Will there be a three-peat league national champion at 18+ 4.0M?

[TennisOTM]

The 2-time reigning 18+ 4.0M national champion captain has a new team, and his season starts tonight. Will he be able to pull off a three-peat? Here's some analysis of his new team, for those interested.

He has 22 rostered players, 11 computer rated and 11 self rated. Looking at the C-rated guys, most of them are not especially high on Tennisrecord, but there are 3 notable exceptions. One guy went 9-1 for him last year, 4-1 at Nationals, was a bump-up prediction on Tennisrecord (which tends to under-estimate), and somehow got rated 4.0C. Another guy went 6-0 at 40+ nationals last year, and a third went 5-0 last year, did not play at nationals but every one of his 5 matches was rated 3.99 or higher on Tennisrecord. It seems USTA really helped out this captain by not bumping up those 3 guys.

Then there are the 11 self-rated guys. Most if not all of them look like they fit the typical profile: guys in their early-to-mid 20's who were very good on their high school teams but did not play on college teams. For all but one of them you can find articles from sometime in the 2010's about their high school playoff successes. They all played some league doubles matches for the local winter league this year and they collectively lost only 1 match out of about 20. The trick will be getting the team to Nationals while using these guys sparingly enough to avoid DQ, which this captain has shown he knows how to do.

So what do you think - will he win it all yet again?

 

[silverwyvern4]

Is it the Mormon team?

 

[Creighton]

So what do you think - will he win it all yet again?

Yes.

 

[Vox Rationis]

The trick will be getting the team to Nationals while using these guys sparingly enough to avoid DQ, which this captain has shown he knows how to do.

So what do you think - will he win it all yet again?

They play so few matches to get through districts and sectionals that I don’t foresee it being a problem. They will be the favorites once again. I hope someone beats them.

 

[Cashman]

They play so few matches to get through districts and sectionals that I don’t foresee it being a problem. They will be the favorites once again. I hope someone beats them.

Why? These guys clearly have very little going on in their lives for this to be so important to them

I hope they get the W, they will probably appreciate it more than most

 

[TennisOTM]

And they're off! 4-1 team victory in match 1 last night. The loss went to two of the C-rated guys at 3D against a strong pair. Surprisingly the captain put one of his S-rated guys at singles: 6-2, 6-2 win over a 3.60 (Tennisrecord). Probably won't be a strike, but could be risky.

 

[Creighton]

And they're off! 4-1 team victory in match 1 last night. The loss went to two of the C-rated guys at 3D against a strong pair. Surprisingly the captain put one of his S-rated guys at singles: 6-2, 6-2 win over a 3.60 (Tennisrecord). Probably won't be a strike, but could be risky.

Wonder what it is like playing these guys in the local league?

 

[silverwyvern4]

If I face the team, should I ask for photo ID to confirm identities before each match?

 

[Moon Shooter]

I hope they win. It brought some new blood (not to mention sweat and tears) to the forums and made them more entertaining to read.

 

[Matthew ATX]

11 self-rated players is absolutely ridiculous. It should be capped at like 2. Or, have as many as you want but if you have more than 2 you are not allowed to go to Sectionals. Get them all computer rated and try again next year.

 

[Vox Rationis]

11 self-rated players is absolutely ridiculous. It should be capped at like 2. Or, have as many as you want but if you have more than 2 you are not allowed to go to Sectionals. Get them all computer rated and try again next year.

I strongly disagree with policies that limit the growth of tennis. Capping how many new players can play before your team gets dq'd seems antithesis to the growth of the sport. I'd rather more strongly regulate what level they can play rather than not have them be able to play at all.

 

[ChaelAZ]

I am sure they are just growing the sport with 11 self-rated players, and also sure they appropriately SR'd themselves to make sure to align with and have at level play. Just wanted to get them back for the fun of it and totally not about stacking a team. Probably no other regular players around at that level that could be on the team too. All in the spirit of sportsmanship and competition.

But, right...no rules or oversight against it, so no harm, no foul as they say.

 

[J_R_B]

11 self-rated players is absolutely ridiculous. It should be capped at like 2. Or, have as many as you want but if you have more than 2 you are not allowed to go to Sectionals. Get them all computer rated and try again next year.

I strongly disagree with policies that limit the growth of tennis. Capping how many new players can play before your team gets dq'd seems antithesis to the growth of the sport. I'd rather more strongly regulate what level they can play rather than not have them be able to play at all.

