3.5 singles

Discussion in 'Adult League & Tournament Talk' started by Playtennis, Apr 2, 2013.

  1. TennisDawg

    TennisDawg Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2007
    Messages:
    613
    Are you a pusher? Pushers give players all kinds of fits. All kidding aside sounds like you have a high Tennis IQ and your opponent didn't. It could be that he's accustom to playing oppoents with low Tennis IQs that complement his style.
     
  2. OnyxZ28

    OnyxZ28 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,143
    If a rising 5.0 will beat Date-Krumm, what chance does a 4.0 have? :p
     
  3. NLBwell

    NLBwell Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    Messages:
    7,081
    JRB
    1) Maybe, when you play full out, you are a better player. Try it against your regular opponents and see how it goes.
    or
    2) I, and many other players in all sports, tend to play down to the level of the opponent. I never beat anyone 6-0, no matter how bad they are. I'll become unfocused and start messing around. Most likely, this is what happened.
     
  4. JRstriker12

    JRstriker12 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    3,364
    B=Benchmark "a player whose rating has been determined by the computer using a combination of the dynamic rating for a player and their match results and to whose record other records are compared, directly or indirectly, to derive ratings for a large number of players."

    http://assets.usta.com/assets/558/Microsites/dps/usta_master/usta/doc/content/doc_90_184.pdf
     
  5. Cindysphinx

    Cindysphinx G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    15,067
    Hey, whoa.

    You started a thread to talk about playing on your high school team.

    Either you're a youngster, or I'm calling the police.
     
  6. J_R_B

    J_R_B Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,632
    Location:
    Newtown, PA
    An exception, but not an extreme exception. I've been double bageled by 5.0s in tournaments, too, so I certainly understand that is going to be a common outcome with that spread in ability (and frankly, if I played the same guy multiple times, I'm sure sometimes it would be love and love with him, too), but it's not a given that it's going to happen every time. That's my point. While it certainly happens (and with more and more regularity the larger the rating/ability discrepancy), the USTA blurb the way it is written makes it sound like a fait accompli every time you step on the court, and that is 100% wrong.
     
  7. J_R_B

    J_R_B Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,632
    Location:
    Newtown, PA
    I wish this were the case, but I do clearly make more errors when I hit out like that. When I'm playing at 4.0, the errors pile up hitting out while keeping the ball deep and safe doesn't lead to losing points. At 5.0, for one, the "safe" balls were sitters to him and points were lost in bunches, just not on my errors, and for another thing, hitting out was much easier because the other guy was giving me more pace and a much cleaner ball to swing at. I know if I play up again like that, I will have to go for it, but at my level, it gets messy...
     
  8. JoeR

    JoeR New User

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    36
    Location:
    Sonoma County
    I've been able to see a couple of college tournaments up here at the SRJC.
    Last summer had some divisional (?) one... with the folks from Fresno cleaning house.

    So many S. American tennis players on their team... it was unreal!
     
  9. asimple

    asimple Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    437
    I am a 4.0C player but have recently improved my game recently and am probably closer to a strong 4.5 so am playing at both levels. The main thing I have noticed in my 4.0 matches is either my opponent can't keep the ball in the court 3 balls in a row or they have nothing that can hurt me so I just wait to put away the safe ball that you mention.

    I have had a huge number of bagels this year, but not many double bagels. It is extremely tough to keep your focus up for a whole match like this. One of my issues is that I have had a problem getting warmed up for some of these matches so played it safe rather than going for too much and becoming angry with myself. For this reason I have had solid victories (4 games max), but not completely dominant. The chance of me losing one of these matches is pretty close to zero though and I am not a 5.0 and definitely not a 5.5.
     
  10. Overdrive

    Overdrive Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,301
    Location:
    Garden of Gethsemane

    There's no references about that.

    You live in Florida am I correct? Or is it California?

    It doesn't matter, their judicial system is broken.
     
  11. beernutz

    beernutz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,400
    Location:
    expanding my Ignore List
    [​IMG]
     
  12. Cindysphinx

    Cindysphinx G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    15,067
    Come on, Overdrive.

