Share your WTN - Crowd sourcing the NTRP to WTN mapping

Moon Shooter

Hall of Fame
You have to wonder if ITF & USTA are aware of this, but see no practical value to fixing it because they don't run mixed-gender competitions (meaning women's pairs against men's pairs or singles matches), the data that would be needed to calibrate across genders is sparse, and it's more socially acceptable to have an equal WTN range for the same NTRP range across genders.

WTN is now a complete mess. If they want to be taken seriously they should rank pros like UTR and they should stop trying to match their results to USTA ratings.

It was already the case that men were more poorly rated then a female of the same strength. Now they exagerated that even more. There are mid 3.5 women that have the same WTN (this was an edit I said utr at frist but I mean WTN) as top end 4.0 men.

This would be easy to fix if they had more truly coed USTA leagues. But USTA seems interested in things other then having an accurate rating system. Why are they so against having an accurate rating system?

They need to get an algorithm and then trust it. Stop manually setting whole groups of people's ratings. It appears - from the USTA faq and the actual changes I see - they just took older guys and added a bunch of points to their rating. In other words they are not letting the results of matches decide your rating they are deciding what you think you should be rated.
 
Last edited:

schmke

Legend
WTN is now a complete mess. If they want to be taken seriously they should rank pros like UTR and they should stop trying to match their results to USTA ratings.

It was already the case that men were more poorly rated then a female of the same strength. Now they exagerated that even more. There are mid 3.5 women that have the same UTR as top end 4.0 men.

This would be easy to fix if they had more truly coed USTA leagues. But USTA seems interested in things other then having an accurate rating system. Why are they so against having an accurate rating system?

They need to get an algorithm and then trust it. Stop manually setting whole groups of people's ratings. It appears - from the USTA faq and the actual changes I see - they just took older guys and added a bunch of points to their rating. In other words they are not letting the results of matches decide your rating they are deciding what you think you should be rated.
All valid points and similar observations I have. The redistribution of Adult league players was done to give more room for juniors so they could be spread out over a larger range, perhaps some validity to this, but they've completely botched the gender neutral part of it and that should just be completely disregarded. This is all consistent with the primary goal of WTN, for the USTA at least, to be an alternative to UTR, and both are more concerned with juniors than anything else.

The coed leagues don't exist because there isn't interest broadly, or there are already more than enough same gender leagues in most areas filling the schedule, and because there aren't coed leagues the gender neutrality of WTN thus isn't an issue in their eyes because men aren't playing women in singles or anything other than traditional Mixed. But the real issue is that WTN is an afterthought for Adult leagues.
 

travlerajm

Talk Tennis Guru
All valid points and similar observations I have. The redistribution of Adult league players was done to give more room for juniors so they could be spread out over a larger range, perhaps some validity to this, but they've completely botched the gender neutral part of it and that should just be completely disregarded. This is all consistent with the primary goal of WTN, for the USTA at least, to be an alternative to UTR, and both are more concerned with juniors than anything else.

The coed leagues don't exist because there isn't interest broadly, or there are already more than enough same gender leagues in most areas filling the schedule, and because there aren't coed leagues the gender neutrality of WTN thus isn't an issue in their eyes because men aren't playing women in singles or anything other than traditional Mixed. But the real issue is that WTN is an afterthought for Adult leagues.
They need a good data guy to help them out.
 

Moon Shooter

Hall of Fame
I am not sure why there would be less demand for coed leagues then there is for mixed. Of course, coed leagues seem impossible now because USTA has intentionally prevented the ratings from being gender neutral. As it was the guys would help their rating by playing against women. But then they just really exaggerated it by giving many guys an extra half dozen points. (worsening their rating) Now mid 3.5 female has the same WTN rating as a high end 4.0 male. (both mid 27) If we had a coed team and both players were on it who do you think the captain would play more? Of course they would just play all guys because the gender neutrality of the ratings went from not great to absolutely crazy. Does USTA think they are fooling anyone?

