I want to go to Nationals ... just once
- Thread starter dizzlmcwizzl
- Start date
Maybe I did not explain it clearly.
Per your example there's 20 self-rated players (2 s-rated players per each of ten teams). i do not know how many teams actively recruit sandbaggers - let's say it is two teams for a total of 4 players. If you ban all self rated because you want to prevent those 4 for playing in postseason, you have banned 16 honest s-rated players out of all 20 s-rated. that is 80%. Ok, it's not 90%, but it is way more than 6.7%. I understand that not all s-rated will go to the playoffs, but you rob them of even a chance to do so. And they have done nothing wrong.
Your example - sure, he could be a sandbagger. He also could be an honest dude who spends hours practicing and is improving. If not him, maybe others like him are honest. My entire point is that there's no way to tell.
And I have no idea what 'Don't go getting all pissy with me' means. i was not even responding to any of your posts. You may have a valid case of someone sandbagging - so your solution is to ban all s-rated from post-season. I'm simply pointing out that it does in fact affects negatively honest players. And since I tend to think there's more honest people than cheaters in my eyes banning is not a good solution. you are certainly entitled to your opinion.
g4driver
Legend
jmnk,
1) My comment about 'Don't go getting all pissy with me' is directed to all the folks on this forum who don't like names being listed, so I didn't list the guy's name, just the first two initials of his first and last name. This comment wasn't directed at you in any manner. There are a lot of posters who will get pissy about posted this guys first and last initials. I say to them, come down here at witness the guy play tennis. What a joke.
2) What you are missing is this: you are placing a great priority on the few honest self-rated players who might miss a chance to make the playoffs at the expense of honest computer rated players who will not make the playoffs due to those who manipulate the system.
What I am saying is this: by allowing self-rated players into the playoffs, there are many more honest computer rated players who will not go to the playoffs due to the dishonest players and Captains who manipulate the system.
If 24 honest self-rated players (two per team and 12 teams total) were banned from the playoffs, how many would have been on teams that made it to the playoffs? Certainly not 24 of them. You are making the false assumption that every self-rated player is penalized by not be allowing to advance to post-season. This simply is not the case. Only a small percentage would be banned, unless you have a team with nearly half the team as self-rated players (as did the team I am talking about.) :shock:
If 4 teams made the playoffs, and the entire pool had 120 players, with two self-rates per team, only 8 self-rated players would be left out (Four teams with two self-rates per team = 8 self-rated players staying home). So 8 divided by 120 is 6.67%, it isn't 80% like you keep posting. So 6.67% of the 120 players would be prohibited from post-season.
On the other hand I saw two teams that didn't have any self-rated players, not make the playoffs last year, due to two teams that were filled with sandbagging self-rated players. This wasn't my team. So in that case 24 honest computer rated players DID NOT make the playoffs due to two teams who had multiple self-rated players who were clearly not 3.5 players. So 24 honest computer rated player stay home due to a Captain who puts guys on his team who are clearly not 3.5 players. So 24 out of 120 players or 20% of the honest computer rated guys miss the post season because of sandbagging self-rating players. It has happened three years straight in Charleston SC with one team.
The player I listed is no better this year than last year. He is 6-1 at 4.0. He sandbagged. He knows, his Captain knows, his team knows it. He wasn't alone. His Captain had six self-rated players on the team last year. Four of those six players were bumped to 4.0. One of my friends was on this team last year and is on the team this year. The same Captain took the best self-rated player from the other team that went to state and put a rival player on his Men's 3.5 Singles Team. Guess the result? Yep, that team went to state and drumroll please. Won it all. Men's 3.5 Singles Champions. <insert golf clap here please>
I am tired of the argument, "protect the honest self-rated players", because that argument doesn't consider the number of honest computer rated players who are penalized by allowing the dishonest self-rating sandbaggers. There are probably ten to twenty honest computer rated players for every honest self-rated player, yet you propose to protect the very small minority of honest self-rated player who might make the playoffs on a good team. I suggest that two or more teams of honest computer rated players miss the playoffs due to sandbagging self-rated players who help their teams win. So 24+ guys miss post season in my example compared to maybe 8 self-rated guys. Protecting the minority versus the majority isn't logical.