    We have read your posts. We know you are in high school. Why are you working to hard to hide something you openly admitted?
     
  13. gmatheis

    gmatheis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,554
    what high schools , or colleges for that matter, play mixed or guys against girls. Never heard of that.
     
  14. Overdrive

    Overdrive Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,301
    Location:
    Garden of Gethsemane
    This still means nothing.
     
  15. Overdrive

    Overdrive Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,301
    Location:
    Garden of Gethsemane
    There's a low ratio of decent female players here, so there's sometimes mixed practice matches.
     
  16. Overdrive

    Overdrive Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,301
    Location:
    Garden of Gethsemane
    I beg to differ. Some people on TT can't read. You & other people have made several errs* in the past.

    What purpose would I gain from hiding my age? That's another point several people are making that makes no sense.

    You're just going to add age insults in you're bag of meaningless & unfunny jokes.


    *Err is a word
     
  17. beernutz

    beernutz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,400
    Location:
    expanding my Ignore List
    Explain it then.
     
  18. beernutz

    beernutz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,400
    Location:
    expanding my Ignore List
    Yes it is, but it is a verb, not a noun which is how you have used it.
     
  19. OrangePower

    OrangePower Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,049
    Location:
    NorCal Bay Area
    Since as you said there is no purpose to hiding your age, why don't you just say what it is? We will take you at your word. It really doesn't make difference, but appearing to be deceptive does hurt your credibility.

    By the way, "err" is a word, but it is a verb, not a noun. You can say "I often err", or "she often errs", but it is incorrect to say "you have made several errs."
     
  20. Overdrive

    Overdrive Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,301
    Location:
    Garden of Gethsemane
    No deception was used, it appeared in perception.
    It doesn't matter how old I am, these people will still flock to my posts and threads and derail them. For some reason, it has reached beyond that, and I don't know why.

    I disagree. Several and often are nearly synonymous.

    In actuality, I can say that someone lied several times and/or often. Meaning, their credibility is useless either way. Would you want to trust someone who has lied to you several times or often?

    In this case, making several errors is just the same as often because it foretells the idea that the person(s) should not be given credit on their behalf.
     
  21. Cindysphinx

    Cindysphinx G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    15,067
    Heaven help America if this is how our young people are being trained up.

    We're doomed, I tell ya. Doomed.
     
  22. mightyrick

    mightyrick Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    4,645
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    I know why. It is because you are making outlandish claims about beating excellent players -- without yourself actually being that great. When people make outlandish claims, they are going to be put under the microscope. And you are very vague on the details, which makes it even more suspicious.

    For those of us who play in a lot of sanctioned tennis tournaments and ladders, we know who can beat who. We have seen so many 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, and 5.5s play.

    We have bona-fide 5.0 and 5.5s on this message board. They have videos. They post names. They talk about their matches. They aren't vague. They aren't evasive. They don't shrug off questions. And you seem to do this.

    Merely making a claim doesn't yield credibility. Demonstrating competence about the subject-matter within that claim yields credible. I think you've yet to do that.
     
  23. OrangePower

    OrangePower Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,049
    Location:
    NorCal Bay Area
    Huh? Are you being deliberately obtuse? Or perhaps doing a most excellent job of trolling us?

    Or have we already reached the grim future where the educational system has completely failed the younger generation?

    The distinction is not between several and often, but between a noun and a verb.

    Let me be more clear:
    "You often err" - correct usage (verb)
    "She often errs" - correct usage (verb)
    "You have often made errs" - incorrect usage (no such noun)
     
  24. North

    North Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2005
    Messages:
    937
    Nah. I think the kid just needs to get a grip.
     
  25. Overdrive

    Overdrive Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,301
    Location:
    Garden of Gethsemane
    What? Why does is a person always being considered a troll in a conversation if it doesn't make sense to them. ? The word is being thrown around with no purpose.

    I still disagree.

