PDA

View Full Version : video: are these guys 5.0?


Pages : [1] 2

pushing_wins
11-11-2009, 11:29 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1YL0CRNCUo&feature=channel

BobFL
11-11-2009, 11:37 AM
Chubby is considerably better. Blue shirt nowhere near 5.0...

ttbrowne
11-11-2009, 11:39 AM
No. First clue: A 5.0 would never have to use a Titanic head size racket.

MomentumGT
11-11-2009, 11:42 AM
Guy with the white shirt has pretty decent control on his shots, especially up at net. He was probably pretty good when he was younger and slimmer. Blue shirt guy was being strung around the court at will. Ratings are all relative.

-Jon

user92626
11-11-2009, 11:51 AM
I have no idea without being able to tell the pace of the shots. How many bounces does a typical FH shot take?

Without pace and spin probadly any 3.5, 4 or whatever can hit like that and more. IMO, there's nothing hard about serving, hitting, volleying, moving at low speed!!!

drakulie
11-11-2009, 12:21 PM
Yes. if I remember correctly, the guy in the white has a verifiable NTRP 5.0 rating.

LeeD
11-11-2009, 01:15 PM
Guy in white might have played 5.0 tournaments, but he's a decent 3.5 at best with not much hope for making solid 4.5's. He's doesn't have movement, pace, reactions, coverage, or much more than basic skills.
I lower level player can always enter multiple Open tournements, but unless he can win 2-4 rounds in each, he does'nt really belong there.
Guy in white doesn't win any rounds in 5.0 tournaments, so doesn't belong there regardless of my spelling.

VaBeachTennis
11-11-2009, 01:30 PM
Guy in white might have played 5.0 tournaments, but he's a decent 3.5 at best with not much hope for making solid 4.5's. He's doesn't have movement, pace, reactions, coverage, or much more than basic skills.
I lower level player can always enter multiple Open tournements, but unless he can win 2-4 rounds in each, he does'nt really belong there.
Guy in white doesn't win any rounds in 5.0 tournaments, so doesn't belong there regardless of my spelling.

I know the guy, he's a friend of mine. He'd wipe all of the people here, who are detracting him across the court and make them look silly. He may be a little "chubby" , but I bet he'd be having you skinny guys panting and out of breath and stalling for a break and begging for mercy, while he is barely breaking a sweat and laughing. Videos are deceptive..............

fruitytennis1
11-11-2009, 01:31 PM
4.0 i would think. Cant really tell since its vid. But he isnt 5.0

SystemicAnomaly
11-11-2009, 01:43 PM
Guy in white might have played 5.0 tournaments, but he's a decent 3.5 at best with not much hope for making solid 4.5's. He's doesn't have movement, pace, reactions, coverage, or much more than basic skills.

I lower level player can always enter multiple Open tournements, but unless he can win 2-4 rounds in each, he does'nt really belong there.
Guy in white doesn't win any rounds in 5.0 tournaments, so doesn't belong there regardless of my spelling.

:twisted:
I don't quite follow that reasoning. Only half the entrants in a given 5.0 tournament make it past the 1st round. 75% of the entrants fail to win the 2nd round. So none of these players belong in a 5.0 tournament?

So let's eliminate all those players from a 5.0 event. Half of the players left will then lose in the first round. So clearly, they do not belong either. We can take it further & eliminate them also from entering a 5.0 event. Taken to its logical conclusion, there is only 1 guy that belongs in a 5.0 tournament. Since this would be the case, there is no reason to hold tournaments at all!!!
:twisted:

retlod
11-11-2009, 01:43 PM
If they're trying, 3.5. If they're screwing around, 4.0. 4.5's shouldn't miss easy shots and should put away short balls with ease. 5.0's should be able to gun you down from the baseline and put those kick serves into the corners instead of right down the middle.

jrod
11-11-2009, 01:51 PM
They sure as hell don't look like 5.0 players in this clip...compared to players in my area, 3.5 - 4.0?

SuperDuy
11-11-2009, 02:21 PM
Look at the guy in the whites youtube videos, he has over 1400 and most of them are on tennis and alot of him giving tips and stuff. On his about me on youtube it says he has coached for over 20 years. I wouldn't doubt hes under a 5.0

Kenny022593
11-11-2009, 02:22 PM
It doesn't matter i learned alot from watching his videos :)

dozu
11-11-2009, 02:33 PM
about 4.0 to be reallistic.

these guys are dime a dozen on the community courts, and usually an ez 6-2 6-2 beat by a standard 4.5

these guys look like eligible for the senior 50+ (or 55+ ? whatever) league, where this standard play can be 5.0

I can usually gun down the senior 5.5 people around here.

the video clips are NOT deceiving... they have no pace, no depth.... a 4.5 in the open group should just overpower them with ease.

VaBeachTennis
11-11-2009, 02:43 PM
about 4.0 to be reallistic.

these guys are dime a dozen on the community courts, and usually an ez 6-2 6-2 beat by a standard 4.5

LOL, I'd like to see you play G, I think that you would possibly be pretty humbled. G is deceptively strong and pretty agile.

Geezer Guy
11-11-2009, 02:49 PM
Neither looked that great to me. The chubby guy in the near court controled the action by either hitting some nice winners or by missing some fairly easy shots. The guy in the far court just hit it back. He had some easy overheads he could have put away, but just eased them back into the court. The chubby guy self-destructed in the TB, going down 1-7 if I counted correctly. He did have several nice touch volleys though. If I was guessing, I'd guess 3.5's or 4.0's.

Nice video - I liked having all the between-point and missed 1st serves cut out. Maybe with some jazzy background music they would look better.

ximian
11-11-2009, 02:53 PM
I agree with the general consensus, nowhere near 5.0. Average 4.0, maybe competitive in some 4.5 markets. But not a realistic 5.0 IMO.

VaBeachTennis
11-11-2009, 02:57 PM
I agree with the general consensus, nowhere near 5.0. Average 4.0, maybe competitive in some 4.5 markets. But not a realistic 5.0 IMO.

LOL, says the guy who would get blown off of the court by the "chubby guy". :)

dozu
11-11-2009, 03:00 PM
LOL, I'd like to see you play G, I think that you would possibly be pretty humbled. G is deceptively strong and pretty agile.

there is no such thing as 'deceptively strong', one either plays like a good player or he doesn't.

concensus on the thread is already pointing to 4.0

I usually go 50-50 with Div I / Div II guys around here. If these guys are at college age, there will be no Div I/II coaches want them on the team. Period.

dozu
11-11-2009, 03:02 PM
LOL, says the guy who would get blown off of the court by the "chubby guy". :)

what is your problem VBT?

if you worship a player, worship Federer or something, not some hack (yes, HACK).

Steady Eddy
11-11-2009, 03:05 PM
I know the guy, he's a friend of mine. He'd wipe all of the people here, who are detracting him across the court and make them look silly. He may be a little "chubby" , but I bet he'd be having you skinny guys panting and out of breath and stalling for a break and begging for mercy, while he is barely breaking a sweat and laughing. Videos are deceptive..............If he'd beat me, so what? That's not really the point, is it? I can see that he might seem tougher on the court than he does in the video, but this says 5.0. I'm a 3.5, so a 5.0 is about half-way between me and a touring pro. Maybe that's too big a gulf to be meaningful, but when I watch players on TV I see: aces, winners and rallies. Here so many points never get started because of all the UEs that get in the way. When we play doubles I'm aware of all the UEs and that that really determines who wins. At higher levels I'd think that errors mostly happen by very forcing shots or when a player really goes for an outstanding shot. I'd expect the "What was that?" shot to be fairly rare. Some hackers are better than others, but the short rallies and inability to keep the ball in play make me think that these guys are some pretty good hackers, but still hackers.

2ndServe
11-11-2009, 03:13 PM
Ok I'm getting back into tennis, I've not played a tourney in 10 years. I'd play either of these guys for money. I'd say I have the strokes of a 5.0 but my movement sucks right now so realistically 4.5. Offer stands if they are in socal. We could tape it too for the tt forum amusement so they can make fun of us both. Every video on here gets torn down, I'm hesitant to post some when I get a new camera. Are they serving two 2nd serves, I don't think I saw a serve break 85mph.

SystemicAnomaly
11-11-2009, 03:36 PM
...

these guys are dime a dozen on the community courts...

I've got a nickel. I'll take 6 please.

VaBeachTennis
11-11-2009, 03:44 PM
what is your problem VBT?

if you worship a player, worship Federer or something, not some hack (yes, HACK).

LOL, I'm just busting some people's horns. Gary is a nice guy, he's done some pretty good work. I don't worship anyone, I was just having a little fun. :)

VaBeachTennis
11-11-2009, 03:47 PM
If he'd beat me, so what? That's not really the point, is it? I can see that he might seem tougher on the court than he does in the video, but this says 5.0. I'm a 3.5, so a 5.0 is about half-way between me and a touring pro. Maybe that's too big a gulf to be meaningful, but when I watch players on TV I see: aces, winners and rallies. Here so many points never get started because of all the UEs that get in the way. When we play doubles I'm aware of all the UEs and that that really determines who wins. At higher levels I'd think that errors mostly happen by very forcing shots or when a player really goes for an outstanding shot. I'd expect the "What was that?" shot to be fairly rare. Some hackers are better than others, but the short rallies and inability to keep the ball in play make me think that these guys are some pretty good hackers, but still hackers.

Read the guy's credentials on his profile. He's not a hacker. I was just messing around before. It's raining like cats and dogs, we had a day off and I had a few beers...................... and he is a nice guy.

SystemicAnomaly
11-11-2009, 03:47 PM
what is your problem VBT?

if you worship a player, worship Federer or something, not some hack (yes, HACK).

Did we get up on the wrong side of the bed today?

JRstriker12
11-11-2009, 03:50 PM
Oh crap... not this **** again.

I love it when someone posts a vid- says are these guys X.0?????

Then people who know the players pull up verifiable proof that they players are on X.0 level, but then half the hacks on this board want to subtract about 2 NTRP levels because their strokes aren't pretty or they don't look like Fed playing tennis..... *sigh*...........

I think more than half of this board have never taped themselves and seen themselves play....

JRstriker12
11-11-2009, 03:57 PM
BTW- if you check the guy's name by visiting his blog then check his NTRP on tennis link - as of 2007, he was rated as a 5.0 - end of thread.

samster
11-11-2009, 03:58 PM
videos can be deceiving/misleading.

VaBeachTennis
11-11-2009, 04:09 PM
BTW- if you check the guy's name by visiting his blog then check his NTRP on tennis link - as of 2007, he was rated as a 5.0 - end of thread.

Yep.......................

nfor304
11-11-2009, 04:13 PM
The guy in white has been questioned on here before and he is apparently a real USTA 5.0, but I think he got that rating mostly from doubles and is more of a weak 5.0.

Rambler124
11-11-2009, 05:05 PM
4.5. People who would even consider listing 3.5 need their head checked. Thats like me posting this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wk_eCLU_qnU&feature=channel

and stating "Can't be more than a 5.0 this guys forehand looks ugly". Doesn't matter if it is not picture perfect. Plenty of people at a 4.5-5.0 level can get the job done with less than perfect technique.

That being said I'm not completely convinced these guys are 5.0. Perhaps varying markets are going to be quite different. I know the competition in Atlanta is pretty sick and these guys (especialy guy in blue) would get abused regularly at 5.0.

BobFL
11-11-2009, 05:14 PM
Just want to add that with "chubby" I DID NOT want to insult that man. I consider myself chubby as well :) Nothing sinister....

drakulie
11-11-2009, 06:11 PM
HE IS A 5.0. YES. 5.0!!!!!!!!!!!

HE HAS A VERIFIED USTA NTRP OF 5.0 End Of Story.

samster
11-11-2009, 06:21 PM
I don't think he can beat drakulie though!

Rambler124
11-11-2009, 06:32 PM
HE IS A 5.0. YES. 5.0!!!!!!!!!!!

HE HAS A VERIFIED USTA NTRP OF 5.0 End Of Story.

3.5 or 5.0? I'm stumped.:?:

drakulie
11-11-2009, 07:49 PM
^^^^uhmmm, if he has a verified 5.0 NTRP, and has had it for a few years>>> what do you think?

drakulie
11-11-2009, 07:50 PM
I don't think he can beat drakulie though!


hahahhahahhhaha. he'd have trouble with your wicked cross court.

