. Sometimes the kiosks didn't work, people felt the marks on the court didn't match the system's call, etc. For the most part it seemed to be popular though. It didn't impede the pace of play or anything, most people seemed to reserve using it for a crucial point or something they were super confident in.
 
I’ve heard the ‘we train so hard’ thing a bunch of times with these types of teams.
You seem to chart and graph a bunch.
The real question is what percentage of your wins came from self-rates this year?
It's a good question, but it's really a trap, he wants a debate about other things besides he pays his players and he gets ridiculous self-rates and won't admit it. The reason why it's difficult to ask questions like this is he can easily respond, not many....because teams like this use "mules" to win the regular season, they have a good roster of workhorses that win in the regular season and then know they won't be playing much at all in postseason. If you ask this year, he would respond,10% self-rate wins and feel vindicated.
Every year he's putting a bunch of self-rates who aren't 4.0 on his 4.0 team, and he knows they're not 4.0.

Everything else is noise, and he's happy when critics are distracted by the noise ("how many self rates is too many," "did they play the key matches," "were they really that good and they got hidden, or did they train to get that good," etc etc etc)

Every year he's putting a bunch of self-rates who aren't 4.0 on his 4.0 team, and he knows they're not 4.0. He's a cheater. Critics shouldn't mince words or get distracted from calling it out directly.
Yes, it is all noise and distraction. It's almost a common thing in society these days, make 25 points so people spend time confused or debating against the 25 points while ignoring the real 2-3 issues.
I'd counter that critics shouldn't get distracted by name-calling and instead call for solutions to the situation they are criticizing. Calling someone a cheater without real evidence of a broken rule doesn't solve anything, other than perhaps feeling satisfying to the name-caller. If we don't want self-rates to be key players on national championship teams, there are plenty of ways USTA could act to change that situation.
USTA can change the way people "cheat" by creating new rules, but nothing will stop the behavior, it will just "change" into new behavior. You have captains willing to treat it like a full time job. The fun part is seeing how some captain won't admit what they are doing, but most of these intense captains will freely admit it and not be delusional.

It's ok to criticize, but I've seen so many rules put in place that are always worked around, over decades. The only way it stops is self-control, but then I personally would have nothing fun to make fun of or be intrigued by.
 
I'd counter that critics shouldn't get distracted by name-calling and instead call for solutions to the situation they are criticizing.
The only actual solution is for the USTA to care about this and want to change it. If they do, there's a million ways they could fix it; if they don't, then suggesting/discussing those million fixes doesn't matter.

Based on their actions so far, I don't think the USTA thinks this is a problem worth solving.
 
While his self rates are questionable, if he had broken a usta rule, that could be settled w a grievance. So we may not like how it looks but he is playing the captain’s game well.

What I think is odd is he keeps wanting to win the 4.0. To me the natural step would be to take the guys bunped to 4.5/ add a few players and try to win at that level. He could continue that same training program to push into 5 0.
 
4.5 is harder to win with young guys. You play college tennis, you can't self-rate as a 4.5 immediately upon exiting. The best 4.5 guys at nationals are roughly 10 UTR. Utah's teams are built off of 18-25 year olds that never played college tennis + old guys that were previously 4.5 but are now 4.0.

The best 4.5 teams are former D2/D3 guys that wait until their late 20's/early 30's to start playing league tennis.
 
You aren't going to gain much of an advantage snagging players with a strong playing history that technically meet the self rate guidelines at 4.5/5.0. Everyone is doing that.

Lots of strong ex college players available to play 4.5 and 5.0.
 
While his self rates are questionable, if he had broken a usta rule, that could be settled w a grievance. So we may not like how it looks but he is playing the captain’s game well.
I disagree with this. I think he did break a rule--the one I copied and pasted several times. I contend that USTA is just not enforcing their rules as much as they could and is waiting on someone to file a grievance. We have lawyers to make cases like this, but no one is going that far. The disqualifications every year show the rule was broken, and USTA is leaving it at that.
 
While his self rates are questionable, if he had broken a usta rule, that could be settled w a grievance. So we may not like how it looks but he is playing the captain’s game well.

