Confronting the USTA - Ratings, Sandbagging and League questions ANSWERED
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 окт 2024
- #1 Amazon new release for tennis book - Essential Tennis: www.amazon.com... Order your copy today and learn from my top 38 principles for tennis success!
------------
Get your FREE membership to ET Academy and IMPROVE your game now:
Grab 15% off Diadem racquets, strings, bags and more using this discount link: diademsports.c...
------------
Follow this simple, free 7-Step checklist in your very next match for smarter, more effective play: essentialtenni...
------------
Looking for the perfect practice partner, match play partner, or qualified coach in your local area? PlayYourCourt will send them directly to the court of your choice! This is the greatest resource on the planet for passionate players looking to maximize their improvement: www.playyourco...
------------
MORE HELPFUL LESSONS:
Why Your Forehand is WEAK
• Why Your Forehand is W...
Steal Roger’s Secret Strategy
• Steal Roger's Secret S...
World’s Most Annoying Tennis Opponent (and why they beat you)
• World’s most ANNOYING ...
Aim HERE For Easy Tennis Wins!
• Aim HERE for Easy Tenn...
Stop Standing HERE In Tennis (why you’re losing)
• Stop Standing HERE In ...
Stop Beating YOURSELF At Tennis!
• Stop Beating YOURSELF ...
Hit WINNERS Like Djokovic
• Hit WINNERS like Novak...
Bryan Brothers DON’T Cover This!
• Bryan Brothers DON'T c...
------------
FOLLOW US ONLINE:
Facebook:
/ essentialtennis
Instagram:
/ essentialtennis
iTunes: itunes.apple.c...
Google Play:
play.google.co...
Twitter:
/ essentialtennis
Stitcher:
www.stitcher.c...
------------
OUR PRODUCTION GEAR:
Slow Motion Camera: amzn.to/2Lw26Dx
Analysis iPad: amzn.to/2MEeFSM
Drone: amzn.to/2okeSfg
Wireless Mics: amzn.to/2NvluT8
Vlog Camera: amzn.to/2PbivQ5
Ball Machine: amzn.to/2ofFZb6
Camera Tripod: amzn.to/2PLKPJR
Phone Tripod: amzn.to/2MENc3p
------------
Essential Tennis is worldwide leader in digital tennis improvement resources. For over a decade their coaches have been publishing video, audio, and written instruction helping millions of passionate players improve at the game they love.
With content ranging from video lessons, to the first tennis podcast ever published on iTunes, to insightful long form emails giving insight into the improvement process Essential Tennis has the guidance you need to reach your goals and break through to the next level of play.
Their coaches also provide world class in person experiences including group clinics and their exclusive, Milwaukee VIP instructional package.
For more information on lessons, digital training programs, or anything else please send an email to support AT essentialtennis DOT com.
------------
If you can read this you have an impressive scrolling game.
:-)
![Tee Grizzley - Robbery 8 [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/34_vkNV6wrU/mqdefault.jpg)
Ian amazing job at landing this interview. Imagine people getting this type of interview in a different sport? It would be huge!!! Way to go brotha!
Ian, thank you (and Heather) SO much for this video, super informative!!
She was so articulate and this made me feel so much better about the rating system! I think I would love more clear steps for getting bumped to the next level. I feel like that’s what I constantly hear people asking around my tennis facility “what exactly do I need to do if I want to get bumped?”
Thank you for bringing our questions directly to the top of USTA. Even if I think some of her answers are naive at best, I feel like you have given me a voice. Thank you for caring.
Maybe each year when ratings are updated USTA could give a history over the past year? The history could show your exact rating and the rating of your opponents over the past year. I think people would enjoy that. It also wouldn’t be as disruptive as giving a detailed, ongoing rating that updates each day.
I think it adds to the sandbagging problem especially since most league membership ends up being 80% the same year over year.
Love this idea! And maybe it could be private and only sent and visible to the player themself!
This system just sounds completely nuts to me and majorly over complicated. In the UK the system is straightforward and easy to follow and progress up the scale. If you beat someone with a rating the same or higher than you, it counts as a win. If you get 6 (junior) or 3 (adult) wins, then your rating moves up. Simple and works really well. Really enjoyed getting an in site into the USTA system. Top work Ian. 👍🏻
That doesn't solve any problems. Here a full team of 15 players will lose 3 seasons of matches on purpose, that's about 16 months of losing, an entire team going like ZERO wins and 25 losses to get bumped down a level. Then once down they will try to win at the lower level and go nearly undefeated, until they get to a regional tournament and lose to someone other team doing the same thing, lol. The UK system sounds easier to go down. Some US tennis players are nuts, trust me.
