USTA Ratings

[jph424]

I last played USTA about 2 years ago and am rated as a 3.0. Since that season I have started playing about 4 times a week and have dramatically improved. I am now winning about 70% of my singles matches against 3.5 players in a independent singles league here in Atlanta. If I want to play USTA again, would it be unethical for me to play 3.0? Should I be looking for a 3.0 or a 3.5 team?

Thanks!

 

[Topaz]

I last played USTA about 2 years ago and am rated as a 3.0. Since that season I have started playing about 4 times a week and have dramatically improved. I am now winning about 70% of my singles matches against 3.5 players in a independent singles league here in Atlanta. If I want to play USTA again, would it be unethical for me to play 3.0? Should I be looking for a 3.0 or a 3.5 team?

Thanks!

Ummm, hello? Play 3.5.

If you play 3.0, we will all call you a sandbagger and throw things at you.

 

[jph424]

I figured as much. I would much rather play 3.5 but the only team I know I can join right now is a 3.0 team. I guess I will keep looking for a 3.5 team.

 

[Topaz]

Are you still a computer rated 3.0? If so, then you can join and play with the 3.0 team and be 'legit'. Sometimes, unfortunately, you have to play a year to give the computer a chance to 'catch-up' to your rating.

Though, we'll still call you a sandbagger and throw things at you!

 

[raiden031]

I was sorta in your situation. The difference was that I played my first year at 3.0 and matches were competitive, and when the very next season came around I knew that 3.0 was no longer competitive for me. I had the computer rating so I wasn't your typical 'bagger, but I had to make the decision of whether to keep playing it or play up (or both). I decided that I would only continue playing 3.0 because I was offered a spot on a team that had the potential to go all the way to Nationals. Otherwise I would have had nothing to gain by playing at that level anymore. I also played up so I still got experience at 3.5. I'm still not sure if ethically I did the right thing, but I still hit some competition in the post-season which is really what I did all this for.

 

[bleach]

If that is your official rating, then you are legit to play in that league. That's not sandbagging! Depending on how long you have been out, you might have to/get to re-self rate yourself. Then you should rate yourself where you think you should be. If you play 3.0 you might find that the matches are not very fun (whether you win or lose).

IMO, if you have a valid computer rating that is never sandbagging. By valid computer rating, I mean you tried your best in every match. No tanking or shaving of games... that's what makes me angry!

 

[circusmouse]

You should play 3.5 for the challenge, not out of fear of sandbagging. People play down a level all the time in order to win. It's not really unethical. It's just a flaw of the rating system.

 

[beastiejam]

Sandbagging

If you sign up at 3.0 and play your best, you are not sandbagging. You may get DQ'd, but if that is what it takes for a 3.5 team to take you, then do it.
Sandbagging is losing on purpose to not get DQ'd.

 

[jph424]

I am still computer rated 3.0. I will definitely try to get on the 3.5 team but if I can't I will play 3.0 and do my best.

 

[raiden031]

If you sign up at 3.0 and play your best, you are not sandbagging. You may get DQ'd, but if that is what it takes for a 3.5 team to take you, then do it.
Sandbagging is losing on purpose to not get DQ'd.

That is another thing to consider. I advertise myself as a 3.5 player, but because my rating is officially 3.0, I feel like I'm not taken as seriously as a 3.5 player. I think people are starting to take me more seriously as I have proven that I can now beat some guys at the top of the 3.5 spectrum.

If you decide to continue playing 3.0, I also think you should play up to 3.5 as well to increase the likelihood of a year-end bump and to also get more competitive matches in.

 

[jgn1013]

I am still computer rated 3.0. I will definitely try to get on the 3.5 team but if I can't I will play 3.0 and do my best.

Try playing 3.5 if you want better competition. Last season I played on a 3.0 team in Marietta, and beat everyone handedly.

 

[beernutz]

If you sign up at 3.0 and play your best, you are not sandbagging. You may get DQ'd, but if that is what it takes for a 3.5 team to take you, then do it.
Sandbagging is losing on purpose to not get DQ'd.

I agree with beastiejam, if you play your best tennis and don't try to work the system you aren't sandbagging. Be sure and tell your 3.0 team captain before the season that your plan is to play your best.

I think this is an example of where the NTRP system breaks down since someone who is in the OP's position who is honestly trying their best and will likely get bumped as a result, runs the risk of getting DQed and screwing his teammates.

