Penalty vs infraction

Question: During an infraction of the CRA rule, the team at fault is penalized. Why aren't the opponents rewarded for playing a match that was at fault? 

Answer: Without question, the CRA rule has to be respected. The total CRA per court has to be greater on the first and less as you go down the following courts. Even if the totals are 0.01 difference, the rule has to be respected. The errors are usually made by the captain or the coach and players unaware that this rule is broken. It is only after the event that the infraction is discovered. We believe these matches are played fairly and in good faith.

In 2014, the TFIM board of administrators decided to eliminate the reversing of matches that sometimes rewarded the opponents or didn't change anything because the courts at fault has loss. TFIM added a penalty on top of that. This was extremely uneven for an offense that was the same for all occasions. The CRA of the concerned players were affected and did not reflect the reality.

Since the 2014-15 season, a penalty of 2 points is added in the Standings of the team at fault and the players are not penalized. The CRA generated by the match reflects a match that was actually played in fairness. You have to realize that this error was not made willingly and since the players are not aware, cannot be penalized or matches awarded to their opponents.

How does the "CRA" formula work?

Whatever the level, the variations in the CRA factor per match are between 0,14 and 0,50 for a win and -0,14 & -0,50 for a loss.

The following include examples taken from level II where basic CRA factors are between 12,00 & 17,00 in the early season.

The formula generating a variation in the CRA factor has 2 parts: the probability of winning the match "Expected %" and the outcome of the games. As a first principle we want a fair game where the odds are 50-50. However, we all know a match is not always 50-50; this is the "EXP %" to win part. The second half of the CRA formula is directly related to the % of games won.

  • 1st half of the formula: regardless of the court, the CRA totals from both teams are subtracted from each other : EX 34.54 - 32.69 = 1.85. The table of EXP % * gives these pairs, 70% and 30% probabilities of winning. The team with a probability of 70% is supposed to win. For a win, the higher the Expected %, smaller is the increase in the CRA factor and the lower the Expected %, greater is the increase in the CRA factor. It's the opposite in a loss; the higher the probability, the greater is the decrease in the CRA factor and the lower the EXP % the smaller is the decrease in the CRA factor.
  • 2nd half of the formula takes into account the % of games won: EX: 6-4, 5-7, 6-3 gives 17 games for the winners and 14 games for the losers or 17/(17+14) = 55% versus 14/(17+14) = 45% of the games.

EXAMPLE: This 70-30 match with scores of 6-4, 5-7, 6-3 (55% & 45%) has 2 possible outcomes:

  • If the team with the 70% wins, the variation in the CRA factor is 0,22 and will be added to each winner's personal CRA factor.
    Calculations: 0,28# X (100% - 70%) + 0,25 ** X ( 55% of the games) = 0,084 + 0,1375 = 0,22. Therefore a decrease of -0,22 per player in the defeated team.
  • If the team with the 30% wins, the variation in the CRA factor is 0,33 added to each winner's personal CRA factor (-0,33 for the defeated team)
    Calculations: 0,28 X (100% - 30%) + 0,25 X (55% of the games) = 0,196 + 0,1375 = 0,33

As previously stated, the variations in the CRA factor per match are between 0,14 and 0,50 for a win and -0,14 & -0,50 for a loss.

  • 0,14 = a match won (7-6, 0-6, 7-6) by the team having 90% chance of winning
  • 0,50 = a match won (6-0, 6-0) by the team having 10% chance of winning
  • -0,14 = a match lost (6-7, 6-0, 6-7) by the team having 10% chance of winning
  • -0,50 = a match lost (0-6, 0-6) by the team having 90% chance of winning.
    *The EXPECTED % is a statistic worked out in an exponential table
    # 0,28 is a constant established by the CRA committee
    ** 0,25 is a constant established by the CRA committee

CRA committee report

For more on the CRA read the "Rapport du comité CRA" tabled on December 1, 2014 (in French only)

NB: amendement to the report tabled in December 2014:

While trying the new numbers we realized that the margin of "4" between 4 & 8, 8 & 12 etc.. was insufficient. It is more convenient to leave the initial extreme minimum of 2 and a margin of "5" per level. This leaves more room to manouvre within a team of 12 players. The particularities within the level 1 makes it difficult to not increase the extreme maximum.

for the 2015-16 season the CRA per level are:

  • Level IV: between 2 & 7
  • Level III: between 7 & 12
  • Level II: between 12 & 17
  • Level I: between 17 & 24

CRA vs MNP

CRA (rule 2.2.6) & MNP (rule 1.8).

The CRA (calculation for the respect of the alignment) and MNP (My Number of Point system) are two distinct formulas. CRA counts in all games played and generates without exception even during retired matches and substituting. The CRA can increase in a win and decrease in a loss. The MNP only adds up the wins and only increases with a win. Although the CRA and MNP give us an idea of the level of play of a player, the two are independent.