I was just wondering how fast one can climb the NTRP skill ladder. Lets say you play alot of USTA tennis in the spring and summer at the 3.0 level, then during the fall and winter you play casual matches and alot of practicing against the wall and lots of serves with the ball hopper, is it possible or likely to enter competition the following spring at say the 4.0 level or higher? Thats just one scenario but I'm just trying to get a feel of how much practice and experience it takes to go from one NTRP level to another.
how fast can one climb NTRP
- Thread starter raiden031
- Start date
I would say it takes a couple years to gain the neccessary experience to move up at each level but everyone is different. It also gets harder and takes longer to move up the higher that you go. It took me like 2 years to go from 3.0 to 3.5. Then like 4 years to go from 3.5 to 4.0 and now maybe 6 years to go from 4.0 to 4.5 but then I started playing more seriously as an adult. A young player who practices and also plays alot of matches should move up more quickly.
I hope I am wrong, but I think most people have a "potential" upto which they can improve rapidly. After that, they stay there no matter what they do. I have had this experience with almost every sport I played. In 6 months, I get to level wher I am better than a lot of people who have been playing much longer. I get excited about my rate of improvement only to find that the the progress curve flattens out.
3.5 is the level that the average person never supasses.
My own potential is probably 4.0. I was around 2.5 in June 2005 when I started playing Tennis seriously(I used to serve underhand or dink it using only the elbow). I was at 3.0 within a month. My current level is 3.5. I feel fairly confident about becoming a decent 4.0, but the real goal of my efforts is to disprove my own theory and make it to 4.5.
My county's Tennis center has a ladder from "3.0" to "5.5"(each level inflated by about 1.0 to 1.5 relative to USTA leagues).
I played
- 4.0 in fall 2005 and finished 2nd (no playoffs)
- 4.5 in summer 2006 and reached finals
- 5.0 in fall 2006 and made playoffs with a 5-2 record within my group(playoffs start in a few days)
The 5.5 level in our club has about 10 4.5 rated USTA league players and most of the rest are solid 4.0 calibre. I would love to make playoffs at this level, but I dont realistically expect to do that next summer. Right now, I would probably lose every game at 5.5
3.5 is the level that the average person never supasses.
My own potential is probably 4.0. I was around 2.5 in June 2005 when I started playing Tennis seriously(I used to serve underhand or dink it using only the elbow). I was at 3.0 within a month. My current level is 3.5. I feel fairly confident about becoming a decent 4.0, but the real goal of my efforts is to disprove my own theory and make it to 4.5.
My county's Tennis center has a ladder from "3.0" to "5.5"(each level inflated by about 1.0 to 1.5 relative to USTA leagues).
I played
- 4.0 in fall 2005 and finished 2nd (no playoffs)
- 4.5 in summer 2006 and reached finals
- 5.0 in fall 2006 and made playoffs with a 5-2 record within my group(playoffs start in a few days)
The 5.5 level in our club has about 10 4.5 rated USTA league players and most of the rest are solid 4.0 calibre. I would love to make playoffs at this level, but I dont realistically expect to do that next summer. Right now, I would probably lose every game at 5.5
I don't know why they do it.
They don't regulate who plays what except that if you win one level, you must move up. So it seems like teh players' fault rather than teh club's. But still, it is pretentious to have a 5.5 league in a county tennis center. Last I checked, there were only a couple of USTA 5.0 teams in the state of NJ, and none in 5.5.
I have seen this kind of inflation elsewhere. My brother is in a Boston club that assigns ratings to members (in increments of 0.1). You can ask for "re-rating"; they set up a couple of matches for you, and depending on ths ersult, you get may get moved up. My borther has a rating of 4.2 and his friend 4.5. I bageled my brother 3 times in a row the last time we played. My record against his "4.5" friend is 3-1
They don't regulate who plays what except that if you win one level, you must move up. So it seems like teh players' fault rather than teh club's. But still, it is pretentious to have a 5.5 league in a county tennis center. Last I checked, there were only a couple of USTA 5.0 teams in the state of NJ, and none in 5.5.
