For the men, Texas won both events and did so with two teams with the same captain and very similar rosters and roster construction. Twelve players played matches for the 40 & Over team, and 8 of the 12 and the 7 highest rated by my ratings were also on the 18 & Over team.
On one hand, this is a tremendous accomplishment! But when you think about it, with level based play, it isn't terribly surprising that a strong 40+ team could augment themselves with some younger players and have a strong 18+ team too.
When doing my simulations, both teams were far and away the favorites to win it all. And they came through with the 40+ team going 14-2 in round-robin, and while the semi was a 2-2 win, the two lost courts were retired after they already had it wrapped up, and the final was 3-1.
The 18+ team went 18-2 in round-robin and won their semi 3-2, yes the two losses were retirements, and then won the final 3-2, yes the two losses were retirements where they were up a set on both. So they really only lost two courts.
The 18+ team had a top-10 average of 3.72, an unheard of 0.09 ahead of the next team, and a 99% chance of making the semis, and the 40+ team had a top-10 average of 3.69 and a 99.8% chance of making the semis. Teams so strong and clearly better than the opponents don't come along very often.
This begs the question, how did they do it? How does a 3.5 team (e.g. NTRP ratings between 3.01 and 3.50) end up with a top-10 average of 3.72?
I'm sorry to say it doesn't appear either team was formed in a way that follows the spirit of the rules and good sportsmanship. And this isn't the first time this team/captain has done this.
For those that don't want to read all the details below, the tldr is that to win 3.5 Nationals, you need a group of 4.0 players that alternate winning one year, and tanking matches the next so they get bumped down to 3.5, or are close enough to appeal down. Rinse and repeat, ideally with two groups of players so you always have one group that has tanked down to 3.5 to make a run to Nationals with.
On to the details. Specifically, the majority of both rosters, at least the portions that played the bulk of the matches at Nationals, have serious questions about how they arrived at their 3.5 level. Here is a summary of the 18+ team with an asterisk denoting those also on the 40+ team:
- Player 1 - DQ'd to 4.5 in 2017, 2017 year-end 4.5C, then didn't play, self-rate as 4.5 in 2021 and somehow appeals down to 4.0, then has three lopsided losses in 2022 to get a 3.5C. Goes 18-1 this year, including 6-0 at Nationals losing just 5 sets all year.
- Player 2 - 2012 and 2013 (perhaps earlier too) 4.5C, then a 4.0C thru 2021 when they appealed down to 3.5. The 4.0 matches thru 2018 were all competitive, but in 2021 they were suddenly lopsided losses leading to the bump down. Goes 11-1 this year including 5-1 at Nationals losing 3 sets all year.
- Player 3 - Self rated in 2022 as a 4.5, then somehow got it appealed down to 3.5. As a self-rate somehow had close scores in the regular season, e.g. a win 0-6,6-3,1-0, before winning seven playoff matches in a row all in straight sets, losing an average of 1.9 games per set. Was DQ'd to 4.0 after 18+ Nationals where he went 4-0 losing just 2.25 games per set.
- Player 4 - Self-rated in 2023, went undefeated all year (18-0) until the Nationals final when he retired up a set when the team clinched the win, so likely would have been 19-0.
- *Player 5 - Self-rated 3.5 in 2020, played two matches, both lopsided losses, but didn't play three so remained self-rated for 2021 where he did play three, all lopsided losses, and got a 3.5C. Proceeds to go 27-1 in 18+ and 40+ including 11-0 at Nationals, only losing 4 sets all year.
- *Player 6 - A 4.0C from 2015 thru 2021 when he was able to appeal down to 3.5. In 2017 went 8-0 at 4.0 (two retirement losses in playoffs when match was clinched) including going to 4.0 Nationals, but then in 2018, 2019, and 2021 can't win a set with 9 lopsided losses to get low enough to appeal down at 2021 year-end. In 2023 goes 18-5 including 9-1 at Nationals.
- Player 7 - A self-rated 3.5 in 2021 and gets a 3.5C and somehow keeps it in 2022. Goes 7-1 in 18+, but only plays twice at Nationals.
- *Player 8 - Bounced back and forth between 3.5 and 4.0 since 2012, but was 4.0C in 2019 after playing on same team winning 40+ Nationals, then 9 lopsided losses in 2021 didn't get him bumped down, but then 0-11 all lopsided in 2022 did get him bumped down. Goes 16-1 this year, 4-0 at 40+ Nationals.
- *Player 9 - A 4.5 in 2013 and then a 4.0 2014 thru 2022, but was close enough to appeal down to 3.5. Got close enough to appeal with 3 lopsided losses not winning a game in any of them. 2021 also had lopsided losses but wasn't enough to get bumped down or to appeal. Goes 15-1 this year, 7-0 at Nationals ignoring a retirement when up a set. Was on same team that went to 2017 18+ Nationals where they won the title.
- *Player 10 - A 4.0 at the end of 2019 and 2021, and went to Nationals 3 times (18+ and 40+ 3.5, 55+ 8.0) in 2019. A bunch of losses, some lopsided, in 2021, then nothing but lopsided losses in 2022, leading to the bump down. This year goes 28-3 including 4-0 at Nationals this weekend losing just one set.
