USTA ratings cheater in Greensboro, NC?

J

Julieta

Guest
I strongly disagree. I think you underestimate the strength of a 5.0+ game. Quite frankly, (and as somebody who has taken long, long breaks from the game), a 5.0+ player CAN play with other 5.0's etc within a couple hours of practice. Often within about 10 min. assuming they're reasonably fit. Will they be at their sharpest? Absolutely not. Will they beat the regular competitor of equal level? No. But they will be able to rally and practice reasonably VERY quickly. In point of fact, any 5.5 player who goes out for a couple practice hits and is "fit" should then completely outmatch any 4.0 player. He could only lose if he is EXTREMELY mentally weak but even that is not likely given his past experience.

Yes, maybe an advanced player returning to competitive tennis cannot immediately expect to win against other 5.0's, but if he just practices regularly for a month or 2, he'll be just fine. Nor should he get ANY SATISFACTION, no matter how rusty he is, taking out 4.0's. If you're an open player, go practice for a bit, you already have the strokes and the competitive experience, all you need is to get a bit of timing back. Then you're good to at least start at the 5.0 level.

I agree 100% with your post for the 5.0+ college player. But not all people who played college tennis were that level. I can think of examples for both extremes. I know one player who would be described as a 6.0-6.5 level college player. Top ranked, All-American, deep into the NCAA draws, wins over players whose names we would all know. This player now never plays, is past 35, doesn't work in the tennis industry and has had a few too many business lunches. But, nevertheless, it would probably only take him a month or maybe less to whip up on some seasoned 5.0s. Looks like a tour player out on the court rallying even when out of shape. This person has no business playing 4.0 and wouldn't want to anyway, unless it was combo doubles with a friend or something.

The other side and I actually know a few of these, the #6 and up players, the players that never play on schools with huge rosters, etc. etc. They were 4.0 maybe 4.5 players in college. Years pass without playing. It is not as easy for them to turn it back on and they would not have been competitive at the 5.0 level in college either. I know someone who played D1 tennis who returned to competition and lost matches to 4.0 players in our city league.

I just think we need to look at the situation before we immediately label everyone who has ever played college tennis as practically pro level jerks who want to spend their weekends beating up on 4.0 systems analysts. There are people who break the rules and they should not get away with it. But there are other people who fall into the gray areas.
 

kylebarendrick

Professional
They may fall into the gray areas talent wise, but there is no gray area to answering "no" on the self-rating form when it asks if you played D1 tennis when, in fact, you did.
 
J

Julieta

Guest
They may fall into the gray areas talent wise, but there is no gray area to answering "no" on the self-rating form when it asks if you played D1 tennis when, in fact, you did.

When did they start self-ratings by the way?
 

bet

Banned
I agree 100% with your post for the 5.0+ college player. But not all people who played college tennis were that level. I can think of examples for both extremes. I know one player who would be described as a 6.0-6.5 level college player. Top ranked, All-American, deep into the NCAA draws, wins over players whose names we would all know. This player now never plays, is past 35, doesn't work in the tennis industry and has had a few too many business lunches. But, nevertheless, it would probably only take him a month or maybe less to whip up on some seasoned 5.0s. Looks like a tour player out on the court rallying even when out of shape. This person has no business playing 4.0 and wouldn't want to anyway, unless it was combo doubles with a friend or something.

.

Sure, that's true! But you've changed the scenario that was being talked about and that you presented. If the person was never a 5.0 then of course he cannot play 5.0 and in fact, he WILL stay at 4.0 for a long timeyou were saying he might not), because that's all he ever was at his best!

But certainly if you want to assert that the term "college" player is a blanket one with much variability, I certainly agree.
 
J

Julieta

Guest
Sure, that's true! But you've changed the scenario that was being talked about and that you presented. If the person was never a 5.0 then of course he cannot play 5.0 and in fact, he WILL stay at 4.0 for a long timeyou were saying he might not), because that's all he ever was at his best!

But certainly if you want to assert that the term "college" player is a blanket one with much variability, I certainly agree.

I didn't communicate it very well. I guess I was thinking of the more borderline cases being forced to play 5.0 just because they played "college tennis" but I didn't express that very well. I guess because I assume the college "stars" aren't in the equation.
 

bet

Banned
I didn't communicate it very well. I guess I was thinking of the more borderline cases being forced to play 5.0 just because they played "college tennis" but I didn't express that very well. I guess because I assume the college "stars" aren't in the equation.

