Rallying and your NTRP rating.

[drakulie]

I was reading an interesting exchange in another thread regarding rallying and how many shots, kept in play would be be the standard for the 4.5 and above players. I believe the bar was set around 20+ shots (each). This got me curious.

While practicing (cross court shots), should keeping the ball in play, for a pre-set length of time really be an indicator for one's NTRP rating?? If so, then if two horrible players, with innapropriate stroke mechanics, who could keep the ball in play for 30 or more shots be considered 5.0 players even if they are simply poking the ball back and forth??

In my experience, I have not only practiced with several 5.0 players, but have also watched many, many 5.0+ players who cannot keep the ball in play for 30 or more shots.

NOTE: These 5.0's can do this, but only if they start really slowing down the swing.

The other thing to consider is the opponent. What if one could consistently hit a target on the court, but the other can't sustain the rally????? Isn't this unfair to the one who is hitting his target????

What do you all think??? Let's keep the debate nice.

[Cindysphinx]

When I was a 2.5, I could sustain a rally with another 2.5 longer than I can now (at 3.5). My opponents are sending me much better balls, and I try to hit correctly rather than poke the ball back like I did at 2.5. At 2.5, I had more time to reach balls, and the balls had no angle, ever. At 3.5, I frequently feel rushed, and your opponents can move you around and make hitting consistently more difficult.

Is that what you had in mind, Drakulie?

[BeHappy]

I think jolly roger said:

who has more consistancy, marat safin or a 2.0 lobber?


to understand these things, you have to ask yourself:

Who has more of a chance of the ball not coming back, ie: winner/forced error, and 'winning the point' as opposed to 'not losing' the point?

Can the chances of the ball not coming back outweigh the chances of you hitting the ball out?

think about it -3.5's

[drakulie]

Thanks for chiming in, Cindy. That is a really good example of what I am referring to. Hopefully, more posters will chime in.

[BeHappy]

I want a new serve video from you Drak!

[Rafael_Nadal_6257]

I have a friend who plays USTA tournaments at the 4.5 NTRP level and I often rally with him. I am a junior, but I do play USTA tournaments fairly regularly and would consider myself 4.5+.

When I rally with him, the rallies almost never go above 30 shots. Part of it is the junior mentality of showing off especially to one's friends :D, but also when you are rallying intensely with someone at an equal level, you don't try to just keep the ball in play. You try to move the ball around, go for more, its all part of rallying and the faster swings at higher levels.

You are trying to use the proper technique against shots hit by your opponent at the same level you are at...(confusing...:p). This is why at higher levels, but below the pros, you are facing shots hit pretty hard, so you try to hit just as hard or harder. You wouldn't want to dink it, hit a slice forehand, or a drop shot back in a rally.

I don't know, I might be wrong with all of this. :p

[wihamilton]

I think Stan Smith once said that you should rally (in a match) so that you get 9 out of 10 balls in... so in other words you'll make an error 1 out of 10 times. If that advice is sound there is no way you'll make it to 20 - 30 ball rallies.

Once you reach a certain level, keeping the ball in isn't enough. That's why pushers are really tough for intermediate players to beat but advanced players pound them every day of the week.

For clarity's sake, I am assuming that the 9 out of 10 rule means you hit 9 out of 10 groundstrokes in w/good power / depth / placement. This as opposed to a pusher who "just gets the ball in," even if it's short, down the middle of the court, etc.

[Rafael_Nadal_6257]

^^ Agree...30 balls hit at an advanced level with good pace, spin, placement, strategy...etc. is much harder to achieve than 2.5 pushers hitting 30 balls in.

[shindemac]

maybe this is referring to practice only. when u r hitting to each other at a rally pace, and the only errors are unforced errors, not forced errors or winners. also when u serving, that really shortens the point.

[raiden031]

There are people who can keep the ball in longer than me, whom I can beat. Also I can fairly confidently say that if I am rallying with my normal strokes where I am following through and aiming for depth, there probably isn't a single 4.0 or 4.5 player who I can consistently last longer than during this type of rally test. So I would say within some set of parameters, there is a correlation between number of shots in a rally and NTRP level. But I imagine it is a better way to separate 3.5 from 4.0 than say 4.5 and 5.0 level players.

[WildVolley]

As a general rule, better players can keep the rally going longer, but they usually start hitting faster balls with more topspin which makes it difficult to keep the rally going. There's a trade-off between consistency and pace and shot quality at some point.

I saw two 7.0s practicing at Indian Wells (Tsonga and Monfils) and they were not usually getting 30 hit rallies. On the other hand, they were hitting the ball over 70mph, deep crosscourt and often skimming the ball just inches over the net. I assume that while they were trying to be consistent, they were also going for a little more on many shots than they'd try in a match.

To simplify, when looking at the rally length, you also need to assess the shot quality. A ten shot rally of heavy balls is more impressive than a 30 shot rally of moonballs or pushes.

[Vision84]

Rallying with crappy shots will do noting for your game, you need to feel somewhat pushed.

[dakels]

I always hated this idea of high rallies = good player. For me, tennis is more about quality then quantity. While one could argue that keeping a ball in play is always a good thing, sacrificing your strokes to do so (which most will do for 30+ ball rallies) is a bad thing. I understand some people just want to keep it in play, win the point, etc. Nothing wrong with that. But if you are powder-puffing every ball to keep your rallies going, then that to me is bad tennis. You are neither exercising yourself or your strokes for improvement.

In regards to rallying, there is a time and place for the "keep it in" shot. That is when you are building a rally (first 5-8 shots). After that I think you should be striving to hit good, full swinging shots. That doesn't mean hit winners. It means don't change your swing to just keep a ball in play. After about 10 shots, you will find most 4.0+ players are starting to fire up more aggressive shots until the rally starts to resemble a point. Often by 12-15 shots it looks like a game point ending in a forced error or winner. This all depends on the players and what they want out of it. I rally with some guys that start moving your to corners on the 5-6th shot.

Overall I guess it depends on what you want and expect out of your rallying. Regardless, high shot rallies are in no way an indicator of skill (past 3.0) or quality of strokes, shots, or even fitness. Forced and unforced errors... now those are numbers I can relate to.

[Swissv2]

It depends on both players, AND the pace of the ball.

I have played with D1 players, and would consistently have 2+ minute rallys. How many strokes could you do in that time? Considering that each stroke takes an average of 1-2 seconds, thats around 40-50 shots. But what is our pace? Pretty fast. I have also rallied with 3.0 players for 2+ minutes straight also, though I have to soften up my stroke quite a bit.

[drakulie]

Some interesting points. So far, it seems like everyones experience has been that the higher the level goes, the harder it is to sustain a rally, especially if there are heavy balls being hit back and forth. But there still doesn not seem to be an agreement as to what would be an appropriate number.

I also agree with NBMJ when he states good players could sustain a rally with pace, and there strokes are less prone to breaking down. However, this doesn't necessarily answer the question being asked.

For example, at the womens Checket cup this past year, two women on the first point of the match had a 96 shot rally. Yes, 96 shots. This would mean they are well above the 5.0level>> especially since they are doing it in tournament play. However, neither one has sound strokes>> they were simply moonballing it, and neither one was barely moving.

[drakulie]

It depends on both players, AND the pace of the ball.

I have played with D1 players, and would consistently have 2+ minute rallys. How many strokes could you do in that time? Considering that each stroke takes an average of 1-2 seconds, thats around 40-50 shots. But what is our pace? Pretty fast. I have also rallied with 3.0 players for 2+ minutes straight also, though I have to soften up my stroke quite a bit.

Great points.

A good player could keep a rally going with another good player for an extended period of time, as well as a lower level player, which brings me to this question.

Swiss, when rallying with the lower level player, did you find you had to run a lot more than the 3.0?? I'm assuming you kept providing them shots that they could handle, without making them move toomuch, whereas they were unable to do the same, and probably sprayed a lot of balls during the rallies??

[raiden031]

Some interesting points. So far, it seems like everyones experience has been that the higher the level goes, the harder it is to sustain a rally, especially if there are heavy balls being hit back and forth. But there still doesn not seem to be an agreement as to what would be an appropriate number.

I also agree with NBMJ when he states good players could sustain a rally with pace, and there strokes are less prone to breaking down. However, this doesn't necessarily answer the question being asked.

For example, at the womens Checket cup this past year, two women on the first point of the match had a 96 shot rally. Yes, 96 shots. This would mean they are well above the 5.0level>> especially since they are doing it in tournament play. However, neither one has sound strokes>> they were simply moonballing it, and neither one was barely moving.

After thinking about this more, I don't think you can put a limit as to how many shots in a row can correlate to each NTRP level. I think you would have to take an arbitrary number of shots in a row (ie. 30) and say that the higher up the NTRP, the higher quality the shots become when going for 30 shots in a row. So 30 shots by a 2.5 will be moonballs but 30 shots by a 5.0 will be with a fair amount of pace as well as depth and directional control. There would be no disputing whose shots are better.

[johnny ballgame]

Probably a bit too general to settle on an "appropriate number" in my view. There are consistent players and not-so-consistent players up and down the NTRP scale.

An instructor I used to occasionly hit with started the lesson with 40 crosscourt forehands. We didn't switch to backhands until I made 40 in a row. He was hitting from the baseline, not feeding balls from mid-court. Then we did 40 backhands.

It took me a few tries the first time he introduced this. By the third lesson I usually got it on the first or second try. I was probably hitting my 70% forehand and my 85% backhand (my backhand is much steadier).

I'm a weak 4.5 or a strong 4.0 depending on the day.

[Tennisman912]

I personally think you can draw some conclusions just watching some people rally. It is not foolproof, but better players can rally (rally not blast winners) much more consistently without hitting powder puffs. But it entirely depends on the two players.

