Many of you probably don't follow your WTN, as for USTA League players it is largely meaningless other than it being a rating you can track. But it doesn't directly relate to your NTRP rating or dynamic rating, nor is it used for anything related to leagues. I'm a ratings geek so I do follow mine, and if you follow yours too I'd be interested in hearing from you or leaving a comment about your experience with it.
If you have followed along with WTN news, you will be aware that this isn't the first time there have been changes. At a minimum there were changes in 2024 to try to have WTN ratings represent a player's ability more quickly, and widespread adjustments in 2023 to redistribute players along the 40:1 scale. You can see all my WTN posts here.
So, this isn't the first change, what is changing now? A quote from the article is the changes will "improve rating accuracy, reflect real match performance, and support player development at all levels of the game". Here are some highlights from the news article above:
- Changes go into effect for the calculations on August 12th
- There will be a rolling 3-year rating window where older results gradually drop out of the calculations
- The algorithm will use game-level scores, not just who won the set
- Ratings may be "gently adjusted" based on age, time since last match, and "typical development patterns"
The biggest news to me is the move from only looking at who won a set to factoring in the score of the set.
Up to this point, if you won 7-6,7-6 the WTN algorithm would treat that the same as if you won 6-0,6-0. In my opinion, there were pros and cons to this.
On one hand, winning sets, and the match, is what matters, how you do it doesn't really matter, so if someone had a track record of winning close matches, they should be rewarded for that. The algorithm was also a little simpler and easier to understand (or reverse engineer?) and less prone to being gamed by someone managing scores. If someone played enough and against stronger and weaker players and accumulated wins and losses, their rating would settle it and represent their level.
On the other hand, ignoring the score is ignoring valuable data. Clearly, winning 6-0 is different than 7-6 and ignoring that seems foolhardy. If someone plays a strong opponent and keeps it close, they don't get rewarded for that, and if that player happened to always play strong players and lose, their rating could perhaps inappropriately keep getting worse. Using the score in a set would allow for rewarding a player for keeping it close. And if someone didn't play a lot of matches, their rating could inappropriately go up or down based on very few matches with limited data, and using the game score would fill in some gaps.
Now, in the algorithm to date, winning sets in a given match was not treated equally, but how much it helped your rating depended on your rating and the rating of your opponent. Win a set against a much weaker opponent and your rating would improve very little. Win a set against a stronger opponent and that would raise your rating a lot. So some of the cons were mitigated a bit and there would be some limit on what a player's rating could get to by only ever playing weaker players and winning.
So, is this change a good thing? I think so, but it will depend on exactly how it is implemented. I don't know of anyone trying to game their WTN, but using game scores opens the door to that. But if that is a rare occurrence, WTN ratings may become a little more representative of a player's ability.
What do you think?