Rambler124
11-11-2009, 07:51 PM
^^^^uhmmm, if he has a verified 5.0 NTRP, and has had it for a few years>>> what do you think?

Ok I'm convinced now. 2.5. Thanks for clearing that up :)

SuperDuy
11-11-2009, 07:51 PM
drakulie how tall are u, im wondering because on your serve speed videos dont look that tall.

dozu
11-11-2009, 08:02 PM
what does the following 3 things have in common

real estate market
politics
NTRP ratings

they are all local!

5.0 (even if verifiable) in 1 market can be 4.0 in another.. the OP's video is a rock solid proof of that.

for Pete's sake.... I got it, so he has been a 5.0, so what, still will only get 2 games out of a set from any 4.5 in my market, or any Div I/II player.

coyfish
11-11-2009, 08:11 PM
He was a computer generated 5.0 in thailand / hawaii (bad tennis . . .). He has videos playing with top thai players and they aren't very good . . .

Hes older and chubby but he has good strategy and placement. Good at net too. In a quality tennis area he would be in the 4.0-4.5 range. He lacks the power and stamina to take higher level players. To say otherwise is preaching ignorance. Those slow high looping shots that bounce at the service line would be game over in any 5.0 matchup.

Plenty of videos he has posted for you to watch. Just watch them and draw your own conclusions.

raiden031
11-11-2009, 08:32 PM
Definitely the worst display of 5.0 tennis I've ever seen! Maybe there is hope for me ever reaching that level of play! :)

This video just proves how little I understand the game of tennis, because I can't figure out why these guys are good.

BobFL
11-11-2009, 08:49 PM
what does the following 3 things have in common

real estate market
politics
NTRP ratings

they are all local!



FYI, NTRP = National Tennis Rating Program

National = Local? Think about it....

coyfish
11-11-2009, 09:01 PM
FYI, NTRP = National Tennis Rating Program

National = Local? Think about it....

Its a national scale but for those who don't travel out of state to play you are ranked based on local competition.

UnforcedError
11-11-2009, 09:09 PM
I can believe they are 5.0, no way they are below 4.5 especially the heavier guy, nice forehand. Anyone that says they are below 4.0 needs to post a video of themselves.

Geezer Guy
11-11-2009, 09:12 PM
I think the NTRP scale is fairly compatible across the nation. I think what skews it is that a lot of players who don't play USTA have an unrealistic veiw of what they would be rated if they did play USTA tennis. (I'm not saying that's the case here.)

And, we all know that a player isn't given a 5.0 rating because he has pretty strokes and a nice body. He get's a 5.0 rating because he plays competitively with other 5.0's. (Or else he self rates as a 5.0.)

crash1929
11-11-2009, 09:27 PM
they are good tennis players but the five o's at my club play at a much higher level.

raiden031
11-11-2009, 09:34 PM
they are good tennis players but the five o's at my club play at a much higher level.

Since most areas don't have leagues above 5.0, one problem is that it may encompass alot of players who would be classified as 5.5-6.0. Since alot of these types of players play mostly open or age group tourrnaments that may not count towards their ratings because they play against unrated players, they may get stuck with that 5.0 rating year after year and play the occasional league match.

Steady Eddy
11-11-2009, 10:40 PM
Do they get better? For the first ten points, the mean # of shots is only 2.1, and that's counting their 6 shot rally on the 10th and last point. All the others are only 1, 2, or 3 shots in duration. Of these 10, 7 end in an unforced error, 2 end with a winner, and on 1 I cannot tell.

If your opponent is so likely to miss, why take so many chances yourself? I like to make my opponent earn their points, I really wonder if a steady 3.5 would beat them? Sure, it wouldn't look impressive and all that, but against a player who rarely puts two consecutive shots in play, (and they're hardly unreturnable when they go in, the other player gets his racquet solidly on the ball, it's just long or in the net...), the steadier player would win. There wouldn't be enough winners for the 5.0 to make up for the errors. Sure, the 5.0 would have all the highlight shots, he just wouldn't have the win.

Then he could create another thread here about how, "I lost to a stupid pusher. :mad: "

ximian
11-11-2009, 11:07 PM
what does the following 3 things have in common

real estate market
politics
NTRP ratings

they are all local!

5.0 (even if verifiable) in 1 market can be 4.0 in another.. the OP's video is a rock solid proof of that.

for Pete's sake.... I got it, so he has been a 5.0, so what, still will only get 2 games out of a set from any 4.5 in my market, or any Div I/II player.

Exactly. The players in the video are not very good when the rubber hits the road.

Ken Honecker
11-12-2009, 01:37 AM
Do they get better? For the first ten points, the mean # of shots is only 2.1, and that's counting their 6 shot rally on the 10th and last point. All the others are only 1, 2, or 3 shots in duration. Of these 10, 7 end in an unforced error, 2 end with a winner, and on 1 I cannot tell. "

That's what I thought. For the first 50 seconds it looked like getting the serve in was all they could manage and I was thinking 3.5 Then they seemed to wake up and started to exchange limited rallys. They seemed to hit the ball much harder and I saw some windshield washer topspin but they still didn't look very complete. God knows if they are 5.0's they are 5.0's but I still keep thinking players better than me should hit the ball in the court more often no matter how hard they are launching it.

raiden031
11-12-2009, 04:46 AM
Do they get better? For the first ten points, the mean # of shots is only 2.1, and that's counting their 6 shot rally on the 10th and last point. All the others are only 1, 2, or 3 shots in duration. Of these 10, 7 end in an unforced error, 2 end with a winner, and on 1 I cannot tell.

If your opponent is so likely to miss, why take so many chances yourself? I like to make my opponent earn their points, I really wonder if a steady 3.5 would beat them? Sure, it wouldn't look impressive and all that, but against a player who rarely puts two consecutive shots in play, (and they're hardly unreturnable when they go in, the other player gets his racquet solidly on the ball, it's just long or in the net...), the steadier player would win. There wouldn't be enough winners for the 5.0 to make up for the errors. Sure, the 5.0 would have all the highlight shots, he just wouldn't have the win.

Then he could create another thread here about how, "I lost to a stupid pusher. :mad: "

This is what I dont' get. I got beat easily in singles several times this year in a 4.0 league. The most generalized memory I have of my opponents is that they rarely give up free points. I myself definitely blew a couple of points early in the rally but they would go at least 4-5 shots before hitting an error.

goober
11-12-2009, 05:54 AM
what does the following 3 things have in common

real estate market
politics
NTRP ratings

they are all local!

5.0 (even if verifiable) in 1 market can be 4.0 in another.. the OP's video is a rock solid proof of that.

for Pete's sake.... I got it, so he has been a 5.0, so what, still will only get 2 games out of a set from any 4.5 in my market, or any Div I/II player.

LOL @ D1/II- what the hell does that have to do with anything? I didn't know those guys played NTRP.

What market are you in? It is true he is playing mostly dubs out of Hawaii.

But I looked over his tournament record. He has a win over a 5.0 player in MI, lost to a 7-5, 6-4 to a 5.0 from Ohio. He actually played a guy I know personally who has a 4.5 rating but was probably 4.0 when he played him, 6-0, 6-1 living in AZ. Granted most of his matches were 4-5 years ago. Right now his singles ratings is probably not 5.0 right now, but I don't see how he would lose to a computer rated 4.0 player from any state.

raiden031
11-12-2009, 06:02 AM
What market are you in? It is true he is playing mostly dubs out of Hawaii.


My team played against Hawaii at 3.0 Nationals. They were a very good team. So yeah it seems odd that Hawaii would be weaker than the rest of the country, yet field a solid team at 3.0 Nationals.

lawrence
11-12-2009, 06:09 AM
Decent strokes but not I think they could step it up on the footwork a bit.

drakulie
11-12-2009, 06:21 AM
for Pete's sake.... I got it, so he has been a 5.0, so what, still will only get 2 games out of a set from any 4.5 in my market, or any Div I/II player.

and the "4.5 in your market" will be lucky to win points off the 4.5's in mine. Therefore, the 4.5's in your market are really just 2.5 players.

Thanks for clearing that up.

NamRanger
11-12-2009, 06:40 AM
4.5/5.0. Probably a 5.0 based on his footwork. That's a pretty damn fast moving big guy.

dozu
11-12-2009, 06:51 AM
and the "4.5 in your market" will be lucky to win points off the 4.5's in mine. Therefore, the 4.5's in your market are really just 2.5 players.

Thanks for clearing that up.

exactly my point - if my 4.5 is really 2.5 in your market, that makes the guys in the video about 1.5-2.0.

Thanks for clearing that up.

jrod
11-12-2009, 07:01 AM
My 5.0 is better than your 5.0? This is the kind of argument we used to engage in during recess in 6th grade.

Have at it boys....just remember to knock it off when the bell rings.

drakulie
11-12-2009, 07:09 AM
exactly my point - if my 4.5 is really 2.5 in your market, that makes the guys in the video about 1.5-2.0.

Thanks for clearing that up.


I don't think so. The guy is a 5.0. Period. He has a NATIONAL USTA ranking. End of story.

If you don't like it, take it up with the USTA.

EikelBeiter
11-12-2009, 07:14 AM
I don't think so. The guy is a 5.0. Period. He has a NATIONAL USTA ranking. End of story.

If you don't like it, take it up with the USTA.

Is that the U.S. national ranking? with Roddick on 1?

what is his ranking (guy in white) ?

Azzurri
11-12-2009, 07:17 AM
Yes. if I remember correctly, the guy in the white has a verifiable NTRP 5.0 rating.

he seems to be a pretty good player and controlled. I have to get out of the mindset how someone's rating is based on how their strokes look. The guy in the white shirt has a very good serve and seems to have good control. He gives his opponent a lot of pressure. The results (based on actual play) is not really argueable.

But how do you "rate" someone if they never played a USTA match(have no rating)? That is the problem I have...its bugging me.:-?

goober
11-12-2009, 07:22 AM
Is that the U.S. national ranking? with Roddick on 1?

what is his ranking (guy in white) ?

NO, rankings are not the same as ratings in the US. Basically if you are in the top 400 in the world you have a 7.0 rating. NTRP ratings are for club/recreational players. 5.0 is generally associated with a good amateur player. So people get into ******** debates when someone posts a video and says this guy is a certain rating and people think he isn't.

Azzurri
11-12-2009, 07:23 AM
I know the guy, he's a friend of mine. He'd wipe all of the people here, who are detracting him across the court and make them look silly. He may be a little "chubby" , but I bet he'd be having you skinny guys panting and out of breath and stalling for a break and begging for mercy, while he is barely breaking a sweat and laughing. Videos are deceptive..............

I agree with you. Its easy to see the guy has "game" and he has good control. He has a good serve and is good at getting into the right position to return shots (wether at net or the baseline). Just because he does not look like Federer on court does not mean he can't WIN. I have come to realize (with a bruised ego) that stroke mechanics don't equal results. My buddy looks like he is swinging a frying pan when he plays. Looks horrible at the net (shanks many shots, yet they go in) and just looks like a 2.5, but he is not. This guy beats people all the time that have prettier strokes. But over the past few months (especially from the JollyRoger issue) I have seen that stroke mechanics don't mean much at all. Heck, I look pretty and I suck!:)

drakulie
11-12-2009, 07:25 AM
Is that the U.S. national ranking? with Roddick on 1?

what is his ranking (guy in white) ?


my apologies. I meant "rating". As in, NTRP rating.

drakulie
11-12-2009, 07:28 AM
he seems to be a pretty good player and controlled. I have to get out of the mindset how someone's rating is based on how their strokes look. The guy in the white shirt has a very good serve and seems to have good control. He gives his opponent a lot of pressure. The results (based on actual play) is not really argueable.

But how do you "rate" someone if they never played a USTA match(have no rating)? That is the problem I have...its bugging me.:-?

we could guess, which is what makes these boards interesting.

As you said, pretty strokes don't mean much. In the end, all that matters is what the score is at the end of the match.

dozu
11-12-2009, 07:29 AM
I don't think so. The guy is a 5.0. Period. He has a NATIONAL USTA ranking. End of story.

If you don't like it, take it up with the USTA.

I already said 'I got it' in a previous post, and I maintain my 'so what, he is still a hack' position.

and who cares about USTA anyway.