Two 5.0 players can hit solid rally shots 20 times each without too much difficulty. We are rallying and not blasting. And DAKELS in my experience it is just the opposite. Most of the 4.0s and below I know lose their patience and just can't resist to whack one while the more advanced players understand what rallying means. Most get impatient well before the 10-15 you mention. That is one of the biggest differences that separate the advanced players from everyone else. They have the patience and strokes to rally. In truth, I would rather rally with a 4.0 or 4.5 lady than most of the guys I know 4.0 or below. I don't see many outside of the tennis mixers I play but if I want to hit some and warm up they are usually far superior. They are just way more consistent in general if you are rallying and not playing.

And your hitting partner makes a big difference. IF I a rallying with someone 5.0+ we should be able to keep it going without lowering our playing level. I find it much easier to rally with that 5.0+ because they are much more consistent. Yes, you can rally with those below 4.5 but you will be chasing more balls because the other guy can't hit it near me as consistently, as you would expect. You will also have to tone down your rally ball or it will be sprayed even more. Why? Because if they could hit it consistently and solidly to you they would be ranked higher. No offense to anyone as that is just reality. We have all been there at one time or another.

So I guess my point is that if someone can hit 20 or so solid, deep ground strokes in a rally, they are a strong player. Probably a strong 4.5 or better. There are very few exceptions in my experience.

Good tennis to all

TM

[Swissv2]

Great points.

A good player could keep a rally going with another good player for an extended period of time, as well as a lower level player, which brings me to this question.

Swiss, when rallying with the lower level player, did you find you had to run a lot more than the 3.0?? I'm assuming you kept providing them shots that they could handle, without making them move toomuch, whereas they were unable to do the same, and probably sprayed a lot of balls during the rallies??

Yes, you touched on an important part Drak. 3.0s generally can't handle pace with control, whereas 5.0+ can. By this I mean that if I up the pace a bit for a 3.0, their timing is off and their control goes way down; they cannot place the ball where they want. If I add slice to the 3.0's weak side, they generally pop it up or hit it into the net. With more advanced players, they can compensate for the change of pace much easier - and have the ability to control the ball where they want it to go. With some of the 5.0+ players I have to be very careful about increasing the pace because they will easily use my speed against me, along with the ability to change direction of the ball and hit to the open court.

[Leoboomanu]

We should include rules... such as... no one enters the baseline... both of same rating, and no moon balls...

IMO 2.5s will not sustain a 30+ rally for these reasons:
arm tiredness
no patience
bad directional control
bad footwork
no depth
flyballs!!

3.0s will be hard pressed... they may break the 'no moon balls rule' or the 'no entering the baseline rule'... but i give them the benefit of the doubt...
but they have to be extra careful and slow down their swings...15 hits each is a long rally...

3.5+ may have enough experience and control to do this consistently...

it's like basketball, only the real shooters make 15 straight freethows...
5 is easy, 6-10 arms get tired, 11-12 pressure is on, 13-15 you start shaking...

if someone says they can hit 30+ rallies... I call BS and say prove it on video...

[Solat]

to put a different slant on it...

i can't rally to save my life (for the level i play at), i have to conciously think about just controlling my strokes when we are having the warm up so that i give them enough balls to hit. Quite simply rallying is not my game so it's not high on my agenda, i hit big and hard and S&V, i don't want long points, i wanna impose myself and make my opponent feel under the pump. At no stage do i want them being able to comfortably make a rally ball, so what happens? a) i play like a demon possessed b) i embarrass all my team-mates

now there is no way on earth i teach this style, i am BIG on making balls, discipline and determination, mainly because those were not instilled in me when i was young. I forever wonder how much better i could be if i could hit ball after ball?

basically its a spiral effect - i couldnt make bulk balls so i HAD to be aggressive to win the rally before i lost it, so by being more aggressive i make more mistakes and so the spiral continued

as i said, i definitely don't encourage my style these days but just giving you a different perspective

[WBF]

While practicing (cross court shots), should keeping the ball in play, for a pre-set length of time really be an indicator for one's NTRP rating??

Nope. I can rally many balls in a row by purposefully working hard to hit the ball right back to the middle (with pace/depth/spin), but typically I don't just rally for fun, we move each other around, and rarely get to 30+ rallies. Other considerations need to be made in determining NTRP, or you may rate some hacks who have decent looking strokes with pace, depth, spin, etc., but who cannot construct points, handle certain combinations of pace/depth/spin/placement and so forth.

[Julieta]

Interesting questions! And quite civil up to this point! You should ask Harold Soloman for his opinion on this.

This isn't really answering the question but is my two cents on what happens on the boards sometimes. I was taught by these hardcore dudes who believed in mastery of shots. That is what separated the “special ones” from everyone else. Being able to hit a lot of balls, maybe 50-100 balls deep and strong was the minimum. If you couldn’t do that, forget it. If you could, then the next phase was development of the rest of the game and overall playing style. That’s when the special one thing came into play. They could do that extra thing – the mastery – hit any kind of ball from anywhere. These players don’t have any hitches in their shots, footwork, preparation, etc. They don’t look like other players…even other good players. I think some of the guys on here such as BB and NoBadMojo; these guys are elite coaches and they are looking at players from that point of view. They are very critical when it comes to movement to the ball and stroke production. So when some of the guys post clips on here who are futures guys or want to play in futures, they are pretty tough on them because they know what they should be seeing if that person is going to make it at that level or beyond it. Just because they arent doing it now doesn’t mean they can’t, which is why BB and others give them feedback and why the guys post in the first place, but if they don’t or can’t correct those issues they wont make it past a certain level. Now there are people who get to 500 or so because to be honest, they have the money to stay out there long enough, for years, and if you’re good enough, which is very good but not special lol and have the cash, you’ll eventually do well. But they wont get past a certain point if they don’t have mastery of shots. Since everyone wants to improve, these guys post information on how to keep improving.

It is kind of hard to articulate this. Those guys like Carlos, maybe now they are not hitting that many balls because that’s not their objective. They’ve been there, done that. But they can if they chose to and would if that’s what it took to win the point (meaning they played someone good enough to neutralize everything they put out there and they had to keep working the point to get that opportunity ball). They do have the "mastery" even if it seems like they don't.

PS: I was not even on the same planet as the special ones!

[Andres]

if someone says they can hit 30+ rallies... I call BS and say prove it on video...
I can't even hit 5+ rallies. Three or four strokes and I'm already at the net :p

[WBF]

Now there are people who get to 500 or so because to be honest, they have the money to stay out there long enough, for years, and if you’re good enough, which is very good but not special lol and have the cash, you’ll eventually do well.

I don't know if you are trying to, but this sounds a bit demeaning to the people who made it that far... although I do agree to a certain extent. It would be quite expensive, particularly when you aren't making much money and spend all your time traveling, training and playing...

[JRstriker12]

Hi Drak!

I would say a player's ability to rally shows they have reached certain level in consistency (at least 3.0 or 3.5), but it really says very little about their abilities in match play -and isn't match play where your NTRP is really determined?

It wouldn't be exactly easy, but I think if I was working cooperatively with a partner on the same level, we could get a 20 or 30 ball rally in practice - maybe cross-court forehands. But that ability to be that consitent in practice breaks down for a lot of players in actual match play. At the 3.5 level, I bet most points are lost on errors, rather than won on winners or forcing shots.

[just out]

Interesting questions! And quite civil up to this point! You should ask Harold Soloman for his opinion on this.

This isn't really answering the question but is my two cents on what happens on the boards sometimes. I was taught by these hardcore dudes who believed in mastery of shots. That is what separated the “special ones” from everyone else. Being able to hit a lot of balls, maybe 50-100 balls deep and strong was the minimum. If you couldn’t do that, forget it. If you could, then the next phase was development of the rest of the game and overall playing style.

Julieta,
Great reply, and interesting points, as to the OP I think that it is possible to get a very good idea of rating from watching players rally and that length of the rally is one rating factor if balls are being hit with pace and depth. The reason rally length IMO is important if players are hitting with pace and depth is that it allows you to see if something is breaking down when someone misses or if they just tried a difficult shot or made a forced error.

[babar]

So, what does it mean if you can rally 20-30 shots randomly around the court, but never reach 20-30 shots if stroking directionally (xcourt or down-the-line).

For most of us, I imagine, movement is the key to keeping the ball in play. If your footwork is disciplined, then your strokes can maintain consistency. When moving around the court in a match, I feel the freedom of space, as opposed to directional hitting, where I feel confined and my movement feels awkward. Much of this is lack of practice, but I've seen it in many players.

[ohplease]

Years ago, I recall seeing footage of Magnus Norman and Pete Sampras practicing in the dwindling sunlight in an empty stadium at flushing. Obviously not the world's most strenuous practice, but they were hitting at least 20-30 ball rallies all day. Like a metronome.

It's important for players AT ALL LEVELS to be able to give their practice partners a nice even ball. Shouldn't be the only thing you practice, but without it, it's a slippery slope to undisciplined puncher's chance tennis. There's something to be said for rhythm and flow in tennis, and there's times where relaxed, even tempo rallies are simply the best things in the world. 5 minutes of this is a great way to start and end practice sessions.

Beware players who can't do this, either because of ability or temperament. I always walk off court after practice sessions with people who know what they're doing struck by just how many more balls and how much more we worked on per unit time compared to other people. It's like the difference between joe standard teaching pro and the best ones - 1 hour can feel like you didn't even break a sweat or you're about to die.

[JRstriker12]

Years ago, I recall seeing footage of Magnus Norman and Pete Sampras practicing in the dwindling sunlight in an empty stadium at flushing. Obviously not the world's most strenuous practice, but they were hitting at least 20-30 ball rallies all day. Like a metronome.