I agree with Vox. This unduly punishes teams that do everything right. The better answer is to actually address the specific situations where people are clearly manipulating the system.

 

[Vox Rationis]

I am sure they are just growing the sport with 11 self-rated players, and also sure they appropriately SR'd themselves to make sure to align with and have at level play. Just wanted to get them back for the fun of it and totally not about stacking a team. Probably no other regular players around at that level that could be on the team too. All in the spirit of sportsmanship and competition.

But, right...no rules or oversight against it, so no harm, no foul as they say.

Rules have to apply to everyone though. You can't just make a rule that harms correctly rated new players across the country in an attempt to keep one team from winning.

 

[Chalkdust]

I agree with Vox. This unduly punishes teams that do everything right. The better answer is to actually address the specific situations where people are clearly manipulating the system.

Dear J_R_B,

In response to your thoughtful suggestion, and to help us correctly target the miscreants, kindly define "clearly manipulating the system".

Regards,
USTA

 

[TennisOTM]

Yeah, a rule against too many self rates on one team would be a tough one. In this case the captain is clearly planning to use the self rated players in a bid for another national championship. On the other hand, these players would almost definitely not be playing league at all if not for this captain's recruitment, so they are growing the league without taking away spots from other people. This 4.0 league has more teams and players this year than it has had in several years. Also, the team's home courts are located the farthest south in the district, and most of these guys seem to live down there. So I think for most of them this would be their natural team to choose even if they had decided to sign up on their own.

 

[ChaelAZ]

Rules have to apply to everyone though. You can't just make a rule that harms correctly rated new players across the country in an attempt to keep one team from winning.

What harm would a simple rule that says a first year SR cannot compete in nationals to establish their C rating? It would require them to at least compete in 3 matches per season so a good sample over a year. That could be applied across the board and I am willing to bet, aside from obvious stacking of a team, any S rated player coming back wouldn't give too much care to not being able to compete there the first year. Won't keep those S rated rings from managing ratings and sandbagging, but sure makes it a long game for them and forces captains to use and roster rated players to make a run at nationals, if that is what their end game is.

We've had several S rated players come on our teams over the years and for us most were just walk-ons looking to pick up the sport again, though we did recruit a few. Just not enough to make a huge difference even if we dd make Nationals.

Any rule applied would have to be applied across the board, sure. And the results might mess with players on the recruitment side and the stacking team sides, but doubt the larger portion of players coming into leagues would be adversly effected. More of an incovience.

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

No nationals 1st year S rate?
Self rate 3.5, lose , tank, become 3.5c, go to nationals. We are focusing on Utah, other sections play the long game. Utah would adapt and do this over 2 seasons and instantly be back.

 

[Matthew ATX]

I strongly disagree with policies that limit the growth of tennis. Capping how many new players can play before your team gets dq'd seems antithesis to the growth of the sport. I'd rather more strongly regulate what level they can play rather than not have them be able to play at all.

So you think they'd be more likely to stick around if they couldn't play on the team they want to join at all because they were forced to immediately rate up a level higher than they wanted to, than if they were allowed to rate at the level they want and just had to sit out the post-season the first year? I don't agree with that. I mean, I'm fine with doing it that way (good luck forcing people to correctly self-rate) but if growing the game is the goal, I think that way would cost you more players than the other way.

 

[Vox Rationis]

So you think they'd be more likely to stick around if they couldn't play on the team they want to join at all because they were forced to immediately rate up a level higher than they wanted to, than if they were allowed to rate at the level they want and just had to sit out the post-season the first year? I don't agree with that. I mean, I'm fine with doing it that way (good luck forcing people to correctly self-rate) but if growing the game is the goal, I think that way would cost you more players than the other way.

No I'm saying what happens to them shouldn't adversely affect the majority of honest self-rates outside of just them. Doesn't matter if those specific guys stick around. You're talking about everyone having to sit out the post season their first year vs just a handful of fringe cases being forced to rate up. One policy hurts everyone. The other just the targeted individuals.

 

[denoted]

Do any of these Utah guys play 4.5 after their inevitable bump? How is that going, if so?

 

[Creighton]

Do any of these Utah guys play 4.5 after their inevitable bump? How is that going, if so?

Some of them have to play 5.0 the following year. Some of them never play again.

He has a 4.5 team this year and his ringers from the past years are on it. Looks like they won 3-2 their first match against the team who went to sectionals last year with blowouts on two courts.

