Sunday, April 27, 2008

3.5 Week in review

Not much to report here, the winners won and losers lost even more matches.

The one shocker was Westlake losing to CC/Carman. Have they given up hope, I am not saying they were big favs in this flight but I thought 3rd place was their's for the taking in this flight.

Someone noted the HP/Jameson singles looked weak and I would have to agree, no knock against the Lifetime team but those two players didn't have great stats but I know they have some past winning experience at 3.0.

So what are the big matchups next week? Flight B should get interesting this weekend as there are a lot of undefeated teams but that has to change soon.

Flight C
Lifetime v. Oakridge, hmm. Things are about to get intersting. I will do some polls tomorrow or Tuesday but I got an early morning so I am headed to bed.

129 comments:

  1. FYI . . . Dallas has BY FAR the largest 3.5 competition in the state of Texas. Here are the number of 3.5 teams competing across Texas:
    1. Dallas 30 teams
    2. Fort Worth 19
    3. Austin 18
    4. San Antonio 17
    5. Houston 14
    6. Corpus 12
    7. Lubbock 11
    8. NETX 8
    9. Amarillo 7
    10. NOHO 7

    If my math is correct we have 165 level 3.5 teams across 16 cities in Texas.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes, but those large numbers do not translate into success. As another blogger pointed out earlier:

    The 2007 3.5 team that Cary captained last year was FAR, FAR superior to any of our 2008 teams _ and Cary's team did not even make the semi-finalsat Sectionals.

    No matter which team wins Dallas they will be overwhelmed by ringers from NETX, FWT, Amarillo, Houston etc.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Probably true . . . but Cary actually had either the best or 2nd 3.5 best team at Sectionals last year. (We do not know for sure because he screwed up his line-up against Houston.)

    ReplyDelete
  4. 50 teams in DFW,
    Wow,
    Maybe we should consolidate some of the teams,
    For instance we can merge Canyon Creek and El Dorado so they could maybe, pull 1 point from a match.

    ReplyDelete
  5. for you 3.5'ers I would stop worrying about my team from 2007 and even your fellow Dallas teams and keep an eye on the FTW team with Aranda, Thompson, etc. Also someone mentioned the NETX team, they looked solid down at Tri Level sectionals. I have heard Noho has a good squad as well since they can take on players from Houston as well.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Checking TennsiLink:

    No Dallas Men's 3.5 team (except for a Bender team in 2005) has even made the semi-finals at Sectionals in the last FIVE YEARS!

    The standard for what constitutes a 3.5 player is obviously higher in other Texas cities.

    And this is despite the fact that we have by far the most players and teams.

    Texas Sectional administrators should do something to level the playing field.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Cary's 2007 team was either the best or second best team last year. On any given day his team could beat that Houston. Had his team not been in the same flight as Houston, his team would have easily advanced to the semi-finals.

    I am defending Cary and his lineup. He had player(s) missing and he put out a lineup that could win. Last year, Kyle Bowman could beat anybody at 3.5 and Edward Henson was capable too. Ed may not have won but it was a calculated risk (and not a screw up). If he brings home two singles lines, he only has to get one more. Edward is more than capable of beating anyone in 3.5. It did not work out as Cary and his team would have liked but you can't put the crap back in the horse. I think people need to get off his back. He tried to put the right strategy together and it did not work but there is no guarantee that it would have worked in any other combination either.

    ReplyDelete
  8. No need to get defensive. All captains screw up once in a while.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thanks anonymous, I agree with you I think we were in the top 3 at sectionals and I toyed with the idea of having our last team retire v. HP/Myers in order to get the wildcard flight but I decided against that, hope I didn't just open myself up for more criticism for that decision but the wild cards flight had some good teams in it as well and less rest times between matches and we didn't have our best players for Friday that weekend.

    Also when did it become a right of Dallasites to win sectionals, I love your city pride but just because we live in a large city doesn't earn us the right to got to nationals and if you don't we need to level the playing field?? are you serious, are you F***ing serious?

    on the houston blog when Jason's teams and the 4.5 Austin teams did not win nats last year everyone was saying, "well I guess Texas isn't that great" Those teams won matches at nationals and did not get blown out by anyone at that level to me that shows Texas is a very strong league tennis area.

    ReplyDelete
  10. congrats to Sam Bert for winning Brookhaven defeating Montalvo, Aranda,Gil Flores in the final.Also To Molina for defeating Marc Klamecki. I guess the Oak Ridge Boys are just warming up for Lifetime this weekend it should be interesting!!

    ReplyDelete
  11. They had a two prong strategy,
    1) For Mark Anderson to Soften me up.
    2) Then for Enrique to finish me off.

    But seriously,
    Enrique played a better match then he did in out last meeting,
    But Anderson did make me play some long points,
    I think every one in my half of the draw beat the hell out of each other.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I will Start it!!!!!

    The "Oakridge Boys" will sweep Lifetime!!!

    Can you say OVER-RATED!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Reitzer loses 2-6, 2-6, i am starting to worry about my Canyon Creek pick now. they got a win though and still undefeated.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Cary,
    I did NOT say because we are from a big city we have the right to go to nationals. What I said was we have the right to a level playing field.

    If you flip a coin 10 times and it comes up tails all 10 times _ then you should examine the coin. That's all I'm saying.

    Just think about it . . . We have the most players and most teams yet are WAY, WAY under represented at Nationals at Men's LEVEL 3.5 and 3.0. (It may be different for women or other levels.)

    In the last FIVE YEARS we have had ONE Dallas 3.5 team win Sectionals but not a single other team even make the semi-finals. (Way below what you would expect if it was a random, fair process.)