The current system allows the dishonest sandbaggers to help their teams win, and go to the playoffs while other teams with honest computer rated players and a few honest self-rated players miss the playoffs. Until self-rated players are banned from the playoffs, more honest computer rated and most honest self-rated guys will miss out.
The local USTA President in Charleston also wants to ban self-rated players from playoffs. He and I don't agree on a lot of things, but we both see this as the best protection to the masses of computer rated players at the expense of a few honest self-rated players each season.
You seem to believe the fallacy that a lot of honest self-rated players will be going to the playoffs. I don't buy that at all. I would think this is much less common as opposed to the sandbagging self-rated players going to the post-season. Maybe at 2.5 Women, and 3.0 Women, but at 3.5 and 4.0 Men, there seems to be a awful lot of sandbagging where I live.
Last edited:
They could do this, though, without teams (kind of like Ultimate Tennis). If people played only for themselves, it would never serve their interests to tank a match and there would obviously be no team lineups to tinker with.
Ratings would not necessarily be superfluous but you could have people wind up with more of a ranking, in comparison to others at their competitive level in progressively larger areas (local, state, region, etc).
We could all probably put our collective heads together and come up with a much more equitable and competitive system along those lines.
dizzlmcwizzl
Hall of Fame
I love league tennis. Please do not take my comments to indicate I don't like league tennis ... I do.
League tennis has motivated me to get better, which I have. I am currently at the top of my band so I know that a shot at going to the national tourney may be limited by having to play up next year.
Also, in local league play during the last 5 years I have only encountered 2 folks I would consider "out of level" sandbaggers. For the most part I get decent matches with folks who are at the right level.
But .... I want to experience Nationals ... not for the plate, or for the glory, or even to win Nationals ... I just want to experience it.
However, once you get to sectionals and you get close ... the difference makers are always the folks who don't belong at this level. They always get bumped up at year end ... but the USTA allows these self rated 1st year players to decide who goes or who doesn't.
So I am only doing what almost every captain of a national qualifying team does. I am looking for ringers, but I am doing it openly. I am not even the captain of this team ... So far my captain has become consistently one of the best teams in the region without a single self rated player ...only to watch others massage the system to victory. I want my massage ... I want my victory ... I want my vacation in the sun at nationals.
Ronaldo
Bionic Poster
Understand, but the best plans can go awry. Loaded a 3,5 team with two great singles players only to lose them mid-season. One became a USPTA pro, certified in Kalamazoo, the other taught at a tennis camp in Vt.
goober
Legend
Just because they move away, doesn't mean they can't show up for your team in sectionas/nationals. I know some teams that flew in key players that moved or took jobs in different states and even different countries (!) for nationals.
Ronaldo
Bionic Poster
We did, from five states but both single players were unavailable for the playoffs.
Angle Queen
Professional
I'm not even so sure about that. We had a local, hand-picked team play in the National Championship match. Not just the event, but the finals. They didn't have a single self-rate on their team but you can bet their opponents, the eventual champions, did. And how! They'd already lost one player during the season to a DQ and so buried their other in doubles. Until Nationals. Where she lost a total of 14 games over six matches at #1 Singles. And, hello, got a double-bump at year-end.
But what's really got me scratching my head is about that local team: only 5 of the 16 players got bumped to the next level. Less than a third...of a National Championship finalist team?!? Seriously? I'm sorry, I've got a real problem with that picture. I don't care what your DNTRP is. You go to that dance, you get moved up. If you really don't belong there, you'll get your butt-kicked in matches...and then the computer'll kick your butt back down the next year.
