Big problem with 5.0+ rule

[rod99]

I haven't been on this forum in over a year but I felt like I needed to vent some frustration that I have with the 5.0+ rule for 18+.

I'm a 34 year old average 5.0 player. Better at singles than doubles. For years I was a 4.5 and I got bumped up a few years ago. I didn't like it but I understood and felt that I should be bumped up. Played a year at 5.0 and went 4-3 at singles. About this time last year I find out about this 5.0+ rule that allows up to two 5.5 players to be on a 5.0 team. I was livid.

Our area now has several recent Div 1 top 6 players that have self-rated as a 5.5 and playing on 5.0+ teams. I suppose that is their accurate rating but how is it competitive to me or them to play against eachother? It gets even more ridiculous once you get to states/regionals/nationals.

This has caused me and several other players in my situation to stop playing spring league tennis. It's just not fun anymore. It's also causing high end 4.5 players to tank games in order to avoid being bumped to 5.0 and be in the same situation as me. This is resulting in fewer 5.0 teams instead of more. I'm planning on sitting out three years and hoping to self-rate as a 4.5.

Another problem is how it affects new computer ratings. These 5.5 players are likely to get bumped down to 5.0 due to playing against 5.0s and 4.5s (playing up). A big flaw in the computer system is players getting bumped down for competing against players who are "playing up", even if they dominate them. This is going to result in 24 year old Div 1 top 6 players being computer rated at 5.0 and then being able to play combo and mixed.

I realize that the goal of USTA is to get more people to play. However if someone is good enough to be a 5.5 then it should be understandable that there is not a league for them.

I'm sure this has been discussed on this board but wanted to hear some thoughts.

 

[J_R_B]

When you turn 40, you'll be the plus player and people will be plssed at you.

 

[rod99]

When you turn 40, you'll be the plus player and people will be plssed at you.

another thing i dislike....the 40+ leagues. hopefully that is long gone by the time i turn 40.

 

[J_R_B]

another thing i dislike....the 40+ leagues. hopefully that is long gone by the time i turn 40.

I wasn't real thrilled with the 40+ league when they announced it last year, but now that I've put together a whole team full of 42 year olds that went to nationals and finished second, i've warmed to the idea. LOL.

 

[schmke]

Good points, I wrote about this same issue and how it is going to result in 5.5s getting bumped down on my blog here.

In your case, did you not have a 5.5 on your team and have to play on court 1 against the 5.5s? In theory, the USTA was planning on all teams having two 5.5s and by requiring they play court 1 would ensure they are playing each other resulting in competitive matches and not having the unavoidable bump downs you and I have described. The problem arises when a team doesn't have a 5.5 and in an effort to win courts 2/3 sacrifices a weaker player against the 5.5 on court 1. The 5.5 is in a no win situation unless they win 6-0,6-0 and their rating goes down.

It will be interesting to see what happens at year-end and if the USTA has to step in to avoid too many 5.5s getting bumped down.

Note of course this same situation can occur in 40 & over with 5.0s in the 4.5+ leagues.

 

[schmke]

another thing i dislike....the 40+ leagues. hopefully that is long gone by the time i turn 40.

Why do you dislike it? There have been lots of reasons folks have offered, but I'm interested in your view since you said you haven't been around for a year and haven't been influenced by others opinions yet

 

[rod99]

Good points, I wrote about this same issue and how it is going to result in 5.5s getting bumped down on my blog here.

In your case, did you not have a 5.5 on your team and have to play on court 1 against the 5.5s? In theory, the USTA was planning on all teams having two 5.5s and by requiring they play court 1 would ensure they are playing each other resulting in competitive matches and not having the unavoidable bump downs you and I have described. The problem arises when a team doesn't have a 5.5 and in an effort to win courts 2/3 sacrifices a weaker player against the 5.5 on court 1. The 5.5 is in a no win situation unless they win 6-0,6-0 and their rating goes down.

It will be interesting to see what happens at year-end and if the USTA has to step in to avoid too many 5.5s getting bumped down.

Note of course this same situation can occur in 40 & over with 5.0s in the 4.5+ leagues.

once i saw the new rule then i didn't even register for a team. based on what you said, a 5.0 player like myself is essentially relegated to playing #2 doubles. i'm a decent enough singles player to be competitive against other 5.0s. however, that's been taken out of the equation due to the 5.5s that can be on the team.