 

[Moon Shooter]

11 self-rated players is absolutely ridiculous. It should be capped at like 2. Or, have as many as you want but if you have more than 2 you are not allowed to go to Sectionals. Get them all computer rated and try again next year.

I proposed that self rate sheets be a minimum and people play matches to get their rating before they can play on a team that requires a rating.

I was told if people play matches where post season play is not on the line they will just tank all the matches and get a low rating. If they are correct then with your proposal they will play their first season with no hope of going post season tank all their matches and be ready to win next year.

 

[TennisOTM]

Do any of these Utah guys play 4.5 after their inevitable bump? How is that going, if so?

He has a 4.5 team this year and his ringers from the past years are on it. Looks like they won 3-2 their first match against the team who went to sectionals last year with blowouts on two courts.

He's not the captain of or a player on that 4.5 team, though they do play out of his home facility - could just be because they live in the area (his main recruiting base). One of his very best self-rated ringers from last year, DQ'ed after Nationals, played his first 4.5 singles in that match and won 6-4, 7-6 against a former D2 college player.

 

[Creighton]

He's not the captain of or a player on that 4.5 team, though they do play out of his home facility - could just be because they live in the area (his main recruiting base). One of his very best self-rated ringers from last year, DQ'ed after Nationals, played his first 4.5 singles in that match and won 6-4, 7-6 against a former D2 college player.

Pretty sure he owns the facility they play out of, right?

 

[Matthew ATX]

No I'm saying what happens to them shouldn't adversely affect the majority of honest self-rates outside of just them. Doesn't matter if those specific guys stick around. You're talking about everyone having to sit out the post season their first year vs just a handful of fringe cases being forced to rate up. One policy hurts everyone. The other just the targeted individuals.

No, that's not what I said.

 

[Matthew ATX]

I proposed that self rate sheets be a minimum and people play matches to get their rating before they can play on a team that requires a rating.

I was told if people play matches where post season play is not on the line they will just tank all the matches and get a low rating. If they are correct then with your proposal they will play their first season with no hope of going post season tank all their matches and be ready to win next year.

I don't know what the bold even means. Every USTA team requires a rating. How is anyone supposed to get matches if they can't join a team at all before playing matches?

 

[Cashman]

I am sure they are just growing the sport with 11 self-rated players, and also sure they appropriately SR'd themselves to make sure to align with and have at level play. Just wanted to get them back for the fun of it and totally not about stacking a team. Probably no other regular players around at that level that could be on the team too. All in the spirit of sportsmanship and competition.

But, right...no rules or oversight against it, so no harm, no foul as they say.

the wicked envy and hate… it is their way of admiring

 

[Moon Shooter]

I don't know what the bold even means. Every USTA team requires a rating. How is anyone supposed to get matches if they can't join a team at all before playing matches?

Usta could rate matches before you join a team that requires a rating of a certain level. Similar to your idea except new players could qualify for post season play.

 

[Moon Shooter]

What harm would a simple rule that says a first year SR cannot compete in nationals to establish their C rating? It would require them to at least compete in 3 matches per season so a good sample over a year.

So they can win lower levels with the self rate but then just at nationals they can’t play them? I think other teams they beat at lower levels would feel cheated too right? Or could only teams that never play self rates play at nationals?


IMO if a person is going to throw games to keep their rating down there is very little usta can do to prevent that. But there is also little evidence this team did that. If Usta simply used the rate sheet as a floor and had these people play some rated matches before they could join a rating restricted team the problem would have been solved. No need to disallow first year players or their teams from post season play.

 

[Pass750]

Don’t people have anything better to do in life than game a system and win events where they beat up on lesser players? They must be so proud of themselves.

 

[J_R_B]

Usta could rate matches before you join a team that requires a rating of a certain level. Similar to your idea except new players could qualify for post season play.

This is still one of the dumbest ideas that's ever been proposed on this board, and you're still clinging to it with badger-like tenacity. Impressive.

 

[Creighton]

This is still one of the dumbest ideas that's ever been proposed on this board, and you're still clinging to it with badger-like tenacity. Impressive.

It would be comical watching all of the 0-6, 0-6 results that would occur in these matches.

 

[leech]

Some of them have to play 5.0 the following year. Some of them never play again.

He has a 4.5 team this year and his ringers from the past years are on it. Looks like they won 3-2 their first match against the team who went to sectionals last year with blowouts on two courts.

