PDA

View Full Version : How good do you have to be?


alb1
03-24-2010, 09:58 AM
For those always asking what does it take to play at _______ college level. Here’s info I recorded based on the ITA college site and the tennisrecruiting.net site. This info is based on a sample of men's team members that have played in Spring team matches.


D1 Top Ranked- Blue chips 5 stars 4 stars
D1 Ranked- 5 stars 4 stars
D1 Unranked- 5 stars 4 stars 3 stars 2 stars

D2 Top Ranked- 4 stars
D2 Ranked- 3 stars 2 stars
D2 Regionally Ranked- 3 stars 2 stars 1 star
D2 Unranked- 3 stars 2 stars 1 star 0 stars

D3 Top Ranked- 5 stars 4 stars 3 stars 2 stars
D3 Ranked- 4 stars 3 stars 2 stars
D3 Regionally Ranked- 3 stars 2 stars 1 star
D3 Unranked- 2 stars 1 star 0 star

ClarkC
03-24-2010, 10:03 AM
How are we supposed to read this?

alb1
03-24-2010, 10:19 AM
How are we supposed to read this?

sorry it didn't post in the format as it appeared when I typed it on the screen. my chart lost it's spacing.

get it in
03-24-2010, 01:45 PM
This is interesting except that I'm not sure how good 1 and 2 star recruits are. Is there a 'standard' that tells us common people how to interpret it? For example, is a 1 star in the top 100 in a section? Anyone care to explain?

TahoeTennis
03-24-2010, 04:02 PM
I would say most college level players are 4.0 and 4.5s with the top colleges hitting 5.0+

I won a few intramural tournaments at New Mexico State University and have played kids who went on to Stanford, and UCSanta Cruz. These kids had skill, solid 4.5's+

DownTheLine
03-24-2010, 04:43 PM
This is interesting except that I'm not sure how good 1 and 2 star recruits are. Is there a 'standard' that tells us common people how to interpret it? For example, is a 1 star in the top 100 in a section? Anyone care to explain?

It's all about nat. rank..

alb1
03-25-2010, 05:06 AM
This is interesting except that I'm not sure how good 1 and 2 star recruits are. Is there a 'standard' that tells us common people how to interpret it? For example, is a 1 star in the top 100 in a section? Anyone care to explain?

From tennisrecruiting.net : The ratings (stars) are awarded once a year, near the beginning of the school year (early October). A special ranking is done that includes matches from Sept 1 through August 31 of the previous year - for classes that have more than 1000 ranked players the top 25 are blue-chips, the next 50 are 5-stars, the next 125 are 4-stars, the next 200 are 3-stars, the next 200 are 2-stars, and the rest are 1-stars. For classes with fewer ranked players, a percentage is used.

It's difficult to assign a standard USTA ranking of ____ = x number of stars because USTA uses the point per round system and the star ratings are based on a head to head system. USTA rankings include guys playing up in age groups while the star ratings are comparing you to others in your graduating class. I've seen guys ranked in the top 10 here in Georgia have as many as 5 stars and as few as 3 stars, with the 3 stars being top 50 in the Southern section rankings. I've seen 1 star players who would be rated 4.0 in adult USTA leauges and other 1 star players who would be rated higher. Some stay at the 4.0 / 1 star level their whole college career while some of these guys that were rated 2 and 1 star players entering college improve and beat 3 star recruits after a year or two in college.
Basically if you want to play college tennis, those with the greatest skills and results have more options, but there are still schools where some with little USTA tournament experience can play. You just can't say I'm going to go to a highly academically regarded D3 school and play tennis figuring the tennis level will be lower because those schools are attractive to high level recruits also.

ClarkC
03-25-2010, 06:40 AM
sorry it didn't post in the format as it appeared when I typed it on the screen. my chart lost it's spacing.

So, are you going to explain it?

alb1
03-25-2010, 08:59 AM
So, are you going to explain it?

