How would a modern 4.5 player fare against Evert in her prime?

GuyClinch · Aug 28, 2009

But if I'm so wrong about a 4.5 winning a couple of games from a WTA pro, how did ZPTennis pull it off? Obviously she let him win those games, right?

Women's tennis is not like men's. The drop off from a #1 player to "pro" is at least a half rating. Back in Evert's day she just walked through those players. It was all bagels and breadsticks. You could simply write in Evert or Martina to nearly every final.

Evert in her prime was pretty awesome - but outside of a few top female players it was just garbage. it hasn't really changed much. The Williams sisters can stay home eat popcorn for months and still win wimbledon. With men OTOH ANY player in the top 300 or so is pretty damn good. Guys 100+ stand a decent chance against Federer if he is playing badly.

You see this recreationally too. I think here in NYC TONS of women play tennis. Its more popular then it is for men. But most of them are like housewives - few can even beat 3.5 men. The percentage of female players that a legit 4.5 and above is STAGGERINGLY small. Its pretty much former college players or better..(Bolleteri kids etc).

raiden031 · Aug 28, 2009

aphex said:
i don't think people realize what pro means.

the difference between a pro and a 4.5, is the same as
the difference between a 4.5 and a monkey holding a racquet.

I don't agree with this. I'm convinced the difference between players at the highest levels is more intangibles then it is raw skills. There are 4.5s who can hit forehands and serves at the same pace as the pros. 4.5 is considered an advanced player. Many 4.5 have developed all the shots, but just can't use them consistently enough during match play to beat better players, 5.0, 5.5, etc. There are some 4.5 players who look like club players (just good defensive players), and some that look like pros (when talking about individual strokes).

When comparing a 4.5 to a monkey (or better a 2.5 player), the raw skill differences are overwhelming. A 2.5 will never look like a competent player and will struggle to hit the ball with any amount of pace because they just don't own any shots. A 2.5 will not even be able to return a shot (from a 4.5 player) that has any amount of pace or spin.

Apples to oranges.

raiden031 · Aug 28, 2009

GuyClinch said:
Women's tennis is not like men's. The drop off from a #1 player to "pro" is at least a half rating. Back in Evert's day she just walked through those players. It was all bagels and breadsticks. You could simply write in Evert or Martina to nearly every final.

Evert in her prime was pretty awesome - but outside of a few top female players it was just garbage. it hasn't really changed much. The Williams sisters can stay home eat popcorn for months and still win wimbledon. With men OTOH ANY player in the top 300 or so is pretty damn good. Guys 100+ stand a decent chance against Federer if he is playing badly.

You see this recreationally too. I think here in NYC TONS of women play tennis. Its more popular then it is for men. But most of them are like housewives - few can even beat 3.5 men. The percentage of female players that a legit 4.5 and above is STAGGERINGLY small. Its pretty much former college players or better..(Bolleteri kids etc).

So do you think its reasonable that a 4.5 men could win a few games off some WTA pros?

I think its stupid that the OP is singling out Evert as if she is inferior to most WTA pros, when she is one of the greater ones in history. So I won't back up that argument.

aphex · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
I don't agree with this. I'm convinced the difference between players at the highest levels is more intangibles then it is raw skills. There are 4.5s who can hit forehands and serves at the same pace as the pros. 4.5 is considered an advanced player. Many 4.5 have developed all the shots, but just can't use them consistently enough during match play to beat better players, 5.0, 5.5, etc. There are some 4.5 players who look like club players (just good defensive players), and some that look like pros (when talking about individual strokes).

When comparing a 4.5 to a monkey (or better a 2.5 player), the raw skill differences are overwhelming. A 2.5 will never look like a competent player and will struggle to hit the ball with any amount of pace because they just don't own any shots. A 2.5 will not even be able to return a shot with any amount of pace or spin.

Apples to oranges.

IMO

the difference between a 6.5 and a 4.5 >>>>>>>>>>>>the difference between a 4.5 and a 2.5

raiden031 · Aug 28, 2009

aphex said:
IMO

the difference between a 6.5 and a 4.5 >>>>>>>>>>>>the difference between a 4.5 and a 2.5

As I stated in an earlier post, if that were true then why is Wayne Odesnik going into tiebreakers with 5.5 players?

drakulie · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
By your logic, since WTA players practice against male pros, they should NEVER miss a service return against a WTA player because they are used to dealing with better serves. Of course it doesn't work like that.

No, you are purposely missing the point I'm making. What I said was they have seen 120 mph serves tens of thousands of times, so a 4.5's 120 mph serve isn't going to be something they haven't seen before.

Secondly, the difference between a 4.5's 120 mph serve, and pros are as follows:

Ability to do it consistently.
Ability to hit it in consistently.
Ability to hit it deep in the box consistently.
Ability to hit it out wide, down the T, into the body consistently.
Ability to hit it with over 2000 rpms of spin with slice, top, etc consistently.
Ability to disquise where they are going with it.
Ability to change it up with off-speed serves consistently.

Do you know of a 4.5 that could do this? If you say "yes", you are lying.

Now one of other thing is.......... The female pro, is practicing against this day in and day out.

raiden031 said:
A 4.5 with a big serve and having a good day can trouble pretty much anybody with their serve.