 

[rod99]

Why do you dislike it? There have been lots of reasons folks have offered, but I'm interested in your view since you said you haven't been around for a year and haven't been influenced by others opinions yet

a couple of reasons:

1) it results in fewer players/teams playing 18+. in several of the leagues around here, the # of teams went down significantly once the 40+ league was offered.

2) 40-49 year old players aren't really hampered by playing younger players in doubles. i see no reason to make leagues for them when they shouldn't be compromised as it is.

3) when state championship time comes around, availability of players becomes an issue. if the weekend of states is the same for 18+ and 40+ (assuming the same location) then that is a lot of tennis for people to play, and there are numerous scheduling conflicts due to the overlap of matches. if the weekends are back to back then many players cannot take off work (or have the $) to play both weekends. this causes teams to struggle to field lines at states.

i realize that $ is probably a driving force behind the league (if a 40+ player registers for both 18+ and 40+ then that's more revenue for the USTA) but i think it limits the quality and the quantity of league tennis as it is now.

most 40+ players that i've talked to around here dislike the 40+ leagues.

 

[atatu]

once i saw the new rule then i didn't even register for a team. based on what you said, a 5.0 player like myself is essentially relegated to playing #2 doubles. i'm a decent enough singles player to be competitive against other 5.0s. however, that's been taken out of the equation due to the 5.5s that can be on the team.

Well, why don't you put together your own team and play singles ? Yeah, you might get killed, but you'll get to play some great players and maybe you'll get bumped down to 4.5 and you won't have to wait three years. It's always better to play....

 

[velvel95]

There is so much wrong with OP’s post…..

Luckily there are still more of us who value experience and development over wins.

 

[rod99]

There is so much wrong with OP’s post…..

Luckily there are still more of us who value experience and development over wins.

what are you talking about? the point of the USTA is to have competitive matches. the + rule has stopped this from happening in many situations. you don't see a 3.5 league that allows for two 4.0s to play. you know why? because in most cases it wouldn't be competitive.

i can go out and find 5.0s to hit with in my spare time and for fun.

clueless response.

 

[jservoss]

I think the biggest problem is the skill range that 5.5 encompasses. I feel like the 5.5s fit into 3 buckets of players.

I think a majority of the 5.5s I know are former average college players who deserve a 5.5 or 5.0 (but got stuck self rating at 5.5) rating and are a good fit for the league.

Another large section of the 5.5s are players who just have had a lot of success at 5.0 and got bumped up. They can't overwhelm 5.0s, but they have a winning record. These players also are a good fit for the league and don't really cause huge mismatches.

The last group of players are the top tier college players and in some cases former pros that when thrown in to matches with 5.0s or legit 5.5s the tennis isn't even competitive. These players I see as a problem.

 

[goober]

Well, why don't you put together your own team and play singles ? Yeah, you might get killed, but you'll get to play some great players and maybe you'll get bumped down to 4.5 and you won't have to wait three years. It's always better to play....

Yah 3 years is a long time. Putting together your own team would work. You would have to lose by substantial margins to get bumped down though playing against a 5.5. If you lost something like 6-4, 6-3 you could actually solidify or even raise your rating.

Alternatively you could the less honorable approach do what a lot of other people do- just tank your matches. If your section counts tourneys you could enter a few. I know a guy who got bumped to 4.5 at ESR in August. He promptly signed up for the next 3 tournaments available and lost in straights to everybody. His year end rating was 4.0C and he captained his team to sectionals the following year.

 

[rod99]

Yah 3 years is a long time. Putting together your own team would work. You would have to lose by substantial margins to get bumped down though playing against a 5.5. If you lost something like 6-4, 6-3 you could actually solidify or even raise your rating.

Alternatively you could the less honorable approach do what a lot of other people do- just tank your matches. If your section counts tourneys you could enter a few. I know a guy who got bumped to 4.5 at ESR in August. He promptly signed up for the next 3 tournaments available and lost in straights to everybody. His year end rating was 4.0C and he captained his team to sectionals the following year.

well i've already sat out one year. i'd rather sit out than tank matches. plus, if the 5.5 i would end up playing decides to tank (or throw games) then it would incorrectly raise my rating.

i've got plenty of ways to play tennis outside of USTA. i think the + league idea is severely flawed and would prefer that it goes away, but i can still play for fun with guys at my level (several who are stuck in the same situation as me).

