Doomed to being just a 3.5 NTRP player?

[soyizgood]

I just played a match against a 4.0 player and lost 6-3 6-1. I'm now 0-5 against 4.0 level players. Maybe I should give up trying to move up. I feel as though 3.5 is a level of just being mediocre or average.

Today my 1st serve was effective, but my best shot, the backhand, fell apart. I had a couple of games that I had break point chances, but couldn't convert. At times I just felt resigned to ending this match ASAP. The first set I can't be too mad because there was only one break of serve. The second set I blew chances to make it much closer.

I practiced 2-4 hours a day 6 days/week for a few weeks leading up to that match. Granted I expected to lose that match and I also signed up to play a 3.5 match later today. But I wonder if I realistically have any chance at becoming a 4.0. I'm 31, most of my playing friends are 3.5 and below, I made countless changes to my forehand and serve, and I've been eager to improve for the past 2 years. I've improved, but I wonder how much losing I'll have to endure before I see results. Is it even worth it? Is being a 3.5 player a bad thing? I just don't want to be average at something I actually care about.

Just letting out some tension and frustration before I play another match in an hour.

[Bagumbawalla]

The 3.5 level is really an interesting level to play at. You will find all different sorts of players and styles of play.

As you begin to progress upward int0 the 4.0s and 4.5s, you will notice that there is less variety, no players who hit forehands off both sides, that moonball and lob, that have exaggeratet service motions, that junk-ball every shot, that use big radar-like rackets.

And that is pecause they have spent time practicing- usually with some instructor/coach and honing their game to rid it of kinks and idiosyncracys, and grove the big serves, the power shots, the crisp volleys.

They do not begin to tire in the third set because they are out of shape. They don't freeze up when they get high balls or low balls or crazy topspin or someone rushes the net-- because they have practiced, and know the answers and have the strokes and are confident in their ability.

So, find some good insrtuctor to look at your game- someone who can push you and set you up with a practice partner to work on drills during the week. Set up a schedule of physical improvement and stick to it. Buy books and study tactics, and try them out in practice.

It will not come easily- you may get blisters, you will ache, progress will be in inches, you will have ups and downs, you will think it's not worth it- but if you don't put out the effort, then you will remain where you are.

[NLBwell]

If you've been practicing 2-4 hours a day for 6 days a week for several weeks, then likely your strokes are as good as they are going to get. If you want to get better, you need to commit to changing your strokes - may need a GOOD pro to help you do that and may need to get worse before you get better. Also, you will need to work at how you move around the court - can you improve your speed or anticipation. How much do you want to improve? Are you willing to spend time and money to be worse for a while?

[Topaz]

You can practice 10 hours a day, but if you're not practicing the right way and with a purpose, it is wasted time.

Is any of this time with an instructor and/or in a clinic? How did you practice and prepare for this match?

How did you lose the match? Too many unforced errors? Got overpowered? Couldn't get to the ball? Lost focus mentally?

If you aren't already, work with an instructor, even if it just a one time deal, and identify the weaknesses of your game. Along with the instructor, establish some goals to make in your game...say three goals/things to work on and improve. Identify *how* you are going to go about it. Write it down. Then get to work. Play a lot more 3.5 matches...only when you can easily beat most 3.5s will you be ready for 4.0.

It isn't just a matter of having nice strokes, but *how* you use those strokes in match play.

Do you play league matches as well? Was this a league or a ladder?

Have I asked enough questions? LOL Sorry, but I think these are things you need to answer and take a look at if you want to progress. Can you get there? Of course! But you need to work on the right things in the right way.

In my area, the 4.0s are just...*solid*. Solid off of both sides, solid serves, solid returns...and they don't give a lot of points away on errors.

[Geezer Guy]

I've heard that the 3.5 level has the widest range of talent. It can take quite awhile to work your way up through the ranks to 4.0. It took me a loooong time. But, after a couple of pretty fun years winning most of my 3.5 matches, now I've been bumped to 4.0 and I'm back to losing most of my matches. If you're only 31 you've got plenty of time to advance. Just hang in there. Remember that you generlly LEARN more from the matches you lose, but it's also important to schedule some matches you have a good chance of winning. No one likes to lose all the time.

[Geezer Guy]

... In my area, the 4.0s are just...*solid*. Solid off of both sides, solid serves, solid returns...and they don't give a lot of points away on errors.

That's EXACTLY what I observed when I started playing against 4.0's regularly. They didn't hit any harder than the 3.5's that I was used to playing against, but - 2 things - they didn't have the obvious weakness in some part of their game that you can find in almost all the 3.5 players, and they were just WAY more consistant than the 3.5 players.

[soyizgood]

2nd straight tournament I win a 3.5 match via default. Oh well, I get to play again on Saturday then. Losing the 4.0 match at least got me a workout. Now I need to figure out if my backhand just simply had a horrible day or if there's something else I need to tweak. That and I may need to consider adding a slice serve for 2nd serve. My opponent attacked my kick 2nd serve for multiple return winners.

Serve improved and got a good amount of cheap points
Forehand only won me a few points outright, but wasn't really a liability
Backhand is usually reliable but went downhill from the beginning
Won a few points at the net, but got beat quite a bit
Still mentally fragile and got angry at myself numerous times (tossed the racquet twice)

[Fedace]

Soyiz. being 3.5 isn't that bad + i have a feeling that you will eventually get to 4.0 anyway. Focus on improving, with specific goals in mind. Focus should be improving your weaknesses and see how it stands up to other 4.0 guys. Hallmark of 4.0 players from what i understand is that they have no real weaknesses. and they do everything fairly well but not spectacularly well.
so focus on improving your weak shots and make it stand up to attacks by 4.0 players. Cause that is what guys do, they try to apply their strongest shot to other guy's weak shot. Player that can do this most effectively wins.
I also noticed in USTA leagues that there are most teams in 3.5 division which tells me that most players are 3.5 level. We always have least guys in the 4.5 level that i play and we always struggle to get more guys in that division. So you are playing in the Majority division. If that makes you feel better...

[LeeD]

Nothing wrong with true NTRP 3.5 rating.
Unless you have access to coaching, 5 days a week, 2 hours a day play and practice, most don't ever get there...and you need that much for a couple full years.
Being fit and quick, good stamina and wind, strong legs and endurance is also needed, besides at least 20 matchs played, seriously, and couple handfuls of tournaments.
A true 3.5 can beat 70 % of the world's "tennis players". Dat aina bad.

[aimr75]

2nd straight tournament I win a 3.5 match via default. Oh well, I get to play again on Saturday then. Losing the 4.0 match at least got me a workout. Now I need to figure out if my backhand just simply had a horrible day or if there's something else I need to tweak. That and I may need to consider adding a slice serve for 2nd serve. My opponent attacked my kick 2nd serve for multiple return winners.

Serve improved and got a good amount of cheap points
Forehand only won me a few points outright, but wasn't really a liability
Backhand is usually reliable but went downhill from the beginning
Won a few points at the net, but got beat quite a bit
Still mentally fragile and got angry at myself numerous times (tossed the racquet twice)

switch to a 1HBH ;)

:lol:

[Mansewerz]

Soyiz. being 3.5 isn't that bad + i have a feeling that you will eventually get to 4.0 anyway. Focus on improving, with specific goals in mind. Focus should be improving your weaknesses and see how it stands up to other 4.0 guys. Hallmark of 4.0 players from what i understand is that they have no real weaknesses. and they do everything fairly well but not spectacularly well.
so focus on improving your weak shots and make it stand up to attacks by 4.0 players. Cause that is what guys do, they try to apply their strongest shot to other guy's weak shot. Player that can do this most effectively wins.
I also noticed in USTA leagues that there are most teams in 3.5 division which tells me that most players are 3.5 level. We always have least guys in the 4.5 level that i play and we always struggle to get more guys in that division. So you are playing in the Majority division. If that makes you feel better...

Very well thought out post Fedace. i'm impressed :D

[Nellie]

Here's my observation (oddly, it jibes with the article in Tennis this month about NTRP ratings):

3.0's are relative beginners
3.5's are people who picked up the game and play
4.0's are often people who played as juniors or on a high school team
4.5's are your better players, and I often see instructors or former college players here since there are generally not higher available leagues.

I actually think that if you played more against 4.0's, you would do fine. The 6-1. 6-3 score is not terrible, and shows a result within level.

[Steady Eddy]

At some point you're going to be dissappointed, unless you can accept yourself. Why not accept it at 3.5? Say you become a 4.0. How do you know that after a year of that you wouldn't say, "Will I ever become a 4.5? Will becoming a 7.0 satisfy you, or would you then need to become #1 in the world? I mean 4.0 tennis players aren't famous for their tennis. People who don't play tennis aren't impressed by a 4.0 rating. 3.5 is good enough. (I wouldn't say this if you were a 3.0. If you were practicing this much and still a 3.0, then I'd say, "C'mon, you can do better." But after 3.5, the number in each category sharply declines. Enjoy life. If this is your biggiest worry, you've got a great life.)

[soyizgood]

I actually think that if you played more against 4.0's, you would do fine. The 6-1. 6-3 score is not terrible, and shows a result within level.

Last year I played a 4.0 at a USTA tourney. I couldn't really hold serve, but I broke his serve 5 times en route to a 6-4 6-4 loss. Yet I played 3 matches against 4.0s in a 4.0 league last year and got killed each time though results got better each time. Played a 4.5 player in late 2007 and lost 6-1 6-1. Mixed bag of results... *shrug*

[CoachingMastery]

While there are many exceptions to the statements I will be adding to this thread, let me say that for 35 years of teaching, the exceptions are rare.

Players who have been at 3.5 levels for more than a few years tend to remain there for life unless they make significant changes in their technique. This obviously very general statement is based on the fact that those players who first learn and work within more advanced strokes seldom stay in the 3.0 or the 3.5 levels very long.

In fact, they often can be seen not winning tournaments at these levels before moving on to higher levels. Because they are working within more advanced patterns they often forgo the 3.5 levels since they encounter a wide range of players; from hackers and pushers to sandbaggers and others.

This is not to take away anything from those at the 3.0 or 3.5 levels. Yet, if the goal is to hit with more effect and prolific stroke patterns, and if one wants to play at levels associated with higher levels, they usually won't make this transition with the typical strokes seen at the 3.0 or 3.5 levels. (Except for those who are using more prolific stroke patterns but are still inexperienced with them and are not ready to compete at higher levels yet.)

Also, a 3.5 in one area may very well be a 4.0 in terms of competitive abilities. However, the NTRP levels are based on the ability to hit specific shots or be able to execute specific strategies...not necessarily based on wins and losses. (However, players are often moved up or down based on winning and/or losing against established players.)

The bottom line is that many stroke patterns and techniques do not allow for progressive player improvement without making specific changes in that technique.

(Which is why 90% of the 117 books I own recommend players transitioning to more advanced grips and stroke patterns as they get better...unfortunately, those same books usually recommend beginners starting out with the very patterns that will stagnate them at lower levels, usually far below their potential.

I have spoken on this topic at various conventions and I'm starting to see an understanding among players and teaching pros alike.

If you hope to become a highly skilled player, (and a higher ntrp rated player), then you need to start learning, using, practicing, and employing those methods that are recognized as being more prolific in their function.

While there are a hundred ways to hit a ball over the net, few of those methods result in players being able to hit more EFFECTIVE shots with those methods.

[Topaz]

Dave...it is a bit of a catch 22 then, isn't it? I know one of my struggles in 3.5 womens is the dinkers. I'm working so hard on hitting consistent and deep and working on those techniques and strokes to play at higher levels...and yet the dinkers and the junkers at 3.5 still get me. It is frustrating for sure, but I'm very lucky to have a pro that 'gets it' and won't let me revert to just getting the ball back over. I suppose that those dinkers and junkers won't be able to 'get' me when I've consistently executed my strokes, correct?

That being said, after a lot of hard work this winter, I'm excited and somewhat anxious to see how this season will go. I'm currently a 3.5, this will be my second year there, and I want out of 3.5 as soon as possible!!!

Soy...like Nellie also said, you did get 4 games off of the 4.0. So, IMO, you need to take what you can from the loss, organize your 'plan', and keep going!

[jgn1013]

In fact, they often can be seen not winning tournaments at these levels before moving on to higher levels. Because they are working within more advanced patterns they often forgo the 3.5 levels since they encounter a wide range of players; from hackers and pushers to sandbaggers and others.



can you elaborate?

[CoachingMastery]

Dave...it is a bit of a catch 22 then, isn't it? I know one of my struggles in 3.5 womens is the dinkers. I'm working so hard on hitting consistent and deep and working on those techniques and strokes to play at higher levels...and yet the dinkers and the junkers at 3.5 still get me. It is frustrating for sure, but I'm very lucky to have a pro that 'gets it' and won't let me revert to just getting the ball back over. I suppose that those dinkers and junkers won't be able to 'get' me when I've consistently executed my strokes, correct?

That being said, after a lot of hard work this winter, I'm excited and somewhat anxious to see how this season will go. I'm currently a 3.5, this will be my second year there, and I want out of 3.5 as soon as possible!!!

Soy...like Nellie also said, you did get 4 games off of the 4.0. So, IMO, you need to take what you can from the loss, organize your 'plan', and keep going!

Absolutely, "keep going!"

I am not trying in any way diminish nor discourage anyone playing the game. But anyone who plays tennis must sincerely and honestly ask this question:

"How good do I want to be?"

Notice I didn't say "how good do I EXPECT to be."

The reason for this is that nearly every student I've taught surpassed any perception of what level they THOUGHT they could reach.

Most players can become extrodinarily good...and I'm not talking about people having to spend every waking hour and spending every expendable dime on tennis!

The difference in players reaching these high levels is in the methods they work on AND employ in competition.

Simply said, players who hit 100,000 shots using 3.0 methods/techniques will only become a good 3.0 level player. A player who understands, can emulate, will employ, more advanced patterns, (I call it an "advanced foundation" in my two books), and then work within, will eventually master (within their level of ability, desire, athleticism, and within any shortcomings).

But, let me address your question about "dinkers getting you."

You mentioned that you are working on consistency and depth. In order to beat dinkers, you need to also work on angles, drop shots, strategies, as well (which you may very well be working on too, but may not have mentioned it). So many players think that to beat the dinker they have to hit harder, deeper or more consistently. While this can contribute to beating dinkers, it usually only creates more frustration since the dinker usually has little trouble hitting lobs off hard shots and are already more consistent than most players who hit harder.

One of the main problems I see with the typical 3.5 player is the tendency to use eastern grips on the volley. As most any quality teaching pro will show you, these grips severely prohibit players from executing sharp angle volleys, drop volleys, and even crisp, driving volleys. (I won't get into the complexities here...but read my books and I will reveal why this is so!)

The solid 4.0 or 4.5 player toys with dinkers. We simply drop shot, lob at the right times, hit solid overheads and knock off volleys with easy angles AWAY from the typical dinker camping out at the net!

Suddenly, the dinker can't simply lob these better players, can't simply slice returns (because nearly any 4.0 or 4.5 and above player will easily poach when they see a slice coming), and they can't just push the ball into the court because they are going to face a sharp angle topspin groundstroke, or drive or drop shot.

So, it goes back to the issue of hitting more effective shots, (as you mentioned), but be sure you know what this includes!

Best of luck in your drive to be better! I know you will get there if you sincerely want to!~

[CoachingMastery]

can you elaborate?

