0 to 5.5 in 5 years starting at age 43?
- Thread starter sureshs
- Start date
UnforcedError
Rookie
A better question is why do they have 5.5 draws at all, the draws should top out at 4.5 in my opinion.
Playing at a 4.5 level for a guy that picked up tennis at 43 is still impressive. I have to say I was right in my initial post, the article as relayed by the OP said he started in the 4.5s and worked his way up to 5.5s, never said that was his rating just the divisions he played in.
I would agree.
I agree and it isn't all that easy to fill up those draw sheets at the 4.5 level either. Sometimes I think the purpose is to filter out some of the wantabes so if you have enough players you end up with something worth while to watch instead of a bunch of bagel matches until you reach the finals. Of course if its open beyond the 4.5 level you end up with the same situation anyway.
Although there are some exceptions the 5.5 guys are either current or recently graduated div 1 college players, those that had a career path change from tennis to whatever, former pro players (yes, there are always a few floating around) or younger teaching pros although many of them would not fit into the 5.5 category anyways.
get it in
Rookie
There...that wasn't so difficult. And, thank you. I appreciate it (I think we all do). Now, can you produce the article? That is the last piece of the pie (for me). I'd love to read it for inspiration!
I hope you understand that the reasons why you (the OP) got these types of responses was because it sounds very unrealistic. Even the thought of being a 5.5 player at that age in 4 or 5 years, starting from scratch, seems absolutely unbelievable. To me it seemed as if you were trying to get a rise out of the community by posting something over the top. Now, if only we had the article...??? Come up with that, and I'll eat my words bro...then I'll come out to Calli and beat ya in a best of 5 set match...LOL...
Do you really need suresh to produce the article? I have a copy of it and have read it. It certainly caught my attention. If you really have to know, I suppose I could post a scan of it tonight. I think some of the common sense in the forum is starting to form. It is obviously possible to rise to 5.5 in 4-5 years, but this guy isn't a true 5.5. I think he is a 4.5 who can hang with a 5.5 on a good day. I simply took it as inspiration.
Interestingly, one of the other guys that was listed previously in this thread is also in his 40's and is playing at 5.5. He started tennis around 40. His strokes aren't pretty, but he wins by attrition (stays in rallys, etc.). He is also supremely fit. I played with before (just for fun). It just goes to show that tennis is a sport with many different styles. Just because someone doesn't play like a pro doesn't mean they cannot be good at the game. Sure, these guys would get smoked against pros, but there is a huge difference between getting paid to play and paying to play.
Which 5.5 did he hang with? None! He gets smoked by 5.0s, and is competitive against 4.5s.
The article is BS and just demonstrates that the 5.5 rankings are watered down and completely meaningless!
Tennisman912
Semi-Pro
HunterST,
I hope you are kidding as I humbly suggest you learn a little more about the lottery and the odds at work in everyday life. Only someone with no idea about the odds would make the statement that because someone wins the lottery, that makes it very plausible you will win. Of course people win. That is like me saying because other people play in the NBA, it is very plausible for me to also make it to the NBA. If I really believed that, you would say I was nuts. But if you look at the odds of me making the NBA, they are much, much better than me winning the lottery. I would suggest that you look up the odds of one individual winning the powerball or mega millions. The odds are infinitesimally small (as I thought most adults knew). Look it up and you will be surprised how small it is (based on your comments). The point being the odds of this thread premise is also infinitesimally small. Is this impossible? No. But highly, highly, highly unlikely. Having said that, there is that small chance that someone somewhere could achieve it some day. As unlikely as it is, it is still possible and if someone had the record to back it up, I would believe it.
If you don’t like the analogy, fine, I get and respect that. But the argument that it is a poor example because of how plausible the odds are that I will win the lottery is pretty far out there to me, and I would guess, anyone else who has any idea of the odds. I can only guess you must be awfully young to believe that as I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt on that front.