Sorry communications is obviously not one of my strengths. The ITA has national team rankings for each division, D1 has 75 ranked teams, D2 has 45, D3 has 29. The top ranked teams are the ones that are capable of winning a national championship in their respective division. The ranked teams are the ones at the bottom end of the national rankings. D2 and D3 also involves more teams by having regional ranking lists, 8 divisions for D2 and 4 divisions for D3, so the regionally ranked teams are the ones at the bottom of their regional lists. I looked at a sample of teams within these guidelines along with unranked teams and recorded the recruitment star level of the guys playing in matches. It's not going to be 100 percent true for every team out there but it does give a good view of the mixture across divisions that is out there. The 3 stars recruit that signs with a ranked D1 program is more than likely going to have a hard time seeing court time initially except against overmatched teams. Unranked D1 teams may have one 5 stars and the rest of the team be a mixture of 3 and 2 stars, or the whole team may be all 4 stars, or a team may be a mixture of 3 stars and 2 stars recruits. D2 is hard to evaluate because there are so many unrated foreign players that make up the majority of a lot of the teams- ranked and unranked. The recruits of top ranked D3 teams are comparable to some ranked and are rated higher than those of many unranked D1 teams. And there is hope for 2, 1, and 0 stars players, you just got to find the right situation.

justinmadison
03-25-2010, 10:56 AM
[QUOTE=TahoeTennis;4500679]I would say most college level players are 4.0 and 4.5s with the top colleges hitting 5.0+
QUOTE]

The people on this forum underestimate junior players when they are comparing them to adult USTA ratings . Top D1 collages are 5.5+. My sonís coach was a top D2 player and is now 31 (read this as older and slower :) ) and does not play competitively very much. He is a USTA 5.5 and has lost appeals to move down.

I looked up a local kid who plays 18ís and he has a two star ranking. He can crush any 4.5 in town and many of the few 5.0ís we have.

On the whole the kids are better than we give them credit for.

get it in
03-25-2010, 05:46 PM
That makes a lot of sense considering a recruiting class is about 1000. There are probably thousands of players yet only the very top get star rankings. I'm guessing there is probably a big dropoff in ability at 1 star since they are essentially everyone left over who didn't get more stars. You could theoretically have a decent player at 1 star and also a not so decent player simply because of the maximum numbers allowed at 2-5 stars. So really a 2 star is nothing to sneeze at. I would believe that.

tennisjon
04-22-2010, 09:54 AM
In general the star system mentioned from tennisrecruiting.net is pretty accurate. Although we (Drew University-D3, Madison, NJ) are not ranked this year (we are usually regionally ranked), we have a 4 star (nearly 5 star) at first singles on the women's side and a 2 star (nearly 3) on the men. Although our 2-5 on both teams are a level below, none of them played in enough tournaments to get stars, so this rating system can be misleading. They are all 1-2 star level players in those positions (4.0-4.5 level on the men and 3.5-4.5 on the women). Most teams who we play against will have a 2-3 star first singles but after third singles, most players are at the 3.0-4.0 level. The difference between our team and the teams above us are not at the top, but rather how much the drop off is from 1 through 6 and the good teams have much less drop off. Most ranked schools have 4.5 level players at 5 and 6 singles. Since a lot of high school players don't play USTA tournaments it can be hard to use this star or even USTA rating system to evaluate talent. We prefer tournament-tough players or at least season high school competitors, but the reality is, at the D3 level, since scholarships for athletics are not given, you take who shows up at tryouts and then decide who can play for your team.

Cross-court
04-22-2010, 03:20 PM
In general the star system mentioned from tennisrecruiting.net is pretty accurate. Although we (Drew University-D3, Madison, NJ) are not ranked this year (we are usually regionally ranked), we have a 4 star (nearly 5 star) at first singles on the women's side and a 2 star (nearly 3) on the men. Although our 2-5 on both teams are a level below, none of them played in enough tournaments to get stars, so this rating system can be misleading. They are all 1-2 star level players in those positions (4.0-4.5 level on the men and 3.5-4.5 on the women). Most teams who we play against will have a 2-3 star first singles but after third singles, most players are at the 3.0-4.0 level. The difference between our team and the teams above us are not at the top, but rather how much the drop off is from 1 through 6 and the good teams have much less drop off. Most ranked schools have 4.5 level players at 5 and 6 singles. Since a lot of high school players don't play USTA tournaments it can be hard to use this star or even USTA rating system to evaluate talent. We prefer tournament-tough players or at least season high school competitors, but the reality is, at the D3 level, since scholarships for athletics are not given, you take who shows up at tryouts and then decide who can play for your team.

