I just got dynamic DQed

ABtennis

New User
Here's my background. I'm 37. I started playing 2 summers ago. I live in an area where it's playable outdoors about 5 months a year. My first year and a half I played the outdoor season about 1 or 2 times a week. I didn't really take any lessons except for 1 set of 6 group lessons which was more of a pro just feeding balls. I was probably a strong 2.5, weak 3.0.

This past summer I started playing more frequently about 4 or 5 times. Took the fall off and joined an indoor club Jan 1. Naturally, I started playing more, 3-5 times a week. I self rated 3.0 based on reading the guidelines and what others with USTA experience told me. I started to improve with my frequent play. I watched lots of youtube videos and learned some strategy and fundamentals. For example, I hit a 1 handed backhand and didn't know to switch grips until recently. I signed up for the 3.0 and 3.5 teams.

Anyway, here are my results in chronological order-

3.0 #1S- 6-1,6-3 W
3.0 #2S- 6-0,6-0 W
3.5 #2D- 6-4,6-2 W
3.5 #1D- 4-6,6-3,1-0 L
3.0 #1S- 6-4,6-2 W
3.0 #1D- 6-4,7-5 W
3.0 #1S- 6-2,4-6,1-0 W

Then the DQ!! I know many people will just respond that I am a sandbagger and I deserved what I got. But that's not my motive. Sandbaggers play down to stroke their egos with wins. I like to play up. I don't mind losing, I just want to improve.

So was my playing up the death blow? The first 2 matches were against weak players, both of whom are winless in singles often by similar scores. The final match, I assume, was the third strike because I got DQed right after it. In that match, I almost lost and fought off a match point in the 3rd set tiebreak. My opponent was a computer rated 3.0. How is this a strike? We basically played the tennis equivalent of a draw.

I'm frustrated with the whole system. Is it possible I can be DQed off my 3.5 team too? Am I allowed to know where the strikes fell?
 

michael_1265

Professional
Here's my background. I'm 37. I started playing 2 summers ago. I live in an area where it's playable outdoors about 5 months a year. My first year and a half I played the outdoor season about 1 or 2 times a week. I didn't really take any lessons except for 1 set of 6 group lessons which was more of a pro just feeding balls. I was probably a strong 2.5, weak 3.0.

This past summer I started playing more frequently about 4 or 5 times. Took the fall off and joined an indoor club Jan 1. Naturally, I started playing more, 3-5 times a week. I self rated 3.0 based on reading the guidelines and what others with USTA experience told me. I started to improve with my frequent play. I watched lots of youtube videos and learned some strategy and fundamentals. For example, I hit a 1 handed backhand and didn't know to switch grips until recently. I signed up for the 3.0 and 3.5 teams.

Anyway, here are my results in chronological order-

3.0 #1S- 6-1,6-3 W
3.0 #2S- 6-0,6-0 W
3.5 #2D- 6-4,6-2 W
3.5 #1D- 4-6,6-3,1-0 L
3.0 #1S- 6-4,6-2 W
3.0 #1D- 6-4,7-5 W
3.0 #1S- 6-2,4-6,1-0 W

Then the DQ!! I know many people will just respond that I am a sandbagger and I deserved what I got. But that's not my motive. Sandbaggers play down to stroke their egos with wins. I like to play up. I don't mind losing, I just want to improve.

So was my playing up the death blow? The first 2 matches were against weak players, both of whom are winless in singles often by similar scores. The final match, I assume, was the third strike because I got DQed right after it. In that match, I almost lost and fought off a match point in the 3rd set tiebreak. My opponent was a computer rated 3.0. How is this a strike? We basically played the tennis equivalent of a draw.

I'm frustrated with the whole system. Is it possible I can be DQed off my 3.5 team too? Am I allowed to know where the strikes fell?