I would much rather coed *and* mixed be based on a truly gender neutral rating. Currently mixed is popular because you have a much larger pool to choose players from, but I am not aware of any men that prefer playing in mixed as opposed to with people at their same level. The whole dynamic of every match trying to hit to the female player and ruin her day is not really fun for most guys, I know. Again the advantage is you double the pool of players you can draw from and you have some flexibility with rating match ups so it is easy to get a team.

WTN should just stop with the "lower rated" player being the stronger player. The "higher rated" player should be the stronger player. That is how we have developed our language why be *intentionally* obtuse? Make 1 the lowest and don't have any cap on the top. Just like chess ratings.

UTR seemed much better on the gender neutral front but even there in my area I think the men had slightly deflated ratings compared to women. But UTR has actual coed leagues so the algorithm will correct that if UTR didn't do other things to make their system unworkable for adult rec tennis. USTA does not even run coed leagues so, of course, ratings for one gender won't cross over to the other gender and they will always be out of whack.

There seems to be some resistance to having a really great age and gender neutral rating system. In an interview Heather at USTA had said she was concerned that we would take the ratings too seriously and how some guy wanted his tombstone to say he was 5.0 tennis player or something. I am not sure how making the rating system more accurate will make that worse. And really I found the whole discussion very patronizing to the USTA membership. Just make the rating system accurate and stop thinking your job is to tell us what our life priorities should be.

Edit; and yes the entire focus of USTA seems to be Juniors and pros. This whole adult rec thing seems like an awkward attachment.
 

andfor

Legend
Late to the thread.

NTRP: 4.5C
WTNs: no data
WTNd: 29.8
UTRd: 6.77
Gray check mark on WTN and 20% reliability UTR.

WTN is still all over the map. I understand I don't have enough matches to be accurate. UTR seems to get it, WTN not so much. Even among high level college players the WTH ratings vary widely.
 

nicolasp

New User
WTN should just stop with the "lower rated" player being the stronger player. The "higher rated" player should be the stronger player. That is how we have developed our language why be *intentionally* obtuse?
They made it this way to match the French rating system, where the lowest rating is 40 and the rating goes down as the skill level goes up. I agree with you that it's a pretty dumb decision. To make it worse, it looks like the FFT (French tennis federation) is dragging its feet on WTN now. There still hasn't been any official word about it ever since the initial announcement in 2019.
 

MGArchitect

New User
The gender thing doesn't make sense for WTN, but age also really messed it up as well in the somewhat recent reshuffling. They seem to have junior bands, then 18-30, 30-40, 40-50, and 50+ bands, but very good 4.5 men who are 50+ have sometimes significantly lower ratings than average 4.0 men who are under 30. They claim this rates you relative to the people you are likely to play, but several 50+ people play in the 18+ USTA leagues.
Like someone mentioned, definitely geared toward juniors.
 

schmke

Legend
They made it this way to match the French rating system, where the lowest rating is 40 and the rating goes down as the skill level goes up. I agree with you that it's a pretty dumb decision. To make it worse, it looks like the FFT (French tennis federation) is dragging its feet on WTN now. There still hasn't been any official word about it ever since the initial announcement in 2019.
The old International Tennis Number (ITN) that had been around for years was on a 10 to 1 scale, and that may have influenced the 40 to 1 of WTN.
 

TennisOTM

Professional
Check out this men's singles tournament I found on USTA:


"Eligible players will have a WTN (World Tennis Number) between 29 and 20. (Equivilant of an NTRP 3.5 to 4.0 rated player)"

Wow, that range is pretty out of whack. There are many 3.5 and 4.0 men who have WTN in the 30's and there are 4.5 and even 5.0 men who have WTN in the 20's. Bizarre!
 

travlerajm

Talk Tennis Guru
Check out this men's singles tournament I found on USTA:


"Eligible players will have a WTN (World Tennis Number) between 29 and 20. (Equivilant of an NTRP 3.5 to 4.0 rated player)"

Wow, that range is pretty out of whack. There are many 3.5 and 4.0 men who have WTN in the 30's and there are 4.5 and even 5.0 men who have WTN in the 20's. Bizarre!
Why would they exclude anyone?
 

