What Should A Former College Player Ntrp Rating Be???!

[cshokraii]

Lets say it's been about 10+ years and 50 lbs since your college days and you used to play #6-7 for a div 1 school, what should your level of play be? I can play guys 4.0 to 5.0 but in league play I only have about a 50% winning percentage in singles against guys that do not have very solid looking strokes or serves but play very consistent and tough tennis. Any thoughts?? Anyone else in my shoes??

[JMS]

Well, if you don't mind me asking, where did you play?

[Jim A]

http://www.usta.com/~/media/9B46CE5C...66D9C47AA.ashx

[vandre]

Originally Posted by cshokraii

Lets say it's been about 10+ years and 50 lbs since your college days and you used to play #6-7 for a div 1 school, what should your level of play be? I can play guys 4.0 to 5.0 but in league play I only have about a 50% winning percentage in singles against guys that do not have very solid looking strokes or serves but play very consistent and tough tennis. Any thoughts?? Anyone else in my shoes??

well, yes and no. it's been 10+ years since i played in college (5-8 d 3), so right off the bat i'm way far below you already. i picked up the racquet again in 06 after much weightlifting for my old job and many ho hos (curse your black heart little debbie ). i'm in a 3.5 league and while most of my matches have been in the 6-3 range, i've not won one this session. this is one of the many flaws in ntrp system. but in its defense, i've heard that the college player ranking applies to players just coming out of college not guys like you and me who put down the racquet for 10+ years. there's a guy who lives in my town who was a former d 1 nationally ranked player in college. this guy repeatedly mops the courts with the best players in town so i'd say the rule should definately apply to him. like alot of rules, i think there are exceptions to it, which is why you could benefit from a living, breathing pro (someone who knows what they're doing) to hit some balls with you and rate you.

hope this helps!

[LeeD]

I'd say 4.0 to 4.5 USTA is about right.....
50 lbs is a whole lot to move around...more than college. 10 years off might take 3 months of 3 times a week play to approach your previous hitting levels, and that doesn't account for conditioning, speed, eyesight loss, and slower reflexes.
I played some pro Q's way back when, going 4 rounds first season, 5 the next, losing to players who made the top 10 a couple years after I played them. So maybe A level or 5.5 for me.
Took my 10 years off (for motocross and windsurfing), came back barely a competitive 3.8 level player, and with maybe 4 months, back to solid, mostly winning 4.0, which I still claim today.
Modern players get to hit at least 3 days a week, play lots of tournaments, train and work out at night, unlike the older players who just played tennis. 4.5 is hard to achieve at a competitive level, but since you were probably there before, depending on which college, you should get close except for your weight, conditioning, declining skills and reflexes, and lack of practice partners, coaches, peers, etc.........
As you well know, a great hitter who has the handicap of the above sentence goes back to being a "one great hitter", and maybe a 4.0 solid player nowadays.

[Geezer Guy]

If this is you:

Div. 1 unranked college team or player; NAIA, Div. 2 & 3 top ranked college team or player (commited to, playing, or played )

it all depends on your age. See Jim A's link above.

You'd use that NTRP to enter into USTA league and tournament play. Depending on your win/loss record in the USTA, the computer may move you up or down.

[Fedace]

Originally Posted by cshokraii

Lets say it's been about 10+ years and 50 lbs since your college days and you used to play #6-7 for a div 1 school, what should your level of play be? I can play guys 4.0 to 5.0 but in league play I only have about a 50% winning percentage in singles against guys that do not have very solid looking strokes or serves but play very consistent and tough tennis. Any thoughts?? Anyone else in my shoes??

4.0-5.0 is pretty wide range. huge difference between 4.0 and 5.0. Can you still use heavy spins and power as you did in division 1 tennis ? if so most likely 4.5 or so.

There is no hard and fast rule. It depends upon what level you were in the first place (#6 could be a 4.0 very easily) while some college players were more or less 7.0s and were trained from birth for elite competition. The other factor is how much you've played since school. Things like kids, jobs and dogs play a role. Injuries too. I hate it when former college players get discriminated against as if they were all John Isners or something.

[Gemini]

I've known Div. 1 players that would be rated as low as 4.0 while some Div 3. programs don't have anyone that's lower than a 5.0. Like someone said, there's no "hard" rule that a former collegiate tennis player has to be a certain level.

[goober]

Originally Posted by Julieta

There is no hard and fast rule. It depends upon what level you were in the first place (#6 could be a 4.0 very easily) while some college players were more or less 7.0s and were trained from birth for elite competition. The other factor is how much you've played since school. Things like kids, jobs and dogs play a role. Injuries too. I hate it when former college players get discriminated against as if they were all John Isners or something.

I agree. I use to think that college players shouldn't be 4.5 if they were D2-3 or 5.0 if they were D1. But now having played against a wide range of ex college players from D1 to small college and a wide range of ages, I would say that many college players get unfairly pegged as sandbaggers. There are some ex D1 players that are in their 40s and took a long time off from tennis and come back. Some are truly are not better than 4.0 and still are 4.0 after a year or two of playing because they just play once a week for fun and are not training. So it really depends.

