The dreaded EOY Rating thread

[GrassCourtFan]

Being on the court with better players certainly gives you the opportunity to evaluate where you need to go in order to reach their level, but you need practice sessions or less stressful matches to actually work on the stuff.

If you play with someone far enough above, it isn't even a useful evaluation. "Be better at everything - hit harder and with more spin off both sides and off serve and return, while also handling pace and spin better" is the only conclusion you can draw when facing someone more than one full NTRP level above you.

If you're playing someone close enough that you have reasonable points at least, you can pinpoint what worked and what didn't, for you and for your opponent. But with a big enough skill gap, the answer is "everything worked for them, nothing for me" and that's the point at which the match becomes pointless for improvement purposes.

 

[TennisManiac]

Play up anyway? This is the dumbest thing I've seen someone cry about on here. You're just humble bragging about your sandbagging.

No, actually I'm complaining about how messed up the usta rating system is.

 

[doublesplayer]

Tennisrecord is a joke. Plain and simple. You can't believe anything that stupid website tells you. It predicted like 15 people in our league to get bumped up. And no one did.

I cannot understand why a lot of league players take any stock in TR as it relates to actual USTA ratings; it doesn’t

There is no affiliation, no knowledge of actual dynamic ratings, pure and simple, it just estimation, same as you or I could say about players with the eye test.

As far as USTA is concerned, TR means nothing.

 

[J_R_B]

I cannot understand why a lot of league players take any stock in TR as it relates to actual USTA ratings; it doesn’t

There is no affiliation, no knowledge of actual dynamic ratings, pure and simple, it just estimation, same as you or I could say about players with the eye test.

As far as USTA is concerned, TR means nothing.

TR is a very useful scouting tool, especially when you get into the playoffs and are playing teams you're less familiar with. They generally do a good job of ranking people from strongest to weakest within a team (or at least in my experience they do). As far as using TR to predict bumps, LOL, no, they are barely better than random guessing for anyone with 0.20 of the bump threshold.

 

[SudsInABucket]

Because everyone has the opportunity to play up a level if they want to play better players.

By sandbagging, you’re depriving a player the ability to play players at his or her own level or below.

The fundamental reason to have handicap events is to allow players to play others within their level. The sandbagging prevents the very reason the level exists.

This.

 

[HBK4life]

I cannot understand why a lot of league players take any stock in TR as it relates to actual USTA ratings; it doesn’t

There is no affiliation, no knowledge of actual dynamic ratings, pure and simple, it just estimation, same as you or I could say about players with the eye test.

As far as USTA is concerned, TR means nothing.

Does anyone know who owns TR?

 

[mpnv1990]

Does anyone know who owns TR?

The people who own Tennis League Analytics. Their names aren’t listed on the site.

 

[Purestriker]

Does anyone know who owns TR?

GD is the host and it they have the ownership listed as private.

 

[Moon Shooter]

If only 9% get bumped, then they are not 70% better than 3.5 male players.

That assumes USTA ratings are 100% accurate. But if you think UTR is at least as accurate as NTRP then you get a different picture.

I think the issue is where you live the ratings are inflated because there are not enough players within each level.

It is true we have fewer players and matches then other areas. I believe less data means less accurate ratings, but not necessarily inflated ratings. The ratings will sometimes be inflated sometimes deflated.

I would guess if you played at state, those opponents are lower rated than you and more difficult opponents than what you experience in a rural local league.

When I played at state against a team from a large city the doubles 1 court had 2 players that had 5.XX UTR. (I think when I looked they were like 5.30ish) Even if they were 5.01 that would put them in the upper 2/3s of 3.5 players. They were not lower rated then I was as they were both bumped up to 3.5 this year and me and my partner stayed at 3.0. We lost the Doubles 1 court but we won two other doubles courts and lost the singles court by a match tiebreaker - we had to default the 4th doubles court so we did not advance. My own rating hovers around 4.0 but there are other 3.0s on my teams who hit UTR 5.XX ratings and I know quite a few USTA 3.5 players with 3.5 and lower UTRs. USTA does not rate as many matches as UTR, so it sometimes is not as accurate.