 

[jservoss]

well i've already sat out one year. i'd rather sit out than tank matches. plus, if the 5.5 i would end up playing decides to tank (or throw games) then it would incorrectly raise my rating.

i've got plenty of ways to play tennis outside of USTA. i think the + league idea is severely flawed and would prefer that it goes away, but i can still play for fun with guys at my level (several who are stuck in the same situation as me).

I think it feels flawed right now because it has only been in effect for 1 years, so the 5.5 players haven't been calibrated yet. There is so much variance within that one rating level.

However, I don't think the + league should be thrown out just because of that, because there are a ton of 5.5 players who fit in well among the 5.0s and it has sucked for them in the past because they haven't been able to play. As a player who has been getting closer and closer to the 5.5 rating (at least according to schmke's ratings) it would suck if I got stuck in the 5.5 dead zone. In fact, I had debated tanking a season just to avoid that, but that doesn't look like it will be necessary now.

 

[velvel95]

I am talking about you being a weak individual. USTA rules allow play .5 up. Why do not you complain about that rule? Is it fun for you to beat up on some weak players, macho man?!? I mean not so macho.
There are plenty of us who do enjoy playing up, but have no opportunity to do so because there are no 5.0 or 5.5 leagues around.
You advocate mediocrity while looking to be better than the competition. Pathetic.

 

[schmke]

Yah 3 years is a long time. Putting together your own team would work. You would have to lose by substantial margins to get bumped down though playing against a 5.5. If you lost something like 6-4, 6-3 you could actually solidify or even raise your rating.

I agree with the "just play" approach. If you lose 6-4,6-3, that is a competitive match so you are getting what you are after. If you lose worse than that consistently, there is a good chance you could get bumped down.

But more importantly, you said you like singles, so play court 2 singles and it will be against a 5.0 which should be a competitive match. The issues arise when a team doesn't have a 5.5 and 5.0s or 4.5s are forced to play court 1.

 

[rod99]

I am talking about you being a weak individual. USTA rules allow play .5 up. Why do not you complain about that rule? Is it fun for you to beat up on some weak players, macho man?!? I mean not so macho.
There are plenty of us who do enjoy playing up, but have no opportunity to do so because there are no 5.0 or 5.5 leagues around.
You advocate mediocrity while looking to be better than the competition. Pathetic.

internet tough guy i see. such a clown post.

ignoring your garbage.....

i'm not saying i should be better than everyone at my level. i'm saying that i should be playing against people at my level. as i said i went 4-3 in singles last year before this rule. i was where i should be. regardless of whether or not i choose to play up, this is going to be a multi-year problem b/c the 5.5 players will get bumped down just for playing against 5.0s. that's a flaw in the system. then you're going to have legit 5.5 players being computer rated at 5.0 and playing leagues like 9.0 mixed (with a 4.0 girl). playing combo as well. until the USTA addresses the flawed issue of players' ratings going down just for playing against players who are playing up (even if they dominate them) then this is going to be an issue.

if all 3.5s were forced to play in a 4.0 league (i realize that only two 5.5s can be on a team but that could encompass 2 out of 3 courts) then imagine the complaints that would come out.

 

[rod99]

I agree with the "just play" approach. If you lose 6-4,6-3, that is a competitive match so you are getting what you are after. If you lose worse than that consistently, there is a good chance you could get bumped down.

But more importantly, you said you like singles, so play court 2 singles and it will be against a 5.0 which should be a competitive match. The issues arise when a team doesn't have a 5.5 and 5.0s or 4.5s are forced to play court 1.

i'm not sure how your 5.0+ leagues are structured but ours are 1 singles and 2 doubles. there is no #2 singles in the 18+ 5.0+ leagues. if there was then i wouldn't be complaining. right now 2 out of the 3 courts can have a 5.5 playing.

 

[goober]

well i've already sat out one year. i'd rather sit out than tank matches. plus, if the 5.5 i would end up playing decides to tank (or throw games) then it would incorrectly raise my rating.

i've got plenty of ways to play tennis outside of USTA. i think the + league idea is severely flawed and would prefer that it goes away, but i can still play for fun with guys at my level (several who are stuck in the same situation as me).

BTW you cannot self rate lower than your previously expired computer rating. You can self rate appeal though to 4.5. So your 3 year plan may or may not work. That rule was instituted several years ago.

 

[velvel95]

you are one weak confused individual. 5.5 will not be able to play 9.0 league because only one point difference allowed between partners in doubles/mixed. If you only wanted to play against people at your level than you should have never played USTA as you may ran into some one who is .5 below you.

