Helping my self-rated player appeal down

[Orange]

I am the captain of a new USTA 2.5 team with a player who would like to join my team but who self-rated at 3.0 when she joined the USTA last year. She joined a 3.0 USTA league team, but didn't play any matches.

Of course, I am looking into the official procedure for her to appeal her self-rating and will follow that procedure. I'm writing now to seek any advice others have about how to support her appeal. She has never played a tennis match in competition--no high school match, no league match, no tournament. She played socially on and off for several years (with her husband and with friends) and has taken some group lessons.

To the extent that there is such a thing as a true 2.5, she is one. I have no doubt that she will not be disqualified for winning too many matches, or for winning matches by too great a margin.

What advice can you give? Thanks in advance!

 

[gmatheis]

When I first started I self rated higher than I had to based on my answers to the questions they ask you (and yes I answered them all honestly)

I then played about 4 tournaments and never won a match.

What I did was to fill out the form for appealing a self rating, and in that I detailed my tennis history and made my argument that based on my tournament results I had over estimated my ability and did not feel I could be competitive at that level. They never answered me but my rating was adjusted down a few weeks later.

Now the down side.

My only problem now is that I have been playing 5+ times a week and my level has increased significantly. Even if I play up I feel I may get disqualified because I only played Combo Doubles and I can't get a computer rating from that. So my self rating is about a full point lower than an honest rating would be for me.

I don't know if any teams will want me if I rate completely by the book, and yet if I even go one level lower I'm afraid that I will get DQ'd

So there is how I got my self rating dropped (which wasn't dishonest at the time I did it) but there is also the situation i face now due to my improvement ... maybe it would be better for your friend to just play at 3.0 and see what happens.

 

[Orange]

Thanks for telling me your experience!

My player cannot play 3.0 because she works on the day the local 3.0 league plays (2.5 plays on a different day) and because she is truly not good enough to play 3.0 yet. She could enter tournaments, but that seems like a waste of money and time just to get to her true level.

I appreciate hearing your response, though.

 

[goober]

My main issue is what would be the basis of your appeal? You have no record of match play to support your claim that she is 2.5 instead of a 3.0. Having never played a competitive match doesn't mean anything. There are plenty of people who have self rated 3.0 and 3.5 and played at those levels succesfully without any prior competitive experience. From what I have seen USTA needs actual evidence for self rate appeals. I am not sure if saying "She isn't good enough " has ever worked for an appeal.

 

[Cindysphinx]

I have a suggestion.

I think your player should handle this directly. I would obtain the name and email for the person who handles appeals for your section and pass these along to the player. Let her write an email explaining her experience and why she picked 3.0 (why did she, BTW?).

I have had this come up a couple of times. Each time, I got the sense that the section official really didn't want to deal with me but wished to speak to the player.

 

[goober]

I have a suggestion.

I think your player should handle this directly. I would obtain the name and email for the person who handles appeals for your section and pass these along to the player. Let her write an email explaining her experience and why she picked 3.0 (why did she, BTW?).

I have had this come up a couple of times. Each time, I got the sense that the section official really didn't want to deal with me but wished to speak to the player.

... and did that work?

 

[Orange]

Let her write an email explaining her experience and why she picked 3.0 (why did she, BTW?).

She picked 3.0 because at the time she joined USTA our club didn't offer a 2.5 team but did have a 3.0 team. The 3.0 team offered a clinic for team members that she wanted to participate in. Therefore, she joined the 3.0 team for the clinic but never played a match.

 

[Orange]

Let her write an email explaining her experience and why she picked 3.0 (why did she, BTW?).

She picked 3.0 because at the time she joined USTA our club didn't offer a 2.5 team but did have a 3.0 team. The 3.0 team offered a clinic for team members that she wanted to participate in. Therefore, she joined the 3.0 team for the clinic but never played a match.

 

[Cindysphinx]

... and did that work?

Yes and no, sort of.

The first lady had played Div. 1, so the computer wouldn't let her rate lower than 4.5. Trouble was, she played Div. 1 20 years and 50 pounds ago. They granted the appeal down to 4.0, but not down to 3.5. Because her skills were nowhere close to 4.0, no one would take her onto a 4.0 team so she quit league.

The second lady is the one I described on a thread here. She had self-rated 3.5 the previous year but hadn't played anything but combo. When it was time to sign up for a 3.5 and 4.0 ladies day team the following year, she accidentally picked 4.0. Even though it was a mistake, the league would not allow her to appeal down to her previous year's 3.5 rating.

 

[Orange]

Thanks again for your comments! I'm writing now to let everyone know what I've learned.

Captains are no longer permitted to appeal on behalf of a player. In fact, the box on the appeal form for "captain" is no longer there.

A player can appeal a self-rating down by attempting to register for a lower-level team. That is the only way I've found to access the appeal form.

My player will be appealing using this method. The form states that players should allow a minimum of 3 weeks for their appeals to be heard.