I have seen this kind of inflation elsewhere. My brother is in a Boston club that assigns ratings to members (in increments of 0.1). You can ask for "re-rating"; they set up a couple of matches for you, and depending on ths ersult, you get may get moved up. My borther has a rating of 4.2 and his friend 4.5. I bageled my brother 3 times in a row the last time we played. My record against his "4.5" friend is 3-1
DRtenniS1112
Semi-Pro
I agree in the sense that it takes longer time to gain levels once you become higher rated however 4 years for 3.5-4.0? I remember this being just under 2 years for me. I hear it is easier to jump ratings though when you are a junior because you progress faster so maybe that is why I jumped quickly.kevhen said:
maverick1 said:
I think you are close but a little off on your theory about having the "potential" to get to a certain level at which you will never get higher. I think thats more of a plateau point rather than a stopping point. I think that threshold is how far you can get without significant effort. Most people don't have the time or motivation to get past that point because it requires too much time practicing. I also think if you do not practice effectively, then you will get stuck at a certain level as well even if you play a whole lot. Take me for example who has been a 3.0 for the past 6 years and I've improved more in the past 2 months then I have the whole rest of the time I've been playing tennis after focusing more on technique and practice then just playing matches. I'd like to think that I could just skip the 3.5 level next year because I've played (and lost to) a lot of 3.5 players and I know I can beat all of them and I know how to beat them, its just when I try to execute my game just falls apart with unforced errors. I feel like once my consistency falls into place, that I would whip any 3.0 or 3.5 player without any problem.
Yeah you may be right about the USTA allowing too much sandbagging. The guys I lose to are top rated D3 players and some of these guys who are probably legit 5.0s, but even they only win half of the time at the 4.5 level likely playing other 5.0s who register as 4.5s since there are no 5.0 leagues around here.
I lost 6-0, 6-2 to one of these guys last night. He did play #1 for a rated D3 team and I thought he would dominate playing 4.5 singles last winter but just did ok and not great but then he did play against other top college level players.
At the lower levels I see many players asking for medical or other requests to stay at a lower level after they get bumped. I don't think the USTA should allow them to come back down until they have played a year at the higher level but I don't know of many instances where the USTA has stood strong and not cater to the paying player. But it hurts the USTA overall since the weaker players at that level have no chance to win (so some quit playing USTA) with all the stronger players sandbagging or asking for exemptions to stay at their current NTRP level.
I lost 6-0, 6-2 to one of these guys last night. He did play #1 for a rated D3 team and I thought he would dominate playing 4.5 singles last winter but just did ok and not great but then he did play against other top college level players.
At the lower levels I see many players asking for medical or other requests to stay at a lower level after they get bumped. I don't think the USTA should allow them to come back down until they have played a year at the higher level but I don't know of many instances where the USTA has stood strong and not cater to the paying player. But it hurts the USTA overall since the weaker players at that level have no chance to win (so some quit playing USTA) with all the stronger players sandbagging or asking for exemptions to stay at their current NTRP level.
jackson vile
G.O.A.T.
In two years my wife went from 0-4.5 I am very very close to a 4.0 and I started at the begining for summer 2005, I have almost 400hrs on the court.
This sring a beat two 3.5 very soundly, IMO they where not real 3.5s they played USTA. I have no weakness in my game but consitancy to the point where I want it.
IMO the older you are the easier it is to take perspective and make a proper training plan and finally to be able to observe and correct.
I was simply not able to do that at a younger age.
This sring a beat two 3.5 very soundly, IMO they where not real 3.5s they played USTA. I have no weakness in my game but consitancy to the point where I want it.
IMO the older you are the easier it is to take perspective and make a proper training plan and finally to be able to observe and correct.
I was simply not able to do that at a younger age.
Geezer Guy
Hall of Fame
ohplease said:
The NTRP is the USTA's rating program, so whatever they say is "right". Almost every club that I've been to has leagues and drills and whatever posted for players that are of a certain NTRP, and they're filled with players that are way below that level.
I have an NTRP of 3.5. It's a computer rating, and I've been benchmarked at Sectionals. When I go to stuff at my club that's advertised for 3.5's, I'm by far the best player there to the point that it's pretty boring. I have to go to stuff that's advertised as 4.0 and 4.5 just to get solid competition.