It's important for players AT ALL LEVELS to be able to give their practice partners a nice even ball. Shouldn't be the only thing you practice, but without it, it's a slippery slope to undisciplined puncher's chance tennis. There's something to be said for rhythm and flow in tennis, and there's times where relaxed, even tempo rallies are simply the best things in the world. 5 minutes of this is a great way to start and end practice sessions.

Beware players who can't do this, either because of ability or temperament. I always walk off court after practice sessions with people who know what they're doing struck by just how many more balls and how much more we worked on per unit time compared to other people. It's like the difference between joe standard teaching pro and the best ones - 1 hour can feel like you didn't even break a sweat or you're about to die.

Great point!

It's great when you can find a practice partner who can hit with you and give you enough balls to really get a rhythm and feel to your strokes. Getting in that groove lets you asses what's going wrong or right and how your adjustment affect your shot.

I practiced the other day and the other guy just could not get back a consistent ball, which in turn threw me off. Think we spent more time pickup up balls than hitting.

[maleyoyo]

I was reading an interesting exchange in another thread regarding rallying and how many shots, kept in play would be be the standard for the 4.5 and above players. I believe the bar was set around 20+ shots (each). This got me curious.

While practicing (cross court shots), should keeping the ball in play, for a pre-set length of time really be an indicator for one's NTRP rating?? If so, then if two horrible players, with innapropriate stroke mechanics, who could keep the ball in play for 30 or more shots be considered 5.0 players even if they are simply poking the ball back and forth??

In my experience, I have not only practiced with several 5.0 players, but have also watched many, many 5.0+ players who cannot keep the ball in play for 30 or more shots.

NOTE: These 5.0's can do this, but only if they start really slowing down the swing.

The other thing to consider is the opponent. What if one could consistently hit a target on the court, but the other can't sustain the rally????? Isn't this unfair to the one who is hitting his target????

What do you all think??? Let's keep the debate nice.


Interesting topic. I think it would make more sense if there are set parameters associated with number of shots for each level of play. Those parameters are: depth, spin and pace.
For example: 3.5 players should be able to handle consistently a 5 (just an example) shot rally with depth = x, spin = y, and pace = z. For the 4.5 players, those parameters should be: 30 shot rally with depth = a, spin = b, depth = c. Of course a,b,c > x,y,z respectively.
There is no way to determine the exact values of the x and y and so forth, but I think you know what I'm trying to say. That's as close as I can get to a standardized solution.
The whole purpose of the practice is to increase your consistency and mental focus. The goal of both players should be NOT to miss. If the players hit to win the point then it doesn't count.
The number of shots in a rally is also a good indication of the level of a player since there seems to be a limit of shots for every player in this situation for his or her technique starts to break down or the muscle fatique begins to show.

[tennisdad65]

Rallying 20-30 shots is not a good indicator of how one will play in a match. The ability to handle low, high, short or deep balls well is much more important than hitting smoothly when you get in a consistently long rally. How many rallies in a match even between 5.5 level players ever get to 20 shots?

tennis matches involve a lot more than just rallying.
IMHO
1) Second serve is the most important single shot in tennis.
2) First serve is next..
3) Return of serve is third
The above 3 are more important at lower NTRP levels, since the average number of shots per point at lower levels is probably 3-4.

Then in no particular order:
baseline game (rallying) and handling low, high, short or deep balls
transistion game (approaches)
volleys/overheads
defence (passing, retrieving or lobbing)
intangibles like speed, mental , concentration, tactics..

[raiden031]

Hi Drak!

I would say a player's ability to rally shows they have reached certain level in consistency (at least 3.0 or 3.5), but it really says very little about their abilities in match play -and isn't match play where your NTRP is really determined?

It wouldn't be exactly easy, but I think if I was working cooperatively with a partner on the same level, we could get a 20 or 30 ball rally in practice - maybe cross-court forehands. But that ability to be that consitent in practice breaks down for a lot of players in actual match play. At the 3.5 level, I bet most points are lost on errors, rather than won on winners or forcing shots.

One thing I will comment on this is that you will never see a 3.5 player in a practice rally hit balls in such a way that any trained eye will say "I bet he's a 4.5-5.0 player". If I, as a 3.5 player is practicing with a 4.0-4.5 player, I can sustain long rallies with them, but my depth and placement are always lacking compared to my partner and the only reason the rallies can go for so long are because my partner can handle these inconsistent balls I am giving him and send them back to me in a uniform way. So to the untrained eye I am as good as the 4.5 partner, but I know very well what is really going on. I can never hit 4.5-5.0 level strokes consistently in a practice rally no matter how much I try and how many shots in a row I can hit.

[rocket]

While practicing (cross court shots), should keeping the ball in play, for a pre-set length of time really be an indicator for one's NTRP rating??

It's all about the quality of the ball & the consistency of it.

[Bungalo Bill]

Rallying 20-30 shots is not a good indicator of how one will play in a match. The ability to handle low, high, short or deep balls well is much more important than hitting smoothly when you get in a consistently long rally. How many rallies in a match even between 5.5 level players ever get to 20 shots?... Tennis matches involve a lot more than just rallying.

True that tennis matches are about constructing points, however, I dont agree with you fully. The difficulty of the ball, the pace of the ball, the ability for one to maintain depth and the ablility to sustain this for many shots does provide insight into the level one could be competitive at.

If I see two players able to sustain a consistent rally with good pace, spin, and depth, while maintaining a consistently smooth stroke, this is a sign of a well practiced tennis player.

Consistency happens in all strokes. How consistent one is getting their first serves in. How consistent they are with their volleys. A well trained tennis player places consistency above all things.

It would be foolish to think that you can't glean something from that.

[tennisdad65]

Match Situation:
you are a 5.0 and rally like a 5.0 :)
opponent has poor technique (think 3.5) on ground strokes, yet keeps ball deep :twisted:

when the match starts, opponent has a great serve and volley game and is unbreakable..
on your serve, he chips and charges and puts pressure on you.. see great volley game from above..

He wins the match..
are you still 5.0?
is he 3.5 because his groundstrokes have bad technique?

[Bungalo Bill]

Match Situation:
you are a 5.0 and rally like a 5.0 :)
opponent has poor technique (think 3.5) on ground strokes, yet keeps ball deep :twisted:

when the match starts, opponent has a great serve and volley game and is unbreakable..
on your serve, he chips and charges and puts pressure on you.. see great volley game from above..

He wins the match..
are you still 5.0?
is he 3.5 because his groundstrokes have bad technique?

TennisDad,

I am not arguing with you regarding match play. I have been around block enough to know that playing a match requires many different skills. However, I do not agree with you regarding the ability for two players to sustain a rally, viewing their technique in hitting a ball, and not being able to gain some insight into the approximate level they are at.

If two players have the ability to sustain a rally with pace, spin, depth, and ball control, this will provide information into their approximate level of play or where they may be competitive at.

[Andres]

Match Situation:
you are a 5.0 and rally like a 5.0 :)
opponent has poor technique (think 3.5) on ground strokes, yet keeps ball deep :twisted:

when the match starts, opponent has a great serve and volley game and is unbreakable..
on your serve, he chips and charges and puts pressure on you.. see great volley game from above..

He wins the match..
are you still 5.0?
is he 3.5 because his groundstrokes have bad technique?
I don't think a 3.5 serve will be unbreakable to a 5.0. In fact, I don't think a true 3.5 would win more than just 1 game per set against a true 5.0

[raiden031]

I don't think a 3.5 serve will be unbreakable to a 5.0. In fact, I don't think a true 3.5 would win more than just 1 game per set against a true 5.0

He's not saying he's a true 3.5, but that he has 3.5 groundstrokes. The problem with that example is that it assumes the 3.5 guy has 5.0+ level everything else except groundstrokes. I don't see how someone can have such great volleying skills, be able to handle anything a true 5.0 throws at him and then beat him without having decent groundstrokes. You can't approach the net every point no matter who you are.

[tennisdad65]

I don't think a 3.5 serve will be unbreakable to a 5.0. In fact, I don't think a true 3.5 would win more than just 1 game per set against a true 5.0

I said 3.5 looking ground strokes. NOT 3.5 level overall! The reason I say this is because I have visited many places outside the US where the courts are terrible (cement courts which are worse than our US roads :)) and many players mainly serve and volley & chip and charge. They have faulty technique on ground strokes (really looks like 3.5 level ground strokes) but WILL definitely give 5.0 folks here a tough time. Keep in mind that 'looking like 3.5 level' on ground strokes is very deceptive if they can keep the ball deep in play...

and yes, they chip and charge on everything.. definitely opponents second serve and often block and charge on first too.. i.e. they have poor baseline 'technique' other than keep ball in play, but with 5.0+ level serve/volley/approach game. I found this very often outside the US.

[Defcon]

One of the key differences I've noticed as you move up (esp from 4 -> 4.5) is the ability to adjust to a bad ball. When rallying, lets say you get a ball thats not hit quite right - its a a bit short, has too much topspin etc? Can you still send the ball back as a normal rally shot? If you and your partner can, you can have endless rallies.

[Bungalo Bill]

One of the key differences I've noticed as you move up (esp from 4 -> 4.5) is the ability to adjust to a bad ball. When rallying, lets say you get a ball thats not hit quite right - its a a bit short, has too much topspin etc? Can you still send the ball back as a normal rally shot? If you and your partner can, you can have endless rallies.

I think we need to keep the rallying point in perspective. Ones ability to sustain a rally while executing good technique is an indication and not the only thing you need to determine ones NTRP rating. It is simply a piece of information that can lead into suggesting ones level of play. It is only that.

It may or may not pan out because it is only a piece of information to formulate ones ability or competitive level. Obviously, other factors need and should come into play.

