My FFT rating vs NTRP

[Znak]

When I was living in Canada I was regularly playing in 4.0 tournaments. I've spent the past two years in France, their scale is much more detailed (and the all around average player is on a better level) — I've moved up all the way up to a 30/2. But when I check on the conversion chart, it says the equivalent is only a 3.0... What the heck? I know I'm miles ahead of my former self I have to be close to 4.5.

Why is this ranking system still the universal in North America, it's horrible, I feel like there's so much discrepancy between a 3.5-4.5 player? Is it that most people have a self-assessed rating? And there has to be something that's up with this conversion chart? (I'm not humble bragging, was more curious about my current level)

 

[ByeByePoly]

No worries ... we are all 5.0 here with perfect strokes, except for those of us stupid enough to post videos.

 

[Znak]

No worries ... we are all 5.0 here with perfect strokes, except for those of us stupid enough to post videos.

Hahah! Didn't I see you on TV winning your 20th something or other?

 

[Deleted member 23235]

When I was living in Canada I was regularly playing in 4.0 tournaments. I've spent the past two years in France, their scale is much more detailed (and the all around average player is on a better level) — I've moved up all the way up to a 30/2. But when I check on the conversion chart, it says the equivalent is only a 3.0... What the heck? I know I'm miles ahead of my former self I have to be close to 4.5.

Why is this ranking system still the universal in North America, it's horrible, I feel like there's so much discrepancy between a 3.5-4.5 player? Is it that most people have a self-assessed rating? And there has to be something that's up with this conversion chart? (I'm not humble bragging, was more curious about my current level)

yeah, there's huge discrepancy even within an NTRP bracket
then factor in that your NTRP rating could be doubles based (so what if you can't run much)... i know folks that are solid 4.5 doubles players with amazing racquet skills, but mid 4.0 singles players only because they are older and no longer mobile
my hope is that UTR dominates all these rating systems. no more BS
side note, the Fr and Bel systems are soooo confusing... please explain!!

 

[Lukhas]

yeah, there's huge discrepancy even within an NTRP bracket
then factor in that your NTRP rating could be doubles based (so what if you can't run much)... i know folks that are solid 4.5 doubles players with amazing racquet skills, but mid 4.0 singles players only because they are older and no longer mobile
my hope is that UTR dominates all these rating systems. no more BS
side note, the Fr and Bel systems are soooo confusing... please explain!!

The French system was based on a handicap system. The handicap was done with and therefore I will not waste time explaining it unless you really want it, but the names of the handicaps remained; hence the weird ranking names. Also, rankings are as of now in 2018 updated every month, so no tanking allowed. You also cannot self-rate.

When I was living in Canada I was regularly playing in 4.0 tournaments. I've spent the past two years in France, their scale is much more detailed (and the all around average player is on a better level) — I've moved up all the way up to a 30/2. But when I check on the conversion chart, it says the equivalent is only a 3.0... What the heck? I know I'm miles ahead of my former self I have to be close to 4.5.

The wonders of the 4th series coupled with the update system. Basically anyone below 30, 30/1 or 30/2 can be anything. No really, you can meet anything below that in the 4th series: guys who only play their club's internal tournament every year, guys who played a couple of team matches, guys who play consistently but do not have a ranking reflecting their ability since they don't play tournaments... You can have pleasant or nasty surprises: I had a team match where the best player on the opposing team was... NC (unranked). As per the rules, we had to send our own NC guy against him. No points for guessing how that turned out.

Beyond 30/2 or 30/1 and with the regular updates you basically know that anyone at these rankings or higher at the very least play tournaments regularly, even if they're not that good of a player. Also, the points you earn (or lose) with each matches depend of the ranking of your opponent. Therefore if you've just begun playing tournaments here, unless you've beat several high ranked opponents you won't gain many points and your ranking won't be that good... even if you used to be a 4.5. So yeah, 3.0/3.5 and 30/2 and below is your typical decent weekend warrior, but much like with USTA system, you can really meet anything and everything at these levels.

For example, since I don't play tournaments, almost never play my week-end team matches and also am a terrible, horrible match player, my ranking is 30/5, which is almost the lowest possible for anyone who has match wins. Doesn't mean I have terrible technique, but to get a better ranking I have to play more matches... and stop choking so much. I've met, really really weak players who have a way better ranking than I do because they play so much more.

