PDA

View Full Version : Is any 4.5 man capable of beating any TOP 100 WTA (except Justine), with ease?


ionutzakis
12-10-2007, 02:16 AM
I'm guessing yes. But did someone from this forum played and won against an actual TOP 100 WTA, and won... easily?

EDIT: to rephrase the question a bit, are ALL 4.5 man capable of beating any TOP 100 WTA (except Justine), with ease?

power_play21
12-10-2007, 02:25 AM
what? are you joking?

I REALLY think people underestimate these women.

theres a 14 year old girl who's a top junior where i live, and she can hang with the 5.0 club pro. IMAGINE A TOP 100 WOMEN IN THE WORLD. SHE CAN WOOP HIS SORRY BUT IN ONE SECOND.

im sorry, but that is a myth on these boards that is trylu getting quite annoying.

sure, some people say that they lose to college players. WERE TALKING 6.0 PLUS HERE.

these women hit hard and good dude. have you ever watched dementieva live? she hits harder than any guy i personally know.

THIS THREAD SUCKS BECAUSE: (Place X where applies)
[X] This topic did not need a separate thread
[X] Fake/duplicate account
[X] It asks when and/or will Nadal become #1 in the world
[X] It is a Nadal v Federer thread where making sense is prohibited
[X] It assumes Federer will forever be on top of the tennis world
[X] It is a lame troll attempt
[X] It is a “Threaten to leave” thread
[X] It over hypes players that don’t deserve it
[X] Original Poster's grammar makes me suspect the post was written by 4 year old
[X] It claims Player X career is over after 1 bad loss
[X] It tries to determine the best player ever (on any surface) for the 200th time
[X] It compares Graf and Seles, in any way.
[X] It asks when or if a young player will ever reach their potential after a totally expected loss
[X] It is a serious discussion of a exhibition match
[X] It proclaims a 16-18 year old's career is finished after a couple of first round losses
[X] It has the word Gilbert in the subject line
[X] It discusses doubles when its not a Davis Cup weekend
[X] It is a serious discussion of a clay clown's chances at a clay event or in an individual match against a competent clay player
[X] It is the annual thread where people complain about clay courters not showing up and embarrassing themselves on grass
[X] It is the annual thread where people complain about Americans not showing up in Monte Carlo
[X] It speculates whether player X is on dope without any evidence
[X] It asks/assumes Safin is finished in tennis after a totally expected few first round loss to the lcal baker in the first round of small tournament X
[X] Use the damn search engine
[X] It accuses the loser of choking when he did nothing of the sort
[X] It talks about fake injuries and/or fake injury time outs
[X] Cramp are called an injury
[X] BROKEN CAPS LOCK
[X] It claims females can be competitive with males in any form of tennis
[X] Wrong forum, eejit.
[X] It was created by a 13 year old desperate for attention
[X] It contains advice to a top ten pro player from a 3.0 with a losing record
[X] It predicts the winner of a tournament final based on a 'feeling'
[X] It's a 'Hey I'm back' thread after a) you were banned for a damn good reason or b) no one noticed you were gone or missed you.
[X] It's a duplicate thread started by someone who can't scroll one inch down the first page.
__________________

ionutzakis
12-10-2007, 02:37 AM
Yes this does need a separate thread because I've read on these boards that a senior exdivision playes was toying with a B.J.KING which was no 1 at that moment, like baggeled her.

And yes, numerous other posts keep on saying that any 5-5.5 player can beat any WTA ranked, so I took it a step further and went to the 4.5 level, no harm in that, is just a question, that's all, you don't have to put that ******** checklist everytime you don't like a thread, it's not like you are a moderator.

JonJon
12-10-2007, 02:45 AM
What planet are you on? A semi amateur 4.5 weekend warrior would not be able to beat a top 100 WTA who has spent most of their lives living and breathing tennis.

Tennis-Chris
12-10-2007, 02:56 AM
I'm guessing yes. But did someone from this forum played and won against an actual TOP 100 WTA, and won... easily?

EDIT: to rephrase the question a bit, are ALL 4.5 man capable of beating any TOP 100 WTA (except Justine), with ease?

You're Joking, Right? About five years ago I hit with a woman at my club who played #1 at University of Texas. At the time I played very competitively with an NTRP of 4.825 and I had my ***** thoroughly handed to me. Her serve was consistently between 90 and 110 mph with a lot of movement. Groundstrokes had me pinned at the baseline and everything I hit across came back - sometimes with a little more pepper than I sent it over with. She had made it as high at 385 (if memory serves me right) on the WTA and although we were not keeping score my mental count was that the first set ended somewhere around 2-6. I held twice and took a handful of points off her service and only came close to breaking her once. The only caveat I will add is that I was about 38 years old at the time and she was about 28 - but age was not the difference.

Don't underestimate how hard the women hit at a very competitive level. :mrgreen:

my_forehand
12-10-2007, 03:22 AM
lol, its just such a bad thread that it deserves all of the checks. the OP is delusional, that should be another option.

