Ratings
The player rating system, with its reliance on a combination of USTA ratings and essentially self-ratings, has been the source of complaints for years. There have been two common refrains. One pertains to self-rated players (or more precisely, those receiving ratings from their favorite pros); there have been complaints in at least half the divisions about players who are playing at levels below their abilities. The fact that they are not required to periodically move up as are players who play USTA has been seen as inequitable. At the same time, every year there are concerns raised from USTA players required to move up due to new ratings from USTA, whose results in River City play do not support their required move. These ratings questions are raised most frequently in the B divisions and lower, but the A divisions have not been totally immune from these concerns.
The TopDog program which RCRL already uses offers a dynamic rating program, in which players’ ratings are determined based on results in league play. In fact, these ratings have been calculated and available to us since 2005. They currently appear on the TopDog site under the heading “Individual Doubles Ratings.”
After careful and lengthy consideration, the RCRL Board has decided that the TopDog ratings may offer an equitable and quantifiable solution to player placement concerns, and it seems more reasonable to rely on ratings generated from play in this league rather than defer to a separate entity (USTA), in which not all our players participate.
So, beginning with the 2011-2012 league year, the following will be in effect:
At the time of rostering on a team, a rating will be entered for each player, which will be determined as follows:
(1) For any player who has a history of at least 8 matches reported in TopDog (that is, 8 matches since the beginning of the ratings in 2005), the rating will be her current TopDog dynamic rating at the time she rosters. That is, her rating at the end of the 2010-2011 season will be the rating at which she rosters at the beginning of 2011-2012.
(2) For those players who do not have that 8 match experience in TopDog, her rating will be her current USTA rating.
(3) Any player who has neither the TopDog rating based on at least 8 matches or a current USTA rating must be verified by an independent tennis professional (that is, not the pro who coaches her team or who regularly gives her lessons). RCRL will designate which pros will participate in the verification program, and will assist in this effort by arranging for several ratings clinics in which players may participate. Players with prior RCRL or USTA experience must provide their records to the pros at verification.
(4) All players who played in the C2 division in 2010-2011 must obtain a pro verification for the 2011-2012 league year, notwithstanding the number of matches they may have played. RCRL will arrange verification clinics for C2 players separate from those for the rest of the league.
(5) Players who have a TopDog rating and choose to sit out for a season must, on their return, roster at the TopDog rating they last achieved at the time they left the league and may not choose to seek pro verification instead.
Player placement will be determined by the rating system described above. Player placement shall be as follows:
A player whose rating equals or exceeds 2.6 shall roster at the C1 level or higher.
A player whose rating equals or exceeds 3.1 shall roster at the B3 level or higher.
A player whose rating equals or exceeds 3.3 shall roster at the B2 level or higher.
A player whose rating equals or exceeds 3.6 shall roster at the B1 level or higher.
A player whose rating equals or exceeds 3.9 shall roster at the A3 level or higher.
A player whose rating equals or exceeds 4.2 shall roster at the A2 level or higher.
A player whose rating equals or exceeds 4.4 shall roster at the A1 level or higher.
A player whose rating equals or exceeds 4.5 shall roster at the Open A division.
A player whose rating equals or exceeds 3.9 may not roster at Masters II.
Players choosing to move down based on this rating system may not move down more than one division in a league year. Also, for the first transition year, 2011-2012, no player who played in Open A in 2010-2012 will be allowed to move down to any other division. This special rule is deemed necessary to assure continued viability of the Open A division during the transition. These rules will be re-evaluated at the end of the league year to determine whether they should be continued.
For the transition year 2011-2012, no player will be required by the new dynamic rating system to move up more than one division. At the end of the year, the Board will consider whether to make that rule permanent.
It is the captain’s responsibility to assure that her players are rostered at with the correct rating. Historic TopDog ratings and results are available on the TopDog website, and USTA ratings are similarly available online from USTA/TennisLink. Division Directors will be asked to check the ratings as well, though the primary responsibility lies with the captain.
C2 has separate rules for determining whether a player qualifies to play in the C2 (beginner) division.
Under the dynamic rating system, ratings change every week based on outcomes. However, players are not required to change divisions during the league year should their dynamic rating change.
The Board may vary these division cutoffs from year to year, based on experience under the rating system and the needs of the league.
