How much sandbagging goes on in USTA

[rockbox]

I went to my area tennis association looking for a team to join because I want to play more tennis, and got linked with one of the team captains who walked me through the whole USTA registration and NTRP rating quiz which rates me as a 2.5. I'm totally new to the whole USTA thing. I haven't played competitive tennis in almost 30 years.

Even though I've only played tennis once a year for the last couple of decades with a few stints of heavy tennis, I have beaten 3.5 and 4.0's in casual doubles matches recently. I've been told by my wife's teaching pro that I should play 3.5 to get my feet wet but could play up to 4.5 if I played a lot more from the times I jumped in on her lessons.

I think the team captain probably knows that I'm not really a 2.5 from our brief conversation, but is using me to bolster his mixed 6.0 doubles team. I don't mind because I'm just looking to play more tennis and have fun even playing with my wife and her 2.5 and 3.0 friends, but I don't want to be seen as the guy that cheats. Now if everyone is sandbagging in USTA and I get some fun competitive doubles matches, then I don't care. What do you think I should do?

 

[Moveforwardalways]

I have never encountered sandbagging in USTA. Not sure what you mean.

 

[kevrol]

No way you should play as a self-rated 2.5. You will be known as the guy that cheats. Have no respect for folks who knowingly do this.

 

[Ft.S]

There is some sandbagging, but I do not believe it is really wide spread, meaning maybe one or two players in a given league team, and looking at the big picture, I do not believe it really impacts the overall results significantly. Things maybe different at sectional or national level plays, I don't have that experience.

As a self-rated player, I also think the system will catch up to your level of play pretty quickly, 3-4 matches depending on how it goes, so don't worry too much

 

[schmke]

The questionnaire identifies, based on a few select questions about your tennis experience, the minimum level you should self-rate at. Being a fairly short set of questions about mostly high school and college experience, it is not perfect and can grossly under rate a player that has experience that the questions don't ask about. If someone knows they can compete at a higher level, they shouldn't stick with the minimum as it won't be rewarding to play such easy matches and isn't fair to the competition. And when playing Adult, there are strikes/DQ's to keep things in check, but there aren't with Mixed, so it can easily be abused.

Note that the guidelines/questions will sometimes spit out too high a number, and when that happens there is an appeal process players can use to get self-rated at the appropriate level.

 

[rockbox]

There is some sandbagging, but I do not believe it is really wide spread, meaning maybe one or two players in a given league team, and looking at the big picture, I do not believe it really impacts the overall results significantly. Things maybe different at sectional or national level plays, I don't have that experience.

As a self-rated player, I also think the system will catch up to your level of play pretty quickly, 3-4 matches depending on how it goes, so don't worry too much

Okay. So I won't worry that much about it. I should get some easy matches to get my feet wet in USTA and everything should go to where I should be after a few matches. I'm cool with that.

 

[dsp9753]

I find that players who self rate without playing or talking to a USTA captain usually over rate themselves about .5. Players who join after talking with a captain about the rating process usually under rate about .5. So if you think you can beat 3.5 to 4.0 players but your captain wants you to self rate 2.5, you are probably around a 3.0 or 3.5.

Its up to you though, I think playing with your wife is fine if your skill level is too far outside the range. (If you are out classing your opponents, not sure what to do then. Give the opponents some type of advantage?)

 

[Ft.S]

Okay. So I won't worry that much about it. I should get some easy matches to get my feet wet in USTA and everything should go to where I should be after a few matches. I'm cool with that.

Another note on this is if you find yourself in a situation in which match after match you are clearly above opponents levels, just appeal your rating in TennisLink to move up. Those appeals are automatically and instantly granted

 

[NTRPolice]

The only way a player gets a 2.5 rating is if they "engineer" it, or literally have no experience playing tennis.

Anyone who has played tennis as a beginner and hasnt tried to engineer their at all would come out as a 3.0 minimum. If you have not tried to engineer your rating and have played tennis quite a bit, you'd probably come out as a 4.0. Of course, these ratings are probably too high, but what im trying to say is that no one gets rated as 2.5 as their first rating unless they are advised on how to do so.

