When do you expect USTA ratings to come out?

kevrol

Hall of Fame
That is exactly what I am telling you. Just pointing out the error in doing what you have written and the USTA did. Statistics and Mathematics don't approve of what you are trying to do. You can't separate values from a given option of multiple options and add like parts back to come up with a valid answer.

If the choice was: play 1 singles or 2 singles, the % is valid. Your 51% is bad math. You can't validly pick apart one value from an answer that has more than one option to come up with a valid answer like you and the USTA did.

That is exactly what @schmke and I both are stating. You and the USTA are trying to pick 51% and argue that the response is valid. It isn't.
I'm not saying they should have or that they were correct in doing so and completely agree with you. I was just pointing out what they did so don't lump me in with them. My point in my original response was that even taking their assertion that 51% voted for 1S that's not an overwhelming majority given that 39% voted for 2S and 10% apparently didn't respond to the question.
 

Vox Rationis

Semi-Pro
That is exactly what I am telling you. Just pointing out the error in doing what you have written and the USTA did. Statistics and Mathematics don't approve of what you are trying to do. You can't separate values from a given option of multiple options and add like parts back to come up with a valid answer.

If the choice was: play 1 singles or 2 singles, the % is valid. Your 51% is bad math. You can't validly pick apart one value from an answer that has more than one option to come up with a valid answer like you and the USTA did.

That is exactly what @schmke and I both are stating. You and the USTA are trying to pick 51% and argue that the response is valid. It isn't.
Pretty sure Kevrol isn't calling the 51% valid. His initial post reads as an "even using the USTA's bad math, 51% compared to 39% isn't convincing enough to warrant a change." He was arguing against it in a different way.
 

g4driver

Hall of Fame
I'm not saying they should have or that they were correct in doing so and completely agree with you. I was just pointing out what they did so don't lump me in with them. My point in my original response was that even taking their assertion that 51% voted for 1S that's not an overwhelming majority given that 39% voted for 2S and 10% apparently didn't respond to the question.
Now I get your point. Hope you understand mine.

This post from you argued the same thing the USTA presented and what I disagree with due to poor mathematical principles.

Yes it was. 25% (1S/4D) + 26% (1S/3D) = 51% for 1S.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
I do. The way USTA interpreted the math they could have also concluded that 64% of respondents wanted to play 5 courts.
Yep.

And I agree with you that even if 51% was valid, it is not a clear indication of overwhelming support and deserves further research. Further research could have been a survey with better/clearer/more options to vet what people really want, but instead it appears the USTA (from their statement I posted) simply talked with program providers and volunteers as well as soliciting votes from the 17 SLCs to break the "tie" between 1S/3D and 1S/4D. So players had no direct input into breaking the tie at that point.
 

kevrol

Hall of Fame
As I told you before my local area eliminated singles from 40+ entirely a few years back due to some alleged survey of players, although I've yet to find a male participant in our area who agrees with this decision.
 

g4driver

Hall of Fame
As I told you before my local area eliminated singles from 40+ entirely a few years back due to some alleged survey of players, although I've yet to find a male participant in our are who agrees with this decision.
Yet another case of your local league responding to the vocal minority. Pathetic action on the part of your league.
 

g4driver

Hall of Fame
So we are stuck with 1S/3D for 40+ in 2020?

Q: what do the people who don't like the format consider is the best method to provide feedback to the USTA so the USTA listens to and responds to the players ?

Twitter, Instagram, change.org, ? Some people don't use social media platforms at all. But many organizations tend to employ people for the soul purpose of monitoring and responding to Social Media.

Sending emails seems like an poor method to get a point across. Loss revenue in few participants might be one direct point the USTA takes note of.
 

kevrol

Hall of Fame
Loss revenue in few participants might be one direct point the USTA takes note of.
Revenue from rec players isn't USTA's bread and butter. They want to make as much money from us rec players as possible with as little effort as possible. The people that care are at the sectional, state and local levels. Nationals doesn't give a flip.
 

g4driver

Hall of Fame
@kevrol

I don't disagree but my post didn't indicate give feedback to the National level. Perhaps the Sections snd State level will notice the drop off from the 4.5 40+ league with the limit of one 5.0 player per match and a reduction to seven players vs eight or nine with four courts of doubles like some areas had.

There are 16 new 5.0 guys bumped up in my area alone and the 4.5 40+ leagues already had plenty of existing 5.0 men.

There will extremely limited playing at 4.5 40 + in spring, mixed, and combo as as a 5.0 guy.

Not many 5.0 women to play 10.0 mixed ,so 9.0 mixed is it. And not many 5.5 men do 9.5 combo is pretty much it as 8.0 mixed is not an option for 5.0 players, and 8.5 combo spots for 5.0 men are few and far between.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
So we are stuck with 1S/3D for 40+ in 2020?

