"I'm pretty much a (4.5) " vs Computer Rated...

Discussion in 'Tennis Tips/Instruction' started by GeoffB, Feb 15, 2009.

  1. GeoffB

    GeoffB Rookie

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    284
    I've seen a bunch of posts where people describe themselves as "pretty much a 4.0", or "high 3.5/low 4.0". I'm wondering, how do you translate between an NTRP based on substantial league/tournament play vs NTRP as a way people describe their playing level?
     
    #1
  2. OnyxZ28

    OnyxZ28 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,143
    The former I would take seriously, the latter not so much.
     
    #2
  3. raiden031

    raiden031 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,997
    Subtract 2 levels from the player using the descriptions. "I'm a 4.5 based on the guidelines" means "I'm a 3.5 if I entered a league".

    But actually I think the algorithm is a little more complicated than that. Here is my translation:

    Guideline - League
    3.0 - 2.5-3.0
    3.5 - 3.0-3.5
    4.0 - 3.0-3.5
    4.5 - 3.5
    5.0 - 4.0
    5.5 - 2.5
     
    Last edited: Feb 16, 2009
    #3
  4. OvertheFence

    OvertheFence Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    159
    ROFL ^^ :)
     
    #4
  5. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    36,324
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    Guidelines mean absolutely NOTHING!
    You are rated by your match and tournament abililty, not by how pretty, smooth, or hard you hit the ball.
    You can say you're 4.5 IF you play even with other 4.5's, beat ALL 4.0 and lower, and can give higher levels a run for their sets....in multiple matches.
    But if you only play a rated player ONCE, it means nothing again.
    They don't judge shooters by the shooter saying "I"m great, I never miss".
    They don't judge football players only by watching them throw and catch.
    They don't judge basketball players by their ability to freethrow and layup.
    They all get judged IN COMPETITION.
     
    #5
  6. Jim A

    Jim A Professional

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    804

    totally agree with Raiden on this, oftentimes @ drop-in I tell them strong 3.0 and get paired with a bunch of rookies, which can be nice at times but mostly I'm looking to work on stuff, whereas most of the supposed 3.5's are essentially 3.0's and the lower half of the 4.0's are low/mid 3.5's..
     
    #6
  7. GeoffB

    GeoffB Rookie

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    284
    So far, I'd pretty much agree. Most self-rated players would most likely have trouble in that level of league play. I generally tell people to self-rate as low as the computer will allow them, and I think any voluntary self-rating at 4.5 and above is pretty much asking for a beatdown (not including former college players and/or juniors who are obligated to use this minimal rating). Even 4.0 is a risk for someone who hasn't played official league.

    Here's another question: do you attribute this discrepancy to an inflated sense of skill among self-rated players, or to sandbagging tendencies among league players?
     
    #7
  8. BullDogTennis

    BullDogTennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2008
    Messages:
    2,216
    Location:
    Big Orange Nation
    actually free throw practice and game situation is the exact same...since no one is on you.
     
    #8
  9. raiden031

    raiden031 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,997
    I actually think that sandbagging isn't all that bad among computer-rated players, just the occasional self-rated playerd. The majority of league players are going to have computer ratings which helps with accuracy. But there is obviously pressure to rate downward and it has more to do with being able to win matches and also contribute to your team. I think when it comes to players bordering two levels, they will almost always choose to be rated on the lower side by self-rating or appeals.

    I think the reason for the discrepancy though is that it is very hard to gauge your skills based on the NTRP guidelines. You have to be an expert on the NTRP system to really know how to use it. Another issue is that players think your level is correlated to your style of game, not your results. So they think if they can serve hard or hit groundstrokes hard, they are automatically a higher rating than someone who is a pusher with a weak serve. And finally its about ego and bragging rights...people want the satisfaction of being a high level player even though they are dead wrong about their ability.
     
    #9
  10. WildVolley

    WildVolley Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    Messages:
    5,787
    I think that the descriptions of levels lead a lot of people astray. I consider myself a strong 4.0, and I occasionally bagel people who self-rate at 4.5.

    Much in the way that inexperienced people on these boards rate videos of touring pros at 4.0 or 4.5, a lot of 3.5 players rate themselves at 4.5 based on the descriptions.
     