Your rating sounds bogus and you know it. You say you think you should play 3.5 and have beaten 3.5's and 4.0's in casual doubles. Do you really have to ask us if we think you should be a 2.5?

Normally I would assume that someone is overrating themselves based on those horrible NTRP descriptors, but your original rating indicates to me that you have already tried to engineer a really low rating. 2.5 is not really supposed to be a starting rank. 2.5 is supposed to be a spill-under rank for 3.0's who lose. JTT doesnt really have 2.5 and many kids in JTT are actual beginners. JTT generally starts at 3.0 or 3.5 and these kids are being trained from day 1 with zero tennis experience, sometimes no experience in any sport at all. How can an adult who has played tennis more than a dozen times in their life come out as a 2.5 when kids 10 or 12 years old start at 3.0 having played no sports in their life?

You know what you did.

 

[Moveforwardalways]

The only way a player gets a 2.5 rating is if they "engineer" it, or literally have no experience playing tennis.

Anyone who has played tennis as a beginner and hasnt tried to engineer their at all would come out as a 3.0 minimum. If you have not tried to engineer your rating and have played tennis quite a bit, you'd probably come out as a 4.0. Of course, these ratings are probably too high, but what im trying to say is that no one gets rated as 2.5 as their first rating unless they are advised on how to do so.

Your rating sounds bogus and you know it. You say you think you should play 3.5 and have beaten 3.5's and 4.0's in casual doubles. Do you really have to ask us if we think you should be a 2.5?

Normally I would assume that someone is overrating themselves based on those horrible NTRP descriptors, but your original rating indicates to me that you have already tried to engineer a really low rating. 2.5 is not really supposed to be a starting rank. 2.5 is supposed to be a spill-under rank for 3.0's who lose. JTT doesnt really have 2.5 and many kids in JTT are actual beginners. JTT generally starts at 3.0 or 3.5 and these kids are being trained from day 1 with zero tennis experience, sometimes no experience in any sport at all. How can an adult who has played tennis more than a dozen times in their life come out as a 2.5 when kids 10 or 12 years old start at 3.0 having played no sports in their life?

You know what you did.

Bingo. I can't imagine the NTRP self rate questions give a 2.5 to anyone who answers "yes" to "have you ever played tennis before".

 

[NTRPolice]

Bingo. I can't imagine the NTRP self rate questions give a 2.5 to anyone who answers "yes" to "have you ever played tennis before".

I believe that will give you a 3.0 rating. To get a 2.5, you'd have to instantly appeal. What will also give you a 3.0 minimum rating is answering "yes" to "have you played any other competitive sports".

If this is true, we know that the OP lied saying that he's never played any sports at all to get 2.5, or he answered yes to playing rec tennis then appealed down to 2.5 after being rated 3.0. In either case, something isnt adding up. That, and these 2.5 sandbaggers are common in 6.0, as the once 2.5 sandbaggers are now all 3.5 C rated players and the team needs new 2.5's.

 

[rockbox]

I believe that will give you a 3.0 rating. To get a 2.5, you'd have to instantly appeal. What will also give you a 3.0 minimum rating is answering "yes" to "have you played any other competitive sports".

If this is true, we know that the OP lied saying that he's never played any sports at all to get 2.5, or he answered yes to playing rec tennis then appealed down to 2.5 after being rated 3.0. In either case, something isnt adding up. That, and these 2.5 sandbaggers are common in 6.0, as the once 2.5 sandbaggers are now all 3.5 C rated players and the team needs new 2.5's.

The question was have you played competitive tennis in the last 15 years. Since I haven't played competitive tennis since my freshman year in Highschool which was 30 years ago, I answered no. Don't get me wrong, I'm not proud of my 2.5 rating. It bruises my ego a little.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

I went to my area tennis association looking for a team to join because I want to play more tennis, and got linked with one of the team captains who walked me through the whole USTA registration and NTRP rating quiz which rates me as a 2.5. I'm totally new to the whole USTA thing. I haven't played competitive tennis in almost 30 years.

