Are NTRP Ratings truly accurate?

[Byakuya]

I took this off the USTA.com website.

A. Begin with 1.5. Read all categories carefully and then decide which one best describes your present ability level. Be certain that you qualify on all points of all preceding levels as well as those in the level you choose.
B. When rating yourself assume you are playing against a player of the same gender and the same ability.

General Characteristics of Various NTRP Playing Levels
(Wheelchair players please see note below)

1.5
You have limited experience and are working primarily on getting the ball in play.

2.0
You lack court experience and your strokes need developing. You are familiar with the basic positions for singles and doubles play.

2.5
You are learning to judge where the ball is going, although your court coverage is limited. You can sustain a short rally of slow pace with other players of the same ability.

3.0
You are fairly consistent when hitting medium-paced shots, but are not comfortable with all strokes and lack execution when trying for directional control, depth, or power. Your most common doubles formation is one-up, one-back.

3.5
You have achieved improved stroke dependability with directional control on moderate shots, but need to develop depth and variety. You exhibit more aggressive net play, have improved court coverage and are developing teamwork in doubles.

4.0
You have dependable strokes, including directional control and depth on both forehand and backhand sides on moderate-paced shots. You can use lobs, overheads, approach shots and volleys with some success and occasionally force errors when serving. Rallies may be lost due to impatience. Teamwork in doubles is evident.

4.5
You have developed your use of power and spin and can handle pace. You have sound footwork, can control depth of shots, and attempt to vary game plan according to your opponents. You can hit first serves with power and accuracy and place the second serve. You tend to overhit on difficult shots. Aggressive net play is common in doubles.

5.0
You have good shot anticipation and frequently have an outstanding shot or attribute around which a game may be structured. You can regularly hit winners or force errors off of short balls and can put away volleys. You can successfully execute lobs, drop shots, half volleys, overhead smashes, and have good depth and spin on most second serves.

5.5
You have mastered power and/or consistency as a major weapon. You can vary strategies and styles of play in a competitive situation and hit dependable shots in a stress situation.

6.0 to 7.0
You have had intensive training for national tournament competition at the junior and collegiate levels and have obtained a sectional and/or national ranking.


7.0
You are a world-class player.

Players in Wheelchairs:
Players in wheelchairs should use these general characteristics to determine their NTRP skill level. The only differences are as follows: Mobility: while players in wheelchairs may have skills that would normally provide them a certain rating, the mobility factor suggests that when competing against able-bodied players, they should participate at an NTRP skill level that provides for competitive rather than compatible play. Serving ability: Due to the nature of the player’s injury or disability, a powerful serve may not be possible. In this case, it may be more realistic to self-rate below 4.0 as service strength becomes key beyond this level.

Many tournament players in wheelchairs have already received an NTRP rating. Wheelchair players should check with players whose skills match their own before determining their rating. The very best world-class players in wheelchairs have an NTRP rating in the low 4.5s.

These descriptions seem very forgiving based on how TW forum members rank players we see on youtube and such. Because by these definitions.. most highschool tennis team players are ranked 4.0+ and i really have doubt it sometimes.

Take a 4.5 rated player for example. What makes you a 4.5 player? Is it power? precision? style? What if you have supposedly an "average" tennis guy who isn't very powerful, but he can return your hard hits, control pacing and have a lot of variety and have great control of the ball, but he has no great arsenal of weapons. Mediocre strokes and decent serve, but he can read his opponents moves well and figure out ways to beat them w/o being a pusher. So this "3.5" player can beat a 4.5 rated player who hits hard and has a fast serve. Who is more talented? who is the better tennis player? how accurate are these rating systems?

If i ranked myself on this NTRP system i would be a 5.0 level player. But i don't feel like i'm even close. I can be consistent, i have a fast first serve that has some hidden spin to it and a decent second slice serve, i can exploit opponents' weaknesses in games, i have a variety of strokes and i can control the pace of the game, my volleying is very aggressive, i can hit flat overhead smashes, but i put some spin on it as well just to make it harder to return (just in case). But i'm 5'5" tall, i don't have a lot of power so i win my games out-maneuvering people on the court. I'm low powered compared to my opponents, so i am really dependent on good form to utilize 100% of my body's potential to really otherwise i play like crap, my serves are easily returnable and i can get pushed back by strong top spinners who take advantage of my height.

