tennis, life and a few things in between

Expending an existing tourney or a league series on My Tennis Group is easy (for example .. .. you made the playoffs or want to add more matches to it ..).
_________________________________
+ MyHome   + MyProfile   + MyGroups
_________________________________

.. from the pull down menu of
-> MyGroups
-> -> Manage Groups
-> -> -> Schedule
-> -> -> + Add A Match (upper left corner)
See below ..
..

~
PS ..

Field of Dreams .. If you build it , he they will come

In the beginning of the season, I was debating if to use this site to manage my team; and had to arm twisting and leg wrestling some one into comply. Now I’m amazed and surprised to see everyone has confirmed their availability on the sectional playoff on 4/11 that I just added, quickly and quietly. The surprise is due to the fact that I chose not to inform the group because I had sent out an evite before I figured out how to add an additional match. Didn’t want to trouble them twice. Well, it sent out anyway. ..

THANKS a ton teamo, I really appreciated it. We’ll continuously do well as a team!!!!

You’re out. .. 2009 Regulation 3.04A

No dynamic disqualification of Year-end Computer (C) or Benchmark (B) players

Each NTRP Level is followed by a letter code indicating the type of rating.
The following identifies who can and cannot be dynamically disqualified
.

How Dynamic Ratings are Calculated for a Specific Match
In matches where all players have previous ratings the procedure is as follows:

1. The system looks up the current dynamic rating of all the players in the match.
2.  The system looks up from a table, the likely score of the match based on the current dynamics of the players.
3. The system compares the likely match score with the actual match score. For example, if one player or team has a tenth of a point higher rating than the opponent, the likely score is 6-4, 6-4.
• If the winning team wins by a larger than expected margin, each player’s ratings is increased based on the margin of victory and the losing player’s rating is decreased by the same amount.
• If the winning team wins by less than the expected margin, their ratings will actually decrease and the losing team’s ratings will increase.
• Likewise, the “wrong” team may win which causes their rating to increase markedly and the rating of the team which was favored would decrease by the same amount.
4. The rating obtained for each player in Step #3 is averaged with a maximum of their previous three dynamic ratings and that number becomes their new current dynamic rating. (Indirectly this connects the current dynamic to all previous matches but weights the four most recent matches more heavily.) The reason for this averaging is to even out the ratings in cases where some unusual situation causes an atypical result.

Each player rating is maintained in the system to the nearest hundredth of a point.

The difference in ratings of the members of a doubles team is held constant in a calculation of an individual match. If the two players are three hundredths (.03) of a point apart going into the match then they are three hundredths (.03) apart after the calculation in Step #4. However, once that number is averaged with the
three previous dynamic ratings (Step #5) that difference may change. This is how we measure the performance of players as they change partners.

Friday, March 05, 2010 12:07 PM ET
By Bill Gray

Some 94,000 USTA League players—about 30 percent of those who competed last year in the association’s adult, senior and super senior age divisions based on their NTRP ratings—had their NTRP ratings changed for the 2010 League Championship year.
That almost doubles the number of players whose levels were changed in 2008.

At the end of each year, the National Tennis Rating Program computer weighs the results of all USTA League players (it considers their win-loss records and the quality of the opponents they’ve played, among other factors) to determine which players need to be promoted or moved down in regard to ratings. The USTA’s decision to promote more players than ever was based on its desire to retain the integrity of the NTRP guidelines after a study was conducted by the USTA National Oversight Group. That study, which included input from staff, volunteers, team captains and players, found a “growing disconnect” between what the NTRP guidelines state and what actual player levels are.

The study found that many players have skills and capabilities that go beyond the NTRP Guidelines for the various categories. For example, the guidelines state that 3.0-level players “lack control when trying for directional intent,” 3.5 players “lack a variety of shots,” and 4.0 players “only occasionally force errors when serving.”

To combat this discrepancy between guidelines and ratings, a higher percentage of players were promoted this year—particularly among players and teams that have dominated local leagues year after year—so that the levels of play will more accurately reflect the guideline’s skill descriptions.

“We’re trying to level the playing field and create a better local league experience for all players, not just the segment that only wants to play at the national championships,” says Dave Schobel, the USTA’s Director of Competitive Play.

In the past, some players have purposely “played down” below their skill level in order to more easily advance to regional, state and national championships. “When I started playing USTA League 25 years ago, I came in as a 4.0 and was really proud to get to 4.5,” says Julia Capara of Grosse Pointe, Mich. “Now it looks like 4.5s aspire to be 4.0s just so they can get to nationals.”

Those who “play down” have been a major cause of oversaturation at the 3.0, 3.5 and 4.0 levels that currently comprise about 271,000 of the 324,000 total USTA League players. The adjustments in ratings are intended to create more players at the 4.5 and 5.0 levels, so there will be more opportunity for local play in these divisions.