Even though I've only played tennis once a year for the last couple of decades with a few stints of heavy tennis, I have beaten 3.5 and 4.0's in casual doubles matches recently. I've been told by my wife's teaching pro that I should play 3.5 to get my feet wet but could play up to 4.5 if I played a lot more from the times I jumped in on her lessons.

I think the team captain probably knows that I'm not really a 2.5 from our brief conversation, but is using me to bolster his mixed 6.0 doubles team. I don't mind because I'm just looking to play more tennis and have fun even playing with my wife and her 2.5 and 3.0 friends, but I don't want to be seen as the guy that cheats. Now if everyone is sandbagging in USTA and I get some fun competitive doubles matches, then I don't care. What do you think I should do?

The evidence seems to point to playing higher than 2.5:
- You've beaten 3.5 and 4.0
- Your wife's teaching pro said you could play 4.5
- The computer tells you 2.5

The difference between 2.5 and 4.5 is vast, contrasting someone who can barely get the ball over the net or use the right grips to someone in the 90%+ percentile of skill.

If you want to stomp all over your competition and get bored quickly, go for 2.5. Don't be surprised if you get hostile "WTF are you doing at this level?" looks.

Seems like 4.0 is a pretty reasonable starting point. Just appeal up. And I'd avoid that team captain.

Oh @Startzel, where art thou?

 

[Startzel]

The evidence seems to point to playing higher than 2.5:
- You've beaten 3.5 and 4.0
- Your wife's teaching pro said you could play 4.5
- The computer tells you 2.5

The difference between 2.5 and 4.5 is vast, contrasting someone who can barely get the ball over the net or use the right grips to someone in the 90%+ percentile of skill.

If you want to stomp all over your competition and get bored quickly, go for 2.5. Don't be surprised if you get hostile "WTF are you doing at this level?" looks.

Seems like 4.0 is a pretty reasonable starting point. Just appeal up. And I'd avoid that team captain.

Oh @Startzel, where art thou?

I've decided to just start cheating because you guys find stuff like this acceptable.

What's the point in playing fairly if this can happen.

 

[Moveforwardalways]

The question was have you played competitive tennis in the last 15 years. Since I haven't played competitive tennis since my freshman year in Highschool which was 30 years ago, I answered no. Don't get me wrong, I'm not proud of my 2.5 rating. It bruises my ego a little.

2.5 league will be incredibly boring for you. And you will likely get complaints to the league coordinator's office unless you are good at faking it. Around here, even guys who are not natural athletes and first picked up a racquet after age 60 play 3.0.

 

[cknobman]

I think you should play at a level you know will be competitive.

Don't try and "reason" your way into something lower.

You will not have fun and that is why you should be playing tennis along with exercise and social interaction.

Heck I've been talked into playing combo with levels below myself and never have fun, ITS NOT WORTH IT.

I'd rather lose then play non competitive tennis for a f'ing plastic trophy.

 

[Moveforwardalways]

I think you should play at a level you know will be competitive.

Don't try and "reason" your way into something lower.

You will not have fun and that is why you should be playing tennis along with exercise and social interaction.

Heck I've been talked into playing combo with levels below myself and never have fun, ITS NOT WORTH IT.

I'd rather lose then play non competitive tennis for a f'ing plastic trophy.

Yes. If you sandbag, you will probably make state or higher, where you will finally run into other sandbaggers. Which means that for the whole season, you finally had a few fun matches at state, while every other evening and weekend you played for the past several months was crap tennis and boring. You choose which one you want.

 

[kevrol]

The only way a player gets a 2.5 rating is if they "engineer" it, or literally have no experience playing tennis.

Anyone who has played tennis as a beginner and hasnt tried to engineer their at all would come out as a 3.0 minimum. If you have not tried to engineer your rating and have played tennis quite a bit, you'd probably come out as a 4.0. Of course, these ratings are probably too high, but what im trying to say is that no one gets rated as 2.5 as their first rating unless they are advised on how to do so.