Good tennis
TM
I hope you are kidding as I humbly suggest you learn a little more about the lottery and the odds at work in everyday life. Only someone with no idea about the odds would make the statement that because someone wins the lottery, that makes it very plausible you will win. Of course people win. That is like me saying because other people play in the NBA, it is very plausible for me to also make it to the NBA. If I really believed that, you would say I was nuts. But if you look at the odds of me making the NBA, they are much, much better than me winning the lottery. I would suggest that you look up the odds of one individual winning the powerball or mega millions. The odds are infinitesimally small (as I thought most adults knew). Look it up and you will be surprised how small it is (based on your comments). The point being the odds of this thread premise is also infinitesimally small. Is this impossible? No. But highly, highly, highly unlikely. Having said that, there is that small chance that someone somewhere could achieve it some day. As unlikely as it is, it is still possible and if someone had the record to back it up, I would believe it.
If you don’t like the analogy, fine, I get and respect that. But the argument that it is a poor example because of how plausible the odds are that I will win the lottery is pretty far out there to me, and I would guess, anyone else who has any idea of the odds. I can only guess you must be awfully young to believe that as I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt on that front.
Good tennis
TM
Topaz
Legend
Ahhh, good to see we finally found out what was up.
If you play in a 4.5 tournament, as a computer rated 3.5, it would depend on your results as to what happens to you and your rating. If you get handled, nothing. If you have some competitive matches and even some wins against computer rated 4.5s, it could get you the bump.
Tennisman, I don't think you quite get what Hunter is getting at.
He is actually correct in pointing out the flaw in your logic. As you stated in your comment above, it is very true that if I came out and said I am going to go from 3.5 to 5.5 when I am 45, it is highly highly unlikely that it will come true. But if I said somebody around the world may accomplish that feat, it becomes much more likely.
What hunter is saying (correctly), is that if going from 3.5 to 5.5 when your 45 is even remotely possible, it would not be unusual to have a story like this pop-up every now and then. I mean, if you won't raise your eyebrow if you read a story in your local newspaper that so-and-so just won a lottery, then you shouldn't raise your eyebrow if you read a story on the board that someone went 3.5 to 5.5 when they are over 45 (as long as it is not happening all the time).
Personally, I don't think this guy even exists so it is a moot point.
get it in
Rookie
I agree with you for the most part. So many factors come into play when you have rankings (such as number and quality of players, etc.). If anyone really wanted to prove how good they were, they could enter an open tournament to see how things go. I wouldn't cry BS, though. You have to look at the context of the article. Whether or not posting this article is BS is really up to the reader. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I'm not sure what the intent of the OP was but I think some the posts are a bit unfair. Just because some people can't get to 4.5 in 5 years doesn't mean it isn't possible. Things can happen with hard work. Try to see it from both sides.
Shaolin
G.O.A.T.
I played a 42 years old guy who was easily a strong 5.0. Had laser precision on serves. I also frequently hit with a 63 yo (former ATP player) who can still hit monster serves and fhs.
I could see a 43 yo being 5.5 quickly if they were talented to begin with and had tons and tons of spare time to practice/play matches/get good coaching.
I could see a 43 yo being 5.5 quickly if they were talented to begin with and had tons and tons of spare time to practice/play matches/get good coaching.
35ft6
Legend
Last and only 5.5 tournament I saw, the guys in the finals, and a dude who lost in the semi's, were clearly good enough to be in the Open draw. But winning a round would have been iffy, and winning 2 rounds probably impossible. Still, plenty of guys in the Open draw were lesser players than the finalists in the 5.5's.
The issue isn't about him getting to 4.5, but about him getting to 5.5. I actually think it would be easier to go from beginner to 4.5, then to go from 4.5 to 5.5. As I said, I know a guy in his late 30s who is 4.5 after 2 years of play. I know that teenagers who have all the time in the world to practice and some coaching can probably do it in 1.5 years even, maybe less.
Tennisman912
Semi-Pro
Gameboy,
I get what you (and maybe HunterST) were getting at and understand what you are saying. But have you ever heard or read a story about someone, anyone going from 3.5 to 5.5 (let alone just picking up the game) ever? I have not. So it stands to reason that it is pretty rare just like the chances of your winning the lottery. They are both very rare IMHO. But I will grant you (both) that a lottery winner happens more frequently.
In fact, look at the numbers for the powerball and mega millions drawings (the two biggest in my half of the country). There are 2 draws a week each so you have 208 chances to win the lottery every year. This of course assumes that someone wins every drawing, which of course is unrealistic and never happens. If that were the case, the jackpots would be much smaller. So the more realistic number is you have 100 chances to win a year ( a guess but probably too high if you took the time to actually figure it out) between both of them. 100 chances times the whole population of potential winners in the US is very, very, very bad odds. That is my point. I don't consider that very good odds.