No, they can't. If they could, they wouldn't be hacking away in weekend recreational leagues>> they'd be playing 5.0, 5.5 tournaments, nationals, satelites/futures. Wake up.

raiden031 said:
As I said a 4.5 serving 115 is the same as a pro serving 115. Its just the pros can do it more dependably and better under pressure.

No, it's not as I already pointed out.

raiden031 said:
But if I'm so wrong about a 4.5 winning a couple of games from a WTA pro, how did ZPTennis pull it off? Obviously she let him win those games, right?

I personally know a girl who just broke 300 in the world (currently). Guess what? There is no way a 4.5 gets a game off her, unless they ace, or hit an unreturnable first serve 4 times in a row. Soon as she gets the ball back, no 4.5 is beating her off the ground.

One more thing, she currently plays/practices 8 hours a day, against the junior guys at the club. They are all well above 5.0 players and nationally ranked. Guess what?? They don't come close to beating her.

aphex · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
As I stated in an earlier post, if that were true then why is Wayne Odesnik going into tiebreakers with 5.5 players?

i have no idea...maybe it was his buddy, maybe odesnik was 16, maybe he had fever maybe maybe maybe...

a legit 7.0, playing seriously, will almost never lose a game from a 5.5...

let alone a 4.5...

let me tell you one of my stories...

this kid we have at our club just got his first atp point in a futures tourney...big strokes, big serve...the works...so a legit 6.0

now, my teacher, at 35, hasnt played professionally in 5 years and is about 15kgs overweight. he used to play in the second league in germany...nothing exceptional but a very good player--at his peak i'd say about 6.75...

when he plays this kid, he beats him 6/2 or 6/3....

my point is that pros (even average ones), have a completely different understanding of the game--they understand the variables---after 10 seconds into the warmup they will diagnose your weakness and pounce mercilessly there.

now, we are talking about a woman who is in the top 3 of all time. of all women. who have ever played tennis. i don't think we can fathom the understanding she has of the game. you like pace? she'll give you none.
you move better to the left? she'll move you to the right.
you have a weak backhand volley? she'll bring you in and make you hit backhand volleys all day long...

NamRanger · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
By your logic, since WTA players practice against male pros, they should NEVER miss a service return against a WTA player because they are used to dealing with better serves. Of course it doesn't work like that.

A 4.5 with a big serve and having a good day can trouble pretty much anybody with their serve. As I said a 4.5 serving 115 is the same as a pro serving 115. Its just the pros can do it more dependably and better under pressure.

But if I'm so wrong about a 4.5 winning a couple of games from a WTA pro, how did ZPTennis pull it off? Obviously she let him win those games, right?

No, a 4.5 with a big serve is not troubling anyone. A 4.5's 115 serve is not the same as a pro serving 115. The pro will have...

A. Better consistency
B. Better placement
C. More spin
D. Better disguise

And those are way more important than power.

Also, there's a big difference between 300 in the world and legendary 18 time grand slam player.

raiden031 · Aug 28, 2009

drakulie said:
No, you are purposely missing the point I'm making. What I said was they have seen 120 mph serves tens of thousands of times, so a 4.5's 120 mph serve isn't going to be something they haven't seen before.

Secondly, the difference between a 4.5's 120 mph serve, and pros are as follows:

Ability to do it consistently.

Ability to hit it in consistently.

Ability to hit it deep in the box consistently.

Ability to hit it out wide, down the T, into the body consistently.

Ability to hit it with over 2000 rpms of spin with slice, top, etc consistently.

Ability to disquise where they are going with it.

Ability to change it up with off-speed serves consistently.

Do you know of a 4.5 that could do this? If you say "yes", you are lying.

Now one of other thing is.......... The female pro, is practicing against this day in and day out.

No, they can't. If they could, they wouldn't be hacking away in weekend recreational leagues>> they'd be playing 5.0, 5.5 tournaments, nationals, satelites/futures. Wake up.

No, it's not as I already pointed out.

I personally know a girl who just broke 300 in the world (currently). Guess what? There is no way a 4.5 gets a game off her, unless they ace, or hit an unreturnable first serve 4 times in a row. Soon as she gets the ball back, no 4.5 is beating her off the ground.

One more thing, she currently plays/practices 8 hours a day, against the junior guys at the club. They are all well above 5.0 players and nationally ranked. Guess what?? They don't come close to beating her.

Again I'm not saying that a 4.5 would even play a competitive match against a female pro, but only that they might hold a few service games if they have a good day. I remember watching USTA pro circuit 2 years ago with women in the top 150-250. They were serving probably not much more than 90mph. These serves were nothing, yet they were able to hold serve. Maybe there is more to these serves than what I saw.

I agree that these woman would be superior to 4.5 players on the ground and in most aspects of the game, but I don't think they are serving. And of course I'm not talking about average 4.5 serving, but solid 4.5 serving. And again seeing big serves in practice doesn't guarantee they can always defend against them. I think if a 4.5 can serve well enough, they can win a few points on the ground if they can end the point before the pro opponent neutralizes the rally and takes over. Also the pro opponent might hit some UEs as well.

NamRanger · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
Again I'm not saying that a 4.5 would even play a competitive match against a female pro, but only that they might hold a few service games if they have a good day. I remember watching USTA pro circuit 2 years ago with women in the top 150-250. They were serving probably not much more than 90mph. These serves were nothing, yet they were able to hold serve. Maybe there is more to these serves than what I saw.

