What is a good winning % to aim for in rec tennis singles and doubles?

[socallefty]

Obviously in rec tennis, you don’t play players only at the same level unlike the pros or college players. So, your winning % in singles and doubles is often heavily influenced by the mix of stronger, same level and weaker opponents you choose to play. What would you consider a good winning % in singles and in doubles for all your rec matches if you play both formats?

If you play USTA league or tournament tennis at a particular NTRP rating level, what would you consider a good winning % for singles and doubles at that level? Here you are playing only same-level opponents most of the time.

 

[GrassCourtFan]

I'd guess 50% is a good amount to aim for. More than that, and you should just play up more, less and you should play down more.

 

[travlerajm]

Given that the usta system is based on level bands, your winning % heavily depends on where you fit on the level scale.

If you’re near, the top edge of your level band, winning 90% of your matches might be a realistic goal.

Conversely, if you’re near the bottom of your band, you might need to aim lower and learn to enjoy a 20% win rate.

 

[Cashman]

Looking for some tips on how to sandbag eh

 

[Daniel Andrade]

55% ?

 

[TennisOTM]

I'd say a good aim would be for self improvement. Whatever win % you had at your level this year, aim to beat it the next year.

 

[sovertennis]

In league play (back when I played 4.5 leagues) I tried for a 60% win rate. Outside of league play, where the pool of players is small (4-6). familiar, and of disparate level, I try to always beat the guys I'm better than (ie those I beat regularly) and stay close (and perhaps steal a set occasionally) from those who are better than me.

 

[jimmy8]

You got to lose some when you sandbag so aim for 80%

 

[silverwyvern4]

60 percent at your level, 35 percent when playing up a level

 

[ChaelAZ]

I'd rather be 50/50 w/l but will take and enjoy good losses over dominating wins.

 

[cks]

If you play USTA league or tournament tennis at a particular NTRP rating level, what would you consider a good winning % for singles and doubles at that level? Here you are playing only same-level opponents most of the time.

I would love to hit 50% win rate during USTA league. If my dynamic NTRP sat near the high end of the 3.5 band, then I would expect a higher win rate.

 

[forzamr_b]

I’ve been tracking my performance the past 1.5 years and I’m currently at an overall of 37-38% and trending upwards. My target for now is 50%. I don’t play USTA but self rate my opponents on the NRTP scale. 3.0 and 3.5 win rate is 75%, 4.0 25%, 4.5 20%. I only play singles.

 

[Pass750]

I’ve been tracking my performance the past 1.5 years and I’m currently at an overall of 37-38% and trending upwards. My target for now is 50%. I don’t play USTA but self rate my opponents on the NRTP scale. 3.0 and 3.5 win rate is 75%, 4.0 25%, 4.5 20%. I only play singles.

If you can only beat 3.0 and 3.5 75% of time, there is a zero % chance of you beating a 4.5 and if that 75% includes losses to 3.0, only a slightly better than zero chance of you beating legit 4.0

 

[travlerajm]

If you can only beat 3.0 and 3.5 75% of time, there is a zero % chance of you beating a 4.5 and if that 75% includes losses to 3.0, only a slightly better than zero chance of you beating legit 4.0

He said he self rates his opponents. That doesn’t mean his scale lines up with the usta one.

 

[Pass750]

He said he self rates his opponents. That doesn’t mean his scale lines up with the usta one.

Quite clearly it doesnt !

 

[forzamr_b]

He said he self rates his opponents. That doesn’t mean his scale lines up with the usta one.

Exactly.

Quite clearly it doesnt !

Probably, but I would contend that my self rating reflects the probability of winning closer to USTA than you suggest it does not. Your assessment assumes my playing level has remained unchanged and that the stats are obtained from large sample sizes, neither of which are true. My 3.0 stat is 1 lost of 4 matches. Likewise, 4.5 stat is 1 win of 5. I primarily played 3.0 self rated opponents when I was returning to tennis after 20 years and lost that one game from unforced errors and lack of strategy. At that time, I self rated myself as 3.5. I have since become more consistent and “match ready”. I’m very sure I will not lose to a 3.0 now even on a super off day. Similarly, my 4.5 win was a short set that was played more recently and I did not deserve to win. Opponent committed a ton of unforced errors. Had we played more than 1 short set, I’m sure he would have found his groove and beat me. Currently, I self rate as a low 4.0 and I also play most of my matches with opponents I self rate as 4.0 and I think my current win percentage is a fair reflection of that.