 

[raiden031]

its just a guideline for self-rating. Many will agree it is not specific enough to really be all that accurate. I could probably rate a full point above my true level with these descriptions. USTA says the only accurate rating is based on match results.

 

[kevhen]

4.5 players don't make many errors when not forced. I can play very consistent and make few errors against a 4.5 but will still lose as they place the ball well and finish any weak shots with winners. They handle pace well and are starting to add some decent spin to their shots. 4.5s are pretty fast and can hit hard but often get into long rallies as their consistency and footspeed is still better than their power game. 4.5s are like decent D3 players likely playing #1 or #2 for their schools. In this state only about the top 5 guys in high school would be considered adult 4.5s but again this is a weak tennis state (and many more of them would consider themselves 4.5s or even 5.0s).

 

[rasajadad]

Based on the guidelines I can be anywhere from a 4.0 to a 5.5! So my answer to the OP is no!

 

[FiveO]

USTA NTRP System vs. EASI Tennis Player Rating System (ETPRS) found here:

http://www.easitennis2.com/NTRPSystem.htm

I prefer the ETPRS system:

USTA 1.5
You have limited experience and are working primarily on getting the ball in play.

ETPRS 1.0
You are a beginner. You may have played socially a few times over a period of several years, but, basically you do not know how to play or how to strike the ball.

USTA 2.0
You lack court experience and your strokes need developing. You are familiar with the basic positions for singles and doubles play.

ETPRS 2.0
You have either learned to rally or to play well enough to have fun, but cannot strike the ball well enough to sustain a 6 stroke rally, and, while being able to keep score, cannot win games against a player who has taken lessons or who has played consistently for several years.

USTA 3.0
You are fairly consistent when hitting medium-paced shorts, but are not comfortable with all strokes and lack execution when trying for directional control, depth, or power. Your most common doubles formation is one-up, one-back.

ETPRS 3.0
You have taken lessons often enough to know the classical stages of a stroke (takeback, step, swing, follow-through) and have played enough to win games and sets from a 2.0 player. But the strokes you have are not consistent (you cannot sustain a 5 shot sequence from the baseline with any stroke).

Alternately, you have never taken lessons but can beat a 2.0 player and can play with someone who has taken lessons as described in the first paragraph.

USTA 3.5
You have achieved improved stroke dependability with directional control on moderate shots, but need to develop depth and variety. You exhibit more aggressive net play, have improved court coverage and are developing teamwork in doubles.

ETPRS 3.5
You can sustain a multi shot (6 or more) rally from the baseline with either the forehand or backhand. You can put your serve in most of the time. You can consistently beat a 3.0 player 6-1,6-1 or better. While your rallies are consistent, they are often short (the ball lands near or inside the service court). You can move from side to side for 4 shots without missing. You can block your volleys and win points in doing so.

Alternately, you can either consistently push the ball back defensively, scramble well, or hack the ball and keep it in play until your opponent misses.

USTA 4.0
You have dependable strokes, including directional control and depth on both forehand and backhand sides on moderate-paced shots. You can use lobs, overheads, approach shots and volleys with some success and occasionally force errors when serving. Rallies may be lost due to impatience. Teamwork in doubles is evident.

ETPRS 4.0
You can beat most 3.5 players 6-1, 6-1 and you can sustain long and deep (within 9 feet of the baseline) ground stroke rallies. You can hit a basic defensive volley, overhead, lob, and serve. You can occasionally hit an offensive serve. Your defense is sound, and when your opponent hits short, you can usually go on the offense and win the point from good placement and a moderate level of speed.

USTA 4.5
You have developed your use of power and spin and can handle pace. You have sound footwork, can control depth of shots, and attempt to vary game plan according to your opponents. You can hit first serves with power and accuracy and place the second serve. You tend to over hit on difficult shots. Aggressive net play is common in doubles.

