Change NTRP to include ALL of your leagues?

[GrandBanana]

I was wondering what your opinions are if the NTRP would include ___ALL___ of your leagues you played throughout the year instead of just the same-sex league that's played in the summer?

I myself think it would be a great idea. I do not like the idea of playing in 4 or 5 leagues each year and having only ONE of them count toward my rating. Talk about putting all of your eggs in one basket!

What I'd like to propose to USTA is that the year-end calculation takes scores from each of your leagues, assigns a weight to each of them (or point system, if you will, with certain types of leagues being more heavily weighted than others), and calculate a grand total based on ALL leagues. Granted, your scores from major leagues (the same-sex summer league) will have the most pull, while others (a one-day tournament, for example) would not carry as much weight.

Doing this would ensure that your full year's membership, enthusiasm, and league fees would be going toward your overall rating as a player. The ratings should be based on your full year-long participation and commitment to the USTA, not just based on two nights in the summer when the captain of the team decided to "sacrifice" you on one court so that the team can win all of the others.

Despite what the USTA says about not being able to do this, it can easily be done to enhance the currently screwed-up rating algorithm...I know this because I do this type of stuff for a living.

Please post your thoughts as to whether you would rather have your rating be based on your whole year play or are you satisfied in the current way that only includes the same-sex league in the summer (save for some exceptions).
Thanks.

 

[JRstriker12]

I was wondering what your opinions are if the NTRP would include ___ALL___ of your leagues you played throughout the year instead of just the same-sex league that's played in the summer?

I myself think it would be a great idea. I do not like the idea of playing in 4 or 5 leagues each year and having only ONE of them count toward my rating. Talk about putting all of your eggs in one basket!

What I'd like to propose to USTA is that the year-end calculation takes scores from each of your leagues, assigns a weight to each of them (or point system, if you will, with certain types of leagues being more heavily weighted than others), and calculate a grand total based on ALL leagues. Granted, your scores from major leagues (the same-sex summer league) will have the most pull, while others (a one-day tournament, for example) would not carry as much weight.

Doing this would ensure that your full year's membership, enthusiasm, and league fees would be going toward your overall rating as a player. The ratings should be based on your full year-long participation and commitment to the USTA, not just based on two nights in the summer when the captain of the team decided to "sacrifice" you on one court so that the team can win all of the others.

Despite what the USTA says about not being able to do this, it can easily be done to enhance the currently screwed-up rating algorithm...I know this because I do this type of stuff for a living.

Please post your thoughts as to whether you would rather have your rating be based on your whole year play or are you satisfied in the current way that only includes the same-sex league in the summer (save for some exceptions).
Thanks.

I would be for it if all the leagues were played within the same NTRP level - i.e. 3.5 only or 4.0 only, etc....

For example, if you play 7.5 combo, how would that work out if you were the 3.5 partner? If you have a fairly strong 4.0 partner, your wins could indicate the other partner's strength and not that the 3.5 partner is really a 4.0.

There's also a question in mixed. For example in 8.0 mixed, you can have 3.5/4.5 combinations. How would you take the performance of that pairing in contributing to your rating? For example, I came up against a combo where the 4.5 player was a guy and due to his skill level he was easily able to dominate the match.

FWIW - I think USTA leagues should have two seasons. At least in my area, it seems like the league start in early spring and are done by early of the summer.

 

[GrandBanana]

Good point

Good point to bring up the differences between partners' ratings; however, I believe that the NTRP addresses that already. Winning in doubles is a team effort and both partners' ratings should be affected (actually all 4 people in doubles, whether you win/lose). The current system allows for the difference between the partners' ratings to be the same (i.e., if you were 3.51 and partner was 4.39, then after you win, you each go up 0.06 for example, to 3.57 and 4.45, resp., but the difference is still the same).

What I'm proposing is to keep that aspect of it the same, but to make sure that ALL of the leagues throughout the year are counted.

I for one, had a pretty good run at mixed 7.0 and mixed 8.0 last spring and my mixed 7.0 league went to the playoffs in the summer --- however, NONE of that mattered once I played my first men's 7.0 match. All that hard work down the drain and all that mattered was the fact that I got creamed at #1 Doubles so that my captain could stack the deck and try to win the majority of the remaining courts. My full-year rating suffered after being sacrificed twice last year and I'm stuck playing 3.5 again...to me, that's just not right.

 

[JRstriker12]

Good point to bring up the differences between partners' ratings; however, I believe that the NTRP addresses that already. Winning in doubles is a team effort and both partners' ratings should be affected (actually all 4 people in doubles, whether you win/lose). The current system allows for the difference between the partners' ratings to be the same (i.e., if you were 3.51 and partner was 4.39, then after you win, you each go up 0.06 for example, to 3.57 and 4.45, resp., but the difference is still the same).

What I'm proposing is to keep that aspect of it the same, but to make sure that ALL of the leagues throughout the year are counted.