    In 2008 the best Dallas 3.5 team will not be nearly as strong as the Dallas/HP 3.5 team in 2007. If history is any guide, our 3.5 city champ team will get stomped by self-rated ringers from smaller cities. (Unless we can get Kyle & Ed to change their names and play for Garland.)

    Our Dallas 3.0 city champs will get beaten like a redheaded step child.

    Other bloggers have made simialr observations.

    Dallas men's 3.5 and 3.0 have statistically done MUCH worse at Sectionals than anyone should expect.

    A legitmate question is why is that occuring and what can be done to have an even playing field???

    ReplyDelete
  15. Marc,

    that's funny. I thought that is what they were saying about your game, ha ha...

    Oakridge has a GREAT team, this is what it is all about. You can't get these two teams anymore up, because we are already there.

    Honestly, Lifetime is going out there to make a STRONG statement this weekend.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Cary,

    What are the chances you post your top ten teams at each level each week?

    ReplyDelete
  17. FLIGHT A
    Although we have a long way to go, Flight "A" now looks easy to call. Garland will cruise to 1st place. High Point lacks the singles to play with the big boys but their doubles are strong enough to get them into 2nd place. Canyon Creek looks good for 3rd place unless Lakes really comes on. (So HP and Canyon Creek make the QT.) Westlake is almost out of the running. They have already lost to both HP and Canyon Creek so it will be really hard for them to gain any ground.

    FLIGHT B
    Toughest to call with a lot of even teams and interesting match-ups.

    FLIGHT C
    Either Life Time or Oak Creek will take 1st place. (Can't wait to see them play.) The loser of that match and Oakridge will likely make the QT. Brookhaven is dangerous but not strong enough to knock off one of the "big three".

    The QT will be really tough this year. With Oak Creek (or Life Time), Oakridge and High Point among others _ we'll have some top notch teams.

    ReplyDelete
  18. To the poster hiding behind anonymous, just because Dallas has the most players mean dick. Dallas just might have the best 3.5 players but they maybe spread then amongst the teams, unlike other cities who have been putting together super teams by recruiting.
    Best players again does not mean anything if they are spread over 5-10 teams and not consolidated. Leveling the playing field has nothing to do with it.

    ReplyDelete
  19. new ar hacker,

    I can tell you haven't been around very long. And clearly your lack of knowledge doesn't keep you for commenting. Maybe you can also give us your thoughts on brain surgery.

    Come out and watch men's 3.5 and 3.0 Sectionals this year. The Dallas teams will not get beat because the talent is spread thin. They will get hammered because some of the other cities have much better players than ANY of the guys playing at those levels in Dallas. (And they will be new, self-rated players.) That has happened a lot of the last 10 years. The Dallas "All Stars" could not beat some of those teams. Where have you been when this has been going down?

    ReplyDelete
  20. sorry AR hacker not only do we have the most 3.5s in Dallas, they are truly nuts but I applaud you for jumping in their post so bravely.

    BTW your comment was spot on regarding the playing level around the state at this level.

    I find it funny we talk about leveling the playing field, what about teams from Midland, Abilene and San Angelo. Who is trying to level their playing field???

    ReplyDelete
  21. well just FYI prior to moving to Pig Country I was playing league in Dallas for 8 years so I know many of the players and knew quite a few 3.5's even though I was playing 4.5s.
    Until Conway and Branch starting putting mega teams together the 4.5 division was the same in that Dallas rarely made it to SF or were crushed in SF, then Conway went to Nationals circa 2003, I was on the 1998 Team that lost to Amarillo in the Finals.
    It is tough to police Midland, San Angelo, Amarillo but that is just what happens. Being the biggest does not equate to the best unfortunately and the talent is spread to thin.

    ReplyDelete
  22. At sectionals, 3.0 and 3.5 may very well get slaughtered this year. Although, last years Dallas 3.0 representative won nationals.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Clearly numbers matter. That's why LBH and HP always have better teams than say Eldorado. They just have more players to pick from. On a National level the Southern Section is by far the largest Section. They do NOT win all the events at Nationals. But they do win more National titles than any other Section and they do have more teams in the top 4 if you consider men and women at all levels.

    We have 425 guys playing level 3.5. And we do not spread out the talent evenly. Garland has an "all star" team as does Life Time and maybe a few others. Some of the smalller cities might have between 30 - 40 players total. Yet they come to Sectionals with some guys better than ANY 3.5 player in Dallas.

    At the bottom levels, (3.5 and 3.0) Dallas is not shut out by any means. But we win a lot less than than some of the smaller cities and a lot less than one would expect.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I know it is not up to us, but it would help if ALL players from ALL cities had to play more matches to be eligible to play at Sectionals.

    Currently a guy only has to play ONE local match (plus receive a default)and he is eligible to play at Sectionals.

    In smaller cities with few teams they often play much fewer matches and do not have playoffs. So a player far out of level might play just 1 or 2 matches then show up at Sectionals. In Dallas we have a long local season then a tough playoff. So few self-rated "ringers" make it through while this is not the case in some of the smaller cities. So a requirement to play more matches might help to catch some of those guys that are way out of level.

    I also like Dave Prather's idea to not allow new players to play in the post-season. But rather first play league or tournaments to establish a valid rating.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I think if you shut self rates out, then 3.0 will definitely hurt. Career 3.0 players are rare. Most people can improve to 3.5 in a relatively short period of time. Few teams can maintain their 3.0s and you will have few players and maybe not enough to make playoffs if you do not allow self-rates.