ETPRS 4.5
You can beat most strictly 4.0 players most of the time 6-2, 6-2. You have both offense and defense and can defend against the offense of most other 4.5 players. Your defense is very sound in all areas (ball speed, complexity, surprise, foot speed, anticipation). You can create opportunities with your strongest stroke and can routinely win the point when your opponent hits short. You can change ball direction with confidence. This is the play level common to many NCAA Division III colleges.

USTA 5.0
You have good shot anticipation and frequently have an outstanding shot or attribute around which a game may be structured. You can regularly hit winners or force errors off of short balls and can put away volleys. You can successfully execute lobs, drop shots, half volleys, overhead smashes, and have good depth and spin on most second serves.

ETPRS 5.0
You have an established system of patterns from which to play a match. You can sustain long rallies at fairly high speeds. You can hit any shot consistently. You can beat most 4.5 players 6-2,6-2 consistently. This is the play level common to a mid level NCAA Division I College.

USTA 5.5
You have mastered power and/or consistency as a major weapon. You can vary strategies and styles of play in a competitive situation and hit dependable shots in a stress situation.

ETPRS 5.5
You can beat 5.0 players 6-2, 6-2 consistently and are capable of being a professional satellite and challenger tournament player, or a top NCAA Division I player. You are capable of achieving a ranking in either the WTA or ATP tour of 500-800.

USTA 6.0 to 7.0
You have had intensive training for national tournament competition at the junior and collegiate levels and have obtained a sectional and/or national ranking.

ETPRS 6.0
You are capable of achieving a ranking on either the WTA or ATP tour of 300-500.

USTA 7.0
You are a world-class player.

ETPRS 7.0
You are ranked in the top 300 in the world.

 

[tennis-n-sc]

In my opinion, the NTRP rating guides are way too lax and really offer no guidance. Once a computer rating is established, I think the system works pretty well and is accurate because it is based on play results. You eventually get where you belong.

 

[thehustler]

Sublevels of each NTRP level

I may have posted this before but I think that in each level there are sublevels that you need to go thru before advancing to the higher NTRP rating. I do like the easitennis rating system, but there are such differences between someone who got bumped to 4.0 and someone who is a high end 4.0 going to 4.5 for example. The following is copied from a document I typed up several months ago about this.

Those of us who play tennis know that there are several NTRP levels ranging from 1.0-7.0. Beginner to pro. While each level is different than the next, each player has to go thru a progression on each skill level to reach the next level. This goes from being able to serve, to volley, to hitting a forehand and importantly the mental skills at each stage. This document explains those different levels and should help you figure out where you are and what you should expect to do to get to the next step. Remember this applies to any skill level.

Level 1

You are able to beat players below your NTRP skill level or a few players at your level that are also Level 1 players. You might score an upset of a Level 2 player, but it will be rare. In this level you were likely dominating the lower NTRP skill and were bumped up, but now realize that you have no idea how to play tennis since the competition is different now. People serve better, they hit harder, you aren’t winning as much as you’d like. It is now more of a learning experience than anything else. At this level you realize that you have a lot to work on to make it to Level 2. If you play tournaments you are lucky to get out of the first round and usually fold to a Level 2 player and are crushed by a Level 3 player.

Level 2

You are the middle of the road at your NTRP skill level. You can beat Level 1 players with ease most of the time, but sometimes fall into a mental trap and get upset. Your all around game is better than a Level 1 player. You can serve harder, hit forehands harder and volley better. Mentally you are tougher as well. You struggle against the Level 3 player but might score the rare upset. You are able to get deeper into tournaments, QF round, semis if you have a favorable draw, but if you face a Level 3 player you go down unless the Level 3 player is having a bad day mentally. You still have plenty to learn, but are winning matches and gaining confidence to move up to Level 3.

