Why UTR is a deeply flawed system.

#51
What do you define as intangibles-work ethic, mental toughness, strategic awareness, competitiveness, etc ? Just curious. One big problem with UTR is that it only counts games, not wins or sets so a player who won 0-6 7-6 7-6 would be rated lower than his losing opponent. UTR somewhat rewards the players who keep matches close but can't close. However, coming back from a disastrous first set to win in tiebreak in the next two sets would show mental toughness, competitiveness, strategic knowledge, etc.

In watching some college matches, sometimes it seems factors of whether the match is away or at home or just how much the player is hungry to win may matter more than UTR. I have seen some college matches or games within matches where a much lower UTR rated player, e.g. a guy who is down like 0-5 all of a sudden goes on a rampage and almost gets the upset. If you were to watch the player when he was on the hot streak, you would not believe the player was ranked 1.5 UTR below his opponent. UTR is also a measure of opportunity, e.g. players who have more opportunities to play higher ranked players even if they lose usually will be ranked higher than players who just play others at their level. There are some talented juniors who go on to play D3 and their UTR goes down-not because they are not playing well, but because they seldom get to play players ranked above 13. However, come summer, if they play some prize $ or other events, they can pull their UTR back up.

Juniors need to play more Futures/Future Qualis this year before the Quali draws are drastically cut in 2019 to see how they do vs guys who already have ATP points. That is more valuable than just looking at UTR.
I think you covered some of what I’m talking about and answered your own question well yourself.
 

jmnk

Hall of Fame
#53
When evaluating a junior for his/her potential success as a professional, because UTR does not factor in intangibles, I find it useless and ineffective in this area. If it could factor in intangibles, I believe that many players with higher UTR numbers would see their UTR numbers drop for lack of intangibles, and some players with lower UTR numbers would see their UTR numbers rise for an abundance of intangibles.
UTR, or USTA, or ITA, or ATP or any other ranking system does factor in intangibles already. The system looks at the results, and gives you the rating. If a given player has those mythical 'intangibles', he surely can convert those to results, and therefore they will be reflected in the rating.

Unless you are talking about those intangibles that _do not_ convert to the results. In that case, well, the said player just picked the wrong sport I suppose.
 
Last edited:

jmnk

Hall of Fame
#54
[...]

In watching some college matches, sometimes it seems factors of whether the match is away or at home or just how much the player is hungry to win may matter more than UTR. I have seen some college matches or games within matches where a much lower UTR rated player, e.g. a guy who is down like 0-5 all of a sudden goes on a rampage and almost gets the upset. If you were to watch the player when he was on the hot streak, you would not believe the player was ranked 1.5 UTR below his opponent. UTR is also a measure of opportunity, e.g. players who have more opportunities to play higher ranked players even if they lose usually will be ranked higher than players who just play others at their level. There are some talented juniors who go on to play D3 and their UTR goes down-not because they are not playing well, but because they seldom get to play players ranked above 13. However, come summer, if they play some prize $ or other events, they can pull their UTR back up.

[...]
that is indeed the major deficiency of UTR or USTA rating system that counts something other than what the ultimate goal of a sport is: to win a match. Because you can raise your rating by making a match close, as long as it is against a higher rated player. The higher rated the opponent the 'less' you have to make it competitive to still make your rating higher. Which is why in USTA, the higher your rating is the harder it gets to make it go up - because you have less and less opportunity to play against players rated higher than you. Meaning - if you are 3.5 it is easy to play against 4.0, and even against 4.5, and you just need to do decent to raise your rating. When you are 4.5 it gets harder to play against 5.0 or 5.5 - just because there are only so many of those high rated players. So at 4.5 you are stuck playing (mostly) against other 4.5 players, and, well, at that point you really have to win, close lose is not going to do much for you.

Which is also why (I would argue) the higher the USTA rating the more accurate it is. Because it was achieved via playing the opponents of the same rating, and the results of such evenly matched players give the best reflection of actual rating.

College ITA rating system is different - in that one you must win to raise your rating. A loss, no matter how close, no matter how higher your opponent was rated, is always going to lower your rating.
 

jmnk

Hall of Fame
#55
What specific attributes you mean, I am asking you because we are creating Rating based on ELO and this may be interesting to be added?
If I may ask - who is 'we'? And why would we need yet another rating system based on ELO? Both UTR and USTA systems are already based on ELO.
 
#56
UTR, or USTA, or ITA, or ATP or any other ranking system does factor in intangibles already. The system looks at the results, and gives you the rating. If a given player has those mythical 'intangibles', he surely can convert those to results, and therefore they will be reflected in the rating.

Unless you are talking about those intangibles that _do not_ convert to the results. In that case, well, the said player just picked the wrong sport I suppose.
First, intangibles are not mythical. Anyone who is somebody in elite tennis understands the importance of intangibles. What do you think separates the top ATP pros/greats from the rest of the pack who have shots that are just as good as (with some shots even being better than) some of the top ATP players/greats? It’s not about the shots anymore at that level. It’s about fully developed intangibles.

Second, algorithms or any other results-based formula is absolutely useless when evaluating top juniors for their potential as professionals. Juniors are still young, developing players, a work in progress, and some develop faster or slower than others. Some top juniors show more intangibles than other top juniors with a higher UTR, but, for them, it is just a matter of time before the intangibles become fully developed. They each develop at their own pace. Patience is required.

