Help me self-rate

[lethalphorce]

I'm planning on playing my 1st year of USTA this upcoming season, so I need to self-rate soon.

Quick history on me: I started playing at 16, played for 2 years in HS. . . played for a couple years after HS mostly just with friends. Then didn't play for about 8 years until this past summer when I decided to start playing again.

So I now belong to a club & play in our club league twice a week. I keep a spreadsheet with my match results & I've used TennisLink to find my opponents' ratings. My record over the last 4 months looks like this:

All Men's Singles

vs:
3.0s: 6-0
3.5s: 7-2
4.0s: 1-0
unrated: 3-2

The 2 3.5's that I lost to are definitely good enough to be 4.0's imo.

Unfortunately, I have very little experience vs 4.0's, so it's hard to properly measure myself. I was planning on self-rating as a 3.5 & hoping to play on a 3.5 & a 4.0 team. But I'm starting to worry that I might get DQ'd from 3.5.

Thoughts?

 

[Geezer Guy]

Personally, I'd have no problems with your plan to self-rate at 3.5. I think that's fairly ligit - even given your winning record against 3.5 players. If you lost to 2 3.5's that were "good enough to be 4.0's" then the 4.0 player you beat must have been bad enough to be a 3.5.

Now - I've played a lot of USTA but I have not had experience with the DQ rules. I don't know if (or when) that would come into play. Personally - I wouldn't worry about it. Just play your hardest and let the chips fall where they may. Even if you get DQ'ed, it's extremely unlikely that will have any material effect on the team you're on anyway. (It would only matter if your team was in contention for Sectionals or Nationals, and chances are good that will not be the case your first time out.)

 

[LeeD]

Play 4.0's if you intend to improve, and have some big shots in your arsenal.
Play 3.5's if you want to collect trophies, stay at your same level, and feed your ego.
If you should choose 4.0's, plan on losing the majority of matches, but you need to lose to improve, and every top pro has done their share of losing to get to better levels.
Before anyone can be a winner, they have to experience losing.

 

[OrangePower]

Based on your history and results, you could legitimately do either 3.5 or 4.0.

If you go 3.5, you will probably do very well. I doubt you will be DQ'd - as long as you are playing only 3.5. It's actually quite hard to be DQ'd.

The downside to rating 3.5 is that you will probably be looking for more of a challenge after a few matches. You mentioned playing on a 4.0 team also. Now that definitely increases your chances of DQ from the 3.5 team. Also, you might find it harder to get onto a 4.0 team with a 3.5 rating (some captains don't want players that are playing up).

If you rate 4.0, you might lose more than you win, but IMO you will enjoy it more. And for sure this will give you more opportunities for improvement.

You will be fine either way, but if it were me, I'd go the 4.0 route.

 

[Deleted member 72105]

Hrmm - 4.0 or 3.5

Am I the only one that finds it depressing that someone can be a 4.0 after two years of tennis? I knew I should have picked up tennis in highschool instead of after college.

I vote for going with 4.0, because if you're good enough to beat 3.5s 7-2 then you'd probably get moved up anyway so why delay the inevitable. Play 4.0

 

[Geezer Guy]

Am I the only one that finds it depressing that someone can be a 4.0 after two years of tennis? I knew I should have picked up tennis in highschool instead of after college.

I vote for going with 4.0, because if you're good enough to beat 3.5s 7-2 then you'd probably get moved up anyway so why delay the inevitable. Play 4.0

No kidding! I took up tennis at 40 and played for over a decade before getting bumped to the 4.0 level. Had some good fun along the way at 3.5 though. I have some friends that self-rated at 4.0 and went years (litterally) without winning a 4.0 match. It's hard to have fun and stay motivated when you're getting the crap kicked out of you every week.

 

[J_R_B]

You could justify 3.5, but I'd go 4.0 if I were you. After that much time off, you are probably still improving, too.

 

[JoelDali]

Sandbag the 3.5s for year and meet tons of women who will think you're the shizzles and invite you on their 7.0 mixed combo teams. Pick up some paperweights and let loose at some Saturday night 3.5 socials exposing your mad social skills and attack volleys. Then move on to 4.0 where you'll be handily crushed by waves of sandbaggers that were DQ'd from 3.5 the previous year.

 

[Sumo]

What kind of game do you have?
If you are playing aggressively and lack consistency, I would say 3.5.
If you are playing conservatively and very steady, go for 4.0

 

[OrangePower]

Am I the only one that finds it depressing that someone can be a 4.0 after two years of tennis? I knew I should have picked up tennis in highschool instead of after college.

Like many other things, if you learn something when younger it makes it much much easier to pick it up again when older. Versus learning a new skill when you're older.

Now that I'm older there are many things I wish I had learned as a child... 2nd language, musical instrument, etc. So much more difficult now. Oh well. At least tennis was one thing I *did* learn when younger

 

[tennis4josh]

I'm planning on playing my 1st year of USTA this upcoming season, so I need to self-rate soon.

Quick history on me: I started playing at 16, played for 2 years in HS. . . played for a couple years after HS mostly just with friends. Then didn't play for about 8 years until this past summer when I decided to start playing again.

So I now belong to a club & play in our club league twice a week. I keep a spreadsheet with my match results & I've used TennisLink to find my opponents' ratings. My record over the last 4 months looks like this:

All Men's Singles

vs:
3.0s: 6-0
3.5s: 7-2
4.0s: 1-0
unrated: 3-2

The 2 3.5's that I lost to are definitely good enough to be 4.0's imo.

Unfortunately, I have very little experience vs 4.0's, so it's hard to properly measure myself. I was planning on self-rating as a 3.5 & hoping to play on a 3.5 & a 4.0 team. But I'm starting to worry that I might get DQ'd from 3.5.

Thoughts?

How did the scores look like in those 9 matches against 3.5s? If you won like 6-1/6-2 and lost like 4-6/5-7 then you should play 4.0. The DQ depends on how many games / sets you gave to your opponents. One could go a whole season undefeated without getting DQ'd.

My suggestion is that before you self-rate, try getting on a 4.0 team. It will most likely require that you hit with current 4.0 players. If they accept you on the team, then definitely you are 4.0. In case they don't accept you on the team, but you were competed well against 4.0s, then find another 4.0 team. If you could not compete (lost 2-6 or worse) then play 3.5.

Good Luck!

 

[lethalphorce]

Am I the only one that finds it depressing that someone can be a 4.0 after two years of tennis? I knew I should have picked up tennis in highschool instead of after college.

Well I've played for more than 2 years. I only played 2 years of organized tennis in HS. After that it was just casual playing with friends for a couple years. Then an 8 year hiatus.

What kind of game do you have?
If you are playing aggressively and lack consistency, I would say 3.5.
If you are playing conservatively and very steady, go for 4.0

Wouldn't it be the other way around? Isn't it easier to develop consistency instead of learning to hit hard? I do play aggressively, and I notice that the more I'm playing, the more consistent I'm becoming.

Play 4.0's if you intend to improve, and have some big shots in your arsenal.
Play 3.5's if you want to collect trophies, stay at your same level, and feed your ego.
If you should choose 4.0's, plan on losing the majority of matches, but you need to lose to improve, and every top pro has done their share of losing to get to better levels.
Before anyone can be a winner, they have to experience losing.

I have absolutely no qualms about losing to better players. I would prefer that to having easy wins. With that being said though, I feel like I should be able to pull my own weight on a team & I would feel like I was letting my team down if I were getting crushed match after match.

 

[lethalphorce]

Another thing to consider is that I have very little doubles experience. Played some in HS, but haven't played much since coming back. I would think this would lean me a bit towards 3.5.

 

[Cindysphinx]

Another thing to consider is that I have very little doubles experience. Played some in HS, but haven't played much since coming back. I would think this would lean me a bit towards 3.5.

I was gonna say that. Really, I was!

In our area, doubles rules. There is a 12-week window in the spring where USTA league offers singles. The rest of the year is 100% doubles.

If you want to be a doubles players, then you'll want to set up some foursomes and see how you do. That said, if you rate 4.0, you can play "down", meaning you can play men's 7.5 combo and mixed 7.0, where you could work on your doubles without being in over your head.

Anyway, go 4.0. Why not?

