D3 all the way to D1

[maratsafin5]

Hey guys

In general, would you say this is accurate and if not, please correct me:

D3 averages 4.0

D2 averages 4.5

D1 averages 5.5-6.0

I'm 5.5, but I don't know my chances of playing D1

[Daycrawler]

If self-rating, take 2.0 off your rating.

[CTennis11]

If you take it as averages then I would say its a pretty close rating.

[maratsafin5]

Good logic...why don't I just rate myself a 1.5 then and subtract 2...would that be better for you, moron

I am an official 5.5, having been evaluated by USTA, not a wannabee 5.5 who just thinks highly of himself, and thanks for answering the question.

[Pistol Pete]

i know a bunch of guys who played d3 and almost beat the #1 in the country d1 the #1 from middleburry couple summers ago lost to justin chou former harvard #1 7-6 in the third the top d3 is pretty scary good depends what school

[autumn_leaf]

i wouldn't bother averaging d3 and d2 since it varies too widely. d1 is definitely upper level. i would prolly say 5.0-6.0 since you kind of skipped the 5.0 range lol.

but just like everything else, you're ability to play at the school depends on the school you choose. so why don't you put up some names of schools and more knowledgeable people can give you better information.

[maratsafin5]

I might apply to Stanford to play varsity hopefully...but my good friend, who is also 5.5 barely got a spot on Princeton's team, and he is bloody good. And not just a 5.5, he is a STRONG 5.5, and an average 6.0, but it just goes to show you how competitive it gets in the upper echelon's of tennis.

[andfor]

Originally Posted by maratsafin5

Hey guys

In general, would you say this is accurate and if not, please correct me:

D3 averages 4.0

D2 averages 4.5

D1 averages 5.5-6.0

I'm 5.5, but I don't know my chances of playing D1

D3 averages 3.0-6.0

D2 averages 3.0-6.0

D1 averages 4.5-6.5

My ranges take into account the extremes on the low and high-ends. Stanford players are likely 5.5 to 6.5/ Most of their players are 6.0's. Have you played against any 5.5's? Do you have a sectional/national U.S. ranking and or are you rated on tennisrecruiting.com?

If you're a bonafide 5.5 with results to back it up you likely are D1 material.

[tennismom42]

Originally Posted by andfor

D3 averages 3.0-6.0

D2 averages 3.0-6.0

D1 averages 4.5-6.5

My ranges take into account the extremes on the low and high-ends. Stanford players are likely 5.5 to 6.5/ Most of their players are 6.0's. Have you played against any 5.5's? Do you have a sectional/national U.S. ranking and or are you rated on tennisrecruiting.com?

If you're a bonafide 5.5 with results to back it up you likely are D1 material.

I would agree with your numbers

[tennismom42]

Originally Posted by maratsafin5

Hey guys

In general, would you say this is accurate and if not, please correct me:

D3 averages 4.0

D2 averages 4.5

D1 averages 5.5-6.0

I'm 5.5, but I don't know my chances of playing D1

If you are 5.5, why do you doubt your ability to play D1? Also, as many have pointed out, for some strange reason, D3 is packed full of stellar (smart) tennis players. Many 5.5s get their butt kicked in D3 because they have a target on their head.

I know a stellar player in D3, goes to Emory, which is a FINE school. He's about a 6.0. He is scarry smart. That D3school + athletics was a smart move, for him. Remember what the real goal is. Is it a scholarship? to play on the team? or to just get to go to college. Don't let other people's definitions & goals become yours.

Do NOT select a college because of it's name. This is the biggest mistake kids make. I knew a kid who really wanted to go to a particular school until he found out they didn't offer the academic program he wanted. You should have seen his face at that moment. Thank heavens he found out before he enrolled. I've seen that happen too. Do more research. Use the research software at your high school to select schools that meet your criteria.

[tennis_balla]

Just because its D2 doesn't mean the level is lower then D1. A lot of D1 schools are not that high level playing wise. It also boils down to where a player is eligible to play. D2 is a bit more lenient when it comes to prize money and age restrictions. NAIA used to be a free for all as ex ATP players used to play there, such was th case with a good friend of mine and his team. Now I hear they're very strict on the rules.

[Fedace]

Originally Posted by maratsafin5

Hey guys

In general, would you say this is accurate and if not, please correct me:

D3 averages 4.0

D2 averages 4.5

D1 averages 5.5-6.0

I'm 5.5, but I don't know my chances of playing D1

Sorry but D3 is much better than 4.0 level. they are more like 5.0 actually.