I for one, had a pretty good run at mixed 7.0 and mixed 8.0 last spring and my mixed 7.0 league went to the playoffs in the summer --- however, NONE of that mattered once I played my first men's 7.0 match. All that hard work down the drain and all that mattered was the fact that I got creamed at #1 Doubles so that my captain could stack the deck and try to win the majority of the remaining courts. My full-year rating suffered after being sacrificed twice last year and I'm stuck playing 3.5 again...to me, that's just not right.

I feel your pain with vatiations in level of play. Sometimes your are hot and can't lose and sometimes you're left wondering where the heck you misplaced your game.

However, wouldn't you say that the play of 3.5's on your level is a more accurate indicator of your level?

If you got creamed at #1 dubs at 3.5 (assuming that your captain paired you up with a fairly capable team mate), why do you think you should have been bumped? If we assume the the #1 dubs postion has high level 3.5 players on it (nearly 4.0's), I would think that even playing 4.0 dubs at #3 would be even tougher.

IMHO - You really, you can't depend on court postion (Court 1, 2, 3 etc.) to generate wins to give you a bump, as the quality of the competition also is a factor in NTRP.

If we assume that the lowest level players play on court #3 - you could have won all your matches on court #3 and still not been bumped to 4.0 since the computer would see that your opponents were not strong.

Now if your captain put you on court #1 with a team mate who was dead-weight, then that's another matter.

 

[GrandBanana]

You said it!

You hit the nail on the head with the last sentence...I got paired with a 3.0 guy at the time who was...well, let's just say he was OK. Not to blame him for the loss, but I found it interesting that we were sacrificed against the sandbaggers we played against because no one else on the team felt confident that they could beat them. Now, being an outsider on the cliquish team, I wasn't able to play on anything except #3 Doubles when someone else cancelled, and #1 Doubles when I was being sacrificed. Nothing I could do about it.

My point, my year-end rating was based on 2 sacrifice slaughters on #1 Doubles and 2 great wins on #3 Doubles, but none of the other leagues or great scores I had in 7.0 (playoffs) and 8.0 even counted at all.

Shouldn't a person get credit for playing all year instead of me finding out when I get to the court that I'm the sacrificial lamb and not only have I been elected to sacrifice the court for the night, I'm expected to sacrifice my rating for the upcoming year as well?

 

[OrangePower]

I would agree and would generalize to say that all USTA play (all leagues and tournaments) should count towards your rating. The rating algorithm as it already is can handle it. So why not use all the information at their disposal to get your rating as accurate as possible through the course of the year?

 

[iankogan]

To the OP: It appears that your goal is to advance to the next NTRP level. If so, there is a somple solution. It's completely in your power to stay away from the team politics: don't join a team where you have no say, or where the team goals may be different from your goals. Most importantly, don't tie your results in with those of a random doubles partner. Instead play singles USTA tournaments at level, or up if you believe you can do well against 4.0 competition. I hope you have these options. I believe this would provide you with the most objective NTRP rating obtainable under the current system.

As for your original point: I agree that it's a pity to see your results from all those 'other' leagues go to waste. But I don't believe in 'unified rating'. While it might be mathematically straighforward to do, such system would not result in 'true' NTRP ratings. The only 'true' rating that could be generated would have to be 'per event': singles, doubles, mixed. Kind of like at a pro level.

 

[Delano]

I would agree and would generalize to say that all USTA play (all leagues and tournaments) should count towards your rating. The rating algorithm as it already is can handle it. So why not use all the information at their disposal to get your rating as accurate as possible through the course of the year?

I agree as well - if the system can handle doubles in regular league (where people with different ratings can play), they should be able to apply the same algorithm to combo or mixed. The system is set up to handle different ratings within a doubles team (ie. a 3.5 and 4.0 team playing 4.0), so I don't think they'd need to change anything to include combo leagues.

There's one potential gotcha here... there's no national competition in combo, which might make it difficult to establish benchmarks. I'm not sure how this works, but I think the ratings system uses players who advance to nationals as benchmarks, and then calculate everyone else's rating based on that, right? So if you had a lot of people who *only* play combo, then maybe the algorithm wouldn't work right?

Seems unlikely, though.

 

[Cindysphinx]

I dunno. One benefit of having some results not count is that you have part of the year when you can take some chances and not have it affect your rating.

As a captain, it would be much more difficult to get players to take one for the team if it meant they might get bumped down. I get enough complaints as it is . . . .

 

[JRstriker12]

I agree as well - if the system can handle doubles in regular league (where people with different ratings can play), they should be able to apply the same algorithm to combo or mixed. The system is set up to handle different ratings within a doubles team (ie. a 3.5 and 4.0 team playing 4.0), so I don't think they'd need to change anything to include combo leagues.

There's one potential gotcha here... there's no national competition in combo, which might make it difficult to establish benchmarks. I'm not sure how this works, but I think the ratings system uses players who advance to nationals as benchmarks, and then calculate everyone else's rating based on that, right? So if you had a lot of people who *only* play combo, then maybe the algorithm wouldn't work right?

Seems unlikely, though.

IIRC - you also get benchmark players at districts or playoffs.