I hope this is helpful for others!

 

[Orange]

The first lady had played Div. 1, so the computer wouldn't let her rate lower than 4.5. Trouble was, she played Div. 1 20 years and 50 pounds ago. They granted the appeal down to 4.0, but not down to 3.5. Because her skills were nowhere close to 4.0, no one would take her onto a 4.0 team so she quit league.

This illustrates what I see as a problem with the USTA system. The problem is even worse for beginners, or people returning to the sport.

When I initially applied, the minimum self-rating I was allowed was 3.5. This was because I had played high school tennis and proceeded to post-season play. Of course, in our small county, everyone proceeded to post-season play; we played the other high schools during the season and then had the county tournament. That was over 30 years ago. I played with a wooden racket, for heaven's sake! On appeal, I was allowed to go down to a 3.0. As I was truly a 2.5, I was allowed to play on the 3.0 team only because only one other person would play singles. After I lost all my 3.0 matches to much better players, my computer ranking was reduced to 2.5, where it should have been in the first place.

If the USTA doesn't allow people who are truly 2.5 players to play 2.5, it will be rare for them to be able to play at all, because most 3.0 teams wouldn't take them. The result will be that beginners and players returning to the sport will not be able to play USTA league tennis at all.

 

[OrangePower]

^^^^^ It's tough, because I can see it both ways. In your situation, you were probably not that good to begin with (sorry, not meaning to be derogatory; just saying that playing post-season HS was not an accurate reflection of your skill level at the time). Then of course getting older doesn't help!

On the other hand, with the lady that used to play Div I (assuming she was a starter on the team), it's a different story... 20 years and 50 pounds later she obviously is not at that level any more, but on the other hand she has the technique and natural ability, which means once she starts playing again she will get better in a hurry. So whereas she might not be competitive at a higher level at the start of the season, chances are that by the end of the season she would be. So USTA is trying to anticipate that, rather than letting her play at a lower level which might initially be more appropriate, but where she would be dominating by the end of the season (and being called a sandbagger by disgruntled opponents!)

 

[kylebarendrick]

The self rate guidelines clearly state that if you are unsure which level to use, you should choose the higher level. This, of course, is almost never followed in practice as people would rather rate low and win. With that in mind, I actually prefer that USTA makes it hard for people with previous experience to appeal down.

 

[Orange]

Orangepower--You are absolutely right, and I am not offended: I really wasn't that good to begin with. I played on a no-cut high school team, in a high school with fewer than 500 students, where every player played post-season. I agree that mine is a different situation from the one in which a player played DI--she clearly had some athletic ability and knowledge of technique and strategy to draw upon when she returned to the sport.

Kylebarendrick--I agree with the concept of choosing the higher rating if one is unsure. My player is not unsure. A 3.0 team won't let her play in the lineup.

I do feel for Cindysphinx's player who accidentally rated herself as a 4.0 because she registered for the 4.0 team first. At least she still has one team with which to play, which is not as good as two, but better than the situation where one cannot get going with tennis because no team will take her at her stated level.

My player has appealed, so we'll see what happens!

 

[Orange]

Thanks for all the advice I received here. My player appealed and was granted her appeal before league play started, so we were both happy.

 

[J_R_B]

Thanks for all the advice I received here. My player appealed and was granted her appeal before league play started, so we were both happy.

It varies from section to section, but around here (Middle States), almost all reasonable self-rate appeals are granted (presumably on the basis of trying to get as many people involved as possible). Medicall and other appeals for existing players are more strict, however.

 

[leech]

Thanks for all the advice I received here. My player appealed and was granted her appeal before league play started, so we were both happy.

Cool; glad it worked out for your player.

I had initially self-rated at 4.0, just by reading the NTRP descriptions and never having played anyone with an NTRP rating. After my first couple of matches in a tennis ladder vs. 3.5 players that spanked me, I appealed my NTRP rating, which was granted. But, it took about a month, so was unable to play a 3.5 tournament I was hoping to participate in last year.

 

[tennisjon]

Unfortunately, there are issues with the system. Not all D1 players, even current ones, are 5.0 or even 4.5. Some are 4.0 level. Obviously, most are 5.0 and up, but there are people who are hurt by this rule. A friend of mine made a D1 squad but was never good enough to start. He can't play at the level he is capable of competing at because the computer put him at 5.5. At best, he is a strong 4.5.

I, on the other hand, didn't even start on my high school team, and wound up making a D1 team (never started due to injuries), but because of being grandfathered in, am a high 4.5 player.

I coach D3 and there are many really strong 5.0 level players who play on weak teams with weak schedules so they go relatively unnoticed and therefore rate as 4.5.

Of course, there are also players that played high school who are great players who decided not to play college and high school players that can barely grip a racquet and both could get the same rating.

Without someone visually evaluating players, it is hard to judge levels. Some people wind up being excluded from USTA team competition simply because the USTA uses a concrete method to keep out sandbaggers.