Grievance prior to Sectionals but no ruling until after

OBGtennis

New User
I'm a 3.0 18+ Captain and filed a grievance on multiple players on a team about a month prior to Sectionals. These players had significant HS Varsity experience yet answered they had "limited tennis experience" on their 3.0 self rating questionnaire, and have been dominating all season (over 90% win rate for all). This team won Sectionals prior to any Grievance ruling, and I just found out after Sectionals ended that they are going to have several of these players DQed, but the team will get to move on to Nationals anyway since they won our Section.

Does this seem right? Seems like the 2nd place team at Sectionals should get to go in their place, especially considering these guys DQed won 90% of their matches at Sectionals and without them this team would have done nothing. They literally cheated and still get away with it! Of course they will get throttled at Nationals without all their top players, but still, they should not get to go!

Anyone have any experience with this where multiple players on a team got DQed before Nationals? Did a 2nd place team get to advance?
 
I think it's different per section, I've heard southern leans toward what you describe, which is insanity, ride the stallions until nationals then lose them, but still go. I know Texas will retroactively default matches in the regular season for dq'ed players, immediately impacting post season. Rules experts chime in.
 

Chalkdust

Professional
I'm a 3.0 18+ Captain and filed a grievance on multiple players on a team about a month prior to Sectionals. These players had significant HS Varsity experience yet answered they had "limited tennis experience" on their 3.0 self rating questionnaire, and have been dominating all season (over 90% win rate for all). This team won Sectionals prior to any Grievance ruling, and I just found out after Sectionals ended that they are going to have several of these players DQed, but the team will get to move on to Nationals anyway since they won our Section.

Does this seem right? Seems like the 2nd place team at Sectionals should get to go in their place, especially considering these guys DQed won 90% of their matches at Sectionals and without them this team would have done nothing. They literally cheated and still get away with it! Of course they will get throttled at Nationals without all their top players, but still, they should not get to go!

Anyone have any experience with this where multiple players on a team got DQed before Nationals? Did a 2nd place team get to advance?
I agree it doesn't seem right. Different sections have different rules about this.

I'm curious though, how did you find out what these players answered on the self-rating questionnaire?
 

OBGtennis

New User
I agree it doesn't seem right. Different sections have different rules about this.

I'm curious though, how did you find out what these players answered on the self-rating questionnaire?
I asked, because they were so good and the team had 13 self-rated players...
 

schmke

Legend
It varies by section.

Some sections will DQ and reverse matches all the way through Sectionals including during playoff events. Get DQ'd during Districts or Sectionals and not only is the player not eligible for future matches, but their results during the current playoffs are reversed. It can change standings big time.

Other sections will DQ but not reverse during the regular season, or only DQ the third strike or something like that, but do the above during playoffs.

Then Southern does its own thing. Not only do they not reverse results during the regular season, they don't check for strikes during a phase of playoffs. This means someone could get their 3rd strike in their first match, but play the rest of that event, perhaps 4 or 5 more matches, and get that many more strikes, and get to benefit from the out of level player. Only after the completion of the event do they check strikes and then the player is DQ'd and not eligible going forward, but everything played stands.

The other great thing about Southern is how they handle early start bump ups. A number of states in Southern have early start leagues, a 2022 championship year league that starts in the Summer or Fall of 2021. A player used their 2019 year-end rating for these leagues (no 2020 year-end ratings published) so someone who was a 3.5 at 2019 year-end (but is now playing at a 4.0 level and perhaps even on a 4.0 team) can play as a 3.5 on this ESL team. When they are bumped up to 4.0 at 2021 year-end, most sections say that player is no longer eligible to play on the 3.5 team during playoffs held in 2022, but Southern lets this 4.0 in 3.5 clothing keep playing on this 3.5 team in playoffs. It is only when the team goes to Nationals that the player is no longer eligible to play on the 3.5 team.

The result of this is that some teams go to and win Southern Sectionals, but then struggle to or can't even field a team at Nationals because they are filled with bumped up players that are no longer eligible. Even if they can field a team, it is an entirely different team that won Sectionals, and IMHO it isn't really fair to the other teams that had to play them at Sectionals, especially if they weren't an ESL team and had to have 2021 year-end 3.5s rostered. But Southern apparently feels it is more important to let the ESL team stick together for the entire season through Sectionals.
 

unexpected

New User
So..a bit of advice wanted here.