What I think is odd is he keeps wanting to win the 4.0. To me the natural step would be to take the guys bunped to 4.5/ add a few players and try to win at that level. He could continue that same training program to push into 5 0.
Theory, I'm a non-stats head but maybe there is a way to look at this statistically, anyway I can't so here's my made up theory. 4.0 offers a better opportunity to recruit people to beat the stuffing out of regular 4.0 players, 3.5 and 3.0 even better, but that's also just a tad harder to find more believable super-players and pretend they are 3.5.

Sooooo, 4.0 is the sweetspot.

Trying to sandbag 4.5 is harder, not impossible and I'm curious if more teams win 4.5 that come out of areas that don't have 5.0 teams at all than the opposite. I know a lot of areas that keep 4.5s at 4.5 level in part because there is no 5.0 organized team competition.

So, I'd say it's really hard to sel-rate and sandbag at 5.0, almost not worth a try.
 
I disagree with this. I think he did break a rule--the one I copied and pasted several times. I contend that USTA is just not enforcing their rules as much as they could and is waiting on someone to file a grievance. We have lawyers to make cases like this, but no one is going that far. The disqualifications every year show the rule was broken, and USTA is leaving it at that.
How would you suggest they enforce the rule? Isn't that what the 3-strike process is for? If a player doesn't get 3-strikes, the USTA seems to believe the rule wasn't broken. And if you have the 3-strike system in place, subjectively deciding players have violated the rule when they haven't gotten 3-strikes is a slippery slope.

One suggestion might be to punish captains who consistently have players that are DQ'd, whether during the year or after Nationals. Points for self-rating too low is actually part of the point penalty system (https://www.usta.com/content/dam/usta/2025-pdfs/2025-league-suspension-point-system.pdf) so presumably points do get accrued, but they seem to be just on the player and not the captain unless the captain assists or condones the inappropriate self-rating. Whether a DQ constitutes proof of inappropriate self-rating I'm not sure.
 
How would you suggest they enforce the rule?
Well, for starters, I think taking the postings here from the captain (talking about how much they are training, using data analyses, etc.) and showing their backgrounds, which USTA can do itself as it uses language about "good athletes," and saying this totally violates your "rule" in your Handbook. This is if I was a lawyer being paid to do this. It is so clear to many what they are doing, and USTA admins seem to know about it. Why should we waste our time during their dirty work? What are you gonna do USTA? They have shown us: nothing besides the computer DQ's. How are we supposed to view this? Can you just state a rule and then have people brag about how they violated it? The messaging is just totally confusing from USTA with regards to what they state and what they allow.
 
Last edited:
You aren't going to gain much of an advantage snagging players with a strong playing history that technically meet the self rate guidelines at 4.5/5.0. Everyone is doing that.

Lots of strong ex college players available to play 4.5 and 5.0.
This is simply not true. Go look at this year's 4.5. This whole forum is obsessed with 4.0 nationals, but the 4.5 guys are doing the same thing. Southern won, and their star guy is a player who definitely could have played college tennis, but instead chose to go to Tennessee and play on the club. He self-rated as 4.5 (when he could have self-rated as a 4.0!), but has since been DQ'ed - as a 10 UTR, he was the highest rated player at 4.5 nationals.

The reality is the ex-D2/D3 college guys are roughly 10-11 UTR upon exiting college. If they self-rate immediately at 22, they're 5.5 according to guidelines. If they wait until they're 26, they can self rate as a 4.5 - but how much have they played in those four years?

Junior tennis background is one factor, but tennis is a game of discipline and repetition. If an ex-low level D1 guy turns 40, is "thinking about picking up a racquet again" and hits for giggles once/month, that guy is going to be a 4.0. Now if he starts hitting 2x/week? He can get back to 4.5 - but these things are so hard to predict ahead of time, which is why the self-rate and DQ system exists.
 
He can get back to 4.5 - but these things are so hard to predict ahead of time, which is why the self-rate and DQ system exists.
Good points--what you state here is fair. However, USTA takes the hard stance in their rules by stating that players who are good athletes and are going to practice a lot should rate at the higher level. USTA just lightly enforces its rule. We could argue the rule should be different, but that is what USTA has decided on. We could argue that a ball that is 99.99% out is out, but that is not what USTA has decided on. Tennis players, of all people, should know that you have to take hard stances in some situations that could be open to interpretation. They have done that in their Handbook.

