Sunday Social – Player Grading Policy

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.