Azzurri
11-12-2009, 07:32 AM
we could guess, which is what makes these boards interesting.
As you said, pretty strokes don't mean much. In the end, all that matters is what the score is at the end of the match.

LOL..hence all the argueing:)

by the way, when are you getting the X90? The SW looks very promising.

drakulie
11-12-2009, 07:32 AM
I already said 'I got it' in a previous post, and I maintain my 'so what, he is still a hack' position.

and that "hack" is a 5.0.

and who cares about USTA anyway.

obviously, you do, and so does the OP since this is what is being discussed here (NTRP rating of this particular player).

drakulie
11-12-2009, 07:35 AM
LOL..hence all the argueing:)

by the way, when are you getting the X90? The SW looks very promising.

Not sure. I was selected by TW to complete a review of a "prototype frame". Could this be the x90??

as for the actual x90, I could of had one a week ago, but didn't have time to follow up. Will just have to wait and see. How about you?? You planning on demoning?? what do you think of the paintjob?? I'm half/half on it.

Azzurri
11-12-2009, 07:35 AM
I already said 'I got it' in a previous post, and I maintain my 'so what, he is still a hack' position.

and who cares about USTA anyway.

Dozu,
these guys are 3.5..the guy in white is much better(OP video).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ER9FKDpSi_g&feature=related

EikelBeiter
11-12-2009, 07:36 AM
NO, rankings are not the same as ratings in the US. Basically if you are in the top 400 in the world you have a 7.0 rating. NTRP ratings are for club/recreational players. 5.0 is generally associated with a good amateur player. So people get into ******** debates when someone posts a video and says this guy is a certain rating and people think he isn't.

my apologies. I meant "rating". As in, NTRP rating.

I see, in The Netherlands we have a rating system and a national ranking system which are seperate.

Does the U.S. also have a national ranking system? Or only a rating system which is based on the international rankings (for high level players)

SlapChop
11-12-2009, 07:52 AM
Dozu,
these guys are 3.5..the guy in white is much better(OP video).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ER9FKDpSi_g&feature=related

That doesn't look anything like the 3.5 match I watched at the last tournament I played. I think I will try and bring my video camera to the next tournament I attend.

dozu
11-12-2009, 07:56 AM
and that "hack" is a 5.0.



yup - that is what I am saying. thanks for stating the obvious.

Azzurri
11-12-2009, 07:58 AM
That doesn't look anything like the 3.5 match I watched at the last tournament I played. I think I will try and bring my video camera to the next tournament I attend.

just going by what the video states...3.5 USTA match. find me another 3.5 match that looks like the one we are debating (from the OP) and you will have something, but as Drakulie stated...the rating is the rating.

some more 3.5...all starting to look the same. I think Drak and a few others arguements hold water.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCRV9sfPxoQ&feature=related

Below is an example of a sandbagger (the guy in the black shorts seems a lot better than the chubby guy...are both 3.5??)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iwZNY7hqqs&feature=related

Azzurri
11-12-2009, 08:10 AM
this is a 3.0

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

drakulie
11-12-2009, 08:11 AM
At the time this video was taken, this guy had a 5.5 rating:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZgQ2lbCpO0

And, NO....... other 5.5's in the nation will not bagel him (they lose).

dozu
11-12-2009, 08:36 AM
At the time this video was taken, this guy had a 5.5 rating:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZgQ2lbCpO0

And, NO....... other 5.5's in the nation will not bagel him (they lose).

very nice - you have just won the race to the bottom.

I give up.

let me add - I am not surprised - there are 5.5 guys around here I can blow off the court, who don't play close to some 4.5's sandbagging as 4.0s.

The system is so screwed up - it's pointless to keep debating.

LeeD
11-12-2009, 08:46 AM
Draks...
Nice short vid.
That guy COULD be a 5.5 because he's got ready position, movement, quickness, and eye concentration.
Guy in white shirt might be ranked somewhere in 5.0's, but his tennis abilities would have him right at strong 3.5 with not much chance of getting better.

2ndServe
11-12-2009, 08:54 AM
The guy in white looks better than he is because his opponent is terrible. Guy in white has a decent spin serve, decent volleys and his forehand can force errors. But he can do most of this because they other guy's backhand is teribad.

I'm going to look like a fool but in the next month I will be playing with guys who have had atp doubles points, they play 6.0 and open doubles and are light years ahead of these guys. Bagel these guys all day and they don't even play singles, just doubles tourneys.

next month you guys can rag on my game.

drakulie
11-12-2009, 09:04 AM
I give up.

as you should, because you can't argue NTRP. facts are facts.

let me add - I am not surprised - there are 5.5 guys around here I can blow off the court, who don't play close to some 4.5's sandbagging as 4.0s.

The system is so screwed up - it's pointless to keep debating.

I could almost guarantee you won't get one game off the guy in the vid I provided. Quite frankly, he doesn't need an NTRP. He was RANKED # 1 in the nation for a few years. Won the Grand slam in his age bracket I believe twice, and missed it a third time by not winning the clay title. To add, won 3 of the 4 nationals titles in the age group younger than him, and was an ex ATP pro who made it to the quarters of Wimbledon. His high ATP ranking was I believe in the 170's.

Bottom line is, videos are deceptive, and prove nothing when it comes to ratings. Only outcome does.

LeeD
11-12-2009, 09:10 AM
As I said, based on ready position, movement, eye tracking, yellow shirt guy could be pretty good.

goober
11-12-2009, 09:42 AM
what does the following 3 things have in common

real estate market
politics
NTRP ratings

they are all local!

5.0 (even if verifiable) in 1 market can be 4.0 in another.. the OP's video is a rock solid proof of that.

for Pete's sake.... I got it, so he has been a 5.0, so what, still will only get 2 games out of a set from any 4.5 in my market, or any Div I/II player.

As far as I can tell from your prior posts, you are from the Northeast. The mighty 4.5 New England team did not win a single match Nationals this year. But the lowly Hawaii team did- lol. Is that the 4.5 area that is so dominating?

EikelBeiter
11-12-2009, 09:43 AM
At the time this video was taken, this guy had a 5.5 rating:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZgQ2lbCpO0

And, NO....... other 5.5's in the nation will not bagel him (they lose).

I would hate losing to that guy :)

truthorbust
11-12-2009, 09:52 AM
4.0 at best IMO. they lack speed and intensity and look unfit.

VaBeachTennis
11-12-2009, 10:03 AM
and that "hack" is a 5.0.



obviously, you do, and so does the OP since this is what is being discussed here (NTRP rating of this particular player).

LOL, which goes back to my original assertion that the guy in question (Gary), would probably soundly beat many of his detractors on this thread.

drakulie
11-12-2009, 10:16 AM
^^^ "gary" will most likely beat over 80% of this board.

mucat
11-12-2009, 10:19 AM
The guy in the white shirt got a nice serve.

Mike Cottrill
11-12-2009, 10:21 AM
I would hate losing to that guy :)

You should see the mood of the guys who walk of the court asking what the $ell happend..

Mike Cottrill
11-12-2009, 10:32 AM
as you should, because you can't argue NTRP. facts are facts.



I could almost guarantee you won't get one game off the guy in the vid I provided. Quite frankly, he doesn't need an NTRP. He was RANKED # 1 in the nation for a few years. Won the Grand slam in his age bracket I believe twice, and missed it a third time by not winning the clay title. To add, won 3 of the 4 nationals titles in the age group younger than him, and was an ex ATP pro who made it to the quarters of Wimbledon. His high ATP ranking was I believe in the 170's.

Bottom line is, videos are deceptive, and prove nothing when it comes to ratings. Only outcome does.

I donít think he made it to the quarters of Wimbledon, but did make it to quarters of another grass court tourney in the states called Newport. ATP top was around 105

There is a benchmark 5.5 player that has taken practice sets off of him who is years younger. It took a very long time for this guy to take sets off him. And I doubt he is really a 5.5 player either. The guy played Div 1 after toping out around 300 atp in doubles.

jazzyfunkybluesy
11-12-2009, 10:33 AM
3.5 or 4.0.

drakulie
11-12-2009, 10:50 AM
I donít think he made it to the quarters of Wimbledon, but did make it to quarters of another grass court tourney in the states called Newport. ATP top was around 105

There is a benchmark 5.5 player that has taken practice sets off of him who is years younger. It took a very long time for this guy to take sets off him. And I doubt he is really a 5.5 player either. The guy played Div 1 after toping out around 300 atp in doubles.


Thanks, Mike.

yeah, I couldn't recall if it was wimby or another grass court tourney. Good stuff.

BTW, I love posting that video in all these threads. :)

Mike Cottrill
11-12-2009, 10:53 AM
^^
Yea, it is funny. I got a chance to play a couple easy go lucky sets of doubles with him a few months ago. He still had his knee all wrapped up. He got swine and a week after that still won a national turney.

dozu
11-12-2009, 10:56 AM
as you should, because you can't argue NTRP. facts are facts.



I could almost guarantee you won't get one game off the guy in the vid I provided. Quite frankly, he doesn't need an NTRP. He was RANKED # 1 in the nation for a few years. Won the Grand slam in his age bracket I believe twice, and missed it a third time by not winning the clay title. To add, won 3 of the 4 nationals titles in the age group younger than him, and was an ex ATP pro who made it to the quarters of Wimbledon. His high ATP ranking was I believe in the 170's.

Bottom line is, videos are deceptive, and prove nothing when it comes to ratings. Only outcome does.


right, and my head to head against federer is 10-0. you can look it up, it's all verifiable.

VaBeachTennis
11-12-2009, 11:06 AM
Here another home video of an ATP Pro playing, he's in the red shirt. I guess some of the people here can "whoop" him too........................... :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pf9NKDdjrc&feature=related

drakulie
11-12-2009, 11:06 AM
^^
Yea, it is funny. I got a chance to play a couple easy go lucky sets of doubles with him a few months ago. He still had his knee all wrapped up. He got swine and a week after that still won a national turney.


Awww. Good stuff. How was it facing that kicker?? :)




dozu, you don't even have a 10-0 head to head against the 8 year old who plays tennis off the wall in your local public park.

jazzyfunkybluesy
11-12-2009, 11:07 AM
Yeah I think the veterans are trying to bs us.

Ripper014
11-12-2009, 11:08 AM
Here another home video of an ATP Pro playing, he's in the red shirt. I guess some of the people here can "whoop" him too........................... :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pf9NKDdjrc&feature=related

The guy in the red shirt is barely trying, you can tell he is a good player... solid stroke making... the guy on the near side is struggling though.

LeeD
11-12-2009, 11:11 AM
VBt....
Man, you gotta like his depth on shots, his serve placement and bounce, and hate his movement and interest. So at least he can hit 5.5 shots without any interest or need to try. Guess he's better than 5.5 when he tries!!

JRstriker12
11-12-2009, 11:13 AM
Yeah I think the veterans are trying to bs us.

LOOK UP THE PLAYER'S RECORD ON TENNIS LINK - 5.0 - CASE CLOSED

VaBeachTennis
11-12-2009, 11:22 AM
The guy in the red shirt is barely trying, you can tell he is a good player... solid stroke making... the guy on the near side is struggling though.

Yeah I agree, here's more footage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iiQ-kgoiSU

jazzyfunkybluesy
11-12-2009, 11:24 AM
If he is a nationally ranked player then he has an open status like Danny at TW.

VaBeachTennis
11-12-2009, 11:25 AM
VBt....
Man, you gotta like his depth on shots, his serve placement and bounce, and hate his movement and interest. So at least he can hit 5.5 shots without any interest or need to try. Guess he's better than 5.5 when he tries!!

LOL, no doubt LeeD. I bet the guy on the near court is his friend or brother.

dozu
11-12-2009, 11:32 AM
dozu, you don't even have a 10-0 head to head against the 8 year old who plays tennis off the wall in your local public park.

you know that kid also? he's ranked 5.5

just look it up.

dozu
11-12-2009, 11:34 AM
LOOK UP THE PLAYER'S RECORD ON TENNIS LINK - 5.0 - CASE CLOSED

indeed, so he is 5.0 - a hack with a rating from a screwed up system.

case closed.

mtommer
11-12-2009, 11:39 AM
indeed, so he is 5.0 - a hack with a rating from a screwed up system.

case closed.

Dozu, just give it up with them.