Only 1 or 2 of those options were actually relevant, so you could add that option, instead of wasting x'ing everything lol.
Plus, the OP probably got confused with 4.5 and college players :-?

helloworld
12-10-2007, 03:23 AM
Well, I used to hit with my friend who is in WTA tour a few times, and I'd say we're about even. I'm about 5.0 level(not sure cause my country doesn't have the rating) and she's ranked 500 something in WTA tour.

raiden031
12-10-2007, 03:39 AM
In the OP's defense, is he talking about a self-rated 4.5 or a computer-rated 4.5? I'm sure there are self-rated 4.5s that could easily beat WTA pros :)

Maestro Nalbandian
12-10-2007, 04:08 AM
these women hit hard and good dude. have you ever watched dementieva live? she hits harder than any guy i personally know.

__________________

+1. I watched her play in Sydney early 2006. I was sitting just 3 rows up from the court, her shots were unbelievably hard and consistent for even a guy of her size.

goober
12-10-2007, 04:58 AM
Top 100 WTA? Uh I would say no legitimate 4.5 male player could beat a top 100 WTA player or even come close.

Topaz
12-10-2007, 05:00 AM
Quick and dirty answer...

NO.

jmverdugo
12-10-2007, 05:10 AM
Nope, not likely.

javier sergio
12-10-2007, 05:27 AM
if a 4.5 man beats any TOP 100WTA, he's not a 4.5 :)

Clintspin
12-10-2007, 05:32 AM
I think the guys that are saying no could be wrong. I just witnessed a male college club player beating a top female college team player. I remember that Chris Evert's brother would always beat her. If you have been at a tournament with both male and female pros, you can clearly see the difference in ball speed and footspeed. Could every 4.5 male player from every region in the country beat every female on the WTA tour, no. It also depends on age. A 4.5 male player is like a 5.0-5.5 female player for the most part.

MEAC_ALLAMERICAN
12-10-2007, 05:42 AM
Uhhh, I don't think a man on that level would even come close to taking a game, must less points unless Justine lets him.

slice bh compliment
12-10-2007, 05:48 AM
No, not a 4.5. I mean, I suppose it's possible, but the girl would have to totally choke the match away.

I'm a 5.0. Probably a 5.5 still, but I do not play tournaments anymore.

I played a good level of college tennis and earned some points on the circuit. Even did some hitting and coaching for male and female tour players.

I'm generalizing here, and this is all so frekaing subjective...........
but trust me, I'd have a LOT of trouble with the top 100 WTA girls, and maybe the best of the college girls. I would lose. I know this because I'd beat them badly 10 years ago, and I've drilled and played with a few more recently. Nowadays, they move better, hit harder and pass pretty well (and I am a little older and slower). They have trouble with big serves (so I will hold serve usually). Big trouble with heavy top, slice backhands and generally a person willing to take the net. But man, they pass well on the run. They're tough as nails and they can run all day. Seriously.

I hit with some tournament-playing 4.5s now. One is a teaching pro in his 40s and the other is a former Div II college player who is still pretty fit and not yet 30. I basically never lose to them. I do not see these guys getting sets off tour women. I really don't.

Current open players, college players and up? Of course they'd beat the best women, but anything short of that, we're toast I think.

Just my opinion, though. You cats can go call one of them up and see for yourself.

Maria Elena Camerin is from Italy. He is ranked 100 on the WTA tour. Call her if you are a 4.5 or even a 5.0. And if you beat her and several others on your way up, call Amelie Mauresmo, who is ranked number 18. Do you see how ridiculous this is?

BTW, if they do not return your call, it's not because they're ducking you, hahaha. It's 'cause they're too busy training with other professional athletes or men who could probably play ATP Challengers.

Phil
12-10-2007, 05:56 AM
In the OP's defense, is he talking about a self-rated 4.5 or a computer-rated 4.5? I'm sure there are self-rated 4.5s that could easily beat WTA pros :)
Every pro in the top 100 except Henin (according to the OP's criteria)? Not a chance. You people are friggin' deluded if you think otherwise, or else, bad 3.0 players.

Thud and blunder
12-10-2007, 06:09 AM
The OP is clearly delusional. I'd say the average 4.5 weekend warrior might beat a top 100 WTA pro at arm-wrestling, and even then, I'd pick a few of the women to hand out some big beatdowns....

Watch a WTA match, and then watch a 4.5 match at your club...be serious, they're not even playing the same sport.

BHud
12-10-2007, 06:21 AM
Agreed...I'm a 48 year old 4.5/5.0 former D1 college player. I would get the arse-spanking of a lifetime if I went up against WTA players! These gals hit the ball hard and move well! I might get a few cheap points off my serve, but it wouldn't take them long to zone in. I certainly couldn't stay in the backcourt and run with them so that leaves the volley as my only hope...and it just ain't that good at that level!