    ReplyDelete
  26. From last weeks comments on what I wrote about self raters: you're right, nobody cares if anyone overrates as that will work itself out and at least they'll have an established record. It's the players and teams that underrate that cause the most problems. I know if you want to put together this super team you'll have to continually underrate players and you'll probably never catch up with the other cities anyway, so why not try to rate properly and play on an even playing field within our city? Nationals won't do anything for you, you'll never get a paycheck from it and what's in a title anyway when you do it the wrong way? Having someone on your team that is going to get bumped in the playoffs or next year just puts an " X " on your team
    and all those that go along with it.
    What happened to Lifetime last yr. with Eddie Hill? Did they go to Nationals? All they did with him was to hurt our local teams that they played, by having this unbeatable guy among regular 3.5s; or Garland having Oberto last fall? He's gone now.
    Well that's enough for now, David Prather

    ReplyDelete
  27. Marc K played a really good match. Good serve and great forehand. I was left standing everytime I hit a short ball. That match could have gone either way. I love playing with a guy that hits as big as Marc does. I watched some of the 4.0s play and very few hit as hard as Marc does. He ran around that backhand and spanked that ball.

    Good match. We have to play again. Mark Anderson did tire you out. Mark Anderson also played a great match using a different strategy.

    Until next time.

    Molina

    ReplyDelete
  28. New AR Hacker is right about the teams being too thin for a serious push at Sectionals and Nationals.

    Come on, we have great playes in the Dallas Area that together can kick some serious butt.

    Singles:
    Marc K.
    Jonathan M.

    Doubles:
    David Prather and Jacque D.
    John Sisk and Dan V.

    I am missing a bunch of people but right there you would have 3 wins right there.

    Dallas Tennis is a social sport versus a bit more serious and goal oriented in other areas. That is just reality. If that was not the case we would not have 30 teams.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Great win for Sam Bert. Knocked out some good players. Sam is on a roll. Brookhaven Tournaments are tough to win.

    Great job.

    Enrique Molina

    ReplyDelete
  30. Enrique,
    If you think Marc hits it hard, wait until Saturday. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  31. J.Marcus, are you saying that you hit harder than Marc? We all know you can hit your forehand hard, but you have to be able to run to what someone hits to be able to

    ReplyDelete
  32. Jonathan's Forehand is Flat

    Mine has Heavy topspin

    Apples and oranges

    ReplyDelete
  33. Jonathan and Marc both have pretty good forehands... but how is the other side and that part of the game in the forecourt?

    ReplyDelete
  34. The Forehand BanditApril 29, 2008 at 9:30 AM

    Hey anonymous people...did you know that if you hit under "Choose an Identity"

    Name/URL

    you can just drop in any nickname that you want? You don't have to sign up or "be a member".

    I really think the name above should be J Marcus signature from now on though.

    Come on guys, let's get a little creative on the names here. I am sick of reading "anonymous" borrrring.

    Sisk could be IHateFlatBellys

    ReplyDelete
  35. Jonathan, If the the rest of your game was as good as your forehand you would be a good player but the rest of your game stinks!!! Also if you played as good as you talk you would never lose, but as you 4.0 record shows thats not the case. Have you ever won a match in 4.0????

    ReplyDelete
  36. Alright Mr. Anonymous,
    Since you like looking at my 4.0 record. Let's talk about it. My actual 4.0 Record is 4-5. Four wins and Five losses. Nothing to brag about, but definitely not the worst record in 4.0.

    None of those wins are defaults, and two of them were against seeded players. All of those other losses are No Shows (NS) due to family emergencies when I'm needed at home or at church and I am unable to make these matches. When you are a husband and a father, tennis is so far down on my list of priorities.

    In 3.5 this year, I am 2-0. In singles play, I have lost a grand total of 2 games, and in doubles play, I lost a grand total of 5 games.

    Since that is my record. What's YOUR record? If you really, really think that you would have a chance at beating me, just name the time and place, and stop hiding behind the "Anonymous" tag.

    ReplyDelete
  37. I'm sure I don't know as much about all these teams as some of you guys, but is my top five teams after 3 weeks:
    1. Garland
    2. Life Time
    3. Oak Creek
    4. Oakridge
    5. High Point/J

    ReplyDelete
  38. Marc,

    Obviously, I was kidding about the play. The joke was right there.

    Give me a call if you want to play sometime, maybe on a Sunday? Or during a weeknight. It would be fun.

    we will never play match play, as I don't play league singles.
    972.712.1530

    ReplyDelete
  39. That was for K Marc (aka Marc Klameci),

    ReplyDelete
  40. You should have beat Mark Anderson,
    I would have rather played you,

    ReplyDelete
  41. Maybe sometime next week,
    Can you get me a guest pass to Lifetime?

    ReplyDelete
  42. Absolutely on the guest pass. Yes, Anderson's a good player, Meltdowns don't help. I heard that he came back from 5-2 on both of us last week. We can talk about that off air.

    ReplyDelete
  43. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Email me with when you are available
    marc@courtcheck.com

    ReplyDelete
  45. Singles:
    Marc K.
    Jonathan M.

    Doubles:
    David Prather and Jacque D.
    John Sisk and Dan V.

    For city purposes the above mentioned players would go undefeated, or maybe one loss a piece all season. BUT for sectionals or nationals I would have to give them a coin toss on winning and losing. None of them are playing far enough above the 3.5 level to be able to handle the ringers, especially in singles. I will admit that I don't know Sisk or Dan so I can't really say anything about them. I think that Prather and Delira have the best chance of winning past the Dallas area. The singles would get really interesting really quickly.