Well done. This is great content for your viewers providing a lot of answers that would normally go unanswered for most.
Wow, Heather is way smarter and more articulate than I ever imagined of the people behind the USTA's NTRP rating system. Great interview questions by Ian, too. I learned a ton, and shared this with all of my tennis league friends. Thanks.
I don't know if there will ever be a follow-up, but I would also like to know why there isn't just a singles league. To play singles you have to join a team, and actually be placed into a singles spot. It's pretty prohibitive, especially in my area.
There are three court singles-only leagues in the Southern section during the winter. Not sure about other Sections. There just aren't as many teams because there's no state, sectional or national tournaments to advance to.
Yes!!!!
Ian is a really good interviewer. Maybe this could be an additional career path for him?
...too many softball questions.
Ratings have crept into dating. I had a friend text me my he met a girl from out of town and she is a 4.5. I laughed for 2 reasons, if we were kids he would not have been that excited, and also that I knew exactly what he meant and no further details were needed. Yes, we have a tennis problem.
That's great that the person in charge of USTA ratings stated she doesn't actually have a background in playing tennis herself, and she seemed quite proud of it. Everything makes sense now
Similar to having a man run a postpartum depression therapy group.
So i take it you would not trust an oncologist to treat you unless they had cancer themselves?
@@YourFriendlyGApilot I'd rather my oncologist have a clean bill of health... sometimes an external non connected perspective is exactly what you need..
@@chrismicklitz6361 That's funny but silly.
@@pabloherrera8964 errrrr.... that called an analogy. 😂😂😂
But look, nevermind you missed that day in school, let's talk about what you think would help her run the algorithm if she were a tennis player and knew the game"inside our". What knowledge EXACTLY do you think playing this would give her that she cannot get, in any way, otherwise?
I'm open to hearing you out, i just cannot think of any good example, so just give me some good examples and we can call it a day (and Ian can call the usta to tell them!!!).
Great interview thanks to both of you.
A bit too much emphasis on sandbagging. If they’re so confident in the algorithm they shouldn’t worry so much about dropping a self rated player into competition and letting the dust settle.
I feel that their algorithm doesn’t allow for enough movement within the ratings. Too much statistical weight to move up. Much easier to go down than up.
Most players i see advancing from 3.5 have become captains of teams to game the numbers in thier favor.
When i started playing 13 years ago i self rated 3.0, was bumped up the next year and have stagnated in the unenjoyable randomness of 3.5 doubles. Tired of playing this game I have gone on my own to improve my tennis outside this structure.
Lots of players out there also doing this.
Other options like UTR or even Ians buddies at Play your Court seem to be too similar to the USTA rating to make any difference.
In Austin we have a Tennis Ladder where you get matched with 2 other players every couple of weeks in a "rung", win both matches you move up to a higher rung, lose both you move down. I've found that system is pretty responsive and gets you matches against opponents that are on your level in fairly short order.
Funny you posted this... I just got DQ'd from my league yesterday. I self rated as a 4.0 two years ago, but since 2020 ratings were frozen, I was never computer rated. After 50+ matches as a 4.0, I finally had my break out string of performances, which bumped me up to a 4.5 mid season, and caused my team to retroactively lose several matches
There MUST be a way to appeal this. What are your options?
This is the one question i really wanted to have asked. If one self-rates, shouldn't the first DQ be considered a natural adjustment given how limited the self-rating questionnaire as opposed to a punishment to all involved?!?!?
@@fredleggett923 appealing it, citing the rating freeze for screwing me over. My 2020 season wasn't very dominant, so I think I would have been computer rated as a 4.0. Based on my performances this year, I should definitely be a 4.5, but that rank up should happen at the end of the year. I'm not very confident in a successful appeal.
@@fredleggett923 I wish more people were DQ'd. We've got some definite cheating in my league.
My biggest issue is that the number of leagues just drops off a cliff at 5.0 so there is a huge incentive to stay at 4.5. However, I have found that a better solution than tanking a few games here and there is to show up out of shape.
Noooo, you shouldn't jeopardize your health just to play tennis at a certain level. :)
For me as a recreational player most of this rating trouble seems to stem from your overall consistency in general which from most below 5.0 this can be a big deal I've been playing tennis for a long time, and consider myself pretty good, but no one is prone to an off day. To me I give these places a lot of credit that attempt to put the leagues together and place everyone as fairly as possible, it can't be an easy thing to do.
For every USTA sectional champion team there are a couple ringers. Every USTA national championship team is a straight up engineered team of sandbaggers. You'll find former Division 1 players on 4.0 teams, and semi pro's at 4.5. There are no reasonable checks and balances as long as the players keep the scores reasonable. But a mediocre player can get a knee replacement and request to go down a level. Request denied!