I agree that these woman would be superior to 4.5 players on the ground and in most aspects of the game, but I don't think they are serving. And of course I'm not talking about average 4.5 serving, but solid 4.5 serving. And again seeing big serves in practice doesn't guarantee they can always defend against them. I think if a 4.5 can serve well enough, they can win a few points on the ground if they can end the point before the pro opponent neutralizes the rally and takes over. Also the pro opponent might hit some UEs as well.

How is a pro going to miss? Due to how slow your ball is compared to theirs I guess?

raiden031 · Aug 28, 2009

aphex said:
i have no idea...maybe it was his buddy, maybe odesnik was 16, maybe he had fever maybe maybe maybe...

a legit 7.0, playing seriously, will almost never lose a game from a 5.5...

let alone a 4.5...

This was 2 years ago when Odesnik was ranked around the top 100. He played some USTA open event and played 5 matches against a handful of 5.5s. He did not double-bagel any of these players.

Why would you make excuses for him? The burden of proof is on someone else to prove that he was not 100%.

aphex · Aug 28, 2009

NamRanger said:
No, a 4.5 with a big serve is not troubling anyone. A 4.5's 115 serve is not the same as a pro serving 115. The pro will have...

A. Better consistency
B. Better placement
C. More spin
D. Better disguise

And those are way more important than power.

Also, there's a big difference between 300 in the world and legendary 18 time grand slam player.

but acocording to some posters here a 4.5 can serve "120mph bombs".
unlike some top 10 players like nadal, davydenko and simon. lmao.

raiden031 · Aug 28, 2009

NamRanger said:
How is a pro going to miss? Due to how slow your ball is compared to theirs I guess?

My ball has nothing to do with my argument. I'm not a 4.5 player. Pros can hit UEs because they are human.

ItsJustaBall · Aug 28, 2009

My sample match results versus differing levels (I'm a 4.0)

vs 3.0 (6-2, 6-4)
vs 3.5 (6-3, 6-4)
vs 4.0 (6-1, 6-2)
vs 4.5 (2-6, 5-7) tennis coach, pickup game at local park
vs 5.0 (0-6, 5-7) usta computer rated 5.0, guy lives next door to me
vs 6.0 (3-6, 4-6) Div 1 player, my neighbor

My point is that you can play anybody no matter their rating and if they aren't taking the match seriously you can take games off of them.

I when I asked my Div 1 neighbor why I wasn't able to beat lower level (5.0 and 4.5 when I could hang with him, he admitted he didn't really take the matches all that seriously. (I really thought I was a badass tennis player)

So I challenged him to play me straight up and he bageled me first set.
My serves that I usually could either ace him or get a service winner from, he was then floating them back deep to get into a neutral position and of course I lost nearly every rally.
Second set we played where I ONLY played half the singles court and he bageled me again.
Third set he played the whole doubles court and I played half the singles court and I still lost 2-6.

So anyway the point is you can win any amount of games from anybody even Federer if he doesn't have a stake in the match.

aphex · Aug 28, 2009

ItsJustaBall said:
My sample match results versus differing levels (I'm a 4.0)

vs 3.0 (6-2, 6-4)
vs 3.5 (6-3, 6-4)
vs 4.0 (6-1, 6-2)
vs 4.5 (2-6, 5-7) tennis coach, pickup game at local park
vs 5.0 (0-6, 5-7) usta computer rated 5.0, guy lives next door to me
vs 6.0 (3-6, 4-6) Div 1 player, my neighbor

My point is that you can play anybody no matter their rating and if they aren't taking the match seriously you can take games off of them.

I when I asked my Div 1 neighbor why I wasn't able to beat lower level (5.0 and 4.5 when I could hang with him, he admitted he didn't really take the matches all that seriously. (I really thought I was a badass tennis player)

So I challenged him to play me straight up and he bageled me first set.
My serves that I usually could either ace him or get a service winner from, he was then floating them back deep to get into a neutral position and of course I lost nearly every rally.
Second set we played where I ONLY played half the singles court and he bageled me again.
Third set he played the whole doubles court and I played half the singles court and I still lost 2-6.

So anyway the point is you can win any amount of games from anybody even Federer if he doesn't have a stake in the match.

lol...nice post

aphex · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
My ball has nothing to do with my argument. I'm not a 4.5 player. Pros can hit UEs because they are human.

playing seriously? against a 4.5?
no. there won't be any errors. either forced or unforced.

raiden031 · Aug 28, 2009

ItsJustaBall said:
My sample match results versus differing levels (I'm a 4.0)

vs 3.0 (6-2, 6-4)
vs 3.5 (6-3, 6-4)
vs 4.0 (6-1, 6-2)
vs 4.5 (2-6, 5-7) tennis coach, pickup game at local park
vs 5.0 (0-6, 5-7) usta computer rated 5.0, guy lives next door to me
vs 6.0 (3-6, 4-6) Div 1 player, my neighbor

My point is that you can play anybody no matter their rating and if they aren't taking the match seriously you can take games off of them.