Most skilled practicioners will move past the 3.0 levels and many even move past the 3.5 levels. Because skilled strokes sort of get mastered like a 'light bulb going off' (because often when players are learning more effective stroke patterns, they suddenly 'get it' and really move forward once that feeling and stroke pattern is comfortable), such players move quickly to those levels they are already hitting at. Even though they won't win for a while at these higher levels, (because those there probably have more experience using those same patterns and understand not just the hitting nuances of high levels but also the strategies and reactive positions associated with higher play takes time to learn and master!) most players enjoy and can compete at higher levels early on.

Examples are the juniors we train. Within one to two years, these kids are competing against 4.0 and above players. And within three years are defeating some, winning some tournaments, and even moving up to higher levels.

I've had the same success with adults but it isn't as successful for a couple reasons: Adults are far more cautious and subject to 'peer pressure' (for lack of a better phrase!) and hold back in using methods that are more advanced. (Even for beginning adults...although, beginning adults are FAR more easier to get to advanced levels than those who have been playing for a couple years or more!) Also, adults have greater preconcieved perceptions of what they think they should be doing...and override the patterns they are learning with the patterns they THINK will work.

Hope that answers the question!

[Topaz]

You mentioned that you are working on consistency and depth. In order to beat dinkers, you need to also work on angles, drop shots, strategies, as well (which you may very well be working on too, but may not have mentioned it). So many players think that to beat the dinker they have to hit harder, deeper or more consistently. While this can contribute to beating dinkers, it usually only creates more frustration since the dinker usually has little trouble hitting lobs off hard shots and are already more consistent than most players who hit harder.



Thanks for such a thought out answer. Yes, those are shots I'm working on as well...last year I pretty much went exclusively down the line, and now I can actually hit angles! Strategies are really what I'm working on *right now*, and I'm sad to say the drop shot still eludes me! I think even my pro is shocked by how bad my drop shots are. But I think (I hope?) that I am finally out of the mentality that I just need to hit harder...I was the queen of UE in 3.5 last year!

I do hope to pick up your book sometime!

[NLBwell]

Thanks to Coaching Mastery for his comments - it does take some time to type up informative comments like that. To play at higher levels you have to have higher level strokes. For Topaz, the first thing to work on against lobbers and really any kind of pushers is the overhead. It is actually a pretty difficult shot that you have to practice a lot to never miss (I'm astounded sometimes at the percentage the ATP pros miss these days). It allows you to control the forecourt, because otherwise you will be lobbed and lose most of the points coming forward - and so have to play the pusher's game.

[raiden031]

Most skilled practicioners will move past the 3.0 levels and many even move past the 3.5 levels. Because skilled strokes sort of get mastered like a 'light bulb going off' (because often when players are learning more effective stroke patterns, they suddenly 'get it' and really move forward once that feeling and stroke pattern is comfortable), such players move quickly to those levels they are already hitting at. Even though they won't win for a while at these higher levels, (because those there probably have more experience using those same patterns and understand not just the hitting nuances of high levels but also the strategies and reactive positions associated with higher play takes time to learn and master!) most players enjoy and can compete at higher levels early on.


I have went through exactly what you are saying. I started playing usta 3.0 league in 2007 after a couple years of being a casual weekend player, and I quickly started reading your book and a couple others, focusing on technique. I could hit with more power, topspin, and variety than most of my opponents but I also lost more often than I won because I was inconsistent and just inexperienced in competitive play. There were times I played well and people thought I had to be a 3.5-4.0ish, but then the next day I'm back to losing to 3.0 players again. Finally I developed some consistency in my game and basically spent only a couple of months at a true 3.5 level before I started beating them easily as well.

So I spent like 5 years at 3.0, a couple months at 3.5 and now I'm at 4.0. I've definitely hit a point where I need to step it up in practice because I got creamed badly by one of my 4.0 teammates (who is a doubles player) in singles and I'm supposed to play singles on this team.

[TennisND]

Nobody wants to stay at 1 level forever. From what I am reading here, you need to spend lots of time and money if you want to move up in the ladder. The only and "possible" fastest way is hiring a pro and pay $500 - 600 a month. Am I correct?

[mawashi]

Dude, you're getting there. Just think they are 5.0 so if you loose it's ok but when you win it's GREAT!

When you get to 5.0 think 6.0 LOL!

mawashi

[Steady Eddy]

Nobody wants to stay at 1 level forever. From what I am reading here, you need to spend lots of time and money if you want to move up in the ladder. The only and "possible" fastest way is hiring a pro and pay $500 - 600 a month. Am I correct?Pretty much correct. When you're young and start out, you wonder if you might be the next Nadal. But when you're older and have a job, do you want to practice so much in your spare time that you lose your relationships? Do you want to spend so much that you don't contribute to your 401(k)? All this so you can get better, but still just be a club player. Someone doing this is having a big-time mid-life crisis.

[Djokovicfan4life]

Dude, you're getting there. Just think they are 5.0 so if you loose it's ok but when you win it's GREAT!

When you get to 5.0 think 6.0 LOL!

mawashi

OK....... so pretend they're at a level that they're not just to feel better about yourself? Sounds like a cop-out to me.

[bad_call]

Nobody wants to stay at 1 level forever. From what I am reading here, you need to spend lots of time and money if you want to move up in the ladder. The only and "possible" fastest way is hiring a pro and pay $500 - 600 a month. Am I correct?

disagree here. there are other ways. another is that one must have access to "better" players that understand the game and individual strokes. not all teaching pros can offer "everything" a player may need to improve their game.

[TennisND]

Bad call: I am talking about the "FASTEST" way. Of course you can teach yourself but I guess it takes ages to do so.

[bad_call]

Bad call: I am talking about the "FASTEST" way. Of course you can teach yourself but I guess it takes ages to do so.

i'm not talking about teaching oneself. and i don't agree that paying a single teaching pro will do the trick either.

[Steady Eddy]

Bad call: I am talking about the "FASTEST" way. Of course you can teach yourself but I guess it takes ages to do so.
I agree with that. Tennis strokes are like golf swings. People read books, take lessons, but when they show you their new swing/stroke, it always looks like it always has. Ever see Charles Barkley's bizarre golf swing on Utube? It will never change. He'll be that way for life. After somebody's acquired a certain way of playing, they can't change it if they try.

[bad_call]

to add...teaching pros will only get one so far. let me know if there is one that guarantees a "4.0 NTRP" rating to any student if they sign on the dotted line.

[raiden031]

I agree with that. Tennis strokes are like golf swings. People read books, take lessons, but when they show you their new swing/stroke, it always looks like it always has. Ever see Charles Barkley's bizarre golf swing on Utube? It will never change. He'll be that way for life. After somebody's acquired a certain way of playing, they can't change it if they try.

No way. I had an eastern grip for volleys and serves for about 5 years because I didn't know any better. I started reading, learned the correct grip and both strokes improved greatly since. I even learned a kick serve in the process...that whole motion couldn't have been more foreign to me but I did it.

Its more mental than anything. If you want to change your technique, you just have to focus on it every time you do that swing until it becomes natural like your old technique was. First you have to know what the proper technique is, which is where the teaching pro or video/book resources come in.

[GuyClinch]

Teaching pros (including things like camps and schools) are still the best way to go IMHO. Unless your quite gifted your not going to play your way into the higher levels. And while I am sure coaching mastery could coach me up a level - I kinda doubt a book can. Though I probably still will buy it in the vain hope that it will.

I think the #1 issue is that most people aren't aware of what their body is doing when the attempt a shot (whether its footwork, etc) - and the corrections needed to fix those mistakes.

So real trick is finding a good pro at an affordable price who can correct those mistakes and then playing a lot of tennis.

[ohplease]

By far, the easiest way to make a living at singles in 3.5/4.0 is to move well. Most club players have pretty good odds of hitting a decent shot with their feet set. The problem is when the competition gets better, the frequency of you coincidentally being in the right place at the right time, with your balance under control, goes way WAY down.

It's NOT your strokes. Time and again, when I see guys who spend their time on the ball machine vs. guys who spend their time on footwork drills, the guys w/ugly strokes and pretty movement dominate. Every time. Latest example in my neck of the woods was a guy who hadn't touched a racket for 3 years but used to be a professional dancer. Doesn't look like much during the warmup, but you've got to be surprisingly solid at point construction to beat him.

Let's put it another way: if you're not easily covering the court against all balls hit to you at the club level, barring putaway overheads/volleys/approach shots forward of the service line, your movement simply isn't good enough. If you can't do this, you'll never be able to hang in rallies, much less create or exploit your own offensive opportunities.

Your problem is less about what goes on in your strike zone and more about getting the ball into your strike zone in the first place.

[Steady Eddy]

No way. I had an eastern grip for volleys and serves for about 5 years because I didn't know any better. I started reading, learned the correct grip and both strokes improved greatly since. I even learned a kick serve in the process...that whole motion couldn't have been more foreign to me but I did it.

Its more mental than anything. If you want to change your technique, you just have to focus on it every time you do that swing until it becomes natural like your old technique was. First you have to know what the proper technique is, which is where the teaching pro or video/book resources come in.I believe you. But you must be the rare exception, because I've not seen that happen in 30 years of tennis. I'll see guys who insist they use a continental grip for their serve, but they somehow shift the grip during the toss, then hit their old, comfortable serve. I'm amazed that you did that after having played for 5 years.

BTW, I was reading McEnroe's "You Cannot be Serious" and he states that he uses an eastern forehand grip for serving! Could that be why his serve was not very powerful for a pro serve?

BTW again, do you know what I'm talking about? Do you know guys who think they've changed their whole game, but when you watch it, it's the same old stuff?

[raiden031]

I believe you. But you must be the rare exception, because I've not seen that happen in 30 years of tennis. I'll see guys who insist they use a continental grip for their serve, but they somehow shift the grip during the toss, then hit their old, comfortable serve. I'm amazed that you did that after having played for 5 years.

BTW, I was reading McEnroe's "You Cannot be Serious" and he states that he uses an eastern forehand grip for serving! Could that be why his serve was not very powerful for a pro serve?

BTW again, do you know what I'm talking about? Do you know guys who think they've changed their whole game, but when you watch it, it's the same old stuff?

I've definitely seen guys who take lessons and think they have changed things and gotten better, but it doesn't appear so to me. But I don't think its rare that you can pull it off, but I just think many people are not as observant of their own movements as they can and need to be.

I took karate as a child and used to compete in forms (for those unfamiliiar, its basically like coreographed patterns of punches, kicks, blocks, and foot movements demonstrating your karate skills. So I was being judged on my technique during competition, so I got a good feel for what my body was doing and was able to incorporate feedback from my instructors reliably...this skill probably helped me in tennis as well. Obviously it is even more difficult to do this when you are under pressure in match situation, but its definitely something you can learn to do.

[mental midget]

BTW, I was reading McEnroe's "You Cannot be Serious" and he states that he uses an eastern forehand grip for serving! Could that be why his serve was not very powerful for a pro serve?


Not to contradict the man himself, but mac served with a continental grip. he does everything with a continental grip. i mean, he just . . . did. and does. mac also had plenty of power, btw. that he preferred to swing people off the court distracts from the fact he could bring a pretty significant amount of heat if he chose to.

as far as the grip terminology thing goes, pretty sure borg's been quoted as saying he used a 'western' grip on his forehand, but by today's standards, it was clearly SW.

[psYcon]

What kind of practice were you getting? Did you practice your weaknesses , example backhand ? Were you practicing against a 3.0 player? the wall? by yourself?

There's a large number of ways to get practice. If the answer is that you practiced against a player of your calibre then I'm afraid that won't do you much good. You need to pick a hitting partner who is better than yourself , at 4.0 level and who is willing to give you practice, move you around . Go all out, don't be afraid to get bagelled, practice strokes which you normally would not dare attempt in a match. The more confident you are with your strokes, the better off you will be.

[CoachingMastery]

Not to contradict the man himself, but mac served with a continental grip. he does everything with a continental grip. i mean, he just . . . did. and does. mac also had plenty of power, btw. that he preferred to swing people off the court distracts from the fact he could bring a pretty significant amount of heat if he chose to.

as far as the grip terminology thing goes, pretty sure borg's been quoted as saying he used a 'western' grip on his forehand, but by today's standards, it was clearly SW.

I'm not 100% sure, (it's been a few years since I read his book), but I believe he said he uses his "forehand grip" for his serve. (He used a continental grip for everything including his forehand topspin.)

He definately used a continental grip for his serve.

[Djokovicfan4life]

I'm not 100% sure, (it's been a few years since I read his book), but I believe he said he uses his "forehand grip" for his serve. (He used a continental grip for everything including his forehand topspin.)

He definately used a continental grip for his serve.

No way Mac could generate that much spin with an EFH grip. It just doesn't seem possible.

[CoachingMastery]

No way Mac could generate that much spin with an EFH grip. It just doesn't seem possible.

Absolutely right. In addition, he opened his wrist position up too, which accented the action of his left-handed spin.

[bad_call]

Absolutely right. In addition, he opened his wrist position up too, which accented the action of his left-handed spin.

recent postings from this member Dave Smith has thus far been quality tennis info. probable that the book is worth a read for those so inclined.

[TennisND]

There's a large number of ways to get practice. If the answer is that you practiced against a player of your calibre then I'm afraid that won't do you much good. You need to pick a hitting partner who is better than yourself , at 4.0 level and who is willing to give you practice, move you around . Go all out, don't be afraid to get bagelled, practice strokes which you normally would not dare attempt in a match. The more confident you are with your strokes, the better off you will be.

I want to know about this too. Currently, I want to improve my 2h backhand but it seems I have long ways to go. I took a few lessons with a very good pro in town and he told me there is nothing wrong with my backhand. But still, I know that I cannot hit it naturally yet. Maybe a recording camera will help this time.

[bad_call]

I want to know about this too. Currently, I want to improve my 2h backhand but it seems I have long ways to go. I took a few lessons with a very good pro in town and he told me there is nothing wrong with my backhand. But still, I know that I cannot hit it naturally yet. Maybe a recording camera will help this time.

maybe...nice to see yourself anyway. suggest u try and find some "better" players that will hit with u. i'm hitting with a younger "lesser" player and see a marked improvement in his game after but a few serve and groundstroke tips. the teaching pro lessons only took him so far. that being said, expect ups and downs as you improve.

[GuyClinch]

By far, the easiest way to make a living at singles in 3.5/4.0 is to move well. Most club players have pretty good odds of hitting a decent shot with their feet set. The problem is when the competition gets better, the frequency of you coincidentally being in the right place at the right time, with your balance under control, goes way WAY down.

In doubles at least - you need good shots as well. If you try some slow paced push shot your going to get clobbered by good doubles players. So sure getting to the ball is very important but so is hitting good shots.

Linsday Davenport was hardly the best mover on tour but she won titles..

[Cindysphinx]

To OP:

I'll tell you what your problem is: You started too high!! :)

Me, I started as a 2.5. So I got some affirmation when I moved to 3.0. Then more affirmation when I moved to 3.5. So if I stay there forever, I still climbed a mountain, right? :)

Anyway, Oh Please is soooo right. That business about getting every ball into your strike zone is the secret. It's the Whole Enchilada. It's what I concentrate on after a miss. When I have a good match, this is the reason. That could be why a pro might say your BH mechanics are solid yet you still don't do well with your BH in a match. It's not the swing. You're not putting the ball in your strike zone with good footwork, so of course you miss.

