I heard that 6-0;6-0 won't be considered in the NTRP calcuation. Is it still true? If so, how could usta bump up a player with winning two matches as 0&0?

At a May seminar with USTA officials I learned that the NTRP software has modified to be able to differentiate between a 6-0, 6-0 default and an actual result. I was informed that 6-0, 6-0 match results will be factored into NTRP ratings beginning 2013.

Before it was pretty easy to find USTA district websites where they said the double bagels were ignored. I cannot find any now so perhaps this omission supports what Bruce heard.

Hi, had this come up last night at a match. If your goal is to move up, should you try to drop one game in a match that you are easily winning. Have had 3 matches this season that have been 6-0, 6-0 wins. Would hate to have them not count towards a ratings bump. One pro at my club said they count, another said they don't and are thrown out like a default.

The thing I don't understand is that when you enter scores you indicate whether it is a default or a completed match so why did the computer have a problem with it in the first place?

My understanding is that with the way they rate players the very top 4.0 should beat the very bottom 4.0 ... 6-0, 6-0. The same is true in the other divisions. The belief is that the doubles bagels will also happen if a 4.0 is playing a 3.5, a 3.0 or a 2.5. So the double bagel gives you no indication of how much better you were on a given day other than to say there is at least 1 full rating level difference, but it could be much more than that. If they chose to include double bagels then it is possible that when a self rated 2.5 plays an open tourney and loses 0,0 to a 5.5 he would end up with a 5.0 rating because 5.0's are also supposed to lose that bad to real 5.5s. All of this is just a guess but it makes sense to me.

Both pros are kinda right... 0 & 0 scores count when it comes to evaluating a strike for DQ, but they do not effect your dynamic rating.

The DQ thing still confuses me. I posted awhile back about a stretch I had this past season in which I won 4 consecutive matches over a 3 week span by the combined score of 48-4 (1-0, 2-1, 0-0, 0-0) and I didn't get DQ'd. (I'm currently a self-rated 4.0) 3 out of the 4 opponents were very weak, but one of the 0-0 wins was against someone who had a winning record. Go figure.

I see two variations when dealing with double bagels and including them in a NTRP algorithm: a) Double Bagel from a Self-Rated Player: There is no mathematically correct way to measure a double bagel except as a strike for a self-rated. I am not sure how the algorithm will change, but there is no reference point from which to begin a measurement if the score is 6-0, 6-0 when the Self-rated player wins 0&0. Now if the USTA starts counting points for / against when there is a double bagel, you would have a measuring stick. This isn't going to happen as it would require scorekeeper anytime a self-rated player plays. b) Double Bagel from a B or C rated player: The algorithm could change to make double bagels become a factor for players with a B or C rating and this would make sense. One 4.0 B/C beats another 4.0 A/B/C/M/S by the score 6-0, 6-0. Since both players have DNTRPs, the USTA could place a specific value to the double bagel and bump one player's DNTRP up and the other's DNTRP down. Strikes aren't a factor as the B/C player can't get a strike. Does this make sense OrangePower? Am I missing something here with my thoughts. Typing with a headache.

Yes this would make sense as long as the two players are somewhat close to one another in DNTRP to begin with (maybe 0.5 or 0.75, but I'm guessing here)... in which case an adjustment could be made that is similar to (but slightly more extreme than) a 6-1, 6-0 score. But if the players are further apart in DNTRP, a 6-1, 6-0 score might actually *increase* the rating of the loser !!! And there is no way to evaluate 0 & 0 in this case. So my guess is that to keep things clean and simple, USTA decided to just disregard 0 & 0 completely from rating, rather than have to deal with various cases in different ways.