There may very well be some truth to what you say with respect to full-grown adults, but denying the reality of intangibles is ludicrous. If a “coach” or other type of “tennis professional” depends on an algorithm or ranking to size up a top juniors potential to succeed as a pro (or even on a college team), then the coach IMO is conceding that he/she doesn’t have the instinct and ability to do what great coaches have done: ID real talent, despite results, and help them develop their intangibles. Anyone who only considers results doesn’t understand the sport, doesn’t understand potential, and doesn’t understand basic human development.

The ones who see and understand how to work with the complexities involved in junior development have a huge advantage over those who don’t. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people attempting to control junior development who don’t have the gift, and, therefore, are blind to this reality.
 
#57
First, intangibles are not mythical. Anyone who is somebody in elite tennis understands the importance of intangibles. What do you think separates the top ATP pros/greats from the rest of the pack who have shots that are just as good as (with some shots even being better than) some of the top ATP players/greats? It’s not about the shots anymore at that level. It’s about fully developed intangibles.
I think you guys are arguing to the same point. The intangibles you are talking about are important, its what converts tennis skills to results, trophies and really big shiny trophies. Which makes them tangibles. If you are talking about intangibles like the future ATP rating of a 12 year old then you will be very disappointed with any rating system. UTR aims to predict which two players are likely to have a competitive match, that's all.
 
#60
If you are talking about intangibles like the future ATP rating of a 12 year old then you will be very disappointed with any rating system.
I assumed it was very obvious that I'm talking about all juniors, including the 16’s and OLDER. UTR is completely useless when evaluating ALL top juniors, including the top 16’s and OLDER, for their potential as professionals.
 
#61
Seems like the biggest issues with UTR are that: 1. Almost an entire league in high school has to subscribe in order to results to be reported and included. Our league, the MIAA, is too lazy and doesn't report results to anybody, not even the USTA. So kids' URTs don't get a boost from HS play. So, this year we're skipping the HS season and only playing USTA and UTR matches. And 2. USTA results are included in UTR calculations, but it doesn't work the other way around. 3. If you're trying to boost your UTR significantly, it seems like playing USTA matches are more valuable than UTR matches. You're not "limited" to playing someone within 1.5 points of your own UTR when you plan USTA matches. You just pick a level (e.g., 5.0) and let the UTR chips fall where they may.
 
#63
UTR is dumb in not recording high school matches, I’ve got some matches that are good, bad, all over the place.

5-7 6-2 10-2 W over a 7
6-1 6-2 W over a 7
5-7 6-3 4-6 L to a 6
3-6 6-4 0-6 L to an 8

I am a UTR 7 but my issue is that none of my HS matches are recorded. They also don’t record JTT matches. I hold a win over an 8 and I got revenge (8-3) over the 6 I lost to during high school season. Yet again it doesn’t count. UTR doesn’t measure this and it’s annoying, luckily I have a profile on a website (OhioTennisZone) which records my high school results, and all coaches can see them, which is good.
 
#64
UTR is dumb in not recording high school matches, I’ve got some matches that are good, bad, all over the place.

5-7 6-2 10-2 W over a 7
6-1 6-2 W over a 7
5-7 6-3 4-6 L to a 6
3-6 6-4 0-6 L to an 8

I am a UTR 7 but my issue is that none of my HS matches are recorded. They also don’t record JTT matches. I hold a win over an 8 and I got revenge (8-3) over the 6 I lost to during high school season. Yet again it doesn’t count. UTR doesn’t measure this and it’s annoying, luckily I have a profile on a website (OhioTennisZone) which records my high school results, and all coaches can see them, which is good.
Our JTT matches get recorded every year. The results get entered in Tennis Link, and My UTR grabs them from there. Also, it's up to the HS league to report their match results somewhere, either to the USTA or UTR. Too many coaches/commissioners are too lazy to do the reporting. So the problem isn't really the UTR folks.
 
#65
Our JTT matches get recorded every year. The results get entered in Tennis Link, and My UTR grabs them from there. Also, it's up to the HS league to report their match results somewhere, either to the USTA or UTR. Too many coaches/commissioners are too lazy to do the reporting. So the problem isn't really the UTR folks.
Mine don’t, weird.

Ok, what I’m trying to say is that UTR should let players manually put in results but they should be approved (like an official picture of the newspaper reporting the hs match score).

I’m getting recruited by schools atm, but I don’t have a UTR, only a “Pending” UTR of 7 from like 3 matches at tournaments. Not only do I not have time to play the 15 or so matches to get an official rating, I don’t have that sort of money. One tournament here in my area costs $65, One tournament guarantees 2 matches, so 7.5 tournaments I need to play. 65x7.5 equals $487. One clinic at my club is $28. And it’s actually useful because I play multiple opponents improving all aspects of my game as the clinic goes on. There’s 2 clinics a week, meaning I could go to about 8-10 weeks or so of clinics and that would equal the amount of money I’d pay for 7-8 tournaments.

Also one HS season of tennis in my area is about 20 matches. The season fee is $175. Way better deal.
 
