My Strokes- Comments Please

[bfactor61]

Just myself and a friend rallying. I am the one in the 2nd and 3rd video. How would you rate us?

1st http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPH4sgr4PVA&feature=channel

2nd http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0hCZkCVijo&feature=channel

3rd http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_519nS6H7so&feature=channel

 

[Dechizen]

3.5-4.0 your forehand has potential

 

[LeeD]

I second that motion.

 

[RoddickAce]

If you two play like this in matches, your friend looks like a 4.5+ player, and you look like a 4.0-4.5 player.

edit: based on the assumption that volleys and serves are at the same level (or higher) as the groundstrokes

 

[5263]

Just myself and a friend rallying. I am the one in the 2nd and 3rd video. How would you rate us?
v=_519nS6H7so&feature=channel[/url]

Neither are quite 4.5 (there are some subtle cues) and making 4.0 would depend on how well you compete.
Your friends Fh looks better, but I think that is mostly cause you try to flatten out and hit thru yours too much from well behind the baseline. (u also let the ball drop too much before contact) That stroke will work better stepping up for balls inside the baseline if you make sure you make contact at a higher pt. in the bounce arc.
You did hit some nice lifting rally TS Fhs though, so I know you can do it. Also watch the 1st vid of your friends Fhs, as he has a nice one to copy. Really finds the ball at a good contact pt and hits up and across the ball quite well. He just needs to move well more consistently for better balance and work on his touch and feel.

I liked your Bh better, but both of you guys looked better than most on that side. You hit up and across much better from that wing, which is quite common since the 2ond hand limits extension naturally and protects you from over extension thru the ball.

Keep up the great work, you are on the way.

 

[SourStraws]

Need to get more consistent

S.S.

 

[bfactor61]

thanks for the comments guys. I see what you mean at taking the ball at a higher contact point and not letting it drop.

 

[jmnk]

so the consensus is that these guys are not as good as those two?

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

Seems, well, strange......

 

[5263]

so the consensus is that these guys are not as good as those two?

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

Seems, well, strange......

Maybe so, but I'd guess the closer one in the shin vid would not give up more than 1-2 games per set to them. He has a confidence of proven shot making ability and a balance to his gate.

 

[SourStraws]

so the consensus is that these guys are not as good as those two?

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

Seems, well, strange......

Correct

S.S.

 

[saigonbond]

3.5-4.0 your forehand has potential

3.5-4.0 (depending on geographical region) is probably a fair assessment. You seem to have a solid base with good balance to work with and not many big hitches in your swing. Your friend in vid#1 has a hitch in his forehand takeback and loop.

Areas for improvement:

1. Better consistency in your forehand takeback. Take the racquet back with both hands until at least parallel with the baseline. This helps to give you more shoulder turn, as your chest should be facing to the right also parallel with the baseline.
2. Practice the "chin-to-shoulder" technique for maximum shoulder turn on racquet takeback and follow thru.
3. Better consistency on your forehand loop, or what I call the "power C" swingpath. Sometimes there's no loop or "C" at all, but just straight back and straight through.
4. Proper footwork preparation prior to swing. Proper footwork during swing. Proper footwork during recovery and once again preparing. You often hit off your back foot leaning back on both sides.
5. Turn more sideways on the backhand. Chest should be facing left and pretend there's a big arrow point from your right shoulder at your target.
6. Proper weight transfer into the shot, beginning with proper loading up with a good knee bend (forehand and backhand).
7. Footwork must always work together with the proper and consistent swing mechanics.
8. Practice, practice, practice to develop muscle memory with the proper technique.

Cheers!

 

[0d1n]

I'm not from the States and have no clue as to how to "NTRP rate" somebody, but people coming up with 3.5 ratings are even more clueless than me.

 

[5263]

3.5-4.0 (depending on geographical region) is probably a fair assessment. You seem to have a solid base with good balance to work with and not many big hitches in your swing. Your friend in vid#1 has a hitch in his forehand takeback and loop.

