Dallas tennis

[beernutz]

Some funny insider stuff here:
http://dallasleaguetennis.blogspot....-bring-home-1st-40-and-over.html#comment-form

I was interested enough to look for this since I played the St. Charles (eventual Southern sectional champs) at sectionals and they in turn were beaten by eventual 3.5 over 40 national champs Dallas in the national semis. The records and scores of several of the Dallas players is pretty eye-popping.

 

[J_R_B]

The bltching on there is funny in a sad kind of way. I knew there was a reason I hate Dallas. Oh yeah, that and the Cowboys.

 

[gameboy]

Sandbaggers gonna sandbag...

 

[Brian11785]

The captain is savvy, no doubt. That's how titles are won (not by the "best players" BS.) When I first started USTA in the spring, he tried to convince me to play on a 3.0 team and told me that I was currently not good enough to play on his over 18 3.5 team.

(I eventually won two matches--including one singles match--at 3.5 sectionals on the team that eventually took me. Ironically, my team finished the same place his 3.5 team did--sectionals semifinalist.)

No judgment. From what I gathered, he seemed very intent on his team's on-court improvement, and you can't knock a guy with a goal and a plan of action to achieve that goal. Just saying that these players can pat themselves on the back all they want.The real secret to USTA success is a captain that knows how to (a) convince players to play below their skill level and (b) manage his team's ratings, including getting them a computer rating.

Sometimes I wish I didn't know how the sausage was made.

 

[cknobman]

^

Yep. you are right about managing your team and players ratings.

Search for this guy: Steven T. Miller

League coordinator for the entire city of Fort Worth and also captain of about 6 different teams throughout a year at both 4.0 and 4.5.

Notice how spring teams are first/second place (and make sectionals). Notice how fall teams get their butts kicked (barely win matches).

Its no coincidence.

I'm not saying hes cheating but he knows how to work the system like a kung fu master.

 

[Turbo-87]

Imagine how good these blog commenters would be if they took that negative energy and actually practiced more. Drama in tennis is hilarious to me.

 

[tennis_tater]

^


Notice how spring teams are first/second place (and make sectionals). Notice how fall teams get their butts kicked (barely win matches).

Its no coincidence.

I'm not saying hes cheating but he knows how to work the system like a kung fu master.

So I'm guessing if he's using one season to sandbag the ratings, then the results for both seasons get factored into a player's dynamic rating. Why would that be allowed by the USTA? Would seem to me that only the season which counts toward qualifying for state/districts/sectionals/nationals would be used for dynamic rating purposes and other match results would not for the very reason that it would lead to thrown match results.

 

[Brian11785]

So I'm guessing if he's using one season to sandbag the ratings, then the results for both seasons get factored into a player's dynamic rating. Why would that be allowed by the USTA? Would seem to me that only the season which counts toward qualifying for state/districts/sectionals/nationals would be used for dynamic rating purposes and other match results would not for the very reason that it would lead to thrown match results.

You'd think.

 

[J_R_B]

I think TX tennis must actually suck. I've never done any of that stuff (had people throw sets/matches/seasons, lie on self-rating, or otherwise do anything to manipulate levels), and we just made the national finals. If cheating in TX is rampant in Dallas, Houston, and Fort Worth, and they still can't win, what does that say about them? The El Paso captain (which is SW section, not TX section) told me he'd rather have the entire city of El Paso removed from TX. I think I can't disagree...

 

[atatu]

I think TX tennis must actually suck. I've never done any of that stuff (had people throw sets/matches/seasons, lie on self-rating, or otherwise do anything to manipulate levels), and we just made the national finals. If cheating in TX is rampant in Dallas, Houston, and Fort Worth, and they still can't win, what does that say about them? The El Paso captain (which is SW section, not TX section) told me he'd rather have the entire city of El Paso removed from TX. I think I can't disagree...

Dude, it's 3.5 tennis, relax.

And El Paso can leave, it's not exactly a garden spot. By the way, pick up this week's time magazine and it will explain why everyone is leaving New York and New Jersey and moving to Texas, not that we need anyone more people to move here...

