Can old players still play well?

Steady Eddy

Steady Eddy

Legend
I deliberately left that vague. When I started tennis, I thought that simply because I was in my early 20s I'd be better than the 40 somethings at the club.

Since then I've been constantly surprised at how good some people can be at tennis, especially doubles at an advanced age. Also, I sense that many young people imagine that they are playing at the highest level of the game. Seems some young guys take up the game hitting with their bro' at the public park. They don't enter tournaments, but they suspect that once they do, they'll go all the way. I've played guys like this first round in tournaments, and they're shocked to be expelled from the tournament so soon by the likes of someone like me.

Some posters really denigrate the 3.5 level, but I wonder, "Can they beat a 3.5, or just think they'd beat a 3.5?" Because you're young and slug the ball you still might not be much of a player until you get out there in the larger tennis community. Just being young isn't enough in this sport.
 
Of course older players can play well in rec leagues. Tennis is one of those sports where you never really know what you will face in an opponent. It is definitely not a sport where you can judge a book by its cover. I have seen many people who you wouldn't expect to be good based on looks alone (like The Sureshs™) but they end up being wizards on the court (again, like The Sureshs™). I have never felt age is a factor in performing well at rec tennis. There are scores of veteran older players who can put youngsters to shame with crafty shot selection alone. There are some 70+ year-old players at my club that are astonishingly accurate and do quite well in doubles, making me wonder how good they were in their younger days. They leave me hoping I can be half that good at the same age. Being young, fast, and strong means very little when playing against someone who makes use of nice shot selection and moves the opponent around.
 
Last edited:
Just had the pleasure of watching a men's 55+ 8.0 combo match.
First, I believe all the men on the court will also be playing 65+ when that season rolls around in a month or so ...
Second .... dang. These men had game.

Yes, slower than those in their 20s/30s but hardly immobile.

My guess is that most on that 8.0 court were probably 4.5+ in their prime years. Still hit with plenty of power, sharp, fast serves ... and wicked accuracy. Much better at net than their younger counterparts.
 
OnTheLine said:
Just had the pleasure of watching a men's 55+ 8.0 combo match.
First, I believe all the men on the court will also be playing 65+ when that season rolls around in a month or so ...
Second .... dang. These men had game.

Yes, slower than those in their 20s/30s but hardly immobile.

My guess is that most on that 8.0 court were probably 4.5+ in their prime years. Still hit with plenty of power, sharp, fast serves ... and wicked accuracy. Much better at net than their younger counterparts.
Click to expand...
Yes, there's a loss in mobility, but they're good at knowing where to stand, so it's hard to exploit. They often can volley well and their serves are first rate.

My grandparents used to tell me that young people can have fun with tennis for a hobby, but when they hit middle-age they'll have to hang it up and play golf. Nonsense!
 
Steady Eddy said:
Yes, there's a loss in mobility, but they're good at knowing where to stand, so it's hard to exploit. They often can volley well and their serves are first rate.

My grandparents used to tell me that young people can have fun with tennis for a hobby, but when they hit middle-age they'll have to hang it up and play golf. Nonsense!
Click to expand...

Now it is Pickle instead of golf.
 
There is a 77-year old world/US champion for the >75 age group at my club who still retains a 4.5 USTA computer rating from his performance in tournaments. When you play against him, he is a normal 4.5 player who plays singles and doubles - he is not a finesse player only as he is really fit and flexible. He plays I-formation often and crouches at the net in doubles calling a lot of intentional poaches without any issues. I’ve seen him do practice drill sessions often for a couple of hours and he works out a lot at the gym also. He humbles the rest of us as we all want to be like him when we ‘grow old’.

There are also ex pro and major college players at my club who look like they could easily have a 4.5 computer rating although they don’t play USTA anymore. Age does not tell you if someone was a pro or college player when they were young. Easier to be a 5.5 or 5.0 player in your youth who declines down to 4.5 when you become a Senior than to be an adult beginner who gets bumped up to 4.5 progressively.
 
Tennis singles is definitely a young persons' game. But doubles, not so much.
The last 18+ doubles champs at our club were 41 and 53 years of age. Both former college and HS, and both still very powerful players.
One was a vacuum at the net, and road runner. The other served very well. Great team.
 
Athleticism is the real determinant

Age is only a number on paper, especially as you get older. If you're gifted athletically and don't throw it away, you'll age much better than someone who wasn't as athletic.

I did two things that a lot of guys my age didn't do:

1) stayed light by not drinking
2) always looking for little challenges. "How many strides will it take me to get up these stairs?" etc.

Keeping that "childlike" focus on the physical world really helps keep your reflexes sharp and your body explosive.
 
Steady Eddy said:
I deliberately left that vague. When I started tennis, I thought that simply because I was in my early 20s I'd be better than the 40 somethings at the club.

Since then I've been constantly surprised at how good some people can be at tennis, especially doubles at an advanced age. Also, I sense that many young people imagine that they are playing at the highest level of the game. Seems some young guys take up the game hitting with their bro' at the public park. They don't enter tournaments, but they suspect that once they do, they'll go all the way. I've played guys like this first round in tournaments, and they're shocked to be expelled from the tournament so soon by the likes of someone like me.