Scholarships for tennis are only for D2-D1?

andfor
04-22-2010, 03:54 PM
Scholarships for tennis are only for D2-D1?

Only NCAA Division 3 does not give athletic scholarships. All other divisions do.

Cross-court
04-22-2010, 04:04 PM
Only NCAA Division 3 does not give athletic scholarships. All other divisions do.

I asked this in another thread and I haven't gotten a response so what do you think about it:

Is there an age limit to play college tennis? If you got out of high school and spent 2 years without going to any college (let's say you were just working), can you still make the team or get a scholarship for tennis if let's say you're a good player?

rosenstar
04-22-2010, 04:20 PM
I asked this in another thread and I haven't gotten a response so what do you think about it:

Is there an age limit to play college tennis? If you got out of high school and spent 2 years without going to any college (let's say you were just working), can you still make the team or get a scholarship for tennis if let's say you're a good player?

You have 4 years of eligibility and 1 year of redshirting is allowed. Your eligibility starts when you enroll in a college. For those of you who aren't familiar with college sports a "redshirt" year is when a player is on the team but does not play for a year. A "redshirt" year does not count against a player's 4 years of eligibility. However, if you play as little as one minute (or in the case of tennis, one match) you lose your redshirt year.

Often teams recruit players and have them "redshirt" their freshman year if the recruit cannot be well utilized in the current line up. A player may also be granted a "medical redshirt" by the NCAA if he/she missed a year of eligibility due to injury.

If a player claims prize money or other winnings from tennis, he/she must claim professional status and forfeit all eligibility. However, the player is allowed to keep enough prize money to pay for expenses (racquets, string, gas, tournament entry fees, housing, etc.).


The NCAA is full of concluded laws that pretty much apply to all sports (with some exceptions). Obviously the prize money clause can be better applied to tennis than football.

Anyways, to answer your original question, yes, you can take time off to work without losing eligibility. Semi-related story, Boston College Quarterback Dave Shinskie played minor league baseball (and no college baseball) for a few years and came back to college in his mid 20's to play football. Since he claimed prize money in a different sport, it doesn't violate any NCAA rules.

Make any sense?

subban
04-23-2010, 06:49 AM
I think eligibility and redshirting is not applicable at the div III level. Its more a club sport. But there is no athletic scholoarships only academic scholarships at D III.

tennisjon
04-23-2010, 09:30 AM
At the D3 level there isn't an age restriction, it goes by semesters in school.

Cross-court
04-23-2010, 07:33 PM
Make any sense?

I didn't understand the point of a redshirt year. What's it for if you don't play? Is it like being part of a soccer/baseball/basketball team but being on the bench always? Do you just practice with the team?


You have 4 years of eligibility and 1 year of redshirting is allowed. Your eligibility starts when you enroll in a college. For those of you who aren't familiar with college sports a "redshirt" year is when a player is on the team but does not play for a year. A "redshirt" year does not count against a player's 4 years of eligibility. However, if you play as little as one minute (or in the case of tennis, one match) you lose your redshirt year.

Often teams recruit players and have them "redshirt" their freshman year if the recruit cannot be well utilized in the current line up. A player may also be granted a "medical redshirt" by the NCAA if he/she missed a year of eligibility due to injury.

If a player claims prize money or other winnings from tennis, he/she must claim professional status and forfeit all eligibility. However, the player is allowed to keep enough prize money to pay for expenses (racquets, string, gas, tournament entry fees, housing, etc.).


