Week 3 of Nationals is a big one - 18+ 4.0 and 4.5, 40+ 3.0 and 3.5

schmke

Hall of Fame
In an attempt not to derail another thread. Predictions for any of the finals?

I'm going Intermountain over Texas at 4.0 men.
Texas over PNW at 3.5 men.
And no earthly idea at 4.5 men. Too close to call.
Also PNW gets the win at 4.0 on the women's side after all the talk of their teams finishing in last.
Am I psychic?
You'r making obvious picks after round-robin when you only have to pick one of four teams and know their seeding?

My simulation picked Texas to win 3.5 men before the event started, and also picked Mid-Atlantic to win the 4.5 men before the event. PNW women, had them threatening to make the semis and the team they beat in Southwest I had in the semis.

But sure, we'll call you a psychic :) . Who is winning 40+ 4.5+ men and women next weekend?
 
You'r making obvious picks after round-robin when you only have to pick one of four teams and know their seeding?

My simulation picked Texas to win 3.5 men before the event started, and also picked Mid-Atlantic to win the 4.5 men before the event. PNW women, had them threatening to make the semis and the team they beat in Southwest I had in the semis.

But sure, we'll call you a psychic :) . Who is winning 40+ 4.5+ men and women next weekend?
The men's side is easy. After 16 teams come together to file a grievance against Nor Cal, USTA National overrules themselves and awards Nor Cal the title in December.
 

tpro2000

Rookie
You'r making obvious picks after round-robin when you only have to pick one of four teams and know their seeding?

My simulation picked Texas to win 3.5 men before the event started, and also picked Mid-Atlantic to win the 4.5 men before the event. PNW women, had them threatening to make the semis and the team they beat in Southwest I had in the semis.

But sure, we'll call you a psychic :) . Who is winning 40+ 4.5+ men and women next weekend?
Do you happen to look at 55+ 7.0? That's club members of where I work. Just curious

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk
 

djkahn86

Rookie
As I predicted, Texas v Utah for 4.0 finals. Utah won semis without their ringer singles player, who was injured on match point bs Mid At last night. It looked like cramps, although some said he rolled ankle. He had medical attention for about 10 minutes, then served out the match with one serve. Will be interesting to see if he plays in the finals today v Texas.
He won 6-0 6-0 in the final
He had a bandage on his right thigh walking around during the semis and had a solid limp going. Guess he gutted it out and handed it a double bagel.
IM wins it all
 

Jack the Hack

Hall of Fame
He won 6-0 6-0 in the final
He had a bandage on his right thigh walking around during the semis and had a solid limp going. Guess he gutted it out and handed it a double bagel.
IM wins it all
The Texas guy that lost 0-6, 0-6 was appealed down from 4.5, and has an estimated 3.9754 DNTRP according to TennisRecord.com (which is usually low by a significant amount). So how good was that Utah kid to win by that score while injured?!? Sounds like a good candidate for the double-bump.

(Not that I feel that bad about Texas getting beat by a better sandbagger.)
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
The Texas guy that lost 0-6, 0-6 was appealed down from 4.5, and has an estimated 3.9754 DNTRP according to TennisRecord.com (which is usually low by a significant amount). So how good was that Utah kid to win by that score while injured?!? Sounds like a good candidate for the double-bump.

(Not that I feel that bad about Texas getting beat by a better sandbagger.)
Not all appeals down are inappropriate. If someone appealed down and played all year through Nationals and was at 3.98, I doubt people would complain. But TR is woefully low on this player, no way he is 3.98. Which makes the Utah kid's self-rating questionable for sure.
 

Bobble

Semi-Pro
He won 6-0 6-0 in the final
He had a bandage on his right thigh walking around during the semis and had a solid limp going. Guess he gutted it out and handed it a double bagel.
IM wins it all
I was on site today as well, for semis and final. Not sure how SoCal went undefeated, must have just been that easy of a draw.

IM/Utah put together one of the deeper teams out that I’ve seen in years (in Texas, or anywhere else), and didn’t need to use too many of the 40+ core...kudos to them. It’s also nice to have home field advantage so more of your younger guys can make the trip.

The big story is that singles junior ringer that everyone is mentioning...he was incredible. The fact that he was injured and played that well, and that he actually had a match go three sets the day before, are both equally egregious. Doesn’t change the fact that Utah just did it better this year.
 
He won 6-0 6-0 in the final
He had a bandage on his right thigh walking around during the semis and had a solid limp going. Guess he gutted it out and handed it a double bagel.
IM wins it all
Double bageled one of the better singles players at nationals

I was on site today as well, for semis and final. Not sure how SoCal went undefeated, must have just been that easy of a draw.