 

[jimmy8]

Exactly.

Probably, but I would contend that my self rating reflects the probability of winning closer to USTA than you suggest it does not. Your assessment assumes my playing level has remained unchanged and that the stats are obtained from large sample sizes, neither of which are true. My 3.0 stat is 1 lost of 4 matches. Likewise, 4.5 stat is 1 win of 5. I primarily played 3.0 self rated opponents when I was returning to tennis after 20 years and lost that one game from unforced errors and lack of strategy. At that time, I self rated myself as 3.5. I have since become more consistent and “match ready”. I’m very sure I will not lose to a 3.0 now even on a super off day. Similarly, my 4.5 win was a short set that was played more recently and I did not deserve to win. Opponent committed a ton of unforced errors. Had we played more than 1 short set, I’m sure he would have found his groove and beat me. Currently, I self rate as a low 4.0 and I also play most of my matches with opponents I self rate as 4.0 and I think my current win percentage is a fair reflection of that.

I can beat higher levels in short sets too. I don't go around claiming I beat them without mentioning the short set. You made a mistake there. It's nice that you explained further later, but it's a problem that it came later.

My record against 3.0 is undefeated. My record against 4.0 is about 1%. My record against 4.5 is 0%.

And you can't count wins against 4.0 where you won a third set 10 point tiebreaker.

 

[ChrisJR3264]

60% or higher

 

[socallefty]

My experience is that unless you have played many years of USTA leagues and had a computer rating for 3-4 years, you will consistently over-rate opponents and yourself when self-rating particularly in singles. Many players who think they are at one self-rated level struggle to win singles for at least a year against experienced USTA singles players who are two levels below. The USTA computer ratings are very different from the average player’s perception when they self-rate.

 

[forzamr_b]

My experience is that unless you have played many years of USTA leagues and had a computer rating for 3-4 years, you will consistently over-rate opponents and yourself when self-rating particularly in singles. Many players who think they are at one self-rated level struggle to win singles for at least a year against experienced USTA singles players who are two levels below. The USTA computer ratings are very different from the average player’s perception when they self-rate.

Yes, agree. Appreciate if you could help me calibrate. How would you rate would myself and my opponents?

I'm in white shorts

I'm in black shorts

 

[Chanwan]

Yes, agree. Appreciate if you could help me calibrate. How would you rate would myself and my opponents?

I'm in white shorts

I'm in black shorts

How does this swing vision work? That's a nice feature

 

[forzamr_b]

How does this swing vision work? That's a nice feature

It’s a tennis app on iOS. You can either use an iOS device to record the match or import video footage. If you have an Apple Watch you can do score tracking and in return your get the scoreboard overlay with no editing on your part.

There’s a whole thread on it on this forum.

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/swing-vision-ai-line-calls-and-analysis.653818/

 

[Chanwan]

It’s a tennis app on iOS. You can either use an iOS device to record the match or import video footage. If you have an Apple Watch you can do score tracking and in return your get the scoreboard overlay with no editing on your part.

There’s a whole thread on it on this forum.

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/swing-vision-ai-line-calls-and-analysis.653818/

Cheers, have got zero Apple devices

 

[jimmy8]

Yes, agree. Appreciate if you could help me calibrate. How would you rate would myself and my opponents?

I'm in white shorts

I'm in black shorts

3.5

 

[Dartagnan64]

100% in singles. If you keep reaching your mark, you'll be Wimbledon champ in no time.
50% in doubles because you can't fix your partner.

 

[CosmosMpower]

70% if you want to continue improving and getting bumped. 90% if you want to be recruited by everyone as a sandbagger.