#66
The only hope I see in UTR is that it could lead to an entity that gives tennis players at all levels, especially the juniors, an opportunity to play in tournaments outside the USTA and other federations and their influence. If it’s run for profit, I believe the quality and popularity of the sport will be revived. American tennis needs someone like Lamar Hunt again this time to take control of junior tennis away from the USTA and the ITF (or any other non-profit association of hackers and amateurs who want to control a sport that they don’t know how to play just to be in a position inside the organization to receive personal benefits from a wealthy donor class) and to put it into the hands of people who know how to create an environment that produces once again high-quality American world champions. As a result, the entire tennis industry will prosper.
 
#67
Mine don’t, weird.

Ok, what I’m trying to say is that UTR should let players manually put in results but they should be approved (like an official picture of the newspaper reporting the hs match score).

I’m getting recruited by schools atm, but I don’t have a UTR, only a “Pending” UTR of 7 from like 3 matches at tournaments. Not only do I not have time to play the 15 or so matches to get an official rating, I don’t have that sort of money. One tournament here in my area costs $65, One tournament guarantees 2 matches, so 7.5 tournaments I need to play. 65x7.5 equals $487. One clinic at my club is $28. And it’s actually useful because I play multiple opponents improving all aspects of my game as the clinic goes on. There’s 2 clinics a week, meaning I could go to about 8-10 weeks or so of clinics and that would equal the amount of money I’d pay for 7-8 tournaments.

Also one HS season of tennis in my area is about 20 matches. The season fee is $175. Way better deal.
Fabresque, do they have UTR tournaments where you are? They typically cost half of what they charge for USTA tournaments. The one we're in today here in Maryland was $35.00, and you get swag for registering. (Some UTR tourneys even include prize $.)
 
#68
Fabresque, do they have UTR tournaments where you are? They typically cost half of what they charge for USTA tournaments. The one we're in today here in Maryland was $35.00, and you get swag for registering. (Some UTR tourneys even include prize $.)
Few and far between, there’s one about 35 minutes from where I live at Denison Univ., but that’s about it. A couple others in Cincy but yea.
 
#69
Mine don’t, weird.

Ok, what I’m trying to say is that UTR should let players manually put in results but they should be approved (like an official picture of the newspaper reporting the hs match score)....Also one HS season of tennis in my area is about 20 matches. The season fee is $175. Way better deal.
I have mixed feelings about the entry of HS results because UTR only calculates ratings based on 30 matches. Way back in 2015, local area HS's had the opportunity to enter match results into UTR in a pilot program.The coach decided not to enter results because all the singles' players UTRs would go down-not because of losses but because they would drop wins vs tournament players which would be replaced by wins vs much lower HS players. The few guys on the team that did not play tourneys-only played dubs which were not in UTR at the time. In our area, the singles players for the better teams were almost always 3-5 star tournament players playing 80-100 USTA matches a year in addition to HS matches. If the HS matches had been included, the results feeding into their uTR would have rotated out every 3 months or less. if UTR had been forced on the teams, the singles players would have quit. The higher UTR players played for the team atmosphere, the chance to go deep in state playoffs, and also for the 30-40% of matches that were actually competitive (vs opponents who also played high level sectionals) and were cheaper to play than USTA tourneys.However, there were plenty of other teams outside the tennis hotspot areas that would have benefited for match entry, and those guys possibly could have been candidates for NAIA and lower D2 and D3 schools.

There is no longer a good ranking system for juniors. TRN does not include ITA summer circuit, UTR events, men's opens, Futures, etc; it does include some junior ITFs. However, it does include 12 months of results, but so many juniors and seniors play excluded events it is starting to lose its significance esp for seniors. Some players may claim to be late bloomers as their TRN goes up 50-100 rankings 2nd semester of their senior year, but part of that reason is 45-50 4 star to blue chip players fall off TRN-are labeled as UR because they did not play enough jr USTA their senior year.

Conversely UTR assumes 30 matches of any catergory-junior, adult USTA/ITF/UTR captures the essence of the player's ability. That would an accurate assumption if matchplay was homogeneous across the year. However, in different seasons of the year, players play on different surfaces with different scoring formats vs different level of opponents. The high school player, the bench Power player, the MM player, and the D3 player might play much higher ranked players during the summer at opens and Futures. The Florida juniors may have the highest rankings May-Labor Day when more clay is played while the Eastern and ******* players may be ranked higher in the winter as they may have more experience indoors. Also just the section where players are located affects UTR; some sections have 32-64 draw sectional tourneys while others may have 128-170+ draws at sectional tourneys. Players in stronger and/or bigger sections will have their UTR turnaround twice as quick as players in smaller/weaker sections. High ranked college players who play no ads during college year may have tighter matches than they expect vs juniors in the summer when they have to go 3 hours in a 3 setter. HS kids who take tough courses and only train a couple hours a week during school year and 20-30 hrs in the summer have gone from 2 stars to 4 stars in 3 months and of course their UTR jumps. To avoid significant cycling of UTR (+/- .5), UTR should include 12 months of results. We know one guy who was in contact with a college coach who stopped contact when his UTR dropped; however the player was still going up on TRN-he got caught on the wrong end of the cycling.

