PDA

View Full Version : NTRP of people playing challengers? Impressive vid


Ballinbob
01-12-2009, 05:16 PM
What would be the NTRP of these guys? The guys are good obviously, but what is the NTRP usually of people playing these events? There's alot to learn from this vid too, both these guys know how to construct points really well. If you don't know the NTRP just take your best guess and enjoy the vid. I really enjoyed this vid, so I thought i'd share. I have no idea what their level is but I'll just guess 6.0 for the hell of it. I'm probably wrong but whatever lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0WK86A_rfU&feature=related

Enjoy:)

edit-if you liked it, look under related vids and you'll find the rest of the match. This really is good stuff

Ambivalent
01-12-2009, 05:26 PM
5.5-6.0

They look like typical D1 college players

Ballinbob
01-12-2009, 05:30 PM
Yeah I think that sounds about right. They're really good, and some great points in there

jasoncho92
01-12-2009, 05:35 PM
I thought challengers were made up of 6.0-6.5

Edit - No way these guys are 5.5 ambivalent. Kristian Pless was rated 65 in the world in 2002, Kevin Kim 63 in 2005

Ballinbob
01-12-2009, 05:42 PM
Our bad then lol...we didn't know. I just took my best guess, I don't know much about ratings that are 5.0+. Thanks for sharing that though.

These guys are great though, and I love the way they construct points. Was impressed by their playing. This thread is for guessing their level and just learning from these guys...kinda a for fun thread. And this is before they went pro right?You dont play challengers when your 65th in the world..I think at least

tennisdad65
01-12-2009, 05:59 PM
thats 7.0 tennis :)
kevin kim is ranked top 130 in the world. he was in the main draw of the chennai open. thats gotta be 7.0.

maratsafin5
01-12-2009, 06:05 PM
Yeh, easily 7.0 without a doubt.

ksqwqb
01-12-2009, 06:20 PM
Dallas challenger, early 2008. I went to this match - good stuff.

tennisfreak15347
01-12-2009, 07:05 PM
I found a video of James Blake and Kevin Kim warming up for a match. If kevin kim gets the privilage of playing a competative match against james blake, then they must be pretty high up the NTRP scale. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ucl9Kq4Qvxg&feature=related

wihamilton
01-12-2009, 07:20 PM
Heh these are professionals. 7.0.

RestockingTues
01-12-2009, 07:30 PM
I like watching lower ranked pros play more than Federer and the guys going at it. The points are longer, there's more point construction... Good stuff, thanks for posting :)

NamRanger
01-12-2009, 09:16 PM
Elite level tennis right there.

iamke55
01-12-2009, 09:40 PM
If these guys are 5.5 or 6.0 then I must be a top 100 player. From watching the video it looks like I could easily hold my own against these guys from the baseline. They guys are 4.0 and have ugly strokes, maybe 4.5 on their best day. They would both get killed by the 4.5 and 5.0 players in my area.

jasoncho92
01-12-2009, 10:03 PM
If these guys are 5.5 or 6.0 then I must be a top 100 player. From watching the video it looks like I could easily hold my own against these guys from the baseline. They guys are 4.0 and have ugly strokes, maybe 4.5 on their best day. They would both get killed by the 4.5 and 5.0 players in my area.
I know. I, just like every other teen on these boards, was a 4.5 after one month of playing. I was probably as good as these guys after 4 months of playing. Too bad i dont have a video camera to record myself playing. Did i mention i hit winners on every single shot that is short?

m27
01-12-2009, 10:21 PM
needless to say, extremely high level tennis.
to me, the most impressive thing is probably the service returns. consistently deep off of very fast and well-placed serves.

NamRanger
01-12-2009, 10:25 PM
If these guys are 5.5 or 6.0 then I must be a top 100 player. From watching the video it looks like I could easily hold my own against these guys from the baseline. They guys are 4.0 and have ugly strokes, maybe 4.5 on their best day. They would both get killed by the 4.5 and 5.0 players in my area.



I truly hope you are being sarcastic.

kelz
01-12-2009, 11:02 PM
Kevin Kim plays on the ATP tour... 7.0

phoenicks
01-12-2009, 11:18 PM
the spin and the pace is very scary, and they guy in red shirt is constantly attacking close to the line in the 1st service game o 1st video, and the guy returns everything back with great defense, I doubt any1 less than ATP pro can do anything like that.

futuratennis
01-12-2009, 11:28 PM
HAHA!! watch kristian pless goes "safin" on a racquet... rofl

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=BIzPZz2atDk&feature=related

btw these guys are awesome, the camera really shows how fast the balls go compared to the tv angles

jasoncho92
01-13-2009, 02:11 AM
Kevin Kim plays on the ATP tour... 7.0
ATP tour doesnt mean you are a 7.0.

goober
01-13-2009, 04:02 AM
I guess the OP doesn't follow pro tennis much:wink: If you are in the main draw of a Challenger you are 7.0 with very few exceptions. In futures you could be 6.0-6.5, but they still have a lot of 7.0s.