    #10
  11. gocard02

    gocard02 New User

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Messages:
    53
    Are you not familiar with the NFL draft? :p
     
    #11
  12. NotAtTheNet

    NotAtTheNet Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    488
    Location:
    Miami/Ft. Lauderdale/West Palm Beach, FL
    Do the names Jamarcus Russell, Vernon Gholston, and Ted Ginn Jr. ring a bell?
     
    #12
  13. Noveson

    Noveson Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,241
    Russel played for the Raiders=Black hole. He had no chance.
     
    #13
  14. julian

    julian Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    3,247
    Location:
    Bedford,Massachusetts,US
    A typo?

    Is "5.5 - 2.5" a typo?
     
    #14
  15. 10nistennis

    10nistennis Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2008
    Messages:
    352
    Location:
    TX
    He plays for an Al Davis team..what do you expect?



    And free throw practice is not the same as a game situation free throw. There is added pressure, and all kinds of stuff like that.
     
    #15
  16. Kevo

    Kevo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,157
    Well, one is real and the other is imagined. When I self rated about 6 or so years ago in order to join a team, I rated as a 4.0 because that's what the team was. I sort of matched the 4.0 - 4.5 description and I thought I would do pretty well at 4.0. The difference between practice and actual competition is pretty large though. When you have someone else trying to make you mess up, and the added pressure of every mistake counts, it's much more difficult to consistently hit the shot you can hit in practice. The NTRP guideline is meant to match your play in competition. Many people read it and don't think about competition at all. They think about what they can do sometimes in practice. It took me quite some time before I started winning consistently in 4.0 and I only got bumped to 4.5 recently.
     
    #16
  17. raiden031

    raiden031 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,997
    No it was a joke. I don't think true 5.5s would usually even refer to themselves by NTRP (unless they spent too much time on this board), but would describe themselves in terms of ranking.
     
    #17
  18. Moses Man

    Moses Man Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    153
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    Well, I used to self-rate at 4.0 and beat a guy 6-1 who was on a 3.5 league. This past fall I played on a 4.0 flex league for the first time and finished 3-2...

    In general though, most people I meet do tend to over-rate themselves--I advertise as 4.0, but a lot of 3.0s end up contacting me...
     
    #18
  19. JavierLW

    JavierLW Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,917
    It's partially because players are self rating too low (not too high), so it creates the phenemonon that raiden describes. (where you can be at almost any level and find competitive matches as low as 3.0)

    It's also because some people who drill well and are told by their teaching pros that they are rating "4.0" do not necessarily have the match experience to make it thru a real match at first, even sometimes in a 3.0 league.... (I find that a lot of that is mental more then anything)

    Or sometimes they do play but it's at their local club with people that they know very well so they are not comfortable when they get in a league match or a tournament in a strange setting against someone they dont know.
     
    #19
  20. Sublime

    Sublime Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    772
    That is a list of guys who received 7 (and in some cases 8 ) figure signing bonuses before they played an NFL snap... what was your point?
     
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2009
    #20
  21. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    36,324
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    Bulldog...
    I know a little about basketball. My ability to hit 95% in practice does NOT translate to even 80% in game situations, especially tight, competitive games. That is true about almost every basketball player, except maybe the top few in each LEAGUE.
    And when the high school coaches scouted our junior high for football players, we needed more than catch and throw, run, jump, start and stop, they talked extensively with our coaches about our character, practice habits, ability to absorb information, and generalities like parental support, growth spurts, friends, and scholastic achievements. Everyone who was even slightly considered had played school sports at least 3 semesters if not more, and usually was the star player on the team.
    That was in 1963.
     
    #21
  22. raiden031

    raiden031 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,997
    Selection of top-quality players for recognition/drafting/recruiting is very subjective in team sports. I played high school football and when they award all-state/all-area honors to players, it often has little to do with results, because obviously they are at the mercy of their teammates' performance, and some positions do not generate stats for more objective measurements. The leading rusher in an area might get first-team honors because of their stats, but how do you determine how good an O-line player is? They have to watch what they do out on the field and subjectively determine if the player is good or not. I remember a couple all-area players whose teams had losing records, but the players were still discovered and recognized somehow.
     
    #22
  23. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    36,324
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    Cool !
    Not sure how it relates to my post, however.
    Most often, the "best" player on our teams was the one who stood out above the rest, had the teams full support, the coach's support, and the facultie's full support. Seemed fair enough to me.
     
    #23
  24. OnyxZ28

    OnyxZ28 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,143
    Blah blah blah, and then one time, at band camp ...
     