I could go on, the theme continues. You see the majority of players have been a 4.0 or even 4.5, or were required to self-rate at 4.0 or higher, have lopsided losses to get bumped down or establish a 3.5C, and once that is done, suddenly can't lose. My ratings have every one of these players at 3.70 or higher, and those with playing histories have been that high or higher in past years, so they are clearly have mid/upper 4.0 ability. The only way to become a 3.5 is to tank matches which most of them do.
And this is not the first time this team or these players have done this. This captain has taken teams to Nationals many times, sometimes at both 18+ and 40+ like this year, and has use this same or similar approach to roster construction in those years.
Now, one can argue that once you get to Nationals, every team has above level players and that is true. But there is a difference between legitimate 3.5s improving during the year, and 4.0s that have tanked just going back to their real ability. The 4.0s have a proven upside that is likely higher than any normally improving 3.5, and that gives an unfair advantage at Nationals as was proven the past two weekends.
You can also make the case that this Texas team isn't the only one that has players that tank matches, and that is true too. But I have not seen an entire roster created in this way. Most other Nationals teams have a few players bumped down or appealed down, or a few inappropriate self-rates that have avoided a DQ, but Texas has an entire roster of such players.
The end result is that the 18+ and 40+ 3.5 men's Nationals were a bit of a joke. When analysis before the event clearly has such dominate favorites that deliver, there is no real competition, and if the USTA can't offer teams competitive matches in level-based play at Nationals, has the promise of level-based play been entirely lost?
It would be great of the USTA were to crack down on this somehow, but it hasn't happened to date as this keeps occurring. I would never encourage other teams to follow this model, but in the absence of any action being taken, other teams may have to just to be able to compete. Or maybe if more teams do it the USTA will do something about it.
What do you think? Is this just the way Nationals is? Or should there be a line that shouldn't be crossed and Texas is crossing it?
Note: To try and identify roster construction issues ahead of time, I've created a Shenanigans Score.
I know from my time at the USTA Tennislink Team as the League and NTRP Coordinator, this is happening every year since I can remember (2006). Everyone knows this is happening in Southern California also but the Texans were probably able to cheat better than the SoCals this year. The Caribbean teams were famous for doing this at the lower levels (2.5/3.0). I can’t tell you how many times I saw a 2.5 Caribbean player all of a sudden playing like a 4.0 at Nationals. The sections don't do anything for two reasons in my humble opinion: 1. The offending captains bring in more revenue than others. Money talks. Or 2. Those captains win Nationals. Nice for every section, haha.
ReplyDeleteNorcal too, Bay Club used be notorious for this
DeleteHonestly when someone is self rated and bumps up within a year or during the season they should remains a self rate until they hold that rating for 2 years. For example you self rate a 3.0 bump to 3.5 you remains a self rate 3.6 for the next year, and if you bump again you stay self rated so that you can be DQ at anytime that you get three strikes. It’s too easy to become computer rated and for those new to tennis who really are getting better it still allows movement until you steady out for two years in a row.
DeleteThank you for laying it out so clearly, Kevin.
ReplyDeleteThe team who cheats best wins. Sounds like a fun way to win. This, and things like this, have been going on forever. Makes it so there is absolutely no reason to play USTA.
ReplyDeleteBut you know what? Even the biggest complainers who have been cheated out of advancing with their team are registering again year after year. Some of them have enough and join the pickleball crowd.
DeleteYou are absolutely correct. People playing the system. Here in middle states we had women's 4.0 team(s) and men's 4.0 team(s) with mostly same players (of respective genders) advance to 18 and 40 nationals. Played competitive. Bit only a cpl players somehow got bumped up. Went on to win the next year too... waiting to see what happens w year end ratings this year. Same players compete in mxd and trilevel to squash opponents. Really makes usta not be fun anymore. Or "competitive"
ReplyDeleteUSTA needs some kind of human interaction. You can see the players who are obviously not rated correctly. The 3 strike thing needs to be tougher.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteBut how many players leave because of these shenanigans? League participation is dropping even with these captains bringing in players.
DeleteProblem is: If the USTA clamped down on those offenders, they would lose 20% of their captains and their teams. Not going to happen.
DeleteThat still doesn't make it right. And no way are they losing 20%. I'd say less than 1%, if that. These captains would continue to have teams and play USTA. Maybe a few less players, but maybe not. But, more players would come back if substantial tanking diminished. I'd predict the net result would be more players playing USTA.
DeleteI agree losing 20% of captains/teams is probably a bit high. There may be some loss, but I think other players may come back in the long run.
DeleteThe USTA needs to grow a pair and enforce the spirit of the rules. Even if they lose players and captains as a result, what are we really losing? Have the courage to put the spirit of level competition back in the game. It’s incredibly disappointing to hear some justify it simply because others do it. It CAN be fixed but it takes some moral courage to do so. Come on USTA….you can do it!
DeleteIt must take an incredibly low level of self respect to tank a whole season to have your rating drop so you can win a USTA championship worth nothing except a bag tag and an Instagram post you can share with your friends.