Even younger 4.5/5.0s with fresh legs can't match their consistency. These are fine athletes in training boys. You'd have a better chance of getting a date with one of them!

ionutzakis
12-10-2007, 06:25 AM
Well this is the result of the discussions on this forum, where if you claim you're a 4.5 then immediately someone comes and says, "no, you're a 2.5 maybe 3.0 at best". Automatically it means that if you're accepted as a 4.5 on this forum, you cannot miss a single volley and you have a 100mph serve. With all those qualities I think a "TW rated" 4.5 man can beat a top 100 WTA. ... especially if it doesn't play with a PS85...

goober
12-10-2007, 06:38 AM
Well this is the result of the discussions on this forum, where if you claim you're a 4.5 then immediately someone comes and says, "no, you're a 2.5 maybe 3.0 at best". Automatically it means that if you're accepted as a 4.5 on this forum, you cannot miss a single volley and you have a 100mph serve. With all those qualities I think a "TW rated" 4.5 man can beat a top 100 WTA. ... especially if it doesn't play with a PS85...

100 mph serve is not really a big deal among higher level players. I have never heard anybody say that a 4.5 can't miss a volley. 7.0 players miss volleys. 4.5 players are just good not great club players- that is about it.

isbisthebest
12-10-2007, 06:44 AM
???????????????????????
I seriously can't believe someone could make such a absurd thread. I mean, it just can't be more stupid than this. Do you want to start up a new thread saying "can 3.0 level players beat WTA top 100"?

P.s. How old are you?
You play tennis?
You ever watched tour level tennis?

atatu
12-10-2007, 06:47 AM
Just a few weeks ago I had a really tough 64, 63 win against a very good woman in her early 30's. Afterwards I asked her if she played college tennis in the states (she was german) and she said yes, she played at SMU then she played professional club tennis in Germany. I felt a lot better about the win....then she casually mentioned, "Of course, I just started playing again after a six year break...." I also have a 61, 61, loss to the then #1 women's player at University of Texas and a couple of years ago, I lost 64, 64 to the #1 18's girl in Texas. So, to answer the question, no way.

JLyon
12-10-2007, 06:58 AM
ATatu is correct no way a legit 4.5 or even 5.0 player could beat a Top 250 WTA player.
When coaching had a Czech girl, who later transferred to Texas and played #1 and now Top 30 in Doubles, she never got higher than 800 in the world and spanked me like crazy and this was when I was a legit 4.5 player unlike today.
I think 4.5 men would have issues even beating a Top 100 D1 lady.

WBF
12-10-2007, 07:24 AM
This is an absurd question. No 4.5 could beat a top 100 WTA player.

A 5.0 might have a chance against some closer to 100, but I think on average they might get beat a bit more, depending on how the players matched up (A 5.0 with a big serve would have a far better chance than a 5.0 without one).

A 5.5 would have a good chance against many women in the top 100 IMHO, again, depending on the matchup. Certain women will be better at handling the male game.

theres a 14 year old girl who's a top junior where i live, and she can hang with the 5.0 club pro. IMAGINE A TOP 100 WOMEN IN THE WORLD. SHE CAN WOOP HIS SORRY BUT IN ONE SECOND.

Seriously? I don't think your club pro is a 5.0 if that is the case, or else you are hiding something.

flyer
12-10-2007, 08:45 AM
Absolutly Not!

ollinger
12-10-2007, 08:52 AM
I'm a pretty strong player and had a chance to hit a few times some years ago with a Russian woman who plays in 5.5 leagues locally and had been the doubles partner of Zvereva when they were both juniors in Russia. It was a most humbling experience.

TonLars
12-10-2007, 10:48 AM
With all respect to the talent and training put forth of the top women pro players, A good college playing male can definitely have a good competitive match with them, and many times win. Usually because of the disadvantage a male can have in power, especially on the serve. Many womens players simply havent seen a big serve like that, unless its the top bunch like the Williams and etc.

A friend of mine originally from my area, approximately a 5.5 that is a competitive tournament player like myself, works at Saddlebrook now and had the privilege of playing Martina Hingis in a practice set. He won 6-2.

power_play21
12-10-2007, 10:53 AM
With all respect to the talent and training put forth of the top women pro players, A god college playing male can definitely have a good competitive match with them, and many times win. Usually because of the disadvantage a male can have in power, especially on the serve. Many womens players simply havent seen a big serve like that, unless its the top bunch like the Williams and etc.

A friend of mine originally from my area, approximately a 5.5 that is a competitive tournament player like myself, works at Saddlebrook now and had the privilege of playing Martina Hingis in a practice set. He won 6-2.

i hope you can see we're talking about a weekend warrior 4.5

he is 1.0 below 5.5, is not a competitive tournament player, and is taking lessons from your friend at saddlebrook lol.

i believe your guy, but the 4.5? common no way, 6-0 6-0 to any top 100 WTA player any day of the week.

its like saying i have a chance against someone playing challengers lol. i wont even bother lifting up my racquet

AM28143
12-10-2007, 10:57 AM
A friend of mine originally from my area, approximately a 5.5 that is a competitive tournament player like myself, works at Saddlebrook now and had the privilege of playing Martina Hingis in a practice set. He won 6-2.

How much cocaine did she snort before the match? JK

A player like Martina would have a particularly difficult time playing against a man. Throughout her career she has be unable to handle hard hitting women like the William sisters. So, I would expect a 5.5 male, who probably can match Serena's or Venus's power in some areas, to defeat her easily

Also, Martina has struggled for the last year and I wouldn’t consider her a top WTA player anymore.

Still an interesting result nonetheless.

