Skip to how CourtRank works
Back to the lab
CourtRank

Your results. In context.

CourtRank is a rating system for pickleball. It considers results, score margins and the strength of partners and opponents to estimate how players compare.

Developed in rotating-partner leagues, it helps organizers make grouping and seeding decisions—and gives players a clearer picture of where they stand within their competition.

Meet the players

01 · The idea

Better games start with better matchups.

We wanted players in games they enjoy, against opponents who challenge them and help them improve.

A win-loss record only tells part of the story. CourtRank adapts the Elo rating model for pickleball, considering score margins and the strength of partners and opponents.

One game, in context

Same win.
Different context.

Tina and Liam are both rated 1,500. Beating a stronger team earns them more than the same win against an evenly rated team.

The score matters, too.

Against the same opponents, an 11–3 win produces a larger gain than 11–9. CourtRank considers both the result and how close the game was.

Starting ratings
Tina1,500
Liam1,500
Team CR
1,500

Three possible results

  1. Even matchup

    Opponent average
    1,500
    Win
    11–9
    CR gain each
    +16.5

  2. Same win. Stronger opponents.

    Opponent average
    1,600
    Win
    11–9
    CR gain each
    +28.6

  3. Same opponents. Wider win.

    Opponent average
    1,600
    Win
    11–3
    CR gain each
    +36.2

As the games add up

Responsive at first.
Steadier with experience.

Early results move a rating more. As games accumulate, each new result has less influence—but the rating keeps adapting.

That same 11–9 underdog win earns each player +28.6 initially, or +18.0 after 20 recorded games, with everything else unchanged.

02 · On court

Three players.
Different journeys.

Two stories from a summer ladder. One from a single-night tournament. Each shows a different way a rating can help make sense of competition.

Joey Ridos

From 33rd seed to third in the playoffs.

Pandora Park Summer Program July–August 2026

Seeded 33rd, Joey won twelve of his first thirteen games. His CourtRank rose from 1,300 to 1,534 after two appearances, accounting for the competition behind those wins.

Each move into a stronger group brought a new test. By his third appearance, he was playing on the top courts. He went on to finish third overall in the playoffs.

Overall playoff finish
3rd
CourtRank (CR)

Joey Ridos’s recorded CourtRank, rounded for display. Seed: 1,300 CR. Week 1: 1,388 CR. Week 2: 1,534 CR. Week 3: 1,534 CR, did not play. Week 4: 1,551 CR. Week 5: 1,531 CR. Week 6: 1,554 CR. Week 7: 1,531 CR. Week 8: 1,530 CR. Both charts use the same 1,200 to 1,600 CR scale. The line uses all recorded weekly ratings, not ladder positions or playoff places.

Explore the summer program

Sue Caithness

Earning her way back.

Pandora Park Summer Program July–August 2026

A 0–7 opening week dropped Sue’s CourtRank from 1,380 to 1,223 and sent her from the top group to Group 3. Eleven wins in her next thirteen games brought her rating back to 1,389.

As Sue progressed through stronger groups, CourtRank weighed her new results against the strength of her partners and opponents. She returned to the top courts for the Week 7 playoffs.

Returned for Week 7 playoffs
Top courts
CourtRank (CR)

Sue Caithness’s recorded CourtRank, rounded for display. Seed: 1,380 CR. Week 1: 1,223 CR. Week 2: 1,317 CR. Week 3: 1,317 CR, did not play. Week 4: 1,389 CR. Week 5: 1,405 CR. Week 6: 1,434 CR. Week 7: 1,437 CR. Week 8: 1,422 CR. Both charts use the same 1,200 to 1,600 CR scale. The line uses all recorded weekly ratings, not ladder positions or playoff places.

Explore the summer program

Josh Chang

Another way into the playoffs.

Pro-Am 4.5–5.5 Tournament September 13, 2026

Josh finished fifth in his pool with four wins from seven games, outside the automatic qualifying places. His CourtRank rose from 1,764 to 1,793—the largest gain among the 25 players competing for the wildcard. That change accounted for partners, opponents and score margins, rather than wins alone.

Under the event’s wildcard rule, that gain earned Josh the final playoff place—and he went on to reach the semifinals.

Earned the final wildcard place
+29 CR

CourtRank · Pool stage

Starting rating 1,764 to post-pool rating 1,793

Why Josh received the wildcard

The top three in each pool qualified automatically. Among the remaining 25 players, the final place went to the largest increase from starting CourtRank to the frozen post-pool rating.

Selected wildcard candidates · pool-stage CourtRank
PlayerStartAfterGain
Josh Chang1,7641,793+29
Jeff Lee1,6791,694+15
John Dixon1,8131,823+10
Brad Dueck1,8381,847+9

Brad finished above Josh in the same pool, also at 4–3, and kept a higher rating. Josh gained more relative to his starting point. That—not a claim that he was the stronger player—met the wildcard rule.

Josh remained 20th by CourtRank before and after pool play. His +29 was a change in rating points, not places. Playoff games did not enter this calculation.

Explore the tournament results

These are recorded 2026 results, calculated under the rules and rating model used at the time.

03 · In practice

Different formats.
Real competition.

We’ve used CourtRank in a summer ladder, a multi-round scramble and an elite tournament. Each put ratings to work differently—from forming the next group to awarding a playoff wildcard.

Season-long ladder
Updated ratings helped form weekly groups as players returned, missed sessions or joined.
Pandora Park · 8 weeks
Multi-round scramble
Post-round ratings informed regrouping between rounds.
Showdown at Zero Zero · 3 rounds
Pools to playoffs
Rating gain determined one wildcard alongside automatic qualification through pool results.
Elite Showcase Showdown

CourtRank provides the rating. Organizers decide how it shapes their competition.

Built by Third Shot Labs

Let’s talk about
your competition.

Running a league or planning an event? Let’s talk about how CourtRank could help you create better matchups for your players.

Talk to the lab