I think playing up was the final nail. You had a couple non-competitive matches, which may or may not have been your strikes, depending on your opponents. Your one match playing up was competitive. I can't imagine that you could be DQ'd at 3.5, because you would have to earn three more strikes there, which is unlikely. Don't sweat it. You improved more rapidly than the average person (like me), and the system isn't built for that. Enjoy your 3.5 matches.
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
Self-rated players who play up are begging to be DQ'd. As a general rule, I won't accept any self-rated player who plans to play up.

OP is lucky the computer disregarded the double bagel win or he would have been DQ'd after the 3.5 competitive loss, I think.
 

Carolina Racquet

Professional
Agree with the other posts here that your DQ was due to a combination of lopsided 3.0 wins and playing up to 3.5.

The 'system' allows you three strikes before being DQ'd. If you beat any benchmark players at 3.0 or 3.5 you got a strike. A lopsided 3.0 win could be a strike and playing up might be a strike.

There's not a lot of details around the NTRP DQ system for good reason. They don't want you to sandbag and skirt the rating system.

Hopefully your DQ didn't result in any loses for the team.
 

athiker

Hall of Fame
You self rated 3.0 and then won 5 straight 3.0 matches and a few were lopsided. That is not an "average" or even a "good" 3.0 result; it is "excellent". You then "played up" 3.5 and had by any interpretation "good" results there. The computer then computes you are a solid 3.5; it has nothing else to go on.

Your explanation is completely reasonable and I don't think you are a sandbagger...but the computer doesn't know your back story. The computer program is designed to work as best as possible for the most players possible. Your story isn't typical so IMHO the computer can't really expect to be accurate for you or really even treat you fairly. You are an outlier that got screened out w/ the true sandbaggers (that everyone would be complaining about if they were allowed to stay).

There is no input into the USTA computer program for watching YouTube videos and thus achieving rapid improvement! I hear you though and am not joking...I've watched a ton too and I truly believe they have helped me significantly!

You may have gotten DQ'd at 3.0 anyway but the playing up was was the nail in the coffin. Your 3.5 play confirmed your ability in the eyes of the computer. I'm playing up this year for the first time (3.5 computer ranking, playing up to 4.0...the videos helped me a lot too!) but went in fully knowing that I am basically asking to get bumped to 4.0 at the end of the season.

As michael said, enjoy your 3.5 matches. Hopefully your DQ doesn't effect the playoff chances of your 3.0 team. But as Cindy said, even if it does the Captain should have known he was playing with fire if he knew you were also playing up in 3.5.
 
Last edited:

Limibeans

Rookie
Just by looking at the results...

You beat someone 6-0, 6-0
You're 5W/0L overall in your 3.0 season
You won at 3.5 while being rated as a 3.0

Reading the guidelines and asking for teammates advice on how you should rate means nothing to the NTRP committee. They dont know who you are, nor do they care. They're going to look at the match results and they speak for themselves.

Sorry, but you played your cards wrong and lost.

You say you like to play up? Well... appeal to 4.0 and good luck.
 

goober

Legend
You say you like to play up, then you should be happy with your move up to 3.5. Why are you frustrated- your play is indicative of you improving as a player? I would say it is highly unlikely you would get Dq'ed at 3.5 but is possible if you start winning big. Just play on your 3.5 team and get a C rating at the end of the year and then you won't ever have to worry about DQs again.
 

polski

Semi-Pro
Here's my background. I'm 37. I started playing 2 summers ago. I live in an area where it's playable outdoors about 5 months a year. My first year and a half I played the outdoor season about 1 or 2 times a week. I didn't really take any lessons except for 1 set of 6 group lessons which was more of a pro just feeding balls. I was probably a strong 2.5, weak 3.0.

This past summer I started playing more frequently about 4 or 5 times. Took the fall off and joined an indoor club Jan 1. Naturally, I started playing more, 3-5 times a week. I self rated 3.0 based on reading the guidelines and what others with USTA experience told me. I started to improve with my frequent play. I watched lots of youtube videos and learned some strategy and fundamentals. For example, I hit a 1 handed backhand and didn't know to switch grips until recently. I signed up for the 3.0 and 3.5 teams.

