DQ at Sectionals

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

After not playing league tennis for many years, I decided to join a team and self rated a few years ago. I answered every single question with 100% honesty. The computer rated me at 3.0. Knowing that rating was well below my actual level, I immediately appealed and manually rated myself at 4.0. I've won about 75% of my league matches at 4.0, so I think I'm where I need to be.

That being said, if I had no previous USTA league experience, I may have kept that 3.0 rating the computer came up with which would have likely lead to me getting DQ'd at some point.

I applaud you for that. What part of your tennis past saved you from being rated higher than 3.0, no college, no superchamp, no tennis on campus experience? I'm just curious.

 

[JRW911]

I played varsity tennis in high school, but that was over 25 years ago. I never played college tennis as I went to an SEC school and wasn't nearly good enough to walk on. I previously played in the 3.5 and 4.0 tennis leagues before getting bumped up to 4.5 in 2009 or so.

My stint at 3.5 was kind of accidental. I was a strong 4.0 two years before the bump down. Didn't play much tennis after that Spring season ended, so when the Spring season started the next year I was super rusty. Played two matches and lost both of them. Got bumped down to 3.5 when the new ratings came out at the end of the year, but by then I had long shaken all the rust off and was playing at a very strong 4.0 to decent 4.5 level. That being said, the local 3.5 captains started recruiting me like crazy, so I decided to give it a shot the following Spring. I blew threw everybody I played. It was NOT fun for them or myself, so I told myself that I'd never do that again!

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

I played varsity tennis in high school, but that was over 25 years ago. I never played college tennis as I went to an SEC school and wasn't nearly good enough to walk on. I previously played in the 3.5 and 4.0 tennis leagues before getting bumped up to 4.5 in 2009 or so.

My stint at 3.5 was kind of accidental. I was a strong 4.0 two years before the bump down. Didn't play much tennis after that Spring season ended, so when the Spring season started the next year I was super rusty. Played two matches and lost both of them. Got bumped down to 3.5 when the new ratings came out at the end of the year, but by then I had long shaken all the rust off and was playing at a very strong 4.0 to decent 4.5 level. That being said, the local 3.5 captains started recruiting me like crazy, so I decided to give it a shot the following Spring. I blew threw everybody I played. It was NOT fun for them or myself, so I told myself that I'd never do that again!

You've got the right attitude about tennis and competition, kudos.

 

[Chalkdust]

I played varsity tennis in high school, but that was over 25 years ago. I never played college tennis as I went to an SEC school and wasn't nearly good enough to walk on. I previously played in the 3.5 and 4.0 tennis leagues before getting bumped up to 4.5 in 2009 or so.

My stint at 3.5 was kind of accidental. I was a strong 4.0 two years before the bump down. Didn't play much tennis after that Spring season ended, so when the Spring season started the next year I was super rusty. Played two matches and lost both of them. Got bumped down to 3.5 when the new ratings came out at the end of the year, but by then I had long shaken all the rust off and was playing at a very strong 4.0 to decent 4.5 level. That being said, the local 3.5 captains started recruiting me like crazy, so I decided to give it a shot the following Spring. I blew threw everybody I played. It was NOT fun for them or myself, so I told myself that I'd never do that again!

I thought if you previously had a USTA rating, and then didn't play for long enough that you had to self rate again, that you then have to self rate at the level you previously had as a minimum?

 

[Moon Shooter]

After not playing league tennis for many years, I decided to join a team and self rated a few years ago. I answered every single question with 100% honesty. The computer rated me at 3.0. Knowing that rating was well below my actual level, I immediately appealed and manually rated myself at 4.0. I've won about 75% of my league matches at 4.0, so I think I'm where I need to be.

That being said, if I had no previous USTA league experience, I may have kept that 3.0 rating the computer came up with which would have likely lead to me getting DQ'd at some point.

Having prior league experience helps you know where you fit. But many self rates do not have prior league experience.

Do you think you would be at the right level if you lost 75% of your games? In other words if you were only good enough to win 25% of your games with other 4.0s would you think you should stay at 3.5?

I think without knowing who you played in 4.0 it is unclear whether you belong as 4.0 or a 4.5. According to how I read schmke's analysis if your average opponent was 3.75 or lower (exactly mid level or lower for 4.0) then yes you belong there. But if your average opponent was 3.85 or better then you are likely a 4.5 player. (best estimate would be you are a 4.05 player)

I suspect the median league match has players with a rating a bit above average for their level.

For example, when I looked at it a few years ago, specifically looking at how often the favorite wins a match grouped by different gaps between the players, it revealed this which looks very much like you'd expect.

Gap	Winning %
0.00 - 0.05	53%
0.05 - 0.15	63%
0.15 - 0.25	75%
0.25 - 0.35	84%
0.35 - 0.45	90%
0.45 - 0.55	93%
0.55 - 0.65	95%
0.65 - 0.75	96%

I have not done nor have I seen this sort of analysis done for UTR, but it would be interesting to see if it is similar.

 

[J_R_B]

I thought if you previously had a USTA rating, and then didn't play for long enough that you had to self rate again, that you then have to self rate at the level you previously had as a minimum?

That was something that was added (between 5-10 years ago). If you're talking before that, it wasn't a rule.

 

[Chalkdust]

That was something that was added (between 5-10 years ago). If you're talking before that, it wasn't a rule.

Just wondering because a previous poster had said he had previously played 4.0 league, took a break, came back after a few years and did the self rate thing, and it recommended 3.5. So it's not smart enough to take into account a previous rating and you have to adjust for that yourself somehow? Sounds like it can be abused (and one could claim ignorance if ever found out).

 

[JRW911]

Just wondering because a previous poster had said he had previously played 4.0 league, took a break, came back after a few years and did the self rate thing, and it recommended 3.5. So it's not smart enough to take into account a previous rating and you have to adjust for that yourself somehow? Sounds like it can be abused (and one could claim ignorance if ever found out).

I remember there being a rule in place at the time I got bumped up to 4.5 that if you sat out and came back years later that you'd have to play at least one season at the last rating you had. A few years ago, I had a buddy tell me they got rid of that rule and that you can now self-rate if you sat out 3 or more years. Just to be sure, I ended up calling the USTA directly who told me the same thing. That's why I was able to self-rate and am now a 4.0.

 

[Chalkdust]

I remember there being a rule in place at the time I got bumped up to 4.5 that if you sat out and came back years later that you'd have to play at least one season at the last rating you had. A few years ago, I had a buddy tell me they got rid of that rule and that you can now self-rate if you sat out 3 or more years. Just to be sure, I ended up calling the USTA directly who told me the same thing. That's why I was able to self-rate and am now a 4.0.

Interesting, thanks. I've not played league for the last few years, so seems I will have options if I ever decide to play again and have to self rate!