Actually that's not true. I self-rated 2.5 when I self-rated and didn't try to engineer the rating, nor did I have someone advising me. Also there was no reason whatsoever for me to try and get a 2.5 rating because I was going to play in a 3.0 league regardless. We don't even have 2.5 men's leagues in my area. Also my wife didn't have anyone advising her when she self-rated and she self-rated as a 2.0.

 

[rockbox]

It was never my intention to sandbag. I was looking for some 3.5-4.0 to play with in the area so I could play more, and it just so happened that one of the team captains contacted me and asked me to join his team. We went through the self rating process and it said I was a 2.5 since I haven't played high school tennis in the last 15 years(Freshman tennis 30 years ago) and I play less than twice a week (I was lucky to play twice a year for the better part of 3 decades). That being said, I've always had solid strokes, dependable kick serve, and I'm in as good of shape now as I've ever been in my life which allows me to play probably at a better level than I did in high school. I'm pretty sure the captain is trying to sandbag or he thinks I'm overrating my abilities like some guys have alluded to. I know I'm not a 2.5 but could realistically be anywhere from a 3.0-4.0 as I play now. My wife's teaching pro thinks I'm a 3.5-4.0 from 30 minutes hitting with me, but said I could get to 4.5 if I got serious about tennis again.

I'm going to go play with this team at 2.5 and if it's not fun, I will either petition to move up and/or leave the team. For the record, I'm not very competitive when I play tennis. I tend to handicap myself based on who I'm playing against. For example, I tend to underhand serve to my wife and her friends because they can't even handle my second serve dialed down.

 

[kevrol]

I'm going to go play with this team at 2.5 and if it's not fun, I will either petition to move up and/or leave the team. For the record, I'm not very competitive when I play tennis. I tend to handicap myself based on who I'm playing against. For example, I tend to underhand serve to my wife and her friends because they can't even handle my second serve dialed down.

Sorry but I have no respect for you as a tennis player. If you played 2x a week for 30 years and played HS tennis there is no way your should be playing as a 2.5 unless you're 90 years old. People like you and your captain are everything that's wrong with USTA League play.

 

[cknobman]

Lets see, I posted this:

I think you should play at a level you know will be competitive.

Don't try and "reason" your way into something lower.

Then not long after you post this:

I know I'm not a 2.5 but could realistically be anywhere from a 3.0-4.0 as I play now. My wife's teaching pro thinks I'm a 3.5-4.0 from 30 minutes hitting with me, but said I could get to 4.5 if I got serious about tennis again.

I'm going to go play with this team at 2.5 and if it's not fun, I will either petition to move up and/or leave the team. For the record, I'm not very competitive when I play tennis. I tend to handicap myself based on who I'm playing against. For example, I tend to underhand serve to my wife and her friends because they can't even handle my second serve dialed down.

You either lack reading comprehension or good personal character traits.
Could be a little of both but I'll lean more towards the latter.

Hard to respect a person like that.

 

[rockbox]

Sorry but I have no respect for you as a tennis player. If you played 2x a week for 30 years and played HS tennis there is no way your should be playing as a 2.5 unless you're 90 years old. People like you and your captain are everything that's wrong with USTA League play.

I play 2 times a year at most.

 

[kevrol]

I play 2 times a year at most.

Doesn't matter. You've already stated you beat 3.5s and 4.0s. No legitimate 2.5 does that. You've already stated your case and credentials. From what you've posted here I have no respect for you. Sorry if that's harsh but you deserve it.

 

[rockbox]

Doesn't matter. You've already stated you beat 3.5s and 4.0s. No legitimate 2.5 does that. You've already stated your case and credentials. From what you've posted here I have no respect for you. Sorry if that's harsh but you deserve it.

I get your point.

 

[Moveforwardalways]

However, you want to be sure you get picked up on a team. And that the team will actually call you up to play. Don't overrate and the get stuck in no-mans-land.

 

[rockbox]

However, you want to be sure you get picked up on a team. And that the team will actually call you up to play. Don't overrate and the get stuck in no-mans-land.

