For people who can't seem to figure out NTRP ratings (lancernrg needs to most help)

A

andymac1

Rookie
Made this especially for lancernrg (3.0 doesn't mean 5.0)... and other people who have a good reason for not knowing the ntrp ratings.

1.0 - 2.0 players (this shouldn't be necessary -_-' ): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6IjMQtBPtU

2.5 - 3.0 players: http://youtube.com/watch?v=ttX1WSKPV48

3.5 players: http://youtube.com/watch?v=ER9FKDpSi_g

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

4.5 player (one in front of camera):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1gFRRnDtGE

5.0 - 5.5 player (forgive the bad music):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ve1qkuBQd_w

6.0 - 6.5 players: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRfKP2T1nSc

7.0 players (pro): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Hp-EArV6s8

Summary in words of ntrp ratings:

1.0
This player is just starting to play tennis

1.5
This player has limited experience and is still working primarily on getting the ball into play

2.0
FOREHAND: Incomplete swing; lacks directional intent
BACKHAND: Avoids backhands; erratic contact; grip problems; incomplete swing
SERVE/RETURN OF SERVE: Incomplete service motion; double faults common; toss is inconsistent; return of serve erratic
VOLLEY: Reluctant to play net; avoids BH; lacks footwork
PLAYING STYLE: Familiar with basic positions for singles and doubles play; frequently out of position

2.5
FOREHAND: Form developing; prepared for moderately paced shots
BACKHAND: Grip and preparation problems; often chooses to hit FH instead of BH
SERVE/RETURN OF SERVE: Attempting a full swing; can get the ball in play at slow pace; inconsistent toss; can return slow paced serve
VOLLEY: Uncomfortable at net especially on the BH side; frequently uses FH racket face on BH volleys
SPECIAL SHOTS: Can lob intentionally but with little control; can make contact on overheads
PLAYING STYLE: Can sustain a short rally of slow pace; weak court coverage; usually remains in the initial doubles position

3.0
FOREHAND: Fairly consistent with some directional intent; lacks depth control
BACKHAND: Frequently prepared; starting to hit with fair consistency on moderate shots
SERVE/RETURN OF SERVE: Developing rhythm; little consistency when trying for power; second serve is often considerably slower than first serve; can return serve with fair consistency
VOLLEY: Consistent FH volley; inconsistent BH volley, has trouble with low and wide shots
SPECIAL SHOTS: Can lob consistently on moderate shots
PLAYING STYLE: Consistent on medium-paced shots; most common doubles formation is still one-up, one-back; approaches net when play dictates but weak in execution

3.5
FOREHAND: Good consistency and variety on moderate shots; good directional control; developing spin
BACKHAND: Hitting with directional control on moderate shots; has difficulty on high or hard shots; returns difficult shot defensively
SERVE/RETURN OF SERVE: Starting to serve with control and some power; developing spin; can return serve consistently with directional control on moderate shots
VOLLEY: More aggressive net play; some ability to cover side shots; uses proper footwork; can direct FH volleys; controls BH volley but with little offense; difficulty in putting volleys away
SPECIAL SHOTS: Consistent overhead on shots within reach; developing approach shots, drop shots; and half volleys; can place the return of most second serves
PLAYING STYLE: Consistency on moderate shots with directional control; improved court coverage; starting to look for the opportunity to come to the net; developing teamwork in doubles

4.0
FOREHAND: Dependable; hits with depth and control on moderate shots; may try to hit too good a placement on a difficult shot
BACKHAND: Player can direct the ball with consistency and depth on moderate shots; developing spin
SERVE/RETURN OF SERVE: Places both first and second serves; frequent power on first serve; uses spin; dependable return of serve; can return with depth in singles and mix returns in doubles
VOLLEY: Depth and control on FH volley; can direct BH volleys but usually lacks depth; developing wide and low volleys on both sides of the body
SPECIAL SHOTS: Can put away easy overheads; can poach in doubles; follows aggressive shots to the net; beginning to finish point off; can hit to opponent's weaknesses; able to lob defensively on setups; dependable return of serve
PLAYING STYLE: Dependable ground strokes with directional control and depth demonstrated on moderate shots; not yet playing good percentage tennis; teamwork in doubles is evident; rallies may still be lost due to impatience

4.5
FOREHAND: Very dependable; uses speed and spin effectively; controls depth well; tends to overhit on difficult shots; offensive on moderate shots
BACKHAND: Can control direction and depth but may break down under pressure; can hit power on moderate shots
SERVE/RETURN OF SERVE: Aggressive serving with limited double faults; uses power and spin; developing offense; on second serve frequently hits with good depth and placement; frequently hits aggressive service returns; can take pace off with moderate success in doubles
VOLLEY: Can handle a mixed sequence of volleys; good footwork; has depth and directional control on BH; developing touch; most common error is still overhitting
SPECIAL SHOTS: Approach shots hit with good depth and control; can consistently hit volleys and overheads to end the point; frequently hits aggressive service returns
PLAYING STYLE: More intentional variety in game; is hitting with more pace; covers up weaknesses well; beginning to vary game plan according to opponent; aggressive net play is common in doubles; good anticipation; beginning to handle pace

5.0
FOREHAND: Strong shot with control, depth, and spin; uses FH to set up offensive situations; has developed good touch; consistent on passing shots
BACKHAND: Can use BH as an aggressive shot with good consistency; has good direction and depth on most shots; varies spin
SERVE/RETURN OF SERVE: Serve is placed effectively with the intent of hitting to a weakness or developing an offensive situation; has a variety of serves to rely on; good depth, spin, and placement on most second serves to force weak return or set up next shot; can mix aggressive and off-paced service returns with control, depth, and spin
VOLLEY: Can hit most volleys with depth, pace, and direction; plays difficult volleys with depth; given opportunity, volley is often hit for a winner
SPECIAL SHOTS: Approach shots and passing shots are hit with pace and a high degree of effectiveness; can lob offensively; overhead can be hit from any position; hits mid-court volley with consistency; can mix aggressive and off-paced service returns
PLAYING STYLE: Frequently has an outstanding shot or attribute around which his game is built; can vary game plan according to opponent; this player is 'match wise,' plays percentage tennis, and 'beats himself' less than the 4.5 player; solid teamwork in doubles is evident; game breaks down mentally and physically more often than the 5.5 player

5.5
This player can hit dependable shots in stress situations; has developed good anticipation; can pick up cues from such things as opponent's toss, body position, backswing, preparation; first and second serves can be depended on in stress situations and can be hit offensively at any time; can analyze and exploit opponent's weaknesses; has developed power and /or consistency as a major weapon; can vary strategies and style of play in a competitive situation.

6.0 to 7.0
These players will generally not need NTRP ratings. Rankings or past rankings will speak for themselves. The 6.0 player typically has had intensive training for national tournament competition at the junior level and collegiate levels and has obtained a sectional and/or national ranking. The 6.5 player has a reasonable chance of succeeding at the 7.0 level and has extensive satellite tournament experience. The 7.0 is a world class player who is committed to tournament competition on the international level and whose major source of income is tournament prize winnings.
whiteln1.gif (935 bytes)
 
Last edited:
what a cool post.

you got fed's rating wrong though. last time i checked, he was like a 10.0-10.5
 
Well Fed probably is 10 -10.5 but the rating system doesn't go that high unfortunately :( . And I had a hard time finding a 4.5 video on youtube, I honestly couldn't find one.
 
I always thought I was a strong 4.0-4.5, but based on your vids (which I'm not endorsing as being correct or incorrect), I'd fall in the 5.0-5.5 category. I don't think I'm there yet, but I hit with a lot of better players than myself and they're certainly at least that or better.
 
andymac1 said:
Well Fed probably is 10 -10.5 but the rating system doesn't go that high unfortunately :( . And I had a hard time finding a 4.5 video on youtube, I honestly couldn't find one.
Click to expand...

It's all right. Fed's been known to break records and such. I'm sure they'll come up with a new rating system specifically for him. He can't be classified in the same system as us mere mortals.
 
Indeed. But then there's Canas (can't find the button combo for a tilde "n") who somehow beats him by just working his arse off for every point.
 
Yay! I sound like a 4.0 according to the descriptions, and the guy in the video didn't look that good, just consistent. Too bad I'm not a 4.0, since I'm a junior.
 
pushers exist on the pro circuit as well. They are known as super, mega, ultra, UBER PUSHERS. And Canas is known as Pushertron.
 
Isn't that what Canas does? Gets the ball back every time until Fed makes an error? I haven't watched the matches myself so that's merely speculation based on all the bits and pieces I've gathered from my tennis circles. My understanding is that he doesn't actually beat Fed, but causes Fed to beat himself. A classic pusher maneuver.
 
I suppose, but a pusher really has no form or power, which Canas definitely has if he's gonna return all of Federer's would be winners.
 
The guidance your trying to give people is commendable but it should be noted that generally it's too tough to tell from a video what someone's NTRP is. Somewhere in the archives there's another thread where a poster tried to correlate videos to NTRP levels.

That being said I'll join the gang critiquing your choices!

I agree from 1.0 to 4.0

Your 4.5 looks like a 4.0. It's hard to tell though b/c he's just hitting some lolly pops with his dad. His footwork is really bad and the slice backhand is ugly.

Your 5.0 looks more like a 4.0-4.5. Again, it's tough to tell from the video. Are his shots going in? What kind of depth is he getting. How hard are the shots that are being sent his way?

Your 6.0-6.5 is at least a 7.0. He's a pro on the challenger circuit.

And your 7.0s are way beyond the NTRP scale.
 
Last edited:
Is that really a 4.5? He didn't seem to have depth control and if his slice seems like just a sitter. and his footwork seemed bad.

but then again he was playing against his dad who didn't seem very good so he probably wasn't trying.
 
snoopy said:
The guidance your trying to give people is commendable but it should be noted that generally it's too tough to tell from a video what someone's NTRP is. Somewhere in the archives there's another thread where a poster tried to correlate videos to NTRP levels.

That being said I'll join the gang critiquing your choices!

I agree from 1.0 to 4.0

Your 4.5 looks like a 4.0. It's hard to tell though b/c he's just hitting some lolly pops with his dad. His footwork is really bad and the slice backhand is ugly.

Your 5.0 looks more like a 4.0-4.5. Again, it's tough to tell from the video. Are his shots going in? What kind of depth is he getting. How hard are the shots that are being sent his way?

Your 6.0-6.5 is at least a 7.0. He's a pro on the challenger circuit.

And your 7.0s are way beyond the NTRP scale.
Click to expand...

My opinions mostly agree with this post. About the 4.5, did u notice his serve at the very end. I know he's playing casual against his dad, but still...
 
shindemac said:
My opinions mostly agree with this post. About the 4.5, did u notice his serve at the very end. I know he's playing casual against his dad, but still...
Click to expand...

5.0 looks like a 5.0 for sure. Your 6.0 though is a 7.0. a good 6.0 would be #1 division 2 player, or #6 singles division 1. 4.0 doesn't look like one, but he could be. 4.5 looks like a 4.5. So over all good job.
 
This is an excellent post, should be stickyed. I have a lot of trouble with this as the rating system is not something I've been exposed to in the past and I believe the UK uses a different one. Very good to understand what you guys are on about with the numbers half the time, now I can relate it to court skill as such...
 
That is very frustrating. From the written description and the video, I would say I'm at least a 3.5. But then a bunch of 3.5 rated players blew me away in a round robin tournmanent! So I'm really just 3.0. (I did beat a 3.0 rated player in the same tournament.)

Later I watched two 3.5 players play against each other. Both of them had beaten me soundly. Watching them play, I couldn't help but think they didn't look very good. Ouch. Better get some video of myself.
 
OK then, I can certainly rate myself a 4.5 (Although I'm better than the guy in the 4.5 vid), I feel like I could go even with the 5.0 guy, but I don't think I'm there just yet, maybe I can be the weakest 5.0 ever. ;)
 
Your 4.5 is more like a 4.0 in NorCal. The 5.0 is OK, but no 5.5! Especially here in the Bay Area.
 
VGP said:
Didn't someone post this before and said that this was a 4.5 USTA doubles match?
Click to expand...

Yes. That is a 4.5 USTA *league* doubles match. One of the guys is
currently about 250 in the socal Open singles seedings list. Also has
some wins over guys ranked about 100 in 2006.
 
Everything looks good, but the "4.5" guy is definitely NOT 4.5, watch his other videos, he has videos of his serve, and if that's a 4.5 serve, my serve is better than Karlovics.
 
I've only watched the 2.5-3.0, and 3.5 videos, and I've got to tell you, I think those guys are rated too high. I'm just a 3.0 (unfortunately, I'm going to get bumped up to 3.5 in August!), and I can't imagine losing a match to either of the 3.5 guys in that video! I'd say 80% of the 3.0s I play with/against could beat those guys...
 
according to this i am a 3.0 but people told here told me i was a 2.5

which is understandable because i only described myself through text

i can do all the things that was in the 2.5-3.0 video and more

i am only lacking a couple from doing everything in the 3.5 video

which is being stronger at net and developing more pace on my serve but there is no way possible right now if ever i can do that because i hurt my wrist

but my cousin which is a 3.5 coniders it a normal serve
i thoguht it was weak but he said it was just fine he returns it a small step just inside the baseline

and my first serve is the same as my second serve both extremely consistant and the same pace

is this rare,is this normal,or is this better than normal

i consider myself a strong 3.0 and my cousin a strong 3.5
according to these videos and last time we played i didnt double fault but a couple times during our one set match
and he considers it a normal paced serve

what are ya'lls opinions
 
Taxvictim said:
That is very frustrating. From the written description and the video, I would say I'm at least a 3.5. But then a bunch of 3.5 rated players blew me away in a round robin tournmanent! So I'm really just 3.0. (I did beat a 3.0 rated player in the same tournament.)

Later I watched two 3.5 players play against each other. Both of them had beaten me soundly. Watching them play, I couldn't help but think they didn't look very good. Ouch. Better get some video of myself.
Click to expand...


You are probably a choker.... and you need more match play experience. You could have the strokes of a 5.0, but you have the mental aspects of a 2.5, i doubt you would win a game at the 4.0 level.
 
eyy...what do you know! i guess im a 4.5-5.0 by the looks of it. well...at least in doubles. I feel i have good strokes....but in a singles match, i usually dont do very well. maybe its my stamina ^_^
 
Well having a partner makes is easier to play better because you don't worry about messing up as much as you would in a singles match.
 
luckyguy said:
generally i may be a 3.5 or a weak 4.0, but my forehand can be a sure 4.5...how do i rate myself then?
Click to expand...
Strokes don't matter, really. Results do.
If you have a 6.0 forehand, and a 3.5 everything else (just to name an example), you're a 3.5. If a 4.0 beats you, even with your 6.0 forehand, you're not better than 4.0 ;)
 
andymac1 said:
Made this especially for lancernrg (3.0 doesn't mean 5.0)... and other people who have a good reason for not knowing the ntrp ratings.

1.0 - 2.0 players (this shouldn't be necessary -_-' ): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6IjMQtBPtU

2.5 - 3.0 players: http://youtube.com/watch?v=ttX1WSKPV48

3.5 players: http://youtube.com/watch?v=ER9FKDpSi_g
Click to expand...

what????????????? i jsut watched the 1.0 2.5 and 3.5 videos, and they are way below! if they are rated atr that, then i am a 4.0 and i am NOT a 4.0 i am like 2.5 at best. i am getting myself on film this weekend i will be posting to show you guys. those guys are way below. especially the 3.5 guys. no backhand, no slice!!!!!!!!! are they 3.5 for real!!!!!!!!!!
edit: i went back and read most of your comments, and you guys have to be kidding! the 3.5 videos and below are way below...how can you say they are accurate??
 
