Poll: Should a former ATP player self rate @ 4.5 ever?

Should a 32 year old former ATP 1100-1300 player self rate at 4.5?

  • Yes

  • No

  • No, his results should be reversed & team, captain(s) penalized for lying

Results are only viewable after voting.
N

Nexus

Semi-Pro
32 years old, career high 1303 in singles 1108 in doubles back in 2004 ~19 years old at the time.

Won 7 matches (singles/doubles combined) and lost 13 in Pro Circuit main draw events.

Even if he/she didn't pick up a racquet for 10+ years [very unlikely that that's the case] (2004-2017), does anyone find it reasonable to let someone of that caliber self-rate at 4.5?

Based on this link & the above data, what do you think their 'honest' rating should be? Post in the comments below & make sure to vote!
https://www.usta.com/content/dam/usta/pdfs/10013_experience_player_ntrp_guidelines.pdf
 
Dartagnan64

Dartagnan64

G.O.A.T.
Agree with darkhorse. They are only 4.5 if they've aged poorly or had some catastrophic injury. I guess if you make them play with their non-dominant hand.

But any tour pro even with a layoff will pick up and play at a high level very quickly. 5.0 would be a low bar for them. 4.5 is ridiculous.
 
atatu

atatu

Legend
I agree also, although I've seen worse (18 year old guys who play futures events and win rounds self rating at 4.5).
 
OrangePower

OrangePower

Legend
Nexus said:
32 years old, career high 1303 in singles 1108 in doubles back in 2004 ~19 years old at the time.

Won 7 matches (singles/doubles combined) and lost 13 in Pro Circuit main draw events.

Even if he/she didn't pick up a racquet for 10+ years [very unlikely that that's the case] (2004-2017), does anyone find it reasonable to let someone of that caliber self-rate at 4.5?

Based on this link & the above data, what do you think their 'honest' rating should be? Post in the comments below & make sure to vote!
https://www.usta.com/content/dam/usta/pdfs/10013_experience_player_ntrp_guidelines.pdf
Click to expand...
5.5 minimum, maybe 6.0

4.5 only if some catastrophic injury

Unless recruited by a captain desperate to make Nationals, in which case it's ok.
 
navigator

navigator

Hall of Fame
If the guy's been playing regular tennis it's unlikely he's not at least a 5.5. If he hadn't picked up a racquet in 10 years maybe a 5.0 after a couple of weeks of practice. Now, if he was 42 and hadn't played in twenty years, then... maybe a 4.5 to start out with (but not for long).

Having said all that, would I care if I had to play him or he played for another team? Not one bit. If folks want to sandbag... so be it. It doesn't pass a threshold of importance.
 
N

Nexus

Semi-Pro
I contend that it is important.

First, it is dishonest. The NTRP ratings are there for a reason. To obtain a self rating, they had to lie during the questionnaire. Liars shouldn't be rewarded with trips to nationals.

Second, this individual impacted the results at a section-level event. They had no business competing* so far below their ability. With 5 lines played and 3 needed to win, their team only had to win 2 more lines with "normal" 4.5 players in any given match. That makes it really, really easy to win 3-2 or better.

Third, that team is representing my state/region. It makes us look like a bunch of shady, sandbagging <insert expletive here>'s. That person should be playing on a 5.0+ team, not taking playing time away from genuine players at the 4.5 level.

Of course by sections you expect that everyone is borderline or mid 5.0, but not ATP status. i.e. the field is still sort of level. You have some college players, teaching pros, but not a velociraptor in a coop full of chickens.

*not much competition when you can win points whenever you want
 
navigator

navigator

Hall of Fame
Nexus said:
I contend that it is important.

First, it is dishonest. The NTRP ratings are there for a reason. To obtain a self rating, they had to lie during the questionnaire. Liars shouldn't be rewarded with trips to nationals.

Second, this individual impacted the results at a section-level event. They had no business competing* so far below their ability. With 5 lines played and 3 needed to win, their team only had to win 2 more lines with "normal" 4.5 players in any given match. That makes it really, really easy to win 3-2 or better.

Third, that team is representing my state/region. It makes us look like a bunch of shady, sandbagging <insert expletive here>'s. That person should be playing on a 5.0+ team, not taking playing time away from genuine players at the 4.5 level.

Of course by sections you expect that everyone is borderline or mid 5.0, but not ATP status. i.e. the field is still sort of level. You have some college players, teaching pros, but not a velociraptor in a coop full of chickens.

*not much competition when you can win points whenever you want
Click to expand...

Eh, I suppose, but it doesn't really seem like much of a reward... it's not like 4.5 tennis is some exalted status and, anyway, there's no prize money involved. If this were an age group competition and someone was lying about their age, or if this was the German Bundesliga where there's money at stake, I'd get it. But NTRP league tennis... it's just not that important in my view. If you want completely objective standards just play age group competitions - there's no fudging there; it's completely objective. Otherwise, continue to subject yourself to subjectivity.
 