A better set up would have obscure players in the 400 rank range on vid. Of course this has been done already with the expected results. :)

drakulie
01-13-2009, 05:29 AM
According to TW reviewers>> this is a perfect example of 3.5 tennis. Thsi should be a sticky thread so other posters will know what 3.5 tennis looks like. :)

raiden031
01-13-2009, 05:49 AM
You cannot put NTRP and Challengers in the same sentence.

Anyone in the top 400 in the world is a 7.0. Last I heard, guys in the top 100-200 play some challengers.

Chauvalito
01-13-2009, 05:55 AM
Kevin Kim plays on the ATP tour... 7.0

thats 7.0 tennis :)
kevin kim is ranked top 130 in the world. he was in the main draw of the chennai open. thats gotta be 7.0.

Kristian Pless is a former Junior World Number 1.

Unfortunately, he has undergone 3 shoulder surgeries during his pro career, and this has severely limited his ranking...otherwise he is a top 50 player.

NamRanger
01-13-2009, 07:24 AM
ATP tour doesnt mean you are a 7.0.


You are right. ATP tour doesn't mean you are a 7.0. ATP tour means you are better than 99.9% of the population in the world.

iamke55
01-13-2009, 08:20 AM
ATP tour doesnt mean you are a 7.0.

These guys have taken sets off of Roddick and Blake, and Pless beat Nalbandian one year. So if you are implying that these guys are not 7.0, then you are wrong.

m27
01-13-2009, 08:26 AM
You are right. ATP tour doesn't mean you are a 7.0. ATP tour means you are better than 99.9% of the population in the world.

more like 99.9999999%, actually...

oneguy21
01-13-2009, 10:45 AM
ATP tour doesnt mean you are a 7.0.

Yes it does. If your within 200, you don't need an ntrp rating. These guys don't even compare to us. We would be bageled VERY easily. It would be a struggle to win some points.

maratsafin5
01-13-2009, 11:36 AM
If these guys are 5.5 or 6.0 then I must be a top 100 player. From watching the video it looks like I could easily hold my own against these guys from the baseline. They guys are 4.0 and have ugly strokes, maybe 4.5 on their best day. They would both get killed by the 4.5 and 5.0 players in my area.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH, thanks for the laugh. Funny thing is, you're being serious(or at least trying to be)

Noaler
01-13-2009, 12:07 PM
these guys are on crack

Ballinbob
01-13-2009, 01:27 PM
Hey guys sorry, I didn't know they were 7.0s let alone pros an all. I just found this vid and loved it, so I thought I'd share and have some fun guessing their level. I do follow pro tennis, but I don't know the details of the tournaments and stuff. Like I have no idea whats the difference between a challenger and a future tournament.. I also liked the camera angle of this vid, shows how hard they're hitting an all. They construct points really well, and thought it would be worth sharing.

And iamke55, I hope your joking...

julian
01-13-2009, 03:18 PM
If these guys are 5.5 or 6.0 then I must be a top 100 player. From watching the video it looks like I could easily hold my own against these guys from the baseline. They guys are 4.0 and have ugly strokes, maybe 4.5 on their best day. They would both get killed by the 4.5 and 5.0 players in my area.
Please read an info about one of them
--->
Kristian Peter Pless (born February 9, 1981 in Odense, Denmark) is a professional male tennis player from Denmark.

In 1999, he won the Australian Open for juniors (defeated Mikhail Youzhny), and reached the junior finals at Wimbledon (lost to Jürgen Melzer), and the US Open (lost to Jarkko Nieminen). He finished 1999 as the no. 1 ranked junior player in the world.

He turned professional in 1999, and on January 28, 2002, Kristian Pless reached his career-high ATP singles ranking: World No. 65. He has won tournaments at the Futures and Challenger levels, and has reached three semifinals on the ATP Tour. He suffered a serious shoulder injury in 2003, which after multiple surgery kept him out of competition for almost a year.

After returning from injury in 2004, he had dropped in the rankings to World No. 846 on May 24. Subsequently, he has gradually climbed the rankings, and after successful performances at the Challenger level in the fall of 2006, he entered the Top-100 again. In January 2007, he continued his good performances as he defeated World No. 8 David Nalbandian in three sets in the first round of Chennai Open. This was Pless' first win against a Top-10 ranked player.

NamRanger
01-13-2009, 03:22 PM
Yes it does. If your within 200, you don't need an ntrp rating. These guys don't even compare to us. We would be bageled VERY easily. It would be a struggle to win some points.



Struggle to win points? Uh, it would be a struggle to win ONE point.

GeorgeLucas
01-13-2009, 03:35 PM
Struggle to win points? Uh, it would be a struggle to win ONE point.

That's deifying top 100 professionals a bit too much. I know it's hyperbole, but with some of the comments we have on TW, you expect professional tennis players should be about 50% cyborg. The other 49% is ninja. 0.9% pirate. 0.1% normal human.