And, if there's a "real" 4.5 there, having a mere 3.5 there is going to frustrate him just as much as I was frustrated by the 2.5's in my 3.5 drill session, so then the 4.5 has to attend the 5.0 drills (if there is such a thing).
I think most players think they're way better than they are, and most players don't play in USTA leagues (for whatever reason) so they don't know their true rating.
Supernatural_Serve
Professional
True. And furthermore they don't play in USTA tournaments, which tells an even more compelling story than USTA league play.Geezer Guy said:
Geezer Guy said:
The USTA also has its supposed elite player guidelines, which are blatantly ignored just about everywhere. I've said it before, but I've run into more than a few club pros and former collegel players (Div 1, 2, 3 - you name it) at 4.5, even 4.0. In fact, try this - go to the qualifier draw for a US pro tournament like los angeles. More than a few of those guys have USTA ratings around 5.0, sometimes 4.5. Nobody with ATP points should be at either of those levels.
Geezer Guy, if anything, your example calls into question the nature of "truth." If every club event, everywhere, is filled with players below USTA level, does that mean that the vast majority of the tennis playing public doesn't understand the NTRP guidelines? Or does that mean that NTRP guidelines have little correlation to what goes on in USTA play? I say it's the latter.
Your experience just confirms what I've long thought about NTRP ratings. Tell me what your club rating is. Now tell me what level you play in USTA events. They won't be the same (off by at least 0.5, often a full point), but at least we all know what we're talking about.
I know one young club instructor who has a heavy 4.5 forehand and good serve and consistent backhand and he signed up as a 4.0 so he could play doubles with his mom who is a league coordinator. By playing doubles, he can hide out for a longer period of time but this kid is 4.5 playing 4.0. Any club instructor should start at 4.5 and go down from there if the results prove that.
jackson vile
G.O.A.T.
kevhen said:
Wow that is stange he is a club instructor playing down? No ethics there LOL
I think you see this a lot in larger cities also, a good example is in Cali and ect where you have 5.0s going to 3.5 LOL
jackson vile
G.O.A.T.
Ace said:
Yea she took 3 in state her second year was number one in south easter Idaho, the people in boise were really good, but the thing was that she just did not have large tournament experience and she played some 5 games in two days LOL
Not to mentioned she used a walmart racketLOL
She was in the newspaper a lot also.
She's very very stronge, plays a well thought out game no baline BS
jackson vile
G.O.A.T.
Ace said:
No she had absolutly no prior experience, this was as an adult. I'm not sure how you could have anything above a 0 if you had never played before?
Ace
Semi-Pro
Well, before you join a USTA league, you have to have a rating. So she had to start with a rating other than "0". Beginners where I am from usually start USTA with a 2.5. Even if you start as a 2.5, I've never seen someone jump from a 2.5 to a 4.5 in 2 years in a USTA league. Even if you are killing everybody, they still usually bump you up a 1/2 point at a time. So 2.5 to 4.5 would be 4 years, unless you get disqualified in-season. And I haven't seen computer rated players get disqualified (in my area) even if they are killing everyone, its usually only the self-rated players that get DQ'd mid-season.
I'm not saying it couldn't happen, I've just never seen it happen where I am from.
So I was just curious at what rating she started at, if she played USTA leagues, and if she got disqualified and stuff like that to get her rating of 4.5.
I was wondering, did she start off playing in a 2.5 USTA league, and get DQ'd, then play 3.0 that same year and get bumped up to 3.5 the next year, or what? What was the progression?
I'm not saying it couldn't happen, I've just never seen it happen where I am from.
So I was just curious at what rating she started at, if she played USTA leagues, and if she got disqualified and stuff like that to get her rating of 4.5.
I was wondering, did she start off playing in a 2.5 USTA league, and get DQ'd, then play 3.0 that same year and get bumped up to 3.5 the next year, or what? What was the progression?
tonysk83
Semi-Pro
maverick1 said:
I agree with the top part. I started playing and in about a year I am better then a lot of people that have been playing since they were young. Since then though, I haven't been able to improve much, besides little things, no drastic improvements. I've never been rated, but compared to what I've seen I am around a high 4.0-low 4.5
jackson vile
G.O.A.T.