Until you HAVE to look like this in order to play at "your" level...who cares about the associated NTRP ratings. In other words, there are no bad "looking" pro's or semi-pros. The "looking good" is an integral part of good technique. You can't not look good if you have good technique, so to speak.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H62f6Z3-3_o&feature=related

Mike Cottrill
11-12-2009, 11:48 AM
Awww. Good stuff. How was it facing that kicker?? :)
.



The first time I played against him years and years ago, he just totally blew me away with shots I have never seen anyone hit before. Hits with more types of spins than anyone I have played before. It was very eye opening for sure. At that time I think he was #1 in the 40ís. I remember seeing your clip of his twister/kick and thought it did not look as nasty as I remembered from years ago (at that time it had been awhile since I had seen him). I think he has taken some mph off of it, but it still moves all over the place. It was giving my partner fits (me too, I hate returning those things, but always a pleasure to get a chance to face a player of this level). My partner kept saying, is he hitting that harder than my twister? I said it is slower but he is hitting the spots. He hits the spots and makes it very tough to do anything with it. No need to blast the kicker harder when he can follow it up with the next shot. Not sure if he was screwing around or if he has changed some things, but he was almost doing a quick serve motion. It was like he was letting the ball drop low before he hit the nasty kick. Did not remember that from before, but granted it was a long time between playing against his serve. My partner said it looked like he was hitting the ball off his ear. You have to keep your feet moving or your just going mess up returning it. I moved around a lot, coming in cutting off the ball before it moved to much, moved back and let it drop low.. Things like that. I remember one time I thought I had him figured out and thought I was getting the kicker and he nailed one and caught me half way between the baseline and the service line and my return was lets say defense in nature. I asked him if he saw me come in, and he said no. I think he did.. I can say, I would rather return 120mph blasters than his kick. I can get it back, but not able to attack it at all. And when there is a 6í5Ē guy at the net, well, not pretty if you do not place it.
Do you still have that vid of his kicker? I would like to see if he was letting the toss drop or short toss.

LeeD
11-12-2009, 11:52 AM
Yup, good stuff there..... solid 5.5's
White boy sure can kick it up.
Nice variety backhand on Santos.
NO doubt, they're solid top college level players.
Some flaws would keep them from Q'ing into the main draw too.

dozu
11-12-2009, 11:55 AM
Dozu, just give it up with them.

Until you HAVE to look like this in order to play at "your" level...who cares about the associated NTRP ratings. In other words, there are no bad "looking" pro's or semi-pros. The "looking good" is an integral part of good technique. You can't not look good if you have good technique, so to speak.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H62f6Z3-3_o&feature=related

thanks for providing some sanity to this.

It's a rainy day in my part of the country and I am just playing along with these guys.

otherwise, I'd have been playing against that 5.5 kid that drakulie was referrring to,and who'd have time for this nonsense.

mucat
11-12-2009, 11:57 AM
Dozu, just give it up with them.

Until you HAVE to look like this in order to play at "your" level...who cares about the associated NTRP ratings. In other words, there are no bad "looking" pro's or semi-pros. The "looking good" is an integral part of good technique. You can't not look good if you have good technique, so to speak.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H62f6Z3-3_o&feature=related

Can't keep a rally going == zero consistency
2.0 at best.

goober
11-12-2009, 11:58 AM
Dozu, just give it up with them.

Until you HAVE to look like this in order to play at "your" level...who cares about the associated NTRP ratings. In other words, there are no bad "looking" pro's or semi-pros. The "looking good" is an integral part of good technique. You can't not look good if you have good technique, so to speak.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H62f6Z3-3_o&feature=related

So you think this pro in the maindraw wimbledon 2006 looks good?:)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kpelRORbGk&feature=related

BTW while in may be in true in general that pros and semipros all have good looking technique. There are a lot of club people who look like their technique is good but actually suck tenniswise.

Mike Cottrill
11-12-2009, 12:08 PM
Yeah I agree, here's more footage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iiQ-kgoiSU

That sure is the strangest way I have seen a pro warm up. Hard to see the purpose of his routine.

JRstriker12
11-12-2009, 12:12 PM
indeed, so he is 5.0 - a hack with a rating from a screwed up system.

case closed.

So you admit that he's a 5.0?

BTW- the 1.0's in my area can beat Federer....

mtommer
11-12-2009, 12:37 PM
So you think this pro in the maindraw wimbledon 2006 looks good?

Yeah, she looks alright. Oh, sorry, you meant her tennis strokes :D.

Srly, though, yeah, she looks fine. Different styles don't make one look bad.

UnforcedError
11-12-2009, 01:32 PM
thanks for providing some sanity to this.

It's a rainy day in my part of the country and I am just playing along with these guys.

otherwise, I'd have been playing against that 5.5 kid that drakulie was referrring to,and who'd have time for this nonsense.

Sorry but MTOMMER agreeing with you is the most sure indication you are wrong available. Check out other recent threads where he thinks match results are a poor way to determine who is better.

jserve
11-12-2009, 02:04 PM
I wished the 5.0 players in my area played like that. I would win a lot more matches.

VaBeachTennis
11-12-2009, 02:25 PM
That sure is the strangest way I have seen a pro warm up. Hard to see the purpose of his routine.

Yeah, i just think that they are friends hitting around and doing an informal warm up. I never checked the guy's name out in the ATP but I figured if they posted his name he must be legit. But then against it's the internet............

ttbrowne
11-12-2009, 07:25 PM
I know the guy, he's a friend of mine. He'd wipe all of the people here, who are detracting him across the court and make them look silly. He may be a little "chubby" , but I bet he'd be having you skinny guys panting and out of breath and stalling for a break and begging for mercy, while he is barely breaking a sweat and laughing. Videos are deceptive..............

He's 3.5-4.0. We have 2 pros at our club who are 5.0 and they would destroy this hacker.

dozu
11-12-2009, 08:20 PM
here is a good-night comment for all. (darn, forecast says more rain tomorrow, maybe we'll have a go at it again when I wake up).

strong - weak - it'a all relative.

us who face strong opponents day in day out can instantly detect that the ball speed and depth are 1-2 levels lower in that video than the everyday tennis we face (Div I/II type of guys),and tend to dismiss the video as 1 of hackers.

those who are hackers themselves, however, can also instantly feel that the video is 1-2 levels above their own tennis, and tends to rate it higher.

perception is reality.

namui
11-12-2009, 08:27 PM
Since the fact is that Gary's actual NTRP is 5.0 (verified), any opinion on his NTRP will reflect the competency (or lack of) of the person who gives the opinion.

CHOcobo
11-12-2009, 08:42 PM
a 5.0 hits like that from baseline?? if i was consistent i could easily be 6.0.....:(

JRstriker12
11-12-2009, 08:46 PM
here is a good-night comment for all. (darn, forecast says more rain tomorrow, maybe we'll have a go at it again when I wake up).

strong - weak - it'a all relative.

us who face strong opponents day in day out can instantly detect that the ball speed and depth are 1-2 levels lower in that video than the everyday tennis we face (Div I/II type of guys),and tend to dismiss the video as 1 of hackers.

those who are hackers themselves, however, can also instantly feel that the video is 1-2 levels above their own tennis, and tends to rate it higher.

perception is reality.

Those who look up the NTRP of the guy in the video tend to rate it exactly as it is....

Mikey Fresh
11-12-2009, 09:29 PM
They have a very 1 dimensional game only serve can get a forehand over but not very hard. No backhand. When they come in they don't close fast enough lots of the volleys insted of bouncing could have been taken earlier as put aways. Not near 5.0. Just my 10 cents

Rob_C
11-12-2009, 10:06 PM
At the time this video was taken, this guy had a 5.5 rating:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZgQ2lbCpO0

And, NO....... other 5.5's in the nation will not bagel him (they lose).

Who is that guy???

Isnt Andy Lake rated as a 5.5???? If so, I say Lake smokes that guy. What do u think???

UnforcedError
11-12-2009, 10:47 PM
Dozu if you were any good you wouldn't be bragging about the people you hit with, you would have the rating or ranking and people who suck would be bragging about hitting with you.

JRstriker12
11-13-2009, 08:40 AM
They have a very 1 dimensional game only serve can get a forehand over but not very hard. No backhand. When they come in they don't close fast enough lots of the volleys insted of bouncing could have been taken earlier as put aways. Not near 5.0. Just my 10 cents

Check him on on tennis link - your 10 cents just depreciated....

2ndServe
11-13-2009, 09:28 AM
They have a very 1 dimensional game only serve can get a forehand over but not very hard. No backhand. When they come in they don't close fast enough lots of the volleys insted of bouncing could have been taken earlier as put aways. Not near 5.0. Just my 10 cents

Sums it up best.

raiden031
11-13-2009, 09:42 AM
Check him on on tennis link - your 10 cents just depreciated....

Pretty sure most of the people who are still appraising them as under 5.0 aren't actually reading all the other posts.

Azzurri
11-13-2009, 11:14 AM
a 5.0 hits like that from baseline?? if i was consistent i could easily be 6.0.....:(

hence you are not.:)

user92626
11-13-2009, 11:50 AM
this is a 3.0

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

D@mn, that guy has a better weight transferring than many guys in my weekend group!

But I can't tell if he's hitting a bh or a fh

tennisdad65
11-13-2009, 11:56 AM
D@mn, that guy has a better weight transferring than many guys in my weekend group!

But I can't tell if he's hitting a bh or a fh

neither could I. At first I thought he was 4-5 year old being trained for baseball. But then I noticed his age was 3 :).

WildVolley
11-13-2009, 04:16 PM
Who is that guy???

Isnt Andy Lake rated as a 5.5???? If so, I say Lake smokes that guy. What do u think???

I think that was a video of Val Wilder, but I'm not sure. Val Wilder was winning the 40s division on multiple surfaces when he was 45.

CHOcobo
11-13-2009, 05:53 PM
hence you are not.:)

hence the :( face

drakulie
11-13-2009, 07:25 PM
I think that was a video of Val Wilder, but I'm not sure. Val Wilder was winning the 40s division on multiple surfaces when he was 45.


yes, the video I posted is, Val Wilder.

Also, one poster asked about Lake and him playing. I believe Lake wins the match in straight sets, but it won't be a blow out.

Azzurri
11-13-2009, 07:46 PM
hence the :( face

hence:)..................

WildVolley
11-13-2009, 08:07 PM
yes, the video I posted is, Val Wilder.

Also, one poster asked about Lake and him playing. I believe Lake wins the match in straight sets, but it won't be a blow out.

Isn't Lake about ten years younger than Wilder?

xFullCourtTenniSx
11-14-2009, 03:23 AM
Jesus Christ... This has been covered many times! (both here and on YouTube)

He is a legitimate USTA NTRP 5.0 player IN HAWAII! COMPUTER RATED TOO!

He'd rather play 4.5 tennis though, and might be having a hard time in 5.0 tennis, so anything under a 4.5 rating is just bullcrap from you idiots. He's proven himself on the 4.5 level already at NATIONALS! And 4.5s there are 5.0+!

And the 5.5 in the video Drakulie posted probably never misses a ball (and probably has very accurate placement)... Looks like he played with a wood racket too from the looks of it (for most of his life as well). Under those conditions, I don't doubt his ability to give me a tough match, and probably even crush me (without even looking at the 5.5 rating). I've seen guys like these play before, and they're very good as long as they can get to the ball and put a racket on it.

Kinda surprised about the amount of pace he put on the last shot. A video of a collection of points would be greatly appreciated. :) Didn't think he could put that much on the ball with his form.

drakulie
11-14-2009, 09:53 AM
Here are some vids of Wilder (serving) in the 45's nationals (finals):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HdWaJ0xwKI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5fBa9uGv9Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=do55aFv36Bw

more vids:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIqR2UXGFyU

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

chico9166
11-14-2009, 12:01 PM
Jesus Christ... This has been covered many times! (both here and on YouTube)

He is a legitimate USTA NTRP 5.0 player IN HAWAII! COMPUTER RATED TOO!

He'd rather play 4.5 tennis though, and might be having a hard time in 5.0 tennis, so anything under a 4.5 rating is just bullcrap from you idiots. He's proven himself on the 4.5 level already at NATIONALS! And 4.5s there are 5.0+!