Some posters really denigrate the 3.5 level, but I wonder, "Can they beat a 3.5, or just think they'd beat a 3.5?" Because you're young and slug the ball you still might not be much of a player until you get out there in the larger tennis community. Just being young isn't enough in this sport.
Click to expand...
Age really doesn’t become an issue in doubles until your serve explosion fades in mid/late 50s. If you can move ur feet and you have the racket skills, age isn’t a serious factor.

For singles, age becomes a big factor around 38-40 when, all other skills being equal, the younger guy can move in ways you can’t. Especially if you’re talking about playing multiple matches a week.
 
These guys are dinasaurs

9c53i4cg_marcelo-arevalo-juanjulien-rojer-afp_625x300_05_June_22.jpg
 
Rosstour said:
Athleticism is the real determinant

Age is only a number on paper, especially as you get older. If you're gifted athletically and don't throw it away, you'll age much better than someone who wasn't as athletic.

I did two things that a lot of guys my age didn't do:

1) stayed light by not drinking
2) always looking for little challenges. "How many strides will it take me to get up these stairs?" etc.

Keeping that "childlike" focus on the physical world really helps keep your reflexes sharp and your body explosive.
Click to expand...
That is very true. I have always played like a 60 years old even when I was 18. I have never been athletic. Now that I’m 53, I still play like a 65 years old, so actually I haven’t regressed much. Not being athletic has put pressure on me since early on to practice more and put more effort into whatever sports I was doing.
 
You can but you need to give 100% attention/commitment in playing/being in shape to play not playing to get in shape. For me I’ve taken tennis as far as I can-not enough time to commit. Now it’s time to focus on health/bodybuilding and watching sports-couldn’t do this when I was playing tennis.
 
vex said:
Age really doesn’t become an issue in doubles until your serve explosion fades in mid/late 50s. If you can move ur feet and you have the racket skills, age isn’t a serious factor.

For singles, age becomes a big factor around 38-40 when, all other skills being equal, the younger guy can move in ways you can’t. Especially if you’re talking about playing multiple matches a week.
Click to expand...
vex said:
Age really doesn’t become an issue in doubles until your serve explosion fades in mid/late 50s. If you can move ur feet and you have the racket skills, age isn’t a serious factor.

For singles, age becomes a big factor around 38-40 when, all other skills being equal, the younger guy can move in ways you can’t. Especially if you’re talking about playing multiple matches a week.
Click to expand...

How much of an outlier is a 40+ player who still has speed comparable to a college player?
 
I'm 51 and last night I played a singles match won the first set 6-1 started to run out of gas lost the second set 6-4. I lost the tie break, joined my team, drank a beer, and passed out from dehydration.


The guy that beat me was probably ten years older than me and had his granddaughter watching the game. So I think as long as someone is under say 65 I don't think age is all that big of a deal in rec tennis if they do not have injuries. But being in shape and hydrated is important.
 
Moon Shooter said:
I'm 51 and last night I played a singles match won the first set 6-1 started to run out of gas lost the second set 6-4. I lost the tie break, joined my team, drank a beer, and passed out from dehydration.


The guy that beat me was probably ten years older than me and had his granddaughter watching the game. So I think as long as someone is under say 65 I don't think age is all that big of a deal in rec tennis if they do not have injuries. But being in shape and hydrated is important.
Click to expand...
My life story :)
 
Turbo-87 said:
Of course older players can play well in rec leagues. Tennis is one of those sports where you never really know what you will face in an opponent. It is definitely not a sport where you can judge a book by its cover. I have seen many people who you wouldn't expect to be good based on looks alone (like The Sureshs™) but they end up being wizards on the court (again, like The Sureshs™). I have never felt age is a factor in performing well at rec tennis. There are scores of veteran older players who can put youngsters to shame with crafty shot selection alone. There are some 70+ year-old players at my club that are astonishingly accurate and do quite well in doubles, making me wonder how good they were in their younger days. They leave me hoping I can be half that good at the same age. Being young, fast, and strong means very little when playing against someone who makes use of nice shot selection and moves the opponent around.
Click to expand...
You have definitely seen the highest levels ever.
 
The instant I moved from nylon to poly my game jumped up a level.

General no. But if you start doing things like lose weight, practice more, decent coaching, etc. Then you can be better as you age.
 
Old players cannot play well.
I was a great player right until the day I turned 40. Easily 5.5.
Day after I turned 40, my game imploded. Barely 3.0.
 
Chalkdust said:
Old players cannot play well.
I was a great player right until the day I turned 40. Easily 5.5.
Day after I turned 40, my game imploded. Barely 3.0.
Click to expand...
I already turned 40 a few years ago and my game is getting better and better. Have no idea how that will end up, it’s becoming pretty scary.
No, seriously after 40 you can still improve your technique, but there is not much you can do against the gradual decline in speed and reactivity. My dad told me, after 40 it’s down the hill… But you can still play decent tennis for a while. My dad is 73, still playing well.
 