My own 4ish UTR places me at about the third of 6 categories in 3.5 tennis:

https://www.kimgranttennis.com/uploads/3/1/3/5/31353957/utr-player-range-page-001_3.jpg

So maybe about as good as the bottom third of players.

I have no idea how to convert my WTN doubles rating of 29.9 but just reviewing what other 3.5 players in my area have, it seems reasonable for a 3.5 player. The range seems to be about 27-32.5 for 3.5 men in my area.

 

[Moon Shooter]

Tennisrecord is a joke. Plain and simple. You can't believe anything that stupid website tells you. It predicted like 15 people in our league to get bumped up. And no one did.

TR has a huge problem with how it deals with Self rated players. That tends to throw off other calculations they do to some extent. But overall the algorithm they use is pretty good at predicting strength of play. For example if you take say a 3.5 USTA men's team the top 1/3 of players according to TR will usually be better then the bottom third of players. Assessing who is a stronger player is different then predicting who will have a higher rating according to USTA. There is a strong correlation but it is not the same.

 

[Purestriker]

That assumes USTA ratings are 100% accurate. But if you think UTR is at least as accurate as NTRP then you get a different picture.



It is true we have fewer players and matches then other areas. I believe less data means less accurate ratings, but not necessarily inflated ratings. The ratings will sometimes be inflated sometimes deflated.



When I played at state against a team from a large city the doubles 1 court had 2 players that had 5.XX UTR. (I think when I looked they were like 5.30ish) Even if they were 5.01 that would put them in the upper 2/3s of 3.5 players. They were not lower rated then I was as they were both bumped up to 3.5 this year and me and my partner stayed at 3.0. We lost the Doubles 1 court but we won two other doubles courts and lost the singles court by a match tiebreaker - we had to default the 4th doubles court so we did not advance. My own rating hovers around 4.0 but there are other 3.0s on my teams who hit UTR 5.XX ratings and I know quite a few USTA 3.5 players with 3.5 and lower UTRs. USTA does not rate as many matches as UTR, so it sometimes is not as accurate.

My own 4ish UTR places me at about the third of 6 categories in 3.5 tennis:

https://www.kimgranttennis.com/uploads/3/1/3/5/31353957/utr-player-range-page-001_3.jpg

So maybe about as good as the bottom third of players.

I have no idea how to convert my WTN doubles rating of 29.9 but just reviewing what other 3.5 players in my area have, it seems reasonable for a 3.5 player. The range seems to be about 27-32.5 for 3.5 men in my area.

Out of 12 of my 3.5's, only one is below a 5. I think the range UTR estimates is too broad to compare it to a USTA ranking. Also, the four 3.5's I lost to 4.0 this year were all high five and two were mid 6's.

 

[Roforot]

TR has a huge problem with how it deals with Self rated players. That tends to throw off other calculations they do to some extent. But overall the algorithm they use is pretty good at predicting strength of play. For example if you take say a 3.5 USTA men's team the top 1/3 of players according to TR will usually be better then the bottom third of players. Assessing who is a stronger player is different then predicting who will have a higher rating according to USTA. There is a strong correlation but it is not the same.

Besides the self-rated, there seems to be odd lags in calculations. I believe some sections count Singles Flex leagues to year-end ratings, some count Tournaments, and others don't count either. I don't know if TR is sophisticated enough to incorporate the correct data for the player based on which section they are playing.

For me it's also helpful to use their spreadsheet to get an idea; say when I play w/ a weak 3.0 next season vs 2 3.5s, how is my rating impacted if he win 6-4 6-4 or lose by the same margin. I can play w/ hypotheticals to see if I can get match ratings to push me to 4.5 (I think we had to win 6-1, 6-1 or 6-2, 6-0)... of course my partners rating would also rise so if I play w/ the same 3.0, the 2nd match is tough to get a match rating > 4.01. Bottom line, is that you really have to dominate 7.0 as 4.0/3.0 pairing to get pushed to 4.5 but this is pretty obvious.

If there's a better spreadsheet or formula, let me know. Is there a way to use UTR to get an idea for how your dynamic rating changes based on match performance?

 

[Moon Shooter]

Out of 12 of my 3.5's, only one is below a 5. I think the range UTR estimates is too broad to compare it to a USTA ranking. Also, the four 3.5's I lost to 4.0 this year were all high five and two were mid 6's.