OrangePower

OrangePower

Legend
navigator said:
Eh, I suppose, but it doesn't really seem like much of a reward... it's not like 4.5 tennis is some exalted status and, anyway, there's no prize money involved. If this were an age group competition and someone was lying about their age, or if this was the German Bundesliga where there's money at stake, I'd get it. But NTRP league tennis... it's just not that important in my view. If you want completely objective standards just play age group competitions - there's no fudging there; it's completely objective. Otherwise, continue to subject yourself to subjectivity.
Click to expand...
I completely agree with you in the sense that if someone wants to win so badly at some arbitrary level that really doesn't correlate to anything other than where the USTA decided to delineate the ratings bands, then eh, whatever.
But just wanted to point out, there is also cheating going on at age group competition. Although the criteria is objective (age), I've heard cases of competitors lying about their age to qualify for the next-older grouping.
 
navigator

navigator

Hall of Fame
OrangePower said:
But just wanted to point out, there is also cheating going on at age group competition. Although the criteria is objective (age), I've heard cases of competitors lying about their age to qualify for the next-older grouping.
Click to expand...

I'm not doubting you here but I'm curious as to how this is possible. Both the ITF and USTA require that you provide a birth date when you join. Are there people that provide an earlier birth date when they join so that they can at some point play in the older classification? I guess this could theoretically happen, but... I've never heard of it actually happening. Also, it's so easy to find someone's age these days... but I'm guessing this is extremely rare (considerably rarer than folks sandbagging via NTRP, which in and of itself is pretty rare).
 
OrangePower

OrangePower

Legend
navigator said:
I'm not doubting you here but I'm curious as to how this is possible. Both the ITF and USTA require that you provide a birth date when you join. Are there people that provide an earlier birth date when they join so that they can at some point play in the older classification? I guess this could theoretically happen, but... I've never heard of it actually happening. Also, it's so easy to find someone's age these days... but I'm guessing this is extremely rare (considerably rarer than folks sandbagging via NTRP, which in and of itself is pretty rare).
Click to expand...

At least in the case I am aware of, the person had an existing USTA account with their real name and age, and then at some point created another account using their middle name and a date of birth a few years earlier. This person then played under the new account (where the player had self-rated at a lower level than the computer rating on the existing account), using the new account for both NTRP and age-based tournaments.

Apparently this went on for at least a year before the player was busted by someone who recognized the player...
 
M

Max G.

Legend
32 years old? That's like prime age for tennis nowadays, same age as the current top players! Even younger!

I can imagine some weird edge cases involving injuries that can drop a pro to 4.5 by age 32, but barring that, there's no way a person who played at a pro level anytime in their life would be a 4.5 by age 32.
 
K

kevrol

Hall of Fame
Nexus said:
I contend that it is important.

First, it is dishonest. The NTRP ratings are there for a reason. To obtain a self rating, they had to lie during the questionnaire. Liars shouldn't be rewarded with trips to nationals.

Second, this individual impacted the results at a section-level event. They had no business competing* so far below their ability. With 5 lines played and 3 needed to win, their team only had to win 2 more lines with "normal" 4.5 players in any given match. That makes it really, really easy to win 3-2 or better.

Third, that team is representing my state/region. It makes us look like a bunch of shady, sandbagging <insert expletive here>'s. That person should be playing on a 5.0+ team, not taking playing time away from genuine players at the 4.5 level.

Of course by sections you expect that everyone is borderline or mid 5.0, but not ATP status. i.e. the field is still sort of level. You have some college players, teaching pros, but not a velociraptor in a coop full of chickens.

*not much competition when you can win points whenever you want
Click to expand...

If this can all be documented (which it sounds like it could pretty easily) I can't believe no one has filed a grievance.
 
D

Deleted member 23235

Guest
i voted yes, so i can play him.
who cares if i get double bagelled.
costs less than a playing lesson or tournament entry fee.

from the sandbagging perspective... unless he's seriously been injured (can't serve, can't move, etc...) he's MILES ahead of anyone playing rec.

a couple decades ago, i recall a guy with an ATP point or two who joined a 4.0 or 4.5 team and went to nationals :p
mainly he did it to meet new folks (he was from a different country), and built his (tennis) business.
and ntrp, usta, etc... information wasn't prolific
 
Ronaldo

Ronaldo

Bionic Poster
sam_p said:
Hmmmm, I wonder if there are any relevant details that are being left out...
Click to expand...
He has a wooden hand?

carl-weathers-in-happy-gilmore.jpg
 
monfils is my homeboy

monfils is my homeboy

Semi-Pro
There is a guy that plays 4.5 here in Tulsa that was a solid ATP player. He had a few wins over Stan Smith and was John Mcenroes partner at Stanford. So D-1 National Champion, and a few wins over the former Number 5 player in the world and he plays 4.5.
 
N

Nexus

Semi-Pro
kevrol said:
If this can all be documented (which it sounds like it could pretty easily) I can't believe no one has filed a grievance.
Click to expand...

