Bumps by section 2020.

denoted

Rookie
There is a rumor circulating that Southern decided to count/calculate ratings for more than just the spring adult league and factored them in. They were trying to see who was sandbagging in spring to play out in combo, singles, etc. Not sure if that is true or not, but some are saying that explains some of the unusual bump ups.
Rumor circulating where? With what basis? Am very interested in hearing more!
 

brettatk

Semi-Pro
Here in Georgia, we've always counted all seasons whether 18+, 40+, or 55+. What doesn't count is combo, mixed (unless you play only mixed), and tri-level. So that couldn't have been the case down here.
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
So will TLS and TR let their year end ratings stand or adjust them? They are off by quite a bit for many in the southern section. Seen more than a few guys with 3.8 ish ratings that are now USTA 4.5's who cannot appeal down.
I don't know about TLS, but in past years, TR has made a correction. For example, if TR calculated someone to 3.95 but they got bumped to 4.5, then they would "adjust" their rating to 4.01 to start the next year, and if you look at their ratings around now, there are a ton of players with 4.0100 or 3.9900 or 4.5100. In particularly bad years for their calculation, there are almost a comical number of players at these fake rating levels.
 

Moveforwardalways

Hall of Fame
Rumor circulating where? With what basis? Am very interested in hearing more!
Just some guys from my local league talking. Trying to figure out a pattern. Some guys on our teams got bumped while guys rated ahead of them did not. We are just trying to see what the pattern was. Some are also hypothesizing that if you had any match at all that rated up you got bumped even if your aggregate rating wasn't bump level.
 

Moveforwardalways

Hall of Fame
I don't know about TLS, but in past years, TR has made a correction. For example, if TR calculated someone to 3.95 but they got bumped to 4.5, then they would "adjust" their rating to 4.01 to start the next year, and if you look at their ratings around now, there are a ton of players with 4.0100 or 3.9900 or 4.5100. In particularly bad years for their calculation, there are almost a comical number of players at these fake rating levels.
Will be hilarious to see guys with 3.8x year end ratings all of the sudden showing 4.01 or something.
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
Here in Georgia, we've always counted all seasons whether 18+, 40+, or 55+. What doesn't count is combo, mixed (unless you play only mixed), and tri-level. So that couldn't have been the case down here.
Mixed will never (and should not) count for obvious reasons, but they could easily add combo to tri-level. In Middle States (and I think most sections) tri-level definitely counts. We don't have combo at all.
 

brettatk

Semi-Pro
Mixed will never (and should not) count for obvious reasons, but they could easily add combo to tri-level. In Middle States (and I think most sections) tri-level definitely counts. We don't have combo at all.
I've always been surprised that tri-level does not count around here.
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
There is a rumor circulating that Southern decided to count/calculate ratings for more than just the spring adult league and factored them in. They were trying to see who was sandbagging in spring to play out in combo, singles, etc. Not sure if that is true or not, but some are saying that explains some of the unusual bump ups.
I would applaud the section if they did that without telling anyone and screwed a ton of people who were sandbagging regular league matches. LOL.
 

kevrol

Hall of Fame
The thought is Sections don't include tri-level, combo, etc because then the cheaters would just use those leagues to manage ratings.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
There is a rumor circulating that Southern decided to count/calculate ratings for more than just the spring adult league and factored them in. They were trying to see who was sandbagging in spring to play out in combo, singles, etc. Not sure if that is true or not, but some are saying that explains some of the unusual bump ups.
Southern did include sanctioned NTRP tournaments this year.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
I would applaud the section if they did that without telling anyone and screwed a ton of people who were sandbagging regular league matches. LOL.
Randomly deciding which leagues to include/exclude isn't a bad idea.

But then, I like the idea of randomly moving the thresholds each year to vary who is top of level and give different players a shot at advancing. 2020, 4.0s are 3.41-3.90, 2021, they are 3.61-4.10. Hard for the manipulators to hit a moving target.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
One of the guys on my team is listed as a 3.68 on TR and was bumped to 4.5 and could not appeal down.
So I had the player nowhere close to 3.68, that is egregiously low, but I didn't have him over 4.0 either, so technically miss for me. But I did have him close enough to 4.0 that whatever adjustment up the USTA seems to have done to Southern 4.0s would have gotten him over and bumped up and likely out of appeal range.
 