True. It sucks. It's a competition against a corrupted system. People are bad.
We definitely have a lot of players obsessed with their personal rating in our area. It kinda ruined the spirit of league play at times. At one point, I was bumped down from 4.0 to 3.5 and I became so obsessed with getting bumped back up to 4.0 to where it took a lot of the fun away from tennis and playing league matches. Now, my main objective is to go out there, have fun, and play with the players I want to play with and not give a darn about who we're playing. I've found this to be much better for my mental state. 😂
What's the story on age-related appeals? I'm a low 4.0 player who's now over 60. I have lost a fair bit of physicality in my game over the past couple of years (knees and back) and can no longer really compete in singles at 4.0, but I'd still like to play singles. Shortly before I turned 60 I tried to appeal down to 3.5 but was rejected. Is there a consideration for appeals at 60? Should I try again? I hear different stories.
How about QUARTERS RATINGS????? 4.00, 4.25, 4.50, 4.75
Great job from her! I was pleased to hear a well-articulated explanation into the details of the system without revealing too much. I thought it was very interesting to hear her opinion on "tennis record", and provide insight into the USTA's monitoring of its accuracy in relation to the true algorithm! Cool to know that the USTA is doing a lot of research and that the algorithm is truly advancing!
She is brilliant, and so able to articulate what the issues with these ratings bring up.
As an added bonus, this would also allow for 4.5 squads to have 5.0 players if the region can’t support a 5.0 league and it would force the top 4.5s to play the 5.0s
Wow! What an amazing interview! This is more of a psych class than tennis, but love it. I’ve leaned toward UTR because of hundredths ratings and enjoy the +/-, but can totally see advantages of just playing without number ratings in the micro as defining me.
I really enjoyed watching this. It was interesting to learn about the considerations and challenges that go into the process. I appreciate her willingness to come on and be so candid.
So much bs that the algorithm isn't open. Here in the Netherlands the algorithm is published and explained in a schematic. And you see your current rating and your opponents before and after the match. Also in the thousands
If you're ducking matches, you get penalties on your rating. We don't know sandbagging here as much, very specific cases maybe in mixed doubles where the better player lowers his or her rating to be able to play with their wife or husband.
Quite possibly a different culture at work there as well though.
How does one actually work for USTA at this capacity? Can someone like myself, who' does not have that much Sports Management experience but have some Tennis networking/management assistance in Social Tennis and Office Administration, even get into the tennis field and have a paid career out of it? It has been so difficult to even try to get into the Tennis Work World.
In regards to this particular video, this has been... interesting to learn. Interesting, and somewhat frustuating.
The range is too wide within same levels...but people don't really get it. But, the sandbaggers man, they are clear high level players. They've done competition before and they are messing with recreational trying to experience tennis competition. Such a bummer.
There's a guy in my 3.5 league whose singles record the last year-plus is 18-1, with SIXTEEN bagel sets in there. He almost never loses more than two games a set. Why hasn't he been bumped up to 4.0? Results are what's supposed to matter & clearly 3.5s are not competitive with him (I haven't played him myself, for the record).
was the loss a 6-0, 6-0 beating from a 3.0 player? that would help his cause :D
@@mbkincaid1 Ah, nuance.
Last year ratings were frozen, which might be a factor
@@lct1196 Ah, I forgot about that! Thanks 🙏🏼
MEP needs to disguise himself as a 3.5 and put that focker to bed. 😂
i’m happy at 3.0 on my diverse, awesome team in atlanta. we make the playoffs this year and that and have a good time! one other reason for not wanting to move up? i don’t want to get booted off my team! i’m not a sandbagger for that - but if my rating is creeping up i would be bummed to get bumped off the team.
Thank you for all the great content you provide. Really appreciated
Thanks!
USTA needs to update their rating descriptions and video examples of the different levels. They’re completely disconnected from reality. If I went off that, I’d be rated way higher. Their 4.0 example on RUclips looks like an actual 3.0.
Great interview, Ian. Recommend you put this on your podcast too.
I am going to ditch the USTA and just play local leagues ... she has helped me reach that decision!
