How do tennis ratings equate to golf handicaps?

[martymule]

This probably isn't the right forum for this question, but I figured I'd get some answers here.

I was out drinking some beers with my non tennis playing buddies (they all play a lot of golf). We somehow got to talking about tennis and they asked me how good I was. I told them that I'm "OK", that I'm rated as a 4.5. They had no idea what that meant, and they asked me what a 4.5 would equate to as a handicap. I had no idea, but it got me thinking. What do some of you golfer/tennis players think about that? What would a 3.5 be in golf handicap terms? a 4.0? a 4.5?

I am just curious and I'm anxious to read your responses.

 

[struggle]

i'd say 3.5 might be about a 15-20 handicapper in golf.

decent but not great.

hard to say.

 

[SweetH2O]

Funny, a guy I played this past weekend and I had a similar conversation after the match. We are high 3.5/low 4.0 players. He asked and I guessed we'd be equivalent to shooting 90 in golf. He thought that was too high and that we'd be more like in the low 80s.

 

[HackersRUs]

ooohh, interesting!

I reckon a 5.0 would be around a 6 - 10 handicap, a 4.5 11 -15 and a 4.0 16 - 20

if you're low single figures on a golf course, you're pretty darn good, so i would say that >5.5 would be, say, 2 - 5 and better than that and you're a pro either way!
anyone?

(no offence to 3.0 - 3.5 players, but I think equating your game to 21 - 30 handicaps is probably fair enough)

 

[Maui19]

I had this conversation with my golf buddies the other day. None of them play tennis. Here's what I told them.

3.0=15-20 handicap
3.5=10-15 handicap
4.0=5-10 handicap
4.5=2-5 handicap
5.0=+1-2 handicap
5.5=+2-+1 handicap
6.0=+4-+3 handicap (minitour pro/occasional Nationwide Tour pro)
6.5=+5-+4 handicap (Nationwide Tour pro/journeyman PGA Tour or up and coming PGA Tour pro)
7.0-<+6 handicap (successful PGA Tour pro)

Tennis ratings are like flights in golf, which is why you need to assign a range of handicaps to each rating level.

I'll tell you one thing. It is very hard to stay good at golf while you are trying to become really good at tennis.

 

[J_R_B]

ooohh, interesting!

I reckon a 5.0 would be around a 6 - 10 handicap, a 4.5 11 -15 and a 4.0 16 - 20

if you're low single figures on a golf course, you're pretty darn good, so i would say that >5.5 would be, say, 2 - 5 and better than that and you're a pro either way!
anyone?

(no offence to 3.0 - 3.5 players, but I think equating your game to 21 - 30 handicaps is probably fair enough)

I agree with this. 6-10 handicap is shooting around 80. You gotta be a goddamn good golfer to do that.

 

[dizzlmcwizzl]

SO I just googled the typical distribution for golf handicaps .... Just like the USTA, golf pros do not really have handicaps much like Nadal is not really a 7.0, the scale these people use is $ or titles ... not some arbitrary number.

Also you can ignore the casual golfer and the casual tennis player that does not have a rating ...

So here it goes ... comparing golf handicap distributions with USTA distributions

9% of golfers with handicaps have handicaps in the 0-6 range I would call these people 5.0+

16% of golfers are in the 6-10 range .... 4.5's

30% of golfers are in the 10-16 range .... 4.0's

30% of golfers are in the 16-22 range .... 3.5's

15% of golfers with handicaps are greater than 22 .... 3.0 or less

 

[dizzlmcwizzl]

Now having said that it is interesting to note that when you hear the following ... I have never played USTA but I am about a 4.0 / 4.5 ... When you play them you realize they are a 3.5.

The opposite happens on the golf course, for betting reasons. They claim to be a 10 handicap but you find out later they are Tiger's swing coach.

 

[dak95_00]

Now having said that it is interesting to note that when you hear the following ... I have never played USTA but I am about a 4.0 / 4.5 ... When you play them you realize they are a 3.5.

The opposite happens on the golf course, for betting reasons. They claim to be a 10 handicap but you find out later they are Tiger's swing coach.

Both of your posts are right on the mark!

However, I wouldn't say the opposite happens when a player is boasting their playing ability. The same term is used in both sports.....SANDBAGGER!

There are many golfers who claim to be 5 or lower handicaps but shoot like an 85 on game day. There are also those who say they are 15 handicap golfers who shoot 70 on game day and "just played their best ever!"

I would say that the golf handicap is a more valid number and should equate to an even playing field if calculated correctly all over the world. That is, a 5 handicap golfer in Ohio would be a 5 handicap golfer in California too.

