Can a 4.5 play with a 3.0 in 7.5

[travlerajm]

Breaking news: This weekend in usta mixed I will have a 3.5 partner who has played 8.0 mixed before.

 

[Steady Eddy]

Like this?

She complains, "He never hits to me." That's a typical thing in mixed doubles? What I see often is never hitting to the man, which makes sense if they're trying to win and the woman is the weaker player.

Seems unfair in pool when your opponent runs the table and claims he beat you when you didn't even get a shot. Same way in doubles when you're the partner of the server and you drop a game in which you didn't hit one ball. You could have poached, but that comes with its own political problems. It's also very boring to lace up, bring your equipment and just watch other people play.

But I guess anything in media has to follow today's narrative that it's the man who is always wrong.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

But I guess anything in media has to follow today's narrative that it's the man who is always wrong.

I interpreted it as good humor and based on things I've seen before; if anything, I thought they were poking fun at themselves as well. I did not see it as trying to be politically correct.

 

[Steady Eddy]

I interpreted it as good humor and based on things I've seen before; if anything, I thought they were poking fun at themselves as well. I did not see it as trying to be politically correct.

I don't want to be disagreeable, but in my experience it's always the other way around. Recalling a high, short ball, hits near the middle of the net. No movement. After what felt like an eternity, I go up and put it away. Aunt Bee says, "Ho, I think I could have gotten to that one."

So I"m the jerk? Should I have asked first? Is it like a party where you show good manners by refusing a couple of times until you indulge yourself?

Played a husband wife team. She serves and he puts away the return with a poach. She starts screaming. Why lady? Your team won the point. Aren't you trying to win instead of playing out some form of Affirmative Action? Won't even get into the trouble I had with a lady where my volley hit her on the foot. The foot! That's a cheap shot?

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

I don't want to be disagreeable, but in my experience it's always the other way around. Recalling a high, short ball, hits near the middle of the net. No movement. After what felt like an eternity, I go up and put it away. Aunt Bee says, "Ho, I think I could have gotten to that one."

So I"m the jerk? Should I have asked first? Is it like a party where you show good manners by refusing a couple of times until you indulge yourself?

Played a husband wife team. She serves and he puts away the return with a poach. She starts screaming. Why lady? Your team won the point. Aren't you trying to win instead of playing out some form of Affirmative Action? Won't even get into the trouble I had with a lady where my volley hit her on the foot. The foot! That's a cheap shot?

What you're describing is just low-level doubles thinking [ie "You stay on your side and I'll stay on mine"; or "That was my ball"]. It's independent of gender. I've seen guys say the same types of things.

Higher-level doubles players [both men and women] understand that there is no fixed "your side" and "my side" and that whose ball it is should be determined by what each player can do with that ball, not where they're standing on the court. I remember poaching so far I ended up in my partner's doubles alley. But I put the ball away. It was a calculated risk and I took it.

When I play MXDs 9.0 with 4.5 women, we both know who should have taken which ball; there's none of this thinking you describe.

Heck, even when I play MXDs 8.0 with a 3.5 woman, they know.

In your first example, my response would have been "I thought I had a good play on the ball." Whether I mention that she hadn't moved depends on how well I know my partner.

In your second example, the woman clearly does not understand the role of the server, which is, in addition to trying to get free points, to set her partner up for easy putaway volleys. It sounds like she did just that. She's mad because she believes in the "your side/my side" dichotomy whereas he appears to subscribe to the "whoever has the better shot" philosophy. If I was the server, I'd be thrilled that I set up my partner for the kill. Give me that all day long. I'm perfectly happy to rack up the assists rather than being the one who "scores"; it is, after all, a team effort.

Trying to educate players in real time is almost always a failure unless they are willing to learn. In my example of MXDs 8.0, my partners told me in advance that they wanted me to direct traffic because I'm two levels above them and much quicker. In turn, I always encourage them to go after any volley they think they can be offensive with; I'd rather they error on the side of aggression than hang back and just guard the alley.

You need to play with higher-level players; you'll find it much more enjoyable.

 

[Steady Eddy]

You need to play with higher-level players; you'll find it much more enjoyable.

Higher level helps, but not taking a couple minutes to do an internet search, even after years is hard for me to understand.

Reminds me of the time I was sent to driving school. Instructor said that a lot of people don't know the traffic rules, they say, "This is how I do it and this works for me." Maybe they've been driving 40 years, often they still don't know the rules. The internet is a great source of information, but only if people use it.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Higher level helps, but not taking a couple minutes to do an internet search, even after years is hard for me to understand.

