Final Results (as of Mar 5, 2020)

Team # of Matches Played Average Points/Match Jan 18, 2020 Feb 1, 2018 Feb 8, 2020 Feb 22, 2020 Feb 29, 2020
SPOR 4 68 67 57 79 68 DNP
MISC 3 66 DNP 70 DNP 64 65
TCWO 3 62 66 DNP 52 DNP 67

* DNP = Did Not Play

Final Player Ratings (as of Mar 5, 2020)

How are Player Ratings calculated?

Player Team Singles Matches Played Doubles Matches Played Rating
Singles Doubles
Current Average Current Average
Othman Ennaciri MISC 3 3 548 549 547 551
Fadi Sallit SPOR 4 4 551 542 524 525
Steve Wechsler SPOR 4 4 529 526 524 524
Andrew Rowe SPOR 4 4 519 522 522 526
Kevin McIlvenna TCWO 4 3 514 516 523 521
Arun Tosing MISC 2 1 519 513
Jeff Henkelman TCWO 3 3 504 501 509 505
Andreas Weigel TCWO 3 2 470 471 475 476
Ronan Boyd MISC 5 4 473 468 475 470
Karim Belkhir MISC 4 3 466 467 475 472
Stevan Szonjic TCWO 3 3 463 466 465 465
Eric Khaiat SPOR 3 3 439 443 434 441

January 18, 2020

TCWO SPOR TB #1 TB #2 TB #3 Retire? Comments League Pts
Singles 1 v 1 Kevin McIlvenna Fadi Sallit 5 13 11 13 9 13 7 15
Singles 2 v 2 Jeff Henkelman Steve Wechsler 10 13 13 10 10 13 11 13
Singles 3 v 3 Andreas Weigel Eric Khaiat 13 6 13 10 13 11 15 8
Singles 4 v 4 Stevan Szonjic Andrew Rowe 10 13 5 13 13 11 9 13
Doubles 1&2 v 1&2 Kevin McIlvenna Fadi Sallit 17 6 12 17 14 17 11 11
Jeff Henkelman Steve Wechsler
Doubles 3&4 v 3&4 Andreas Weigel Eric Khaiat 15 17 17 6 17 5 13 7
Stevan Szonjic Andrew Rowe
League Total Points 66 67

Feb 1, 2020

SPOR MISC TB #1 TB #2 TB #3 Retire? Comment League Pts
Singles 1 v 1 Andrew Rowe Othman Ennaciri 9 13 6 13 9 13 8 15
Singles 2 v 2 Fadi Sallit Arun Tosing 13 4 13 4 13 12 Arun subbing for Ahmed 15 6
Singles 3 v 3 Steve Wechsler Ronan Boyd 10 13 13 2 13 4 13 6
Singles 4 v 4 Eric Khaiat Karim Belkhir 5 13 3 13 7 13 4 15
Doubles 1&2 v 1&2 Andrew Rowe Othman Ennaciri 6 17 13 17 11 17 6 15
Fadi Sallit Arun Tosing
Doubles 3&4 v 3&4 Steve Wechsler Ronan Boyd 15 17 17 12 13 17 11 13
Eric Khaiat Karim Belkhir
League Total Points 57 70

Feb 8, 2020

SPOR TCWO TB #1 TB #2 TB #3 Retire? Comment League Pts
Singles 1 v 1 Steve Wechsler Sean James 13 8 4 13 13 4 11 8
Singles 2 v 2 Andrew Rowe Kevin McIlvenna 5 13 12 13 13 10 10 13
Singles 3 v 3 Fadi Sallit Jeff Henkelman 13 0 13 4 13 7 15 3
Singles 4 v 4 Ronan Boyd Stevan Szonjic 13 8 11 13 13 12 13 11
Doubles 1&2 v 1&2 Steve Wechsler Sean James 17 12 17 12 17 11 15 8
Andrew Rowe Kevin McIlvenna
Doubles 3&4 v 3&4 Fadi Sallit Jeff Henkelman 17 11 17 16 17 12 15 9
Ronan Boyd Stevan Szonjic
League Total Points 79 52

Feb 15, 2020

TCWO MISC TB #1 TB #2 TB #3 Retire? Comment League Pts
Singles 1 v 1 Kevin McIlvenna Arun Tosing 7 13 10 13 10 13 8 15
Singles 2 v 2 Andreas Weigel Ronan Boyd 9 13 8 13 10 13 8 15
Singles 3 v 3 Jean-Paul Pham Karim Belkhir 13 11 13 8 13 4 15 6
Singles 4 v 4 0 0
Doubles 1&2 v 1&2 0 0
Doubles 3&4 v 3&4 0 0
League Total Points 31 36

Note: only singles matches were played on Feb 15, 2020. No doubles.