But that's the other little dirty secret to the whole thing, there's not nearly enough downward movement to truly make it interesting and competitive at the margins.
floridatennisdude
Hall of Fame
^^^^that is why I used the word "attempt". We know it's not perfect, but it's the only system that tries to rate players from a national level down. Yea, there are cracks in the system as wide as the grand canyon, but it does try to get even matchups. The sandbag dilemma will constantly exist as long as humans have egos.
Angle Queen
Professional
I hear ya, FTD. And I do believe that, in general, NTRP does work for the vast majority of players. But when there's clear evidence of an aspect of it not working, I think we need to speak up and out.
floridatennisdude
Hall of Fame
Ok, well I like your thoughts.
As for your example of 5 out of 16, without knowing your league, I think that sounds about right. Generally speaking, 5 players could carry a team that far. I don't think the other 11 should have to suffer through a season or two Of beatings if their skill isn't the clear reason of their teams past success.
I think there should be a rule limiting self-rates to some degree. Either they cannot play in the post season their first year, or self rate dq results all should be enforced on prior results. Or both. I know the opposite side of this argument is to not punish a guy that plays his first season and has success. But, I say that if he enjoys league, he'd be happy to sit the post season to play again for it the next...once a year end rating confirms his is accurate.
kylebarendrick
Professional
I used to oppose banning self rated players from the post-season. My preference was simply to immediately promote all self-rated players at the end of the regular season if their dynamic ratings put them at the next level. I still think this would be a relatively painless solution...
That said, I think a complete ban would be fine. The self-rating guidelines make it clear that if are unsure which level to rate yourself at, you should pick the higher level. We know in practice that nobody actually does this because they want to win. But if you are good enough as a self rated player to not only help your team make the playoffs but to also be counted on for wins in the post-season, then you rated too low. Your punishment? No post-season. That doesn't sound unreasonable to me.
Now for the people that lie on their self-rate forms ("yeah, I know I played Div 1 but that was 5 years ago and my team wasn't that good so my captain says I should self-rate at 3.5"): 1 year ban for the player and a 2 year ban for the captain. If the captains get punished instead of rewarded they'll think twice before rostering yet another ringer.
That said, I think a complete ban would be fine. The self-rating guidelines make it clear that if are unsure which level to rate yourself at, you should pick the higher level. We know in practice that nobody actually does this because they want to win. But if you are good enough as a self rated player to not only help your team make the playoffs but to also be counted on for wins in the post-season, then you rated too low. Your punishment? No post-season. That doesn't sound unreasonable to me.
Now for the people that lie on their self-rate forms ("yeah, I know I played Div 1 but that was 5 years ago and my team wasn't that good so my captain says I should self-rate at 3.5"): 1 year ban for the player and a 2 year ban for the captain. If the captains get punished instead of rewarded they'll think twice before rostering yet another ringer.
g4driver
Legend
+1 Kylebarendrick
There is no penalty for intentionally cheating. I have played both the guy I mentioned as a 3.5S and a 5.0B. There isn't much difference in their games, or ages. One 24, one 25. One properly self-rated at 4.5 and was bumped and the other guy lied and went to and won state 3.5 Single's Championship, and will be bumped to 4.5 this year most likely. Meanwhile, the 3.5 Captain keeps on bringing in 4.0 and 4.5 skill level players to his 3.5 team without penalty.
Self-rated players don't deserve protection at the expense of the computer rated ones. 3 to 4 times the number of computer rated players are screwed over compared to the small number of self-rated ones who didn't lie.
There is no penalty for intentionally cheating. I have played both the guy I mentioned as a 3.5S and a 5.0B. There isn't much difference in their games, or ages. One 24, one 25. One properly self-rated at 4.5 and was bumped and the other guy lied and went to and won state 3.5 Single's Championship, and will be bumped to 4.5 this year most likely. Meanwhile, the 3.5 Captain keeps on bringing in 4.0 and 4.5 skill level players to his 3.5 team without penalty.
Self-rated players don't deserve protection at the expense of the computer rated ones. 3 to 4 times the number of computer rated players are screwed over compared to the small number of self-rated ones who didn't lie.