Is a 4.5 tennis player in Ohio as good as a 4.5 tennis player in California?

BTW, I claim to be a 6 handicap golfer and a 4.0/4.5 tennis player. Both are made up numbers but I was once honestly rated a 2 handicap golfer. My tennis rating is made up because I've never played USTA and I play very competitively w/ 4.0 and 4.5 players; sometimes I win and sometimes I lose. Tennis is so much more difficult to be consistant because of that pesky guy on the other side hitting back at me.

 

[dizzlmcwizzl]

I would say that the golf handicap is a more valid number and should equate to an even playing field if calculated correctly all over the world. That is, a 5 handicap golfer in Ohio would be a 5 handicap golfer in California too.

Except that when I was coaching golf I found folks that were a 8 handicap on their home course but when they played somewhere else they were much worse. The handicap includes a slope rating for a particular course that is supposed to account for this however, club players often times will have a lower handicap by really knowing the home course ... not necessarily having the stroke mechanics of a better player.

I guess this happens a little if you get really accostomed to clay and then have trouble switching to hard courts.

However I think the differences between playing surfaces is less troubling than the differences in the courses you encounter.

 

[JRstriker12]

Is a 4.5 tennis player in Ohio as good as a 4.5 tennis player in California?

Yes, in fact this year they were better than the 4.5's in California (At least for the mens)

http://www.usta.com/Play-Tennis/USTA-League/45_LeagueNationalChampionships/

Not a golfer, but IMHO it's harder to say is a 4.5 from state X better than a 4.5 from state Y. Problem is - which 4.5? Is it the 4.5 from CA that just got bumped and has a losing record, or is it the 4.5 from Ohio that will probably get bumped to 5.0?

You might be able to say that CA has MORE 4.5's, and thus an overall stronger pool of players.

But on a player, by player basis, it's all about the match-up.

 

[equinox]

I agree with this. 6-10 handicap is shooting around 80. You gotta be a goddamn good golfer to do that.

my bro used to shoot those kinds of scores in juniors with jason day.

the average golf pro has so many more playing options and earning potential equivalent tennis player.

 

[J_R_B]

Is a 4.5 tennis player in Ohio as good as a 4.5 tennis player in California?

Yes. That is what the benchmark rating system does - level out the different regions of the country.

 

[g4driver]

I have a friend with a 4.5 USTA rating and an 8 handicap. Tough on both the court and golf course. And worse, I think he sandbags at both.

Both the USTA and USGA have sandbaggers. In golf, sandbaggers don't turn in low rounds, and but rather their higher rounds = your handicap stays high. In USTA, lay off the pedal when you're up 5-0, or 5-1, and wait until your serving. I don't condone this, but it is reality.

 

[obtn]

This is one reason I'm becoming kind of partial to the Tencap rating system. The range is from 0 to 80, where 0 is a pro, and 80 is 1.0 NTRP.

I am personally a 41 right now (trending to 39)... 31-40 would be 4.0, 41-50 is 3.5. I find this gives a better idea of where within an NTRP you are. The rating system also gives a sort of "handicap" to the lower ranked player during a match... essentially 1 game per 2 points rating difference, per set. So if I am a 41 and I play a 45, the system expects me to win 6-4 6-4, and therefore gives the 45 player 2 games per set handicap. So if I really did win 6-4 6-4, the adjusted score would be 6-6 6-6, and neither player's rating would change.

On a side note, I played a golf pro in my last first round match at a tennis tournament (He has earned 300k in prize money playing golf), and won.

 

[polski]

This probably isn't the right forum for this question, but I figured I'd get some answers here.

I was out drinking some beers with my non tennis playing buddies (they all play a lot of golf). We somehow got to talking about tennis and they asked me how good I was. I told them that I'm "OK", that I'm rated as a 4.5. They had no idea what that meant, and they asked me what a 4.5 would equate to as a handicap. I had no idea, but it got me thinking. What do some of you golfer/tennis players think about that? What would a 3.5 be in golf handicap terms? a 4.0? a 4.5?

I am just curious and I'm anxious to read your responses.

I would have loved to be at that conversation. How interesting to think about?

From my experience, golfers strive for a lower handicap as it correlates to success. Tennis players dread getting bumped to a higher NTRP because it could lead to more failures.