 

[schmke]

i'm not sure how your 5.0+ leagues are structured but ours are 1 singles and 2 doubles. there is no #2 singles in the 18+ 5.0+ leagues. if there was then i wouldn't be complaining. right now 2 out of the 3 courts can have a 5.5 playing.

You are right, I was thinking of the 40 & over 4.5+ league where (in some sections at least) it still is 2 singles and 3 doubles.

But even with the 18 & over 5.0+ league where it is 1 singles and 2 doubles, only one 5.5 can play in a team match. So only 1 of the 3 courts will possibly have a 5.5. So only a 33% chance of facing one, and only 50% chance if you feel compelled to be on a court 1 for some reason. So most of the time you won't be facing a 5.5, and if you do, embrace the challenge and test yourself.

I just don't see the huge issue, you aren't going to be facing a 5.5 every match.

 

[beernutz]

i'm not sure how your 5.0+ leagues are structured but ours are 1 singles and 2 doubles. there is no #2 singles in the 18+ 5.0+ leagues. if there was then i wouldn't be complaining. right now 2 out of the 3 courts can have a 5.5 playing.

Would you have a problem if only 1 5.5 were allowed to play each match? Unless you made them play #1 doubles only then you'd be in the same situation as now.

 

[schmke]

if all 3.5s were forced to play in a 4.0 league (i realize that only two 5.5s can be on a team but that could encompass 2 out of 3 courts) then imagine the complaints that would come out.

Perhaps you didn't mean it this way, but when it is a 3 court league, only one 5.5 can play in a team match so only 1 of the 3 courts will have a 5.5 on it.

See http://assets.usta.com/assets/1/15/2013_Regs_final_draft.pdf page 11

2.01A(1)a In Plus (+) NTRP levels utilizing three individual matches within a team match, no more than one Plus (+) level player shall be allowed to play in a team match and shall be required to play in the #1 position, either singles or doubles

 

[Maui19]

you are one weak confused individual. 5.5 will not be able to play 9.0 league because only one point difference allowed between partners in doubles/mixed. If you only wanted to play against people at your level than you should have never played USTA as you may ran into some one who is .5 below you.

Just stop. You are cra-pping up the thread with this drivel.

 

[rod99]

you are one weak confused individual. 5.5 will not be able to play 9.0 league because only one point difference allowed between partners in doubles/mixed. If you only wanted to play against people at your level than you should have never played USTA as you may ran into some one who is .5 below you.

reading comprehension is not your friend. what i was saying is that the 5.5 player will be bumped down to 5.0 simply due to playing 5.0s in the 5.0+ league. then this player (i mentioned the 5.5 player b/c the player is likely still a 5.5 in skill even though he was bumped down due to playing 5.0s) will be able to play with a 4.0 girl in 9.0 mixed.

generally guys who act tough on the internet are trying to compensate for something....or lack thereof.

 

[rod99]

Perhaps you didn't mean it this way, but when it is a 3 court league, only one 5.5 can play in a team match so only 1 of the 3 courts will have a 5.5 on it.

See http://assets.usta.com/assets/1/15/2013_Regs_final_draft.pdf page 11

i actually didn't realize that. i had thought that you could play two 5.5s in a match but had to put them at #1 singles and #1 doubles. i guess you can only play one 5.5 player but can have two on the roster. not as bad as i thought but i still don't like it.

an even bigger issue is the 5.5 players being bumped down by simply playing 5.0s. that is going to have lasting consequences by computer rated players at 5.0 who are legit 5.5 players.

 

[KOFS]

I was out of USTA tennis for 6 years but had to come back at the rating I left at, so sitting out doesn't do any good.

 

[J_R_B]

i actually didn't realize that. i had thought that you could play two 5.5s in a match but had to put them at #1 singles and #1 doubles. i guess you can only play one 5.5 player but can have two on the roster. not as bad as i thought but i still don't like it.

an even bigger issue is the 5.5 players being bumped down by simply playing 5.0s. that is going to have lasting consequences by computer rated players at 5.0 who are legit 5.5 players.