Ace said:
This was for hichschool and college, sorry I think USTA sucks the open tournaments are better though.
By 0 I just simply imply no experience at all, and case in point USTA rating first time players anywhere from 1.5-3.0+ . That is sad and incorrect, when I first started they wanted to rate me at a 3.5 and I found more out about the USTA and decided not to join, they thought I had a few years highschool play LOL
So she just simply too their number one spot on singles end of story, she beat the #1 twice and the number one was a big baby about it saying it was the wind ect, but when she went into college it was the same BS all over again.
I like tennis and hate the people LOL
jackson vile
G.O.A.T.
tonysk83 said:
Wow in one year almost a 4.5? I would like to see some video of you. I have made great progess and I am still not a 4.0 IMO and have some ways to go.
FH2FH
Professional
I agree with others that many have inflated their own/others ratings. If you regularly compete in tournaments or leagues, then you have some idea, but even then it's not concrete. Here we have 3.0-4.0 in 3.5, many 3.0's who should not be bumped and some 4.0 sandbagers. That is the bulk; 3.5/4.0 is the general meat of the curve.
As far as how fast... I can see people with talent and limited competition moving up quickly, where in tennis thriving communities this will be more difficult.
Also keep in mind match play is much different than banging away from the baseline in practice. Many people can look like 5.0's in practice, but putting it all together to win consistently at that level is a different story.
As far as how fast... I can see people with talent and limited competition moving up quickly, where in tennis thriving communities this will be more difficult.
Also keep in mind match play is much different than banging away from the baseline in practice. Many people can look like 5.0's in practice, but putting it all together to win consistently at that level is a different story.
EliteNinja
Semi-Pro
Oh yeah?
I live in Canada and don't really have anyone to compare to.
Not a club member either.
So I have no idea what I'm rated at.
If I had to go by the descriptions, I'd have to say 4.5.
But considering the following:
1. Leagues are sandbagged
2. I'm overrating myself by a lot because ppl tend to overrate,
I'm probably a 3.5
I live in Canada and don't really have anyone to compare to.
Not a club member either.
So I have no idea what I'm rated at.
If I had to go by the descriptions, I'd have to say 4.5.
But considering the following:
1. Leagues are sandbagged
2. I'm overrating myself by a lot because ppl tend to overrate,
I'm probably a 3.5
jackson vile said:
Not to say your wife isn't really a 4.5, but to me it seems like women players are often way overrated. In fact I've seen women playing D3 college and I'm positive I can beat them (I'm 3.0 male). They have slow first serves, moderate pace, and just don't seem to have any weapons. I actually played a few informal games with a former D1 female college player rated at 5.0 and it was neck and neck. I believe that the gap between male and female NTRP ratings has gotten very wide at the club level.
Maybe it just appears this way because the males are all sandbaggers while the women are legit.
FH2FH
Professional
It's not a perfect science is it? lol. Elite Ninja, are you solid with all of the descriptions of a 4.5 in the NTRP guidelines, even during match play? Then I would say you are a 4.5, who should sandbag like everyone else... making you a 4.0! hehe. j/k.
It isn't always sandbagging though. Players go up and down depending on the time of year, health, how much they practice, etc. USTA suggests overrating, but that's not what happens. I would prefer to be overranked and play in a tougher league to be challenged, rather than win my matches easily. It's much easier to find practice/playing partners who are worse than you than you than ones who are better. I'm a 5.5 by the way.... J/k, 3.5 actually.
It isn't always sandbagging though. Players go up and down depending on the time of year, health, how much they practice, etc. USTA suggests overrating, but that's not what happens. I would prefer to be overranked and play in a tougher league to be challenged, rather than win my matches easily. It's much easier to find practice/playing partners who are worse than you than you than ones who are better. I'm a 5.5 by the way....
J/k, 3.5 actually.
goober
Legend
raiden031 said:
While I agree with general gist of your post, if you really are a 3.0 male, I doubt you could hang with a 5.0 D1 female player. Either you are better than your rating or her playing level has dropped a lot since her college days.
I have a 4.0 computer rating and there is no way I could hang with your average D1 female player. I have beaten D3 and D2 female players. I am not sure though if they were representative of the average play at those levels.