 

[dak95_00]

Yes, in fact this year they were better than the 4.5's in California (At least for the mens)

http://www.usta.com/Play-Tennis/USTA-League/45_LeagueNationalChampionships/

Not a golfer, but IMHO it's harder to say is a 4.5 from state X better than a 4.5 from state Y. Problem is - which 4.5? Is it the 4.5 from CA that just got bumped and has a losing record, or is it the 4.5 from Ohio that will probably get bumped to 5.0?

You might be able to say that CA has MORE 4.5's, and thus an overall stronger pool of players.

But on a player, by player basis, it's all about the match-up.

I must've been talking about the women.

Thanks for the clarification. I like knowing that it is more mathematical and it is fair.

 

[goober]

I would have loved to be at that conversation. How interesting to think about?

From my experience, golfers strive for a lower handicap as it correlates to success. Tennis players dread getting bumped to a higher NTRP because it could lead to more failures.

Hmm interesting, my friends that play both competitive golf and tennis tell me that the sandbagging in golf is 10x worse than in tennis. For a lot of amateur golf tournaments there is money on the line. A lot of people know how to get their handicap way up and then when tournament comes they all the sudden have several "miracle rounds". NTRP tournaments typically offer nothing so there is less incentive. Second, there is a lot betting in golf even in just friendly play. You almost never see betting in recreational tennis matches. When money comes into the picture people, have huge incentives to sandbag

 

[dak95_00]

Except that when I was coaching golf I found folks that were a 8 handicap on their home course but when they played somewhere else they were much worse. The handicap includes a slope rating for a particular course that is supposed to account for this however, club players often times will have a lower handicap by really knowing the home course ... not necessarily having the stroke mechanics of a better player.QUOTE]

I know a few of these guys. I don't really consider them true 8 handicappers. I bet if we followed them around that we'd see they don't turn in those bad scores from the other courses.

I once played in a match against one of these players. It was a weekend "grudge match" pairing players from rival public golf courses against each other. The two owners pitted their best 20 players against each other to see who had the better golfers on their course. Each hole was worth a point and everyone played the entire 18. The first day at the away course I played pretty bad and split 9-9 against this guy. He was talking all kinds of stuff about me having a bad attitude and not really being that good. The next day I beat him 15.5-2.5 and he couldn't have been more apologetic. I've also gone out of state to play in a member guest and been accused of being a pro. When I told them I was a high school math teacher, they began to quiz me on what little math they could remember to test my story. My game travels!

I've only played on clay a couple times in my life. I'm sure my tennis game would probably look like crap against a player who has much more experience on clay.

 

[dak95_00]

This is one reason I'm becoming kind of partial to the Tencap rating system. The range is from 0 to 80, where 0 is a pro, and 80 is 1.0 NTRP.

I am personally a 41 right now (trending to 39)... 31-40 would be 4.0, 41-50 is 3.5. I find this gives a better idea of where within an NTRP you are. The rating system also gives a sort of "handicap" to the lower ranked player during a match... essentially 1 game per 2 points rating difference, per set. So if I am a 41 and I play a 45, the system expects me to win 6-4 6-4, and therefore gives the 45 player 2 games per set handicap. So if I really did win 6-4 6-4, the adjusted score would be 6-6 6-6, and neither player's rating would change.

On a side note, I played a golf pro in my last first round match at a tennis tournament (He has earned 300k in prize money playing golf), and won.

This makes sense to me! I'd vote for this type of scoring and handicap system.

 

[dak95_00]

Hmm interesting, my friends that play both competitive golf and tennis tell me that the sandbagging in golf is 10x worse than in tennis. For a lot of amateur golf tournaments there is money on the line. A lot of people know how to get their handicap way up and then when tournament comes they all the sudden have several "miracle rounds". NTRP tournaments typically offer nothing so there is less incentive. Second, there is a lot betting in golf even in just friendly play. You almost never see betting in recreational tennis matches. When money comes into the picture people, have huge incentives to sandbag

I agree. I've only been asked to play tennis for money once. If there is money on the line, cheating will come into play. It's like the old style of thinking in golf where amatuers were thought to be the most noble players and professionals were thought to be the lowest part of society. You play the game for honor. That's the way I see tennis; as a game of honor. I don't play tennis leagues so I can't say anymore about sandbagging. However in golf, I've seen many sandbaggers just because money was on the line and I've seen many different ways of dealing w/ it to make it work out. The worst sandbaggers are at so-called national or world amatuer tournaments that allow players to use handicaps. A 20 handicap golfer will play 5 straight days like a 4 handicap golfer. That's because he was a 4 handicap golfer! It is bad but it is made worse when you look at the other 19-23 handicap golfers who finished second, third, etc. by shooting very similar scores! Locally, these guys are called out.