If you really are not sure and think you are going to practice just once a week and then decide you are gonna be on the regimen this captain has, then just adjust your self-rate accordingly. Think about the greater good more than your individual experience and $100 league fees. Admit you made a mistake and do the right thing. But that really is a rare scenario--what is going on here with the captain is nothing like that. Guys know what they are signing up for given the seminars and workshops he puts on regarding recruiting and finding "like-minded" players, history of his "championships," etc.

And, yes, we are focusing on 4.0 because this captain probably has more championships than any captain in USTA league history. It's also easier to sandbag at the lower levels given that there is a bigger pool to draw on and the nuances of the USTA self-rate guidelines. How this captain has "won" is just plain wrong according to USTA rules.

I don't think it is worth getting into a nuanced discussion on what a rule is. USTA put the language they do on this issue in their Handbook for a reason. That is what they want followed. And if people do the right thing, it makes sense why USTA has the wording this way. They are trying to accommodate for the situation you describe and not penalize those people. It's just a pain to go after those people who are difficult and do not do the right thing.
 
Last edited:
Good points--what you state here is fair. However, USTA takes the hard stance in their rules by stating that players who are good athletes and are going to practice a lot should rate at the higher level. USTA just lightly enforces its rule. We could argue the rule should be different, but that is what USTA has decided on. We could argue that a ball that is 99.99% out is out, but that is not what USTA has decided on. Tennis players, of all people, should know that you have to take hard stances in some situations that could be open to interpretation. They have done that in their Handbook.

If you really are not sure and think you are going to practice just once a week and then decide you are gonna be on the regimen this captain has, then just adjust your self-rate accordingly. Think about the greater good more than your individual experience and $100 league fees. Admit you made a mistake and do the right thing. But that really is a rare scenario--what is going on here with the captain is nothing like that. Guys know what they are signing up for given the seminars and workshops he puts on regarding recruiting and finding "like-minded" players, history of his "championships," etc.

And, yes, we are focusing on 4.0 because this captain probably has more championships than any captain in USTA league history. It's also easier to sandbag at the lower levels given that there is a bigger pool to draw on and the nuances of the USTA self-rate guidelines. How this captain has "won" is just plain wrong according to USTA rules.

I don't think it is worth getting into a nuanced discussion on what a rule is. USTA put the language they do on this issue in their Handbook for a reason. That is what they want followed. And if people do the right thing, it makes sense why USTA has the wording this way. They are trying to accommodate for the situation you describe and not penalize those people. It's just a pain to go after those people who are difficult and do not do the right thing.

I believe this is the paragraph you are referring to as the rule not being enforced:
Note: Players who are good athletes or intend to spend a great deal of time taking lessons and
practicing should be aware that their improvement may be significant enough to surpass their
original self-rating during the local league season or championship play. To avoid NTRP Dynamic
Disqualification, these players should enter at a higher NTRP level of play at the beginning of the
local league season.
To me, the key thing is the last sentence, that to avoid NTRP Dynamic Disqualification they should self-rate at a higher level. It does not say that it is a rule that is being broken if they self-rate too low, and given that, I'm not sure how you would enforce this as a rule.

I raise this not to disagree with you regarding weeding out over-performining self-rated players, nor do I do I disagree with you that players have a certain responsibility to know they are above level and do the right thing. It is just that as the rules are written, I don't think this is an enforceable rule on its own. My read is that the USTA is clearly saying the NTRP Dynamic Disqualification (3-strike DQs) process is what they believe in to police the issue, and they are just warning players if they self-rate too low they may be 3-strike DQ'd.

If we want to crack down on self-rate abuses, I think we need to take some of the steps I've written about before by using WTN or UTR as an input to the self-rating, or lowering strike thresholds, or requiring more matches to be eligible for playoffs and Nationals, or several others I've highlighted before.
 