Anyway, here are my results in chronological order-

3.0 #1S- 6-1,6-3 W
3.0 #2S- 6-0,6-0 W
3.5 #2D- 6-4,6-2 W
3.5 #1D- 4-6,6-3,1-0 L
3.0 #1S- 6-4,6-2 W
3.0 #1D- 6-4,7-5 W
3.0 #1S- 6-2,4-6,1-0 W

Then the DQ!! I know many people will just respond that I am a sandbagger and I deserved what I got. But that's not my motive. Sandbaggers play down to stroke their egos with wins. I like to play up. I don't mind losing, I just want to improve.

So was my playing up the death blow? The first 2 matches were against weak players, both of whom are winless in singles often by similar scores. The final match, I assume, was the third strike because I got DQed right after it. In that match, I almost lost and fought off a match point in the 3rd set tiebreak. My opponent was a computer rated 3.0. How is this a strike? We basically played the tennis equivalent of a draw.

I'm frustrated with the whole system. Is it possible I can be DQed off my 3.5 team too? Am I allowed to know where the strikes fell?

My story was similar when I was a 3.5 a few years back. I played up to 4.0 my first year of playing NTRP league. I had played mixed and combo the year before. I had been playing almost every day & lost a ton of weight. I stormed through 3.5 spring season undefeated and was above .500 at 4.0. I got my 3.5 DQ right after 2 wins at States. It made sense to me then and it should makes ense to you now.
 
My story was similar when I was a 3.5 a few years back. I played up to 4.0 my first year of playing NTRP league. I had played mixed and combo the year before. I had been playing almost every day & lost a ton of weight. I stormed through 3.5 spring season undefeated and was above .500 at 4.0. I got my 3.5 DQ right after 2 wins at States. It made sense to me then and it should makes ense to you now.

I didn't realize you get DQ'd after the regular season. What happens in Sectionals when someone is DQ'd?
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
Self-rated players who play up are begging to be DQ'd. As a general rule, I won't accept any self-rated player who plans to play up.

OP is lucky the computer disregarded the double bagel win or he would have been DQ'd after the 3.5 competitive loss, I think.

This is a definite weakness of the system. If you are playing for the first time and unsure of your true level, you can't self-rate at a lower level and play at two levels while you figure out where you really belong. Almost any match other than a 0 & 1 loss at the higher level will be a strike at the lower level. Rather, you have to pay at the lower level exclusively, and then if you are too good for that level, make the switch to the higher level and never look back.
 

Kostas

Semi-Pro
It amazes me how many captains let self-rated players play on their team when they know they're also playing up on another team.
 

Limibeans

Rookie
This is a definite weakness of the system. If you are playing for the first time and unsure of your true level, you can't self-rate at a lower level and play at two levels while you figure out where you really belong. Almost any match other than a 0 & 1 loss at the higher level will be a strike at the lower level. Rather, you have to pay at the lower level exclusively, and then if you are too good for that level, make the switch to the higher level and never look back.

How many players play two different levels when they first started?

The OP really sounds like a sandbagger who reached for too much and got burned. Common sense can answer the question "Why did I get DQ'ed" because its painfully obvious when you have a perfect season and even a win at a level up.

When you choose your NTRP, you either choose right or wrong.

If you choose right, then you're fine right where you are cause you're competitive with players of the same rating.

If you choose wrong, you'll either lose badly cause you're overrated or you'll be a ringer and underrated.

If you're a ringer, you're either a smart ringer and get to ring for the next 10 years or you're a dumb ringer and get a dynamic DQ by having a perfect season while winning matches playing a level up on another team.


It's not a weakness of the system. Its the people who arnt playing their hands right, whether they're unsure of their NTRP or dont know how to sandbag.
 

