Differences Between NTRP Ratings?

[FH2FH]

...other than what's specified by the USTA. Just wondering what others have experienced. To me, the guidlines are something like this:

3.0: Slow/moderate rally balls, developing consistency. Weak in most areas but the forehand. Footwork is poor and players are impatient or defensive. Basically just keeps the ball in play.

3.5: Moderate/fast rally balls, better consistency. More developed backhands, serves/returns. Still learning to construct points and is not comfortable over the entire court.

4.0: Rally ball similar to 3.5 with good consistency/depth. Consistent with most strokes including volleys. Footwork is being established and players are effective in their favorite area of the court. Serves/returns now more important.

4.5: Like 4.0, but with fewer weaknesses and more reliable "go to" shots. Has excellent control and plays each shot with a purpose. Comfortable in most areas of the court, but prefers to establish control of a point with a favorite shot or two.

5.0: ?? [I have not played any 5.0's, only hit a few times. I would be happy to win a handful of points over a set, haha.]

I'm curious to see others comments. I'm a 3.5 now with full swings and improving speed, but I don't have much experience since this is only my 3rd season in USTA. I've been playing seriously about 2 years.

 

[noobplayer]

dat seems like 2.0 Slow/moderate rally balls, developing consistency. Weak in most areas but the forehand. Footwork is poor and players are impatient or defensive. Basically just keeps the ball in play.

just move everything u have 1.0 down

 

[thehustler]

Sublevels of each skill level

I think people overlook that there are different levels to each skill level. You might be a 3.5, but you may have just been bumped up from 3.0. Are you a good 3.5 yet? Probably not. Things are different than from 3.0. Players serve better, hit harder, so it's like you're learning all over again. Below is a better detailed description of what I mean. This is copied from a document I typed up several months ago.

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.

Hope this helps or make some bit of sense.

 

[kevhen]

Your descriptions sound pretty right on. 3.0s usually can't hit backhands too well but can rally slow-paced balls. 3.5s are a mixed bag but usually lose because they are still inconsistent and don't place the ball that well when they go for big shots. 4.0s are usually pretty consistent and may have one minor weapon. 4.5s have even less weaknesses to attack and even better placement.

 

[FH2FH]

Yeah, I haven't even been bumped up yet, but I'm winning against 3.0's easily. It will happen. I didn't play last spring. The 3.5 matches are competetive and the 4.0's kick my arse. I can win games off some of them though. The 1-3 levels you mentioned makes sense. I would say I'm a 1 or 2, definitely not 3, but that will come with confidence/experience.

I've always had fast/full strokes, so for me the problem has been finding a balance instead of becoming more aggressive. I think what's helped most is patience, anticipation, footspeed/footwork, which come with practice & experience. I used to "freak out" in matches and get so tight against better players that I could barely swing. If you're not confident, regardless of who's the "better" player, you will lose more matches.

 

[FH2FH]

noob, what I mean about "slow balls" is you get lots of sitters. Too many 3.0's hit these balls 15 feet long, in the net, or hit them so weak that they're lobbed easily, etc. A 4.0/4.5 will put them away or force you into a defensive position every time.

All the 4.0/4.5's I know look like pros during practice, but breakdown in matches (too aggressive or lack variety?). That's what makes me believe confidence/fitness/experience is just as important as skill. If you can get to every ball comfortably and know where to put the ball then you have options. The 5.0's I've watched look like pros in matches!! It's like the ball is on a string, lol. I can't see the differences above that level yet. I don't get to watch many college matches and there are only a handful of 4.5/5.0's around here.

 

[Deleted member 13755]

A 4.0/4.5 will put them away or force you into a defensive position every time.

All the 4.0/4.5's I know look like pros during practice, but breakdown in matches (too aggressive or lack variety?). That's what makes me believe confidence/fitness/experience is just as important as skill.

OH MY GOD, DO I KNOW YOU?

You nailed my style of play and ways of play COMPLETELY.


I'm freaking out.


No, seriously freaking out.

 

[Supernatural_Serve]

I would add:

4.0 - Has at least one weapon. Something that can end the point.

3.5 and under - Can't hurt you with a weapon.

 

[FH2FH]

OH MY GOD, DO I KNOW YOU?
You nailed my style of play and ways of play COMPLETELY.
I'm freaking out.
No, seriously freaking out.