This USTA stuff is so political. I just want to play more. If tennis was more like pickup basketball where I could just go to a court and call next, I wouldn't even bother with this league stuff.

 

[Startzel]

Actually that's not true. I self-rated 2.5 when I self-rated and didn't try to engineer the rating, nor did I have someone advising me. Also there was no reason whatsoever for me to try and get a 2.5 rating because I was going to play in a 3.0 league regardless. We don't even have 2.5 men's leagues in my area. Also my wife didn't have anyone advising her when she self-rated and she self-rated as a 2.0.

I'm guessing you played 6.0 mixed and or 5.5 combo?

 

[kevrol]

I'm guessing you played 6.0 mixed and or 5.5 combo?

Nope. I played 3.0 and 6.5 Combo.

 

[Startzel]

Nope. I played 3.0 and 6.5 Combo.

With a 4.0 partner?

 

[kevrol]

With a 4.0 partner?

Nope. 3.5 or 3.0 partner. You can't play a 4.0 and 2.5 together in combo (at least you can't here.)

 

[schmke]

...
That being said, I've always had solid strokes, dependable kick serve

That right there means you aren't a 2.5. No valid 2.5 has ever had a kick serve let alone a dependable one.

and I'm in as good of shape now as I've ever been in my life which allows me to play probably at a better level than I did in high school.

So if you hadn't had years off since high school and answer the questionnaire, it would probably spit out 3.5 or 4.0 due to your high school experience. And you say you are able to play at a higher level now. Again, not 2.5.

I know I'm not a 2.5 but could realistically be anywhere from a 3.0-4.0 as I play now. My wife's teaching pro thinks I'm a 3.5-4.0 from 30 minutes hitting with me, but said I could get to 4.5 if I got serious about tennis again.

Then don't play 2.5. You should at a minimum self-rate as a 3.0 and that only if for some reason the politics/connections don't allow you to find a 3.5 team. You will not have fun playing 2.5 and it won't be fair to your opponents.

I tend to underhand serve to my wife and her friends because they can't even handle my second serve dialed down.

If anyone has a serve that can't be handled even when dialed down, you aren't a 2.5.

 

[NTRPolice]

Actually that's not true. I self-rated 2.5 when I self-rated and didn't try to engineer the rating, nor did I have someone advising me. Also there was no reason whatsoever for me to try and get a 2.5 rating because I was going to play in a 3.0 league regardless. We don't even have 2.5 men's leagues in my area. Also my wife didn't have anyone advising her when she self-rated and she self-rated as a 2.0.

I have no idea how this is possible unless age is a factor. I dont know anyone who started below 3.0 after answering "no" to every question. Even the seniors and super seniors I know never started below 3.0. I only know one legitimate 2.5. He's like 80 and can barely move.

It's possible if you're over 40 and answer "no" to everything you start out as a 2.5, then can appeal down to 2.0. Since many sections have a 1.0 maximum NTRP differential allowing people to start out as 2.0's makes no sense. You'd have to play up in 2.5 adult league, which are very rare. You couldnt play 6.0 unless your section/district allows for greater than 1.0 NTRP combos. You'd have to play 5.5 combo league with a a 3.0? I guess?

It makes no sense for USTA to start people out below 3.0 because there are very few 2.5 leagues. 2.5 or below is only useful for 2.5 league because you can always play 6.0 combo as a 2.5 even if you dont have a 3.5 partner. Since I dont know anyone who started as a 2.5 who didnt appeal, and being a 2.5 is almost useless for league, I assume that USTA does not want people to start there. If they want to be there, they have to play as a 3.0 and lose, or start as a 3.0 and immediately appeal. What's the point of starting new players out with a rating that cant even be used in league? Do you want to pay for your USTA yearly and then try to sign up for league only to find there are no 2.5 teams? Probably not, right?

 

[Moveforwardalways]

Why wouldn't USTA beginner tennis start with a 1.0 rating? It seems arbitrary to start with 3.