[LuckyR]

Match Situation:
you are a 5.0 and rally like a 5.0 :)
opponent has poor technique (think 3.5) on ground strokes, yet keeps ball deep :twisted:

when the match starts, opponent has a great serve and volley game and is unbreakable..
on your serve, he chips and charges and puts pressure on you.. see great volley game from above..

He wins the match..
are you still 5.0?
is he 3.5 because his groundstrokes have bad technique?

A couple of definitions to make sure this post is apples to apples.

First, you define the first guy as 5.0 And he is a true 5.0 OK

The other guy is also a 5.0 (because he beat a 5.0), yet he has unorthodox strokes (a fairly common circumstance). Someone (you?) has erroneously labelled him a "3.5" because he has unorthodox strokes. That is the observer's (your) error.

[tennisdad65]

A couple of definitions to make sure this post is apples to apples.

First, you define the first guy as 5.0 And he is a true 5.0 OK

The other guy is also a 5.0 (because he beat a 5.0), yet he has unorthodox strokes (a fairly common circumstance). Someone (you?) has erroneously labelled him a "3.5" because he has unorthodox strokes. That is the observer's (your) error.

not entirely true..If he were forced to play from the baseline only he would lose easily.. his ground game is unorthodox AND definitely NOT AT 5.0, but his serve/net/approach game is 5.0+.. therefore you cannot equate baseline rallying to NTRP level in this case.

And the main theme of this thread is to try and EQUATE rallying to NTRP rating.. It just cannot be done.. rallying is just a small fraction of match play..

[LuckyR]

not entirely true..If he were forced to play from the baseline only he would lose easily.. his ground game is unorthodox AND definitely NOT AT 5.0, but his serve/net/approach game is 5.0+.. therefore you cannot equate baseline rallying to NTRP level in this case.


Since in the game of tennis noone is "forced" to play any particular style, someone who can beat a true 5.0, is at least 5.0 It doesn't matter if he stands on his head while he plays. Matchplay results, not stroke technique is the definition of the levels.

Of course I agree with your last sentance, but I would add: "... or any other case."

[tennisdad65]

Since in the game of tennis noone is "forced" to play any particular style, someone who can beat a true 5.0, is at least 5.0 It doesn't matter if he stands on his head while he plays. Matchplay results, not stroke technique is the definition of the levels.

Of course I agree with your last sentance, but I would add: "... or any other case."

ok .. you win :)

I was trying to emphasize that baseline rallying consistently for X shots and looking like a pro in doing so, does not give much indication of NTRP level.

[Teyko]

ok .. you win :)

I was trying to emphasize that baseline rallying consistently for X shots and looking like a pro in doing so, does not give much indication of NTRP level.

I thought you were simply arguing that one should look beyond groundstrokes in considering NTRP.

[tennisdad65]

I thought you were simply arguing that one should look beyond groundstrokes in considering NTRP.

yes... I was but you said it much simpler above :)

[Bungalo Bill]

ok .. you win :)

I was trying to emphasize that baseline rallying consistently for X shots and looking like a pro in doing so, does not give much indication of NTRP level.

I dont agree with this at all. This is a lot like the exaggeration that NTRP ratings can tell you what a players NTRP is without considering other areas as you mentioned.

To say they dont give much indication is an exaggeration when they can give a decent indication. We are not talking about accuracy on the NTRP rating we are talking in a range. In other words, I can tell a beginner rally from an intermediate rally from an advanced players rally.

Also, many players who can rally well also compete at the level you would think.

I can definetly tell the difference in an advanced players footwork and stroke compared to a beginners footwork and stroke in a rally. I may not be exact but I can tell what level they might be competitive at. To say it offers "not much" is farfetched.

[Julieta]

I don't know if you are trying to, but this sounds a bit demeaning to the people who made it that far... although I do agree to a certain extent. It would be quite expensive, particularly when you aren't making much money and spend all your time traveling, training and playing...

I apologize if that sounded demeaning. It is really hard to write about tennis sometimes. Definitely anyone who has made it to the 500 level deserves some serious respect! It is just so hard out there and all over the world there are good players. People have to try somehow to balance confidence and goal setting with realism so that the goals are appropriate. What I guess I mean is that there are players who are no doubt very good, but they are not so talented that they go right up in the rankings. It takes them a lot of time because they are a tier or more below that elite group. So if they have the money and can stay out there and keep at it, they get more and more experienced, improve and eventually they'll do okay. It takes so much money. There are so many really good players who just cant keep up with the costs so they retire early on and in a lot of cases they don't get to maxmize their potential. Or they realize that they don't have what it takes for top level, or don't like the lifestyle or whatever. There are other reasons besides money. But there are some who are lucky enough to have the resources to just stay out there as long as they want. By travelling, training with good players every day and putting themselves under pressure, they can maximize their potential. But they don't quite have what it takes to be at the top or they would be there. You have to be really special to go out there and start winning futures. I know a girl who has been out there longer than Maria Sharapova and she's nowhere near the top 500. Maria won the first $10K she played in, so it was apparent right away that she had something extra. But my friend is improving every year because fortunately for her, she has the resources to give herself a chance.

[Julieta]

Some interesting points. So far, it seems like everyones experience has been that the higher the level goes, the harder it is to sustain a rally, especially if there are heavy balls being hit back and forth. But there still doesn not seem to be an agreement as to what would be an appropriate number.

I also agree with NBMJ when he states good players could sustain a rally with pace, and there strokes are less prone to breaking down. However, this doesn't necessarily answer the question being asked.

For example, at the womens Checket cup this past year, two women on the first point of the match had a 96 shot rally. Yes, 96 shots. This would mean they are well above the 5.0level>> especially since they are doing it in tournament play. However, neither one has sound strokes>> they were simply moonballing it, and neither one was barely moving.


I remember that thread. I think one of those players in the 96 shot exchange played in French Open. Shouldn't you get a minimum rating if you've played in a slam, even if now you're a mom who rarely plays? Just messing with you, I know you have nothing but respect for the senior women!!!!

[Julieta]

No one said that ability to sustain a ralley is the only consideration, and i think we all know that there are other elements to the game of tennis than groundstroke rallies..thought that would go without saying. you;re talking about something else

I agree that not many non professional match ralleys go very many hits. I dont hang at the baseline and bash when i play, but having grooved strokes is paramount to be able to confidently hit a point changing or point ending shot and really importantly to not hit a ball out or into the net, or one that is easily exploited by a good player..the idea is to not make errors, and at a reasonably advanced level to not have your groundstrokes break down resulting in a weak or short ball, because <w. the modern gear>, a better player gobbles stuff like that up...better players make less errors and they make less errors because they have practiced grooved repeatible reliable strokes....goes hand in hand with being able to sustain a ralley with pace which is the subject of this thread


Perfectly said.

[split-step]

30 ball rally is not hard... as long as it is in one direction so cross-courts, up the lines etc.
One person cross court, one person up the line is not hard either, as long as my opponent isn't hitting too close to the lines..

[Julieta]

thanks...nice of you to say....i encourage you to post more often ;)

Thanks! I would like to post more but I find it hard to talk about tennis sometimes without spending a lot of thought into what I say so I don't sound wrong! Then it takes too much time to write!!!

[raiden031]

ok .. you win :)

I was trying to emphasize that baseline rallying consistently for X shots and looking like a pro in doing so, does not give much indication of NTRP level.

I know your argument was saying its possible to have crappy groundstrokes while playing at a higher level, but your statement here implies the opposite argument as well (great groundstrokes, low level of play).

I would say that no 3.0 or 3.5 can hit 20-30 deep shots in a row that could fool someone knowledgeable into thinking they are highly rated. I just never see that kind of hitting ever. If say a 3.5 could hit like that, then they could dink every serve and never play the net because their groundstrokes could carry them to victory every match, and so they'd be higher rated.

[Cindysphinx]

We should include rules... such as... no one enters the baseline... both of same rating, and no moon balls...

IMO 2.5s will not sustain a 30+ rally for these reasons:
arm tiredness
no patience
bad directional control
bad footwork
no depth
flyballs!!

3.0s will be hard pressed... they may break the 'no moon balls rule' or the 'no entering the baseline rule'... but i give them the benefit of the doubt...
but they have to be extra careful and slow down their swings...15 hits each is a long rally...

3.5+ may have enough experience and control to do this consistently...

it's like basketball, only the real shooters make 15 straight freethows...
5 is easy, 6-10 arms get tired, 11-12 pressure is on, 13-15 you start shaking...

if someone says they can hit 30+ rallies... I call BS and say prove it on video...

I can comment on the part of this regarding 3.0s and 3.5s (women).

No way, no how can a 3.0 woman sustain a rally of 30 balls. I know this because I tried it recently.

I was practicing doubles with three 3.0 women. All three were at the upper end of 3.0, based on their success in USTA 3.0.

At the end of a practice session, we decided to see if we could get 20 balls over the net deeper than the service line, doubles lines. Now, this was with 4 people on the court. It took a long time (probably 15 minutes) to get to 20 shots. It only takes one person to flub it, and then you start over. The shots that finally got us over were not pretty -- it was Moonball City. And this was with much less movement/running because we had 4 people.

So no. A typical 3.0 woman cannot sustain a rally of 30 balls, I would guess.

I do not think 3.5s women can do it either. On that same day, I tried to do 20 shots with another 3.5 woman, deeper than the service line, singles lines.

We never did get to 20.

[drakulie]

Some really interesting perspectives so far, including rallying with a male vs. a female.

Tennisman912stated he would rather rally with a 4.0-4.5 female than with a 4.0 male, because the females are more patient and continue to get the ball back, whereas the male would whack the ball well into the rally.

Julieta, I believe Harold Solomon would tell you to keep the ball in play at all costs, and most likely would consider a 500 shot rally>>> a warm-up to the rest of the practice session. :) And yes, I have tons of respect for the women in the thread you mention. One of my regular hitting partners played in that tournament and is now ranked #4 in the nation (but even she can't sustain a rally that long and she would be well above the 5.0 level)

many of you brought up other great points, such as: not being able to rally because you would be up at the net within 5shots.

