Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 1 member: TABLE SETTER 11; 62 anonymousDiscussion: Ratings Day??????
| Posted | Discussion |
| March 19, 2010 Rappahannock Men's 60 3 posts | Ratings Day?????? I guess today was a magic day for ratings. Hey, you win a tournament or two, time to move up. |
| March 20, 2010 Dirty Men's 50 1371 posts | As it probably should be. Nothing wrong with moving up. Why not accept a challenge instead of taking the easier way to a ring you have to buy yourself anyway. |
| March 20, 2010 softballerK1 Men's 65 30 posts | Dirty, I agree there is nothing wrong with moving up. After all, isn't that the real purpose of the competition? But, why is it that you can win one tournament with 3 teams in the bracket and be moved up, but you have to play 3 tournaments and get your butt kicked just so you can make an appeal to be moved down? Every team out there can have one of those tournaments where everything goes right and you win. But, should that mean an automatic move up when the other 13 tournaments you played in didn't produce any trophy's? I think that if you have to play 3 to move down, you should have to win 3 to move up. It makes it a little more equitable and does not penalize the team that "got lucky" for a weekend. |
| March 20, 2010 Rappahannock Men's 60 3 posts | I don't get it either, but it seems they're right more often than they're wrong. |
| March 20, 2010 Dirty Men's 50 1371 posts | K1, I can't argue with that. What you need to do to be put back down should be the same as you need to get moved up. Seems to me it should be the same on both sides of the fence. Now maybe three isn't the right number to use, maybe two. But whatever it is, make it the same both ways. That does seem MUCH more equitable. |
| March 20, 2010 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | Agree with the challenge of playing the highest level. The only problem is there is not enough teams or tournaments to play once you get there. Unless a team wins everything in sight, let them stay put for the season. |
| March 20, 2010 SSUSA Staff 3483 posts | The Senior Softball Summit member organizations all have National/World Championship events, and by agreement of the associations, the winners of those year-end events are moved up automatically (without appeal rights) for the following year. There are two limited exceptions, as follows: • Three to five teams in bracket - May appeal to be moved back down after three tournaments played • Two teams in bracket - NOT subject to automatic move up There is a widely held major misconception that teams are moved up after winning any single event, other than only the ones mentioned above. This is incorrect. "Performance Based" ratings adjustments, either up OR down, are always the result of analysis of cummulative performance by the teams in SSUSA events, both statistically and by written input received from the 12-member National Ratings Committee Advisory Board. In all cases, there is more than one tournament appearance involved in the review data and related decisions. Occasionally, teams will be moved up immediately prior to a specific event based on their desired addition of new roster players from higher ratings level(s). This is always done following extensive discussion/negotiation between the team's Manager and SSUSA Staff. There WAS a rather notable team rating adjustment made this year: One team (Viking Classics, 55-AA) asked specifically to be moved to a higher rating for the 2010 tournament season. Their request was granted. |
| March 20, 2010 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Good for that team, however I do not find them on the list... Viking Classics. 55, anything. Great seeing all of you Fri, working away. |
| March 20, 2010 lemons Men's 65 323 posts | SSUSA Staff, What criteria was used in moving The Indy 60's up months after their only tournament win? It happened only after the pool play portion of The SPA National in Dalton and followed SPA's knee-jerk decision. Be careful in your wording since another 60+ AA team in our area has won multiple tournaments involving several (6 or more) teams and remained in AA for at least 4 years. Thanks, Mel |
| March 20, 2010 #6 Men's 60 1173 posts | taist, That's Ron Perkins team, they call themselves TEXAS CLASSIC'S NOW, I THINK ! |
| March 20, 2010 SSUSA Staff 3483 posts | lemons - We are always happy to receive unsolicited ratings observations about other teams you believe we may have overlooked in the process. Please feel free to send an e-mail to Attn: George at info@seniorsoftball.com with the specifics of your reasoning and we'll take a look at them, even if we have previously. Please identify yourself in case we might have any follow-up questions after we've read your rationale. As to your team, your manager had extensive conversations with this office regarding your team's rating, but here's a synopsis for you in case he hasn't communicated that information individually to you. 1. Your team was re-rated on "Performance Based" criteria in the late August, 2009 rating session, which is one of only four annual reviews (See the Staff M/B post on TEAM RATINGS • Guidelines & Procedures for additional information) 2. Over 15 games in three SSUSA tournaments (Winter Nationals '08, Brickyard '09 and Northern's '09) during the rating data period, your team: • Had an 11-2 record against 60-AA opponents, and the losses were by 1 and 4 runs each (differential: -2.0) • Had an overall run differential of +8.1 runs per game over the 13 games against 60-AA teams • Had an run differential of +10.0 runs per game in the 11 wins against 60-AA teams, which is double the +5.0 differential data threshold for triggering a closer look at a team. 3. The results of Pool Play in the SPA Nationals in Dalton, where you were 3-0 with an average run differential of something in the range of +14.0 runs per game, were not a factor in our evaluation of your team. The timing was purely coincidental in early September following our August rating review. Hope this helps! |