Actually, prior to the tournament all three captains in the flight filed grievances and yet USTA upheld their ruling.
 
Ronaldo

Ronaldo

Bionic Poster
monfils is my homeboy said:
There is a guy that plays 4.5 here in Tulsa that was a solid ATP player. He had a few wins over Stan Smith and was John Mcenroes partner at Stanford. So D-1 National Champion, and a few wins over the former Number 5 player in the world and he plays 4.5.
Click to expand...
Does he have joint replacement surgery?
 
S

sam_p

Professional
Nexus said:
Actually, prior to the tournament all three captains in the flight filed grievances and yet USTA upheld their ruling.
Click to expand...

Hmmmmm, I wonder if there are some relevant details that you aren't sharing?

And, I wonder how you know the results of a USTA grievance process?
 
ChaelAZ

ChaelAZ

G.O.A.T.
Interesting irony in all this. There is a guy Elliot something on YouTube that all his posts say something about NTRP 5.5 or such, and there are tons of comments saying he is no more than a 4.5 player, but he was a number 1 singles player for some college.

Everyone is a critic.
 
J

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
The guidelines say only at age 56 or older, which seems reasonable for a general guideline. As for this specific case, if the USTA upheld the rating, then there is information that we are missing here.
 
C

cneblett

Rookie
In jacksonville 4 or 5 years ago former world number 29 self rated at 4.5 nd got bumped to 5.0 end of hear. We all went ok, but played it out. He was like 53 or so. 2012 and 13. Lost a few matches. He wasnt completely out of line.
 
Moveforwardalways

Moveforwardalways

Hall of Fame
Max G. said:
32 years old? That's like prime age for tennis nowadays, same age as the current top players! Even younger!

I can imagine some weird edge cases involving injuries that can drop a pro to 4.5 by age 32, but barring that, there's no way a person who played at a pro level anytime in their life would be a 4.5 by age 32.
Click to expand...

I agree. 32 years old is prime tennis life.
 
bwongman

bwongman

Rookie
It really depends on how he took care of himself and if he touched a racquet in those 13 years. When I was 18 I weighed 175lbs could dunk and had a 6 pack. By the time I hit 32 I weighed 225 lbs had a beer belly a bad back and couldn't run a full mile. I think its possible to drop that far down but I would not self rate myself that low.
 
D

Deleted member 23235

Guest
bwongman said:
It really depends on how he took care of himself and if he touched a racquet in those 13 years. When I was 18 I weighed 175lbs could dunk and had a 6 pack. By the time I hit 32 I weighed 225 lbs had a beer belly a bad back and couldn't run a full mile. I think its possible to drop that far down but I would not self rate myself that low.
Click to expand...
even then a former atp player is STILL miles ahead of even a low-mid 5.0 player.

just the serve alone would be hard for a 5.0 to break. a former atp guy's timing is that much better than us rec folks because they've hit 1000x as many balls in competition (and they are accustomed to fast speeds)

kinda like a former pro baseball player... he could get fat and out of shape but he's gonna read pitch near his strike zone and hit a homer.
 
bwongman

bwongman

Rookie
Really depends. First of all, I wouldn't use baseball as an example since it isn't the most athletically challenging sport. I'm sure a former pro could hit pitches thrown in the strike zone, but I don't think he would have as much power and the homers would be a lot fewer and further between. It's not easy hitting 90 mph fastballs when your reflexes and timing aren't on point.

Second is that a gain of 50 lbs alone can really mess up your game. Your endurance would be worse and you would be slower to get to shots. This would cause a lot more errors. Also, if you haven't hit a serve in 10 years you aren't just going to walk up to the line and start hitting 120 mph serves. We are not talking about Roger Federer here ... we are talking about some guy ranked outside the top 1000.
 
Blade0324

Blade0324

Hall of Fame
Here is the link to the USTA rules on this. Basically any player with a world ranking outside the top 400 more than 5 years ago can only play 6.0 under age 35.
Age 36-45 they can be 5.5.
Age 46-55 they can be 5.0.
Age 56 and over they could be 4.5.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/ustaassets/assets/1/15/10013_experience_player_ntrp_guidelines.pdf

I have a couple of friends that were both ranked about 400 in the world and are 49 and 51 years old respectively and tried to play 5.0 and both were DQ'd.
 
J

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
Blade0324 said:
Here is the link to the USTA rules on this. Basically any player with a world ranking outside the top 400 more than 5 years ago can only play 6.0 under age 35.
Click to expand...
No. A player with a ranking >400 more than 5 years ago under age 35 can only self-rate at 6.0. Anyone who self-rates can appeal the rating, and if the appeal is granted by the sectional appeals committee, they can play wherever they are approved to play by the committee. I don't specifically know whether that procedure was followed properly in this case, but OP does mention that self-rating grievances against the player were denied, which is a pretty strong indicator that the proper procedures were followed since a grievance where a person self-rates THREE levels too low without an appeal should not be denied.

As someone else said and I agree, there's more to this story that we're not getting because OP's perspective is not unbiased.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top