Last edited:
floridatennisdude
Hall of Fame
I like the captain suspension/ban idea...that would be the most effective. If a self rate gets DQ'd, his captain would sit out of league for two years. Interesting proposal...
Just make sure it's just DQ for a self-rating grievance and not a dynamic DQ. Dynamic DQs happen to players who unintentionally misrate and play honestly. Sandbaggers who are gaming the system know how to avoid dynamic DQ, too.
michael_1265
Professional
I never thought about that, but you nailed it.
goober
Legend
I pretty much agree, I have noticed the same thing. This is easily fixed. They really should bump every player who reaches national level teams. One player last season was undefeated in districts and sectionals. His only losses were at nationals and those were ALL 3rd set 10 pt tiebreaks. He did not get bumped.
goober
Legend
Unfortunately the common demoniator for these players is they have huge egos. Their egos can only be stroked by being the big fish in the little pond.
tennis4josh
Rookie
The results at Nationals do not affect your rating in Norcal.
floridatennisdude
Hall of Fame
How did Norcal get out of it? Doesn't seem fair to the other sections.
8. After the USTA League Adult and Senior National Championships, benchmark and year-end NTRP published levels will be calculated using USTA NTRP Computer Rating System Procedures approved by the USTA League Committee.
http://assets.usta.com/assets/1/15/final regs.pdf
tennis4josh
Rookie
Here are couple of ways to do it (semi) legally:
1. Move to Hawaii or Peurto Rico: You have much better chance of winning at nationals.
2. Get your self rated sandbagger to play some combo doubles and full season of mixed doubles. He will be C rated next year and no one can touch him! Even if he beats Federer he will still be 4.0C. Now all you need to do is find former Davis Cup players from east Europe or Africa.
-Josh
1. Move to Hawaii or Peurto Rico: You have much better chance of winning at nationals.
2. Get your self rated sandbagger to play some combo doubles and full season of mixed doubles. He will be C rated next year and no one can touch him! Even if he beats Federer he will still be 4.0C. Now all you need to do is find former Davis Cup players from east Europe or Africa.
-Josh
goober
Legend
1. It might be easier to make it to Nationals through Hawaii , it won't be easier to win it. Typically Hawaii has not done well in Nationals. It is a long and expensive trip and it is difficult to get all your players to nationals. The talent pool is also smaller. Does Puerto Rico play in the Carribean section? That section is not easy to come through especially on the lower levels of 3.0 and 3.5
2. Combo does NOT affect your NTRP rating. If you play mixed only you will have a M rating and will have to self rate to be in regular league play the following year. You will also be subject to DQ.
OrangePower
Legend
News to me. Source please?
Combo dubs does not impact NTRP, mixed produces M rating. Player would still need to self rate for adult. Rating will be S rating and subject to DQ.
EDIT: goober beat me to the punch on this last one!
tennis4josh
Rookie
I am no expert in USTA rules and regulation. I was speaking in general terms based on what I have seen. When I said "your results at National do not affect your rating in Norcal", I meant two things:
1. A self rated player is not subject to 3-strike disqualification during nationals.
2. Every player who played at sectionals gets a B rating at the next NTRP level for the next season. So if you played 3.0 sectionals then next year you would be 3.5b. As far as I know you will get this 3.5b irrespective of your results at nationals.
If your team won 3.0 nationals, is it possible to some of your players to get 4.0b rating for next season?
You are right in pointing out that if you were self rated player during combo season, you remain a self rated player for next year's adult season. You could get a 3-strike disqualification. But I have seen players appeal against a NTRP grievance and win using the argument that no one filed grievance against them during combo or mixed season. Anyone who intentionally recruits a sandbagger is also smart enough to coach the player to not win with a big margin. I have seen players intentionally drop a set or even loose the 2nd singles once their team has already won the tie.
If anything I said above is incorrect, then I am open to learn and correct myself.
Thanks
-Josh
^^^Listen to this. I was on a team that placed third at Nationals in 2006 (Tucson). Yeah, I had a good time going on a weekend tennis vacation with the team, but it was pretty expensive for what it was. It was, well, kind of...meh...
