Official 2022 ratings thread.

FuzzyYellowBalls

Hall of Fame
You're making it sound more sinister than it is. Texas has always allowed players to finish out the year at the rating they held that year. The new garbage software TD's have been stuck with just won't allow the proper adjustments to be made. This is why players have to register before that deadline, wherein the past, TD's could just adjust it for that particular tournament.
Why shouldn't players be able to finish playing 2021 with their 2021 rating?
It's not a dig at USTA texas, sorry if I put it that way, not intended. If you're getting bumped, and one should know if they self rated and destroyed, it's time to end the year with some real competition. That's what I meant the message to be.
 

BallBag

Professional
I think it's more for computer rated players that are on the bubble. If you are in that borderline area, the difference is more about having competitive matches earlier or later in the tournament. Getting bumped out of a level doesn't mean you dominate everyone in that level.
 

Moveforwardalways

Hall of Fame
Looking at the ratings on TR it looks like a large number of 4.5 players in my area would get bumped down. How sticky are the ratings as most of the ones that look to be below the 4.5 cutoff are truly 4.5 caliber players?
TR ratings are notoriously lower than actual USTA ratings (and also probably lower than @schmke ’s as well). Even if TR has them at 3.8-3.9 they will probably stay at USTA 4.5. In fact, I know quite a few guys who were bumped to 4.5 with a TR of 3.7X in 2019.
 

time_fly

Hall of Fame
It now appears that all of the Early Start 2022 activity has been moved to the 2021 season in TR. Hopefully this is a temporary thing to assist in EOY ratings calculation and things will be corrected afterwards. I use TR quite a bit to get team and player record information, since it's much easier to use than Tennislink. But now all the 2022 season stuff is gone in terms of being tracked separately.
 

Creighton

Semi-Pro
TR ratings are notoriously lower than actual USTA ratings (and also probably lower than @schmke ’s as well). Even if TR has them at 3.8-3.9 they will probably stay at USTA 4.5. In fact, I know quite a few guys who were bumped to 4.5 with a TR of 3.7X in 2019.
The only thing that gives me hope is schmke had one of my best players at 3.44 while TR has him at 3.48. Let's hope TR is overrating this time and I somehow survive :)
 

Moon Shooter

Semi-Pro
It's generally only mixed that advances to nationals. So your 6.5 wouldn't generate a M rating. Only 6.0
Interesting.




"Which matches do and don’t count toward a player’s rating?
All USTA Leagues (i.e., 18 & Over, 40 & Over, 55 & Over, 65 & over, Mixed) are included in the Year-End Rating calculation. Mixed Doubles divisions will only have an effect on the ratings of players who played exclusively Mixed Doubles. Each Section has the option to include or exclude other adult leagues as well as NTRP tournaments. Ladders, non-sanctioned leagues, and non-sanctioned tournament results shall not be used to produce Year-End Ratings."


It seems to say all USTA mixed leagues are included. But "other" adult leagues and tournaments are up to the section. Is that a new rule?



What do you guys make of this:


"Can a player declare self-rating for different Adult Divisions (e.g., 3.5 for Adult 18 & Over, and 4.0 for Adult 40 & Over?
No. Once a player declares an initial self-rating, the player is bound by it for two years or until they generate a computer rating."

I self rated at 3.0 back in June. What does this mean: "the player is bound by it for two years or until they generate a computer rating."


If for example I get a mixed 3.5 will that allow me to change my self rate? Or will I have to remain a self rate 3.0 and therefore risk getting disqualified if I play in a 3.5 league? I suppose a DQ at the higher level would not cost me or my team anything right? No games would be forfeited and I would be able to continue to compete I guess.
 

Creighton

Semi-Pro
Interesting.




"Which matches do and don’t count toward a player’s rating?
All USTA Leagues (i.e., 18 & Over, 40 & Over, 55 & Over, 65 & over, Mixed) are included in the Year-End Rating calculation. Mixed Doubles divisions will only have an effect on the ratings of players who played exclusively Mixed Doubles. Each Section has the option to include or exclude other adult leagues as well as NTRP tournaments. Ladders, non-sanctioned leagues, and non-sanctioned tournament results shall not be used to produce Year-End Ratings."