But having said that, I will grant you that 100 chances to win is probably higher than the chances of someone going from beginner to 5.5 in 5 years in their 40s as I have never heard of it happening. But counting the world population of people who could play tennis, the chance of someone somewhere in the world doing or having done it I assume has to have happened. We just may not have heard of it. Just some rambling thoughts on the matter.
Good tennis
TM
I get what you (and maybe HunterST) were getting at and understand what you are saying. But have you ever heard or read a story about someone, anyone going from 3.5 to 5.5 (let alone just picking up the game) ever? I have not. So it stands to reason that it is pretty rare just like the chances of your winning the lottery. They are both very rare IMHO. But I will grant you (both) that a lottery winner happens more frequently.
In fact, look at the numbers for the powerball and mega millions drawings (the two biggest in my half of the country). There are 2 draws a week each so you have 208 chances to win the lottery every year. This of course assumes that someone wins every drawing, which of course is unrealistic and never happens. If that were the case, the jackpots would be much smaller. So the more realistic number is you have 100 chances to win a year ( a guess but probably too high if you took the time to actually figure it out) between both of them. 100 chances times the whole population of potential winners in the US is very, very, very bad odds. That is my point. I don't consider that very good odds.
But having said that, I will grant you that 100 chances to win is probably higher than the chances of someone going from beginner to 5.5 in 5 years in their 40s as I have never heard of it happening. But counting the world population of people who could play tennis, the chance of someone somewhere in the world doing or having done it I assume has to have happened. We just may not have heard of it. Just some rambling thoughts on the matter.
Good tennis
TM
get it in
Rookie
Sure. I think it is definitely an issue. I think it isn't possible either, at least not consistently. Anyone can try to play a 5.0+ once or twice just to get smoked. It pretty clear this person isn't a true 5.5 so why don't we leave it at that.
I'll try to post the article here. Hopefully it works.
Jay27
Rookie
Absolutely no way! If you're basing your logic on the examples you just posted, then you're absolutely on crack (not to be taken as an insult...please). Your 42 year old that had laser precision on serves has probably played all of his life and the 63 year old was, as you mentioned, A FORMER ATP PLAYER! Your 42 year old (as you mention) easily a 5.0 player (that's quite a bit less and very different from a 5.5 player). Based on this, you're saying that someone well into their 40's could begin tennis (from scratch) and become a 5.5 player within 5 years (who could then probably beat both of whom you just mentioned)? Absolutely, positively, 100%ly no way. I always try to use logic, but this entire thread has me in a frenzy. Listen ppl, you can play a 5.5 player all day long, but that doesn't qualify or make you a 5.5! I still need the article...lol.
TonLars
Professional
Totally agree, there is zero chance
It sounds like this guy is a 4.5 which is plausible level for a rec player.
As a 4.0 player, I can play with and "hang" with some 4.5 players, winning some points and games in competitive situations.
A 5.5 (like TonLars) is a different story. The consistency is unbelievable. Even in practice rallies, I'm lucky to get a point against him. It's a rare and special event
As a 4.0 player, I can play with and "hang" with some 4.5 players, winning some points and games in competitive situations.
A 5.5 (like TonLars) is a different story. The consistency is unbelievable. Even in practice rallies, I'm lucky to get a point against him. It's a rare and special event
Shaolin
G.O.A.T.
I was saying that those guys mentioned were not held back by age in any way. My point is that, even though its 99.9 % unlikely for it to happen, if a guy was just a freak of nature talent-wise to being with, then (maybe being independently wealthy or something) he could spend ridiculous amounts of time practicing, getting *good* coaching, working out, etc, there might be a .1% chance of it happening.
Injury factor is huge if you start out at 43. The 43 year old already has played sports for decades, and he's within a hair from becoming injured again.
If he hasn't played competitive sports for decades, he has no chance of becoming even 4.0 because he's not athletic.
NO chance, no way.
You can't find an athletic 40 year old who isn't already close to injured. Fragile knees, hips, shoulders, wrists, hands, ankles.