ReplyDeleteEveryone has their own priorities and goals ... But yes, this is recreational tennis with (artificial) level-based play determining who the best mediocre adult tennis players are.
DeleteI think about these people and their professions. If you are cheating in tennis which is for fun, how are you cheating in your business life? Not people I want to do business with.
DeleteSo I was interested in the retirements, mostly in the finals. Is this to help keep rating lower? I get doing it in the semis if your team has clenched, save energy.
ReplyDeleteIt is generally done to save themselves for the next match, usually in the semis when there is no risk of the retirement affecting standings tie-breakers. But it can also happen in the final once it is decided.
DeleteIt is very clear that they gamed the system and I doubt USTA would do anything about it. The staff was already saw their favorites in Texas.
ReplyDeleteThere was yet another instance where one of the players was serving bombs but, 9 out of 10 times from the inside (foot faulting). The USTA umpire called faults a few times after warning him a few times. Then, went her way. When reported to other officials, heard that he is not doing to gain advantage but, is habitual.
But, a fault is a fault ... however good a player he is!
I have totally lost trust in USTA.
It is just sad if an official refuses to call violations.
DeleteAgain, the time, money, and effort to attend sub-par events is not worth it.
DeleteSpending money to lose 0-6, 0-6 for an entire season (or two or three!) just to go to Nationals the next year and slaughter a bunch of people sounds awful and pathetic. I guess I just don’t understand why it’s appealing.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, am I going to be able to appeal down to 4.5 this year?!?!?
DeleteGreat write-up, Kevin. Obviously this team/captain is a problem. I've never seen the USTA do anything about tanking, even when it's 100% obvious and egregious.
ReplyDeleteBut from other perspectives, they're 3.72 compared to 3.63 as the 2nd best team coming in. That 2nd best team has several players who shouldn't be allowed either; and almost every team at nationals I'm guessing has at least one player substantially under-rated. This doesn't make it right for this Texas team though. I'd suspect almost all if not all the 3.5 teams at nationals would take any of these ringer 3.5s on Texas if they had the chance. The Texas captain probably just spends more time finding a way for these players to be 3.5. But, the players have to buy into it, too. In a way, it's a crazy commitment and being able to win and make nationals so often is great. However, what does it actually mean? They win the title for being the shadiest team in the country. Unfortunately, that's what it boils down to at nationals often.
I hear about these things sometimes. Teams have players tank or manage ratings. Other teams keep bringing in new ringers every year. Or players ask for special appeals or just any appeal. Often, it's minimal differences or the supposed under-rated players are barely over level, but sometimes the players are substantially over level. Though I've seen many players over-rated and sometimes substantially over-rated, too, which isn't good either. But the question is or my question to you is: what are some solutions to this problem? If players have that C rating, what can the USTA do? From what I've learned, that C rating is a golden ticket.
I agree Texas is not alone in doing this and other teams at Nationals have some questionable players too. This Texas captain just takes it to the extreme. For all I know, he wants to get caught so keeps pushing it, but the USTA fails to do anything.
DeleteAnd yes, while the captain encourages it, players still bear some responsibility too.
Stay tuned for a post highlighting some things I think could be done.
So you can’t publish the names with your player data so we know who we should call out when we run into them. Yes the captain is arrogant but the players are equally at fault bc they know all of this and chose to participate to win what exactly? I would be so embarrassed to hold up a 3.5 national winner level but they are not obviously doing it year after year.
DeleteIt is pretty much the whole team, but you can figure out the players I listed by looking at their records and correlating with what I wrote.
DeleteGot it. Some of the members on these teams and others also creates new accounts with new names sometimes. Truly pathetic people especially when it’s a recreational sport!
DeleteKevin, I'm sure you know this. But, I wanted to ask you about the Utah captain/team that won 18 4.0 nationals 3 years in a row(2019, 2021, 2022). And then I see the same captain formed an 18 4.5 team this year and made nationals with them, but didn't win. Probably more winning teams than not at nationals have a few players playing at the wrong level, regardless if their rating was achieved honestly. And maybe this Utah captain/team is formed in a good way. But, winning 3x in a row seems crazy to me and unlikely there isn't something fishy going on.
ReplyDeleteInterestingly, the Texas captain you're talking about in this article had 18 4.0 teams make nationals in 2019 and 2021, finishing 2nd in 2019.
Yep, I am well aware of the Utah captain/team. From what I recall, his teams don't really tank matches to get bumped down, but he does have his share of self-rates that are probably too low.
DeleteBut the captain has also posted in public forums about his "program" to take players with potential that are willing to commit, and have them do drills and practice with the team and against other stronger players, all to improve to win Nationals.
In the end, his players are well out of level, and that means they are probably questionably at the C rating at the time, but how do you legislate against players putting in time to improve? Might other C rated players also improve similarly if they put the work in?
Perhaps this is just as bad, but I do see it as different from tanking to get an artificially low rating.