Heather is great. So cool you have her here! She spoke with our section a couple years ago and her seminar was attended by hu
There are documents that describe the USTA ratings system. They don't cover every detail, and they are old, but TennisRecord started with those published algorithms and worked from there, tuning to fit the NTRP numbers. I recall finding discussions on Tennis forums as the TR algorithm was being developed. My experience over the last few years is that TennisRecord is quite close. Clearly USTA doesn't like this, and I'm sure there are cases where ratings are inaccurate, but most ratings are not far off. People who say otherwise always have a vested interest - no disinterested party has access to the details. People will game the system regardless of whether USTA publishes hundredths or not. There are two very different reasons for doing so - one is winning, the other is just to keep playing. Even people who have no interest in sandbagging can be motivated by promotions causing them to be unable to play either due to lack of league at that level or due to lack of interest from established teams having little interest in new players at the bottom of their range. USTA is very concerned about changes causing loss of players - well, NEWS FLASH - there is already a loss of players going on, so doing nothing also has a cost. Most businesses understand that getting new customers is harder than keeping existing customers. Perhaps teams should have a requirement to use a wider range of players in matches or forfeit lines so there would be some motivation for keeping people at all levels onboard. The current system favors and places a higher value on those at the high end of each range and punishes those at the lower end of each range. Players are dis-incentivized to advance beyond the top of their current range. Punishing players who merely want to keep playing doesn't solve much.
I was going to live tweet watching this video then realized Essential hasn’t tweeted in a long time.
But here’s a follow up topic I would have liked to hear. The idea of sandbagging can absolutely be regulated by the USTA. They just don’t want to upset competitive regions where the old guard thinks this is the game. Well. Tough. Make a call. Regulate it and solve multiple problems at once.
Preamble - have each league Opt-In to a stack-less league and give them access to amazing tech to run it.
Step 1 State that lineups should follow the skill set order as best as possible
Step 2 Expose the hundredth decimal to the lineup card and have captains SET the available players to see who is eligible to play which spots
Step 3 - spot eligibility - the USTA site would create three groupings based on the hundredth decimal but not show this to the captains if that is the decision. Instead it would be tiers
Top 3 eligible for 1S and 1 doubles
Next three eligible for 2S and 2 doubles
Bottom three eligible for 2S and 3doubles
Optional at 2 and 3 Dbls are combos of tier 2-3
Optional at 1Dbls is a combo of tier 1-2
Eliminates sandbagging lowest players on any given match into top spots and Visa versa
Also allows for any given player to play any position depending on how strong or weak their own lineup is that match.
Also allows for each team to see all other squads in order of a power ranking without having to know the individual decimal number or it’s relationship to your own team.
Then let the sandbaggers play their own way with each other during the season but make sectionals follow the new rules.
I know this is an older video but I just saw it. Sandbagging is still a huge issue. I play 4.0 after a 20 year break from tournament play. I played a guy in the finals that was not 4.0. I asked him about it and he said he’s really closer to a 5.0 but plays 4.0 so he doesn’t mess up his league rating since his team is trying to make nationals at 4.0. It sucks but just means I just need to work harder on my own game to get to that level.
Not sharing NTRP hundredths isn't avoiding any of those concerns with sharing it since TennisRecord and UTR are being used in absence of having that level of detail.
45 mins in: "so can you tell us more about why you don't expose ratings to 1/100?" 🙄
What if the ratings were also implemented like a gold handicap? Where a single digit ends up giving strokes to a mid handicap. I don’t know how that could be implemented in tennis, outisde of a lower rated player a game, or points in a set. It’s probably too complicated in practical sense but something like it might be possible.
You can see it's a stupid system with ET having lots of 4.5 players because there is no 5.0 league, so in that area all the 5.0 players are now 4.5 players which makes it a higher standard of 4.5 then areas with a full 5.0 league (defeating the point of a country wide standard). It's actually an incentive not to improve - your reward for hard work and improvement is no one to play with.
I don't know that having no one to play with is USTAs fault though, regardless of improvement. Here in SE Pa where I am at there are hardly any mens leagues, and virtually none for senior men. Has to be a case of lack of interests. 5.0 is pretty elite level, shouldn't we expect less opponents at our level as we move up? There are only hundreds at the very top of the sport.
This is so great
I would say rating is a good idea, maybe hold rating back until +5 ratings reached and have older ratings fall off (over 6 or 12 or 18 months). And while this next idea may be time consuming, could be a quicker way to judge overall if someone shows a recorded video. Then USTA could suggested rough standards of how to record a video that could be considered for review. An idea cause I've definitely played a few folks well above my skill level in certain leagues...while fun playing sucks it has to come at the cost of my team's rating etc. Great video!
Great Interview. UTR comparison: She compared the UTR success in youth vs. adult rating system and both are great as both have players' ranking based on how competitive they are to the people they play. Because USTA adult uses a ranking system based on skill to others you play, UTR IS NOT finding much traction with adults. However, Since USTA youth rankings system does not work like this at all, UTR dominates the youth ranking system. USTA YOUTH: Rankings are based totally on a ALL or nothing point scale. You win you get 100 points toward your rank....you lose you get Zero points. IN USTA your rank goes up even with forfeits and walkovers. College coaches use UTR as it gives the best rating of a player based on who they Play and how competitive they are, so losing 7-6,7-6 raises your UTR if the player was ranked higher, however losing with the same score in a usta tournament...you get ZERO POINTS. This does nothing for the college coach finding the best possible competitor. USTA YOUTH SCORING IS OLD AND OUT OF DATE. SOLUTION: if the USTA would simply have a state and national ranking system that incorporates a games won point total toward your rank, players skill differential would be as accurate as possible to actual skill. thus UTR could lose their competitive edge for recruiting.