It could be variations in area. It could also be that you have a decently strong 3.5 team. It could also be that the players who end up at USTA 3.5C ratings but are playing at under 4.5 UTR strength don't get asked to be on many 3.5 teams and if they are asked would prefer not to play.

But if high UTR 5 and mid 6s are beating USTA 4.0 players then that should at least demonstrate a UTR 5.XX is going to be an upper 3.5 player. Did the 3.5 players that beat you get bumped to 4.0? And it seems to me (and is born out by the UTR chart) that there is more overlap between 3.0 and 3.5 then there is between 3.5 and 4.0. Cities with dense populations of tennis players may be able to pack their 3.5 teams with players that all have high 5 or even mid 6 UTRs. But they will likely be strong 3.5 teams.

The UTR Chart of data is in line with what we are both saying.

 

[doublesplayer]

That assumes USTA ratings are 100% accurate. But if you think UTR is at least as accurate as NTRP then you get a different picture.



It is true we have fewer players and matches then other areas. I believe less data means less accurate ratings, but not necessarily inflated ratings. The ratings will sometimes be inflated sometimes deflated.



When I played at state against a team from a large city the doubles 1 court had 2 players that had 5.XX UTR. (I think when I looked they were like 5.30ish) Even if they were 5.01 that would put them in the upper 2/3s of 3.5 players. They were not lower rated then I was as they were both bumped up to 3.5 this year and me and my partner stayed at 3.0. We lost the Doubles 1 court but we won two other doubles courts and lost the singles court by a match tiebreaker - we had to default the 4th doubles court so we did not advance. My own rating hovers around 4.0 but there are other 3.0s on my teams who hit UTR 5.XX ratings and I know quite a few USTA 3.5 players with 3.5 and lower UTRs. USTA does not rate as many matches as UTR, so it sometimes is not as accurate.

My own 4ish UTR places me at about the third of 6 categories in 3.5 tennis:

https://www.kimgranttennis.com/uploads/3/1/3/5/31353957/utr-player-range-page-001_3.jpg

So maybe about as good as the bottom third of players.

I have no idea how to convert my WTN doubles rating of 29.9 but just reviewing what other 3.5 players in my area have, it seems reasonable for a 3.5 player. The range seems to be about 27-32.5 for 3.5 men in my area.

USTA. ratings are accurate because you are playing and registered with USTA. You may not like or think they are accurate but since it is based on your results against other USTA players, their calculations are accurate. It's math.

 

[Moon Shooter]

USTA. ratings are accurate because you are playing and registered with USTA. You may not like or think they are accurate but since it is based on your results against other USTA players, their calculations are accurate. There is USTA play, and UTR play, but no TR play.

I'm not saying they did the math wrong. I am saying that if a player has a better rating that does not mean they are a better tennis player. My UTR and WTN ratings are based exclusively on USTA matches. These ratings and USTA do not always agree about who should have a stronger rating even though they are all looking at USTA matches. They can't all be right.

 

[MGArchitect]

Does anyone know who owns TR?

I’ve looked this up before. The site is owned by a company called Virtual Sports located in Tennessee that also owns a couple of virtual horse racing simulation sites/games. Something like horseracinggame.com and horseracingpark.com. People pay money to pretend they are horse breeders and earn real money from different simulated horse races. I figured they used tennis record to both generate ad revenue from the curious and as some sort of RNG for the horse racing thing.

 

[mpnv1990]

Can someone explain to me why you’d wanna appeal your rating up if you play mixed?

As an example, if you appeal up from 2.5 to 3.0, you’re eligible to play 7.0 mixed. But you’d be overwhelmed.

If you play 6.0, then you’d have to play with a 3.0 as opposed to a 3.5, and that’s a huge difference.

 

[Creighton]

Can someone explain to me why you’d wanna appeal your rating up if you play mixed?

As an example, if you appeal up from 2.5 to 3.0, you’re eligible to play 7.0 mixed. But you’d be overwhelmed.

If you play 6.0, then you’d have to play with a 3.0 as opposed to a 3.5, and that’s a huge difference.

Some people play tennis to have fun and not to win.