Granted, he is a very good player!!

jasoncho92
01-13-2009, 03:53 PM
Yes it does. If your within 200, you don't need an ntrp rating. These guys don't even compare to us. We would be bageled VERY easily. It would be a struggle to win some points.
Please dont put words in my mouth, and learn to comprehend basic English. I just refuted his statement that any player on the ATP tour is a 7.0, not that these particular players are not 7.0s. Im having a hard time finding where i said that we can be compared to these players, please direct me to the post where i said that.

Ballinbob
01-13-2009, 04:04 PM
Yeah I don't think we can really compare ourselves to pros lol.

Did you guys like the vid though? I don't know why people get into arguments over ratings like this. I just meant it to be something for fun where you guess their level and enjoy the vid/points. I love the first couple points where Pless is blasting the forehands and then that dropshot:)

Noaler
01-13-2009, 05:06 PM
Please dont put words in my mouth, and learn to comprehend basic English. I just refuted his statement that any player on the ATP tour is a 7.0, not that these particular players are not 7.0s. Im having a hard time finding where i said that we can be compared to these players, please direct me to the post where i said that.

He would think that since you said some were below 7.0. And thats sorta of comparing to some of us.

tennisfreak15347
01-13-2009, 05:25 PM
If these guys are 5.5 or 6.0 then I must be a top 100 player. From watching the video it looks like I could easily hold my own against these guys from the baseline. They guys are 4.0 and have ugly strokes, maybe 4.5 on their best day. They would both get killed by the 4.5 and 5.0 players in my area.

so you're saying you're better than a player ranked 65 in the world? He even competatively played top players like James Blake, ect. I highly doubt this.

NamRanger
01-13-2009, 05:31 PM
That's deifying top 100 professionals a bit too much. I know it's hyperbole, but with some of the comments we have on TW, you expect professional tennis players should be about 50% cyborg. The other 49% is ninja. 0.9% pirate. 0.1% normal human.


Granted, he is a very good player!!



D1 college level players struggle to take games off a top 1000 professional player. Do you seriously think amateur tennis players that are in the 3.5-4.5 area could seriously take a point off a top 100 professional player if he was actually trying? I HIGHLY doubt it.

tennisfreak15347
01-13-2009, 05:49 PM
D1 college level players struggle to take games off a top 1000 professional player. Do you seriously think amateur tennis players that are in the 3.5-4.5 area could seriously take a point off a top 100 professional player if he was actually trying? I HIGHLY doubt it.

actually, anyone could take ONE point off of a top 100 player. two words, net tape.

LeeD
01-13-2009, 05:54 PM
I'd think....
Most top 400 players are at least 6.5 level.
If we consider ourselves 4.5's..... then we can go play against a 3.5 and can we consistently beat him double bagel ??
I can't.
Then you add another level of difference. I'd think, double bagel easy, and the lower player would get a few points overall, but hardly ever more than one each game.

kimbahpnam
01-13-2009, 06:00 PM
the acoustics in there make it sound like they're spanking the ball

bpp
01-13-2009, 06:11 PM
D1 college level players struggle to take games off a top 1000 professional player. Do you seriously think amateur tennis players that are in the 3.5-4.5 area could seriously take a point off a top 100 professional player if he was actually trying? I HIGHLY doubt it.

A lot of the better current D1 college players have had ATP rankings in the top 1000. Your statement makes no sense. In fact, a large percentage of D1 and ex D1 players make up the ranked players outside of the top 200. Most are inactive while they play college but if you search the top players, you all see quite a few had rankings in the top 1000 before entering college.

ZPTennis
01-13-2009, 06:13 PM
This forum is Obsessed with Ratings. Ratings don't really apply after the 5.x+ level. I'm not saying there aren't descriptions for 5.5 to 7.0. But they just arent talked about like 5.0 and below. Go ask any #1 seed at any mens open tournament what their rating is. They'll probably look at you funny and say they don't know.

LeeD
01-13-2009, 06:14 PM
I'm pretty sure anyone ranked in the top 400 in the world pretty much "spanks" the ball most of the time.
Not really swung faster, but much better, cleaner, contact and drive. The whole body is behind each shot, much like a professional boxer's big punch compared to ours.
And earlier, quicker preparation for each shot, coupled with superior eye-hand coordination, and adding better fitness and practice....their ball just goes faster effortlessly compared to ours.

NamRanger
01-13-2009, 07:05 PM
A lot of the better current D1 college players have had ATP rankings in the top 1000. Your statement makes no sense. In fact, a large percentage of D1 and ex D1 players make up the ranked players outside of the top 200. Most are inactive while they play college but if you search the top players, you all see quite a few had rankings in the top 1000 before entering college.



You are taking the Cream De La Cream of D1 college players. The AVERAGE D1 college player struggles to take games off journeyman tennis players. This is simply due to the journeyman player having far more experience and probably better fitness. Yes, guys like Isner, Benjamin Becker, and Kevin Kim played college. However, they played and DOMINATED D1 tennis. These just aren't your average D1 players.


