Saturday, June 8, 2013

Troy Toole

We had a 4.5 DQ.

Troy Toole, of the Good-er Guys, who was a self rate and had played 4 matches, 3 at line 3 doubles and one at line 2 doubles. Not exactly a high risk DQ, one would think. But as you know, the computer sometimes has a mind of its own.

I quickly looked him up on that ratings website I mentioned last week, and he was listed at 4.48 (through matches of 5/17), so he was in the danger zone. It adds some credence to the algorithm being used by that website, in my opinion.

The DQ moves the Deucebags into first place, and drops the Good-er Guys to 5-1. I'm guessing that he was playing in the rain interrupted match between the two teams, but I have no knowledge of that. It definitely makes the Wild Card race interesting. The Good-er Guys may end up on the outside looking in, despite a talented roster.

123 comments:

  1. Sometimes you just can't figure these things. I think most people would have assumed someone like Danny Schnyder or Christopher Lee would have gotten nabbed before Toole, given their singles success and self-rate status.

    ReplyDelete
  2. If Good-er Guys win the rematch vs Deucebags and Hurricane's beats Old School again, doesn't this put old school on the outside looking in?

    If that were the case, would the hurricanes have incentive to play a less good roster vs Old School to help keep Good-er Guys out of the playoffs?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think a better question is: would there be anything wrong with that?

    ReplyDelete
  4. dbags dont deserve the playoffs. they are probably the 8th best team.

    ReplyDelete
  5. it's probably that alain tran trying to get someone dq'd

    ReplyDelete
  6. Was Ernie Lai tanking last year? Sure is a dramatic turnaround for him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think tankers self rate at 4.5 and play in the 5.0 division...usually they self rate lower than they want to be and play in the lowest possible division they qualify for.

      Delete
    2. This got me thinking, how to spot a tanker. There's probably a lot of ways to look at the #'s, here's one how else do we look at the numbers?

      Look at the TLS ratings at the end of 2012 through 5/17/2013, and look at players who had gained at least half a level (0.25 rating points in this time). Of 1800ish players, very few had improved this much, I think it's very difficult to make that big of a jump unless you have underrated yourself in the past or tanked.

      Here's the list of players on 4.0 teams:
      Bryant Chan (double_trouble) went from 3.04 to 3.83, change of 0.79
      Ronnie R Pedroso (ace_n_spinners) went from 2.92 to 3.62, change of 0.70
      David Vincent Bryce (poachers) went from 2.50 to 3.14, change of 0.64
      David A. Rudolph (predators) went from 3.50 to 4.05, change of 0.55
      Eric D. Schultz (poachers) went from 3.25 to 3.70, change of 0.45
      Evan Fontenot (sienna) went from 3.66 to 4.10, change of 0.44
      Robert Dornbos (hurricanes) went from 3.68 to 4.10, change of 0.42
      Juan Carlos Guarin (spin_drs) went from 3.53 to 3.93, change of 0.40
      Xavier Pena (acers) went from 3.53 to 3.92, change of 0.39
      Camilo Rodriguez (spin_drs) went from 3.62 to 4.00, change of 0.38
      Christiaan B. Stevens (spin_drs) went from 3.45 to 3.83, change of 0.38
      Roger Oppenheim (spin_drs) went from 3.51 to 3.87, change of 0.36
      Ronald Toht (predators) went from 3.24 to 3.60, change of 0.36
      Peter Charles Nasser (cobra_kai) went from 3.19 to 3.55, change of 0.36
      Miles Marks (lakeside) went from 3.70 to 4.05, change of 0.35
      Rob Vargas (ace_n_spinners) went from 3.75 to 4.08, change of 0.33
      William K. Mao (sienna) went from 3.59 to 3.92, change of 0.33
      Richard J. Patton (hurricanes) went from 3.68 to 3.99, change of 0.31
      Greg S. Olinger (good_guys) went from 3.63 to 3.93, change of 0.30
      Bill Seitz (controlled_terror) went from 3.71 to 4.01, change of 0.30
      William Kelly (aces) went from 3.52 to 3.82, change of 0.30
      Michael Tran (hurricanes) went from 3.50 to 3.80, change of 0.30
      Jonathan Henderson (columbia_lakes) went from 3.43 to 3.72, change of 0.29
      Alan Michael Kramer (controlled_terror) went from 3.78 to 4.06, change of 0.28
      Kevin Viet Trinh (sienna) went from 3.74 to 4.02, change of 0.28
      Alan Moon (thors) went from 3.63 to 3.90, change of 0.27
      Noor Mirza (double_trouble) went from 3.23 to 3.50, change of 0.27
      Oscar J. Santollani (aches_n_pains) went from 3.45 to 3.71, change of 0.26
      Robert P. Smith (quail_valley) went from 3.12 to 3.38, change of 0.26


