Think about becoming a member of a event that you simply consider has been organized for gamers at your ability stage (e.g. particularly for intermediate stage). You register, you pay the becoming a member of price, and also you practice. You hope for the most effective. You go on the market, play your absolute best, hoping to get to the rostrum.
However the dream ends since you get outclassed by somebody who seems means higher than the event’s ability stage requirement. You give that participant the advantage of the doubt, solely to see that very same participant flip up time and again at decrease ability stage tournaments regularly strolling away with golds and podiums.
You ask your self, how is it that regardless of all these wins, these gamers haven’t progressed to a higher-level class and are nonetheless in a position to qualify for decrease ability stage tournaments?
If you happen to’ve been across the sport lengthy sufficient, you understand what sandbagging is already. It refers back to the deliberate manipulation or suppression of 1’s DUPR score to be able to qualify for tournaments with score caps. By getting into lower-rated divisions, a participant good points a aggressive benefit over opponents who’re genuinely rated at that stage, usually rising their possibilities of successful matches, titles, and prize cash.
The issue is that throughout the event taking part in group, gamers know who these Buayas are, and quietly complain amongst themselves after they see their names in yet one more newbie’s event, however no-one appears ready to name them out. Match organisers are conscious and pissed off, however generally uncertain tips on how to deal with the issue, and different gamers silently suffers
So PNA determined to look into this additional and assess whether or not that is actually occurring. We chosen some names that saved on cropping up within the “eco-system” chatter as “Buayas” to see if the stats backed up the rumors.
We should always state that what follows is an evaluation of some participant’s event efficiency mixed with a overview of their DUPR rankings. PNA will not be making a judgement on whether or not these particular gamers are deliberately dishonest, we’re solely presenting the info to permit readers to attract their very own conclusions.
After cautious consideration PNA has elected NOT to call the gamers as a result of we felt we couldn’t justify solely naming three when there are such a lot of others that exhibit the identical actions which in our view appear to be DUPR manipulation. It will not have been truthful to single out and title simply three.
Nonetheless, we do hope these gamers learn this text and if our suspicions are right, that they realise that their actions will not be going unnoticed.
Instance 1 – 32-Yr-Previous Feminine from Petaling Jaya
This woman often performs blended doubles and her title was talked about in a number of discussions that PNA performed with gamers, event officers, and event organisers. These discussions raised questions inside the group about score patterns and event efficiency.
PNA is not alleging that this participant has engaged in dishonest, misconduct, or intentional manipulation of DUPR rankings. Our overview is proscribed to inspecting publicly obtainable DUPR information and evaluating it with event outcomes to find out whether or not the group hypothesis surrounding the time period “buaya” has any observable foundation.
Any observations made right here replicate evaluation and commentary, not factual conclusions about Participant Identify’s intentions or integrity.
A overview of her outcomes on Sportsync and her DUPR play reveals what in our opinion is sample which may very well be interpreted as manipulation.
Outcomes present competitors play in <3.5 DUPR tournaments with wins and podiums together with prize cash, then instantly following the purpose when her DUPR rose above 3.5, we see a sequence “social DUPR video games” seem on her DUPR profile, performed over a single session. Throughout this social session she loses sufficient video games to deliver her DUPR down again beneath 3.5. From our perspective, these losses within the social video games look like in distinction together with her leads to official event play.
We additionally see as soon as her DUPR comes right down to beneath 3.5 she then continues competing in beneath 3.5 class official tournaments. This sample has occurred greater than as soon as in her DUPR historical past. It does appear that the one time these “social video games” seem in her profile is instantly following her DUPR rising above 3.5 and the impression is to deliver it again under. That is NOT proof of intentional dishonest, however in our view it actually warrants deeper investigation and we perceive why this can be fueling group hypothesis.
This participant has had a podium end in 13 of the 20 tournaments she has joined to this point, with six gold medals, 4 silver medals, a 107-30 won-loss report general, and a powerful 78.1% win ratio. She has additionally earned upwards of RM10,000 from her podium finishes mixed.