[CTennis11]

Originally Posted by Fedace

Sorry but D3 is much better than 4.0 level. they are more like 5.0 actually.

On average there is no way d3 would be 5.0. There are those players at that level for sure, but not top to bottom.

[andfor]

Originally Posted by Fedace

Sorry but D3 is much better than 4.0 level. they are more like 5.0 actually.

You must have skipped class the day they taught averages at Standford. JK I would say you might be right if you are talking about the average playing level of the #1 and #2 players on D3 teams across the country.

Originally Posted by andfor

D3 averages 3.0-6.0

D2 averages 3.0-6.0

D1 averages 4.5-6.5

My ranges take into account the extremes on the low and high-ends. Stanford players are likely 5.5 to 6.5/ Most of their players are 6.0's. Have you played against any 5.5's? Do you have a sectional/national U.S. ranking and or are you rated on tennisrecruiting.com?

If you're a bonafide 5.5 with results to back it up you likely are D1 material.

I agree with these numbers also.

I just looked up someone who played (but not often) for a D1 school and they struggled in 4.5 USTA and got bumped down to 4.0. From this same school, the #1 player got to the semis of the Rolex (yes I am dating myself) and was probably 6.0 maybe even 6.5 player. The person they lost to that year in a close match ended up winning the final (the Rolex) easily and turned pro soon after.

Originally Posted by tennis_balla

Just because its D2 doesn't mean the level is lower then D1. A lot of D1 schools are not that high level playing wise. It also boils down to where a player is eligible to play. D2 is a bit more lenient when it comes to prize money and age restrictions. NAIA used to be a free for all as ex ATP players used to play there, such was th case with a good friend of mine and his team. Now I hear they're very strict on the rules.

That is true also. Back in the day NAIA could be VERY tough.

[andfor]

Originally Posted by Julieta

That is true also. Back in the day NAIA could be VERY tough.

Still is. Just ask the D1 schools who play against the University of Auburn-Montgomery.

Way back in the day (80's) I believe Tobias Sventensson played at Flagler before transferring to OK State and Sven Groeneveld played at SW Baptist before transferring to Kansas. More recently Wesley Moody Auburn-Montgomery then Boise State and Chris Haggard Auburn-Montgomery then Tennessee. They were all amazing players and I believe they all made NAIA All-American and many made NCAA All-American. Most of these guys have had modest to very good pro careers, Moodie has won an ATP tour singles title and multiple doubles titles as well as qualifying for the ATP year-end masters doubles. Chris Haggard was very successful on the ATP doubles circuit. Groeneveld has had great success coaching the pros like Mary Pierce and Ana Ivonovic.

I'm sure someone will point out they are all foreign.

[10isDad]

They are all foreign...

Actually, they have 3 seemingly domestic players this season.

Originally Posted by andfor

Still is. Just ask the D1 schools who play against the University of Auburn-Montgomery.

Way back in the day (80's) I believe Tobias Sventensson played at Flagler before transferring to OK State and Sven Groeneveld played at SW Baptist before transferring to Kansas. More recently Wesley Moody Auburn-Montgomery then Boise State and Chris Haggard Auburn-Montgomery then Tennessee. They were all amazing players and I believe they all made NAIA All-American and many made NCAA All-American. Most of these guys have had modest to very good pro careers, Moodie has won an ATP tour singles title and multiple doubles titles as well as qualifying for the ATP year-end masters doubles. Chris Haggard was very successful on the ATP doubles circuit. Groeneveld has had great success coaching the pros like Mary Pierce and Ana Ivonovic.

I'm sure someone will point out they are all foreign.

Excellent examples of NAIA talent!

The foreign student thing has been going on for a long time. I remember looking up to a lot of those players growing up in the 70s and 80s and actually most of them were very good role models for me. I guess the difference between now and then is that back then, a school might have had a few at the top, but still had a few locals, while now some schools are 100% foreign. But they are bringing attention to the programs if winning so I guess it is not all bad. Not sure I would want to be the coach of a team of 23 year olds though...if they didnt like you it wouldn't be pretty.

[andfor]

Originally Posted by 10isDad

They are all foreign...

Actually, they have 3 seemingly domestic players this season.

My "all foreign" reference was to the NAIA players who tranfered to NCAA D1 not the AUM team. As useless information my son took a clinic a few years ago with Monty Tucker who was one of the instructors, nice kid.