 

[JRstriker12]

You hit the nail on the head with the last sentence...I got paired with a 3.0 guy at the time who was...well, let's just say he was OK. Not to blame him for the loss, but I found it interesting that we were sacrificed against the sandbaggers we played against because no one else on the team felt confident that they could beat them. Now, being an outsider on the cliquish team, I wasn't able to play on anything except #3 Doubles when someone else cancelled, and #1 Doubles when I was being sacrificed. Nothing I could do about it.

My point, my year-end rating was based on 2 sacrifice slaughters on #1 Doubles and 2 great wins on #3 Doubles, but none of the other leagues or great scores I had in 7.0 (playoffs) and 8.0 even counted at all.

Shouldn't a person get credit for playing all year instead of me finding out when I get to the court that I'm the sacrificial lamb and not only have I been elected to sacrifice the court for the night, I'm expected to sacrifice my rating for the upcoming year as well?

Bummer man. Sounds like it's time for a new team.

 

[GrandBanana]

To the OP: It appears that your goal is to advance to the next NTRP level. If so, there is a somple solution. It's completely in your power to stay away from the team politics: don't join a team where you have no say, or where the team goals may be different from your goals. Most importantly, don't tie your results in with those of a random doubles partner. Instead play singles USTA tournaments at level, or up if you believe you can do well against 4.0 competition. I hope you have these options. I believe this would provide you with the most objective NTRP rating obtainable under the current system.

As for your original point: I agree that it's a pity to see your results from all those 'other' leagues go to waste. But I don't believe in 'unified rating'. While it might be mathematically straighforward to do, such system would not result in 'true' NTRP ratings. The only 'true' rating that could be generated would have to be 'per event': singles, doubles, mixed. Kind of like at a pro level.

I agree, that would be a nice option, but one I don't have. There seems to be a lot more politicking in my area than I thought about the ratings --- I'm hoping that the recent bump-ups and teams breaking up will handle that within a year or two. Unfortunately, it took me 3 years after I moved to this area to even get in on a low-level team at all...and I had to do that as a provisional player (read..."sandbagger")...I've since had my rating increased.

Yes, my ultimate goal is to get the 4.0 that I feel I deserve. With some recent injuries holding my level of play back, I can (and have) beat or wreak havoc on the majority of the guys who got bumped up from 3.5 to 4.0 this year, not to mention go head-to-head with a lot of the guys who were already at 4.0 last year and stayed there.

Hoping this will be my last year at 3.5 --- if not, it will be my last year in USTA.

 

[ttbrowne]

I actually use some of the non-usta stuff to work on new stuff. I don't get to practice that much and use the other matches for practice.

 

[JRstriker12]

I agree, that would be a nice option, but one I don't have. There seems to be a lot more politicking in my area than I thought about the ratings --- I'm hoping that the recent bump-ups and teams breaking up will handle that within a year or two. Unfortunately, it took me 3 years after I moved to this area to even get in on a low-level team at all...and I had to do that as a provisional player (read..."sandbagger")...I've since had my rating increased.

Yes, my ultimate goal is to get the 4.0 that I feel I deserve. With some recent injuries holding my level of play back, I can (and have) beat or wreak havoc on the majority of the guys who got bumped up from 3.5 to 4.0 this year, not to mention go head-to-head with a lot of the guys who were already at 4.0 last year and stayed there.

Hoping this will be my last year at 3.5 --- if not, it will be my last year in USTA.

Best of luck man. Hope you reach your goals.

One more thing, you could always start your own team. You could maybe even start an 4.0 team and play up since alot of people got bumped and may be looking for a new team.

 

[iankogan]

I agree, that would be a nice option, but one I don't have. There seems to be a lot more politicking in my area than I thought about the ratings --- I'm hoping that the recent bump-ups and teams breaking up will handle that within a year or two. Unfortunately, it took me 3 years after I moved to this area to even get in on a low-level team at all...and I had to do that as a provisional player (read..."sandbagger")...I've since had my rating increased.

Yes, my ultimate goal is to get the 4.0 that I feel I deserve. With some recent injuries holding my level of play back, I can (and have) beat or wreak havoc on the majority of the guys who got bumped up from 3.5 to 4.0 this year, not to mention go head-to-head with a lot of the guys who were already at 4.0 last year and stayed there.

Hoping this will be my last year at 3.5 --- if not, it will be my last year in USTA.

I'm sorry that you don't have the option of playing tournaments; it was presumptious of me to assume that you do. I think the underlying issue here is that you are not in control of your options in terms of generating the year-end NTRP rating. As another poster suggested: is starting your own team a possibility?

Good luck, and enjoy your game!

 

[GrandBanana]

Options

Yeah, even though there is a huge USTA contingent here in this area, I found it's harder than you think to get on a team...it's all who you know (which apparently I don't know the right people).

I had a lot of trouble getting on a team this spring...had to send out a mass email to 15-20 clubs to see if any of them have any openings. Why? Because my local league coordinator is kinda useless in finding a league for people...and it was her idea that I just look up club numbers and contact them directly (so much for doing your job, eh?). Fortunately, a club across town contacted me and I'll be on a mixed 7.0 league for the spring. So, I don't have a lot of options if I want to play at all (unless I start my own league)...therefore, I don't have a lot of say when it comes to what court I play on or who my partner will be when I do get to play.