 

[schmke]

I think TX tennis must actually suck. I've never done any of that stuff (had people throw sets/matches/seasons, lie on self-rating, or otherwise do anything to manipulate levels), and we just made the national finals. If cheating in TX is rampant in Dallas, Houston, and Fort Worth, and they still can't win, what does that say about them? The El Paso captain (which is SW section, not TX section) told me he'd rather have the entire city of El Paso removed from TX. I think I can't disagree...

If everyone in TX does it, it kind of cancels itself out. But very valid point about them still not winning it all.

 

[schmke]

So I'm guessing if he's using one season to sandbag the ratings, then the results for both seasons get factored into a player's dynamic rating. Why would that be allowed by the USTA? Would seem to me that only the season which counts toward qualifying for state/districts/sectionals/nationals would be used for dynamic rating purposes and other match results would not for the very reason that it would lead to thrown match results.

Yes, including other leagues opens the door for this type of sandbagging behavior. To me though, the inconsistency between sections is also an issue.

Some sections pretty much include only the "spring" 18 & over, 40 & over, and 55 & over leagues for NTRP rating purposes. Others have fall/winter leagues that count, then there are tri-level leagues and singles leagues, that count. Then tournaments count in some sections and don't count in others.

I think the reason other leagues get included is that for some players, the bulk of their play is only in these "other" leagues, so not including them means you are basing a player's rating on only a handful of matches and perhaps only 20-30% of those played. Doing this would introduce another set of issues with players never getting bumped up or down simply because there isn't a large enough sample.

Consider a 30 year old that lives in an area where they can't reasonably go play in another area's 18 & over league near by. Their team is in a subflight with 9 other teams, so 8 matches get played. They have a large roster, say 18 people, so every player can really only get 3-4 matches, and then with scheduling perhaps some only get 2 or 3. A self-rated player may never get computer rated if this is the only league that counts, and the other players won't see their rating move much at all unless there are huge wins/losses.

If their fall and winter and tri-level leagues count though, they probably get another 10-15 matches in and their rating can be based on a much more complete set of data.

What I'd like to see is something in the algorithm that looks for sandbagging results and omits them, or throw out the best/worst results at year-end so a few really good or bad results don't skew a rating one way or the other.

 

[lostinamerica]

I think TX tennis must actually suck. I've never done any of that stuff (had people throw sets/matches/seasons, lie on self-rating, or otherwise do anything to manipulate levels), and we just made the national finals. If cheating in TX is rampant in Dallas, Houston, and Fort Worth, and they still can't win, what does that say about them? The El Paso captain (which is SW section, not TX section) told me he'd rather have the entire city of El Paso removed from TX. I think I can't disagree...

This is one angry post. That post on that link was a link to them winning the championship. You made the finals and congratulations.

Before you break your arm patting yourself on the back, if you were in the flight that had the champions in it, would you have made the finals?

 

[J_R_B]

This is one angry post. That post on that link was a link to them winning the championship. You made the finals and congratulations.

Before you break your arm patting yourself on the back, if you were in the flight that had the champions in it, would you have made the finals?

No one was going to beat Tennessee no matter when they played them, but TX lost a second match in group, too (and finished 4th in their group based on courts). We at least got to 3 match tbs and had a chance (and when TN clinched and started celebrating, one singles tb was tied and the other was about to begin).

 

[lostinamerica]

No one was going to beat Tennessee no matter when they played them, but TX lost a second match in group, too (and finished 4th in their group based on courts). We at least got to 3 match tbs and had a chance (and when TN clinched and started celebrating, one singles tb was tied and the other was about to begin).

My post had nothing to do with Texas. I was generally speaking. I am not going into the relative scores and everything but you definitely are showing anger towards the Texas team. I have nothing to do with that team. Maybe their captain was a jerk to you; I don't know.

The link provided showed a team winning a championship and you say they are cheating and cannot win... even though they won. Then there are a bunch of comments attacking the winners. That sounds about par for every USTA section. Winners get bashed.

If you say you are better than all the Texas players; you may be. I don't know them and I don't know you. It was just a very angry bitter post. I was trying to figure out where that came from; I read how a Texas team wins a championship and you are all over how they lose.