Nellie

Hall of Fame
It is really hard to tell without knowing the ratings of your opponents. Winning against weak opponents doesn't mean much, but losing close matches to strong opponents will really up your rating. Similarly, playing up at 3.5 won't get you DQ'd if you are playing other 3.0's. Usually, the USTA will give you letter describing the strikes so you can figure out what happened.
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
It is really hard to tell without knowing the ratings of your opponents. Winning against weak opponents doesn't mean much, but losing close matches to strong opponents will really up your rating. Similarly, playing up at 3.5 won't get you DQ'd if you are playing other 3.0's. Usually, the USTA will give you letter describing the strikes so you can figure out what happened.

While both strength of opponents and margin of victory enter the rating formula, it seems to me that margin of victory is more heavily weighted. We had a guy DQ'd at 4.0 last year who played only historically losing 4.0 players or guys just bumped from 3.5 with no previous 4.0 experience, so people you would expect to be "low 4.0s", but he won 6-2 6-0, 6-0 6-1, 6-1 6-0, and 6-1 6-1 and got DQ'd.
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
This is a definite weakness of the system. If you are playing for the first time and unsure of your true level, you can't self-rate at a lower level and play at two levels while you figure out where you really belong. Almost any match other than a 0 & 1 loss at the higher level will be a strike at the lower level. Rather, you have to pay at the lower level exclusively, and then if you are too good for that level, make the switch to the higher level and never look back.

It's not that hard to sort out.

If you don't know whether you should be a 3.0 or 3.5, self-rate at 3.0. Then play 3.5. If you get schooled, you can always play 3.0. If not, then you keep chugging along at 3.5.

Plus, you get the bonus that your opponents will underestimate you when they see the 3.0 rating during your 3.5 matches. That oughtta be good for a couple of free points until they catch on.
 

amarone

Semi-Pro
The 'system' allows you three strikes before being DQ'd. If you beat any benchmark players at 3.0 or 3.5 you got a strike.
This is incorrect. As has been stated many times in this forum, being a benchmark means that the player progressed to the playoffs the previous year. Beating a benchmark player has exactly the same effect as beating any other - it depends on the ratings of all involved and the margin of victory/defeat. The "B" is irrelevant.
 

amarone

Semi-Pro
Just by looking at the results...

You beat someone 6-0, 6-0
You're 5W/0L overall in your 3.0 season
You won at 3.5 while being rated as a 3.0

Reading the guidelines and asking for teammates advice on how you should rate means nothing to the NTRP committee. They dont know who you are, nor do they care. They're going to look at the match results and they speak for themselves.

Sorry, but you played your cards wrong and lost.

You say you like to play up? Well... appeal to 4.0 and good luck.
This would be correct if you changed "committee" to "computer" and "they" (and similar) to "it".
 
Congratulations to the OP for rapid improvement. From your scores it's not at all surprising that you got DQed. There is no reason to be upset since you really seem to belong at 3.5 level. It may hurt a bit if your 3.0 team lost any ties because of your DQ. But I will blame it on the captain. Accepting a self rated player who is also playing up is like sitting on a time bomb.

Just focus on your improvement and enjoy your tennis. In theory you can get bumped up at 3.5 level as well, but that would require you to win 3 matches against computer rated 3.5 players and not drop more than 3 games in each match.

If you want to set a record (and be very unpopular among your tennis friends), try playing at 4.0 as well. :)

The NTRP dynamic rating is based on number of games you win / drop adjusted for the level of competition. So you would get a strike for winning 6-1, 6-1 against a 3.0 C, and you would also get a strike for loosing in 3 sets against a 3.5 C.

I would not sweat a lot about DQ. Just enjoy your improvement and have fun playing tennis.

Any one starting with a self rating should never play at two levels. The fact that a higher level team accepts you is an strong indication that you really belong there and should not be playing at lower level. If you just want to test water before jumping in, then self rate at lower level and only play at higher level. If you consistently loose something like 6-1, 6-1 or worse, then stop playing at upper level and play only at lower level.

By playing up you are asking USTA to move you to the next level, and that is exactly what they did after seeing the proof in your scores. Even if you had lost all your matches at 3.5 the system would have rated you 3.5 at the year end.