It's just going to make the 5.0 level tougher. The thing you have to remember is that there is no universal standard for a "5.5 player". 5.0 & 5.5 are levels that are defined by the governing body (i.e. USTA). If the USTA decides to define the levels differently, that's their perogative. It will benefit some and hurt others. This is the perspective that you need to understand NTRP. 5 years ago I was a decent 4.0. Then the USTA changed how the levels were defined in the two years of the big bump, and now I'm a nationals caliber 4.0 player. Is that because I'm suddenly a world beater? No, it's because the USTA arbitrarily redefined 4.0 in a way where pretty much everyone better than me was bumped to 4.5. I benefitted from that immensely, but that's lucky, not good, and when I was just a decent player at the level, I just played for fun and for the competition, knowing that there were some people at the level better than me that will beat me long before I get to nationals. You have to be able to just play for fun when you don't happen to be at the top of an arbitrary skill level boundary.

You see various forms of this complaint on here all the time. What it boils down to is that most people think that the arbitrary skill level boundary should always be set right at the level they are so that they should be the best player at the level and people better are sandbaggers or cheaters who shouldn't be there. While there are certainly rare examples of people cheating or gaming the system to play out of level, that's not the case 99% of the time.

 

[Rjtennis]

what are you talking about? the point of the USTA is to have competitive matches. the + rule has stopped this from happening in many situations. you don't see a 3.5 league that allows for two 4.0s to play. you know why? because in most cases it wouldn't be competitive.

i can go out and find 5.0s to hit with in my spare time and for fun.

clueless response.

I understand why you would be frustrated. A 5.5 player with a college fitness level would NOT be competitive. That's a high level of play as is and when you through in the fitness factor at singles that's just too much. There are only a few 5.5's in my area and they completely destroy the very solid 5.0 singles players they play. Even in doubles they control the match easily. With that said, in my area there is nowhere close to enough 5.5 players to make a 5.5 league so I don't know what the solution is.

 

[velvel95]

How convenient for you to hide behind 4.0 girl. You exposed yourself in the original post. You are poor 34 year old cry baby who is treated unfairly. A “flawed” system created a possibility for you to face a better competition. “Let me find my sorry followers. I am so hurt.” Where is your response to my question how come you were fine all these years playing against weaker players? Do not worry - I do not expect one. There is no weaseling out of being a cry baby. Just give up. Quit. That is clearly the best solution for you. At least have a decency not to explore your weak nature. Embarrassing. Well, congratulations on finding fans.

 

[sam_p]

It's just going to make the 5.0 level tougher. The thing you have to remember is that there is no universal standard for a "5.5 player". 5.0 & 5.5 are levels that are defined by the governing body (i.e. USTA). If the USTA decides to define the levels differently, that's their perogative. It will benefit some and hurt others. This is the perspective that you need to understand NTRP. 5 years ago I was a decent 4.0. Then the USTA changed how the levels were defined in the two years of the big bump, and now I'm a nationals caliber 4.0 player. Is that because I'm suddenly a world beater? No, it's because the USTA arbitrarily redefined 4.0 in a way where pretty much everyone better than me was bumped to 4.5. I benefitted from that immensely, but that's lucky, not good, and when I was just a decent player at the level, I just played for fun and for the competition, knowing that there were some people at the level better than me that will beat me long before I get to nationals. You have to be able to just play for fun when you don't happen to be at the top of an arbitrary skill level boundary.

You see various forms of this complaint on here all the time. What it boils down to is that most people think that the arbitrary skill level boundary should always be set right at the level they are so that they should be the best player at the level and people better are sandbaggers or cheaters who shouldn't be there. While there are certainly rare examples of people cheating or gaming the system to play out of level, that's not the case 99% of the time.

Yep, this is the plight of the great unwashed at most levels. Certainly good enough to be at that level but not at the top of the heap. It is frustrating to many and leads to some degree of sandbagging by some. It also leads to unscrupulous captains seeking out "unknown" skilled players and convincing them to self-rate too low. Personally, I have much more fun playing against other 4.5 players - I play better and enjoy the game more, win or lose.

Edit - BTW - "the great unwashed" isn't an insult, I include myself among those at the 4.5 level...

 

[Spin Doctor]

I understand why you would be frustrated. A 5.5 player with a college fitness level would NOT be competitive. That's a high level of play as is and when you through in the fitness factor at singles that's just too much. There are only a few 5.5's in my area and they completely destroy the very solid 5.0 singles players they play. Even in doubles they control the match easily. With that said, in my area there is nowhere close to enough 5.5 players to make a 5.5 league so I don't know what the solution is.

For the rest of us toiling away below 5.5, how does this ability gap translate? Are you completely out of the rallies entirely or can you hit competitively and sneak out a couple of games? Just curious if the disparity is greater than a 5.0 vs. 4.5 or 4.5 vs. 3.5 or something like that.