Fair enough! We're pretty much in agreement then :)
 

bet

Banned
While we wait for someone who can give a precise answer: somewhere between 5 and 10 years ago.


what?? Oh no no no! It got heavily pushed in the late 80's and early 90's, I remember doing attending some coaching clinics that were devoted to it, we were supposed to do ratings sessions where I and at least one other coach would rate club players.

It was around in the 80's but I don't think it was very popular. When it started, I'm not sure.
 

amarone

Semi-Pro
what?? Oh no no no! It got heavily pushed in the late 80's and early 90's, I remember doing attending some coaching clinics that were devoted to it, we were supposed to do ratings sessions where I and at least one other coach would rate club players.

It was around in the 80's but I don't think it was very popular. When it started, I'm not sure.
When I started playing USTA, in about 1998, you had to go to a clinic to be rated by pros. At least, you did in Atlanta - I don't know if other areas differed. At some point over the following 5 years, it changed to self-rating.
 

JavierLW

Hall of Fame
Another problem with USTA leauge is, if you rout a person in singles like 0 and 1 you get flagged or bumped. But the computer doesnt consider how bad the opponent is which is the problem.

Yes it does. Go to www.usta.com and read about how the Dynamic Rating System works. It's based off of your opponent's rating, not just the simple game score.
 

JLyon

Hall of Fame
When I started playing USTA, in about 1998, you had to go to a clinic to be rated by pros. At least, you did in Atlanta - I don't know if other areas differed. At some point over the following 5 years, it changed to self-rating.

Dallas was doing verification clinics as well in 1998, of course they were a joke you just said what you wanted and typically got it.
 

JavierLW

Hall of Fame
When I started playing USTA, in about 1998, you had to go to a clinic to be rated by pros. At least, you did in Atlanta - I don't know if other areas differed. At some point over the following 5 years, it changed to self-rating.

Clinics were around until the 2003 season I think. (I self rated in 2002, I think that was the last year) Some sections may of started self rating earlier as a test in 2002.

I had a player in 1999 not get his 3.0 rating for my 3.0 team once. It was weird because I had beaten the guy in some club league and I was not even a great 3.0 player at the time.

When you think about it, there is no way those things were ever effective, usually they shoved you on a court with 3 different randomly leveled players and you only played some games for 30 minutes. There are all sorts of things wrong with that picture to me.

Half the time when a club pro rates you they hit around with you 1 on 1 for 20-30 minutes and they get it wrong.
 
I started playing league back around 98 or 99 and I had to go to a ratings clinic to get rated. We played one set of singles and one set of mixed doubles with other players (we gave them a rating we though we were and they put us in a group with similar players). I went out and just had an awesome day, beating a recent Div I college player 6-1 and then handily winning my mixed doubles match so they rated me a 5.0. I was not a 5.0 then and am not a 5.0 now. I had to sit out for 3 years and then was able to be rated 4.5. Ratings clinics are tough b/c somebody could be out of their mind good or could be just overly nervous one day.
 

penang

Rookie
I hate this type of crap. I wish the USTA would give out a lifetime suspension to the captain and the player. Then, they should publish that they are going to do this on a regular basis in every section's newsletter! Problem solved!

Unfortunately, the USTA doesn't give a damn and is more than happy to take his $23 for every team he cares to sign up for.

I agree if indefinite suspension to a player and captain. And the season is over for the team as well. The team members cheat too because they already know who is not in the same playing level.
Oh ya! with $23 you can get away from from anything you were accused wrong doing in any USTA League Tournament.
 

safins back

New User
I don't see where the problem is. The guy Payne has cheated or whoever filled out his self rate form has cheated period! It's cut and dry and an injustice was done and as soon as the first person caught it and southern tennis was made aware of it he should've been gone end, of discussion. What difference does it make if the guy he beat is a jerk or not. Lying is lying and cheating is cheating and he has done both!
 
I don't see where the problem is. The guy Payne has cheated or whoever filled out his self rate form has cheated period! It's cut and dry and an injustice was done and as soon as the first person caught it and southern tennis was made aware of it he should've been gone end, of discussion. What difference does it make if the guy he beat is a jerk or not. Lying is lying and cheating is cheating and he has done both!

