Maybe we need to come to an understanding about ratings

[LuckyR]

Obviously, as others have stated, the A, B and C system worked just fine. Why then does a "better" system (2.5 thru 5.0) create threads like this one?

IMO the reason is the (unrealistic) modern expectation that matches between members of the same USTA level will be decided by single break sets, ie that the matchplay will be even.

The USTA takes pains to explain that 6-0, 6-0 matches will take place between players that are correctly rated within their system, but still the erroneous expectation of close matches persists.

Welcome to the real world.

[TennisDawg]

Originally Posted by LuckyR

Obviously, as others have stated, the A, B and C system worked just fine. Why then does a "better" system (2.5 thru 5.0) create threads like this one?

IMO the reason is the (unrealistic) modern expectation that matches between members of the same USTA level will be decided by single break sets, ie that the matchplay will be even.

The USTA takes pains to explain that 6-0, 6-0 matches will take place between players that are correctly rated within their system, but still the erroneous expectation of close matches persists.

Welcome to the real world.

That makes a lof of sense! 6-0, 6-0 matches occur at every level of the game, even in professional tennis. If we had a little NTRP rating "verfier" with a clipboard going around rating these guys, what would he do?

[floridatennisdude]

Originally Posted by TennisDawg

That makes a lof of sense! 6-0, 6-0 matches occur at every level of the game, even in professional tennis. If we had a little NTRP rating "verfier" with a clipboard going around rating these guys, what would he do?

He would collect a paycheck and make USTA dues go up probably.

[Power Player]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

Congratulations?

My point is that if you are telling folks that you are a 5.0 (or 4.0 or 4.5) based on what the coaches and directors of your league are telling you and not based on a USTA computer rating . . . well, that is not accurate.

You may in fact have skills that would allow you to be a computer-rated 5.0, but that doesn't mean you should claim to be a 5.0. 'Cause without that actual computer rating, you're just guessing.

Frankly, the problems I am describing are more likely limited to those who are 4.5 and below. There aren't many USTA league playing opportunities for 5.0s, so that does tend to be a different orbit.

So in other words we have to play in a USTA league even though we may not want to? I brought up my league and you dismissed it . I don't need congratulations, I am simply making a point. Let me expound :

There are all kinds of leagues. I have never had anyone ask my rating, but I have heard pros and club directors do a quick ranking so they can get people together in a league.

You want a uniform rating system even though USTA is not really the ideal way to play for all of us. In FL there are tons of alternatives. And in those leagues people describe others as a 4.0, 5.0..etc. It will never change.

[Cindysphinx]

Powerplayer,

All I am saying is that those who do not have a current USTA computer rating need to stop misleading others.

USTA rating is currently the most ubiquitous and consistent rating available at the moment for most rec players, so that is what most people think of when they hear, "I'm a 3.5." The people who are claimung to be 3.5s when they have no computer rating are causing needless confusuion.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

Powerplayer,

All I am saying is that those who do not have a current USTA computer rating need to stop misleading others.

USTA rating is currently the most ubiquitous and consistent rating available at the moment for most rec players, so that is what most people think of when they hear, "I'm a 3.5." The people who are claimung to be 3.5s when they have no computer rating are causing needless confusuion.

Maybe, but 3.5/4.0/4.5 ratings are very useful for people who don't have the luxury of predictable work hours to commit to USTA leagues. I have some people with whom I play with whom I met on Craigslist or tennis websites based on their claimed rating. Most of them have worked out and we have been playing for years now. There is a guy I played on Sunday who plays 4.0 matches but only those that are organized in his club and we are evenly matched. He introduced himself as a 4.0 player a year ago and that was useful info.

[goober]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

Powerplayer,

All I am saying is that those who do not have a current USTA computer rating need to stop misleading others.

USTA rating is currently the most ubiquitous and consistent rating available at the moment for most rec players, so that is what most people think of when they hear, "I'm a 3.5." The people who are claimung to be 3.5s when they have no computer rating are causing needless confusuion.

This may surprise you but most rec players don't play USTA or necessarily have an official rating even if they belong to the USTA. Ratings are only meaningful in the context which they are derived from. If someone says they have an official 4.5 rating at their club and they play only at their club. Well by golly they are a 4.5 at their club. In fact you could argue that computer ratings are only valid within the context of USTA league and tournament play. Ratings are just arbitrary numbers that people shouldn't get to hung up on. I just take them as general guidelines for level of play.

I don't feel I am misled by people when they tell me their ratings adn they are not "official". Just note where they derived their rating from- self, club rated or computer rated and you will have a pretty good idea.