Reminds me of the time I was sent to driving school. Instructor said that a lot of people don't know the traffic rules, they say, "This is how I do it and this works for me." Maybe they've been driving 40 years, often they still don't know the rules. The internet is a great source of information, but only if people use it.

It's not hard at all for me to understand: people are lazy. They've been playing doubles for x years, they got instruction from coach y, the clinic guy doesn't correct them, all of their friends play the same way, etc. There's no reason for them to question their worldview. if the Bryan brothers showed up and gave some tips, then they would listen.

This is more difficult: what I've outlined is based on doubles principles, not on rules. it's a concept of how the game should be played optimally. Different levels of players will have different ideas about this.

Those lower level players will likely stay lower level: even if their shots improve, their understanding of the game will not. That will limit them. The only way that will change is if something happens that forces them to open up to new information.

 

[Steady Eddy]

It's not hard at all for me to understand: people are lazy. They've been playing doubles for x years, they got instruction from coach y, the clinic guy doesn't correct them, all of their friends play the same way, etc. There's no reason for them to question their worldview. if the Bryan brothers showed up and gave some tips, then they would listen.

This is more difficult: what I've outlined is based on doubles principles, not on rules. it's a concept of how the game should be played optimally. Different levels of players will have different ideas about this.

Those lower level players will likely stay lower level: even if their shots improve, their understanding of the game will not. That will limit them. The only way that will change is if something happens that forces them to open up to new information.

I like watching a 3.0 or a 3.5 doubles championship on youtube. They're not sandbaggers. They really have unremarkable strokes. But they don't make lots of silly errors and win points by placement from the net, rather than blasts from behind the baseline. Winning is nice, but also it looks so much more fun than playing hit-or-miss.

 

[PaddyDutch]

ok, if 3.0 women player can hit winners from any position off a shot by an opposing 4.5 male (and that is the situation we are talking about here) then I'd like to see a video of it.

I believe this works 100%, but you need:
1. opponents to be hesitant to hammer balls across as if your partner isn’t there.
2. The woman in question needs to not be intimidated. A history in softball catching helps

As the opponent, After 5 or 6 balls I’d definitely mention that you are free to stand wherever you want, but I’m not going to be playing “around” the person positioned as an obstruction. If she can still volley back points, fair enough.

 

[mikelikesgatorad]

I 100% believe you, as I spend time in the southern section lately, I'm beginning to be impressed with the sneakiness. So far the #1 irregularity I've played in any USTA mixed/combo was in Southern, a 3.5 male, self-rate, who was the #1 singles player for a D2 university in 2009 and is 100% still in shape, currently doing triathlons (he had his race shirt on, we chatted about it). He was a super nice guy and very, no very very good. He wouldn't have been too out of place if he was the higher rated player of the pair, but to be a self-rate 3.5 was silly.

My takeaway from this is that you can stay in shape without playing tennis and still play at a decent level

 

[Moon Shooter]

ok, if that is so even in the league play - why would anyone advocate for mixed doubles results to be included in calculating one's USTA (or any other ranking)? And there are certainly many folks advocating for that, there's I think entire thread dedicated to that. Clearly such 'social contract' prohibits one from playing to win per his/her best ability/tactic, so?

And eventually someone is going to start hitting her with the ball to force her off the net. Of course she enjoys winning, but it's on you for ruining the tennis match by not allowing her to play actual tennis.


The only people I've ever seen advocating for it are people who are new to tennis and don't really understand how league tennis works. Or people trying to cheat the system.

I personally think every season should count on its own. Then your rating should be whichever rating is the highest. The problem with counting adult, mixed, or other leagues like combo is that it gives people seasons to intentionally sandbag so they can win easier on the season they actually care about. In my local league, people quit caring about the adult league so they started throwing games so they could win at combo because it doesn't count toward ratings. So their ratings actually went down as they won sectionals 3 years in a row.

The problem with mixed doubles in adult rec tennis is not directly caused by it involving two different genders. The problem is that there are two different rating systems for men and women that really do not overlap in USTA and the men have a deflated rating compared to women. So the first step should be to have one rating system like WTN and UTR. But even that will not fix the problem if men and women remain separated as they are now. Mixed doubles does not really allow the rating system to adjust between men and women efficiently because both teams always have 1 man and 1 woman. So the rating system has no way to tell whether the male of the female player was more skilled.