Nobody ever said that it was ok b/c the guy he beat is a jerk. If you actually read through the post my post stated:

The guy he beat 0 and 1 in the state finals or semi-finals is pretty darn good as well (a total jerk in my experience but very good).

Then you asked me why I thought he was a jerk and I explained. It had nothing to do with the Payne guy. I actually totally agree that letting Payne rate as a 4.0 is tantamount to cheating. I filled out a self rating form for a player before and if he had filled it out honestly he should have been at least rated 5.0 but would have most likely been rated 5.5.

The way you worded your response makes me wonder if you are Cooke.
 

safins back

New User
No I am not but again that's not the issue. The issue is why is he allowed to cheat and everyone else isn't allowed to? I do know Shawn and he isn't a jerk as far as I know and I have played on lots of teams with him and even against him. You are entitled to your opinions as am I. Do not lose sight of the OP ratings cheater, thats what he is and his team as well because they knew he cheated and all of them should be banned.
 

GSOPlayer

New User
No I am not but again that's not the issue. The issue is why is he allowed to cheat and everyone else isn't allowed to? I do know Shawn and he isn't a jerk as far as I know and I have played on lots of teams with him and even against him. You are entitled to your opinions as am I. Do not lose sight of the OP ratings cheater, thats what he is and his team as well because they knew he cheated and all of them should be banned.

Yep, can't argue your point. You must be Cory! :)
 
Well, I do know that while at VT, this Mr. Payne was awarded the Most Improved player in 1988 and given the Bernstine Award (Team Spirit) in 1988 as well. Maybe he just improved a great deal this year. He was not good enough to play in most of the regular season teams matches and did not make the cut during the preliminary matches at states. He could have been down in Hilton Head getting lessons during that time. So he could have gotten the Most Improved Player for the GSO team as well. 20 year bookends to the award for most improved. Not sure if he could have gotten the Williams Award (the name of the award for the Team Spirit of the GSO team in honor of David Williams). Although David did get the Award named after him thru his early commitment to the team by self rating himself a 3.5 (after college tennis at NAIA level) for the 7.5 team. Can we say Double Bookends?
 

GSOPlayer

New User
Not sure if he could have gotten the Williams Award (the name of the award for the Team Spirit of the GSO team in honor of David Williams). Although David did get the Award named after him thru his early commitment to the team by self rating himself a 3.5 (after college tennis at NAIA level) for the 7.5 team. Can we say Double Bookends?

WOOOOHAHAHAHA!!! Stop it John, you're killing me. Good one!
 
Actually, the computer does take into account how bad the other players are. There are players you can rout 0 and 1 and not get flagged. There are also players you can play 3 and 3 and still get flagged because they were at the top of the rating too.

how does this "flag" business work?
 

tennisjudge

New User
judge is here

There is cheating everywhere. The most cheating is in ga. 3.5 atlanta team destroys competition. All comes down to the captain. One can play the system by telling higher level players to lose during the season on different teams. Playing players at lower positions (three doubles) knowing when the team takes three points, tanking will be done. Nothing we can do about this. Computer system for college players for usta did not start until 2001 in ga. If you get in your college play before 2001, you cannot find too much information about that player. Division I can play 4.5 until 36 years old or above. Than you can play 4.0. You can complain all you want, noone really knows how the computer will react. Sooner or later those players will be caught or bumped or seldon dqed. It takes two years to have a championship team. It takes a great captain who knows his stuff and all the tricks to have a great team. Behind a great team is a great captain. System blows, but how can you fix it. You cant.... It can only be improved...

Judge has spoken...
 