    ReplyDelete
  46. I think there will be some players that emerge that will be as good as any of them. Doubles is hard to gauge. Singles is harder to hide players. Of course, some of those singles players could be hiding in doubles too.

    ReplyDelete
  47. My observations are as follows, Jonathan Marcus is a big bag of wind, OC/BL is Full of Crap. Lifetime Fitness needs a few more self rated sand baggers on there team. All of you anonymous guys need to sign in with your account.Other than that this sight is a lot of good B.S. Keep up the trash talking.Good Luck to anyone who plays Lifetime Fitness.

    ReplyDelete
  48. I'm guessing that was Grandpa Ratcliff

    ReplyDelete
  49. J Marcus how do you like drop shots? To your forehand or backhand? Get your running shoes ready!

    Ha, Ha, Ha

    ReplyDelete
  50. Dear Marc Klamecki, What makes you think an old guy is Ed Ratcliffe.He is not the only old guy you seem to disresept. He usually posts with his name. I guess I will keep you guessing about who I really am. Maybe some day we will meet. Until then work on your backhand everybody says thats the way to beat you. There were many SENIORS you put down during the senior season and I guess we all want a shot at you.

    ReplyDelete
  51. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Dear Marc Klamecki, I am glad some other older player has noticed your attitude towards seniors but the observation made by the old man whom ever he is seems pretty accurate. I guess it wont change until one of us old guys takes you out. And probably that wont even change it. Seems like Mark Anderson gave about all you could handle at brookhaven.Good match against Molina in league match but dont make excuses when you lose. If you cant play 2 matches in 1 day thats too bad!! You should beat seniors quicker and not have to expend too much doing it. I cant wait for your answer. maybe we will get to play at some point this season. I will look forward to it with Great antisipation.Ed Ratcliffe

    ReplyDelete
  53. I don't know how all you old guys got though World War II being so sensitive.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Interesting . . . Canyon Creek/Jolly has a 3 - 0 record. However, they have not yet won a singles line. They have lost BOTH singles lines in all three matches.

    On the other hand, they are a perfect 9 - 0 in doubles lines.

    But if Larry starts playing decent tennis again they will be tough to beat.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Canyon Creek may be more formidable than we first thought. When Larry is back to form, they could be really tough.

    I would rate the teams as follow:
    1a/b/c OC/Lifetime/Garland - We will learn more when Lifetime plays OC and they have Oakridge this weekend. Lifetime looks the best but I will wait until they play Oakridge and OC. Garland has a pretty easy ride until they play HP. I doubt HP can get a singles point so Garland must only get one doubles point. With their roster, I can't imagine that they cannot get at least one doubles point against anyone in the league. Especially, when they are capable of getting at least two on any team in the league.

    4 Oakridge - they would be rated higher but OC got the best of them.

    5 Canyon Creek - w/Larry Reitzer. A team that drops zero doubles lines in three matches and if Reitzer is playing well will be formidable.

    6 HP/Jameson would be 5 if CC is w/o Larry Reitzer. This team has some serious singles problems and unless they add a couple to the roster they will just be a nice team.

    ReplyDelete
  56. High Point has Jaurequi who was a pretty decent singles player last year. He was not nearly as good as Delira or Marcus _ but could still beat a lot of guys. Now Jaurequi has put on some weight and plays mostly doubles. Maybe High Point can get him in shape by playoffs.

    ReplyDelete
  57. High Point,

    You guys need to trade a first round draft choice plus $5,000 for Delira!

    ReplyDelete
  58. By the way . . . World War II never really happened.
    - Muhammad

    ReplyDelete
  59. I agree; the holocaust never happened. It is just a great big zionist conspiracy.

    Ahamanedjiad

    ReplyDelete
  60. Can we get back to tennis instead of world affairs!!

    ReplyDelete
  61. Lifetime vs. Oakridge

    What time?

    and is it OK with Grandpa Ratcliffe if I come and watch?

    ReplyDelete
  62. I think the USTA should require valid picture IDs and vaild SS #s to play League Tennis.

    I don't mind getting beat by ringers every year but I really hate losing to illegal immigrants. (They do not let them play in Carrolton.)

    Your thoughts . . .

    ReplyDelete
  63. Snaggle tooth Becky MillerApril 30, 2008 at 4:01 PM

    Now that was funnEEEEE

    ReplyDelete
  64. Dear Marc, the match is at 1:30 If you come out you might learn something about sportsmanship,humility. And by the way I might be old but I am not a grandfather. It sounds to me like you want to be like me when you grow up. Sounds like a possible challenge match in future.

    ReplyDelete
  65. We need to leave Marc alone. We all have the same passion for tennis and he is a good guy. His sportsmanship has never been a question when we have played.

    Dude you have one fan.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Ed, I want to be like you when I grow up. You have taught me so much about tennis and took me under your wing when I was learning how to play. You are my hero.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Just to get this away from the Klamecki vs... about everyone over the age of 40 feud?

    Who are the 3.5s that are lying in wait? I mean the players that have little to no history and are actually poised to make an impact.

    ReplyDelete
  68. WHO ARE THE 3.5's LYING IN WAIT?That's a great question. I don't worry so much about the guys that I already know. I worry more about the new self-rated ringers that I don't know. And those guys are not going to raise their hands and identify themselves. I guess we will have to wait and see.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Why do you want us to identify ourself when you remain anonymous!

    ReplyDelete
  70. Who gets the $5,000 me or John?