-Josh
 
Last edited:

ABtennis

New User
I definitely understand the sandbagger accusations. Obviously, as the season approached and progressed, I noticed my rapid improvement outpaced that of my teammates and opponents. However, I fail to understand some of the logic presented here and even by the USTA.

The USTA says if you expect to improve rapidly, self rate yourself higher. But how can anyone be assured they'll improve? I'm sure most of us expect to improve, that's why we play. But many people don't improve enough to jump an entire division.

Suppose I self rate 3.5 when I'm really a solid 3.0 expecting to improve--- there's not many 3.5 teams that want me as a teammate. Therefore, I don't have a place to play. There seems to be a flaw in the system. Perhaps making any clubs that host USTA teams must have their pro available to rate players. Then the pro would be on the hook for consistent low evaluations.

I just think the DQ and reversal of all my matches was severe for a team and player trying to play honestly, by the rules. I have read about sandbagging and rigging the final scores to avoid being DQed. I would never partake in something like that because it's blatant cheating. No grey area there at all, imo.

So now the team went from 4-1 to 1-4 because we were in several close matches. I understand the bump up based on a computer algo, but I think the reversal of matches is unwarranted unless you prove the intentional low self-rating.
 

kylebarendrick

Professional
It doesn't really matter if it was intentional - the computer got enough data to conclude that you are a solid 3.5 (the threshold for a strike is near the middle of the next level). I'd argue in most cases that it is harsher to allow matches won by a 3.5 in a 3.0 league to stand than it would be to overturn them.

There's nothing you can really do about it at this point but move on...
 

NLBwell

Legend
Of course there are flaws in the system, as there are in all systems, and this case is one of them.
The OP should certanly have been bumped up to 3.5, but it is pretty unfair to the rest of the team punished because of it. I don't really see an answer though if you want to discourage sandbagging. The real problem is that the real sandbaggers know how to work the computer and don't get bumped up.
 

dizzlmcwizzl

Hall of Fame
This is a definite weakness of the system. If you are playing for the first time and unsure of your true level, you can't self-rate at a lower level and play at two levels while you figure out where you really belong. Almost any match other than a 0 & 1 loss at the higher level will be a strike at the lower level. Rather, you have to pay at the lower level exclusively, and then if you are too good for that level, make the switch to the higher level and never look back.

I would not call it a weakness. The self rating guidelines clearly states that if you think you are between two rating levels then you should choose the higher one. 3. If in doubt, place yourself in the next highest category.

Essentially the USTA is saying we want players to have fair competition ... you cannot make a mistake play choosing the higher level, but if you choose to play at two levels there is a real chance you will be disqualified from the lower level.
 

gameboy

Hall of Fame
USTA computers did their job.

You captain should have known right away the your ripe for DQ based on your early scores and you playing up a level.

Even with that, he kept playing you.

Your team just received what your captain sowed.
 

athiker

Hall of Fame
I definitely understand the sandbagger accusations. Obviously, as the season approached and progressed, I noticed my rapid improvement outpaced that of my teammates and opponents. However, I fail to understand some of the logic presented here and even by the USTA.

The USTA says if you expect to improve rapidly, self rate yourself higher. But how can anyone be assured they'll improve? I'm sure most of us expect to improve, that's why we play. But many people don't improve enough to jump an entire division.

Suppose I self rate 3.5 when I'm really a solid 3.0 expecting to improve--- there's not many 3.5 teams that want me as a teammate. Therefore, I don't have a place to play. There seems to be a flaw in the system. Perhaps making any clubs that host USTA teams must have their pro available to rate players. Then the pro would be on the hook for consistent low evaluations.

I just think the DQ and reversal of all my matches was severe for a team and player trying to play honestly, by the rules. I have read about sandbagging and rigging the final scores to avoid being DQed. I would never partake in something like that because it's blatant cheating. No grey area there at all, imo.

So now the team went from 4-1 to 1-4 because we were in several close matches. I understand the bump up based on a computer algo, but I think the reversal of matches is unwarranted unless you prove the intentional low self-rating.