 

[J_R_B]

I'm not angry at the Texas team. I didn't even run across them once at the tournament at all. All people from TX talk about both here and In that blog is how the captains that win all systematically cheat to get the best players into levels where they shouldn't be. All this effort into cheating and they got nothing out of it (at least at 4.0). That must really suck. I've never engaged it, witnessed, or even heard about those types of shenanigans at all here ever. I just play and have fun and so does everyone else around here, and it's always a little disconcerting seeing all of the negativity elsewhere and in particular in TX.

 

[Brian11785]

I'm not angry at the Texas team. I didn't even run across them once at the tournament at all. All people from TX talk about both here and In that blog is how the captains that win all systematically cheat to get the best players into levels where they shouldn't be. All this effort into cheating and they got nothing out of it (at least at 4.0). That must really suck. I've never engaged it, witnessed, or even heard about those types of shenanigans at all here ever. I just play and have fun and so does everyone else around here, and it's always a little disconcerting seeing all of the negativity elsewhere and in particular in TX.

Cheating is a strong word. I'd call it "following the form of the rating-system rules" as opposed to "following the spirit of the rating-systems rules."

I say, do away with nationals. Regardless of what rules are in place, they are going to be abused and stretched to their limit by those that are prone to do so. Take away the largest incentive to sandbag. Boom, problem largely solved.

 

[lostinamerica]

Getting rid of nationals is no solution. We need some reason to play. Nats is a great experience and you want to get rid of it so you can believe sandbagging will end. It is not like it is a free trip.

If you don't want to go, join an average team and it will not be an issue. For those who join very good teams, it usually is not an issue. Go play and have fun in the manner you wish to enjoy. Don't stop something to correct some perceived injustice.

 

[Brian11785]

Getting rid of nationals is no solution. We need some reason to play. Nats is a great experience and you want to get rid of it so you can believe sandbagging will end. It is not like it is a free trip.

If you don't want to go, join an average team and it will not be an issue. For those who join very good teams, it usually is not an issue. Go play and have fun in the manner you wish to enjoy. Don't stop something to correct some perceived injustice.

Honestly, if going on some trip is someone's main motivation for playing tennis, then I think USTA leagues are better without that person.

 

[lostinamerica]

Honestly, if going on some trip is someone's main motivation for playing tennis, then I think USTA leagues are better without that person.

It is the desire to compete. It is the desire to play new and different people. It is the desire to see how you stack up with others. There is more than a trip. Maybe you don't like to compete, others do. I've been to nationals and it was a great trip and experience. You may not desire to compete against the best at your level, but many of us do. If you want to go out and win half your matches, play up but don't begrudge people who get enjoyment out of something you do not.

I believe if a person wants to dictate what others desire, regardless of what that is, that person is a serious egomaniac. Why people think the world should behave as they desire is beyond me. That person needs to get over themselves. The world does not revolve around them.

Honestly, the tennis community would be better off without people who think the world should conform to their world. You should start a league with no nationals. Actually, there are plenty of them and the competition is ridiculously bad.

 

[Avles]

If you want to go out and win half your matches, play up but don't begrudge people who get enjoyment out of something you do not.

Maybe I just don't understand how this NTRP thing is supposed to work. But it seems like if you are winning half of your matches, you aren't "playing up." Wouldn't winning half your matches mean that you're at the correct level?

 

[Brian11785]

It is the desire to compete. It is the desire to play new and different people. It is the desire to see how you stack up with others. There is more than a trip. Maybe you don't like to compete, others do. I've been to nationals and it was a great trip and experience. You may not desire to compete against the best at your level, but many of us do. If you want to go out and win half your matches, play up but don't begrudge people who get enjoyment out of something you do not.

So you'd rather play the "best at your level" at Nationals after spending a year playing inferior opponents than play up and play actually better players (which you imply you could beat half the time) the entire year. I think you are confusing "competitive" with "win-craving."

 

[Avles]

So you'd rather play the "best at your level" at Nationals after spending a year playing inferior opponents than play up and play actually better players (which you imply you could beat half the time) the entire year.

Maybe lostinamerica just misspoke, but it sure seems like if you could go .500 at the next level up, you aren't actually in the correct level. I thought the whole point of NTRP was to help you find opponents at your own level.

I think you are confusing "competitive" with "win-craving."

You might be right. Maybe we should ask these guys what they think:

 

[LafayetteHitter]

All that over 3.5 tennis? Pretty funny in itself.