    The thread is derailed now. I'm stopping because this won't go anywhere.
     
  26. gmatheis

    gmatheis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,554
    Are you disagreeing with his statement that "err" is a verb only and not a noun?

    From dictionary.com

    err intransitive verb \ˈer, ˈər\

    Definition of ERR
    1 archaic: stray

    2 a: to make a mistake <erred in his calculations> <erred on the side of caution>
    b: to violate an accepted standard of conduct

    If you want a noun the word you use is "error"

    Also "several" and "often" are not the same at all.
    Several refers to an amount.
    Often refers to a frequency of something.

    To illustrate: if a politician makes 1000 votes on bills and voted against his party 3 times you could say he voted against his party several times. You could hardly say that he votes against his party often though as you would be hard pressed to define 3 out of 1000 as often.
     
  27. JRstriker12

    JRstriker12 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    3,364
    Actually, our tennis coach's daughter was on my high school team. There wasn't any girls tennis teams in our area so I think my coach worked something out with the other coaches. Our team was pretty bad, so I don't think any of the other teams were worried about it.
     
  28. Overdrive

    Overdrive Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,301
    Location:
    Garden of Gethsemane
    Okay, I understand.
    Thanks for the grammar lesson.
     
  29. TahoeTennis

    TahoeTennis Professional

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Messages:
    900
    31. Are all players in a given NTRP level equal in ability?

    "
    No …The NTRP system identifies general levels of ability, but an individual will
    be rated within those levels at 50 different hundredths of a point. For example, a
    3.5 player can fall anywhere between a 3.01 and a 3.50. That is the reason many
    people feel they are playing sandbaggers – they are closer to the bottom of that
    range while their opponents are closer to the top of the range. A typical match
    result for a player, for example, with a 3.01 rating versus a 3.49 player, both of
    whom are 3.5s, would be 6-0, 6-0 in favor of the higher rated player."
     
  30. g4driver

    g4driver Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2009
    Messages:
    1,728
    I am totally with J_R_B

    I wasn't there, but I have seen guys shock higher rated players and give them a match they didn't expect.

    It has happened to me on the reserve side of the coin also. I played a 3.0S guy who took me 3 sets. The 3.0S player and his teammate who play ladder matches against USTA 4.0C players and won several matches against 4.0 C players. At the end of the year, they were bumped to 3.5.

    So now the 3.0S guys are 3,5C players and they are beating 3.5C and 4.0C players in USTA matches in their one ditch effort to advance in the playoffs.

    Last year a friend of mine was a 3.0C bumped to 3.5C. This spring he played 4.0 and lost 4&4 to a 4.0B Captain who has been to 4.0 State three years in a row. Had this been in Nov 2012 instead of Feb 2013, the 6-4, 6-4 score would have been a 3.0 vs a 4.0B

    Was the 4.0B tanking ? Probably.

    The USTA algorithm didn't see that coming, even in Feb 2013. The system needs tweaking with a win-loss percentage factor to address tanking games.

    Want to tank a set ? Fine. But a Win/Loss factor built in could overide a tanked set.

    When you win 85+% of your matches at your current level, odds are you will be just fine at the next level.

    Funny how most companies are always trying to make their products better, and stay ahead of the game. But the USTA doesn't strike me as an organization that gets it.

    I've just accepted the USTA for what they are: an organization that gets priority courts in my area from 6-10 pm on Weeknights and 8-12 am on Saturdays. Want to play at these times, better play USTA due to limited courts..
     
  31. alegare

    alegare New User

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    Messages:
    24
    You'll see some ok groundstrokes, but not too much consistency. You'll also get second serves that are just tapped in.
     
  32. Wilson6-1

    Wilson6-1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2007
    Messages:
    204
    In my prior experience the 3.5 level seemed to provide the greatest variety of skill levels. I don't know if it is because it is a common self-rating level or because others like to stay (sandbag) at this level. But I recall playing 3.5 players that I could have sworn never played the game before and others that were so consistent, I couldn't believe they were playing at that level.