 

[cknobman]

I'm starting to think this is a troll bait thread.

I'm calling BS on OP.

 

[kevrol]

I'm starting to think this is a troll bait thread.

I'm calling BS on OP.

I hope you're right.

 

[silentkman]

sand bagging has always been a part of the USTA. it simply can't be stopped. I thought the dynamic rating would. As somebody once said 'if you ain't cheating, you ain't trying'.

 

[Moveforwardalways]

sand bagging has always been a part of the USTA. it simply can't be stopped. I thought the dynamic rating would. As somebody once said 'if you ain't cheating, you ain't trying'.

No rating system can do that. It isn't the system that's broken, it is the manipulated data put into the system that's the problem.

 

[Jim A]

I think the USTA could help itself by making a small change to the algorithm. Make the matches against the better players (those above/at your level of play) than those lower. Players who are trying to stay at level can make those look much more competitive (say 7-6, 2-6, 1-0) and have won the match but lost more than they won overall. Let's face it, you get out there in a warm up and see the discrepancy and know you are going to win the match (maybe they are stacking/sacrificing at D1), you might give up a couple games along the way as you are at 85% and not 100% but it's in the bag regardless and 3 and 3 vs 1 and 0 but now the rating is static or doesn't go up....you get the break and don't necessarily go for the 2nd, you work on returns, s&v, patterns and get to the post-match grill and booze in an hour or so.....then you beat the big boys later on but all it does it get you even to where you at...

 

[time_fly]

I'm starting to think this is a troll bait thread.

I'm calling BS on OP.

No, it's true. When I joined USTA a few years ago, the automatic questionnaire assigned me a 2.5 rating. Similarly to the original poster, I played up through high school tennis, took about 20 years off, then did a couple years of club play before deciding to join USTA. If you answer the questions honestly in this scenario, you can get a 2.5 rating due to lack of any recent competitive playing experience. In my case, I did overrule the computer and assign myself a 3.5 rating anyway.

 

[time_fly]

Duplicate post. :-(

 

[damazing]

I was checking the opponents roster on the upcoming league and it looks like 2 people that were bumped up in December had successfully appealed back down. One of the guys only lost to other players that had also been bumped up, so not sure why the appeal was granted but he clearly wants another chance to try to get to nationals.

At the next level up he would be on the low end but probably still be competitive.

 

[g4driver]

The question was have you played competitive tennis in the last 15 years. Since I haven't played competitive tennis since my freshman year in Highschool which was 30 years ago, I answered no. Don't get me wrong, I'm not proud of my 2.5 rating. It bruises my ego a little.

Then don't play as a 2.5 on the mixed team or as a 2.5 period.

Man up and play 3.0 at least. If you have a 18 your old daughter, it would be legal for your 50 year old divorced buddies to "date" her. Not illegal, just sleazy.

Don't be sleazy.

 

[Robert F]

If I was an honest 2.5 on the other team and had to face you, I wouldn't be very happy to play you at least in a league format.
I don't mind playing way better players then me (usually enjoy it), but not when the odds are supposed to be even or close to that in a league.

Sounds like I'd go out and pay $20 bucks to get my butt whipped in an hour in a way that really didn't help my game. Here I think I'm in a league I can compete in and then come off the court wondering if I should ever play again.

There are plenty of ways to play tennis and you don't have to do it in an inappropriate league. Find a higher league or play with people of appropriate level. The nice think about tennis is you need one court and either 2 or 4 people. It ain't that hard to arrange.

I have seen sandbagging in the USTA before. I felt it was pretty rampant about 5-7 years ago, and I don't see it as often now. At least here in the *******. Teams seem more even and not a lopsided. There doesn't seem to be a vast level difference. Sure a guy might have a great serve, but then the rest of his game levels it out.

"In the old sandbagging days," I remember playing one team didn't add a guy to the roster until after the match (which I think is against the rules). He had played college tennis (recent grad), served with insane spin and pace had a volley that slammed harder than most of our forehands. Afterwards, the captain asked if he fit in our 4.0 league. I said "no, he's at least 4.5 or better." He just shrugged and walked away.