It seems to say all USTA mixed leagues are included. But "other" adult leagues and tournaments are up to the section. Is that a new rule?



What do you guys make of this:


"Can a player declare self-rating for different Adult Divisions (e.g., 3.5 for Adult 18 & Over, and 4.0 for Adult 40 & Over?
No. Once a player declares an initial self-rating, the player is bound by it for two years or until they generate a computer rating."

I self rated at 3.0 back in June. What does this mean: "the player is bound by it for two years or until they generate a computer rating."


If for example I get a mixed 3.5 will that allow me to change my self rate? Or will I have to remain a self rate 3.0 and therefore risk getting disqualified if I play in a 3.5 league? I suppose a DQ at the higher level would not cost me or my team anything right? No games would be forfeited and I would be able to continue to compete I guess.
Each section has always had the ability to choose which leagues count. That has created disparity between sections at time.

If you don't get a M rating, you can always appeal your self rate upward to get to 3.5 if that's what you want. But yes, being a 3.0S won't have any impact on your 3.5 results if you get disqualified to 3.5. Your 3.5 results would only be an issue in the unlikely chance you get disqualified to 4.0.
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
I self rated at 3.0 back in June. What does this mean: "the player is bound by it for two years or until they generate a computer rating."


If for example I get a mixed 3.5 will that allow me to change my self rate? Or will I have to remain a self rate 3.0 and therefore risk getting disqualified if I play in a 3.5 league? I suppose a DQ at the higher level would not cost me or my team anything right? No games would be forfeited and I would be able to continue to compete I guess.
I think if you get an M or T rating, you'll have to self-rate again for the adult league, and when you do that, it should force you to take 3.5 as a minimum if that is your M rating.
 

Snarf

New User
Interesting. I'm not sure when that page was written, but it is written like the calculation is done and occurred in the past. But supposedly the cut-off date was only two days ago. So either this is just a boilerplate answer anticipating everything will be done normally, or the cut-off date really was two weeks ago and they have done the calculations already and can comment on how they were done.
Another explanation could be that the tinkering they do is mainly with the results at nationals in mind. I don't think they want to fiddle with the algorithm because of a few early start matches. It seems more likely that those would just be plugged in to an already tweaked system.
 

winchestervatennis

Hall of Fame
I got bumped to 5.0 then end of 2019. Have probably appealed my rating 100 times since then. After about 2 i knew it wouldn’t be granted but mainly did it outta spite. I did the 101st and probably last until new rankings come out. Shame is i got 2 5.0 matches in 2020 before things shut down then moved to an area ida had to drive at least an hour for 5.0 league so never got a third match. I’m doomed.
 

time_fly

Hall of Fame
TR is generally biased low. If we went by their ratings, the only men who will be bumped up in our section are a handful of self-rates that were probably underrated. I didn’t spot any C-rated players going up, and about a quarter of our 4.0 league would be bumped down.
 
You'd think Tennis Record would want to fix a rating system that crowds about two thirds of the people at each level into the bottom half of those levels ......... but I guess not.
 
Last edited:

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
Probably closer to 0.15
From my comparing @schmke ratings to TR a little over a year ago the difference was closer to 0.20. This was across an entire team of roughly 15 players.

But it was haphazard .... on most it was that TR was .2 low ... on some it was only .1 low and on others it was up to .2 too high.
Greatest discrepancy on C rated players with a lot of matches and S rates. Which also makes no sense as you would think more data means more accurate.

Bottom line: TR cannot be trusted at all.
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
Only one 4.0 player is predicted to be bumped up in my district after two years of not doing ratings. And the one player that is out of level is at 4.001 LOL
Yup. On the 3.5 women's team that came in 2nd at Nationals: Last I checked, TR has only 3 of the 17 members getting a bump. (the same team 1/2 the members also made it to Nats at 40+ making it to semifinals if I recall correctly.

My guess ... nearly the entire team gets bumped.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
Yup. On the 3.5 women's team that came in 2nd at Nationals: Last I checked, TR has only 3 of the 17 members getting a bump. (the same team 1/2 the members also made it to Nats at 40+ making it to semifinals if I recall correctly.

