No difference between 3.5 and 4.0 in local area … how to fix it?

[time_fly]

We have a weird situation in our local USTA area. I captain a 3.5 team with a lot of strong guys and we do pretty well in playoffs, but only one guy has been bumped up in a while. There are a couple of other strong 3.5 teams in the area and our matches are always a battle, while all of the stronger teams just mow down the weaker ones.

This spring, our 4.0 age 40+ team was very short on guys so me and a few of my 3.5 guys are playing up regularly. We are winning almost every time, even at D1 and D2, while going around 0.500 as usual in our 3.5 matches against the strong teams. Our one guy who was bumped up to 4.0 finished the winter season 0-3 at 3.5, and is 3-0 at 4.0. I played a 4.0 D2 match with him and we beat a pair of 4.0Cs, one of which also has wins and close losses at 4.5 (but to be honest he’s not close to a 4.5 IMO). One of our strongest doubles players has two consecutive 4.0 D1 wins with a D2 3.5 loss in between.

I think part of the problem is that our leagues have become very stagnant. We have a competitive group at 3.5, and a mostly mellow, older group at 4.0 that just like to play for fun and don’t put any effort into their games. They all play each other within these two distinct groups with competitive matches so the ratings don’t change, but clearly overall things have drifted out of calibration. Almost everyone involved is C-rated with their dynamic ratings on TR in the expected ranges for their levels.

I’m curious if and how this could be solved? I don’t foresee a massive pile of bumps that shuffles everyone because that never seems to happen and according to TR the players are at the appropriate levels, with all of the 3.5 wins at 4.0 appearing as massive flukes In their system.

 

[ChaelAZ]

The struggle has been real in AZ for a bit too.

My solution was to stop playing leagues and not renew my UTSA membership this year after 10 years. Got a solid group of a few dozen guys we coordinate on our own and have great matches. Players from 3.5's to 4.5's, all enjoying both competitive matches, and just social matches.

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

While "D1 and D2" are good indicators instead of D3, the actual players do matter, but I assume you know the players you played were ok. The example of the 1 guy who loses at 3.5 and wins at 4.0 is interesting, but again, the actual players he played is important, perhaps it was the worst 4.0 and the best 3.5 he played or somewhere close to that or matchups/playstyle.

Otherwise there is no solution if you live in a place where there is not that much change in people moving in and out. I've often been aggressively shouted down saying there are different tennis environments in the US that are like little bubbles, where ratings kind of churn themselves into strange geographical ratings , but I've seen it happen. And no, post season doesn't fix it.

 

[daman sidhu]

This isn't an easy problem to solve since the pool of players you have in your area remain the same. Unless those 3.5 guys become 4.0 and start beating those older 4.0 guys consistently, this issue will persist. It's no different from a particular area having stronger players in that same rating vs the other. For example in New England, most of the 4.0 players in Massachusetts are consistently stronger than the ones you will find in New Hampshire. When teams go to sectionals, they find out the variance very quickly.

 

[Moon Shooter]

The answer is simple and well known. More data/games will allow the algorithm to better sort out the players. Unfortunately USTA refuses to even rate the majority of USTA matches that men play in, in my area.

There are more mixed matches in my area then then men's adult league matches. It is just a challenge to get all the players at the exact same level and gender. None of those mixed matches count toward ratings! Instead USTA only uses the adult ratings which often involve many self rated players so the number of actual matches that count is further reduced making the borders of these huge levels even more fuzzy.

UTR rates all USTA matches and they published what UTR's players in the various USTA levels have. You can see the levels for male players have a very wide range and lots of overlap with other levels.

https://www.kimgranttennis.com/uploads/3/1/3/5/31353957/utr-player-range-page-001_3.jpg

I suspect if you live in an area with lots of active adult leagues these ranges will be narrower and the overlap less. But if you do not then the ranges will be wider and the overlap even more pronounced. This is evidenced by the fact that there is much higher women's participation and their levels are more narrow.

 

[Purestriker]

We have a weird situation in our local USTA area. I captain a 3.5 team with a lot of strong guys and we do pretty well in playoffs, but only one guy has been bumped up in a while. There are a couple of other strong 3.5 teams in the area and our matches are always a battle, while all of the stronger teams just mow down the weaker ones.

This spring, our 4.0 age 40+ team was very short on guys so me and a few of my 3.5 guys are playing up regularly. We are winning almost every time, even at D1 and D2, while going around 0.500 as usual in our 3.5 matches against the strong teams. Our one guy who was bumped up to 4.0 finished the winter season 0-3 at 3.5, and is 3-0 at 4.0. I played a 4.0 D2 match with him and we beat a pair of 4.0Cs, one of which also has wins and close losses at 4.5 (but to be honest he’s not close to a 4.5 IMO). One of our strongest doubles players has two consecutive 4.0 D1 wins with a D2 3.5 loss in between.

I think part of the problem is that our leagues have become very stagnant. We have a competitive group at 3.5, and a mostly mellow, older group at 4.0 that just like to play for fun and don’t put any effort into their games. They all play each other within these two distinct groups with competitive matches so the ratings don’t change, but clearly overall things have drifted out of calibration. Almost everyone involved is C-rated with their dynamic ratings on TR in the expected ranges for their levels.

I’m curious if and how this could be solved? I don’t foresee a massive pile of bumps that shuffles everyone because that never seems to happen and according to TR the players are at the appropriate levels, with all of the 3.5 wins at 4.0 appearing as massive flukes In their system.

Same issue. Our 18 and over 3.5 team, tied for first is currently in second place in the 18 and over 4.0 team and the difference was one line (they beat us 3-2). They have two 3.5's and the rest are a mix of older 4.0's. At 18 and over 3.5, there are still 3 other teams that could push us out of first place. Not at 4.0, we have it locked up.

The problem for us has been several solid 4.0 teams that have just stopped playing league tennis and only inter club play. I would guess only a handful of the 3.5's on the three best teams end up 4.0's. Especially after we all advance to state and the sectional team always ends up with their ratings going down enough to stay at the same level.

 

[mauricem]

Its not a question of play style is it? I know some (generally younger) players who will be very competitive against high level big hitters and servers but inevitably implode when playing against no pace slicer dropper lobber types. More generally playing up is strong motivation to lift your level and find your best game.

 

[ichaseballs]

I think part of the problem is that our leagues have become very stagnant.

this...
most of the time it is the same group of people playing.
we need new blood in leagues, but usta league coordinators (in my area) are indifferent. sucks to be in a league with two teams.

 

[J D]

Around here, 4.0 and 4.5 are more alike then 3.5 and 4.0. 3.5’s playing up tend to get slaughtered. Many of the 4.0’s are former 4.5’s that have aged down. Seems like the large majority of 4.0’s are 50+.