Predicting the Nationals winner 18 & over 4.0 women

[schmke]

I figure there will be a lot of these, so starting a unique thread for each.

In less than a week we'll have a National champ for the 4.0 women. I used my simulation to write up a prediction, see more on my blog, but the short story is that Hawaii is the pick to come out on top of a very tight final over New England, but NorCal and Middle West are right there. Several teams right there as well if any of these slip up.

 

[OnTheLine]

took me a minute to figure out what middle west was .... need another cup of coffee on this Monday

 

[ShaunS]

Creative way to avoid the paranoid word filter TW brandishes.

 

[JoelDali]

People all over the world are anxiously awaiting the results of 4.0 women’s nationals.

 

[schmke]

FWIW, some excitement in the 4.0 semis, or who played. It appears Caribbean showed up with only 7 players, whether by accident or known in advance and not disclosed, I don't know for sure, but they were allowed to play and never had an 8th show up, so defaulted 3D the whole event. They still made the semis on the strength of two very strong singles players winning 3-2 three times and 4-1 once, but then grievances were filed and it appears they were excluded from the semis and Southern who was 5th in the standings inserted instead.

There is a reason the USTA requires a full roster of 8, so this is all by the rules, just interesting they let them play with just 7. I'm guessing they had a good story about the 8th to show up and that didn't transpire. The reasons being that A) default a match is not fair to their 4 opponents (8 players) that show up to Nationals expecting to play, and B) it also upsets the competitive balance, especially in the new format, when 4 teams are getting a default win and 6-0,6-0 in the standings while other teams have to play all the matches.

 

[OnTheLine]

FWIW, some excitement in the 4.0 semis, or who played. It appears Caribbean showed up with only 7 players, whether by accident or known in advance and not disclosed, I don't know for sure, but they were allowed to play and never had an 8th show up, so defaulted 3D the whole event. They still made the semis on the strength of two very strong singles players winning 3-2 three times and 4-1 once, but then grievances were filed and it appears they were excluded from the semis and Southern who was 5th in the standings inserted instead.

There is a reason the USTA requires a full roster of 8, so this is all by the rules, just interesting they let them play with just 7. I'm guessing they had a good story about the 8th to show up and that didn't transpire. The reasons being that A) default a match is not fair to their 4 opponents (8 players) that show up to Nationals expecting to play, and B) it also upsets the competitive balance, especially in the new format, when 4 teams are getting a default win and 6-0,6-0 in the standings while other teams have to play all the matches.

Your rationale makes total sense. It wouldn't be fair on so many levels to force them to default (and not play). This is recreational tennis and we are there to actually play. PLUS the effect on the standings under the new format.

Pretty lame move to pull unless it really was a last minute unavoidable thing (which we of course do not know).

 

[BeyondTheTape]

FWIW, some excitement in the 4.0 semis, or who played. It appears Caribbean showed up with only 7 players, whether by accident or known in advance and not disclosed, I don't know for sure, but they were allowed to play and never had an 8th show up, so defaulted 3D the whole event. They still made the semis on the strength of two very strong singles players winning 3-2 three times and 4-1 once, but then grievances were filed and it appears they were excluded from the semis and Southern who was 5th in the standings inserted instead.

There is a reason the USTA requires a full roster of 8, so this is all by the rules, just interesting they let them play with just 7. I'm guessing they had a good story about the 8th to show up and that didn't transpire. The reasons being that A) default a match is not fair to their 4 opponents (8 players) that show up to Nationals expecting to play, and B) it also upsets the competitive balance, especially in the new format, when 4 teams are getting a default win and 6-0,6-0 in the standings while other teams have to play all the matches.

The Caribbean girls kept telling teams and usta officials that their 5th court was "on the way" Plane issues was their excuse. But they all flew together from Puerto Rico?

But apparently she wasnt "on the way".... as they defaulted again on day 2 and she never showed up. I think they knew they were stronger than anybody and felt like 4 courts was enough for them (which it was).

Once the final four teams were settled after match 4 with Caribbean in the final four. There was a grievance filed. And this was not a quick decision by USTA to default them from the semi's. The decision wasnt final until 1230am in which Southern took their place.

 

[BeyondTheTape]

double post

 

[OnTheLine]

The Caribbean girls ....

Good information, but thought we were talking about adult league ....

 

[schmke]

The Caribbean girls kept telling teams and usta officials that their 5th court was "on the way" Plane issues was their excuse. But they all flew together from Puerto Rico?

But apparently she wasnt "on the way".... as they defaulted again on day 2 and she never showed up. I think they knew they were stronger than anybody and felt like 4 courts was enough for them (which it was).

Once the final four teams were settled after match 4 with Caribbean in the final four. There was a grievance filed. And this was not a quick decision by USTA to default them from the semi's. The decision wasnt final until 1230am in which Southern took their place.

That's what I heard from one source as well, but the coach has been posting on my Facebook page saying they told the USTA before the event they only had 7. I wasn't there, I don't know for sure, but I'm going with your version as it comes from two sources now and passes the smell test (mine at least) on why they would have been allowed to start (the promise of the 8th coming), and then DQ'd when that turned out to be a fib.

The USTA was put in a really tough spot. A team makes the trip (pays for plane, hotels, etc.) and is there and has a story on the 8th coming soon. They could stick to the letter of the law and not allow them to play, but that is a bit heartless given the 8th player is (supposedly) coming and it would also wreak havoc on the schedule as it would have to be redone to give teams 4 matches without any repeat opponents, so they decide to let them play on the promise the 8th is coming.

When it turns out the 8th coming was untrue, they are now in the tough spot of allowing them to continue to the semis thereby setting the precedent that a team can show up with less than 8 in violation of the rules and lie to talk their way in, and then benefit by going to the semis and perhaps winning. How can the USTA enforce the 8 player rule in future years if they do that? IMHO, they had to DQ them once it was clear their story was fraudulent and they were in violation of the 8 player minimum rule.

 

[dannywilliams10s]

That's what I heard from one source as well, but the coach has been posting on my Facebook page saying they told the USTA before the event they only had 7. I wasn't there, I don't know for sure, but I'm going with your version as it comes from two sources now and passes the smell test (mine at least) on why they would have been allowed to start (the promise of the 8th coming), and then DQ'd when that turned out to be a fib.

The USTA was put in a really tough spot. A team makes the trip (pays for plane, hotels, etc.) and is there and has a story on the 8th coming soon. They could stick to the letter of the law and not allow them to play, but that is a bit heartless given the 8th player is (supposedly) coming and it would also wreak havoc on the schedule as it would have to be redone to give teams 4 matches without any repeat opponents, so they decide to let them play on the promise the 8th is coming.

When it turns out the 8th coming was untrue, they are now in the tough spot of allowing them to continue to the semis thereby setting the precedent that a team can show up with less than 8 in violation of the rules and lie to talk their way in, and then benefit by going to the semis and perhaps winning. How can the USTA enforce the 8 player rule in future years if they do that? IMHO, they had to DQ them once it was clear their story was fraudulent and they were in violation of the 8 player minimum rule.

With 7 there, they should have been defaulting #2 singles the whole time which would have worked against them as they had 2 really good and probably unbeatable singles players.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk