Going from 4.5 to 5.0 level-what best to focus on?

[Japanese Maple]

What do you think is the key differences between being a 4.5 player and someone at the 5.0 level. What would it take to get to the 5.0 level-what best to focus on? Can you move from 4.5 to say 4.75 then to 5.0? I would think that the key areas, considering you have all the shots and are consistent, would be improving ones serve, especially the second serve-mainly placement, spin variety, and disquise, along with improving your return of serve. All things being equal at the 5.0 level you have to hold serve and break serve. Thanks for your input.

 

[kevhen]

I just reached 4.5 and what I see in the 5.0s is the ability to place the ball much better and add even more spin to shots. Consistency is also very, very good at 5.0 level no matter what types of shot you throw at them. Footspeed is also very obvious with 5.0s as they are all in very good shape and very fast. Ability to place the ball really improves as you go from 4.5 to 5.0. 4.5s can hit hard and place the ball fairly well but 5.0s can still place it well when under pressure.

 

[lkdog]

Have played at the 4.0 to 4.5 level the past 15 years and played against several guys rated 5.0 in tournaments.
Agree with KevHen-they do everything a little more consistently and better than a 4.5.
Generally have no basic glaring weakness in stroke technique, are fit and pretty athletic, and have a couple serious weapons from below:

1) power off ground or very heavy ball off ground
2) great consistency, placement, or attacking off return of serve
3) power off serve or excellent spin and placement or both
4) great volleyer
5) great consistency
6) very good movement and fitness
7) mental toughness

Basically have an element to their game that you have to cope with as it is a real problem for opponents.

They also are capable of playing competitively against D1 players-not beating them but doing well enough to not embarrass themselves. Usually a 5.0 played some tennis after high school at the next level at an NAIA, DII, or DIII, or lower D1 program.

It is a jump from 4.5 to 5.0 IMO. Much bigger difference than 4.0-4.5 which is a real crapshoot in terms of how it is even judged and everybody in that group has a weakness in their game.

 

[Nellie]

In my eye, 4.5 players hit most shots well but are only beginning to develop strategy.

A 5.0 player is a competitive/successful tournament player with a definite strategy built around a self awareness of their strengths and weakness. As previously mentioned on this board, the progression from 5.0 to 6.5 is pretty small and depends a lot on fitness and raw physical ability.

I think the big differences between 4.5 and 5.0 players are:

(1) Fitness - most 5.0 players are on the courts constantly and have good footwork. In my area, most 5.0s are teaching pro's who play all day. It's not that the 4.5 players have bad footwork - they just get tired and start using lazy technique. The U.S. National open champion is a guy who started playing after college, but was previously a semi-professional soccer player who can ran all day.

(2) A weapon that is used selectively- most 5.0 players have a favorite shot (like a down the line backhand or inside-out forehand) that allows them to win certain points almost automatically. At the same time, the shot needs to be hit with discretion and at high percentage. That means you play conservatively, except when you get a ball in your wheelhouse. This allows a better player to really shrink the court. For example, if the opponent cannot hit wide to the backhand side, it makes it tough for them to rally. As you get better, you may develop multiple weapons, but start with one. If it is your serve, practice placing it consistently.

(3) Similarly, the ability to put away easy shots - most players can punish opponents for any mistakes (short balls, weak returns, etc.) The better your ability to reliably put away shots, the better your game. You should be able to do this consistently in practice. When your opponent needs to play almost perfectly, it further shrinks the court and puts pressure on them to make errors.

So, to improve, I would recommend jumping rope (a lot); deciding on the strength of your game and planning a strategy to allow you to use that strength while cutting down mistakes when you are not using that shot; and practicing putting away short balls.

 

[kevhen]

I agree that 5.0s really do shrink the court against 4.5s. I have to hit the ball with much more depth or my 5.0 opponent hits a routine winner. If I hit a perfect shot, often the 5.0 gets to it just in time and forces me to hit another perfect shot, often 3-4 before I win the point. But if I sit back and play safe then the 5.0 controls and makes me run and ends up hitting the winner anyway. So it's tough! Catch-22.

So I play more doubles now against the 5.0s where I can compete with less court to cover and a better net game than many 5.0s who can outhit me from the baseline. At 37 years old, the only way I get to 5.0 now is to develop a big time windshield wiper forehand which is possible since I still have a pretty simple old school forehand or just keep improving my net game and win alot in 4.5 doubles that way.

 

[Bagumbawalla]

I thinl the, above, people have done a very good job of describing the differences between a 4.5 and a 5.0.

To determine what you need to concentrate on, you need to examine your game point by point and do an inventory of what can be improved-- obviously everything, but what improvements will help to advance you the most.

The serve is where the most improvement can come with the least effort. If you can develop a killer serve-- win your serve every time with aces or shots that force weak returns-- you only need to break your opponent once to win the set.

Do you have at least one groundstroke that is a weapon to be feared? If not work on the forehand or backhand until you can hit shots that pressure the opponent, and when you step in for a short ball-- are clear winners. The more pressure you put on the opponent, the more they will either play defensively or tend go for too much.

Do you just bash the ball or to you have a strategy(s) that can be varied for different types of opponent? If not, buy some books on the subject and read them cover to cover.

Can you hit virtually any shot at will or are you hampered by not having "all the shots"? If an opponent sees you have any weakness at all (low short sliced ball, so-so volleys, problems changing direction...)- they will be sure to dig at that weakness over and over.

Are you physically fit enough to play 3 hard sets in 100+ degree heat and still play the same at the end as at the start? Examine your workout/training routine and see if there is room for improvement.

Can you steal time/space from the opponent by hitting deep, catching the ball on the rise, hitting flat when necessary, creating angles with topspin. dropshotting when they are out of position?

Just a few things to consider, as you make your own list, I'm sure you will come up with more areas to examine.

 

[callitout]

The original question is a good one...and many of the answers highlight the difference between solid club players and truly outstanding players, but seem to miss the point of the question. The question is what makes the leap to just 5.0...The answers are mostly describing players who are 6.0-7.0:
Can easily hit winners off neutral balls, put away all short balls, never get tripped up by the short slice...well this describes Fed better than a 5.0. Play all day in 100 degree heat without getting tired. C'mon. This isnt 5.0. These are at least junior national champions you are describing.

I too would like to know what elevates a 4.5 to a 5.0, not what makes a player without weakness and a few strengths a 6.0-7.0.

 

[Tennismastery]

A true 4.5 should have all strokes mastered and is able to call upon such shots in practice and in competition. However, the 5.0 and above have not just mastered all such shots, but they are building upon this foundation with many of the things discussed here already: greater consistency at higher levels of effectiveness, (ie: better placement, spin, depth or angle), and they can dictate play through better shot management, point manufacturing, and by moving to intercept balls earlier and hitting shots that are determined by his or her own choices instead of hitting the shots that opponents specifically want them to hit. (Running around the backhand to hit an inside-in, inside-out forehand, etc.)

The practice of 5.0's and above focus on several elements. Here are a handful of drills I use with my high 5.0 and above (ranked) players:

* 40, 30, 20 10 drills
* Butterfly drills
* Push out (backout) drills
* Various movement drills that focus on greater court range of movement and balance
* Pushing the envelop in terms of racquet head speed
* Working on sequencing drills; Drives and drops, approach shots and volleys/overheads
* Acceleration drills to improve first step
* Hitting bombs at them to develop faster reflexes (both at net and baseline)
* Developing greater finesse shots; dipping passes, topspin lobs, etc.
* Running down defensive shots and hitting offensive shots off such balls, (Running down the lob and driving a down the line passing shot)
* We even work on "tweeners", behind the back shots, and other trick shots as these add to the player's racquet control and body control.

 

[sharpy]

hard to believe that the diff. from 5.0 to 6.5 is small?!?!

and no the ability to put away short balls is not 6.5 level! I would say 5.0's can put away short balls easily, not 6.5...

5.0 players are consistent and powerful.
4.5 players are powerful but not as consistent, maybe 1 or 2 weaknesses
4.0 players have no weapons yet.

for a 4.0 player to get to 5.0 you NEED a weapon or two. preferably serve and forehand. and no fitness is not a weapon.

I've hit with a 6.5. It's kind of like crazy magic. They're at the ball before you even know it.

6.5. They do something special with the ball.

EXAMPLE 1

I know I crushed a short ball down the line.

The 4.0 misses the ball totally, its a winner.
The 5.0 would get the ball back with a lob to put away at the net.
but the 6.5 hits a wristy sharp angle crosscourt pass winner using all wrist!

EXAMPLE 2

you hit a deep ball back in a high speed rally

4.0 is still getting in position when the ball bounces, and he's late
5.0 has begun moving shortly after ball contact
6.5 is already there, and waiting to unload before you can look back on his side!!!

 

[NLBwell]

As a 5.5 who moved to 5.0 the difference was basically due to 1) Speed on the court (I was 8 years older when I started playing again) and 2) consistancy (with my long strokes, it was necessary to play at least a couple of hours a day to keep them grooved). As a 5.0 who moved to 4.5, the difference was movement (due to knee surgeries) and serve (due to shoulder injuries).

I guess to do it in reverse order (4.5 to 5.0) I would first work on your serve until it is a weapon that you have complete confidence in - especially turning your second serve into something your opponent fears. Next would be working on your speed on the court and just hitting and hitting to get your strokes consistant.

 

[tlimster]

This is an interesting thread, because I just got rated for the first time. I was previously a junior tournament player, ranked sectionally but not nationally. So after 12 years I just joined a club, have been playing again for 3 months, and got rated by the club pro at 4.5 now, and he said that if I play more than once a week I will easily move up to 5.0. I have been hitting with a few 4.5s now, as well as a nationally ranked 14 year old who plays at the club, and can make the comparison to juniors who I used to play with who were I guess 5.0 on an NTRP rating level, with some up to 6.0 (nationally ranked juniors who I lost to pretty easily). These are my observations:

1) 4.5s do not hit the ball that hard, but they are consistent. They remark at how hard I hit the ball, but I was only an average pace hitter when I played junior tennis. They are probably, overall, better lobbers, because they lob more often than they should (at least against 5.0s);

2) 4.5s do not put away short balls as well. If I hit a short ball (either inside the service line that's not a fast highly angled crosscourt, or a moderately paced ball just over the service line), then they do not put it away -- the rally continues. When I played before, if I hit a short ball mentally i'd check out of the point, or at least think that I would likely lose it. Now, I just think it's part of the rally. In fact, short slices sometimes win me points (due to unforced errors on approaches), which would have been unthinkable before. This also brings up my own angst, which is that I make unforced errors on other peoples' short slice shots, which is why i'm definitely not a 5.0 anymore.

3) their approach shots are, 40% of the time, not that great.

4) I'm not sure I agree with other opinions that a killer serve is important -- for most people under 6 feet (including myself at 5'9), it would be hard to develop one. There was one kid who was 5'4" with a spin serve, however, who was so fast and had such great groundstrokes that he was actually in the top 10. The spin serve was just not attackable - it had enough pace that the best you could do was start the rally, but he'd kill you in the rally, and his return was good enough to keep you from coming in, so he'd kill you in that rally too.

5) I can generally win a point with a hard shot down the line, especially from my backhand side (because they're not expecting it).

All that being said, I think I would probably lose to half of the guys I play with right now because I can't myself hit a volley still (I still have yet to play a 2 out of 3 set singles match). As for my own game, I rely on a consistent backhand and a less consistent but more powerful heavy topspin forehand, which when it gets going can win me a string of points quickly.

 

[MTXR]

Ginormous Serve.

 

[NLBwell]

tlimster - good post - made me re-think some things. When I was a junior, even though I wasn't very big, I always hit exceptionally hard - thus my emphasis on consistency - controlling the power you posess.

I think my emphasis on the serve, especially the second serve is correct, though. A 5.0 will take apart second serves that are not difficult and you can not afford to lose your serve in a 5.0 match. The serve doesn't have to be a monster in terms of speed (McEnroe's wasn't) but it has to be a weapon even on the second serve.


From people I know who have moved up to 5.0 (Most 5.0s have actually moved down from top juniors, college, etc.). They spent a lot of time (and usually money) learning good technique on their strokes to get the power and consistency necessary.
You should have all the shots to be a 5.0 - approach shots, half volleys, dinks, big topspin, slice and be able to use them at the proper time. A lot of this is just on-court time, as is getting the consistency to get those proper strokes grooved.

 

[burosky]

All points with merits. Don't forget better shot selection and court positioning.

 

[skiracer55]

Very well said...

I thinl the, above, people have done a very good job of describing the differences between a 4.5 and a 5.0.

To determine what you need to concentrate on, you need to examine your game point by point and do an inventory of what can be improved-- obviously everything, but what improvements will help to advance you the most.

The serve is where the most improvement can come with the least effort. If you can develop a killer serve-- win your serve every time with aces or shots that force weak returns-- you only need to break your opponent once to win the set.

Do you have at least one groundstroke that is a weapon to be feared? If not work on the forehand or backhand until you can hit shots that pressure the opponent, and when you step in for a short ball-- are clear winners. The more pressure you put on the opponent, the more they will either play defensively or tend go for too much.

Do you just bash the ball or to you have a strategy(s) that can be varied for different types of opponent? If not, buy some books on the subject and read them cover to cover.

Can you hit virtually any shot at will or are you hampered by not having "all the shots"? If an opponent sees you have any weakness at all (low short sliced ball, so-so volleys, problems changing direction...)- they will be sure to dig at that weakness over and over.

Are you physically fit enough to play 3 hard sets in 100+ degree heat and still play the same at the end as at the start? Examine your workout/training routine and see if there is room for improvement.

Can you steal time/space from the opponent by hitting deep, catching the ball on the rise, hitting flat when necessary, creating angles with topspin. dropshotting when they are out of position?

Just a few things to consider, as you make your own list, I'm sure you will come up with more areas to examine.

...and I think this encapsulates a lot of what everybody else has said in this excellent thread. Notice that it's not just strokes, but athleticism, match toughness, a Plan A strategy but lots of backup strategies. I agree totally that the biggest bang for the buck you can get is to jack up your serve. At 5.0, you can *maybe* get away with a solid, but not spectacular serve, but not above 5.0. And if you can get to 5.0, why not, as they say in the Air Force, Aim High and go for the next level?

 

[Identity]

Have played at the 4.0 to 4.5 level the past 15 years and played against several guys rated 5.0 in tournaments.
Agree with KevHen-they do everything a little more consistently and better than a 4.5.
Generally have no basic glaring weakness in stroke technique, are fit and pretty athletic, and have a couple serious weapons from below:

1) power off ground or very heavy ball off ground
2) great consistency, placement, or attacking off return of serve
3) power off serve or excellent spin and placement or both
4) great volleyer
5) great consistency
6) very good movement and fitness
7) mental toughness

Basically have an element to their game that you have to cope with as it is a real problem for opponents.

They also are capable of playing competitively against D1 players-not beating them but doing well enough to not embarrass themselves. Usually a 5.0 played some tennis after high school at the next level at an NAIA, DII, or DIII, or lower D1 program.

It is a jump from 4.5 to 5.0 IMO. Much bigger difference than 4.0-4.5 which is a real crapshoot in terms of how it is even judged and everybody in that group has a weakness in their game.

Yep. I am 4.5 and a great 4.5. I have always wanted to be a 5.0. I guess the same could be said about all the D1 players that don't make it on the tour. Most if not all 5.0 players will not lose to anyone 4.5-3.5. I believe 3.5 was created for hackers who just annoy the crap out of you by getting the ball back in play. A 4.5 player makes too many mistakes on winners after consistent ball rallies and 3.5-4.0 players on a 4.5's bad day can beat [me]. I consider myself a low advanced player and a 5.0 player is just a better athlete. It's unobtainable to me imo.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Yep. I am 4.5 and a great 4.5. I have always wanted to be a 5.0. I guess the same could be said about all the D1 players that don't make it on the tour. Most if not all 5.0 players will not lose to anyone 4.5-3.5. I believe 3.5 was created for hackers who just annoy the crap out of you by getting the ball back in play. A 4.5 player makes too many mistakes on winners after consistent ball rallies and 3.5-4.0 players on a 4.5's bad day can beat [me]. I consider myself a low advanced player and a 5.0 player is just a better athlete. It's unobtainable to me imo.

If you are a great 4.5, then 5.0 is obtainable.

If 5.0 is not obtainable, then you're not a great 4.5.

It's not as if there is a magic amount of athleticism that distinguishes a high 4.5 from a low 5.0. It's more an incremental thing rather than an absolute thing.

An average 4.5 should not beat an average 5.0. By the same logic, an average 4.0 should not beat an average 4.5. And so on. If you as a 4.5 can lose to a 4.0, then you are not as consistent as the average 4.5.

I don't know the relevance of the "3.5 hacker" comment: as a great 4.5, you should not be bothered by *anything* a 3.5 does.

 

[Identity]

Well I measure my 4.5 ability from the years of 14-46. lol. You don't know everything. Watch videos on YouTube. There are plenty of 3.5 players that beat 4.5, because they force the 4.5 to miss. 3.5 have underdeveloped strokes, but the object is to get the ball in play.

Sure buddy if I keep working out everyday I can look like Arnold! Everyone reaches a plateau. It's just life. There are no 4.5 players that can beat a 5.0. All players within a range have weaknesses. I don't like long rallies, and I can hit a 4.5 ball from from all strokes. Winning does not = NTRP rating.

The relevance to me is that 3.5-4.5 is a sliding scale under different circumstances. 5.0 players do not have sliding scales with any levels. They compete within their own. 5.0 can not beat 5.5-7.0 and they don't lose to anyone below. 9/10 times I don't lose to 3.5-4.0 players. When starting back after 4-10 year hiatus, it happens.

I guess since you want to play semantics. I should have said I am a great tennis player. I am 4.5. I don't believe there is that much difference in any 4.5 player to call one average or great. 5.0 is considered an expert. After that level, if you don't know then I aint tellin.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Well I measure my 4.5 ability from the years of14-46. lol. You don't know everything. Watch videos on youtube. There are plenty of 3.5 players that beat 4.5, because they force the 4.5 to miss.

Link to a few; I have not seen any but that doesn't mean they don't exist.

However, if a player can force an average 4.5 to miss consistently enough to win a match, IMO that player is not a 3.5. He's more like an above-average 4.5. Unless he's simply playing out of his mind, which is also possible.

3.5 have underdeveloped strokes, but the object is to get the ball in play.

Previously, you wrote the 3.5 forces the 4.5 to miss. That implies a certain amount of development in stroke technique. I don't see how a 3.5 with underdeveloped strokes is going to force a 4.5 to miss for an entire match.

There are no 4.5 players that can beat a 5.0.

I'm sure it happens. It just doesn't happen that often.

All players within a range have weaknesses. I don't like long rallies, and I can hit a 4.5 ball from from all strokes. Winning does not = NTRP rating.

NTRP is determined by winning and by the strength of my opponent. It certainly isn't determined by stroke technique or how versatile I am.

The relevance to me is that 3.5-4.5 is a sliding scale under different circumstances. 5.0 players do not have sliding scales with any levels. They compete within their own.

I don't see how it's possible that everyone < 5.0 has a sliding scale but that 5.0s do not. Of course they do. Maybe such variations are harder to see because they aren't as obvious as at the lower levels but they exist.

5.0 can not beat 5.5-7.0 and they don't lose to anyone below. 9/10 times I don't lose to 3.5-4.0 players.

You consider 5.0 to be the magic dividing line. I believe the line is a lot more porous. Upsets happen. If a 4.0 player can beat you, then you can beat a 5.0.

When starting back after 4-10 year hiatus, it happens.

Totally expected; it will take a while before you hit your stride after that long of a break.

I guess since you want to play semantics. I should have said I am a great tennis player. I am 4.5. I don't believe their is that much difference in any 4.5 player to call one average or great. 5.0 is considered an expert. After that level, if you don't know then I aint tellin.

According to the USTA, the lowest 4.5 is somewhere around the 88th percentile of registered players. That's pretty darn good. Whether that is "great" is in the eye of the beholder. A 5.0 might not think so. A 4.0 would.

5.0s are somewhere in the 97th percentile. I don't know what 5.5 corresponds to. "Ridiculously good", probably.

 

[travlerajm]

I have lost to 4.0 players and beaten 5.5 players. It’s important to know how to win humbly against players better than you, and to know how to lose humbly to players worse than you.

I started out my usta league life playing 5.0 for a couple years, then took an extended break, and resurfaced with deteriorated skills as a 4.5. The huge serve that previously made me a legit 5.0 was gonzo.

That was 15 years ago, and I stayed a 4.5 according to the usta computer since then, mostly only playing mixed, despite my dynamic rating on the TR site saying I flashed into 5.0 territory for recent stretches.
In 2019, life circumstances allowed me a unique chance to play matches several times a week against former world class players, which helped my court awareness in singles a lot, and showed how bad my weaknesses are limiting me, while also revealing ways that I can cover up my weaknesses enough to beat better players on my good days. I still had huge technical flaws in my game, most notably an epileptic forehand.

Last year, in 2020, I played more often and made some major tangible technical improvements to my game, most notably re-tooling and learning a completely new and improved forehand technique and cleaning up some nagging issues on my serve and bh volley. I’ve seen my competitive results against 4.5 and 5.0 guys steadily improve since the start of the lockdowns. I’m confident that I’ve consistently played at 5.0 level for the past 2 months, but since I haven’t played a league match to prove it, the usta still says I’m 4.5.

 

[dominikk1985]

I would say apart from improving your strokes a lot will gained from improving your athleticism.

Doing sprints, jumps, shuttles and med ball throws can make you a lot more agile and explosive and improve both your speed on court and your hitting power.

Obviously that is harder to do as you get older but for people under 35 getting a better athlete is probably the second biggest hold back after tennis fundamentals (don't worry about tiny things like how your backswing looks but some things just need to be done right).

 

[Identity]

BTW: don't take my mid-4.5 word for it. Ask some 5.0s. @MaxTennis, @J011yroger, @timtennis, @travlerajm are all 5.0s with plenty of tournament experience. Get their take.

Are you serious? Maybe you should read the description of the NTRP ratings. You with all these dividing up my sentences are again doing the same thing the T2 league does. There are no "-" leagues. The only sliding scale that a 5.0 player will face is within the 5.0 league. I would never ask anyone's opinion against my opinion. I speak about facts. The NTRP ratings are written in descriptive abilities within that number. There is no description for a 4.5- player or so on. Point being. When I was 15, I got beat by an old man in the neighborhood. Gripped the racket at the neck and could only hit under the ball on every stroke. Sure he beat a kid 7-6 and then the little devil quit on me. But he won being an unconventional chipping backboard, while I am hitting great topspin and every other stroke. You know push vs. stroke. That is 3.5 to me. And yes do your own homework. If you know tennis, you should have seen it before a million and one times. You don't need a Youtube video to know the difference between someone who is rated 4.5 b/c he pushes all day, and someone who is 4.5 based on years of stroke development. Do I need to provide the link to the NTRP skill descriptions?

 

[Dragy]

You don't need a Youtube video to know the difference between someone who is rated 4.5 b/c he pushes all day, and someone who is 4.5 based on years of stroke development. Do I need to provide the link to the NTRP skill descriptions?

I'm not in US, but I always thought NTRP rating is result-based, while skill description only gives general guideline for those curious or for self-rating before entering league?

Anyway, skill descriptions are vague mostly. Some crowd here in Russia use to inflate them so that no rec player fits to be a 4.0. Even those who lived in US, played league and had actual rating.

 

[Identity]

In my 35 years or whatever of playing. My experience is that my best days were beating 4.5 players that usually beat me. This has grown tiresome. So I don't plan reading this anymore. I did not intend to argue. I agreed with the poster. Difference being 5.0 players do not have sliding scales, while 4.5 players still can lose.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Are you serious? Maybe you should read the description of the NTRP ratings. You with all these dividing up my sentences are again doing the same thing the T2 league does. There are no "-" leagues. The only sliding scale that a 5.0 player will face is within the 5.0 league. I would never ask anyone's opinion against my opinion. I speak about facts.

My mistake: I thought you were talking about skill levels within 5.0, not NTRP divisions in a league/tournament.

In my experience, 4.5 is typically the last fixed division. After that, it's Open. There aren't enough 5.0s typically to fill a division.

In a 4.5+ league, 5.0s can play.

The NTRP ratings are written in descriptive abilities within that number. There is no description for a 4.5- player or so on. Point being. When I was 15, I got beat by an old man in the neighborhood. Gripped the racket at the neck and could only hit under the ball on every stroke. Sure he beat a kid 7-6 and then the little devil quit on me. But he won being an unconventional chipping backboard, while I am hitting great topspin and every other stroke. You know push vs. stroke. That is 3.5 to me. And yes do your own homework. If you know tennis, you should have seen it before a million and one times. You don't need a Youtube video to know the difference between someone who is rated 4.5 b/c he pushes all day, and someone who is 4.5 based on years of stroke development. Do I need to provide the link to the NTRP skill descriptions?

The descriptions aren't meant to be taken dogmatically. They're gross examples to try and classify players so that matches can be arranged that are hopefully somewhat equal. Once you self-rate, assuming it was reasonably accurate, your results will be determined by record; those descriptions aren't relevant anymore.

The fact that the pusher/hacker/slicer beat you meant he was better than you, at least on that day. How he beat you, as long as he did it within the rules, is irrelevant.

I'm aware of the skill descriptions. I'm also aware that there are pushers even at 4.5 who win primarily by profiting from their opponent's mistakes and have form which is less than ideal. But they are 4.5 nonetheless.

Talk to @nyta2 about pushers being the gatekeepers of 4.0.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

I'm not in US, but I always thought NTRP rating is result-based, while skill description only gives general guideline for those curious or for self-rating before entering league?

You are correct.

Anyway, skill descriptions are vague mostly. Some crowd here in Russia use to inflate them so that no rec player fits to be a 4.0. Even those who lived in US, played league and had actual rating.

And how much can they account for things that can't easily be seen like mental toughness, fitness, footwork, etc? In the old days of a rater observing your game, he might only watch for a few minutes before moving on to the next candidate. A pusher who is tough as nails and fit won't score very high on the scale while someone with textbook strokes who has fundamental weaknesses elsewhere might score highly.

In the end, it all comes out in the wash, barring sandbagging or trophy ratings.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Well I measure my 4.5 ability from the years of 14-46. lol. You don't know everything. Watch videos on YouTube. There are plenty of 3.5 players that beat 4.5, because they force the 4.5 to miss. 3.5 have underdeveloped strokes, but the object is to get the ball in play.

Sure buddy if I keep working out everyday I can look like Arnold! Everyone reaches a plateau. It's just life. There are no 4.5 players that can beat a 5.0. All players within a range have weaknesses. I don't like long rallies, and I can hit a 4.5 ball from from all strokes. Winning does not = NTRP rating.

The relevance to me is that 3.5-4.5 is a sliding scale under different circumstances. 5.0 players do not have sliding scales with any levels. They compete within their own. 5.0 can not beat 5.5-7.0 and they don't lose to anyone below. 9/10 times I don't lose to 3.5-4.0 players. When starting back after 4-10 year hiatus, it happens.

I guess since you want to play semantics. I should have said I am a great tennis player. I am 4.5. I don't believe there is that much difference in any 4.5 player to call one average or great. 5.0 is considered an expert. After that level, if you don't know then I aint tellin.

Well, first off, welcome to the Tennis Talk forum. 2ndly, congrats on resurrecting a thread that had died out more than 13 yrs ago. And the poster you had initially replied to has not been around TT at all since early 2017 (while the OP stopped visiting nearly 10 yrs ago). It's great to see that you were able get some feedback from members who are currently active.

Back when I was starting to play 4.0 (about 3 decades ago), I would sometimes find that I'd be losing to legit 3.5 players. It perplexed me at first but then I decided to investigate why that was the case. One reason was that many 3.5 "hackers" had unconventional strokes, often poorly executed. I was finding that my own level of play, at that time, was better against 4.0 and 4.5 players than against some 3.5 players.

It was because these 3.5'ers were often harder to read than 4.0 & 4.5 players. It was not cuz they were innately more deceptive. It was primarily because their strokes were so unorthodox, sometimes just slapping at the ball, that it would be difficult to tell where their ball was going to go when they slapped at it. So I got better at reading their tendencies and got much better at reacting to unexpected (seemingly unreadable) shots. Picked up on some "tells" as well.

The other reason I was having problems with some 3.5 players was that my level of interest in the game against them was often lacking. I was not (as) motivated and focused as I was against 4.0/4.5 players. I would often find myself playing "flat-footed" against the lower level players. Once I realize this, I started to work on that aspect of my game. I got to the point where I was keeping up my focus (vigilance) consistently. I would even find that I could play in a manner where I was constantly pushing them. Playing shots that were at their envelope or just a little bit past their abilities. So I was able to get decent rallies with these hackers and still maintain my interest in the game.

Once I developed both of these aspects of my game, I became a much better 4.0 player which also helped me to reach a 4.5 level. Eventually, I reached a 5.0 level but that was rather short-lived since I was pushing 50 and old injuries from my 30s and 40s were starting to haunt me on a regular basis.

I actually found it a bit easier to move from 4.5 up to 5.0 (and 3.5 to 4.0) than I did moving from 4.0 to a 4.5 level.

 

[user92626]

I have lost to 4.0 players and beaten 5.5 players.