    By the way I do not consider this Garland team to be an all star team..we have been practicing for almost 3 years together and have really improved. When Berto and VJ signed up and at the beginning of there return to playing tennis most of us could beat them...But over time and lot's of practice they improved and it happened to peak in the fall of 08. VJ and Trey and Oberto also practiced on their own besides our team practices..so If you want to play better...guess what? You have to practice more! We are not guilty of recruiting ringers but maybe recruiting players that wanted to improve or change their name and did so by hitting tons of balls. That's it for me...I am hitting the gym and courts and preparing for sectionals...I am going to lose 20 lbs and perfect a backhand and learn a mean serve and volley game..see you in the play offs...No trash talking here...just some self motivation ..anyone want to join me Monday for drills?

    ReplyDelete
  71. how funny is it that you typed "change your name" instead of "change your game?"

    ReplyDelete
  72. "change their name"
    Delarosa reference, obviously.

    Well Done Jacques

    ReplyDelete
  73. I think that was a slip. You don't change your name by hitting lots of balls.

    Regardles of slip or not... that was funny.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Hey Jocko, that improve and change your name thing was great

    ReplyDelete
  75. that was hilarious Jacques, or should I say Jackie for 2009?

    ReplyDelete
  76. John,
    When you talk about your team being just guys that have improved over the past 2 or 3 seasons . . .you are totally full of crap.

    You have one guy, Hardwick, who had a good record at level 4.0, then sat out a few seasons and now is back at 3.5. You have a new ringer, I mean player, Harvey, who is undefeated and trying to keep his scores close. You have another guy, Vandendider, who was new in the fall but is saving his best tennis for the playoffs. NONE OF THESE GUYS PLAYED WITH YOUR TEAM FOR 2 OR 3 SEASONS AND HAS JUST IMPROVED.

    You had another player that changed his name and tried to sign up at 3.5 _ well below where he belongs.

    You had Oberto new last fall. He was too good for 3.5 the day he signed up _ not the product of "improvement". Same goes for Vijay Singh. He was a new ringer last spring, not a league player that improved over time.

    The facts do not support your story and you know it.

    ReplyDelete
  77. John,

    He is right. All your bull about "improvement" just doesn't fly.

    Nobody is the least bit worried about you. And we are not worried about any of your teammates that have played league for a couple years and improved. We are concerned about the steady stream of ringers you seem to find every season.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Sounds like alot of jealous people to me. I'm sure if any of those guys wanted to play on your team you would tell them no because they are too good. He is a good captain who finds good players. Don't be a hater.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Dear anonymous poster. You were not at our practices when VJ and Ben showed up at the Garland tennis center..secondly John nor I did any recruiting of these players outside of the tennis center..they showed up on their own and began to drill and play league...Our pro suggested that they possible play on our 3.5 team. Both VJ and Ben were both losing singles matches to me and a few other guys..but that only lasted for about 3 to 4 months and then they began to play consistant tennis from lots of practice. You were not at our practices seeing how these guys games changed. They are younger and more athletic but they were true 3.5's who have moved into 4.0 play and they earned it! So take your mouth and run your trash talk else where or get off your fat lazy ass and go practice so you too can see how it is possible for players to improve their games...maybe just not their whiny ass cry baby personality.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Newsflash for everyone crying about "ringers". Life is not fair!.
    Get over it.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Garland would have a top team without self rated players.

    The fact that every year they get a few self-rated guys that almost immediately move up to the next level is what people are talking about.

    People could also give Oak Ridge a hard time because they had three top players get bumped up based on matches and then appealed back down.

    Both are playing within the rules.

    They just use the rules to better advantage than others.

    ReplyDelete
  82. WoW …….. Just in …………

    …….. David Prather (Oakridge) takes Jonathan Marcus (Lifetime Fitness) down …. 6-0, 3-6, 1-0.

    ReplyDelete
  83. I think the double bagel by Molina is more shocking than the Prather win.

    I told you Lifetime was Over-Rated!

    Now the next question is Brookhaven/Creamer for real?

    We will find out in two weeks.

    ReplyDelete
  84. I guess the famous Jonathan Marcus forehand is only good for one set.

    That makes that flight very interesting. Oakridge may very well be back in the hunt. Lifetime is now fighting for their life. OC with Garland gets the nod for best team.

    ReplyDelete
  85. I would bet my life that nobody on the Garland team is trying to keep matches close to protect their rating. All you have to do is look at their scores to see that. In the first 3 weeks they lost 2 sets. Especially Vandefifer, who I play with all the time and is too competitive to lose games on purpose.

    Everybody's a ringer unless they are on your team.

    ReplyDelete
  86. gosh jacques, give it a rest. calm your ass down

    ReplyDelete
  87. Come on, where's the king of the blog, with all the new sh__? for this week. Let's get with it Bazan!

    ReplyDelete
  88. ROTjock,

    Chill man!

    No one believes your story about players "improving magically". We've seen Berto & VJ play and they were way too good for 3.5 from the very begining. It is only your Garland friends defending them.

    It is only natural for other teams to wonder what kind of crap you guys are going to pull this year. You started off with the name change strategy but that didn't work. What else do you have up your sleeve?

    ReplyDelete
  89. hello mr. need me around poster. I have been busy working, playing tennis and drinking with my mixed doubles crew.

    I was impressed by the Brookhaven scores as well as the big win by Oakridge and the win by Molina and Prather. I like that lineup for them. It would be hard to take out both of them but as mentioned that shows how good the OC is.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Corey, Garland is not playing all out. That George Hardwick beat down in week one was very contrived. He and his partner lost to a couple of very average players. One is a computer rated 3.0.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Ban Garland From the USTA NOW!!!
    I demand it!