      Here's the count on a per team basis:
      4 spin_drs
      3 hurricanes
      3 sienna
      2 double_trouble
      2 ace_n_spinners
      2 predators
      2 controlled_terror
      2 poachers
      1 columbia_lakes
      1 acers
      1 good_guys
      1 lakeside
      1 thors
      1 aces
      1 cobra_kai
      1 aches_n_pains
      1 quail_valley

      Delete
    3. Same for 4.5:
      Jeep Christian (hrc) went from 3.25 to 3.90, change of 0.65
      Lance Thrower (lobsters) went from 3.82 to 4.34, change of 0.52
      Nicolas LARGE (serve_folley) went from 3.65 to 4.17, change of 0.52
      Peter Talosig (gooder_guys) went from 3.75 to 4.21, change of 0.46
      Robert Dornbos (serve_folley) went from 3.68 to 4.10, change of 0.42
      Luis Morales (unicorns) went from 3.88 to 4.29, change of 0.41
      Jeffrey M. Jordan (black_sheep) went from 4.06 to 4.45, change of 0.39
      David Hall (deucebags) went from 4.46 to 4.82, change of 0.36
      Adam Park (hulks) went from 3.91 to 4.27, change of 0.36
      Bret Alan Bosker (lobsters) went from 3.79 to 4.14, change of 0.35
      Richard R. Boehck (deucebags) went from 3.92 to 4.26, change of 0.34
      Tomas Huynh (clambakes) went from 3.68 to 4.02, change of 0.34
      Sam Ahn (lobsters) went from 3.83 to 4.15, change of 0.32
      Ryan A. Morone (hulks) went from 3.84 to 4.15, change of 0.31
      Victor H. Rocca (gooder_guys) went from 3.93 to 4.24, change of 0.31
      Richard J. Patton (gautamizers) went from 3.68 to 3.99, change of 0.31
      Corbin E. Cooke (black_sheep) went from 4.15 to 4.46, change of 0.31
      Dan Le (gooder_guys) went from 3.96 to 4.27, change of 0.31
      Dan B Gillis (net_crushers) went from 3.53 to 3.83, change of 0.30
      Trey Everett Dugas (deucebags) went from 4.11 to 4.38, change of 0.27
      Miguel A. Morales (deucebags) went from 4.11 to 4.38, change of 0.27
      Joshua E. Bruce-Black (hulks) went from 3.98 to 4.24, change of 0.26
      Lee R. Johns (lobsters) went from 3.84 to 4.10, change of 0.26
      Andres Zornosa (net_crushers) went from 3.60 to 3.86, change of 0.26

      4 deucebags
      4 lobsters
      3 hurricanes
      3 gooder_guys
      3 hulks
      2 black_sheep
      2 net_crushers
      2 serve_folley
      1 hrc
      1 gautamizers
      1 unicorns
      1 lakeside
      1 clambakes

      Delete
    4. Added in players who didn't have TLS ratings in 2012, but are playing above level in 2013 (ex, rated 4.0 rating is 4.20).

      That adds these players:
      Tom G. Flematti 4.73 4.5
      Joe Schornick 4.56 4.5
      Jurgens Johannes Schoeman 4.53 4.5
      Mike Eagle 4.21 4.0
      Christopher Rossi 4.16 4.0
      RUDYRICK ALFORQUE SAYA-ANG 4.12 4.0
      Manfred I. Jachmich 4.11 4.0
      Rodolfo E Hare 4.10 4.0
      Gustavo Copstein Cuchiara 4.09 4.0
      Kirk D. Mann 4.04 4.0
      Daniel Johnson 4.04 4.0
      Jason Ye 4.02 4.0
      Calvin Miller 4.02 4.0
      Antonio Dinamling 4.00 4.0
      Craig Arthur Hartman 3.84 3.5
      Ryan Schmidt 3.67 3.5
      Jim Nguyen 3.62 3.5
      Alisher Kamalov 3.61 3.5
      Hernan Polverini 3.60 3.5
      Tung Huynh 3.58 3.5
      Patrick Masse 3.57 3.5
      Amal Patel 3.56 3.5
      Seshu Bulusu 3.54 3.5
      Dennis Quinio 3.53 3.5
      Andy E. Diaz 3.53 3.5
      Yan Zheng 3.51 3.5
      John Nguyen 3.51 3.5
      Juan jose Rodriguez 3.33 3.0
      Jeff Paul Steinkirchner 3.25 3.0
      George Don-Arthur 3.17 3.0
      Kemble Walters 3.17 3.0
      Michael Stryker 2.62 2.5