 

[LafayetteHitter]

Maybe lostinamerica just misspoke, but it sure seems like if you could go .500 at the next level up, you aren't actually in the correct level. I thought the whole point of NTRP was to help you find opponents at your own level.



You might be right. Maybe we should ask these guys what they think:

When the goal is to loudmouth at the club while slamming beers, 3.5 bragging rights is a big deal...Half the time they get beat by 3.5's that have only played a year or two anyways. I always laugh at these guys that have played 3.0 and 3.5 for like 15 years and hoot and holler about a win...haha yea ok

 

[lostinamerica]

So you'd rather play the "best at your level" at Nationals after spending a year playing inferior opponents than play up and play actually better players (which you imply you could beat half the time) the entire year. I think you are confusing "competitive" with "win-craving."

I think you are confusing your inexperience in life with actually knowing anything.

The "best at level" is at nationals. We also play the best in our city, in our state and in our section.

You also forget that the USTA is a private organization and can make their own rules. You are not obligated to play. Go play Ultimate Tennis or some of the other leagues where nearly everyone overrates themselves by a 1.0. It is your prerogative.

Are there out of level people? There are out of level players on occasion but 99% of all players are where they belong. It is a pretty big ego that requires a private organization that is voluntary for you to belong and play should change.

As for playing the occasional ringer, I have fun with it. I've been beaten before and I will be beaten again.

 

[Brian11785]

I think you are confusing your inexperience in life with actually knowing anything.

'Preciate the condescension.

The "best at level" is at nationals. We also play the best in our city, in our state and in our section.

I understand what you mean. What you want to do is go to/ win nationals. It has little to do with the wanting to play the "best". If you want to play quality opponents, you would be playing up. It's not about the level of opponent. That's like a baseball player capable of playing in the majors saying he would rather play "the best in a AAA league." The best competition is in the majors, not the AAA league. He just wants to play there where he could be the big fish in a little pond.

You also forget that the USTA is a private organization and can make their own rules. You are not obligated to play. Go play Ultimate Tennis or some of the other leagues where nearly everyone overrates themselves by a 1.0. It is your prerogative.

Are there out of level people? There are out of level players on occasion but 99% of all players are where they belong. It is a pretty big ego that requires a private organization that is voluntary for you to belong and play should change.

This is utter out-of-left-field, totally defensive, nonsense. What is your point about private organizations? People suggest changes or provide feedback about private organizations all time time. (Ever fill out that comment card at Cracker Barrel? Is giving your feedback "imposing" your beliefs on a private organization?) Particularly paying customers (which I am one.) No one is REQUIRING anything. You are making stuff up.

 

[lostinamerica]

Brian,

You want the system to work like you think it should work. It does not work like you want; go start your own organization.

It is not defensive; I am not the one calling to end an event. I am not making anything up. Your solution is to abolish nationals when few people object to it.

The defensive one is you. I can't tell if you are neophyte player or just a kid. You write in such a way like a new law school grad who thinks they have all the answers when in fact the old curmudgeon that appears a little dim is the real one to listen to.

 

[Brian11785]

Brian,

You want the system to work like you think it should work. It does not work like you want; go start your own organization.

It is not defensive; I am not the one calling to end an event. I am not making anything up. Your solution is to abolish nationals when few people object to it.

The defensive one is you. I can't tell if you are neophyte player or just a kid. You write in such a way like a new law school grad who thinks they have all the answers when in fact the old curmudgeon that appears a little dim is the real one to listen to.

I don't honestly expect nationals to be abolished, although I think it would solve the sandbagging issue. But to suggest that people aren't allowed to suggest solutions to what they see as problems (regardless of whether or not you see them as problems) in private organizations of which they are paying members is pretty ludicrous.

I am not some powerful person strongarming the USTA board into changing anything. I am a guy on a message board. Guys on message boards have opinions.

 

[gameboy]

Seriously.

If you truly wanted higher level of competition, you would just play up. People do this all the time. Especially, folks who are pushing themselves to get better.

People aim for playoffs, because they want trophies, not competition. To say that with a straight face requires a lot lying or self-delusion.

 

[KOFS]

Guys just go out and try to win ever match. The ratings will take care of itself and its more fun.

