What rating do you think this player is?

[TimeToPlaySets]

Rate the tiny far player, based on what you see.
What do you assume his rating to be?
Feel free to support your guess.

Answer will be revealed on 7/14

 

[Papa Mango]

Rate the tiny far player, based on what you see.
What do you assume his rating to be?
Feel free to support your guess.

Answer will be revealed on 7/14

You called me tiny.. now it's getting personal!

 

[LeeD]

I know, I know... can I raise my hand?
I"ve only been playing with both of them for the past 5 years.
I'm the lowest 4.0 possible.
Dude in black is better.
Dude across the net is even better, and if he played more than once a week, might be close to 4.5.

 

[tennis tom]

Is that James Blake?

 

[Moveforwardalways]

Looks like Sam Querry.

 

[Carefree]

Well, people here on this board play with both of them, in rated leagues, I assume. If the league he is in rates him as 4.0, then he is 4.0, IMO.

Based solely on this video, I have to say that his consistency wasn't that good. But, this is only hitting around, and it really only tells us how good they are at co-op hitting.

I know lots of guys who are good at co-op hitting (myself included) who are terrible at winning points (myself included). I also know some guys who can't keep a co-op rally going, but beat me (or really frustrate me) because they can win points. They don't let me get in to a CC consistency battle which I'll win. This is true all over, hence the number of "I'm better than that guy but I lost...." threads here.

I believe that ratings in the US are based on competitive play, is that not true? So, it would be difficult to ascertain someone's rating without seeing them serve, return, etc (not everyone's shots are all at the same level) or see them play points.

 

[ptuanminh]

Guy across the net doesnot seem to be hitting seriously. need a better video

 

[RyanRF]

Dude in black is better.
Dude across the net is even better, and if he played more than once a week, might be close to 4.5.

.....And yet the video shows the guy on the far side missing more shots and losing most points.

I think any player can be made to look .5 higher or lower simply by selective editing.

 

[RyanRF]

And my $0.02:

- Groundstrokes are too solid on both sides to be a 3.5
- Movement/speed is slower than what I'd expect for a 4.5
- Could be anywhere from weak 4.0 to weak 4.5
- This video is just clips from casual hitting. Can't really say without seeing unedited match video that shows frequency of errors/faults, quality of 1st and 2nd serve, etc.

**EDIT**
Comments are for player in black. Far side player appears slightly weaker in all categories.

 

[OrangePower]

We are collectively pretty awful at rating players based on video.
A while back a friend of mine posted one of his matches. Collective wisdom pegged him as a strong 3.5 / weak 4.0. Meanwhile in actuality he is a good 4.5 who has around 80% winning percentage in league (singles), playing in a reasonably strong tennis area.

 

[LeeD]

.....And yet the video shows the guy on the far side missing more shots and losing most points.

I think any player can be made to look .5 higher or lower simply by selective editing.

Did you forget, dude in white worked a full day, deals with 2 kids and possibly a wife, then comes out to hit with Shroud who works out of his house and is single. Read the whole story, before deciding. You have no idea how good far side dude is, based on that video. And of course, a video doesn't always show the player on his best, or even interested day.
You can look at my video against Matt Lin and surmise I"m a 3.0 level player. Yet a couple months later, i played Volynets to a tiebreak, who went 10-4 in USTA League 4.5 singles the previous year.

 

[SGM1980]

ETA whoops, rated the other player. No time to go back and re-watch!

I thought the near player was a 4.0. Far player isn't as good.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

This is my description of a 3.0

• He does not move back for deep balls.
• Almost all his strokes land short (in service box)
• Weak backhand (unforced errors on basic rally balls)
• Slow reaction and foot speed
• No approach shot body turning. Runs straight at the ball.
• No early turn. Just watches the ball.
• Lets ball drop too low before hitting.
• Racket not out in front waiting for volley

Does that seem fair?

Now look at the video again
Let me know if even one comment is incorrect.

:03
1:17
He does not move back for deep balls.

:10
:22
:47
1:07
2:08
2:48
Basic FH (unattacked FH) lands in service box.
Almost all his strokes land short.
Hitting deep is simply not in his wheelhouse.
Hitting deep is a must for 4.0 play.

:18
1:17 (even on a feed)
Can't hit a backhand

:28
BH lands in service box.

:32
1:01
Slow reaction and foot speed

:32
1:34
Runs straight at the ball.
No approach shot turning.

:41
Slow recovery ?

:50
Does not have a defensive shot.
Lands in service box.

1:21
No early turn.
Just watches the ball.

1:21
Can't hit a low ball

1:30
Can't even hit a short ball deep.
Lets it drop too low.
Not turned

1:57
Look how slow he is.
Being so late, he makes the shot much harder than it was.
Lets it drop too low.

2:11
Weak reply

2:41
Crap footwork (Did this guy just run a marathon before hitting with you?)
Lets it drop too low.
Being so late, he makes the shot much harder than it was.

