Is it a good idea or bad idea to play "down" if you want to move up?

[Cindysphinx]

I have a friend and occasional doubles partner who is a 3.5. She is bound and determined to be bumped up this year. She plays 4.0 ladies, 7.0 mixed and 8.0 mixed.

Last year, she played some 3.5 and 4.0 singles and thinks she did not get bumped up because of her poor singles results. She plays a very aggressive serve and volley game in singles and doubles, which yields a lot of spectacular winners but a lot of errors also.

Before the spring season, she was on the fence about playing 3.5. Her pro told her it would be a mistake to play 3.5 and she should only play 4.0. I don't know why he thinks this, although I suspect it is because she has said her goal is to move up.

I told her I thought she should play 3.5 as well as 4.0. My feeling was this was her last year to introduce new skills and work on consistency before being bumped up, not to mention that being a strong 3.5 is just plain fun. I also think if you have a 4.0 game, you will dominate in 3.5 so that playing 3.5 will not drag you down.

Recently, she played a 3.5 match with a new partner. They won, but she found it frustrating because her partner didn't do things like switch behind my friend when she poached. This experience reinforced her aversion to playing 3.5.

What do you think? Can playing 3.5 hurt a player whose goal is to move up to 4.0?

[jdubbs]

Yes it will hurt her, tell her to play 4.0. Crushing opponents is not that much fun and will actually hurt her game, and will get boring after a while.
4.0 will be a much more fun challenge.

[floridatennisdude]

It never hurts to know how to beat everyone...3.5, 4.0, 4.5, etc. I'd say that if she is rated as a 3.5, she should play at that level and up if desired. She might find herself as a 4.0 in the future and playing combo with a 3.0...you never know

[tennis tom]

Playing about 30% against players below you will allow you to practice shots that you wouldn't be able to under the pressure of higher competition.

[cak]

Looking around my club, it looks like you advance in the computer faster if you play your level. Heck, the ones that advanced the fastest played only their level.

Note: this is in the computer. It would probably help her game more to play up.

[LuckyR]

Since your friend plays doubles, although the posts above are true, in addition she will have better partners and thus play a different game of doubles by playing up.

[OrangePower]

In general it depends on goals, and on tennis playing style.

If the goal is to improve, independent of what the computer might do, then of course the best is to play at both levels. You get the exposure to the game at the higher level, but still get to learn how to beat those at your own level.

If the primary goal is to get bumped up, then it depends on the style of game. Players that win through smarts and consistency are probably better of playing just at their level. Players that are aggressive are probably better of playing at just the higher level. This is because an aggressive player is likely to get pretty similar results regardless of the strength of the opponent (within reason of course), whereas a player that is more consistent will have more variance in results based on opposition.

In your friend's case, since her primary goal is to get bumped up and she is an aggressive player, she should play only 4.0. Otherwise her inconsistency will lead to some dissappointing results in 3.5 that will reduce her chances of getting bumped up.

EDIT: Just to mention again that in principle I am against players playing up, but I'm putting that aside for purposes of answering your question

[shell]

I can certainly buy into the rationale that OrangePower is offering. Your friend does sound like she could be fairly inconsistent, but would enjoy the 4.0 game style much more. Play up.

[Cindysphinx]

Well, yes. She does play up.

She has time and opportunity to play 3.5 and 4.0. The question is whether, given that she is already playing 4.0, she should also play 3.5.

I was mulling the answers, and I think there may be a common misconception at play here. That misconception is that someone who is ready for a higher level could have such poor results at the lower level that it could prevent them from being bumped.

Honestly, I do not see how that could happen, and I have never seen it happen.

When someone is a strong 3.5 bordering on 4.0, that is what they are. They should be able dispatch other 3.5s routinely. If they encounter low 3.5 opponents, they should crush them without losing more than a couple of games. When they encounter high 3.5 opponents such as themselves, they should have a competitive match.

If someone thinks they are 4.0 material, then they have nothing to fear from playing 3.5 also.

They do, of course, have much to gain by playing 3.5. These things are:

Learning to deal with no pace.
Learning to deal with pushers.
Learning to build and finish a point.
Learning to deal with unexpected spins and placement.
Learning how to play your game when you are expected to win.
**Learning how to support a weaker partner.**

This last one is absolutely key and something that cannot ever be practiced by a 3.5 who is playing up at 4.0.

[Topaz]

Cindy, you know you could darn well be writing this post about me. Though, I know you aren't, and while I'm not 'bound and determined' to get moved up, I kind of expected it last year.

And I'm playing both 3.5 and 4.0. And I'm now faced with the real possibility of staying 3.5 another year, because I've already lost two 3.5 matches to computer rated 3.5 players (plus one to a self rate).

At the end of the day, it is what it is. But if my number one goal was to move up, I would only play 4.0.

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by Topaz

Cindy, you know you could darn well be writing this post about me. Though, I know you aren't, and while I'm not 'bound and determined' to get moved up, I kind of expected it last year.

And I'm playing both 3.5 and 4.0. And I'm now faced with the real possibility of staying 3.5 another year, because I've already lost two 3.5 matches to computer rated 3.5 players (plus one to a self rate).

At the end of the day, it is what it is. But if my number one goal was to move up, I would only play 4.0.

I haven't looked up your opponents, but . . .

I would not assume you won't be bumped up because of two singles losses to computer-rated 3.5s. If your scores were close, it is quite likely they will be bumped up and your loss is strong enough to get you bumped up also. Geez, when I bumped from 3.0 to 3.5, I barely had a winning record.

Anyway, I am glad your number one goal isn't to move up. Moving up without having the skills to move up is kind of pointless. Me, I think you will move up because you play a 4.0 level of tennis.

