Hours played and NTRP

[Hokiez]

Hmmm, interesting.

3.5 - 100 hours - I only started playing last year
4.0 - ~40 hours or so

I only play every other week or so due to shoulder issues. I might be a 4.5 next year as I mow through the vast majority of the 4.0's I play. Of the 4.5's I know, I'll be on the lower end of them so I would rather not get bumped.

 

[goober]

Hmmm, interesting.

3.5 - 100 hours - I only started playing last year
4.0 - ~40 hours or so

I only play every other week or so due to shoulder issues. I might be a 4.5 next year as I mow through the vast majority of the 4.0's I play. Of the 4.5's I know, I'll be on the lower end of them so I would rather not get bumped.

What setting are you mowing through 4.0 players? USTA tournaments or leagues? Or nonUSTA leagues or in practice matches?

Just curious.

 

[edi5386]

I don't know how you can equate hours into NTRP rating. If you don't try to improve your technique, watch videos, improve strategy etc you could be playing around the clock and not get past a certain level. I think tennis is one sport where technique is so critical to getting above that 4.0 4.5 level but that is just my opinion.

 

[Moses Man]

10 hours playing tennis feels like 30 minutes on these forums i can assure you!

serveitup911 what level are you anyway?

He's on the Furman tennis team, a powerhouse in the Southern Conference. I also go to Furman, but I'm near the bottom of the ladder on the Club tennis team

 

[chess9]

Quality is as important as quantity. Getting great coaching will cut down on the quantity, but regardless, most people, even with the best coaching and very hard work, will not rise above 5.0.

-Robert

 

[Tennismastery]

Quality is as important as quantity. Getting great coaching will cut down on the quantity, but regardless, most people, even with the best coaching and very hard work, will not rise above 5.0.

-Robert

Finally someone got it right. There are tens of thousands (if not millions!) of players who have played tennis for decades, hit hundreds of thousands of balls and countless hundreds of hours...yet they remain at 3.5 or 4.0 levels at best.

Why?

Because it is not so much the total time spent, but the technique being practiced over that time. You can serve ten thousand serves using a frying pan grip, standing facing the net, swinging leading the elbow through the contact phase and never, never, never, never, (I don't have enough 'nevers' memorized!), become a top level server!

You can hit a million forehands and backhands and if you roll the racquet, flip the wrist, open up your hips too early or don't develop a repetitive swing pattern within the parameters of a proper swing path, then you will not only not be able to hit more effective shots consistently, but you also won't be able to defend more effective shots consistently...and, at higher levels you must do both.

So, all of you, forget about total hours spent and focus on learning what you need to be spending time on. If you continue to revert back to those patterns you developed as a 3.5, well, guess what...you will remain a 3.5 player.

I often tell my students: "If you hit 3.5 level shots, you will always be a 3.5 level player." You won't spontaneously evolve inadequate shots into prolific shots just because you spend 4000 hours hitting such inadequate shots. However, if you spend 4000 hours working on the best techniques possible, you not only will acquire and become familiar with such methods, you will begin to evolve into a far better tennis player.

Not too many 5.0 players stayed at the 3.5 levels for very long...and it has very little to do with "talented athleticism"...(although, it doesn't hurt!). I have had players who clearly were not as 'gifted' become top level college players in highly competitive tennis areas, (southern Calif., Phoenix, AZ,).

Quit counting hours and start studying tennis. And then start practicing within those patterns.

 

[FitzRoy]

swinging leading the elbow through the contact phase

Tennismastery,

Good post. I was wondering if you could possibly elaborate on the specifics of this? When I read this, I realized that it might be a flaw in my serve motion, but I'm not entirely sure what exactly you mean here, so I can't determine if I'm doing it or not.

 

[Zets147]

Hey, I have approx. 1084 hours on the court haha
Guess I'm still a 3.5

 

[Sakumo]

My Level - Total Hours to reach (Estimated as accurately as possible)
1.0 - 0
1.5 - 10
2.0 - 50
2.5 - 120
3.0 - 600
3.5 - 1200
4.0 - 2000
4.5 - 3200
5.0 - 5000
5.5 - 7000
6.0 - 9500+ (Still Here)

That is a good chart. The rule of thumb is that it takes 10,000 hours to become "professional" at any sport. Not sure who first said that.