I played a 3.5S from one of these super-teams at the 2018 40+ 3.5 Nationals. He went like 9-1 at 18+/40+ 4.0 Nationals in 2019, then got double-bumped to 5.0 for 2020! He went 2-0 as a 5.0 then stopped playing USTA leagues (moved out of the area, too), last I checked.

 

[Vox Rationis]

No, that's not what I said.

Obviously I meant everyone meaning everyone who fits your qualifications (more than 2 self-rates on a team). But that rule would apply evenly everywhere affecting more proper self-rates than it would improper. How is that supposed to be better? It's a competition and yet new players shouldn't be allowed to compete?

 

[Creighton]

Obviously I meant everyone meaning everyone who fits your qualifications (more than 2 self-rates on a team). But that rule would apply evenly everywhere affecting more proper self-rates than it would improper. How is that supposed to be better? It's a competition and yet new players shouldn't be allowed to compete?

If you’re “competing” at sectionals in your first season, you’re not rated properly.

 

[Moon Shooter]

It would be comical watching all of the 0-6, 0-6 results that would occur in these matches.

You have the most out of touch view of tennis players I have ever seen. Especially players that are new to USTA. Go ahead and captain a team and tell players brand new to USTA to start throwing their very first matches so you can cheat and win nationals. See how that works for you.

This thread and the others are delightful. Because the rules of this game are a mockery for most of the country except certain tennis hot spots. And you guys from these hotspots try to defend the rules and say anyone proposing different rules are idiots. But you cry and accuse others of cheating or being dishonest when they beat you even though you can't point to a single rule they violated or false statement they made. And you and some others from southern are especially interesting because you openly claim you "cheat" but you just seem upset that they are just better at "cheating." But wanting to know whether the captain half way across the country owns certain property etc. I think you are taking this stuff way to seriously.

Stop acting like a spoiled child. Either explain how you think the rules should be changed, or stop crying "unfair" every time others beat you by those rules.

 

[Creighton]

You have the most out of touch view of tennis players I have ever seen. Especially players that are new to USTA. Go ahead and captain a team and tell players brand new to USTA to start throwing their very first matches so you can cheat and win nationals. See how that works for you.

This thread and the others are delightful. Because the rules of this game are a mockery for most of the country except certain tennis hot spots. And you guys from these hotspots try to defend the rules and say anyone proposing different rules are idiots. But you cry and accuse others of cheating or being dishonest when they beat you even though you can't point to a single rule they violated or false statement they made. And you and some others from southern are especially interesting because you openly claim you "cheat" but you just seem upset that they are just better at "cheating." But wanting to know whether the captain half way across the country owns certain property etc. I think you are taking this stuff way to seriously.

Stop acting like a spoiled child. Either explain how you think the rules should be changed, or stop crying "unfair" every time others beat you by those rules.

Moonie, you’ve played one season of 6.5 mixed. You already complained about your opponents who beat you at 7.0 mixed this year. You made another post about people being rated incorrectly in your area( you just blamed the USTA instead of your opponents.)

I can’t wait for you to run into some real sandbaggers. Your tune is going to change.

Maybe you should just accept the fact I have a lot more experience than you when it comes to USTA. I also am a lot more connected with how you win “within” the current rules.

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

If you enjoy discussing rules changes, no big deal, it's interesting to see the ideas. But, USTA will always be reacting and under-resourced to stop determined 4.0 trophy hunters. Like therapy, the solution is to treat the problem, but I don't think that is possible. However, if you could somehow shift the idea of competition to wanting to be a 4.5 or wanting to get to the highest number/rating as a badge of honor, that would solve it all . Again, it's impossible.

I think some people have unique personalities that drive them to reshape tennis competition so that it not only includes beating people in a competitive match, but tennis competition includes winning at any level. Winning a trophy when you already know before you walk on the court you will win is the same as earning a trophy through real competition.

I watched too much netflix in the pandemic, but one theme in the world is sex drives men to do some unusual things, to create wealth, to create cults, to invent religions, etc. while ending up mostly a tool for shenanigans. I often wonder if an obsession to getting to nationals is "related" to that, I've seen myself and heard of many tales of parties and hooking up on these trips.

 

[Moon Shooter]

Moonie, you’ve played one season of 6.5 mixed. You already complained about your opponents who beat you at 7.0 mixed this year. You made another post about people being rated incorrectly in your year( you just blamed the USTA instead of your opponents.

I can’t wait for you to run into some real sandbaggers. Your tune is going to change.

