PDA

View Full Version : usta ratings.....men vs women


jbleiman
01-08-2010, 01:06 PM
say a man is playing a woman... roughly equal skill level...lets say man wins 7-6,7-5...woman is rated 4.5...what should the man's usta raking be...4.0 ??

jrod
01-08-2010, 01:11 PM
say a man is playing a woman... roughly equal skill level...lets say man wins 7-6,7-5...woman is rated 4.5...what should the man's usta raking be...4.0 ??


They say it's about a 0.5 pt difference, on average. Of course one size doesn't fit all so take it for what it's worth....

treo
01-08-2010, 01:20 PM
1-2 point difference with 1.5 being average. 3.5 male can beat a 5.0 female. 3.5M beating 5.5F would be difficult, 4.5F would be routine.

jrod
01-08-2010, 01:47 PM
1-2 point difference with 1.5 being average. 3.5 male can beat a 5.0 female. 3.5M beating 5.5F would be difficult, 4.5F would be routine.


This is utter nonsense. You are so far off here it's not even funny.

SlapShot
01-08-2010, 01:50 PM
This is utter nonsense. You are so far off here it's not even funny.

Agreed. There is no way in he|l that a 3.5M is going to be able to even beat a 4.5F, much less a 5.0F.

amarone
01-08-2010, 01:52 PM
Agreed. There is no way in he|l that a 3.5M is going to be able to even beat a 4.5F, much less a 5.0F. While he is way off, when I was a 3.5 and my wife 4.5, I beat her comfortably - I never lost. However, I was very close to 4.0 (subsequently getting there), and she hovered around the 4.0/4.5 boundary, going up and down several times. Based on this, I would say that the gap is approaching a full point. Maybe 0.8 - 0.9.

jrod
01-08-2010, 01:57 PM
While he is way off, when I was a 3.5 and my wife 4.5, I beat her comfortably - I never lost. However, I was very close to 4.0 (subsequently getting there), and she hovered around the 4.0/4.5 boundary, going up and down several times. Based on this, I would say that the gap is approaching a full point. Maybe 0.8 - 0.9.


Not in my neck of the woods. There is no way a 3.5M would ever take any of the women ranked 4.5. The 4.5F are way too consistent and the 3.5M would simply lose based on UEs.

The average difference is about 0.5 points. This has been discussed many times, in many places. There are always exceptions and anecdotal stories, but the average probably applies to the majority of players.

OrangePower
01-08-2010, 02:10 PM
While he is way off, when I was a 3.5 and my wife 4.5, I beat her comfortably - I never lost. However, I was very close to 4.0 (subsequently getting there), and she hovered around the 4.0/4.5 boundary, going up and down several times. Based on this, I would say that the gap is approaching a full point. Maybe 0.8 - 0.9.

Bingo. Gap is 0.8. Observation based on numerous data points.

Of course this is the gap between dynamic ratings. Which USTA does not publish. So makes is hard to predict.

For in OP example, woman is rated 4.5, but...

* She could be a strong 4.5 (eg dynamic rating 4.4), in which case the man would be around 3.6 dynamic = 4.0 USTA (weak 4.0)

* Or, she could be a weak 4.5 (eg dynamic rating 4.1), in which case the man would be around 3.3 dynamic = 3.5 USTA (above average 3.5)

burosky
01-08-2010, 02:12 PM
I played a 5.5 woman one time and beat her easily. Therefore, any 4.5 guy can beat any 5.5 woman easily.

Sad to say but there are people who tend to think this way.

OrangePower
01-08-2010, 02:16 PM
Not in my neck of the woods. There is no way a 3.5M would ever take any of the women ranked 4.5. The 4.5F are way too consistent and the 3.5M would simply lose based on UEs.

The average difference is about 0.5 points. This has been discussed many times, in many places. There are always exceptions and anecdotal stories, but the average probably applies to the majority of players.

Well... strong 3.5 M beats weak 4.5 F. At least here in Norcal. But average 3.5 M loses to average 4.5 W. Also, weak 4.0 M loses to strong 4.5 F.

It's all about the dynamic ratings which of course are not published...

jrod
01-08-2010, 03:13 PM
Well... strong 3.5 M beats weak 4.5 F. At least here in Norcal. But average 3.5 M loses to average 4.5 W. Also, weak 4.0 M loses to strong 4.5 F.

It's all about the dynamic ratings which of course are not published...


It just goes to show you how much variation there is in a given level then. I know of several 3.5M that were recently bumped to 4.0 and none of them are consistent enough to hang with the 4.5F singles players. My observation is they simply lack the consistency and donate a hefty % of points.

OrangePower
01-08-2010, 03:19 PM
It just goes to show you how much variation there is in a given level then. I know of several 3.5M that were recently bumped to 4.0 and none of them are consistent enough to hang with the 4.5F singles players. My observation is they simply lack the consistency and donate a hefty % of points.

Yup I agree... there is a .5 range of variation within each level and that is huge - even according to USTA that means that a strong person in a level could bagel or breadstick a weak person within that same level.

Throw in the fact that ratings don't differentiate between dubs and singles, and you're going to get results that are all over the place.

LeeD
01-08-2010, 03:57 PM
The .8 variation could be close when comparing lower levels.
Seems most 5.5 Mens (Div1 singles) would have little trouble handling all except the top 4 female PRO's.
As a top 3.5 with a huge serve and great quickness and change of direction, I regularly hit with several 6.0 or A/Open women, about even if I don't use my serves or drop/angles. They'd pout, stop the point, and threaten not to hit with me if I adopted pure "win" tactics.
All 3.5's are not exactly the same, some get to upper 5 levels within a year (not me), while others stay 3.5's the following year.