My guess ... nearly the entire team gets bumped.
I'll go on record saying 10 will be bumped up, and I may even be a little low for teams that make semis at Nationals. @OnTheLine report back in a few days and let us know which is closer :unsure:
 

J011yroger

Talk Tennis Guru
Is what true? Them not wanting to be more accurate? Dunno. That they are pretty inaccurate predicting year-end levels and tend to be low? That is my observation from doing small sets of comparisons over the years but I've never done a comprehensive check.
That 2/3 of the people at each level are in the bottom half of the level.

J
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
That 2/3 of the people at each level are in the bottom half of the level.

J
That would be incorrect as a general rule, and thus an indication their TR is a bit askew from reality if that is what they have at each level.

Now, at 5.0, and perhaps 4.5, there are more players at the lower half of each level simply because you are approaching the part of the bell curve where this happens. But at 3.0 thru 4.0 it is quite balanced within each level, and at 3.0 arguably it is the upper half of the range that has more players.
 
That would be incorrect as a general rule, and thus an indication their TR is a bit askew from reality if that is what they have at each level.

Now, at 5.0, and perhaps 4.5, there are more players at the lower half of each level simply because you are approaching the part of the bell curve where this happens. But at 3.0 thru 4.0 it is quite balanced within each level, and at 3.0 arguably it is the upper half of the range that has more players.
I really think you're way off here. Did you even check at all? I only checked one level on Tennis Record because it's too tedious to do. At the men's 4.0 level in my district there were 208 players listed. 142 players had ratings below 3.75 and 66 had ratings above 3.75. That equates 68.75% having ratings below mid 4.0 level. Is that not very close to what I guessed?
 
Last edited:

Max G.

Legend
I really think you're way off here. Did you even check at all? I only checked one level on Tennis Record because it's too tedious to do. At the men's 4.0 level in my district there were 208 players listed. 142 players had ratings below 3.75 and 66 had ratings above 3.75. That equates 68.75% having ratings below mid 4.0 level. Is that not very close to what I guessed?
Schemke's telling you tennis record is *wrong* about the players' ratings.
 
Schemke's telling you tennis record is *wrong* about the players' ratings.
That was my point in the first place, that Tennis Record is way off. Obviously only Tennis Record lets you see the dynamic number. USTA doesn't so how could anyone even guess how many are in the bottom half of the rating level?
 

Creighton

Semi-Pro
That was my point in the first place, that Tennis Record is way off. Obviously only Tennis Record lets you see the dynamic number. USTA doesn't so how could anyone even guess how many are in the bottom half of the rating level?
Schmke has his own ratings he can verify against.
 

silverwyvern4

New User
I wonder why tennis record gave my one guy a 3.52 rating and medium chance of promotion and my other guy a 3.53 rating and a "low" chance of promotion??
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
I really think you're way off here. Did you even check at all? I only checked one level on Tennis Record because it's too tedious to do. At the men's 4.0 level in my district there were 208 players listed. 142 players had ratings below 3.75 and 66 had ratings above 3.75. That equates 68.75% having ratings below mid 4.0 level. Is that not very close to what I guessed?
I was referring to ratings distribution reality, not Tennis Record's distribution.
 
Sure you were. I guess after your first sentence in which referred to Tennis Record you forgot who you were talking about in your second sentence.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
This is a chart I did a number of years ago using my ratings showing the number of players in tenth of a point buckets.


You can see at 2.5 and 3.0 there are more players at the top of each range than the bottom by a pretty wide margin.

At 3.5 it is pretty balanced, but note that this chart included men and women so there is a peak of 3.0/3.5 women overlaid with the peak of 3.5/4.0 men.

At 4.0 there are more in the lower part of the range, but again this is in part due to men and women in the same chart. Clearly at 4.5 and above there are more at the lower end which is what I was saying earlier.
 
Just keep trying to save face by putting up charts about your ratings which have nothing to do with the fact that the discussion was about TENNIS RECORD.
 

syshy111

New User
Yes I would agree that TR is low In my case. It has me back at 4.0 after getting dq’d after sectionals this year. Looks like TR has only 2 guys on my National runner up team getting bumped lol
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
As long as TR is only 0.20 low ... if it is 0.202 low then I am in trouble.
(For the record, I do not believe I am in trouble ... no desire to see a bump this year!)
 
Top