Tanking matches is only one way to stay below level though. Maybe that Utah captain is doing it more in a right way. Are all these players from Utah? I seem to remember several coming in from a long distance. If any bigger city has one team committed to pooling all the best players at a specific level together each year, they could be very good each year. But, it seems hard to believe they'd be able to do this every year in Utah with legit 4.0 players, and then actually winning nationals 3x in a row. Many of these players who are S have to be well below level I'd suspect.
DeleteIn this example, if players are legit 4.0 and then put in the time and effort one year to get as good as possible, I see no problem with that. Actually, that's great. That's the whole point of sports. It stinks for everyone else if a legit 4.0 at the start of the year is now 4.25+ by the end of the year, but that's not the faults of these players trying to improve. But if these players aren't legit 4.0s to begin with, then there's a problem. If they so many S rates who are below level, then obviously not great for any other team. If they have C rates who didn't tank to stay C, but who are incorrectly rated 4.0 by the USTA, then that's the USTA's NTRP system failure.
The Utah captain has seemed to look for underrated C players and self-rates he think can improve significantly with practice. Some of those self-rates probably shouldn't self-rate at the level they do, but the guidelines/questionnaire allows it. And the players being bumped up and doing well at the higher level, and potentially getting bumped again is probably proof of that.
DeleteI'm not saying this is necessarily good or anything. But, most competitive captains are looking for those underrated C players to improve their chances of winning, and that's perfectly good and all though not great for their opps and even worse when one team has so many of these types of players, but they're just following the USTA system. So, it's a system problem in this regard. The below level S rates are a bigger problem, especially when they're bunched up on the same team, though even 1-2 can drastically change which team(s) win. If following the guidelines, then good in that aspect. But, your potential solutions in your last post could help some. But one question that doesn't seem like everyone can agree on is: what exactly is a 3.5(or 4.0, or 4.5, etc) anymore? 3.5s look better than 4.5s sometimes.
DeleteTo your last question, I think the better one to ask is what exactly is a _Nationals_ 3.5 supposed to be?
DeleteI think most agree that a 3.5 should be able to have a "compatible" and hopefully a "competitive" match with another 3.5, and will lose more often than not to a 4.0 and win more often than not versus a 3.0.
I think most will agree that Nationals teams are going to have the best at their level, and a number of these players will be on their way to being bumped up.
I think the question is, is there some reasonable degree a Nationals player is expected to be above level, or is there a reasonable cap on what that is? If a Nationals 3.5 plays like a "normal" 4.0, I don't think too many people would complain. But when a Nationals 3.5 plays like a top 4.0 or even a 4.5 that seems to be too much.
But drawing a line and enforcing it is hard.
Right, but maybe not just a Nationals 3.5 specifically. How you describe a 3.5 make sense. But most of us wouldn't exactly know what a 'Nationals 3.5' exactly means. Almost every district/section will have 1 or more 3.5s who look much below level. When someone sees 1 of these 'ringer 3.5s' somewhere which this player is allowed to remain 3.5, how are the rest of these players/teams supposed to be competitive?
DeleteWhen you say 'normal 4.0,' I'm guessing you mean average 4.0 more or less. To me, that's well above level, halfway to 4.5. That's pretty extreme. Now, top 4.0 or even 4.5 ability is a totally different matter, true.
And true drawing a line and enforcing it is hard. But also, which exactly is that line, too?
I just noticed this same Texas captain has had tri teams make the past 3 nationals finishing 1st, 6th, and 3rd in 2020, 2021, and 2022, respectively. And he's played on 2 4.0 teams in 2023 with each of his teams losing extremely badly each match. The cycle win continue with him having awesome 3.5s next year.
Well, today the line is there is no line for computer rated players, and if you are an S or an A there is the strike threshold to set a line. I think this works if the threshold is lower, and steps are taken to avoid fradulent C ratings. If those two things are done, most of the problems are solved.
DeleteAgree. These are easy fixes at least to minimize the shenanigans. Having strikes for C players seems a little dicey, but if the threshold is higher than for S or A players, could have some merit.
DeleteWe played this team a few years back in OKC and there were almost fights in more than one of their matches. Everyone knew they were cheating. For the finals, everyone came out to cheer on the Pacific NW team, which was stacked with guys who were legit 3.5 great athletes and almost beat them. We also took them to a 3-2 match. That Texas captain and team sucks. Can’t believe four years later they’re still doing the same thing.
ReplyDeleteFreeman’s tactics are a disgrace, and to say I am close to the group is an understatement.
ReplyDeleteUSTA needs to implement a rule that once you’ve played and won at a certain NTRP level, you are barred from entering the summer league at or below the level in the future…until you’ve breached the next age bracket threshold - at which point you’ll be allowed to enter whatever level again subject to the same restrictions if you win at that level again.
Thanks for the comment.
DeleteI agree there could be more deterministic rules in place to prevent players from going back down, I mentioned some of this in a subsequent post. But I like your suggestions too.
They also need to bring back the “official raters” so that sandbaggers can actually get booted.
ReplyDeleteThere is merit to this, but how are official raters consistent with each other? And what is the line they are looking to be crossed? Won't players just try to look bad to avoid that?