J

Julieta

Guest
The reason I asked about self rates is that I think there are a lot of people in the system who were never rated at a clinic or self rated. For example if you never played league but had a usta membership for tournament play - if you sign up for a league do you have to self rate?
 

fe6250

Semi-Pro
I still find it comical the amount of effort people are willing to put into amateur tennis to win a fountain pen! Give me a break already - anyone else just playing for the good exercise and good competition?
 

raiden031

Legend
There is cheating everywhere. The most cheating is in ga. 3.5 atlanta team destroys competition. All comes down to the captain. One can play the system by telling higher level players to lose during the season on different teams. Playing players at lower positions (three doubles) knowing when the team takes three points, tanking will be done. Nothing we can do about this. Computer system for college players for usta did not start until 2001 in ga. If you get in your college play before 2001, you cannot find too much information about that player. Division I can play 4.5 until 36 years old or above. Than you can play 4.0. You can complain all you want, noone really knows how the computer will react. Sooner or later those players will be caught or bumped or seldon dqed. It takes two years to have a championship team. It takes a great captain who knows his stuff and all the tricks to have a great team. Behind a great team is a great captain. System blows, but how can you fix it. You cant.... It can only be improved...

Judge has spoken...

I still find it comical the amount of effort people are willing to put into amateur tennis to win a fountain pen! Give me a break already - anyone else just playing for the good exercise and good competition?

I was on a team like this, having won 3.0 Nationals. Two of our guys self-rated at 3.0, but probably could play 4.0. We had 2 guys appeal down after last year, who could hold their own at 3.5. Then there's me who is a player that just missed the bump last year, but got alot better between seasons.

While it was a great experience to play and win at Nationals, there has always been that feeling inside that some of us didn't belong there. For critical matches during the season, I was typically the guy who played #2 singles and #3 doubles because strategically it was a guaranteed win, but I wasn't a guaranteed win at #1 because there's always a few 'bagger self-rates scattered around the league playing those spots, and thats where our two self-rates would come into play.

My captain and co-captain were very enthusiastic about winning these championships. I can understand the feeling they get about winning a championship even if it is some arbitrary skill level, but what I don't get is some of the things they are willing to do to ensure victory. I'm all about playing where there is tough competition and something at stake. Its hard to pretend that Nationals doesn't matter when you are there and preparing for a match. You cannot help but want to win so bad. Its just when I look back I wonder whether it was fair that we had the team that we had.
 

kylebarendrick

Professional
Raiden, I played at 3.0 nationals 2 years ago. We finished fourth (losing to your captain's team in the consolation match). In the grand scheme of things, winning (or finishing 4th) at 3.0 nationals means you suck. Same goes for the 3.5s, 4.0s, etc. Have fun and enjoy the experience, but there isn't any great meaning to it.

If I read things correctly, your captains play very little and remain 3.0s. I'd rather play and get better than continually work to assemble teams of ringers and watch them play at nationals.

Your situation seems very similar to mine. I'd played 3.0, didn't get bumped, got better, had a very good season, and finally got the bump to 3.5. Keep looking for chances to play better players and enjoy the sport. Good luck finding a 4.0 team this year - I'll be doing the same.
 

goober

Legend
Its just when I look back I wonder whether it was fair that we had the team that we had.

Fair to whom? Let's face it when you get to Nationals the team that wins pretty much has better or more ringers/appealers/sandbaggers than the other teams. The other teams would have done the same thing if they access to the same type of players. That's the nature of the beast.
 
Amarone,

That pertains to where people have to initially self rate at. With computer rating, the ratings guidelines are irrelevant. Even a person who truthfully answers the self rating questions can appeal their rating.
 

Z-Man

Professional
There is cheating everywhere. The most cheating is in ga. 3.5 atlanta team destroys competition. All comes down to the captain. One can play the system by telling higher level players to lose during the season on different teams. Playing players at lower positions (three doubles) knowing when the team takes three points, tanking will be done. Nothing we can do about this. Computer system for college players for usta did not start until 2001 in ga. If you get in your college play before 2001, you cannot find too much information about that player. Division I can play 4.5 until 36 years old or above. Than you can play 4.0. You can complain all you want, noone really knows how the computer will react. Sooner or later those players will be caught or bumped or seldon dqed. It takes two years to have a championship team. It takes a great captain who knows his stuff and all the tricks to have a great team. Behind a great team is a great captain. System blows, but how can you fix it. You cant.... It can only be improved...

Judge has spoken...