Areas for improvement:

1. Better consistency in your forehand takeback. Take the racquet back with both hands until at least parallel with the baseline. This helps to give you more shoulder turn, as your chest should be facing to the right also parallel with the baseline.
2. Practice the "chin-to-shoulder" technique for maximum shoulder turn on racquet takeback and follow thru.
3. Better consistency on your forehand loop, or what I call the "power C" swingpath. Sometimes there's no loop or "C" at all, but just straight back and straight through.
4. Proper footwork preparation prior to swing. Proper footwork during swing. Proper footwork during recovery and once again preparing. You often hit off your back foot leaning back on both sides.
5. Turn more sideways on the backhand. Chest should be facing left and pretend there's a big arrow point from your right shoulder at your target.
6. Proper weight transfer into the shot, beginning with proper loading up with a good knee bend (forehand and backhand).
7. Footwork must always work together with the proper and consistent swing mechanics.
8. Practice, practice, practice to develop muscle memory with the proper technique.

Cheers!

Where do you see a hitch on his Fh?

He brings it to the side as he should to stalk the ball, then loops back and finds the ball from below nicely. Could be smoother, but no hitch that I can see.

 

[Kunohara]

Looking good.

I will say your lateral movement is great.

But you need to work a bit on your forward/backward movement.

You hit too many shoulder height forehands from behind the baseline.

It's even more obvious on short balls. You let them get to you and they're barely a foot from the ground on their second bounce, forcing you to hit a weak loopy reply.

Practice quick stepping back and forth for the deep shoulder height balls and the short balls, and hit them in your contact zone. Your consistency will shoot up.

For now, keep the shoulder height flat forehands for when you're inside the baseline.

Cheers.

 

[saigonbond]

I'm not from the States and have no clue as to how to "NTRP rate" somebody, but people coming up with 3.5 ratings are even more clueless than me.

If you're not from the States and don't know anything about the NTRP, then maybe you should refrain from making asinine comments.
Google is your friend by the way...

http://www.usta.com/Play-Tennis/USTA-League/Information/1237_NTRP/

 

[0d1n]

If you're not from the States and don't know anything about the NTRP, then maybe you should refrain from making asinine comments.
Google is your friend by the way...

http://www.usta.com/Play-Tennis/USTA-League/Information/1237_NTRP/

I have googled plenty on the subject of NTRP, have read the guidelines and watched plenty of video with various people with official ratings from 3.0 to 5.0/5.5 ... and that's exactly why I say that IMO people who mention the possibility of a 3.5 rating with regards to the people in the OP's video (like yourself) understand this system even less than me and/or are morons and/or have never played tennis seriously themselves...and are just talking out of their arses.
You get to choose where you fit...from those options. Now go learn some tennis. Dismissed.

 

[saigonbond]

Where do you see a hitch on his Fh?

He brings it to the side as he should to stalk the ball, then loops back and finds the ball from below nicely. Could be smoother, but no hitch that I can see.

I'm sure you would be able to see it more clearly if the vid (#1) was shot from the player's right side, but Yes there is a hitch, flaw, break in the loop, or whatever word(s) you want to use to describe it. The good news is that its not a difficult fix and has the opportunity of becoming an even bigger weapon.

This "hitch" is caused by a slightly improper laid back wrist angle because of the abbreviated swing loop or "power C." From the height of his loop, he drops the head straight down in order to get below the level of the ball before contact, never making a full loop. Notice that his racquet never points towards the back fence and the butt cap never points towards the net. Instead, his racquet points out to the right and the butt cap points towards his waist.