Divisions with special “strength roster rules”
Open A, A1, Masters I and Masters II: Generally, the strength roster or court placement schemes currently in effect remain in effect.
In order to simply the application of the “strength roster rules” , the dynamic rating at the time the player rosters will remain her rating through the last match of 2011 (i.e., it will not be adjusted weekly). Prior to the first match in 2012, the ratings will be adjusted to reflect each player’s current dynamic rating, and that rating will be in effect through the end of the season. These “frozen” ratings (called “posted ratings” in the rules) will be published on the website for easy reference.
Masters II: The upper limit for playing in Masters II will be the same as the upper limit for B1 (less than 3.9); this is consistent with current rules. Within the division, players whose current rating equals or exceeds 3.3 (the upper limit for B3) may only play on Courts 1 and 2. The 70% rule becomes obsolete and is abolished. As is currently the case, players cannot play both Masters I and Masters II. Also, players in the A division are ineligible to play in Masters II.
The Board will review the operation of the strength roster rules at mid-year in the 2011-2012 season, after experience with the dynamic rating system, and may make changes at mid-year if necessary for the good of the division as a whole.
Super Seniors
There is interest in establishing a Super Seniors division for players ages 60 and older. Assuming sufficient interest is found and court time available, which is being investigated by those promoting the league, Super Seniors will be made available on an experimental basis in 2011-2012. Players will be allowed to play in one (but not both) Masters divisions as well as Super Seniors; of course, they can play in the “alphabet divisions” as well, for a total of three teams. Details will follow when available.
Scoring (to address concerns relating to “stacking”)
For all divisions except Open A, A1, C2 and Masters II, a total of 20 match points will be awarded as follows:
Court 1 – 6 points
Court 2 – 5 points
Court 3 – 4 points
Court 4 – 3 points
Bonus points – 2 available (no change from current bonus point system: total the number of games won by each team; if a team wins by 10 or more games, that team receives 2 bonus points and otherwise, each team receives 1 bonus point.)
Open A, A1 and C2 will maintain their existing point system of 1 point per court, with no bonus points. Masters II will award 2 points per court, with 2 bonus points available as in other divisions. These different rules are justified by the “strength roster” rules in those divisions and the special teaching purpose of C2.
Sportsmanship and Appropriate Behavior
All players and captains should be mindful of the fact that tennis is governed by a code of conduct and RCRL expects its players to behave accordingly. Regrettably, there have been a growing number of reports of bad behavior on the courts, poor sportsmanship and gamesmanship, to the extent that the Board felt it necessary to provide penalties for such behavior. Accordingly, RCRL is adopting the following rule:
RCRL expects teams, captains and players to recognize USTA Rules (where not inconsistent with these rules), USTA Code of Conduct and appropriate tennis etiquette. Players are expected to maintain control of their emotions and resulting behavior throughout the match. Gamesmanship or intentional distractions that interfere with an opponent’s concentration or effort to play the ball are prohibited.
If a player feels that an opponent failed to conduct herself in accordance with these standards and has committed a violation under the Code of Conduct, her captain or acting captain may file a grievance, following the procedures set out in the Appendix for grievances.
If the Grievance Committee determines that an infraction has occurred, the Committee shall consider the severity of the infraction and the player’s history of previous reported incidences and shall impose one of the following penalties:
Level 1 (first offense in a one year period): Written warning.
Level 2 (second offense in a one year period): Written reprimand.
Level 3 (third offense in a one year period): Suspension of the player from play on the affected team for the four matches immediately following the date of final decision.
Level 4 (fourth offense in a one year period): Suspension of the player from play on the affected team for one year from the date of final decision.
In addition, in the event of a Level 3 or Level 4 penalty, the court on which the offending player played will be scored as a default for her team.
This is intended as a progressive discipline system, with the levels followed in most cases. However, should the severity of the conduct warrant it, the Grievance Committee may skip one or more levels of penalty. The decision shall be communicated to the parties, to the player, and to the Board.
The decision of the Grievance Committee shall be final for any Level 1 or Level 2 penalty. The decision of the Grievance Committee on a Level 3 or Level 4 may be appealed by the sanctioned player to the full Board, by filing a written appeal within 5 days of the Committee’s decision.
Grievance Procedure (establishing a grievance committee to hear all grievances, rather than the full Board).