And the 5.5 in the video Drakulie posted probably never misses a ball (and probably has very accurate placement)... Looks like he played with a wood racket too from the looks of it (for most of his life as well). Under those conditions, I don't doubt his ability to give me a tough match, and probably even crush me (without even looking at the 5.5 rating). I've seen guys like these play before, and they're very good as long as they can get to the ball and put a racket on it.

Kinda surprised about the amount of pace he put on the last shot. A video of a collection of points would be greatly appreciated. :) Didn't think he could put that much on the ball with his form.

Yeah, I can vouch for the way Val played back in the late 1980's. He used to work out/play with some of us, many of whom were major college players. Dude handled all of us for the most part.

At 6'4 or so, with an unbelievable kick serve, WORLD CLASS VOLLEYS AND OVERHEAD, he was almost impossible to break. Just really, really tough. Trust me, he would still throttle most anyone on this forum.

Topaz
11-14-2009, 12:23 PM
I think the NTRP scale is fairly compatible across the nation. I think what skews it is that a lot of players who don't play USTA have an unrealistic veiw of what they would be rated if they did play USTA tennis. (I'm not saying that's the case here.)

And, we all know that a player isn't given a 5.0 rating because he has pretty strokes and a nice body. He get's a 5.0 rating because he plays competitively with other 5.0's. (Or else he self rates as a 5.0.)

This really sums up the inconsistent answers on the thread, I think. Well said.

My 5.0 is better than your 5.0? This is the kind of argument we used to engage in during recess in 6th grade.

Have at it boys....just remember to knock it off when the bell rings.

Heh, heh, it is an argument to protect the very delicate ego.

I see, in The Netherlands we have a rating system and a national ranking system which are seperate.

Does the U.S. also have a national ranking system? Or only a rating system which is based on the international rankings (for high level players)

Again, it bears repeating, that in the US ratings and rankings are two different things. NTRP ratings are earned through league play and NTRP tournament play (based on results...shhh, don't anyone tell mtommer).

Rankings are determined by participation in various tournaments. To earn an open ranking, you must enter and play an open tournament (though, there are rules stipulating how many and what your results must be to actually get a ranking). Likewise, age group tournaments will generate age group rankings, and NTRP tournaments will generate NTRP rankings (as well as effect your rating!).

It can get confusing, and it is frightening to see how it is vastly misunderstood by some as well (not directing that at *you* EB).

Mike Cottrill
11-14-2009, 03:42 PM
Yeah, I can vouch for the way Val played back in the late 1980's. He used to work out/play with some of us, many of whom were major college players. Dude handled all of us for the most part.

At 6'4 or so, with an unbelievable kick serve, WORLD CLASS VOLLEYS AND OVERHEAD, he was almost impossible to break. Just really, really tough. Trust me, he would still throttle most anyone on this forum.

What about that simple backhand? Drive anyone nuts back in the day?
Drak picked some strange points to post. Not all his points are like that, he can work a rally too ;)
When I played him a few months back, he was hitting the serve a little lower off a little shorter toss. Maybe the knee or something

chico9166
11-14-2009, 04:34 PM
What about that simple backhand? Drive anyone nuts back in the day?
Drak picked some strange points to post. Not all his points are like that, he can work a rally too ;)
When I played him a few months back, he was hitting the serve a little lower off a little shorter toss. Maybe the knee or something

Yeah Mike,

I just always thought that his groundstrokes kinda served the purpose of getting him into net. It wasn't like he blew you of the court from the ground. But invariably, he'd figure out a way to use them to transition forward, and then you were in trouble. Kinda Mcenroe'esk, in that regard. I don't know how he's moving now, but he really was an extra-ordinarily agile and quick big guy. A great athlete!

Mike Cottrill
11-14-2009, 04:52 PM
Yeah Mike,

I just always thought that his groundstrokes kinda served the purpose of getting him into net. It wasn't like he hit a heavy ball that had you on your heels. But invariably, he'd figure out a way to use them to transition forward, and then you were in trouble. I don't know how he's moving now, but he really was an extra-ordinarily agile and quick big guy. A great athlete!
8-10 years ago he moved very well. Hopefully his knee is better now. And yes, he still looks to get forward and I guess that is why grass fits him so well. All those different spins he has. Yep, power is not his game. Not sure he can even hit a serve over 110mph. I donít think he started playing tennis until his teens??

NamRanger
11-14-2009, 05:01 PM
Here are some vids of Wilder (serving) in the 45's nationals (finals):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HdWaJ0xwKI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5fBa9uGv9Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=do55aFv36Bw

more vids:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIqR2UXGFyU

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



That guy's kick serve is absolutely insane.

chico9166
11-14-2009, 05:02 PM
8-10 years ago he moved very well. Hopefully his knee is better now. And yes, he still looks to get forward and I guess that is why grass fits him so well. All those different spins he has. Yep, power is not his game. Not sure he can even hit a serve over 110mph. I donít think he started playing tennis until his teens??



Bottom line, the guy was/is a really great player. What top 100 in the world? It's good to see he's still doing it after all these years.

Slzr.Matias
11-14-2009, 10:34 PM
My opinion is that he's a 4.0

EikelBeiter
11-15-2009, 02:52 AM
Again, it bears repeating, that in the US ratings and rankings are two different things. NTRP ratings are earned through league play and NTRP tournament play (based on results...shhh, don't anyone tell mtommer).

Rankings are determined by participation in various tournaments. To earn an open ranking, you must enter and play an open tournament (though, there are rules stipulating how many and what your results must be to actually get a ranking). Likewise, age group tournaments will generate age group rankings, and NTRP tournaments will generate NTRP rankings (as well as effect your rating!).

It can get confusing, and it is frightening to see how it is vastly misunderstood by some as well (not directing that at *you* EB).

Even if it was directed at me I wouldn't take offense, because I don't live or play in the U.S. But thanks for explaining the system, seems a little bit over complicated though.

Topaz
11-15-2009, 03:19 AM
Even if it was directed at me I wouldn't take offense, because I don't live or play in the U.S. But thanks for explaining the system, seems a little bit over complicated though.

Heh, heh, well, just being careful...I've had several diatribes directed at me lately that I didn't see coming!

If you're in the 'system' and competing in leagues and tournaments, you get a bit more used to it and it makes more sense, but I can totally see how from the outside it would seem complicated. For all the criticism directed at it from some on the board, it almost seems a bit unfair, because for the most part it works and works really well.

alidisperanza
11-15-2009, 08:51 AM
No. First clue: A 5.0 would never have to use a Titanic head size racket.

I play with a former davis cup player that hits with ti s6's....It's what you do with it, not what it is.

alidisperanza
11-15-2009, 08:55 AM
I can't say much about the guy in the blue as he's pretty far away but the Gentleman in the white has pretty stable mechanics and court conception. Who knows.

cork_screw
11-15-2009, 10:37 AM
These guys are probably 6.0

The round one looks like a pokemon character and laughs like a japanese princess.

Ultra2HolyGrail
11-15-2009, 11:10 PM
LOL, says the guy who would get blown off of the court by the "chubby guy". :)


lol. The chubby guy is a 4.0 honestly. And he would not be top 5 in my state in 4.0s. He has no backhand. His pace is lacking. And he comes into the net on pretty weak serves which is the best part of his game.

Again, comming into the net does not make you a 5.0. Isn't this the same guy from hawaii?

Ultra2HolyGrail
11-15-2009, 11:21 PM
They have a very 1 dimensional game only serve can get a forehand over but not very hard. No backhand. When they come in they don't close fast enough lots of the volleys insted of bouncing could have been taken earlier as put aways. Not near 5.0. Just my 10 cents


Spot on with the closing the net observation. Way to slow. And the no backhand observation and realtively weak topspin forehand. His serve is decent and best part of his game. I respect he likes to come to net though. Any good 4.0 with a decent return and baseline game would give this guy trouble though.

Ultra2HolyGrail
11-15-2009, 11:23 PM
HE IS A 5.0. YES. 5.0!!!!!!!!!!!

HE HAS A VERIFIED USTA NTRP OF 5.0 End Of Story.



Lmao. I suppose he is impressive to YOU.

drakulie
11-16-2009, 07:33 AM
^^^The USTA has him rated as a 5.0. I know this bothers you, as well as others, but unless you come up with some factual proof, such as that of a USTA rating, your opinion has no bearing on this fact.

ttbrowne
11-16-2009, 07:34 AM
I think I can make it to 5.0 after reading all of these posts.

JRstriker12
11-16-2009, 08:15 AM
Lmao. I suppose he is impressive to YOU.

Being 5.0 is not about being "impressive", it's about being able to compete with other 5.0 rated players - which this guy has - he's rates 5.0 on tennis link.

LeeD
11-16-2009, 08:30 AM
HE IS A 5.0 player who will never get better with poor strokes and movement.

Djokovicfan4life
11-16-2009, 10:03 AM
lol. The chubby guy is a 4.0 honestly. And he would not be top 5 in my state in 4.0s. He has no backhand. His pace is lacking. And he comes into the net on pretty weak serves which is the best part of his game.

Again, comming into the net does not make you a 5.0. Isn't this the same guy from hawaii?

The rating system was created by the USTA. The USTA rates him as a 5.0 player. Therefore, he is a 5.0 player.

I really don't get what's so hard about this.

If you want to rate him a 4.0 in the TW ratings system, that's fine by me, but this thread is about the real NTRP system.

mtommer
11-16-2009, 10:25 AM
I really don't get what's so hard about this.

It's easy. In the video the guys do not display the following level of skills, whether they are computer rated 5.0 or not.

USTA 5.0 skills description:

Forehands: Strong shots with
control, depth, and spin;
uses forehand to set up
offensive situations; has
developed good touch;
consistent on passing
shots

Backhands: Can use backhand as
an aggressive shot
with good consistency;
has good direction and
depth on most shots;
varies spin

Serve or Return of Serve: Serve is placed effectively
with intent of hitting to
a weakness or developing
an offensive situation;
has a variety of serves
to rely on; good depth,
spin, and placement on
most second serves to
force weak return or set
up next shot; can mix
aggressive and off-paced
service returns with
control, depth, and spin

Volley: Can hit most volleys
with depth, pace and
direction; plays difficult
volleys with depth;
given an opportunity
volley is often hit for a
winner

Special Shots: Approach shots and
passing shots are hit
with pace and high
degree of effectiveness;
can lob offensively;
overhead can be hit
from any position; hits
mid-court volleys with
consistency

Playing Style: Frequently has an outstanding
shot, consistency,
or attribute around which
game is built; can vary
game plan according to
opponent; this player is
“match wise,” plays
percentage tennis and
“beats himself or herself”
less than the 4.5 player;
solid teamwork in
doubles is evident; game
breaks down mentally
and physically more
often than the 5.5 player

What this means is that if the guys can play how they are in the video, and be rated 5.0, then the skills and actual play don't mesh. Granted this should make sense though as 3.0 is beginner, the middle, 5.0, is intermediate (as it should be) and 7.0 is advanced. Whether the USTA intends such descriptions to be guidelines or not, the moment "skills" are associated with a particular number, it will be perceived as "mandatory" that the associated skills need to be displayed. Let me reiterate that, whether they are intended to be guidelines or not, once put down, they WILL be taken as set in stone. That's human nature. It also means the 5.0 description needs to be rewritten for a lesser adept player.

r2473
11-16-2009, 10:28 AM
are these guys 5.0?

No, much taller.

JRstriker12
11-16-2009, 10:42 AM
It's easy. In the video the guys do not display the following level of skills, whether they are computer rated 5.0 or not.

USTA 5.0 skills description:

...blah, blah, blah.....

What this means is that if the guys can play how they are in the video, and be rated 5.0, then the skills and actual play don't mesh. Granted this should make sense though as 3.0 is beginner, the middle, 5.0, is intermediate (as it should be) and 7.0 is advanced. Whether the USTA intends such descriptions to be guidelines or not, the moment "skills" are associated with a particular number, it will be perceived as "mandatory" that the associated skills need to be displayed. Let me reiterate that, whether they are intended to be guidelines or not, once put down, they WILL be taken as set in stone. That's human nature. It also means the 5.0 description needs to be rewritten for a lesser adept player.

And you would know what skills these guys display? You don't even play USTA tennis.

You also know those just general guidelines for people who self rate? "Skills: are not associated with a number. There's no "5.0 rating skills test" that you take.