I'm playing in the Texas 4.0 sectionals this weekend. There's a team in my pod who has an 8 UTR player in their lineup - another self-rated 4.0. He was a 10 UTR in high school, took a 5 year break, didn't play a USTA match before this league, and now he's here!

So what's the best strategy here - we were semi-joking that we should have a grievance filled out before hand. Does it even matter? If he's in our round-robin pool, would they DQ that quickly? He's played exactly 4 matches, and managed to stay eligible, so should we let the strike system do it's thing? Can we even file a grievance ahead of time (I read that we have to wait until the match is played). Any advice?
 
You need grounds before you file a grievance, like a specific rules violation or a specific question answered falsely on the self-rate form, with evidence to back it up. Do you have that? Otherwise, better to let the strike system do its thing.
 

Moon Shooter

Hall of Fame
So many of these threads…the usta is hot garbage. They need to just scrap ntrp and partner with utr and get on with life. 3.0 nationals…what does that even mean to people. SMH. If you get dqed you should be forced to stay in pickleball

yep another thread about the problems of having unrated players (aka “self rated”) play in categories meant for rated players.

But utr is crap for adult rec tennis. Wtn might someday provide a viable solution for this. It could at least provide a floor along with the self rate form.
 
But utr is crap for adult rec tennis. Wtn might someday provide a viable solution for this. It could at least provide a floor along with the self rate form.
It's not crap, it can reveal people who incorrectly self-rate for USTA because it captures matches from high school and from other countries, it also captures collegiate matches. If there was a top 3 categories of self-rate sandbaggers, it would be in no particular order, high school players who were/are very good self rating too low, foreign players moving to the US for work or going to school in the US for college who are very good and self rating too low, and college players who take a few years off from recorded tennis and then self rate too low for USTA.

UTR has been very useful in at least identifying these players before they even play 1 USTA match. I can't understand why you would say it is crap when it really does this. You can't base it off your own limited experience with UTR.

Not really that impactful, but if a really good player with a high UTR rating loses a match 6-0 6-0 in a USTA league to tank their USTA rating (obviously to a lower UTR) , UTR will red flag that result as a fluke and give it little credit toward the UTR rating, another interesting UTR thing, not the greatest thing in the world, but interesting.
 

Moon Shooter

Hall of Fame
FYB
I agree that it is possible UTR could play a role in putting an additional floor on new USTA rec adult players.

I was responding to this:

"They need to just scrap ntrp and partner with utr and get on with life."

When I said UTR is crap. I just meant, I don't think it would be good to scrap NTRP and go with UTR as a partner. I mean he didn't explain exactly what he meant by "partner" but I am just saying that to the extent he meant partner with UTR and have it replace NTRP I think it would be a bad or at best lateral move. I think UTR is so removed from typical adult rec realities that they would be a poor partner.

But even with what you propose wouldn't WTN do this better? If a person that played in high school did not play in the last 12 months UTR would say they are unrated. So ok USTA could go back in time and try to look at old UTR ratings. If you want to pick a floor what day would you choose? The last rating they had on the last day they were rated? The average rating they had the last 12 months they reported games as long as their were more than 3 games in that year? I mean it could be done with UTR and I agree it would be better than the current system but I wonder if WTN without the wild daily swings wouldn't be better suited. Perhaps UTR has more data for match results for college and high school players. But I would think USTA could ask for that data since they already share data with UTR.
 
FYB
I agree that it is possible UTR could play a role in putting an additional floor on new USTA rec adult players.

I was responding to this:

"They need to just scrap ntrp and partner with utr and get on with life."

When I said UTR is crap. I just meant, I don't think it would be good to scrap NTRP and go with UTR as a partner. I mean he didn't explain exactly what he meant by "partner" but I am just saying that to the extent he meant partner with UTR and have it replace NTRP I think it would be a bad or at best lateral move. I think UTR is so removed from typical adult rec realities that they would be a poor partner.