If he hasn't played competitive sports for decades, he has no chance of becoming even 4.0 because he's not athletic.
NO chance, no way.
You can't find an athletic 40 year old who isn't already close to injured. Fragile knees, hips, shoulders, wrists, hands, ankles.
tennisdad65
Hall of Fame
Very possible:
1) gotta be in great shape
2) history of being injury free.. strong tendons etc..
3) prior sports experience like squash, racquetball etc..
4) rich - should have ability to pay for a good coach when needed
5) retired at 40
6) willing to spend 3-4 hours a day on the wall/ball machine/court
1) gotta be in great shape
2) history of being injury free.. strong tendons etc..
3) prior sports experience like squash, racquetball etc..
4) rich - should have ability to pay for a good coach when needed
5) retired at 40
6) willing to spend 3-4 hours a day on the wall/ball machine/court
Jay27
Rookie
Hmmm, good point. I know I've been mostly negative within in this thread. I'm normally not this way, but I just can't quit thinking about how ludacrous even the thought of someone starting tennis at 43 and progressing to a 5.5 in 5 years, with one of the years sat out due to injury. Then, when presented with a name (and not the article), we learn that almost any 5.5 event will be loaded with 4.5's and 5.0's (almost never an actual 5.5) and that this guy gets smoked by 5.0's and has only a decent record against 4.5's (respectable). Then, we can't determine for ourselves that what the OP says is actually true because he can't produce the article (and for the longest time...wouldn't give up the name because he felt bad...that's when I became flustered).
Very possible:
1) gotta be in great shape
2) history of being injury free.. strong tendons etc..
3) prior sports experience like squash, racquetball etc..
4) rich - should have ability to pay for a good coach when needed
5) retired at 40
6) willing to spend 3-4 hours a day on the wall/ball machine/court
7) Single or divorced
I threw away the article. I don't plan in advance to post here. Initially, I did not remember the name, so I could not give it out even if I wanted to. But I think I did well in cautioning people not to make any remarks against him, and it worked. I would have felt very bad otherwise.
![4292627722_70c2487a2d.jpg" width="371" height="500" alt="scan0001"](http://www.flickr.com/photos/azau/4292627722/" title="scan0001 by sd_scoot_b, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4069/4292627722_70c2487a2d.jpg" width="371" height="500" alt="scan0001")
Sorry folks, I am simply not having any success posting the article. I'll try again later unless you all agree to end this thread.
So you have the yearbook? I see you are from SD. Just scan it into a jpg, then upload to tinypic.com and post the URL here
I agree 100%, I'm 47, been playing tennis since I was a kid. Did not have too many injuries until my early 40's. The most I could play in a week is maybe 2-3 days a week of singles, 4 days of doubles.
Another PR stunt by the USTA!
Of course, I know plenty of guys who started tennis at 40, have become maybe 5.0 doubles players, but I can crush them in singles...me 4.0. Kinda makes them less than 4.0 in singles. That particular guy plays 6 days a week, 3 hours a day, for the last 7 years.
Talking singles here, not mixed, not pro sets.
I really think injuries is what separates the "can do, and dids", from the could have done, but didn't's".
My excuse is that I broke my left collarbone (me lefty) in 1979.....:twisted:
Talking singles here, not mixed, not pro sets.
I really think injuries is what separates the "can do, and dids", from the could have done, but didn't's".
My excuse is that I broke my left collarbone (me lefty) in 1979.....:twisted:
OK, let's take a look at his results for 2009.
At SD District Championship, he competes in Men's 45 singles and loses 6-1, 6-1 in the round of 16 (to a 5.0 player). I would say that is not a what I would expect out of a 5.5 player.
At Balboa Open, he competes at Men's 5.5 singles and he loses in Quarterfinals 6-1, 6-2. Not bad, except the guy he beat in round of 16 (in three sets) was a 4.5 (with limited tournament record).
At Ace Tennis Classic, he plays 4.5 singles draw and loses in semi. But the guy he beat to get there is a 4.0.
I am not seeing any quality win against top 4.5 players let alone 5.0 or 5.5.
This guy is a solid 4.5 which is definitely a feat by itself at his age and how quickly he advanced.