Here is a link to blog from uTR on entering high school results https://blog.universaltennis.com/2017/09/02/utr-launches-team-match-reporting-tool-for-high-schools/ At least one difference from 2015, is UTR does not include the results of a match if the higher ranked player dominates and wins against a player 2.5 UTR below. However, it is still disappointing to a player to see his UTR go down because he beat a player 2.45 below 1,0 causing a win vs a player 1.0 uTR higher to drop that was only 6-9 months old. Once during a busy summer of long state and sectional qualifiers when my son tried to fit in some local cheap opens in between, he played 18 matches in 3 1/2 weeks. he had a lot of UTR cycling-some in his favor and some out during recruiting.

A significant part of UTR is level of player played. By only including 30 matches, there is a disincentive for top junior and college players to play opens that attract juniors, collegians, pros, and adults in the summer. There is a player on a power team who dropped .35 on UTR from playing more than a dozen summer ITA circuit matches. He replaced wins and losses vs players on top 40 D1 teams with wins against players many with UTR 2.0 lower-

UTR will get better for all the more crossplay data exists. If UTR wants relevant crossplay, it needs to include a year's worth of matches or the guys with high UTRs may just skip summer tourneys (after Future draws drop next year) and practice among themselves. My son plays half or less the summer matches he used to. Players do not want to drop valuable wins to earn wins that drop them in UTR and could results in their placement in the B vs A flight in fall college invitationals or in their ITA regional Qualifier instead of main draw-even a .1 or .2 difference in UTR has that effect.

Good luck to you FAbreque in your recruiting journey. I am glad that with UTR tennis may get a lot less expensive for college hopefuls.Maybe recruits wont have to play tons of tourneys to get the ranking to be seen by coaches at Kzoo because coaches will recruit players for their UTR and agree to watch them at a closer regional tourney. That's the bright side. The dark side is the 30 match limit of UTR is causing juniors to drop out of backdraws and some college players to play less summer events. We all lose when we dont have the opportunity to play the best in the area, and UTR with its 30 match limits make rob us of that chance.
 
#70
Now that I think about it, UTR is one of the most flawed systems out there. My friend played HS tennis and got a 3 set win over a 9 and went 3 sets with a 10. He plays in a 5.0 league and apparently his UTR is a 5???? That makes 0 sense. The system is so broken yet UTR doesn’t recognize it. Silly.
 

MathGeek

Hall of Fame
#71
Every system boiling down real flesh and blood people to a single number is deeply flawed.

The more interesting question is which rating system is the best for a given purpose. I prefer UTR to NTRP because it is more useful for how I play tennis.
 

Fabresque

Professional
#72
Our JTT matches get recorded every year. The results get entered in Tennis Link, and My UTR grabs them from there. Also, it's up to the HS league to report their match results somewhere, either to the USTA or UTR. Too many coaches/commissioners are too lazy to do the reporting. So the problem isn't really the UTR folks.
Okay, they did enter in my JTT matches. I’m currently a 7 on the system.

I’m still bugged out that I have to play in over expensive tournaments just to get my UTR up... my goal is to get an 8 and go with that but it’s rough out here.
 
#73
Ok, what I’m trying to say is that UTR should let players manually put in results but they should be approved (like an official picture of the newspaper reporting the hs match score).
Not a big fan of UTR myself, but what you're describing would require a lot of effort for a relatively minimal return of results.

And why would we need yet another rating system based on ELO? Both UTR and USTA systems are already based on ELO.
The thing is USTA NTRP and UTR are actually pretty far from true Elo rating systems. It's more that they borrow the concept of estimating performance and grading based off that, which if you're actually trying to rank competitors accurately is almost required. It's not that there are too many "modified" Elo systems, but that there's no one devising a better one. Admittedly, UTR isn't common in my area, and I'm outside the historical target audience. But I don't see it showing that it addresses the big problems plaguing NTRP, and that's why it's a competing standard instead of a prevailing one. At the end of the day I'm not sure the NTRP system's "math" is wrong. It's just dealing with all of the variables is too hard.
 
#74
On a kinda funny note (well, at least funny to me) I was looking to see what the $90 a year premium gets you and one of the features is "Rating Precision (2 decimals)".

Seriously? WTH does that do for ANY player?

I dunno. That just made me giggle for sum reason.
 
#75
On a kinda funny note (well, at least funny to me) I was looking to see what the $90 a year premium gets you and one of the features is "Rating Precision (2 decimals)".

Seriously? WTH does that do for ANY player?

I dunno. That just made me giggle for sum reason.
I wouldn't pay a cent more than $75 for that kind of precision!
 

Fabresque

Professional
#76
On a kinda funny note (well, at least funny to me) I was looking to see what the $90 a year premium gets you and one of the features is "Rating Precision (2 decimals)".

Seriously? WTH does that do for ANY player?

I dunno. That just made me giggle for sum reason.
They had that without having to pay for that premium crap. Absolutely a joke.
 
#77
This is funny. But it looks like UTR has now added 4 new standards to the mix.

Initially there was one UTR. It was the One Rating to rule them all. This was the single metric that reflected how good every player was. Life was nice and simple back then.

Then they added a doubles rating. It's a number that is pretty close to the singles rating in most of the cases I've seen, but it's calculated using the average of the two players' doubles ratings and comparing it to the average of the other team's ratings. So now there are two.

Finally they've added the "verified" singles and doubles rating. It is calculated using just matches played in "verified" tournaments and leagues. I'm not sure that I play that much different in unverified events, but perhaps some players do. And now there are four.