So how about this last one??? Players who are clearly 5.0+ players who win competitively at that level, but can't hit grounstrokes to save there life, yet have such a great serve and volley game>>> they consistently win?????

Would also like to thank NBMJ, and BB for chiming in, and giving their respective opinions.

[drakulie]

To add, I posted this video a while back ago. This is a point that lasted over 30 shots. Many posters who saw this video stated these guys are around the 3.0 level, when in fact they are both 5.0+ players.

Post your thoughts in relation to the topic of this thread.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8flwTWXCgOc

[Bungalo Bill]

Would also like to thank NBMJ, and BB for chiming in, and giving their respective opinions.

Well I hope I explained myself. I found in this conversation that there was some exaggeration on both sides. One saying you can rate someone and the other saying you can't.

Although I will agree that at times a player can have good looking strokes and not fair well in competition (thus a lower rating then expected), I will not agree with TennisDad as I felt he implied that it is more of the norm that players with good strokes in a rally will most likely not be that great in their NTRP due to other factors. I find it more on the side of the exception.

[rocket]

To add, I posted this video a while back ago. This is a point that lasted over 30 shots. Many posters who saw this video stated these guys are around the 3.0 level, when in fact they are both 5.0+ players.

Post your thoughts in relation to the topic of this thread.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8flwTWXCgOc

Both of them push, so they even out against eachother. But if they face a solid 5.0, that sissy 2nd serve would have been a piece-meal for him.

[drakulie]

But if they face a solid 5.0, that sissy 2nd serve would have been a piece-meal for him.

They ***are** 5.0's. Both of the guys in that vid are solid 5.0 players and nationally ranked. The serve may not look like much, but they both have solid serves, and place them well.

[tennisdad65]

Both of them push, so they even out against eachother. But if they face a solid 5.0, that sissy 2nd serve would have been a piece-meal for him.

'sissy 2nd serve'? That particular 2nd serve seemed deep in the service box and to the opponents backhand :)

oops.. sorry.. it was to the forehand.. that guy is a lefty..:oops:
Seems like he aimed the first serve fault to the forehand too..

[Leoboomanu]

I can comment on the part of this regarding 3.0s and 3.5s (women).

No way, no how can a 3.0 woman sustain a rally of 30 balls. I know this because I tried it recently.

I was practicing doubles with three 3.0 women. All three were at the upper end of 3.0, based on their success in USTA 3.0.

At the end of a practice session, we decided to see if we could get 20 balls over the net deeper than the service line, doubles lines. Now, this was with 4 people on the court. It took a long time (probably 15 minutes) to get to 20 shots. It only takes one person to flub it, and then you start over. The shots that finally got us over were not pretty -- it was Moonball City. And this was with much less movement/running because we had 4 people.

So no. A typical 3.0 woman cannot sustain a rally of 30 balls, I would guess.

I do not think 3.5s women can do it either. On that same day, I tried to do 20 shots with another 3.5 woman, deeper than the service line, singles lines.

We never did get to 20.

interesting... so you're saying that 'maybe, just maybe' when you get to 4.0, you mat be able to pull-off the 30+

wow, i never really tried to rally 30+ with a purpose, but i think i've done it in practice unconsciously... i will try to do it on video just for kicks...

Maybe we should do the '30+ Rally VIDEO CLUB'... That would be the most exclusive club yet...

i can't really associate with the NTRP ratings coz i'm not in the states, so there you go with my estimation hehehe...

[rockbox]

When I'm rallying with my pro(computer rated 5.5 player), our rallies regularly reach 20-30 shots because regardless of what junk I send his way, he hits it back to me the exact same way. I'm a 3.5-4.0 player.

[snoopy]

I just want to congratulate everyone for being civil and making well written interesting posts.

This is good stuff! I'm learning a lot.

In the past this thread would have been zapped by now due to all the name calling. I guess everyone is taking their meds, lol.

[rocket]

They ***are** 5.0's. Both of the guys in that vid are solid 5.0 players and nationally ranked. The serve may not look like much, but they both have solid serves, and place them well.

Yeah you mentioned their level when posting the link. :)

As a point of comparison, let me just say that NickB, who's rated 4.0 by some here, would clobber these guys, 0 and 1. Boojay, who's game is typical of a 4.5, would clean them up, 1 and 2. Slicelob? Fuhgeddit, a double bagel in 28 mins.

Dunno why they even bother to play at 5.0 level.

[rocket]

'sissy 2nd serve'? That particular 2nd serve seemed deep in the service box and to the opponents backhand :)

oops.. sorry.. it was to the forehand.. that guy is a lefty..:oops:
Seems like he aimed the first serve fault to the forehand too..

The guy's 2nd serve is basically a push, with no pace & no spin, right into the receiver's strike zone. A good 5.0 would hammer that serve-return, wide cc or dtl.

Depth doesn't mean much if the ball has no spin on it. :)

[Ash_Smith]

I think an extended rally is more of a mental challenge than a 'rating level' challenge. I often set a similar challenge in practice with my squads but only as a character test to see which players can set themselves mentally to achieve. They can all hit ten in a row so can they set themselves to make ten times that many.

In terms of player development the ability to hit 30+ plus shots is hardly relevent to competition tennis where the first 5 or 6 shots are what count. Therefore the ability to hit 8-10 shots with real quality are what make the player effective in my opinion.

[Moz]

Yeah you mentioned their level when posting the link. :)

As a point of comparison, let me just say that NickB, who's rated 4.0 by some here, would clobber these guys, 0 and 1. Boojay, who's game is typical of a 4.5, would clean them up, 1 and 2. Slicelob? Fuhgeddit, a double bagel in 28 mins.

Dunno why they even bother to play at 5.0 level.

I'm in the advance flaming time zone so I will just give you a light warm-up before the heavyweights bundle in.

These guys are playing a national tournament and are ranked. They are legitimate 5.0's. Boojay and NickB have posted impressive videos but really the ratings come from results and they would not be handing out 1 & 2 thrashings to these two.

Do you really live in a world where it's easy to nail a winner off a topspin serve that arrives around shoulder height to the average height player? Or that you win matches just by hitting hard?

[Pusher]

To add, I posted this video a while back ago. This is a point that lasted over 30 shots. Many posters who saw this video stated these guys are around the 3.0 level, when in fact they are both 5.0+ players.

Post your thoughts in relation to the topic of this thread.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8flwTWXCgOc

They are playing 45's but the question is are they 5.0 players. Do they also play in 5.0 draws.

They are good players at the 45 level but 5.0? I'm thinking not.

[Cindysphinx]

When I'm rallying with my pro(computer rated 5.5 player), our rallies regularly reach 20-30 shots because regardless of what junk I send his way, he hits it back to me the exact same way. I'm a 3.5-4.0 player.

Exactly. But if you rally with a 3.0 or a 3.5, your chances of the rally ending prematurely on their error skyrockets.

Remember, for the rallying I was talking about, the ball had to bounce past the service line on all shots. That makes it a lot harder. When we don't have that requirement, we can get long rallies going, with someone scooting up to the service line to get a short ball and then backpedaling to continue the rally.

[rocket]

I'm in the advance flaming time zone so I will just give you a light warm-up before the heavyweights bundle in.

These guys are playing a national tournament and are ranked. They are legitimate 5.0's. Boojay and NickB have posted impressive videos but really the ratings come from results and they would not be handing out 1 & 2 thrashings to these two.

Do you really live in a world where it's easy to nail a winner off a topspin serve that arrives around shoulder height to the average height player? Or that you win matches just by hitting hard?

Thanks, I need a warm-up! :)

Boojay plays in the USTA 4.5s & Nick plays ex-pros & juniors. To play at a certain level, you have to have the shots. Yeah you can be athletic & run around pushing balls back, but from 4.5 & up, your shots should have pace & spin or you're gonna get clobbered.

If you look at the vid again, the ball reached shoulder-height but dipped to chest-level, not because of spin but because of lack of pace. The receiver didn't do much with it; in fact, he didn't do much with the ball throughout the whole point. He merely high-sliced it back over & over again, didn't even try to put away a short ball or a ball with nuthin' on it.

At 4.5 level, you'll find good pace on serve & spin on groundies. At 5.0, you'll find pace & spin in every shot. You cough up a nothing ball & the point is over.

I still don't think these guys can handle pace from NickB & spin from Boojay, so yeah, 0 and 1 / 1 and 2, nationally ranked or not (Slicelob would punch balls right through them, so I'm not even going there). :)

[Moz]

Thanks, I need a warm-up! :)



Ha ha!

I think the video is particularly misleading in this case. I'm pretty sure they'll turn out to be better than you think. Sounds like some more information is in order.

Well, I've been surprised by older players who have played like that before and would put my 4.5 record up against anyone's. I also regularly play fairly highly rated juniors, open and veteran players in tournaments.

[raiden031]

Thanks, I need a warm-up! :)

Boojay plays in the USTA 4.5s & Nick plays ex-pros & juniors. To play at a certain level, you have to have the shots. Yeah you can be athletic & run around pushing balls back, but from 4.5 & up, your shots should have pace & spin or you're gonna get clobbered.

If you look at the vid again, the ball reached shoulder-height but dipped to chest-level, not because of spin but because of lack of pace. The receiver didn't do much with it; in fact, he didn't do much with the ball throughout the whole point. He merely high-sliced it back over & over again, didn't even try to put away a short ball or a ball with nuthin' on it.

At 4.5 level, you'll find good pace on serve & spin on groundies. At 5.0, you'll find pace & spin in every shot. You cough up a nothing ball & the point is over.