@S&V-not_dead_yet

Why do you like/endorse travlerajm's point? travlerjam was saying the same thing as Identity whom you're arguing against.

travlerg has beaten players that were 1 whole point above his 4.5. Same thing identity was saying about "plenty of 3.5 players that beat 4.5"

LOL

Or you just feel like arguing in your spare time. hahaha I do that too but I'd pick a smarter thing to say

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

@S&V-not_dead_yet

Why do you like/endorse travlerajm's point? travlerjam was saying the same thing as Identity whom you're arguing against.

travlerg has beaten players that were 1 whole point above his 4.5. Same thing identity was saying about "plenty of 3.5 players that beat 4.5"

LOL

Or you just feel like arguing in your spare time. hahaha I do that too but I'd pick a smarter thing to say

If you read Identity's post, he said that 4.5s could lose to 3.5-4.0s but that 5.0s never lose to 4.5s.

"5.0 can not beat 5.5-7.0 and they don't lose to anyone below."

@travlerajm's post contradicted that idea.

"Aah, gotcha!"

"No you haven't."

"Yes I have. If you're arguing, I must have paid."

"Not necessarily...I could be arguing in my spare time."

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

^ Love the Monty Python bit.

 

[Moveforwardalways]

A 5.0 is a either a player who is on the way down from playing at a very high level, or a 4.5 who happened to figure out how to win 4.5 matches. The limiting factor for almost everyone is athletic ability. Training can get most moderate-decent athletes to 4.5, but 5.0 requires that plus a natural gift in some area that not many have.

 

[xFullCourtTenniSx]

I speak about facts.

The NTRP ratings are written in descriptive abilities within that number.

That is 3.5 to me.

You don't need a Youtube video to know the difference between someone who is rated 4.5 b/c he pushes all day, and someone who is 4.5 based on years of stroke development.

No, you're speaking purely in opinion.

If you spoke in facts, you wouldn't say that someone is a 3.5 to you. That is a subjective statement.

NTRP rating guidelines and general characteristics are written qualitatively. Therefore, they are subjective and cannot be taken as fact, as a player's NTRP rating cannot be factually (objectively) concluded from subjective guidelines.

The only way to factually conclude a person's NTRP rating is a sufficiently large sample size of competitive tennis matches (depending on how accurate you want the rating to be).

What's the difference between a "pushing" 4.5 and a "stroke development" 4.5 (whatever that is)? Aesthetics? Despite popular belief, Federer's aesthetics are not what got him to #1 in the world. It just made him the most aesthetically pleasing to watch #1.

In my 35 years or whatever of playing. My experience is that my best days were beating 4.5 players that usually beat me. This has grown tiresome. So I don't plan reading this anymore. I did not intend to argue. I agreed with the poster. Difference being 5.0 players do not have sliding scales, while 4.5 players still can lose.

If 4.5 players are usually beating you, you probably aren't 4.5. You should be having a decent split with them to be a 4.5. Not necessarily 50/50, but good enough to not say "they usually beat me".

A 5.0 is a either a player who is on the way down from playing at a very high level, or a 4.5 who happened to figure out how to win 4.5 matches. The limiting factor for almost everyone is athletic ability. Training can get most moderate-decent athletes to 4.5, but 5.0 requires that plus a natural gift in some area that not many have.

This is kind of a 1=1 take.

Nobody is born or starts out as a 5.0. So obviously, like anything in life, you have to go up the skill/competitive progression ladder. Yes, 5.0 comes after 4.5 if you're still climbing. Yes, 5.0 is below 5.5 if you're falling. People get to 5.0 after learning to win at 4.5. They also get to 5.0 when being no longer capable (for whatever reason) at the 5.5 level. It's more concise to simply say, you reach 5.0 when you compete at a 5.0 level, which is an obvious statement.

5.0 isn't that tough to get. 5.5 is also reasonable too if you're willing to work for it and start early enough with proper guidance and help.

It's almost entirely a learning and discipline thing, like any other competition.

To be the top 0.01% is insane, for sure. To be the top 1%, not nearly as insane.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

A 5.0 is a either a player who is on the way down from playing at a very high level, or a 4.5 who happened to figure out how to win 4.5 matches. The limiting factor for almost everyone is athletic ability. Training can get most moderate-decent athletes to 4.5, but 5.0 requires that plus a natural gift in some area that not many have.

That's a good point that lends some credence to Identity's idea of 5.0+ being unique: I don't know a single 5.0 who didn't play juniors or college or didn't receive a lot of instruction and practiced a ton. I've been attempting to be the outlier but haven't yet succeeded.

 

[GuyClinch]

That's a good point that lends some credence to Identity's idea of 5.0+ being unique: I don't know a single 5.0 who didn't play juniors or college or didn't receive a lot of instruction and practiced a ton. I've been attempting to be the outlier but haven't yet succeeded.

Most players who post about ratings are actually unrated. It doesn't mean they are wrong - but really only people who have league/tournament records currently can claim to be this or that level.. If I was made head of USTA I would abandon the self-rating guideline nonsense. Someone like MEP has little of what it takes to be 4.5 on paper - but is a legit 4.5 IRL.

It has done quite a lot to harm tennis those subjective guidelines. Tennis is a sport. If you could beat Fed pushing every shot with a continental grip and just running everything down with Bo Jackson speed - you would still be world class.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Most players who post about ratings are actually unrated. It doesn't mean they are wrong - but really only people who have league/tournament records currently can claim to be this or that level.. If I was made head of USTA I would abandon the self-rating guideline nonsense. Someone like MEP has little of what it takes to be 4.5 on paper - but is a legit 4.5 IRL.