I when I asked my Div 1 neighbor why I wasn't able to beat lower level (5.0 and 4.5 when I could hang with him, he admitted he didn't really take the matches all that seriously. (I really thought I was a badass tennis player)

So I challenged him to play me straight up and he bageled me first set.
My serves that I usually could either ace him or get a service winner from, he was then floating them back deep to get into a neutral position and of course I lost nearly every rally.
Second set we played where I ONLY played half the singles court and he bageled me again.
Third set he played the whole doubles court and I played half the singles court and I still lost 2-6.

So anyway the point is you can win any amount of games from anybody even Federer if he doesn't have a stake in the match.

It is hard to double-bagel inferior opponents. People don't play at the top of their ability every single game. Sometimes there is bad luck, sometimes your opponent hits lucky shots, sometimes you underestimate your opponent, many things can go wrong that ruin your double-bagel chances.

MichaelChang · Aug 28, 2009

raiden, did you watch pros practise with their hitting partners? for example stand next to the court and watch them practice? I have to remind you that, the top pros can hit maybe a 100 shot rally with their hitting partner, without missing a single ball. When you don't put pressure on them, they hit back with pace easily as if they play with their eyes closed. The consistency level they are at, is something beyond your imagination.

No, unless they have a serious opponent, they will not make UFEs.

Thud and blunder · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
I don't agree with this. I'm convinced the difference between players at the highest levels is more intangibles then it is raw skills. There are 4.5s who can hit forehands and serves at the same pace as the pros. 4.5 is considered an advanced player. Many 4.5 have developed all the shots, but just can't use them consistently enough during match play to beat better players, 5.0, 5.5, etc. There are some 4.5 players who look like club players (just good defensive players), and some that look like pros (when talking about individual strokes).
When comparing a 4.5 to a monkey (or better a 2.5 player), the raw skill differences are overwhelming. A 2.5 will never look like a competent player and will struggle to hit the ball with any amount of pace because they just don't own any shots. A 2.5 will not even be able to return a shot (from a 4.5 player) that has any amount of pace or spin.

Apples to oranges.

This is just so wrong that its impossible to engage with on any meaningful level. Name-calling might be the only appropriate response.

Raiden, weren't you the dude that was wondering why you were hitting similar shots to the pros, but somehow your hack opponents keep getting them back, while the pros are smoking similar shots for clean winners? :shock:

raiden031 · Aug 28, 2009

MichaelChang said:
raiden, did you watch pros practise with their hitting partners? for example stand next to the court and watch them practice? I have to remind you that, the top pros can hit maybe a 100 shot rally with their hitting partner, without missing a single ball. When you don't put pressure on them, they hit back with pace easily as if they play with their eyes closed. The consistency level they are at, is something beyond your imagination.

No, unless they have a serious opponent, they will not make UFEs.

There is a difference between cooperative hitting and when someone is trying to win points. Even an inferior opponent will try to hit it away from them, and they have to move along the baseline. As balls are hit with different amounts of pace, spin, direction, and depth, the more likely it is to lead to an UE. I seriously doubt that a pro can return every single 100mph serve without ever missing up. I don't care if its not perfectly placed and disguised, they will mess up occasionally.

drakulie · Aug 28, 2009

4.0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xB4RLZguN4

7.0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KB6EY7FxgUg

I serioiusly think this 4.0 (on his very best day) could take a couple games off the 7.0.

raiden031 · Aug 28, 2009

Thud and blunder said:
This is just so wrong that its impossible to engage with on any meaningful level. Name-calling might be the only appropriate response.

Raiden, weren't you the dude that was wondering why you were hitting similar shots to the pros, but somehow your hack opponents keep getting them back, while the pros are smoking similar shots for clean winners? :shock:

So based on what you bolded, you are saying that 4.5 players cannot hit serves in the 100+ range (there are WTA players who can barely surpass 100). No 4.5 players can hit 80-100 mph forehands. You are saying that 4.5 players are NOT advanced players, despite being in the top 15% of all tennis players in the world. You are saying that no 4.5 players have proficient strokes.

Cindysphinx · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
Again I'm not saying that a 4.5 would even play a competitive match against a female pro, but only that they might hold a few service games if they have a good day. I remember watching USTA pro circuit 2 years ago with women in the top 150-250. They were serving probably not much more than 90mph. These serves were nothing, yet they were able to hold serve. Maybe there is more to these serves than what I saw.

I agree that these woman would be superior to 4.5 players on the ground and in most aspects of the game, but I don't think they are serving. And of course I'm not talking about average 4.5 serving, but solid 4.5 serving. And again seeing big serves in practice doesn't guarantee they can always defend against them. I think if a 4.5 can serve well enough, they can win a few points on the ground if they can end the point before the pro opponent neutralizes the rally and takes over. Also the pro opponent might hit some UEs as well.

Raiden, you'll recall the recent threads about the serving competition at the Legg Mason. I believe IIRC that Andrew said two of the male competitors were above 4.0, and both had won a serving competition.

Neither of them could put a serve in the box on three tries. I am having trouble remembering the speed of these serves that landed well long, but I think it was 115. They were flat and up the middle. What would the speed be if they had to take something off to get it in the box and aim for placement?

So how is a 4.5 going to hold serve? He misses his first serves, and then he has to hit a second serve? Some sad kicker that isn't going to bother anyone. I say the 4.5 guy has no chance against a female pro.

raiden031 · Aug 28, 2009

Cindysphinx said:
Raiden, you'll recall the recent threads about the serving competition at the Legg Mason. I believe IIRC that Andrew said two of the male competitors were above 4.0, and both had won a serving competition.