Q: what do the people who don't like the format consider is the best method to provide feedback to the USTA so the USTA listens to and responds to the players ?

Twitter, Instagram, change.org, ? Some people don't use social media platforms at all. But many organizations tend to employ people for the soul purpose of monitoring and responding to Social Media.

Sending emails seems like an poor method to get a point across. Loss revenue in few participants might be one direct point the USTA takes note of.
Yes, stuck with it for 2020 at the National level, although sections are allowed to use alternate formats if they so choose, but doubt a section is going to change back now if they already announced they are doing 4-courts.

I (and others in my section) have a dialog going with our Section Coordinator and he has been responsive, but is also asking we give it a shot for 2020. He has said they will do a survey after our 40+ season completes and will consider changing back to 5 courts if it appears that is better for all involved.
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
So we are stuck with 1S/3D for 40+ in 2020?

Q: what do the people who don't like the format consider is the best method to provide feedback to the USTA so the USTA listens to and responds to the players ?

Twitter, Instagram, change.org, ? Some people don't use social media platforms at all. But many organizations tend to employ people for the soul purpose of monitoring and responding to Social Media.

Sending emails seems like an poor method to get a point across. Loss revenue in few participants might be one direct point the USTA takes note of.
Also, the USTA does have a "USTA League (Official)" Facebook page/group and there are a few threads there with reaction to the change (mostly negative). Not sure how much of the feedback there is monitored or if it gets to any decision makers or committee.
 

kevrol

Hall of Fame
Yes, stuck with it for 2020 at the National level, although sections are allowed to use alternate formats if they so choose, but doubt a section is going to change back now if they already announced they are doing 4-courts.

I (and others in my section) have a dialog going with our Section Coordinator and he has been responsive, but is also asking we give it a shot for 2020. He has said they will do a survey after our 40+ season completes and will consider changing back to 5 courts if it appears that is better for all involved.
That's what they told us the year they eliminated singles. 3 years later still no singles. Although this was at the local level not sectionals. Still don't think anyone is going to change. That ship has sailed.
 

J011yroger

Talk Tennis Guru
@kevrol

I don't disagree but my post didn't indicate give feedback to the National level. Perhaps the Sections snd State level will notice the drop off from the 4.5 40+ league with the limit of one 5.0 player per match and a reduction to seven players vs eight or nine with four courts of doubles like some areas had.

There are 16 new 5.0 guys bumped up in my area alone and the 4.5 40+ leagues already had plenty of existing 5.0 men.

There will extremely limited playing at 4.5 40 + in spring, mixed, and combo as as a 5.0 guy.

Not many 5.0 women to play 10.0 mixed ,so 9.0 mixed is it. And not many 5.5 men do 9.5 combo is pretty much it as 8.0 mixed is not an option for 5.0 players, and 8.5 combo spots for 5.0 men are few and far between.
Why TF would a 5.5 guy want to play doubles with a 4.0 guy? Then again why would a 5.0 guy want to play with a 4.0 woman.

J
 

g4driver

Hall of Fame
Why TF would a 5.5 guy want to play doubles with a 4.0 guy? Then again why would a 5.0 guy want to play with a 4.0 woman.

J
Consider the 5.5C who played 9.5 combo with 4.0S rated guys now recently bumped to 4.5

9.5 combo and 10.0 mixed was the only leagues for those 5.5 guys and some played in both.

And yes there are 5.0 guys playing 9.0 mixed. Have no idea why they play it but do.
 

J011yroger

Talk Tennis Guru
Consider the 4.0S rated guys who played 9.5 combo with said 4.0S rated guys like Jayson Wingfield and a few other 4.0S guys recently bumped to 4.5. 9.5 combo and 10.0 mixed was the only leagues for those 5.5 guys and some played in both.

And yes there are 5.0 guys playing 9.0 mixed. Have no idea why they play it but do. M
I know why I do it...

J
 

g4driver

Hall of Fame
I know why I do it...

J
Oh there are stories to be told about divorced Div 1 5.0 guys / teaching pros at clubs with wives who haven't worked since college.

Google Daniel Island Club and think about some people who live there. [emoji28] Bored wealthily and playing tennis 5 days a week + divorced tennis pros can be a recipe for few more divorces and that record keeps on playing. [emoji2960]
 

kevrol

Hall of Fame
Oh there are stories to be told about divorced Div 1 5.0 guys / teaching pros at clubs with wives who haven't worked since college.

Google Daniel Island Club and think about some people who live there. [emoji28] Bored wealthily and playing tennis 5 days a week + divorced tennis pros can be a recipe for few more divorces and that record keeps on playing. [emoji2960]
That's why I insisted we join a club with an attractive female head pro.

