Sunday Social – Player Grading Policy

1 day ago

2 min read

Purpose

This policy ensures a fair, transparent, and consistent approach to grading players for Sunday Social.

The grading rubric provides a framework for assessing playing level where objective ranking data is unavailable, while recognising the Committee’s role in final decision-making.

Grading Methodology

1. Objective Data First

Where available, a player’s UTR or GLTA ranking will be the primary determinant of their grade using the below matrix, adopted from the GLTA.

Social Grading	GLTA	UTR (100% reliable)
🔴 Red	Open	7.0+
🟠 Orange	A	5.5 – 7.0
🟡 Yellow	B	4.0 – 5.5
🟢 Green	C	2.5 – 4.0
🔵 Blue	D	1 – 2.5

2. Grading Rubric

A Grading Rubric shall be applied where no UTR/GLTA ranking exists, or where rankings are not reliable indicators of current playing ability.
The rubric is used guide observation and grading but is not determinative on its own.
The rubric must be completed by a Grader who is already graded at the Target Level or above. For example, if a player is seeking a Target Level of Orange, the Grader should be an Orange level player (based on objective data).
To complete the rubric, the Grader must observe the player over a set consisting of at least 4 games, where the other players are graded at the Target Level.
The Grader may be a Committee member, or a delegate appointed by the Committee.

3. Review and Approval

Completed rubrics must be submitted to the Committee, which will make the final decision as a group. No person shall have authority determine gradings individually.
The Committee may consider additional relevant information (e.g., player history, feedback from team captains, observed performance in competitions).

Grading Reviews

4. Regular six-month updates

All player grades will be reviewed against current UTR/GLTA rankings every six months.
Players with no reliable UTR/GLTA rankings will remain at their existing Social Grading unless an Ad Hoc Review is requested.

5. Ad Hoc Review

Players may request an ad hoc review of their grade where their UTR/GLTA ranking has increased outside of the regular six-month update cycle, or where UTR/GLTA data is unavailable or unreliable.
A player may request no more than one ad hoc review every six months.
Ad hoc reviews will be conducted in accordance with the Grading Methodology.

6. Fairness and Transparency

The grading process must be applied consistently and transparently.
Players will be advised of their grading and, if requested, provided with feedback based on the rubric and Committee’s decision.