The result of this is:

1. Having to "arm" or "muscle" the ball, because of the loss of torque that a full loop or "power C" helps provide. Basically, he has to swing harder to generate pace and spin. His friend in vid 2 & 3 also tries to "muscle" the ball sometimes, which causes him to swing thru at a "flatter" trajectory and not completing his "power C." Proper mechanics and technique often breaks down when trying to "hit hard" in players in the 3.5-4.0 range. (Both guys are probably showing off a bit to the camera lol.)
2. Less than a full shoulder turn on takeback and on follow thru. He should read my tip on the "chin-to-shoulder" technique, which will create even more torque, uncoiling, and load transfer into the shot. A consistent full takeback with both arms will also help with shoulder turn (especially with an open stance forehand).

Cheers!

 

[Falloutjr]

I would be prone to say low 4.5 based on watching the first video. You have really good strokes, though you have a slow recovery when hitting rally forehands (I noticed you sped that up considerably when hitting forehands out of your comfort zone). Your backhand was a wee bit shaky, perhaps because you get to the ball a bit late on both your 2HBH and your slice. You have a good forehand motion, but your trajectory is a bit low for as much topspin as you generate, which is an easy way to dump balls in the net. You seem to be comfortable playing about 4 feet behind the baseline, so it's hard to take balls early there, so I would suggest either driving through it more and make the ball clear the net before it begins it's dip or hit a more exaggerated low-to-high lotion which will result in a higher arc and a greater margin of error.

Again, your groundstroke errors don't stem from anything technical, your form is perfect. It's a matter of you getting in position to hit the shot. If you could hasten your recovery on your forehand side, I think that would translate to getting to the backhand side and your game would take a big step forward.

 

[saigonbond]

I have googled plenty on the subject of NTRP, have read the guidelines and watched plenty of video with various people with official ratings from 3.0 to 5.0/5.5 ... and that's exactly why I say that IMO people who mention the possibility of a 3.5 rating with regards to the people in the OP's video (like yourself) understand this system even less than me and/or are morons and/or have never played tennis seriously themselves...and are just talking out of their arses.
You get to choose where you fit...from those options. Now go learn some tennis. Dismissed.

I suggest you Google some more then play in some USTA leagues and tourneys. We have a saying in US about people who assume things...you may have to Google that too. Since I've played through the juniors, played D1 college, and have many years experience of USPTA & PTR coaching and teaching, I'm pretty sure I understand the game and the NTRP rating system well enough to make informed comments. By your ignorant comments, you have chosen quite clearly where you fit...from those options. School dismissed, US style.

Cheers!

 

[0d1n]

I suggest you Google some more then play in some USTA leagues and tourneys. We have a saying in US about people who assume things...you may have to Google that too. Since I've played through the juniors, played D1 college, and have many years experience of USPTA & PTR coaching and teaching, I'm pretty sure I understand the game and the NTRP rating system well enough to make informed comments. By your ignorant comments, you have chosen quite clearly where you fit...from those options. School dismissed, US style.

Cheers!

Are you also good friends with Bud who is rating top 200 ATP players as 4.0/4.5's ??? If so...I understand.
I have made no ignorant comments.
If you truly have played so much tennis, you sir...should indeed be more informed and not pull 3.5 rating comments out of your arse.
So ... you are obviously either lying, or have never seen yourself on video and think you are way better than you actually are.

 

[masterxfob]

consistency, there is none. if you guys were rallying, you should at least be able to get 10 shots going. my vote is 4.0, maybe low 4.5 granted that the serve is equal to groundstrokes.

 

[saigonbond]

I'm not from the States and have no clue...

Might be an understatement...

Are you also good friends with Bud who is rating top 200 ATP players as 4.0/4.5's ??? If so...I understand.
I have made no ignorant comments.
If you truly have played so much tennis, you sir...should indeed be more informed and not pull 3.5 rating comments out of your arse.
So ... you are obviously either lying, or have never seen yourself on video and think you are way better than you actually are.

