Real 4.5 match play
- Thread starter AnyPUG
- Start date
Curious
G.O.A.T.
It looks higher than 4.5 level. Could it be because it’s a highlights video? I think I can make a highlights video of mine looking half level higher than my actual level.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
These are offensive players likely with good records at the 4.5 level. If you show only offensive highlights, aggressive baseliners with good serves look even better.
They look pretty dam# good. Hope that some of the players outside the US and those who don’t play USTA leagues in the US will stop self-rating that they are 4.5+ now that they have a sense of what real-life 4.5 players look like unlike the weak-@ss definitions of the USTA NTRP written rating definitions.
They look pretty dam# good. Hope that some of the players outside the US and those who don’t play USTA leagues in the US will stop self-rating that they are 4.5+ now that they have a sense of what real-life 4.5 players look like unlike the weak-@ss definitions of the USTA NTRP written rating definitions.
Last edited:
It looks higher than 4.5 level. Could it be because it’s a highlights video? I think I can make a highlights video of mine looking half level higher than my actual level.
They are officially rated 4.5 currently, though they have played at higher levels several years before. Good luck with making your video looking great! I'm sure you can do it - rooting for you!
Point starting at 1:00 was a 10 shot rally - that point is more than enough to evaluate the gs quality imo.
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
That's some pretty kick-*** 4.5-level play!
Kind of reminds me of the level of @timtennis or @tofast4u05 [both of whom might be 5.0 now].
Kind of reminds me of the level of @timtennis or @tofast4u05 [both of whom might be 5.0 now].
Curious
G.O.A.T.
I said I could make myself look like a half level higher player with a highlights video. Didn’t say it would look great!
Bender
G.O.A.T.
Great players but some of the things the guy with the bleached tips says irritates me "I know it's a good serve; I hit it" and that thing about McDonald's breakfasts.
I know you're meant to tell yourself things to keep your spirits up and clearly it's working for him but I just find his self-commentary to be a weird mix of machismo and excuse making.
I know you're meant to tell yourself things to keep your spirits up and clearly it's working for him but I just find his self-commentary to be a weird mix of machismo and excuse making.
sredna42
Hall of Fame
they are hamming up the banter for the video, they both mention at the end how they are friends and trash talk each other usually.
Oops, I thought you are going to bleach your hair, grow some mustache and look really cool...
Yeah, he is a showboat to some degree.
Slowtwitcher
Legend
Even more annoying to watch than UTS...
Bender
G.O.A.T.
Yeah I know but he did that in the last video he was in, if I remember correctly something about not eating whole pizzas or whatever
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
It is amazing that 4.5 players are becoming YouTube celebrities. Maybe tennis has a bright future.
MaxTennis
Professional
heninfan99
Talk Tennis Guru
We must ask poster TennisTim.
Yeah Scott looks pretty 5.0ish. His face has so much sun damage I discounted him being any good - but its clear he can really smack it. He is not a 5.5 though. Saw some guy in Atlanta who is a 5.0 player who would demolish Scott IMHO. That guy is 5.5 as that the highest they have in league.
Most likely makes a few more UE because he can't grind it out like the younger guys to get to 5.0. He's definately one of those on the 4.5-5.0 borderline....The guy is 50+ so all credit to him.
It's indoors so no one is going to grind it out on those fast courts. The older guy played D1 back in the day but I know nothing about the school. The other guy played D3 but more recently, so it hasn't been that long since he was playing 40 matches a year or whatever. I would guess based on their location they want to stay at 4.5 so they have more playing opportunities.
5.5 for the 40+ crowd are the elites.
5.5 for the 40+ crowd are the elites.
Is 5.5 in a local league equivalent of NTRP 5.5? most likely not even close. A lot of folks rated 4 or 4.5 in their local areas/leagues think they are NTRP 4/4.5, but coaches I talked to say it's usually a lot lower in terms of NTRP. (at least by 0.5 and in most cases by one full level)
Atlanta is unique due to ALTA which is a local league with some serious talent.
What does it mean? Atlanta 4.5 is NTRP 5.0 or NTRP 4.5 or NTRP 4.0?
D
Deleted member 771407
Guest
Wait so NTRP is only self rated ? You guys don't have national tournaments, or an equivalence system between local and national leagues ? Some people say I could be NTRP 3.0 from watching me hit, but from simply match results I'm something like 1.0 or 1.5. Why would anyone self-rate his level ? That's completely flawed, very few people don't overrate themselves, it's a natural human bias.
Cashman
Hall of Fame
How can you have a C rating and it not be your ‘real’ NTRP?
Surely by definition if the computer rates you a 4.5 then you are a 4.5 (barring sandbagging or any other deliberate manipulation).
If computer ratings don’t define what a ‘real’ 4.5 is, what does? Some coach’s opinion? Surely not, that’s just self-rating by another name.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
I think he is talking about non-USTA local leagues and club ratings. If you play USTA leagues, you will get a computer NTRP rating after a minimum number of matches played that is official.