The NCAA is full of concluded laws that pretty much apply to all sports (with some exceptions). Obviously the prize money clause can be better applied to tennis than football.

Anyways, to answer your original question, yes, you can take time off to work without losing eligibility. Semi-related story, Boston College Quarterback Dave Shinskie played minor league baseball (and no college baseball) for a few years and came back to college in his mid 20's to play football. Since he claimed prize money in a different sport, it doesn't violate any NCAA rules.

So all this applies only to D1?

Cross-court
04-23-2010, 07:52 PM
So what are the NTRP ratings like in Division 2? What's the lowest and highest NRTPi in it?

andfor
04-23-2010, 07:56 PM
I didn't understand the point of a redshirt year. What's it for if you don't play? Is it like being part of a soccer/baseball/basketball team but being on the bench always? Do you just practice with the team?




So all this applies only to D1?

Generally the redshirt year allows for either a player to further develop without losing a year of eligibility or for a player who gets injured.

This is the 3rd time I've posted this link in 2 days. Has anyone clicked on it and read it? There's also a number to the NCAA for all the one-off questions that come up. It would be nice if a coach was here who knew all the rules but we are not that fortunate.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/wps/wcm/connect/ncaa/NCAA/Legislation%20and%20Governance/Eligibility%20and%20Recruiting/Faqs/eligibility_seasons.html

andfor
04-23-2010, 07:57 PM
So what are the NTRP ratings like in Division 2? What's the lowest and highest NRTPi in it?

Are you serious? 2.5 to 6.0 is the range. Could be lower, could be higher

Cross-court
04-23-2010, 08:31 PM
Generally the redshirt year allows for either a player to further develop without losing a year of eligibility or for a player who gets injured.

This is the 3rd time I've posted this link in 2 days. Has anyone clicked on it and read it? There's also a number to the NCAA for all the one-off questions that come up. It would be nice if a coach was here who knew all the rules but we are not that fortunate.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/wps/wcm/connect/ncaa/NCAA/Legislation%20and%20Governance/Eligibility%20and%20Recruiting/Faqs/eligibility_seasons.html

Yeah, I just clicked on it and I also went to some other sites, I've got almost all the answers I needed.

Since I just learned that D3 don't give any scholarships, that's a problem. So it would have to be D2.

I just did a little research and it turns out there's only 1 D2 college in NYC. I say this because I'll probably move to NYC very soon, Manhattan to be exact. Is Queens College the only D2 college in NYC?

andfor
04-24-2010, 01:44 AM
Yeah, I just clicked on it and I also went to some other sites, I've got almost all the answers I needed.

Since I just learned that D3 don't give any scholarships, that's a problem. So it would have to be D2.

I just did a little research and it turns out there's only 1 D2 college in NYC. I say this because I'll probably move to NYC very soon, Manhattan to be exact. Is Queens College the only D2 college in NYC?

http://www.tennisrecruiting.net/division.asp?id=2

Check the schools listed on TR versus the actual schools website to be sure the program is still active. They may be more NYC tennis playing colleges on the NAIA page.

Cross-court
04-24-2010, 10:28 AM
http://www.tennisrecruiting.net/division.asp?id=2

Check the schools listed on TR versus the actual schools website to be sure the program is still active. They may be more NYC tennis playing colleges on the NAIA page.

I checked it and Queens seems to be the only one in the NYC area.

What do you think about the St. Francis College in Brooklyn? I know it's D1 but what do you know/think about it?

andfor
04-24-2010, 12:01 PM
I checked it and Queens seems to be the only one in the NYC area.

What do you think about the St. Francis College in Brooklyn? I know it's D1 but what do you know/think about it?

They went 3-16 in the NEAC. Not exactly a powerhouse conference. If you are a strong player they could use some help. They did beat Wagner pretty bad twice. I looked at Wagner's athletic website and their mens tennis appears very, very weak.

Other than what I see on the St. Francis website I really don't have an opinion. Don't know the coach, players or the conference.