I have no idea who Bud is. ATP tour players have no need for and don't use NTRP ratings. Technically, however, they (top 400) would be classified by the USTA as 7.0. I find it interesting that someone from Romania is trying to tell us what a USTA NTRP 3.5 rating is when he has already stated as to being completely ignorant of what the NTRP even is. Once again I suggest you Google the American phrase about "people who assume things." This is, by the way, is the Tips and Instruction section.

Cheers!

 

[olliess]

For some reason the video #2 looks more impressive than the other two. Is it just the angle?

 

[5263]

I'm sure you would be able to see it more clearly if the vid (#1) was shot from the player's right side, but Yes there is a hitch, flaw, break in the loop, or whatever word(s) you want to use to describe it.

Ok, I now understand what you are referring to, although I would not call it a hitch or even a flaw. Often this is part of the developmental curve on the way to a smoother loop and not something I would consider needing to fix, but more that it will smooth out over time as they become more relaxed and confident in their strokes. But we all have our own coaching styles.

 

[jmjmkim]

In looking at the Shin vs G vdo, past about level 3.5, it's about winning matches . . . . not looking pretty.
I've seen many days when guys like Shin and G. just kills you on points and games.

 

[0d1n]

Might be an understatement...



I have no idea who Bud is. ATP tour players have no need for and don't use NTRP ratings. Technically, however, they (top 400) would be classified by the USTA as 7.0. I find it interesting that someone from Romania is trying to tell us what a USTA NTRP 3.5 rating is when he has already stated as to being completely ignorant of what the NTRP even is. Once again I suggest you Google the American phrase about "people who assume things." This is, by the way, is the Tips and Instruction section.

Cheers!

I'm not trying to tell you (plural) so "tell us" is a pathetic attempt at actually associating yourself with the rest and somehow "against me" ... with regards to this discussion.
Many posters in this thread provided estimates of 4.0/4.5 and I agree with those (4.0 probably), hence ... I'm only trying to tell YOU ... not YOU + others. Yes, I have already admitted that not being from the US I don't have direct experience in playing in your USTA tournaments, but obviously ... being from the States is not a sufficient condition to know what you are talking about on this subject (and you are proving this with every post).

With regards to the "assume" stuff, you can stop repeating it in a desperate attempt to appear witty and/or give me a lesson in the English language...I don't need to google it, I know what "they say" about people who assume things.
As illustrated by this quote "This is, by the way, is the Tips and Instruction section." you are in no position to give me English lessons either, just like you are (apparently) in no position to correctly estimate somebody's level based on video.
You are probably one of those chaps that think if they underestimate somebody's level it somehow tells the rest of the world that they are extremely advanced players...and oh so much above the people that are providing video and asking for feedback.
You fail.

 

[masterxfob]

my e-penis is bigger than yours...

8------------------------------------------------------------D

 

[0d1n]

consistency, there is none. if you guys were rallying, you should at least be able to get 10 shots going. my vote is 4.0, maybe low 4.5 granted that the serve is equal to groundstrokes.

I think that (like saigonbond said...we can actually agree on some things apparently), it's perfectly possible they are showing off a bit for the camera, which would affect consistency.
Also...one can rally with different goals in mind, not necessarily for consistency.
I agree with the rating, this is my "best guess" as well...probably 4.0.

In looking at the Shin vs G vdo, past about level 3.5, it's about winning matches . . . . not looking pretty.
I've seen many days when guys like Shin and G. just kills you on points and games.

This is very true. However, one can only estimate in these cases, based on what is displayed in the video.
So...based on what one can see in the video, I would say that unless they are serving underhand in match situations and / or are total mental wrecks that can't string two shots together when playing for points (both assumptions not being displayed in the video)...there is no way in hell they are 3.5.
I prefer to give the benefit of the doubt and assume that the serve is somewhat similar to the ground game/movement ... in which case ... they are NOT 3.5's.
That is all.

 

[0d1n]

my e-penis is bigger than yours...