    #24
  25. Verno Inferno

    Verno Inferno New User

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Messages:
    54
    Location:
    Chicago
    I think the guidelines for self-rating are only a good starting point. I hadn't played for a number of years and read the guidelines for 4.0 and 3.5. I was all, "Hey. That 3.5 sounds a lot more like me than the 4.0." So I entered a 3.5 league and got absolutely smoked. Dropped to 3.0/3.25 and learned that's where I belong.

    I learned that just because I CAN do the things in the 4.0/3.5 when I'm playing with my pals/family, doesn't mean I can execute them at all when I'm in real competition.

    It was a good learning experience.

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

    Anybody who's played highschool level at all thinks they are this person. Personally... I underestimated what these terms from that description REALLY mean: dependable, directional control, moderate-paced shots, some success. To me, those described my game. But sheesh. I was wrong.

    A lot of us who self-rate from scratch, have no idea what these terms really mean until we start competing.
     
    #25
  26. Toxicmilk

    Toxicmilk Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    916
    .....you cannot be serious.
     
    #26
  27. dman72

    dman72 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,997
    Location:
    Long Island, NY
    Good points. I can force more than a few errors on serve, but the other descriptions of a 4.0, in terms of a match situation, are iffy, hence, I'm really a 3.5.
     
    #27
  28. Sublime

    Sublime Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    772
    It's exactly the same... just like hitting second serves in practice is just like hitting a second serve on breakpoint.
     
    #28
  29. dman72

    dman72 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,997
    Location:
    Long Island, NY

    ..at center court at Wimbledon. Same thing. :)
     
    #29
  30. MegacedU

    MegacedU Professional

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,328
    Location:
    Rhode Island
    In my mind, you graduate from Rating X when you beat a Rating Y.
     
    #30
  31. Sublime

    Sublime Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    772
    But what if Rating Y player got his ranking from going on to the USTA website and said, "Ohh... I can hit a backhand and forehand cross court, that makes me a 3.5"
     
    #31
  32. Verno Inferno

    Verno Inferno New User

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Messages:
    54
    Location:
    Chicago
    Exactly! I went 7 - 7 in the 3.0/3.25 league. Some of those guys beat me easily and I beat some of them easily. Ya need a good cross-section.

    Also: if I beat a 3.5 or 4.0 player simply because he can't deal with my style of play or I'm "on" that day.... that doesn't make me a 3.5 or 4.0 player. Yet. :) It may mean I have 3.5 and 4.0 tendancies and when I execute well, I can compete with some people at that level. But i'm not gonna fool myself into thinking I'm better than I am until the league moves me up and I have a respectable record. Even if it's a losing record.

    Also Also: now I'm fascinated by the free throw talk.
     
    #32
  33. MegacedU

    MegacedU Professional

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,328
    Location:
    Rhode Island
    I was speaking in terms of league play.
     
    #33
  34. Okazaki Fragment

    Okazaki Fragment Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Messages:
    430

    Have you ever beaten a 4.0? I can't imagine in any circumstances where a 4.0 would lose to a real 3.0.
     
    #34
  35. GPB

    GPB Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,187
    Location:
    Jacksonville, FL
    Me too, almost exactly the same situation.
     
    #35
  36. raiden031

    raiden031 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,997
    In USTA leagues the computer can move you to rating Y without ever playing against a rated Y player. Would you say the computer is inaccurate when it moves someone up like that?
     
    #36
  37. raiden031

    raiden031 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,997
    I think its possible if you take someone who at 3.0 has a very aggressive game (obviously inconsisent though hence the 3.0 rating) and they are having a great day, and they play against a 4.0 having a very bad day. Not a common scenario but wouldn't rule it out. I beat a 4.0 when I was a weaker 3.5 in 3 sets, and it was a bit of a fluke because he crushed me the second time we played.
     
    #37
  38. Verno Inferno

    Verno Inferno New User

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Messages:
    54
    Location:
    Chicago
    Not in the last nine years. But 9 years ago when I was competing at 3.5/3.75, yes. Once. I believe he traveled cross-country the night before and got precisely zero hours of sleep and it was about 108 degrees. He looked like road-kill.

    Also, Raiden makes a good point about inconsistent, winner-happy morons like myself can---on that magical day---accidently beat someone who self-rates a little higher than us.

    Shoot. Oklahoma City Thunder have managed to win 13 games in the National Basketball Association. On those days, I bet Durant accidently shoots 65%.