Pspielha

Rookie
Check out this men's singles tournament I found on USTA:


"Eligible players will have a WTN (World Tennis Number) between 29 and 20. (Equivilant of an NTRP 3.5 to 4.0 rated player)"

Wow, that range is pretty out of whack. There are many 3.5 and 4.0 men who have WTN in the 30's and there are 4.5 and even 5.0 men who have WTN in the 20's. Bizarre!
So now USTA is holding tournaments that don’t even adhere to their own NTRP rating system? Lol.

Within my local league if I look up different players’ WTN ratings they are all over the place, and are not consistent whatsoever based on who is a 3.5 vs. 4.0. What a dumpster fire.
 

Roforot

Hall of Fame
Mens 3.5C
WTN Singles 33.4 (med) GZ 35.2 - 31.6
WTN Doubles 28.9 (high) GZ 30.6-27.1
UTR Singles 5.2 (100% reliable)
UTR Doubles 5.60 (100% relilable)
TR 3.64 --> somehow increased to 3.79 after yearend ratings came out.
 

Moon Shooter

Hall of Fame
Check out this men's singles tournament I found on USTA:


"Eligible players will have a WTN (World Tennis Number) between 29 and 20. (Equivilant of an NTRP 3.5 to 4.0 rated player)"

Wow, that range is pretty out of whack. There are many 3.5 and 4.0 men who have WTN in the 30's and there are 4.5 and even 5.0 men who have WTN in the 20's. Bizarre!

It actually could be ok for women. They used to have women with just slightly stronger rating then the men of the same usta level. But then Usta decided to give huge numbers of men about half a dozen rating points but not the women. It seems usta purposefully makes their rating systems bad. Your testing showed wtn was about as good as a coin toss at predicting match outcomes.
 

Moon Shooter

Hall of Fame
They made it this way to match the French rating system, where the lowest rating is 40 and the rating goes down as the skill level goes up.

It took me a while to even understand what you were saying. How can a rating go down below the lowest rating? It just creates ambiguity when you use common terms like someone is a “lower rated” or “higher rated” player. Who made the decision to do that? It just seems they are trying to make dumb decisions.
 

nyta2

Hall of Fame
update:

wtn:
singles: 11.6 (13.4-9.8)
doubles: 15.5

utr:
singles: 7.99 (no new matches since last update)
doubles: 8.45 (playing lots of usta dubs, mx,... went to nationals and played dubs)

side note, big advantage that utr has... is that they pull usta data, but usta doesn't pull utr data...
NTRP: 5.0C (bump up Nov30)
TR:
WTN(s): 27.7 (low confidence)
WTN(d): 24 (high confidence)
UTR(s): 7.97 (from 2022)
UTR(d): 7.98 (100% reliable)


thoughts/observations:
* utr counts mixed results... guessing that usta does not (i have alot of mixed matches)... i wonder if usta counts tri-level matches
 
Last edited:

travlerajm

Talk Tennis Guru
NTRP: 5.0C (bump up Nov30)
TR:
WTN(s): 27.7 (low confidence)
WTN(d): 24 (high confidence)
UTR(s): 7.97 (from 2022)
UTR(d): 7.98 (100% reliable)


thoughts/observations:
* utr counts mixed results... guessing that usta does not (i have alot of mixed matches)... i wonder if usta counts tri-level matches
Congrats on the bump!

TR has you as a better mixed player.
TR mixed: 4.53
TR mens: 4.36

Usta computer ignores mixed unless you only played mixed, which means the usta computer rated you significantly higher than TR.
 
Last edited:

nyta2

Hall of Fame
Congrats on the bump!