LOL, nah man. I just practice/play with lots of 3.0's to 4.0's so I have a good mental inventory. Your comments reminded me of like the SouthPark where Kyle(?) pretends to be psychic, haha.

I posted this to see what people think it takes to reach higher amateur levels. I want to be a strong 3.5 or 4.0 by next year. I am willing to work at it, but I need bigger balls and to quit eating like a pig. I also want to learn how to do quicker assessments of my opponents when we play. I don't adapt as well as I'd like during a match.

 

[raiden031]

I think the 3.0-3.5 level is much more complicated then people realize. The reason being that the development of strokes can vary so immensely between these players and what really matters is who can do the best job of avoiding unforced errors. At that level the server has little or no advantage, at least not in any match I have ever played.

Take me for a perfect example. I am a 3.0 solely because of match play, even though I have better strokes than EVERY 3.5 player I have played to date. I have the fastest serves, the most technically correct forehands and one-handed backhand, and often people just assume I am going to beat them when we're warming up. The reason I can't win is because my strokes are not consistent enough during match play and I can't keep the ball within the court when I go for sharp angled shots. Also I mishit alot and I have a tendency to blow crucial points...don't know if that is a mental thing.

I find that most 3.5 players are pushers and I have huge problems playing them. I will go neck-and-neck with any 3.5 player who hits with a full swing but get absolutely creamed by a 3.5 player who pushes. At the 3.0 level I will lose to pushers about half the time, but I am guaranteed to beat any 3.0 player that is not a pusher with ease.

Let me just mention now that I am SOLELY speaking based on players in MY AREA and I realize that a 3.5 in other parts of the USA are far better than the 3.5s in which I've competed.

 

[kevhen]

There are plenty of 4.0s I know who can rally all day but don't have any weapon that can end a point except for consistency.

I know plenty of 3.5s who do have weapons like a forehand that they love to rip but only get them in like 50/50 so it's not really a huge weapon.

 

[Caswell]

The problem with NTRP ratings (IHMO) is that most people place themselves by going up from beginner to wherever they think they fit. In reality, with professional players being on the scale at 7.0 you really need to work back from there to find where you fit.

That's the reason why descriptions such as "moderate pace" cause problems with these systems. Beginners think that anything more than a dink is "moderate pace", when in reality you're talking about moderate pace from a professional standpoint. The players I'm on court with in different leagues (from 3.0 to 4.0, men's and mixed) think I beat the hell out of the ball, but in reality that's probably nothing more than "moderate pace" to a seasoned player.

Keeping things like pace and "ending points" out of it (my serve can end points against a 3.0, but is only good enough not to be attacked by someone over 4.0), it boils down to this:

3.0 - Keep the ball in play and you'll win
3.5 - Keep the ball in play and keep it deep and you'll win
4.0 - Keep the ball in play, keep it deep, place it well and you'll win
4.5+ - Better have a weapon to end the point

 

[Caswell]

I know plenty of 3.5s who do have weapons like a forehand that they love to rip but only get them in like 50/50 so it's not really a huge weapon.

Absolutely. Last night's doubles match included a 3.5 player I spend a lot of time on court with. Once or twice a match, his forehand turns lethal - my partner started to worry, and I told him that we just had to hang on until he started missing them again. Sure enough, a game later they were either going into the backstop or the net.

I don't think it's necessary to have a weapon to win as a 3.5. My forehand or overhead can end a point when I get a sitter, but at that level it was nothing more than solid fundamentals that generated the sitter from my opponent in the first place.

 

[maverick1]

There are plenty of 4.0s I know who can rally all day but don't have any weapon that can end a point except for consistency.

I know plenty of 3.5s who do have weapons like a forehand that they love to rip but only get them in like 50/50 so it's not really a huge weapon.

I find this to be mostly true as well.

I can stay in the point with a 3.5 if they are hitting a regular ground stroke, no matter how short the ball was. They can put away moderate volleys and overheads. On groundstrokes, they may go for winners and hit some, but their consistency is such that they are better off not attempting them.

The 4.0s, on the other hand, either hit winners or get a stranglehold on the point if you let them move in and hit a forehand from around the service line or closer.
There are exceptions though. The pushing legend in my club nevert hurts you with his strokes but has a .500 record in USTA 4.0 leagues. He gets everything back. When you come to the net, he has just enough pace, height, spin and placement on his half-lob/half-passing shot that you need to be a really good volleyer to put them away. The best 4.0s almost bagel him, but he can bagel the weakest 4.0s.