I played 8.0 with a 4.0A who appealed up. She wasn't good enough to win matches but it was a lot of fun to play with her.

 

[mpnv1990]

Some people play tennis to have fun and not to win.

I played 8.0 with a 4.0A who appealed up. She wasn't good enough to win matches but it was a lot of fun to play with her.

You’re proving my point. She would’ve done 1,000 times better with a 4.5.

 

[Moon Shooter]

You’re proving my point. She would’ve done 1,000 times better with a 4.5.

USTA won’t allow that. For mixed teams that end .0 you can’t be more then one point different then your partner. I wanted to play 8.0 with a 5.0 female and they wouldn’t let me.

 

[mpnv1990]

USTA won’t allow that. For mixed teams that end .0 you can’t be more then one point different then your partner. I wanted to play 8.0 with a 5.0 female and they wouldn’t let me.

You’re missing my point. By appealing up to a 4.0, she has to play with a 4.0. If she stayed at 3.5, she gets to play with a 4.5. That is a huge difference.

 

[Roforot]

Stereotypically women want the status and appeal up. Men want the wins and appeal down… i do know one guy who appealed up but his side hustle is coaching. So for ego or status he can’t be dropping his rating

 

[schmke]

Stereotypically women want the status and appeal up. Men want the wins and appeal down… i do know one guy who appealed up but his side hustle is coaching. So for ego or status he can’t be dropping his rating

It also varies some by level. I wrote about it on my blog a few years ago looking at 2022 data, here are the numbers.

Here are the appeals down and up for women using the appealed from level.

• 2.5 - 0 / 670
• 3.0 - 191 / 753
• 3.5 - 449 / 390
• 4.0 - 622 / 52
• 4.5 - 411 / 2
• 5.0 - 165 / 0
• 5.5 - 18 / 0

And the men.

• 2.5 - 0 / 71
• 3.0 - 46 / 188
• 3.5 - 473 / 148
• 4.0 - 835 / 54
• 4.5 - 626 / 7
• 5.0 - 254 / 0
• 5.5 - 17 / 0

So you see women do appeal down some, especially at higher levels. But men appeal down at a higher rate, even at higher levels.

 

[johnmccabe]

i just need to get use to their pace"...

Do you think cranking up ball machine to max is useful for this purpose? The green playmate seems to be able to simulate 4.5 hard shots easily.

 

[ichaseballs]

USTA should use AI instead of their secret formula for ratings

 

[E.T.]

Tennis record now shows data for sets and games won. Has that been there before at year end, or is that new?

 

[silverwyvern4]

Not new

 

[E.T.]

Not new

I just realized it’s there on my phone when I rotate it. It’s not normally in the viewing field on my phone, but I was looking on a computer yesterday.

 

[Moon Shooter]

It also varies some by level. I wrote about it on my blog a few years ago looking at 2022 data, here are the numbers.

Here are the appeals down and up for women using the appealed from level.

• 2.5 - 0 / 670
• 3.0 - 191 / 753
• 3.5 - 449 / 390
• 4.0 - 622 / 52
• 4.5 - 411 / 2
• 5.0 - 165 / 0
• 5.5 - 18 / 0

And the men.

• 2.5 - 0 / 71
• 3.0 - 46 / 188
• 3.5 - 473 / 148
• 4.0 - 835 / 54
• 4.5 - 626 / 7
• 5.0 - 254 / 0
• 5.5 - 17 / 0

So you see women do appeal down some, especially at higher levels. But men appeal down at a higher rate, even at higher levels.

Looking at the absolute numbers is good but to appreciate the difference in behavior you also need to understand the total numbers at each level.
For example, I'm not sure if this is still accurate but it appears (as of 2018) there are about 3xs as many 3.0 female players as male players.

Analyzing 2018 USTA NTRP year-end ratings - Distribution of players by level

Next in the sequence of analyzing the 2018 year-end ratings , we'll take a break of bump up/down percentages and look at how many players th...

computerratings.blogspot.com

So this would suggest that the overall chance that the Men are hitting the appeal down (from 3.5) is much higher then it is from the women.