The fly in the ointment of your argument that there is a flaw in the system is that you played up. There was a 3.5 team that wanted you as a teammate. You rated 3.0 yet you joined a 3.5 team in addition to a 3.0 team. You knew you were improving rapidly, as you mentioned above, and were at the very least a very strong 3.0. What player that felt they were a weak or middle of the road 3.0 would play up to 3.5 their very first season? What 3.5 team would take them unless they saw their play was at least passable for 3.5? The fact that it was your first season and you were a self rated player is what got you...and should've gotten you IMHO.

For the benefit of those reading this who are new to USTA or thinking of joining, I've read a lot of threads on here about bump ups and this seems to be the basic rule: No player should play up unless they are willing to get bumped up...and if you are self-rated a mid-season bump-up is a DQ...plain and simple.

I'm still not saying you were an intentional sandbagger from the get-go, I'm just saying the system is set up to work for the majority of players and situations. It shouldn't let first time players dominate at a lower level while simultaneously producing very good results a step higher and let them stay at the lower level. I also understand the disappointment of hurting your team's record. I had no concept of USTA ratings or the way leagues worked when I first joined a few years ago and might've stepped into something like this. This is not really on you though if your 3.0 captain knew you were playing up...he should've known the situation and possible consequences. This result, the DQ, is a predictable result any experienced USTA player could've seen coming. I say before the season, but without a doubt after the first few match results. Though at 3.0 maybe your captain hasn't been around that long either?

Anyway, since you went in w/ honest intentions don't let it bug you too much and enjoy 3.5. Hopefully the old 3.0 teammates understand the situation and that it was simply a "rookie" mistake. That or they know their captain tried playing with fire and burned the team...so they can just be mad at him! :)
 
Last edited:

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
I would not call it a weakness. The self rating guidelines clearly states that if you think you are between two rating levels then you should choose the higher one. 3. If in doubt, place yourself in the next highest category.

Essentially the USTA is saying we want players to have fair competition ... you cannot make a mistake play choosing the higher level, but if you choose to play at two levels there is a real chance you will be disqualified from the lower level.

You definitely can make a mistake choosing the higher level. If you self-rate higher and then find yourself completely overmatched, you are stuck at a level where you can't compete in a system where there is a ton of downward stickiness in the computer ratings. You basically just eliminated USTA as an avenue for competition for yourself. With the new rules about self-rating at a minimum of your last rating, it may even be a permanent mistake now. Remember, a lot of these people are people who never played USTA and honestly have no idea what rating they should be.
 

robert

Rookie
Disagree. USTA only let players to self rate once they have a team to join. This means that the player already got team # from a captain. In other words, the captain believed that this player belong to this level at least.

It isn't the other way around. You won't self rate a level and find a team. So there isn't a scenario that you selfrate too high to join a particular team. The only exception is that you accidently select a high level and click the confirmation button.

You definitely can make a mistake choosing the higher level. If you self-rate higher and then find yourself completely overmatched, you are stuck at a level where you can't compete in a system where there is a ton of downward stickiness in the computer ratings. You basically just eliminated USTA as an avenue for competition for yourself. With the new rules about self-rating at a minimum of your last rating, it may even be a permanent mistake now. Remember, a lot of these people are people who never played USTA and honestly have no idea what rating they should be.
 

Jim A

Professional
It amazes me how many captains let self-rated players play on their team when they know they're also playing up on another team.

agreed and this is one thing I like about Intermountain, you can only play on one team/rating each season with the exception of Mixed.

To me it helps preserve level of play, ie. you don't want to be a 3.5 trying to move up and play 3.0's half the season..
 

SJS

New User
Disagree. USTA only let players to self rate once they have a team to join. This means that the player already got team # from a captain. In other words, the captain believed that this player belong to this level at least.

It isn't the other way around. You won't self rate a level and find a team. So there isn't a scenario that you selfrate too high to join a particular team. The only exception is that you accidently select a high level and click the confirmation button.