February 22, 2020

MISC SPOR TB #1 TB #2 TB #3 Retire? Comment League Pts
Singles 1 v 1 Othman Ennaciri Fadi Sallit 3 13 10 13 13 11 9 13
Singles 2 v 2 Andrew  Clark Steve Wechsler 9 13 5 13 3 13 5 15
Singles 3 v 3 Karim Belkhir Andrew Rowe 12 13 6 13 3 13 7 15
Singles 4 v 4 Ronan Boyd Eric Khaiat 13 12 13 6 13 5 15 7
Doubles 1&2 v 1&2 Othman Ennaciri Fadi Sallit 17 13 17 7 17 12 15 7
Andrew  Clark Steve Wechsler
Doubles 3&4 v 3&4 Karim Belkhir Andrew Rowe 14 17 17 12 17 13 13 11
Ronan Boyd Eric Khaiat
League Total Points 64 68

February 29, 2020

MISC TCWO TB #1 TB #2 TB #3 Retire? Comment League Pts
Singles 1 v 1 Othman Ennaciri Kevin McIlvenna 13 9 13 8 13 6 15 7
Singles 2 v 2 Ahmed Aref Jeff Henkelman 1 13 4 13 9 13 4 15
Singles 3 v 3 Karim Belkhir Andreas Weigel 13 8 5 13 11 13 9 12
Singles 4 v 4 Ronan Boyd Stevan Szonjic 13 7 12 13 13 9 14 10
Doubles 1&2 v 1&2 Othman Ennaciri Kevin McIlvenna 11 17 15 17 17 11 10 12
Ahmed Aref Jeff Henkelman
Doubles 3&4 v 3&4 Karim Belkhir Andreas Weigel 14 17 17 13 17 15 13 11
Ronan Boyd Stevan Szonjic
League Total Points 65 67

How are Player Ratings calculated?

The rating system is based on a logarithmic scale, with a 50 point rating difference equivalent to a factor of 2 difference in points expected to be won.  If player “A” has a rating of 300, and player “B” has a rating of 250, the difference of 50 indicates that player “A” is expected to  win 2 points for every 1 point won by player “B”.  The logarithmic scale means that a rating difference of 100 points is equivalent to a factor of 4 difference in point ratio.

How Rating Changes are Calculated

After a match, the rating change for each match is calculated by the computer (spreadsheet).  For each match, the ratio of points won by the each player is used to calculate the corresponding rating difference for that match.  This rating difference is compared with the actual rating difference between the players.  The difference in these rating is multiplied by 15% (an empirical fudge factor) to arrive at the assigned rating change (a maximum rating change of 10 is allowed in a match to avoid wild swings in ratings, and for players with a rating difference greater than 50, an adjustment is made as described below).  The rating of the player who won more points than expected goes up, and the other player’s rating goes down (rating is conserved).

If the rating difference between players is greater than 50,  the following adjustment is made to the calculated rating change: a) if the rating difference is 100 or greater, no rating change is allowed; b) if the rating difference is between 51 and 99, the calculated rating change is adjusted by the factor ((100 – rating difference) / 50).  This adjustment is applied to avoid large rating changes when players of significantly different ability play each other.

For example, consider 2 players with a rating difference of 50.  They play a tiebreak to 16 points.  If the higher rated player wins 16-4 the rating changes are calculated as follows:

  1. In the game the higher rated player won 16 points, and the lower rated player won 4 points.  The point ratio is therefore 4:1.  This point ratio translates to a game rating difference of 100 points in the logarithmic rating scale (see “What the Rating Mean”, above).
  2. The rating change     = 0.15 * (100 (game rating difference) – 50 (rating difference between players)) =   0.15 * 50      = 7.5.
  3. The winning players rating goes up 7.5, and the losing players rating goes down by 7.5.

History of the Rating System

Bob Donders developed this rating system in the 1990’s for use at the Deep River squash club, and it was used it for over a decade for a group of 20-30 players that played each week in an informal round-robin. The players were split into 3 groups (A, B, C) according to their ratings. For each match the rating systems was used to adjust the starting scores so that the outcomes were always close. For example, if Player A was rated 50 points higher than Player B (so Player A is expected to win twice as many points as Player B), and the game is played to 15 points, then the starting score would be -5 to +5. Player A would need to win 20 points to win the game, which is twice as many as Player B (who would only need to win 10 points). The system worked out really well.