Those guidlines don't mean anything when it the person in question has a history of sucessfully competing at the 5.0 level. If he couldn't compete at 5.0 he would have been bumped down until he found a level that fit his level of play.

In the end its results- actual matches - wins and losses that determine your level (as it should be) - not looks - not a list of "skills."

Of all the people who want to rate this guy 4.0 or 3.5 etc. no one has come up and been able to prove they play at or above the same level as this guy. It's obvious that none of these people have ever taking a video of themselves playing and seen how awkward and ugly their games really are.

JoelDali
11-16-2009, 10:50 AM
It's obvious that none of these people have ever taking a video of themselves playing and seen how awkward and ugly their games really are.

We all look like Fed when we're playing in our own head. Take a video of yourself and feel the vomit and self disgust flare up in your belly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6bZd-fHpDY

user92626
11-16-2009, 10:56 AM
We all look like Fed when we're playing in our own head. Take a video of yourself and feel the vomit and self disgust flare up in your belly.



Speak for yourself. I'm not disgusted by my tennis. I swing and look at myself in the mirror sometimes. No problem. At the court once in a while I play all out and some people've told me I looked intimidating!

JoelDali
11-16-2009, 11:04 AM
Speak for yourself. I'm not disgusted by my tennis. I swing and look at myself in the mirror sometimes. No problem. At the court once in a while I play all out and some people've told me I looked intimidating!

I videotaped myself all summer and I was happy with my game too. I meant most people. Not necessarily you specifically you beasty little 6.5 player you...also, you really should paint your mirror black, the mirror always lies.

mtommer
11-16-2009, 11:09 AM
And you would know what skills these guys display?

I can see with my own eyes what skills they don't display. Did Bollieterri (whatever the spelling is) play professional tennis?



You also know those just general guidelines for people who self rate? "Skills: are not associated with a number. There's no "5.0 rating skills test" that you take.

Do you not read? It doesn't matter if they are guidelines. If you spend anytime of these boards, there are many people who view the skills as set in stone for each level. In this case, perception is reality whether that is the way it's supposed to be or not.


Those guidlines don't mean anything when it the person in question has a history of sucessfully competing at the 5.0 level. If he couldn't compete at 5.0 he would have been bumped down until he found a level that fit his level of play.

It only serves to demean the "glorrified" 5.0 status. I'm perfectly okay with that as I relate 5.0 to intermediate level tennis as the play displayed is so far from even semi-professional play. Your opinion of "5.0 greatness" is your own.

Awkward and ungly tennis isn't good tennis no matter what "level" it's called.

JoelDali
11-16-2009, 11:13 AM
Awkward and ungly tennis isn't good tennis no matter what "level" it's called.

Ok, sounds marvelous.

mtommer
11-16-2009, 11:15 AM
We all look like Fed when we're playing in our own head. Take a video of yourself and feel the vomit and self disgust flare up in your belly.


I have. I look awful. As I should. I'm not very good. :D

JRstriker12
11-16-2009, 11:16 AM
Speak for yourself. I'm not disgusted by my tennis. I swing and look at myself in the mirror sometimes. No problem. At the court once in a while I play all out and some people've told me I looked intimidating!

LOL! If you strokes only look good in the mirrior, then you have some serious problems.

Seriously, go take a video of yourself playing a real match (tournament or league), not a match agaist a hitting buddy, not being fed by a pro, not a ball machine, or your 2 year old sister and you will see that you look 20X worse than any 5.0 or 4.5 video posted to this board.

Anyone can look intimidating to the people on the next court who show up with presureless balls and kid's sized rackets.

chico9166
11-16-2009, 11:23 AM
The rating system was created by the USTA. The USTA rates him as a 5.0 player. Therefore, he is a 5.0 player.

I really don't get what's so hard about this.

If you want to rate him a 4.0 in the TW ratings system, that's fine by me, but this thread is about the real NTRP system.

This says it all.

JRstriker12
11-16-2009, 11:28 AM
I can see with my own eyes what skills they don't display. Did Bollieterri (whatever the spelling is) play professional tennis?

Do you not read? It doesn't matter if they are guidelines. If you spend anytime of these boards, there are many people who view the skills as set in stone for each level. In this case, perception is reality whether that is the way it's supposed to be or not.

It only serves to demean the "glorrified" 5.0 status. I'm perfectly okay with that as I relate 5.0 to intermediate level tennis as the play displayed is so far from even semi-professional play. Your opinion of "5.0 greatness" is your own.

Awkward and ungly tennis isn't good tennis no matter what "level" it's called.

1. Nick actually knows sometings about tennis and talent..... you do not. How many GS champs have you coached? ..... That's what I thought....

2. Did you not read? If you spend any time playing USTA and playing with people who know anything about NTRP then you would know the purpose and limitations of SELF-RATING guidelines. This skewed perception of these guidelines as being written in stone only come from ignorant posters such as yourself who don't actually play USTA tennis.

3. Who said 5.0 was some glofied level of "greatness" - a 5.0 player by definition is not a pro or a semi pro - but at the sametime, a 5.0 player is probably better than 75% of the tennis playing population - that's pretty good. Funny that you, a horrible tennis player can "look down" on someone who put in the time and work to play tennis at a level you could never reach - must take a tall ladder.

4.You may view it as akward and ugly, but that doesn't mean they don't play 5.0 tennis. As I said before, these guys "look" and play better than probably 99% of the hacks on TW.

Federer, he isn't - but you should respect the fact that most people here would be lucky to lose at breadsticks against the guy.

mtommer
11-16-2009, 11:44 AM
This skewed perception of these guidelines as being written in stone only come from ignorant posters such as yourself who don't actually play USTA tennis.

It doesn't matter.


but at the sametime, a 5.0 player is probably better than 75% of the tennis playing population - that's pretty good.

"That" is mere opinion, one I don't agree with.


Funny that you, a horrible tennis player can "look down" on someone who put in the time and work to play tennis at a level you could never reach - must take a tall ladder.

And this is really what most "comments" on this whole thread is about - at least it's an issue I have at any rate. It's not arrogant or belittling to point out "bad" play just because some one has put in a lot of hard work to play at that level. Pointing out reality is never arrogant or belittling. Point two in the video: the resulting hit long is unacceptable. The guy in white was not stressed and it was an easy ball to hit. Easy volleys dumped into the net, not acceptable. And so on. By not acceptable I mean not acceptable such to be considered a good player. It doesn't matter how much work the guy put in to be that level.


4.You may view it as akward and ugly,

It is. Opinion isn't necessary to see that.


but that doesn't mean they don't play 5.0 tennis. As I said before, these guys "look" and play better than probably 99% of the hacks on TW.


So 5.0 tennis is awkward and ugly tennis. Fine. Just don't pretend it's not (not aimed at you in particular).

Djokovicfan4life
11-16-2009, 12:08 PM
So you can't dump easy volleys into the net and be a 5.0? I guess we should inform Stepanek that he's really a 4.0 player who just got lucky.

Topaz
11-16-2009, 12:47 PM
Please people, don't reply to mtommer. Doesn't matter how many times you explain it to him, he won't budge, and eventually you will end up throwing your keyboard across a room. It isn't worth the cost of a new keyboard, or the time it took to throw it against a wall.

mtommer
11-16-2009, 12:52 PM
So you can't dump easy volleys into the net and be a 5.0?

Sure you can be. What's that got to do with 5.0 tennis being held up on a pedestal?

GuyClinch
11-16-2009, 01:07 PM
Who said 5.0 was some glofied level of "greatness" - a 5.0 player by definition is not a pro or a semi pro - but at the sametime, a 5.0 player is probably better than 75% of the tennis playing population - that's pretty good. Funny that you, a horrible tennis player can "look down" on someone who put in the time and work to play tennis at a level you could never reach - must take a tall ladder.

if we are talking about people who play once a year or more 5.0 is much higher then 75% IMHO. We are talking well over 95% of the population is 5.5 or worse.. Some 5.5s are teaching pros. Club players aren't beating those guys in general.

In fact there are so few 5.5 and better players USTA doesn't even bother creating a league for them.

With regards to ratings you can try to hype yourself up with how bad people "look" on video.. But when it comes down to it many of those bad "looking" players beat up on the vast majority of tennis players. Also people tend to look better in person then on video so its not a big deal.

The same guys that look like crap on some video can actually draw a crowd at a local club.

Pete

NamRanger
11-16-2009, 01:12 PM
HE IS A 5.0 player who will never get better with poor strokes and movement.



John McEnroe had poor strokes and not the greatest movement in the world, yet he was world #1 and a multiple slam champion. Ok, not the best example, but I think you get my point.

LeeD
11-16-2009, 01:34 PM
JonMc had the GIFT of the softest hands, the best eyesight, the ability to get you off your game, and the competitive fire to make up for his Aussiegripped groundies and slow moving serves.
We don't, you don't.
His movment was just fine, as shown in his classic groundie battles with Borg.
Prolly the top 10 best half volleys and low volleys, despite a dipping rackethead.
Talent can defy convention, and he did.....as did Connors.
Convention would likely be more like PeterKorda, Goran, GregRusds, and plenty others.
Nadal defies convention also.

JoelDali
11-16-2009, 01:54 PM
Please people, don't reply to mtommer. Doesn't matter how many times you explain it to him, he won't budge, and eventually you will end up throwing your keyboard across a room. It isn't worth the cost of a new keyboard, or the time it took to throw it against a wall.

http://a512.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/13/l_b6c86ca1c593df9b0c1d017845dd0b9f.jpg

Topaz
11-16-2009, 02:17 PM
^^^Nice earrings!

SystemicAnomaly
11-16-2009, 02:42 PM
...

3. Who said 5.0 was some glofied level of "greatness" - a 5.0 player by definition is not a pro or a semi pro - but at the sametime, a 5.0 player is probably better than 75% of the tennis playing population - that's pretty good...
...

"That" is mere opinion, one I don't agree with...

You may not agree with it but the 2nd part it is probably true. The bulk of the tennis population plays below at 4.0 level.

LeeD
11-16-2009, 02:48 PM
Reality, majority of total tennis players well BELOW 3.0 level.
Think of how many "tennis players" you meet who play less than once a month...or less.

JRstriker12
11-16-2009, 02:49 PM
You may not agree with it but the 2nd part it is probably true. The bulk of the tennis population plays below at 4.0 level.

I think we agree on this one. My point was that the majority of tennis players in the world cannot compete on the 5.0 level. Being better than 75% may be a low estimate. IMHO, 3.5 is probably the average for most USTA tennis players.

I was responding to the troll - I'm not saying these guys are Federer, but they are pretty good. Heck of alot better than I am.

Ripper014
11-16-2009, 03:29 PM
Reality, majority of total tennis players well BELOW 3.0 level.
Think of how many "tennis players" you meet who play less than once a month...or less.

Totally agree... like golfers where 95% play over 100 I would guess 95% play well below a 5.0 level of tennis.

SourStraws
11-16-2009, 04:23 PM
I can concur w/ the 5.0 rating

S.S.

jazzyfunkybluesy
11-16-2009, 04:43 PM
Please people, don't reply to mtommer. Doesn't matter how many times you explain it to him, he won't budge, and eventually you will end up throwing your keyboard across a room. It isn't worth the cost of a new keyboard, or the time it took to throw it against a wall.

Too freakin funny man.

Ultra2HolyGrail
11-16-2009, 10:30 PM
The rating system was created by the USTA. The USTA rates him as a 5.0 player. Therefore, he is a 5.0 player.

I really don't get what's so hard about this.



I really don't get what's so hard to understand that the rating system is not accurate with accuracy of level of every player. If you don't think it can be flawed i don't know what to tell you. I've been on 5.0 team where i assume many of the players on there have a 5.0 rating and in reality many where 4.0-4.5. I judge strictly what i see. And i've played players from 4.0 to open, seen the top ranked 4.0's and 4.5-5.0 players play and played them to know what level a certain player is at unless a video like drakulie pulls out that really makes a player look worse than he is can fool you. But this video here there is just no denying he is a 4.0. If the actual player is reading this he knows i'm right. I'm just being straight up with what he does well and what he does not. Pretty good serve, and a decent topspin forehand. Sad to say but zero backhand. Any good player can see the way he approaches the net is way to slow and he is expecting a soft shot hit right to him from a weak returner. Any good returner would eat him up. Just calling it the way it is, not a fantasy 5.0 rating and that's from a system that is flawed. The only people that think he IS a 5.0 is players that obviously think he is good and are nowhere near a 5.0.

mtommer
11-16-2009, 10:41 PM
Careful, Topaz is going to run out of keyboards. ;)

Ultra2HolyGrail
11-16-2009, 11:08 PM
HE IS A 5.0 player who will never get better with poor strokes and movement.