Sort of like a least integer function, but not just integers, also halves.
Is there any self-policing by team captains within their own team?
The best remedie against sandbagging is take away the reasons why they do it.
If a system can result in your promotion to a higher level takes away the ability to compete as there is no competition, then you should make sure that everyone is always able to compete at whatever level
She didn't answer your question about the 5.0 in your area at all. If there are no 5.0, let them compete in the 4.5 as a 5.0
Then there is not need to sandbag and maybe more people were doing that and taking away the punishment, maybe enough 5.0 players exist to build a league at that level in the future
Why doesn't USTA adopt UTR? Stop it with the smoke and mirrors and let the players know where they stand!! This is why people go to third parties for info.
Dammit. I just want to go out and play tennis. I don't give a damn about the level of my opponent regardless of how high or low level he/she is at. I play for the experience and the problem-solving.
same man... I'm talking smack to the 5.0 player just as loud as I will to the 3.5....
I found it a somewhat sad commentary that the "human psychological elements" being addressed in the NTRP rating system are invariably based on negative characteristics such as sandbagging or not recruiting lower level players, etc.
I was told that playing USTA tournaments has zero factor into your USTA RATING. As someone who lives an hour away from the closest league, I only have time to play in tournaments. Is this really true? Am I stuck playing at my current level?
Sanctioned tourneys do impact your NTRP rating. Unsanctioned ones do not. I've been repeatedly told to play up and do well in (sanctioned) tourneys in order to move up.
The only answer I had problems with is "reach out to your coordinator". I have been in two different sections and other people have had problems but the coordinator doesn't help (also in my current section the coordinator plays in the leagues in our region which creates a host of problems), so this answer feels like a non-starter.
He asked 20 minutes in why we can't know the full rating. Her answer is scrambled eggs. On the one hand she says leagues can start with .25 differences in classes. How do they know if someone is a 3.25 or under? They have to go to tennis record or some other third party which she says is inaccurate! On the other hand she says people focus on their incorrect rating too much. In other words they are extremely patronizing. They think giving USTA members knowledge of their rating will make them do bad things so USTA hides the information from its members. And really what bad thing will they do? Well a few grown ups will cheat and throw matches so they can win a trophy at USTA's level based league nationals. And because of these few idiots no one can get this information. (Newsflash these guys get this information from third parties anyway)
She is so focused on this league tennis that it should really be USTLA. US Tennis League Association. USTA only cares about their silly leagues and they don't really care about the vast majority of tennis players that do not play in leagues but would still like to have an accurate rating that compares them to other players.
She says people would obsess about the ratings but that has never happened. She is assuming that because rating go up and down people will obsess about that. But they never published the information so she is just speculating. Chess has a very good rating system and people are happy to play others that are higher rated.
You can have the dynamic rating published monthly. But it would be the rating that is published on a certain month that count for that year's league play. If your rating changes after that it is information for the player but it won't effect your ability to play in a league that year.
The other thing they should do is allow a team to average the dynamic rating. So someone who just goes up to the next rating by a couple hundredths of a point is not disqualified if there are some others that play on the team that are a bit lower than the break. The important thing is that in any competition those that play have to have an average below the limit - not every player below the limit. This would also make the leagues more competitive for smaller areas that don't have 15 people that are rated 3.97-4.0 to play in a 4.0 and under league. But of course USTA is so focused on these big tennis communities that like it to be rigged in their favor this won't happen.
you have too much free time.
Use UTR
Right? Its a PAID service... give us our damn ratings to the 1/100th. Bad actors will always be bad actors.
I was thinking about her reasoning and honestly I believe she's right and she probably has data to back that up. For instance almost all competitive video games, CS, LoL, Rocket League, etc use elo ratings similar to what USTA uses, people OBSESS about their rankings and it really turns into people sandbagging to wreck lower ranked players and just get wins or people OBSESSING about their rankings and putting a ton of pressure on themselves and teammates to win to the point of absurdity. Also scale is an issue as said in the interview there won't be enough players to form a league if the rankings were down to the 100th of a point in many regions.