Topaz, I feel your pain with the dinkers. It's infuriating to lose points to someone who can barely move and who hacks at the ball. I am starting to get the hang of it, though. The secret isn't to try to blast their ball. The secret is to use footwork to get to the ball and set up properly, and then hit a nice solid, technically correct shot. Do that a few times and the dinker is in trouble.

[Djokovicfan4life]

To OP:

I'll tell you what your problem is: You started too high!! :)

Me, I started as a 2.5. So I got some affirmation when I moved to 3.0. Then more affirmation when I moved to 3.5. So if I stay there forever, I still climbed a mountain, right? :)

Anyway, Oh Please is soooo right. That business about getting every ball into your strike zone is the secret. It's the Whole Enchilada. It's what I concentrate on after a miss. When I have a good match, this is the reason. That could be why a pro might say your BH mechanics are solid yet you still don't do well with your BH in a match. It's not the swing. You're not putting the ball in your strike zone with good footwork, so of course you miss.

Topaz, I feel your pain with the dinkers. It's infuriating to lose points to someone who can barely move and who hacks at the ball. I am starting to get the hang of it, though. The secret isn't to try to blast their ball. The secret is to use footwork to get to the ball and set up properly, and then hit a nice solid, technically correct shot. Do that a few times and the dinker is in trouble.

Hey, good to see you posting again! For a while I thought we'd lost you for good.

[Tennisman912]

Soyizgood,

Only you can answer whether putting in the effort to move up it worth it to you. As previously stated, it doesn’t matter how much you practice if your technique will limit your progress. And by definition, at the 3.5 level you most certainly have some technical issues that need correcting. Get some professional help and aim high. Learn what you need to fix and more importantly, why you need to fix it. Understanding the why behind needing to change is important so you understand why the change is needed.

Also work on developing a weapon of some kind. As you move up and advance, you need a reliable weapon to take control of the situation. For most it is the forehand or serve, but try to develop something. The reason people look the same at the higher levels is the basics are pretty universal. Sure everyone does things their way, but the basics are there in all the advanced players strokes. Also, play smarter. More points are lost due to poor shot selection and not understanding what they should be doing at the lower levels than are won outright. If it were possible to give a 5.0 player your exact skills, he would beat you 99 times out of 100. Why? He understands how to play tennis, not just hit strokes. He/she knows when to be aggressive, conservative, what the percentage shot is in every situation, etc. My point is strokes only take you so far. The mental side and really understanding the game and percentages means more as you advance as everyone has good strokes.

Don’t get frustrated by the lack of progress. There is a reason most players peak at 3.5 to 4.0. They won’t take the time to fix their faults whatever they are or worse, don’t know they have faults. Learn the correct basics and you can go far. It is a process. Try to enjoy it.

Good luck

TM

[SmAsH999]

soyizgood, when i was a 3.5, i was there for a while and i felt i wasn't getting anywhere. I even considered quitting tennis. Yet several years later, I am a low 5.5. All you need is some talent, a ton of hard work, and someone to push you to your absolute limit.

[VaBeachTennis]

Granted I expected to lose that match and I also signed up to play a 3.5 match later today.

This could be part of it.................. Practicing 2-4 hours a day is a good amount of work. Do you segment your practices or do you just go out and "hit" for 2-4 hours? Sometimes people practice well, but then fall apart or break down when it comes to match play. Maybe incorporating "match play" into your practice session may help, if you don't do it already. Good luck, stay strong, and be positive. 31 years of age is young!

[VaBeachTennis]

By far, the easiest way to make a living at singles in 3.5/4.0 is to move well. Most club players have pretty good odds of hitting a decent shot with their feet set. The problem is when the competition gets better, the frequency of you coincidentally being in the right place at the right time, with your balance under control, goes way WAY down.

It's NOT your strokes. Time and again, when I see guys who spend their time on the ball machine vs. guys who spend their time on footwork drills, the guys w/ugly strokes and pretty movement dominate. Every time. Latest example in my neck of the woods was a guy who hadn't touched a racket for 3 years but used to be a professional dancer. Doesn't look like much during the warmup, but you've got to be surprisingly solid at point construction to beat him.

Let's put it another way: if you're not easily covering the court against all balls hit to you at the club level, barring putaway overheads/volleys/approach shots forward of the service line, your movement simply isn't good enough. If you can't do this, you'll never be able to hang in rallies, much less create or exploit your own offensive opportunities.

Your problem is less about what goes on in your strike zone and more about getting the ball into your strike zone in the first place.

I agree, having good footwork is definitely a plus. Now add good strokes, good footwork, and good strategy or shot selection, and one will be a pretty formidable player.

[soyizgood]

Practiced more again today, even in 94 degree heat at lunch. The serves were getting in at a good rate, even when playing with topspin slice serves for 2nd serves. I might make that my default 2nd serve and even my 1st serve for that matter. Looks like the past few months of working on the serve is beginning to pay off (one of the few good things I did on Sunday). I can hit flat, slice, kick, or even a reverse slice for 1st serve. My kick 2nd serve lets me down too much, so I may just use it less or lean forward more.

Practiced after work. Serves were still doing well, even with a spectator watching me. Just for the heck of it, I was hitting eastern forehands. After about 6-7 balls I hit out or long, I was in a groove. I used eastern for a long time, but the past 3 years I tried semiwestern and extreme eastern. Not happy with those results. I was very aggressive with the eastern forehand in the past and after about 10 minutes I was having a blast with it. Got good topspin and I was also able to hit the ball deep and with some good angles. At least very few balls were struck weak. For highballs I was using extreme eastern. I'll have to try this out more this week, but it looks quite promising.

[BreakPoint]

Today my 1st serve was effective, but my best shot, the backhand, fell apart.

Now I need to figure out if my backhand just simply had a horrible day or if there's something else I need to tweak.

Backhand is usually reliable but went downhill from the beginning

I think I have the answer for you. How about switching to a one-handed backhand? :-P

Just kidding.....

There's no shame in being a 3.5 player. In fact, there's an advantage because there are so many 3.5 players out there that you will always be able to find someone to play with. :)

[ttbrowne]

Did anyone cover your game tactics? I was a very risky 3.5 player who was having a tough time winning 50% of my matches. One day, I changed. I just thought a little patience in my game would not hurt. I stopped going for so much and just playing the get it back at all costs, then go for the winner when I'm comfortable with it. It worked. I started winning most of the 3.5 matches and playing to tiebreakers with my 4.0 friends. I can't tell you how much better about my game I feel.

[BreakPoint]

Last year I played a 4.0 at a USTA tourney. I couldn't really hold serve, but I broke his serve 5 times en route to a 6-4 6-4 loss. Yet I played 3 matches against 4.0s in a 4.0 league last year and got killed each time though results got better each time. Played a 4.5 player in late 2007 and lost 6-1 6-1. Mixed bag of results... *shrug*
What was the rating of the person you played in the 4.0 tournament? Was he a true 4.0 or another 3.5 like yourself playing up?

[BreakPoint]

However, the NTRP levels are based on the ability to hit specific shots or be able to execute specific strategies...not necessarily based on wins and losses. (However, players are often moved up or down based on winning and/or losing against established players.)

Actually, these days there are no longer any visual ratings so the USTA has no idea what specific shots or strategies you are able to or not able to execute in determining your rating. Your rating is now based SOLELY upon your win/loss record and the scores of each one of your matches. They also factor in the ratings of your opponents and input all of this data into their computer algorithm to arrive at your dynamic rating.

[BreakPoint]

BTW, I was reading McEnroe's "You Cannot be Serious" and he states that he uses an eastern forehand grip for serving! Could that be why his serve was not very powerful for a pro serve?

That's pretty funny because McEnroe uses a continental grip for his forehand (as well as his backhand). :)

[BreakPoint]

as far as the grip terminology thing goes, pretty sure borg's been quoted as saying he used a 'western' grip on his forehand, but by today's standards, it was clearly SW.
I'd say Borg's forehand grip was more Eastern despite what he claimed.

[BreakPoint]

Soyizgood,

Only you can answer whether putting in the effort to move up it worth it to you. As previously stated, it doesn’t matter how much you practice if your technique will limit your progress. And by definition, at the 3.5 level you most certainly have some technical issues that need correcting. Get some professional help and aim high. Learn what you need to fix and more importantly, why you need to fix it. Understanding the why behind needing to change is important so you understand why the change is needed.

Also work on developing a weapon of some kind. As you move up and advance, you need a reliable weapon to take control of the situation. For most it is the forehand or serve, but try to develop something. The reason people look the same at the higher levels is the basics are pretty universal. Sure everyone does things their way, but the basics are there in all the advanced players strokes. Also, play smarter. More points are lost due to poor shot selection and not understanding what they should be doing at the lower levels than are won outright. If it were possible to give a 5.0 player your exact skills, he would beat you 99 times out of 100. Why? He understands how to play tennis, not just hit strokes. He/she knows when to be aggressive, conservative, what the percentage shot is in every situation, etc. My point is strokes only take you so far. The mental side and really understanding the game and percentages means more as you advance as everyone has good strokes.

Don’t get frustrated by the lack of progress. There is a reason most players peak at 3.5 to 4.0. They won’t take the time to fix their faults whatever they are or worse, don’t know they have faults. Learn the correct basics and you can go far. It is a process. Try to enjoy it.

Good luck

TM
Excellent post! :)

[Frank Silbermann]

Originally Posted by CoachingMastery
However, the NTRP levels are based on the ability to hit specific shots or be able to execute specific strategies...not necessarily based on wins and losses. (However, players are often moved up or down based on winning and/or losing against established players.)

Actually, these days there are no longer any visual ratings so the USTA has no idea what specific shots or strategies you are able to or not able to execute in determining your rating. Your rating is now based SOLELY upon your win/loss record and the scores of each one of your matches. They also factor in the ratings of your opponents and input all of this data into their computer algorithm to arrive at your dynamic rating.

I propose that every player should carry two NTRP levels:

(1) The NTRP level at which you _are_, which is based on the strokes as described in the NTRP guidelines, and

(2) The NTRP level at which you _compete_, which is at least 1.0 (and probably 1.5) levels lower, and which is based on twenty-five years of progressive sandbagging and lying by plastic trophy hunters.

[Frank Silbermann]

I have went through exactly what you are saying. I started playing usta 3.0 league in 2007 after a couple years of being a casual weekend player, and I quickly started reading your book and a couple others, focusing on technique. I could hit with more power, topspin, and variety than most of my opponents but I also lost more often than I won because I was inconsistent and just inexperienced in competitive play. There were times I played well and people thought I had to be a 3.5-4.0ish, but then the next day I'm back to losing to 3.0 players again. Finally I developed some consistency in my game and basically spent only a couple of months at a true 3.5 level before I started beating them easily as well.

So I spent like 5 years at 3.0, a couple months at 3.5 and now I'm at 4.0. I've definitely hit a point where I need to step it up in practice because I got creamed badly by one of my 4.0 teammates (who is a doubles player) in singles and I'm supposed to play singles on this team. So part of the problem is coaches who insist that consistency and steadiness must come first.

[Frank Silbermann]

Players who have been at 3.5 levels for more than a few years tend to remain there for life unless they make significant changes in their technique. This obviously very general statement is based on the fact that those players who first learn and work within more advanced strokes seldom stay in the 3.0 or the 3.5 levels very long.

In fact, they often can be seen not winning tournaments at these levels before moving on to higher levels. Because they are working within more advanced patterns they often forgo the 3.5 levels since they encounter a wide range of players; from hackers and pushers to sandbaggers and others.
...
The bottom line is that many stroke patterns and techniques do not allow for progressive player improvement without making specific changes in that technique.

(Which is why 90% of the 117 books I own recommend players transitioning to more advanced grips and stroke patterns as they get better...unfortunately, those same books usually recommend beginners starting out with the very patterns that will stagnate them at lower levels, usually far below their potential.

I have spoken on this topic at various conventions and I'm starting to see an understanding among players and teaching pros alike.
To some extent, this has already happened. You see way fewer frequent players popping in their second serve using a western grip, volleying with a windshield-wiper grip, chopping all their backhands, etc., like I saw thirty-five years ago.

If everyone put more effort into moving to advanced stroking patterns, 70% of frequent players would _still_ languish at the 3.5 level. The only difference is that they would be as good as _today's_ 4.0 and 4.5 players -- but their league would still be called 3.5. Heck, maybe by then they'd be called 3.0, as ex-junior competitors and long-term lesson-takers move down to the 3.5 level in the hope of winning trophies.

[CoachingMastery]

To some extent, this has already happened. You see way fewer frequent players popping in their second serve using a western grip, volleying with a windshield-wiper grip, chopping all their backhands, etc., like I saw thirty-five years ago.

If everyone put more effort into moving to advanced stroking patterns, 70% of frequent players would _still_ languish at the 3.5 level. The only difference is that they would be as good as _today's_ 4.0 and 4.5 players -- but their league would still be called 3.5. Heck, maybe by then they'd be called 3.0, as ex-junior competitors and long-term lesson-takers move down to the 3.5 level in the hope of winning trophies.

Frank, I believe you would be right that the general levels would rise up in ability if everyone used more advanced learning patterns from the start. However, the ntrp ratings are based on various abilities, skills, and strategic patterns that are usually (but not nearly enough), associated with each level within the ntrp. Thus, we would see the average ntrp level go up and we would have very few in the 3.0 and 3.5 and far more in the 4.0 and 4.5 and above.

From my experience, 90% of those taught an "advanced foundation" become highly skilled players, (provided they kept playing and training within these patterns and didn't revert or succome to using more rudementary methods out of fear or simply taking the 'easy way out'!). Thus, if every single person who picked up a tennis racquet was taught correctly, or taught themselves correctly (considering the vast amount of information now available on tennis), then we would see only 10% of the playing population at the 3.0 or 3.5 level and the rest would be playing more advanced tennis, separated among the 4.0 levels and above based on experience, athleticism, desire, and opportunity.

However, unfortunately, we won't see this scenario happen anytime soon!

[Tennisman912]

I agree with CoachingMastery all the way in that those who get an advanced foundation early can go as far as they please with some effort because they haven’t limited themselves by poor technique. The trouble is most don’t care to learn the right way the first time (unless they learned as juniors for the most part) or instructors just don’t emphasize that they should change, they just feed balls. But more likely what happens is the pro does try to get them to change but they just won’t do it. After a while they essentially give up on them because you can’t help someone if they don’t want to change. They won’t take a few steps back to take leaps forward.

A group of 3.0-3.5 plays in front of me in one of my groups and I guarantee none have improved in 10 years. They have so many flaws they could practice 4 hours a day and never get to 4.0. Sure they may become a better 3.0 or 3.5, but they have no chance to move up and from what I observe waiting to play, they don’t seem to realize this or care to do anything about it (and no offense as we have all been there at one time or another).

The bottom line is if people don’t learn the proper foundation in the beginning, they have just above a zero chance making meaningful changes as they age. I wish it were different but that is the way it is. There are very few who do make those changes. It would be nice to see the situation improve but I don’t think it will in my lifetime and I am on optimist.

The moral: Fix those flaws asap or be resigned to the fact you probably won’t make the changes. The longer you have played your way, the lower your chances of changing. Just my observation during my tennis career, not trying to be Johnny rain cloud.