Maybe you should just accept the fact I have a lot more experience than you when it comes to USTA. I also am a lot more connected with how you win “within” the current rules.

Creighton that is correct I blame the rules when the rules are to blame not the players that are just playing by the rules set by USTA. The players I mentioned did nothing wrong. They honestly filled out the sheet and played all their games as best they could. The fact that USTA doesn't rate the games is not their fault! The fact that USTA's rules are such that if someone is playing mixed doubles two levels below where they should be is not their fault. I am sure that if USTA bumped them up mid year they would be fine with it and likely even happy that they performed well as shown by the rating system!

I know you are much more connected with USTA. I think that is why your sense of tennis players is so warped. Most players I know want to get a higher rating.

I have played on 2 teams and will be playing on at least 3 more and captaining my own team. If captains told people new to USTA that they want them to throw matches to tank their rating word would quickly spread. Everyone in my community would correctly believe those captains are dishonest and want to have no association with them. People I play tennis with are often professionals and their reputation is so much more important than winning sections in adult rec tennis that I am surprised by this culture USTA's rules and emphasis foster.

Now after a captain and a teammate has been involved with USTA for a while might that happen? I take your word for it. But that is not happening with the vast majority of new self rates. Its only guys like you that have been with USTA for a long time and therefore mostly not new self rated players like the guys on Utah.

The people on the Utah team were DQed and bumped because they did not throw games. The DQ's only punish people that are unwilling to throw games.


Matthew ATX proposed an idea that would take away the issue of self rates. People like you think oh well everyone will then throw games their first year if they can't make it to post season so next year they can win. I don't think that is the case. But I do think VOX makes a good point that it might be hard to recruit new players to USTA if they will only qualify for post season play their second year. I also think there are some logistical issues with how that would work as I posted in response to Chael. But at least he is proposing solutions and not just slandering other tennis players that he has never even met creating a toxic environment.

 

[TennisOTM]

Pretty sure he owns the facility they play out of, right?

Yes, it's a new facility and there are about a dozen 18+ teams playing out of there, across several levels men/women. As far as I know he only has an active hand on the one 4.0 men's team, but I could be wrong.

 

[denoted]

I watched too much netflix in the pandemic, but one theme in the world is sex drives men to do some unusual things, to create wealth, to create cults, to invent religions, etc. while ending up mostly a tool for shenanigans. I often wonder if an obsession to getting to nationals is "related" to that, I've seen myself and heard of many tales of parties and hooking up on these trips.

From what I've seen of the league demographic, I find this somewhat incredible. Parties, sure, if you mean some guys drinking beer. But hooking up? Dehydrated and sunburnt middle-aged people in Arizona or Orlando? I suppose it's possible.

 

[Moon Shooter]

If you enjoy discussing rules changes, no big deal, it's interesting to see the ideas. But, USTA will always be reacting and under-resourced to stop determined 4.0 trophy hunters. Like therapy, the solution is to treat the problem, but I don't think that is possible. However, if you could somehow shift the idea of competition to wanting to be a 4.5 or wanting to get to the highest number/rating as a badge of honor, that would solve it all . Again, it's impossible.

I agree with much of what you say, especially the bolded part. IMO that is really the cornerstone that will make USTA and leagues less toxic, corrupt, and overall healthier. But I don't think that is impossible. It is a spectrum not an on off switch. USTA is openly saying they are trying to do the opposite of the bolded. Listen to Heather's interview with Ian from essential tennis. That is why they don't publish dynamic ratings etc. USTA makes many decisions that emphasize the importance of nationals and de-emphasizes the importance of ratings. This is why USTA suffers in non-hotspots.

I am mostly interested in the rating. That is why I am trying to promote UTR in my area - even though it has some major flaws USTA seems to intentionally make their ratings vague and unclear. If someone here says they won nationals at 3.5 that is far less impressive then if they have achieved a 9.8 UTR. I mean both are nice and I think the whole post season is a good thing. It is just a matter of the emphasis USTA puts on it compared to creating a good transparent rating system that players will understand and value.

I think some people have unique personalities that drive them to reshape tennis competition so that it not only includes beating people in a competitive match, but tennis competition includes winning at any level. Winning a trophy when you already know before you walk on the court you will win is the same as earning a trophy through real competition.