DeleteWell thanks for doing this Kevin, but sadly the USTA has lost it's way and won't do anything about this. Up in the PNW region, we have seen this for years as well. Sports is supposed to be about achieving your personal best, not finding someone you can beat. Not sure what you get for be 40+ and winning something that only makes you the 15,000th best player on the planet...woo hoo!
ReplyDeleteSimple way to solve it: If you go to Nationals you move up and can never go back down.
Sadly, this happens across the entire USTA...look at teams consistently going to Sectionals...the competition is stilted in a way that makes winning more important than sport.
Well said
DeleteI guess the "move up or split up" rule is the reason why those "professional captains" are always on the lookout for cheating with self-raters. I have some stories about them in the November issue of TENNIS CLUB BUSINESS.
DeleteHey USTA: Ban the local USTA coordinator... they knew this was happening and are just as culpable (if not more) than the captain. Can't run a section without the coordinator and that would send a swift message
ReplyDeleteFor those of us in Houston who compete against Jason Freeman’s team, trust me… We’re as frustrated with his bullshit as y’all are.
ReplyDeleteUSTA empowers people like him by doing nothing. This blog posting is well-constructed. It should end up in the USTA inbox, as well as other league coordinators, sectionals chairs, and as many popular tennis forums as possible.
That, and force his teams to play with wooden rackets going forward. :)
Certainly your LCs know about this. Do they not care? Are friends and have a conflict of interest? Or feel they are unable to do anything?
DeleteFor LCs who are being paid a commission per league registration, the lure of turning a blind eye to cheating captains who most likely bring in several teams season after season is huge.
DeleteGreta article! Kevin, the girl we spoke about a couple months ago ended up not playing in nationals for some reason and shocker, their team lost. Too bad our team didn’t get to go due to her shenanigans. The ratings system needs improving for sure!
ReplyDeleteThank you Kevin for making players aware of this! Those captains should be banned for encouraging this. I know players who won't play in spring so they don't get bumped down or bumped up. I know a USTA Coordinator that also captained a USTA team and took only the best players to play on her team. Golf uses all the scores and USTA should use all the matches not just the spring. They have all the matches in their sytem. That would prevent some of the games people play. And USTA should encourage more players to captain a team (maybe they play free). We have teams that have 18 players when only 6 players play in a match. That means you might 2 or 3 matches in a season. There used to be maximum number of players of 12 players and they keep bumping that number up. It is so difficult to get on teams. Unfortunately, I predict USTA is going to fade away if changes are not made.
ReplyDeleteI agree the clear cases of tanking or flagrant violation of the spirit of the rules should result in bans.
DeleteI like the idea of encouraging more captains. I think roster limits were lifted because the USTA cares primarily about league registrations and if a team can register 18 players instead of 12, that is 6 more registrations and associated fees. Those 6 players on a new team does nothing for the USTA, and in fact is more work as that is another team that has to have matches scheduled. They'd rather have two 18 team rosters than three 12 team rosters.
League registrations become ultimately quite important for the bottom line. Fact is that the number of league players has gone down over the years so they are not being published anymore. They rather publish the number of registrations (going up) knowing full well that the reason is players play on more teams each season. The USTA is posting those "330,000 league players" on their web pages but I don't think they have more than 300,000 unique players anymore. I may be wrong.
DeleteThe analysis I usually do is for the main advancing leagues, as those have a consistent definition. I think the 330K the USTA uses include all leagues, so it very well could be accurate.
DeleteWhat may be the best number to track is players with a year-end rating. That indicates someone that didn't just register, but played enough matches in a league that "counts".
What's funny is that USTA Texas posted on facebook praising these guys and bragging about Houston "dominating" USTA Nationals.
ReplyDeleteAnd someone posted a link to this blog on their page! Wasn't me, but thanks!
DeleteI would hope any section would post one of their teams(two in this instance) winning nationals still. But, cool someone posted to this blog.
DeleteMake it simple. Self rates can’t advance past districts. Have seen self rates run up 4-0 leads then double fault away a couple games to keep from earning strikes (in sectionals!) I like if you win more than lose at nationals you get bumped and can’t come back down and can’t play with a majority of same players ever again.
ReplyDeleteI am surprised. I am a solid 3.5 and am doing my best to play in a 4.0 team. Would never consider dropping a level just to win.
ReplyDeleteYou and the majority of USTA League players. But a few bad apples that insist on winning at artificial levels mess it up for the rest of us.
DeleteWhy not name the captain and the players, Kevin? They clearly are proud of their "accomplishments." Why protect them? They don't deserve your courtesy.
ReplyDeleteIt is easy enough to look up.
DeleteThere is nothing that can be done to fix it. We play within the system we are in. Tanking is now part of the game. Mark Cuban just did it. NBA teams do it all the time. Part of the game.
ReplyDeleteYes, we play within the system that is implemented. But, there is definitely something that can be done. Those in charge aren't following the rules/guidelines very well to eliminate or bump up grossly under-rated players. There's blatant sandbagging that occurs sometimes, and the system if followed correctly could/should easily eliminate a lot of this stuff.