There is a rumor circulating that Southern decided to count/calculate ratings for more than just the spring adult league and factored them in. They were trying to see who was sandbagging in spring to play out in combo, singles, etc. Not sure if that is true or not, but some are saying that explains some of the unusual bump ups.
Just some guys from my local league talking. Trying to figure out a pattern. Some guys on our teams got bumped while guys rated ahead of them did not. We are just trying to see what the pattern was. Some are also hypothesizing that if you had any match at all that rated up you got bumped even if your aggregate rating wasn't bump level.
Sounds like they're just making stuff up to come to terms with what they don't understand. Highly doubt any of that is even remotely close to the truth.
 
But then, I like the idea of randomly moving the thresholds each year to vary who is top of level and give different players a shot at advancing. 2020, 4.0s are 3.41-3.90, 2021, they are 3.61-4.10. Hard for the manipulators to hit a moving target.
This has always been my favorite idea. That way everyone could just play and do their best. The fun will be in competing to win and not in cheating to win.
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
Just some guys from my local league talking. Trying to figure out a pattern. Some guys on our teams got bumped while guys rated ahead of them did not. We are just trying to see what the pattern was. Some are also hypothesizing that if you had any match at all that rated up you got bumped even if your aggregate rating wasn't bump level.
How did they know who was ahead of who?
 

winchestervatennis

Hall of Fame
At least 8 guys from the SC 18+ 4.5 team that went to sectionals got bumped to 5.0. The shame is SC does not have 5.0 leagues, just register a team and you go right to state. So for those guys < 40 thats very little playing opportunity next year. And tough to get 3 matches in to potentially get bumped back down to 4.5. League tennis was fun while it lasted.
 

J011yroger

Talk Tennis Guru
Correct. My hypothesis is that being bigger has diminishing returns. Compared with a section like Northern, yes, all that Southern has to offer from the larger pool of players to being more tested will result in Southern beating Northern at Nationals the majority of the time. But other sections like Eastern Mid-Atlantic, Middle States, Middlewest, Texas, SoCal, NorCal, Florida, and PNW are all large enough that given how teams are formed locally, can compete with Southern toe to toe in most years.
Thing is that southern is huge, I'd think super teams would come out of more dense sections, I'd think that 75% of the Eastern players are within an hour drive from Manhattan, Mid Atlantic is similarly dense, and maybe SoCal?

I'm obviously wrong but that's what I would think logically.

J
 

kevrol

Hall of Fame
Thing is that southern is huge, I'd think super teams would come out of more dense sections, I'd think that 75% of the Eastern players are within an hour drive from Manhattan, Mid Atlantic is similarly dense, and maybe SoCal?
Problem is SoCal may be 30 miles apart but that translates to 4+ hrs. LOL
 

J011yroger

Talk Tennis Guru
Problem is SoCal may be 30 miles apart but that translates to 4+ hrs. LOL
Lol, I don't live in NYC but I play 5.0 & 10.0 there in addition to Long Island to sneak a couple extra matches in, I remember one match two years ago where my GPS said I was 2.1 miles away and my ETA was 38 minutes.

In California it seems like you are either going 80mph or 5mph.

J
 

kevrol

Hall of Fame
Someone here likened TR and TLS to reading tea leaves

It shouldn't be trusted by any means
Taken as a whole (comparing team vs team) I find they are very accurate. However relying on them for an individual's rating, none of the sites are to be relied upon.

There's a player here that TR has as a 3.31 and TLS has as a 3.23 that was bumped to 4.0 and denied an appeal already this morning so is above threshold for appeal. Of course this is Southern and something was obviously adjusted here.
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
Taken as a whole (comparing team vs team) I find they are very accurate. However relying on them for an individual's rating, none of the sites are to be relied upon.

There's a player here that TR has as a 3.31 and TLS has as a 3.23 that was bumped to 4.0 and denied an appeal already this morning so is above threshold for appeal. Of course this is Southern and something was obviously adjusted here.
Right. Their algorithms are going to take in consideration what they think the USTA's algorithm does, so they're probably going to somewhat accurate at least in relative terms.

But taking their dynamic ratings at face value (e.g.: TR/TLS says I'm 3.61 so I'll be bumped to 4.0) is not very useful because they have no idea how the USTA is going to adjust the knobs, figuratively speaking
 

2ndServe

Hall of Fame
Looks like if you win nationals like PNW did years ago and Southern did this year it inflates it for everyone around you. Take a look at bumps the other years other sections won
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
Thing is that southern is huge, I'd think super teams would come out of more dense sections, I'd think that 75% of the Eastern players are within an hour drive from Manhattan, Mid Atlantic is similarly dense, and maybe SoCal?

I'm obviously wrong but that's what I would think logically.