Why is this ranking system still the universal in North America, it's horrible, I feel like there's so much discrepancy between a 3.5-4.5 player?

To be fair, a USTA computer rated 4.5 player is supposed to beat 6-0/6-0 a 4.0 player and so on. A .5 difference is supposed to be that dramatic. That said, I do think a 30/2 player is better than a 3.0 as there's no way a 30/2 should get mangled 6-0/6-0 by a 30/1 like this chart implies, but different systems yield different results. Beyond those really low rankings, I think the chart is otherwise rather accurate.

 

[Znak]

yeah, there's huge discrepancy even within an NTRP bracket
then factor in that your NTRP rating could be doubles based (so what if you can't run much)... i know folks that are solid 4.5 doubles players with amazing racquet skills, but mid 4.0 singles players only because they are older and no longer mobile
my hope is that UTR dominates all these rating systems. no more BS
side note, the Fr and Bel systems are soooo confusing... please explain!!

UTR, interesting! Didn't know that was a thing, had to look it up! For the Fr system, took me awhile as well! Basically you start at a high # and move down as you get better/complete more tournaments. But the interesting thing is each Division is divided in 5 so there's alot more delineation between groups/ratings, (why I think it works better). This table isn't the best but it's the left most column

Basically anyone below 30, 30/1 or 30/2 can be anything. No really, you can meet anything below that in the 4th series: guys who only play their club's internal tournament every year, guys who played a couple of team matches, guys who play consistently but do not have a ranking reflecting their ability since they don't play tournaments... You can have pleasant or nasty surprises: I had a team match where the best player on the opposing team was... NC (unranked). As per the rules, we had to send our own NC guy against him. No points for guessing how that turned out.

Beyond 30/2 or 30/1 and with the regular updates you basically know that anyone at these rankings or higher at the very least play tournaments regularly, even if they're not that good of a player. Also, the points you earn (or lose) with each matches depend of the ranking of your opponent. Therefore if you've just begun playing tournaments here, unless you've beat several high ranked opponents you won't gain many points and your ranking won't be that good... even if you used to be a 4.5. So yeah, 3.0/3.5 and 30/2 and below is your typical decent weekend warrior, but much like with USTA system, you can really meet anything and everything at these levels.

For example, since I don't play tournaments, almost never play my week-end team matches and also am a terrible, horrible match player, my ranking is 30/5, which is almost the lowest possible for anyone who has match wins. Doesn't mean I have terrible technique, but to get a better ranking I have to play more matches... and stop choking so much. I've met, really really weak players who have a way better ranking than I do because they play so much more.

Agreed, I think there's still alot of discrepancies in lower levels much like in NTRP, but I do appreciate that you have to earn your stripes... but at the same time you're right it's not always indicative of the player

To be fair, a USTA computer rated 4.5 player is supposed to beat 6-0/6-0 a 4.0 player and so on. A .5 difference is supposed to be that dramatic. That said, I do think a 30/2 player is better than a 3.0 as there's no way a 30/2 should get mangled 6-0/6-0 by a 30/1 like this chart implies, but different systems yield different results. Beyond those really low rankings, I think the chart is otherwise rather accurate.

Huh didn't know that, I'm curious if I could wipe out a 4.0, 6-0/6-0... appreciate the breakdown @Lukhas!

 

[Topspin Shot]

UTR, interesting! Didn't know that was a thing, had to look it up! For the Fr system, took me awhile as well! Basically you start at a high # and move down as you get better/complete more tournaments. But the interesting thing is each Division is divided in 5 so there's alot more delineation between groups/ratings, (why I think it works better). This table isn't the best but it's the left most column

Agreed, I think there's still alot of discrepancies in lower levels much like in NTRP, but I do appreciate that you have to earn your stripes... but at the same time you're right it's not always indicative of the player


Huh didn't know that, I'm curious if I could wipe out a 4.0, 6-0/6-0... appreciate the breakdown @Lukhas!

6-0 6-0 doesn't usually happen in practice, it's more like 6-2 6-2.