Tennis Record - Accurate or Not?

Joanna F

New User
What are some opinions out there on the accuracy of tennis record? Many ladies in my area are so focused on it - yet it doesn't seem accurate to me at all. I'm currently a 3.5C player - have been for 4 years. Most all of my losses to comparable 3.5 players were in a tie break where we lost by 1 point? Yet I'm rated in TR as a 2.91? Does this system take a 3 year average like USTA is supposed to?
 

time_fly

Hall of Fame
It's not very accurate in most peoples' opinion. The site is more useful for statistics than rating estimation. Use the search function and you will find a lot more about it.
 

gmatheis

Hall of Fame
What are some opinions out there on the accuracy of tennis record? Many ladies in my area are so focused on it - yet it doesn't seem accurate to me at all. I'm currently a 3.5C player - have been for 4 years. Most all of my losses to comparable 3.5 players were in a tie break where we lost by 1 point? Yet I'm rated in TR as a 2.91? Does this system take a 3 year average like USTA is supposed to?
Can't lose a tiebreak by 1 point.
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
It's all math @Joanna F ... special TR math.

Your rating is determined by the spread between you and your partners ratings vs your opponents cummulative ratings.

if you and your partner are a combined 6.0 and your opponents are a combined 6.25 you should lose (according to the computer) by say 12-5. (6-2; 6-3)

If you "cover the spread" and lost but only 12-7, your ratings go up. If you don't cover the spread and lose 12-3 your ratings go down.

So if you always play with a partner that has a high rating and end up against opponents with lower ratings, the math can be stacked against you and leaking any games can lower your rating.

Is TR accurate? No. If you want to know if it matches USTA's dark magic math at the end of the season. It is however accurate onto itself.

Within players that all have 10+ matches ... it will have them ranked by strength pretty accurately.
 
TR isnt perfect, but it does several useful things:
1. It provides a transparent dynamic ntrp rating for free, and updates it regularly.
2. It provides separate mixed and same-gender ratings.
3. It provides a history of individual match ratings, so you can see whether a certain opponent is currently playing at, above, or below the most current rating by reviewing the trend over the last several matches.

TR is only as accurate as the data that goes into it, so it’s possible to be misleading if it’s based on a small sample size of only 2 or 3 matches. But for players with many recent matches, I’d say it’s a very accurate rating of a player’s level.
 
Last edited:

Joanna F

New User
Sudden death 1 point - for tied tiebreak score during timed matches. Most opponents rated much higher than us in TR.
 

Joanna F

New User
Rating was up and down but fairly steady - the 2.9-3.03 range.- I have 2 matches that I played self rated players - one I won in a breaker and 1 I lost pretty badly. So I know those haven't been factored in yet.
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
Sudden death 1 point - for tied tiebreak score during timed matches. Most opponents rated much higher than us in TR.
Ah, timed matches ... but still goes in 0-1 as a lost game.

But if your opponents are combined much higher than you and you always play with the same partner ... and you always lose by only 3rd set breaker, what is the total game spread of the match?

Because so far, the math does not add up. And with TR, 90% of the time the math adds up.

All doubles? or do you have other matches with other partners and/or singles ... because all of those factor in as well.
 

Joanna F

New User
Ah, timed matches ... but still goes in 0-1 as a lost game.

But if your opponents are combined much higher than you and you always play with the same partner ... and you always lose by only 3rd set breaker, what is the total game spread of the match?

Because so far, the math does not add up. And with TR, 90% of the time the math adds up.

All doubles? or do you have other matches with other partners and/or singles ... because all of those factor in as well.
Thanks. Yes, I have played with other partners - So most of the game spreads were,3-6,, 6-4, 0-1. Of my 8-10 record on the year, 7 of my losses were breakers where the game numbers varied by 1 (other team's favor). I had 3 bad losses. I have 1 singles loss (one of the bad losses - not a singles players but took one for the team. Had some great wins 1, 1, 2, 3 BUT some were against 3.0 players so that did me no favors. On appeals, do local league coordinators approve?
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
There are two types of appeals. An Auto-appeal where if you are within a certain point spread of the cut off it will automatically approve and those that go to your LLC

But seriously, I don't put a lot of stock into the TR actual number. I think it gets trends right and I think it ranks people in general right but in terms of the actual rating number itself ... don't think it is close.

I also sent you a quick PM with more specific information ....
 
Are "section league coordinators" the same as local league coordinators for USTA?
No. Sections league coordinators are just that. They are over their entire section whether it be one state such as Texas or Florida since they are their own sections or multiple states as with Intermountain, Missouri Valley, etc...

Local league coordinators are merely over an area within a district or region.

Subsets of a Section may break down to:
Section - State - District - Local Area
Big wig to increasingly small wig.
 