@@watcheswithwesley6569 If they gave rankings to a hundredth they could just say the team average (the players that actually play at an event) has to be at or below a certain number instead of having arbitrary cut offs for every player. That would allow many more teams to be formed and there would be less incentive to sandbag. Because then people like Ian wouldn't be completely without the possibility to be on a team if he ends up rated 4.53 he could just average out with someone that is 4.47 or below.
I don't think video games where you can at least potentially create fake accounts to troll people are going to be similar to games where you play face to face. The elo system works well in chess. In any case hiding information from adults for fear the truth will cause them to obsess about rating is being paternalistic.
I was on a 4.0 team at sectionals that had a captain and a few players that were so intent on not getting bumped to 4.5 because they won sectionals that they tanked the finals against a team we beat 5-0 in round robin….Ourbest dubs team won 6-2,6-1in rr….lost 6-1,6-1 against same dubs team in finals…meanwhile im busting my arse to win a singles match in 95 degree heat (fl) not knowing what part of the team is up to. I was irate.
ps…team we “lost” to ended up second at nationals
I'd love to see the star system implemented. In Houston, the best teams would be full of 1 star players 🤣
What I do not get, at least here in Southern, is that only spring league affects your rating. Is this true elsewhere? Its dumb I ALWAYS play better in the later half of the year but my rating stagnates due to post-winter rustiness and the shit show that is self-rated new players.
Never trust someone who begins every answer with, "That's a great question!"
Have you ever watched Intuitive Tennis' videos? 😂
@@kwii22789 lol! But Nicola actually answers the questions above and beyond!
@@kwii22789 Nick doesn't say that to every question. It's just that Samir does in fact ask a lot of good ones. And @Emmet Fettig is right. Nick doesn't serve up word salad in response to them.
@@jacksonlar It's a joke.
@@kwii22789 God he's such a good coach
I live in a smaller district where we know who’s managing/sandbagging their rating. It’s much easier for these people to know who they are playing against to mange their rating easier. My question is does usta ever look at players who consistently make it to National tournaments, because I’ve seen many players bump up and then a few years later they appeal down and go to nationals again and again. I guess I live in one of these hot spots 🤦🏽😐
Where is this hot spot?
Very informative
Wish I had been in on asking questions, I get called a sandbagger all the time or just flat out "You're not a 3.0". My response, that's what USTA rated me! Note, I only play doubles. So to enjoy playing with like skilled players I play 4.0 WTT, and win. I stopped playing tournaments and leagues - embarrassing to hit and serve to 3.0's. That's not fun for them.
Geographic disparity is driven by hiding the precise ratings. Having a larger base allows selecting a higher average team so it is actually a stronger team. If the scores were visible this would be evident. Perhaps the precise scores should be published once per year after reranking is done. This would not be often enough to tune a sandbagging response, but it would allow retrospective understanding of how the system is working be visible for everyone to see.
I'm assuming the current model utilizes some kind of machine learning algorithm. Interpreting these types of models can range from hard to almost impossible.
I still don't understand why they wouldn't strictly use elo, and just adjust their "settings" to play with whatever range of elo they want and if there is overlap between 2 players regardless of rating they can play together. A 3.0 can play with a 4.0 but the result of their game will not really move their rating. Teams can have a certain rating range... It's very simple.
The math of how you calculate ratings based on match results, for example elo ratings in chess, is extremely well understood. The reason why the usta is keeping this a secret is obvious: their algorithm is garbage and it would be embarrassing to them if it was public.
So ntrp is just a worse version of utr?
Interesting how she basically admitted the difference between the bottom end of a rating and the top is a 6-0, 6-0 type of match. That in and of itself is part of the problem as that match is between 2 players who are not at the same level despite the same USTA rating....how many people want to play in those type of matches on either end? Also, reading between the lines I think the USTA knows their system is flawed and will be making some changes soon but they are not ready to announce/implement those changes...we'll see what, if anything happens
The alternative is having smaller leagues with a tighter spread in rating. Something that you can lobby your local league coordinator about but cant be implemented nation wide.
@@efrgsergfsgg Being at the top or bottom of a rating level (depending on the year) I'd rather have smaller leagues with every match being at my level vs half the matches being competitive and the other half not. Ultimately, the USTA model is flawed/outdated. IMO scrapping the whole "Nationals" objective would solve a lot of problems as in almost all acts of life the cheaters are 1 step ahead of the law and what needs to be done is to eliminate the incentive for manipulating ones rating. When you think about the "National" champion" at each division, it isn't which team is the best at that rating, but which team has the most/best misrated players playing for it (be it computer, appeal or self-rated players)
No offense but the USTA should invest in a team of statisticians, programmers, and sports science experts who adapt and improve the algorithm on a yearly basis.
Why did I start watching this lol, I'm not an american.