Edit: consider what purestriker says here which is not surprising to me based on my experience:

The dreaded EOY Rating thread

Being on the court with better players certainly gives you the opportunity to evaluate where you need to go in order to reach their level, but you need practice sessions or less stressful matches to actually work on the stuff. If you play with someone far enough above, it isn't even a useful...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

So if you are a guy anywhere below say 5.5 UTR and you want to win then you are trying to get into the 3.0 level. Since 3.0 is the lowest level for USTA that means there really is no place for males who are below say 3.5 UTR to really have a shot at winning.

 

[njhmusicman]

So would love to see if anyone has ever had a similar story as mine, but in December 2021, my rating updated and it bumped me to a 4.5 from a 4.0. I was able to appeal back down to a 4.0. Next year when the 2022 ratings came out, my rating did not update and it stayed the same as a 4.0 A from 2021. In 2023, when the new ratings came out, the same thing happened in my rating stay the same as a 4.0 A from 2021. So this year, I was very curious to see if my rating would jump up or if I would stay a glitch. Well, I did get bumped up to a 4.5 and was not able to pull back down but that was only because I had nine separate grievances/complaints filed against me because of my rating not being updated. Our district head looked into my situation and couldn't figure it out and neither could anyone above her until they went all the way to the national level. They realized that I should have been bumped up a while ago and so if the complaints had not been filed I would have stayed at 4.0 for the rest of my life. Now, if I'm playing my best, I am a low maybe mid-level 4.5 but my average level I feel like a high-end 4.0. The biggest thing that people complain about is my serve which at its best is high level 4.5 to low level 5.0 which is why people were not happy. I've just never heard of anyone else having a similar situation

 

[Moon Shooter]

I’ll bite. 9 separate grievances when you weren’t even playing? Fess up. What did you do to make so many people angry?

 

[schmke]

Yep, we are missing some information. You say nothing about your playing history in 2022 or 2023. Did you have matches that should have resulted in a new year-end rating? Were you playing Combo or some other league that doesn't count for ratings and cleaning up there resulting in the grievances? Please share more if you can.

 

[njhmusicman]

I’ll bite. 9 separate grievances when you weren’t even playing? Fess up. What did you do to make so many people angry?

Yep, we are missing some information. You say nothing about your playing history in 2022 or 2023. Did you have matches that should have resulted in a new year-end rating? Were you playing Combo or some other league that doesn't count for ratings and cleaning up there resulting in the grievances? Please share more if you can.

Sorry guys, I guess I should have mentioned more. Since I got bumped up to a 4.5 in 2021 and then was able to appeal back down to a 4.0, I have been playing only mixed doubles and really since I joined in 2018, that's really all I have played with the one time I played in a tri-Level 18+ 4.0 team for men but everything else has been mixed. I never played men's in the summer because every time I wanted to join it wanted me to self rate again and my captain thought if I did that I might get bumped to a 4.5 and not be able to appeal down. So really all I have been playing in is an 18+8.0 league and an 18+7.0 league. I have gone 44-8 since 2021, combined in both of those leagues and went to sectionals once for 8.0 and twice for 7.0 and we went to nationals once for 7.0. My tennis record

 

[Moon Shooter]

Sorry guys, I guess I should have mentioned more. Since I got bumped up to a 4.5 in 2021 and then was able to appeal back down to a 4.0, I have been playing only mixed doubles and really since I joined in 2018, that's really all I have played with the one time I played in a tri-Level 18+ 4.0 team for men but everything else has been mixed. I never played men's in the summer because every time I wanted to join it wanted me to self rate again and my captain thought if I did that I might get bumped to a 4.5 and not be able to appeal down. So really all I have been playing in is an 18+8.0 league and an 18+7.0 league. I have gone 44-8 since 2021, combined in both of those leagues and went to sectionals once for 8.0 and twice for 7.0 and we went to nationals once for 7.0.

Interesting. Any idea what your utr has been? I think having a player with about 4.5 strength playing in 7.0 mixed would really help the team. Even regular 4.0 players far outperform their rating when playing 7.0 mixed.

 

[njhmusicman]

Interesting. Any idea what your utr has been? I think having a player with about 4.5 strength playing in 7.0 mixed would really help the team. Even regular 4.0 players far outperform their rating when playing 7.0 mixed.

