I have just perused them a little. Any thoughts on who will win at each level at this Major Zone tourney.
Samuel Grand had a small tourney this weekend and Noaman Azhar took the 4.5 title and Greg Wiley took the 3.5 title. He took out of couple of Oakridgers in the process, good stuff Greg.
4.0 looks interesting with a lot of Dallas entries but there are a lot other good players, 4.5 shouldn't be interesting because Alfonso keeps racking up points by merely showing up and scaring people off the court.
Who looks good in 3.5, Tran of Houston or maybe an Oakridge boy?
A few matchups I see that are interesting.
ReplyDeleteAt 4.5, Noel vs Warren should be a doozy. Warren was a top dog at 4.0 last year, so should be interesting to see how this one plays out.
At 4.0,
Not much really jumps off the page - a few local area matchups I see where we could analyze if people know both players.
1. Jose Velasquez-Castro of Ft. Worth drew the #1 seed Ansari. I think this is a really tough draw as Jose is a really good player. This should have been a 2nd or 3rd round match as Jose crushed the #7 seed Mark Carter in March. Expect the loser of this to go very far in the Consolation rounds.
2. Newman could play Somabut really early if they both win.
3. McKinney of Rowlett plays Trevino of Bedford.
4. Voss drew the #11 seed Scholl from Houston who has some impressive wins.
5. #13 seed S. Russell drew 2 Dallasites early. He starts with James Schick and if he wins that has a possible matchup with THE Eddie Hill
Any thoughts?
I always have a hard time finding these tournaments. Where are they listed on the USTA site?
ReplyDeleteGo to Tennislink and then just click "Tournaments" - Add these 2 together and it will get you there
ReplyDeletehttp://tennislink.usta.com/Tournaments
/TournamentHome/Tournament.aspx?T=62653
I am actually looking forward to playing Jason. I just hope everything I have heard about him is not true. If so it probably won't be a fun match. This is the first time I haven't been seeded in a major zone in probably four years so I guess I have something to prove.
ReplyDeleteSeeding has nothing to do with who the best players are or head to head results. Tournaments go straight down the points rankings. If one plays every week, they are likely to beseeded high.
ReplyDeleteWhy are Adult rankings not done like Jrs'. In Jrs they actually look at who you beat and it isnt so much about who plays more. In this day and age with computers, it should be a little more complex than who has the most points.
ReplyDeleteIt is too difficult and time consuming to look at head-to-head match-ups for all players. It is not as easy as it sounds. It would take a long time just to do it for 1 draw, much less all the men, women, mixed, singles, doubles, etc.......
ReplyDeleteIn most big city major zones they have seeding committees that take a look at the participants. If you want to know who the ringers are then typically take a look at the last 1 or 2 seeds who jumped others with more points.
ummm - everything is computerized now days. I would agree if someone was having to manually look at everything, but you have a formula, plug in the entrants and it shoots out your seeds.
ReplyDeleteHonestly I was talking more about end of year rankings than seeding.
The points are only based on your top 5 singles tournaments and top 4 doubles tournaments.
ReplyDeleteThe 12-month rolling point system works pretty good. Those folks deserve a seed up to a point. Then hopefully you have a seeding committee of sorts that will consist of folks in the know that could point out local ringers, etc......
ReplyDeleteThe bad thing about looking at who you beat to determine rankings is that it's very subjective. The current system is just like the pro system, you get points based on what round you advance to in the tournament. The only difference is that you only get points for your top 5 tournaments. I like the system, although it doesn't seem fair that beating Michael Hanson is worth the same points as beating Chris Leach potentially.
ReplyDeleteI am just asking why reinvent the wheel. The USTA already has a computerized system in place used in the Jr program for Champ and Super Champ play - why not use the same system for adults.
ReplyDeleteOne thing I like about the junior system is that once you accumulate a certain number of points, you move up to the next level. I think this could be used for adults also, although I'm sure it would be manipulated too. I think anybody who wins an adult major zone should not be able to play that level again for a while.
ReplyDeleteDoes tournament results affect your rating? Can you get strikes from tournament play or is only league play taken into account for a players true dynamic rating?
ReplyDeleteTournaments will not give you any strikes. It may be used against you for grievance evidence.
ReplyDeleteMitch and Gene,
ReplyDeleteNo tourneys are just fine, you can play as many as you want especially in the open and 5.5 divisions
good luck to all tomorrow and this weekend.
ReplyDeleteTournaments are only used at the end of the year as part in determining your year-end rating. They are not used as evidence for anything unless they show that a person was playing super-champs, college or pro tennis.
ReplyDeleteFor NTRP folks you are free to win as big and as often as you would like in tournament tennis and not worry about a DQ but you might be bumped up at the end of the year.
just a note, I assume Texas still factors in tournaments? Southern Section changed their policy last year after a ton of players played tournaments, but no league in order to lower their ratings, which was the opposite Southern expected. As of 2007 Southern no longer factors tournament results into the ratings if a player plays in a USTA league, if they only play Tournaments, they still get a T rating I assume.
ReplyDeletePersonally I think Mixed Exclusive and Tournaments should go the way of the dinosaurs.
If you playa 4.5 tournament and perform well while being a self rated 3.5, believe me it is evidence for a grievance.
ReplyDelete