OTOH, players who are clearly playing below their level and who lose just enough or keep scores close enough to not get bumped run almost no risk of getting DQed. </$.02>

 

[Moz]

I agree with beastiejam, if you play your best tennis and don't try to work the system you aren't sandbagging. Be sure and tell your 3.0 team captain before the season that your plan is to play your best.

I think this is an example of where the NTRP system breaks down since someone who is in the OP's position who is honestly trying their best and will likely get bumped as a result, runs the risk of getting DQed and screwing his teammates.

OTOH, players who are clearly playing below their level and who lose just enough or keep scores close enough to not get bumped run almost no risk of getting DQed. </$.02>

Well said. You owe it to your 3.0 team to be honest with them.

But most of all you owe it to yourself to play in the highest league possible. IMO it would be an unforgiveable waste of your time to spend a year solely at 3.0.

 

[locomotion]

I last played USTA about 2 years ago and am rated as a 3.0. Since that season I have started playing about 4 times a week and have dramatically improved. I am now winning about 70% of my singles matches against 3.5 players in a independent singles league here in Atlanta. If I want to play USTA again, would it be unethical for me to play 3.0? Should I be looking for a 3.0 or a 3.5 team?

Thanks!

The first question would be about the "real" level of the independent singles league since it is not a USTA league. Yes, it is called a 3.5 league, but are the players in it really 3.5's. I play on a 4.0 USTA team, but when I play in non-USTA leagues, to play my level I have to play 4.5. We call them country club ratings.

You should first call a few people from the 3.0 team, play against them, and see how you do.

 

[goober]

The first question would be about the "real" level of the independent singles league since it is not a USTA league. Yes, it is called a 3.5 league, but are the players in it really 3.5's. I play on a 4.0 USTA team, but when I play in non-USTA leagues, to play my level I have to play 4.5. We call them country club ratings.

lol country club ratings...

It must be a national phenomenon I once played some older guy who told me he was a 5.0 at his country club. He was off a bit- about a strong 4.0/weak 4.5

 

[cak]

Yeah, country club ratings. I occasionally play in a 4.0 clinic. I'm a USTA 3.5. So is everyone else in the clinic. Oh, except the occasional 3.0 sub. Perhaps it should be renamed the "Working to someday be a 4.0" clinic.

I also suspect ratings go up with travel. Whenever I'm on vacation I get set up with other 3.5s. Except I can dominate them, and I'm not all that good in USTA 3.5. I wander back to the hotel room, look up tennis link, and sure enough, they must have been promoted on the plane ride there and it hadn't gotten back to tennis link yet. Often the pros at the resorts will watch me play a little and move me from the intermediate (3.0-3.5) groups to the advanced (4.0-4.5) groups. I wonder what real USTA 4.0s do on vacation.

 

[nu2fuhzballs]

I just started playing a year ago. One instructor thought I was a 2.5 and another instructor thought I was a 3.0 so I played both in the spring. Although I won my 2.5 matches fairly easily, I was glad I played both. The 2.5 matches gave me an opportunity to try different things I was learning because I knew I could come back if I got down. The 3.0 matches forced me to focus and think about game strategy and just work harder.

To the OP, I would suggest playing 3.0 and 3.5 if you can.

 

[amarone]

If you sign up at 3.0 and play your best, you are not sandbagging. You may get DQ'd, but if that is what it takes for a 3.5 team to take you, then do it.

He won't get DQed - he's computer rated.

 

[sMaShGaL]

Does anybody know when new ratings will come out for USTA Southern - North Carolina?

 

[Topaz]

I know my section (Mid-Atlantic) comes out late November. Pretty sure other sections are close to that.

 

[amarone]

Does anybody know when new ratings will come out for USTA Southern - North Carolina?

It doesn't look from their web site as if NC does early-start ratings, in which case you will get new ratings just once a year - the national year-end ratings that come out in late November.

 

[sMaShGaL]

Thanks!!

There is an NTRP tournament the beginning of December. Will they use the new ratings or do the new ratings not take effect until the Spring leagues?

 

[Topaz]

Thanks!!

There is an NTRP tournament the beginning of December. Will they use the new ratings or do the new ratings not take effect until the Spring leagues?

My guess is that they would use the new ratings, because as soon as they come out, that's what you are designated in the computer. Your league coordinator should be able to answer that question for sure, though.