I believe this is the paragraph you are referring to as the rule not being enforced:
You left out the paragraph right before it, which is key. I have pasted and referenced it again. It's on page six. The title of the document this language is in is the USTA Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations: https://www.usta.com/content/dam/us...onal-regulations-with-q-a-interpretations.pdf. To me, that means what is in there is a rule and/or regulation.

It's rule/regulation number five. There are eight other rules/regulations in this section. The rule/regulation just before it is as follows: "4. Players with a valid NTRP rating level must enter at that level or higher. (See Valid NTRP Computer Ratings Table)." I think that is clear as a rule/regulation. Do you want to challenge that rule/regulation as well? Do you think it is leaving open the possibility that a 6.5-NTRP player can play at the 2.5 level up until they get a DQ by the computer (three strikes)? Would it be OK for this 6.5 player to just play two matches in the regular season to be eligible, play at Nationals, and get a computer-DQ the following Monday? If not, why do you think that rule/regulation number five below should not be treated as a rule/regulation? So, the computer would not let this person register. Should all regulation be done by the computer then? There is no distinction between the nine rules/regulations in this section; they are all equal. Have you looked at the layout of this section and how official it is? How would you like USTA to change the layout/language here? The note part gives further clarification and gives equal weighting for violating the guidelines chart and the language about being a good athlete and planning to practice a lot.

"5. Players in the USTA League without a valid computer rating must self-rate in accordance with the General & Experienced Player Guidelines – Supplement to the NTRP Guidelines. Factors such as a player's on-court performance, tennis background, and any additional information should be considered in the self-rating decision. When players are rating themselves, if they question at which level they should play, they should place themselves in the higher NTRP level of play.

Note: Players who are good athletes or intend to spend a great deal of time taking lessons and practicing should be aware that their improvement may be significant enough to surpass their original self-rating during the local league season or championship play. To avoid NTRP Dynamic Disqualification, these players should enter at a higher NTRP level of play at the beginning of the local league season."

They have a link to a 21-page Q & A supplement with interpretations: Notably, the above language is not even discussed there. I guess USTA thought it was clear enough. It's very clear to me what one should do.

Would you like to contact USTA and ask that they use the word "rule" more throughout the document as the title of the document is not sufficient? That seems like a simple enough change that they could maybe actually do without much effort. That's the kind of change they seem to like. Should they just state a reminder on every page that this document is for rules and everything in it is a rule? At the top of the page this language is on, it already states, "2025 USTA League National Regulations - 4/23/2024." That language is on every page.

Chat GPT I tells me that the word "regulation" is actually more strict than "rule":
Prompt: What is the difference between a rule and regulation?

"Good question — rules and regulations are closely related, but they’re not exactly the same. Here’s a clear breakdown:

1. Definition

  • Rule:
    A rule is a specific guideline or principle that tells people what they can or cannot do. It’s usually more general and may apply within an organization, game, or community.

    Example: “No running in the hallways” is a school rule.

  • Regulation:
    A regulation is a type of rule made and enforced by an authority—often a government agency—to carry out laws. Regulations are usually more formal, detailed, and legally binding.

    Example: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations on air quality standards.
In short:

All regulations are rules, but not all rules are regulations.
Regulations are legally binding rules made by official authorities to enforce laws.
Would you like me to give a simple real-world example comparing the two (for example, in business or school)?"


Based on this, I think it is fair to say that the above language is a regulation and rule, and even more strict than a rule. More shame to these captains for breaking rules and regulations.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure how you would enforce this as a rule.
We're going to have to agree to disagree. To me, everything mentioned in the USTA Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations is a rule and/or regulation as that is the title of the document. I guess the test would be to file a grievance with USTA and see what they say. It seems no one has actually done that. Lawyers get paid to do things like that. League tennis is supposed to be a hobby. It's stressful and confrontational to have to deal with things like this. I guess though that some people consider that part of it a hobby as well. A lot of people just say forget it, you can have your championship as well as the guilt that comes with it.

At the end of the day, while this forum serves as a type of entertainment, it is not our job to enforce USTA rules and regulations. That's on them.
 