2:59
Racket not out in front waiting for volley

 

[RyanRF]

Did you forget, dude in white worked a full day, deals with 2 kids and possibly a wife, then comes out to hit with Shroud who works out of his house and is single. Read the whole story, before deciding.

Lol what?

The OP says "Rate the tiny far player, based on what you see."

My apologies. Next time I'll hire a P.I. to follow the guy around for a few days before commenting on a 'guess the rating' video.

 

[willeric]

This is my description of a 3.0

• He does not move back for deep balls.
• Almost all his strokes land short (in service box)
• Weak backhand (unforced errors on basic rally balls)
• Slow reaction and foot speed
• No approach shot body turning. Runs straight at the ball.
• No early turn. Just watches the ball.
• Lets ball drop too low before hitting.
• Racket not out in front waiting for volley

No, this is all wrong. 3.0 is a rating based on winning and losing to other USTA players. It's not a technique critique.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

No, this is all wrong. 3.0 is a rating based on winning and losing to other USTA players. It's not a technique critique.

"Correlation"

 

[OrangePower]

This is my description of a 3.0...
Does that seem fair?
Now look at the video again
Let me know if even one comment is incorrect.

Oh, spot on. You can totally rate a player by picking out shots where they have not lived up to your expectations.
For example, in the following video, dude overruns and then totally flubs an easy FH put away and is thus clearly a 3.0...

 

[LeeD]

The OP says "Rate the tiny far player, based on what you see."

My apologies. Next time I'll hire a P.I. to follow the guy around for a few days before commenting on a 'guess the rating' video.[/QUOTE]

Oh, spot on. You can totally rate a player by picking out shots where they have not lived up to your expectations.
For example, in the following video, dude overruns and then totally flubs an easy FH put away and is thus clearly a 3.0...

Precious..

 

[wings56]

Very slow and clunky mover. Poor backhand. No feel for how to handle a short ball. 3.5

 

[Papa Mango]

Did you forget, dude in white worked a full day, deals with 2 kids and possibly a wife, then comes out to hit with Shroud who works out of his house and is single. Read the whole story, before deciding. You have no idea how good far side dude is, based on that video. And of course, a video doesn't always show the player on his best, or even interested day.
You can look at my video against Matt Lin and surmise I"m a 3.0 level player. Yet a couple months later, i played Volynets to a tiebreak, who went 10-4 in USTA League 4.5 singles the previous year.

Thanks @LeeD .. Lately I have been thinking about quitting work/family and living at SPP to get to the elite 4.5 level of USTA tennis

 

[tennis tom]

4.5 , since that was the highest choice the poll provided--he's a very good player.

 

[Turbo-87]

Did you forget, dude in white worked a full day, deals with 2 kids and possibly a wife, then comes out to hit with Shroud who works out of his house and is single. Read the whole story, before deciding. You have no idea how good far side dude is, based on that video. And of course, a video doesn't always show the player on his best, or even interested day.
You can look at my video against Matt Lin and surmise I"m a 3.0 level player. Yet a couple months later, i played Volynets to a tiebreak, who went 10-4 in USTA League 4.5 singles the previous year.

How would anyone here know any of the back story on this guy?

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

Oh, spot on. You can totally rate a player by picking out shots where they have not lived up to your expectations.
For example, in the following video, dude overruns and then totally flubs an easy FH put away and is thus clearly a 3.0...

TT is the best place to miss the forest for the trees.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

4.5 , since that was the highest choice the poll provided--he's a very good player.

You must be blind then.

 

[Carefree]

When I think about the disparity between strokes and ratings, I think about this video:

If we were to watch close-ups of "shirtless guy's" (SG) strokes when just hitting, not playing a match, what would we rate him at? He's strolling between shots. Unit turn? Split step? rotation? Non-existent.

But, I know, this guy would drive me mental in a match. I don't think he'd beat me, but he would definitely let me beat myself. Implode actually. Over and over. Look how hard his opponent is working. You could probably argue that he needed to throw in some short angle slice to get SG moving forwards and backwards too. But, not everyone has that in their locker, it's difficult (especially for me who's only learned how to hit semi-western topspin forehands and 2HBH). Same with the serve and volley. How many 4.0 players have those shots on lock down?

One of the more insightful things that I've seen on these boards is that "Pushers are the gate-keepers to advanced tennis".

Now, I'm not in any way suggesting that "tiny guy" (is that what we're calling him?) is a pusher. But, it's an example of not being able to really judge a player's rating by what they look like in a casual hit around.

 

[OrangePower]

TT is the best place to miss the forest for the trees.

Precisely. Which is exactly why you can only rate someone based on their results.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

I love at 3:45 when Chris Farley gets mad at himself.

Shirtless guy has good early racket prep.
Blue guy is playing dumb tennis, and constantly hits to his FH (or directly to him)

 

[TennisDawg]

Not sure, he's hard to see. But, I'm sure the guy in dark sweats is Brad Gilbert.

 

[tennis tom]

You must be blind then.

Yes, I'm blind, but I have a braille monitor and slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

 

[Carefree]

I love at 3:45 when Chris Farley gets mad at himself.