It really is pretty silly in GA. I played a guy last weekend who was supposed to be a 4.5. I googled his name, and it turns out he left college after 1 year to go pro. He won two satellite tournaments before hanging it up. It was fun getting a chance to see that kind of player close up, but he was kind of a loudmouth. He was about two levels above me. If I was that good, playing against people I knew I would beat, I would be nicer. His partner, who was supposed to be a 4.0, is better than the 4.5s I play with. I guess he's a 5.0, but if all the 5.0s and 5.5s are sandbagging down into 4.5, I'd hate to see what's lurking in 5.0 in ATL. Their #2 team had another 5.0+ player who was rated 4.5. He played D1 tennis and still plays some open tournaments. Part of me was annoyed that these guys were so loaded up, but another part of me was glad to get a chance to see that kind of competition. It really let me know where I stand and helped me reflect on what I need to do to improve.

I think the only answer is that more people should be bumped to 5.0. If 5.0 was big enough, the crazy good ringers would get out of 4.5, and the low level 4.5s playing 4.0 might move up. That would take pressure off of 3.5 and so on.
 

bet

Banned
It really is pretty silly in GA. I played a guy last weekend who was supposed to be a 4.5. I googled his name, and it turns out he left college after 1 year to go pro. He won two satellite tournaments before hanging it up. It was fun getting a chance to see that kind of player close up, but he was kind of a loudmouth. He was about two levels above me. If I was that good, playing against people I knew I would beat, I would be nicer.

Even if he were very nice, or acted very nice, he would still be an INCREDIBLE LOSER. Assuming he's under say....55 yrs old.
 

amarone

Semi-Pro
It really is pretty silly in GA. I played a guy last weekend who was supposed to be a 4.5. I googled his name, and it turns out he left college after 1 year to go pro. He won two satellite tournaments before hanging it up. It was fun getting a chance to see that kind of player close up, but he was kind of a loudmouth. He was about two levels above me. If I was that good, playing against people I knew I would beat, I would be nicer. His partner, who was supposed to be a 4.0, is better than the 4.5s I play with. I guess he's a 5.0, but if all the 5.0s and 5.5s are sandbagging down into 4.5, I'd hate to see what's lurking in 5.0 in ATL. Their #2 team had another 5.0+ player who was rated 4.5. He played D1 tennis and still plays some open tournaments. Part of me was annoyed that these guys were so loaded up, but another part of me was glad to get a chance to see that kind of competition. It really let me know where I stand and helped me reflect on what I need to do to improve.

I think the only answer is that more people should be bumped to 5.0. If 5.0 was big enough, the crazy good ringers would get out of 4.5, and the low level 4.5s playing 4.0 might move up. That would take pressure off of 3.5 and so on.
Are these players self-rated? If so, are you prepared to raise a grievance or at least name names so they can be investigated? You can email me if you prefer that to posting.
 

Z-Man

Professional
I really don't want to get anyone in trouble. I take tennis seriously, but this USTA stuff is just for kicks. If 5.0+ players want to waste their time beating up on me, that's fine. I'll keep getting better and they'll keep getting worse. I try to play with the best players who will tollerate me. It's always that way with teams from ATL. Lots of former college players move there and they can play each other or ALTA, which keeps them out of the USTA system. Then they load up a team and cruise through to sectionals. It's all the same people every year. One of the guys on that combo team beat me in the finals of 4.0 last year. He hasn't lost yet as a 4.5, but because of the rules, he can still play 8.5 combo this year as 4.0. (Dude, if you're reading this, I'm working on my 120mph serve, so watch out!) The funny thing is that I play on a 4.0 team and there was almost a fight at one match because the other team accused me and my friend of being ringers and losing games on purpose. Then we both got destroyed at state by 5.0+ players. I guess it's all relative. A sandbagger during the season can become a liability at state...
 
Last edited:
J

Julieta

Guest
It really is pretty silly in GA. I played a guy last weekend who was supposed to be a 4.5. I googled his name, and it turns out he left college after 1 year to go pro. He won two satellite tournaments before hanging it up. It was fun getting a chance to see that kind of player close up, but he was kind of a loudmouth. He was about two levels above me. If I was that good, playing against people I knew I would beat, I would be nicer. His partner, who was supposed to be a 4.0, is better than the 4.5s I play with. I guess he's a 5.0, but if all the 5.0s and 5.5s are sandbagging down into 4.5, I'd hate to see what's lurking in 5.0 in ATL. Their #2 team had another 5.0+ player who was rated 4.5. He played D1 tennis and still plays some open tournaments. Part of me was annoyed that these guys were so loaded up, but another part of me was glad to get a chance to see that kind of competition. It really let me know where I stand and helped me reflect on what I need to do to improve.

