The short answer is "Yes, the strike threshold for appealed players is the same for self-rates".If you appeal your rating down, do you have to generate the same dynamic rating that you would as a self-rate to generate a strike?
Sounds like a major loophole in the USTA system.An A for an appeal sticks with the player until they get a new rating at the end of the year, or until they get a 3-strike DQ or some other administrative rating change.
And @J_R_B nailed it, an appeal player, if they simply play at the same level they did in the previous year, is very unlikely to get DQ'd. They have to play significantly better than their rating for a number of matches before they'll start accumulating strikes.
Assuming you play three matches where everybody else has a valid computer rating, does every match afterwords generate a new dynamic rating?An A for an appeal sticks with the player until they get a new rating at the end of the year, or until they get a 3-strike DQ or some other administrative rating change.
And @J_R_B nailed it, an appeal player, if they simply play at the same level they did in the previous year, is very unlikely to get DQ'd. They have to play significantly better than their rating for a number of matches before they'll start accumulating strikes.
Lots of people do appeal down. You have to be pretty close to the threshold for it to be granted, and there are some situations where appealing down is just denied (going to Nationals for example).Sounds like a major loophole in the USTA system.
Why don’t more people appeal down?
It doesn't take three matches to start generating dynamic ratings, those are calculated after every match.Assuming you play three matches where everybody else has a valid computer rating, does every match afterwords generate a new dynamic rating?
You have to be within a very small margin of the bump threshold for the appeal to be granted. If your year end dynamic rating is 4.01 or 4.02, you can appeal down to 4.0, but if it's 4.10 or 4.20, you can't.Sounds like a major loophole in the USTA system.
Why don’t more people appeal down?
I don't mind the auto appeals as long as they keep the threshold fairly close to the line. People are just barely bumped because they ran into an opponent or two who were having a bad day shouldn't be stuck in purgatory.Lots of people do appeal down. You have to be pretty close to the threshold for it to be granted, and there are some situations where appealing down is just denied (going to Nationals for example).
I agree allowing these auto appeals is questionable and potentially creates more problems than it solves. But I can also see it having value in some cases.
The short answer is "Yes, the strike threshold for appealed players is the same for self-rates".
The long answer is that, despite using the same numerical threshold, it is much more difficult to get strikes as an appealed player because you start with a dynamic rating (slightly above the bump threshold), so the match ratings are averaged with that existing dynamic rating right away from match one of the new league season. In other words, if you have a 4.01 year end dynamic rating and appeal down to 4.0 and play your first match in the new season with a 4.30 match rating, the dynamic rating for that is only 4.15 (or below the 4.20 strike threshold) because it is averaged with the existing dynamic rating. If you are self-rated with no existing dynamic rating, the raw match rating for your first two matches while you establish a dynamic rating is compared against the strike threshold, so if a self-rate plays a 4.30 rated match in their first match, it's a strike.
For an appealed player with a 4.01 dynamic rating to get a strike in their first match, they would need to play at a 4.40 or above match rating in the first match, which is near-5.0 level and nearly impossible against 4.0 level competition without double bageling one of the top rated 4.0s. If the player can play at a near-5.0 level, it begs the question of how they got into the appeal range at year end in the first place. Appealed players who are dynamically DQ'd have to play consistently above the strike threshold for many matches before starting to actually accumulate strikes. This means either playing up and winning at the level they appealed from and/or absolutely destroying good competition at the lower level, neither of which commonly happen, especially if the rating in the appeal range is generated through playing fairly and not intentionally tanking.
Sounds like a major loophole in the USTA system.
Why don’t more people appeal down?
may vary, but I would get a lot of heat from the club, teammates, etc. if I were playing w/ that 'A' next to my name. I don't know if people have stories; I'm sure eventually ppl would forget and move on, but peer pressure can be real.Appealing down makes sense in many cases especially for mixed and tri-level where I do not think you can be DQed.
Reasons not to appeal down:
1) You want to play up. E.g., a 3.0A can't play in a 4.0 league.
2) You don't want to worry about DQs at all or
3) have no interest in playing mixed tri level or at the lower level and you think your captain (of the level above) may not play you as much unless you keep the higher c level rating.
That is interesting.may vary, but I would get a lot of heat from the club, teammates, etc. if I were playing w/ that 'A' next to my name. I don't know if people have stories; I'm sure eventually ppl would forget and move on, but peer pressure can be real.