 

[JavierLW]

Another thing to consider is that I have very little doubles experience. Played some in HS, but haven't played much since coming back. I would think this would lean me a bit towards 3.5.

That's probably true and if they put you at doubles, maybe that would definitely help keep you from even worrying about being DQ'ed.

But if they figure out you're the sort of guy that's a pretty solid win in 3.5 singles, they might want to put you there.

But it sounds like from what you say, the couple people that were 4.0ish beat you. That's what you'd mainly have to worry about, when you play the best 3.5's out there, are you going to to beat them? (and by how much)

Just going 7-0 is meaningless because if they are just average 3.5 players and the matches are competitive you will not get DQ'ed.

Think about it this way, you looked them up and know they are 3.5, but what are they? #1 Singles players, or more like #2 or #3 Doubles players?? Generally when there are specific ringers on a team they mainly play #1 Singles and #1 Doubles and on some of the top teams #2 Singles as well...

 

[lethalphorce]

OK, so this week I played 2 more 4.0's & won both matches. That puts me at:

vs:
3.0s: 6-0
3.5s: 7-2
4.0s: 3-0
unrated: 3-2

I guess I'm going to self-rate @ 4.0.

 

[Geezer Guy]

I think that's a good plan - especially in light of all the recent bump-up's.

 

[HunterST]

Play 4.0's if you intend to improve, and have some big shots in your arsenal.
Play 3.5's if you want to collect trophies, stay at your same level, and feed your ego.
If you should choose 4.0's, plan on losing the majority of matches, but you need to lose to improve, and every top pro has done their share of losing to get to better levels.
Before anyone can be a winner, they have to experience losing.

Hell yes LeeD!

Why is everyone so concerned with being low ranked so they can and win instead of being worried about getting better? In my mind, everyone should be thrilled if they get bumped.

This doesn't apply to the OP. I know he's just trying to pick an appropriate level. But I'm speaking in general, everyone wants to play against the worst possible competition. It's sad.

 

[Z-Man]

Self rate as a 3.5 and get a season under your belt. If you go 4.0 now, you might find things tougher than you expect. Who knows how good the one 4.0 you played is. If he doesn't play leagues, chances are he doesn't know where he stands either. At 4.0, you'll have to play 4.5s like me who play down because good 4.5 teams want 5.0 singles players. The 3.5s who beat you are still playing 3.5 because nobody wants them on their 4.0 team because they can't win at state. You don't want to be that guy--yet. Get a taste of winning before you try to play up.

I had a similar story and had a great season at 3.5. Went to state and would have won, but my buddy got DQ'd. Then I had a very tough season at 4.0 before my game developed, and eventually I got bounced up to 4.5 and back a few times. Remember, you can always play up, but you can never play down. Find a hot chick who is underrated as a 3.5 and clean up at 7.0 mixed. Then go out for a few drinks to celebrate...

 

[MayDay]

Are the 3.5 chicks generally hotter than 4.0 chicks?

 

[kelawai]

Self rate as a 3.5 and get a season under your belt. If you go 4.0 now, you might find things tougher than you expect. Who knows how good the one 4.0 you played is. If he doesn't play leagues, chances are he doesn't know where he stands either. At 4.0, you'll have to play 4.5s like me who play down because good 4.5 teams want 5.0 singles players. The 3.5s who beat you are still playing 3.5 because nobody wants them on their 4.0 team because they can't win at state. You don't want to be that guy--yet. Get a taste of winning before you try to play up.

I had a similar story and had a great season at 3.5. Went to state and would have won, but my buddy got DQ'd. Then I had a very tough season at 4.0 before my game developed, and eventually I got bounced up to 4.5 and back a few times. Remember, you can always play up, but you can never play down. Find a hot chick who is underrated as a 3.5 and clean up at 7.0 mixed. Then go out for a few drinks to celebrate...

Take Z Man advice and you will have fun during your 1st year in the League. But don't crushed your 3.5 opponent by 6-0,6-1. I was a hot property once when in Mixed Doubles League until the year end rating comes out, got bumped up and back to normal.

 

[PINENUT]

i would always try to play the best competition. age will eventually catch up with you and you can play down. if you're relatively healthy, go for 4.0