    Filthy Cheaters!!

    ReplyDelete
  92. NTRP POLICE

    4/12 Kim Anderson & Alan Gerber beat George Harwick & Danny Vandefifer 6 - 3, 6 - 1.

    THE GARLAND GUYS TOTALLY TANKED THAT MATCH. GARLAND IS VERY SLEAZY.

    Anderson is very weak, Gerber only fair. No way this can be real.

    ReplyDelete
  93. "ROT Jock"

    That's funny!

    ReplyDelete
  94. Marc, Thanks for coming out to watch our teams win at Lifetime-No thanks to me. I probably played about as bad as I have all season but We won as a team. I hope we do get to play at some point. Lifetime has a very good team and thats the 2nd time we have won in deciding tiebreakers against them. Great Job to all my teammates. Your team should have a good match against them when you play.Good Luck the rest of the season.GRANDPA

    ReplyDelete
  95. What a good match today at Lifetime as usual, we all had some good wins out there today and I was very nervous and excited having to be a part of it. The rest of the season should be full of tough matches, with Kraemers team and Oakcreek still to play against Lifetime. Mark Ferrell is a good captain and a good sport! None of us like to lose, but being gracious in defeat really shows what we are made of.
    Thanks Mark for your attitude and for being a good host.
    David Prather

    ReplyDelete
  96. No Prob Grandpa,
    I'm Sure my cheering put you guys over the top.

    ReplyDelete
  97. What's wrong with Oak Creek/Kotlarek and LBH/Daly? Are they too dumb to get their scores posted???

    ReplyDelete
  98. From talking to Dan I can guarantee it was legitimate because he was pissed. He had never even met George I believe before they played. Also, George is playing nowhere near up to the level he was when he last played. I don't know their competition but I know Dan wanted to win. I don't know George that well but I'm sure he felt the same. Based on what you are saying about Dan's opponents, he probably couldn't handle the off-pace shots they were hitting.

    I think there are other people on that team to worry about besides George, and it would be much harder for me to defend them playing 3.5.

    As far as all of the comments about Ben and Vijay, I feel like the best possible players a team can get are those that are serious players with the potential to get better quickly, either because they are quick learners or because they played at a high level in the past. These players only get better during the season and are great assets to a strong team.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Vijay did have some shaky early results when he played the previous fall and it is hard for me to believe he tanked an entire fall season, that is even too shady for Garland. He is a hot and cold player and when he is hot he is tough to beat but he can get wild. As far as Oberto I played against him and he is no ringer in fact I would be surprised if he has a winning record at 4.0 this year. He will get better though in time since he is young and quick.

    There is going to be some great matches in flight A much like our 4.0 flight D. the bad thing is a good team will miss the playoffs from that flight.

    Oh and by the way I hate to be all nice and stuff because as you know I am mean and vindicative but maybe it is the late night drinks talking but you will not meet a nicer guy than Mark Ferrell. He once argued with me against one of his players on a line call that his player finally relented on.

    ReplyDelete
  100. Things Cary Inexplicable Loves (Gay Man Crushes):
    1) Westlake
    2) Mark Ferrell
    3) Jeromi Kesley

    Anything else you can think of?

    P.s.
    The OC 5 - LB 0

    ReplyDelete
  101. It's always easy for guys that use to play in high school and or college (and were somewhat good), to make fast improvements, as they learned the right way, but there again the college ones are supposed to self rate at 4.5 or higher and some of the high school ones should too. Those guys are still ringers, even though they haven't played in awhile, and just because the jock man and others could beat them at first doesn't prove anything. You can't be a player like Oberto and act like he was just this guy that all of a sudden improved and now he's the guy he turned out to be; he was a either a very good player at some point in the past or this blog doesn't really exist.
    To defend this type of action is actually worse than the action itself.

    ReplyDelete
  102. I thought Jonathan Marcus was suppose to get Lifetime easy wins. Was he not the second coming with Oakridge and Lifetime fight for him?

    Then again, Jonathan who?

    ReplyDelete
  103. Full credit goes to David Prather as captain of Oakridge for setting up the best match-ups to give the Oakridge team a chance to win against a very good Lifetime team. The Lifetime team were all good sports and really nice guys.

    ReplyDelete
  104. LOL - this 3.5 forum is too damn funny. Never heard so much bitching and moaning over average tennis. This is sort of like bitching about a guy winning the special olympics because he isnt retarded enough.

    When good players play down - enjoy the better competition and move on. You are making our heads hurt crying all day long.

    ReplyDelete
  105. David Prather – Congratulations on the win against Jonathan Marcus! That is a hell of a win. What was Jonathan doing during the first set? Was Jonathan still trying to wash down a bagel or two from last week with some orange juice?

    Oakridge Team – Congratulations on the win over Lifetime!

    ReplyDelete
  106. Jonathan – What’s going on? I’m finding these scores that you’re posting to be unacceptable. Those bagels must be tasty. They must be cinnamon raisin bagels. I think you need to slow down, make sure you chew completely before washing the bagel down with orange juice and taking another:)

    ReplyDelete
  107. From one anonymous poster (who knows several of these players in 3.5 but has no rooting interest but remain anonymous to not piss off friends and acquaintenances)

    I am with the anonymous poster who thinks the whining is funny. I know he stole the special olympics gig from Southpark but it is really funny...