Ratings are universal
I have terms for the extremes of line-calling sportsmanship or lack thereof. A ball on the line is "USTA out", i.e. what is called by @%^&#'s obsessed with making it to Nationals. A ball outside the line by less than a ball width is "Gustavus in", i.e. from Gustavus Adolphus College and their Tennis and Life Camps' emphasis on maximum sportsmanship.
But how does a 4.5 singles player winning all matches at Nationals is not bumped up to 5.0?
That is extremely rare for that to happen. Usually if a team makes it to nationals they all get bumped.
NTRP Self rating can be manipulated (sandbagging) by players and team captains...I played in USTA league 25 years ago and did not rate myself properly because my team captain told me to self rate lower(3.0) because the computer will just bump me up if I start winning...I end up holding my game and intentionally losing sometimes...I know that because when I beat my opponents 6-0,6-1 or 6-1,6-2,I was bumped to 3.5 right away so I started manipulating the system by not winning so much or making the score close,6-4 or play 3 sets...My skill level at that time was 4.5 because I beat a lot of 4.5 players singles and doubles and 4.0,6-0,6-0 outside the USTA league...
Yes, the star rating system, just like eBay, would be very valuable. I don’t like the sandbagging.
I know this is all done, but instead of releasing ratings secondly (daily) or the current yearly. Isn't there somewhere in between like weekly or monthly????
What if USTA just adopted Chess' rating system.
You mean a transparent and legitimate one that people can see has value? She says it would lead to sandbagging. But anyone who knows about it see it does the opposite. Presumably people sandbag in tennis to win a trophy or prestige. But in chess you lose prestige if you lose rating points so no one in chess sandbags just to win a trophy like they do in tennis.
@@niceforkinmove5511 if the USTA system can't weed out sandbagging ... WELL ... that would mean the system is very flawed and broken!!!
(Discosure: I'm an early intermediate, and I have a 12yo so i researched UTR and drank that kool-aid)
I like her and appreciate her nerdiness on this topic! She really did NOT convince me that hiding/rounding the underlying rating was good for the majority of players. I bet they are just buying time to get process and systems in place to monetize it. They will eventually expose it....but for an annual feee (UTR displays YOUR 2-decimal rating for no charge, but to see other players', you have to pay!)
This really made me appreciate UTR! ...but then again, I don't do doubles, leagues/teams yet, so i don't get the issue like others here do.
Correction - I have competed in 2 UTR "Flex" Leagues (singles). Since it is all rating-based, I guess there is no such thing as sandbagging? It would be hard to convince me that more transparency is a net negative.
@@TerryGrayTX 100% couldn't agree more!! They know their USTA system is broken! She admitted it when she made the statement that smaller market areas are playing higher rating players with in their respective rating! So if you live in a smaller market area and are tied to many big city markets in your district ... where is the incentive to play when you know you will get slaughtered in every match you play? BROKEN RANKING SYSTEM (USTA)
The 4.0 player wanting to propose to his girlfriend is proposing to a 4.5 girlfriend 👻
I hate USTA ratings so much less now… I love the star idea, MEP, I give you 1 star.
Basically its world of warcraft ranking system
What about let each player rate themselves on how they felt they played today? Maybe no one would give themself a 5/5 if they lost...
I assume/HOPE that tournament directors are using UTR to build the draws to help combat sandbaggers and encourage true level-play. At least 1 sandbagger gets eliminated by another!
Unfortunately, sandbagging is alive and well in the tournaments that I play in. Just played in a tournament where a club pro called himself a 4.0. He basically pushed his partner out of the way and took over.
I see the star system being bad. The problem with it is with the person's style of play. Many people join leagues for fun while some people take it more seriously and play much more aggressive. If the person playing just for fun feels " rubbed " the wrong way, they have the power to ruin someone's reputation.
This is a very bad idea. It turned into how you liked playing against the person for rating not what do you believe their rating should be.
The guy i played against was a deusch so i give him 1 star when in reality, the guy is a dick which doesn't have anything to do with rating but he is a solid 4.5 playing at 3.5. She turned it into a bit of a popularity contest.
Popularity contest... no thanks.
Not publishing dynamic ratings because "sandbaggers will use it" is silly in my view. Sandbaggers ALREADY KNOW to just let their weaker opponents come "close" and their rating stays low. Publishing will, however, give ongoing feedback for honest people who are interested in self-improvement.
Ian - I appreciate the effort but really in 1 hour & 8 minutes, it was basically the same 8 minutes just worded differently. There are some real question that could have been asked to Heather. I understand that is my fault for seeing this months later but I would like to have her email address so I can poise the questions to her that were not asked her. The big thing you should have asked her is the slotting of a self rated player. Are you at the top of the range, so a few good matches gets you DQed? I know many people that have quit USTA because the rigidness of the rating process.