Also, D1 tennis in the U.S. is slightly inflated in skill level due to overseas players coming here to play. These are the players talented enough to play in the pros, but do not have the money to do so to support their endeavors. What's the next best thing to do? Come to the U.S. and play other good players while getting paid to do it AND get an education.


If you seriously think the average joe schmo on this forum can take even a point of a top 100 player, you are SORELY mistaken.

NamRanger
01-13-2009, 07:06 PM
actually, anyone could take ONE point off of a top 100 player. two words, net tape.



You wouldn't even have a chance to try and tape the ball.

JHBKLYN
01-13-2009, 08:35 PM
If you seriously think the average joe schmo on this forum can take even a point of a top 100 player, you are SORELY mistaken.

A high-level 3.5 player with a great serve can take at least one point off a top 100 player. Just go for aces on every serve and go for winners on the pro's serve. Pros are great players but they're not god. And this can be proven. :)

bpp
01-13-2009, 08:44 PM
You are taking the Cream De La Cream of D1 college players. The AVERAGE D1 college player struggles to take games off journeyman tennis players. This is simply due to the journeyman player having far more experience and probably better fitness. Yes, guys like Isner, Benjamin Becker, and Kevin Kim played college. However, they played and DOMINATED D1 tennis. These just aren't your average D1 players.


Also, D1 tennis in the U.S. is slightly inflated in skill level due to overseas players coming here to play. These are the players talented enough to play in the pros, but do not have the money to do so to support their endeavors. What's the next best thing to do? Come to the U.S. and play other good players while getting paid to do it AND get an education.


If you seriously think the average joe schmo on this forum can take even a point of a top 100 player, you are SORELY mistaken.

Again you are wrong. Somdev Devvarman was last years NCAA champion and is now ranked 154 in the world. SO he is EASILY in the top 1000. He had an incredible record in college BUT all the singles players he played did not struggle winning games. He didnt lose many sets but a lot of his sets were 7-6, 6-4,6-3, etc. These were not just the creme de la creme, these were #1 singles players across the board for a lot of different schools and some were ranked outside the top 150 in college.

I am probably between a 4.5 and 5.0 and I am pretty sure I could win a point against a top 100 player. I have a hard enough serve (probably around 110-115 on a well struck ball) and would just crush them in down the T or out wide. At some point, I would either get an ace or force an error. Also, there is a decent chance I could force some unforced error at some point.

Tennisguy777
01-13-2009, 08:55 PM
I thought going to the indoor club and hitting with the ball machine for 2 - 3 hrs a day 5 days a week would make me as good as them! But after 1 month I think I got worse! I just don't have it. It takes talent, skill and great coaching to be that good!

Okazaki Fragment
01-13-2009, 08:59 PM
Again you are wrong. Somdev Devvarman was last years NCAA champion and is now ranked 154 in the world. SO he is EASILY in the top 1000. He had an incredible record in college BUT all the singles players he played did not struggle winning games. He didnt lose many sets but a lot of his sets were 7-6, 6-4,6-3, etc. These were not just the creme de la creme, these were #1 singles players across the board for a lot of different schools and some were ranked outside the top 150 in college.

I am probably between a 4.5 and 5.0 and I am pretty sure I could win a point against a top 100 player. I have a hard enough serve (probably around 110-115 on a well struck ball) and would just crush them in down the T or out wide. At some point, I would either get an ace or force an error. Also, there is a decent chance I could force some unforced error at some point.

Heh, forcing an unforced error. I like that.

As it stands, the pro's game is made for other professional opponents. If you were the type of opponent (much lesser player, but down 48 straight match points) they were paid to play against, I'm sure they would adapt their games to win.

bpp
01-13-2009, 09:06 PM
Also, D1 tennis in the U.S. is slightly inflated in skill level due to overseas players coming here to play. These are the players talented enough to play in the pros, but do not have the money to do so to support their endeavors. What's the next best thing to do? Come to the U.S. and play other good players while getting paid to do it AND get an education.



LOL, you realize this whole paragraph makes no sense. D1 is inflated? What does that even mean? Slighly inflated in compared to what? Is there D1 in another country? Foreign players have been coming over here forever to play college tennis. They don't get paid to play, they get a scholarship and the stipend is very small. Most of the foreign players ARE NOT talented enough to making a living in the pro tour and use tennis as means of education and entry into the USA.

bpp
01-13-2009, 09:10 PM
Heh, forcing an unforced error. I like that.

As it stands, the pro's game is made for other professional opponents. If you were the type of opponent (much lesser player, but down 48 straight match points) they were paid to play against, I'm sure they would adapt their games to win.