Good tennis

TM

[Djokovicfan4life]

Well, I was going to recommend Dave's book, but it looks like he's already typed out most of it! Guess you guys can save your money for now. :)

[CoachingMastery]

Well, I was going to recommend Dave's book, but it looks like he's already typed out most of it! Guess you guys can save your money for now. :)

Ha ha! I do have a tendency to write a lot here...only because a) I don't want people to misunderstand...and b) It is hard to get across concepts in just a few sentences!

Since my books are 330 pages and 403 pages, respectively, I've got a long way to go!

(Not to mention over 350 pictures in both!)

But, nonetheless, I appreciate the comments!

Best!

[Frank Silbermann]

Frank, I believe you would be right that the general levels would rise up in ability if everyone used more advanced learning patterns from the start. However, the ntrp ratings are based on various abilities, skills, and strategic patterns that are usually (but not nearly enough), associated with each level within the ntrp. Thus, we would see the average ntrp level go up and we would have very few in the 3.0 and 3.5 and far more in the 4.0 and 4.5 and above. Then how do you explain the fact that the improvement in shotmaking among league players over the last twenty-five years simply raised the requirements for each NTRP level, rather than raising the ratio of 4.5 to 3.5 players?

[BreakPoint]

Then how do you explain the fact that the improvement in shotmaking among league players over the last twenty-five years simply raised the requirements for each NTRP level, rather than raising the ratio of 4.5 to 3.5 players?
Since everyone has gotten better due to the advances in racquet, string, and shoe technologies, today's 3.5's still can't beat today's 4.5's.

[NLBwell]

I don't know that there has really been any improvement in shotmaking. The guys I played 5.0 with in the early 90's (all with correct strokes - juniors during the late 70s tennis boom) are now mostly 4.5's due to age and injury. By that happening, you could say that 4.5's now have improved shotmaking, but that has left a dearth of 5.0 players around here. I don't see any true increase in improved shotmaking across the board - otherwise the old guys would be getting passed up.

[BreakPoint]

I don't know that there has really been any improvement in shotmaking. The guys I played 5.0 with in the early 90's (all with correct strokes - juniors during the late 70s tennis boom) are now mostly 4.5's due to age and injury. By that happening, you could say that 4.5's now have improved shotmaking, but that has left a dearth of 5.0 players around here. I don't see any true increase in improved shotmaking across the board - otherwise the old guys would be getting passed up.
But the old guys are better and more consistent now with their big, powerful modern racquets than they were with their tiny, powerless wood racquets, right?

[Mountain Ghost]

I just played a match against a 4.0 player and lost 6-3 6-1. I'm now 0-5 against 4.0 level players. Maybe I should give up trying to move up. I feel as though 3.5 is a level of just being mediocre or average.

Today my 1st serve was effective, but my best shot, the backhand, fell apart. I had a couple of games that I had break point chances, but couldn't convert. At times I just felt resigned to ending this match ASAP. The first set I can't be too mad because there was only one break of serve. The second set I blew chances to make it much closer.

I practiced 2-4 hours a day 6 days/week for a few weeks leading up to that match. Granted I expected to lose that match and I also signed up to play a 3.5 match later today. But I wonder if I realistically have any chance at becoming a 4.0. I'm 31, most of my playing friends are 3.5 and below, I made countless changes to my forehand and serve, and I've been eager to improve for the past 2 years. I've improved, but I wonder how much losing I'll have to endure before I see results. Is it even worth it? Is being a 3.5 player a bad thing? I just don't want to be average at something I actually care about.

Just letting out some tension and frustration before I play another match in an hour.

[1] If you think you’re doomed, you’re doomed. [2] If you think maybe you should give up trying to move up, by all means, quit. [3] If you feel resigned to ending a match ASAP, then you certainly don’t have what it takes to turn things around. [4] If you expect to lose, you’re just an IDIOT! [5] And NO, you don’t have a chance of ever becoming a 4.0, whatever such “quantifiable” milestones mean in that twisted head of yours. [6] How much losing can you endure? [7] Is it even worth it? [8] If you can’t stand the thought of being average at something you claim to care about, maybe it’s really ego gratification you love, and NOT tennis! [9] Just go buy a Wii and play with yourself for the rest of your life.

Sorry . . . “Just letting out some tension and frustration before I” . . . give you some encouraging advice:

[1] No, you’re not doomed. [2] Don’t quit. [3] Everything can turn around at the flick of a mental switch. [4] Expect to get prepared and in position for the next ball. [5] I repeat, get prepared and in position for the next ball! [6] All forms of endurance training require that you endure beyond the “pain.” [7] Whimpering does not help you endure. [8] How “good” you are has nothing to do with the last (or next) point, game or match. It’s mostly about getting prepared and in position for the ball coming at you NOW! [9] If you must “compare,” it’s a privilege to play people who are better than you are.

Also, no matter how much anyone thinks they know, or how diligently they practice, there are details/issues in almost everyone’s game that only an alert teaching pro can see and help them to correct. And even if you’ve taken lessons from a great pro, there are always things that another unique set of professional eyes might pick up.

You live in Southern California, where you can play outside 300+ days a year with an amazing array of talented players. Part of that blessing is there are no illusions about how good you really need to be to compete. The “ruling classes” of smaller tennis worlds are not so lucky!

MG

[NamRanger]

Although I am no coach, one of the things that holds most people back that want to improve, is that they are trying too hard and they are too tense while in a match. Relax; just play your game, and stay loose. Calm your mind, and just realize that it's a game. Everyone from the pros to the amateur level player plays best when they are in a calm state of mind, and let everything come naturally.

[NamRanger]

Actually, these days there are no longer any visual ratings so the USTA has no idea what specific shots or strategies you are able to or not able to execute in determining your rating. Your rating is now based SOLELY upon your win/loss record and the scores of each one of your matches. They also factor in the ratings of your opponents and input all of this data into their computer algorithm to arrive at your dynamic rating.



Thus why some 4.0s play an extremely ugly looking game.

[BreakPoint]

Thus why some 4.0s play an extremely ugly looking game.
That's right. But if they can beat most other 4.0's with their ugly looking games, then they are a legitimate 4.0 according to the NTRP ratings. It all comes down to winning and not your strokes anymore.

[CoachingMastery]

Remember the ratings are guidlines to establish a point of reference. A player can have a 3.0 serve, a 2.5 volley and a 4.5 forehand groundstroke. This player, in theory, could beat some 4.0 players, and lose to 3.5 players.

Thus, the ntrp ratings guide would not be a clear indicator of such a player's rating. Yet, it still gives a relative rating for various abilities, and give them a place to compete.

As players continue to play tournaments (within specific ratings), they obviously will gain a better feel for what level they are at through the wins and losses.

It isn't a perfect system and I doubt there will ever be one!

[thehustler]

I just played a match against a 4.0 player and lost 6-3 6-1. I'm now 0-5 against 4.0 level players. Maybe I should give up trying to move up. I feel as though 3.5 is a level of just being mediocre or average.

Today my 1st serve was effective, but my best shot, the backhand, fell apart. I had a couple of games that I had break point chances, but couldn't convert. At times I just felt resigned to ending this match ASAP. The first set I can't be too mad because there was only one break of serve. The second set I blew chances to make it much closer.

I practiced 2-4 hours a day 6 days/week for a few weeks leading up to that match. Granted I expected to lose that match and I also signed up to play a 3.5 match later today. But I wonder if I realistically have any chance at becoming a 4.0. I'm 31, most of my playing friends are 3.5 and below, I made countless changes to my forehand and serve, and I've been eager to improve for the past 2 years. I've improved, but I wonder how much losing I'll have to endure before I see results. Is it even worth it? Is being a 3.5 player a bad thing? I just don't want to be average at something I actually care about.

Just letting out some tension and frustration before I play another match in an hour.

Ok I'm no teaching pro nor would anybody confuse me for one. I haven't spent a lot of hours practicing with a pro. I just play matches. Tons of matches. I'm 31 in a couple of weeks and I know you can get to 4.0. Heck I got to 4.5 in about 4 years of playing, starting at 3.5 level. There were some things that you said that bothered me.

First of all I believe one should never give up. Hence my screen name. I think the first problem is that you are too focused on moving up from 3.5 and aren't focusing on what you need to do to really improve your game. Sometimes when we focus too hard on what we want we never get it. It's best not to obsess about something and let it come naturally at the rate it's supposed to.

The 2nd thing that bothers me is that you expected to lose a match. I can't stand people who think that way. Out of my group of friends I'm probably the best or 2nd best player. Most of them know this. But they still play me and I still play them. I expect to win. Maybe they expect to lose, but they never tell me that or show me that on the court. If they did I simply wouldn't hit with them.

I don't know if you're playing in tournaments or leagues, but you should play at the 3.5 level if you want to move up. Eventually you will figure out how to beat 3.5s and the USTA computers will have no choice but to bump you up to 4.0. After my first year of playing tournaments I was bumped from 3.5 to 4.0. I got slaughtered in the first few tournaments I played at 4.0 until I figured out how to use my game to beat other players. I started to win. The 2nd year of me playing 4.0 tournaments I wound up being the #1 ranked player in the section. Not bad for someone who didn't have the greatest serve. What I had over most people was sheer will and determination to be the best. Most people like to think their strokes are all of that but that doesn't win matches. Gritty determination, consistency and patience win matches.

As I just mentioned gritty determination, consistency and patience win matches. Of course good footwork and solid strokes are needed as well, but you can have those and still lose. I just played a league final last night where I won 6-0, 6-3. The sun was out and it was a little breezy. We were right by a busy road and surrounded by noise. I just used the same tactics that work on most players. Those are keep the ball in, be consistent and be patient. Most players at the 3.5, 4.0 level can be impatient and pull the trigger at the wrong time. This is where patience is key. Just keep hitting cross court to their strength, eventually they'll get antsy and miss. Open up the court on their forehand, pull them out wide and then hit it back the other way to their backhand so they have to chase it down. These simple things will win you matches and get you to 4.0 in no time.

In my final year of 4.0 USTA league last year I was actually accused of being a sandbagger. I was actually quite shocked to hear it and in a weird way flattered. I knew I wasn't though but I also knew why I was accused of that. It's because I was a patient player. Sure I didn't have the best serve or amazing pace on my strokes, but I kept the ball in, tracked everything down and made my opponent work.

Not to toot my own horn but you may want to check out this thread http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=254251 It may help you out and it may not. It's just my opinion on being a complete player. Good luck out there and if you just relax and believe and let things flow naturally you'll be a 4.0 before you know it.

[snowpuppy]

Nice post hustler. I am kind of going the same thing trying to get to the 4.0 lv. The other posters pretty much sum it all up and I feel the same in that I'll need a combination of technique, experience and mental game.

Any of these departments and hold you back. If you don't have the technique then chances are you are muscling your stokes and that will only last as long as your body can hold up. You can get pass this hump on your own but I hate to say, you'll have to be pretty gifted to progress without some kind of outside help.

Match play and mental game is almost as big too. People have told me i have the stokes to compete with 4.0's but I always seem to lose because of mental collapses. It was weird how I was able to turn that around on someone else during a pick up game once. He was out serving, out volleying me and dominated so much I was lucky to come out losing 6-3 to him. But 2nd set I hang tight, challenge his shots and you can feel doubts slowly creeping in and in the end served a horrible game to lose 7-5. This just goes to show technique isn't the only thing to compete in the next level.

[NLBwell]

But the old guys are better and more consistent now with their big, powerful modern racquets than they were with their tiny, powerless wood racquets, right?

Well, no. Not even close. 30 additional years of age can not be compensated for no matter what kind of super racket they invent.

Oh well....................

[BreakPoint]

Well, no. Not even close. 30 additional years of age can not be compensated for no matter what kind of super racket they invent.

Oh well....................
I don't know about that. I often see old guys play incredible doubles with their big powerful modern racquets. They never seem to miss and can hit the very hard and with lots of spin. I doubt they were ever that good in their younger days with wood racquets. I remember those days.

[Xisbum]

Ok I'm no teaching pro nor would anybody confuse me for one. I haven't spent a lot of hours practicing with a pro. I just play matches. Tons of matches. I'm 31 in a couple of weeks and I know you can get to 4.0. Heck I got to 4.5 in about 4 years of playing, starting at 3.5 level. There were some things that you said that bothered me.

First of all I believe one should never give up. Hence my screen name. I think the first problem is that you are too focused on moving up from 3.5 and aren't focusing on what you need to do to really improve your game. Sometimes when we focus too hard on what we want we never get it. It's best not to obsess about something and let it come naturally at the rate it's supposed to.

The 2nd thing that bothers me is that you expected to lose a match. I can't stand people who think that way. Out of my group of friends I'm probably the best or 2nd best player. Most of them know this. But they still play me and I still play them. I expect to win. Maybe they expect to lose, but they never tell me that or show me that on the court. If they did I simply wouldn't hit with them.

I don't know if you're playing in tournaments or leagues, but you should play at the 3.5 level if you want to move up. Eventually you will figure out how to beat 3.5s and the USTA computers will have no choice but to bump you up to 4.0. After my first year of playing tournaments I was bumped from 3.5 to 4.0. I got slaughtered in the first few tournaments I played at 4.0 until I figured out how to use my game to beat other players. I started to win. The 2nd year of me playing 4.0 tournaments I wound up being the #1 ranked player in the section. Not bad for someone who didn't have the greatest serve. What I had over most people was sheer will and determination to be the best. Most people like to think their strokes are all of that but that doesn't win matches. Gritty determination, consistency and patience win matches.

As I just mentioned gritty determination, consistency and patience win matches. Of course good footwork and solid strokes are needed as well, but you can have those and still lose. I just played a league final last night where I won 6-0, 6-3. The sun was out and it was a little breezy. We were right by a busy road and surrounded by noise. I just used the same tactics that work on most players. Those are keep the ball in, be consistent and be patient. Most players at the 3.5, 4.0 level can be impatient and pull the trigger at the wrong time. This is where patience is key. Just keep hitting cross court to their strength, eventually they'll get antsy and miss. Open up the court on their forehand, pull them out wide and then hit it back the other way to their backhand so they have to chase it down. These simple things will win you matches and get you to 4.0 in no time.

In my final year of 4.0 USTA league last year I was actually accused of being a sandbagger. I was actually quite shocked to hear it and in a weird way flattered. I knew I wasn't though but I also knew why I was accused of that. It's because I was a patient player. Sure I didn't have the best serve or amazing pace on my strokes, but I kept the ball in, tracked everything down and made my opponent work.

Not to toot my own horn but you may want to check out this thread http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=254251 It may help you out and it may not. It's just my opinion on being a complete player. Good luck out there and if you just relax and believe and let things flow naturally you'll be a 4.0 before you know it.

You must be 97 years old, because this is some wise stuff. For all its complications and difficulties, tennis is at heart very simple - hit the ball back one more time than the opponent, and you win.

Excellent posts, here and in the other thread, Fast Eddie, AKA TheHustler.

[NLBwell]

Well, no. Not even close. 30 additional years of age can not be compensated for no matter what kind of super racket they invent.

Oh well....................

I don't know about that. I often see old guys play incredible doubles with their big powerful modern racquets. They never seem to miss and can hit the very hard and with lots of spin. I doubt they were ever that good in their younger days with wood racquets. I remember those days.

Well, McEnroe could win an ATP doubles tournament in his late 40's and Martina N. was also a top doubles player while quite old, but I don't think they would claim they were better players than when they were younger no matter what racket they were using.
Similarly, these guys who were top natl. ranked juniors and D1 college players still can look pretty amazing, but I don't think they would claim they were better than when they were younger.