So when a female 3.0 is playing like a low level male 2.5 and they are then put on the court with a male 4.0 it gets a bit ridiculous. But of course it depends why the person is lower level. If they have very bad mobility but amazing hands then maybe that can work ok.

In tennis it is not really fun when you are always hitting the ball at a player that is so weak they really don't belong on the court. You are trying to get that weaker player to completely collapse mentally because everyone knows they are the weak link and they are blowing the match. I suppose some sadistic people might like that but for the most part in USTA matches I hope the other team had fun. Of course, when you are trying to win for your team you sort of set that aside and go ahead and ruin the persons day but on the whole it makes the entire match less enjoyable.

Players at these beginning levels can get hurt if they do not know for example that they need to move away from the net when the other side is about to hit an overhead or a short swinging volley. Even a high sitter close to the net is a good way to end up with an eye injury if you are not used to the pace those balls can come back at and you have a partner telling you to stand at the net the whole time. If you are not telling your lower level partner to move back from the net on certain shots like that I think you are setting them up for injury unless the other team just decides beating you is not worth hurting someone else. So I do agree there is a certain amount of abuse in taking that approach. And I have to say I tend to think it is not worth hurting the other team so I and many other players are less enthused to play lower level mixed doubles.

As far as whether mixed games should be rated that depends on what you think is important.
1) If you think having an accurate rating is important you will want to include all the data. The ratings already are very inaccurate due to a lack of data (even though they are just trying to basically divide all the rec male players into 3 big groups) so ignoring data is just making a bad situation worse. Is the ignored data good data? In my experience, it's a very rare tennis player that will actually play worse to lower their rating so the vast majority of these matches would provide much needed and useful data.
2) If you are more concerned about a sandbagger winning a trophy then you might try to do something like Creighton suggests.

But the problem with pursuing goal number 2 is if someone is really going to throw games they can find ways to do it. People can for example join an adult league team one level higher, or they can join a league from a neighboring division etc. Plus now USTA includes many matches in your rating including same gender combos and tri level play. Sandbaggers can easily use that as their "rating killing team" while they try to win at the team they hope to win trophies with. This is not hard to do especially for many of these teams that have the best shot of going to nationals since they have a dense population of USTA tennis players.

I would love to see some stats on how mixed doubles is growing or shrinking in USTA. But in smaller areas like mine mixed doubles is often the majority of a players matches just because you are not limited to half the available players in forming leagues and teams. I just wish USTA would finally get around to fixing the obvious problems with it.

 

[Moon Shooter]

ok, if 3.0 women player can hit winners from any position off a shot by an opposing 4.5 male (and that is the situation we are talking about here) then I'd like to see a video of it.

The opposing team is not usually going to have a 4.5 male in a 7.5 mixed match.

What happens is the 4.5 player hits hard shots at the opposing team that is maybe a 3.5 and 4.0. (if we assume this is a 7.5 mixed) The opposing 3.5 maybe "gets" the ball but it will often be a weak pop up so the 3.0 net player is basically shooting fish in a barrel.

edit: this is especially true when the 4.5 is serving or returning serve. I mean even if you have two 3.5 men playing two 3.5 men and one of the men is really doing well on their serve and serve return the net player just has an easy job putting away weak responses.

Yes when the weak player is returning this can be tough but as long as the 4.5 puts pressure on the server when he is returning and does not allow the server an easy ball to hit down the line eventually the weaker player should either have an UE or cough up an easy ball for the 3.0 net player.

 

[travlerajm]

The problem with mixed doubles in adult rec tennis is not directly caused by it involving two different genders. The problem is that there are two different rating systems for men and women that really do not overlap in USTA and the men have a deflated rating compared to women. So the first step should be to have one rating system like WTN and UTR. But even that will not fix the problem if men and women remain separated as they are now. Mixed doubles does not really allow the rating system to adjust between men and women efficiently because both teams always have 1 man and 1 woman. So the rating system has no way to tell whether the male of the female player was more skilled.

So when a female 3.0 is playing like a low level male 2.5 and they are then put on the court with a male 4.0 it gets a bit ridiculous. But of course it depends why the person is lower level. If they have very bad mobility but amazing hands then maybe that can work ok.