IM/Utah put together one of the deeper teams out that I’ve seen in years (in Texas, or anywhere else), and didn’t need to use too many of the 40+ core...kudos to them. It’s also nice to have home field advantage so more of your younger guys can make the trip.

The big story is that singles junior ringer that everyone is mentioning...he was incredible. The fact that he was injured and played that well, and that he actually had a match go three sets the day before, are both equally egregious. Doesn’t change the fact that Utah just did it better this year.
A player with his background is usually a ringer on a good 4.5 team. I've seen multiple with his exact tennis history dominate 4.5 districts and sectionals. Never seen one self-rate at 4.0 before.
 

Tiafoe

Rookie
I was on site today as well, for semis and final. Not sure how SoCal went undefeated, must have just been that easy of a draw.

IM/Utah put together one of the deeper teams out that I’ve seen in years (in Texas, or anywhere else), and didn’t need to use too many of the 40+ core...kudos to them. It’s also nice to have home field advantage so more of your younger guys can make the trip.

The big story is that singles junior ringer that everyone is mentioning...he was incredible. The fact that he was injured and played that well, and that he actually had a match go three sets the day before, are both equally egregious. Doesn’t change the fact that Utah just did it better this year.
His match the day before was 6-4, 7-6 over the Mid Atlantic kid. That was the only remotely close match he had all season including Sectionals and Nationals. So the two dynasty captains from Texas and Intermountain have swept titles at 3.5 18+, 4.0 18+ and 4.0 40+ this year. Intermountain also took 3rd in 4.0 40+ and Texas took 2nd in 4.0 18+. It's pretty funny if you think back to all that was said about those teams/captains before Nationals began.
 
Last edited:

tennis_tater

Semi-Pro
I believe I said before the tournament they comparing Utah to Texas was more of an apples to apples comparison than apples to orange. Just a different way of gaming the system. Some said last year that some of the 3.5 Utah players would have have won matches at 4.0 nationals. Some laughed. One year later, many of those same players stormed through 4.0!nationals. They were improperly rated a year ago (or the year before that when they “got protected”) just like the singles player this year was clearly improperly rated. He’s 22 years old. His junior credentials are on the web and easy to compare to guidelines. No debate - kid should have registered as 5.0! His results double bageling multiple 4.0 national singles players, who themselves likely have rating in the 4.5 range, confirms he was well out of level.
 
His match the day before was 6-4, 7-6 over the Mid Atlantic kid. That was the only remotely close match he had all season including Sectionals and Nationals. So the two dynasty captains from Texas and Intermountain have swept titles at 3.5 18+, 4.0 18+ and 4.0 40+ this year. It's pretty funny if you think back to all that was said about them before Nationals began.
Texas captain won 3.5 40+ too. He won 3 out of 4.
 

leech

Rookie
Looking at the IM roster I saw that one of their guys played @leech in 3.5 Nationals last year.
Dang, looks like my man has been killing it at 4.0 this year; went 9-1 at 4.0 Nationals (40+ made semi; 18+ won the whole thing)! Could be one-and-done at 4.0 for him.
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
Dang, looks like my man has been killing it at 4.0 this year; went 9-1 at 4.0 Nationals (40+ made semi; 18+ won the whole thing)! Could be one-and-done at 4.0 for him.
And didn't your (wife's?) 3.5 ladies team win it all this past weekend?
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
Yes, the 3.5 ladies team from MidAtlantic took out strong teams from MiddWest and Southern yesterday to win 40+ Nationals! A bunch of my friends are on that team, but not my wife (who is a 4.0); so happy for them.
My bad, making an assumption as you were tagged in nearly every photo! :)

that's awesome!
 

djkahn86

Rookie
that is pretty boring. what kind of prizes did they have this year ?
Sunday players got crystal participation trophy’s engraved with their final standing.

Captains got backpacks and pullovers

Players got towel, t shirt, dampener and bag tag.

Plus free food and some drinks at the players party.

Plus each player that played a match exchanged wristbands with their opponents. Color coded to each section.
Wish I could have played IM or Texas dubs teams as I went 4-0. Would have like to test my skills against the more dominant teams. They looked solid but nothing dominant like that IM singles kid. He was a little jack rabbit.
 

Nostradamus

Bionic Poster
Sunday players got crystal participation trophy’s engraved with their final standing.

Captains got backpacks and pullovers

Players got towel, t shirt, dampener and bag tag.

Plus free food and some drinks at the players party.