So my doubles UTR is a 6.39. And yeah, it definitely helps. My mixed 18+7.0 record is 29-2 one loss coming from a sectionals match where me and my partner lost 10–8 in the super tiebreaker in a bit of a controversy and the other one was from nationals where we also lost 10–8

 

[schmke]

Sorry guys, I guess I should have mentioned more. Since I got bumped up to a 4.5 in 2021 and then was able to appeal back down to a 4.0, I have been playing only mixed doubles and really since I joined in 2018, that's really all I have played with the one time I played in a tri-Level 18+ 4.0 team for men but everything else has been mixed. I never played men's in the summer because every time I wanted to join it wanted me to self rate again and my captain thought if I did that I might get bumped to a 4.5 and not be able to appeal down. So really all I have been playing in is an 18+8.0 league and an 18+7.0 league. I have gone 44-8 since 2021, combined in both of those leagues and went to sectionals once for 8.0 and twice for 7.0 and we went to nationals once for 7.0. My tennis record

So, you are in part taking advantage of your 4.0A from Adult play sticking with you for three years allowing you to play Mixed without getting a new year-end rating. You did finally get a new year-end rating, a 4.5M this year as that 4.0A expired.

The grievances could be valid in that you were a 4.5, but allowed to appeal down, and you very well could have been playing at a 4.5 level for the past three years but getting to be a 4.0 simply because the USTA lets you keep your 4.0 level from Adult play. I think one can understand, given your record, why an opponent might feel you are out of level.

This is arguably a flaw in the NTRP system, but it is the system we have so you've technically done nothing wrong. And my Mixed rating for you is hovering right around the threshold so from a rating standpoint I don't think you are egregiously out of level, but you very well may have gotten a 4.5M in previous years had the rules allowed your M rating to replace your A rating earlier. Or, as an A, had the USTA calculated strikes for Mixed, it is possible (but I doubt it) you would have gotten strikes and been DQ'd, but again the USTA hasn't done that in the past.

So, whether it was deliberate or not, you've found a few loopholes and exploited them.

 

[Kochua]

I for one am shocked (shocked!) that someone with a “high level 4.5 to low level 5.0 serve” would generate complaints playing 7.0 mixed.

On that particular serve/return interaction, it’s not dissimilar to that other thread about the college sandbagger playing a 3.0 tournament, although in this case it’s fully USTA sanctioned.

 

[njhmusicman]

So, you are in part taking advantage of your 4.0A from Adult play sticking with you for three years allowing you to play Mixed without getting a new year-end rating. You did finally get a new year-end rating, a 4.5M this year as that 4.0A expired.

The grievances could be valid in that you were a 4.5, but allowed to appeal down, and you very well could have been playing at a 4.5 level for the past three years but getting to be a 4.0 simply because the USTA lets you keep your 4.0 level from Adult play. I think one can understand, given your record, why an opponent might feel you are out of level.

This is arguably a flaw in the NTRP system, but it is the system we have so you've technically done nothing wrong. And my Mixed rating for you is hovering right around the threshold so from a rating standpoint I don't think you are egregiously out of level, but you very well may have gotten a 4.5M in previous years had the rules allowed your M rating to replace your A rating earlier. Or, as an A, had the USTA calculated strikes for Mixed, it is possible (but I doubt it) you would have gotten strikes and been DQ'd, but again the USTA hasn't done that in the past.

So, whether it was deliberate or not, you've found a few loopholes and exploited them.

I will say though, our district manager did say, if no one had complained, and let's just say that they just accepted the fact that they got beat and just went on their way, then I would have continued to stay a 4.0 forever as I was a glitch in the system.

 

[njhmusicman]

I for one am shocked (shocked!) that someone with a “high level 4.5 to low level 5.0 serve” would generate complaints playing 7.0 mixed.

On that particular serve/return interaction, it’s not dissimilar to that other thread about the college sandbagger playing a 3.0 tournament, although in this case it’s fully USTA sanctioned.

Yeah, it helps when you're 6'6" using a 29 inch racket with 137 in.² head.

 

[schmke]

I will say though, our district manager did say, if no one had complained, and let's just say that they just accepted the fact that they got beat and just went on their way, then I would have continued to stay a 4.0 forever as I was a glitch in the system.