    :)
     
    #38
  39. Okazaki Fragment

    Okazaki Fragment Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Messages:
    430
    Well, that's the thing. No matter how aggressive the 3.0 is, there is no way he can be aggressive on deep moon balls. And any 4.0 can toss up those kind of shots no matter how bad of a day they are having. And no 3.0 will have a well developed enough net game to counter that kind of junk-balling.

    I can see a 3.5 taking out a 4.0 but 3.0 is just too much. 3.0s are basically beginners.
     
    #39
  40. Okazaki Fragment

    Okazaki Fragment Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Messages:
    430
    Ha. But I bet if your skill set was regressed to a couple years earlier (at a 3.0 level), you couldn't have beaten that road-kill 4.0.
     
    #40
  41. Verno Inferno

    Verno Inferno New User

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Messages:
    54
    Location:
    Chicago
    :) I totally agree with you. When I'm playing like I'm a 3.0, I couldn't beat a 4.0 even if his bachelor party was the night before and his boys dropped him off at the court in the same clothes he put on the night before and handed him a ping-pong paddle.
     
    #41
  42. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    36,324
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    Ha ha..
    My first serve was close to 3.0 today. 4 out of maybe 60 in two long sets....:evil::evil:
    Lucky my second serve decided to ascend towards 5.5 levels, hitting side lines consistently out wide, bouncing well over a 5'10" players head, and actually hitting the lefty guy twice.
    Oh, my dropshots were 3.0 also. That rabbit got to every one and hit good approach's every time..:confused:
     
    #42
  43. MegacedU

    MegacedU Professional

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,328
    Location:
    Rhode Island
    I would absolutely say the computer is inaccurate in that case.
     
    #43
  44. GeoffB

    GeoffB Rookie

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    284
    I self rated too high at first as well. Thing is, I was really very systematic about it. I played some NTRP 4.0s in friendlies, then joined a USTA 4.0 flex league and went 6-3. At that point, I was invited to join a 4.0 team, so I foolishly self-rated 4.0.

    Team league, as it turns out, is a lot more competitive than flex league, and I went 1-5 and got bumped down to 3.5. This is one reason I caution people a lot about self rating, especially if they plan to play league.
     
    #44
  45. raiden031

    raiden031 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,997
    I got moved to 4.0 after playing precisely 11 3.0 matches in a row. Most of those opponents got moved to 3.5 at year-end and I bageled a few of them, and won a few more easily (although I did lose one close singles match). So would you say based on the fact that I beat these type of players that the system made a mistake with my rating? I will say that I can beat most 3.5 players in singles in my sleep right now. But I have no clue how I would do against 4.0s, because I played a few in the summer and lost usually like 6-3 type sets, but not nearly enough matches to gauge where I fit in.
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2009
    #45
  46. raiden031

    raiden031 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    5,997
    I had been playing tennis off and on for like 5 years prior to joining USTA. Back in summer '06 I moved to my current area and discovered the USTA leagues. Although it was too late to join for that season, but I did meet a couple league players by finding some ladders and pickup games. I played against a 3.0 player and beat him easily. So I joined a 3.5 ladder assuming that I must be a 3.5. Hahahah I got crushed by every 3.5 I played. Then I joined another ladder and lost to every 3.5 and at least half the 3.0 players. I was a little shocked because I had better strokes than all of them, but could hardly win a match. Thats when I hit rock bottom and joined this board basically and learned alot about my own game and about tennis in general. That is what happens when you go from weekend warrior tennis to competitive tennis, it really humbles you at first.
     
    #46
  47. VERRIC

    VERRIC New User

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    19
    That because some of the Flex league players do not have enough time to practice like a league player for a team.
     
    #47
  48. GPB

    GPB Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,187
    Location:
    Jacksonville, FL
    This!!!

    My strokes are miles better than most of the guys I play, but I'm something like 1-6 in 2009. It sucks. I just started having my wife video me when I play, and I've seen a few things I can work on, but seriously... it's pretty frustrating!
     
    #48
  49. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    36,324
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    Strokes are just strokes.
    Matchplay determines how good you really are.
    Around here, plenty of fluid, hard hitting, good form players. Most I can beat 2-3, with my akward forehand and sliced backhands. I'm 4.0. Lefty.
    Movement, anticipation, patience, knowing WHEN to do WHAT determines winning or losing, at that comes with experience.
     
    #49
  50. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,465
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida
    Well said, raiden.

    the difference is night and day.
     
    #50

Share This Page