Actually, that changed this year. Players can now self-rate before signing up for a team.
 

amarone

Semi-Pro
IIRC the appeal to overturn a dynamic DQ is still overseen by actual humans. The computer DQ's you, the humans reverse it.
You can request a review of a DQ and the review will be handled by humans. However, they will not be looking at the scores and making any assessments of the merit of the DQ.

2.04C NTRP DISQUALIFICATION REVIEW PROCEDURES.
2.04C(1) Reviews are considered based solely on missing or incorrect information.
 

robert

Rookie
Actually, that changed this year. Players can now self-rate before signing up for a team.

That is interesting to know. But for most of first usta players, they will still look for a team and then self rate accordingly. I don't know why a first time player would just self rate him blindly first then find a team accordingly. In summary, I think it very likely to under selfrate than over selfrate with current usta league process (looking for team -> approved by captain -> self rate ->join team). Tournament is different story and you won't be DQed by tournament play anyway.
 

ABtennis

New User
Anyway, here are my results in chronological order-

3.0 #1S- 6-1,6-3 W
3.0 #2S- 6-0,6-0 W
3.5 #2D- 6-4,6-2 W
3.5 #1D- 4-6,6-3,1-0 L
3.0 #1S- 6-4,6-2 W
3.0 #1D- 6-4,7-5 W
3.0 #1S- 6-2,4-6,1-0 W

My DQ letter from the USTA cites the 3 strikes as follows-
3.0 #2S- 6-0,6-0 W
3.5 #2D- 6-4,6-2 W
3.0 #1S- 6-2,4-6,1-0 W

as for the first strike, contrary to popular belief, 6-0,6-0 wins are not thrown out.

on strike 2, playing up wins seem to be auto strikes because the team we played was honestly, god awful.

on strike 3, it's still a bewilderment to me. As I said earlier, this was a singles match against a 3.0C and I almost lost, facing a match point and winning in a tiebreak. I can only assume he has a very high dynamic rating.

I hope others learn from my experience. It's a disappointment to all teammates when a DQ occurs.
 
Anyway, here are my results in chronological order-

3.0 #1S- 6-1,6-3 W
3.0 #2S- 6-0,6-0 W
3.5 #2D- 6-4,6-2 W
3.5 #1D- 4-6,6-3,1-0 L
3.0 #1S- 6-4,6-2 W
3.0 #1D- 6-4,7-5 W
3.0 #1S- 6-2,4-6,1-0 W

My DQ letter from the USTA cites the 3 strikes as follows-
3.0 #2S- 6-0,6-0 W
3.5 #2D- 6-4,6-2 W
3.0 #1S- 6-2,4-6,1-0 W

as for the first strike, contrary to popular belief, 6-0,6-0 wins are not thrown out.

on strike 2, playing up wins seem to be auto strikes because the team we played was honestly, god awful.

on strike 3, it's still a bewilderment to me. As I said earlier, this was a singles match against a 3.0C and I almost lost, facing a match point and winning in a tiebreak. I can only assume he has a very high dynamic rating.

I hope others learn from my experience. It's a disappointment to all teammates when a DQ occurs.

The third strike is bit surprising. I bet that the 3.0C opponent must have had several easy wins this season and his current dynamic rating is 3.5. Basically USTA has already determined him to be a legit 3.5 but his C rating prevents them from bumping him up mid season.

The USTA system is not perfect and will never be perfect, but its not all that bad. Most of the times the people who get burned are the people like you who make honest mistakes. The ringers and sandbaggers know how to game the system.

But as I said before, don't think too much about DQ. Its really captain's fault. Its not your fault that you are good and keep winning. No reason to feel bad at all.

-Josh
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
The third strike is bit surprising. I bet that the 3.0C opponent must have had several easy wins this season and his current dynamic rating is 3.5. Basically USTA has already determined him to be a legit 3.5 but his C rating prevents them from bumping him up mid season.