OrangeOne
12-10-2007, 11:07 AM
No 4.5 would beat a serious 15yr old female (state-level in Australia), let alone a serious 16yr old female.

Leelord337
12-10-2007, 11:43 AM
no way jose. no male 4.5 serve in the 120s like venus, serena, sharapova etc... plus to make it in the top 100 they have to be very consistent off the ground which most 4.5s I've seen aren't. Maybe an established college tennis player will have a chance on beating a wta top 100.
also, does the riggs-king match come into play here?

NoBadMojo
12-10-2007, 11:52 AM
I've been a hitting mule for a couple of the WTAers. if the question were rephrased to be a 5.0-5.5 male then we would have at least the basis for a conversation provided the guy had a good serving game, a creative return game, and is more than a baseliner. The WTAers can hit through most 5.0-5.5 guys from the back and love the pace, but have weaknesses which can be exploited by someone with a lot of variety and an all court game..speaking in general terms.
There's a quantum jump from 4.5 to 5.0 in my opinion...tons of 4.5's out there and far fewer 5.0s and even fewer 5.5's etc

!Tym
12-10-2007, 12:00 PM
I've been a hitting mule for a couple of the WTAers. if the question were rephrased to be a 5.0-5.5 male then we would have at least the basis for a conversation provided the guy had a good serving game, a creative return game, and is more than a baseliner. The WTAers can hit through most 5.0-5.5 guys from the back and love the pace, but have weaknesses which can be exploited by someone with a lot of variety and an all court game..speaking in general terms.
There's a quantum jump from 4.5 to 5.0 in my opinion...tons of 4.5's out there and far fewer 5.0s and even fewer 5.5's etc

Totally agree with that. There really is a quantum jump in player pedigree and talent when going from 4.5 to 5.0-5.5. 4.5 I think is where most reasonably average players can reasonably hope to achieve that level assuming they've either enough dedication, love, and/or financial resources to learn the game.

However, I find that as far getting beyond this level, there seems to be a brick wall for most where you either have it in you or you don't, and this is the level where players tend to stagnate before heading into a slow, steady decline.

It's like with the painting, most people with enough dedication could probably get to a certain level of marginal impressiveness (i.e. a close enough approximation to the real thing to be somewhat believeable); but beyond that it takes something else.

WBF
12-10-2007, 12:02 PM
There's a quantum jump from 4.5 to 5.0 in my opinion...tons of 4.5's out there and far fewer 5.0s and even fewer 5.5's etc

++

It's a major barrier to many players.

Once you get to 5.0 or 5.5, one should have the foundation to reach the very top of the game, given the proper environment (training, money to fund training all day vs. working, etc) and genetics (athleticism, etc).

SFrazeur
12-10-2007, 12:04 PM
A 4.5 male? What an insulting thread to top 100 women players.

-SF

anchorsteamer
12-10-2007, 12:05 PM
Just a dumb thread: 4.5? With ease??? ridiculous. Women's tennis is weak but they would still spank any 4.5 player...WITH EASE...

CGMemphis
12-10-2007, 12:11 PM
Just a dumb thread: 4.5? With ease??? ridiculous. Women's tennis is weak but they would still spank any 4.5 player...WITH EASE...

Ditto. Wow, this thread is hilarious.

NoBadMojo
12-10-2007, 12:37 PM
++

It's a major barrier to many players.

Once you get to 5.0 or 5.5, one should have the foundation to reach the very top of the game, given the proper environment (training, money to fund training all day vs. working, etc) and genetics (athleticism, etc).

Like most everything else, the better you get at something the harder it is to improve. but there is something about the jump from 4.5 to 5.0 that is the largest jump of all the changes in levels below it i feel.

Connelly
12-10-2007, 12:37 PM
maybe if they are an insane sandbagger..

Kaptain Karl
12-10-2007, 12:46 PM
I don't share the attitudes of most of you.

The drop-off in capability in the WTA is dramatic after about #30. I'd be inclined to think there are more than a few 4.5 males with the ability to beat some of the WTA players between 85 and 100 in the rankings.

I'm a HS Coach. One of the (very average) teams we played this year had a kid on their JV with an astonishingly BIG serve. Teasing the other Coach, I said, "He played #1 on Varsity against _____ didn't he?"

She laughed and told me he'd be a Varsity star ... if he could keep his concentration on a match for more than 20 minutes. IOW, he had *sick* physical skills, but he was a "head case."

My point is 4.5 males come in many forms. Most of you folks seem to be thinking of "the average 4.5" in your replies....

- KK

anchorsteamer
12-10-2007, 12:55 PM
I don't share the attitudes of most of you.

The drop-off in capability in the WTA is dramatic after about #30. I'd be inclined to think there are more than a few 4.5 males with the ability to beat some of the WTA players between 85 and 100 in the rankings.

I'm a HS Coach. One of the (very average) teams we played this year had a kid on their JV with an astonishingly BIG serve. Teasing the other Coach, I said, "He played #1 on Varsity against _____ didn't he?"

She laughed and told me he'd be a Varsity star ... if he could keep his concentration on a match for more than 20 minutes. IOW, he had *sick* physical skills, but he was a "head case."