But even with what you propose wouldn't WTN do this better? If a person that played in high school did not play in the last 12 months UTR would say they are unrated. So ok USTA could go back in time and try to look at old UTR ratings. If you want to pick a floor what day would you choose? The last rating they had on the last day they were rated? The average rating they had the last 12 months they reported games as long as their were more than 3 games in that year? I mean it could be done with UTR and I agree it would be better than the current system but I wonder if WTN without the wild daily swings wouldn't be better suited. Perhaps UTR has more data for match results for college and high school players. But I would think USTA could ask for that data since they already share data with UTR.
Aha, that makes sense. I think WTN could do better or the same, I haven't given much thought to it since I think other posters including yourself can analyze it better and it's not in my tennis world yet so to speak.

Your ideas are well thought out, I'm just too apathetic to think about it too much since the USTA won't change things dramatically even if the best idea in the world was hashed out here on the forums, but I enjoy seeing the ideas and keeping tabs on the irregularities.
 

unexpected

New User
You need grounds before you file a grievance, like a specific rules violation or a specific question answered falsely on the self-rate form, with evidence to back it up. Do you have that? Otherwise, better to let the strike system do its thing.

Thanks, this is helpful. Of course, we do not have his self-questionnaire. I will inform the team that we should just let the strike system do its thing!
 
The USTA could take a few lessons from golf's handicap system, which includes a number of clever safeguards against sandbagging. Some of these they could implement pretty easily, if they cared to spare a few resources for it.
 

Bodhi312

New User
You can ask for a copy of his self-rating questionnaire from your USTA local rep, that's how I'm getting 4 players DQed for lying on it!

This happened in my district with a woman who apparently didn’t fill her questionnaire out properly. I’m guessing the experience portion of the questionnaire wasn’t entirely accurate (based on the outcome of the grievance filed), but I can’t say for certain.

The woman played D1, then started playing USTA (as a 4.5) 2 years later. I’m guessing she should have rated as a 5.0S (at a minimum), based on the guideline chart I found online.

One of the women’s captains around here filed a grievance and the woman was DQ’d to 6.0D during 2021 (so she’s a 6.0C right now, effectively locked out of playing USTA until she can self-rate again based on inactivity).

The woman was 6-2 during her brief stint in USTA league matches, with tennisrecord.com rating her 4.12 just before the disqualification (so at least to me, 4.5 seems like a reasonable rating for her).

The woman’s singles UTR was 6.78 and her doubles UTR was 6.54, which seems reasonable for 4.5 level player.
 

Jack the Hack

Hall of Fame
The USTA could take a few lessons from golf's handicap system, which includes a number of clever safeguards against sandbagging. Some of these they could implement pretty easily, if they cared to spare a few resources for it.

Can you explain some of these safeguards in the golf handicap system and how they could work in tennis?

The reason I ask is because about 20 years ago, I got the golf bug, built a 75 yard hole with a synthetic green and sand trap in my back yard (I had a house with 2 acres), and started practicing like crazy. Every other week, I would play a round at one of 3 local courses and officially record my scores. After a year or two, I got my handicap down to a 12, which for people that don't know, means that for a course where par is 72, I usually averaged a score of 84. Anyway, I decided that I might be good enough to play an amateur golf tournament, so I signed up for one. They divided the flights up according to handicap, so I was in a category with people that had handicaps of 10 to 12, or something like that. As I recall, we only played a single 18 hole round, and I played really good, shooting an 82. Therefore, as I was coming off the 18th green, I remember thinking "I might be a contender to win this." Then I found the leader board for my category and discovered that the winner had shot a 70. Not a net 70 after the handicap was applied, but an actual 70. WTF! That is completely impossible. There is no way that someone that averages golf scores in the mid 80s suddenly shoots a 70, let alone in a tournament. And the tournament officials acknowledged this, but just shrugged their shoulders.

So that's when I learned that people cheat and sandbag in golf as much as they do in tennis.
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
This happened in my district with a woman who apparently didn’t fill her questionnaire out properly. I’m guessing the experience portion of the questionnaire wasn’t entirely accurate (based on the outcome of the grievance filed), but I can’t say for certain.

The woman played D1, then started playing USTA (as a 4.5) 2 years later. I’m guessing she should have rated as a 5.0S (at a minimum), based on the guideline chart I found online.

One of the women’s captains around here filed a grievance and the woman was DQ’d to 6.0D during 2021 (so she’s a 6.0C right now, effectively locked out of playing USTA until she can self-rate again based on inactivity).

The woman was 6-2 during her brief stint in USTA league matches, with tennisrecord.com rating her 4.12 just before the disqualification (so at least to me, 4.5 seems like a reasonable rating for her).

