travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
Some other things:Here are some potential off the cuff qualities that people might find valuable in a rating system:
1) Transparency - is it clear how your matches/games count - this leads to the rating gaining legitimacy in the community.
2) Does it apply to all tennis players or just certain groups such as age groups, gender groups, nationalities etc. If it only a applies to small groups it is not so relevant.
3) Is it accurate. You would test this by seeing if it accurately predicts outcomes.
3a) how many matches are required for it to provide decent accuracy?
4) Does it provide a goal or motivation for players? For example I think UTR fails in this regard because everyday is a completely new day and it doesn't seem to track your highest ratings. USTA and WTN might be better at this.
5) Does it allow people to set up tennis events where players feel like they are playing with and against appropriately skilled players.
6) Is it easy to record match results and participate in the rating system. UTR seems to be one of the best for this, but even UTR could improve.
7. does it provide match ratings? To my knowledge TR does this, but WTN and UTR don’t. This is my favorite thing about TR, because it allows me to compare my level on different days. Maybe I am comparing two racquet setups, and if I play two matches with each, TR will spit out objective opponent-adjusted numbers that let me compare how I did with each setup.
8. does it provide pre-match ratings? TR and WTN both do this. UTR does not. This is really important for accuracy because it allows you to have a snapshot of your level at each point in time. It should not be assumed that every stays the same constant level over time. Some are improving some are declining.
9. does it provide pre-match opponent ratings? TR and WTN both do this. UTR does not. There is no way to tell on UTR how difficult your past opponent was, especially if more than a year ago, because UTR just assigns past opponents with a current UTR.
10. Is the rating stable? TR and WTN appear to be stable, because the rating does not change when past opponents have new results. This is not true with UTR.
11. Does the rating include all available data? WTN seems to be superior to both TR and UTR in this respect. A big hole in TR ratings is that it draws a blank for players who have only played either same-gender or mixed, then switch over. This makes opponent ratings less reliable and trickles through the system. UTR has the aforementioned problem that it ignores older data beyond a year, compromising the accuracy of the entire player network by limiting rated players to a minority of the total player pool.
12. does it provide separate ratings for doubles and singles? UTR and WTN both do this. TR does not.
14. does it provide separate ratings for mixed and same-gender? TR does this. WTN and UTR do not.
15. Does it update regularly? TR, WTN, and UTR all do this. TLS does not, disqualifying it from further analysis.
16. can it account well for recent upticks or downticks in results? TR and WTN both can do this. UTR appears to be stickier and unable to detect recent trends.