TR has you as a better mixed player.
TR mixed: 4.53
TR mens: 4.36

Usta computer ignores mixed unless you only played mixed, which means the usta computer rated you significantly higher than TR.
interesting... never looked at my mixed rating... lol probably because i never really cared about mixed results (kinda got roped into it, during a moment of weakness :p)
 

schmke

Legend
It took me a while to even understand what you were saying. How can a rating go down below the lowest rating? It just creates ambiguity when you use common terms like someone is a “lower rated” or “higher rated” player. Who made the decision to do that? It just seems they are trying to make dumb decisions.
Whether it originated with the ITF, FFT, or LTA, I dunno, but the rating systems used by each prior to WTN were also "upside down", but were generally 10 to 1, 10 being a beginner, 1 being a pro, the International Tennis Number (ITN) was what the ITF offered up for years prior to WTN. WTN simply extended this to 40 to 1 to give more granularity, and has a more detailed algorithm than ITN did.
 

Klitz

Rookie
interesting... never looked at my mixed rating... lol probably because i never really cared about mixed results (kinda got roped into it, during a moment of weakness :p)
How do you view different ratings on TR? I only see one dynamic rating?
 

travlerajm

Talk Tennis Guru
How do you view different ratings on TR? I only see one dynamic rating?
Click on Recent Match History under the colored rating bar.

This will pull up record over the last year in reverse chronological order. For each match, there is both a match rating (on left) and a rolling average rating (on right). The ratings in red are mixed only, the black are same gender only.
 

Roforot

Hall of Fame
Click on Recent Match History under the colored rating bar.

This will pull up record over the last year in reverse chronological order. For each match, there is both a match rating (on left) and a rolling average rating (on right). The ratings in red are mixed only, the black are same gender only.

Ah this makes sense.
One thing I noticed w/ players who have only played Tournaments and have a 3.5T or 4.0T, TR has no estimated dynamic rating for these guys.
It has their matches listed though under history... maybe it's this way for all sections? I suspect this may account for some of the inaccuracies in bump predictions.
 

nyta2

Hall of Fame
...
I would much rather coed *and* mixed be based on a truly gender neutral rating.
...
so would i... playing in 8.0mx is kinda a waste of time for 4.5M (from a purely skill/practice standpoint - eg. playing against similar rated players - not to mention i tend to hit less balls)
Currently mixed is popular because you have a much larger pool to choose players from,
but I am not aware of any men that prefer playing in mixed as opposed to with people at their same level.
The whole dynamic of every match trying to hit to the female player and ruin her day is not really fun for most guys, I know.
yes,
and yes
and yes
Again the advantage is you double the pool of players you can draw from and you have some flexibility with rating match ups so it is easy to get a team.
i doubt it's "double"... there are significantly fewer woman than men in a particular level, i think.. at rec anyway
and given that ntrp/usta primary focus is max participation... making ntrp levels/pairings using something like utr, would reduce participation...
...
UTR seemed much better on the gender neutral front but even there in my area I think the men had slightly deflated ratings compared to women. But UTR has actual coed leagues so the algorithm will correct that if UTR didn't do other things to make their system unworkable for adult rec tennis. USTA does not even run coed leagues so, of course, ratings for one gender won't cross over to the other gender and they will always be out of whack.
utr has coed tourneys, but not that many, and usually only for the lower levels (eg. utr9 and below...)
usta keeps the M & F separated at the junior levels
There seems to be some resistance to having a really great age and gender neutral rating system. In an interview Heather at USTA had said she was concerned that we would take the ratings too seriously and how some guy wanted his tombstone to say he was 5.0 tennis player or something.
lol at some point in my life (30y ago, and definitely before utr), "5.0 player" was definitely something i aspired to, thinking it was the pinnacle of tennis (not realizing it was top of rec tennis, but there was a ocean of skill above that...
I am not sure how making the rating system more accurate will make that worse.
definitely would reduce participation... eg. at 8.0... only 4.0M + 4.5F (ie. presume 4.5F == 4.0M)... that's a really smallish number of 4.5F in the rec world
vs. today, you can have so many combinations... from 3 different skill groupings {4.5F+3.5M, 4.0M+4.0F, 3.5F+4.5M}... much easier to construct teams...
And really I found the whole discussion very patronizing to the USTA membership. Just make the rating system accurate and stop thinking your job is to tell us what our life priorities should be.
true, but what they are really saying is that max-participation is their priority
Edit; and yes the entire focus of USTA seems to be Juniors and pros. This whole adult rec thing seems like an awkward attachment.
 