Hehe, yea I realized that but after I hit submit. Eventually they would make a mistake. I doubt most of my groundstrokes would trouble a pro very much but its not like they don't make mistakes. I think I could force errors I on my serve though. I have played some service games well enough that I think I would have gotten 3-4 aces/forced errors on almost any player. A 110-115 mph serve straight down the T is hard to stop at almost any level.

fluffy Beaver
01-13-2009, 09:23 PM
I am probably between a 4.5 and 5.0 and I am pretty sure I could win a point against a top 100 player. I have a hard enough serve (probably around 110-115 on a well struck ball) and would just crush them in down the T or out wide. At some point, I would either get an ace or force an error. Also, there is a decent chance I could force some unforced error at some point.

How about a vid?

Oh and LOL at a 4.5 getting points on a top 100 pro (I know you said A point, but still a joke).

Have you even seen the pros live? I've seen solid 5.0's play again guys ranked around 400 on the tour and they can hardly win any points. I highly doubt someone around a 4.5 could against someone in the TOP 100! If anything, you are underestimating the pros.

jasoncho92
01-13-2009, 10:48 PM
He would think that since you said some were below 7.0. And thats sorta of comparing to some of us.
Youre kidding right? When i say that someone like Agassi was worse than Pete Sampras, i dont mean that Agassi can be compared to the average 3.0 that roams TT. When you pull something out of your ***, what you want comes out. Saying that the ATP tour is made up of more than just 7.0 players gives absolutely no below the surface meaning that allows one to think, "oh hes comparing atp players to 3.0s."

shintan17
01-13-2009, 11:35 PM
You can definitely win "ONE" point against ATP Pros without a doubt with luck after many tries. "TWO" points? Probably not.

Just like you can get a basehit against MLB pitchers if you close your eyes ;) and swing the bat for millions and millions times.

raiden031
01-14-2009, 04:13 AM
If you seriously think the average joe schmo on this forum can take even a point of a top 100 player, you are SORELY mistaken.


Are you kidding? Haven't you ever heard of an unforced error? Pros cannot hit every single shot perfect. Even when they are hitting casually in warmup, they always miss a few shots.

raiden031
01-14-2009, 04:16 AM
Youre kidding right? When i say that someone like Agassi was worse than Pete Sampras, i dont mean that Agassi can be compared to the average 3.0 that roams TT. When you pull something out of your ***, what you want comes out. Saying that the ATP tour is made up of more than just 7.0 players gives absolutely no below the surface meaning that allows one to think, "oh hes comparing atp players to 3.0s."

You're still wrong though. Name one player on the ATP tour that is not a 7.0? By definition, anyone in the top 400 in the world is a 7.0.

bpp
01-14-2009, 01:35 PM
How about a vid?

Oh and LOL at a 4.5 getting points on a top 100 pro (I know you said A point, but still a joke).

Have you even seen the pros live? I've seen solid 5.0's play again guys ranked around 400 on the tour and they can hardly win any points. I highly doubt someone around a 4.5 could against someone in the TOP 100! If anything, you are underestimating the pros.

Let me see if I can get my hands on a camcorder. So you don't think a hard serves would net me any points? Especially if I was going for all out on both first and second serves? Its not that I am underestimating pro but a hard serve down the T (on the line or close) is gonna be an ace or service winner quite a bit.

Anyways, if I post a video how about you? The board loves to critique but lets make it fair.

itisgregory
01-14-2009, 02:02 PM
This is a no brainer. They are both at least 6.5 players that should be in the pros or just turning pro.

Alexio92
01-14-2009, 02:19 PM
You can definitely win "ONE" point against ATP Pros without a doubt with luck after many tries. "TWO" points? Probably not.

Just like you can get a basehit against MLB pitchers if you close your eyes ;) and swing the bat for millions and millions times.
Well if you surpsied them with a drop shot underarm serve, then yes you could win one point like that and one with luck :)

bpp
01-14-2009, 02:49 PM
Well if you surpsied them with a drop shot underarm serve, then yes you could win one point like that and one with luck :)

Funny that you mention this. I do have a trick server that is somewhat similar to the Chang one but the goal is more to hit a huge curving slice (the opposite spin of an overhand slice serve). Essentially, you take your racket almost to the highest point (similar to a trophy pose but your tossing arm is down) and then you drop the ball. You try to hit the ball with a huge slicing underhand motion (the swing is a big J, opposite of the windshield wiper forehand) and right before it hits the ground you hit it. Since you are stationary you can really whip through the ball and hit a huge amount of sidespin and it really explodes off the court. Never seen anyone try this and I always thought it was too cheap to use (and perhaps would get to many laughs) but is interesting.

I think you would find a video of this much more interesting then me trying to serve hard...but maybe I can put both together:). I might need to use an oversize head to prevent the ball from hitting the frame because the motion is so exaggerated.