I wonder about this too. Someone's year-end rating starts off their initial dynamic rating for the following year. But then how much weight is it given when the first new year's match result gets averaged in?I know this is beside the point you were making so the numbers you used may not have been intended to be accurate but, does USTA count the first few matches of a new year different then the last few matches of last year? I mean if I have a 3.01 dynamic rating based on 24 matches from 2024 and then play one or two matches after the cut off with a performance rating of 3.31 will my dynamic rating really bump to 3.15?
Players age doesn't enter the ratings calculation at all. That one I know.I know this is beside the point you were making so the numbers you used may not have been intended to be accurate but, does USTA count the first few matches of a new year different then the last few matches of last year? I mean if I have a 3.01 dynamic rating based on 24 matches from 2024 and then play one or two matches after the cut off with a performance rating of 3.31 will my dynamic rating really bump to 3.15? If my first two matches of the next year are a 2.80 performance rating will my dynamic rating drop to 2.91? I would think after you get your dynamic rating all matches count about the same the only thing that may effect the weight ("k factor" or "Glicko RD") of a match is the time between matches.
I also wonder if age of the player effects the weight given to any one match.
But if a self-rated player played at that level (just above threshold), they would also not get DQ'd, right?And @J_R_B nailed it, an appeal player, if they simply play at the same level they did in the previous year, is very unlikely to get DQ'd. They have to play significantly better than their rating for a number of matches before they'll start accumulating strikes.
Longer than it would take for an S rate The S rate would get strikes from every 4.30 while the A would require several 4.30s to bring the calculated/averaged rating above the strike threshold.But if a self-rated player played at that level (just above threshold), they would also not get DQ'd, right?
The more interesting question is how long would it take the A-rate to get DQ'd if every match in the new year rated above the DQ threshold.
E.g. in the @J_R_B example, if the DQ threshold is 4.20 and every match rates 4.30, how long before the first strike hits?
Yep, ratings are calculated for the "rating year" which lately has started/ended about the 2nd weekend of November. The USTA chooses to confusingly give year-end ratings a rating date of "12/31" but yes, the matches played after the rating year cut-off in November/December will be included in the following rating-year period.Players age doesn't enter the ratings calculation at all. That one I know.
As for the first question, I think so. My understanding is that matches played after the ratings cutoff date in the same calendar year are treated as matches in the next year for rating purposes and the "year-end" rating is really "rating year end" not "calendar year end". If the rating year is 11/1-10/31 and you play some matches in November and December, your DNTRP at the end of the calendar year will not be the same as your DNTRP rating a the end of the rating year. You may even fall in a different rating band (i.e. if your rating was 2.90 at the rating year end and you play well in Nov/Dec, you may have a 3.05 DNTRP as of 12/31), but you will not be bumped up because those matches that caused the movement of your DNTRP are in a different rating year. @schmke can correct me if I'm wrong about that.
I estimate that the 5th match at 4.30 would be the first strike. If you drop it to 4.25 (which is also a 1-2-3, you're out scenario for S-rates), it would be the 8th match for the first strike.But if a self-rated player played at that level (just above threshold), they would also not get DQ'd, right?
The more interesting question is how long would it take the A-rate to get DQ'd if every match in the new year rated above the DQ threshold.
E.g. in the @J_R_B example, if the DQ threshold is 4.20 and every match rates 4.30, how long before the first strike hits?
The rating date of 12/31 could be considered appropriate in that you can play under that rating (for any team you are already registered for anyway) until 12/31 of the following year even if you are bumped tht November.Yep, ratings are calculated for the "rating year" which lately has started/ended about the 2nd weekend of November. The USTA chooses to confusingly give year-end ratings a rating date of "12/31" but yes, the matches played after the rating year cut-off in November/December will be included in the following rating-year period.
Good point. Some other local rule notwithstanding, that is the date after which you must play at your new rating.The rating date of 12/31 could be considered appropriate in that you can play under that rating (for any team you are already registered for anyway) until 12/31 of the following year even if you are bumped tht November.
I don't mind the USTA making things secret as much as I mind confusing or stupid, which is also commonplace.Good point. Some other local rule notwithstanding, that is the date after which you must play at your new rating.
I still think it is confusing given that they are not transparent about what the rating year/period is. They seem to think keeping things a secret will somehow prevent the cheaters from figuring out how to manipulate things.