The most telltale sign that something was askew was a significant number repeat playoff winners, says Larry Jones, who created and runs the TennisLink computer system as the USTA’s NTRP coordinator. He says the odds of the same player reaching one of the 17 section championships should be something like 20-1 based on the size of their section, but certain players have made it that far for five consecutive years. “Something is up if someone can pull off an unlikely event like that several times in a row,” he says.

It is a very complicated formula. Someone told me all matches officially counts but realistically, if you play the mens/womens matches, the mixed can get to be be insignificant. You are given a rating after the 1st match. Every match after that is averaged in. So, if you play a lot of the mens/womens season, the mixed will be just a fraction of your rating. If you play a weak team and win but with a 7-5, it is counted against you since you are expected to win by a big margin. If you play a super strong team and lose by 5 – 7, that actually is in your favor. The computer knows what the scores should be based on the people playing. We know a person that got bumped up playing 3 matches and losing 2 out of the 3!!! That is because she played against strong people but meanwhile, her partners in those 3 matches did not get bump up. Go figure.

A color-coordinated but nerve-racking first doubles match at National Tennis Center on Feb 19. The Our love birds prevailed. We were at USTA to cheer our squad on – most our teammates were there, except Sir Can Not Lah who’s back home.

Looking at those pictures did I realize she now dresses just like me, in drabs. What’s happened with her dazzling tennis outfits? Hey, girl, I didn’t recuite some grandma .. 🙂

.

We had few discussions on let and if and when to award fresh two serves, stemming from my last match: we didn’t offer our opponents ‘take two‘ when ball rolled onto our court or I went to ball-chasing in between their serves. Simon even followed me once to the court behind us (with thick blue vinyl): the pro was helping too.

Q ..

Also a ball rolled onto our court before the second serve. Shall we award her a fresh first serve or continue with her second?

If my memory serves me right, she hasn’t started her motion. She saw the ball was rolling in and stood there watching Andy swiped it back to the next court with his racket.

A ..

You are only required to award two serves if the interruption occurred while the server had started their motion. In this case it didn’t, so it’s up to you.

Q ..

If the server is on his second serve, why would you give him 2 serves, even if there was an interruption before the motion started? Logic would say he gets another chance at his second serve. But the rules say he gets 2 serves again?

A..

Its a let. So replay the point, 1st serve.

Kai is forever the gentleman and generous on court. I actually learned this act – ‘take two’ from him during the years playing with his group: I didn’t get to play with him often because he’s super doper popular, everybody wanted to be his partner.
The reason we didn’t offer them ‘take two’ I felt was due to the strained atmosphere on court. I have never played with any one who didn’t at least occasionally raise their hands or nod their head after my loud “good shot.” shout Andy make a great shot to the deuce court, landed on line and skipped out. Simon went to chase but couldn’t even touch it. He shouted “great shot!”
I looked at them, high fiving each other .. .. then moved on.

A ..

You don’t have to if the interruption is short, but if the incident causes a delay (let’s say 15 – 20 sec’s +) then good sportsmenship warrants that you should

Here’s what I found on the net ..

Let in tennis is when a point has to be stopped because of a distraction in the middle of a point from something like a balls rolling on to the court. A let is also where the serve hits the net and goes over into the correct service box. This rule applies to everything but the lets in World Team Tennis and Division one mens college tennis.

A let is a stroke that doesn’t count and must be replayed. This most commonly happens when a serve touches the net before entering the proper service court. It’s also a let if the serve is delivered before the receiver is ready, if play is interrupted by some unusual occurrence (such as an animal running onto the court), or if a linesman’s decision that resulted in stoppage of play is reversed by the umpire.

During my trading days, remembered few big swing dicks or Master of the Universe had said repeatedly that don’t squeeze out the last bit of profit. It sounded so untrue given the cut throat nature of the business they inhabit. But I do believe that everyone should leave something on the table for the opponent. This may come bite me if I were to make the playoffs? Will see.
I’ve told our teammates don’t dish out bagels because, well, we’re all players and would meet again some times down the road. .. I don’t think anyone liked what I said. It met with deadly silence. One player later retorted:
“I would take it at love .. ”

It was bit of surprise and bit of shock that one of our pairs bagel-ed their opponents not once, but twice in a match. I said nothing since I wasn’t there and two they’re all more experienced players than I am. After a week or so, the bagel lady told me why they did what they did: They had no choice because each game had gone to deuce multiple times. We’re talking about one point here and there and the game and match’s over.
She said they did consider what I’ve said, but then the opponents began to double faulting that gave them the match. During the play, her partner told her a match he played once: he and his partner were leading 5:2 and they were goofing off .. ended up losing it at 5:7.
Momentum is a tricky thing.
I should learn to say less is more.

#1 Doubles: 6-3, 1-6, 0-1
#2 Doubles: 6-0, 6-0
#3 Doubles: 6-3, 6-2