Moon Shooter

Hall of Fame
Men’s 4.0C
WTN SINGLES: 30.8 (med) GZ 32.6-29.0
WTN DOUBLES
: 27.7 (high) GZ 29.5-26.0
UTR SINGLES: 4.81
UTR DOUBLES: 6.55
With that WTN doubles you would be competitive with many of the 3.5 ladies in my area. Of course their UTR doubles is would be in the 3.XX range.

It is clear that WTN did some sort of big forced adjustment that just completely destroyed any hint of legitimacy that system may have had. They should just guage it to their USTA dynamic ratings but have the men be about 4 points lower (better) for the same USTA dynamic rating as a female. After that they should just let the algorithm do the work.
 

Moon Shooter

Hall of Fame
....
i doubt it's "double"... there are significantly fewer woman than men in a particular level, i think.. at rec anyway
and given that ntrp/usta primary focus is max participation... making ntrp levels/pairings using something like utr, would reduce participation...

.....

definitely would reduce participation... eg. at 8.0... only 4.0M + 4.5F (ie. presume 4.5F == 4.0M)... that's a really smallish number of 4.5F in the rec world
vs. today, you can have so many combinations... from 3 different skill groupings {4.5F+3.5M, 4.0M+4.0F, 3.5F+4.5M}... much easier to construct teams...

true, but what they are really saying is that max-participation is their priority


There are considerably more women USTA players then men overall.
But yes you are right there are fewer 4.5 women then 4.0 men.

I am not necessarily against allowing say a 3.5 to play with a 4.5 in an 8.0 league. But the difference becomes pretty absurd when the 3.5 female who is about as good as a mid level 3.0 male and the 4.5 male is pushing 5.0. At least if everyone was on the same rating scale the 3.5 female would be as good as the same dynamically rated 3.5 male.

I think participation would definitely go up for the bulk of Adult rec players - which are 3.0-4.0 level. In the ******* many areas with populations 100-300k do not have any or very few teams. If they had more options to create teams USTA could grow.

I don't really think it would hurt 4.5 guys too much. Because I think many are not interested in playing with a 3.5 female anyway. I think if that player was as good as a 3.5 male then I think there would be more interest. So yes there would be fewer players to draw from but the actual tennis would be better.

At 9.0 mixed I am not so sure. I think the female 4.5 level is pretty wide as well. And then when you get into 5.0 women I am not sure they are always about the same as 4.5 men. The 5.0 women teaming up with 4.0 men do about as well as 5.0 men teaming up with 4.0 women.

I think because there are almost no 5.5 female players the 5.0 female bracket is very open ended. But we have no 4.5 men's leagues or 5.0 women's leagues in my area. So I have very little sense of the divides at these levels.

These combos line up well with UTR's predictions based on their NTRP to UTR conversion chart.

Notice there is no 5.5 USTA women listed in the chart.

Edit: also notice that the top 3.0 men are stronger then top 3.5 women. This continues until you hit 5.0 women. The top 4.5 men are not as strong as the top 5.0 women.
 
Last edited:

nyta2

Hall of Fame
At least if everyone was on the same rating scale the 3.5 female would be as good as the same dynamically rated 3.5 male.
true, and i would prefer this too (more equally competitive in my current NTRP)... not to mention that 4.5M playing with 3.5F is kinda a waste of time/exercise in "how not to get my partner killed, while trying to kill the opposing weak player".
but participation wise, i still think there would be less opportunities (i'm sure usta has spreadsheets to prove this :p)
Edit: also notice that the top 3.0 men are stronger then top 3.5 women. This continues until you hit 5.0 women. The top 4.5 men are not as strong as the top 5.0 women.
yeah, not exacltly linear, but a good general rule of thumb imo (eg. men.NTRP-0.5 ~= women.NTRP)
 