For the OP, you may want to play some tournaments first instead of leagues and self rate either 4.0 or 4.5. See how you do and adjust. Play a bunch of these first. You can't get DQ'ed in tourneys so you won't have to worry about that or **** other league players off.

Originally Posted by goober

I agree. I use to think that college players shouldn't be 4.5 if they were D2-3 or 5.0 if they were D1. But now having played against a wide range of ex college players from D1 to small college and a wide range of ages, I would say that many college players get unfairly pegged as sandbaggers. There are some ex D1 players that are in their 40s and took a long time off from tennis and come back. Some are truly are not better than 4.0 and still are 4.0 after a year or two of playing because they just play once a week for fun and are not training. So it really depends.

For the OP, you may want to play some tournaments first instead of leagues and self rate either 4.0 or 4.5. See how you do and adjust. Play a bunch of these first. You can't get DQ'ed in tourneys so you won't have to worry about that or **** other league players off.

Exactly. It makes such a difference how much time someone has and how much they are into it. I think too there is such a perception that to play in college you had to be a superstar. Not always true. Some teams take players that are good additions to the team for other reasons. Maybe they only play matches that dont count and some dont play much at all. Some schools have huge rosters.

There is also the google test. Anyone who played college before the internet got really big probably isnt going to be on google unless they did something a little more unusual. As an example, if you google someone and their name comes up under something like "All Time Pac-10" then chances are, even without playing, this person isn't a 4.0 player. They did enough in college to get their name in the record books. They would be in at least the 5.0 range. On the other hand, I googled a guy I knew who played D1 at a ranked school but didnt play much and nothing comes up about his college tennis. He was probably a 4.0 back then and still is now. Of course its different with younger people because all of their playing comes up now, but anyone over a certain age it is more interesting to see if they are out there. Of course people could improve too and be even better now. Doesn't work as well for ladies since they change their names more often. This is of course not to stay that if the person's name doesn't come up they werent really good, but if they were it is a lot more likely they'd come up in some kind of conference or ITA archive.

[Kick_It]

Another thought is to sign up for age group tournaments and see how you do against different players there. Presumably most of the folks your age group have day jobs now, have put on a few pounds, and have similar agility (or lack thereof).

OP never mentioned why you care about NTRP - but presume leagues from your initial post. That is about the only reason I can see why you'd need it. In that case - if you do age groups, just look up the ratings of your opponents and correlate with your results against them to figure out a good fit.

OP also didn't mention how much D1 match experience you had and in singles vs doubles. At my college #7 was either a doubles specialist or occasionally got to play #3 doubles (when 1-6 was injured). He didn't travel with the team except maybe a pre-season tournament or two. I know a few people who were primarily practice players that never got to play many D1 or conference matches - who might have great strokes but aren't so good at match play. That just adds to NTRP confusion as previous two replies mention.

I can kinda relate to OP's situation. I went about 15 years without playing after college. At age 20 I figured out I realistically wasn't going any further with tennis (the dream had ended so to speak), so plowed myself into the classes I skipped for tennis practice yet managed to get B-'s in w/o attendance and then plowed myself into the job I got after college and then my career.

I thought it would be fun to pick it back up in time to play 35s. Gads was there lots of rust and my movement was atrocious at first and I hadn't really worked out other than an occasional "fun run" with friends in at least 8 years at the time. The trick is to make the most out of the time you can now spend on tennis.

Have fun with it regardless, K_I

[cshokraii]

Originally Posted by JMS

Well, if you don't mind me asking, where did you play?

I played at Radford University

[bigfoot910]

I'm pretty much in the exact same situation as you... Except about 80 lbs instead of 50 and 5 years out. I know, I know. Played 7 at a D1 school, then quit for personal reasons. I took 2 years off away from tennis then picked back up as a coach, then moved back into playing.
I came back in at 4.5, it is the lowest the USTA will let you play if they have evidence you played D1.

However, if you lose the majority of your matches they can bump you down to 4.0.
I played at 4.5 and it was very competitive for me, if I lost the weight I would bump up again, but man that's a lot of work...

Hope you can get back in and be successful and have fun!

[goran_ace]

When you self-rate the USTA's online tool won't let you go any lower than 5.0, but its pretty easy to get an appeal as long as you do it at least a month and a half before the season starts. Just write in the comment section that you took x years off, had such and such injuries or pains, and have gained x lbs over your playing weight. I know two guys who were D-I all-conference players who are both playing 4.5. Another friend of mine (also former D-I player) successfully appealed to play 4.0. There's a guy in my club who was a former D-III player who is playing 3.5 this year. If you appeal down, I assume people will be watching you more closely for sandbagging, but in the end its better for everyone if you play where you are comfortable.

[atatu]

I personally don't think anyone who played D1 should rate below 4.5, regardless of how much time you took and how much weight you put on. I've gained 60 pounds since High School, but I have never played below the 4.5 level and I took about 8 years off for law school and kids, etc. I'm now 47 and although I'm not one of the best 4.5 players, I can still play at that level.