My point is 4.5 males come in many forms. Most of you folks seem to be thinking of "the average 4.5" in your replies....

- KK

And my point is that it's unfortunate that you are in a teaching capacity in the great sport of tennis if you honestly believe that. Women's tennis (especially below #30) is weak...but 4.5? That's just ridiculous. I'd agree if you said solid Division one player that at least flirts with the ranking or guy in 1100-1500 ATP rankings but 4.5 player...absolutely no chance.

Your argument about the JV kid makes no sense...we're talking about 4.5 level players, not 5.5 level players that never try and as such are considered 4.5's. The obvious basis of the question (and reason for a rating system to begin with) was to argue what an actual 4.5 level player could do against a WTA player. Obviously the origonal question itself is ridiculous and barely worth responding to but bringing up a hard serving JV player whose a star if he tried to argue about different 4.5's makes no sense...

Kaptain Karl
12-10-2007, 01:04 PM
My goodness! Such ... superiority.

We disagree. Don't take InterNet forums so seriously....

- KK

anchorsteamer
12-10-2007, 01:10 PM
Perhaps I was a bit harsh (too much Drakulie madness on the Vick message board) but seriously...4.5 level players have no chance against top 100 women players...not gonna happen. I rip womens tennis more then anyone, and have hit many times with girls in the top 300, and to think a 4.5 would beat them is dumb. Like I said...guys around 1000 and solid division 1 players will beat top 100 WTA players...not 4.5

Clintspin
12-10-2007, 07:50 PM
I think part of the problem with this discussion is in the vast skill difference in 4.5 players from different parts of the country. The 4.5 players around here are pretty good. A whole lot of them are former college players. And as I said before, age has a lot to do with it. Captain Karl has a point. I had a student that was only top twenty in the 16's and went to Bolleterri's for a week, played one of their top resident super star girls and beat her.

shintan17
12-10-2007, 08:03 PM
The question was "with ease" right?
The answer is NO and NO. There MAYBE some 4.5s that could be competitive when they are on, but...beat top 100 WTA players WITH EASE? IMPOSSIBLE.

spiritdragon
12-10-2007, 08:15 PM
err.. i'm pretty sure that there are no 4.5 males that can beat top 100 women.

CAM178
12-10-2007, 08:28 PM
Why'd my post get deleted in this thread? Oh well. I just said that a 4.5 would get killed by a Top 100 WTA player.

Hot Sauce
12-10-2007, 09:57 PM
Threads like these really embarrass the OP.

35ft6
12-10-2007, 10:11 PM
No way a 4.5 player could beat a top 100 pro, I'd be surprised if they won a game.

Jonny S&V
12-10-2007, 10:12 PM
What level would you rate an 18 year old kid going to Bolliteri's acadamy? I remember reading about how Maria Sharapova couldn't keep up with them at all (no flaming please, just adding to an interesting discussion).

tzinc
12-10-2007, 10:20 PM
LOL uh, nope.

35ft6
12-10-2007, 10:59 PM
What level would you rate an 18 year old kid going to Bolliteri's acadamy? I remember reading about how Maria Sharapova couldn't keep up with them at all (no flaming please, just adding to an interesting discussion).It varies, but you figure if you they put a boy up against their then biggest super-star, he was probably good, like ITF good. Like a very high national ranking, in the country of his origin, and a good international ranking. So probably approaching 6.0.

Seriously, lets put a real 4.5 against UCLA's number 6 female singles player before we start talking about the pros. Yes, there's a huge difference between women and men, but a top college player or good pro player, the skill difference is just too vast for a man's biological advantages to be a factor. I'm a chunky 5.0 to 5.5 player, and I would barely lose games against a real 4.5 player and I'd barely have to move. Get the top 16 year old girl in California, and I'd bet money that she'd edge out the top 4.5 player in the country. Like real 4.5, not former pro sand baggers and 5.5 guys who have no other league options.

mrDamien
12-10-2007, 11:01 PM
I could beat up Sharapova easily. I will use S&V to kill off her game easily. As simple as that.

ionutzakis
12-11-2007, 03:03 AM
I could beat up Sharapova easily. I will use S&V to kill off her game easily. As simple as that.

I fully agree

power_play21
12-11-2007, 03:08 AM
i cant believe this thread has gone to 3 pages. it didnt deserve that...

hyogen
12-11-2007, 07:55 AM
ah..I see my signature was erased. My apologies -_-

I just really dislike the williams sisters...their attitudes disgust me.

JLyon
12-11-2007, 08:00 AM
I have played as mentioned earlier a current Top 30 WTA doubles player who played #1 at Texas, I have played a former SMU #1 and Top 50 D1 player and at the time I played them I was a legit 4.5. I could hold my own but these players were much more consistent and could place the ball on a dime.
No legit 4.5 player can beat a Top 250 much less Top 100 player.
Once you get to 5.5 then maybe, but it would be a close match.

Fatmike
12-11-2007, 08:28 AM
someone told me once that #1 WTA = around #1000 ATP

Topaz
12-11-2007, 08:34 AM
someone told me once that #1 WTA = around #1000 ATP

And you believed them?

anchorsteamer
12-11-2007, 08:42 AM
And you believed them?