Four ratings to rule them all. Ignore all the rest of them. They just complicate things.

(I'm waiting on the "UNIVERSAL" Universal Tennis Rating. That'll be a weighted average of the singles and doubles ratings. Then the "VERIFIED UNIVERSAL" Universal Tennis Rating will be Mac Daddy of them all)
 

MathGeek

Hall of Fame
#78
Both UTR and USTA systems are already based on ELO.
For me, the weaknesses of NTRP are that
1) there is no attempt for the rating to combine juniors, men, and women
2) results are always excluded unless the event is USTA sanctioned
3) maintaining/updating the rating requires an annual membership fee to USTA
4) the rating system is tied to a deeply flawed competitive structure that rewards purposeful manipulation such that purposeful manipulation is widespread

The strengths of UTR are
1) juniors, men, and women are combined so that there is a reasonable expectation that with sufficient data, meaningful comparisons will be possible
2) results of non-UTR sanctioned events are included (caveat, but not all)
3) no annual fee is required
4) there is no evidence of purposeful manipulation - in most UTR events, grouping is with similar skill levels, but there is no way to manipulate one's rating to be at the top of a skill level grouping
5) Since most UTR events are grouped only by skill level as reflected by UTR rating, one has a much more diverse set of opponents: men, women, and juniors

Fabresque, do they have UTR tournaments where you are? They typically cost half of what they charge for USTA tournaments. The one we're in today here in Maryland was $35.00, and you get swag for registering. (Some UTR tourneys even include prize $.)
In my neighborhood, UTR tournaments tend to be a bit more than USTA events: $50-$60 is typical. USTA events at the same location with the same organizer are often cheaper. However, I don't mind paying more for the advantages mentioned above. In fact, there are very few men's USTA tournaments, because getting critical mass of adult men at my skill level to participate is difficult, but since UTR includes ladies and juniors, there are several UTR options every month within a 45 minute drive. The cost advantage of USTA would only be relevant if both were available regularly - and then I'd have to deal with the sandbaggers. I don't think I've seen a single suspected sandbagger at a UTR event. Performance and outcomes have always been reasonable for their UTR rating.
 
#79
For me, the weaknesses of NTRP are that
getting critical mass of adult men at my skill level to participate is difficult, but since UTR includes ladies and juniors, there are several UTR options every month within a 45 minute drive.
So do you regularly see an event with a mix of adults and juniors, men and women? I find it interesting in the CA Championships that's going on right now not a single woman signed up out of the 270+ entrants. You know there are some college women that could have been competitive in the field in the earlier rounds of the event.

I don't think I've seen a single suspected sandbagger at a UTR event. Performance and outcomes have always been reasonable for their UTR rating.
Don't you think that this is because leagues aren't using UTR yet? I'm pretty sure when they are, it'll be easy for a 7 UTR to drop enough games to a 5 UTR to keep his/her rating low while still winning the match.
 
#80
So do you regularly see an event with a mix of adults and juniors, men and women? I find it interesting in the CA Championships that's going on right now not a single woman signed up out of the 270+ entrants. You know there are some college women that could have been competitive in the field in the earlier rounds of the event.



Don't you think that this is because leagues aren't using UTR yet? I'm pretty sure when they are, it'll be easy for a 7 UTR to drop enough games to a 5 UTR to keep his/her rating low while still winning the match.
The CA Championship is men's open event so they didn't open it to women. Though I do agree that it would have been really cool if they opened it up to women with separate prize money. I think they really missed out on some marketing hype by not doing it.
 
#81
This is funny. But it looks like UTR has now added 4 new standards to the mix.

Initially there was one UTR. It was the One Rating to rule them all. This was the single metric that reflected how good every player was. Life was nice and simple back then.

Then they added a doubles rating. It's a number that is pretty close to the singles rating in most of the cases I've seen, but it's calculated using the average of the two players' doubles ratings and comparing it to the average of the other team's ratings. So now there are two.

Finally they've added the "verified" singles and doubles rating. It is calculated using just matches played in "verified" tournaments and leagues. I'm not sure that I play that much different in unverified events, but perhaps some players do. And now there are four.

Four ratings to rule them all. Ignore all the rest of them. They just complicate things.

(I'm waiting on the "UNIVERSAL" Universal Tennis Rating. That'll be a weighted average of the singles and doubles ratings. Then the "VERIFIED UNIVERSAL" Universal Tennis Rating will be Mac Daddy of them all)
Business opportunity for you: draw data from the UTR website and create a UUTR. Then, throw in some Artificial Intelligence, Big Data Analytics, and Machine Learning and charge $50/yr for a UUUTR [Ultimate Universal UTR].
 

MathGeek

Hall of Fame
#82
Don't you think that this [absence of sandbagging] is because leagues aren't using UTR yet? I'm pretty sure when they are, it'll be easy for a 7 UTR to drop enough games to a 5 UTR to keep his/her rating low while still winning the match.
I think it is unlikely that sandbagging will ever be as widespread in UTR events as it is in NTRP for a couple reasons:
1. UTR events work with ranges that are not universally determined, but depend on the discretion of the individual organizer.
2. One does not have the pot of gold of a trip to sectionals or nationals as a potential reward.
3. In the ranges below 7 or 8, UTR is dominated by juniors who are actively working to increase their UTRs for status, scholarships, and the privilege of playing better players in upcoming events.
4. There is no "playing up" in UTR events, if a player once to improve with quality opponents, the player has to earn a good UTR.