      Updated team counts:
      4 hurricanes
      4 spin_drs
      3 sienna
      3 double_trouble
      3 ace_n_spinners
      2 predators
      2 controlled_terror
      2 poachers
      2 corporate
      1 columbia_lakes
      1 hrc
      1 acers
      1 wranglers
      1 good_guys
      1 unicorns
      1 lakeside
      1 thors
      1 aces
      1 comets
      1 cobra_kai
      1 aches_n_pains
      1 quail_valley


      4.5 Team counts:
      5 lobsters
      4 deucebags
      4 hurricanes
      3 hrc
      3 gooder_guys
      3 hulks
      3 black_sheep
      3 serve_folley
      2 unicorns
      2 net_crushers
      2 clambakes
      1 gautamizers
      1 lakeside

      Delete
    5. Looks like from that list, 2 people should probably be DQed:

      Rodolfo E Hare 4.10 4.0 - Wranglers - DQ has no playoff implications
      Daniel Johnson 4.04 4.0 - hrc - DQ moves westside comets up to 2nd, and they would have only 2 losses, maybe a wildcard contender. Also gives Lakeside an additional individual win, maybe locks up #1 seed if they didn't have it locked up already.

      Delete
    6. My conclusion from looking at those lists is that there's less tanking going on than people suspect. Not exactly a murderer's row of players there.

      Delete
    7. Or maybe they're good enough at tanking that you cannot spot it from the statistics? Maybe the real tankers are guys like Chris Lee that are just under the rating level.

      Delete
  7. A pretty fun race is shaping up in Austin 4.5. AusTennis is 9-0, 42-3, Lakeway is 8-1, 39-6 (also AdIn is 8-1, 35-10). AusTennis and Lakeway play in the last week of the season, so winning every line has been crucial for the top two teams.

    As a side note, Lakeway's top player, Conrad Ramirez, is a self-rate, and has a 4.48 rating according to TLS. They have been using him every week in order to stay within striking distance, but he has dropped the first set of his last three matches.

    Should they manage to overtake AusTennis in the last match, I'm guessing they'll be on pins and needles waiting for Todd Reed to run the numbers.

    ReplyDelete
  8. How is Zach Marnitz eligible to self-rate as a 4.5? He played high school tennis at Houston Memorial and I remember him signing with Lees-McRae College, an NCAA Division II school.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A lot of 4.5's are D2/D3. It depends on how good Lees-McRae is and how highly ranked Marnitz is. Were either 'top ranked'?

      4.5:
      "NAIA, Div. 2 & 3 unranked college team player (commited to, playing, or played ) -program with no scholarships (not
      much stronger than High School tennis); Junior College player;
      Former Juniors who had national (foreign or domestic) rankings but did not tour or play in college"

      5.0:
      "Div. 1 unranked college team or player; NAIA,
      Div. 2 & 3 top ranked college team or player
      (commited to, playing, or played ) "

      "Domestic or foreign Junior 18's ranked in top
      150 nationally or in a section in the top 20 "

      "Domestic or foreign Adults ranked in the top 20
      nationally or in a section in the top 10 "

      5.5:
      "Div. 1 Top 75 ranked college
      team or player (commited to, playing, or played)"

      Delete
    2. Chickity-check yo self before you wreck yo self.

      Delete
    3. What a fool.

      Delete
  9. This shit has been blowing up twitter today.

    http://gawker.com/worst-person-ever-gives-dunkin-donuts-worker-hell-over-512298174

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous 1:03, you are qouting the General & Experienced Player Guidelines in effect from December 2011 until February 2011.

    http://assets.usta.com/assets/1/15/General%20_%20Experienced%20Player%20Guidelines.pdf

    The G&E Player Guidelines currently in effect (since February 2011) and the guidelines in which the current self-rating questionairre is based off of is this.

    http://assets.usta.com/assets/1/15/ExperiencedGuidelines_02142011_V2pdf.pdf

    5.0:
    For ages 25 and under "NAIA, Div. 2 & 3 unranked college team player (committed to, playing, or played) - program with no scholarships"


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, didn't see the USTA update. Looks like a DQ is in order.