These display pictures are taken from the gamers Public DUPR web page and show what now we have described above. You possibly can see the purpose at which the DUPR strikes from above 3.5 to under (picture on the left) and the Social DUPR video games which deliver the rating down (picture on the precise).
Instance 2 – 21 Yr outdated Male from Selangor
This man performs each blended and males’s doubles, his title was talked about in a number of discussions that PNA performed with gamers, event officers, and event organisers. These discussions raised questions inside the group about score patterns and event efficiency.
PNA is not alleging that this participant has engaged in dishonest, misconduct, or intentional manipulation of DUPR rankings. Our overview is proscribed to inspecting publicly obtainable DUPR information and evaluating it with event outcomes to find out whether or not the group hypothesis surrounding the time period “buaya” has any observable foundation.
Any observations made right here replicate evaluation and commentary, not factual conclusions about Participant Identify’s intentions or integrity.
The participant’s DUPR score reached 3.8 on August 11, just for that score to fall beneath 3.5 on August 15. Evaluation of his DUPR historical past reveals {that a} two social DUPR session performed on the thirteenth and 15th of August was chargeable for the drop we describe above.
Following this drop, he was in a position to go on a run of Beneath 3.5 tournaments racking up a number of wins and gathering prize cash alongside the way in which. From our perspective, these losses within the DUPR social video games look like in distinction along with his leads to official event play.
These display pictures (under) are taken from the gamers Public DUPR web page and show what now we have described above. You possibly can see the purpose at which his DUPR strikes from above 3.8 to under 3.5 (picture on the left) and the a collection of Social DUPR video games which deliver the rating down (picture on the precise).
In all on the time of writing, now we have seen that this participant has gained no less than 5 gold medals in 15 tournaments, with a won-loss report of 65-16 and a win ratio of 80.2%. WE have been in a position to establish no less than RM7800 in prize cash that he has collected.
None of that is proof of intentional dishonest. In our view it displays related patterns that we noticed within the different instance’s DUPR historical past and once more we really feel that his DUPR historical past does appear to replicate the group hypothesis.
Instance 3 – 25 Yr Previous Male from Selangor
This participant competes in each blended and males’s doubles and his title was talked about in a number of discussions that PNA performed with gamers, event officers, and event organisers. These discussions raised questions inside the group about score patterns and event efficiency.
PNA is not alleging that this participant has engaged in dishonest, misconduct, or intentional manipulation of DUPR rankings. Our overview is proscribed to inspecting publicly obtainable DUPR information and evaluating it with event outcomes to find out whether or not the group hypothesis surrounding the time period “buaya” has any observable foundation.
Any observations made right here replicate evaluation and commentary, not factual conclusions about Participant Identify’s intentions or integrity.
The participant has solely not too long ago attained a DUPR score that exceeds 3.5, Wanting again in his DUPR historical past we see that again in July 2025 when his DUPR started an upward trajectory, he performed a DUPR social session which considerably lowered his DUPR score from 3.2 to beneath 2.9, following which he instantly performed in a Novice (beneath DUPR 3.0) event coming 2nd. He then went on to play a sequence of intermediate tournaments.
These display pictures (under) are taken from the gamers Public DUPR web page and show what now we have described above. You possibly can see the purpose at which his DUPR strikes from above 3.2 to under 2.9 (picture on the left) and the a collection of Social DUPR video games which deliver the rating down (picture on the precise)
On the time of writing, now we have recognized that in intermediate stage tournaments he has gained no less than 9 gold medals in 16 tournaments, with a won-loss report of 111-22, a win ratio of 83.5%, and now we have recognized prize earnings of no less than RM9,900 that he has collected.
Once more the DUPR historical past is NOT proof that that the participant has engaged in dishonest or intentional manipulation. However the modus operandi does in our view look like much like the opposite examples now we have showcased.
Over this run this participant bagged 9 gold medals in 16 tournaments, with a won-loss report of 111-22, a win ratio of 83.5%, and prize earnings of no less than RM9,900 to date.