FH2FH
Professional
I agree w/ that. Raiden31 is 3.5+ and/or the girl was having a very bad day. I play with a 4.5 girl here and lost to her 4 & 4 in the spring, but now she can beat me 2 & 2. Her serve is weak, but her placement and coverage are excellent. Same is true of 4.0 guys I play. I run my *** off in the rallies.
FH2FH said:
I'm definitely a strong 3.0 to weak 3.5 player against USTA computer-rated males. Its possible that the girl I played against was either 1) very rusty after not playing a long time or 2) playing down because she knew I wasn't as good. But the fact is I was probably hitting the ball with more pace than she was and she didn't have anything about her game that made me think she was a quality player. She was a bit more consistent but I won 3 games off her and she won about the same (maybe one more) and we quit because of time constraints.
Ace said:
In NorCal I have seen two people bumped from 2.5 to 3.5 in one season. (And even weirder, one of those then got bumped from 3.5 back to 2.5 the following year...) I have also seen a slew of computer rated players get disqualified this year in playoffs. Then again, NorCal is pretty out there on computer ratings. We have ESR (Early Start Ratings) mid year, so you are rerated twice a year, once in December, once in June. A new "Up and Out" rule says if you get bumped up during the season you can finish the season on the team, but cannot play in playoffs. So a 4.0 adult team that has most their team bumped to 4.5s in June cannot play the people with 4.5 ESRs in playoffs. This will first take affect with these fall leagues (combo, mixed, seniors) so we'll see come December how many teams have to default playoffs because they don't have enough players left to field a lineup.
Ace
Semi-Pro
cak said:
Actually, I did see that once, and it was because that person had played some 4.0 doubles matches and did well. Since then, our section does not allow you to play more than 1/2 up. So 2.5's can no longer play 4.0, or even 3.5, so getting bumped up that much higher would be harder to do.
Geezer Guy
Hall of Fame
ohplease said:
Well, around here the team Captains are VERY familiar with the elite player guidelines, and are more than happy to get opposing players disqualified if former college players attempt to play down. The captain who has an elite player signed up on his team is put on a two year probation, and if it happens again he's kicked out of the league.
I have not read the elite player guidelines lately. I don't remember if it references teaching pro's or not. Not all teaching pro's played D1 college ball, so possibly a teaching pro COULD start out as a 4.0 or 4.5. There are also older teaching pro's that could probably ligitimately play at that level too. Just because you feed the ball all day doesn't mean you're a 5.0 player.
ohplease said:
I say the former. And, I'd also say that the vast majority of USTA players are playing at exactly the right level. However, just a few (perceived) sandbaggers can ruffle a LOT of feathers.
ohplease said:
As I said earlier, I have a computer-generated NTRP of 3.5. I don't have "club" rating. My club doesn't give ratings - and none do (around here) that I know of. What my club DOES do is advertise that there will be a league (or drills, or whatever) for "x.x" level players, and they accept anyone that signs up for the league. As far as I know, they've never stopped anyone from joining anything because they were not the right level. For example, they advertise for a 4.0 singles league and a bunch of unrated 3.0, 3.5, 4.0 and 4.5 players sign up. Well, the 3.0's get crushed by everyone, so they figure out pretty quickly they're not 4.0's. The 3.5's beat up on the 3.0's, they play pretty even with the other 3.5's and some of the lesser 4.0's, and get crushed by the 4.5's. THEY figure - hey, I lost a few tough matches, but most of the time I either won or it was pretty close. I must be a 4.0 player!
I belong to a fairly small club. When we have club tournaments they usually have two categories: 3.5 and below, and 4.0 and above. Being a ligitmate 3.5 player I played in the 3.5 and below the first two years and won. Since then I've played the 4.0 and above level and lost. It's not that I don't like winning, and I certainly don't think I'm "really" a 4.0 player (although on a good day...) but I just want to give the 3.0 guys a chance to win also.
In USTA events I play 3.5 and win-lose about 60-40 or maybe 70-30. I've played USTA 4.0 doubles events (with both 3.5 and 4.0 partners) and my win-loss is about 50-50. (But some of those wins at the 4.0 level were against other 3.5 players.)
OK - enough about me, but you asked.