I usually hover between 65 to 75%. I’m a at 74% this year combined 4.0, 4.5 and 8.5 combo doubles as a 4.0c expecting to get bumped up to 4.5. Mid utr 7.

My best 4.0 teammate is at 85% mixed 4.0 and 4.5. Everyone is constantly trying to recruit him. High utr 7 and bagels and breadsticks most his 4.0 opponents and very competitive with mid 4.5 players

 

[CosmosMpower]

Yes, agree. Appreciate if you could help me calibrate. How would you rate would myself and my opponents?

I'm in white shorts

I'm in black shorts

Mid 3.5

 

[loveallcats]

A coach told me to aim for winning 2/3 of your matches which seems like a good place to be.

 

[TennisOTM]

A coach told me to aim for winning 2/3 of your matches which seems like a good place to be.

This seems like strange advice, unless you are somehow hand picking your opponents. If you can choose to play against better players only 1/3 of the time then maybe it's achievable. But if you just have to take your assigned opponents in leagues / tournaments at a given level, there's no way the target should be one size fits all. You are at the mercy of where you happen to fall between the arbitrary level boundaries. For some a target of winning 2/3 would be shooting way too high (at least in the short term), while for others winning only 2/3 would be a failure.

 

[Dartagnan64]

A coach told me to aim for winning 2/3 of your matches which seems like a good place to be.

If you are not sandbagging, you should be 50% in your level appropriate matches. That being said it's not easy to find level appropriate matches since people sandbag.

 

[nyta2]

Obviously in rec tennis, you don’t play players only at the same level unlike the pros or college players. So, your winning % in singles and doubles is often heavily influenced by the mix of stronger, same level and weaker opponents you choose to play. What would you consider a good winning % in singles and in doubles for all your rec matches if you play both formats?

If you play USTA league or tournament tennis at a particular NTRP rating level, what would you consider a good winning % for singles and doubles at that level? Here you are playing only same-level opponents most of the time.

What's the QBQ (question behind the question)?
For training? #ideally 1/3 above/below/same
For determine your skill at a particular level? # 50/50
To sandbag? #100%, but win with scores like: 7-6, 0-6, 1-0 (net loss!)
To get bumped up? #100% at #1S, or #1D
To brag about? To consider it a "winning" season? # >50% at either #1S or #1D (whichever you care about)...
etc...

i have a 72% winning streak last year, but mostly dubs... so who cares... i still lose to my #1S on all my teams... and singles is more important to me.

 

[mpnv1990]

Depends on what you’re looking for. I would say 50% ideally because that means you’re being challenged at the right level.

 

[Moveforwardalways]

What is a good winning percentage in rec tennis?

Is a mile a long way?

 

[LuckyR]

Huh? Do folks try to lose so they can match what they're "aiming for"?

 

[socallefty]

I think if you are near the top of your level, 70% winning % is a good aspirational target as there should be more players worse than you than are better. If you get bumped up to a new level, then you might need to start with targets of 35%-40% and try to improve your game slowly to aspire for higher targets.

 

[Roforot]

USTA is tricky in that if you win 20 matches 6-4, 4-6, 1-0 or lose 20 matches by that score, your dynamic rating may not move too much at the end of a season.

Now, a better metric may be what % of games are you winning.

 

[socallefty]

USTA is tricky in that if you win 20 matches 6-4, 4-6, 1-0 or lose 20 matches by that score, your dynamic rating may not move too much at the end of a season.

Now, a better metric may be what % of games are you winning.

The question is more about what would make a player happy and satisfied. It is not all about improving your dynamic rating. In fact some players may not want to get bumped up above the level where their friends play.

 

[Roforot]

Oh well that is a tough question. I don't think anyone likes losing but a 100% winning rate could lead to boredom...
I would say if games won is 50-55% I'd love a 95% winrate. This would indicate a lot of close matches and I enjoy the mental aspect of winning those contests.

In 2023, I had a blast winning 65% of my matches but my games won was only 55%. I had suffered an injury setback and when I returned to the court had a few losses but also some good close wins.
I enjoyed those wins much more than a blow out.