The woman’s singles UTR was 6.78 and her doubles UTR was 6.54, which seems reasonable for 4.5 level player.
The 6.0 rating was clearly punitive. Given the evidence, it's entirely possible that she could have been granted a self-rating appeal to play 4.5 since there is evidence that she is actually a 4.5 level player, but once you decide to falsify the questionnaire and cheat the system to avoid an appeal, they don't give you any lenience any more. Furthermore, this is a person who played D1. It's hard to plead ignorance of tennis as a reason to answer incorrectly when you've played at that level.
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
Can you explain some of these safeguards in the golf handicap system and how they could work in tennis?

The reason I ask is because about 20 years ago, I got the golf bug, built a 75 yard hole with a synthetic green and sand trap in my back yard (I had a house with 2 acres), and started practicing like crazy. Every other week, I would play a round at one of 3 local courses and officially record my scores. After a year or two, I got my handicap down to a 12, which for people that don't know, means that for a course where par is 72, I usually averaged a score of 84. Anyway, I decided that I might be good enough to play an amateur golf tournament, so I signed up for one. They divided the flights up according to handicap, so I was in a category with people that had handicaps of 10 to 12, or something like that. As I recall, we only played a single 18 hole round, and I played really good, shooting an 82. Therefore, as I was coming off the 18th green, I remember thinking "I might be a contender to win this." Then I found the leader board for my category and discovered that the winner had shot a 70. Not a net 70 after the handicap was applied, but an actual 70. WTF! That is completely impossible. There is no way that someone that averages golf scores in the mid 80s suddenly shoots a 70, let alone in a tournament. And the tournament officials acknowledged this, but just shrugged their shoulders.

So that's when I learned that people cheat and sandbag in golf as much as they do in tennis.
It's funny, when my dad was active in golfing (he's 82 now, so his golf days are long behind him...), his handicap was always biased in the other direction because if he was playing poorly, he'd get mad and quit and never submitted those scores for handicapping, so the only scores that got recorded were the rounds where he played well. If he ever tried to play a tournament like that, he'd finish dead last (or DNF, LOL).
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
I'm a 3.0 18+ Captain and filed a grievance on multiple players on a team about a month prior to Sectionals. These players had significant HS Varsity experience yet answered they had "limited tennis experience" on their 3.0 self rating questionnaire, and have been dominating all season (over 90% win rate for all). This team won Sectionals prior to any Grievance ruling, and I just found out after Sectionals ended that they are going to have several of these players DQed, but the team will get to move on to Nationals anyway since they won our Section.

Does this seem right? Seems like the 2nd place team at Sectionals should get to go in their place, especially considering these guys DQed won 90% of their matches at Sectionals and without them this team would have done nothing. They literally cheated and still get away with it! Of course they will get throttled at Nationals without all their top players, but still, they should not get to go!

Anyone have any experience with this where multiple players on a team got DQed before Nationals? Did a 2nd place team get to advance?
About a month prior to sectionals is plenty of time to come to a decision on the grievance well before sectionals and get a replacement team if the DQ's resulted in that team not having enough players left to play at sectionals. That was very poor by that section. If you file a grievance the day before sectionals start, yes, of course you're not going to have a decision until afterwards, but a month should leave them enough time to do it beforehand. I've never heard a grievance decision taking longer than 2 weeks even if there is no time crunch for it.
 

CosmosMpower

Hall of Fame
So..a bit of advice wanted here.

I'm playing in the Texas 4.0 sectionals this weekend. There's a team in my pod who has an 8 UTR player in their lineup - another self-rated 4.0. He was a 10 UTR in high school, took a 5 year break, didn't play a USTA match before this league, and now he's here!

So what's the best strategy here - we were semi-joking that we should have a grievance filled out before hand. Does it even matter? If he's in our round-robin pool, would they DQ that quickly? He's played exactly 4 matches, and managed to stay eligible, so should we let the strike system do it's thing? Can we even file a grievance ahead of time (I read that we have to wait until the match is played). Any advice?

And yet they didn't win sectionals. Dallas did with a bunch of UTR 6's. The UTR 8 singles guy did pound our line 2 singles guy like 1 and 0 or something. Luckily you have to win 3 lines.
 