But, there are many local leagues in each metropolitan area that are not sanctioned by USTA and players self-rate to play at the appropriate level in those leagues. These ratings are usually 0.5 to 1.0 over-rated above what the actual computer rating might be if that player played official USTA leagues.
For instance when a new member joins my club, the club has a coach watch him or her play against feeds or a ball machine and give them a rating that can be used by the club for matching up the player to same level opponents during club events. Since 90% or higher of members don’t play USTA leagues, this is the only rating that player will ever get. The coaches always rate players 0.5 above what their actual computer rating in an USTA league might be - this has been the case in multiple clubs I have belonged in. If you have strokes that you were taught as a junior that look good with textbook form, you might even get a coach rating that is 1.0 above your ability to win USTA league matches - this is because many players do only drills and never play matches and their serves/returns/ability to deal with variety/ability to read opponents etc. might be poor compared to groundstroke quality against a ball machine. For instance, I know many players who had a club rating of 5.0 who struggled to win 4.0 USTA matches when they actually joined the club’s USTA league team especially in singles.
Then, there are many local leagues within our county for women (PacSun, Hill and Canyon) on weekdays where many members play - the club fields something like 15 teams in these leagues while the club fields less than 3 or 4 USTA league teams at any given time. So, all these members might play at that internal coach-assigned rating in these local leagues for years and years with no idea that they are playing at least one or two levels above where they should play in an USTA league.
Last edited:
Cashman
Hall of Fame
Wow, as a non-American I had no idea - from reading this forum it seemed like USTA was the main form of competitive tennis in the US.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
I think my club has somewhere between 1,500 to 2,000 members and probably about half are male. There are only three (3.5, 4.0 and 4.5+) men’s teams in a given USTA season and about 15 members on each team. I think the women don‘t even have a 4.5 team and there might be one or two mixed doubles teams. So, it is likely less than 100 players who play on any of the USTA teams. In contrast, there are about 15 ladies teams in local weekday county leagues at any given time and at least 25% of the female members might be playing on one of those teams. Unfortunately, there are no local non-USTA league teams for men at my club.
I would say a full 30-40% of the men do only group drills and the club organizes many of them at all times of the day and evenings. Another third might play only social doubles in club-sanctioned events. Less than a third of the men play singles matches, organize their own doubles with their tennis buddies or play on USTA league teams. Most courts are usually booked for club-organized events or for junior academy training as there are a lot of kids going through systematic training programs all year long spending a minimum of 4-5 hours after school every day at the club. At my last club which was smaller, there were no USTA league teams for either men or women (except for a brief 2-year period when I captained a team) and members played in mostly internal club-sanctioned doubles and singles.
At a public park, most players just play with their friends and don’t play USTA leagues in most cases either as there are only a few USTA teams that play out of public parks at each level in the California county where I live which by the way is a tennis hotbed for developing US college and pro players.
The most serious tennis-obsessed players are the ones who play in USTA leagues and you might get more of them on a tennis forum like this. It is also possible that USTA tennis is more popular in other regions of the country. This is the reason I would trust that a poster is accurate in judging their level only if they say they have a USTA computer rating. Here in California, I would guess that a high percentage of 4.5+ computer-rated players either played for their high school or college teams (most were better when they were younger and rating is down from their peak) and there are very few self-taught players who learned tennis as adults at those levels.
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
No, NTRP is computer-generated and controlled by the USTA. I think the "local league NTRP" was a reference to people estimating their NTRP based on comparison with players who do have an NTRP.
The reason people [mainly guys] don't overrate but actually underrate themselves is that they can sandbag and stomp all over the competition and feel good about themselves.
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
I think 4.5 arguably describes the widest swath of the ntrp ability level scale.
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
The smaller the sample size, the more variable the results, typically. So I'd expect to see bigger variations at 1.5 and 5.5.
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
Maybe in theory, but 1.5 and 5.5 don’t exist, at least in my part of the country.
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
Then take the lowest and the highest, whatever they may be. 1.5 and 5.5 were just examples. My point was that smaller sample sizes typically have more variability.
Definitely not, though surprised by Mark leading at the end of "today's episode" - probably the first set went into a TB.
Daniel Andrade
Hall of Fame
It does for me.
They still look good, but before I thought they were playing much better.
I think I could compete with them
and lose 6-1 6-1
I think 5.0 is the widest swath - because there is nothing higher in most leagues. That means you see some 5.5 guys lumped in with guys that can still beat all the 4.5s and those legit 5.0s get crushed. Saw one dude whose forehand was a legit weapon like your average pro but in a rec league. Occasionally some guys that had an ATP point might slum in those leagues as well.
Did anyone notice? The match started at 9:28 and finished at 10:40 - very quick match, not even 75 minutes. A pushers game would have lasted double that - Ian and GSG will probably battle it out for much longer. (unless one player manages to bagel and breadstick)
Last edited:
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
Can you edit out the score? Otherwise the ending is spoiled.
Last edited:
Similar threads