It has done quite a lot to harm tennis those subjective guidelines. Tennis is a sport. If you could beat Fed pushing every shot with a continental grip and just running everything down with Bo Jackson speed - you would still be world class.

The idea behind ratings is certainly sound [to match similarly-skilled players together]. But like any system, rules can be bent; some can be broken. "Now hit me, if you can." - Morpheus to Neo; *The Matrix*.

 

[travlerajm]

The idea behind ratings is certainly sound [to match similarly-skilled players together]. But like any system, rules can be bent; some can be broken. "Now hit me, if you can." - Morpheus to Neo; *The Matrix*.

My goal is to bend the ratings matrix.

 

[nyta2]

Well, first off, welcome to the Tennis Talk forum. 2ndly, congrats on resurrecting a thread that had died out more than 13 yrs ago. And the poster you had initially replied to has not been around TT at all since early 2017 (while the OP stopped visiting nearly 10 yrs ago). It's great to see that you were able get some feedback from members who are currently active.

Back when I was starting to play 4.0 (about 3 decades ago), I would sometimes find that I'd be losing to legit 3.5 players. It perplexed me at first but then I decided to investigate why that was the case. One reason was that many 3.5 "hackers" had unconventional strokes, often poorly executed. I was finding that my own level of play, at that time, was better against 4.0 and 4.5 players than against some 3.5 players.

It was because these 3.5'ers were often harder to read than 4.0 & 4.5 players. It was not cuz they were innately more deceptive. It was primarily because their strokes were so unorthodox, sometimes just slapping at the ball, that it would be difficult to tell where their ball was going to go when they slapped at it. So I got better at reading their tendencies and got much better at reacting to unexpected (seemingly unreadable) shots. Picked up on some "tells" as well.

The other reason I was having problems with some 3.5 players was that my level of interest in the game against them was often lacking. I was not (as) motivated and focused as I was against 4.0/4.5 players. I would often find myself playing "flat-footed" against the lower level players. Once I realize this, I started to work on that aspect of my game. I got to the point where I was keeping up my focus (vigilance) consistently. I would even find that I could play in a manner where I was constantly pushing them. Playing shots that were at their envelope or just a little bit past their abilities. So I was able to get decent rallies with these hackers and still maintain my interest in the game.

Once I developed both of these aspects of my game, I became a much better 4.0 player which also helped me to reach a 4.5 level. Eventually, I reached a 5.0 level but that was rather short-lived since I was pushing 50 and old injuries from my 30s and 40s were starting to haunt me on a regular basis.

I actually found it a bit easier to move from 4.5 up to 5.0 (and 3.5 to 4.0) than I did moving from 4.0 to a 4.5 level.

i had a similar expeirience (except for the part about making it to 5.0 )
other things to add...
which hitting against hard hitters... it's much easier to abbreviate/simplify a stroke with pace being added (eg. by a typical 4.5 hitter)...
from low4.0 to high4.0, i learned to hit "big" (ie. time full swings)...
but to really get past 4.0, i needed to learn to measure my strokes... ie. if i'm hitting 2ft behind baseline, take a "full swing" but if i'm inside the baseline it might be a 3/4 swing, and by the service line a 2/3 swing...
as a 4.0 losing to slice/dicer/dinker... i was always trying to use my shiny new full stroke heavy topspin stroke (into the net or long)

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

You guys chase of new member, @Identity? After resurrecting the thread Fri, has not returned to TT since then.

 

[Fintft]

So, to improve, I would recommend jumping rope (a lot); deciding on the strength of your game and planning a strategy to allow you to use that strength while cutting down mistakes when you are not using that shot; and practicing putting away short balls.

I'm thinking this also applies from 4.0 to 4.5, doesn't it?

 

[Chas Tennis]

Yep. I am 4.5 and a great 4.5. I have always wanted to be a 5.0. I guess the same could be said about all the D1 players that don't make it on the tour. Most if not all 5.0 players will not lose to anyone 4.5-3.5. I believe 3.5 was created for hackers who just annoy the crap out of you by getting the ball back in play. A 4.5 player makes too many mistakes on winners after consistent ball rallies and 3.5-4.0 players on a 4.5's bad day can beat [me]. I consider myself a low advanced player and a 5.0 player is just a better athlete. It's unobtainable to me imo.

When comparing poster's stroke techniques using high speed videos, there is usually a list of differences. Often the differences are flaws compared to the very effective high level techniques.

I have posted forehand and backhand slow motion compilations below a poster's strokes for these comparisons. If you don't want to post on the forum you need to know another member and use the Conversation feature to compare your videos on the forum.

You can compare forehands. For Youtube use the period & comma keys. Always select the video using alt + left mouse click, otherwise the video starts playing.

Spend some time fishing for your stroke differences and see what you find. You can observe differences in videos without detailed understanding of the strokes. Just list the differences and decide if they should be changed.

Changing your strokes is often not easy but you may discover an easy fix. For example, separation on the forehand with more uppermost body turning was an easy fix for me and added to my forehand. (and also to my backhand)