| March 20, 2010 lemons Men's 65 323 posts | SSUSA Staff, Thank you for clarifying your position. As a player, I certainly didn't know the numbers you quoted. They were a little different at The TOC, weren't they? I appreciate your prompt response and look forward to more softball as the weather allows. |
| March 20, 2010 lemons Men's 65 323 posts | P.S. Personally, I would NOT like to pass on observations regarding other teams. |
| March 20, 2010 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | #6, I was informed on that and you are correct. Lemons, That's what pretty much goes on here. Sharing personal opinions, observations, with a lot of factual info thrown in, and making friends long distance. Well Mesquite was a bust maybe, Rockin Reno or The Cal cup. Take care all travelers, Play well, stay healthy. |
| March 20, 2010 titanhd Men's 60 638 posts | SSUSA Staff-I don't want to specifically name the team but,how is a team re-rated when they don't actually win a tourney but finish second and are awarded the Championship.Technically they didn't win the tournament but are re-rated AAA > MAJORfor 2010. |
| March 21, 2010 pushin60 Men's 60 61 posts | SSUSA Staff, I find it hilarious that you feel the need to posture about the decision making process of rating teams up, when you refuse to avail yourself of the fairest tool at your disposal. You continue to use your easily-manipulated system of 5+ runs, and the accumulated record in tournaments as the basis of a team’s stature in their division. Using your system, teams that always seem to finish high in your big tournaments can purposely lose their seeding games by big margins, and in a double elimination format lose as many as four games total, and stay under your radar. You don’t listen to the opinions of the tournament directors and team managers from the local qualifiers, a key tool at your disposal, and in many cases you have never seen the teams that you are promoting play a game. You just go off your “statistics”. It’s time for a Player Commission, something that has been suggested numerous times on this website, to be a part of the decision process. People from all parts of the country, selected by THEIR PEERS, who will give an objective opinion on whether or not a team is worthy of a promotion to the next level. You will still, of course, retain the final say on these matters, but periodic posts from you regarding the voting process on the teams you feel the need to promote would go a long way in stopping the complaints of teams that have been moved up. Thanks for listening. |
| March 21, 2010 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | Ken, All of the teammates that I ever played with would never lose a game on purpose. It is a fact that we probably have won games that we should not have. To lose a game on purpose does not make any sense to me. The bottom line is if you win a tourney you are going up. To shave games to stay at a certain level is the most ridiculous thing that I have ever heard. you can still be non competitive in a tourney pool game and win the tourney and get moved up. How can you play with the idea of not winning. HELLO THAT IS WHY YOU PLAY THE GAME. enough said, Thanks Harry |
| March 21, 2010 Dirty Men's 50 1371 posts | Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner! Great job, Harry. |
| March 21, 2010 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Have been on 2 different teams that did it. Reason I believe was who won or lost seeding games and 1st round of the double elim. games. But when asked, was told chances to come back were better from the losers bracket than from the winners bracket. Given the teams at the time in each it was really only a 50\50 chance in my view, and I was there to play not complain. Those were 3 & 4 years ago. |
| March 21, 2010 E4/E6 Men's 70 873 posts | My personal opinion would be that I play, and I am sure my team mates agree, we play to improve, when we improve we win, when we win we would hope our skills are the reason and would hope to be moved up. Stiffer competition breeds better players. And who doesnt enjoy breeding? |
| March 22, 2010 Dirty Men's 50 1371 posts | LOL But apparently many guys are still looking for the easier way out, and don't want to work to improve and accept challenges. And all, in some cases, just for the right to BUY YOUR OWN RING. |
| March 22, 2010 pushin60 Men's 60 61 posts | Birdie, I never said I would lose any games on purpose. In fact, the teams that I played the last few years won most of our seeding games to point where we used to laugh at ourselves about it. Personally, I would prefer that they go to the system where teams have to do well in there preliminary games to get to the medal round. I merely used that example to illustrate the flaws in the rating system, and as Taits has attested to, it can and is being done. Don’t you ever wonder how some teams can lose both their seeding games convincingly and then just turn it on in the double elim? I’m aware that teams play all their players in the seeding games to try and get everyone playing time. I’m also aware that on some teams not all the top players show up until the double elim. But this shouldn’t result in large deficits in the losses. You can choose to keep your head in the sand and refuse to see the possibility of a flawed system, but I think SSUSA owes us more than one person’s opinion on where teams should be placed. |
| March 23, 2010 turn2 489 posts | The plus five victory is not always right. Ths is what we were told when we were a 60 major plus team playing with 2 55 players in a local 55 major tourney. Then when we won it we were told we had to play 55 major plus becasue of this PLUS 5 rule. Then I resaerched the same tourney and found out a team won by a plus 9 and told SSUSA and they said they did not know about that but thanks for letting them know. They move who they want to. I want to play the best competition and I want to win every game if possible. If you beat my team you deserve to win. Play to be the best not the worst. Donnie |
| March 23, 2010 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | Ken, The point that I was making is even if you are not competing in the pool games if you win the tourney your team is moving up. Thanks Harry |