 

[MTXR]

Hey it seems like a lot of you guys know about Fort Worth, I live in Fort Worth, how do I get on a team? I just want to play more tennis.

 

[Nostradamus]

which mixed doubles teams have the hottest girls ?

 

[KOFS]

MTXR get in touch with Steve Miller. Most tennis centers and clubs have a team.

 

[coyote]

which mixed doubles teams have the hottest girls ?

Lifetime Fitness. I've noticed mixed is a bit light on hot chicks.

There is a youtube video titled Hitler plays USTA tennis in Dallas. Look for it, it is very funny and addresses this is issue.

 

[Nostradamus]

Lifetime Fitness. I've noticed mixed is a bit light on hot chicks.

There is a youtube video titled Hitler plays USTA tennis in Dallas. Look for it, it is very funny and addresses this is issue.

This is very funny, though I always found anything with Hitler very offensive. I had no idea lifetime fitness had indoor courts there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bg7xHsrw2Tw

 

[Torres]

Some funny insider stuff here:
http://dallasleaguetennis.blogspot....-bring-home-1st-40-and-over.html#comment-form

Any video of the finals matches? Am curious to see what a '3.5' finalist looks like.

 

[beernutz]

Any video of the finals matches? Am curious to see what a '3.5' finalist looks like.

If you look at the record for the #1 singles player for the winning team you can see that he is also winning straight set singles victories playing up at 4.0. That should give you some idea.

 

[lostinamerica]

This is very funny, though I always found anything with Hitler very offensive. I had no idea lifetime fitness had indoor courts there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bg7xHsrw2Tw

They don't have indoor courts. They are talking about Brookhaven's indoor courts. On the Lifetime website, they say they are putting some onsite. I haven't lived in Dallas in a few years but nothing has changed.

 

[lostinamerica]

Deleted.. Double post

 

[dode]

I still don't know how he did not get bumped up at year end last year. I played him at Nationals last year and he was playing with a guy that did get bumped, and he was the better player. He and his partner went 5-0 at Nationals, though they were slightly down in the semifinal match when their opponents retired because they had won enough courts. It definitely seems like some ratings management as during the regular season his 3 matches were all very close, but then the lopsided wins came at Nationals. In 5 matches, his game scores were a combined 58-30 and 8 of his 10 opponents are now 4.0's. I'm guessing his partner must have had a high rating that kept his lower, even though he was the stronger player. I would have thought that even with the ratings management, the benchmarking process would have brought his ranking up, but apparently not.

John

 

[Avles]

This picture expresses my feelings on the concept of "3.5 National Champions":

(For the record I'm a 3.5 at best)

 

[Brian11785]

^ Ouch.

To me, it is more like when Cartman faked being disabled to win the $1,000 prize at the Special Olympics (not Nationals itself, but the route that some teams seemed to have taken to get to Nationals....)

 

[Nostradamus]

They don't have indoor courts. They are talking about Brookhaven's indoor courts. On the Lifetime website, they say they are putting some onsite. I haven't lived in Dallas in a few years but nothing has changed.

I do agree with the video that Dallas division 4.0 guys are pretty weak. Only guys that are any decent is on the very top team of that division from there. Even those guys are just decent.

 

[coyote]

I do agree with the video that Dallas division 4.0 guys are pretty weak. Only guys that are any decent is on the very top team of that division from there. Even those guys are just decent.

Dallas 4.0 is real weak the last few years. I put a great deal of thought into this earlier this year and thought if you cherry picked the best players in the city, you still don't win sectionals. Dallas has a lot of ego players/captains that can't coexist so that will never be an issue. I am friends with most of the players/captains of the competitive teams and think they are all nice but I have been told what they all think of each other (probably not told what they think of me). Personally, I would rather remain friends with all players/captains than get in the middle of the personal ego wars. Dallas players/captains are really nice but they do get into their own personal ego wars and sometimes to their own detriment.

Contrary to this thread, Dallas does not have a major sandbagging problem. That 3.5 team was full of computer rates. Some of them been moved up but for some reason the computer disagreed; you cannot fault a player for playing at a level the computer said they belonged. Many of those guys have been 3.5 for many years. That is not a sandbagged team. Many of these same players did play on the 18+ team and made the semis of sectionals. They got beat by a Houston team that went on to go winless in their flight at nationals. Anyone who thought they were way out of level probably overrates themselves. I know these players and only the two singles players translate up to the next level. At that, they are VERY average 4.0 players in a city that is light on quality 4.0.