Regardless of the three people now we have highlighted, its usually accepted throughout the entire Malaysia pickleball event taking part in group that Buayas exist and it’s a big difficulty that extends to many extra gamers.
Root of the Downside
At its core the Buaya drawback is one among particular person moral failure and lack of an ethical compass.
The purpose of Novice and Intermediate competitors is to offer alternative and expertise to these up-and-coming gamers who aspire to achieve the open ranks and play on the larger stage.
Getting an opportunity to compete towards different gamers who’re genuinely on the similar stage offers these real novices and intermediates an opportunity of tasting some success, constructing motivation and confidence and constructing a basis to finally compete on the larger stage.
The DUPR cheats whom exploit the system in pursuit of coining in on a profitable facet hustle are selfishly undermining the enjoyment, enjoyable and good spirits of the remainder of the pickleball group who’re in it for the precise causes.
The issue right here is that DUPR sandbagging isn’t only a case of gaming the system. It’s really corrosive to the game. It slowly erodes belief within the aggressive ecosystem of pickleball in Malaysia, which remains to be very a lot in its progress section even with all of the leaps and bounds it has made through the years. For a lot of amateurs, these occasions will not be nearly medals or cash, they’re milestones, validation of enchancment, and motivation to remain within the sport. Sandbagging poisons all of that.
On the grassroots stage, its impression is rapid and private. Reliable 3.0–3.5 gamers who repeatedly run into buayas start to query their very own potential. Losses that ought to be studying experiences as an alternative really feel futile. Some cease becoming a member of tournaments altogether. Others deliberately underplay themselves simply to “survive” in brackets they consider are already compromised. In that sense, sandbagging turns into contagious. As soon as gamers consider the system is damaged, moral behaviour feels non-obligatory relatively than important.
The difficulty can be rubbing off onto event organisers whom rely closely—generally solely—on DUPR numbers and achieve this with out deeper verification, as a result of they lack time and useful resource to test on each participant. However the wider taking part in group is beginning to look to event organisesr to do extra to fight the problem
“Gamers can manipulate DUPR score nonetheless they need, however the root trigger remains to be right down to the organisers the place they didn’t do their due diligence in checking and filter out those that don’t qualify for that individual class,” commented Jensen Puah, a member of the favored Pickleball Malaysia Fb group established by Edward Chen. “When the enforcement is weak from the organisers, the culprits will benefit from it. Pair it with a excessive prize, extra of those manipulative gamers or the domestically known as ‘buaya’ will swarm the competitors. A few of them even make a residing out of it. All in all, if the event set a sure algorithm (particularly for decrease classes), and comply with a strict filtering course of in permitting certified gamers to enter, we gained’t be having this dialogue.”
Then once more, being event a organizer will be a thankless job—and sandbagging has additional sophisticated issues. A number of Malaysian event organisers, talking informally, acknowledge that rating-based occasions have grow to be tougher to police, particularly with rising prize swimming pools and competitors changing into extra cutthroat.
Issues finally circle again to the DUPR, which trumpets itself because the gold normal for pickleball rankings. Nonetheless, its susceptibility to manipulation is more and more troublesome to disregard. The system struggles to tell apart between real inconsistency and strategic dropping, particularly when “social DUPR video games” are handled with the identical mathematical weight as aggressive matches. In apply, this creates a loophole large sufficient to drive a doubles group by means of. Till DUPR meaningfully differentiates between match contexts or limits how a lot a score can drop inside quick home windows, sandbaggers will proceed to sport the mathematics.
There may be additionally a cultural dimension at play. The informal acceptance of the time period “buaya” is telling. What ought to be an accusation is usually delivered jokingly, even admiringly. Successful, in spite of everything, remains to be successful. Prize cash remains to be prize cash. In some circles, being “good sufficient” to take advantage of the system is seen much less as dishonest and extra as cleverness. That mindset, left unchecked, normalises deception and shifts blame away from these actively undermining truthful competitors.
