Ratings in 2021

Traffic

Hall of Fame
So with COVID disruption in USTA league play. What do you think will happen to player's ratings when the 2021 season starts up?

I played a full season of 40+ mens and things shut down going into the post season. No 18+ and no other formal league play until possibly 18+ MXD in the fall (which looks like might not happen...)

So only one season of play to add into the formula for bump up or bump down, will we have a lot of under-rated players that stayed frozen? Will folks that still performed well/poorly get moved?

Thoughts?
 

brettatk

Semi-Pro
The problem is that other areas have played many matches that could count. We had the end of our 40+ Spring league plus we'll have 18+ Summer and 40+ Fall. There will also be a few matches that would count for our 18+ Winter season. I think it'll have to be an agreement across the country. I mean how could some Sections freeze ratings and others bump people up or down. It will be interesting to see what they do.
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
My thoughts based on nothing factual.

YE ratings are designed to balance the country
Some sections of the US are not playing any leagues for 2020
Other sections are playing all their leagues
Sectionals have been pretty well universally canceled
Nationals have been canceled

Therefore, there will be little gauge to see ratings by district against other districts, or sections against other sections

My guess is that overall YE ratings will be frozen
With the exception of people with a sufficient data set (at least more than 3 matches) who performed grossly out of level (up or down)
 

Vox Rationis

Semi-Pro
My guess is ratings are frozen except for self rates and appeal players. But that they will calculate YE 2021 ratings with matches from both this year and next year.
 
USTA Missouri Valley froze all ratings for 2020. No matches count and ratings to start 2021 will be the same as they were to start 2020

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
 

Moveforwardalways

Hall of Fame
Why wouldn’t they continue to issue ratings if you have played enough matches - which is 3, I think? If you have played 2 matches or fewer, then no rating update. If you played 3 or more matches, then your rating is updated. This could be confounded by how many matches your opponents played, but there should be a way to control for that statistically.
 

Traffic

Hall of Fame
Again, I am really curious. I played 8+ matches in the 40+ season. So there should be sufficient data.

But who knows what anyone played from March to June. Assuming most folks are out playing on their own by now. But with variations in play (up or down) that aren't being monitored, it'll be interesting to see what the competition looks like in respective leagues come '21.
 

Matthew ATX

Semi-Pro
Why wouldn’t they continue to issue ratings if you have played enough matches - which is 3, I think? If you have played 2 matches or fewer, then no rating update. If you played 3 or more matches, then your rating is updated. This could be confounded by how many matches your opponents played, but there should be a way to control for that statistically.
Because nothing is advancing and since nothing is advancing, it's tank city. Yes, there's data, but it's all bunk.
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
This is going to be much like choices made by school districts. No matter what they do, it is going to be some level of wrong and some level of right.
 

ATX Tennis

New User
I’ve mentioned before, but we have been told by our local league office that ratings won’t be run this year, so you’ll remain at your current rating. It was supposed to be up for vote at the national level, but it seemed like a done deal.
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
Hadn't even thought about that ... but yes, anyone who wanted to avoid a bump could take a non-advancing league and throw games or matches at will.
 

Moveforwardalways

Hall of Fame
Hadn't even thought about that ... but yes, anyone who wanted to avoid a bump could take a non-advancing league and throw games or matches at will.
Yes, but they have known for awhile now and we have had summer league and now fall league will be starting. He’s right...there would be a lot of tanking.
Non-advancing leagues do not count for ratings anyway. Only regular adult league does, and those are already over.
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
Non-advancing leagues do not count for ratings anyway. Only regular adult league does, and those are already over.
It really depends on the section/district ... we aren't all on the same schedule and we each have different leagues/tournaments that "count"

In Intermountain:
We are still playing our normal 18+ league ... even though it is now non-advancing
We are about to play our fall non-advancing league .. it has always counted towards ratings even though it has never advanced to anything
 

Moveforwardalways

Hall of Fame
It really depends on the section/district ... we aren't all on the same schedule and we each have different leagues/tournaments that "count"

In Intermountain:
We are still playing our normal 18+ league ... even though it is now non-advancing
We are about to play our fall non-advancing league .. it has always counted towards ratings even though it has never advanced to anything
Fall leagues count for the next year though right?
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
I wrote about the pros and cons of this awhile ago and put a poll up for folks to vote.