Nostradamus

Bionic Poster
What are some opinions out there on the accuracy of tennis record? Many ladies in my area are so focused on it - yet it doesn't seem accurate to me at all. I'm currently a 3.5C player - have been for 4 years. Most all of my losses to comparable 3.5 players were in a tie break where we lost by 1 point? Yet I'm rated in TR as a 2.91? Does this system take a 3 year average like USTA is supposed to?
It is fairly accurate if you play a lot of matches, but if you only play few here and there, it is inaccurate useless site
 

ShaunS

Semi-Pro
What are some opinions out there on the accuracy of tennis record? Many ladies in my area are so focused on it - yet it doesn't seem accurate to me at all.
Undoubtedly, it's one of the top two sites for free estimates of your NTRP ranking.
 
D

Deleted member 23235

Guest
What are some opinions out there on the accuracy of tennis record? Many ladies in my area are so focused on it - yet it doesn't seem accurate to me at all. I'm currently a 3.5C player - have been for 4 years. Most all of my losses to comparable 3.5 players were in a tie break where we lost by 1 point? Yet I'm rated in TR as a 2.91? Does this system take a 3 year average like USTA is supposed to?
lol, IMO it's not accurate,... to folks who think they are better than they are :p
granted tr, tls, utr, can be wrong (lol, even ntrp on usta can be wrong!),... but the only way to "prove" that it's wrong is to play more matches, and win :p
 

ShaunS

Semi-Pro
Just for fun, here's how TennisRecord did for my Summer 4.0 team:

We had several guys near the top of 4.0 so there were a lot of opportunities.

In order of TR ratings:
Player 1 - TR predicted bump up, he wasn't.
Player 2 - TR didn't predict bump up, he was, but within auto-appeal range.
Player 3 - TR didn't predict bump up, he was. (I don't know if he's close enough to appeal)
Player 4 - TR didn't predict bump up, he was, but within auto-appeal range.
Player 5 - TR didn't predict bump up, he wasn't. *Best player on the team for what it's worth.
Player 6 - TR didn't predict bump up, he wasn't.

So in truth not a great run for the folks at TR, but obviously the range here was very close.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
Just for fun, here's how TennisRecord did for my Summer 4.0 team:

We had several guys near the top of 4.0 so there were a lot of opportunities.

In order of TR ratings:
Player 1 - TR predicted bump up, he wasn't.
Player 2 - TR didn't predict bump up, he was, but within auto-appeal range.
Player 3 - TR didn't predict bump up, he was. (I don't know if he's close enough to appeal)
Player 4 - TR didn't predict bump up, he was, but within auto-appeal range.
Player 5 - TR didn't predict bump up, he wasn't. *Best player on the team for what it's worth.
Player 6 - TR didn't predict bump up, he wasn't.

So in truth not a great run for the folks at TR, but obviously the range here was very close.
2 for 6, not so good ...

FWIW, I was 11 for 13 for your team, one miss by just 0.01. I even had the 3.5 correct (which TR missed on too).
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
On my teams:

TR was 2-2 on predicted bump ups;
1-3 on bump downs (predicted 3 only 1 happened although honestly, I think USTA was wrong too).
Missed a bump down that I was certain needed to happen, @schmke was uncertain of only because of number of matches played as an S rate ... but TR had her well in level and USTA bumped her down. Trust me, USTA was right.

I did see some bump ups that no one saw coming. Friend was 3.31 on TR and got bumped to 4.0 as just one example.
 
TR missed on all 8 of us.

@schmke just bagel'ed TR. He was right. TR on the other hand... 0 for 8 I tell ya!

Ratings Bagel
You already know this but just to continue piling it on TR, they missed on 8 guys on the team from our club too with the lowest miss being a 3.76 on TR. Ironically, the guy they had closest to a bump stayed as a 4.0C. I guess that technically makes them 1-9 on that squad.
 

WhiteOut

Semi-Pro
For me it isn't so much whether TR is 'accurate' or not -- the question is, is it consistent across a ratings group. Since TR and NTRP run their own respective algorithms, there will be discrepancies between the two at the edges of each ratings segment. I find TR to be a great tool to have a look at someone's overall history, and to be able to review common opponents, and look at trends etc. TL is an incredibly horrible design with respect to reviewing one's record, common opponents, courts played etc.

For the 3.5 team I cap, TR projected three guys getting bumped up, and a fourth was close. Two of them did, and the third did not, but a different third guy did get bumped up, but TR did not project that result. Ironically, the one who did not get bumped was the same guy who I was most-certain would...he was self-rated and I had to be careful not to get him DQ'd this summer....
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
TR projected zero bump ups and two bumps downs from my team, which would have been fairly shocking considering we destroyed our league and districts and lost sectionals by one court on a court count tiebreaker. We actually had 3 bumps up and no one down. The three ups had TR ratings of 3.98, 3.95, and 3.93 and were listed as 3 of the top 4 DNTRPs on our team on TR. One guy who was projected to be bumped down only had 2 matches, so he actually remained 4.0S, not 4.0C. I have no idea if he actually could have been bumped down or not. The other was 3.47 on TR but not bumped down. Both these guys had down years for different reasons, but certainly aren't 3.5s. In all, it looks like TR has our team systematically underprojected by a little.
 