DeleteNothing can be done. They ask players if they tank. Player says no. Don’t hate the playa. Hate the game. I will say that I was a victim of watching this in my league for years. I cried and cried and was shut down over and over. At which point it became play with a bunch of “cheats” don’t play at all, or join in. And my ethics aren’t tarnished one bit. Because I tried to stop it and was rebuffed. This is the system. It stays. And if you want to change it. Change it for all. But comments like “whoever cheats the most wins” are total bullshit when this system that forced players to do it exists. Who the fk wants to play in a fked up system knowing it’s going on. Only one choice if you want to play. Join. This is done
ReplyDeleteThis whole thread is the dumbest thing ever. I captain in Southern California and have in Texas as well. 90 percent not 10 percent of us play games a bit and and tank here and there to get the best players. Human nature. And has kevin shmidt ever picked up a tennis racket. Let alone deal with the thankless job of captaining. I’m not about to watch my players suffer and lose because other guys are gaming the system a bit. I’ll game it back.
ReplyDeleteThanks for posting anonymously. If 90% of players are all doing it, I'd think you wouldn't have any issue not being anonymous.
ReplyDeleteAnd thanks for the personal attack. I've played USTA League for 15 years, am currently a 4.5, play several times a week, have been to Sectionals several times as both a player and a captain, and Nationals once. I'm currently captaining a team and have captained a team every other year or so.
I think you are the only one here posting that 90% of players do this, so I'm pretty sure that isn't the case. Your assuming that I can't have ever picked up a racket because I don't game the system is more evidence that your perception of how many are doing it is perhaps off base.
Anonymity has nothing to do with the all amount of people doing it. Zero. My issue is that why several other captains have commented about your comments. At Nats, I hear Kevin shmidt said this or that. Stupidest thing ever. Not to reign on your parade. But you do not work for usta. Have no idea about the inner workings and it’s annoying as shit.
ReplyDeleteAnd I am not off base. I have spoken to the most ethical of captains. And I would say close to zero haven’t bent a rule….rescheduling matches. Making them up. Perhaps playing below level. If you have never broken a usta rule. You are in the minority. Congrats to you But Kevin shmidt is not a usta authority. Which is why this thread is bull shit
ReplyDeleteI wrote an article observing that a team had done what it appears is clear and egregious tanking to get players bumped down, and as a result they were able to take what were clearly above players to Nationals and win two events. It doesn't sounds like you are disputing that this happens in general, nor that it happened in this case, so I'm not sure what raining on my parade is valid. You've effectively confirmed what I wrote happens and is correct.
DeleteI even wrote that this isn't the only captain/team that does this, so you are agreeing with me and confirming that too.
I'm not sure what my not working for the USTA has to do with it, nor why that means I have no idea about the inner workings. I assume you don't work for the USTA either (I could be wrong) in which case I guess you have no idea of the inner workings either so your comments could be classified as annoying too?
I do know people at the USTA and get the feeling that they would like to get rid of the tanking and cheating, but it is hard to prove. The level it is getting to may result in some sort of action though. We'll see what happens.
One more thing. Congratulations to Texas. The world ain’t black and white. It’s gray. There were players out of level all over the place. They played within the system and you have no right to tarnish their accomplishments. Usta does. The fed sets the interest rates. They set the law. And sometimes they’ll tighten up. Sometimes they’ll loosen up. And the astute captain has to know when things Are loose and tight and adapt. The world has always been about adaptation. Charles Darwin. Don’t hate the playa. Hate the game kevo! We move on fortunate to have usta. Sometimes we forget this. If Texas got their guys in. Hats off. Like I said this conversation is stupid
ReplyDeleteOf course there are players out of level, if there weren't no one would get bumped up. The question is how players end up being out of level. There are many ways to get there, but I would guess that only those that do it would say blatant tanking of matches to get bumped down is an acceptable way to end up being out of level. But it is hard to draw a line on where exactly it is or isn't ok, I don't dispute that.
DeleteAnd you are right the USTA "sets the law", and in fact there are laws against this! The point suspension system calls out a few pertinent offenses.
Under sportsmanship:
Unsportsmanlike Conduct/Violations of The Code (e.g.,
intentional/retaliatory bad line calls, refusing to call out the
score, "quick" serving, stalling, feinting, grunting, tanking/not
using best efforts to win; obscene/profane language or
gestures)
These are clearly hard to prove and rarely enforced, but not tanking is the law.
The there is:
Misrepresenting scores (incl. intentionally entering
inaccurate scores or representing scores without playing the
match)
Also listed, so is the law.
You can blame the USTA for not enforcing the rules they have in place, but I struggle to rationalize that players aren't violating the rules simply because they get away with it.
Perhaps the USTA will decide to start enforcing more of the rules they have on the books, I don't know.
Right Kevin, where do we draw the exact line is the question. But, without a doubt, a better line needs to be drawn quickly. It does seem to be getting out of control more lately about egregiously under-rated players. But, part of that problem is the algorithm, too. But, also lots of players get through the cracks and honestly too. I see multiple 3.5 C players yearly who would excel at 4.0 and do, and most of them aren't trying to stay at 3.5. So, this type of stuff needs to be resolved better, too.
DeleteGood points that tanking is against the rules. I guess the USTA is allowing a lot of tanking and/or can't/won't enforce it, but it's still against the rules.