Level 3

You are at the top of your NTRP skill level. You beat Level 1 players with ease and most Level 2 players without a problem. Level 3 players bring out the best in you and it is a toss up as to who wins each time you play. In tournaments you are consistently getting to the semi’s or finals and winning a few tournaments along the way. Your all around game is better than a Level 2 player in every way, but still needs improvement against the next skill level above. You are tougher mentally and have more match experience and you are more confident when you play. However you never get to sit at this level for too long as you’ll get bumped up to the next NTRP level and start at Level 1 all over again.

There could be a better breakdown of players, but from what I have noticed in leagues and tournaments there typically is 3 types of players out there in each skill level. Which level you are should be rather easy to figure out and this should help you get to the next level and be able to enjoy your tennis even more.

I hope that made sense. If it doesn't I'll try to explain it better somehow.

 

[Cindysphinx]

USTA ratings say I'm a 3.5.

Yeah, right.

A 3.5 player would destroy me in singles (although I'd do better in doubles).

I like the ETPRS rating descriptions much better.

 

[Frank Silbermann]

The Guidelines reflect the intention of the rating system. It was created so that people who had never played each other or even other players in common could match each other up with good competition -- e.g. when on vacation somewhere far away.

The Guidelines have long been inapplicable to competitive league play because people rate themselves way below what the NTRP Guidelines suggest. (For example, many people claim that any player who is "truly an NTRP 5.5" ought to be ranked in his state or region. Nonsense. The ability to get a ranking was the Guidelines' definition of a 6.0 player.)

Originally this ranking deflation happened because so many adults with the emotional maturity of children felt there was more prestige and honor in, say, winning an NTRP-level 4 _trophy_ rather than _playing_ in an NTRP-level 5 league. (But the trophy is _shiny_, and you can't put your participation in a higher league on the mantel over the fireplace!)

 

[raiden031]

The EASI system is way more specific than NTRP and therefore is a better guide for self-rating. I also agree with the guy who divides up NTRP into sub-levels. I am living proof that there are sub-levels.

I will crush most 3.0 players, but will also get crushed by many 3.5 players. I tend to play very close matches against 3.5 players that play my style of game, which is offensive and lots of top spin. I will lose to 3.5 players who play with the pusher style that is mainly defensive. Therefore I would put myself somewhere in between. My serve and strokes are too good for 3.0, but my consistency is not quite good enough for 3.5.

 

[raiden031]

The Guidelines reflect the intention of the rating system. It was created so that people who had never played each other or even other players in common could match each other up with good competition -- e.g. when on vacation somewhere far away.

The Guidelines have long been inapplicable to competitive league play because people rate themselves way below what the NTRP Guidelines suggest. (For example, many people claim that any player who is "truly an NTRP 5.5" ought to be ranked in his state or region. Nonsense. The ability to get a ranking was the Guidelines' definition of a 6.0 player.)

Originally this ranking deflation happened because so many adults with the emotional maturity of children felt there was more prestige and honor in, say, winning an NTRP-level 4 _trophy_ rather than _playing_ in an NTRP-level 5 league. (But the trophy is _shiny_, and you can't put your participation in a higher league on the mantel over the fireplace!)

Can't say I blame people too much for underrating. Here's why.

By rating yourself too low, you will play better on a league team which means you get more playing time in matches because your captain will see you as a strong player on the team. In a tournament you will advance further as well, which means again more playing time.

However there is also a time when people overrate. That is when they tell other people their rating. Plenty of people on this board probably overrate themselves when they post questions and mention their rating. If they really had that rating they probably wouldn't have the problem with their game that they are posting about.

One of the 3.5 pushers who regularly whips my ass is self-rated as a 3.0, but hasn't played any USTA-sanctioned matches that would alter that rating. I know he is a 3.5 because he is the strongest of a number of 3.5 computer-rated players that also competed in my county tennis ladder.

 

[AngeloDS]

They are accurate for the most part. But the ratings make it sound easier than it is.

"You have developed your use of power and spin and can handle pace. You have sound footwork, can control depth of shots, and attempt to vary game plan according to your opponents. You can hit first serves with power and accuracy and place the second serve. You tend to over hit on difficult shots. Aggressive net play is common in doubles."

