Why most people overrate themselves?

[shintan17]

I've been playing with some of the local guys that I found from the USTA website. I rate myself probably average-good 3.5 (never played in the league, but I played against guys playing in the USTA league before), so I was looking for some partners in the local area between 3.5-4.0 (you can set up the rating you want to search for). So far, I've played with three of them, and all of them were...I wouldn't say A LOT WORSE, but not too competitive against me when we played a match. I played with this guy today, and I won 6-2 6-1, though when I talked to him he was talking like he is probably average 3.5 which I doubt.

When people ask me how good I am, I usually tell them CONSERVATIVELY...I am an average 3.5 player, and some people were like NO WAY, you are at least 4.0 or better???? Are you kidding me? Most people have no idea how tough the competition is, and how hard it is to play consistently at 4.0-4.5.

Anyway..I've realized most recreational players, and even some serious players (like play 3-4 times a week at least), don't even know what they are talking about when they talk about the ratings, and how good they are. That's the fact.

 

[circusmouse]

It's a psychological thing. People usually overrate themselves. If you take surveys asking if people think they're average, below average, or above average at a long list of skills, you'll find that most people are above average at almost everything. Also, most people have never seen videos of themselves playing tennis. They don't know how bad they are.

 

[Mick]

probably because they have a superiority complex to some degrees

 

[shintan17]

probably because they have a superiority complex to some degrees

Yeah, I guess..

I mean..I usually underrate my skills, especially when it comes to the sports because I don't wanna embarrass myself.

 

[krz]

prolly for the same reason that everybody has a 12in wiener

 

[Mick]

Yeah, I guess..

I mean..I usually underrate my skills, especially when it comes to the sports because I don't wanna embarrass myself.

It's kind of like looking at what people say they are capable of doing in their resume. Then you start asking questions and learn that they are not the same person they described in that resume

 

[crazy8tiger]

I try to rate myself conservatively too, I don't want to meet such a high standard when I'm not that good yet and I'd rather be complimented on playing well when I rate myself a little lower, rather than be embarrassed when I have a bad game when I rated myself pretty high.

 

[goober]

I've been playing with some of the local guys that I found from the USTA website. I rate myself probably average-good 3.5 (never played in the league, but I played against guys playing in the USTA league before), so I was looking for some partners in the local area between 3.5-4.0 (you can set up the rating you want to search for). So far, I've played with three of them, and all of them were...I wouldn't say A LOT WORSE, but not too competitive against me when we played a match. I played with this guy today, and I won 6-2 6-1, though when I talked to him he was talking like he is probably average 3.5 which I doubt.

When people ask me how good I am, I usually tell them CONSERVATIVELY...I am an average 3.5 player, and some people were like NO WAY, you are at least 4.0 or better???? Are you kidding me? Most people have no idea how tough the competition is, and how hard it is to play consistently at 4.0-4.5.

Anyway..I've realized most recreational players, and even some serious players (like play 3-4 times a week at least), don't even know what they are talking about when they talk about the ratings, and how good they are. That's the fact.

You can simply screen people better by asking them about their competitive tennis history. If they have played a lot of leagues and tourneys they are probably legit. If they never have- I would subtract at least 1 level from their stated rating but be prepared to play somebody 2 levels below. This is just from my experience meeting people over the internet before I knew enough tennis players to hit with.

 

[shintan17]

You can simply screen people better by asking them about their competitive tennis history. If they have played a lot of leagues and tourneys they are probably legit. If they never have- I would subtract at least 1 level from their stated rating but be prepared to play somebody 2 levels below. This is just from my experience meeting people over the internet before I knew enough tennis players to hit with.

Thanks for the tip. People I met were not THAT far behind of their SUPPOSED ratings, but they looked more like strong 3.0 or very weak 3.5. I think they can probably win one match at the most in USTA 3.5 around here (Baltimore) if they get lucky draw. Maybe I should just start looking for someone around 4.0-4.5 instead.

 

[spot]

If you read the USTA website and go off of that for your ratings I think that everyone would significantly overrate themselves.

 

[Taxvictim]

Because they haven't seen video of themselves playing.