The Board shall appoint a Grievance Committee composed of five (5) current or former Board members. The Grievance Committee shall consider and decide all grievances filed with the Board. A Committee member who plays in the division in which the grievance arose shall abstain from the vote on the grievance. In any case in which a committee member cannot serve, the immediate past president shall serve in her stead. Except with regard to the suspension of any player, the decision of the Grievance Committee shall be final. Committee decisions regarding player suspensions may be appealed by the player to the full Board. Grievances will be decided by the committee no later than 30 days after their filing.
The Grievance process, including specific deadlines for each step (including 48 hours to file, no matter what kind of grievance it is), will be set out in an appendix to the rules, and the various references to Grievance procedures will all be to that appendix, for clarity. A Grievance form will be developed and will be required.
Grievances pertaining to playing out of position (revision of existing rule V.D.5)
If within 48 hours [seven days] after the conclusion of the match it is found that a player played a court out of her proper position (not on the court to which she was assigned on the official score sheet or in violation of the strength roster rules), the team will be penalized by defaulting [losing all points won on] that court and whatever other courts may have been affected. If the captains of both teams agree on the violation and the penalty, they shall report this to the division director for information, and to the Data Administrator to correct the score. If the captains do not agree on the facts or the penalty, the matter must be handled under the grievance procedure. Player position errors not brought up within 48 hours are waived.
Cooperation and Good Faith (new rule)
RCRL encourages courtesy and cooperation between captains, and recognizes that there are occasions that captains (or acting captains) agree to go forward with a match under circumstances in which, without that agreement, there would be a violation of these rules (for instance, accommodating a player running slightly late due to an unusual traffic situation, allowing the opposing captain to correct an unintended error in a lineup after the lineup is exchanged but before play has begun). In those cases, neither captain can later complain or file a grievance over the accommodation. Matches played in good faith will stand.
Official Score Sheet (revised/new rule; underscored material is new)
The official score sheet shall be the host team’s score sheet [this sentence currently appears at V.D.5]. Both captains (or acting captains) shall sign the official sheet. Captains shall note on the official sheet any potential grievance of which they are aware at the time of signing the sheet (other than pertaining to player misconduct or sportsmanship). Failure to note that grievance shall be considered a waiver of the issue.
Captains’ Responsibilities (New provisions to be added at appropriate place within existing rule II.H)
It is the responsibility of the captain to assure that all her players are familiar with the rules of tennis, the Code, and the rules of RCRL. It is also the responsibility of the captain to assure that all players understand the expected standard of conduct of players.
In those circumstances in which the captain cannot be present at a match, it is the responsibility of the captain to arrange for a co-captain or acting captain to serve as captain. That substitute must be thoroughly familiar with the rules and prepared to make decisions on behalf of the team if necessary. Captains are encouraged to advise the opposing captain in advance of the name and contact information for any acting captain.
In those situations in which it is absolutely impossible for either the captain or co-captain to attend a called division meeting, the captain shall arrange for another member of the team to attend.
Directors’ and Co-Directors’ Responsibilities (revised rules; underscored is new)
II.F.3 (Director) She will hold a mandatory captains’ meeting at least two weeks prior to the beginning of the first rotation. At that meeting, she shall review any rule changes from the prior year. She shall also carry out any additional training of captains that the Board may require.
II.G.5 (Co-Director) She should [is encouraged to] attend all board meetings and may vote in the absence of the division director.
Player Eligibility and Team Roster (revision/addition to Rule IV.A)
Revise the last sentence of IV.A to read as follows:
Additional names of eligible new players may be added to the roster up to midnight the night before the first scheduled match for the division in the league year and the first scheduled match after January 1 [in August and January].
Add a new section:
A player who has moved into the area from a distance of more than 100 miles during the league year may be added to a roster at any time during the league year.
Rules Pertaining to Match Play (revisions to Rule V)
Regarding cell phones, existing rule V.A.1:
Electronic devices (cell phones, PDAs, pagers) are not allowed to be used on the court during matches except to determine official court time. The first time there is an electronic interference, the opponent will get the point. If there is a second interference, the opponent takes the game being played. A third interference gives the opponent the match. Any surrounding courts affected by the electronic device may call a “let.” Players may not make or receive phone calls or text messages and may not check voicemail messages or email from the beginning of warmup through the completion of the match, including during breaks of any kind, except with the agreement of all players on the court.
