Originally Posted by Cindysphinx
NTRP Police wrote:
This could explain why we often disagree about what players at a particular level can do.
Consider this. In 2011, I was a 3.5C. I went to districts, sectionals and nationals. For 2012, I was a 4.0B.
I think it would be a mistake to say that in 2012 that I was at the "real level" of 4.0 because I was a 4.0B.
More accurate would be to say that in 2011, I was at the top of 3.5 even though I was a 3.5C. In 2012, I was at the very bottom of 4.0, even though I was a 4.0B.
So why is it that you keep suggesting that the playoff level is the real level?
This idea of considering benchmark ratings as the "real level" seems to be causing a lot of confusion and misstatements around here. People with B ratings are scattered throughout a particular level. In other words, if you gathered all of the 3.5B men in a room, you would find a wide range of ability. Some would be recent move-ups from 3.0, and others would be almost 4.0.
So why does it make sense to consider 3.5B the "real level?"
The thing about the "B" rating is that it just means you advanced to a playoff that year. The "B" rating has nothing to do with a bump or staying at a level. If you're due for a bump, you will be bumped. If you advanced to a playoff, you will have a "B" rating.
B ratings really just have to do with a YER and nothing else. It just signifies that you advanced to a playoff the same way a "C" rating means you've played enough matches to lock in your rating.
I'm going to say most people who play tennis want to win. I really do think that most of the players who play just for "fun" and for "social" reasons do want to win to some extent.
Getting to a district playoff is a good indicator of top level play.
I'm going to say you're a top level 3.5 player because that is the level you "earned" your "B" rating at. You will just keep your "B" rating as a 4.0 because you also earned enough points to be bumped up a level.