Cindy -- off to go look at Topaz's recent match results

[Cindysphinx]

OK, Topaz. This is nuts.

Your record for 2012 in 3.5 singles is 13-2. You are frequently giving up just 2-3 games for each win. In one loss, you won 8 games; in the other loss you won 5 games.

So how are your 3.5 results possibly hurting you?

[dcdoorknob]

I guess I just don't get the mentality honestly. If one does only play up and somehow manage to get bumped up despite not learning how to easily dispatch those that are not at the top of their current level, I don't hold out much hope for that person when it comes to actually winning very often at the higher level. So congrats on manipulating the system into putting you at a level which is higher than your skillset will let you even achieve mediocre results. Really what fun is that?

[OrangePower]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

I was mulling the answers, and I think there may be a common misconception at play here. That misconception is that someone who is ready for a higher level could have such poor results at the lower level that it could prevent them from being bumped.

Honestly, I do not see how that could happen, and I have never seen it happen.

This is no misconception. I personally know a couple of 4.0 players who also play up at 4.5, and they have similar success (about .333) at both levels.

Let me illustrate how this can happen using an extreme example: Imagine a player with a 5.5 level serve but 3.5 level ROS and groundstrokes. This player holds serve 90% of the time whether playing against a 4.0 or a 4.5. Somewhat randomly and rarely, this player can fluke a ROS winner. So this player can win some matches by (a) holding serve, and (b) lucking out with a few winner returns strung together in one game to break serve. The success rate of this player will be very similar at both 4.0 and 4.5, although at both levels this player will lose more than he wins due to his general inability to break or to contend in a rally.

The above example is extreme, but you get the picture - an aggressive, risk-taking player can, on the occassional 'on' day, beat players at a higher level, but on the more common 'off' day, lose to players of the same level.

In terms of how this impacts ratings:

A 3.5 (for example) playing up at 4.0, and winning say one in three, actually has a decent chance of getting bumped up (depending on exact scores, opponents' ratings, yada yada). That's assuming no matches at 3.5. But if that same 3.5 was also playing at 3.5, and winning one in three, that would likely be enough to drag down their DNTRP and keep them at 3.5.

[EDIT: Just adding my standard disclaimer for the record that I am in principle against playing up.]

[Cindysphinx]

I will see your hypothetical and raise you a baseless argument.

Yeah, you've identified a fluky situation, but it is one that doesn't happen often if at all.

More typical is a player wins most of the time at the lower level and has competitive losses at the higher level.

I suppose it is possible to have an aggressive player who plays her A game at 4.0 but pushes at 3.5, figuring that is the best way to win. Because pushing is her B game, she is not good at it and has competitive results at 3.5 when she should perhaps dominate. Or perhaps she gets tight at 3.5 because it would be so embarrassing to lose to an "inferior" opponent.

[OrangePower]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

I will see your hypothetical and raise you a baseless argument.

Yeah, you've identified a fluky situation, but it is one that doesn't happen often if at all.

More typical is a player wins most of the time at the lower level and has competitive losses at the higher level.

I suppose it is possible to have an aggressive player who plays her A game at 4.0 but pushes at 3.5, figuring that is the best way to win. Because pushing is her B game, she is not good at it and has competitive results at 3.5 when she should perhaps dominate. Or perhaps she gets tight at 3.5 because it would be so embarrassing to lose to an "inferior" opponent.

Absolutely agree with the bolded part. But I do have two real-word examples (players I know) that when 'on' (maybe 25% of the time) are competitive 4.5s, and when 'off' (75% of the time) are weak 4.0s. They have very big games but are extremely inconsistent, and wouldn't know how to tone it down even if they wanted to.

[JoelDali]

What overgrip does she use?

I would tell her to continue GOATing the 3.5s then she'll get bumped and start Annaconing(tm) the mid tier 4.0 players.

If she switches to an all poly setup it will psych out all of the low end 4.0 spider vein hackers.

I think I know who this poast is about.

[Topaz]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

OK, Topaz. This is nuts.

Your record for 2012 in 3.5 singles is 13-2. You are frequently giving up just 2-3 games for each win. In one loss, you won 8 games; in the other loss you won 5 games.

So how are your 3.5 results possibly hurting you?

Because you know, as well as I do, that your record has nothing to do with it. Too many of those wins, already, were 'competitive'. One was 10-8 in a TB, and another was a sudden death point. Three losses to 3.5s (one of the 4.0 losses was to a 3.5).

So, yeah, those things, even if I win, can lower my DNTRP. Still lots of matches to go though.

So I take a risk when I play 3.5 singles...of losing and staying down. To eliminate that possibility, I could just play 4.0, where I would likely win a few, have a few competitive losses, and get blown out a few times. But that would probably be enough to get bumped.

I *do* think I know who you are talking about...

[Topaz]

Originally Posted by dcdoorknob

I guess I just don't get the mentality honestly. If one does only play up and somehow manage to get bumped up despite not learning how to easily dispatch those that are not at the top of their current level, I don't hold out much hope for that person when it comes to actually winning very often at the higher level. So congrats on manipulating the system into putting you at a level which is higher than your skillset will let you even achieve mediocre results. Really what fun is that?

This is a good point...and there are more than a few players I know who are complaining about being bumped up. I look at them and say 'what did you expect, you plowed through everyone at 3.5'. But now they are just 'average', and that doesn't sit so well!

[Topaz]

But, Cinday, an argument in FAVOR of what your former partner is doing was perfectly displayed last night. A match where it looks like I blew someone out, where all I had to do was stand there, occasionally serve second serves (didn't need to hit first serves) and sometimes return.

Those kinds of matches don't help my game. And it didn't even help my confidence, because I know full well she did all the work to lose that match. I didn't really have much to do with it.