What to Do About Sandbagging: Bag the Buayas?
The query then is that this: What will be achieved?
Like all different issues, options exist to counter sandbaggers and kill off these buayas. However these options require collective will. Fixing this issues finally begins with the organisers, who want to begin implementing stricter eligibility guidelines, corresponding to utilizing peak DUPR rankings inside a rolling time window relatively than present rankings alone. In different phrases, organisers have to be extra vigilant to the place transparency is upheld, DUPR rankings are scrutinised, apparent volatility triggers handbook overview, and repeat offenders are both reclassified or outright banned. from capped divisions.
To this finish, some organisers have begun introducing safeguards, corresponding to handbook opinions, observable ability assessments, or post-event reclassification. Others are contemplating hybrid approaches that mix DUPR rankings with organiser discretion.
An instance of the foregoing is Pickle Fest 2025. Upon saying the event, the organisers posted a “FAIR PLAY NOTICE” on the occasion’s official Fb web page that learn:
“Lately, we’ve seen an rising variety of so-called “Buaya” circumstances showing in numerous tournaments—gamers utilizing a number of DUPR accounts or pretend rankings to realize unfair benefits. This type of behaviour not solely damages the spirit of competitors but in addition harms the integrity and progress of our pickleball group.”
It additionally applied a zero-tolerance coverage for the next whereas enjoining gamers to “uphold honesty and sportsmanship” and inspiring them to report dishonest:
- Gamers with a number of DUPR accounts
- False or manipulated rankings
- Any try and misrepresent ability ranges
Gamers, too, have a task. Reporting suspicious patterns, refusing to normalise sandbagging behaviour, and supporting stricter guidelines—even when inconvenient—are all a part of defending the game. Silence solely advantages these exploiting the grey areas.
DUPR may, in concept, do higher as nicely. DUPR was designed to create a good, clear system that permits gamers of comparable ability ranges to compete towards one another. Match organisers depend on it to construction divisions, whereas gamers use it as a benchmark for enchancment and development. When the system works as supposed, it creates aggressive steadiness. When it’s exploited, that steadiness breaks down.
Clearly, some gamers have found out tips on how to exploit this technique, which seems to be open to manipulation to start with. The social video games, specifically, characterize a serious loophole that wants correction. Even its new algorithm, which DUPR says is best than earlier than, is exploitable, as gamers don’t must lose video games anymore as a result of underperforming will do the trick.
“The true difficulty utilizing DUPR in Malaysia is that its self filling, and this may be manipulated and open to abuse. Gamers’ dishonestly can enhance or decrease their scores with none verification by any authority,” noticed Ray Yussuf, a pickleball participant and member of the Vibrance Pickleball Group.
Then once more, bettering DUPR is past the attain of event organisers and pickleball teams all over the place. This is the reason, within the right here and now, it’s crucial that they work along with gamers and different pickleball stakeholders to determine methods to maintain buayas from undermining a rising group that thrives on togetherness even in competitors.
Does Malaysia Pickleball Affiliation Have a Position to Play Right here?
In our view that is an are that the Malaysia Pickleball Affiliation may assist to regulate, we aren’t certain of the true attain and bounds of what MPA is ready to do, however investigating “buaya’s” and probably banning them from MPA authorized tournaments for a time period, with a 2 or 3 strikes resulting in everlasting ban appears to be one thing they may look into.
Transferring ahead, as pickleball in Malaysia continues to develop, the integrity of competitors will matter greater than ever. Ranking techniques are instruments, not ensures. Making certain truthful play will rely on how nicely the group chooses to guard the spirit of the game alongside its speedy growth.
Finally, sandbagging is not only a technical drawback or a statistical quirk. It’s an integrity difficulty. Malaysian pickleball is at a crossroads: it might both develop right into a aggressive scene grounded in equity, or slide into one the place mistrust and cynicism dominate.
Holding the buayas accountable is barely step one. What issues extra is whether or not the system—and the group—has the resolve to empty the swamp by which they’re making an attempt to thrive.