J
Middle States is like that. People can play in NJ, Philly, & DE districts within an hour or so drive, plus Eastern PA not too much further. In 4.0, you do see that exact thing all the time. For example, the team in Philly that's been to nationals the last 3 years added their top singles player from a South Jersey team and added a top doubles team from DE. The team that won NJ district added their top doubles team from an Eastern team from NYC. I play in NJ and Philly and I add players from my NJ team to my PA roster when I can, too. The result has been MS placing at nationals 5 of the last 7 years with "augmented" teams.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
Southern needs to be broken up into 3 sections IMO. If I were king of USTA I'd do the following:

  • Carolinas (NC & SC)
  • Southern (GA, TN, KY)
  • Gulf (LA, MS, AR, AL)
Won't happen, Southern won't give up that much power.

But do that and split up *******, and you have a nice round 20 sections. Of course, then the USTA could do un-flighted round-robin and have a greater chance of silly scenarios at Nationals!
 

J011yroger

Talk Tennis Guru
Won't happen, Southern won't give up that much power.

But do that and split up *******, and you have a nice round 20 sections. Of course, then the USTA could do un-flighted round-robin and have a greater chance of silly scenarios at Nationals!
All matches 4 courts and rock paper scissors in case of 2-2 tie.

J
 

Tattooedracket

New User
TR had me at 3.78, TLS had me at 3.75, bumped up to 4.5, appeal denied above the threshold. I know not to trust those sites, but wow I was shocked. In Texas.
 

Snarf

New User
Won't happen, Southern won't give up that much power.

But do that and split up *******, and you have a nice round 20 sections. Of course, then the USTA could do un-flighted round-robin and have a greater chance of silly scenarios at Nationals!
Most of the chatter I’ve heard from state and sectional tournament heads is that the unflighted format is driven by the desire to give all teams 4 matches. They say folks complain when they only get three matches.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
Most of the chatter I’ve heard from state and sectional tournament heads is that the unflighted format is driven by the desire to give all teams 4 matches. They say folks complain when they only get three matches.
That is true, and when it is used in a way that accomplishes this, it usually avoids most of the downsides of the format (not enough matches for large flights leading to ties and tough tie-breakers). The format is not fundamentally bad when used appropriately. But 17 teams at Nationals with 4 matches per team is borderline risking some bad scenarios. 20 teams would definitely cause them to happen fairly often.
 

Snarf

New User
I thought I already posted this so my apologies if this is a drunk double post, but 22 of 36 people in 18’s 4.5 local league got bumped to 5.0. 3 of those who stayed down were 4.0’s coming in to 2019. All 4.5s now. 2 of those bumped to 5.0 have been able to appeal. Southern section.
 

Snarf

New User
That is true, and when it is used in a way that accomplishes this, it usually avoids most of the downsides of the format (not enough matches for large flights leading to ties and tough tie-breakers). The format is not fundamentally bad when used appropriately. But 17 teams at Nationals with 4 matches per team is borderline risking some bad scenarios. 20 teams would definitely cause them to happen fairly often.
Surely they would do 4 groups of 5 in a 20 team scenario - thereby guaranteeing all teams 4 matches.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
Two matches Friday and Saturday in each bracket. Semis and finals on Sunday.
Makes too much sense, will never happen ...

To be fair, I think they like the increased drama of un-flighted round-robin with a team that loses early still being in it (as long as there aren't four undefeated teams). With flights, you lose early and are possibly just going through the motions hoping the team you lost to loses, and even then likely being on the outside as you have the head-to-head disadvantage should they lose and be tied with you.
 

McLovin

Legend
@schmke...I have a question maybe you can help with:
There is a player who was a self-rated 4.5 on the Mid-Atlantic team that won Nationals. Discounting his mixed play, he was 14-1 on the season, and went 5-0 at Nationals, all in singles, without losing a set. Additionally, he beat 2 players during the season (one at Nationals) who were bumped to 5.0 this past week.​
So...how the F is he still a 4.5?!?!?!?​
 
@schmke...I have a question maybe you can help with:
There is a player who was a self-rated 4.5 on the Mid-Atlantic team that won Nationals. Discounting his mixed play, he was 14-1 on the season, and went 5-0 at Nationals, all in singles, without losing a set. Additionally, he beat 2 players during the season (one at Nationals) who were bumped to 5.0 this past week.​
So...how the F is he still a 4.5?!?!?!?​
Maybe some of his best wins were against other self-rates who had yet to garner a rating? Maybe he was in appeal range? Did he have any close matches against 4.0s? That's the best I got. Sounds pretty ridiculous otherwise.
 
Top