 

[FH2FH]

Let me butcher this up, like the pusher butchers you. Just kidding.

3.0-3.5 level ...strokes can vary so immensely ...best job of avoiding unforced errors ...server has little or no advantage.

Agree.

I am a 3.0 solely because of match play ...mishit alot and I have a tendency to blow crucial points...don't know if that is a mental thing.

It's definitely a mental thing. You need to use other "gears" when you play. If your opponents are smart they'll try to disrupt rythym. Slow down against a pusher and wait until you have the opportunity to win the point. By pusher I mean just they only get the ball back. These are the practice partners you need until you can beat them easily!! Focus on placement/consistency and look for opportunities to move forward and pressure your opponent instead of trying to make the ESPN highlights.

most 3.5 players are pushers and I have huge problems playing them. I will go neck-and-neck with any 3.5 player who hits with a full swing but get absolutely creamed by a 3.5 player who pushes.

Full swings are good for power, but bad for control at this level; footwork is weak, players are impatient, and faster racquet speeds require better timing (something a 3.0/3.5 is still developing). Once those full swings are consistent, they are 4.0's.

 

[Caswell]

I guess it really depends on where you're playing and what the level of competition is like.

Serves are a big advantage with the 3.5 men I play with. One knows that I'll hit a deep return anywhere off the forehand wing, so I spend entire matches against him hitting shoulder high kick serves off my backhand. I'll see maybe a dozen forehand returns in an entire match.

There are no pushers at the 3.5 level and even down into the upper 3.0's. Granted, 90% of the play at our club is doubles, and the 3.5's are comfortable enough at the net to end points against pushers quickly.

 

[FH2FH]

There are plenty of 4.0s I know who can rally all day but don't have any weapon that can end a point except for consistency.

I know plenty of 3.5s who do have weapons like a forehand that they love to rip but only get them in like 50/50 so it's not really a huge weapon.

I agree. Consistency itself is a weapon IMO, especially combined with speed.

...it boils down to this:

3.0 - Keep the ball in play and you'll win
3.5 - Keep the ball in play and keep it deep and you'll win
4.0 - Keep the ball in play, keep it deep, place it well and you'll win
4.5+ - Better have a weapon to end the point

Those seem like very good guidelines. I think those are actually better than the wordy NTRP guidelines, haha.

 

[raiden031]

I guess it really depends on where you're playing and what the level of competition is like.

Serves are a big advantage with the 3.5 men I play with. One knows that I'll hit a deep return anywhere off the forehand wing, so I spend entire matches against him hitting shoulder high kick serves off my backhand. I'll see maybe a dozen forehand returns in an entire match.

There are no pushers at the 3.5 level and even down into the upper 3.0's. Granted, 90% of the play at our club is doubles, and the 3.5's are comfortable enough at the net to end points against pushers quickly.

Your description of 3.5 definitely doesn't match what I've gone up against. In fact all of the top 3.5s in my area are pushers, which I define as those that are more likely to hit slow balls and slice their forehands. The only 3.5 players I have played that have a fast serve don't have the consistency for it to even be a weapon, its actually more of a liability. One thing I will say is that 3.5 players are much smarter on the court than 3.0 players. I don't have the ability to adapt to different players' games like 3.5 players do.

 

[Ronaldo]

Ever ckout this book, http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0880117559/ref=sib_dp_pt/104-0468017-7139905#reader-link

 

[FH2FH]

Here there is a mix agressive and defensive 3.5 players. The 3.0 players are mostly defensive. Of the 3.5's who serve fast consistently, it's often the same spin/speed and they can usually only hit one side of the box or the other. Many 2nd serves are still weak, which puts the returner at an advantage. I'm working on that now, placing the return. I used to go for lots of winners, but that rarely pays off and doesn't keep pressure on my opponent. I want to make them earn it.

I like to hit an 80-90% power 1st serve and move it around, unless I'm rarely double faulting and/or my opponent isn't hurting me on the return; then I will go for the lines. Too many people try to intimidate with a huge first serve that only goes in 1/4-1/2 of the time. It's like "great, you got your 3 aces, but you also got broken once each set." Dumb.

 

[kevhen]

Getting broken once per set is not bad for a 3.5 but you are right about the low first serve percent leading to too many DF's or serving too many weak second serves from 3.5s.

3.0s don't have weapons although they may have a decent forehand they can hit the occasional winner with but they don't place the ball well enough or hit hard enough to be considered weapons.