Plus each player that played a match exchanged wristbands with their opponents. Color coded to each section.
Wish I could have played IM or Texas dubs teams as I went 4-0. Would have like to test my skills against the more dominant teams. They looked solid but nothing dominant like that IM singles kid. He was a little jack rabbit.
can you post a picture of bag tag ? I always wondered if they look the same as ones I got from district championships and sectionals ?
 

Bobble

Semi-Pro
Would have like to test my skills against the more dominant teams. They looked solid but nothing dominant like that IM singles kid. He was a little jack rabbit.
No joke on the IM kid, I went up to him on Sunday to shake his hand just based on abilities. Didn’t have the energy to make fun of the massive celebration for his 6-0 6-0 win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Nostradamus

Bionic Poster




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That looks so pretty. how does the Sectional championship one look like ?? my district champion tag looks way different. does regional or sectional tag look more like district or national tag ? Thanks
 

djkahn86

Rookie
No joke on the IM kid, I went up to him on Sunday to shake his hand just based on abilities. Didn’t have the energy to make fun of the massive celebration for his 6-0 6-0 win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Tennis record has him listed as a 3.87.
Yikes
 

tennis_tater

Semi-Pro
Tennis record has him listed as a 3.87.
Yikes
Right. Not only did the captain have the player improperly self rate two levels below what he should have, he played him in the mimimum three matches, in meaningless matches for his team, where he tossed five games in each match (all the while pairing up with a teammate with a dNTRP likely in the 4.5 range, to make the matches "competitive" and avoid getting strikes. They then didn't play him at any sectional matches to avoid grievances so they could go to Las Vegas and start every match with a 1-0 advantage. As the poster above noted, I guess Utah's captain really did "do it better than everyone else," including the infamous Texas captain.
 

djkahn86

Rookie
sorry but Tennis Record is very unreliable
It is but man that’s way off. I saw him play several matches this past weekend. It was more of a joke. If it were true then according to tennis record I would wax the court with him. That clearly wouldn’t happen. Lol.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
It is but man that’s way off. I saw him play several matches this past weekend. It was more of a joke. If it were true then according to tennis record I would wax the court with him. That clearly wouldn’t happen. Lol.
TR is "only" off about 0.5 on this one ...
 

sunnyday

New User
I watched the IM singles player in his finals match too - he was amazing - I felt bad for the TX guy! His teammate said he had a huge blister which was causing him to limp - but he insisted on playing the finals, hurt and all!
 

ShaunS

Semi-Pro
It is but man that’s way off. I saw him play several matches this past weekend. It was more of a joke. If it were true then according to tennis record I would wax the court with him. That clearly wouldn’t happen. Lol.
I'll offer a half-hearted defense of Tennis Record in this instance. IF someone is actually sandbagging/point-shaving/whatever then their record will not be accurate, as that is the whole point. The more data points (matches played) that are logged the easier it is for the system to detect possible abuse.

Hence increasing the number of matches self-rates/appeals need to be eligible for nationals to 4. Whether that makes a difference... that's for this thread to discuss:
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
I'll offer a half-hearted defense of Tennis Record in this instance. IF someone is actually sandbagging/point-shaving/whatever then their record will not be accurate, as that is the whole point. The more data points (matches played) that are logged the easier it is for the system to detect possible abuse.

Hence increasing the number of matches self-rates/appeals need to be eligible for nationals to 4. Whether that makes a difference... that's for this thread to discuss:
He lost 16 games total in his last 5 matches, all straight set wins in playoffs, 4 of those at Nationals. That should certainly offset alleged sandbagging in two regular season matches and allow any decent algorithm to be reasonably accurate. I know mine doesn't have him at a hard to fathom 3.87.
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
He lost 16 games total in his last 5 matches, all straight set wins in playoffs, 4 of those at Nationals. That should certainly offset alleged sandbagging in two regular season matches and allow any decent algorithm to be reasonably accurate. I know mine doesn't have him at a hard to fathom 3.87.
The 3.87 in TR doesn't include the nationals matches. It has the regular season matches that he played in doubles with non-dominant scores against less than stellar competition, which left him at 3.71. He then played one districts match in singles against a 3.86 that calculated out to a 4.06 match rating but left him at 3.87 DNTRP. The nationals matches don't have a rating yet (still listed NC), but surely, he'll go up when they are added. I don't know where you had him after districts, but given the scores, opponents, and results, it doesn't look unreasonable. His matches at nationals were:

1. 6-0 6-0 vs 3.87. Should rate out around 4.35
2. 6-0 6-1 vs 3.79. Should rate out around 4.2
3. 6-4 7-6 vs 3.98. Should rate out around 4.1
4. 6-0 6-0 vs 3.98. should rate out around 4.45

Based on this, I would expect his DNTRP to calculate out to about 4.15 on TR once the nationals matches are included. I suspect that is still too low compared to the USTA DNTRP.