What the 3.5 Texas teams did is ridiculous and means nothing winning 3.5 Nationals with 4.5 players mostly.
Texas deserves no congratulations; and save all of the black/white/gray garbage. They have zero integrity, and they have accomplished nothing. It's not about USTA rules; it's about YOUR own personal code as a competitor. Those players, rather than man up and challenge themselves as competitors, used the ineptitude of the USTA to take the easy way out. Cowards and cheats, plain and simple, no two ways about it.
DeleteMy point is, If the usta does they do. You got no right to knock the Texas team. They played within the system that was given. No right. You sound like a whiner. This conversation is over. Don’t hate the player hate the game. If usta wants to tighten up they will do so and let all know accordingly. But no one individual or team will be blamed for simply playing within the system. That’s communistic bull shit. Now I said this conversation is over. So do not reply again.
ReplyDeleteUmmm, I'm free to have an opinion and express it. You don't have to agree with it, that's fine, I can respect different opinions.
DeleteAlso, it is my blog, I'm free to reply as I see fit. I haven't deleted your comments, I think the discussion is worth having. You don't have to reply, that is fine.
Was happy to call you out face ti face. You were no where to be found on social media ! It’s your blog!
DeleteConversation is not over. These Texas guys are cheaters and everyone should know it. You obviously think this is good sportsmanship? Ever read the tennis code? #1 principle - Tennis is a game of cooperation and courtesy. Cheating to get ahead is neither cooperative nor courteous. Their behavior is reprehensible and should be called out. I realize you’re probably not smart enough to understand this - I’d recommend a dictionary to start with some basic terms and their meanings.
DeleteThe Texas players are cowards plain and simple. To spend an entire season tanking matches just so you can win at a level where you do not belong is beyond disgraceful. Those players aren't man enough to challenge themselves and play at their true level. They would rather rack up pointless wins against subpar competition and pretend they did something impressive. It's like a 6th grader bragging about being the best player on a team of 1st-graders. Their titles mean nothing, and they are a discredit to the sport.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting that Freeman is getting all these players to tank that badly. Basically every team who makes Nationals, probably has at least 1-2 players out of level, but this is probably the most extreme example I or almost anyone has ever seen, and it's being going on for years with no end in sight. While most of them are probably not quite 4.5 level, I wouldn't think too many 4.5 level players would want to play 3.5 tennis in any capacity, so I'm a bit surprised he's getting these many players to buy in. I'm sure at Nationals, it's like playing decent 4.0s or better even. And other teams are doing something similarly. The question is: where is the line? But, it's a hard question to answer. Though this obviously shouldn't be allowed. It's also a trickle-down effect to other teams where these players will play other divisions like mixed and tri-level and likely dominate and make a bunch more Nationals, too.
DeleteI have long thought that as long as the USTA crowns national champions at all levels, there will be players and clubs and sections that game the system. I played 6 seasons for German clubs, and there is only a national champion at the top division, the Bundesliga. Every other division has a champion for a smaller geographical area the farther down you go. What you get for winning is the team moves up the next year. But it might only be champion of a county, or a region, or a state. I think this takes care of the issue. But there is so much money involved that I doubt the USTA is going to change.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if it really matters if there's Nationals for all levels or not. The top level would also only be players who played D1 and/or very high level college tennis or better even. 99.9% of players aren't in this category.
DeleteWhat you say is that champions for the any lower division are crowned for smaller areas like states and sections. That'd be the 'Nationals' for basically everyone then and players/teams would still try to win that similarly to what happens now. But, I guess without the incentive of possibly reaching Nationals, fewer players might join USTA but in some ways maybe more players would join instead. Hard to tell exactly.
USTA leagues are overall well structured and organized with clear knowledge of advancing through the season and postseason. However, the ingrained nature of USTA of gaming the system as you put it would be very hard to overturn. The USTA is inconsistent at best at how they regulate players' ratings and allow basically anything unless someone complains. But they then follow through all too easily if someone actually complains. Many of the complaints shouldn't actually be upheld, though many should be, too.
In 2017 when my team made it to nationals we met a player from Utah that talked about how his captain recruits with tanking being something his players did year after year. He went on to talk about the process and even stated that his captain paid for the team’s flights and hotel rooms at nationals. 🤪
ReplyDeleteWhat division? I'm guessing 3.5 as both Doug Fowkes' teams made nationals that year and I've heard stories of him paying his teams' expenses.
DeleteI'd guess that too.
DeletePaying expenses is always tricky. On one hand, it may allow some players to participate in league play or make the trip to playoffs/Sectionals/Nationals that otherwise couldn't, or allow them to reach their potential with drills and coaching which is helping to promote more play and interest. But it can clearly be abused too and give significant advantage to those with more resources.
I never realized Fowkes was going to Nationals for 3.5 like this before winning 3 18 4.0 men's National titles in a row until this previous commenter said that and I looked into it. These are great accomplishments on the surface, no doubt. But with how competitive the USTA is now and for some of the biggest divisions, especially repeat years when breaking up is necessary, it makes one quite skeptical what exactly is happening. Pretty much every competitive team will have at least 1-2 players out of level but also likely someone's gaming the system. It's hard to know what exactly a 3.5, 4.0. 4.5, etc player is anymore. But some of these teams it sounds like has 8-15 players out of level and gaming the system dramatically.