      It doesn't look like that will affect teams making the playoffs, but it will certainly hurt the Unicorns chances in the playoffs.

      Delete
    2. The Unicorns are good without him.

      Delete
  11. Unicorns 4.5 and 4.0 getting it done this year. Get out the way!!

    ReplyDelete
  12. I will be shocked if the Corns do any damage. It sure seems like the teams are run by incompetents.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Watch out for the Teletubbie!

    ReplyDelete
  14. If someone complains about Zach they would be a serious prick. Let the system decide if he is too good. New self rating rules are a joke.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It has nothing to do with how good he is, the issue is he clearly lied when answering the self-rating questions. To me, that is the prick move. If you really want to "let the system decide if he is too good" then he should have answered the questions correctly, got his 5.0 rating and then the system would have bumped him down to 4.5.

      Delete
    2. I agree. Lying on self rating questions is a crappy thing to do. He should have to slug it out with other D2/D3 self rates, if he can't keep up the computer will bump him down.

      Delete
  15. Looks like 4.5 Hurricanes will be unbeatable... Freeman just added Sydney Jim, 29 year old former ATP pro. WTF

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Welp, there is always next year.

      Delete
    2. 2 ways to look at it. Sure their roster is a lot stronger, but if Freeman's still recruiting then he thinks there's holes.

      Delete
    3. How the hell does Sydney Jim keep getting a 4.5 rating, what an absolute joke. Just shows lying wins out in USTA Tennis, does not take a rocket scientist in this case to see there was some out right lying on player history

      Delete
    4. I don't know what or when he did his self rating, but it's pretty obvious he didn't tank last year if you look at his record. The USTA just screwed up.

      Delete
  16. How much fun is it going to be for the 2nd tier level players on the Hurricanes to just watch from the sidelines once the play-offs start? Forget about sectionals!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Allison McLendon!!!June 11, 2013 at 3:04 PM

    I thought registration closed 6/7/13.

    ReplyDelete
  18. At 4.48, he actually isn't that close to being in danger so that number can't be that accurate. The threshold for strikes isn't 4.5, it is a bit higher, at least 4.6 or 4.65 in my experience.

    I have done some estimated dynamic NTRP reports for people in Houston (see http://sites.google.com/site/computerratings/usta-tennis/example-report) and so have a few of Troy's matches reviewed already and through 5/17 would have estimated that he had 2 strikes and a rating of quite a bit higher than 4.48, more around 4.7, which would seem to be a lot more accurate given that he did get the DQ after one more match.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Also, see http://computerratings.blogspot.com/search/label/tennis for more about my estimated ratings and NTRP calculations.

      Delete
  19. (Extremely) small sample size, but it makes me wonder if the TLS ratings calculations are a bit low overall. I know nothing about their accuracy and in fact stumbled upon the website before posting a link to it here. Still, it fascinates me.

    Have you done any backtesting on your algorithm's accuracy, Kevin? I do know of at least one Houstonian who purchased a report from you, and it seemed to be accurate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Regarding accuracy, for the reports I did at the end of last year, I was 93% accurate on having people at the right level including bump ups and downs. During this year, I've correctly predicted a number of DQs or my ratings have been in agreement with DQs that have occurred. There will always be some differences, I'm not attempting to do true year-end calculations with benchmark players and all, but I'm fairly pleased with how accurate I've been.

      Delete
    2. 93% Doesn't sound that impressive when you consider that you are looking at many rankings that are not borderline. Do you have confidence measures with each point value?

      For example:
      @ 4.49 - 60% certain player will be rated 4.5
      @ 4.48 - 65% certain player will be rated 4.5
      @ 4.47 - 70% certain player will be rated 4.5

      At what rating are you 100% certain that you are within your margin of error?

      Delete
    3. I have not run those specific statistics, but the majority of people who requested reports were doing so because they thought they might be bumped up or down and were pretty close to a threshold. In fact, I just checked and 74% of the requesters ratings were within 0.1 of a threshold, so I didn't have a lot of non-borderline players.

      And as I noted earlier, I am estimating the dynamic rating that is updated throughout the year. Year end ratings include benchmark calculations and in some sections tournament results that I don't include in my estimates and these are likely contributing factors to any "misses" I have.