Sure, some losers will sandbag any system. But it will be much rarer in UTR than it is in NTRP. Do you really expect many sandbagging adults to drop games on purpose to teenage girls and junior guys?
 

schmke

Hall of Fame
#83
I think it is unlikely that sandbagging will ever be as widespread in UTR events as it is in NTRP for a couple reasons:
1. UTR events work with ranges that are not universally determined, but depend on the discretion of the individual organizer.
2. One does not have the pot of gold of a trip to sectionals or nationals as a potential reward.
3. In the ranges below 7 or 8, UTR is dominated by juniors who are actively working to increase their UTRs for status, scholarships, and the privilege of playing better players in upcoming events.
4. There is no "playing up" in UTR events, if a player once to improve with quality opponents, the player has to earn a good UTR.

Sure, some losers will sandbag any system. But it will be much rarer in UTR than it is in NTRP. Do you really expect many sandbagging adults to drop games on purpose to teenage girls and junior guys?
All your points are ignoring the dynamics that will be introduced if leagues are played using UTR.

1. A league with any structure would not be an ad hoc assemblage of players at various levels with the league organizer choosing what levels play together. It would likely be a league with a flight of UTR 7's or UTR 6-7's, etc. Perhaps in its infancy the grouping is determined after everyone signs up, but as it grows there will become established levels/groups players expect to have.

2. Most leagues, especially of something sanctioned/organized by UTR, is going to have designs on having teams from different areas/states/etc. play each other at a Nationals. It may be this isn't there from the start, but if the league has any success it may grow to include this.

3. Sure, if UTR isn't used for leagues then UTR continues to be dominated by juniors. But the whole point of this discussion is what if UTR is used for leagues so your premise of it being dominated by juniors begins to change.

4. And what do you do when you don't have critical mass for the UTR 3-4 flight and players want to play? You said yourself in #1 that the ranges are at the discretion of the organizer so he decides to make it a UTR 3-5 flight and that certainly sounds like UTR 3's playing up against UTR 5's.

UTR works for what it does today because it caters to and serves a specific segment of players, primarily tournament players and even then primarily juniors and collegiate players. As soon as you try to apply it to other situations, it will suffer the same challenges any other system does.
 
#86
All your points are ignoring the dynamics that will be introduced if leagues are played using UTR.

1. A league with any structure would not be an ad hoc assemblage of players at various levels with the league organizer choosing what levels play together. It would likely be a league with a flight of UTR 7's or UTR 6-7's, etc. Perhaps in its infancy the grouping is determined after everyone signs up, but as it grows there will become established levels/groups players expect to have.

2. Most leagues, especially of something sanctioned/organized by UTR, is going to have designs on having teams from different areas/states/etc. play each other at a Nationals. It may be this isn't there from the start, but if the league has any success it may grow to include this.

3. Sure, if UTR isn't used for leagues then UTR continues to be dominated by juniors. But the whole point of this discussion is what if UTR is used for leagues so your premise of it being dominated by juniors begins to change.

4. And what do you do when you don't have critical mass for the UTR 3-4 flight and players want to play? You said yourself in #1 that the ranges are at the discretion of the organizer so he decides to make it a UTR 3-5 flight and that certainly sounds like UTR 3's playing up against UTR 5's.

UTR works for what it does today because it caters to and serves a specific segment of players, primarily tournament players and even then primarily juniors and collegiate players. As soon as you try to apply it to other situations, it will suffer the same challenges any other system does.
1. The current USTA groups are based on NTRP levels so having a smaller range of skill within a group or moving the overall level of a group is not practical. A group based on UTR could have 5 to 7 one year and 6 to 8 the following year. I remember this is something you wanted to see implemented with USTA in the past. Additionally, a region that can support smaller groups like 5-6 and 7-8 can do so. USTA is pegged to 5-8 whether there's 50 players in a league or 250.
2. Nationals ruins everything
3. UTR's resolution below 5 isn't usable for adults. Juniors start out at 5 or blow through that range within a year.
4. I played UTR tournaments with a UTR 4 first round opponent. I'm ok with this, I have stuff I can work on against a 4 UTR. In don't know if I would have that patience in league.
 
#87
How different should doubles and singles NTRP & UTR ratings be? (If it accurately reflected playing). It seems almost that doubles and singles are different games entirely, but the ratings don't reflect that.
 
#88
Okay .... decided in my mind that I was going to try and do a UTR event .... even if that meant traveling for it. Set my radius at 250 miles that lets me pick up LA/San Diego and the like .... set my time frame between now and March 1 ....

WHAT A JOKE ..... the claim that UTR is so darn wonderful because it blends men and women and blends adult and juniors .... well, no it sure as heck does not.