MomentumGT
01-14-2009, 02:53 PM
A high-level 3.5 player with a great serve can take at least one point off a top 100 player. Just go for aces on every serve and go for winners on the pro's serve. Pros are great players but they're not god. And this can be proven. :)

Hey guys we're talking about 1 point not 1 game right? I still lulz at this ^^^ statement. LOL

I play consistently with a guy that used to be ranked #3 in 3.5 Men's Sinlges in Socal in 2006 and he struggles to get games off me, and I'm a shell of my former self. I'm a sandbagger 4.0 currently.

I remember back in my Jr. days when I was ranked #83 boys 18's Socal 98' and played my coach who was just inside the the top 500's worlds ranking and I get a total of 9 points in 2 sets, but none of those points equated to 1 game :oops: Yea top 100 pros are that good.

-Jon

jasoncho92
01-14-2009, 03:00 PM
You're still wrong though. Name one player on the ATP tour that is not a 7.0? By definition, anyone in the top 400 in the world is a 7.0.
Haha youre using "by definition" now?
The 7.0 is a world class player who is committed to tournament competition on the international level and whose major source of income is tournament prize winnings.
A top 100 player can barely make a living off of tournament prize winnings. Im pretty damn sure that since a top 100 player barely makes the majority of their incoming playing tournaments, a top 400 isnt classified as a 7.0, but a 6.5.

fluffy Beaver
01-14-2009, 03:27 PM
Let me see if I can get my hands on a camcorder. So you don't think a hard serves would net me any points? Especially if I was going for all out on both first and second serves? Its not that I am underestimating pro but a hard serve down the T (on the line or close) is gonna be an ace or service winner quite a bit.

Anyways, if I post a video how about you? The board loves to critique but lets make it fair.

Why is is necessary for me to post a vid? I'm just an average 4.0. Unlike you, I don't run my mouth. And btw, you going all out on both second and first serve to a pro to them would feel like the El mago is serving, in fact, not even close to that. And yes you are underestimating the pros BY A LOT. You even say just getting your serve down the T is going to ace them quite a bit. What a joke.

fluffy Beaver
01-14-2009, 03:29 PM
Haha youre using "by definition" now?
The 7.0 is a world class player who is committed to tournament competition on the international level and whose major source of income is tournament prize winnings.
A top 100 player can barely make a living off of tournament prize winnings. Im pretty damn sure that since a top 100 player barely makes the majority of their incoming playing tournaments, a top 400 isnt classified as a 7.0, but a 6.5.

Since when does income play into rating?

Ballinbob
01-14-2009, 03:33 PM
I think its possible to win point in a whole match just from an unforced error from a pro. It still would require alot of luck though.

And bpp, your a joke. You think you can ace a pro? You think you can FORCE errors from a pro? And don't run your mouth on your rating. I thought I was a 5.5 when I first started and guess what! I'm actually a 3.5 who could maybe pass for a 4.0 on a really really good day. But still a 3.5. The rating descriptions on the USTA website are garbage

LeeD
01-14-2009, 03:41 PM
I'd think the individual who's playing the low ranked pro would have different styles, power, pace, placements, etc.
Some solid 6.0's don't have pace, win by consistency and pressure, and might not get a game off a top 50 player.
Other 6.0's have the big strokes, and if they can harness those under duress, with the spotlight in their eyes, and the pressure of his friends watching, might take a few games.
This is not pure guess and conjecture.
I watched one of my practice partners, PeterPearson get double bagelled by an old, tired BobbyLutz, who lost second round (next) really badly to a tiny EddyDibbs.
Next match, I watched RockyMcQuire lose 4 and 4 to JohanKriek, who got to the finals.
Peter regularly beat Rocky in practice matches, and was ranked higher in the A's !! And Peter played great against BobbyLutz, just Lutz was not under any pressure ever during the match.

raiden031
01-14-2009, 06:17 PM
Haha youre using "by definition" now?
The 7.0 is a world class player who is committed to tournament competition on the international level and whose major source of income is tournament prize winnings.
A top 100 player can barely make a living off of tournament prize winnings. Im pretty damn sure that since a top 100 player barely makes the majority of their incoming playing tournaments, a top 400 isnt classified as a 7.0, but a 6.5.

In the USTA Experienced Player Guidelines, they state that top 400 is a 7.0.

bpp
01-14-2009, 07:38 PM
I think its possible to win point in a whole match just from an unforced error from a pro. It still would require alot of luck though.

And bpp, your a joke. You think you can ace a pro? You think you can FORCE errors from a pro? And don't run your mouth on your rating. I thought I was a 5.5 when I first started and guess what! I'm actually a 3.5 who could maybe pass for a 4.0 on a really really good day. But still a 3.5. The rating descriptions on the USTA website are garbage

I misspoke when I said could force an error. I meant to say I think I could get enough balls in play that they eventually might make an error. I still contend that there is a decent chance I could get an ace or a service winner. And no I am not running my mouth...I wouldnt say winning a point or two against a pro is running your mouth.

wilsonplayer
01-15-2009, 06:02 AM
winning a point against a pro, a 7.0 pro, i don't think would be that difficult for players that are 4.5 and up. 4.0 is iffy, depending on the quality of their own serve. when you factor in unforced errors, double faults, your own aces/ service winners, a lucky let shot it doesn't seem all that unlikely. i've taken a few points off a 6.0-6.5 who plays for USC just due to my serve. unfortunately in our sport, games are the things that matter, and there's no way i'd get close to taking a game off of him.

