More Accurate NTRP Rating for $$?

[JRstriker12]

I just finished the USTA survey. In one section they ask what members would be willing to pay extra for – such as video/stroke analysis etc…..

Anyway, one of the options was: Ability to have a precise USTA skill rating, updated based on match results.

I was a bit confused – doesn’t USTA already give you a skill rating based on league/tourney results?

Also, what would be the benefit of paying to have a more precise skill rating?

 

[Cruzer]

In Norcal they tried to introduce a dynamic rating system where your rating could change each week depending on your latest match results. The idea was you would still have your annual computer generated rating and then as you played matches a dynamic rating. I never understood what it would mean if your computer rating was 3.5 and your dynamic rating was 3.5 one week and the next week your computer rating is the same but your dynamic rating is possibly 4.0 or 3.0. I presumed you would still keep playing on your 3.5 team. Anyway in Norcal the concept went no where and it caused a big rift in the Norcal board and the then President resigned over the matter.
I responded to the same survey but didn't think that spending more money/charging higher membership fees would do anything to improve the current rating system.

 

[raiden031]

I would love it if they ranked individual players in the league by statistics or rating, but of course that would give hints to sandbaggers where they stand so they might try to manipulate it to keep from getting DQ'd. But it would be nice to see where you fit in instead of only knowing your rating as it was at the end of the previous year.

Also I hate how only adult counts and that mixed, combo, and some tourneys don't count towards ratings.

 

[JRstriker12]

In Norcal they tried to introduce a dynamic rating system where your rating could change each week depending on your latest match results. The idea was you would still have your annual computer generated rating and then as you played matches a dynamic rating. I never understood what it would mean if your computer rating was 3.5 and your dynamic rating was 3.5 one week and the next week your computer rating is the same but your dynamic rating is possibly 4.0 or 3.0. I presumed you would still keep playing on your 3.5 team. Anyway in Norcal the concept went no where and it caused a big rift in the Norcal board and the then President resigned over the matter.
I responded to the same survey but didn't think that spending more money/charging higher membership fees would do anything to improve the current rating system.

Thanks Cruzer. That sort of clears it up. Doesn't seem to be that much of a benefit to a dynamic rating... though I could see maybe updating your rating at the end of each season instead of the end of the year.

 

[Ace]

In Norcal they tried to introduce a dynamic rating system where your rating could change each week depending on your latest match results. The idea was you would still have your annual computer generated rating and then as you played matches a dynamic rating. I never understood what it would mean if your computer rating was 3.5 and your dynamic rating was 3.5 one week and the next week your computer rating is the same but your dynamic rating is possibly 4.0 or 3.0. I presumed you would still keep playing on your 3.5 team. Anyway in Norcal the concept went no where and it caused a big rift in the Norcal board and the then President resigned over the matter.
I responded to the same survey but didn't think that spending more money/charging higher membership fees would do anything to improve the current rating system.

Thats what the USTA does now. Your "dynamic" rating is calculated depending on your latest match results. The only thing is you don't get to know exactly what it is.
At the end of the year, the computer assigns you a rating which is the average of your "dynamic" rating, and how you have done compared to the people who have gone on to become benchmarked that year (or how you have done against others who have played them, etc).

I wonder if they are asking if you would like to know the precise number after each match you play? Thats a problem for people who might be in an "easy" flight where they beat everyone, so their dynamic rating says they should be bumped up, but when they roll down the national benchmark comparisons, they really shouldn't be bumped up. I can see people getting mad. I'm sure people would find something to complain about no matter what though.

I keep a spreadsheet myself and just updated it each match based on what I guess my opponents rating might be. Close enough, I predicted my rating bumps the last two times.

 

[goober]

I thought the whole reason they kept you from knowing your dynamic rating is so you don't try to manipulate it? Exactly what type of people would pay extra to get a precise rating? Obviously those who have a vested interest in staying at certain level. If your rating goes to X.98, you might start tanking to avoid a DQ and once it goes down again start playing regular.

I think it is a bad idea.