Neither of them could put a serve in the box on three tries. I am having trouble remembering the speed of these serves that landed well long, but I think it was 115. They were flat and up the middle. What would the speed be if they had to take something off to get it in the box and aim for placement?

So how is a 4.5 going to hold serve? He misses his first serves, and then he has to hit a second serve? Some sad kicker that isn't going to bother anyone. I say the 4.5 guy has no chance against a female pro.

I can't believe you are taking that serve competition seriously. I could not even hit a freakin clean serve in the serve speed cage because I was completely overwhelmed by the urge to get a high number. When I did the groundstroke target-hitting competition last time I was there on the clay courts, I barely landed a groundie on the court because I was trying to kill the ball and made myself look like a fool in the process.

I one time played in a social (doubles) against a 4.5 who had the hardest flat serve I'd ever seen. I was standing like 8 feet behind the baseline and still could barely get my racquet on it. He aced me like 5 times. Of course the rest of the guy's game was manageable but his serve was just insane. I'm talking about this kind of player against female pro.

Thud and blunder · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
So based on what you bolded, you are saying that 4.5 players cannot hit serves in the 100+ range (there are WTA players who can barely surpass 100). No 4.5 players can hit 80-100 mph forehands. You are saying that 4.5 players are NOT advanced players, despite being in the top 15% of all tennis players in the world. You are saying that no 4.5 players have proficient strokes.

Raiden, I'm anointing you poster boy for the Dunning-Kruger effect

raiden031 · Aug 28, 2009

Thud and blunder said:
Raiden, I'm anointing you poster boy for the Dunning-Kruger effect

I think you are a fool for making assumptions about me based on posts of mine that you clearly don't understand and take out of context.

My opinions about 4.5 players vs. female pros has nothing to do with my own abilities. I'm the first to admit a number of reasons why I can't beat 4.5 players myself. I don't claim that I can hold serve against a WTA player either.

But my experiences in tennis show that it is difficult for anybody to play their highest level of tennis every single point, every single game, and every single match. I can't reliably double-bagel 3.0 players even though I can beat a weak 4.0 player. How can this be??

Why can't Wayne Odesnik double bagel a 5.5 in any of 5 matches he played? Why can't a top 300 player bagel ZPTennis? Maybe because a tennis match is more complex than people think. There's a big difference between winning a couple games and playing a competitive match.

drakulie · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
I one time played in a social (doubles) against a 4.5 who had the hardest flat serve I'd ever seen. I was standing like 8 feet behind the baseline and still could barely get my racquet on it. He aced me like 5 times. Of course the rest of the guy's game was manageable but his serve was just insane. I'm talking about this kind of player against female pro.

raiden, I live at a tennis club (literally). The Solomon Institute is run out of this club. I see top juniors in the nation there every day (string for some of them too). Dementiava practices there with Solomon. I've met her, and been on the court when she has been practicing her return of serve. On one day, they had one of the kids there (who got a full ride to a top tennis university) serving to her. This kid is about 6'5", and serves easily over 120 with some heavy spin. She was standing directly on the baseline, and once he hit his serve, she would take a huge step inside the court to return them. Not only was she making contact with the serve, she was getting them back in to the court deep.

Again, these pros are facing that type of serve every day, and practicing for hours returning them.

Here is some video I took of her:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mF4tWB5BPvQ

I also got to hit with mariano puerta last year. I couldn't come close to keeping up with the pace or spin he hits with, and "he was taking it easy" and only hitting to my FH (long funny story). I compete and play all the time with 4.5, 5.0 players, and have currently been hitting quite a bit with an ex-satellite player. Again, there is an enormous difference with a 7.0 pro and all of us hacks.

Puerta:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zumFYO8u70&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trgTODz4erc

smoothtennis · Aug 28, 2009

Lsmkenpo said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-SzAAACcJI&feature=related

4.5 ???? win against these players

Seriously LMAO. There isn't a 4.5 on the planet that can beat this kind of movement, anticipation, and pure shot making. That was just a completely SICK drop shot Chris hit at the end. Insane.

Notice also, Evert's serves are up at Martina's shoulders with pace - so much for bouncing three times before it gets to the baseline.

After Claudius beats Evert, I want to see him beat Navratilova and Seles too.

Thud and blunder · Aug 28, 2009

35ft6 said it well the other day, may have been somewhere in this thread even, commenting on a ground level vid of Michael Russell playing a Challengers event. Something along the lines of that vid would embolden 3.0s to imagine they could hang with the pros, while at the same time totally disheartening 5.5s...35ft6 is a wise man, and understands Dunning-Kruger very, very well

smoothtennis · Aug 28, 2009

Thud and blunder said:
35ft6 said it well the other day, may have been somewhere in this thread even, commenting on a ground level vid of Michael Russell playing a Challengers event. Something along the lines of that vid would embolden 3.0s to imagine they could hang with the pros, while at the same time totally disheartening 5.5s...35ft6 is a wise man, and understands Dunning-Kruger very, very well

I admit, I used to watch vids, and think the way the OP thinks. I have since been to the US Open twice, and watched WTA at the Garden. What you see on the ball in person along the fences is just insane energy and action on the ball. The change up - off pace shots - are almost optical illusions once they establish a rhythm.