 

[schmke]

i actually didn't realize that. i had thought that you could play two 5.5s in a match but had to put them at #1 singles and #1 doubles. i guess you can only play one 5.5 player but can have two on the roster. not as bad as i thought but i still don't like it.

an even bigger issue is the 5.5 players being bumped down by simply playing 5.0s. that is going to have lasting consequences by computer rated players at 5.0 who are legit 5.5 players.

Playing two 5.0s, each having to be on court 1 (they both can be 1D) is the rule if there are 5 courts being played.

 

[rod99]

How convenient for you to hide behind 4.0 girl. You exposed yourself in the original post. You are poor 34 year old cry baby who is treated unfairly. A “flawed” system created a possibility for you to face a better competition. “Let me find my sorry followers. I am so hurt.” Where is your response to my question how come you were fine all these years playing against weaker players? Do not worry - I do not expect one. There is no weaseling out of being a cry baby. Just give up. Quit. That is clearly the best solution for you. At least have a decency not to explore your weak nature. Embarrassing. Well, congratulations on finding fans.

you are clearly very young, immature, and not very bright. again, you are not able to comprehend my post. i'm not talking about myself "hiding behind a 4.0 girl". i'm talking about a 5.5 player being bumped down to 5.0 (bumped down simply by playing 5.0s/4.5s in the + league) and being able to play with a 4.0 girl (not even sure where "hiding" even came from) in 9.0 mixed.

in response to your question (which i am answering) i was rated a 4.5 for 8 years before i got bumped. once i got bumped to 5.0 then i was ok with it b/c that is where i belonged. playing against 5.0s. some were better than me and some were not, but it's where i belonged.

that's like a 3.5 being bumped to 4.0 and now having to play against 4.5s. there is a big difference.

my opinion is that if someone is good enough to be a 5.5 then you shouldn't expect there to be a league for you. go play open tournaments or hit with local college players.

 

[rod99]

It's just going to make the 5.0 level tougher. The thing you have to remember is that there is no universal standard for a "5.5 player". 5.0 & 5.5 are levels that are defined by the governing body (i.e. USTA). If the USTA decides to define the levels differently, that's their perogative. It will benefit some and hurt others. This is the perspective that you need to understand NTRP. 5 years ago I was a decent 4.0. Then the USTA changed how the levels were defined in the two years of the big bump, and now I'm a nationals caliber 4.0 player. Is that because I'm suddenly a world beater? No, it's because the USTA arbitrarily redefined 4.0 in a way where pretty much everyone better than me was bumped to 4.5. I benefitted from that immensely, but that's lucky, not good, and when I was just a decent player at the level, I just played for fun and for the competition, knowing that there were some people at the level better than me that will beat me long before I get to nationals. You have to be able to just play for fun when you don't happen to be at the top of an arbitrary skill level boundary.

You see various forms of this complaint on here all the time. What it boils down to is that most people think that the arbitrary skill level boundary should always be set right at the level they are so that they should be the best player at the level and people better are sandbaggers or cheaters who shouldn't be there. While there are certainly rare examples of people cheating or gaming the system to play out of level, that's not the case 99% of the time.

see, i think there is a universal standard for a 5.5 player, at least for those who are self-rating. if you look at the "General & Experienced Player Guidelines" chart that defines NTRP levels then a 5.5 is defined by a combination of age and experience. it's not a moving target like it is at lower levels where college/futures/satellite experience is not relevant. i don't know any 5.5 player who didn't at least play college tennis. for example a top 75 ranked Div 1 college player that is between 31-40 years old is a 5.5.

 

[anubis]

OP: why don't you switch to playing open-level tournaments instead? You'd get all the competition you want there. In my area, there's normally a good 10 or 12 per year. They are a lot of fun, I occasionally play them but I'm only a 3.0 so I obviously get my butt handed to me.

If I was in your situation, that's probably the route I'd go. The ones with bigger prize purses will draw from a larger pool of better, more talented players. you'll get some good competition there.

 

[jservoss]

OP: why don't you switch to playing open-level tournaments instead? You'd get all the competition you want there. In my area, there's normally a good 10 or 12 per year. They are a lot of fun, I occasionally play them but I'm only a 3.0 so I obviously get my butt handed to me.

If I was in your situation, that's probably the route I'd go. The ones with bigger prize purses will draw from a larger pool of better, more talented players. you'll get some good competition there.