Purestriker

Legend
true, and i would prefer this too (more equally competitive in my current NTRP)... not to mention that 4.5M playing with 3.5F is kinda a waste of time/exercise in "how not to get my partner killed, while trying to kill the opposing weak player".
but participation wise, i still think there would be less opportunities (i'm sure usta has spreadsheets to prove this :p)

yeah, not exacltly linear, but a good general rule of thumb imo (eg. men.NTRP-0.5 ~= women.NTRP)
I am happy to be done with mixed. Provides zero value or growth.
 

nyta2

Hall of Fame
I am happy to be done with mixed. Provides zero value or growth.
agree, for the most part (certainly easier to find value/growth against similarly skilled opponents)... but it's not zero IMO... it has motivated me to really focus on:
* serve (if *I* lose my serve, and can't expect my partner to help - we probably lose the set)
* groundstroke precision & depth (because my mindsset is about (a) preventing my partner from getting killed (b) settign them up for the easy volly putaway)
* poaching & volley putaways - because if i touch the ball, i have to make it count... else the opposing team will just pick on my partner relentlessly (which is what we are trying to do to them)

becomes a real chess match when playing other 4.5/3.5 combos,...
9.0 is def more challenging
 

Purestriker

Legend
agree, for the most part (certainly easier to find value/growth against similarly skilled opponents)... but it's not zero IMO... it has motivated me to really focus on:
* serve (if *I* lose my serve, and can't expect my partner to help - we probably lose the set)
* groundstroke precision & depth (because my mindsset is about (a) preventing my partner from getting killed (b) settign them up for the easy volly putaway)
* poaching & volley putaways - because if i touch the ball, i have to make it count... else the opposing team will just pick on my partner relentlessly (which is what we are trying to do to them)

becomes a real chess match when playing other 4.5/3.5 combos,...
9.0 is def more challenging
OK. Zero was a little harsh. I get some value in working on the mental toughness aspect and reflex volleys (dodging the OH's and smashes off their weak returns).
 

Pspielha

Rookie
but to your point, i can get all that + more, if playing against similarly skilled opponents... (vs. trying to protect my vulnerable partner)
I am happy to be done with mixed. Provides zero value or growth.
As a woman, I also don’t see the value of mixed (aside from socially) unless the men are 3.5 and below (and playing with 3.5-4.0 women). Even then, never enjoyed it. But at higher levels the gap of athleticism and skills really starts to deviate even further apart, and make it pretty pointless unless the women are a full 2-3 levels above the men.
 

nyta2

Hall of Fame
unless the women are a full 2-3 levels above the men.
IME, one level is about right to be competitive, but without comparing utr's... can only guess if someone is at the top/middle/bottom of an ntrp range
eg.
bottom of 4.0F vs top of 4.0M, is effectively 3 levels of difference.
top of 4.0F vs top of 4.0M is 2 levels diff
top of 4.0F vs. bottom of 4.0M is 1 level of diff
 
Last edited:

Moon Shooter

Hall of Fame

"We examine whether UTR or WTN ratings better predict head-to-head match success using 1,532 matches played by 870 participants at the 2022 United States Tennis Association (USTA) Junior National Championships. We observe overall classification accuracy of 73.9% and 70.4% for UTR and WTN ratings, respectively."

So how did USTA manage to screw up WTN for Adult rec players so bad that it came in dead last in this thread:


And we have mid 3.5 women in the same range as mid 4.0 men?
 

time_fly

Hall of Fame
The USTA just sent an email touting their new Player Dashboard that shows the NTRP along with the ITF WTN numbers. But the sample image they sent of the page is hilarious. It's an NTRP 2.5S with a Singles WTN of 17.9 and Doubles WTN of 16.5. Yeah, that sounds about right for the self-rates in our area. :-D
 

time_fly

Hall of Fame
Maybe someone has a more precise conversion, but Mark Sansait for example is currently 5.0C / 20.28 / 22.55.
 

CiscoPC600

Hall of Fame
Male 4.0 C
WTN Singles: 29.08 (medium confidence)
WTN Dubs: 28.57 (high confidence)

USTA's crappy rankings strikes again! We will never have competitive leagues without sandbagging, ha!
 
Top