My search popped up 8 UTR tournaments in my search parameter
6 are only open to juniors under the age of 18 ..... well, so much for that blending of adult and juniors that people keep crowing about
1 is all UTRS and All genders .... BUT only 1 level .... tournament starts this weekend and has 0 (ZERO) entrants
1 is open to MALE ONLY ... so much for that blending of the genders .... y'all can stop talking about it any time ... AND has only 6 entrants (starts next weekend) and all juniors all male and all UTRs of 11 or higher

I increased my search to go through May 1st .... nothing changed ... these tournaments are open to juniors only

Entry fees are well more than double the fees of USTA tournaments .... so they may not be getting an annual membership out of you.... but do more than 2 events a year and you have payed way more than the USTA membership.
 
#89
Okay .... decided in my mind that I was going to try and do a UTR event .... even if that meant traveling for it. Set my radius at 250 miles that lets me pick up LA/San Diego and the like .... set my time frame between now and March 1 ....

WHAT A JOKE ..... the claim that UTR is so darn wonderful because it blends men and women and blends adult and juniors .... well, no it sure as heck does not.

My search popped up 8 UTR tournaments in my search parameter
6 are only open to juniors under the age of 18 ..... well, so much for that blending of adult and juniors that people keep crowing about
1 is all UTRS and All genders .... BUT only 1 level .... tournament starts this weekend and has 0 (ZERO) entrants
1 is open to MALE ONLY ... so much for that blending of the genders .... y'all can stop talking about it any time ... AND has only 6 entrants (starts next weekend) and all juniors all male and all UTRs of 11 or higher

I increased my search to go through May 1st .... nothing changed ... these tournaments are open to juniors only

Entry fees are well more than double the fees of USTA tournaments .... so they may not be getting an annual membership out of you.... but do more than 2 events a year and you have payed way more than the USTA membership.
I know this won't make you feel any better but its different from region to region. We have UTR events that fit your criteria once a month in this area. UTR enables organizers to hold these types of events, they don't organize them. Maybe look into organizing a UTR tournament yourself? They have some help on their website on how to do it.
 
#90
I know this won't make you feel any better but its different from region to region. We have UTR events that fit your criteria once a month in this area. UTR enables organizers to hold these types of events, they don't organize them. Maybe look into organizing a UTR tournament yourself? They have some help on their website on how to do it.
LOL ... I did find a few East of the Mississippi and overseas.... and no, I am not in for organizing a tournament myself .... even looking really far away, most of the tournaments are open to juniors only ... a few for all ages all genders.

I will happily stick with NTRP tournaments and USTA league .... at least they exist near me!
 
#91
Okay .... decided in my mind that I was going to try and do a UTR event .... even if that meant traveling for it. Set my radius at 250 miles that lets me pick up LA/San Diego and the like .... set my time frame between now and March 1 ....

WHAT A JOKE ..... the claim that UTR is so darn wonderful because it blends men and women and blends adult and juniors .... well, no it sure as heck does not.
Maybe it should read "UTR theoretically allows blending across groups."
 
#94
Okay .... decided in my mind that I was going to try and do a UTR event .... even if that meant traveling for it. Set my radius at 250 miles that lets me pick up LA/San Diego and the like .... set my time frame between now and March 1 ....

WHAT A JOKE ..... the claim that UTR is so darn wonderful because it blends men and women and blends adult and juniors .... well, no it sure as heck does not.
.
Great tourney going on now in Cali-unfortunately men only https://www.myutr.com/events/849?t=0 Unique feature of this tournament is staggered entry starting from UTR 3.0 all the way up to pro 15+. While the tourney is a week long, with staggered entry, most players will only play 2-3 days coming in at their level and continuing daily play if they prove they can beat higher ranked players. Today college players are playing top 50 US pros. I hope this will be a model that can be tweaked and used to set up regional tourneys with men, women, and juniors. This is a very large tourney with 200_ entrants and over 10 staggered levels. However, this model could be adapted for fewer levels of wider ranges depending on interest and entrant levels. Another great element of this tournament is that it drew former college players who had not played a tournament or league in 5-6 years. Now these guys played one event and will have a projected UTR ranking.

If there are more local/regional events, tourney expense will be cheaper due to local travel cost and hopefully less days of hotels with players only playing 1-3 days with staggered entries. USTA jr tourneys often had entry fees of $100+ so UTR fees seem reasonable for an event with crossplay between groups
 

MathGeek

Hall of Fame
#95
UTR works for what it does today because it caters to and serves a specific segment of players, primarily tournament players and even then primarily juniors and collegiate players. As soon as you try to apply it to other situations, it will suffer the same challenges any other system does.
That is possible, but mixing men, ladies, and juniors will always make it easier to achieve critical mass with players of comparable levels, because it removes the artificial distinctions. Also, the reduced incidence of sandbagging among juniors and college players will have the effect of diluting the sandbagging stupidity of the adult league players. Further, one hopes local organizers will have the power to deal with obvious sandbaggers without the bureaucracy-ridden USTA process.

One thing I've noticed about UTR events so far, is that the local directors have much more real power than USTA wonks. YOU will play in the group they assign you to, or you won't play. If they think you are sandbagging, they have complete power to place you in a different group. Sandbagging is empowered by USTA not allowing this level of local control. A sandbagging NTRP 4.0 cannot be excluded or forced to play up by local organizers. A sandbagging UTR 7.0 absolutely can be excluded or bumped to a higher group. Sandbagging only works in USTA because local organizers have to go along with it.
 