8------------------------------------------------------------D

:twisted: Something like that.
But I'm "letting the judge know" that I have not made personal comments nor engaged in this quarrel before being "accused of" making asinine comments because some people feel "attacked" by general statements.

 

[Devilito]

You don’t step into your shots. You get pushed back on hard or deep loopy shots. You move side to side and hit side to side. You need to step into the ball more. Earlier and quick preparation with good footwork will allow this. If a hard ball is at your feet step into it and take it on the rise. Don’t jump backwards in hopes of bringing the ball into your strike zone. If you can’t control the baseline and stand your ground as a baseliner you will get pushed around hardcore as you play better and better opponents.

Apart from that, I’d prefer a camera angle behind you that shows were the ball lands and a more complete picture of the rally

 

[NLBwell]

Your forehand has 4.5 level speed and spin. Yes, there could be an improvement in consistency, but it isn't really bad. It is possible that you would lose to a top experienced 3.5, though. People who rally like this (not moving into the court on short balls is a tip) tend to have the rest of their games weaker than their groundstrokes. You probably aren't as good in midcourt, volleying, returning spin serves, and consistency in serving as you are hitting groundstrokes. An experienced 3.5 would try feeding you junk, short balls, and angles to get you into uncomfortable positions and then attack your backhand. You wouldn't get to hit forehands.

Just a guess.

 

[EikelBeiter]

There is no reason why people from outside the US can't guess someone NTRP rating.

If your country is on the following chart you can judge on your country's own system and voila you have an NTRP rating

http://www.itftennis.com/shared/medialibrary/pdf/original/IO_3274_original.PDF

I'd say the op is a 4.0, and is closer to 4.5 than 3.5

 

[dr325i]

I would be prone to say low 4.5 based on watching the first video. You have really good strokes, though you have a slow recovery when hitting rally forehands (I noticed you sped that up considerably when hitting forehands out of your comfort zone). Your backhand was a wee bit shaky, perhaps because you get to the ball a bit late on both your 2HBH and your slice. You have a good forehand motion, but your trajectory is a bit low for as much topspin as you generate, which is an easy way to dump balls in the net. You seem to be comfortable playing about 4 feet behind the baseline, so it's hard to take balls early there, so I would suggest either driving through it more and make the ball clear the net before it begins it's dip or hit a more exaggerated low-to-high lotion which will result in a higher arc and a greater margin of error.

Again, your groundstroke errors don't stem from anything technical, your form is perfect. It's a matter of you getting in position to hit the shot. If you could hasten your recovery on your forehand side, I think that would translate to getting to the backhand side and your game would take a big step forward.

Edited after watching all of the videos:
4.0 at shot-wise, some great looking FHs, but not so consistent.
That may completely change in a real match situations, but shown in the videos I'd say 4.0-4.5 is possible.

 

[dr325i]

Your forehand has 4.5 level speed and spin. Yes, there could be an improvement in consistency, but it isn't really bad. It is possible that you would lose to a top experienced 3.5, though. People who rally like this (not moving into the court on short balls is a tip) tend to have the rest of their games weaker than their groundstrokes. You probably aren't as good in midcourt, volleying, returning spin serves, and consistency in serving as you are hitting groundstrokes. An experienced 3.5 would try feeding you junk, short balls, and angles to get you into uncomfortable positions and then attack your backhand. You wouldn't get to hit forehands.

Just a guess.

There is no such a thing as "experienced 3.5" that is so good to feed a 4.5 junk. If he's capable of that -- he is higher than 3.5

 

[NLBwell]

There is no such a thing as "experienced 3.5" that is so good to feed a 4.5 junk. If he's capable of that -- he is higher than 3.5

Yeah, I thought about it last night. There were some guys like that around, but they pretty much got their NTRP bumped up this year.

The premise of my post, though, is that I'm figuring the OP is NOT at a 4.5 level at the rest of his game. His backhand is certainly not a 4.5 and I predict that the rest of his game is even weaker than that.

