I know a girl who is looking to join a USTA League team and is a former D-3 college player at an unranked school. I was looking at the experienced guideline chart and it says she would be considered a 4.5 player. Now my question is whether this guideline MUST be followed when self-rating or whether its just a general idea of how they should self-rate? I know her game and would say she's definitely a minimum of 4.0 but unfortunately I don't know what a 4.5 woman's game is like since I've never seen one, so I don't know if 4.5 is too high or just right. All I can compare her to is myself (I beat her 6-4, 6-4, and I can bagel some 3.5 women). I would feel bad if I talk her into joining a league at 4.5 and it turns out too high. But if the system forces her, then I'd like to know that in advance because you can't self-rate until you have a team so she'd have to find a team at the right level first.
question on self-rating former college player
- Thread starter raiden031
- Start date
Topaz
Legend
Raiden, what qualifications do you have to rate this woman? You said yourself that you don't know what a 4.5 woman looks like.
Can you have her hit with a pro and get some feedback that way? Keep in mind that how she rallies and how she plays a match may not necessarily look the same as well.
My understanding is that those self-rating guidelines are pretty explicit, and that if followed honestly and truthfully, then 4.5 would be the *lowest* level at which she could self-rate. There are exceptions (injury, etc.), but I've read those guidelines a fair amount of times, and they seem pretty explicit to me.
Edited to add: I would stay away from the 'I beat her, and she beat this person, and that person beat another person' chain of events, because on any given day....(I think you know the rest).
Can you have her hit with a pro and get some feedback that way? Keep in mind that how she rallies and how she plays a match may not necessarily look the same as well.
My understanding is that those self-rating guidelines are pretty explicit, and that if followed honestly and truthfully, then 4.5 would be the *lowest* level at which she could self-rate. There are exceptions (injury, etc.), but I've read those guidelines a fair amount of times, and they seem pretty explicit to me.
Edited to add: I would stay away from the 'I beat her, and she beat this person, and that person beat another person' chain of events, because on any given day....(I think you know the rest).
Thats exactly what I was asking is whether you MUST use the guideline when self-rating or whether its just a suggestion. I know for sure that there are college players who are not always at the rating that the guideline says, so I'm wondering what those players do when they want to join a league.
And yeah I played against her in a serious match, so we weren't just hitting around. I would be surprised if I could beat her if she was 4.5 or 5.0, but she definitely seems alot better than 3.5. But really I don't know if a pro would be any more helpful because a pro told me I was a 4.5 after 15 minutes of feeding me perfectly fed balls to my strike zone.
lostinamerica
Semi-Pro
She must self rate at 4.5 but can add some information as to why she should self rate at a different level. It is my experience that you get to self rate at the level you the self rate guidelines state. Have her self rate and see if she can get a 4.0.
If she self-rates as an experienced player, she really won't have a choice on what her minimum rating will be. The computer will rate her based on her answers to the questions. There is a good demo on Tennis Link I tell my players to look at before self-rating. She may be able to appeal so should have her reasons ready if she gets a higher rating than what she wants.
Islandtennis
Rookie
Raiden, she needs to answer all of the questions truthfully. That should automatically self rate her as a 4.5. As soon as she does this, she needs to immediately appeal her rating to the District ratings coordinator with an explanation of why the 4.5 rating is higher than her actual ability.
goober
Legend
Well somebody can find out pretty easily. Nothing will happen unless someone files a greivance which probably won't happen unless somebody loses badly as is pissed or playoffs/sectionals are involved. I have seen successful grievances filed against former college players even when they are clearly playing at the right level so I wouldn't simply dismiss it as if it would never happen.
lostinamerica
Semi-Pro
You are right. I saw a grievance upheld on a guy in this very scenario. A guy that played JUCO was sent to 4.0 and he was really a very average 40 39 year old 3.0.
Even D1 includes a fairly wide range of ability. If she does it right she will disclose college play and may end up with a "forced rating" which I believe is minimum 4.5. This can be appealed and if she comes up with good reasons (injury, layoff etc.) they may agree to reduce the rating to 4.0. I went through this process myself (D1 but 7 year layoff due to severe TE) and that is was the result in my case.