 

[batakdepores]

Shintan17,

I had the same experience when I resume my "regular" tennis playing about two years ago. I started to search people in the same level to be a regular hitting partner and got mixed result. From reading USTA description I then honestly thought I was a 4.5:

4.5
You have developed your use of power and spin and can handle pace. You have sound footwork, can control depth of shots, and attempt to vary game plan according to your opponents. You can hit first serves with power and accuracy and place the second serve. You tend to overhit on difficult shots. Aggressive net play is common in doubles.

Reading the description above, I thought ,"I can handle pace, I can scramble, I can serve well."

Then I went on a tennis website and be conservative in my self-rate, and rate myself a 4.0:

4.0
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.

I played with a couple of guys, beat them 6-2s (not competitive). Confused whether the guys I played overrated themselves, I underrated myself, or we both overrated ourselves, I went to a club pro and got a 20-minute rating attempt. He said I'm between 4.0-4.5 (closer to 4.0). Guess where I'm playing competitively (doubles) right now? USTA 3.5!

What does that mean? The whole USTA leaguers played down one level? Many of the people when I say I'm a 3.5 they protested saying that no way I'm a 3.5 (to suggest higher). But then again I'm more of a double specialist so that my strokes seems so much better than the people in 3.5 (or even 4.0) level because I don't have to cover so much court (not really but to put simply) and feel like I have more preparation time. My volleys stroke and placement makes people think that I don't belong in 3.5.

Yet, when our team got to Regional (New York), I see myself and my partner being blown away off the court? I can't imagine what national level 3.5 from Florida or South California would play like!

Again back to my search for true rating quest, what does all of this makes me? So, I'm back to networking with people to find a group competitive against my skills.

 

[TennezSport]

Exactly....

^^^^ In the states the rating will vary from region to region with California, Texas and Florida being the strongest states. The southern states fall in behind that all due to their ability to play and train all year long, more academies, instructors etc. It will generally vary by 1 NRTP point between regions.

TennezSport

 

[shintan17]

Shintan17,

I had the same experience when I resume my "regular" tennis playing about two years ago. I started to search people in the same level to be a regular hitting partner and got mixed result. From reading USTA description I then honestly thought I was a 4.5:

4.5
You have developed your use of power and spin and can handle pace. You have sound footwork, can control depth of shots, and attempt to vary game plan according to your opponents. You can hit first serves with power and accuracy and place the second serve. You tend to overhit on difficult shots. Aggressive net play is common in doubles.

Reading the description above, I thought ,"I can handle pace, I can scramble, I can serve well."

Then I went on a tennis website and be conservative in my self-rate, and rate myself a 4.0:

4.0
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.

I played with a couple of guys, beat them 6-2s (not competitive). Confused whether the guys I played overrated themselves, I underrated myself, or we both overrated ourselves, I went to a club pro and got a 20-minute rating attempt. He said I'm between 4.0-4.5 (closer to 4.0). Guess where I'm playing competitively (doubles) right now? USTA 3.5!

What does that mean? The whole USTA leaguers played down one level? Many of the people when I say I'm a 3.5 they protested saying that no way I'm a 3.5 (to suggest higher). But then again I'm more of a double specialist so that my strokes seems so much better than the people in 3.5 (or even 4.0) level because I don't have to cover so much court (not really but to put simply) and feel like I have more preparation time. My volleys stroke and placement makes people think that I don't belong in 3.5.

Yet, when our team got to Regional (New York), I see myself and my partner being blown away off the court? I can't imagine what national level 3.5 from Florida or South California would play like!

Again back to my search for true rating quest, what does all of this makes me? So, I'm back to networking with people to find a group competitive against my skills.

Hi, thanks for writing all these. I think the level around Baltimore is quite high, too though I don't know how good it is comparing to those states you mentioned. One thing I know for sure is that when it comes to the USTA league, so many players underrate themselves and play in the level or two below where they should belong. This summer, I went to watch the USTA 4.0 matches in Baltimore because my friend was playing in it, and this guy beat the heck of my friend 6-2, 6-1, and I CAN'T EVEN COMPETE with my friend. The way this guy was playing there was no way he is 4.0. I didn't see he makes unforced errors AT ALL, and everything was so solid. Everyone including my other friends watching the match suspect the guy is actually 4.0.

Anyway, like I said, I think people never played in the league before usually overrate themselves unless they have lots of friends who play in the league and played against them like me. Of course, the real match it counts (in the league) is probably more difficult to deal with than just regular practice matches at your local court, that's why I usually underrate myself rather than overrate and embarrass myself.