I still don't think these guys can handle pace from NickB & spin from Boojay, so yeah, 0 and 1 / 1 and 2, nationally ranked or not (Slicelob would punch balls right through them, so I'm not even going there). :)

I looked up the SF and finalists and they are 5.0+ players according to the USTA system.

[Supernatural_Serve]

I always walk off court after practice sessions with people who know what they're doing struck by just how many more balls and how much more we worked on per unit time compared to other people.A predictive corollary to your good point is:

You can often tell how well the tennis lesson is going to go for the remaining 50-55 minutes, by how many balls are still in the basket versus laying all over the court after the first 5-10 minutes.

[rocket]

Ha ha!

I think the video is particularly misleading in this case. I'm pretty sure they'll turn out to be better than you think. Sounds like some more information is in order.

Well, I've been surprised by older players who have played like that before and would put my 4.5 record up against anyone's. I also regularly play fairly highly rated juniors, open and veteran players in tournaments.

I bet you can beat them handily.

Best of luck with your journey Tennisman! :)

[Moz]

I bet you can beat them handily.

Best of luck with your journey Tennisman! :)

Hopefully you are right as I'm improving, but I still think the video makes them look worse.

I think that should have been "Best of luck with your tennis journeyman!"

[Pusher]

I looked up the SF and finalists and they are 5.0+ players according to the USTA system.

Had some idle time so I looked them up as well. (Ft Lauderdale national event beginning 4/20/08)

None of the semi-finalists had an NTRP ranking-only 45 singles.

Am I missing something?

[Offshore]

......, since everyone else is suggesting their personal experience makes what they say right: every week we have drill sessions here with fellow 5.0's. every week we routinely sustain ralleys with pace in drilling type formats...........we did this today on some squirrely clay to boot, and i counted to 25 and stopped counting but continued hitting until the ralley broke down. we had some ralleys that didnt make 25 as well....

Mojo, have you ever posted a video of your play? If not it would be very helpful - given your great help & tips on the board.

[WBF]

At 4.5 level, you'll find good pace on serve & spin on groundies. At 5.0, you'll find pace & spin in every shot. You cough up a nothing ball & the point is over.



But if they face a solid 5.0, that sissy 2nd serve would have been a piece-meal for him.

I'm not sure what sort of experience you have, but it obviously isn't against 5.0 or 5.5 level players.


*edit*
They are playing 45's but the question is are they 5.0 players. Do they also play in 5.0 draws.

They are good players at the 45 level but 5.0? I'm thinking not.

These comments on 45's not competing at the 5.0 level are just absolutely ridiculous. Please, do not try to add to a discussion on a topic you have no experience with.

Figures Pusher would be arguing this as well :p

[rocket]

These comments on 45's not competing at the 5.0 level are just absolutely ridiculous. Please, do not try to add to a discussion on a topic you have no experience with.

Are you sure you didn't get me mixed up with someone else? I never stated anything of the sort.

[WBF]

Are you sure you didn't get me mixed up with someone else? I never stated anything of the sort.

The second part was addressed at Pusher, added in the pusher quote later (thats probably why it looks like it's adressed to you)... sorry for the confusion.

[rocket]

I'm not sure what sort of experience you have, but it obviously isn't against 5.0 or 5.5 level players.

Compare this guy's 2nd serve...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpahPoNbvu4

with that guy's 2nd serve:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8flwTWXCgOc

While you're at it, see how short or nothing balls are dealt with in the 1st vid. ;)

[SlapShot]

hi..and thanks. i dont have current video of me and have no plans to create some.

Oh come on - don't you want to be rated as a 3.5 at best by the "experts" of TTW? :p

[Fedace]

Compare this guy's 2nd serve...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpahPoNbvu4

with that guy's 2nd serve:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8flwTWXCgOc

While you're at it, see how short or nothing balls are dealt with in the 1st vid. ;)

Hey rocket. What level is the guy on the 1st video vs the 2nd video ?? guy on the 1st video could be a 5.0. but I find it amazing how he is constantly dropping his left arm too early on the serve and yet most of his serve goes in the box. If this guy ever learned how to keep his arm up there longer and explode up into the ball better, he could have pinpoint accuracy on his serves. Notice how he gets nice pop on the serve but it is landing in the middle of the box often. ? and when he does go for the corner, see how often he misses.
and what level is the guy on the 2nd video ?? serve isn't much but they have pretty good consistancy on the groundies

[WBF]

Compare this guy's 2nd serve...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpahPoNbvu4

with that guy's 2nd serve:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8flwTWXCgOc

While you're at it, see how short or nothing balls are dealt with in the 1st vid. ;)

I don't know if that was intentional, but... The guy in the foreground on that first video has a much harder time returning against obnoxious old-fart serves that hit corners, stay low, etc. than he does with hard serves, flat or otherwise. He enjoys punishing D1 and D3 players' serves, but gets very annoyed when he can't work as effectively with the weak and puny serves their fathers offer up.

guy on the 1st video could be a 5.0. but I find it amazing how he is constantly dropping his left arm too early on the serve and yet most of his serve goes in the box. If this guy ever learned how to keep his arm up there longer and explode up into the ball better, he could have pinpoint accuracy on his serves. Notice how he gets nice pop on the serve but it is landing in the middle of the box often. ? and when he does go for the corner, see how often he misses.

I compete at the 5.0 level, although some crafty 4.5's could probably take me out, and I would have a shot at some 5.5's on a good day (working on fitness now to try to ensure I have 'good days' every day). The serves that day were comparatively poor; I don't know if you can see it in the video, but I'm swaying or shifting my weight at the start of my serve, creating balance issues... The first game which isn't shown involves me realizing I need to slow down my serves due to some issue. Kept doing it for a week, until my fiancee asked me why I was swaying when I served. I'll work on keeping my arm up longer during the serve, thanks for the tip! Oh... And guys like that in the video? They would dominate me. They typically have a mastery of hitting shots you can't comfortably hit, and if you haven't had experience with them, you might think 'damn! these balls are slow, I should swing hard and go for winners!' and proceed to make numerous unforced errors.

[nickb]

ha! no thanks. i really dont feel the need to 'show off'.

Why is posting a video "showing off"?

Thats a pretty dumb comment...im sure you know how valuable videos can be when coaching.

[Julieta]

For those who want to look up the ratings records whatever of the guys in the later rounds of the Mens 45s in Fort Lauderdale, you're better off looking at atptennis.com or itftennis.com.

Here's some examples:

Paul Smith took third or fourth in the Australian Open doubles with Andy Castle (some of the Brits may have heard of him). He also beat Flach and Seguso in college and I'm sure we've all heard of them...

Charlton Eagle played on the ATPtour. I think he made it to the 200s or so. I knew a couple of guys who played him. They were younger and Eagle beat up on them...well one of them...the other guy won but he was spooky good.

Egan Adams, who lost earlier than usual, played at Pepperdine and was top 100 ATP.


When you've posted stats like that you can come back and trash them. It is hard enough just to get one single ATP point. Are they going to look like 20year old 5.0s? Probably not...but they can play. Could they beat 20 year old 5.0s? I don't really know. But that doesn't discount what level of players they are.


Some things to keep in mind when looking at their videos include:

- years playing and injuries. Playing full time on the circuit for years will take its tool on your shoulders, legs etc. Some players have had to modify their shots just to keep playing. I love how they are getting compared to 25 year olds!

- playing styles - these guys learned differently than how the game is played today...equipment was different (racquets, strings, etc.)

- time playing and practicing right now. Lots of these guys work, have families, etc. They don't really play competitions that much. Some of them can't play that much because of point #1 - they are just too worn out.


As I said before, it is my view that when some of the guys on here post comments to the guys who post their videos, they are trying to help. I can't tell you how many conversations I've had with ex-players that start out with "if I knew then what I know now, I would have done a lot of things differently." Maybe these younger guys will set the world on fire. No one here is saying that they suck. But everyone wants to improve right? I am sure that right now, in any corner of the world, the worlds top players are out there working working working on their games. They don't pay coaches to tell them how wonderful they are.

[Julieta]

Julieta, I believe Harold Solomon would tell you to keep the ball in play at all costs, and most likely would consider a 500 shot rally>>> a warm-up to the rest of the practice session. :) And yes, I have tons of respect for the women in the thread you mention. One of my regular hitting partners played in that tournament and is now ranked #4 in the nation (but even she can't sustain a rally that long and she would be well above the 5.0 level)

.

She is probably an ex-tour player!

Hey are you going to the Jimmy Evert event that is coming up? You could take some film of those guys and post it on here so they can get rated lower!!!

[Bungalo Bill]

we did this today on some squirrely clay to boot, and i counted to 25 and stopped counting but continued hitting until the ralley broke down...we had some ralleys that didnt make 25 as well. if this is done correctly with good footwork and batspeed it's very tiring... In 1:15 hour to 1:30 it is possible to hit a very large volume of balls and to have had a pretty good workout if done properly.

And folks, these are the key words and the insight into what we are trying to say. "WHEN THE RALLY BROKE DOWN." I might even go as far as saying that many times it is even when the STROKE breaks down. Maybe NBM is also indicating this as well.

Various levels should be able to sustain a 20-30 ball rally at a given speed WITHOUT their stroke breaking down. For beginners, it would be looping slow moon balls. For intermediates, maybe the pace quickens some. For advanced players, there is definetly some footwork, movement, deep shots to rally with and balls with spin and pace.

Without exaggerating, many times you can get a good idea what level of competition a player is at from a rally. If their stroke stays smooth and their technique does not breakdown, you can see that they are well practiced players. You can see it in their conditioning, their movement, their early preparation, and their ability to control the ball as their stroke stays consistent for a long period of time.