DeleteI played against a 4.0 Utah player at ITT Nationals last year. I guess he was going to be on Fowkes team this year, but ended up bumping to 4.5 playing just a few mixed matches. His level is just above average 4.5 at worst from what I saw. New player, so legit rating and all.
Yea, it's quite generous to pay expenses for your team(s). But wow, that is extreme if a captain is paying for travel expenses plus weekly matches/drills for all team members, let alone if doing it for multiple teams. There might be 1-2 players that might need more help at least for travel to playoffs, but that's a lot different. Honestly, how much is being spent for one team like this for the entire year?
Hello. Great article - well researched and well written. As the captain of the team that lost to a clearly above level Texas team in the 2023 3.5 men’s 40+ finals, I can attest to the frustration of losing to a team of self-rated and appealed-down players. It’s a travesty and the USTA should be ashamed they let it happen. I’ll put it out there - maybe they should strip the national title from TX and award it to the true winners - the all computer-rated, improving-as-they-play guys from West Michigan! Thanks for your comments.
ReplyDeleteIn that Final, 12 of the 14 players bumped up at year end, including one player from Texas bumping to 4.5. Each team had one player in the Final who remained 3.5. I guess the harsh reality is that you need as many 4.0 level players as possible to win 3.5 Nationals, 4.5 level players to win 4.0 Nationals, etc. I don't think that will ever change. But improvements can certainly be made. But the only way that's fair to the entire country is if these improvements are implemented everywhere. This certainly doesn't happen and doesn't seem that it will happen. The USTA has known about guys like Freeman and others for years and nothing has happened. But similar things are happening everywhere, just rarely to the extreme of Freeman.
DeleteYes, true that the guys from our team
ReplyDeleteGot rated up after the season, but for each of them this was their first time to reach that level. None of them was rated-down, appealed-down, or tanked and lost matches to get down to the 3.5 level. We all start out self-rated, but it’s Bullshixx to see guys rated 4.5 that end up at 3.5 by losing matches on purpose to get there. We got to the finals by winning matches. Very proud of my guys and their teamwork. Can’t even imagine how the TX guys must feel after cheating the system (and selling their souls) to get to their “accomplishment”.
I understand what you're saying and not disagreeing. I'm just saying from an outsider view, it looks like both teams had way too many guys out of level and every other team in the country would be upset with both teams in the Final. It's just that Freeman was super extreme at getting his guys to 3.5. But the Final was very narrowly 2-2, though Texas would've won at 2-2 on tiebreaks. So, he's still not cakewalking winning Nationals doing this stuff. It probably gives him validation that what he's doing is ok.
DeleteChad Harris, his guy who bumped to 4.5, won his court in the Final in a super. He's probably well underrated at 3.5, but actually a 4.5? Maybe, maybe not. But, he still had a competitive, very close Finals match.
Without looking too closely, it looks like you had Duc Duong, first year of USTA in 2023 but must've snuck out a 3.5 C playing a few matches at the end of 2022. That guy steamrolled pretty much everyone, and winning mostly at 4.0. Not giving you a hard time, but I doubt any team you faced was thrilled about playing that guy.
Duc had been out of all tennis for over 20+ years. When he first started playing with us, he barely made the team. LOL. but he had skills from high school tennis that were dormant. His work ethic is fantastic and he improved to get where he is - not the other way around. He came on strong in 2023 and became a force on the courts. There was no sandbagging, just opportune timing. Same story with several others. But not one of them EVER had a rating higher than 3.5 - ever. And, as I mentioned, they were all solidly computer rated.
DeleteI'm not saying nor implying anything was sketch regarding his rating or how he self rated. I'm talking how he performed over the course of 12 months, and his results clearly indicate he had no business being a 3.5 for very long. If you had to face a 3.5 like this, I'd bet you wouldn't enjoy that. If he wasn't able to sneak in a 3.5 C rating at the end of 2022, I'd guess he would've struckout quickly if he was S rated. He was 10-0 in his 2022 calendar-year 3.5 matches, but maybe just 6-0 before the cutoff date. Looks like he was 35-5 overall for 3.5 for the 2023 season. So, he was actually winning at his very start and often very easily.
DeleteGaming the system is obviously not a great thing. But there's different ways to get certain ratings, regardless if someone is intentionally trying to get that certain rating or not. To me, it's more about the bottomline. Duong was essentially an S player for 2023, but he played enough matches at the end of 2022(2023 season) to secure that C rating and keep him safe for the rest of 2023.
I'm not condoning anything Freeman does/did. Actually, the contrary. But, how could he or anyone else expect to beat someone like Duong at 3.5 without having a 3.5 who's high level 4.0 or better? The same goes for other teams facing Freeman. It's a never-ending cycle. I'm sure no 3.5 team would've said no to Duong playing as a 3.5 for them since they thought he was too good for 3.5. He's the type of 3.5 a team needs to go far in the postseason.