    I think the reason some of the people give Garland a hard time is they try to defend their position. Oberto/VJ Singh (not the golfer) were really too strong for 3.5 from day one and the Garland supporters come on here and say "oh no... they just improved beautifully and were suddenly good about the time the season started." With the De La Rosa fiasco... there is no defense. The name changing thing may have been worth a try but not clever. As for the person who talked about the off pace play of the players from Lifetime (Anderson/Gerber)... I am a member of Lifetime (not a Lifetime team or any other 3.5 team) and I can tell you that they hit the ball with plenty of authority; their issue is they cannot consistently get it over the net or between the lines. Hit hard? Yes they do... hit it in, not very often.

    My real opinion is I do not care but do not exacerbate the problem by incessantly defending yourself. Does anyone think you can bring home a championship without players that are out of level? As mentioned earlier in this thread, Dallas has not been terribly succeful on the national scene. Dallas may have won a 3.0 championship and I do not know any of those guys but I bet most of them were at least somewhat out of level and did not just "improve" exponentially.

    I looked up the players from that team and the ones I could find playing 3.5 looked to be pretty successful at the next level too (admittedly not as dominant as I suspected but nevertheless, they appear to be above average to very good 3.5 players).

    Corey Noel is correct when he says get the best players available that can improve. I suspect if Corey could get Federer through as a 4.5, he probably would try. This goes for every captain of teams with post season aspirations. Branch would love to add a few 5.5/6.0 players to his juggernaut and Somabut would too.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Why in the world does 3.5 get more interest on this blog than all of the other levels combined? I guess it is the high level of tennis being played at 3.5.

    The real reason is it may be the only level that is still up for grabs. In the end 4.0 will be Somabut and 4.5 will be Branch. In this level, nobody really knows. The best I can tell, Lifetime was the team to beat but Oakridge had something ot say about that. Oak Creek and Garland appear to be the current flavors of the week. They play Canyon Creek this week to determine if CC is a contender or pretender. HP/Jameson is just sitting there with nobody to play for several weeks looking to sign a free agent singles player (unless Sisk accepts the $5,000 and draft pick trade). OC plays Brookhaven to determine if Brookhaven is a contender. Flight B is closely bunched but CC/Jolly will probably emerge but next they play Stonebridge in a battle of unbeatens.

    This year, the other levels have little to no drama. Somebody in 4.0/4.5 needs to self rate a former Div I player to see a good bitch and moan session at those levels.

    ReplyDelete
  109. Trust me, there are many teams who already have Div. 1 college players on their 4.5 teams, including guys who have had ATP points in the past. I have no 5.0 players on my team, which explains why my team is going to be very lucky to go to sectionals.

    The reason there are more comments on the 3.5 than the other levels is obvious. The higher you go in level, the fewer players there are competing. If you look at tournaments, there are more entries at 3.5 than any other division. Although to counter that theory, the Houston blog is 95% 4.5 and 5.0, so maybe it just depends on who starts the blog and spreads the word.

    ReplyDelete
  110. Hopefully this will take Vijay's name out of the sandbagging argument.

    Vijay's first three matches:

    L 4-6, 6-4, 1-0
    L 6-4, 6-0
    W 5-7, 6-4, 1-0

    These are not the results of somebody who started out at the wrong level. I'm not going to try to argue for Ben because I don't believe he was ever a 3.5, but even Bazan has said that he was.

    Why don't you all forget about the past and worry about the ringers that are playing this season?

    ReplyDelete
  111. Corey,

    First, I'd like to say we all appreciate your opinion. But there are a LOT of 3.5 players from last year that would completely disagree with your assessment of those two players.

    Second, you are right we should all be focusing on 2008. But those players were brought up only because they show a pattern of behavior on the part of John Sisk at Garland.

    This pattern continued in 2008 with a player who attempted to change his name and play for Garland at a level too low. Also John added a player this year who had a good record at level 4.0 but sat out a few seasons and re-rated himself 3.5.

    Most non-Garland players do not believe the "immaculate improvement" story told by fat John and Rot Jock.

    ReplyDelete
  112. The difference is I have results to back up my opinions and I don't have to resort to name-calling. Vijay had a sub-par first season at 3.5. George has already lost his first match at 3.5. De La Rosa is no 4.0 player anymore, and how is it John's fault that he tried to get a new membership? You are using secondhand sources to get all of your information whereas I have gotten all of my info directly from the parties involved.

    I'm not going to stand by and let people be attacked without reason. It's very easy to criticize under an "anonymous" cloak. If you are so confident in your opinions, how about you stand up for them by posting your name?

    ReplyDelete
  113. BTW, does anybody know Roger Federer's USTA number?

    ReplyDelete
  114. Corey,
    You must be smoking something really strong!

    ReplyDelete
  115. i think most of my contacts were at 3.5 so that is why there is more action at this level. I do know some 4.0s that read it in fact every time we play a team their captain mentions it but not all post up.

    And to be honest 3.5s are just more fun and like Corey said it always up for grabs.

    I will never forget playing one of my first league matches ever at 3.5 and we were waiting for the match before us to end. I was a borderline 3.0 at the time and to me these guys were amazing until they starting cussing at each during the changeover with someone's 8 year old around. I asked, "what league is this?" Answer: 4.0 I was glad not to be a 4.0 at that time. Now with two similar experiences in my last two matches I am sorry to say my assessment was pretty right on.

    Come on Big John, can you buy me a new USTA membership. I can wear a wig and go by the name Luckee Thundree. No one will notice, I promise, I will keep my matches close.

    ReplyDelete
  116. Dave, Congrats to you and your team. That was a fun atmosphere. I like to give credit where credit is due, you outplayed me, and my hope is that there can be a second round, hopefully in the playoffs.