 

time_fly

Hall of Fame
In our area, we play early start leagues and players were given a “grace period” through the end of this weekend to play at their old level if they were bumped up. I personally saw two newly-minted 4.0s get sent off to their new levels with losses to players that didn’t get bumped. Lol.
 

silverwyvern4

New User
For this year, Is it expected to be end of October cutoff for matches that count and early December updated ratings release again?
 

silverwyvern4

New User
I just started usta for the first time this year. If my first several matches are against other new to usta players who don't have prior matches, will I still get a dynamic rating after 4 matches?
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
I just started usta for the first time this year. If my first several matches are against other new to usta players who don't have prior matches, will I still get a dynamic rating after 4 matches?
If you play at least three matches in leagues that count for ratings, the USTA figures out a way to calculate a rating for you at year-end.
 

silverwyvern4

New User
If there's a doubles match, where one of the players is new and doesn't have a dynamic rating, do the other 3 player's ratings still get affected by the match result?
 

Moon Shooter

Semi-Pro
If there's a doubles match, where one of the players is new and doesn't have a dynamic rating, do the other 3 player's ratings still get affected by the match result?
I don't think so. But it seems Schmke is saying that if two players are unrated perhaps both unrated players could end up with a rating from that match if it is one of three rated matches.
 

Tthcr

New User
Anyone remember when TR posts their year end projected rating?
I know this old but TR is starting to post them now. Looks like they have the teams that have played nationals and sectionals so far with a YE projection. Not on their player pages though yet. Click the Tennis Record icon on the upper left, then player rankings, then player ratings Then chose section, area, rating etc. The players shown were on teams that went to sectionals and above. It could take over a week for TR to fully update from when you could see when they downloaded new matches until when they had the newly calculated results on the players page though. Assuming all the updates trickle down like that it could be a while for them to show up on individuals player page.
 

FuzzyYellowBalls

Hall of Fame
Oh there are stories to be told about divorced Div 1 5.0 guys / teaching pros at clubs with wives who haven't worked since college.

Google Daniel Island Club and think about some people who live there. [emoji28] Bored wealthily and playing tennis 5 days a week + divorced tennis pros can be a recipe for few more divorces and that record keeps on playing. [emoji2960]
Oh yeah, now my tennis coaches weren't div 1 guys, not really, but solid players and great teachers, people pleasers. As in they weren't in their 20s in super good shape or anything, but didn't matter. My main coach slept with about 8 members over 10 years , 6 while they were married, and another guy I took from off and on at another country club was fired for the same thing. Makes you wonder, eh, eh?
 

Creighton

Semi-Pro
Oh yeah, now my tennis coaches weren't div 1 guys, not really, but solid players and great teachers, people pleasers. As in they weren't in their 20s in super good shape or anything, but didn't matter. My main coach slept with about 8 members over 10 years , 6 while they were married, and another guy I took from off and on at another country club was fired for the same thing. Makes you wonder, eh, eh?
Yeah our pro had a great personality. Ended up divorcing from his wife and marrying a doctor who split with her neurosurgeon husband.
 

MarinaHighTennis

Professional
I know this old but TR is starting to post them now. Looks like they have the teams that have played nationals and sectionals so far with a YE projection. Not on their player pages though yet. Click the Tennis Record icon on the upper left, then player rankings, then player ratings Then chose section, area, rating etc. The players shown were on teams that went to sectionals and above. It could take over a week for TR to fully update from when you could see when they downloaded new matches until when they had the newly calculated results on the players page though. Assuming all the updates trickle down like that it could be a while for them to show up on individuals player page.
What does it mean? Im holding off making teams for next yr bc idk what my rating will be. If you're in the top 100 would you get bumped?
 

Tthcr

New User
What does it mean? Im holding off making teams for next yr bc idk what my rating will be. If you're in the top 100 would you get bumped?
No It doesn’t mean you will be bumped. It’s not the USTA. It is more like a guesstimate. But if you arent very close to the bump up number its not as likely you will move up.
 

Tthcr

New User
And everyone is waiting. One week to go
Its not all been calculated yet either If you are looking at the top 100. All those players have played in Districts or higher it looks like. If you look at best record list, which isnt based on just the ratings number, there are some with lines through the projected year end rating. They have not been calculated yet and on the players page no ones projected year end is listed. It’s still being worked on. Also if your section counts tournaments in the year end ratings it doesn’t look like that they have been added in the the year end but I’m not sure on that.
 

Tthcr

New User
Its not all been calculated yet either If you are looking at the top 100. All those players have played in Districts or higher it looks like. If you look at best record list, which isnt based on just the ratings number, there are some with lines through the projected year end rating. They have not been calculated yet and on the players page no ones projected year end is listed. It’s still being worked on. Also if your section counts tournaments in the year end ratings it doesn’t look like that they have been added in the the year end but I’m not sure on that.
And the top 100 rating list will likely change a lot as the other players who havent played in championships are calculated.
 
Top