[TennisDawg]

Originally Posted by sureshs

Maybe, but 3.5/4.0/4.5 ratings are very useful for people who don't have the luxury of predictable work hours to commit to USTA leagues. I have some people with whom I play with whom I met on Craigslist or tennis websites based on their claimed rating. Most of them have worked out and we have been playing for years now. There is a guy I played on Sunday who plays 4.0 matches but only those that are organized in his club and we are evenly matched. He introduced himself as a 4.0 player a year ago and that was useful info.

No matters if you don't play in USTA sanctioned leagues or tournaments it's best not to claim you're a 3.5, 4.0 or any rating as far as that goes. You have no computer rating, a self rating has no meaning. If you self rate you are dishonest most likely sandbagging or have overrated yourself, thereby violating protocol and are being deceptive. You can play all non-USTA leagues you want, but you're just a wanna be hanging out. Until you get out of that sandbox, you we'll never be accepted by the USTA Tennis League, Tournament NTRP community. So, enjoy that non-USTA sanctioned league at least for now.

[Power Player]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

Powerplayer,

All I am saying is that those who do not have a current USTA computer rating need to stop misleading others.

USTA rating is currently the most ubiquitous and consistent rating available at the moment for most rec players, so that is what most people think of when they hear, "I'm a 3.5." The people who are claimung to be 3.5s when they have no computer rating are causing needless confusuion.

You just say " I don't have a computer rating", but I play with XXX and XXX who do and they are 4/5.x"

It's not a huge deal. So what, some people say they are better then they are. That will never change.

I know a tennis director who gets me matches and sets me up against 4-5.0 players and none have ever said it was a waste of time, in fact most want to play me again..a lowly guy with no USTA rating..imagine that.

[LuckyR]

This is a tempest in a teapot. Many don't play in official USTA tourneys and leagues, but it would be the very rare player in the US who nevers plays against an opponent with a legit USTA rating.

If I am unrated but my Sunday morning tennis buddy is USTA 4.0 and I beat him half the time, guess what? I can make a legit claim to be 4.0 as far as communications with a guy I meet at the resort courts in Hawaii on vacation next time.

[LeeD]

I haven't played a tournament since 1978.
I still play tennis, and player's always ask me my level, whether they played with me or not.
Mostly say "4.0".
I beat EVERY member of MarinCounty''s No1 4.0 team, only lost twice at night to their no.1 singles, and beat him daylight maybe 15 times. Never lost a set to the other 11 guys.
Still say I'm a 4.0.
What else can I say if someone asks me my level.
I see real 4.5's hit all the time, play doubles with them, and I KNOW I'll lose matches to them.

[Cindysphinx]

Usta ratings *are* the only real ratings that use the half point system that I am talking about. By "real," I mean "commonly understood."

There are other systems, of course. Many clubs apparently have their own system. That is fine.

If your are on vacation and someone asks your rating, isn't the correct answer "I don't have a rating, but I play with a bunch of 4.0s back home."

Or if you play a non-USTA county league and someone asks your level, isn't the answer "I don't have a USTA rating, but I think I am around 4.0"

What is so hard about just being truthful? The folks who insist on obscuring things (not referring to everyone here, just one or two people) are acting like having a computer rating is such a big deal that it is necessary or justified to fib.

As far as whether your local league pseudo-4.0s could prevail over usta comuter 4.0s . . . Who cares? I am a 4.0 (a legit one) and some 4.0s can beat me and some cannot.

I don't understand why some folks wriggle so hard rather than just admit they do not have a computer rating. I don't have a golf handicap, so why would I wish to go around suggesting that I do?

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

If your are on vacation and someone asks your rating, isn't the correct answer "I don't have a rating, but I play with a bunch of 4.0s back home."

Ideally yes, but on Craigslist you will see "me 4.0, you be at least 3.5" and on many tennis websites, your profile allows you to enter or select a number, not write an essay. That is the only thing that can be used in the search criteria. If you leave it empty, people are not going to find you, even if the site allows you to leave it empty, and many don't.

If my regular partners are on leave, and I see a "me 4.0" on Craigslist with a mention of the same area I live in, I will reply to that guy. I don't care if he plays USTA 4.0 or not. Most of the time, I have found that such people will be 3.5 to 4.0 and we have a good time.

[OrangePower]

When I first started playing tennis again several years ago, before I had a network of people to play with, I would look for hitting partners on craigslist. I knew roughly what my level was, based on playing a friend who had a USTA rating. So I would look for people advertizing themselves as at that level. Ended up being pretty much a waste of time - I ended up meeting up with 4-5 people IIRC, and all were much weaker than I had expected.