[BreakPoint]

Well, McEnroe could win an ATP doubles tournament in his late 40's and Martina N. was also a top doubles player while quite old, but I don't think they would claim they were better players than when they were younger no matter what racket they were using.
Similarly, these guys who were top natl. ranked juniors and D1 college players still can look pretty amazing, but I don't think they would claim they were better than when they were younger.
I've seen McEnroe play live during his prime and I've seen him play live on the seniors tour and also when he won the San Jose ATP doubles tournament a couple of years ago. In many respects, he is better now in his late-40's with his modern racquet than he was when he was in his early 20's with his wood racquet. He hits the ball harder now and with more power and spin. He rarely mishits the ball. And he serves with much more pace and spin now than when he played with a wood racquet. Even McEnroe himself has admitted to all of this. With a wood racquet, he never broke 100mph on his serve, ever. Now, with his modern racquet, he routinely serves above 120mph and averages around 115mph. If you watch his old matches, you'll see how much he mishits the ball with his wood racquet and how slow his shots were. He now hits much harder and never mishits the ball. That's why he was able to win the tournament at age 47 against current pros in their 20's.

[sn1974]

find a coach who has higher expectations of you than you have of yourself -- someone who believes you can play better than you play right now.

harder to find than you'd think. so many pros are happy to feed you balls and work on a few specifics without helping you take your game to the next level.

[NLBwell]

I've seen McEnroe play live during his prime and I've seen him play live on the seniors tour and also when he won the San Jose ATP doubles tournament a couple of years ago. In many respects, he is better now in his late-40's with his modern racquet than he was when he was in his early 20's with his wood racquet. He hits the ball harder now and with more power and spin. He rarely mishits the ball. And he serves with much more pace and spin now than when he played with a wood racquet. Even McEnroe himself has admitted to all of this. With a wood racquet, he never broke 100mph on his serve, ever. Now, with his modern racquet, he routinely serves above 120mph and averages around 115mph. If you watch his old matches, you'll see how much he mishits the ball with his wood racquet and how slow his shots were. He now hits much harder and never mishits the ball. That's why he was able to win the tournament at age 47 against current pros in their 20's.

There were plenty of guys in McEnroe's day who could do those things that McEnroe beat easily. Speed is incredibly important in tennis. That's what age takes away from you (the strokes don't go away). Of course, it isn't as big a factor in doubles. I'd take the old McEnroe to beat the current one.

[soyizgood]

I played a 3.5 today and lost. I was so disgusted with my play it was ridiculous. It had me telling myself I should just give up playing tennis. I made plenty of unforced errors and double faults. He only hit a few winners and was just content to loop balls all day. Almost every time I went to attack my shots went out or into the net. I blew plenty of break point opportunities. He said afterward I have good shots and that it was likely just a bad day for me. Still, I was fuming angry and as I was in the parking lot I dropped my racquet bag and kicked it against a wall. I called my friend on the phone and vented like a jet about to take off. I went home after ordering some food and just went off on myself, telling myself that every time I'm in a good mood, reality is just going to kick me to the ground guaranteed.

Whether it's tennis or life in general, I'm just an underachiever and doomed to fail at almost everything it seems. Had me in tears after I was through venting at myself. The more I expect out of myself, the more I set myself up for an epic disappointment. I'm so down I don't have the appetite to eat my meal that's sitting next to me. Tennis is supposed to be a stress reliever, but for me it seems to be an extension of all the tension and frustration I have all pent up inside.

[Mansewerz]

While there are many exceptions to the statements I will be adding to this thread, let me say that for 35 years of teaching, the exceptions are rare.

Players who have been at 3.5 levels for more than a few years tend to remain there for life unless they make significant changes in their technique. This obviously very general statement is based on the fact that those players who first learn and work within more advanced strokes seldom stay in the 3.0 or the 3.5 levels very long.

In fact, they often can be seen not winning tournaments at these levels before moving on to higher levels. Because they are working within more advanced patterns they often forgo the 3.5 levels since they encounter a wide range of players; from hackers and pushers to sandbaggers and others.

This is not to take away anything from those at the 3.0 or 3.5 levels. Yet, if the goal is to hit with more effect and prolific stroke patterns, and if one wants to play at levels associated with higher levels, they usually won't make this transition with the typical strokes seen at the 3.0 or 3.5 levels. (Except for those who are using more prolific stroke patterns but are still inexperienced with them and are not ready to compete at higher levels yet.)

Also, a 3.5 in one area may very well be a 4.0 in terms of competitive abilities. However, the NTRP levels are based on the ability to hit specific shots or be able to execute specific strategies...not necessarily based on wins and losses. (However, players are often moved up or down based on winning and/or losing against established players.)

The bottom line is that many stroke patterns and techniques do not allow for progressive player improvement without making specific changes in that technique.

(Which is why 90% of the 117 books I own recommend players transitioning to more advanced grips and stroke patterns as they get better...unfortunately, those same books usually recommend beginners starting out with the very patterns that will stagnate them at lower levels, usually far below their potential.

I have spoken on this topic at various conventions and I'm starting to see an understanding among players and teaching pros alike.

If you hope to become a highly skilled player, (and a higher ntrp rated player), then you need to start learning, using, practicing, and employing those methods that are recognized as being more prolific in their function.

While there are a hundred ways to hit a ball over the net, few of those methods result in players being able to hit more EFFECTIVE shots with those methods.

If i'm understanding this correctly, some players lose more at the lower levels because they're practicing to get to the higher level rather than to win at the lower level?

For example, i'm trying to learn how to serve and volley. I may lose more at this time because winning at the lower level is consistency, but once I get to the higher level, my serve and volley will piss people off. The same goes for pushers and people with frying pan serves?

[BreakPoint]

There were plenty of guys in McEnroe's day who could do those things that McEnroe beat easily. Speed is incredibly important in tennis. That's what age takes away from you (the strokes don't go away). Of course, it isn't as big a factor in doubles. I'd take the old McEnroe to beat the current one.
Yet, on the seniors tour, McEnroe now easily beats guys from his era, like Borg, who he had more trouble beating in his prime. McEnroe even beats younger ex-pros like Sampras and Courier.

When was the last time you watched an entire McEnroe match from the late-70's or early 80's when he used a wood racquet. Compare that to how well he plays today on the seniors tour. I think today's McEnroe with his modern racquet would beat the younger McEnroe with a wood racquet. I don't think the younger McEnroe with a wood racquet could even return the older McEnroe's serves with the modern racquet.

[Carlito]

There are a bunch of 3.5 guys that I play with at my club. I usually play , 4.0-4.5 tournaments (I can take sets off some 5.5 guys but my main problem is conditioning). I can tell you that the difference between the 3.5 guys and the 4.0 guys is the amount of free points you will get. If you really want to get better than 3.5, you can't give away free points. When I play 3.5 guys, I know all I have to do is flip it back and they will eventually miss. When I play 4.5, i know I have to earn the points.

Just think about it this way; you only need 4 points to win a game. If you give up 2 easy points a game, your opponent is half way there.

[raiden031]

There are a bunch of 3.5 guys that I play with at my club. I usually play , 4.0-4.5 tournaments (I can take sets off some 5.5 guys but my main problem is conditioning). I can tell you that the difference between the 3.5 guys and the 4.0 guys is the amount of free points you will get. If you really want to get better than 3.5, you can't give away free points. When I play 3.5 guys, I know all I have to do is flip it back and they will eventually miss. When I play 4.5, i know I have to earn the points.

Just think about it this way; you only need 4 points to win a game. If you give up 2 easy points a game, your opponent is half way there.

I think you are right. Strokewise there's generally not a big difference, but man some of these guys do not like giving up points (mainly in singles). I'm discovering that in doubles I think the gap between 3.5 and 4.0 is closer than in singles.

[raiden031]

If i'm understanding this correctly, some players lose more at the lower levels because they're practicing to get to the higher level rather than to win at the lower level?

For example, i'm trying to learn how to serve and volley. I may lose more at this time because winning at the lower level is consistency, but once I get to the higher level, my serve and volley will piss people off. The same goes for pushers and people with frying pan serves?

They lose while they are still developing their strokes because they don't 'own' those strokes yet. Eventually their strokes become consistent and they start playing at higher levels because their form is good and stroke patterns are repeatable. So if you have bad form, you might have to take a step back and learn new strokes that are uncomfortable and paralyze your game, before you can take 3 steps foward.

While someone with unorthodox strokes might have played a couple years and win all the 3.5 tournaments, but because his strokes are fundamentally wrong, they provide limitations that prevent him from improving to 4.0 and beyond. I guess these unorthodox strokes are more likely to break down when facing more skilled players.

[NLBwell]

Yet, on the seniors tour, McEnroe now easily beats guys from his era, like Borg, who he had more trouble beating in his prime. McEnroe even beats younger ex-pros like Sampras and Courier.

When was the last time you watched an entire McEnroe match from the late-70's or early 80's when he used a wood racquet. Compare that to how well he plays today on the seniors tour. I think today's McEnroe with his modern racquet would beat the younger McEnroe with a wood racquet. I don't think the younger McEnroe with a wood racquet could even return the older McEnroe's serves with the modern racquet.

McEnroe was 8-2 versus Roscoe Tanner (145mph serve) 1978-1983. I don't know the exact date he switched to graphite, but in most, if not all those matches, he used a wood racket. (He switched to graphite in 83 and two of the matches were it 83 - 1 and 1 in those 2 matches.)

[NLBwell]

I played a 3.5 today and lost. I was so disgusted with my play it was ridiculous. It had me telling myself I should just give up playing tennis. I made plenty of unforced errors and double faults. He only hit a few winners and was just content to loop balls all day. Almost every time I went to attack my shots went out or into the net. I blew plenty of break point opportunities. He said afterward I have good shots and that it was likely just a bad day for me. Still, I was fuming angry and as I was in the parking lot I dropped my racquet bag and kicked it against a wall. I called my friend on the phone and vented like a jet about to take off. I went home after ordering some food and just went off on myself, telling myself that every time I'm in a good mood, reality is just going to kick me to the ground guaranteed.

Whether it's tennis or life in general, I'm just an underachiever and doomed to fail at almost everything it seems. Had me in tears after I was through venting at myself. The more I expect out of myself, the more I set myself up for an epic disappointment. I'm so down I don't have the appetite to eat my meal that's sitting next to me. Tennis is supposed to be a stress reliever, but for me it seems to be an extension of all the tension and frustration I have all pent up inside.

I would say don't be so hard on yourself, but I've done this to myself many times (as I'm sure many on this board have). It just hurts so badly when something you put so much effort into seems to go nowhere. As many times as I've done this, though, I've always kept playing tennis and am the better off for it. Don't let your feelings about tennis affect how you feel about the rest of your life - try to keep it compartmentalized. Even then, it does hurt, but you'll be out playing again in a day or two.

[snoopy]

Yet, on the seniors tour, McEnroe now easily beats guys from his era, like Borg, who he had more trouble beating in his prime. McEnroe even beats younger ex-pros like Sampras and Courier.



Mac says he's more fit now compared to when he was younger. I don't think a lot of the guys on the senior tour are serious about being fit. So Mac has a huge advantage over them.

[BreakPoint]

McEnroe was 8-2 versus Roscoe Tanner (145mph serve) 1978-1983. I don't know the exact date he switched to graphite, but in most, if not all those matches, he used a wood racket. (He switched to graphite in 83 and two of the matches were it 83 - 1 and 1 in those 2 matches.)
So if McEnroe played Tanner today, I'd bet he'd be 10-0.

Tanner fastest serve ever might have been 145mph, but he almost never hit it that fast. He averaged in the 120's mph and only when he got it in, which is not that often with a tiny headed racquet. Besides, Tanner's prime was in the '70's and he was already past his prime in most of his matches with McEnroe.

[thehustler]

I played a 3.5 today and lost. I was so disgusted with my play it was ridiculous. It had me telling myself I should just give up playing tennis. I made plenty of unforced errors and double faults. He only hit a few winners and was just content to loop balls all day. Almost every time I went to attack my shots went out or into the net. I blew plenty of break point opportunities. He said afterward I have good shots and that it was likely just a bad day for me. Still, I was fuming angry and as I was in the parking lot I dropped my racquet bag and kicked it against a wall. I called my friend on the phone and vented like a jet about to take off. I went home after ordering some food and just went off on myself, telling myself that every time I'm in a good mood, reality is just going to kick me to the ground guaranteed.

Whether it's tennis or life in general, I'm just an underachiever and doomed to fail at almost everything it seems. Had me in tears after I was through venting at myself. The more I expect out of myself, the more I set myself up for an epic disappointment. I'm so down I don't have the appetite to eat my meal that's sitting next to me. Tennis is supposed to be a stress reliever, but for me it seems to be an extension of all the tension and frustration I have all pent up inside.

You know I've been right where you are. I've been so upset at myself that I've done the things you described. It took me a long time to realize that I was wasting energy. It's funny I got a shirt from Prince and on the front it says "Energy where it matters". I think that's such an important quote, energy where it matters. Think about where you're putting your energy for a minute. Are you putting your energy in the right areas?

Your opponent put his energy in the right areas. He looped the ball back and let you make the mistakes. He didn't have to do much and he won the match. You probably put your energy being upset and focusing on your double faults and unforced errors. So what? I used to double fault a lot and sometimes I have those bad days where I do. But I don't count my errors, heck I don't count my winners, I just focus on the ball. That's the only place where your energy should be. When you lose don't look at it as losing, but finding a way to not beat someone. Remember the way you didn't beat the guy and improve on it. Remember what you did well that won you points and games and improve on that.

I hope this helps you out. I've been there and done that. You'll get thru it. We all have to go thru crap to get to the good stuff. That's just life. But you know what? When you get there it's that much sweeter. Trust me.

[Bhagi Katbamna]

I played a 3.5 today and lost. I was so disgusted with my play it was ridiculous. It had me telling myself I should just give up playing tennis. I made plenty of unforced errors and double faults. He only hit a few winners and was just content to loop balls all day. Almost every time I went to attack my shots went out or into the net. I blew plenty of break point opportunities. He said afterward I have good shots and that it was likely just a bad day for me. Still, I was fuming angry and as I was in the parking lot I dropped my racquet bag and kicked it against a wall. I called my friend on the phone and vented like a jet about to take off. I went home after ordering some food and just went off on myself, telling myself that every time I'm in a good mood, reality is just going to kick me to the ground guaranteed.

Whether it's tennis or life in general, I'm just an underachiever and doomed to fail at almost everything it seems. Had me in tears after I was through venting at myself. The more I expect out of myself, the more I set myself up for an epic disappointment. I'm so down I don't have the appetite to eat my meal that's sitting next to me. Tennis is supposed to be a stress reliever, but for me it seems to be an extension of all the tension and frustration I have all pent up inside.

Don't extrapolate the results of one bad day to mean that you will underperform in all aspects of your life.

[soyizgood]

It's funny I got a shirt from Prince and on the front it says "Energy where it matters". I think that's such an important quote, energy where it matters. Think about where you're putting your energy for a minute. Are you putting your energy in the right areas?

Your opponent put his energy in the right areas. He looped the ball back and let you make the mistakes. He didn't have to do much and he won the match. You probably put your energy being upset and focusing on your double faults and unforced errors. So what? I used to double fault a lot and sometimes I have those bad days where I do. But I don't count my errors, heck I don't count my winners, I just focus on the ball. That's the only place where your energy should be. When you lose don't look at it as losing, but finding a way to not beat someone. Remember the way you didn't beat the guy and improve on it. Remember what you did well that won you points and games and improve on that.