    Fellas, this is NTRP, most of us have similar skill levels, it just comes down to who wants the win more, yesterday, Dave won and just shows he was better equipped to play me than I was at playing him.

    This was definitely a hard pill to swallow, but I'll just lace them up, and try again in two weeks against Canyon Creek.

    Dave, great win. If you play Waco, I'll play 3.5 for another shot.

    Jonathan

    ReplyDelete
  117. I agree Cary. The higher the level, the less fun it is. I honestly think that is a main reason there are so many sandbaggers playing 3.5 and 4.0. That was one thing I heard all the time when I got moved up to 4.5. Everybody told me all of the guys were assholes. Luckily I haven't come across too many but I certainly have to deal with more egos and personalities at 4.5.

    ReplyDelete
  118. Jonathan, thanks for the comments and I was glad to see everyone on both teams play hard and with good sportsmanship. I was mentally up for our match, as I knew how good you are and I really wanted to win.
    I also have been disappointed about your decision to play for Lifetime, as you gave me your word that you would play with us and you told me that " your word was your bond " to quote you. You also asked me if you could miss the week we were to play Lifetime, as they were friends and such and I said that would be fine. Just before you got yourself bumped up to 4.0 we talked to you about playing with us, as you had posted that if a good team wanted you to play then you would remain at 3.5 and so Ed and you talked and you and I talked several times about playing with us, you contacted the USTA and had your rating changed back to 3.5, so I expected honesty from you and I got a lie. I talked to you several times on the phone prior to your signing up with Lifetime and you made no mention to me that you had other plans, also when we finally found out about your signing, which you didn't give us a call or anything like that-we saw your name on their teams list, you e-mailed Ed and said that you were only going to play 2 or 3 times for them during the season, as you were working 2 jobs and you didn't have time to play more, as if that made everything OK, so I had a bit of motivation when we played Sat. I have finally got this off of my chest and I can just be glad things went the way they did.
    I hope you at least understand that the way you handled it all was wrong and I felt like this needed to be said.
    David Prather

    ReplyDelete
  119. wow, someone needs a hug.

    ReplyDelete
  120. Damn,
    You need to let that stuff out BEFORE the match,
    That's the kind of thing I can market.

    It's always nice to see the good guys triumph over the Darkside.

    Now we just need a team to stand up to Garland.

    ReplyDelete
  121. Jonathan,
    You must be a real piece of work!

    ReplyDelete
  122. Sorry Marc I should have told you I actually knew about it. Jonathan actually asked my opinion and I said I would choose Lifetime but it was really up to him. No offense David.

    I wouldn't take it personally David players come and go and the ones that stick are the ones you depend on. No offense Jonathan.

    Jonathan is honest that he is a USTA nomad and there is nothing wrong with that, I have known plenty in the past, I know guys that wait till a few matches have been played so they can see how teams stack up. some want to play for a winner others want to get a lot of playing time.

    Hope you all can kiss and makeup, can someone say blog challenge???

    ReplyDelete
  123. May the force be with us

    ReplyDelete
  124. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  125. First of all, let me just say, those who are accusing John Sisk of recruiting ringers, get off your high horse and stop your holier than thou BS!!
    For all of you non-believers out there, I moved to Dallas in 2006 and was looking for a place to play at. I found the Garland Tennis center on Google and decided to visit since it is close to where I live. To be honest, at the time I didn’t even know a USTA league system existed. I learned about it from the pro at the garland Tennis center. And the pro rated me 3.5, I DID NOT rate myself. The season I joined Garland, I was struggling to keep the ball in play, I couldn’t serve well, forget hitting a backhand. I had not played for a number of years. I used to play as a kid and therefore, I understood the game and maybe why I took a little less time to improve. Had you played me back then, you would know what I am saying. Delira, John and Corey played me back then, I was loosing to everybody. That said, I believe it is wrong to recruit ringers. I don’t know what pleasure you would get by having a player who is actually a 4.5 beat a 3.5 player. That is un-sportsman like behavior and is detrimental to the sport. I was glad to be bumped up to 4.0 because I want to play players who are better than me and improve.
    I have been with Garland since summer of 06 and I have not seen any ringers. Those who want to speculate and accuse Garland of having ringers, please continue, you are only wasting your own time. Or, you can try and improve.
    John, Corey, Trey, Jacque, Ben: I am glad to play with you guys any day!!

    ReplyDelete
  126. ZZZZ! We moved past Garland and after Kirby and I crushed Corey and John then we can hold a memorial for all of John's stats and past wins from the 1970s as well.

    Vijay I kind of buy your story, I have seen you play and you are one of those hot/cold players and did probably need time to get some timing down. If you were a true ringer you would have gone undefeated up at sectionals and at 4.0 but that hasn't happened. how good was the guy who crushed you from Waco last summer? I am guessing he is a true ringer.

    ReplyDelete
  127. I would say he looked like a low 4.5 player

    ReplyDelete
  128. For my friendly anonymous poster. Here is a list of new names for me. The first one is the correct spelling of your attempt at name calling.

    1. Jock Rot
    2. Jock Itch
    3. Jock Strap (most used)
    4. Jock me off
    5. Jock ass
    6. Jock Shirac (sp?) (french president)

    My ex wife's favorite....drum roll please.......ASSHOLE!

    So, with that said...I enjoy reading what you think ...but I also enjoy responding to your post..it is relieving and feels good to say things I normally can not say out loud and in social settings.

    I am chilled..no more outburst from me. Just some competitive tennis...I want in on a grudge match but I don't have any grudges...yet?

    Jonathan and David have fun and I hope I can make it to the match.

    ReplyDelete