Sectionals are just as fun, same atmosphere, and much closer. If you really want to go to Nationals, just go - there's no ticket sales or special passes. Take your sticks; there's plenty of folks around to hit with
Point being, it's not worth sacrificing your integrity to get a team there. I can tell you, you need more than one or two players out of level. We had four players in 2006 that have been bumped up twice since then and pretty much the rest of the team is playing up from where we were back then. The two captains that put the team together were bent on going, but IMO the end result is not really worth the time and effort spent.
The post you were referring to is no joke. And the estimated number of "out-of-level" players mentioned is actually pretty conservative...
Angle Queen
Professional
Yes, as far as I know, playing in any sort of post-season play (which can mean Districts and Sectionals), gets you a "B" or Benchmark rating for the following year regardless of if your NTRP changes. And that can be a problem, at least insomuch as I think the general playing public knows. I tend to think of the word "benchmark" as being "the standard" against others are held. But how "benchmark" or even "typical" is a newly-minted NTRP player, except perhaps one coming from the self-rate ranks? Just because you and your team had a good season and made it out of your regular season flight....how is that indicative that you're The Standard of the NEXT level?
It is possible to get a two-level bump and that B rating. I gave an example earlier in this thread: the #1 Singles player on the 2011 4.0W Championship team made that leap from 4.0S to 5.0B.
For those who continue to believe it's fair (and necessary) to let self-rates play in the post-season, I'll point to this one example of how doing so ruins the process for so many more others. If the practice is to continue, perhaps, and only perhaps in my mind, the only way to try to make it right would be to continue to DQ (both by grievance and dynamically) until and including the very, very end. Still, I think that does a grave disservice to the multitude of others who've worked so hard to legitimately prevail.
I have collected a few other examples of self-rates who were ultimately DQed and those revised results could or, in one case, would have changed which team would have gone to the next round. While those examples are certainly not pervasive, when they occur, they're disheartening and demoralizing for everyone -- except the team that's perpetuated the fraud. I think most of us can get over it, so to speak, but to have the ultimate prize, the National Championship, finagled away from you...now that's another pill to swallow.
Angle Queen
Professional
Bad form to quote yourself...but I had a second thought and rather than edit my first, I'll go here to give y'all something to shoot at.
Let's see if I can maybe explain it better. Let's say you're a 3.5C. You have a good season, your team has a good season. You go to and play in playoffs.
Scenario #1: Your NTRP goes up to 4.0B because of your personal success and you're assigned Benchmark status by virtue of your team's success. What that says to me is clearly what you're NOT rather than what you are. You're not a 3.5C anymore. Ok, true enough.
Scenario #2: For whatever reason (perhaps not so much success at those playoffs), your NTRP remains at 3.5B because of not so much personal success even though your team did well. What that says to me, again, is clearly what you're NOT. You're not a 4.0B or 4.0C. So, again, I guess "the computer" gets it right.
But play that out for all the different NTRPs. So start the game over as a 3.0C or 4.0C, instead of a 3.5C(or even B). Looking from the outside in and without looking at at-least two years of NTRP ratings (which tennislink doesn't really let you do easily), you can't tell if a B is someone who is good (and got the bump and the B)...or not-so good (by staying the same even their teammates were/might have been).
Guess that's why most players I know patently ignore the whole B/C debate. To the common player, heck to anyone but The USTA Computer, it is...for all intents and purposes, immaterial.
The B is immaterial. The only difference between B and C that I know of is that B-rated players can't appeal down their rating (or if they do, it's automatically denied). I think that is the reason that the computer gives dynamically DQ'd players a B-rating at the end of the year instead of C. You don't want someone who was dynamically DQ'd to tank a couple matches at the higher level and then appeal back down to the level they were just deemed too strong for.
LuckyR
Legend
Alas, I fear you are correct.
Matt H.