Cross-court
04-24-2010, 12:38 PM
They went 3-16 in the NEAC. Not exactly a powerhouse conference. If you are a strong player they could use some help. They did beat Wagner pretty bad twice. I looked at Wagner's athletic website and their mens tennis appears very, very weak.

Other than what I see on the St. Francis website I really don't have an opinion. Don't know the coach, players or the conference.

So would it be easier to get in there? Haha. Do you think D1 players are 5.0's at the least, or are there still 4.5's?

Currently I am a 4.5 with some 5.0 traits maybe, but the thing is I can't play and practice as much as I would want and there aren't that many players around here, so I can only improve so much like that. If I could play/practice several times a week with good players I am sure I could raise my level quickly because I have done that before and your level does raise fast when you practice a lot with good players.

andfor
04-24-2010, 05:35 PM
So would it be easier to get in there? Haha. Do you think D1 players are 5.0's at the least, or are there still 4.5's?

Currently I am a 4.5 with some 5.0 traits maybe, but the thing is I can't play and practice as much as I would want and there aren't that many players around here, so I can only improve so much like that. If I could play/practice several times a week with good players I am sure I could raise my level quickly because I have done that before and your level does raise fast when you practice a lot with good players.

Look. You're asking an unknown person (me) to make a lot of guesses about an unknown player (you) and unseen college tennis team (U of St. Francis NY). That said if you are a legitimate 4.5 and based on St. Francis NY being 3-16 in the NEAC my best educated guess is worst case you may be able to walk on. Additionally if you can play tournaments or H.S. tennis this would bring credentials and attention from the coach that would be much more valuable than claiming to be a 4.5. Best advise I can give you is to play tournaments and or H.S. tennis (that is if you are still in H.S.), contact the coach for a visit and find out what he is looking for in a student athlete tennis player. Ask his what his view is of you as tennis scholarship athlete for his team. If he is not willing to offer you a scholarship ask what his walk-on policy is if you are serious about playing tennis for his team.

Good luck

Autodidactic player
04-24-2010, 06:35 PM
I would say most college level players are 4.0 and 4.5s with the top colleges hitting 5.0+

I won a few intramural tournaments at New Mexico State University and have played kids who went on to Stanford, and UCSanta Cruz. These kids had skill, solid 4.5's+

I'll concede that I'm an old-timer having gotten a division 1 scholarship in 1977. That said, unless things have changed radically I have a hard time believing that there are any varsity players at "top colleges" less than 5.5. Back in the day I knew several sectionally ranked players - easily playing at what would be 5.0+ levels today - that weren't given a single scholarship offer. At any rate, the NTRP rating system specifically states that Divison 1 scholarship players are 6.0. Here is what it says about players 4.5-6.0.

"4.5 This player has begun to master the use of power and spins; has sound footwork; can control depth of shots and is able to move the opponent up and back; can hit first serves with above average power and accuracy and place the second serve; is able to rush net with some success on serve against players of similar ability; can compete evenly with top players on good high school teams that are advancing beyond regional play to the state tournament.

5.0 This player has good shot anticipation; is able to overcome some stroke deficiencies with outstanding shots or exceptional consistency; will approach net at opportune times and is often able to force an error or make a winning placement; can execute lobs, drop shots, half-volleys, and overhead smashes with above average success; is able to vary the spin on the serve; plays well enough to reach the high school state tournament (beyond sectional tournaments) in singles or doubles; is skilled enough to compete on many Division III college teams.

5.5 This player is able to execute all strokes offensively and defensively; can hit first serves for winners and second serves to set up an offensive situation; plays well enough to be a top performer at the state high school championship level; is skilled enough to play college tennis on top Division II & III teams.

6.0 This player has mastered all of the above skills; is able to hit both slice and topspin serves; can vary strategies and styles of play in competitive situations; plays well enough to be a state high school champion, hold a national ranking, and be offered a Division I tennis scholarship."


