The purpose of this forum is to discuss the tennis event at Gay Games VII in Chicago.

I heard from one of the Gay Games tournament directors that they will done in cooperation wtih the Gay and Lesbian Tennis Alliance. This is significant for a number of reasons:

- Matches won and points earned may accrue to players' rankings if full sanctioning is pursued
- GLTA rules and guidelines which gay tennis players are accustomed to would be followed
- Recently developed age division events which are more suited to the demographics of the gay tennis community would be offered

I think this is a very positive development which will greatly enhance the experience of participants.

[ March 22, 2004, 09:03 PM: Message edited by: rtwilliams ]

Cool. Now if only Fed Cup and Davis Cup would follow suit!

I can say that I fully support that move and it has been the standard at Gay Games for many years even though GLTA has not been an active participant in the FGG for many years.

My big concern is that non-ranked Tennis players can self rank and then become a wolf in sheep's clothing at the Gay Games.

In the C event in Sydney, all of the medalists were non GLTA ranked players. They chose to be C players and the result was that all of the GLTA ranked players were shut out of the medals.

This is a bit of a personal complaint I guess as I lost in the 1/4 finals in that way. I am not saying that we should have earned a medal, but I am saying there is a statistical difficulty with rankings being used for some and not all of the entrants.

Now that I have raised the issue, I have to admit that I don't have a solution.

Any thoughts?

Although Sydney benefited from some collaboration with the GLTA, I know they were not sanctioned and I'm not sure of the degree to which they utilized GLTA rules and guidelines.

The problem of sandbagging is self correcting in the medium and long term because players are quickly placed into the appropriate division as dictated by their results. However, for players who have no track record and then enter the Gay Games, you're right that the potential for serious sandbagging exists.

I think the key to detering this sort of thing is to make sure the division standards are well known and educate the players that the tournament director has the authority to default a player who has entered an inappropriate division. For example, if a clear 4.0 player (A level) without a GLTA ranking is observed playing in the C division, he or she can and should be defaulted.

Here is how the rules are stated:

"If a player violates these provisions by playing in an inappropriate division, then that player should be immediately defaulted out of the tournament and will not be awarded GLTA points in any singles or doubles division for the tournament(s) at which the violation(s) occurred. Tournament Directors should disqualify a player after play has begun if that player was entered into the wrong division. If only one round of play has occurred, the defeated player is to be re-instated as the winner."

I have full confidence that the highly experienced tournament committee in Chicago will be able to run their tournament in a way which upholds this rule, even in the case of players without a ranking who intentionally sandbag.

[ March 22, 2004, 09:04 PM: Message edited by: rtwilliams ]

This is going to take some thinking and strategizing. I can see the "automatic default" of people out of the Gay Games being seen as a serious negative and also counter to the "inclusive" nature of the event. On the other hand, that same value would seem to suggest that divisions within sports like tennis should be upheld to afford everyone a chance to do their "personal best." The first step will be, of course, education of the athletes ... we'll need to work closely with GLTA to give non GLTA-ranked players a sense of what the rankings mean.

That said, my ex-bf is a tennis player, and he's always complaining about people playing out of their ranked areas in tennis, so ... not all of this will be fixed, that's for sure.

Kevin Boyer
Gay Games VII
Chicago2006.org

I'm not familiar with the GLTA. I've visited the website once, but the tournaments seem spread out. I'm curious what NTRP rating the majority of the players hold. Are there many 5.0 or above players (that would not be me)? I'm guessing the largest draws are the 4.0 and 4.5 divisions, although they're called something else?

varig, the division in glta are open, a, b, c and d. open is supposed to correspond to 5.0+ players (although in reality there are many 4.5 players playing open), A corresponds to 4.5, etc.

if you're a tennis player, varig, you really should contact the austin tennis club. michael garcia, the ATC club president, does a wonderful job there. in texas, austin has its tournament in march, dallas in october and houston in november.

however, if you're a good player, please hold off on joining ATC until after our "texas cup" (davis cup-like competition between houston, dallas and austin) takes place in march... wink

kevin, i don't know if you have any say in the matter, but it's only right to remove obvious sandbaggers.

you may feel like you're being unfair to someone who may have traveled a great distance to play only to be disqualified, but it's more important to be fair to the hundreds of others who have played in their legitimate divisions wanting only to compete on a level playing field.

The largest draws are B (3.5-4.0) and C (3.0), but needless to say there's a level of competition for everybody, so come on out and play!

Rich Williams
Tournament Standards Chair
Gay and Lesbian Tennis Alliance

Kevin,

My advice to you, Sam Coady and whoever is coordinating the tennis tournament there(I'm not sure if it will be Chris Myers or not) is to be very proactive in eliminating as many of the potential sandbaggers as possible, beginning a year prior to Gay Games.