I hope this helps you out. I've been there and done that. You'll get thru it. We all have to go thru crap to get to the good stuff. That's just life. But you know what? When you get there it's that much sweeter. Trust me.

My serve fall apart, MISERABLY. I had been feeling good about the improvements I made in this area. Yet my 1st serve % was low, I made a lot of double faults even though I knew my opponent wasn't going to punish me for it, and it got to the point that I was just trying to puffball the 2nd serve in with the sun in my eyes an the breeze going against me. The serve is often what usually causes me to lose my mental focus most. I hate serving because I don't hold serve that well. In fact, when I win tosses I always choose to receive first.

The forehand was doing okay on rally ball exchanges. Unfortunately, when I got a sitter or a ball to attack, my forehand would sail out or into the net time after time. Granted this is my weaker side, but I had been liking the modifications I recently made to it. Probably I should have just played it safe and used it to set up my volleys or position to attack with my backhand.

I had no problems with his serve, except when I saw a chance to attack it. Sometimes it was successful, but other times I hit out and/or mishit.

I gave him too many free points even though I dictated the pace on many of the points. I tried to force the issue, tried to prove my forehand is not a liability, and tried in vain to make my serve a weapon. Failed on all counts. I didn't want to play pusher ball and was eager to play more aggressively than I had before.

Many friends and even people I run into have said nice things about my shots, but also mention that I mentally beat myself up. I agree that's generally true when things go wrong. I don't have a short-term memory when I play. And as mistakes pile up I get really frustrated with myself. I'm not an optimistic person to begin with, so that only makes matters worse unless I somehow pull my way out.

I have to fix that 2nd serve (debating whether to use a kick or slice serve for it). And while I'm at it probably choose a main serve for 1st serve (I mix slice and kick with an occasional flat). That area is a wildcard in that I don't know what to expect from it when I play.

I may have to be content with hitting a rally ball forehand until I'm confident I can hit winners more reliably. I feel like an oddball in that I have plenty of confidence with the backhand (my only reliable weapon), but not much faith in the forehand. I have been trying hard for over 2 years to make my forehand a weapon, but it still doesn't generate many winners. It feels as though I put more steps into that shot to where it's a chore when I'm trying to take charge off that wing.

I'm probably going to practice less in the near term. I don't know if I will ever get it together.

[Mansewerz]

I think becoming more optimistic is the first step.

[NLBwell]

So if McEnroe played Tanner today, I'd bet he'd be 10-0.

Tanner fastest serve ever might have been 145mph, but he almost never hit it that fast. He averaged in the 120's mph and only when he got it in, which is not that often with a tiny headed racquet. Besides, Tanner's prime was in the '70's and he was already past his prime in most of his matches with McEnroe.

Well, since Tanner has been in and out of jail, and McEnroe has been playing the seniors tour, I'm sure McEnroe would win easily. (Don't know if Tanner has tried any seniors events)

In Tanners prime years 77-79 - Won Aussi over Vilas (2x winner) in 77 - Finalist to Borg in 79 at Wimbledon (great 5 set match) and semis at US Open - McEnroe was 3-1.

Soy: Whatever points are being made about old guys playing tennis, remember these are old guys playing tennis. It is a lifelong sport and you can play almost as well or better in your 50's. It really is hard to take a long-term view when you are young, but bad memories fade away and whatever level of tennis you end up playing you can still enjoy it.

[thehustler]

My serve fall apart, MISERABLY. I had been feeling good about the improvements I made in this area. Yet my 1st serve % was low, I made a lot of double faults even though I knew my opponent wasn't going to punish me for it, and it got to the point that I was just trying to puffball the 2nd serve in with the sun in my eyes an the breeze going against me. The serve is often what usually causes me to lose my mental focus most. I hate serving because I don't hold serve that well. In fact, when I win tosses I always choose to receive first.

The forehand was doing okay on rally ball exchanges. Unfortunately, when I got a sitter or a ball to attack, my forehand would sail out or into the net time after time. Granted this is my weaker side, but I had been liking the modifications I recently made to it. Probably I should have just played it safe and used it to set up my volleys or position to attack with my backhand.

I had no problems with his serve, except when I saw a chance to attack it. Sometimes it was successful, but other times I hit out and/or mishit.

I gave him too many free points even though I dictated the pace on many of the points. I tried to force the issue, tried to prove my forehand is not a liability, and tried in vain to make my serve a weapon. Failed on all counts. I didn't want to play pusher ball and was eager to play more aggressively than I had before.

Many friends and even people I run into have said nice things about my shots, but also mention that I mentally beat myself up. I agree that's generally true when things go wrong. I don't have a short-term memory when I play. And as mistakes pile up I get really frustrated with myself. I'm not an optimistic person to begin with, so that only makes matters worse unless I somehow pull my way out.

I have to fix that 2nd serve (debating whether to use a kick or slice serve for it). And while I'm at it probably choose a main serve for 1st serve (I mix slice and kick with an occasional flat). That area is a wildcard in that I don't know what to expect from it when I play.

I may have to be content with hitting a rally ball forehand until I'm confident I can hit winners more reliably. I feel like an oddball in that I have plenty of confidence with the backhand (my only reliable weapon), but not much faith in the forehand. I have been trying hard for over 2 years to make my forehand a weapon, but it still doesn't generate many winners. It feels as though I put more steps into that shot to where it's a chore when I'm trying to take charge off that wing.

I'm probably going to practice less in the near term. I don't know if I will ever get it together.

I have days where my 1st server % is low. It happens. I have days where I hit too many doubles. When I hit my doubles though, its not for me puffing the ball over. I go for my serves, both first and 2nd. I figure if I miss, well at least I went for it. That way I don't feel bad. I tend to get more serves in when I go for it and it's difficult for an opponent to return a 2nd serve that's just as hard as the first. I always choose to receive when I win a toss. I like the idea of any early break and an extra game to get a rhythm going. It helps me out. Dropping serve/having a poor serve game can make you lose mental focus. But if you focus in another area, say your return game that can help out your serve game.

You answered your own problem for your forehand. Just use it as a setup shot. No harm in that. My backhand is solid, but it is my weaker wing. I will use it to setup my forehand or a volley. You don't get punished for using a weakness to setup a strength. That's a totally ok thing to do. You should never go out and do anything to prove a point. The only thing that will prove is that you can't prove the point you want to make. I've always known what was weak on my game, but I never went out to prove it. I just stuck to what I am good at and the results speak for themselves.

You will need to change how you think on the court if you want better results. Don't worry about what you can't do well, just focus on what you do well. Patience is a big thing in tennis. Remember the guy who wins the last point wins the match. Just get the ball over, don't worry about winners, forehands, backhands or serves. Focus on the ball and the rest will take care of itself. You really can't worry about your forehand not producing winners. I have matches where I have only a few winners, perhaps you can count them on one hand, but my opponent has tons of UE's and FE's and that drives them crazy. I beat my opponents by being patient and if I get some winners that's great. But if I'm the last one to get the ball in, well I'll take that any day over 50 winners. Good luck. I have faith in you. Just believe in yourself and good things will come.

[BreakPoint]

Well, since Tanner has been in and out of jail, and McEnroe has been playing the seniors tour, I'm sure McEnroe would win easily. (Don't know if Tanner has tried any seniors events)

In Tanners prime years 77-79 - Won Aussi over Vilas (2x winner) in 77 - Finalist to Borg in 79 at Wimbledon (great 5 set match) and semis at US Open - McEnroe was 3-1.

Tanner is 8 years older than McEnroe and was in the Top 20 in the early 70's and Top 10 in the mid-70's.

[fuzz nation]

soyizgood... something for your consideration...

I read a book from Vic Braden a couple of years back titled Mental Tennis and a good chunk of it addresses this state of mind that you're stuck in. The author has been a presence in tennis for decades and he's also a liscenced psychologist, so he understands a lot of the mechanisms in our heads that can help us or hurt us. The good news is that his writing is really entertaining - if our sport had comedians, he'd be one of them.

One of the most valuable things that I learned from Vic's book is that our expectations can often be out of touch with reality. Even if we possess plenty of potential for improvement, much of that can go unrealized when we're stuck in a state of constant disappointment. As simple as it may sound, it can take some serious work to realign our expectations and stay focused on where we're going instead of where we believe we've been for too long.

Two of my tennis pals have borrowed this book and they've been just as positive about it as I have - so far I've read it twice, might have another go this summer, and I'm also looking to get one or two of Braden's other works. If you have the time, I hope this can get you in a better direction.

[chess9]

I played a 3.5 today and lost. I was so disgusted with my play it was ridiculous. It had me telling myself I should just give up playing tennis. I made plenty of unforced errors and double faults. He only hit a few winners and was just content to loop balls all day. Almost every time I went to attack my shots went out or into the net. I blew plenty of break point opportunities. He said afterward I have good shots and that it was likely just a bad day for me. Still, I was fuming angry and as I was in the parking lot I dropped my racquet bag and kicked it against a wall. I called my friend on the phone and vented like a jet about to take off. I went home after ordering some food and just went off on myself, telling myself that every time I'm in a good mood, reality is just going to kick me to the ground guaranteed.

Whether it's tennis or life in general, I'm just an underachiever and doomed to fail at almost everything it seems. Had me in tears after I was through venting at myself. The more I expect out of myself, the more I set myself up for an epic disappointment. I'm so down I don't have the appetite to eat my meal that's sitting next to me. Tennis is supposed to be a stress reliever, but for me it seems to be an extension of all the tension and frustration I have all pent up inside.

I understand how you feel. In college I felt this way. I had been a strong baseball player and took up tennis too late to be very good. But, it was very frustrating being a mediocre college player. So, after college I quit tennis!! Didn't pick up a racquet for many many years and only because a very pretty English lass asked me to play tennis with her. I was awful! Still!!! :)

But, here's the lesson about all of this: WE ARE ALL AWFUL HERE. Well, 99% of us are just HAVING FUN. You simply need the following attitude:

1. Accept that thankfully, you have two legs, two arms, two legs, and no serious illnesses. (You could have been shot up or died in 'Nam like a lot of my Marine buddies.)

2. Every loss is a learning experience.

3. Accept that you may not get any better. It's possible that you have reached the point at which improvement is not possible. This happens to everyone. Imagine being #50 in the world? You and Nadal would walk into an airport and he'd be mobbed but no one would know who you are, probably. In some ways, you are better off being ranked 1,480,349,322nd in the world. :)

If you can't play with a carefree attitude, do something else. Life is too short to get aggravated over the little yellow ball.

But, I'll bet you CAN play with joi de vivre, IF you learn to love yourself regardless of your mistakes.

Peace and happiness-
Robert

[Mountain Ghost]

Soyizgood . . . you need to get some balance in your life and the way you look at things. Your observations are obscenely lopsided!

When you “lose,” you go into great detail about what you did wrong and how bad you are, and you gloss over what you did right and how good you are. For example, in a match where you might have lost 6-3, 6-3, the truth is you would probably have hit more shots IN the court than out. It’s just that you give “point” (easily quantifiable) shots SUCH a high premium in your self evaluation that you become literally blind to anything you might have done well.

It is time for you to come back to center. Your homework is to give EQUAL TIME to the “good” and the “bad” in your documentation of every on-court event. For every 50 words you come up with to describe the “bad” (even if just in your mind), you must come up with 50 words describing the “good.” The actual “value” of the “good” is not important, just the general “polarity” and the equal time you give to focusing on it.

There is NO HOPE unless you can learn to give it an observational fighting chance.

You have a lot of writing to do!

MG

[GuyClinch]

I dont think anyone is doomed at the 3.5 level but with limited practice time and lack of access to professional help its not that easy to improve.

That being said I have seen people go from a weak 3.5 to a decent 4.0. That was done with 4x a week play + 8 or so weekend camps (with professional instruction and filming) so its possible.

I think its the 4.5 and 5.0 levels that seem unattainable for the player that didn't learn in his childhood. I don't know a single 5.0 player who didn't play as a child..

Though I am sure a talented athlete (World class boxer, NFL cornerback, NBA PG) could do it..

[LeeD]

Excellent assessment of reality.
Only full grown +30 to achieve 5.5 is maybe JohnLucas, who was an all American tennis player in college, quit for 10 years to play NBA basketball, and needed TWO full years of work, coaching, and practice to crack the top 50 in tennis.

[ohplease]

Excellent assessment of reality.
Only full grown +30 to achieve 5.5 is maybe JohnLucas, who was an all American tennis player in college, quit for 10 years to play NBA basketball, and needed TWO full years of work, coaching, and practice to crack the top 50 in tennis.

Top 50 what? Lucas had an 0-3 record on the ATP in 1979. Maybe he made top 50 for his age group - you still need some kind of evidence before using him to make any kind of point.

In fact, according to USTA guidelines, since he was a division 1 player on a top 75 program, even after his 14 year NBA career (not 10), he was already a 5.5 player by definition.

[LeeD]

Well, fitter fatter...
14, 10, makes little difference in the long run, eh?
Point we're making is that it's really hard to get to 5.0 levels without childhood coached tennis experience.... especially if you're starting out as an adult.
I met John in '77, still a Warrior, talking about tennis again. Long hard work road to get to tennis's elite levels.
Sure, he was not great, but few great players make it into the pro levels. Team tennis, he was average, but successful, depending on your idea of "success".
There were no "5.5"'s in those years, so maybe John was a low ranked A player in his college years. Pro, A, B, were the ratings.
Touche' for you in knowing about him thos. For me, it was a long time ago in another life in another dream...

[skiracer55]

...let me add a few thoughts of my own:

- I am not a real fan of NTRP, because, among other things, it tends to be self-limiting. The OP is not happy with being "just" a 3.5, so the answer is...become a 4.0? When I was growing up, there was no NTRP, just senior and junior tournaments. I played in everything I could, because I figured that that was the only way to become the best player I could be.

- In that vein, as Ken Kesey used to say, stop going through the same door. Break out of the NTRP thing and go play an age group event or, better yet, a Men's Open event. I'm 60, have played since the Stone Age, and am probably a 5.0 or better. I don't play any NTRP just down in age groups (Men's 50, Men's 45) and Men's Open. I haven't won a whole lot of matches lately, but I've played some great tennis, and it just keeps getting better. If you want to know how good you can be, and where your game really is, and what you really need to work on, play some matches, like Men's Open, where you have to rise to a much higher level than you're accustomed to. It's a great learning experience...and a great tennis experience.

[vinouspleasure]

I played a year in college, hurt my back, couldn't run at all for two years and was too busy having fun to come back my senior year. After college, I moved to nyc where I didn't play for 15 years...basically 20 years without tennis.

After we moved to the burbs I started to play again and it was a terribly humbling experience. I was frustrated but eventually just relaxed about it. The idea was to have fun, not join the tour, and as long as it was fun, why not accept the fact that I wasn't consistent enough to beat dinkers and pushers? So while I applaud OPs drive to improve, I say relax and enjoy yourself on the court. Your results will certainly improve and you'll have a better attitude on the court.

As a side note, my game has come back to a 4.0 level and if we go to a tennis camp (my wife has taken up the sport with a vengeance), I can compete with 4.5s after about a day and half of drills. Its kinda nice to know the game is still in there...

From my perspective, one of the biggest differentiators between 3.5 and 4.0 is the second serve. IMO, its pretty hard to win at 4.0 and above without a decent kick serve.