Regarding tiebreaks, the current arrangement, in which each division decides between three choices for tiebreaks, is maintained. See Rule V.C. The following revisions are made to that rule:
The 15-minute option is changed to 20 minutes.
Add: Tiebreaks played in good faith shall stand and an objection to the form of tiebreak cannot be a basis for a grievance.
Regarding postponement for inclement weather, Rule V.I:
In order to clarify the deadline for makeup matches, after the schedule for all matches for the league is set, the Board will set a deadline for makeup of all matches, and will announce that deadline to all captains. Confusing references to last regular season match will be deleted.
We will maintain and add emphasis to the rule requiring that the match lineup for all courts must be exchanged before the match time for the first court to play, in the event that a rescheduled match must be played in a series of courts, rather than all courts at once. We will clarify that in the event a player in such a lineup becomes unavailable to play when scheduled, the team may substitute a player not already listed in the full lineup.
Captains have 14 (changed from 7) days from the original scheduled date of a postponed match to set a date for the rescheduled match and find court time available to play it. If teams fail to agree on a rescheduled date, the division director may refer the matter to the Grievance Committee to set the date and/or determine an appropriate penalty.
Regarding Coaching, revised Rule V.K.1:
No coaching will be permitted from the start of warmup through the conclusion of the match, including during any break [during the match or during the five-minute break] by anyone including a team’s coach, a captain, another player, or an observer.
Regarding spectators and children (new):
Spectators (including infants or children) are not allowed on the court during warmups or play.
Regarding continuous play/breaks: Confusion has arisen regarding the various rules on bathroom breaks and injury timeouts. In some instances, bathroom breaks are excessively long . Set breaks are currently five minutes, which is longer than necessary. All provisions on changeovers, set breaks, bathroom breaks and so on will be rewritten and combined into one section that will provide:
Ninety second changeover limit
Set break – between sets or before match tiebreak – 2 minutes
Bathroom break – should (not must) be taken at changeovers or set breaks. Time limit is 5 minutes. This 5 minutes can be combined with the changeover time for a total of 6-1/2 minutes, or the set break, for a total of 7 minutes.
Equipment malfunction – includes racquet, shoe strings, contact lens, etc. – 5 minute limit.
Medical timeout – gastrointestinal problems, blood sugar testing, etc. Limited to 5 minutes, and only one medical timeout per match. A medical time out can be used as a bathroom break, but cannot be combined with a bathroom break. Like a bathroom break, a medical timeout could be combined with changeover or set break, for a total of 6-1/2 or 7 minutes, respectively. Limited to one for the same problem.
Injury timeout – 5 minutes. Limited to one for the same problem.
Provisions regarding team placement
No substantive change is proposed to the way this has been handled by the Board in the recent past, but the rule is apparently still not clear to everyone. We will try a complete rewrite, using some definitions. We will combine the letter of intent and new team application form into one form which will be used by all teams, whether new, old, moving up, moving down. The form will have boxes to check to show into which category the team falls.
(1) Status quo team – a team which is playing in the same division as in the previous year and which is returning at least 6 players from its previous year’s roster
(2) Qualified move up team – a team which has won its division or won 75% (calculated on match points) in the previous year, must move to the next higher division and take a majority of its players from the previous year’s roster. In addition, any team that wins 70% or more (calculated on match points), may move up to the next higher division, and in doing so must take a majority of its players from the previous year’s roster.
(3) Qualified move down team – a team which has won less than 25% (calculated on match points) for two consecutive years and is returning a majority of its players from the previous year must move down one division in the next year. In addition, a team which has won less than 25% (calculated on match points) for one year may move down one division.
(4) New team – any team which is not listed in 1, 2 or 3, above. New teams include teams petitioning to play at new level, teams seeking to jump over a level, as well as new combinations of players or mergers of existing teams that do not meet the definitions above. New team placement will be determined using the criteria listed in existing rule.
Delete provisions in V.L pertaining to Indiana’s Spring Break
Retired Matches: The computer program will not allow us to advance the score of a retired match, then mark it as retired. We will change the scoring to the usual protocol, that is, to enter retired match with the actual number of games won, not advancing the score.
General Cleanup: There are some general cleanup changes which make little or no substantive change in the operation of the league, but captains are strongly encouraged to review the revised rules in complete detail, and to attend the mandatory captains’ meeting.