I anticipate that a significant number of participants will have played at least one GLTA sanctioned tournament in their lifetime prior to Gay Games VII. You should incorporate a small tennis committee to keep track of results from GLTA tournaments beginning May of next year, look at the various results from the tournaments as well as the points standings and do not assume that the person applying in the B division in 2005 will stay in that division through 2006, especially if that person has great results in the year preceding Gay Games.

Additionally, for those who will not have a prior GLTA tournament background, ask them to submit as much information on previous tournament results as possible. This means that an additional mailing to the entrants might be necessary to obtain that information if it isn't included on the registration form. Having that information will, in the long run, prove to be invaluable.

When I was co-director of the tennis tournament for GGIV, Regina Dorian, the other co-director and I must have attended 15 tournaments between us in the year prior to GGIV and we also sent an additional mailing to entrants requesting additional results information. We were aware of the major players in each division (men and women), we kept track of changes in the points standings and who moved up or down in division through the April tournaments before determining our draw and allowed for a few adjustments based on the 1994 USGO results before finalizing everything.

Also, it is not a bad thing to use judgment (based on the tools you have to work with of course) in determining seeding, possible sandbaggers, etc. I remember we received an application from a guy who was the top ranked open player in the Northeast who had never played a GLTA tournament. Everyone we knew in the New York tennis circles knew this guy and could vouch for the results and we felt strongly about placing him among the top two seeds, which angered a number of open players who played the GLTA circuit. The end result is that our judgement proved right - he ended up in the finals.

Your committee also has the ability to move people based on their results, though you will not catch every possible sandbagger. There was someone who was clearly playing two levels below where he should have been placed, but he never played a GLTA tournament before Gay Games and we hadn't heard of him before and had no indication on his entry form that he was entering the wrong division. He won Gold medals in singles and doubles and a number of people were angered, but we never promised absolute perfection.

I'm being a bit wordy, but my point in all of this is, unlike GLTA tournament directors who tend to follow the point standings to the letter to avoid controversy (which I can understand and respect), the Gay Games tournament committee has the power and ability to make its tournament as level a playing field as possible within the confines of "participation, inclusion and personal best." You have to be engaged in the process in order to accomplish that goal. In the end, you will have the respect of your peers and hopefully a seamless tournament.

Charles,

I applaud the effort that you put into organizing GGIV.

The issue that surfaced at the C level in Sydney was that the guys that won medals were all from NZ, Australia and Japan (and one Californian that won a bronze in Doubles but was ranked a in GLTA singles)

Your solution will not be able to take care of this situation and it may be that this was not an issue. I think it may have been, but unlike my normal self, I do not have a recommendation that can be made to solve that problem.

A truly international event that doesn't have an international ranking leading up to it may still allow for decent sized gaps in rankings. It may be something that we need to live with.

On the other side - does anyone else ever get tired of those people that spend time complaining that everyone else in their division that has/can beat them should be one ranking abover where they are? The logical progression is that the person speaking should always win the Tournament they are in.

I am now playing B by scraping my way up from C a year and a half ago and look forward to playing new opponents and sometimes learning lessons along the way. (Hope to see you in Seattle Charles!)

Ken

Ken, if it means anyting, I encountered a similar problem in Amsterdam. My doubles partner and I were two rounds from a bronze and we encountered a doubles team from Germany who clearly should have been in the A division (and they knew it) and could have medalled in that division. We lost 2 & 2 and I played the last four games with a slight hamstring pull running down a shot on that red clay. In Amsterdam, a number of the Europeans were playing below the level I would have placed them, and in some cases, I don't think it was intentional - they just didn't know. In many, some of the entrants clearly knew what they were doing.

I can't even begin to address the situation in Sydney as I wasn't in attendance. However, I did perform a cursory review of that draw and saw a number of instances where people were playing doubles in an ability AND age appropriate division, which is just wrong. I received a few complaints from tennis players in California on the way the tournament was being organized and tried to address those concerns with the tournament director, but was ignored. I think you're probably going to find your largest cases of sanbagging infractions in the B and C divisions and a few in D as well. All in all, I heard the tournament in Sydney pretty much ran without a hitch.

I certainly feel that the advantage of having Gay Games VII in North America is that it will allow us an opportunity to lay some requirements that should hopefully eliminate a majority of the sandbagging that occurs.

Also, I'm planning on being in Seattle!

[ May 08, 2004, 09:11 AM: Message edited by: CharlesK ]

I played tennis at the Gay Games in 1998 (football's my sport, but they didn't have it in Amsterdam) and was upset when I later discovered there was a division below the one I registered for. This division (for total beginners) was not on my registration form and I never found out how/when it was added. I had zero fun playing someone for whom the Amsterdam court was his home court and knowing I would lose from the start. My friend had the identical experience to mine.