[Mick]

the secret to become a better player is to practice every day with good players.

if you have already done this and the other guy still beat you, then he is just a better player.

personally, i would rather play against a better player and lose than play against an inferior player and win.

[aimr75]

I played a 3.5 today and lost. I was so disgusted with my play it was ridiculous. It had me telling myself I should just give up playing tennis. I made plenty of unforced errors and double faults. He only hit a few winners and was just content to loop balls all day. Almost every time I went to attack my shots went out or into the net. I blew plenty of break point opportunities. He said afterward I have good shots and that it was likely just a bad day for me. Still, I was fuming angry and as I was in the parking lot I dropped my racquet bag and kicked it against a wall. I called my friend on the phone and vented like a jet about to take off. I went home after ordering some food and just went off on myself, telling myself that every time I'm in a good mood, reality is just going to kick me to the ground guaranteed.

Whether it's tennis or life in general, I'm just an underachiever and doomed to fail at almost everything it seems. Had me in tears after I was through venting at myself. The more I expect out of myself, the more I set myself up for an epic disappointment. I'm so down I don't have the appetite to eat my meal that's sitting next to me. Tennis is supposed to be a stress reliever, but for me it seems to be an extension of all the tension and frustration I have all pent up inside.

i havent read through all this thread but you should probably put things into perspective.. how were you hitting a year or 2 ago compared to now? Has your technique improved? serve? movement?

Looking at the bigger picture, im sure youve had incremental improvements over time, its nothing to get down about if things arent working right now.. overall you are probably quite a few steps ahead from where you were

I thought about this recently when i had a few bad sessions, i figured despite this, overall everything still has improved, so try and take away some positives from where you are at vs. where you were

[GuyClinch]

the secret to become a better player is to practice every day with good players.

if you have already done this and the other guy still beat you, then he is just a better player.

personally, i would rather play against a better player and lose than play against an inferior player and win.

That's not exactly a "secret" - why do you think pros can get upwards of $100 an hour just to hit with people.. <g>

[Mick]

That's not exactly a "secret" - why do you think pros can get upwards of $100 an hour just to hit with people.. <g>

yeah but the OP's goal is to beat 3.5 players and move on to the 4.0 level.
You don't need a $100 an hour coach to realize this goal.

[Ultra2HolyGrail]

the secret to become a better player is to practice every day with good players.


That certainly helps but the real secret is to learn good technique from the getgo. Bad habits and poor technique is what probably keeps the majority of players from being a advanced player.

[Thud and blunder]

I haven't read the whole thread but a couple of comments:

1) 'doomed' to be a 3.5...is that a fate worse than death? NTRP is just an approximate way of allowing people to find opponents who'll give them a competitive match, its not a badge of honour. You don't get more money, women, power etc by getting bumped up to 4.0. Doomed to find players on your level? Doesn't sound so terrible.

2) OK, but there is the burning desire to improve; Fair enough. But this can be a vastly inhibiting factor on the court. You become too goal-orientated, and not enough process-orientated. 'I have to win this match' rather than 'let me put this ball into the corner three quarter pace heavy topsin'. That kind of thinking really holds you back. This is something most players have gone through at some stage, I would guess. Its only by playing a lot that you stop fixating on any given result, as any one match just becomes part of a continuum. When you've got over that hump, you give yourself breathing room to play your game and improve.

[dickbarney]

You need to improve your skill level to get out of 3.5. Most people can only refine their current skill level with practice. Most people can go from 3.5 to 3.75 with practice.

I got out of 3.5 with lessons from several pros. You need to find a pro that can help you. There are a lot of pros that "teach tennis" but don't help you improve. You may need to try several pros before you find a good one that fits you.

I was a 3.5 at 30 and I play 4.0 to 4.5 at 60+ years so there is hope but it can take dedication replace unlearn bad habits with new skills.

[GuyClinch]

That certainly helps but the real secret is to learn good technique from the getgo. Bad habits and poor technique is what probably keeps the majority of players from being a advanced player.

For regular people its hard to know what really good technique is without a pro and its even harder to know about your own bad habits.. Thats why people end up paying pros alot of money..

Most of the really good players learned at a very young age and had pro guidance. Those two factors seem to be the main indicators for high levels of play. Interestingly enough I don't feel that exceptional levels of athleticism really start to kick in until the pro level..

That being said we are not doomed to 3.5. Thats a much lower level then really cuts people off. Most people I think could play well above that.. So we pretty much agree.

[GuyClinch]

I got out of 3.5 with lessons from several pros. You need to find a pro that can help you. There are a lot of pros that "teach tennis" but don't help you improve. You may need to try several pros before you find a good one that fits you.

Finding a pro that can help you is a real challenge. I agree with this wholeheartedly. There are lots of reasons why..

1) Most pros don't seem that committed to helping players succeed who are not going to be able to "do anything" with their career. Teaching adults is a way to make money - not really what they do.

2) Many pros are able to play at high levels but are unable to properly diagnose mistakes that people make and take the steps to correct them.

3) Many pros seem unwilling to work the students really hard on the court. They believe being "nice" and "supportive" will earn them more repeat business. And they may well be right..

4) High cost. As with anything the best pros seem to cost the most money - bargains can be found (some high level college player with a flair for teaching that just got in the business..) But its hard.

[skiracer55]

...by looking at the description of a 3.5, a 4.0, and a 4.5 player:

3.5
You have achieved improved stroke dependability with directional control on moderate shots, but need to develop depth and variety. You exhibit more aggressive net play, have improved court coverage and are developing teamwork in doubles.

4.0
You have dependable strokes, including directional control and depth on both forehand and backhand sides on moderate-paced shots. You can use lobs, overheads, approach shots and volleys with some success and occasionally force errors when serving. Rallies may be lost due to impatience. Teamwork in doubles is evident.

4.5
You have developed your use of power and spin and can handle pace. You have sound footwork, can control depth of shots, and attempt to vary game plan according to your opponents. You can hit first serves with power and accuracy and place the second serve. You tend to overhit on difficult shots. Aggressive net play is common in doubles.

So, to a certain extent, it's not rocket science. For a 3.5, you have decent ground strokes but need more depth and control, and lo and behold, when you get those things wired, those are, in fact, the characteristics of ground strokes at the 4.0 level. So drilling down a bit more, what, specifically do you need to do to get more depth and control on your ground strokes? Again, not rocket science. You need a consistent, effective swing path, and in addition to that, you need good footwork, antiicipation, and preparation to put you in position to use your newly found consistent, effective swing path.

If you're talking about today's open stance Western or semi-Western forehand, sure, there are variations, but the basics of the stroke are pretty well known. You can read about it in a book or watch videos of same. There's tons of instructional video out there. Then you can go video yourself and see what you're doing and adjust accordingly. I think a good coach is a great thing to have, but it's not the only path to tennis improvement. And the path, as I show above, is pretty well defined, so figure out where you are on the NTRP scale, see what you have to do to get to the next level (with an eye on the levels above that...who said you had to go one level at a time?), and go to it.

There is an obvious caveat, however, which is that you can have the strokes of a 4.5 but lose to a 3.0 if you don't know how to play a match, which is different from playing an individual point or game. On the other hand, you're probably not going to win consistently at the 4.5 level, for instance, if you don't have the characteristics...the strokes and strategies of a 4.5. So it takes both, but you can look at the characteristics as the pre requisites for competing effectively at whatever level...

[chess9]

Well, fitter fatter...
14, 10, makes little difference in the long run, eh?
Point we're making is that it's really hard to get to 5.0 levels without childhood coached tennis experience.... especially if you're starting out as an adult.
I met John in '77, still a Warrior, talking about tennis again. Long hard work road to get to tennis's elite levels.
Sure, he was not great, but few great players make it into the pro levels. Team tennis, he was average, but successful, depending on your idea of "success".
There were no "5.5"'s in those years, so maybe John was a low ranked A player in his college years. Pro, A, B, were the ratings.
Touche' for you in knowing about him thos. For me, it was a long time ago in another life in another dream...

Well, in college, he'd come off the basketball court right onto the tennis court without so much as a two or three week training session. Sure, he hit a few balls during the year, but he was SO talented athletically that he really never gave himself a chance at tennis in college or the pros. Darn shame too as he could move like a JEDI KNIGHT. He didn't have much power in his game, but he returned everything, sort of like Brad Gilbert, but with a bit more grace and style. (Sorry, Brad, if you're 'listening', as I'm one of your fans too.) And then, there were the drugs, and sort of reminscent of a pre-Len Bias era. (another great one gone)

-Robert

[LeeD]

Wow, nice to see you knew him too...
He also collaborated with HenryHines on that movement book, both talking to lots of athletes from different sports on movements, first step, ready position, fitness, diet, sleep, recovery, and all dat jazz....
I was actually surprised when Hine's book came out, I wasn't mentioned in the credits. That's life, then I die.

[GuyClinch]

So, to a certain extent, it's not rocket science. For a 3.5, you have decent ground strokes but need more depth and control, and lo and behold, when you get those things wired, those are, in fact, the characteristics of ground strokes at the 4.0 level. So drilling down a bit more, what, specifically do you need to do to get more depth and control on your ground strokes? Again, not rocket science. You need a consistent, effective swing path, and in addition to that, you need good footwork, antiicipation, and preparation to put you in position to use your newly found consistent, effective swing path.

If your going by the ridiculous self rating system sure it sounds easy to soar past 3.5. When I started playing I thought I was a 4.5!

In reality a 4.0 is going to be better then MOST tennis players who play regularly. Thats a good deal tougher for the older player with limited time to achieve.

Can a teenager who plays on his HS tennis team soar well beyond that - sure. But for recreational players its a big jump. You don't see alot of entirely self taught players win in 4.0 leagues.


There is an obvious caveat, however, which is that you can have the strokes of a 4.5 but lose to a 3.0 if you don't know how to play a match, which is different from playing an individual point or game. On the other hand, you're probably not going to win consistently at the 4.5 level, for instance, if you don't have the characteristics...the strokes and strategies of a 4.5. So it takes both, but you can look at the characteristics as the pre requisites for competing effectively at whatever level...

You need to play some league tennis - there is no way someone with 4.5 strokes would lose to 3.0. They could know NOTHING about strategy and blow that guy off the court.

4.5 strokes are REALLY good. Sure they might look like garbage on video because all you watch are pros (on video) but IRL a 4.5 could hit right back to a 3.0 and win every time.

[JRstriker12]

4.5 strokes are REALLY good. Sure they might look like garbage on video because all you watch are pros (on video) but IRL a 4.5 could hit right back to a 3.0 and win every time.

True - that!!!!

I play among a fairly mixed group of players ranging from 3.0-open players. Most in our group are 3.5 - I am also a 3.5.

With most 3.0 players, all you have to do is keep the ball in play with decent depth and spin and they will cough up the errors.

If you run across anyone with 4.5 strokes, and they played a 3.0, even if the 4.5 played the ball right to the 3.0. The 3.0 would not be able to keep that ball in play for very long, if they weren't overwhelmed by the massive spin and pace.

[Tennisman912]

GuyCinch,

I respectfully disagree that finding a pro is the problem here. Any self-respecting pro can help someone at the 3.5 level, if that person is willing to change things to improve. Granted, some are better than others and finding someone who meets your personality traits is important: i.e. do you want someone riding you or do you want someone who is more low key. I would recommend someone who rides you and will challenge you every time when you revert to old habits. Most can’t handle that though.

Soy,

I also agree that playing with those better than you will definitely help your progress. But you are wasting your time playing with anyone 4.5 or above even if they tone it way down. You just can’t handle it IMHO yet. Find the good 4.0s to play with. They will be more willing to play with you and you can help each other work on things.

Believing you can improve is important. Based on a lot of the self-talk we are seeing, if you don’t believe that you have no chance to make it. Think positively and be optimistic. Anyone can improve to at least 4.0. But it takes effort. Enjoy the journey, keep reaching higher and never give up. You don’t have to settle at any level if you will do what it takes to move up. There’s the rub. Most won’t do it no matter what. Don’t be that guy.

Good tennis

TM

[GuyClinch]

I respectfully disagree that finding a pro is the problem here. Any self-respecting pro can help someone at the 3.5 level, if that person is willing to change things to improve. Granted, some are better than others and finding someone who meets your personality traits is important: i.e. do you want someone riding you or do you want someone who is more low key. I would recommend someone who rides you and will challenge you every time when you revert to old habits. Most can’t handle that though.

Oh its not problem if cost is no object...:P

[Tennisman912]

GuyClinch,

Not all pros are super expensive. The more junior pros will run you anywhere to 35-50 an hour. You need the advice of someone because you don’t know what you don’t know and that is what is hurting you. It will cost a few bucks but you don’t have to take many lessons to learn the basics, with an occasional lesson to keep you on track.

Your only other option is finding a good HS or college player who will help you for less, or maybe even nothing. But I would see a pro first to put you on the right track and then use any means to improve from there. Because if you listen to anyone else, you are taking a big chance that they know what they are doing and don’t have some bad habits that may suit them but not necessarily you. Again, at this stage you don’t know enough to discern the difference. I hope you wouldn’t let a couple of hundred bucks keep you from meeting your goals.

But for every person like Raiden031 who mostly taught himself to improve his skills with books and study as mentioned in this thread, there will be 5000 people who can’t do it without help (conservatively). People like that are an anomaly (in a good way Raiden). Sorry but that is the truth. Make your choice on which way is best for you and do the best you can.

Good tennis

TM

[skiracer55]

If your going by the ridiculous self rating system sure it sounds easy to soar past 3.5. When I started playing I thought I was a 4.5!

In reality a 4.0 is going to be better then MOST tennis players who play regularly. Thats a good deal tougher for the older player with limited time to achieve.

Can a teenager who plays on his HS tennis team soar well beyond that - sure. But for recreational players its a big jump. You don't see alot of entirely self taught players win in 4.0 leagues.




You need to play some league tennis - there is no way someone with 4.5 strokes would lose to 3.0. They could know NOTHING about strategy and blow that guy off the court.

4.5 strokes are REALLY good. Sure they might look like garbage on video because all you watch are pros (on video) but IRL a 4.5 could hit right back to a 3.0 and win every time.

...and, in addition, you're judging the whole thing by what happens in the arena of NTRP leagues. NTRP leagues are not all of tennis, but a lot of people have made the mistake of thinking that's the way the world works! What I'm trying to say is, if you want to improve, think of it in terms of becoming the best player you can be, and if you're still into the NTRP thing, then your rating will take care of itself. I'm getting this feeling that people who are terminally hung up on NTRP are looking at a way to hang a label on themselves on paper. You don't play tennis on paper, you play it on the court.

Everybody is built differently, but to me, it's a very limited goal to say "I want to have somebody rate me as a 4.5." Okay, fine...then what? There have been tons of people who made it to the top of the world in tennis who were incredible physical specimens...and then there are those who also made it to the top of the world who, by any reasonable definition, were pencil-neck geeks. Rod Laver is something like 5' 7", 150 pounds soaking wet. Ken "Muscles" Rosewall is something like 5' 6", 135 pounds. Yet each of them won Grand Slams, etc., by believing that their good old fashioned work ethic would get them there. I'm really tired of this discussion that says "I'm going to be a 3.5 for the rest of my life...what a tragedy." You don't like being a 3.5 any more? Fine, then do something about it, where the accent is on you. It doesn't hurt to enlist the aid of a good coach, a support team, whatever...but let's just remember that tennis is an individual sport, and if you want to be good, the only thing holding you back is you...and the only thing that will help you go forward...is you.