Tennis4008

New User
I'm a 3.0 18+ Captain and filed a grievance on multiple players on a team about a month prior to Sectionals. These players had significant HS Varsity experience yet answered they had "limited tennis experience" on their 3.0 self rating questionnaire, and have been dominating all season (over 90% win rate for all). This team won Sectionals prior to any Grievance ruling, and I just found out after Sectionals ended that they are going to have several of these players DQed, but the team will get to move on to Nationals anyway since they won our Section.

Does this seem right? Seems like the 2nd place team at Sectionals should get to go in their place, especially considering these guys DQed won 90% of their matches at Sectionals and without them this team would have done nothing. They literally cheated and still get away with it! Of course they will get throttled at Nationals without all their top players, but still, they should not get to go!

Anyone have any experience with this where multiple players on a team got DQed before Nationals? Did a 2nd place team get to advance?
We had a. similar situation in this but it was just one player but I do agree with you...NOT FAIR...and glad ou filed a grievance!!! I'm really just commenting to see what other options there are!
 
Can you explain some of these safeguards in the golf handicap system and how they could work in tennis?

The reason I ask is because about 20 years ago, I got the golf bug, built a 75 yard hole with a synthetic green and sand trap in my back yard (I had a house with 2 acres), and started practicing like crazy. Every other week, I would play a round at one of 3 local courses and officially record my scores. After a year or two, I got my handicap down to a 12, which for people that don't know, means that for a course where par is 72, I usually averaged a score of 84. Anyway, I decided that I might be good enough to play an amateur golf tournament, so I signed up for one. They divided the flights up according to handicap, so I was in a category with people that had handicaps of 10 to 12, or something like that. As I recall, we only played a single 18 hole round, and I played really good, shooting an 82. Therefore, as I was coming off the 18th green, I remember thinking "I might be a contender to win this." Then I found the leader board for my category and discovered that the winner had shot a 70. Not a net 70 after the handicap was applied, but an actual 70. WTF! That is completely impossible. There is no way that someone that averages golf scores in the mid 80s suddenly shoots a 70, let alone in a tournament. And the tournament officials acknowledged this, but just shrugged their shoulders.

So that's when I learned that people cheat and sandbag in golf as much as they do in tennis.

I never said golf’s system was perfect! But just like locks on doors make it harder to break into houses and thus reduce but don’t eliminate crime, better systems reduce but don’t eliminate sandbagging. But reduction is still worthwhile, I think.

One of golf’s mechanisms is that they only include the best half of your last 20 scores in your handicap. So where you said your 12 handicap meant that your average score was 84, that wasn’t quite true, actually it meant that the average of the best 50% of your scores averaged 84. The worst 50% probably averaged 94, for an overall average of 89. So right there a guy would have to tank twice as many matches in order to achieve the same result. That dissuades some. I believe the same approach could be applied to NTRP – not without a technical issue or two, but clever minds could work it out.

Another mechanism, which is new since you left the game, is that your handicap can only move upward a certain number of strokes per year. The USTA could easily apply such a limit, say 0.2 NTRP points per year or whatever.

Don’t get me wrong, sandbagging is still prevalent in golf, but for reasons that are largely not present in tennis (e.g. self-reporting of scores). We could improve the NTRP system by adopting some of their good features.
 

Steady Eddy

Legend
Can you explain some of these safeguards in the golf handicap system and how they could work in tennis?

The reason I ask is because about 20 years ago, I got the golf bug, built a 75 yard hole with a synthetic green and sand trap in my back yard (I had a house with 2 acres), and started practicing like crazy. Every other week, I would play a round at one of 3 local courses and officially record my scores. After a year or two, I got my handicap down to a 12, which for people that don't know, means that for a course where par is 72, I usually averaged a score of 84. Anyway, I decided that I might be good enough to play an amateur golf tournament, so I signed up for one. They divided the flights up according to handicap, so I was in a category with people that had handicaps of 10 to 12, or something like that. As I recall, we only played a single 18 hole round, and I played really good, shooting an 82. Therefore, as I was coming off the 18th green, I remember thinking "I might be a contender to win this." Then I found the leader board for my category and discovered that the winner had shot a 70. Not a net 70 after the handicap was applied, but an actual 70. WTF! That is completely impossible. There is no way that someone that averages golf scores in the mid 80s suddenly shoots a 70, let alone in a tournament. And the tournament officials acknowledged this, but just shrugged their shoulders.