You have to follow the guidelines and answer the questions correctly. Last year one of our team members and the captain was suspended after a grievance was filed.
The player tried to self rate as a 4.0. She was over 36 which would qualify her to play 4.0. During her play on the D2 college team the team somehow ended up with a #40 ranking which made her ineligible for a 4.0 rating. She was never aware of the ranking, neither was her captain nor any of her team mates. Somehow someone on the oppossing team was able to find that information and filed a grievance. The captain and player were suspended. A lawyer who was on the team filed an appeal completely proving it was unintentional and that the player was not a 4.5. It made no difference. They were both suspended.
This year I know a girl that played on a D2 team last year. She is in her early 20's making her a 4.0. She self rated and immediately appealed. She was granted her 4.0 self rating but was told that she can be DQ'd if any grievances are filed.
The easiest way for her to get her true rating is to self rate according to the guidlines then go play. If she gets killed at 4.5, they will drop her down. If she wins or plays competitively, that's where she belongs.
The player tried to self rate as a 4.0. She was over 36 which would qualify her to play 4.0. During her play on the D2 college team the team somehow ended up with a #40 ranking which made her ineligible for a 4.0 rating. She was never aware of the ranking, neither was her captain nor any of her team mates. Somehow someone on the oppossing team was able to find that information and filed a grievance. The captain and player were suspended. A lawyer who was on the team filed an appeal completely proving it was unintentional and that the player was not a 4.5. It made no difference. They were both suspended.
This year I know a girl that played on a D2 team last year. She is in her early 20's making her a 4.0. She self rated and immediately appealed. She was granted her 4.0 self rating but was told that she can be DQ'd if any grievances are filed.
The easiest way for her to get her true rating is to self rate according to the guidlines then go play. If she gets killed at 4.5, they will drop her down. If she wins or plays competitively, that's where she belongs.
I'm still going by the common sense index. If she is clearly not a 4.5, it shouldn't matter if she self rates at 4.0. I wouldn't trust the USTA to appeal back down. There are plenty of cases of people accidentally self rating too high (like a typo) and having to go through hoops to get it fixed.
If she might be a 4.5, then you should err on the side of caution and rate as such.
If she might be a 4.5, then you should err on the side of caution and rate as such.
The problem with appealing is that she is only 2-3 years out of college, is still playing, and has no injuries. So the only reason to appeal would be if she believed she couldn't compete with 4.5s despite being a recent college player. She told me that practically anybody could make her college team so they weren't a highly competitive conference. I guess it would be better to find a 4.5 captain and tryout and see if she can hang with the them. If she can't, then she can worry about appealing down to 4.0. Its too early to tell right now.
shell
Professional
She should trust her instincts. If she has seen 4.0 and 4.5 players, and is fair about her abilities, then the system will let her adjust acordingly.
I self rated after reading the qualifying terms, and even though I should have been a 5.0, I knew I was not due to very specific circumstances. USTA was very responsive to that, and I am where I am supposed to be - although now that I have been playing regularly, I may need to go up to 4.5.
I find the ratings fair, and the system fair to argue a point. Hope she does the same.
I self rated after reading the qualifying terms, and even though I should have been a 5.0, I knew I was not due to very specific circumstances. USTA was very responsive to that, and I am where I am supposed to be - although now that I have been playing regularly, I may need to go up to 4.5.
I find the ratings fair, and the system fair to argue a point. Hope she does the same.
kairosntx
Professional
I walked on to the tennis team at an NAIA school. As a Freshman I never was in the top 6 and never played in any official matches. After my Freshman year the school dropped the tennis program but I stayed at the school as it was in my hometown. That was in 1984. After a 23 year layoff I applied for a USTA card to play in a league. I self rated at 3.5 and it was a good place for me to get started. I answered the college tennis experience question "NO" as I never played in any official matches.
Was I right?
note: after playing 20+ matches, hitting regularly and working on some parts of my game, I have moved up to 4.0.
Was I right?
note: after playing 20+ matches, hitting regularly and working on some parts of my game, I have moved up to 4.0.