    Whether at 3.0, 3.5 or 4.0, in general, the fewer the mistakes the better. Most of my problems come from trying to do too much.

    Lastly, the one point I would disagree with is that a .5 difference in rating would double bagel the lower player. While I agree they would win, it does depend on the skill of the player. For example, even when I was a 3.0 player, I always had a big serve and could take games off of much better players. Today, as a 4.0, I can easily take games off of 4.5 players, and often do, winning on the other hand, is the tricky part.
     
  33. TennisDawg

    TennisDawg Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2007
    Messages:
    613
    I've played 3.5s that are very consistent and have high tennis IQs, they don't beat themselves. They are not interested in moving up in level.

    My theory is that the smart/consistent 3.5s are very settled into their games and stay within their game.
    Whereas many 4.0s (1) are overrated and will usually beat themselves or (2) they are working on their games and trying new strokes to move up in level and losing points because of it and even matches.
     
  34. The Isomotion31

    The Isomotion31 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2013
    Messages:
    484
    Location:
    The Bay Area, California
    Played my first singles 3.5 match against a great team this past weekend. I lost but it was a great experience. Couldn't ask for a better opponent.

    He told me he could tell that had I been able to get more reps in and practice the outcome might of been different.

    This guy was consistent and just knew when to take a chance and put away a ball.

    Stamina wise I felt great. Could of played more. I was able to serve and volley here and there but the baseline ground stroke rallies were really fun.

    He told me he is 3.5 computer rated(I am a 3.0 self rated) and will be making the move up to 4.0.

    So much fun, can't wait for my next match!
     
  35. Sakkijarvi

    Sakkijarvi Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    505
    I know a guy that appealed down (at the advice of his USTA captain) to 3.5 from 4.0, but beats benchmarked 4.0 guys 6-0, 6-0 in club singles leagues. Truly, a 3.5 G.O.A.T. in the making.
     
  36. JRstriker12

    JRstriker12 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    3,364
    Honestly, I think your theory is wrong. The level of consistency is a big factor in going from 3.5 to 4.0.

    But don't confuse a pusher (just get it back in play, wait for the other player to self destruct) with a counter-puncher (Very consistent and solid, smart, waits for an opening to attack)

    Also, it's not a mystery that a lot of the better 3.5's and 4.0's tend to be very consistent players off of both sides. Consistency plus a high tennis IQ make a tough to beat opponent at any level.

    It's the guys with the low tennis IQ's and inconsistent games (everything has to be a winner) that generally don't advance. The guys with high tennis IQ's are the guys working on their games and trying to get better.

    As for your statement about 4.0's - Couldn't you say that about any NTRP group? There some players at the bottom - like a recent bump up from 4.0 to 4.5 who will struggle and could be considered "overrated" and guys trying to improve. But I wouldn't say trying to improve necessarily means losing points/matches.
     
  37. TennisDawg

    TennisDawg Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2007
    Messages:
    613
    I base my theory on the fact that most recreational players are Intermediate players (3.5 to 4.0). It's also my perception that a large number of 3.5 players are not happy being just an average player and being inpatient leap frog (and they are overrrated) into the 4.0 level in hopes of someday being a 4.5. Many of these players are not ready or they may never be ready.

    Now, I said many not all. Someone that has the talent and with some work will play at 4.0 and go thru a fairly short learning curve, but while they're learning they are beaten by players of way less ability. Eventually in a fairly short time they will beat all the 4.0s (pushers included) and transiton into 4.5 and with more play and practice end up at 5.0 or higher.


    Many pushers are the perpetual 3.5 and they have a high tennis IQ and are content to remain a 3.5. A 3.5 pusher can win many matches and even tournaments at 3.5 because he's savvy and doesn't care that his style drives opponents crazy, a win is a win. In fact a 3.5 pusher can also beat many at the 4.0 for the reasons I stated above.
     