It wasn't a glitch, it is just the way the rules are written. A C (or A rating appealed from a C) is valid for three years. The 2021 rating you had expired and that is why you got a 4.5M. You would have gotten that whether there was a grievance or not.

 

[njhmusicman]

It wasn't a glitch, it is just the way the rules are written. A C (or A rating appealed from a C) is valid for three years. The 2021 rating you had expired and that is why you got a 4.5M. You would have gotten that whether there was a grievance or not.

Hmm, interesting, yeah that's not what my district manager said. She said that my situation would have gone unnoticed if it wasn't for the people that had complained. But because people complained, she looked into it and couldn't figure it out and went to her higher-ups and they couldn't figure it out and it went all the way to the national level and they said that I should've been bumped up a while ago but there was a glitch in the system that didn't bump me up. I don't know if you have ever seen this but in 2022 when all the ratings came out my rating still said 2021 and not 2022 and the same thing in 2023. I also probably should've been dq'ed but they didn't have that for mixed until now. Does that make sense? This is just everything that I have been told by my captain and the people above me

 

[denoted]

If 3.0 women are complaining about having to return a 6'6 ex-college player's left-handed serve, with quick action and low toss, whose spin is enhanced with a super oversize extended racquet, then what hope do they have of competing at 3.5?

 

[J_R_B]

Hmm, interesting, yeah that's not what my district manager said. She said that my situation would have gone unnoticed if it wasn't for the people that had complained. But because people complained, she looked into it and couldn't figure it out and went to her higher-ups and they couldn't figure it out and it went all the way to the national level and they said that I should've been bumped up a while ago but there was a glitch in the system that didn't bump me up. I don't know if you have ever seen this but in 2022 when all the ratings came out my rating still said 2021 and not 2022 and the same thing in 2023. I also probably should've been dq'ed but they didn't have that for mixed until now. Does that make sense? This is just everything that I have been told by my captain and the people above me

It's not surprising that people all the way up to national have no idea what they are talking about, but @schmke is right. Your A-rating expired this year, so you got an M-rating. They may have been referring to the fact that you actually got the 2021 computer rating from play in 2020 leagues, not even 2021 leagues, but YE 2020 is the year the USTA skipped ratings because of Covid and rolled the results into a 12/31/2021 combined rating for both 20 and 21, so really, the loophole is even a little bigger in that you had the A-rating for 4 years, not 3, because of the way 2020 was handled.

I'd guess that the complaints/grievances came from 7.0. A 6'6" guy serving 110+ to 3.0 and 3.5 women is probably on the dangerous side for them regardless of the quality of the rest of your game. Your 7.0 results confirm that you shouldn't be playing 7.0 mixed, but your 8.0 results are far less dominant. Also, the guy you lost to at 7.0 sectionals was someone who was originally rated as a very LOL-sy 3.0 and was bumped two consecutive years to 4.0 now, so you may have been out-ringered in that match.

 

[Purestriker]

It's not surprising that people all the way up to national have no idea what they are talking about, but @schmke is right. Your A-rating expired this year, so you got an M-rating. They may have been referring to the fact that you actually got the 2021 computer rating from play in 2020 leagues, not even 2021 leagues, but YE 2020 is the year the USTA skipped ratings because of Covid and rolled the results into a 12/31/2021 combined rating for both 20 and 21, so really, the loophole is even a little bigger in that you had the A-rating for 4 years, not 3, because of the way 2020 was handled.

I'd guess that the complaints/grievances came from 7.0. A 6'6" guy serving 110+ to 3.0 and 3.5 women is probably on the dangerous side for them regardless of the quality of the rest of your game. Your 7.0 results confirm that you shouldn't be playing 7.0 mixed, but your 8.0 results are far less dominant. Also, the guy you lost to at 7.0 sectionals was someone who was originally rated as a very LOL-sy 3.0 and was bumped two consecutive years to 4.0 now, so you may have been out-ringered in that match.

Wouldn't have happened in Southern. Maybe this is why the moved to only allow level based play in mixed. He would have to play 8.0 and probably still would have dominated most matches with that serve.

 

[Roforot]

oh and before this year there was no risk of strikes from playing mixed? that's quite clever Mr. Musicman.