Why is the long rally an indicator of skill level? It is because of what NBM indicated, a long rally is tiring and the stroke and footwork for many players break down on the 4th maybe the 6th shot. End of rally. This is not good because you want to be able to go a long time and exceed the normal rallies in a match.

I believe this is exactly what NBM was indicating to NickB regarding his ability to sustain a rally. His footwork, court position, some hitches, and movement caused his stroke to breakdown much too soon. Key words, TOO SOON.

[raiden031]

Had some idle time so I looked them up as well. (Ft Lauderdale national event beginning 4/20/08)

None of the semi-finalists had an NTRP ranking-only 45 singles.

Am I missing something?

here's what i discovered using NTRP Find a Rating on the four semi-finalists:

R. Thomas Coulton - 5.0B
Peter Markes - 5.0C
Michael Rose - 5.0T (Edit: Verified his location)
Horacio Rearte - 5.5T (Winner of tournament)

[WBF]

I don't think assigning a 5.0 to guys like that is very accurate though. They have the tools to dismantle even the more accomplished 5.0's, and they have the experience to know when to use each tool. I would imagine that they would absolutely dominate a younger player who is rated at the same level, and that they could probably do well against some 5.5's depending on their fitness levels (some of these guys, as Julieta mentioned, do have some physical issues that could be problematic against a very good 5.0 or 5.5 player... but they usually know how to work around these issues).

[Bungalo Bill]

in many many cases, what breaks down is the footwork rather than the stroke. get the other stuff right and often the stroke just goes really well on its own. it's fundamental tennis..played from the feet up. pretty strokes w. bad footwork arent going to get people very far assuming their goal is to play better tennis rather than pose.

Oh yeah, we are very much in agreement. Build a stroke from the ground up is my motto. :) Very good!

[rocket]

Some things to keep in mind when looking at their videos include:

- years playing and injuries. Playing full time on the circuit for years will take its tool on your shoulders, legs etc. Some players have had to modify their shots just to keep playing. I love how they are getting compared to 25 year olds!

- playing styles - these guys learned differently than how the game is played today...equipment was different (racquets, strings, etc.)

- time playing and practicing right now. Lots of these guys work, have families, etc. They don't really play competitions that much. Some of them can't play that much because of point #1 - they are just too worn out.

Does age turn you into a hack? I don't think so. Just watch this 'older' guy (in blue) play. So smooth!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dN8a5hmWtio

Great placement too!

[WBF]

Haha, stop it! To put things in perspective, he's barely in the top 50 for 50's singles nationally. He does reasonably well at these tournaments, but is on a completely different playing field from the top of the heap. Remember, that's for 50's, and we're discussing 45's. His biggest weakness? Playing 'hacks'. He feeds off my pace (and my poor placement in that video), but has trouble with players like the ones under discussion.

[rocket]

Haha, stop it! To put things in perspective, he's barely in the top 50 for 50's singles nationally.
Barely? LOL!

[Pusher]

here's what i discovered using NTRP Find a Rating on the four semi-finalists:

R. Thomas Coulton - 5.0B
Peter Markes - 5.0C
Michael Rose - 5.0T (Edit: Verified his location)
Horacio Rearte - 5.5T (Winner of tournament)

What is "NTRP Find a Rating"?

[SlapShot]

Barely? LOL!

Okay, we get it. You have an axe to grind with WBF.

The fact of the matter is that a number of high level players and coaches have told you that you are wrong, and you refuse to admit that.

[raiden031]

What is "NTRP Find a Rating"?

http://tennislink.usta.com/leagues/reports/NTRP/FindRating.asp

[rocket]

Okay, we get it. You have an axe to grind with WBF.

The fact of the matter is that a number of high level players and coaches have told you that you are wrong, and you refuse to admit that.

What axe to grind? WBF is a good 5.0 player & his father is a GREAT player. I can watch his father play for hours on end.

And who told me that I'm wrong? WBF only stated that hacks could beat him. Who else?

[WBF]

You also have to keep in mind that some people won't pop up in that database. I'm listed as '0'

S - Self-rate or Medical Appeal
A - Appeal
B - Benchmark - advanced to playoff or championship round
C - Computer
D - Dynamic
M - Mixed Exclusive Year-end Rating
T - Tournament Exclusive Year End Rating

Ahh! Cool! Was wondering what these letters meant.

Rocket: I'm not sure why 'barely' is funny? I used the word to indicate his placement without an exact number. By 'hacks' beating him, I mean players who might not look like they have the smoothest strokes, but who can consistently get the ball in places that make it hard to hit an offensive shot from (players like those in the video).

I know smooth, powerful shots are fun to watch, but what do you prefer hitting, a shot with good pace, or a shot that's off speed where you need to generate the powr yourself? It's also psychologically different; if you see a strong shot, you might not think "hey! what a sitter, I'm going to demolish this ball", but if one of these 'hacks' hits you an off speed ball, you will often (subconsciously or consciously) think something along those lines, and go for a less consistent shot.

[rocket]

Rocket: I'm not sure why 'barely' is funny? I used the word to indicate his placement without an exact number. By hacks beating him, I mean players who might not look like they have the smoothest strokes, but who can consistently get the ball in places that make it hard to hit an offensive shot from (players like those in the video).

Sorry dude, 'barely' in this context means that you remain humble & play down his achievements. How many guys can go around saying that their dad is in the top 50? :)

[Pusher]

http://tennislink.usta.com/leagues/reports/NTRP/FindRating.asp

Cool. never seen that search function before.

[drakulie]

Yeah you mentioned their level when posting the link. :)

As a point of comparison, let me just say that NickB, who's rated 4.0 by some here, would clobber these guys, 0 and 1. Boojay, who's game is typical of a 4.5, would clean them up, 1 and 2. Slicelob? Fuhgeddit, a double bagel in 28 mins.

Dunno why they even bother to play at 5.0 level.

No disrespect to Boojay/NickB, but it is apparent, you have no idea what you are talking about.

As others have already pointed out, some of these guys were on the ATP Tour, and although they have lost many of the skills they had in their youth>>> one thing remains, which is what we are talking about in this thread>>> THEY KEEP THE BALL IN PLAY. I have personally hit with some of these guys, and watched them play "young" 5.0's. They sure as heck don't get knocked off the court, and believe me when I tell you>>> they could flat out plaster the ball when needed, but they understand something you don't>>>>> hitting shots long or into the net doesn't win points.


She is probably an ex-tour player!

Hey are you going to the Jimmy Evert event that is coming up? You could take some film of those guys and post it on here so they can get rated lower!!!

Julieta, I will not be able to attend that tourney. :( I guess the posters on here will have to low rate some one else. :)

[rocket]

No disrespect to Boojay/NickB, but it is apparent, you have no idea what you are talking about.

As others have already pointed out, some of these guys were on the ATP Tour, and although they have lost many of the skills they had in their youth>>> one thing remains, which is what we are talking about in this thread>>> THEY KEEP THE BALL IN PLAY. I have personally hit with some of these guys, and watched them play "young" 5.0's. They sure as heck don't get knocked off the court, and believe me when I tell you>>> they could flat out plaster the ball when needed, but they understand something you don't>>>>> hitting shots long or into the net doesn't win points.

I don't know how much you undertand technique, but like riding a bicycle or driving a car, once you've grooved your strokes, they stay with you. Yeah you might be a tad slower to get to the ball & don't hit as hard, but technique is technique & you don't just forget.

Sure some were injured so they had to modify their strokes, but the vid that you posted shows two hacks having a 'fun' rally. Both have no FH to speak of (the server arms his FH, standing completely flat-footed). The receiver kept hitting to the server's BH, his stronger wing. It's so tactically wrong! But I'll stop there. If you really want to see an older guy hitting the ball like a serious player, go see WBF's dad vid.

You're welcome to start a new thread titled "How to beat Hacks", but this thread is about rallies & NTRP rating, and as BB pointed out, one look at two guys rallying is enough for him to determine their NTRP level.

I never liked to rate someone down - I never did, until now.

Peace out!

[drakulie]

but this thread is about rallies & NTRP rating,

It has already been pointed out, these guys are 5.0 players. Now go learn how to hit a ball.

[rocket]

It has already been pointed out, these guys are 5.0 players. Now go learn how to hit a ball.

These guys don't typically represent the 5.0 level of play/rally. Check with BB & see if it's how 5.0's play. If he says yes, then you're pot-on, Dude!

I hit the ball quite nicely, thanks for your concern, Dude! LMAO.

[Swissv2]

These guys don't typically represent the 5.0 level of play/rally. Check with BB & see if it's how 5.0's play. If he says yes, then you're pot-on, Dude!


Sooooooo, let me get this straight.

If guys don't "look" like they are 5.0+ players in a short video clip, yet they have already proven themselves as solid 5.0+ players on the national level, then they are not 5.0+ players?

hmmm.

[drakulie]

These guys don't typically represent the 5.0 level of play/rally. Check with BB & see if it's how 5.0's play. If he says yes, then you're pot-on, Dude!

I hit the ball quite nicely, thanks for your concern, Dude! LMAO.

No disrespect to BB, but regardless of what he "thinks" they are, the fact remains these guys are 5.0 players, and are playing in the finals/semi finals of a National **Open** event.

They achieved that rating by playing in not only 5.0 tournaments, but *OPEN* tournaments as well. Additionally, they are reaching the semis and finals of these events, which would put them ahead of other proven 5.0 players.

[Moz]

Sod the videos, results is what we need!!

[Swissv2]

No disrespect to BB, but regardless of what he "thinks" they are, the fact remains these guys are 5.0 players, and are playing in the finals/semi finals of a National **Open** event.

They achieved that rating by playing in not only 5.0 tournaments, but *OPEN* tournaments as well. Additionally, they are reaching the semis and finals of these events, which would put them ahead of other proven 5.0 players.