USTA TENNIS RATING PROGRAM (http://gustavus.edu/events/athletics/tlc/2008/USTATENNISRATINGPROGRAM.html)

andfor
04-24-2010, 07:59 PM
I think you are right on. However their are a handful of really weak D1 teams that would not surprise me have some 4.0 level players on their varsity/starting lineup.

aerogami
04-24-2010, 10:55 PM
I'll concede that I'm an old-timer having gotten a division 1 scholarship in 1977. That said, unless things have changed radically I have a hard time believing that there are any varsity players at "top colleges" less than 5.5. Back in the day I knew several sectionally ranked players - easily playing at what would be 5.0+ levels today - that weren't given a single scholarship offer. At any rate, the NTRP rating system specifically states that Divison 1 scholarship players are 6.0. Here is what it says about players 4.5-6.0.

"4.5 This player has begun to master the use of power and spins; has sound footwork; can control depth of shots and is able to move the opponent up and back; can hit first serves with above average power and accuracy and place the second serve; is able to rush net with some success on serve against players of similar ability; can compete evenly with top players on good high school teams that are advancing beyond regional play to the state tournament.

5.0 This player has good shot anticipation; is able to overcome some stroke deficiencies with outstanding shots or exceptional consistency; will approach net at opportune times and is often able to force an error or make a winning placement; can execute lobs, drop shots, half-volleys, and overhead smashes with above average success; is able to vary the spin on the serve; plays well enough to reach the high school state tournament (beyond sectional tournaments) in singles or doubles; is skilled enough to compete on many Division III college teams.

5.5 This player is able to execute all strokes offensively and defensively; can hit first serves for winners and second serves to set up an offensive situation; plays well enough to be a top performer at the state high school championship level; is skilled enough to play college tennis on top Division II & III teams.

6.0 This player has mastered all of the above skills; is able to hit both slice and topspin serves; can vary strategies and styles of play in competitive situations; plays well enough to be a state high school champion, hold a national ranking, and be offered a Division I tennis scholarship."


USTA TENNIS RATING PROGRAM (http://gustavus.edu/events/athletics/tlc/2008/USTATENNISRATINGPROGRAM.html)

It's nice to see people trying to help make sense of the rating system but,

This is not the USTA NTRP Guidelines, this is a cut-up reworking of the usta guidelines most likely done by a coach at Gustavus - the school that your link takes us to. Whoever wrote this made slight changes to the real descriptions and then tacked on their own take on high school performance as it relates to the NTRP, rendering the whole thing more confusing and less accurate. Definitely Gustavus should change the name of the page - the USTA would probably appreciate that - this kind of stuff only makes the whole rating debate worse.

The actual USTA guidelines scarcely mention high school tennis, and do not break out college div I,II,III the way that this quote does. I would suggest that everyone look at the real USTA website to find out about the rating system - it's pretty self explanatory. I have a link here that will take you to a chart on the USTA site that shows the General NTRP characteristics at the top, and then at the bottom it lines up different factors affecting actual NTRP rating- age, professional success, college sucess, junior ranking, etc.

It's a bit confusing to look at at first but it makes sense if you give it a minute. At any rate, for league play, which a lot of folks on here are curious about, the general characteristics (at the top)are what most USTA officials will tell you to keep in mind when being rated.

http://www.usta.com/~/media/9B46CE5C64B14C04B93686466D9C47AA.ashx

good luck guys,

aerogami
04-24-2010, 11:21 PM
And by the way, my post is not intended to tell you what any given College coach thinks a player's level is based on his resume. I'm just sending people a link to the actual offical USTA NTRP guidelines and specifics chart, since there are so many interpretations put up on TT every day.

Autodidactic player
04-25-2010, 03:31 AM
And by the way, my post is not intended to tell you what any given College coach thinks a player's level is based on his resume. I'm just sending people a link to the actual offical USTA NTRP guidelines and specifics chart, since there are so many interpretations put up on TT every day.