The open tournament in the PNW always schedule matches on weekdays where you have to take time off work to play in them. They also have larger entry fees. They just aren't nearly as accessible as the USTA leagues.

Additionally, the skill variance in those tournaments varies by a huge amount. There are 3.5s that enter just for the experience and semi-pros that can destroy legit 5.5. Its an expensive gamble if you're looking for competitive matches.

 

[tennis tom]

OP: why don't you switch to playing open-level tournaments instead? You'd get all the competition you want there. In my area, there's normally a good 10 or 12 per year. They are a lot of fun, I occasionally play them but I'm only a 3.0 so I obviously get my butt handed to me.

If I was in your situation, that's probably the route I'd go. The ones with bigger prize purses will draw from a larger pool of better, more talented players. you'll get some good competition there.

There's your answer, all other play is for practice or social, why allow a computer to control your tennis game or destiny?

 

[tennis tom]

The open tournament in the PNW always schedule matches on weekdays where you have to take time off work to play in them.

Doesn't everyone work from home around here?

 

[jservoss]

Doesn't everyone work from home around here?

Yes, but 90 second changeovers isn't enough time to come up with carefully crafted emails to make it look like I'm working.

 

[JLyon]

problem I have with the 5.0+ is the stretching of the rating now by eager captains, such as bringing in a former U of Illinois player from 2002-03 and being able to self-rate him at 5.5, when it clearly should be 6.0, but Section and locals let it go and poof you now have a highly ranked college player under 35 playing 5.0's

 

[tennis tom]

Yes, but 90 second changeovers isn't enough time to come up with carefully crafted emails to make it look like I'm working.

Then you need to take a "shower break" or run out for a "burger".

 

[rod99]

problem I have with the 5.0+ is the stretching of the rating now by eager captains, such as bringing in a former U of Illinois player from 2002-03 and being able to self-rate him at 5.5, when it clearly should be 6.0, but Section and locals let it go and poof you now have a highly ranked college player under 35 playing 5.0's

not only that but also sometimes playing 4.5s that are playing up. then the 5.5 gets bumped down to 5.0 just for playing lower rated players and they get computer rated at a level they should not be.

this is what is causing many 4.5s to tank matches/games in the 4.5 league so they don't get stuck playing these guys.

 

[J_R_B]

see, i think there is a universal standard for a 5.5 player, at least for those who are self-rating. if you look at the "General & Experienced Player Guidelines" chart that defines NTRP levels then a 5.5 is defined by a combination of age and experience. it's not a moving target like it is at lower levels where college/futures/satellite experience is not relevant. i don't know any 5.5 player who didn't at least play college tennis. for example a top 75 ranked Div 1 college player that is between 31-40 years old is a 5.5.

The self-rating guidelines are put together to best slot new players into the USTA rating levels as they have defined them, but they are not even close to perfect. You can have a 35 year old former D1 college player who works as a teaching pro, stays fit, and competes in open tournaments and a 35 year old former D1 college player who put down his rackets for 10 years, got a desk job, started a family, and gained 50 pounds who now wants to get into USTA leagues to get back in shape. In reality, they're nowhere close to the same level on the court, yet they are on paper. The self-rating guidelines will still work for most people even if they move the goalposts on the rating bands a little. If they get too far disjointed, then the USTA will have to change the guidelines or be prepared to grant a bunch of self-rating appeals to get people to the correct level. This isn't a major change. It will allow some people who are 5.5s to move down to 5.0 when they otherwise wouldn't (and similarly from 5.0 to 4.5 in 40+), but not everyone. There will still be a lot of 5.5s who play mostly 5.5s or kick *** enough against 5.0s to stay 5.5.

In addition, it may take a couple years to normalize, but the downward pressure on ratings will filter through lower levels. In other words in year one, some lower 5.5s will be rated down to 5.0. In the next year, when they smoke the lower level 5.0s who wouldn't have even been playing them in previous years, some of those 5.0s will end up rated down to 4.5. The following year, that class of newly rated down 4.5s will smoke the lower level 4.5s and some of them will be rated down to 4.0. Eventually, the whole system will reach an equilibrium again at a slightly different place. The whole change will benefit the players that end up at the upper boundary of the new equilibrium and hurt those who were at the upper boundary but now are at the middle of the level, but it's not inherently biased or unfair towards anyone in particular.

 

[asimple]

I think one of the issues is that there actually are similar levels of play which would allow better grouping than the current lines that the USTA are setting at least in terms of singles. There seems to be clusters of players right around the 4.0/4.5 boundary and the 4.5/5.0 boundary which I believe are natural.