Dallas' ringers have been hunted to near extinction. I know every top captain is searching for them but they are more camera shy than Bigfoot and the Lochness Monster.

 

[Brian11785]

Dallas 4.0 is real weak the last few years. I put a great deal of thought into this earlier this year and thought if you cherry picked the best players in the city, you still don't win sectionals. Dallas has a lot of ego players/captains that can't coexist so that will never be an issue. I am friends with most of the players/captains of the competitive teams and think they are all nice but I have been told what they all think of each other (probably not told what they think of me). Personally, I would rather remain friends with all players/captains than get in the middle of the personal ego wars. By large, Dallas players/captains are really nice but they do get into their own personal ego wars and sometimes to their own detriment.

Contrary to this thread, Dallas does not have a major sandbagging problem. That 3.5 team was full of computer rates. Some of them been moved up but for some reason the computer disagreed; you cannot fault a player for playing at a level the computer said they belonged. Many of those guys have been 3.5 for many years. That is not a sandbagged team. Many of these same players did play on the 18+ team and made the semis of sectionals. They got beat by a Houston team that went on to go winless in their flight at sectionals. Anyone who thought they were way out of level probably overrates themselves. I know these players and only the two singles players translate up to the next level. At that, they are VERY average 4.0 players in a city that is light on quality 4.0.

Dallas' ringers have been hunted to near extinction. I know every top captain is searching for them but they are more camera shy than Bigfoot and the Lochness Monster.

This is a little misleading. Houston went winless at Nationals, but you fail to mention the DQs that occurred on the team (including their best singles guy). Still, comparing Dallas to Houston, the (as I understand it) ringer-iest section in the nation, isn't really putting Dallas off the hook. Perhaps Dallas feels like it has to do something to keep up with Houston. It's an arms race.

Though, results are only one side of the issue. As you say, captains can't find ringers that don't exist.The issue is (and I think your post more than implicitly agrees with me--your saying that ringers have been "hunted to near extinction") the constant struggle to find ringers. To me, the same Machiavellian captains and sections going to nationals every year runs counter to the USTA's mission: “To promote and develop the growth of tennis.”

It only took one experience of being scouted for a 3.0 team when I thought I was being scouted for a 3.5 team for me to see the way the USTA nationals-aspirant sausage is made. Being told by a captain I wasn't good enough to play on his 3.5 team (and then joining another team and winning two matches at 3.5 sectionals) I think proves that I didn't overrate myself at 3.5.

 

[coyote]

This is a little misleading. Houston went winless at Nationals, but you fail to mention the DQs that occurred on the team (including their best singles guy). Still, comparing Dallas to Houston, the (as I understand it) ringer-iest section in the nation, isn't really putting Dallas off the hook. Perhaps Dallas feels like it has to do something to keep up with Houston. It's an arms race.

Though, results are only one side of the issue. As you say, captains can't find ringers that don't exist.The issue is (and I think your post more than implicitly agrees with me--your saying that ringers have been "hunted to near extinction") the constant struggle to find ringers. To me, the same Machiavellian captains and sections going to nationals every year runs counter to the USTA's mission: “To promote and develop the growth of tennis.”

It only took one experience of being scouted for a 3.0 team when I thought I was being scouted for a 3.5 team for me to see the way the USTA nationals-aspirant sausage is made. Being told by a captain I wasn't good enough to play on his 3.5 team (and then joining another team and winning two matches at 3.5 sectionals) I think proves that I didn't overrate myself at 3.5.

You have only played one year. Before you think you have it all figured out, you might should play a few more years. Like many of us, as you gain experience, your perception changes.

You are proud of your sectionals results as well as you should be. So I looked at your fall results and it appears you really have discovered 'how the sausage is made.' A guy that wins half his sectionals matches does not go 3-3 with losses of 0&3, 1&4, & 3&2. You did have a very impressive 3 set win over a 3.0. Are these players better than you? Absolutely, but you are not the gold standard of your level.

