I abhor the widespread suspicion and vilification of NTRP self-rated players within USTA League culture. Even worse is the fact that this absolute bias leads to rules and restrictions that make it harder for players without an NTRP computer rating to initially engage in organized USTA League play. That is the exact opposite of the organizational mission to develop and promote the growth of tennis.
On the other hand, I also have a low tolerance for players and enterprising Captains who abuse the self-ratings process. There is little doubt that those violations listed within the USTA League Suspension Point System are occurring with great regularity. Another issue is obvious match-fixing used to manipulate computer ratings. Paradoxically, there are NO violations outlined in the current USTA League Suspension Point System for tanking matches.
That brings me to a philosophical rumination of whether the punishments match the crimes within the USTA’s Suspension Point system. Based on sidebar discussions from my Section’s semi-annual conference last month, I can draw some broad strokes about the organizational attitude toward potential suspensions. In a nutshell, there is extreme reluctance to mete out significant penalties.
That isn’t necessarily a bad thing. An organization founded with the mission to promote and develop the growth of tennis shouldn’t be routinely kicking people out of the ecosystem. On the other hand, allowing miscreants free reign for unsportsmanlike behavior ruins the experience for everyone else. Even worse, rampant corruption has impacted the culture of USTA League tennis to the point where some types of terrible behaviors are considered to be smart. That is not OK.
When the USTA League Suspension Point System was first unveiled, there may have been a prevailing idea that handing out points just below the level that triggers a suspension would serve as a deterrent to continued bad behavior. For many of the categories, that may actually be true. Unfortunately, the paradigm does not work for egregious Self-Rating violations. A player only self-rates once during the possible duration of any Suspension Points. Repeat violations are simply not possible.
The emerging idea within my Section seems to be that three-month suspensions are a more effective deterrent than Suspension Point assessments without penalties. My personal opinion is that in USTA League Tennis, a three-month suspension is not at all impactful. Perhaps by this time next year, the organization will start trending toward longer durations.
A recent blog post from Schmid Computer Ratings (link below) calls out disturbing patterns of manipulation in rosters of players at last month’s USTA League Nationals. Some of the issues highlighted include suspiciously strong performances from self-rated players. That analysis also suggests a broad pattern of tanked matches for ratings manipulations.
This is a good time to review the precise text of the Self-rating violations defined in the USTA League Suspension Point System. Two violations are defined as applicable to players only. Captains cannot receive Suspension Points for a player who commits these infractions.
- Self-rating lower than true playing ability. (8 Suspension Points)
- Failure to self-rate in accordance with the Guidelines, or omission of information regarding player’s tennis history (8-10 Suspension Points)
However, a third violation obviously applies to Captains and potentially other third parties.
- Any USTA League player, or Captain, who knowingly assists or condones of another player’s inaccurate or inappropriate self-rating (including guiding that player to omit information) (10 Suspension Points)
An initial suspension requires an accumulation of 10 suspension points. That means the player-exclusive violations are unlikely to generate any suspension time. However, a Captain or other third party who is shown to assist or condone inaccurate Self-rating will automatically trigger a suspension of three months. That is next to nothing.
For a first-time isolated offense, three months feels appropriate. Not so much for a Captain with a roster full of these players or a history of egregious self-rates. I am curious how many times that penalty has been assessed. Let me get my shocked face ready for the probable answer of zero.
The absence of strategic match tanking in the USTA League Suspension Point System is a terrible omission. Even though prosecuting individual instances would be dangerous and impossible to prove, it is something that has to be encoded to establish standards of unacceptable behavior. That needs to include provisions for Captains with full rosters of players who evidence a strong pattern of ratings manipulation.
The current USTA League Suspension Point System needs to be revised to capture all the types of ratings abuse described in Kevin Schmidt’s “Texas demonstrates the foolproof plan to win USTA League Nationals – Game the system by tanking matches.” A tougher stance is needed to keep these unsportsmanlike practices from becoming more widespread… and accepted… than they currently are.
- USTA League Suspension Point System 2023, USTA Resource Document, March 23, 2023.
- Texas demonstrates the foolproof plan to win USTA League Nationals – Game the system by tanking matches, Schmidt Computer Ratings Blog, October 8, 2023.
Yep, all this nonsense is why I dropped out of USTA play. I have enough tennis buddies that I can still play fun tennis every day. That said, even in a friendly match, a not-uncommon comment is, “Good shot — but in USTA, that would have been out!”