Different sections play at different times, and in some non-advancing leagues count. In some areas some leagues were complete or nearly so, while other areas/leagues never started, but may be starting now. So the "tanking" factor/opportunity is different in different areas.

My view is that all matches played prior to the shutdown were played in good faith and should count (if they were set to count). I see no reason to not count these and using the matches would allow players to get to the right level for 2021. This is especially true for self-rates to get rid of the "S" if they played enough, but also appeal rated players as they too could have played enough. But even C rates may have had 5-10 matches and a bump up or down is justified and there is no reason to not do the bump.

Matches played after the resumption one can debate. For many players, including most self-rates that you'd really like to get a rating for if they played enough, the matches they play are in good faith and indicative of their ability. But clearly there are some that will use these matches that "don't count" (no Sectionals/Nationals) to tank. That is unfortunate, but for that reason I can see the argument to not include post-resumption matches.

Not publishing ratings for those that played enough just keeps players at the wrong level for another year, either too high a level and they are discouraged having to play at that level another year and don't play at all, or too low a level which is unfair to the general population that has to play them. If someone only played 3-5 matches, the appeal thresholds are larger and someone just above/below a threshold can appeal if desired, but just leaving everyone at the same level, and self-rates remaining self-rates, seems like a big mistake.

To the point about no Nationals so can't benchmark and compare sections, that is true, but the adjustments from that are small enough or significant for few enough, that any problem from not doing these year-end calcs is far smaller than the problem of changing no ones rating/level IMHO.

FWIW, 35% polled said to just use the final dynamic rating to determine year-end levels. 24% said to not publish and leave everyone the same. 14% said to publish year-end but have threshold for appeals more lenient, while 11% said to publish but only use matches prior to suspension of play. And 10% said to only publish for self-rates and appeals.
 

timmbuck2

New User
It really depends on the section/district ... we aren't all on the same schedule and we each have different leagues/tournaments that "count"

In Intermountain:
We are still playing our normal 18+ league ... even though it is now non-advancing
We are about to play our fall non-advancing league .. it has always counted towards ratings even though it has never advanced to anything
I wonder about "auto bumps" or bumping up self rated players. We have a guy in our league who is self rated and has won all 5 matches at singles, 6-1 6-1, 6-0 6-0, 6-1 6-0, 6-2 6-2, 6-1 6-2. I have asked the league coordinator, this guy needs to get bumped. It was one of my solid singles guys that he beat 6-1 6-0. I don't care about the match, we aren't moving up so we are just having fun, but just never fun to play sandbaggers, whether it is intentional or not. I expected him to be bumped after losing only 3 games his first 3 matches, but still there so I assuming nothing at all until maybe the end of the year?

Thanks all
 

Moveforwardalways

Hall of Fame
I wonder about "auto bumps" or bumping up self rated players. We have a guy in our league who is self rated and has won all 5 matches at singles, 6-1 6-1, 6-0 6-0, 6-1 6-0, 6-2 6-2, 6-1 6-2. I have asked the league coordinator, this guy needs to get bumped. It was one of my solid singles guys that he beat 6-1 6-0. I don't care about the match, we aren't moving up so we are just having fun, but just never fun to play sandbaggers, whether it is intentional or not. I expected him to be bumped after losing only 3 games his first 3 matches, but still there so I assuming nothing at all until maybe the end of the year?

Thanks all
If they do bumps, then they have to calculate ratings. So they will likely either do them for everyone or no one.
 

brettatk

Semi-Pro
I'm playing 40+ and 18+ right now, both are advancing leagues for 2021. So there isn't any more tanking going on that doesn't normally take place.