Ironically, they were probably all around the same level as each other, so presuming they were looking for partners only on craigslist, it would have worked out well for them since it appears that whether by luck or design they are all using the same scale. But whatever scale was being used is not equivalent to NTRP, so it's misleading to those used to NTRP.

Point is, it's useful to have a common language, and for lack of anything more universal, NTRP is it.

[Cindysphinx]

Craigs list is not the universe.

Bottom line: Be as honest as you can. If your rating is not official, just say that.

Sorry to be such a stickler, but there is enough misinformation and kvetching about sandbagging etc without having people muddy the waters more by saying they are 4.0 when it is based on what their pro told them, or the country club rating conversion chart, or a home grown algorithm.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

Craigs list is not the universe.

Bottom line: Be as honest as you can. If your rating is not official, just say that.

Sorry to be such a stickler, but there is enough misinformation and kvetching about sandbagging etc without having people muddy the waters more by saying they are 4.0 when it is based on what their pro told them, or the country club rating conversion chart, or a home grown algorithm.

USTA is also not the universe. If someone is not playing USTA, how can he sandbag a USTA tournament? Why does it matter to you at all? Many people have real jobs and do not want to promise that they will be available at a certain time and then not show up. When I played WTT a few years ago, I said I would play home matches only. Many don't have the time or like to travel to other clubs.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by OrangePower

When I first started playing tennis again several years ago, before I had a network of people to play with, I would look for hitting partners on craigslist. I knew roughly what my level was, based on playing a friend who had a USTA rating. So I would look for people advertizing themselves as at that level. Ended up being pretty much a waste of time - I ended up meeting up with 4-5 people IIRC, and all were much weaker than I had expected.

Ironically, they were probably all around the same level as each other, so presuming they were looking for partners only on craigslist, it would have worked out well for them since it appears that whether by luck or design they are all using the same scale. But whatever scale was being used is not equivalent to NTRP, so it's misleading to those used to NTRP.

Point is, it's useful to have a common language, and for lack of anything more universal, NTRP is it.

That can happen too. I was in the pro shop once, and a guy walked in to buy a racket. Owner asked him his level, he said 5. He thought the scale was from 0 to 10 so it was safe to say 5. Another time a guy kept sending me email begging to play. I assumed he had seen the level on the website. It turned out he had never played tennis before but thought that it was just a matter of swinging the racket.

[TennisDawg]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

I don't understand why some folks wriggle so hard rather than just admit they do not have a computer rating. I don't have a golf handicap, so why would I wish to go around suggesting that I do?

Nothing is wrong with just stating "my rating is 3.5, 4.0, 4.5 or whatever" period end of story, that's an honest answer! No need to elaborate and go into any further disussions just because somebody asks your NTRP rating. Besides when you enter a league or tournament the block where you enter the rating won't accept anything else but a rating, you don't have xplain it as if you're guilty of something.

[sureshs]

I would be more concerned about whether a guy who is going to play with me is a serial killer/cannibal rather than whether his rating is sanctioned by USTA (as Hannibal Lecter said, I will be having a friend over for dinner)

[TomT]

Interesting thread, as they all are for me. Reading through it, I think I have come to agree with what I now take to be Ms Cindy's main point:

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

... if you play a non-USTA county league and someone asks your level, isn't the answer "I don't have a USTA rating, but I think I am around 4.0"?

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

Bottom line: Be as honest as you can. If your rating is not official, just say that.

I agree with this. If your rating isn't a USTA computer rating, then just say up front that it isn't, and reveal the origin and development of your rating.

As I mentioned in a previous post in this thread, there aren't any USTA leagues in the Fort Lauderdale area, so it's all based on self rating according to NTRP guidelines, starting out, and is then adjusted by league adminstrators according to performance. Maybe not as accurate as computers, but pretty accurate, I think.

It is of course easy to overestimate one's abilities. Knowing nothing about these ratings, when I first got into the league I'm currently involved in I, as did all the other players, had to self-rate my level based on the NTRP guidelines. So far, it's worked out really accurately, I think. In my own case, I had to weigh the beauty (imho) of my shotmaking with the fact that I'm playing guys who are, on average, about 30 years younger than me. Guys with (imho) relatively ugly games who I would have (imho) beaten mercilessly 40 years ago beat me now because they're stronger, faster, quicker, and have more stamina.

So, (and I think I saw this in somebody's sig) I'm one of those old guys with, like, 4.0 + strokes who compete effectively only at a 3.0 (or less) level.