Last edited:
We're going to have to agree to disagree. To me, everything mentioned in the USTA Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations is a rule and/or regulation as that is the title of the document. I guess the test would be to file a grievance with USTA and see what they say. It seems no one has actually done that. Lawyers get paid to do things like that. League tennis is supposed to be a hobby. It's stressful and confrontational to have to deal with things like this. I guess though that some people consider that part of it a hobby as well. A lot of people just say forget it, you can have your championship as well as the guilt that comes with it.

At the end of the day, while this forum serves as a type of entertainment, it is not our job to enforce USTA rules and regulations. That's on them.
Yep, we can agree to disagree, no problem with that.

And I have asked folks at the USTA and they say the paragraph I quoted isn't an enforceable rule but is a guideline to aid in someone self-rating themselves, in essence a warning they could be dynamic DQ'd if they self-rate too low when they know they may improve quickly. So if the USTA doesn't consider that paragraph a rule, ...

Someone can always file a grievance against a player and how the grievance committee would render a decision is hard to predict as they can take into account a variety of information and each case is unique. But I also know that players have and will appeal those decisions and unfortunately at times the USTA may be leery of those appeals and potential lawsuits (yes, it has happened) and thus wants to stick to strictly objective rules, and not subjective opinion of guidelines or "should" statements.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cks
Yep, we can agree to disagree, no problem with that.

And I have asked folks at the USTA and they say the paragraph I quoted isn't an enforceable rule but is a guideline to aid in someone self-rating themselves, in essence a warning they could be dynamic DQ'd if they self-rate too low when they know they may improve quickly. So if the USTA doesn't consider that paragraph a rule, ...

Someone can always file a grievance against a player and how the grievance committee would render a decision is hard to predict as they can take into account a variety of information and each case is unique. But I also know that players have and will appeal those decisions and unfortunately at times the USTA may be leery of those appeals and potential lawsuits (yes, it has happened) and thus wants to stick to strictly objective rules, and not subjective opinion of guidelines or "should" statements.
Thank you for this information. This is really disappointing to hear. I don't think I should spend more time on this subject. It's just not worth it. USTA is going to do what they want. It is not worth it to file a lawsuit and challenge what they say to people and do and then compare it to what they have written. One could claim false advertising. That seems to be the only option left if one really wants change. The USTA Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations has clear language to me. If the points I made in the long post above do not resonate, I don't know what else to say. I feel the system USTA has in place now is for those with a lot of resources like this captain. It is not justice in my opinion. It is just sad to me. Better to focus my time and energy on things that give me hope and joy.
 
Last edited:
Yep, we can agree to disagree, no problem with that.

And I have asked folks at the USTA and they say the paragraph I quoted isn't an enforceable rule but is a guideline to aid in someone self-rating themselves, in essence a warning they could be dynamic DQ'd if they self-rate too low when they know they may improve quickly. So if the USTA doesn't consider that paragraph a rule, ...

Someone can always file a grievance against a player and how the grievance committee would render a decision is hard to predict as they can take into account a variety of information and each case is unique. But I also know that players have and will appeal those decisions and unfortunately at times the USTA may be leery of those appeals and potential lawsuits (yes, it has happened) and thus wants to stick to strictly objective rules, and not subjective opinion of guidelines or "should" statements.

Yeah the issue is that the Utah captain is violating the social norms, which is far worse than violating USTA rules but not subject to punishment from the USTA.
 
Ok @schmke and anybody from the Southern section how did the nationals winning Southern 40+ 3.5 Mississippi team make it to districts finishing second in its local league of only two teams?
 
Ok @schmke and anybody from the Southern section how did the nationals winning Southern 40+ 3.5 Mississippi team make it to districts finishing second in its local league of only two teams?
I'm guessing they knew both teams would advance so the season was just to get players qualified?

Most guys played just the minimum two matches, but interestingly the self-rates played more as their match count to be qualified is higher, and all three went 0-4 ...
 
Iirc I saw an 8utr that played at 3.5 nationals with a 6-4 6-4 win over a 3utr doubles team during the regular season.

Not only is it obvious, but it also makes you wonder just how strong some of these players are. They have utrs massively out of level while throwing matches.
 
Back
Top