More like #10 equals #1000...though many guys around 1000 would certainly beat Henin...

power_play21
12-11-2007, 08:45 AM
someone told me once that #1 WTA = around #1000 ATP

And you believed them?

that seems about right to me...

slice bh compliment
12-11-2007, 08:50 AM
Did i accuse you of being an old man? Hmm...i don't think so..... :x

No, you did not. I was saying that one could call me 'old' for my opinion that one whould not use a word like that to describe a player like Venus, that's all.

morten
12-11-2007, 09:08 AM
top 100 wta are very good. I am a 5.0 player and played the Croatian #2 for girls under 16 in Croatia this summer and wow she was good. We won equal, great experience btw, played 5 days in a row! She had enormous talent, might be a new star...? who knows...

sureshs
12-11-2007, 09:09 AM
Any 4.5 man who beat a top 100 WTA player is likely to be in prison.

power_play21
12-11-2007, 09:22 AM
Any 4.5 man who beat a top 100 WTA player is likely to be in prison.

hahaah yea, that pretty much sums it up for this thread!

rasajadad
12-11-2007, 09:55 AM
If a 4.5 male could even hand with a WTA top 100, I'd appeal his rating as he is a 5.5 at least.

tbini87
12-11-2007, 11:58 AM
this thread is awesome. im almost a 4.5 (on a good day), and i think i could beat a top pro (besides justine, of course).

beernutz
02-20-2008, 01:01 PM
this thread is awesome. im almost a 4.5 (on a good day), and i think i could beat a top pro (besides justine, of course).

What are your feelings on the Easter bunny?

norcal
02-20-2008, 01:19 PM
What are your feelings on the Easter bunny?And the tooth fairy!

Hooooon
02-20-2008, 01:31 PM
this thread is awesome. im almost a 4.5 (on a good day), and i think i could beat a top pro (besides justine, of course).

i'll let you know after you get smoked by grossmont tomorrow....
back on topic: i hit with a 15 yr old girl ranked 50-70 nationally (16s) and she is better than every 5.5 male player i've seen in san diego. however, any male player with an atp ranking and the top 300+ college players are better than any woman in the history of tennis.

ngray99
02-20-2008, 01:36 PM
someone told me once that #1 WTA = around #1000 ATP

I would say #1 WTA = #3000 ATP

Kaptain Karl
02-20-2008, 02:01 PM
i hit with a 15 yr old girl ranked 50-70 nationally (16s) and she is better than every 5.5 male player i've seen in san diego.
That's just nonsense. (Or ... you don't know any 5.5s.)

- KK

TonLars
02-20-2008, 05:34 PM
That's just nonsense. (Or ... you don't know any 5.5s.)

- KK

Agreed, that statement simply just doesnt add up. 50-70 nationally? Lol, alot of male 5.5 players, when they were that age, were ranked better in the boys, and at 18's.

15 year old girl ranked 50th nationally would not have a prayer against a real 5.5 male. Have you ever seen a Division 1 Mens college tennis match Hooon?

I noticed you did say, however, that you believe the top 300 some college players are better. So im confused. You must think that these college players are 6.0 or 6.5 or something, which is incorrect. Most good college players are at the 5.5 level. The very best would be a level or so above, in the 6 ranges.

WBF
02-20-2008, 05:42 PM
i'll let you know after you get smoked by grossmont tomorrow....
back on topic: i hit with a 15 yr old girl ranked 50-70 nationally (16s) and she is better than every 5.5 male player i've seen in san diego. however, any male player with an atp ranking and the top 300+ college players are better than any woman in the history of tennis.

Seriously? What level would you consider a 50-70 nationally ranked 16 year old *guy*? You don't think some 5.5's could use their (often) extended experience to trounce some of those kids??

Shaolin
02-20-2008, 07:49 PM
I would say #1 WTA = #3000 ATP

There is no 3,000 in ATP...Rankings only go as high as 1,500 with a billion people tied with one point.

Agreed with previous statement #1 WTA = #1,000 ATP. Think about it, Davenport in her prime cant even beat her husband what's his face.

racquet_jedi
02-20-2008, 07:51 PM
Yes, a 4.5 man is capable of beating a top 100 WTA pro...

If she is out of shape, blind, and using a racquet with broken strings, that is...

CAM178
02-20-2008, 08:01 PM
Yes, a 4.5 man is capable of beating a top 100 WTA pro...
If she is out of shape, blind, and using a racquet with broken strings, that is...
LMAO! Good one, jedi. That is exactly how I was going to answer it.

My other answer was going to be if she is playing without shoes, with a broken string, and with a chair tied to her leg.

Ultra2HolyGrail
02-20-2008, 08:56 PM
I know i can serve harder than any wta pro. :)

HeadPrestige
02-20-2008, 09:16 PM
i can server harder than any wta pro as well... but i would get slaughtered on court.... any 4.5 player that thinks he can beat a top wta pro is very... VERY ignorant.

saram
02-20-2008, 09:27 PM
i can server harder than any wta pro as well... but i would get slaughtered on court.... any 4.5 player that thinks he can beat a top wta pro is very... VERY ignorant.