Power, spin and can handle pace. Sound footwork. Control depth of shots and attempt to vary game plan. Can hit first serves with power & accuracy and place second serve etc. Sounds easy but it isn't. To be consistent with it is difficult as well. To sit down and play a 1-2+ hour match and consistantly fulfill that is difficult.

The problem really falls to footwork, anticipation & fitness; a lot of people have difficulty hitting on the run and then getting themselves back into position.

Such as this a 4.5 rating. A strong 4.5 player vs a decent 4.5 player; the stronger player will pretty much mute every weapon the decent 4.5 player had and the game becomes very difficult for that decent player. And the stronger player will be in control of the point so it's difficult. Not only this but the stronger 4.5 will be consistent throughout the game.

Like when you play people below your level. You can beat them easily and effortlessly. You probably could hit winners from any place on the court, no ball feels fast to you and the person on the other end is trying their hardest to really keep up with you but the gap is that wide and they just can't.

But switch that to someone on your level or above. You won't be hitting those winners easily, the rallies are difficult because of the pace, spin and consistency. A lot of the shots you could do say practicing or playing people who are below your level are muted. So you're pretty much left with the bare basics w/ percentage tennis.

I'd compare it to say like practice. In practice you feel like you can hit any shot, but once match time comes a lot of people are like, "wtf where did my strokes go." They didn't go anywhere, you could still hit them given you had a ball slow enough. But the pace really just kills your ability to do whatever you want.

 

[Rafa's best friend]

The USTA rating system truly sucks the big one. It is completely different where you are in the country, and with all the cheaters, it is impossible to keep fair.

 

[andrew_b]

I'd agree with Kevhen and AngeloDS. It sounds easier than it is, and people tend to gloss over their weak spots and focus on their strengths. Also, there are a few more points to consider.

First, the description provided in the OP is the "basic" version. It is meant for people who have not played USTA competetively. There is a more detailed description also available to the general public that provides a description for each stroke at each level (i.e., if you're a 4.5 player, your serve should do this). Note that the "improvement" from 5.0 to 5.5 levels are not really related to specific shot execution. At that level, it becomes more about performing under stress, being able to read opponents and develop strategy, etc. It's also interesting that many players I know who have gone through the self-rating process end up dropping their own ratings a half or even full point just by reading the more detailed description.

Next, there are certified raters that have experience and even more detailed guidelines that are not available to the public for use (at least, there used to be - in our area they kind of disappeared after the implementation of the dynamic rating stuff).

Finally, in sanctioned USTA play, results are tracked and you will establish a rating based on your play. The computerized dynamic rating system tracks you results (score, not win/loss) and factors in the rating of your opponent. The computerized rating can still be challenged, but at least it's based on your performance and not observation. Even so, you can still be "bumped" at higher level NTRP events (like sectionals) by the "rating police".

Perfect? Nope. But better than nothing, and better than it used to be.

play well,
Andrew

 

[FiveO]

The NTRP is a ball-park and we see it being abused by interpretation and in some cases necessity, all the time.

Many players "gloss over" elements of the level descriptions such as the ability to place second serves well and only see what they feel they can do to over-rate themselves and then don't want to come to terms with the fact that the 4.5 they just played is a true 4.5 and they may not be.

There is a motive to under-rate to the 4.5 level in that there are relatively few 5.0 players and above in the northeast, who don't play for age group or open rankings. I personally don't see a problem with that locally because most of the guys doing it, other present/former college players and teaching pros are spread among various teams and end up competing against each other.

Personally I believe I think it was more straightforward without the NTRP. Enter as an individual or a team and see how it works out, which is what ultimately happens through competition. I never minded winning or having my *** handed to me by someone blowing in from a higher national ranking, top D1 or overseas to see where I was at any given time.

I think the expectation that the competition should only be "this good" is a reflection of an overly PC culture which only limits itself. Without superior competition, one is unlikely to improve, which is why as a junior there was a mindset to play up and play open divisions to find better and better competition which like pushers do at lower levels, expose where one's limitations are and what they need to improve to be competitive. Playing in a pool of true peers is ultimately limiting. Playing a level up or down, within reason, is the best gauge for where one stands.