I stand on the prediction that the guys I was referring to would beat him in a match. The OP will have to play his weakest shots, not his strongest and his consistency will be tested.

 

[fruitytennis1]

These strokes arent exactly realistic to a match situation considering your missing alot. Those big fh's that go in are 4.5 stroke but obviously not the consistancy or placement. My best assessment considering I can't see the ball bouncing(use back view)
I'd say solid 4.0

 

[saigonbond]

...I have not made personal comments nor engaged in this quarrel before being "accused of" making asinine comments because some people feel "attacked" by general statements.

...and you would be wrong, since you wrote this (below) at #12. Wanna try again?

I'm not from the States and have no clue as to how to "NTRP rate" somebody, but people coming up with 3.5 ratings are even more clueless than me.

-----------------------------------------------------------

I'm not trying to tell you (plural) so "tell us" is a pathetic attempt at actually associating yourself with the rest and somehow "against me" ... with regards to this discussion.
Many posters in this thread provided estimates of 4.0/4.5 and I agree with those (4.0 probably), hence ... I'm only trying to tell YOU ... not YOU + others. Yes, I have already admitted that not being from the US I don't have direct experience in playing in your USTA tournaments, but obviously ... being from the States is not a sufficient condition to know what you are talking about on this subject (and you are proving this with every post).

With regards to the "assume" stuff, you can stop repeating it in a desperate attempt to appear witty and/or give me a lesson in the English language...I don't need to google it, I know what "they say" about people who assume things.
As illustrated by this quote "This is, by the way, is the Tips and Instruction section." you are in no position to give me English lessons either, just like you are (apparently) in no position to correctly estimate somebody's level based on video.
You are probably one of those chaps that think if they underestimate somebody's level it somehow tells the rest of the world that they are extremely advanced players...and oh so much above the people that are providing video and asking for feedback.
You fail.

Yes, you assume too much. Yes, I am qualified to give you lessons in English and in tennis. Posters in this section ask for input, so I give it. You're the one who made the "clueless" comment originally. If you don't like my stroke analysis and opinion, too bad. The stroke analysis was not intended for your benefit, but for the OP and his friend as he requested.

However, since your analysis and knowledge of the USTA is severely lacking and admittedly ignorant (by your own description), its obvious you could use some lessons yourself. If you actually read my stroke assessment, I think you would agree with most if not all of it. Go ahead, diagnose my analysis if you can. My educated opinion of 3.5-4.0 (depending on geographical region) is based on my years of USTA knowledge from playing, coaching, and teaching here in the US. Yours is based on what? I am admittedly ignorant about Romanian tennis (other than Nastase).

If you have a better analysis of the OP's strokes, so be it. Don't direct your comments towards me (or anyone else), that is, unless you want me to analyze your strokes as well. I'm sure I could help improve your game too.

Cheers!

 

[Winky]

I have not made personal comments nor engaged in this quarrel before being "accused of" making asinine comments because some people feel "attacked" by general statements.

Wrong dude, this was your first post in the thread:

I'm not from the States and have no clue as to how to "NTRP rate" somebody, but people coming up with 3.5 ratings are even more clueless than me.

Relax... juuuuust relaaaax. You're not making yourself look good.

 

[Commando Tennis Shorts]

I'm not from the States and have no clue as to how to "NTRP rate" somebody, but people coming up with 3.5 ratings are even more clueless than me.

Agree completely. The friend is easily a 4.5, and the other guy is a strong 4.0, weak 4.5. Anyone who says 3.5 is being ridiculous or the players in their area must be insanely good.

 

[Commando Tennis Shorts]

By the way, the USTA's description of 3.5 and real-life 3.5 or two very different things.

 

[Fugazi]

My estimate is 4.0, maybe 4.5? You really need to work on your footwork. You seem athletic, but probably not intense enough with your feet. Often hitting on your backfoot.