[GuyClinch]

...and, in addition, you're judging the whole thing by what happens in the arena of NTRP leagues.

This is basically nonsensical. Of course I judge the whole thing by what happens in the leagues and tournaments. The way NTRP ratings are determined is via league and tournament play. So for someone concerned with moving up a half point ranking with regards to NTRP that is what you should be concerned with. <g>

At the very least someone who claims to be a 4.0 ranking should be able to beat 3.5 league ranked players consistently - even if this is done on an informal basis.


NTRP leagues are not all of tennis, but a lot of people have made the mistake of thinking that's the way the world works!

Umm its not how the world works but its kinda how the NTRP rankings work. What's next your going to tell us the NASCAR points standing isn't about racing cars in NASCAR? Perhaps the MLB standings aren't REALLY about teams playing in the MLB?

What I'm trying to say is, if you want to improve, think of it in terms of becoming the best player you can be, and if you're still into the NTRP thing, then your rating will take care of itself.

Actually your rating is determined independently of what your thinking about yourself. <g> Think good or bad thoughts and you could move up and down the rankings. It depends on how you play - or for informal means how you do against your buddies who DO play in the leagues.

I'm getting this feeling that people who are terminally hung up on NTRP are looking at a way to hang a label on themselves on paper.

That's kinda the point of NTRP. You get this handy little label that tells you how good you are. It's established by comparing your results in playing various players to those players results of all his opponents and so on and so forth. Ideally by just playing a few matches you can compete with everyone in the leagues and tournaments - in a roundabout way. It's pretty smart - but not perfect of course.

I am saying basically its not so easy for most people to move up the rankings because it means that you have to be capable of beating most players. The rankings are relative.

The real results are rather depressing as people have indicated. Most people (though not all) get stuck around a 3.5 level. They play year after year perhaps thinking they have improved but in reality they wouldn't beat a larger percentage of the people who play tennis regularly in a match..

Most players would likely do best with consistent help from a pro or at least superior players. I have my doubts whether a large amount of the population can improve greatly via book reading or video watching. I get better results from a pro. Though perhaps very talented or young individuals don't need such help. And I haven't yet read all the books or seen all the videos to aid a tennis player..

Pete

[GuyClinch]

Not all pros are super expensive. The more junior pros will run you anywhere to 35-50 an hour. You need the advice of someone because you don’t know what you don’t know and that is what is hurting you. It will cost a few bucks but you don’t have to take many lessons to learn the basics, with an occasional lesson to keep you on track.

This kinda depends on where you live I think.. Anyway i don't really disagree with anything you wrote.

[Mick]

maybe the OP should lower his goal to become the best 3.5 NTRP player first before aiming for the 4.0 level.

There are many 3.5 players out there and to become the best of among them is not easy either.

[skiracer55]

This is basically nonsensical. Of course I judge the whole thing by what happens in the leagues and tournaments. The way NTRP ratings are determined is via league and tournament play. So for someone concerned with moving up a half point ranking with regards to NTRP that is what you should be concerned with. <g>

At the very least someone who claims to be a 4.0 ranking should be able to beat 3.5 league ranked players consistently - even if this is done on an informal basis.




Umm its not how the world works but its kinda how the NTRP rankings work. What's next your going to tell us the NASCAR points standing isn't about racing cars in NASCAR? Perhaps the MLB standings aren't REALLY about teams playing in the MLB?



Actually your rating is determined independently of what your thinking about yourself. <g> Think good or bad thoughts and you could move up and down the rankings. It depends on how you play - or for informal means how you do against your buddies who DO play in the leagues.



That's kinda the point of NTRP. You get this handy little label that tells you how good you are. It's established by comparing your results in playing various players to those players results of all his opponents and so on and so forth. Ideally by just playing a few matches you can compete with everyone in the leagues and tournaments - in a roundabout way. It's pretty smart - but not perfect of course.

I am saying basically its not so easy for most people to move up the rankings because it means that you have to be capable of beating most players. The rankings are relative.

The real results are rather depressing as people have indicated. Most people (though not all) get stuck around a 3.5 level. They play year after year perhaps thinking they have improved but in reality they wouldn't beat a larger percentage of the people who play tennis regularly in a match..

Most players would likely do best with consistent help from a pro or at least superior players. I have my doubts whether a large amount of the population can improve greatly via book reading or video watching. I get better results from a pro. Though perhaps very talented or young individuals don't need such help. And I haven't yet read all the books or seen all the videos to aid a tennis player..

Pete

as follows:

- NTRP definitely isn't all of tennis, and it really isn't all that accurate an indicator of how well you play or whom you can beat. In Colorado, they did away with 5.5 leagues and tournaments a few years ago...and as a result, all the former 5.5s slid down to 5.0, and all the 5.0s slid down to 4.5, and so forth.

And what about 5.5 and above? Is Federer a 6.9999? Is Nadal a 7.0? I'm sure those guys never think in those terms. One of my suggestions to the OP was "Stop playing NTRP. Go play some age group tournaments and see how that works. You won't have to fixate on whether you're a 3.5 or not, just on beating the guy on the other side of the net, which is kind of the point of tennis."

- NTRP doesn't look like a whole lot of fun to me, these days. It was originally a noble experiment by the USTA back in the 1970s, when tennis participation was waning, and the idea was to provide a fun but competitive tennis experience where people could play matches against other players with similar skills.

A nice idea, maybe, but perhaps unrealistic. On a daily basis, tour players struggle through the Futures and Challenger levels to get to the ATP, where they often get destroyed in the first round. You see lopsided tennis matches, double bagels and the like, at all levels of tennis, including the upper echelons. The news these days, on the USTA web site, in regards to NTRP is all about "dynamic NTRP" and "How you can be dynamically disqualified", which is happening because players are sandbagging their true abilities because...winning is everything, right?

Losing a tennis match is no fun, but it's a game, for Pete's sake. If you win your next 4.0 league match, you're probably not going to get a wild card into Wimbledon, but if you lose it, they probably aren't going to take you out and shoot you, either.

- Finally, all I was saying about improvement was, regardless of whether you measure yourself by the NTRP scale or by whatever measure, if you want to get better, get going! Tennis is not really a team sport, regardless of what the NTRP would have you think, and it's really up to you whether you get better or not. A good coach is a great help. I've been lucky enough to have, as my coaches over the last 4 years, two former Men's Assistant at Colorado University Boulder, the Head Men's Coach at CU, and the #2 player at CU. They've done a lot for me, and it cost a few bucks, but they didn't wave a magic wand over me and presto, my serve got 20 mph faster. I had to put in a lot of sweat, under their guidance, to make that happen. But I was already a 4.5/5.0 player when they got ahold of me, and getting to that level was just me figuring it out on my own, and working to be a better athlete and competitor.

Yep, it's true...lots of people get stuck at the 3.5 level. It's usually because they got wired in some bad stroke habits, poor court movement, and poor strategy on the way to 3.5. If you look at the NTRP level descriptions, it kind of implies that there is a steady continuum up through the levels. Not really, from what I've seen. Most 3.5 players are serving with a Western forehand grip, swinging at volleys, and pushing groundstrokes up the middle of the court. It's pretty easy to get to the 3.5 level with any collection of strokes. The problem is that if you get there with a bunch of fundamental problems, you have to unwire everything you have going on, and then rewire it with things that work. Not fun, but it can be done...as long as you are willing to put in the miles...

[NLBwell]

[QUOTE=LeeD;3368090]
Sure, he was not great, but few great players make it into the pro levels. Team tennis, he was average, but successful, depending on your idea of "success".
There were no "5.5"'s in those years, so maybe John was a low ranked A player in his college years. Pro, A, B, were the ratings.
QUOTE]

John Lucas was ACC champion one year, I believe. He played #1 at Maryland. One of the very top college players. Much better than "low A."

[ramseszerg]

CoachingMastery: What exactly do you mean by stroke patterns? Thanks.

[CoachingMastery]

CoachingMastery: What exactly do you mean by stroke patterns? Thanks.

Stroke patterns are those swing patterns combined with footwork patterns that produce specific shots in specific situations. For example, a player may be pulled out wide. A 3.0 player will run, hit the ball off the wrong foot, hit the ball flat, and be only able to produce a lob at best. A 5.0 player will hit balanced, time the right footwork, and have a swing path that can produce any number of shots; ie: topspin lob, sharp crosscourt topspin, down the line winner.

Same thing for volleys where some players only can hit the ball "back" while more advanced players can take a difficult shot and hit a drop volley, angle volley, volley lob, dice a cutting return volley low crosscourt or down the line, or any number of other options.

Stroke patterns are based on proper grips, swing patterns, footwork, balance, and experience.

[raiden031]

as follows:
- NTRP definitely isn't all of tennis, and it really isn't all that accurate an indicator of how well you play or whom you can beat. In Colorado, they did away with 5.5 leagues and tournaments a few years ago...and as a result, all the former 5.5s slid down to 5.0, and all the 5.0s slid down to 4.5, and so forth.

And what about 5.5 and above? Is Federer a 6.9999? Is Nadal a 7.0? I'm sure those guys never think in those terms. One of my suggestions to the OP was "Stop playing NTRP. Go play some age group tournaments and see how that works. You won't have to fixate on whether you're a 3.5 or not, just on beating the guy on the other side of the net, which is kind of the point of tennis."


I agree with most of what you said in your post. What I don't agree with is that you say people shouldn't care about NTRP. The problem with playing age group tournaments is that a 3.5 player will get destroyed over and over and over and over and rarely play competitive matches, because 3.5 players in general are more likely to play NTRP tournaments, not age division tournaments because they know better.

For a 3.5 player to actually start seeing measurable improvement in these tournaments, they would probably have to reach 4.5-5.0, which might never happen. So they will say they spent the last 10 years losing in the first round of every tournament and accomplished nothing. NTRP provides shorter milestones that show progress. And of course there are the leagues, that have alot of advantages over tournaments. Progress can be measured as follows: year 1 - lose all matches at 3.5, year 2 - go .500 in 3.5 matches, year 3 - win most matches, bumped to 4.0. There's progress right there.

[chess9]

[QUOTE=LeeD;3368090]
Sure, he was not great, but few great players make it into the pro levels. Team tennis, he was average, but successful, depending on your idea of "success".
There were no "5.5"'s in those years, so maybe John was a low ranked A player in his college years. Pro, A, B, were the ratings.
QUOTE]

John Lucas was ACC champion one year, I believe. He played #1 at Maryland. One of the very top college players. Much better than "low A."

Yes, absolutely. He could have been an NCAA champion if he'd played just tennis in college. But he was a joy to watch on the basketball court too. When you think about it, he was an amazing guy....

-Robert

[Oldracquet27]

Pretty much correct. When you're young and start out, you wonder if you might be the next Nadal. But when you're older and have a job, do you want to practice so much in your spare time that you lose your relationships? Do you want to spend so much that you don't contribute to your 401(k)? All this so you can get better, but still just be a club player. Someone doing this is having a big-time mid-life crisis.

It depends the type of person you are: are you content with hitting on the weekends for fun and some exercise? or are you competitive, athletic and in love with the game of tennis?? if you belongs to the second category, then the answer is yes , you will do anything possible to improve and keep competing and having fun at higher levels, it is an excellent way to forget a little about stress and problems when you have another thing to focus on, and noooooot , you don't need to loose your relationships or get out of money if you organize yourself, we are talking about normal people here not pot heads.....

[Oldracquet27]

[1] If you think you’re doomed, you’re doomed. [2] If you think maybe you should give up trying to move up, by all means, quit. [3] If you feel resigned to ending a match ASAP, then you certainly don’t have what it takes to turn things around. [4] If you expect to lose, you’re just an IDIOT! [5] And NO, you don’t have a chance of ever becoming a 4.0, whatever such “quantifiable” milestones mean in that twisted head of yours. [6] How much losing can you endure? [7] Is it even worth it? [8] If you can’t stand the thought of being average at something you claim to care about, maybe it’s really ego gratification you love, and NOT tennis! [9] Just go buy a Wii and play with yourself for the rest of your life.

Sorry . . . “Just letting out some tension and frustration before I” . . . give you some encouraging advice:

[1] No, you’re not doomed. [2] Don’t quit. [3] Everything can turn around at the flick of a mental switch. [4] Expect to get prepared and in position for the next ball. [5] I repeat, get prepared and in position for the next ball! [6] All forms of endurance training require that you endure beyond the “pain.” [7] Whimpering does not help you endure. [8] How “good” you are has nothing to do with the last (or next) point, game or match. It’s mostly about getting prepared and in position for the ball coming at you NOW! [9] If you must “compare,” it’s a privilege to play people who are better than you are.

Also, no matter how much anyone thinks they know, or how diligently they practice, there are details/issues in almost everyone’s game that only an alert teaching pro can see and help them to correct. And even if you’ve taken lessons from a great pro, there are always things that another unique set of professional eyes might pick up.

You live in Southern California, where you can play outside 300+ days a year with an amazing array of talented players. Part of that blessing is there are no illusions about how good you really need to be to compete. The “ruling classes” of smaller tennis worlds are not so lucky!

MG


hahahahaha , loved this...... i like the first part better, it was hard but trust me that is what he needs to hear, so he realizes what he needs to do!!

[ubermeyer]

As you begin to progress upward int0 the 4.0s and 4.5s, you will notice that there is less variety, no players who hit forehands off both sides, that moonball and lob, that have exaggeratet service motions, that junk-ball every shot, that use big radar-like rackets.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Ba/B/Brian-Battistone.aspx

This guy hits forehands off both wings, and does a jump serve... yet he's been ranked as high as #152 in doubles and #953 in singles. Not exactly Roger Federer, but he's no 3.5 either.

[GuyClinch]

It depends the type of person you are: are you content with hitting on the weekends for fun and some exercise? or are you competitive, athletic and in love with the game of tennis?? if you belongs to the second category, then the answer is yes , you will do anything possible to improve and keep competing and having fun at higher levels, it is an excellent way to forget a little about stress and problems when you have another thing to focus on, and noooooot , you don't need to loose your relationships or get out of money if you organize yourself, we are talking about normal people here not pot heads.....

I think you can improve in limited time - if you plan it out carefully. If you say play 3-4hrs a week with friends and take a weekly lesson (private).. Plus perhaps go to a few tennis weekends.. You might be able to make it to 4.0. Mix in some off-court training as well and study the game..

FWIW the weekly lesson IMHO is the most important thing because MANY people play a TON without getting much better. If you don't get lessons from a pro your very likely to get locked into bad patterns without realizing it.

I'd say each level gets harder and harder. I think 4.0-4.5 is the natural max for most healthy reasonably fit people.. All the 5.0s I know played while young and in college and such.. And don't get me wrong 4.5 is a very good player. Such a player can beat most HS varsity players and beat most club players.

I think the "hacker" limit is around 3.5. That is to say for the average guy who only takes beginner lessons and then just plays (even ALOT) your going to get stuck at 3.5. hence the thread title.. You have to compromise between being Nadal and being respectable.. Some of these guys imagine they are 4.0s but in reality if they played in a league they would quickly discover they are just better 3.5s.

I think tennis is actually less practice intensive then golf. I saw one pro saying that once guys really learn how to play tennis at the 4.0 level or better you can maintain that with a fairly small amount of weekly play.

Pete