  38. JRstriker12

    JRstriker12 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    3,364
    Impatiently 3.5 leap frog to 4.0? You can play up, but your results will determine if you get rated 4.0, once you get that 4.0 bump, it's not like you can go back and play 3.5 and wait to improve - appeals down are pretty rare.

    I don't see how a pusher has a high tennis IQ, it's just about being consistent and mentally tough. Players with a high tennis IQ understand things like net play, approach and transitioning, use of angles - etc. A pusher generally doesn't learn these things - thus why they depend on their opponent to self destruct.

    A 3.5 pusher that can beat many 4.0 wouldn't be a 3.5 for long. You average computer rated 3.5 pusher is not beating your average computer rated 4.0 - fact. Being able to beat a 3.5 pusher is basically the low ceiling to getting to 4.0.
     
  39. TennisDawg

    TennisDawg Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2007
    Messages:
    613
    Yes, that's my point. Many 4.0s are playing at that level but have no business playing at that level. There's nothing in the USTA system that prevents him from playing up. His ego can't handle getting beat in straight sets at 3.5, especially if he's been striving to move up for years.

    Based on my perception there are quite a few in that category and as I mentioned in the previous post the data supports that the largest NTRP level of all players is the 3.5 to 4.0.


    A pusher has a high tennis IQ because he knows his own limitations, he is not under the illusion that he will someday break out that style of play. He knows "it's not in the cards" and is content to just stay right there and rack up wins at 3.5.

    A 3.5 pusher may even do well at 4.0 because he may have a large field of low tennis IQ players that shoud still be playing 3.5, essentially they lower the bar.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of that style of play, but I give credit where it's due.
     
  40. TahoeTennis

    TahoeTennis Professional

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Messages:
    900
    my 2 cents:


    First off, there must be said that once we are talking about a 4.5+ level things get a lot more interesting.
    For example, 2 years ago I was moved up to a 4.5 level. I've been playing tennis for over 20 years now, the last 10 being very serious about it. I've hit with 5.0's and 2 5.5's and have won a few games and hit a few winners against some of them, but have lost all of them, for now. The good news is you get better playing people better than you, so keep practicing and have fun! That's while we're all here, we love tennis.

    Also for your consideration:

    The local teaching pro here, Jani T, is a 5.5, has won 4 gold balls, and almost won the World Championships last year. (He won the California 30's division 3 or 4 times) In fact, his brother is Jersey J's coach! Anyway, he's a 5.5 and got to hit with Jarkko Nieminen recently.
    Now what are pro's "rated", 7.0? I have no doubt in my mind that Jani could take many points, and yes even a game or 2 off some pros, which according to this thread is a 1.5 point difference.
     
  41. beernutz

    beernutz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,400
    Location:
    expanding my Ignore List
    Knowing your limitations is not the same thing at all as having a high tennis IQ.

    "A 3.5 pusher may even do well at 4.0 because he may have a large field of low tennis IQ players that shoud still be playing 3.5, essentially they lower the bar."

    Redonkulous.
     
  42. gmatheis

    gmatheis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,554
    you just don't understand how good pros are.

    Could a 5.5 take some points? sure ... i mean even a pro double faults from time to time. Could this 5.5 take games ... not if the pro took the match seriously and didn't want them to. You just don't understand how good you have to be to be a successful touring pro.
     
  43. anubis

    anubis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    3,008
    I agree. I've seen some spectacular 5.5 matches. These guys really wail at the ball. But at the end of the day, a 5.5 rating is an amateur rating. Pros don't use NTRP, it doesn't apply to them.

    5.5's have the "strokes", sometimes, but there's so much more that goes into the game than simply having good strokes. There's point construction, reading your opponent, faking out your opponent, fitness, muscle memory, strength training... all as a full time job.

    The best 5.5 strokes are still just a lazy warm up for a pro.
     
  44. J_R_B

    J_R_B Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,632
    Location:
    Newtown, PA
    All NTRP ratings over 5.0 get muddled very quickly. There's just not enough of a player pool to calculate an accurate rating like there is at the height of the bell curve around 3.0-4.0.
     

Share This Page