rating question

Discussion in 'Adult League & Tournament Talk' started by spectraflamed, Dec 6, 2006.

  1. spectraflamed

    spectraflamed New User

    Nov 4, 2006
    I am new to this rating stuff so please bear with me. I went here to see how I fit in and assume it is the correct place. http://www.usta.com/leagues/custom.sps?iType=931&icustompageid=1655 I am torn since I do not really want to overrate myself. How do serves play into this? How does mostly playing doubles in this? I see myself anywhere from 3 to 4 but really have no clue where I fall in that. I would think in singles I am closer to a 3 but in doubles probably a 4. Can you have different ratings for singles and doubles? I can do most everything listed as 4 when playing doubles ie. lobs, volleys etc... but in singles I am not nearly as good. Also my serving is pretty bad so that in reality could kill my rating all the way down to who knows what a 2. I am considering entering my first tournament and I am totally confused on what to state as my rating. I do not care if I am a 1 or a 7 I just want an honest rating. Sorry about the long post
  2. Jack the Hack

    Jack the Hack Hall of Fame

    Jan 18, 2005
    From what I've read, the average club tennis player in the US that plays 2-3 times per week and has been playing for 5+ years is usually about 3.5. So there is your middle of the spectrum, average rating to judge yourself against.

    How long have you played tennis?

    How did you learn?

    What is your competitive background?

    What are your goals (ie, tournament play, league play, or pure recreational play)?

    If you are very inexperienced, I think you should probably self rate at 3.0 and play tournaments at that level. I don't think there are many NTRP tournaments that have draws lower than 3.0, so that is the entry point for most beginning tournament players. If your goal is to play USTA league and there is a 2.5 level team in your area, you might want to self rate there. You can always play up (2.5 playing in 3.0 tournaments), but you can not play down a classification level.

    If 3.0 tournaments turn out to be too easy for you, generally there are many very good and experienced players in 3.5 tournaments - and as I said, you can always play up a classification. The guys that win at the 3.5 level are usually young dudes on the way up or older folks that used to play at a higher level but have lost speed and strength (but still know how to put points together and win). In both 3.0 and 3.5 tournaments, you will run into a lot of hackers and pushers, which are guys that have very unconventional looking strokes and just get the ball back in play. A lot of players at this level that have been developing classic strokes will lose to these type of players and want to commit suicide, but if you stick with it long enough, commit to your game, and learn how to put points together, you will eventually raise your level to 4.0+.

    4.0 tournament players usually have good overall strokes and have something of a weapon (like a good forehand or serve), but also still have a weak point in their game that can be exploited with enough consistancy or pace. There are hackers and pushers at this level, but they generally have more conventional strokes and really know how to strategize. The same could be said for 4.5 level, except those players generally hit a little harder, make less errors, and have a more polished overall game. Most 4.5 players have a high school or college (JC or small college, or fringe major college years ago) background and have played competitively for many years. 5.0+ guys are usually big hitters in the 19-50 age range that pound the ball and look like a professional to the average person.
  3. spectraflamed

    spectraflamed New User

    Nov 4, 2006
    I guess I will say I am a 3.0 however I would not be suprised if I could beat some 3.5/4.0 people. I guess the reason I see myself as about a 3.0 single player is because I do not play a lot of singles. I see myself as maybe a 4.0 doubles player because that is what I play a lot and usually am the best or one of the best ones out there. It appears as long as I have no official rank I am best off playing at the lowest rank as possible at least to start.
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2006
  4. Geezer Guy

    Geezer Guy Hall of Fame

    Feb 17, 2005
    Big Canoe, GA
    Based on your replies to Jack, I think 3.0 is a good place for you to start. You may get bumped up to 3.5 in a year or so. If you have a LOT of success at 3.0 play right off the bat (which I doubt) you can always play up to 3.5.

    No offense, but I don't think you'll be beating any "true" 4.0's after just 14 months of play. I could be wrong though. It depends a lot on your dedication and drive.

    Good luck, and don't be discouraged if it takes you awhile to settle in to the right rating. It'll come with competition.

Share This Page