happyandbob
Legend
A friend's co-worker hasn't played tennis in 20 years, but played D1 singles in college. Just self rated as a 3.5. True story
USTA "3.5"
- Thread starter happyandbob
- Start date
silverwyvern4
Semi-Pro
Is she going to play 3.5 women's league?
ErrorMachine
Rookie
What’s the age? My buddy is a former d1 player who is now 68. He told me usta rated him 3.5. I didn’t watch him take the quiz but I can’t see him lying as he plays age group opens, so he not going out and sandbagging.
happyandbob
Legend
45 years old. Yes, planning to play 3.5 USTA
schmke
Legend
The self-rate guidelines say committed to or played D1 and 41 or older should be a 4.0. To be a 3.5 they'd have to be 61 or older.
I play at the 3.25/ 3.5 level and have found that new people that sign up and put themselves as a 3.5 are a wild card. Sometimes they end up being a 4.0 or above and sometimes they should probably be in the 3.0 division. Usually they are around a 3.5 type player. I enjoy playing them first because it is fun to see what they got.
innoVAShaun
G.O.A.T.
ichaseballs
Hall of Fame
depends on their age, but if they are underrated... sounds like a slam dunk grievance
Purestriker
Legend
Amazing. This is why nobody minds scooping up 18 year old varsity tennis players or former D2 players for 3.5.
Purestriker
Legend
Dang, I should have had those varsity kids playing 3.0 back in the day. Which would have been criminal.
happyandbob
Legend
yeah, I'm sure there was a lot of lying on the self-rater
MGArchitect
Rookie
I don't understand the motivation to underrate. I also took a 20+ year break from playing college tennis (D3, reasonably competitive) and so was concerned by the rust I would have, but I self-rated per the form at 4.0, and after my first practice, was thinking maybe that I should have self-rated 4.5 because of the quality on the court (several over-confident 3.5s). Now I play with a regular group of guys who cross over between 4.0C and 4.5C and that seems about right. One difference being, they regularly practice, and I just show up for matches. 3.5 would not have been fun or competitive for me and it won't be for this person either, unless they have a weird idea of what constitutes "fun".
FuzzyYellowBalls
Legend
3.5 wow! That's so egregious. If you have time, report back his results as they unfold,, lol, will be funny.
It's an extra layer of confusion for me, after college tennis, it's so hard to take USTA seriously, there's no way I would be proud of beating adults who are just learning tennis.
Purestriker
Legend
It's sort of a big thing.
ttwarrior1
Hall of Fame
play her in tri level, combo and at 3 doubles
johnmccabe
Hall of Fame
Not sure the op mentioned gender. Is it more outrageous for a man or a woman to do this?
FuzzyYellowBalls
Legend
More confusing for a woman, men are usually the idiots doing things like this.
Same here. I don't understand the people who want to play down just to advance in the end of season tournament, but it seems to happen a lot with repeat team organizers behind the recruiting of experiences players new to USTA who can be signed up for 3.0.
eh, he probably listened to the capt to not get stuck in-between-ntrp-limbo-hell...
he's probably shanking every other ball atm, and likely is a 3.5, but will probably only take a summer of hitting to shake off the rust to get back to 4.5
true, but if i'm just getting back into tennis, but can't find a team because i self rated properly, then likely i won't be able to get back to my level due to no one wanting me on the team...
taydbear7
Professional
Maybe it's a male who identify as a female?
johnmccabe
Hall of Fame
No, no, no, no no...
Purestriker
Legend
Exactly. Women are actually pretty honest on their ratings.
HBK4life
Hall of Fame
In area the women want to get bumped up. As it is a sign of you know improving and playing at the correct level.
HBK4life
Hall of Fame
The same reason Kramer in Seinfeld was in a karate class with kids.
happyandbob
Legend
A friend of mine played football at Amherst. He said Rick Fox (who played for the Celtics at the time) and Rick's brother (or friend) used to come into the Amherst gym all the time and play pick up basketball with the students. One time the brother threw up an alley oop and Rick dunked on my friend -- screaming "OOOOOOH!" in his face afterwards. My friend still chuckles about how insecure do you need to be that a professional basketball player needs to come dominate some 19 year old kids playing pickup basketball
HBK4life
Hall of Fame
Sounds like they would fit right in with the usta.
am1899
Legend
Some people care more about winning than their own or the game’s integrity.
schmke
Legend
There is a women's 2.5 Nationals, but not men's.
ErrorMachine
Rookie
I think the chart creates strong groups but people inflate their ratings, making each group weaker than it is. I’m an example. I should be a 3.0, but self rated at 3.5 because that’s where most people play. I’m youngish and have fast modern strokes, but as the name suggests I’m an error machine. People forget the errors and just see the flash and assume I’m a 4.5+. I tell them I’m a 3.0 trying to make it in the 3.5, to which they say I’m a sandbagger and have no business in 3.5, let alone 3.0. Sure I played top varsity doubs as a sophomore in high school, but I probably won 5-6 matches over those 3 seasons. I was a small fish in a tennis mud puddle and didn’t have a real coach (except for LeeD and Kiteboard here online).
I think if more people by the chart we would have a stronger tournament experience.
I think if more people by the chart we would have a stronger tournament experience.
Unless they were granted a self-rating appeal. If they just happened to omit that they played D1 tennis, yes, slam dunk grievance, but if you self-rate and feel you should be lower, you can file an appeal and a committee will decide your fate based on the rationale you give for the lower rating. Like, is this player actually a ringer? Or do they have a legitimate reason to playing a lower level? Twenty years is a long time. A lot can happen.
happyandbob
Legend
Update, the self-rater subtly changed the spelling of their last name when they signed up for USTA. My friend laughed and accused them of trying to prevent being linked to college results.
happyandbob
Legend
.