Cheers

 

[5263]

By the way, the USTA's description of 3.5 and real-life 3.5 or two very different things.

important point.

 

[0d1n]

There is no reason why people from outside the US can't guess someone NTRP rating.

If your country is on the following chart you can judge on your country's own system and voila you have an NTRP rating

http://www.itftennis.com/shared/medialibrary/pdf/original/IO_3274_original.PDF

I'd say the op is a 4.0, and is closer to 4.5 than 3.5

Thanks, my sentiments exactly.

...and you would be wrong, since you wrote this (below) at #12. Wanna try again?

-----------------------------------------------------------

Yes, you assume too much. Yes, I am qualified to give you lessons in English and in tennis. Posters in this section ask for input, so I give it. You're the one who made the "clueless" comment originally. If you don't like my stroke analysis and opinion, too bad. The stroke analysis was not intended for your benefit, but for the OP and his friend as he requested.

However, since your analysis and knowledge of the USTA is severely lacking and admittedly ignorant (by your own description), its obvious you could use some lessons yourself. If you actually read my stroke assessment, I think you would agree with most if not all of it. Go ahead, diagnose my analysis if you can. My educated opinion of 3.5-4.0 (depending on geographical region) is based on my years of USTA knowledge from playing, coaching, and teaching here in the US. Yours is based on what? I am admittedly ignorant about Romanian tennis (other than Nastase).

If you have a better analysis of the OP's strokes, so be it. Don't direct your comments towards me (or anyone else), that is, unless you want me to analyze your strokes as well. I'm sure I could help improve your game too.

Cheers!

1) The fact that my post may have been directly underneath one of yours does not mean that I was speaking to you specifically. There were multiple 3.5 comments in the thread, and my post was simply stating my own opinion that those estimates are inaccurate (yes, including yours).
You have subsequently chosen the path of quoting my response and engaging in the "quarrel" that followed by calling my comments asinine.
I have responded...and everything that followed is posted for everybody to see.
I stand by my estimates, just like you stand by yours...no harm done, move along...nothing to see here.

2) No, you have not yet proven to be qualified in giving me lessons in either English or tennis.
I believe I'm at a sufficiently high level in English to not require lessons from you (even though English is my 3rd language and I've never studied it in school), and I believe to be at a sufficiently high level in tennis to be better served by getting help locally (in person) rather than "over the internet" from people like yourself. So, please refrain from making such "asinine" comments in the future...even if you have been playing at the level you're stating.

3) Yes, I have agreed (maybe "silently") with many of your "detail" points, I just don't agree with the rating (the 3.5 one), based on what I've seen. This is my subjective opinion...and like I said...I stand by it.
Also, I'm sure you realize that many of your otherwise useful points might "get lost" due to the fact that you are conveying them in an obnoxious, "know it all" kind of way which might p1ss people off (yes, I'm well aware that this fact also applies to me and many others).

Wrong dude, this was your first post in the thread:

Relax... juuuuust relaaaax. You're not making yourself look good.

Yes, that was my first post in the thread, but it was not "directed" at anybody in particular as I didn't "quote" anybody when making that statement.
How come the only one that felt "threatened" by my comment was our buddy saigonbond ??
Also...you can rest assured of the fact that I'm actually very relaxed, and I don't really care how I make myself look.
I usually stand by what I say unless proven wrong. So, if our OP comes out with a "confession" that he is actually a middle range 3.5 player and as a result I'm proven wrong, I will be the first to admit that I'm an ***.
Until then...

Agree completely. The friend is easily a 4.5, and the other guy is a strong 4.0, weak 4.5. Anyone who says 3.5 is being ridiculous or the players in their area must be insanely good.

Or they are trying to appear better themselves by rating lower (I've seen that as well, not necessarily in this thread).
The "I would beat this guy with my right hand behind my back and only jumping on one leg syndrome" that manifests itself on the TW boards sometimes (too often).