And according to the USTA itself, the NTRP aside, players, like water, will find their own levels through results of that competition. If one wants a trophy fine, but if one wants to improve they should crave better competition as often as possible.

 

[raiden031]

I agree that the computer-rated system is a good idea. However how do they prevent the ratings from drifting away from what they were intended. For instance, we all know there are alot of former college players playing at the 4.5 levels. Over time a true 4.5 would start drifting downwards in rating because they are not playing well against these sandbagging 4.5 players. Soon the true 4.5 player now is rated at a 4.0. The true 4.0s are starting to bump down to 3.5, etc. And soon you have 3.0s gettings their ass handed to them by advanced players. How do they anchor the ratings to really mean what they were intended to mean instead of being relative to what was started at the 4.5 level due to sandbagging. If certain regions have more sandbagging college players than others, then that would present even more problems, especially with nationals.

Do the experts ever step in and benchmark the rating level using their own judgement, or from now until the end of times will they let the computer decide that, based on the current players at each rating level?

I love a good challenge, but when people who are legitimately 3.0 players don't get picked to play in a 3.0 league because they can't compete with the other players (~3.5) on the team, or get crushed in the first round of a tournament and lose their $50, then it becomes a little unfair.

 

[andrew_b]

I agree that the computer-rated system is a good idea. However how do they prevent the ratings from drifting away from what they were intended. For instance, we all know there are alot of former college players playing at the 4.5 levels. Over time a true 4.5 would start drifting downwards in rating because they are not playing well against these sandbagging 4.5 players. Soon the true 4.5 player now is rated at a 4.0. The true 4.0s are starting to bump down to 3.5, etc. And soon you have 3.0s gettings their ass handed to them by advanced players. How do they anchor the ratings to really mean what they were intended to mean instead of being relative to what was started at the 4.5 level due to sandbagging. If certain regions have more sandbagging college players than others, then that would present even more problems, especially with nationals.

Not sure if this is the cause, but it does seem like the 4.0/4.5 levels have gotten tougher. Or it could be I'm just getting older! LOL

Do the experts ever step in and benchmark the rating level using their own judgement, or from now until the end of times will they let the computer decide that, based on the current players at each rating level?

yes. At sectionals and above, there are roving raters who watch people play to make sure they're not rated too low. Coaches are allowed to register "complaints" (don't think they call it that, but that's what it is) on players they feel are sandbagging, and those players will then be randomly watched, and possibly bumped up. nasty part is, if they're bumped up, it means all their points all season are forfeited, which could change team standings.

play well,
Andrew

I love a good challenge, but when people who are legitimately 3.0 players don't get picked to play in a 3.0 league because they can't compete with the other players (~3.5) on the team, or get crushed in the first round of a tournament and lose their $50, then it becomes a little unfair.[/QUOTE]

 

[Frank Silbermann]

They are accurate for the most part. But the ratings make it sound easier than it is.

"You have developed your use of power and spin and can handle pace. You have sound footwork, can control depth of shots, and attempt to vary game plan according to your opponents. You can hit first serves with power and accuracy and place the second serve. You tend to over hit on difficult shots. Aggressive net play is common in doubles."

Power, spin and can handle pace. Sound footwork. Control depth of shots and attempt to vary game plan. Can hit first serves with power & accuracy and place second serve etc. Sounds easy but it isn't. To be consistent with it is difficult as well. To sit down and play a 1-2+ hour match and consistantly fulfill that is difficult.

The 4.5 guidelines you quoted don't say you have to be able to do all that _consistently_ -- they just say you have to be able to do it. If you can do it _consistently_ then according to the guidelines you're probably a 5.5: "5.5 This player has developed power and/OR _consistency_ as a major weapon."

 

[emo5]

I think the rankings are a more specific way of the catergories,
'Beginner, Intermediate and Advanced'
So no, they're not entirely acurate, different countires have different rating systems.