 

[Tennismastery]

That is a good chart. The rule of thumb is that it takes 10,000 hours to become "professional" at any sport. Not sure who first said that.

Again, the total number of hours is meaningless. There are thousands of tennis players who have put in at least this much time and not only are they far from being tennis pros, they often can't get past 3.5.

Professionals have not only put in the hours...but, they worked within patterns that are essential for reaching their potential.

10,000 hours spent hitting poor strokes will only insure someone getting really good at being bad.

 

[Tennismastery]

Tennismastery,

Good post. I was wondering if you could possibly elaborate on the specifics of this? When I read this, I realized that it might be a flaw in my serve motion, but I'm not entirely sure what exactly you mean here, so I can't determine if I'm doing it or not.

FitzRoy,

The issue of leading with the elbow at contact is a common fault of players who use eastern forehand grips when serving. Think of it as the common adage, "throw like a girl." (I do not personally partake in this belief...but it usually spawns the thought of what I'm talking about.)

In other words, if you face your target in throwing, point your elbow at your target and then throw overhand. The elbow pulls down and the forearm follows then the release of the ball. Not exactly the best throwing method!

Yet, this is the way many thousands of players serve.

If you watch pros and skilled players alike serve, the elbow will come forward in the initial service motion, but stops allowing the racquet to accelerate in a whip-like fashion, bringing the forearm up and over and the 'edge-on' racquet position to pronate. This maximizes racquet head speed at the point you need it: Contact.

If you serve leading with the elbow through contact, the racquet head speed is no where near optimal...in fact, such servers actually will have their racquet reach this point of speed down about waist level long after they have hit the ball.

 

[Sakumo]

Again, the total number of hours is meaningless. There are thousands of tennis players who have put in at least this much time and not only are they far from being tennis pros, they often can't get past 3.5.

Professionals have not only put in the hours...but, they worked within patterns that are essential for reaching their potential.

10,000 hours spent hitting poor strokes will only insure someone getting really good at being bad.

That is why it is a rule of thumb not one of th 10 commandments.

 

[Tennismastery]

That is why it is a rule of thumb not one of th 10 commandments.

A 'rule of thumb' would infer that it would be practical or accessable for a large number of players. 10,000 hours doing something with inadequate methodology will only make the next 10,000 hours even more frustrating in trying to make a change in the ingrained pattern.

It would be a much better 'rule of thumb' to spend time on understanding the game and what makes good players good than to just assume that 10,000 hours will be a 'rule of thumb' to follow for one to become a professional.

Now, if we are talking about someone who has indeed studied the game, worked within the framework of skilled stroke patterns, then your 10,000 hours is definately not only a 'rule of thumb' but a very sound figure.

As a teaching professional who has worked with the very players who spent 10,000 hours hitting ineffective shots, and want despretely to move out of the 3.5 level, I want to make sure that people are not misled by the simplistic concept of thinking that 10,000 hours will make them a star.

I'm not disagreeing with your calculations...just adding clarity that it is not the means to an end.

 

[WildVolley]

Tennismastery is right. I've only coached for a short while, but already I see students that hit and hit and never improve. Mostly, they never think about what they are doing and make no effort to improve their form or drill a consistent shot.

Other beginners I've seen will actually attempt to use proper form and practice a technique until they own it. I'm not kidding. I've seen a beginner who's only hit for three months surpass someone who has played for years. I doubt I'm the only one who has seen this.

 

[Hokiez]

What setting are you mowing through 4.0 players? USTA tournaments or leagues? Or nonUSTA leagues or in practice matches?

Just curious.

USTA primarily but also in a local league. I'm not very adept at doubles (I'm capable, but my volley's are suspect) so I did lose a 4.0 doubles match when I played with a 3.5 as my partner 19-17 in a third set tiebreaker.

I played 4 matches in the local league. One against a guy who is 10-2 in 3.5 USTA. I won that one 10-0. The others have been 10-4, 10-3, and 10-4 against USTA ranked 4.0 players (some better than others).

Like I said, I'm a good 4.0, but would be a weak 4.5. I don't have the discipline to truly practice enough to be competitive at 4.5 (the local 4.5's at my club are the pro, the asst. pro, and a bunch of pretty talented guys).