But to call this guy a 5.5 is a joke. Which is too bad, because they ruined a perfectly nice story by stretching it beyond what it really is.
At SD District Championship, he competes in Men's 45 singles and loses 6-1, 6-1 in the round of 16 (to a 5.0 player). I would say that is not a what I would expect out of a 5.5 player.
At Balboa Open, he competes at Men's 5.5 singles and he loses in Quarterfinals 6-1, 6-2. Not bad, except the guy he beat in round of 16 (in three sets) was a 4.5 (with limited tournament record).
At Ace Tennis Classic, he plays 4.5 singles draw and loses in semi. But the guy he beat to get there is a 4.0.
I am not seeing any quality win against top 4.5 players let alone 5.0 or 5.5.
This guy is a solid 4.5 which is definitely a feat by itself at his age and how quickly he advanced.
But to call this guy a 5.5 is a joke. Which is too bad, because they ruined a perfectly nice story by stretching it beyond what it really is.
get it in
Rookie
It's been explained earlier that he doesn't really compete at the 5.5 level- he's more like a 4.5 who occasionally forays into 5.5 but pretty much gets beat down. Not a bad thing since you should play better players to get better. Reading this article again I would say he didn't really get to 5.5. They were stretching the truth a bit so everyone who cries foul can rest their case. Can we close this thread yet?
Tim Tennis
Professional
You are either getting better or going backwards
Absolutly this is possible. This individual must be truly exceptional, gifted. What are the odds, maybe 1 out of 500,000. A 5.5 player is one hell of a tennis player. I am 64 and I am still working on that goal but it seems like I am moving in the wrong direction. LOL
Best regards,
Ed
Tennis Geometrics
www.tennisgeometrics.com
Absolutly this is possible. This individual must be truly exceptional, gifted. What are the odds, maybe 1 out of 500,000. A 5.5 player is one hell of a tennis player. I am 64 and I am still working on that goal but it seems like I am moving in the wrong direction. LOL
Best regards,
Ed
Tennis Geometrics
www.tennisgeometrics.com
Yeah but others are ...
Tim Tennis
Professional
So if I agree are you going to send me $10.00 I promise to try to help stimulate the economy.
Best regards,
Ed
Tennis Geometrics
Seriously did you not read the thread? The guy is not a 5.5 player. There is no such thing as a 5.5 player who cannot beat a single 5.0 player.
Tim Tennis
Professional
You are right, I did not read all the responses but my point is it is possible. Granted it would take one truly exceptional individual.
Counter point, I have seen a number of people who say they are 3.5 players who could beat the hell out of most 4.5 players. So you never know.
Check out the national finals of the USTA tournaments. To get there you have to be 1 to 2 levels above what ever the so called level is.
Best regards,
Ed
Tennis Geometrics
Last edited by a moderator:
Counter point fails...we in this thread are making the point that it doesn't matter what division you play in or what tennislink says your rating is, it matters how you compete against others. If you are a 3.5 beating all 4.5 players, then you're at least a 4.5 player.
BobFL
Hall of Fame
Your "counter point" is a perfect example of false logic. However, your signature is "amazing" way to get some free advertising :???:
Tim Tennis
Professional
Logic?
Hi Bob, it sounds like you might be one of those sand baggers who ruin and make a mockery of the USTA tournaments or maybe you just did not understand the logic.
Best regards,
Ed
Hi Bob, it sounds like you might be one of those sand baggers who ruin and make a mockery of the USTA tournaments or maybe you just did not understand the logic.
Best regards,
Ed
Tim Tennis
Professional
First Post
Raiden 031, This is what the post is about and that is what my first post answered.
Best regards,
Ed
Raiden 031, This is what the post is about and that is what my first post answered.
Best regards,
Ed
I just find it aggravating that the truth comes out in the thread, and then posters continue posting based on false premises like Suresh's OP and the USTA article, because they didn't bother reading the thread at all. It was all nonsense, so what value could someone get from your comment?
Tim Tennis
Professional
Yeah, I think that's what I said. But if he told the author he started tennis as a 4.5 then I have to view him as being less than honest, and that's putting it nicely. Has anybody watched a beginner hit a tennis ball? I'ts not a pretty sight and is light years away from the 4.5 level.
Last edited:
Similar threads