So that's when I learned that people cheat and sandbag in golf as much as they do in tennis.
There was a guy like that at my parents golf club. They had two tournaments a year for their members. One was straight-up, the other was handicap. While the winner of the regular tournament changed every time, the same guy always won the handicap tournament, and by like 10 strokes! He would always miss his last putt to get a big handicap, and then win that event. People are weird.
 

CosmosMpower

Hall of Fame
The UTR 8 guy couldn't make it, so it was never an issue!

Not true, there was a singles player on the SA team that was a UTR 8. He beat one of our decent UTR 6/over 4.0 TR dynamic singles players 1 and 3 and probably didn't even break a sweat. He also 1 and 3'd another over 4.0 dynamic player during sectionals. He went 3-0 at sectionals never losing more than 3 games in any set. He also went 12-0 for the year with a dynamic over 4.00 (at one point as high as 4.30 on TR)
 
Last edited:

unexpected

New User
.09
Not true, there was a singles player on the SA team that was a UTR 8. He beat one of our decent UTR 6/over 4.0 TR dynamic singles players 1 and 3 and probably didn't even break a sweat. He also 1 and 3'd another over 4.0 dynamic player during sectionals. He went 3-0 at sectionals never losing more than 3 games in any set. He also went 12-0 for the year and dynamic over 4.00 (at one point as high as 4.30 on TR)

I was talking about the Houston team! For sure the strength of your team is your depth. Good luck at Nationals, I hope all of you get bumped for next year!
 

nyta2

Hall of Fame
I'm a 3.0 18+ Captain and filed a grievance on multiple players on a team about a month prior to Sectionals. These players had significant HS Varsity experience yet answered they had "limited tennis experience" on their 3.0 self rating questionnaire, and have been dominating all season (over 90% win rate for all). This team won Sectionals prior to any Grievance ruling, and I just found out after Sectionals ended that they are going to have several of these players DQed, but the team will get to move on to Nationals anyway since they won our Section.

Does this seem right? Seems like the 2nd place team at Sectionals should get to go in their place, especially considering these guys DQed won 90% of their matches at Sectionals and without them this team would have done nothing. They literally cheated and still get away with it! Of course they will get throttled at Nationals without all their top players, but still, they should not get to go!

Anyone have any experience with this where multiple players on a team got DQed before Nationals? Did a 2nd place team get to advance?
geez, i pay folks better than me, to hit with me, and you're complaining about getting to hit with better players for free!!
in 4.5 and 5.0+ no body complains about ringers playing... because everyone wants to be able to play them,... sans hitting fee :p
 

Creighton

Professional
geez, i pay folks better than me, to hit with me, and you're complaining about getting to hit with better players for free!!
in 4.5 and 5.0+ no body complains about ringers playing... because everyone wants to be able to play them,... sans hitting fee :p

When you pay for a hitting session, you actually get to hit with them because they give you balls to hit.

In a league match, they can just embarrass you and take the fun out of it.
 

nyta2

Hall of Fame
When you pay for a hitting session, you actually get to hit with them because they give you balls to hit.

In a league match, they can just embarrass you and take the fun out of it.
there is so much learning to be done just playing against people much better... imagine if folks spent the same energy from filing grievances,... on the practice court :p
 

CosmosMpower

Hall of Fame
I heard there was at least 4 under 40?

We might have 4 total on the team under 40 but I can only think of 2 that would be starters that could go toe to toe with top teams at nationals.

One singles guy and one doubles guy. The singles guy may be in his late 20s or 30s I’m not sure.

Most of the best players are older doubles guys. Two of them are also going to nationals on the 40+ team.
 

Chalkdust

Professional
He's attacking the character of the victims to defend the cheaters. Likely a guilty conscious.
Wow, tough crowd.
I did not interpret his comment as an attack on the 'victims', but rather an observation that since cheaters are gonna cheat anyway, one is better off spending the time and energy playing tennis vs trying to out the cheaters.
 
Wow, tough crowd.
I did not interpret his comment as an attack on the 'victims', but rather an observation that since cheaters are gonna cheat anyway, one is better off spending the time and energy playing tennis vs trying to out the cheaters.
Same here, I understood it that way.
 
Top