I watched too much netflix in the pandemic, but one theme in the world is sex drives men to do some unusual things, to create wealth, to create cults, to invent religions, etc. while ending up mostly a tool for shenanigans. I often wonder if an obsession to getting to nationals is "related" to that, I've seen myself and heard of many tales of parties and hooking up on these trips.

I never thought that winning these adult rec tennis events would make me appear more attractive to women. But I guess it is not a matter of whether it actually will, but rather whether some guys think it will.

 

[Creighton]

Everyone in my community would correctly believe those captains are dishonest and want to have no association with them. People I play tennis with are often professionals and their reputation is so much more important than winning sections

You have to really give up on this strawman argument that your area is somehow different and morally superior to the rest of us.

Tennis is an upper class sport. We are all doctors, lawyers, accountants, professors, and businessmen as well. One year we actually had a dentist have his doctor buddy give him a very "favorable" diagnosis to win a medical appeal.

You're an attorney. Of all people you should know it isn't slander if it's true.

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

I never thought that winning these adult rec tennis events would make me appear more attractive to women. But I guess it is not a matter of whether it actually will, but rather whether some guys think it will.

Oh, it's not even really about being seen as attractive, it's the opportunity to spend a weekend/week away from the wife or husband and kids and drink, a lot of drinking. Not everyone, but again, after watching too much Netflix, sex can make people do strange things, such as spend months trying to get to a tennis tournament out of town .

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

You have to really give up on this strawman argument that your area is somehow different and morally superior to the rest of us.

Tennis is an upper class sport. We are all doctors, lawyers, accountants, professors, and businessmen as well. One year we actually had a dentist have his doctor buddy give him a very "favorable" diagnosis to win a medical appeal.

You're an attorney. Of all people you should know it isn't slander if it's true.

Reeeeeel it back in a bit fellas. Moon, a profession doesn't immunize a rec tennis player from shenanigans. Some doctors/lawyers/entrepreneurs have such god complexes they won't care and are wealthy enough they don't need to care about a reputation. However, in general, the captains doing this are retired and the teams are young people self-rating. The professions that require many hours per work week aren't messing with this stuff.

Creighton, I don't think he was saying anything about being in a superior area, he's just relating what he thinks might happen in his area.

Anyway, carry on.

 

[J_R_B]

And you guys from these hotspots try to defend the rules and say anyone proposing different rules are idiots.

Not anyone, just you, and only because your proposals are idiotic.

 

[Vox Rationis]

If you’re “competing” at sectionals in your first season, you’re not rated properly.

And not many do. That doesn't mean we should take the option away from them.

 

[Moon Shooter]

Reeeeeel it back in a bit fellas. Moon, a profession doesn't immunize a rec tennis player from shenanigans. Some doctors/lawyers/entrepreneurs have such god complexes they won't care and are wealthy enough they don't need to care about a reputation. However, in general, the captains doing this are retired and the teams are young people self-rating. The professions that require many hours per work week aren't messing with this stuff.

Creighton, I don't think he was saying anything about being in a superior area, he's just relating what he thinks might happen in his area.

Anyway, carry on.

Yes I am speaking of the people in my area. Even if they are retired they would not tell new players to throw games. I am not saying the people are necessarily ethical - although I give them that presumption. My point is even if they were unethical you wouldn't ask young people that are new to USTA to throw games. Just like you don't ask someone you just met if they want to rob a bank with you. Because that behavior is obviously unethical so their answer is likely to be "no" and they are likely to tell others about your immoral behavior. As for players that have been involved in USTA for considerable lengths of time well sure that may have a corrupting influence because USTA emphasizes winning this post season play so much.

If you ask new players to answer the questions on a questionnaire honestly and go with the lowest rating it gives them, there is nothing obviously immoral about that. In fact I don't think there is anything immoral about that at all. Look at all the teams that were blown out in their flight, district or state or regionals only to have the team they lost to get blown out by some other team at the next round. Did they all "know" what 4.0 meant? Who really knows what it means to be a 4.0 Creighton? The only thing we know is what USTA tells us. If USTA gives people a rating based on games or answers to a some questionnaire and based on that they say you are X rating then how are we to know different? Blaming people because they honestly fill out a self rate sheet that USTA designed is completely blaming the wrong party for your perceived injustice.

 

[Creighton]

And not many do. That doesn't mean we should take the option away from them.

It's a line drawing issue. You're either going to be under inclusive or over inclusive.

The reality is that allowing self rates to participate in the playoffs encourages the cheating behavior. You either punish the C rated players or you punish the S rated players. It seems better to punish the latter.