.


Ugh, I totally agree. If a player is going to do that, at least be nice and do it for the right reasons. Perhaps he is getting paid. Or he is just a creep. I know I would have no problem with someone playing "down" (within reason) if they just wanted to play with their friend or something and they were nice and made it fun for everyone. If the person is truly at a high level, they should recognize the situation and act accordingly. They should be good enough to play a game that they can extend points and make it a good match for all players, kind of like a pro-am or something, no trash talking, showing off, hooking or whatever. And of course not show up at sectionals and things like that.
 

amarone

Semi-Pro
I really don't want to get anyone in trouble. I take tennis seriously, but this USTA stuff is just for kicks. If 5.0+ players want to waste their time beating up on me, that's fine.
The problem is that when tennis players in Atlanta are asked what their biggest issue is with USTA, sandbagging is far and away the number one response. Some people do not play because of this issue. It does not take many sandbaggers to spoil things for everyone else.

Atlanta is penalized by special rules that mean that at many levels only one in sixty four teams gets to go to the State Championships. Hence just one team of sandbaggers can spoil things for 63 others.

My view is that it is not a matter of "getting anyone in trouble", but that if there are known cases of players deliberately self-rating at the wrong level, we need to get them out of there and bumped up to the correct level.
 

ohplease

Professional
Atlanta is penalized by special rules that mean that at many levels only one in sixty four teams gets to go to the State Championships. Hence just one team of sandbaggers can spoil things for 63 others.

Many metro areas w/big tennis scenes have similar problems. San Francisco, for example, can often feature 1 team out of 18 or 20 getting to districts - which is really only a chance at sectionals. In fact, in norcal's biggest levels, it's not uncommon to have only around 5-10% of the teams participating in districts, and <1% of the teams at sectionals.

There's no state title, but if you wanted to represent norcal at nationals, you've got to be the last team standing of literally hundreds of teams, after months of local and regional playoffs. Forget a couple of sandbaggers, you'd need a full on system of recruiting + player rotations to avoid fatigue to even be a serious part of the conversation.
 

mental midget

Hall of Fame
pathetic. unless there is money involved, of course.

kidding. honestly, why would anyone who considers themselves a real athlete take any pleasure beating up on people far below their skill level? isn't it about seeing how good a player you can stay competitive with? i get impatient and bored playing people who don't challenge me, and i don't think i'm that special in this regard.
 

raiden031

Legend
The problem is that when tennis players in Atlanta are asked what their biggest issue is with USTA, sandbagging is far and away the number one response. Some people do not play because of this issue. It does not take many sandbaggers to spoil things for everyone else.

I don't get it why someone would choose not to play on a league because of sandbaggers. Who wouldn't like to play tougher competition rather than easier competition? I think you have to be reasonable and expect that the odds of winning championships are pretty low and just try to enjoy the competition as it comes. I would never quit because I can't be on a winning team because there are too many sandbaggers.

It seems there is a huge conflict between players and captains in my area. Most players are frustrated that they have weak partners or weak opponents, and are trying to play up at higher levels where matches are more fun. Most captains want people who are above and beyond the skill level the team is playing at, so often you find people playing at a level they don't belong.
 

onehandbh

G.O.A.T.
It can go pretty far, though. I know someone who was self-rated
as a 2.0. This guy's beaten a guy who's probably about a 4.0+.
He's also played for many years and hits fairly hard and plays
almost every day. Pretty ridiculous.
 

kellywilson

New User
Wow, I sign up for this message board and, surprise, there are complaints about me!!!

First, let's begin with the fact that I had a computer-rating of 5.0, and not a self-rating. So if you have any issues about my rating you should take those to the USTA and not make attacks against me. Every match and tournament that I have played is listed on the USTA website, as well as my resume on my club's website, so to call me a "cheater" is way out of bounds. Calling me a cheater implies that I tried to decieve or manipulate others during the ratings process, and this is blatantly false. If you review my results you will see that I have won several gold balls, won many 5.0 matches easily, etc. Obviously I have done nothing except try my hardest to win every match that I play. You need to back off of your personal attack against me and re-direct your frustration to the appropriate target, namely, the USTA.