CosmosMpower

Hall of Fame
TR projected zero bump ups and two bumps downs from my team, which would have been fairly shocking considering we destroyed our league and districts and lost sectionals by one court on a court count tiebreaker. We actually had 3 bumps up and no one down. The three ups had TR ratings of 3.98, 3.95, and 3.93 and were listed as 3 of the top 4 DNTRPs on our team on TR. One guy who was projected to be bumped down only had 2 matches, so he actually remained 4.0S, not 4.0C. I have no idea if he actually could have been bumped down or not. The other was 3.47 on TR but not bumped down. Both these guys had down years for different reasons, but certainly aren't 3.5s. In all, it looks like TR has our team systematically underprojected by a little.
Dang 3.98, 3.95, lucky they weren't bumped straight to 4.5
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
I got a team report on a sectionals opponent from schmke. They had 7 bumps. Schmke's report predicted 5, but that was before they played sectionals (which they won) and nationals (where they were 4th). The 7 bumps included all 5 Schmke indicated pre-sectionals plus the next two players on his report, who were 3.99 and 3.97 on his report at the time. That's pretty damn good if you ask me.

Edit: there were actually 8 bumps on this team. There was one guy Schmke missed, but he was an S-rate whose rating was managed through the regular season and then he kicked ass at sectionals and nationals, so he legitimately could have shot up in that time.
 
Last edited:

time_fly

Hall of Fame
It looks like TR has updated players' ratings and started pulling in the 2019 matches for those of us in early-start leagues. Yay, another year of obsessing over small decimal changes!
 

Zman

New User
And unless you're trying to manipulate your rating by tanking there's not much to do about your rating once you know it.
I don't agree with that. You can put yourself in (or avoid) situations that would yield an especially high or especially low rating. For instance, you can play with a high-rated doubles partner whose style of play doesn't fit with yours. You can play singles against some teams and not others, based on how well your game matches up with the singles guys on the other team. You can play with a partner who you know is either much stronger or much weaker than his rating. And so on. As long as you try your hardest to win each match, none of these would be tanking, and all of them would affect your rating.
 

MRfStop

Professional
There are four 4.0s in my area that were predicted to get bumped down to 3.5 by TR and the past two years they have are still 4.0
 

WhiteOut

Semi-Pro
I don't agree with that. You can put yourself in (or avoid) situations that would yield an especially high or especially low rating. For instance, you can play with a high-rated doubles partner whose style of play doesn't fit with yours. You can play singles against some teams and not others, based on how well your game matches up with the singles guys on the other team. You can play with a partner who you know is either much stronger or much weaker than his rating. And so on. As long as you try your hardest to win each match, none of these would be tanking, and all of them would affect your rating.
This is exactly true. By April and into June I was playing my best tennis ever, injury free, down about 7 lbs, and generally playing/feeling great. In spite of that, as mentioned above, since I cap a few teams, there are time when I have to insert myself into a lineup at the last minute in order to not default a court, quite often with one of the weakest players on my team. I know in these instances I will (likely) hold all of my own service games, and we might even get a break or two, but that also I'm just not a consistent enough player to overcome my partner's weaknesses...and depending on the opponent, the court will likely be a loss.

I don't do this to sandbag or keep my rating down. I'm a high 3.5 and competitive at 4.0, but rarely win there except for when I am paired with a strong 4.0 partner -- I can hold my own and eke out a win...the point is, if I were not capping, and purely playing league tennis for myself, I would be much more selective about with whom I'm partnered, against which opponents, etc...it's a 'soft' manipulation or, put another way, a more 'protective' way of playing in the leagues...nothing illegitimate about this approach. I liken it to a player who avoids certain tourneys in order to maximize the probability of success over the short and long term. Nothing wrong with managing one's 'career'.
 

CosmosMpower

Hall of Fame
I don't agree with that. You can put yourself in (or avoid) situations that would yield an especially high or especially low rating. For instance, you can play with a high-rated doubles partner whose style of play doesn't fit with yours. You can play singles against some teams and not others, based on how well your game matches up with the singles guys on the other team. You can play with a partner who you know is either much stronger or much weaker than his rating. And so on. As long as you try your hardest to win each match, none of these would be tanking, and all of them would affect your rating.
Sounds like too much work, I just prefer to tank the good ole fashioned way :)
 

time_fly

Hall of Fame
I wish TR would start calculating ratings based on new results. I've won my first four matches in our early start leagues, and I want to see my rating climb before my inevitable mid-season nagging injuries tank me again.
 
Last edited:
I wish TR would start calculating ratings based on new results. I've won my first four matches in our early start leagues, and I want to see my rating climb before my inevitable mid-season nagging injuries tank me again.
Looks like it's coming. My last matches of the season that came after the cutoff are now listed on TR finally. They're still listed as NC, but all new input seems to sit at that state for a few days before the rating for the match is calculated. So I'm guessing that by the end of the week, those matches will be factored into my rating.
 

brettatk

Semi-Pro
I think TR gives some guys a false sense of security. There are several guys in my area that have a history of managing their rating that were listed around the 3.8 range on TR. Many of them were bumped up to 4.5 this past time. I wonder when TR is going to do their "adjustment" to try and make it look like they are close in calculating ratings. If I had any question on whether I am close, I know who I'd contact to find out.
 
Top