I see video in context now.

Cindysphinx · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
I can't believe you are taking that serve competition seriously. I could not even hit a freakin clean serve in the serve speed cage because I was completely overwhelmed by the urge to get a high number. When I did the groundstroke target-hitting competition last time I was there on the clay courts, I barely landed a groundie on the court because I was trying to kill the ball and made myself look like a fool in the process.

Are you suggesting that a 4.5 who was facing off against a WTA player wouldn't be completely overwhelmed by the urge to hit a hard serve or trying to kill the ball?

Don't get me wrong. A 4.5 guy looks like a good player to me. But I was at Legg Mason, courtside, when Gonzalez played Odesnik. That looked *nothing* like 4.5 play. And when I have watched WTA players at Indian Wells, they are incredible movers and are spanking the ball in ways you simply do not see in league play.

Anyway, I am pleased to hear the spirited defense of women players in this thread by so many men. They are good athletes and are deserving of some respect.

Cindy -- who had never heard of the Dunning-Kreuger effect and who thinks it explains a lot of what is said on this board

r2473 · Aug 28, 2009

Raiden, I'm anointing you poster boy for the Dunning-Kruger effect

What is the term that describes why intelligent people feel the need to argue with "Dunning-Kruger" effected idiots?

As none of these fools will ever play Evert (or anyone close to her ability), why not let them continue to believe that (in the words of the OP):

Claudius said:
I would beat her relatively easily.

raiden031 · Aug 28, 2009

Cindysphinx said:
Are you suggesting that a 4.5 who was facing off against a WTA player wouldn't be completely overwhelmed by the urge to hit a hard serve or trying to kill the ball?

Actually I don't. They are trying to show off and hit 3 big serves and thats all they get. Of course they are going to choke in that environment.

Don't get me wrong. A 4.5 guy looks like a good player to me. But I was at Legg Mason, courtside, when Gonzalez played Odesnik. That looked *nothing* like 4.5 play. And when I have watched WTA players at Indian Wells, they are incredible movers and are spanking the ball in ways you simply do not see in league play.

Again if a WTA player can force errors with a 90-100mph serve, a 4.5 with a 110 or 120 mph could do the same.

Cindy -- who had never heard of the Dunning-Kreuger effect and who thinks it explains a lot of what is said on this board

I don't buy this idea that every 7.0 shot is better than every 6.5 shot, is better than every 6.0 shot, is better than every 5.5 shot, is better than every 5.0 shot...nonsense. Its more complex than that. Its more about frequency. A 4.5 hits an absolute good shot 10% of the time whereas a 5.0 hits one 25% of the time, where a 7.0 pro hits one 75% of the time. Of course the player with the 75% will easily beat the one who hits it 10%. Doesn't mean the 4.5 can never hit the same good shot, but they wouldn't do it enough to be a threat of winning the match.

I have yet to see a 7.0 hit cooperatively without hitting occasional errors, so I don't believe they would do it in a match against a 4.5 either.

Thud and blunder · Aug 28, 2009

r2473 said:
What is the term that describes why intelligent people feel the need to argue with "Dunning-Kruger" effected idiots?

'Slow Friday effect'

NamRanger · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
I think you are a fool for making assumptions about me based on posts of mine that you clearly don't understand and take out of context.

My opinions about 4.5 players vs. female pros has nothing to do with my own abilities. I'm the first to admit a number of reasons why I can't beat 4.5 players myself. I don't claim that I can hold serve against a WTA player either.

But my experiences in tennis show that it is difficult for anybody to play their highest level of tennis every single point, every single game, and every single match. I can't reliably double-bagel 3.0 players even though I can beat a weak 4.0 player. How can this be??

Why can't Wayne Odesnik double bagel a 5.5 in any of 5 matches he played? Why can't a top 300 player bagel ZPTennis? Maybe because a tennis match is more complex than people think. There's a big difference between winning a couple games and playing a competitive match.

Dude, have you ever thought Odesnik is sleep walking in those matches against 5.5 players? Or maybe he's just being nice?

What's next, are you going to say you can hold serve against Andre Agassi now?

If Odesnik was taking the match seriously (which somehow I doubt he was against those 5.5 players), he would double bagel everyone on this board short of Clint, who is an actual professional tennis player (who would also double bagel everyone on this board).

Cindysphinx · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
I don't buy this idea that every 7.0 shot is better than every 6.5 shot, is better than every 6.0 shot, is better than every 5.5 shot, is better than every 5.0 shot...nonsense. Its more complex than that. Its more about frequency. A 4.5 hits an absolute good shot 10% of the time whereas a 5.0 hits one 25% of the time, where a 7.0 pro hits one 75% of the time. Of course the player with the 75% will easily beat the one who hits it 10%. Doesn't mean the 4.5 can never hit the same good shot, but they wouldn't do it enough to be a threat of winning the match.

I have yet to see a 7.0 hit cooperatively without hitting occasional errors, so I don't believe they would do it in a match against a 4.5 either.

Maybe I have lost track of the point you are trying to make. It's a long thread, after all.

If you are making the point that a WTA player might not be able to take a golden set off of a 4.5, then I would agree with you. I mean, a WTA player can lose a point off of a let cord. And as you point out, she could make a mistake.