      And while the NTRP wasn't necessarily created to predict winners of matches, in some of the checking I've done recently during some district and sectional play (which should have closely rated players and competitive matches), my ratings were 23-5 predicting winners. See http://computerratings.blogspot.com/2013/05/how-accurate-is-ustas-dynamic-ntrp-at.html, http://computerratings.blogspot.com/2013/05/usta-dynamic-ntrp-accuracy-part-2.html, and http://computerratings.blogspot.com/2013/05/usta-dynamic-ntrp-accuracy-part-3.html.

      I'd say that an 82% rate at predicting winners is an indication my ratings are probably pretty accurate.

      Delete
    4. That doesn't really answer the question.

      The fact that the ratings were 23-5 at predicting ratings just shows that the NTRP is fairly accurate at prediction, it doesn't show how well your prediction mirrors the NTRP rating. This shows me if I'm a captain interested in creating good lineups I can look at your data to predict my teams strength and the opposing teams strength. But if I'm a captain looking to figure out if my self rates will get DQed you haven't told me anything useful.


      Your statements lead me to believe you only 'run statistics' when players request a report. Wouldn't you need something like the TLS data that predicts *all* players ratings from *all* matches to be accurate? Surely you can write a script/program to run all DQs through your algorithm and calculate how accurate your prediction was? I would think you would want to do this in order to tweak your calculations. Aren't a large portion of your customers interested in # of strikes?

      Delete
    5. I can't see how he could do it accurately without running the numbers for the entire section, or at least for all the players in the same city. Do you do that, Kevin? If I want to buy a report for myself, what procedure do you go through? Do you have to recalculate all of Texas?

      Delete
    6. Does anyone know how DQs work? Here's some theories I have:

      1) To get DQed someone has to contest your rating. It won't happen on it's own.
      2) To get DQed you have to have 3 consecutive matches above your rating level. For example if you get bumped from 4.5 to 5.0 you have to be at 4.50 or higher for 3 consecutive matches. If you are at 4.51, 4.49, 4.51, 4.51 that would only be 2 strikes, because in your 2nd match you dropped below the 4.50 level.

      Delete
    7. The strikes don't have to be consecutive. Plus, there's a little buffer zone, so 4.51 wouldn't be a strike. I don't think anybody really knows how big the buffer zone is.

      Delete
    8. What is “Clearly above level”? The USTA does not disclose this exact value and it is different depending on the level. Lower levels are allowed more tolerance than higher levels but generally the tolerance is greater than (0.10). For example a 3.5 Level player generating a Dynamic Rating of 3.6 would not be considered “Clearly above level” and would not get a Strike counted against them.

      Delete
    9. I bet the TLS is just calculating the computer rating levels without taking this into account. I think with this information and the TLS data as rating references you can calculate things more accurately for self rates. Because of this, I believe in general that the TLS data will generally under-rate self rates.

      "The exception is when a Computer-Rated player plays a Self-Rated player. In this case, the Computer-Rated player does not get a new Dynamic Rating. The Self-rated player gets a new Dynamic Rating established relative to the Computer-Rated player’s Dynamic Rating using the CRD derived from the scores in that match (See Table 1 above). If two self-rated players play each other, the computer ignores the results and does not generate a Dynamic Rating for either player. There is one other significant difference in the way Dynamic Ratings are calculated for the Self-Rated player. The first 3 times a Self-Rated player plays against a Computer-Rated player, a new Dynamic Rating is calculated independently without being averaged with any other ratings. The 4th time the Self-Rated player plays against a Computer-Rated player, the new Dynamic Rating is calculated the same way but it is then averaged with the first 3 independently calculated Dynamic ratings to generate the 4th Dynamic Rating. After four Dynamic Ratings are generated for the Self-Rated player the computer treats them just like a Computer-Rated player."

      Delete
    10. I do run all data within a an area/district/section as needed including looking at past year results in order to have an accurate starting point for this year. It is a lot of work the first time but subsequent players in the same area/district/section are a lot easier after that.

      And yes, have looked at specific DQs and verified that I've predicted the vast majority of them. If I'm correctly predicting bump ups/downs the majority of the time, predict DQs correctly the majority of the time, and predict winners in matches the majority of the time, I don't think I'm that far off. I've also spot checked a variety of players between my ratings and TLS and I've been more accurate in predicting bump ups/downs.