JHBKLYN
01-15-2009, 08:43 AM
Hey guys we're talking about 1 point not 1 game right? I still lulz at this ^^^ statement. LOL

Yea top 100 pros are that good.

-Jon

Yes, just one measly lousy point, not a game. Robby Ginepri, top 50 player, lost a point against this Joe schmo and this guy looks terrible, probably a 3.0 player on his best day. Granted it wasn't a point in a set but Ginepri wouldn't want the embarassment of losing this "joes vs pros" encounter and still had an unforced error.

http://video.aol.com/video-detail/pros-vs-joes-2-episode-5-robby-ginepri-tennis/3310666730

If top 100 pros were "that good," why do they double fault, miss easy volleys, chip shots, overheads, and hit short balls out? Why don't they hit every first serve on a dime in the corner? Why don't they hit every forehand and backhand on the lines every time? Why can't they do it????? I'll tell you why, because they are flesh and blood and do make errors from time to time.

Of course this can only be proven on the court so the only real way to prove it is to get an exhibition going. Another way is to ask the pros themselves. Maybe an email to Murphy Jenson and ask him to ask the pros whether a USTA 3.5 to 4.5 recreation player can get a point off them and have him announce the results on Open Access!

MomentumGT
01-15-2009, 11:48 AM
Yes, just one measly lousy point, not a game. Robby Ginepri, top 50 player, lost a point against this Joe schmo and this guy looks terrible, probably a 3.0 player on his best day. Granted it wasn't a point in a set but Ginepri wouldn't want the embarassment of losing this "joes vs pros" encounter and still had an unforced error.

http://video.aol.com/video-detail/pros-vs-joes-2-episode-5-robby-ginepri-tennis/3310666730

If top 100 pros were "that good," why do they double fault, miss easy volleys, chip shots, overheads, and hit short balls out? Why don't they hit every first serve on a dime in the corner? Why don't they hit every forehand and backhand on the lines every time? Why can't they do it????? I'll tell you why, because they are flesh and blood and do make errors from time to time.


Since we are talking about 1 lousy point I can actually see it happen with lots of luck on the 3.5'rs side, just not enough to get a game. The statement bolded I agree with whole heartily. I just can't see a 3.5r's game to pressure a top 100 pro's game to make them miss very many shots if at all 2 points to throw out the "luck" factor of the 3.5r. A top 100 pro would miss more than one shot hit by a 3.5r if the pro is not inspired to play his best... heck, top level 3.5r's have a hard time staying in a rally with a 4.5r with heavy "neutral" groundies let alone a world level athlete. Anyway if it ever happened we can all enjoy the hilarity in the expense of the 3.5r.

-Jon

raiden031
01-15-2009, 12:00 PM
Since we are talking about 1 lousy point I can actually see it happen with lots of luck on the 3.5'rs side, just not enough to get a game. The statement bolded I agree with whole heartily. I just can't see a 3.5r's game to pressure a top 100 pro's game to make them miss very many shots if at all 2 points to throw out the "luck" factor of the 3.5r. A top 100 pro would miss more than one shot hit by a 3.5r if the pro is not inspired to play his best... heck, top level 3.5r's have a hard time staying in a rally with a 4.5r with heavy "neutral" groundies let alone a world level athlete. Anyway if it ever happened we can all enjoy the hilarity in the expense of the 3.5r.

-Jon

I don't get why people think its impossible to win a point against a pro. There is a HUGE difference between winning a point or a few points in a match and winning a game. If pros were that reliable, then they would never hit unforced errors and so it would be forced errors and winners on every point.

Gee Willikers Batman!
01-15-2009, 12:08 PM
thanks for the video ballinbob

appreciate it,

MomentumGT
01-15-2009, 12:09 PM
I don't get why people think its impossible to win a point against a pro. There is a HUGE difference between winning a point or a few points in a match and winning a game. If pros were that reliable, then they would never hit unforced errors and so it would be forced errors and winners on every point.

If you think your 3.5 game can actually pressure a pro to make unforced or forced errors or even score winners on your end that's cool :-| String a few points together, video and post it, buy a lotto ticket while you're at it too. The lotto isn't impossible to win. . . people have done it.

-Jon

AlpineCadet
01-15-2009, 12:17 PM
whomp whomp

raiden031
01-15-2009, 12:19 PM
If you think your 3.5 game can actually pressure a pro to make unforced or forced errors or even score winners on your end that's cool :-| String a few points together, video and post it, buy a lotto ticket while you're at it too. The lotto isn't impossible to win. . . people have done it.