Professional
Here was our recipe for going to nationals last year:
Our tennis center traditionally had two 4.0 teams. In 2010 my team was the better team but we still lost out in the local playoffs 3-2 to another park. That team (sunset lakes) ended up going all the way to nationals. We utilized the break-up rule (only 3 players from a nationals team can play together the following year) and we took the 3 best 4.0 players from sunset lakes and merged the best talent from the 2 teams at my park. We created a “super team” in a sense.
It *STILL* took a bit of luck to make it through. We lost a match in Regionals that was reversed when 4 of the players were dynamically DQ’d (they had 6 self rated players on their squad). That turned a 1-4 loss into a 3-2 win for us. They boycotted and threw the remaining matches so we went to Sectionals. In Daytona Sectionals I believe we won every match 3-2 to get the Nationals invite.
In all honesty, Sectionals was much more fun than Nationals. The location could be a huge factor though because in this case it’s Daytona Beach, FL vs Tucson, AZ. If your league is slated to have Nationals at Las Vegas….disregard everything I said regarding the matter because it’s Vegas baby.
Our tennis center traditionally had two 4.0 teams. In 2010 my team was the better team but we still lost out in the local playoffs 3-2 to another park. That team (sunset lakes) ended up going all the way to nationals. We utilized the break-up rule (only 3 players from a nationals team can play together the following year) and we took the 3 best 4.0 players from sunset lakes and merged the best talent from the 2 teams at my park. We created a “super team” in a sense.
It *STILL* took a bit of luck to make it through. We lost a match in Regionals that was reversed when 4 of the players were dynamically DQ’d (they had 6 self rated players on their squad). That turned a 1-4 loss into a 3-2 win for us. They boycotted and threw the remaining matches so we went to Sectionals. In Daytona Sectionals I believe we won every match 3-2 to get the Nationals invite.
In all honesty, Sectionals was much more fun than Nationals. The location could be a huge factor though because in this case it’s Daytona Beach, FL vs Tucson, AZ. If your league is slated to have Nationals at Las Vegas….disregard everything I said regarding the matter because it’s Vegas baby.
goober
Legend
LOL this is what happens when you take this stuff so seriously. It cost you time and money to travel to sectionals to play tennis, but you boycott games after your self rates get DQ'ed? It is crazy... this is recreational tennis.
I know a bunch of people who basically quit USTA after a similar happening. The captain threw a bunch of matches to get his year end rating down to 4.0. He then went about forming his super team. He breeezed through league and districts . He had only 1 self rated ringer. Unfortunately this ringer got DQ'ed during sectionals and turned a 3-2 win into 2-3 loss and subsequently cost them a trip to nationals. They all vowed never to play USTA again and I actually haven't seen them on any USTA teams, tournaments or anything since then.
Yup. After having been to Nationals myself, it really amuses me now watching captains/teams "trying" to get there by any means necessary. For my money, I would much rather go to a pro tournament for a weekend, a tennis camp, or a vacation at a tennis resort.
USTA Nationals is really not a lot of bang for your buck.
Have two national championship trophies at 4.0 and 4.5. I was legitimate at 4.0 but computer rated at 4.5 there were 3 seasons in between in which I was bumped to 4.5 where i was winning and improving and hoping to get to
5.0. That didn't happen until winning 4.5 nationals even after 2 trips to sectionals with 3-1 recorsds both years in singles and dubs. Both were played in Tucson at a less than stellar facility. Sectionals both years was more competitive and fun in the southern section...once in charleston and the other time in Mobile. Reaching nationals is a lot of fun because of the anticipation and the willingness to get out there and practice. As an open level player at this point, I just like to have something to practice for...whether it be a charity went or a national tournament. Then, as a 5.0 last year, my only league option was 9.0 mixed which I played and won every match but got bumped back down to 4.5. This is another way teams get good players. Now I have a 4.5 rating despite beating 5.0s and 5.5s frequently in singles and doubles.
