top of page

Embarking on a Computerized Rating System (CRS):

The computerized rating system pilot, led by Kevin Hillstrom, has proven to be a resounding success! The board recognizes the valuable role that a computerized rating system can play in our club, particularly in determining changes in player ratings.

This system significantly reduces or eliminates the subjectivity inherent in traditional rating methods. Under this new approach, your rating will be exclusively determined by your on-court performance. This shift in rating methodology will not only provide a fairer assessment but also alleviate the time burden on volunteer raters, enabling them to fully enjoy their pickleball participation.

For those interested in reviewing Kevin's weekly insights following each week of play, you can access them on our club website. CRS Blog



Plan A: Initially, we considered using DUPR as our club's computerized rating system. However, we have encountered two significant issues with DUPR.

  1. They modified the algorithm twice during our pilot phase. At one point, all new players were set at a 3.5 rating. This approach proved ineffective for our context, and DUPR itself also recognized the flaw, subsequently revising their algorithm to determine initial player ratings.

  2. DUPR's strength lies in its all-encompassing nature, incorporating external tournament play, internal club events, and member-organized recreational matches to determine player levels. Nonetheless, we encountered a notable concern among our 200+ tournament participants. Many were hesitant to blend a rating obtained from outside bracketed tournament play with club games that were not categorized by age or skill groups.


Hence, we have decided to rule out DUPR for the present time.

Plan B: We became aware in spring that our current software vendor, CourtReserve, is developing a rating algorithm. This has the potential to be a game-changer, offering an integrated rating system that streamlines event management and administration. However, our enthusiasm has tempered as summer progresses, given the lack of a definite timeline from CourtReserve for the rollout of their algorithm.

In essence, we are adopting a wait-and-see approach. Once the algorithm is launched, we will rigorously assess its compatibility with our club's requirements.

Plan C: We consider ourselves fortunate to have had Kevin Hillstrom lead our pilot initiative. Kevin's character and expertise are impeccable, and he possesses an intrinsic understanding of data. He has designed an algorithm dubbed KPR (Kevin’s Pickleball Rating), modeled after the UTPR algorithm—an established tournament rating system used by the USAP for sanctioned tournaments, an arena many of our members are well-acquainted with.

Kevin diligently reported each participant's KPR following every week of play in the pilot phase. These reports vividly demonstrated the fluid nature of player ratings. For those intrigued by the pilot's outcomes, you can find detailed summaries in our CRS blog via the provided link.

To sum up, KPR emerges as the most viable alternative, and our club has opted to implement this algorithm for our computerized rating system launch. While we maintain an open stance toward assessing any noteworthy algorithms that cross our path, our current plan with KPR is firmly established. Kevin will continue to report player KPRs on a weekly basis, maintaining the transparent approach we established during the pilot phase.

bottom of page