The third strike is surprising to me, not for the match it came on but rather the ones that it didn't. I would have thought the 3.5 doubles match would ahve been the third. He had strikes in his two previous matches, so his dynamic rating was probably over the limit to start and then he played up and split sets. I would have thought that would have been the 3rd.

The USTA system is not perfect and will never be perfect, but its not all that bad. Most of the times the people who get burned are the people like you who make honest mistakes. The ringers and sandbaggers know how to game the system.

This is the reason that I don't really agree with overturning results unless there is proof of cheating. The system is best designed to catch people who honestly rate too low, play to the best of their ability, and find out they were too strong for the level. That is what happened here. If the computer identifies these people, of course they should be DQ'd from the lower level and forced to move up to the correct level, but since they were being honest and playing honestly, I don't think they or their team should be punished for that. The system is much less good at catching people intent on cheating since there are ways to manipulate it.

It's a different situation if you catch someone actually cheating (like throwing matches or lying on the self-rating questionnaire). In those cases, of course the match results should be overturned, too.
 

schmke

Legend
Anyway, here are my results in chronological order-

3.0 #1S- 6-1,6-3 W
3.0 #2S- 6-0,6-0 W
3.5 #2D- 6-4,6-2 W
3.5 #1D- 4-6,6-3,1-0 L
3.0 #1S- 6-4,6-2 W
3.0 #1D- 6-4,7-5 W
3.0 #1S- 6-2,4-6,1-0 W

My DQ letter from the USTA cites the 3 strikes as follows-
3.0 #2S- 6-0,6-0 W
3.5 #2D- 6-4,6-2 W
3.0 #1S- 6-2,4-6,1-0 W

as for the first strike, contrary to popular belief, 6-0,6-0 wins are not thrown out.

on strike 2, playing up wins seem to be auto strikes because the team we played was honestly, god awful.

on strike 3, it's still a bewilderment to me. As I said earlier, this was a singles match against a 3.0C and I almost lost, facing a match point and winning in a tiebreak. I can only assume he has a very high dynamic rating.

I hope others learn from my experience. It's a disappointment to all teammates when a DQ occurs.

This actually makes sense. I've attempted to recreate the Dynamic NTRP computer ratings and I know I don't have everything right (haven't found where one can get specifics/numbers/thresholds on the system, just a description of how it works) and using the results above with roughly average players except for the last match, has the dynamic NTRP going into 3.5 territory several times.

Assuming average partner and opponents, the rating would be 2.91 (average 3.0 is 2.75) after the first match. The second match would take it to 2.96 and and the third to 3.03 which is into 3.5 territory (3.01-3.50). Even though the 4th was lost it would stay at 3.02 and get down to 3.0 (2.9999) after the 5th. The 6th would keep it about the same, 2.99, but if the last was against a very good 3.0, it could easily go back up to 3.02.

So, my analysis has him above 3.0 three times, so three strikes, just on slightly different matches. But I'm assuming average opponents/partners which I'm sure isn't accurate and accounts for the strikes occurring at different points.
 

amarone

Semi-Pro
So, my analysis has him above 3.0 three times, so three strikes, just on slightly different matches. But I'm assuming average opponents/partners which I'm sure isn't accurate and accounts for the strikes occurring at different points.
However, the threshold for a DQ is not 3.0. Players are DQed if they prove to be towards the higher end of the next level. The strike level for a 3.0 player is 3.30 (or at least it was a couple of years or so ago - it could conceivably have changed since, but it would not be 3.0).
 

schmke

Legend
However, the threshold for a DQ is not 3.0. Players are DQed if they prove to be towards the higher end of the next level. The strike level for a 3.0 player is 3.30 (or at least it was a couple of years or so ago - it could conceivably have changed since, but it would not be 3.0).

Thanks for the feedback and additional information.

Like I said, my algorithm is just an approximation of the NTRP system and may not be aggressive enough on big wins/losses. But I think it shows how against even average opponents the spikes in one's rating pretty much correlated with the matches he was told were his strikes.

If you have other details/numbers on how the NTRP system works, do let me know and I will update my system.
 
Top