Are you throwing matches? Actually, I don't think you are but I also don't think you are nearly as wise as you think you are. Maybe you peeked behind the curtain and saw something and filled in your own holes. You haven't played long enough to understand the levels.

Dallas 3.5 40s won nationals with a bunch of long time computer rates. They made it to the semis of 18+ with mostly computer rates. Neither Dallas 4.0 18+ team got out of their flights at sectionals. Dallas 4.5 got beat in the semis. In fairness, Dallas 5.0 made the finals of nationals but I hear very little about 5.0 sandbagging. At 3.0 (had to actually look this one up), Dallas went 1-4 at sectionals finishing next to last.

You believe in a bogeyman that just is not there.

As for searching for ringers, captains are absolutely looking for them. They occasionally find one but it is not some rampant activity. You think so because you got beat and your perception of a level is that you are a gold standard of a level. This is a common ailment of many new players. You are a first year league player; you have a very limited view of the entire system.

 

[Brian11785]

You have only played one year. Before you think you have it all figured out, you might should play a few more years. Like many of us, as you gain experience, your perception changes.

You are proud of your sectionals results as well as you should be. So I looked at your fall results and it appears you really have discovered 'how the sausage is made.' A guy that wins half his sectionals matches does not go 3-3 with losses of 0&3, 1&4, & 3&2. You did have a very impressive 3 set win over a 3.0. Are these players better than you? Absolutely, but you are not the gold standard of your level.

Are you throwing matches? Actually, I don't think you are but I also don't think you are nearly as wise as you think you are. Maybe you peeked behind the curtain and saw something and filled in your own holes. You haven't played long enough to understand the levels.

Dallas 3.5 40s won nationals with a bunch of long time computer rates. They made it to the semis of 18+ with mostly computer rates. Neither Dallas 4.0 18+ team got out of their flights at sectionals. Dallas 4.5 got beat in the semis. In fairness, Dallas 5.0 made the finals of nationals but I hear very little about 5.0 sandbagging. At 3.0 (had to actually look this one up), Dallas went 1-4 at sectionals finishing next to last.

You believe in a bogeyman that just is not there.

As for searching for ringers, captains are absolutely looking for them. They occasionally find one but it is not some rampant activity. You think so because you got beat and your perception of a level is that you are a gold standard of a level. This is a common ailment of many new players. You are a first year league player; you have a very limited view of the entire system.

You say perception changes as you gain more experience. I say perception changes as you become part of the machine.

I was not trying to point out Dallas as especially ringer-y. But it's evident that these issues that are everywhere are issues here as well.

I actually started grad school this semester, in addition to working full-time. In the summer, I was playing five days a week. Particularly early in the fall semester (see: the first two weeks of the season), USTA was about the only time I was getting to play during the week. Also, I have been playing line 1 singles this season, instead of line 2, which I did at sectionals this summer.

I am not saying that I am some top-tier 3.5 or trying to toot my own horn. I am just saying that I am competent enough at 3.5 to feel queasy about being convinced to play 3.0. Others much better than I probably have no problem playing at 3.0 and collecting trophies. If that's what they value, whatever. But let's not pretend that it's not going on.

 

[schmke]

You are proud of your sectionals results as well as you should be. So I looked at your fall results and it appears you really have discovered 'how the sausage is made.' A guy that wins half his sectionals matches does not go 3-3 with losses of 0&3, 1&4, & 3&2. You did have a very impressive 3 set win over a 3.0. Are these players better than you? Absolutely, but you are not the gold standard of your level.

Are you throwing matches? Actually, I don't think you are but I also don't think you are nearly as wise as you think you are. Maybe you peeked behind the curtain and saw something and filled in your own holes. You haven't played long enough to understand the levels.

I took a look and he seems to be a decent 3.5, not the gold standard like you say, and while his rating has dipped a bit in the Fall league since Sectionals, not severely and certainly not consistent with with some of the other sandbagging I've observed in Texas. Two of his losses were to a good and very good 3.5, so no shame in that.

 

[schmke]

I am not saying that I am some top-tier 3.5 or trying to toot my own horn. I am just saying that I am competent enough at 3.5 to feel queasy about being convinced to play 3.0.

Kudos to you for that. Your rating is consistent with 3.0 being too low, so it seems you self-rated at the right level and have had competitive matches, which I'm guessing is what you were looking for.