In tennis it is not really fun when you are always hitting the ball at a player that is so weak they really don't belong on the court. You are trying to get that weaker player to completely collapse mentally because everyone knows they are the weak link and they are blowing the match. I suppose some sadistic people might like that but for the most part in USTA matches I hope the other team had fun. Of course, when you are trying to win for your team you sort of set that aside and go ahead and ruin the persons day but on the whole it makes the entire match less enjoyable.

Players at these beginning levels can get hurt if they do not know for example that they need to move away from the net when the other side is about to hit an overhead or a short swinging volley. Even a high sitter close to the net is a good way to end up with an eye injury if you are not used to the pace those balls can come back at and you have a partner telling you to stand at the net the whole time. If you are not telling your lower level partner to move back from the net on certain shots like that I think you are setting them up for injury unless the other team just decides beating you is not worth hurting someone else. So I do agree there is a certain amount of abuse in taking that approach. And I have to say I tend to think it is not worth hurting the other team so I and many other players are less enthused to play lower level mixed doubles.

As far as whether mixed games should be rated that depends on what you think is important.
1) If you think having an accurate rating is important you will want to include all the data. The ratings already are very inaccurate due to a lack of data (even though they are just trying to basically divide all the rec male players into 3 big groups) so ignoring data is just making a bad situation worse. Is the ignored data good data? In my experience, it's a very rare tennis player that will actually play worse to lower their rating so the vast majority of these matches would provide much needed and useful data.
2) If you are more concerned about a sandbagger winning a trophy then you might try to do something like Creighton suggests.

But the problem with pursuing goal number 2 is if someone is really going to throw games they can find ways to do it. People can for example join an adult league team one level higher, or they can join a league from a neighboring division etc. Plus now USTA includes many matches in your rating including same gender combos and tri level play. Sandbaggers can easily use that as their "rating killing team" while they try to win at the team they hope to win trophies with. This is not hard to do especially for many of these teams that have the best shot of going to nationals since they have a dense population of USTA tennis players.

I would love to see some stats on how mixed doubles is growing or shrinking in USTA. But in smaller areas like mine mixed doubles is often the majority of a players matches just because you are not limited to half the available players in forming leagues and teams. I just wish USTA would finally get around to fixing the obvious problems with it.

My impression is that the popularity of mixed doubles in usta has been gaining market share relative to same-gender tennis.

 

[Moon Shooter]

My impression is that the popularity of mixed doubles in usta has been gaining market share relative to same-gender tennis.

It is certainly very popular in my area. In fact 3 of the 4 seasons are dominated by mixed doubles. I am not sure my area even has same gender match play other than the summer season. And quite a few male tennis players around here focus on golf in the summer.

 

[Creighton]

The problem with mixed doubles in adult rec tennis is not directly caused by it involving two different genders. The problem is that there are two different rating systems for men and women that really do not overlap in USTA and the men have a deflated rating compared to women. So the first step should be to have one rating system like WTN and UTR. But even that will not fix the problem if men and women remain separated as they are now. Mixed doubles does not really allow the rating system to adjust between men and women efficiently because both teams always have 1 man and 1 woman. So the rating system has no way to tell whether the male of the female player was more skilled.

So when a female 3.0 is playing like a low level male 2.5 and they are then put on the court with a male 4.0 it gets a bit ridiculous. But of course it depends why the person is lower level. If they have very bad mobility but amazing hands then maybe that can work ok.

In tennis it is not really fun when you are always hitting the ball at a player that is so weak they really don't belong on the court. You are trying to get that weaker player to completely collapse mentally because everyone knows they are the weak link and they are blowing the match. I suppose some sadistic people might like that but for the most part in USTA matches I hope the other team had fun. Of course, when you are trying to win for your team you sort of set that aside and go ahead and ruin the persons day but on the whole it makes the entire match less enjoyable.

Players at these beginning levels can get hurt if they do not know for example that they need to move away from the net when the other side is about to hit an overhead or a short swinging volley. Even a high sitter close to the net is a good way to end up with an eye injury if you are not used to the pace those balls can come back at and you have a partner telling you to stand at the net the whole time. If you are not telling your lower level partner to move back from the net on certain shots like that I think you are setting them up for injury unless the other team just decides beating you is not worth hurting someone else. So I do agree there is a certain amount of abuse in taking that approach. And I have to say I tend to think it is not worth hurting the other team so I and many other players are less enthused to play lower level mixed doubles.