The other thing that needs to be said here is that they held this kid out of all of the playoffs except one match in districts to make sure he is eligible for nationals, and they won sectionals. In other words, they had a good enough team to qualify for nationals without him. It's a heck of a lot easier to "hide" a ringer for nationals if the rest of your team is good enough to breeze through sectionals without the player. Not many other teams can do that.
 
Last edited:

CiscoPC600

Professional
Can someone explain to me how the matchups worked in 18&over 4.5? And how the winner is decided if there are 4 teams that went 4-0?

newbie here.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
Can someone explain to me how the matchups worked in 18&over 4.5? And how the winner is decided if there are 4 teams that went 4-0?

newbie here.
If there were to have been five teams all 4-0 (and we were one match tie-break away from it happening), the USTA would have sent the team home that was 5th in the standings. The standings are determined by team record (all 4-0), court record, head to head (if applicable), sets lost, games lost, game winning percentage.

In this case, court record would have decided it unless the team that ended up losing had won their last match 5-0. Had they done that, there was no head to head so it would have gone to the other criteria listed. Note that are some significant flaws in those tie-breakers, namely ignoring sets won, and ignoring games won until the very end, which means it is better to lose a set 6-0 than it is to lose it 7-6 as 6-0 is one fewer game lost.
 

CiscoPC600

Professional
If there were to have been five teams all 4-0 (and we were one match tie-break away from it happening), the USTA would have sent the team home that was 5th in the standings. The standings are determined by team record (all 4-0), court record, head to head (if applicable), sets lost, games lost, game winning percentage.

In this case, court record would have decided it unless the team that ended up losing had won their last match 5-0. Had they done that, there was no head to head so it would have gone to the other criteria listed. Note that are some significant flaws in those tie-breakers, namely ignoring sets won, and ignoring games won until the very end, which means it is better to lose a set 6-0 than it is to lose it 7-6 as 6-0 is one fewer game lost.
Wait, so the winner was already decided? By court record? What's that?
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
If there were to have been five teams all 4-0 (and we were one match tie-break away from it happening), the USTA would have sent the team home that was 5th in the standings. The standings are determined by team record (all 4-0), court record, head to head (if applicable), sets lost, games lost, game winning percentage.

In this case, court record would have decided it unless the team that ended up losing had won their last match 5-0. Had they done that, there was no head to head so it would have gone to the other criteria listed. Note that are some significant flaws in those tie-breakers, namely ignoring sets won, and ignoring games won until the very end, which means it is better to lose a set 6-0 than it is to lose it 7-6 as 6-0 is one fewer game lost.
On the game winning percentage thing I think I agree with you .... but which is better? winning 7-6; 6-7; 1-0 or winning 7-6; 7-6? Does winning that one extra set actually show any meaningful difference? It is still a 1 game difference either way.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
On the game winning percentage thing I think I agree with you .... but which is better? winning 7-6; 6-7; 1-0 or winning 7-6; 7-6? Does winning that one extra set actually show any meaningful difference? It is still a 1 game difference either way.
Good example to look at.

If you were to lose 7-6,7-6, you lost 14 games. You also won 12, and had a game differential of -2

If you were to lose 7-6,6-7,1-0, you lost 14 games. You also won 13, and had a game differential of -1.

By the USTA's tie-breakers (looking only at games lost), both scores are the same which seems silly. Certainly losing in a match tie-break should be considered better than losing in two tie-break sets, no? Using game differential correctly rewards the second scenario.
 

djkahn86

Rookie
The 5th team lost their match 3-2, so there were just four 4-0 teams. But we were one super tie-break away from having five.
Don’t remind me
We were one super tiebreaker from being 4-0 and ending up in 5th place on the outside looking in. So it didn’t hurt as bad losing to New England 2-3 knowing that if we had won 3-2 , we still wouldn’t have played Sunday.
 

Max G.

Legend
Good example to look at.

If you were to lose 7-6,7-6, you lost 14 games. You also won 12, and had a game differential of -2

If you were to lose 7-6,6-7,1-0, you lost 14 games. You also won 13, and had a game differential of -1.

By the USTA's tie-breakers (looking only at games lost), both scores are the same which seems silly. Certainly losing in a match tie-break should be considered better than losing in two tie-break sets, no? Using game differential correctly rewards the second scenario.
Yeah, that sounds better! Losing 7-6 6-7 1-0 is one game better than losing 7-6 7-6. That would make sense.
 

kelkat

Rookie
Sorry if I missed this, but can someone give me the link for the actual results from the recent National events? Thanks!
 
Top