      Delete
    11. To inquire about a report, contact me at computerratings@techrunning.com. I'll look at your specific situation and give you a quote, but it is usually $20 for a detailed report similar to what you see here: https://sites.google.com/site/computerratings/usta-tennis/example-report

      Delete
  20. probably, alain tran, cuz he has a history of trying to dq his opponents

    ReplyDelete
  21. So what is the exact situation with the Good Guys and DeuceBags match?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Gooder guys are 3-0 before Troy's match.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Not just at 4.0+ level, in Houston even at 3.5 level there are teams who are tanking.

    Creating two teams 3.5 and 4.0 with same players.

    Losing 4.0 matches 6-0, 6-1, or 6-2 and in 3.5 win 6-3 or so

    ReplyDelete
  24. News flash: 4.0 is tougher than 3.5. Story at 11.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Is Zach Marnitz really that bad?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Nice win for Copperfield Shock & Awe last night. Three teams still have mathematical chances to win 4.0 Division I.

    Also, Good Guys swept the doubles to beat Ace N Spinners and win their division. The Sandwich Blaster won at line 1 doubles.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Despite being in first place, it looks like Double Trouble has been eliminated with the entry of a couple of matches by the Hawkeyes.

      Delete
  27. Eliminated from winning the division, that is.

    ReplyDelete
  28. 4.0 wild cards looks decided, I think Double Trouble is eliminated

    Looks to me like the locks are:
    Sienna : 8-1 (37-8)
    Ace N Spinners : 8-2 (38-12)

    Eliminated:
    JCC : 5-3 (24-16) - 3 team losses
    HRC: 4-3 (16-19) - 3 team losses
    Falcon Pt: 5-2 (22-13) - Too many individual losses even if they win out
    Double Trouble: 8-2 (32-18) - Either Hawkeyes or Copperfield will win their next match. Winner has tied record and wins tie break
    Copperfield/Hawkeyes - One of these teams will win the division with a win in the final match, the other drops to 7-3 and is eliminated

    ReplyDelete
  29. Red signed up for the Hurricanes.

    ReplyDelete
  30. How many teams get into the playoffs in 4.0? 4.5 ?

    ReplyDelete
  31. It's 2 pools of 4 in 4.0 and winners play for it all. In 4.5 it's a round robin.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Will Houston be getting any wild cards for sectuonals this year ?

    ReplyDelete
  33. How does someone like Sydney Jim play as a 4.5? As late as 2008 he has results that are posted on ATPtour.com. I always wonder about people like this and wonder what kind of satisfaction he gets out of playing 4.5. Or is it that he doesn't want to risk losing in the higher level leagues?

    Keep, in mind, however, that he was a very low level pro.

    As far as Freeman goes, if the USTA system allows him to have Jim on his team, why shouldn't. I agree it is crazy however you can't blame him.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Let's just face it. Sydney is insecure and trying to feed his self-worth.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Is sydney unbeatable? Seems like people are misinformed. Sydney never made it in the pros. Just because you play in some qualifying doesnt mean squat.

    ReplyDelete
  36. When are the playoffs ?

    ReplyDelete
  37. If you played college tennis for a division I school and you are under 35, how can you be rated 4.5?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is a good question. The same would go for D2/3 players in 4.0.

      In the past I have played in tournaments, I remember one fellow from Dallas who was 4.0. He said he played D2 and was mandatory rated 4.5 at least until he turned 30. Then his rating was allowed to potentially drop. Did that guy not know what he was talking about or are others somehow abusing the system?

      Delete
  38. when your an ex-pro and under 35, how can you be rated 4.5?

    ReplyDelete
  39. There seems to be some confusion about the rules. They are self-rating guidelines. It looks like Sydney self-rated 5.5 and was listed as a 5.5 on the fall 2011 sugar creek 4.5+ team.

    ReplyDelete
  40. So how does Sydney win all his line 1 singles matches(5.0 2012 sugarcreek team) and doubles matches except for 3 close dubs matches.... yet he gets bumped down to 4.5? something just don't seem to add up.

    ReplyDelete
  41. The Austin 4.5 race continues to intrigue me. Both AusTennis and Lakeway posted 5-0 wins. Vulnerable player alert: Conrad Ramirez won 6-4, 6-2 at line 1 singles, and Tim Klitch won 6-2, 6-1 at #1 doubles.

    There are occasionally comments made on here about some team being "eliminated" from the playoff race. It's kinda' fun when a team thinks they're out of it and a DQ happens and things take a 180.