As far as how satisfying can it be to only lose 1 game in 5 matches- it was very satisfying, thank you very much. I beat a 4.5 player who broke all of her strings in the first set and had to borrow a racquet, and another player who retired after 4 games, and 2 other ladies who were nearly 50 years old playing their 4th and 5th matches in the 108 degree heat.

Regarding why I played USTA, I played for the same reason that everyone else plays, for the love of the game and to play with friends. Our group had several strong players and felt that we had a shot at the National Championship so we went for it. "Giving up 4 days of lesson money"? I don't teach Friday - Sunday. And paid for playing???? In my dreams!!!

The rating system has worked as I have been bumped up for next season. You should get your facts straight and stop the attack on me.

Merry Christmas!
 

smoothtennis

Hall of Fame
Wow, I sign up for this message board and, surprise, there are complaints about me!!!

First, let's begin with the fact that I had a computer-rating of 5.0, and not a self-rating. So if you have any issues about my rating you should take those to the USTA and not make attacks against me. Every match and tournament that I have played is listed on the USTA website, as well as my resume on my club's website, so to call me a "cheater" is way out of bounds. Calling me a cheater implies that I tried to decieve or manipulate others during the ratings process, and this is blatantly false. If you review my results you will see that I have won several gold balls, won many 5.0 matches easily, etc. Obviously I have done nothing except try my hardest to win every match that I play. You need to back off of your personal attack against me and re-direct your frustration to the appropriate target, namely, the USTA.

As far as how satisfying can it be to only lose 1 game in 5 matches- it was very satisfying, thank you very much. I beat a 4.5 player who broke all of her strings in the first set and had to borrow a racquet, and another player who retired after 4 games, and 2 other ladies who were nearly 50 years old playing their 4th and 5th matches in the 108 degree heat.

Regarding why I played USTA, I played for the same reason that everyone else plays, for the love of the game and to play with friends. Our group had several strong players and felt that we had a shot at the National Championship so we went for it. "Giving up 4 days of lesson money"? I don't teach Friday - Sunday. And paid for playing???? In my dreams!!!

The rating system has worked as I have been bumped up for next season. You should get your facts straight and stop the attack on me.

Merry Christmas!

Kelly - I have only read this thread every so often, pretty cool to have you come in here and make the appearance. Love it.

I am not one of these ratings junkies or compainers about sandbaggers all the time here, but I have a serious question.

How would you as a former WTA professional tour player, get a 5.0 rating from the USTA? When I started playing my first year, I had to self rate to get into the system. I didn't know there was any other way to get a rating to start off with.

As to why it was still fun to play 5.0 players for you, how well did these ladies play? I guess they were able to make the games somewhat competitive or did you find it to be a pretty clear mis-match in skills, and the mental game? That is not a set up question - I have just always been curious how someone in the top 200-300 still plays once they are off the tour for a while. I would have been telling all my friends that if I got to play you! :mrgreen:
 

JavierLW

Hall of Fame
I don't get it why someone would choose not to play on a league because of sandbaggers. Who wouldn't like to play tougher competition rather than easier competition? I think you have to be reasonable and expect that the odds of winning championships are pretty low and just try to enjoy the competition as it comes. I would never quit because I can't be on a winning team because there are too many sandbaggers.

It seems there is a huge conflict between players and captains in my area. Most players are frustrated that they have weak partners or weak opponents, and are trying to play up at higher levels where matches are more fun. Most captains want people who are above and beyond the skill level the team is playing at, so often you find people playing at a level they don't belong.

You are right about the motivation for actually playing. It's not worth quitting over.

But it's amazing because sometimes the biggest quitters are some of these people who are only out there to win a pen, when they finally do get moved up sometimes they disapear rather than end up on some 5th place team at the higher level.

Sandbagging is still a problem. Most players sign up to play the actual whole season (which is mostly the local league), and it would be nice if the winner was decided by the team that actually played the best tennis, or whoever had the best lineups, but because of sandbagging you can pretty much win your league (at least the local one) before the season even starts just by recruiting ringers.

But you are right, that's not the most important aspect, there are still plenty of fun matches to be played, and if we didnt enjoy playing tennis we wouldnt be out there year after year.

It's just like anything else, all we can pretty much do is just think less of those people. (but file a grievance anytime it's obvious that they are doing anything against the rules)
 
Top