#96
That is possible, but mixing men, ladies, and juniors will always make it easier to achieve critical mass with players of comparable levels, because it removes the artificial distinctions. Also, the reduced incidence of sandbagging among juniors and college players will have the effect of diluting the sandbagging stupidity of the adult league players. Further, one hopes local organizers will have the power to deal with obvious sandbaggers without the bureaucracy-ridden USTA process.

One thing I've noticed about UTR events so far, is that the local directors have much more real power than USTA wonks. YOU will play in the group they assign you to, or you won't play. If they think you are sandbagging, they have complete power to place you in a different group. Sandbagging is empowered by USTA not allowing this level of local control. A sandbagging NTRP 4.0 cannot be excluded or forced to play up by local organizers. A sandbagging UTR 7.0 absolutely can be excluded or bumped to a higher group. Sandbagging only works in USTA because local organizers have to go along with it.
Empowering coordinators to make decisions if someone is sandbagging or not seems like corruption to me. While it may feel fair to you, consider how unfair it feels to the person being singled out as the sandbagger especially if they are innocent. That's one player you have lost forever if they are innocent. Also, some people just look good playing tennis but don't have the results.

Is it better to let a potential cheater go free? Or accidentally punish an innocent person?

Also, if a coordinator has a personal vendetta against someone or a particular group, can easily use their power under the guise of, while I thought they were sandbagging and looked too good.
 
#97
Empowering coordinators to make decisions if someone is sandbagging or not seems like corruption to me. While it may feel fair to you, consider how unfair it feels to the person being singled out as the sandbagger especially if they are innocent. That's one player you have lost forever if they are innocent. Also, some people just look good playing tennis but don't have the results.

Is it better to let a potential cheater go free? Or accidentally punish an innocent person?

Also, if a coordinator has a personal vendetta against someone or a particular group, can easily use their power under the guise of, while I thought they were sandbagging and looked too good.
To be honest I only know about one definitive sandbagger in the my area and he got the bump. I don't see it as being enough of a problem to require a solution. Especially since the only solution is to demotivate sandbagging by doing away with nationals.
 

MathGeek

Hall of Fame
#98
Is it better to let a potential cheater go free? Or accidentally punish an innocent person?
Aah, you labor under the misconception that participation in a tournament or league is a RIGHT.

It isn't. UTR organizers (so far) are independent entrepreneurs who are absolutely free to include or exclude participants as they see fit, subject only to civil rights laws regarding public accommodations. They need not bow to your sense of fairness. Nor do they need to disclose their reasons for bumping a player up or excluding them. Welcome to the real world.

I don't think there needs to be a universal answer to your question. FREEDOM and LOCAL CONTROL are the best option so each local organizer, guided by their own common sense and assessment regarding fairness and how their decision will impact their bottom line can make their own decision. So far, I've seen a lot of common sense and players that seem to be sandbagging placed with higher rated groups.

Is being placed in a higher group really a "punishment" for a seeming sandbagger who may be innocent? I don't see it as anything more than a reasonable exercise of director discretion. It's a free country. If the player objects, they can take their business elsewhere.
 
#99
Aah, you labor under the misconception that participation in a tournament or league is a RIGHT.

It isn't. UTR organizers (so far) are independent entrepreneurs who are absolutely free to include or exclude participants as they see fit, subject only to civil rights laws regarding public accommodations. They need not bow to your sense of fairness. Nor do they need to disclose their reasons for bumping a player up or excluding them. Welcome to the real world.

I don't think there needs to be a universal answer to your question. FREEDOM and LOCAL CONTROL are the best option so each local organizer, guided by their own common sense and assessment regarding fairness and how their decision will impact their bottom line can make their own decision. So far, I've seen a lot of common sense and players that seem to be sandbagging placed with higher rated groups.

Is being placed in a higher group really a "punishment" for a seeming sandbagger who may be innocent? I don't see it as anything more than a reasonable exercise of director discretion. It's a free country. If the player objects, they can take their business elsewhere.
I'm all for local control but allowing league coordinators to overwrite someone's NTRP level is too much power for one person to control.
 
Aah, you labor under the misconception that participation in a tournament or league is a RIGHT.

It isn't. UTR organizers (so far) are independent entrepreneurs who are absolutely free to include or exclude participants as they see fit, subject only to civil rights laws regarding public accommodations. They need not bow to your sense of fairness. Nor do they need to disclose their reasons for bumping a player up or excluding them. Welcome to the real world.

I don't think there needs to be a universal answer to your question. FREEDOM and LOCAL CONTROL are the best option so each local organizer, guided by their own common sense and assessment regarding fairness and how their decision will impact their bottom line can make their own decision. So far, I've seen a lot of common sense and players that seem to be sandbagging placed with higher rated groups.

Is being placed in a higher group really a "punishment" for a seeming sandbagger who may be innocent? I don't see it as anything more than a reasonable exercise of director discretion. It's a free country. If the player objects, they can take their business elsewhere.
I don't think its a right, just a bad look in general for UTR. We believe this system works but because cheating is so rampant, we allow all coordinators to randomly reject you and/or move you to a different UTR at their whim. If you play enough matches, UTR should quickly move you to the correct level anyways.

Also USTA removes/sanctions people too. It just takes more steps and more people involved then just 1 person arbitrarily deciding everything.
 
Top