As far as whether mixed games should be rated that depends on what you think is important.
1) If you think having an accurate rating is important you will want to include all the data. The ratings already are very inaccurate due to a lack of data (even though they are just trying to basically divide all the rec male players into 3 big groups) so ignoring data is just making a bad situation worse. Is the ignored data good data? In my experience, it's a very rare tennis player that will actually play worse to lower their rating so the vast majority of these matches would provide much needed and useful data.
2) If you are more concerned about a sandbagger winning a trophy then you might try to do something like Creighton suggests.

But the problem with pursuing goal number 2 is if someone is really going to throw games they can find ways to do it. People can for example join an adult league team one level higher, or they can join a league from a neighboring division etc. Plus now USTA includes many matches in your rating including same gender combos and tri level play. Sandbaggers can easily use that as their "rating killing team" while they try to win at the team they hope to win trophies with. This is not hard to do especially for many of these teams that have the best shot of going to nationals since they have a dense population of USTA tennis players.

I would love to see some stats on how mixed doubles is growing or shrinking in USTA. But in smaller areas like mine mixed doubles is often the majority of a players matches just because you are not limited to half the available players in forming leagues and teams. I just wish USTA would finally get around to fixing the obvious problems with it.

You’re not wrong about the issue with unbalanced pairs and the ratings not being the same for both genders.

In 7.0 there could be a full two level difference between a 4.0 man and 3.0 woman. I would prefer mixed to be 3.0, 3.5, 4.0 etc. or somehow require unbalanced pairs to have the female rated higher. But I can’t think of a way to craft that rule without being sexist.

 

[Chalkdust]

You’re not wrong about the issue with unbalanced pairs and the ratings not being the same for both genders.

In 7.0 there could be a full two level difference between a 4.0 man and 3.0 woman. I would prefer mixed to be 3.0, 3.5, 4.0 etc. or somehow require unbalanced pairs to have the female rated higher. But I can’t think of a way to craft that rule without being sexist.

Not just sexist; the numbers would not work.
For example, for 9.0 mixed, there would not be enough women, since 4.5 men are more common than 4.5/5.0 women.

EDIT: Although, I completely agree with you in the sense that the only time I've ever enjoyed playing mixed is where the ladies are higher rated than the guys.

 

[travlerajm]

Not just sexist; the numbers would not work.
For example, for 9.0 mixed, there would not be enough women, since 4.5 men are more common than 4.5/5.0 women.

EDIT: Although, I completely agree with you in the sense that the only time I've ever enjoyed playing mixed is where the ladies are higher rated than the guys.

I must report that this season of usta mixed has been a statistical fluke for me.

All 5 (100%) of my opponent teams faced during the summer regular usta 8.0 season have been 4.5F/3.5M pairings, the rarest 8.0 combo. I find these pairings to be generally very balanced, but with the female often more “skilled” and the male often having the “more dangerous” weapon.

 

[anirbandutta]

Yes, in a USTA combined doubles event, a 4.5 can partner a 3.0 in a 7.5 NTRP doubles event.

 

[TennisOTM]

Yes, in a USTA combined doubles event, a 4.5 can partner a 3.0 in a 7.5 NTRP doubles event.

This is not true everywhere for league play. There are no national-level USTA leagues for combination 7.5 or any X.5 combo or mixed, so there are no national-level rules for them. The national USTA league rules only refer to X.0 combo or mixed leagues, and for those leagues, rule 2.01A(3) says: "The NTRP difference between members of an individual doubles team may not exceed 1.0. " See https://www.usta.com/es/content/dam/usta/2022-pdfs/2022_League_Regulations.pdf (page 10).

When sections or districts offer X.5 combo or mixed leagues, they should have their own local league regulation document that supplements the national rules. Generally they will list some area-specific rules and default to the national rules for anything not specifically mentioned. So if the local rules don't specifically address the allowed NTRP difference for X.5 combo/mixed league partners, I think it should default to the 1.0 maximum difference above.

For example, for the Intermountain Section the relevant regulations in their document state:

"ITA Mixed Doubles League Tennis will comply with all USTA and ITA general regulations as well as those outlined in 2.00 in the USTA League Regulations.
1) Levels of play for the ITA Mixed Doubles League will be 5.5, 6.5, 7.5, 8.5, and 9.5.
2) Minimum NTRP level for 5.5 is 2.5; 6.5 is 2.5; 7.5 is 3.0; 8.5 is 3.5; 9.5 is 4.0."

So, while 3.0 players can play in the 7.5 league, it seems they cannot partner with a 4.5 player, because there is no local rule that overrides rule 2.01A(3) from the USTA League Regulations.