    In this case, perhaps the Captains are aware of the risk but are playing their vulnerable players due to the closeness of the race. Or maybe they're oblivious. Or maybe I'm overstating the players' risks. We'll see.

    ReplyDelete
  42. A local example: In 4.0, Copperfield S&A and the Hawkeyes seemingly have a do-or-die makeup match. The Hawkeyes are screwed if they don't win, but they also have a player who COULD be vulnerable (Dan Watson). They could win the match and yet see it reversed. Maybe Double Trouble still has a chance (I haven't checked to see what the impact would be, or if there are any other vulnerable players, even). Still, you gotta' play the guy and let the chips fall where they may when your season is on the line.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why do you even take the write some of the crap that comes out of your mouth?

      Do you really care if S & A, Hawkeyes or Double Trouble make it into the playoffs?

      You already know that the system is rigged and Freeman along with his band of cheaters will win regardless of who makes it into the playoffs.

      4.0, 4.5... it doesn't matter.

      Unless something drastic happens with the HTA or USTA (Todd Reed) towards the actions of Freeman, nothing will change and everybody will be playing for second place. It's a waste of time once playoffs come around.

      The readers of this blog is divided into two camps: those who are on Freeman's team and are in denial of their behavior and their stupid allegiance to him and those who despise everything about Freeman and his band of cheaters.

      We already know which camp you are on.

      Delete
    2. Lakeside has an outside shot. And Ive heard the unicorns have been doing some good recruiting so i wouldnt say the hurricanes are a lock. Even though they are favorites by a bit.

      Delete
    3. Hurricane 4.0 did not make it out of Houston last year you dickheads...

      Delete
  43. Freeman has finally past Red as the biggest Villain in Houston Tennis.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Greg is just trying to take attention away from the Hurricanes (all levels) and Sydney Jim.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not really. I was just bored.

      I'm not as involved with the Hurricane goings-on as I once was. But I can assure you Sydney's eligibility is not in question. I don't have any reason to deflect attention from Sydney. I honestly have no idea if he's even playing/practicing or planning on playing in the playoffs. I think the team will be fine with or without him, though obviously the ceiling is much higher with him.

      Delete
    2. curios to know why every new topic on this blog starts with a mention of players on other teams that are ready to be DQed and those who are supposedly illegal self-rates but none is ever mentioned from the hurricanes?

      why wasn't sydney jim given his own headlines?

      you could have started the topic with something like this: "nothing new here: hurricanes cheat again!"

      Delete
    3. Two reasons:

      A. I'm obviously biased. If Kerig or someone else who can competently write wants to contribute some stuff here, they are free to do so. email me at houstonleaguetennis@gmail.com

      B. Because Sydney is a non-story from an eligibility standpoint. Why weren't you complaining last year when he played for Sugar Creek. Why didn't you or your captain protest him then?

      Delete
    4. I am going to go with Answer A.

      Delete
    5. Greg sounds hostile. He knows he is as dirty as Freeman and Red.

      Delete
  45. Actually, he is just stating the facts. Should someone like Zach Marnitz who is currently playing college tennis be allowed to play? Under the self rating guidelines he is ineligible. Shouldn't he be discussed?

    ReplyDelete
  46. I think what you meant to say was that Ryan Reeves is currently playing Divsion II tennis for Lindenwood and is a computer rated 4.0 for Freeman's team.

    He (or Freeman) lied on his self-rate questionnaire when he signed up in the summer last year.

    Reeves (or Freeman) had already to committed to Lindenwood and then denied it on his questionnaire.

    I think Reeves or Freeman could be in BIG trouble for this!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, they might put them on Double Secret Probation or something. Has the USTA folks in Austin done anything more than DQ player... ever????

      Delete
  47. No, I meant to say Marnitz is a good player who will be under scrutiny and illegally self rated. I have no idea who Reeves is so I wont comment. I'm merely talking about 4.5. I'm not a hurricane activist, if that is what your trying to insinuate. There are other teams than the hurricanes, let's not forget that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. There are other teams. But apparently I'm not allowed to mention them, since they are supposedly irrelevant.

      Delete
    2. Funny.

      You have no idea who Ryan Reeves is?

      He's on your team. :)

      You point out all the people who are illegal self-rates on other teams and yet you are clueless about the illegal actions and cheating of Freeman.

      Delete
    3. So if this Reeves guy is a illegal self rate, why don't you file a protest? He's in the same boat as Marnitz??

      Delete
    4. Ryan Reeves is a computer rated 4.0.