I had one guy join our 4.0 team that would win usually 2,1 or 1,1 at our number one singles. He said if I kept playing him his 3.5 rating would bump up. So he asked me to play him at #3 doubles for a while. When I said that would not be appropriate, next season he joined another team that was willing to scam his rating with underplay and line-up stacking.

Some guys just want to win. I never understand it. I want to win a fair hard fought match. I don't want to steam roll someone who can't play at my level.
Sure it would be cool to go to Nationals but on merit and effort not because I beat a bunch of guys who just picked up the game.

 

[g4driver]

There is thread in 2008 where the OP, Roxbox claims to be a 3.5 He posted in a another thread I was reading and the name sounded familiar. He was asking for a 12 oz Pure Drive with a 66-67 Flex. Those aren't specs any 2.5 or most 3.5 guys use. From reading his posts, I just don't get guys like him.

Sounds like he would fit in much better at 4.0

 

[jls304]

Sandbagging is such a "norm" that you should almost always go .5 or even 1 point below your true ntrp. Everyone else basically does just that. I believe I'm a true 4.0 but in a tournament I feel like half the guys I play are solid 4.5. People hate to lose.

 

[OrangePower]

Sandbagging is such a "norm" that you should almost always go .5 or even 1 point below your true ntrp. Everyone else basically does just that. I believe I'm a true 4.0 but in a tournament I feel like half the guys I play are solid 4.5. People hate to lose.

Funny at tournaments I feel exactly the opposite. Half of the entrants in 4.5 tournaments are 4.0s playing up. So I don't find tournaments worth it. I think the competition is better in league.

 

[dlk]

A ton. In my experience, it is usually a few teams, from the elite clubs, that have a distorted analysis of their players' talents. "Wow, dude you and your Bro beat us 1 & 1, you've been a 3.5 for 7 years & your 28 years old." In my area, it's the same ole guys & teams; I believe USTA ratings system needs tweaked to correct, I'm just not sure how to accomplish that. Hey, if they can sleep at nite.

 

[Ronaldo]

I've decided to just start cheating because you guys find stuff like this acceptable.

What's the point in playing fairly if this can happen.

Play 5.0s 6 out of 7 days. On the seventh day suck it up and take one for the team. Grab those fins and take a dive into a 2.5 inch pool.

 

[TennisCJC]

just like all league tennis I've played in 40+ years there's always lots of sandbagging. 10+ years ago we won 4.0 city finals in Atlanta. I was pushing 50 years old. Our captain recruited 2 singles guys about 23 or 24 years old that just came out of a D3 college program. It doesn't sound too bad on paper because there are lots of ex-D3 at 4.0 but these kids played 1 and 2 singles and had very strong records. I wasn't in favor of it but didn't quit the team either. Team we beat in city SF round was threatening protest and screaming at the captain in the parking lot after they lost - it was ugly. Anyhow, we won the city, 1 of the kids was DQed so couldn't go to state and the other kid did not bother to travel to state. We still made the SF round at state with just the old men. By the way, the team we beat in the Atlanta city finals had 7 of the 8 players in their starting line-up bumped to 4.5 so there was sandbagging on both sides. My experience is to go deep in USTA or Atlanta's ALTA playoffs, you really need 2 or 3 players that are capable of playing higher simply because the competition will have similar players.

 

[Deleted member 23235]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/23/sports/tennis/a-self-defeating-adventure-in-self-rating.html
it's a catch 22...
* need to lose in usta at the higher level
* no team will take you at the higher level... so you can't play any matches to lose.
solution: sandbag city.

i think part of the "game" of usta tennis is manipulating the system, if that's your thing (ie. beat up folks weaker than you to make yourself feel better).... but i think that happens more with the lower level folks, not so much with the higher level folks.... and part of the unavoidable reason for why it happens sometimes is because sandbagging is the only way to get play time at all (ie. no 5.0+ league in your area, and/or no one will take you at your supposed "correct" level)