Bring a data driven person, wouldn’t more data help in general? If USTA had data on how close games are, would this “help”? I’ve definitely played a match where I’ve gone to deuce many times and end up losing bad in terms of games. I know win is win, but in terms of a “hundredth” rating, more data is better?
I'm certain they use the score, which is more indicative than "win or loss". I've been on the deuce-train myself and have difficulty closing -- that's accurately captured in the game count. I agree more data could yield better assessment (i.e., score of each game), but the reporting burden is a non-starter.
@@pbillings808 definitely the burden is too much trouble than it’s worth. But somebody winning a game 40-0 vs 40-40 every game in a 6-0 match, you’d consider the latter score meaning they’re actually closer in skill, just “bad at closing” as you mention. These scores are not currently treated differently.
Does the "S" by a self rated players rating ever go away?
Ratings in 2020 were frozen, so if you were still self rated at the end of 2019, you will stay self rated until you are bumped up mid season, or receive a computer rating at the end of the year
It does - once there are enough matches, then the S ratings change to a C rating the following year. Sometimes it takes longer if there are barely any matches played by the S player. I'm not sure of what the trigger point for this is though. Thinking about nearly everyone I play with - everyone would be rating an S, as everyone at some point self rates, especially when they first start playing leagues.
Wow, both ends are so extreme. You have some people unwilling to live life until they reach a certain rating. Then you have others deliberately throwing matches to stay lower rated. Lol. Crazy that both those can exist in the same system.
totally agree. when I was playing competitive tennis I just wanted to go out and play some great tennis.. didn't really care who was on the other side of the court. win or lose as long as I went out and felt like I played the best I could that day I was happy..
There is a problem with appealing your rating, especially if you’re under 50. By the time you get it dropped, you’ll probably be playing at the higher level.
Great interview! Star system is a HORRIBLE idea for many reasons. I really like that she is thinking of solutions, but a peer star rating would be a disaster. It would turn into judging someone's personality rather than level of play. Every 1 star rating would be protested. If people want "evidence" of tanking, they should film the match from start to finish. Witness testimonials can't be trusted.
I want to comment again for RUclips's algorithm. I'm gaming their algorithm while listing why not to game my rating. :)
💪🏼🔥
She admits there is a difference in small market areas compared to big cities so if all the players you compete against are the highest levels in a rating and your market area are the lowest in a rating category ... don't they think that creates a bias for players who have to try and compete against that?
Its not a matter of sports statistics that USTA favors Atlanta and high density population areas. They choose to rig it that way.
Having visibility to the hundredths to me is no different than when I played on a team and had challenge matches each week. You may win all your matches but if you cannot beat the guy above you in the ladder, you really have not improved. The only people that are watching the number really close are people who are trying to game the system (sandbagging). And it makes it completely obvious. If people get close to moving up and don't want to, they can play their buddy that is really low and throw the match to drop back down. You cannot do anything about cheaters, so I would rather see the data more than once per year.
This is incredible how open she was about everything. I’m not one that worries about ratings issues too much since it’s not a big issue in NC. I do think it’s VERY interesting that the leader of this system doesn’t play tennis though…she’s clearly highly intelligent but I mean come on, gotta hit the courts to understand the game.
The rating system isn't trying to measure how much you understand the game, it's trying to predict how likely you are to win any given match. That's the same for tennis, squash, chess, whatever your game is. A stats background is actually way more relevant than a tennis background, and I don't think that not playing tennis would have any effect on how well they're able to build a system which predicts future results based on past ones.
@@joec2221 Totally agree!
The system is flawed, not all leagues affect your ratings. So there are players who game the system by losing in certain league format that affect their ratings, while playing competitively in leagues that don’t affect their ratings. Remember, the USTA exists to draw in revenue, pure and simple, so their agenda is to allow these loopholes.
Its all Bullshit, I am a strong 3.5 player and I am constantly getting beat by 3.0S from a particular park, I have filed many Grievances, but USTA keep declining. It's just about the money
Did Ian lose the other airpod? 😂
should someone ranked 4.5 charge hundreds (or even thousand) for tennis lessons? mep is ranked 4.5 would anyone paid for tennis lessons from him?
I would definitely. He's a winner. Winning in ANYTHING is almost 100% mental. I also believe champions are made, not born, and his tennis appears to be self made. I'm certain he has a LOT to offer in that regard.
If rating is an accurate measure of strength at tennis that is all USTA should care about. If people are stupid about how much they care about their tennis ability that is beyond USTA's concern or competence. It is not USTA's job to hide ratings from everyone just because one fool wants 5.0 on his tombstone.