      Jason Freeman lied on his self-rate questionnaire when he signed him up.

      Delete
    5. That's not good. What about this Marnitz guy?

      Delete
    6. Let it go Kerig...

      Delete
    7. If Reeves or Freeman lied, Kerig would have gotten him last year. Come on. Nothing gets past that guy.

      He probably filled out the questionaire before he went off to college.

      Delete
    8. If you have committed to playing college tennis then according to the rules, it is the same as playing college tennis.

      Delete
    9. Kerig misses nothing. He must of committed after the season started. Would that make him ineligible right away? If it should, then I misjudged Kerig I guess.

      Maybe Kerig was waiting for playoffs and Reeves never showed up.

      Delete
    10. Ryan Reeves committed to Lindenwood College way in advance of Freeman lying on his Reeves' self-rate questionnaire.

      Delete
    11. Kerig didn't notice because Reeves is white.

      Delete
    12. Can a computer rated player be challenged? Surely there's some sort of checks in place for this sort of situation?

      Playing a 1.0 or more below your appropriate level is ridiculous!
      http://www.tennisrecruiting.net/player.asp?id=698550

      Delete
    13. Has anyone tried to challenge these guys? I'd love to hear what Mr Reed has to say about all this:

      https://www.tennisrecruiting.net/player.asp?id=193237
      http://classic.tennisrecruiting.net/player.asp?id=569570

      Delete
  48. I'm really surprised that teams like Westside Black Sheep, JCC Blast and Lakeside didn't really make an impact this season in 4.5.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Blast lost Rios. Obviously. He is irreplaceable.

      Delete
    2. I heard they tried to replace him with Babu and/or the Sandwich Blaster, but both turned JCC down.

      Delete
    3. The captain of the JCC must have priapism.

      Delete
  49. Is lakeside in the running in 4.0?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lakeside is one of the top 4.0 contenders, I think the consensus is they are somewhere in the top 3 teams. They have outstanding doubles players at all 3 lines.

      Delete
  50. really hope we get to see the unicorns play these guys. Would be a great fair match up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Which level are you referring to, 4.5 or 4.0?

      Delete
  51. There sure are a lot of bitter scrubs who are mad that Freeman finds star players before they do.

    Sydney Jim has been playing for years. Tyler Copley was playing 4.0 tournaments in January.

    The list goes on and on. Face it. You suck and your captain sucks. Freeman doesn't want you and it hurts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hey dipstick.

      jason freeman cheats plain and simple:

      1) he recruits players that are completely out of level.

      2) he then creates teams in the fall and has one of his sycophants run the team(i.e. robert rizzari, ronnie kwan, bruce inting, eddie janek, daniel goodwin, michael tran, bethuel gabriel, benedict gabriel) in order for them to input fake scores, have the players lose on purpose, and/or manage their scores for the sole purpose of qualifying as computer rated players.

      3) he doesn't want to be caught cheating so he has everyone else do it for him.

      4) he also fills out most of his recruits self-rate questionnaires and lies about it since he pays for their registration.

      if i failed to manage any of his other ball suckers, my apologies.

      Delete
    2. Have you complained through official channels? If so how and what was the response? Rather than complaining, how can we be proactive in addressing this problem?

      Sincerely,
      -Another Concerned Captain

      Delete
    3. You must be the 2nd line scrub that will be sitting when the Hurricane 1st liners play.

      Delete
  52. it hasn't been years. only 2012 did sydney start playing league. How does he go 10-0 in 5.0 singles and get bumped down to 4.5?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The grassy knoll. I love some of the conspiracy theories. Did you know that Freeman is facebook friends with someone in the HTA!!!!

      Get your facts straight, Mr. Conspiracy Theory. He wasn't 10-0 in 5.0 singles. In fact, what 5.0 rated singles players did he beat?

      And he didn't get bumped down last year. He was 4.5 in 2012 and he remained 4.5 in 2013. And your shitty captain had just as good a chance as Freeman at picking him up. But he dropped the ball. Again.

      Delete
    2. Get your shitty captain to recruit Babu, who is a free agent this year. Oh wait, you cannot get him his two matches in unless you are the Unicorn captain.

      Delete
    3. Someone tried to recruit Babu once, but it was they who were in turn recruited.

      Delete
  53. I just beat Babu and he said he will retire until next year. Go Unicorns !

    ReplyDelete
  54. Dude. 3:47.

    He’s not competing with you.

    Just get past it, and enjoy your tennis.

    ReplyDelete