This is the thing that perplexes me. I feel happy that I won 3.5 tournament last year and now I'm a 4.0 and if I get bumped down to 3.5, I don't think I'd get the same satisfaction. If I somehow ended up 3.0, I definitely wouldn't have fun in winning. So how does someone who's competed and won against other d1 players take joy in getting wins vs. 3.5s? Maybe he's playing w/ his non-dominant hand or maybe he's had hip surgery and can't run? I'm curious about what makes your friend's thought process. Changing the name seems pretty intentional and deliberate.
Thats the million $ question many of us ask here.
happyandbob
Legend
It turns out the player has been hitting again for a few years before self-rating as a 3.5... because they want to play competitive tennis without having to actually compete.
silverwyvern4
Semi-Pro
Our section doesn't even require you to give your name when you sign up for USTA. You can just put "X X as your name.
On that chart what's the difference between:
- Played or commited to play for a Division II,III or NAIA College Team
- Played for a DII, III or NAIA college and I or my team were unranked or ranked out tof the top 10 in ITA rankings
Yeah it's a bit confusing. The first row you listed seems like it's mostly there to encompass those who "commited to play" for those colleges but didn't actually play, whereas for those who actually played in those colleges, there are multiple rows depending on how highly ranked the player or team were. The wording could be improved and consolidated.
johnmccabe
Hall of Fame
Not trying to defend this 3.5. one of our local 4.5 likes to manage his rating to 4.0 and play national. He actually convinced me that he just genuinely wants to play against players from different areas. He admitted that he can't compete at 4.5 national. I'm coming around to think not all sandbaggers are bad people.
Sandbaggers, so to speak, are what keep USTA leagues going. People love to complain about them, which is part of the fun, and they also love to play against them, despite the occasional sore loser we encounter. I now think the regulations are designed to allow sandbagging without making it too obvious, and, frankly, it's quite a subtle and admirable bit of administration.
FuzzyYellowBalls
Legend
Lol, then he can just travel and enter tournaments, even UTR ones. As I collect sandbagging stories and my own experiences in post season I do know some who do it to get out of town and out of sight of their significant others, you'd be amazed how people behave at these things.
FuzzyYellowBalls
Legend
Haha, sure. It's not a proactive administration planning on opening the faucet a tiny bit to allow sandbagging, it's not enough resources and some subtle favoritism from within. Omg, to give credit to the USTA that they designed a system for for sandbagging, clever thought, ridiculous though.
As someone who's been stuck at the low end of my level for several years, I can understand wanting to set yourself up to be good at your level. When I was at the high end of the lower level, it was really enjoyable experience - getting invited to lots of different teams, playing in team playoffs, going deep in individual tournaments - so many opportunites for good competitive tennis experiences.
I've still been enjoying playing since then. I actually enjoy being the underdog, which is probably why I haven't been bumped down in 6 years - I fight really hard against better players and apparently get enough games and occasional upsets to keep my rating up. But it would be nice to be able to sign up for a tournament without the most likely outcome being one-and-done. It'd be nice to play league in the post season on more than very rare occasions (and not getting absolutely demolished when I do).
I think that USTA occasionally shifting the boundaries of the levels would go a long way to improving things. Imagine if every other year they switched the ranges, so for example in even years 4.0 was the current range of 3.51-4.00, and in odd years it was 3.76-4.25.
I've still been enjoying playing since then. I actually enjoy being the underdog, which is probably why I haven't been bumped down in 6 years - I fight really hard against better players and apparently get enough games and occasional upsets to keep my rating up. But it would be nice to be able to sign up for a tournament without the most likely outcome being one-and-done. It'd be nice to play league in the post season on more than very rare occasions (and not getting absolutely demolished when I do).
I think that USTA occasionally shifting the boundaries of the levels would go a long way to improving things. Imagine if every other year they switched the ranges, so for example in even years 4.0 was the current range of 3.51-4.00, and in odd years it was 3.76-4.25.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
How about the old fashioned route of improving to get higher in your rating level? Get a coach, practice often, get fitter etc.
Last edited:
Yes I should have mentioned I enjoy pursuing that goal too, though it's become harder every year with age. My practice and improvement efforts probably kept my aging limbs from dropping me to the lower level. Kind of ironic that if I had practiced less, I would have a better W/L record the past couple of years (though at the lower level).
Most folks I know don't care to get a higher rating level enough to put in the work it would take to move up a level or two. Most of us are middle aged folks who just want to play fair/competitive matches 2-3 times a week. We have to put in enough effort at home, work, etc. Tennis is an outlet for recreation/escape/excercise, not a job for most of us. Nor do we want it to be.
Yes I work out w/ weights primarily to keep myself injury free and I spend time w/ yoga/foam rolling and doing sucky things like glute medius strengthening. If I were trying to get faster/stronger, I'd need another weekly weight session. If it were just playing more tennis or doing lessons, it'd be great.
I don't mind playing players who are legitimately improving and I congratulate them as they progress. One guy I played with has only been playing tennis for 1 year and although I won 2 & 2, I can already see in a year or two, he will turn the tides. probably another year or two after that before USTA catches up and bumps him and in that time he'll be very popular for leagues! I've only had one experience w/ a player who was tanking/managing his score and it was unpleasant (obviously I "won" a waste of time). Those are negative sandbagging experiences.
I don't mind playing players who are legitimately improving and I congratulate them as they progress. One guy I played with has only been playing tennis for 1 year and although I won 2 & 2, I can already see in a year or two, he will turn the tides. probably another year or two after that before USTA catches up and bumps him and in that time he'll be very popular for leagues! I've only had one experience w/ a player who was tanking/managing his score and it was unpleasant (obviously I "won" a waste of time). Those are negative sandbagging experiences.