Clearly you can not be a 5.0 and have poor strokes and movement.

LeeD
11-17-2009, 12:31 PM
Seems to me...
It's possible to get 5.0 POINTS based on previous year entry into multiple 5.0 tournaments, maybe getting lucky in singles draw, maybe with addition of doubles draw wins, and be rated in the 5.0's.
Your skill level above could easily be 4.0 or strong 3.5, but you entered a buncha OPEN tournaments and went more than one round in one....:):)
Vid is of a guy around strong 3.5 to 4.0 level, that's all. Points awarded after a season of Open tournaments might have given him some weight towards "5.0".

5263
11-17-2009, 03:02 PM
That guy's kick serve is absolutely insane.

are you serious or being sarcastic?

Mike Cottrill
11-17-2009, 03:11 PM
^^
Val has a very good twist ..

robt18
11-17-2009, 03:14 PM
I see that white shirt has a good conisistent serve and some tricks at the net. They are pretty good, especially becuase they look past their prime which is why they use old serve and volley. Im not certain I am better than the white shirt guy. But im pretty sure i can beat all the dumbasses with negative postings.

mtommer
11-17-2009, 06:25 PM
I see that white shirt has a good conisistent serve and some tricks at the net. They are pretty good, especially becuase they look past their prime which is why they use old serve and volley. Im not certain I am better than the white shirt guy. But im pretty sure i can beat all the dumbasses with negative postings.

I'm in Kalamazoo, MI. Let me know when you arrive.

5263
11-17-2009, 08:51 PM
^^
Val has a very good twist ..

I expect he does, but that was not a high bounce in the vids, much less insane. I guess from what you are saying, it has some nice action, but it still isn't getting up that high in the vids. The returner was taking them about shoulder high, and he looked on the short side.

TnTBigman
11-17-2009, 08:55 PM
Damn. Florida 3.5 at best. And thats being generous to the first guy serving.

GuyClinch
11-17-2009, 10:57 PM
LMAO. Not the "area" argument again. We had guys from texas and Hawaii now who are rated - and were pegged 2 points lower then their real rating on this board.

Those are plenty good areas for tennis. Truth is the NTRP rating is FINE. Its not like one area wins the NATIONAL tournaments.

Videos are just more revealing then watching guys play IRL. You watch 5.0s play in real life and you can tell they are good. On video they look much worse..

I say again - show me the "3.5s" in your area that look like 5.0s anywhere.. You can't do it.

aphex
11-18-2009, 12:38 AM
I'm in Kalamazoo, MI. Let me know when you arrive.

i thought you didn't play "matches"...lol, muppet...

no1
11-18-2009, 02:06 AM
Both players are at least 4.5 as they look to be able to beat anyone at the 4.0 level I've played against.

Mike Cottrill
11-18-2009, 04:53 AM
I expect he does, but that was not a high bounce in the vids, much less insane. I guess from what you are saying, it has some nice action, but it still isn't getting up that high in the vids. The returner was taking them about shoulder high, and he looked on the short side.

He put me into the side fence. He can hit the spots making it vey hard to attack. The movement is the key.

drakulie
11-18-2009, 05:58 AM
^^Val, has a big kicker. Period. Seeing it on vid, and in person are very different. The fact that even on vid one could see the movement, and height it gets should be enough for people to understand how much heavier it is live.

chico9166
11-18-2009, 06:49 AM
^^Val, has a big kicker. Period. Seeing it on vid, and in person are very different. The fact that even on vid one could see the movement, and height it gets should be enough for people to understand how much heavier it is live.

Yup,

Only in the world of internet forums. It's a little comical. One would think, that a player who held a top 100 world ranking would have a decent serve. But not here. Can't wait for the serve critiques. Hope Val is tuning in, so maybe he can really learn something.

Mike Cottrill
11-18-2009, 07:05 AM
^^Val, has a big kicker. Period. Seeing it on vid, and in person are very different. The fact that even on vid one could see the movement, and height it gets should be enough for people to understand how much heavier it is live.

^^

I can verify that. I saw the vids, I have returned that serve, and I have seen him use it on players way above my level.. It is easier to return 120+ blasters than this thing. Those vids do not do it justice. If you do not move your feet and use baby steps, youíre hosed.

JRstriker12
11-18-2009, 07:15 AM
Seems to me...
It's possible to get 5.0 POINTS based on previous year entry into multiple 5.0 tournaments, maybe getting lucky in singles draw, maybe with addition of doubles draw wins, and be rated in the 5.0's.
Your skill level above could easily be 4.0 or strong 3.5, but you entered a buncha OPEN tournaments and went more than one round in one....:):)
Vid is of a guy around strong 3.5 to 4.0 level, that's all. Points awarded after a season of Open tournaments might have given him some weight towards "5.0".

Not what happened - check his record on tennis link.

JRstriker12
11-18-2009, 07:33 AM
New idea for a TV show in Tennis Chan - call it "I can beat that guy."

Average hack contestants are shown YouTube videos of a person playing tennis, then make a wager on the score, by how much they would win or lose.

The contestant then plays the actual guy from the youtube clip and wins prizes/or money based on how close their prediction is. However, if the contestant loses 1 and 1 or worse and doesn't predict that score, the person they play gets their prize.

I'd like to line up some of the "he's a 3.5" crowd here and see what happens.

mtommer
11-18-2009, 07:59 AM
i thought you didn't play "matches"...lol, muppet...

I don't as a matter of course. It doesn't mean I can't. The offer is quite valid.

mucat
11-18-2009, 08:57 AM
Here are some vids of Wilder (serving) in the 45's nationals (finals):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HdWaJ0xwKI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5fBa9uGv9Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=do55aFv36Bw

more vids:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIqR2UXGFyU

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


The last 2 serve videos are wicked. First one twisted and pull the receiver outside. The second one got no twist (it even looks like slice, hard to tell from the angle) and the opponent got jammed. And the same freaking serve motion.

LeeD
11-18-2009, 09:02 AM
Not saying there not good players, but they aren't 5.0's who have potential to get better!
Wow, did we look so bad 15 years ago?
Looks like me playing in 100 degree weather.

chico9166
11-18-2009, 09:10 AM
New idea for a TV show in Tennis Chan - call it "I can beat that guy."

Average hack contestants are shown YouTube videos of a person playing tennis, then make a wager on the score, by how much they would win or lose.

The contestant then plays the actual guy from the youtube clip and wins prizes/or money based on how close their prediction is. However, if the contestant loses 1 and 1 or worse and doesn't predict that score, the person they play gets their prize.

I'd like to line up some of the "he's a 3.5" crowd here and see what happens.

This has potential.:)

VaBeachTennis
11-18-2009, 12:30 PM
New idea for a TV show in Tennis Chan - call it "I can beat that guy."

Average hack contestants are shown YouTube videos of a person playing tennis, then make a wager on the score, by how much they would win or lose.

The contestant then plays the actual guy from the youtube clip and wins prizes/or money based on how close their prediction is. However, if the contestant loses 1 and 1 or worse and doesn't predict that score, the person they play gets their prize.

I'd like to line up some of the "he's a 3.5" crowd here and see what happens.

That would be really fun to watch!!!

JRstriker12
11-18-2009, 12:39 PM
This has potential.:)

That would be really fun to watch!!!

It's sort of like the Tennis version of the MTV "bully" show. LOL! Have you seen it?

Basically, a person who was bullied gets their bully to go toe-to-toe with a real MMA fighter with the promise of winning a few thousand dollars.

Depending on how the bully does, they either win or lose money to the person they bullied.

For example, they have a submission hold round and the bully loses $500 for everytime he taps out.

It's really funny watching some of these dudes get cut down while thinking they are bad-azzes.......

5263
11-18-2009, 12:45 PM
New idea for a TV show in Tennis Chan - call it "I can beat that guy."

Average hack contestants are shown YouTube videos of a person playing tennis, then make a wager on the score, by how much they would win or lose.

The contestant then plays the actual guy from the youtube clip and wins prizes/or money based on how close their prediction is. However, if the contestant loses 1 and 1 or worse and doesn't predict that score, the person they play gets their prize.

I'd like to line up some of the "he's a 3.5" crowd here and see what happens.

that would be a good one;
and a lot more realistic than watching someone get pummeled by a pro fighter.

JRstriker12
11-18-2009, 01:29 PM
that would be a good one;
and a lot more realistic than watching someone get pummeled by a pro fighter.

Funny thing is they tell these dudes they are going up against a pro fighter and they still get baited into it. Most rational people would run the other way...FAST!

For example, there was this one episode where the bully was a pretty big dude - like 6'6", pretty well built and they guy asks him if he knew anything about MMA techniques and the guy just comes up with the BS to sound like he's so tough. He can't admit that he doesn't know anything about martial arts and basically bullies people because he's a big dude and the people he picks on aren't trained fighters....Lucky, the show usually puts a limti on what the fighter can do, like submission holds or take downs only.

onehandbh
11-18-2009, 01:55 PM
that would be a good one;
and a lot more realistic than watching someone get pummeled by a pro fighter.

If anyone wants to do this in socal, I'll film and edit it.

MomentumGT
11-18-2009, 04:55 PM
If anyone wants to do this in socal, I'll film and edit it.

I can provide pro mma fighters for this event. Couple of buddies are training for a show, so they should be in pretty good shape.

-Jon

Blade0324
11-19-2009, 06:42 PM
I really find it humerous to see people here defend the two guys in the video. In my area, Colorado, they would be 3.5 based on ground strokes and volleys, and 4.0 based on serve. I'd say they are propably 4.0 but would lose most of their matches at that level as most 4.0's here are far more consistant than that. I have a number of 4.5 and 5.0 friends that these guys would be lucky to get a couple games off of. I don't buy the whole you can't tell from video thing. I have seen video of 4.5-5.0 players that show much better skill and shotmaking than this.

Rambler124
11-19-2009, 06:45 PM
I really find it humerous to see people here defend the two guys in the video. In my area, Colorado, they would be 3.5 based on ground strokes and volleys, and 4.0 based on serve. I'd say they are propably 4.0 but would lose most of their matches at that level as most 4.0's here are far more consistant than that. I have a number of 4.5 and 5.0 friends that these guys would be lucky to get a couple games off of. I don't buy the whole you can't tell from video thing. I have seen video of 4.5-5.0 players that show much better skill and shotmaking than this.

Shhhhhhh....

This thread was dead and I liked it that way.

JRstriker12
11-19-2009, 07:34 PM
I really find it humerous to see people here defend the two guys in the video. In my area, Colorado, they would be 3.5 based on ground strokes and volleys, and 4.0 based on serve. I'd say they are propably 4.0 but would lose most of their matches at that level as most 4.0's here are far more consistant than that. I have a number of 4.5 and 5.0 friends that these guys would be lucky to get a couple games off of. I don't buy the whole you can't tell from video thing. I have seen video of 4.5-5.0 players that show much better skill and shotmaking than this.

http://arikia.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/facepalm1.jpg

mtommer
11-19-2009, 07:36 PM
I'm kinda' surprised that nobody's mentioned the obvious yet about the original video (either that or I missed the mention).

10ACE
11-19-2009, 08:40 PM
I'm kinda' surprised that nobody's mentioned the obvious yet about the original video (either that or I missed the mention).

? His sinister laugh at 0:23!!!

GuyClinch
11-20-2009, 12:35 AM
Why would CO be a better area then Hawaii? LMAO. Its sunny and nice all the time there. Those guys can play year round. <g>

You guys are just grasping at straws with this "area" nonsense. They have national tournaments and SoCal doesn't clean up. SoCal just has MORE high level players.

BTW club pros can be better then 5.0. So yes some club pros would kill these guys. But many club pros are 5.5 or 6.0. Most club pros are either ex high level college players (around 6.0) or ex satellite guys. One of the club pros I talked with said his biggest problem is finding high level players to practice with..so this brings your game down some..