Last edited:
Steady Eddy said:
I deliberately left that vague. When I started tennis, I thought that simply because I was in my early 20s I'd be better than the 40 somethings at the club.

Since then I've been constantly surprised at how good some people can be at tennis, especially doubles at an advanced age. Also, I sense that many young people imagine that they are playing at the highest level of the game. Seems some young guys take up the game hitting with their bro' at the public park. They don't enter tournaments, but they suspect that once they do, they'll go all the way. I've played guys like this first round in tournaments, and they're shocked to be expelled from the tournament so soon by the likes of someone like me.

Some posters really denigrate the 3.5 level, but I wonder, "Can they beat a 3.5, or just think they'd beat a 3.5?" Because you're young and slug the ball you still might not be much of a player until you get out there in the larger tennis community. Just being young isn't enough in this sport.
Click to expand...
steady
its all relative, we got a couple of the guys at our club that are 90.
they can move a couple of steps, but thats about it
you can beat them if you are a "scumb bag" by hitting drop shots and moonballs, moving them around the court
if you hit the shots at them, they had better be winners, as they still got game and can volley and angle
them off
z
 
The interesting thing about tennis is that it's all relative to other players who are your age. I mean, when I was in my 30's I would say that I was very average maybe in the 50% of the guys I knew my age who played seriously. Now that I'm 60, I'm a bit higher than that, although I understand that a lot of players have quit, taken up pickleball, etc.
 
I’ve played in private clubs for the past twenty years and so have played matches against a mix of ages all through this time. Matches are set up by the club or by players based on level and so, you end up playing people all over the age spectrum. The club has coaches evaluate players when they join the club and so, the level is not a self-rating.

I’ve stopped making assumptions about how someone will play based on their age or how they look as there are too many surprises. Even people’s speed cannot be judged purely by how much they weigh as a lot of ‘tennis speed’ is based on anticipation and good players start moving early towards the ball.
 
Most definitely. You see young gunners lose to older, wiser guys all the time. The OGs have seen every kind of ball, thousands of times.
 
Rosstour said:
How much of an outlier is a 40+ player who still has speed comparable to a college player?
Click to expand...

College is a wide range. I can see a 40+ pro being like a good college player for speed. Like maybe Feliciano Lopez - but he's already starting to make inroads as a presenter vs player. Or Ferrer.
A rec player, though? Not unless they are rather light, and juice a bit.
Though my speed isn't anything what it used to be, what I miss most are my reflexes and eyesight. Fortunately, I still have most of my strength.
 
sureshs said:
The pic is timely because Serena has copyrighted (or is it trademarked?) "Serena Williams Pickleball."
Click to expand...
They would likely play pickleball as no one has ever seen it before. :-D
On a sidenote, in the past Monfils beat the "No. 1 paddle player in the world" whereas he had hardly ever played it before. The level of the pros in tennis is so high that they could certainly crush the competition in pickleball as well, and possibly in other racquet sports less professional than tennis. Maybe fun to see, but I prefer(ed) Roger on a tennis court.
 
Most people who are 3.5 or 4.0 are not limited by age (at least up until they can’t run anymore). They are limited by technique, racquet skills, shot selection, buying 6 Pure Aero Rafa editions with RPM blast instead of buying 1 or 2 and spending the rest of that money on private lessons with a teaching pro, playing matches all the time instead of drilling, and lack of general fitness training outside of tennis. At 4.5 this is a different story, but at 3.0, 3.5, and 4.0, you can play these levels for a very long time, almost indefinitely.
 
vex said:
Man, that would be a pretty special athlete.
Click to expand...

WYK said:
College is a wide range. I can see a 40+ pro being like a good college player for speed. Like maybe Feliciano Lopez - but he's already starting to make inroads as a presenter vs player. Or Ferrer.
A rec player, though? Not unless they are rather light, and juice a bit.
Though my speed isn't anything what it used to be, what I miss most are my reflexes and eyesight. Fortunately, I still have most of my strength.
Click to expand...

@WYK Do you have kids? I noticed my reflexes have actually improved since I had my daughter at 32. But unlike you, I miss my strength. Esp upper body

"rather light" is certainly me though. I asked the question about being an outlier because I've had two different college players (one ex D3, one current D1) tell me that my speed is comparable to active college players.

I thought they might be blowing smoke but the D1 guy got specific and said "I know some guys who are faster, but you stand out bc you only need three steps to reach top speed"

felt too specific to be BS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Cindysphinx
Well, I Decided To Play
2
Replies
55
Views
3K
Moveforwardalways
Moveforwardalways
T
  • Poll Poll
League or Tournament - which has better players?
Replies
23
Views
2K
cknobman
cknobman
Jim A
Question about League/Tournament Play for Self-Rated Players
Replies
3
Views
782
goober
goober
H
Tournament play
Replies
45
Views
3K
Moz
Moz
E
what is a tennis league and how do you join??
Replies
3
Views
7K
zapvor
zapvor
Back
Top