You can serve in the high 120's to 130's? Do you know what the fastest serve on the WTA is? Just curious. It's as fast--if not faster--than Roger's or Rafa's average serve.

Ultra2HolyGrail
02-20-2008, 09:27 PM
I would say a strong 5.0 would beat a venus or serena. They look powerful against other girls but i would like to see how they could handle big serves and forehands from top juniors-open level male players.

Ultra2HolyGrail
02-20-2008, 09:55 PM
You can serve in the high 120's to 130's? Do you know what the fastest serve on the WTA is? Just curious. It's as fast--if not faster--than Roger's or Rafa's average serve.

I dont think no women can get into high 120's. Low 120's, but not 130. 130 is alot of heat, even from men.

Hot Sauce
02-20-2008, 10:25 PM
You can serve in the high 120's to 130's? Do you know what the fastest serve on the WTA is? Just curious. It's as fast--if not faster--than Roger's or Rafa's average serve.

Having a fast serve doesn't really matter if you can't do it consistently. You probably know that already, but.. I just think that having a fast top serve means anything.

The_Spartan
02-21-2008, 07:02 AM
A 4.5 Man beating a WTA Top 100 Player ?

No way. The difference between 4.5 and a world class 7.0 player is light years away. It isn't about power, man -vs- woman, it's about skills.

He'd get worked on variety of shots and consistency alone.

Kaptain Karl
02-21-2008, 08:06 AM
I would say a strong 5.0 would beat a venus or serena. They look powerful against other girls but i would like to see how they could handle big serves and forehands from top juniors-open level male players.You and I agree ... and disagree. I, too, think the WTA players are way over-rated versus good non-Pro men. But we don't at all agree about "why".

The WTA girls can handle the power better than you think. (Any 5.0 guy who tries to "blow her off the court" would be schooled IMO. It's the greater variety of shot ... the foot speed ... and the placement of the guy that would win it for him.



A 4.5 Man beating a WTA Top 100 Player ?

No way. The difference between 4.5 and a world class 7.0 player is light years away. It isn't about power, man -vs- woman, it's about skills.

He'd get worked on variety of shots and consistency alone.This is interesting.... You and I disagree ... and agree.

I don't think (See the Topic) a 4.5 guy could beat a top 100 WTA player "with ease." I do think the same 4.5 guy would have a (roughly even) chance against the WTA players from 70-100. (The WTA's "depth" is a joke and a lie.)

Where we agree -- if we move the 5.0 guy into the picture -- is on the key to victory. It's just that you and I don't agree on who would win.

"Reasonable minds can differ...."

- KK

Hooooon
02-21-2008, 09:03 AM
You and I agree ... and disagree. I, too, think the WTA players are way over-rated versus good non-Pro men. But we don't at all agree about "why".

The WTA girls can handle the power better than you think. (Any 5.0 guy who tries to "blow her off the court" would be schooled IMO. It's the greater variety of shot ... the foot speed ... and the placement of the guy that would win it for him.



This is interesting.... You and I disagree ... and agree.

I don't think (See the Topic) a 4.5 guy could beat a top 100 WTA player "with ease." I do think the same 4.5 guy would have a (roughly even) chance against the WTA players from 70-100. (The WTA's "depth" is a joke and a lie.)

Where we agree -- if we move the 5.0 guy into the picture -- is on the key to victory. It's just that you and I don't agree on who would win.

"Reasonable minds can differ...."

- KK

you make this such a hypothetical comparison when, in fact, it is not. i know several wta pros and dozens of 4.5-6.5 male players, many of whom have played against wta pros. the only real advantage men have is power/spin. if he slows down his game, even a top 100 ncaa player would lose to the #100 wta player. to beat a wta pro, a sub-6.0 guy would have to serve big and at a high percentage. also, he would have to return very aggressively because he will get SMOKED in baseline rallies he is not immediately in control of. good women can hit winners from the baseline, period. they can also move as well as most men who don't train like pros and they will be much steadier in long points. 300+ wta= 5.0-5.5 male. 40-299 wta=strong 5.5 (better than #1 5.5 in socal, which i'm now convinced is full of 4.5s in 5.5 tourneys). top 40=6.0 (#5-6 singles player on a good (not great) mens D-1 team).

WBF
02-21-2008, 09:42 AM
6.0 (#5-6 singles player on a good (not great) mens D-1 team).

Did I miss something, or are you ridiculously off base here.

*Edit: After looking at the guidelines, (http://dps.usta.com/usta_master/usta/doc/content/doc_13_7372.pdf) I suppose someone lower on a top 75 team could be technically counted as a 6.0, but I would imagine they would match up quite well with your average 5.5 player.

Hooooon
02-21-2008, 10:11 AM
Did I miss something, or are you ridiculously off base here.

*Edit: After looking at the guidelines, (http://dps.usta.com/usta_master/usta/doc/content/doc_13_7372.pdf) I suppose someone lower on a top 75 team could be technically counted as a 6.0, but I would imagine they would match up quite well with your average 5.5 player.

they would match up well as in have an easy match... what do you consider yourself?

and yes, i was targeting lower 6.0s, any top 100 ncaa player playing well would lose 0-2 games/set vs justine.