 

[ssjkyle31]

The problem with NTRP ratings (IHMO) is that most people place themselves by going up from beginner to wherever they think they fit. In reality, with professional players being on the scale at 7.0 you really need to work back from there to find where you fit.

Keeping things like pace and "ending points" out of it (my serve can end points against a 3.0, but is only good enough not to be attacked by someone over 4.0), it boils down to this:

3.0 - Keep the ball in play and you'll win
3.5 - Keep the ball in play and keep it deep and you'll win
4.0 - Keep the ball in play, keep it deep, place it well and you'll win
4.5+ - Better have a weapon to end the point

So true. When play USTA/WTT league it does boil to these description. But in Southern California, alot player tend to sandbag in the league.

 

[Dr. Van Nostrand]

Take me for a perfect example. I am a 3.0 solely because of match play, even though I have better strokes than EVERY 3.5 player I have played to date. I have the fastest serves, the most technically correct forehands and one-handed backhand, and often people just assume I am going to beat them when we're warming up. The reason I can't win is because my strokes are not consistent enough during match play and I can't keep the ball within the court when I go for sharp angled shots. Also I mishit alot and I have a tendency to blow crucial points...don't know if that is a mental thing.

Yeah, when I started I used to have problems winning matches yet I had very good strokes and people used to think I was sandbagging when they would watch me warm up or just hit. My problem was not having the mental toughness that it takes to win matches. The mental aspect cannot be overlooked and it certainly plays an important part in being able to win matches.

I find that most 3.5 players are pushers and I have huge problems playing them. I will go neck-and-neck with any 3.5 player who hits with a full swing but get absolutely creamed by a 3.5 player who pushes. At the 3.0 level I will lose to pushers about half the time, but I am guaranteed to beat any 3.0 player that is not a pusher with ease.

I would say the minority of 3.5 players are pushers and I hate playing them as well. It is hard to stay patient against a pusher as they put very little pace on their shots, they tend to hit high lob-type shots whenever they can, and they are excellent ball retreivers. Once again the mental aspect comes into play and you have to adjust to that style of play and generally be patient.

 

[drakulie]

1.0- Just starting.

1.5- Started a little earlier than the 1.0

2.0- Has just learned how to keep score.

2.5- Learned how to keep score a little earlier than the 2.0.

3.0- Most people on these boards.

3.5- Phil

4.0- kehven

4.5- me

5.0- better than me

5.5- better than the guy who is better than me.

and so on......


7.0 Federer

 

[moxio]

The problem with NTRP ratings (IHMO) is that most people place themselves by going up from beginner to wherever they think they fit. In reality, with professional players being on the scale at 7.0 you really need to work back from there to find where you fit.

That's the reason why descriptions such as "moderate pace" cause problems with these systems. Beginners think that anything more than a dink is "moderate pace", when in reality you're talking about moderate pace from a professional standpoint. The players I'm on court with in different leagues (from 3.0 to 4.0, men's and mixed) think I beat the hell out of the ball, but in reality that's probably nothing more than "moderate pace" to a seasoned player.

Keeping things like pace and "ending points" out of it (my serve can end points against a 3.0, but is only good enough not to be attacked by someone over 4.0), it boils down to this:

3.0 - Keep the ball in play and you'll win
3.5 - Keep the ball in play and keep it deep and you'll win
4.0 - Keep the ball in play, keep it deep, place it well and you'll win
4.5+ - Better have a weapon to end the point

Yeah that looks good to me

 

[shindemac]

It's really hard to generalize because I think there are a lot of different player types. But I think these two can be safely said. After 4.0, serves get bigger and better. And each higher level will have players with more complete strokes until you hit 5.0's and up who will have a complete game.

You could say the lower levels (3.0 and down) are dominated by UEs. So you end up with 2 types of players. Those that try to develop usually one stroke like a forehand, and those that don't have technically sound strokes but can keep the ball in play, usually pushers.

 

[ssjkyle31]

7.0 Federer

7.0 for Federer. More like 8.0 Nadal 7.5

 

[drakulie]

7.0 for Federer. More like 8.0 Nadal 7.5

OK. My bad.

 

[ssjkyle31]

Just looking at the reality of Federer play look at the INDESIT ATP 2006 point standing.
Ferderer - 1325
Nadal - 825
3rd thru 20 between 436 and 215.

I should say up to thru 301 -1 pt

http://www.atptennis.com/