The people that are saying it's already been decided in their Section that ratings will be frozen. Does that mean that all matches played this year will be like they were never played or does that mean they just will not count for ratings this year but will count for the next years ratings? I just don't see how one section can decide to freeze everything and bump nobody where another Section would bump people up or down. That Section would be at a terrible disadvantage come Sectionals/Nationals next year it would seem.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
I'm playing 40+ and 18+ right now, both are advancing leagues for 2021. So there isn't any more tanking going on that doesn't normally take place.

The people that are saying it's already been decided in their Section that ratings will be frozen. Does that mean that all matches played this year will be like they were never played or does that mean they just will not count for ratings this year but will count for the next years ratings? I just don't see how one section can decide to freeze everything and bump nobody where another Section would bump people up or down. That Section would be at a terrible disadvantage come Sectionals/Nationals next year it would seem.
As I understand it, each section can identify which leagues will count for ratings. "Normally", every section has advancing leagues count (although there have been a few exceptions), and then some sections include varying subsets of non-advancing leagues (Tri-Level, One-Doubles, Summer/Fall Doubles, etc.). Since a section seems to have this decision authority at a league level, even for advancing leagues, all they'd have to do is identify an advancing league as non-counting.

So it isn't that a section is saying no bumps for 2020 year-end, they are effectively saying no leagues count, resulting in no bumps.
 

brettatk

Semi-Pro
As I understand it, each section can identify which leagues will count for ratings. "Normally", every section has advancing leagues count (although there have been a few exceptions), and then some sections include varying subsets of non-advancing leagues (Tri-Level, One-Doubles, Summer/Fall Doubles, etc.). Since a section seems to have this decision authority at a league level, even for advancing leagues, all they'd have to do is identify an advancing league as non-counting.

So it isn't that a section is saying no bumps for 2020 year-end, they are effectively saying no leagues count, resulting in no bumps.
Again, these ESL down here can screw things up that other Sections don't have to worry about.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
In what may be considered a meaningless post, I heard today (and just wrote about on my blog) that National has still not decided if they will publish year-end ratings for 2020 yet. So we continue to wait.

I almost wonder if they are holding off on saying just to keep players from knowing so they don't know if they should tank or not or go all out or not. This probably primarily affects those in Georgia (right now) or other areas with 2021 early start leagues where knowing would determine if players go all out trying to win and advance, or use the league to manage their rating.
 

Vox Rationis

Semi-Pro
I almost wonder if they are holding off on saying just to keep players from knowing so they don't know if they should tank or not or go all out or not.
I honestly think that's the case. Or at least one of the factors being considered. I think they tell us in late October.
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
I honestly think that's the case. Or at least one of the factors being considered. I think they tell us in late October.
I think they won't say a thing at all. The "ratings" will come out.

Only people bumped up or down will be those wildly out of level and S/A rates with at least 3 matches moving to C.

We will notice significantly fewer bumps up or down and will conclude that many people just weren't playing enough league matches to trigger the system and that will be that..

On to 2021 ...
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
I think they won't say a thing at all. The "ratings" will come out.
Oh, I think they'll say they will be published (if they do), but it likely won't be until October, perhaps early November, after matches that would be included are complete.

Only people bumped up or down will be those wildly out of level and S/A rates with at least 3 matches moving to C.
Which is the sensible thing to do and what I advocated in my analysis on my blog. But that almost makes it certain that isn't what is done ...
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
Oh, I think they'll say they will be published (if they do), but it likely won't be until October, perhaps early November, after matches that would be included are complete.


Which is the sensible thing to do and what I advocated in my analysis on my blog. But that almost makes it certain that isn't what is done ...
Yup .... it will look just like "normal", but not.

And totally agree it is the sensible thing .... LOL that you are right, probably will do something else!
 
Top