Are Combined Ratings Fair in Mixed Doubles Pickleball?

Why Are Mixed Doubles Tiered by Combined Ratings (and Is It Fair?)

A Competitive Structure with a Controversial Balance

In competitive pickleball, particularly at the amateur and club levels, organizing fair and balanced matches is a logistical and philosophical challenge. Nowhere is this more debated than in mixed doubles, where men and women play side by side. Many tournaments and leagues use combined player ratings to create divisions—placing teams based on the average of both players’ skill levels. But while this method aims for simplicity and equity, it’s not without critics.

Players often ask: Is this approach really fair? Does it benefit balanced teams? Or does it allow strategic pairings that create lopsided matches?

Understanding why combined ratings are used—and whether they succeed at achieving fairness—requires examining not just the numbers, but the dynamics of mixed doubles itself.

What Are Combined Ratings in Mixed Doubles?

In pickleball, players are rated using a numerical system (typically 2.0 to 6.0), representing their skill level. These ratings can be self-assessed, club-assigned, or formally calculated by software like DUPR (Dynamic Universal Pickleball Rating) or USAPA ratings.

In combined rating formats, a team’s entry division is determined by adding the two players’ individual ratings together. For example:

A 4.0 male and 3.0 female partner would compete in the 7.0 mixed division.

Two 3.5 players would also play in the 7.0 division.

The idea is that the sum total of skill represents the team's strength. This system is used in many amateur tournaments across the United States, especially when organizing large brackets with minimal seeding.

Why Tournament Organizers Use This System

Simplicity and Scalability

Combined ratings allow for quick bracket creation, especially in tournaments with high registration. Organizers don’t need to verify nuanced matchups—they simply group teams based on a fixed threshold (6.0, 6.5, 7.0, etc.).

Encourages Balanced Pairings

By capping divisions by team total, the system discourages the stacking of strong players with weak ones. Ideally, both players contribute meaningfully to success.

Accommodates Varied Pools

In mixed doubles, there may be a disparity in player numbers across gender lines. Combined ratings help smooth uneven entries, ensuring enough teams per bracket.

Why Some Players Say It’s Unfair

Despite its practicality, the combined rating method isn’t universally loved—particularly by players who feel it obscures real differences in ability and matchup dynamics.

1. Skewed Pairings Can Dominate

One of the most common criticisms is that a high-rated male paired with a low-rated female can dominate certain divisions. This is especially noticeable in divisions like 7.0, where a 4.5/2.5 team could outplay a balanced 3.5/3.5 team despite sharing a combined rating.

Because the male player is often targeted less in mixed play—whether due to power differences or court positioning—this team might consistently win, even if the partner contributes minimally. The same criticism applies in reverse, though it occurs less frequently due to gender trends in competitive entries.

2. Disparity in Role Distribution

Mixed doubles strategy often leads to asymmetrical court roles. Male players (in heterosexual pairings) are more likely to be assigned center court responsibilities, control net play, and take more aggressive shots. If one player is significantly stronger, they may carry the team regardless of combined rating.

3. Inconsistency Across Tournaments

Not all tournaments apply combined ratings the same way. Some enforce maximum individual rating caps, others don’t. As a result, teams with identical combined scores may still vary widely in ability.

Alternative Systems and Their Trade-Offs

Some tournaments are experimenting with other structures to address perceived imbalances.

Individual Cap Systems: Teams must fit a combined rating and neither player can exceed a certain threshold (e.g., 7.0 combined, no player over 4.0). This prevents a 5.0/2.0 team from dominating.

Weighted Rating Systems: Assign different value to players based on position, performance, or historical results. Though more accurate, it complicates scheduling and bracket design.

Self-Selection with Oversight: Allow teams to choose their division, but enforce post-match promotion/demotion based on performance. This works in leagues but is harder to execute in one-off events.

Each of these systems seeks fairness, but no model is perfect. The challenge lies in balancing efficiency, equity, and participation.

What the Data Suggests

Anecdotally and through analysis of match results, most dominant teams in combined rating formats feature one above-average player paired with a partner who can simply keep the ball in play. While this doesn't always guarantee victory—especially against well-coordinated teams—it highlights how combined ratings may not fully reflect real match impact.

Moreover, as the sport grows and skill levels broaden, combined ratings that worked in small communities may struggle under national-level competition.

Is It Fair? The Real Answer May Be Contextual

For casual, club-level tournaments, combined ratings are often the best fit. They allow for flexibility, make it easier to partner up, and keep brackets moving. At these levels, players are typically more focused on experience than medals.

For serious, high-stakes tournaments, the fairness debate intensifies. Competitive players may invest time and money to travel, train, and perform. In these cases, a one-dimensional rating system may fall short of capturing team dynamics.

How Players Can Adapt

If you’re entering a mixed doubles event under a combined rating system:

Choose a partner with complementary skills, not just a convenient number. Communication, movement, and decision-making matter more than rating alone.

Practice as a team. Mixed doubles has unique strategies—especially around court positioning and role-sharing.

Understand the landscape. If you know your division allows for wide rating gaps, adjust your strategy accordingly. You may need to prepare for opponents with unbalanced but highly effective pairings.

Conclusion: A Useful Tool, Not a Perfect One

Combined ratings in mixed doubles aren’t inherently unfair—but they’re imperfect. They simplify logistics and promote inclusivity, but they also open the door for teams that bend the numbers without breaking the rules. As the sport matures, ongoing refinement of rating systems will likely follow.

In the meantime, the best approach is to understand the format, plan around it, and compete with the same mindset that makes pickleball so popular in the first place: with focus, adaptability, and respect for the game.