-Jon

Thats the point of calling it unforced, because it is not pressured. My 4.0 game will win a few points but I will still lose 6-0.

raiden031
01-15-2009, 12:20 PM
A 3.5 vs a 4.0, and the score was 6-0 to the 4.0 :oops:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGe0TyCdKh4

As I said. You cannot compare winning a game to winning a point. Winning 4 points in an entire match is way different than winning 4 points in one game.

JHBKLYN
01-15-2009, 01:23 PM
Since we are talking about 1 lousy point I can actually see it happen with lots of luck on the 3.5'rs side, just not enough to get a game. The statement bolded I agree with whole heartily. I just can't see a 3.5r's game to pressure a top 100 pro's game to make them miss very many shots if at all 2 points to throw out the "luck" factor of the 3.5r. A top 100 pro would miss more than one shot hit by a 3.5r if the pro is not inspired to play his best... heck, top level 3.5r's have a hard time staying in a rally with a 4.5r with heavy "neutral" groundies let alone a world level athlete. Anyway if it ever happened we can all enjoy the hilarity in the expense of the 3.5r.

-Jon

I'm not saying every 3.5 will win a point, but as you mentioned, with luck, lack of inspiration, and the pressure of winning every point, there'll be a few that will do it.

As far as winning a game, fugetaboutit! Forget the pro, a true 3.5 will not be able to take a game off a 5.0. When I was a 3.0, I played open tournaments and played against 5.0 players that would eventually win the tournament with ease. That was the first time I've experience how good the really good tennis players are. I had no forehand, no backhand, the only thing going for me was I had a very good serve and I can move around the court. I got points by serving aces, hitting non-returnable serves, by serving & volleying, and unforced errors. But due to my deficiency as a good tennis player, I couldn't string 4 points together against these 5.0's. The one or two chances I had game point in those matches, they would somehow come back and win the game. I was amazed how easy they could hit winners, and put away short balls at will, and how hard of a time I had returning their serves and strokes. I'm thinking if these guys are bageling me, and pros can bagel these guys, how good would a pro be? But no matter how good a pro is, they will make errors and in a match, you have 24 chances to get one lousy point, and unless you are a really really really crappy player, the odds are with you.

It would be a riot if Federer faced off against a 3.5 player and see whether the 3.5 can get one point off Fed. But if I was betting, and the player is a high level 3.5 with a good serve, as great as Fed is, I would lay money on the 3.5 guy. :)

JHBKLYN
01-15-2009, 01:54 PM
Haha youre using "by definition" now?
The 7.0 is a world class player who is committed to tournament competition on the international level and whose major source of income is tournament prize winnings.

A top 100 player can barely make a living off of tournament prize winnings. Im pretty damn sure that since a top 100 player barely makes the majority of their incoming playing tournaments, a top 400 isnt classified as a 7.0, but a 6.5.

It really depends what you mean by make a living. Kevin Kim, ranked 117 in the world already made $118,000.00 and he didn't even win a title! Prakash Amritraj, ranked 211 in the world, already made $83,000.00 and some people probably never heard of him! I wouldn't feel sorry for some of these lower ranked tennis players.

As far as ratings, what you said is technically true and not true. Anyone above a 5.5 rating doesn't need a rating so if you are in the top 400, you can be anywhere from a 6.0 to a 7.0 but rather than rating them with those NTRP numbers, they have a ranking. On the other hand, you could be a 7.0 and be ranked in the top 400 because there are other 399 other 7.0's better than you!

The rankings system would actually solve all USTA ratings problems. Rather than say someone is a 3.5 or 4.0, they should give each person a ranking and there would be no more this person ain't a 3.5 argument anymore! Instead, we'll have if this person is ranked 20,587, then I'm a 20,000! :)

raiden031
01-15-2009, 03:18 PM
The rankings system would actually solve all USTA ratings problems. Rather than say someone is a 3.5 or 4.0, they should give each person a ranking and there would be no more this person ain't a 3.5 argument anymore! Instead, we'll have if this person is ranked 20,587, then I'm a 20,000! :)

I would love this if they could pull it off. I wish they could add some kind of ranking system to local league play to show how players stack up against each other in the skill division. Unfortunately this type of information would facilitate manipulation of the system so they can never do it.

ssjkyle31
01-15-2009, 04:56 PM
The rankings system would actually solve all USTA ratings problems. Rather than say someone is a 3.5 or 4.0, they should give each person a ranking and there would be no more this person ain't a 3.5 argument anymore! Instead, we'll have if this person is ranked 20,587, then I'm a 20,000! :)

That would be 20,587 in Brooklyn, NY (LOL),in New York or in the Eastern, or even better the whole USTA League :).

tfm1973
01-20-2009, 11:05 AM
lol. i like the idea of a ranking system for usta leagues. 2 thoughts though.

1 - would it be like the women's pro tour which rewards people for playing a ton of tournaments like jankovich or would it be like the men's tour that takes into account the best results out of X amount of matches?

2 - will anyone care that i'm the 5,255,445th most talented player in the world?