Thanks for the clarification - I was on my way to bed and just posted the first link I came across in my google search. In my area we have several very good "seniors" ages 50-60 and we sometimes find ourselves playing college age players. Although the pace of their shots is significantly harder, what really gets to all of us is their speed around the court. I find I can handle the pace but there is no substitute for speed/quickness. Alas, my NTRP rating would be something like: "This player is able to execute all strokes offensively and defensively - when he can get to the ball"! :)

justinmadison
04-25-2010, 01:17 PM
It might be more interesting to link tennisrecruiting.net grade and star ratings with USTA adult ratings.

My son is a 3 star 8th grader and he would be a solid adult 4.5 USTA.

In my opinion the top 50 boys 14ís are 5.0. I donít know what the 16ís are 18ís are, but donít bring any weak 4.5 tennis to play with them unless you want to be embarrassed. :)

Does anyone else have direct experience with juniors .vs. USTA adults?

tennisjon
04-25-2010, 02:23 PM
4.5 to 5.0 level are mostly good D3 players and lower level D1 players. There is a lot of overlap at the D2 level. I coach at Drew University in Madison, NJ (about 30 miles from NYC) and we have had players who have played for us and have gone onto play at the D1 level. Essentially going from 1st singles to non-starter or low level starter. Our team has been regionally ranked in the past and should be going to nationals this year. Queens is a good school academically (my grandma and mother went there) and has a good program (we used to play them). Just because a school is D1 or D2 doesn't mean that there are scholarships available or that they are willing to give you one. Many times a scholarship at a school may be just a few thousand dollars. My school gives nearly $17,000 in aid to the average student, which significiantly lowers the cost of the school. You should weigh the academics, the costs, the social life, as well as the athletic fit. Our top players are 5.0 and 4.5 from 1-4 on the team and 4.0 at 5-7, just to give you an example of the level.

Kick_It
04-25-2010, 04:28 PM
I think y'all are in the weeds if you think NTRP matters for college tennis.

What matters to D1 coaches are tournament wins against tough competition in your age group (or higher) or open divisions - preferably against top competition sectionally (in the US), nationally, or internationally.

Perhaps NTRP matters for team/league tennis and D2 or D3. Most of my experience and knowledge is with D1.

Good Luck! K_I

subban
04-26-2010, 10:02 AM
4.5 to 5.0 level are mostly good D3 players and lower level D1 players. There is a lot of overlap at the D2 level. I coach at Drew University in Madison, NJ (about 30 miles from NYC) and we have had players who have played for us and have gone onto play at the D1 level. Essentially going from 1st singles to non-starter or low level starter. Our team has been regionally ranked in the past and should be going to nationals this year. Queens is a good school academically (my grandma and mother went there) and has a good program (we used to play them). Just because a school is D1 or D2 doesn't mean that there are scholarships available or that they are willing to give you one. Many times a scholarship at a school may be just a few thousand dollars. My school gives nearly $17,000 in aid to the average student, which significiantly lowers the cost of the school. You should weigh the academics, the costs, the social life, as well as the athletic fit. Our top players are 5.0 and 4.5 from 1-4 on the team and 4.0 at 5-7, just to give you an example of the level.

thx, this sums up Div III ntrp level. But in terms of aid when your getting a student loan that will eventually have 20% interest rate after you graduate, I don't think of it as aid, I think of it as more of racqueterring...Pun intended...hahahha.

coaching32yrs
04-27-2010, 06:11 PM
It might be more interesting to link tennisrecruiting.net grade and star ratings with USTA adult ratings.

My son is a 3 star 8th grader and he would be a solid adult 4.5 USTA.

In my opinion the top 50 boys 14ís are 5.0. I donít know what the 16ís are 18ís are, but donít bring any weak 4.5 tennis to play with them unless you want to be embarrassed. :)

Does anyone else have direct experience with juniors .vs. USTA adults?

I am a solid 4.0 with years of USTA league play experience. I have played a 4 star 8th grader and cannot hang with him. At my club there are guys 35-45 who played mid D1 tennis and #1 on top D3 teams. In my opinion, the 14 yr old would take them in straight sets in singles. Not in doubles.