I think many posters are probably not thinking of the fact that these fellows are playing on hartru

[raiden031]

According to Rocket's logic, Santoro should not even be a 5.0, yet he is a 7.0 and has beaten the top players in the world.

[Swissv2]

According to Rocket's logic, Santoro should not even be a 5.0, yet he is a 7.0 and has beaten the top players in the world.

Santaroooooo!!!!!!!!!

One of my favorites :mrgreen:

[Julieta]

I don't know how much you undertand technique, but like riding a bicycle or driving a car, once you've grooved your strokes, they stay with you. Yeah you might be a tad slower to get to the ball & don't hit as hard, but technique is technique & you don't just forget.

Sure some were injured so they had to modify their strokes, but the vid that you posted shows two hacks having a 'fun' rally. Both have no FH to speak of (the server arms his FH, standing completely flat-footed). The receiver kept hitting to the server's BH, his stronger wing. It's so tactically wrong! But I'll stop there. If you really want to see an older guy hitting the ball like a serious player, go see WBF's dad vid.

You're welcome to start a new thread titled "How to beat Hacks", but this thread is about rallies & NTRP rating, and as BB pointed out, one look at two guys rallying is enough for him to determine their NTRP level.

I never liked to rate someone down - I never did, until now.

Peace out!

You don't have to identify yourself, but would you mind telling all of us your ATP rating?

[rocket]

Sooooooo, let me get this straight.

If guys don't "look" like they are 5.0+ players in a short video clip, yet they have already proven themselves as solid 5.0+ players on the national level, then they are not 5.0+ players?

hmmm.

I never disputed their level. If they're 5.0+ players, then so be it, what do I care? My point simply was: with the ball-pushing that went on in the vid, I believe NickB & Boojay could give them some serious spanking. If you don't think so, then fine, it's just my opinion.

Funny how Drak asked for ppl's opinions, and when I gave him mine, he got aggressive. Bah. Whatever.

[Julieta]

Sod the videos, results is what we need!!

Forget it. In this discussion, ATP results don't seem to matter!

How are the Italy preparations going?

[rocket]

According to Rocket's logic, Santoro should not even be a 5.0, yet he is a 7.0 and has beaten the top players in the world.

Santoro's technique is definitely unorthodox, but highly effective. He bends the ball at will.

[J011yroger]

No disrespect to BB, but regardless of what he "thinks" they are, the fact remains these guys are 5.0 players, and are playing in the finals/semi finals of a National **Open** event.

They achieved that rating by playing in not only 5.0 tournaments, but *OPEN* tournaments as well. Additionally, they are reaching the semis and finals of these events, which would put them ahead of other proven 5.0 players.

Getting to the semis in 45s would put them in 5.5 territory if they routinely go deep into nationals.

Trying to convince someone who has delusions about 5.0 players is really impossible. If you are not/were not one, then you don't realize just how imperfect 5.0+ players actually are, and that they do all the same stupid crap that everyone else does, including but not limited to double faulting, dumping volleys into the net, botching overheads, missing floaters, hitting the wrong shot at the wrong time, being to aggressive/not aggressive enough, ad infinitum.


J

[Moz]

Forget it. In this discussion, ATP results don't seem to matter!

How are the Italy preparations going?

Not bad thanks Julieta - although been unable to get on a clay court recently. A friend is travelling as well this time - I hope we'll be able to play practice sets for at least a day before our real matches start...

Any regrets yet?! Our hotel is 30 metres from the beach!

[drakulie]

^^^Well said, Pirate!!

Rocket, yes, I want people's opinions, however, in the case of the two guys in the vid>>> there is no opinion>>> there is fact, and you have been repeatedly told those guys are 5.0players, yet continued to post ridiculous comments.

[Julieta]

Not bad thanks Julieta - although been unable to get on a clay court recently. A friend is travelling as well this time - I hope we'll be able to play practice sets for at least a day before our real matches start...

Any regrets yet?! Our hotel is 30 metres from the beach!

That's great you're travelling with someone. At least you have the recent experience in Barca.

I do regret it, kind of...would be fun and the hotel seems like a great price for tournament players. Have you looked at any ITFs in Latin America?

[WBF]

Oh man... So I haven't had much serious singles since December... I forgot how much I hated drilling/rallying. I can do forehands down the line and cross court fine, backhands down the line fine, but for some reason, backhands cross court *drilling* just absolutely suck! And then 5 minutes later, we play groundstroke games and they work perfectly fine, same deal for actual games. Even when the guy is continuously attacking my backhand after seeing my weakness during drills... Weird.

PS: rocket: I know he looks good, but my dad is not even close to the level of those players. Those were national 45's. My dad plays national 50's (older people, same tournament). He doesn't make it quite that far, and there is absolutely a major difference between people who can regularly get to the later rounds in those tourneys, and the rest of the players. Watching them on video just doesn't do their games justice.

[drakulie]

WBF, has your dad played in the 45's??? he should sign up for it next year, and you should come down!! Would be great to meet you two.

[couch]

Trying to convince someone who has delusions about 5.0 players is really impossible. If you are not/were not one, then you don't realize just how imperfect 5.0+ players actually are, and that they do all the same stupid crap that everyone else does, including but not limited to double faulting, dumping volleys into the net, botching overheads, missing floaters, hitting the wrong shot at the wrong time, being to aggressive/not aggressive enough, ad infinitum.


J

They just don't do these things that often. ;) Heck, I've seen pros miss easy overheads before; doesn't mean they're not pros. It's all about consistency when you get to higher levels.

[J011yroger]

They just don't do these things that often. ;) Heck, I've seen pros miss easy overheads before; doesn't mean they're not pros. It's all about consistency when you get to higher levels.

Yes, and the quality of the ball is that much better aswell.

The problem is that 3.5s play a 5.0, and the 5.0 blows them out of the water, and doesn't miss a thing because the 3.5 doesn't have the skill, speed, or firepower to challenge the 5.0, so they conclude that 5.0s don't miss. But when 2 5.0s play each other, they challange each other, and miss more.

J

[rocket]

But when 2 5.0s play each other, they challange each other, and miss more.

J

Isn't that obvious? It's called a match. When two skillsets are vastly different, it's not much of a match, is it?

[rocket]

Rallying is good for you. Grooving your strokes is good for you. Having fine footwork & being in the best position to hit the ball is good for you. Having the endurance to stay in the point & not mess up a shot cuz you're out of steam/out of position is good for you. Being able to control the ball & hit the spot is good for you.

The idea is to be ready when you play a match. There's a mental aspect too but let's take one thing at a time.

About the S/F pushers. They're 5.0+. Great, good for them. You can choose to play like they do & get their kinda results, or you can choose to practice hard & hit the ball a little better everyday, with proper strokes, good footwork, etc.

There're ways to beat pushers. I've played them enough to know. But pushers or not, the key is to figure out your opponents, see what they like & don't like, then give them plenty of what they don't like.

On that note, peace out!

[WBF]

WBF, has your dad played in the 45's??? he should sign up for it next year, and you should come down!! Would be great to meet you two.

He hasn't; I think he started playing these in 2006, and has been playing in the 50's each year. That would be fun though, I'll have to mention it. Is it usually late April like this year?

[crosscourt]

I was reading an interesting exchange in another thread regarding rallying and how many shots, kept in play would be be the standard for the 4.5 and above players. I believe the bar was set around 20+ shots (each). This got me curious.

While practicing (cross court shots), should keeping the ball in play, for a pre-set length of time really be an indicator for one's NTRP rating?? If so, then if two horrible players, with innapropriate stroke mechanics, who could keep the ball in play for 30 or more shots be considered 5.0 players even if they are simply poking the ball back and forth??

In my experience, I have not only practiced with several 5.0 players, but have also watched many, many 5.0+ players who cannot keep the ball in play for 30 or more shots.

NOTE: These 5.0's can do this, but only if they start really slowing down the swing.

The other thing to consider is the opponent. What if one could consistently hit a target on the court, but the other can't sustain the rally????? Isn't this unfair to the one who is hitting his target????

What do you all think??? Let's keep the debate nice.

My feeling about this is that if they are good players -- and I gather that 5.0 means a good player -- they shouldn't be slowing their swings down or speeding them up in a rally. They should swing pretty constantly in speed terms. Obviously there will be times when you have to go faster or slower. But in a rally in hitting practice that shouldn't be the case.

cc

[drakulie]

About the S/F pushers. They're 5.0+. Great, good for them. You can choose to play like they do & get their kinda results,

Results like **Winning.**

He hasn't; I think he started playing these in 2006, and has been playing in the 50's each year. That would be fun though, I'll have to mention it. Is it usually late April like this year?

Yeah, it was played in April this year. If your dad does decide to sign up, let me know.

[Moz]

That's great you're travelling with someone. At least you have the recent experience in Barca.

I do regret it, kind of...would be fun and the hotel seems like a great price for tournament players. Have you looked at any ITFs in Latin America?

I've had a look and considered them, but the cost and organisation is a bit of an issue. How about you?

[J011yroger]

Isn't that obvious? It's called a match. When two skillsets are vastly different, it's not much of a match, is it?


I don't know what to make of this. Are you just trying to be rude and speak condescendingly to me by taking my words out of their context and asking rhetorical questions?

If so, please do it over private e-mail. If not, then I apologize for misunderstanding your intent.

J

[rocket]

I don't know what to make of this. Are you just trying to be rude and speak condescendingly to me by taking my words out of their context and asking rhetorical questions?

If so, please do it over private e-mail. If not, then I apologize for misunderstanding your intent.

J

Nope, sorry if it sounds rude & condescending. I basically agree with you, and it's a shame that some posters gave your vids a 3.5 score (thinking that 5.0s don't mess up... well from what I gathered, didn't see the vids or read the comments myself). Players make silly mistakes at every level of play, when under pressure or due to lack of care, or time.