5.0. That didn't happen until winning 4.5 nationals even after 2 trips to sectionals with 3-1 recorsds both years in singles and dubs. Both were played in Tucson at a less than stellar facility. Sectionals both years was more competitive and fun in the southern section...once in charleston and the other time in Mobile. Reaching nationals is a lot of fun because of the anticipation and the willingness to get out there and practice. As an open level player at this point, I just like to have something to practice for...whether it be a charity went or a national tournament. Then, as a 5.0 last year, my only league option was 9.0 mixed which I played and won every match but got bumped back down to 4.5. This is another way teams get good players. Now I have a 4.5 rating despite beating 5.0s and 5.5s frequently in singles and doubles.
goober
Legend
You still would be subject to DQ if you joined a regular league because you would have a M rating. But yes another loophole that has to be closed. I know a fair number of people played mixed only the following year they got bumped and almost all of them got bumped down after one season just in time for ESRs- lol. They should institute a rule that you cannot self rate lower than your previous league rating when you left regardless of what is your mixed rating.
He also has to self-rate if he has a 4.5 M rating, and one of the self-rating questions is "what was your last computer rating", which was 5.0, so he would not be allowed to just go back to Adult play without being granted a self-rating appeal.
That is not one of the questions. I had the option to rate 4.5 to 5.5.
goober
Legend
It looks like looking at the 2012 changes they did close that loophole. It is in big red letters about the changes they made-lol. Before you could self rate as long as your it was not lower than your M rating even if you had a C rating from prior years that was higher.
http://assets.usta.com/assets/536/15/2012 USTA Regulations Finals 11-7-11.pdf
goober
Legend
hmm well that is interesting...
The 2011 4.0 National Champs had Zero college players. The team was comprised of young college students who played Jr. champ tournaments and high school tennis. The above statement is a big exaggeration.
OrangePower
Legend
Every player at sectionals gets a B rating, but not necessarily at the next level.
All the B means is that you were used as a benchmark; meaning you were part of the pool of players from different areas competing in playoffs that were compared against each other in order to standardize ratings across areas.
Because as a B you were part of this across-area-comparison-pool, and your rating has been deamed appropriate, you are not allowed to appeal.
However, as far as what your actual rating level is, it still depends on your results, just like anyone else. So you could end up with a B rating and still at the same level (pretty common), a B rating at the next level up (pretty common if you're deep into playoffs), or even a B rating two levels up (rare but it's happened). Theoretically you could even get a B rating one level *down* (rare, but could happen if you're a weak player on an otherwise strong team).
goober
Legend
If you had a deep team with all or mostly strong 4.5 level players, you could win. There are alot really good players that don't play college level tennis. If you watch some the USTA college club championships, there were a lot of 5.0 level players playing. Some of the players vids I saw from UCLA could have easily been on D2 or even low level D1 schools.
dizzlmcwizzl
Hall of Fame
I am asking because I dont know .. not because I want to argue.
How many of those players were self rated ... and how many of them are now playing college tennis?
I respect OP honesty. There is no such thing fair and square to get to Nationals.
USTA league coordinator's in my area are big and lazy. Always their friends or team they play for get the best part of meat and information of course. I have seen many good College graduate players and one D1 player in 4.0 league. Is like having them taking Jr High School test. To play in the league win or lose for me is to have a competitive game after get off from work and get away from family But not get @ZZ kick by someone from out of space or beat up someone 1-1. I don't blame those Captains. USTA and their league coordinator didn't do their job right.
Yes, I agree that Self rated players should not allow to play in Playoffs.
USTA league coordinator's in my area are big and lazy. Always their friends or team they play for get the best part of meat and information of course. I have seen many good College graduate players and one D1 player in 4.0 league. Is like having them taking Jr High School test. To play in the league win or lose for me is to have a competitive game after get off from work and get away from family
But not get @ZZ kick by someone from out of space or beat up someone 1-1. I don't blame those Captains. USTA and their league coordinator didn't do their job right. Yes, I agree that Self rated players should not allow to play in Playoffs.
The suspended Captain will still run the team and have one of his weakest player named as Captain.