The 4.0/4.5 boundary consists mainly of people who took tennis up later in life and have never really played competitive tennis. The 4.5/5.0 boundary consists mainly of people who played competitive tennis when they were young but were not in the top tier. There is a clear difference in the styles of tennis between these groups and I think the arbitrary line should attempt to separate them. There are obviously people who don't fit in this, but these levels fit much better with my playing partners.

I would personally move the boundaries up 1/2 of the current level, and for the highest level (5.5/Open) add prize money to add incentives for participation.

 

[rod99]

I think one of the issues is that there actually are similar levels of play which would allow better grouping than the current lines that the USTA are setting at least in terms of singles. There seems to be clusters of players right around the 4.0/4.5 boundary and the 4.5/5.0 boundary which I believe are natural.

The 4.0/4.5 boundary consists mainly of people who took tennis up later in life and have never really played competitive tennis. The 4.5/5.0 boundary consists mainly of people who played competitive tennis when they were young but were not in the top tier. There is a clear difference in the styles of tennis between these groups and I think the arbitrary line should attempt to separate them. There are obviously people who don't fit in this, but these levels fit much better with my playing partners.

I would personally move the boundaries up 1/2 of the current level, and for the highest level (5.5/Open) add prize money to add incentives for participation.

i think plenty of 4.0s/4.5s played tennis growing up and many were fairly successful at it. obviously not Div I (or II) material but still decent players.

while i would like 5.5s to be grouped with opens (as opposed to 5.0s) i have no idea where any prize money would be funded from.

 

[anubis]

The open tournament in the PNW always schedule matches on weekdays where you have to take time off work to play in them. They also have larger entry fees. They just aren't nearly as accessible as the USTA leagues.

Additionally, the skill variance in those tournaments varies by a huge amount. There are 3.5s that enter just for the experience and semi-pros that can destroy legit 5.5. Its an expensive gamble if you're looking for competitive matches.

First of all, I've played around 8 tournaments this year alone, and none of them had any matches scheduled during normal working hours. Any matches during the week were after 5:00 pm. So I have trouble believing that if the OP wanted to start to play tournaments, he'd have difficulty in finding them after hours.

Secondly, you're saying that skill variance is wide. True, but when you're a 5.5, who cares? At the 5.5 level, you really ought to expect serious players and high-level competition. If you get the occasional 3.5 who is just "trying his luck", then all the better -- you practically get a walk over.

Lastly, as to "expensive", the highest price tournament i've payed for this year was $48.88. I mostly play NTRP level tournaments, but there's always an open rank slot as well, and it's always the same price.

 

[jservoss]

First of all, I've played around 8 tournaments this year alone, and none of them had any matches scheduled during normal working hours. Any matches during the week were after 5:00 pm. So I have trouble believing that if the OP wanted to start to play tournaments, he'd have difficulty in finding them after hours.

In the Seattle area, to get anywhere by 5pm requires leaving at least an hour earlier. At 5 all the highways are backed up.

Furthermore, the Washington State Open and the Pacific Northwest Championships (the two largest Open tournys near me) both schedule matches during the day. The tournaments that have an NTRP with an additional Open category don't usually draw strong enough players to be worthwhile.

It may be different for other players, but for me, the USTA league tennis is where I consistently find the best competitive play without having travel or take time off work.

 

[schmke]

I think one of the issues is that there actually are similar levels of play which would allow better grouping than the current lines that the USTA are setting at least in terms of singles. There seems to be clusters of players right around the 4.0/4.5 boundary and the 4.5/5.0 boundary which I believe are natural.

The 4.0/4.5 boundary consists mainly of people who took tennis up later in life and have never really played competitive tennis. The 4.5/5.0 boundary consists mainly of people who played competitive tennis when they were young but were not in the top tier. There is a clear difference in the styles of tennis between these groups and I think the arbitrary line should attempt to separate them. There are obviously people who don't fit in this, but these levels fit much better with my playing partners.

I would personally move the boundaries up 1/2 of the current level, and for the highest level (5.5/Open) add prize money to add incentives for participation.

Interesting hypothesis. To there are actually an increased number of players (a cluster) at the boundaries, I took a look at the count of players at each rating down to the tenth that I have. See blog post here with the chart and details.

Now, perhaps you weren't necessarily saying the clusters around the boundaries were larger, but from my data at least, that doesn't seem to be the case.