If you are talking about winning actual games, I don't see it.

NamRanger · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
Actually I don't. They are trying to show off and hit 3 big serves and thats all they get. Of course they are going to choke in that environment.

Again if a WTA player can force errors with a 90-100mph serve, a 4.5 with a 110 or 120 mph could do the same.

I don't buy this idea that every 7.0 shot is better than every 6.5 shot, is better than every 6.0 shot, is better than every 5.5 shot, is better than every 5.0 shot...nonsense. Its more complex than that. Its more about frequency. A 4.5 hits an absolute good shot 10% of the time whereas a 5.0 hits one 25% of the time, where a 7.0 pro hits one 75% of the time. Of course the player with the 75% will easily beat the one who hits it 10%. Doesn't mean the 4.5 can never hit the same good shot, but they wouldn't do it enough to be a threat of winning the match.

I have yet to see a 7.0 hit cooperatively without hitting occasional errors, so I don't believe they would do it in a match against a 4.5 either.

I guarantee you a WTA player's 100 mph serve is better than nearly everyone's serve here. Power is not everything.

raiden031 · Aug 28, 2009

Cindysphinx said:
Maybe I have lost track of the point you are trying to make. It's a long thread, after all.

If you are making the point that a WTA player might not be able to take a golden set off of a 4.5, then I would agree with you. I mean, a WTA player can lose a point off of a let cord. And as you point out, she could make a mistake.

If you are talking about winning actual games, I don't see it.

Thud and Blunder implied that a 4.5 can't hit pro quality shots. I don't agree with this, but instead believe that some 4.5s can hit pro quality shots, but not often enough to be a threat. So to me its not like each NTRP level is restricted to a certain max when it comes to the pace and effectiveness of their best shots, but instead NTRP is the summation of all skills put together and the frequency in which they can hit good quality shots. Ie. a 4.5 player might ace a 5.5 player on a serve, but the rest of his game is inferior so he loses badly and hence the lower rating.

So do you consider ZPTennis a liar, because he's a 4.5 who lost a set 6-3 against a top 300 female player. I mean everyone dismisses the evidence as "the pro wasn't trying". Well I guess the only way that a pro would ever try is if they are playing in a pro tourney, which of course you'll never see a non-pro player participating. You can only go by the evidence thats available. Unless the pro stated, "I wasn't trying", then we don't really know.

Z-Man · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
It is hard to double-bagel inferior opponents. People don't play at the top of their ability every single game. Sometimes there is bad luck, sometimes your opponent hits lucky shots, sometimes you underestimate your opponent, many things can go wrong that ruin your double-bagel chances.

Actually, I don't think it's that hard to double bagel players at lower levels. Maybe for an attacking player that makes a lot of UEs and wins at his current level by thin margins. But a consistant player will have to goof off to lose games to someone two levels below him.

I'm an OK 4.5 singles player. I have two friends who were among the best 3.5 singles players in a competetive USTA league. They've both been bumped to 4.0. Neither one of them can get a game off of me unless I goof around. And having a big serve or a big forehand doesn't matter. I serve 65 MPH and beat lots of 4.5s who can hit in the 100s.

I've also played against a few very good D2 players. They are 5.5s, and I doubt I could get more than 1/12 games off of them.

Claudius · Aug 28, 2009

Z-Man said:
Actually, I don't think it's that hard to double bagel players at lower levels. Maybe for an attacking player that makes a lot of UEs and wins at his current level by thin margins. But a consistant player will have to goof off to lose games to someone two levels below him.

I'm an OK 4.5 singles player. I have two friends who were among the best 3.5 singles players in a competetive USTA league. They've both been bumped to 4.0. Neither one of them can get a game off of me unless I goof around. And having a big serve or a big forehand doesn't matter. I serve 65 MPH and beat lots of 4.5s who can hit in the 100s.

I've also played against a few very good D2 players. They are 5.5s, and I doubt I could get more than 1/12 games off of them.

Kudos to that.

JHBKLYN · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
As I stated in an earlier post, if that were true then why is Wayne Odesnik going into tiebreakers with 5.5 players?

He needed to tank a few matches so he doesn't get DQ'ed for the Nationals ... damn sandbagger .. what the heck is he playing USTA tennis in 2007??? How fun could it be beating up on 5.5 guys???

raiden031 · Aug 28, 2009

JHBKLYN said:
He needed to tank a few matches so he doesn't get DQ'ed for the Nationals ... damn sandbagger .. what the heck is he playing USTA tennis in 2007??? How fun could it be beating up on 5.5 guys???

I don't know why. But based on some of the posts here, he should have won every match 0 and 0. If the difference between 7.0 and 5.5 was greater than the diff. between 4.0 and 2.5, then certainly that would be the case. I think a 4.0 would more easily double bagel a 2.5 than a 7.0 would a 5.5.

This is because at the higher levels everyone hits the ball hard, so its harder to win every game than at 2.5 where people can barely keep the ball in play even on moderate shots. I mean a 2.5 would never hit a winner against me when both at the baseline simply because they aren't skilled enough to even generate the pace.

Bungalo Bill · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
Thud and Blunder implied that a 4.5 can't hit pro quality shots.