WBF
02-21-2008, 10:31 AM
No idea. I would guess around 5.0, with a good chance at competing at the 5.5 level once I've had a few months to work on my fitness.

Any top 100 ncaa player playing well would lose 0-2 games/set vs justine.

That is a very strong statement.

Especially when reviewing one of your last posts... however, any male player with an atp ranking and the top 300+ college players are better than any woman in the history of tennis.

Was that sarcasm?? Why do you make such closed, absolute statements?

Hooooon
02-21-2008, 10:59 AM
No idea. I would guess around 5.0, with a good chance at competing at the 5.5 level once I've had a few months to work on my fitness.



That is a very strong statement.

Especially when reviewing one of your last posts...

Was that sarcasm?? Why do you make such closed, absolute statements?

maybe i just have enough experience to know something. 75x6=450 starters on top 75 teams. i played 4-6 on a team that was ranked top 75 on a few brief occasions. when i was 16 i beat conchita martinez 6-4, 6-1 2 days before her first match in the (former) acura classic. i played a couple of sets against alexandra stevenson (worst player ever to reach a slam semi) when i was 15 and won 1/2. i currently hit with a 15 year old girl (much closer to her prime than a 15 yo boy should be) ranked @60 nationally in the 16s. she beats several local male open players (legit 5.5s i suppose) most of the time and when i play sets against her i cannot hold back if i want to win. from watching you play i don't think you would ever break her. your serve, however, does look heavy, but you don't seem to place it well or have any more margin on your 2nd than your 1st(muchoooo doubles i bet). i agree that with major improvements in your quickness/movement/fitness (1st step is slower than the old dude you're playing) you would be a 5.5, maybe even a good one. i prefer concrete comparisons though........

TonLars
02-21-2008, 11:34 AM
Alright well now I agree with most of what Hooon is saying, except a couple things. I just think 6.0 is too high of a rating for someone playing #5-6 on a standard Division 1 team. I consider myself a 5.5 player, and I would beat most 5's and 6's for sure, except on the really good teams like a UCLA, Georgia or Baylor. Ive played and beaten some guys ranked in the top 50 and I think theyre borderline 5.5-6.0. I probably would have played 3 or 4 for alot of top 60 Division 1 schools. I just think you put the very best ranked college players at 6.0, and the very top and guys playing pro tournaments regularly at 6.5-7.

This 15 year old girl sounds interesting. I have a hard time believing she can regularly beat 5.5 type players. In other words, good college men. You said she is ranked around 50th for 16's nationally. A girl around here was ranked better than that in the 18's, she is a freshman at Michigan now. Ive seen her play, she is an excellent player. But there is no way she can make up for the strength and speed a good male player has.

PED
02-21-2008, 11:59 AM
A friend of mine acts as a hitting partner for the wta pros when they come to the Family Circle Cup. He played d2 tennis up north and said the biggest difference in playing against his peers vs hitting with the wta women is that the women hit with much less topspin and also the serves are much easier to handle due to the women's lack of muscle mass compared to a man. He did say the women hit with a decent amount of power but with much less action. I think that just reaffirms the points made above. Just his 2 cents.

Hooooon
02-21-2008, 12:14 PM
Alright well now I agree with most of what Hooon is saying, except a couple things. I just think 6.0 is too high of a rating for someone playing #5-6 on a standard Division 1 team. I consider myself a 5.5 player, and I would beat most 5's and 6's for sure, except on the really good teams like a UCLA, Georgia or Baylor. Ive played and beaten some guys ranked in the top 50 and I think theyre borderline 5.5-6.0. I probably would have played 3 or 4 for most Division 1 schools. I just think you put the very best ranked college players at 6.0, and the very top and guys playing pro tournaments regularly at 6.5-7.

This 15 year old girl sounds interesting. I have a hard time believing she can regularly beat 5.5 type players. In other words, good college men. You said she is ranked around 50th for 16's nationally. A girl around here was ranked better than that in the 18's, she is a freshman at Michigan now. Ive seen her play, she is an excellent player. But there is no way she can make up for the strength and speed a good male player has.

it may as simple as san diego distorts ntrp ratings... from what you're saying you must consider the guys in the video 4.0ish (you may have explained earlier).

i looked you up a wee bit and am surprised that you consider yourself a 5.5. do you not think that if you traveled internationally you'd be qualifying for a lot of futures and picking up a point or two here and there? if you're even with nick edlefsen (:) good win) there's no way you would lose a set in a year playing 5.5 tourneys twice a month in socal.

again, it wouldn't surprise me if people's image/ego issues in socal results in dozens of 5.0-5.5 players playing opens just so they can say they're open players. when he was 17-18 my brother, who played high school tennis/local tourneys (he was ranked 150ish in socal throughout the juniors) used to practice with the #1 5.0 player in the section. my brother would beat him comfortably if he was on, otherwise he'd lose. the "#1 5.0" player is about the level of the better player in this thread's video (4.0-4.5).

socal tourneys tend to have 30-60 open players and 4-8 5.5s, maybe the #s should be more even.