Pete

robt18
11-20-2009, 12:39 AM
I don't as a matter of course. It doesn't mean I can't. The offer is quite valid.

Wow that is pretty humourous that someone called you on that.

dozu
11-20-2009, 05:22 AM
I'm kinda' surprised that nobody's mentioned the obvious yet about the original video (either that or I missed the mention).

let me try.

most people said the blue shirt is considerably weaker than the white shirt.... but he actually won the TB at the end.

apparently the white shirt cut out most of his own crappy points and only kept the highlights... so the score went from 4-1 to 4-4 all of a sudden.

the blue shirt obviously has no serve, no volley, no overhead, no backhand, and only a so-so fh with poor footwork, .... and for the white shirt, being an S&V player, not being able to put away such an opponent with ease, says a lot about his playing ability.

an S&V player usually have a lot of highlight points in a match, due to the high risk high award playing style..... but in the end he loses to such a hack... he can be rated 5.0 by the computer, but his playing ability is just an advanced beginner.

goober
11-20-2009, 06:21 AM
New idea for a TV show in Tennis Chan - call it "I can beat that guy."

Average hack contestants are shown YouTube videos of a person playing tennis, then make a wager on the score, by how much they would win or lose.

The contestant then plays the actual guy from the youtube clip and wins prizes/or money based on how close their prediction is. However, if the contestant loses 1 and 1 or worse and doesn't predict that score, the person they play gets their prize.

I'd like to line up some of the "he's a 3.5" crowd here and see what happens.

Well according to one poster you could still be better than another player if you lose 6-0, 6-0. I would like to see some actual match footage of some of the posters here who call out people saying the 4.5 players in my area is sooooo much better.

5263
11-20-2009, 06:46 AM
most people said the blue shirt is considerably weaker than the white shirt.... but he actually won the TB at the end.


I found this interesting to note as well.

drakulie
11-20-2009, 06:54 AM
I have seen video of 4.5-5.0 players that show much better skill and shotmaking than this.

we all have seen this. However, it doesn't mean the guy is not a 5.0.

Who has prettier, more technically sound strokes? Fed or Santoro??

Yet, they are both 7.0 players. And yet, Santoro does get games off of Fed, even though "the guys in this vid would be lucky to get a game off of your 4.5/5.0 friends".

Why is it so hard to accept what the USTA has them rated at, which is based on actual match results?

darthpwner
11-20-2009, 06:59 AM
^^^ agreed drak. I'd laugh if one of these posters who thinks they have a chance gets schooled by one of them 0 and 0

mtommer
11-20-2009, 08:32 AM
Who has prettier, more technically sound strokes? Fed or Santoro??


Why do people keep bringing up Santoro? Both players strokes are 100% equally technically sound. If they didn't have technically sound strokes, they wouldn't have the level of control they clearly, clearly, demonstrate. The two players just have different styles of hitting. Go back and watch some of those Santoro clips. When he wants to bring it, he can. Just because Santoro chooses a different style of playing doesn't reflect on his ability to play other styles.

mtommer
11-20-2009, 08:34 AM
Wow that is pretty humourous that someone called you on that.

They haven't called me yet. I'm still waiting. :D

drakulie
11-20-2009, 09:02 AM
Why do people keep bringing up Santoro? Both players strokes are 100% equally technically sound. If they didn't have technically sound strokes, they wouldn't have the level of control they clearly, clearly, demonstrate. The two players just have different styles of hitting. Go back and watch some of those Santoro clips. When he wants to bring it, he can. Just because Santoro chooses a different style of playing doesn't reflect on his ability to play other styles.


Uhmm, and name me even one 5.0 or 4.5 who has perfect strokes? I'll make this easy for you>>>>> ZERO. They all have different looking strokes. Some more text book, some not so much. However, in the end of the day, the one (regardless of what their strokes look like) wins is the better player. Period.

NamRanger
11-20-2009, 09:58 AM
I expect he does, but that was not a high bounce in the vids, much less insane. I guess from what you are saying, it has some nice action, but it still isn't getting up that high in the vids. The returner was taking them about shoulder high, and he looked on the short side.




It's alot different when you compare your own serve to his. My kicker is no slouch, but I could never get that much action on the ball. And yes, those serves are insane. Did you see how much twist was on those serves?

scotus
11-20-2009, 10:24 AM
Uhmm, and name me even one 5.0 or 4.5 who has perfect strokes? I'll make this easy for you>>>>> ZERO. They all have different looking strokes. Some more text book, some not so much. However, in the end of the day, the one (regardless of what their strokes look like) wins is the better player. Period.

True. If we blacked out John McEnroe's face and showed his ground strokes to TW members, some teenagers might call him 3.5 at best.

It matters not how beautiful the strokes look. 5.0 is simply someone who can competently compete in legit 5.0 tournaments.

mtommer
11-20-2009, 11:17 AM
Uhmm, and name me even one 5.0 or 4.5 who has perfect strokes? I'll make this easy for you>>>>> ZERO. They all have different looking strokes. Some more text book, some not so much.

So, uh, what exactly does this have to do with Federer's and Santoro's strokes?


However, in the end of the day, the one (regardless of what their strokes look like) wins is the better player. Period.

Being the better player for a match doesn't determine who will be, or is, the better player overall (in many cases it probably is true....many...not all). Who's better, Federer or Nadal? And isn't there a book by one pro tennis player that mentions tanking? If you make the assumption that EVERYBODY plays to win, and more importantly, tries to win even if it means pushing yourself to the edge of your limits (which would mean giving it you're all), then your statement makes sense. Do you make that assumption?

NamRanger
11-20-2009, 11:26 AM
So, uh, what exactly does this have to do with Federer's and Santoro's strokes?



Being the better player for a match doesn't determine who will be, or is, the better player overall (in many cases it probably is true....many...not all). Who's better, Federer or Nadal? And isn't there a book by one pro tennis player that mentions tanking? If you make the assumption that EVERYBODY plays to win, and more importantly, tries to win even if it means pushing yourself to the edge of your limits (which would mean giving it you're all), then your statement makes sense. Do you make that assumption?



Except we're not talking about one match. That guy has a Computer Rating which is assigned based on the results of MULTIPLE MATCHES against other Computer Rated 5.0 players.



It doesn't matter how your technique looks; if you are beating 5.0 players, you are a 5.0 player or better.

mtommer
11-20-2009, 11:30 AM
True. If we blacked out John McEnroe's face and showed his ground strokes to TW members, some teenagers might call him 3.5 at best.

I doubt it. McEnroe vs Connors Highlights (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSC-pMS0bOs) McEnroe's strokes look just fine, elite, like a pro.

Djokovicfan4life
11-20-2009, 11:35 AM
I doubt it. McEnroe vs Connors Highlights (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSC-pMS0bOs) McEnroe's strokes look just fine, elite, like a pro.

Kohlschreiber was rated 3.0 on here before, and he certainly has a "prettier" game than J Mac from the back of the court.

SystemicAnomaly
11-20-2009, 11:40 AM
True. If we blacked out John McEnroe's face and showed his ground strokes to TW members, some teenagers might call him 3.5 at best.

It matters not how beautiful the strokes look. 5.0 is simply someone who can competently compete in legit 5.0 tournaments.

Uhmm, and name me even one 5.0 or 4.5 who has perfect strokes? I'll make this easy for you>>>>> ZERO. They all have different looking strokes. Some more text book, some not so much. However, in the end of the day, the one (regardless of what their strokes look like) wins is the better player. Period.

So true. I've seen plenty of 4.5 & 5.0 players with awesome groundstrokes but spastic-looking serves (or maybe just quirky-looking serves). Even tho' I can no longer keep up with the 5.0 guys, I'm pretty sure that my serves look a whole lot better than many of them. Heck, we've even seen some 7.0 players with awkward strokes. In the end, it comes down to results as these guys say.

mtommer
11-20-2009, 11:42 AM
It doesn't matter how your technique looks; if you are beating 5.0 players, you are a 5.0 player or better.

And I'm sure as you see can from the many "contrary" replies on this thread as well as many, many, other threads from a MULTITUDE of posters, the "5.0" rating doesn't provide a mental picture of playing ability like "pro play" does. Why are many here so surprised when people see the play and all of a sudden their mouth drops open because what they "heard" about 5.0 play doesn't match the hype? And please don't pretend there isn't hype about 5.0status on this board.

SystemicAnomaly
11-20-2009, 11:43 AM
I doubt it. McEnroe vs Connors Highlights (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSC-pMS0bOs) McEnroe's strokes look just fine, elite, like a pro.

Connors had a very awkward (jack-knife) serve. It was considered one of the weakest in pro men's tennis (possibly in the past 5-6 decades). It was even quirkier than the Mac serve shown in this vid.
.

mtommer
11-20-2009, 11:49 AM
Kohlschreiber was rated 3.0 on here before, and he certainly has a "prettier" game than J Mac from the back of the court.

WTH are you talking about? Kohlschreiber (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1k2wDmpO8I) It's just like the Fed vs Santoro pip that Drak mentioned; there's NO difference save for differing styles. Maybe the issue is that what constitutes "pretty" isn't meshing. When I think pretty I look at how people react, respond to and setup for incoming balls and their own ball production. "Pretty", to me, has nothing to do with how they swing but what they produce with their swing.

Djokovicfan4life
11-20-2009, 11:52 AM
WTH are you talking about? Kohlschreiber (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1k2wDmpO8I) It's just like the Fed vs Santoro pip that Drak mentioned; there's NO difference save for differing styles. Maybe the issue is that what constitutes "pretty" isn't meshing. When I think pretty I look at how people react, respond to and setup for incoming balls and their own ball production. "Pretty", to me, has nothing to do with how they swing but what they produce with their swing.

I don't know what you're talking about, but all I said was that the "experts" on TW rated Kohlschreiber as a 3.0.

mtommer
11-20-2009, 12:02 PM
I don't know what you're talking about, but all I said was that the "experts" on TW rated Kohlschreiber as a 3.0.

I was objecting to your "prettier" conotation. I don't think either player is "prettier". That's all.

yellowoctopus
11-20-2009, 01:31 PM
No. First clue: A 5.0 would never have to use a Titanic head size racket.

One of the most ill-perceived statements I've encountered on this board. There are a number of WTA players that use the so-called 'Titanic head size racket'--believe me, these women are very skilled on the court.

However, I think the logic could be turned around to apply to those who insist on using rackets that are just too difficult for them to use--all in the name of being perceived as playing with a 'player's racquet'.

My point is, a good player is good, regardless of which racquets he or she uses. :|

drakulie
11-21-2009, 08:44 AM
True. If we blacked out John McEnroe's face and showed his ground strokes to TW members, some teenagers might call him 3.5 at best.

It matters not how beautiful the strokes look. 5.0 is simply someone who can competently compete in legit 5.0 tournaments.

This has already happened time and time again on this forum. Someone posted vid of Sampras practicing and people stated he looked like a 4.0, I posted vid of Youzhny and posters rated him at 3.5, Santoro> 3.0, Verdasco, 3.5, etc.

And I'm sure as you see can from the many "contrary" replies on this thread as well as many, many, other threads from a MULTITUDE of posters, the "5.0" rating doesn't provide a mental picture of playing ability like "pro play" does. Why are many here so surprised when people see the play and all of a sudden their mouth drops open because what they "heard" about 5.0 play doesn't match the hype? And please don't pretend there isn't hype about 5.0status on this board.

Because like you, they have absolutely no clue, have never played matches, or USTA league and are ignorant fools who refuse to learn.

dozu
11-21-2009, 09:33 AM
this thread has reached the point where only a fight-to-the-death can settle the score.

bring it on guys!

drakulie
11-21-2009, 09:41 AM
^^No need to. Those who refuse to believe what the USTA has him rated at, are already "BRAIN DEAD"

LafayetteHitter
11-21-2009, 09:51 AM
^^No need to. Those who refuse to believe what the USTA has him rated at, are already "BRAIN DEAD"

Good call Drak. I bet none of these wannabe arm chair pro's have posted videos to show how much better they look compared to these guys. 5.0 is not based on 'looks' it's based on results. I know some 3.5 guys here with superb looking strokes that get smoked by this one guy locally that looks like an ape when he plays.

Rambler124
11-21-2009, 10:42 AM
I live on the North Pole. These guys are definitely 2.5's based on what I see here.

Is there any way to lock these stupid threads.