Panic492
01-08-2010, 04:29 PM
I am a 4.0, I have played 3 different 4.5 women (including one that played D1 college 7-8 years ago) and have won all in straight sets fairly easily. I would say 1.0 would be the difference-about. There is always variability.

ALten1
01-08-2010, 08:02 PM
Several people in another thread(s) have said they believe the difference is greater the higher you get. I am leaning toward that assessment.
3.0m=3.5w
4.0m=5.0w

michael_1265
01-08-2010, 08:56 PM
There are too many variables involved. I am a strong 3.0, and I've played a couple of higher-rated women who are also 10-15 years younger than me. One is a 4.0 with forcing shots who I play close but lose to, and the other is a wonderfully quick, athletic 4.0 (I think she will be 4.5 next year) who I play close in the first set, and then she wears me down and beats me handily in the 2nd. On the flipside, I know a 4.5 women I could likely beat because she lacks mobility. Keep it away from her cannon flat forehand, and I think I could make her miserable. I am a doubles specialist, but I think if I concentrated on singles, my record would be better against the 4.0s above. It's really tough to generalize, because so much is based on fitness, how hard you hit the ball, and whether you play a lot of singles or doubles. Ratings don't account for those factors.

michael_1265
01-08-2010, 09:01 PM
The .8 variation could be close when comparing lower levels.
Seems most 5.5 Mens (Div1 singles) would have little trouble handling all except the top 4 female PRO's.
As a top 3.5 with a huge serve and great quickness and change of direction, I regularly hit with several 6.0 or A/Open women, about even if I don't use my serves or drop/angles. They'd pout, stop the point, and threaten not to hit with me if I adopted pure "win" tactics.
All 3.5's are not exactly the same, some get to upper 5 levels within a year (not me), while others stay 3.5's the following year.

I agree that the difference can be large. I remember reading an interview with Chris Evert, and she said that when she was a top pro, her brother could still beat her.

raiden031
01-09-2010, 04:38 AM
The .8 variation could be close when comparing lower levels.
Seems most 5.5 Mens (Div1 singles) would have little trouble handling all except the top 4 female PRO's.
As a top 3.5 with a huge serve and great quickness and change of direction, I regularly hit with several 6.0 or A/Open women, about even if I don't use my serves or drop/angles. They'd pout, stop the point, and threaten not to hit with me if I adopted pure "win" tactics.
All 3.5's are not exactly the same, some get to upper 5 levels within a year (not me), while others stay 3.5's the following year.

So now you're a 3.5? And you can compete with a 6.0 woman without using your serves and angles, but if you use them, what you win easily? Purely ludicrous.

Why do I find myself so frequently questioning posts of yours?

raiden031
01-09-2010, 04:42 AM
1-2 point difference with 1.5 being average. 3.5 male can beat a 5.0 female. 3.5M beating 5.5F would be difficult, 4.5F would be routine.

Did you just pull this straight outta your *** or somethin?

Well... strong 3.5 M beats weak 4.5 F. At least here in Norcal. But average 3.5 M loses to average 4.5 W. Also, weak 4.0 M loses to strong 4.5 F.

It's all about the dynamic ratings which of course are not published...

This sounds more reasonable. I would say the difference within the USTA-league ratings is closer to 0.5, but rises as levels increase.

A strong 3.5M could be 3.45 and a weak 4.5F could be 4.05. That right there is a .06 difference, not a 1.0 difference.

ALten1
01-09-2010, 04:56 AM
As an above average 3.5 male. I guess I have never seen a true 4.5 woman play.I have played with and watched the 4.0 women play and I don't have a lot to worry about. Now a 6.0 woman on the other hand would probably spank me rather easily. I would have to imagine her placement would be exceptional, making me span the whole court with good line shots where as her side of the court would be 3 to 4 feet narrower because of my shots not as accurate.

TennisPassion5
01-09-2010, 05:46 AM
So in reality, what would Serena be? Around a 6.0, right?

equinox
01-09-2010, 06:09 AM
The difference is 1.0 ntrp.

It's the reason why there no open singles events for both sexes participation.

raiden031
01-09-2010, 06:14 AM
The difference is 1.0 ntrp.

It's the reason why there no open singles events for both sexes participation.

No the reason they don't compete together is because of sexism...women are afraid of being sexually harassed by their male opponents and males are afraid of "losing to a girl".

equinox
01-09-2010, 06:21 AM
So in reality, what would Serena be? Around a 6.0, right?
The gap widens the higher you go on ntrp.
A 5.5 would beat serena fairly easily. I know, seen the practice partners they bring in for the aussie open. solid state (6+) / grade one (5.5+) local pennant players and they could spank these girls at will. no contest.

Serena might be able to beat tommy tu on a good bad. ;)

86golf
01-09-2010, 07:19 AM
Around here, if you are just hitting it is about a .5 difference. Once you start serving the gap widens a little more. Our ladies sandbag like crazy though.

Topaz
01-09-2010, 01:43 PM
Not in my neck of the woods. There is no way a 3.5M would ever take any of the women ranked 4.5. The 4.5F are way too consistent and the 3.5M would simply lose based on UEs.

The average difference is about 0.5 points. This has been discussed many times, in many places. There are always exceptions and anecdotal stories, but the average probably applies to the majority of players.

Quoted for truth.