I agree with this. A 4.0 player can hit pro level shots, however, it is much less frequent (consistency). I l know some players that can cream their forehand and serve but they are not consistent with it enough to play at the pro level with it.

Other areas, like conditioning, time on the court, mental prepardness, etc... also lack.

aphex · Aug 28, 2009

raiden031 said:
Actually I don't. They are trying to show off and hit 3 big serves and thats all they get. Of course they are going to choke in that environment.

Again if a WTA player can force errors with a 90-100mph serve, a 4.5 with a 110 or 120 mph could do the same.

I don't buy this idea that every 7.0 shot is better than every 6.5 shot, is better than every 6.0 shot, is better than every 5.5 shot, is better than every 5.0 shot...nonsense. Its more complex than that. Its more about frequency. A 4.5 hits an absolute good shot 10% of the time whereas a 5.0 hits one 25% of the time, where a 7.0 pro hits one 75% of the time. Of course the player with the 75% will easily beat the one who hits it 10%. Doesn't mean the 4.5 can never hit the same good shot, but they wouldn't do it enough to be a threat of winning the match.

I have yet to see a 7.0 hit cooperatively without hitting occasional errors, so I don't believe they would do it in a match against a 4.5 either.

IF he he gets a perfect shot, into his IDEAL strike zone he might hit a winner.
that's NEVER gonna happen against a pro.

seriously, how can you not understand this? a pro will probably return your BEST EVER shot...problem is that he simply wont let you hit that shot....the best shot that they'll allow you to hit, is a pathetic sitter for them...

Bud · Aug 28, 2009

smoothtennis said:
I admit, I used to watch vids, and think the way the OP thinks. I have since been to the US Open twice, and watched WTA at the Garden. What you see on the ball in person along the fences is just insane energy and action on the ball. The change up - off pace shots - are almost optical illusions once they establish a rhythm.

I see video in context now.

Absolutely true. You can't really appreciate all the action/spin on the ball until you sit and watch on an outer court right next to the players. I've sat in stadium boxes a number of times for the later rounds in bigger tournaments... and still, it's not like sitting courtside on one of the outer courts.

raiden031 · Aug 28, 2009

aphex said:
IF he he gets a perfect shot, into his IDEAL strike zone he might hit a winner.
that's NEVER gonna happen against a pro.

seriously, how can you not understand this? a pro will probably return your BEST EVER shot...problem is that he simply wont let you hit that shot....the best shot that they'll allow you to hit, is a pathetic sitter for them...

Why? Two reasons.

1. Because a pro does not hit 100% of their shots perfectly.

2. I haven't had a chance to play in or watch a bizarre matchup in which a pro faces off against an amateur to see what really happens. I won't blindly accept what people on this board say without seeing evidence to back it up. I've seen evidence that amateurs will get their butt-kicked by pros easily. I have not seen evidence that amateurs can't occasionally hit good shots and/or win service games against pros who are far superior to them.

drakulie · Aug 28, 2009

Until one actually hits with an ex pro, or current pro, they have no effen idea what they are talking about, and absolutely no point of reference. This thread is an example of those who haven't.

A pro would absolutely demolish a 4.5 player.

There are high school kids right now that play baseball, and throw over 100 mph, and they would get absolutely tattoed pitching against a bench player in major league baseball. Why?? Because they haven't learned how to actually "pitch".

Bungalo Bill · Aug 28, 2009

aphex said:
IF he he gets a perfect shot, into his IDEAL strike zone he might hit a winner.
that's NEVER gonna happen against a pro.

Very much true. A pro will take control of the point almost immediately because he can and not just because the point happened to play out that way. Pros are very used to using power to their advantage while a club player is not.

drakulie · Aug 28, 2009

Raiden, go into the national tournaments and look at Carlos Gomez Diaz (ex pro, whom I've hit with several times), and look at some of the tourneys he won. (routinely beats NTRP rated 5.0 players 6-1, 6-0, 6-2, 6-1, etc.) and this guy is 40 years old, and only made it to about 175 in the world. A 4.5 would get beat worse than the 5.0, and if he was being a real jerk, the 4.5 would be lucky to get 10 points in the entire match.

Hate to say it, but you are absolutely delusional.

TonLars · Aug 28, 2009

Ive never seen a true 4.5 that could come close to matching the consistency of Evert. Could be some good rallies, 4.5 will likely make some winners or unreturnable serves, and possibly win a game or two in a whole match, but Evert wins easily. Im not sure why people think she couldnt handle pace?

NamRanger said:
If Odesnik was taking the match seriously (which somehow I doubt he was against those 5.5 players), he would double bagel everyone on this board short of Clint, who is an actual professional tennis player (who would also double bagel everyone on this board).

Really?

How would a modern 4.5 player fare against Evert in her prime?

Who wins?

Evert

4.5 player.

Legend

Legend

Legend

Banned

Legend

Talk Tennis Guru

Banned

G.O.A.T.

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Legend

Banned

Legend

New User

Banned

Banned

Legend

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Legend

Talk Tennis Guru

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Legend

Semi-Pro

Legend

Talk Tennis Guru

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Legend

Semi-Pro

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Legend

Professional

Professional

Rookie

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Banned

Bionic Poster

Legend

Talk Tennis Guru

G.O.A.T.

Talk Tennis Guru

Professional

Similar threads