Last edited:
zapvor said:
what????????????? i jsut watched the 1.0 2.5 and 3.5 videos, and they are way below! if they are rated atr that, then i am a 4.0 and i am NOT a 4.0 i am like 2.5 at best. i am getting myself on film this weekend i will be posting to show you guys. those guys are way below. especially the 3.5 guys. no backhand, no slice!!!!!!!!! are they 3.5 for real!!!!!!!!!!
edit: i went back and read most of your comments, and you guys have to be kidding! the 3.5 videos and below are way below...how can you say they are accurate??
Click to expand...

If you want an accurate rating (well as accurate as video ratings can be), do an unedited video yourself playing match against a known rated NTRP player. Do not just do a ball feed or rallying session because these can make you look better than you actually look like in a real match. I assure you are not going to like what you see.

Remember real ratings are results based not what people look like on a video. There are a ton of 3.0 and 3.5 players that have ugly games that can win many matches. Once you start playing competitively in USTA you will see what I mean.
 
goober said:
If you want an accurate rating (well as accurate as video ratings can be), do an unedited video yourself playing match against a known rated NTRP player. Do not just do a ball feed or rallying session because these can make you look better than you actually look like in a real match. I assure you are not going to like what you see.

Remember real ratings are results based not what people look like on a video. There are a ton of 3.0 and 3.5 players that have ugly games that can win many matches. Once you start playing competitively in USTA you will see what I mean.
Click to expand...

no i know, but those guys are definitely lower than they are. because i can beat them. and i am 2.5. i am the first to admit i am a lowly 2.5. and i hit better those guys. esepcially the guy in the 4.0 video. hes not even close. i will be posting a video after this weekend. i look forward to your criticism.
 
zapvor said:
no i know, but those guys are definitely lower than they are. because i can beat them. and i am 2.5. i am the first to admit i am a lowly 2.5. and i hit better those guys. esepcially the guy in the 4.0 video. hes not even close. i will be posting a video after this weekend. i look forward to your criticism.
Click to expand...

I don't understand your post. On the one hand you say you are a 2.5 and then you say you can beat these players. So are you saying they should be rated 2.0?

How do you know that you can beat them? Have you played them? I would never say I can beat a guy based on a video. The guy in the 4.0 video is in your area- Maryland I believe. Email maverick and have him set up a match since he is the one who posted the video. If you can beat him than you are not a 2.5.
 
goober said:
I don't understand your post. On the one hand you say you are a 2.5 and then you say you can beat these players. So are you saying they should be rated 2.0?

How do you know that you can beat them? Have you played them? I would never say I can beat a guy based on a video. The guy in the 4.0 video is in your area- Maryland I believe. Email maverick and have him set up a match since he is the one who posted the video. If you can beat him than you are not a 2.5.
Click to expand...

well yea i am awful. if someone asked me i wouldnt rate myself higher than 2.5 thats why when i saw the videos i was shocked, because i think i am better than that. i guess i am biased...

no i have never played them. i am basing it on the video alone. i had no idea maverick is in the mid atlantic. he should join the chapter, and i would love to play with him :)
 
People don't seem to understand how this rating stuff works. It doesn't matter how crappy/good the strokes look, it matters how much you win(!).
 
D-man said:
People don't seem to understand how this rating stuff works. It doesn't matter how crappy/good the strokes look, it matters how much you win(!).
Click to expand...

yea but not strictly? because you cant win that much if your strokes are not 'good' you know? in order to get enough wins to become a 4.0, your strokes should be pretty good. i didnt say their strokes were ugly. i said their strokes look bad, as in they look sucky.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Can someone be a 3.5 after 4 months?
2
Replies
64
Views
4K
Amone
Amone
Tenny
  • Poll Poll
What's your rating?
Replies
20
Views
2K
equinox
equinox
B
Are NTRP Ratings truly accurate?
Replies
18
Views
5K
emo5
E
FH2FH
Differences Between NTRP Ratings?
Replies
28
Views
2K
ssjkyle31
ssjkyle31
J
What's my American rating?
Replies
8
Views
1K
JohnThomas1
J
Back
Top