Shirtless guy has good early racket prep.
Blue guy is playing dumb tennis, and constantly hits to his FH (or directly to him)

Think so?

It looks like his racquet comes back after the ball bounces a lot. I don't really see it as good early racquet prep. Agree to disagree on that.

 

[wings56]

when do we get to find out the answer?

 

[kevrol]

when do we get to find out the answer?

+1

 

[Deleted member 23235]

How would anyone here know any of the back story on this guy?

you don't have the app for that?
you can scan the "little guy" in the background, like a QR code, it instantly gives you the person's relevant tennis back story.
it's a bit buggy though, crashes with "not enough space" when i scan suresh's gif.

 

[Deleted member 23235]

Yes, I'm blind, but I have a braille monitor and slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

lol, no one ever gets the holiday inn joke, when in use it

 

[Deleted member 23235]

I know, I know... can I raise my hand?
I"ve only been playing with both of them for the past 5 years.
I'm the lowest 4.0 possible.
Dude in black is better.
Dude across the net is even better, and if he played more than once a week, might be close to 4.5.

interesting.
i'd have guessed that near side was better... seemed to be dominating with fh
far side didn't look like he was trying (injured? timing off? style match - eg. black fh is heavy?) - definitely has strokes, but just didn't have them refined.
just goes to show you can't tell a person's level, from someone just hitting.

i lost a (doubles) match recently to a guy with a decent efh, dink 2nd serve, only a lob bh,... turns out he was a 5.0 last year, amazing touch.. we started exclusively hitting to the "player with good looking strokes" (who was also a teaching pro), hoping that he'd overhit.

 

[Morch Us]

That guy comes in TV once in a while named "Rafael Nadal" should be a 3.0

Almost all his strokes land short (in service box)

 

[Papa Mango]

+1

+2.... I am on my toes here..... hehehehe

 

[tennisBIEST]

Just based off there non existent footwork I'm grading them both a 3.5. Maybe low low 4.0 in dubs

 

[tennis tom]

Answer will be revealed on 7/14

Has the answer been revealed? I don't think I can go on living without knowing the USTA truth.

 

[g4driver]

The key to this video is the very weak guy in white giving the no-pace in the service box feeds. Anyone could look great with those weak feeds.

The guy closest to the camera gets crushed badly at 4.0 Southern singles.

This guy in white across the net is feeding no pace slice balls to the guy in black. So the guy in white is either a 3.0 or extremely weak 3.5 based on his pushing the ball back with 80% of the balls he hits landing inside the service box.

The guy in black has a forehand, but he's look better in this video than he is in reality due to the weak opponent in white.

His backhand is descent on the no pace short feeds from the guy in white, but that backhand gets picked apart by a player who can hit off both wings with pace past the service line unlike the guy in white feeding those soft layups to him.

The guy in black is 3.5 at best in Charleston SC or is a 4.0 who needs to bumped down. He wouldn't get any playing time at 4.0 on the teams I am on, unless we needed him to save a default.

 

[NLBwell]

Guy in white has nice form on topspin rally forehand. Backhand is just OK on form, but simple and not a big problem. Able to hit slice forehands and backhands, so some variety possible. Not much info on volleys. No serves, so no idea on the most important stroke. He can't hit the ball in the strings at the start, but improves on that a lot toward the end of the video, so I assume he wouldn't have much of a problem with that if he was really trying. Seems like he'd be a solid consistent player. My guess is mid to high 4.0, but really too little information to make an educated guess.

 

[wings56]

So much for a reveal on the 14th as promised

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

Both players play at 4.0
I rated the far player as 3.25
Far player is 4.0 playoff or something.

 

[tennis tom]

Both players play at 4.0
I rated the far player as 3.25
Far player is 4.0 playoff or something.

4.5 , since that was the highest choice the poll provided--he's a very good player.

You must be blind then.

So, if he's rated at 4.0 and playing in playoffs, he's really a sandbagging 4.5 ! Victory is SWEET--not bragging mind you, as I'm the most humble person I know . My rating was based upon the few snippets of technique which showed his potential--how you do something is how you do everything. He probably has a good serve too. That was fun keep 'em coming--I always wanted to be a USTA rater, too bad they did away with that. If you ever want to know your rating, have a session with your pro, they've seen so much tennis they can tell in three minutes--at the club/rec/league level, it mostly comes down to 3.5/4.0, because that is the mean average and that is where the majority of players are. The 3.0's are too busy shopping at Safeway, picking up the veggie platter for the after match social and the 4.5's+ are practicing (what's that???), teaching pros or selling stocks or advertising.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

The 3.0's are too busy shopping at Safeway, picking up the veggie platter for the after match social
and the 4.5's+ are practicing (what's that???),

LOL, so true

 

[fundrazer]

LOL, so true

Funny cause I was busy hitting approach shots + actually hitting a follow up volley today. I even serve volleyed on one point, got a nice low volley to his backhand corner, and crushed his lob with an overhead. And I was hitting forehands down the line, one of my favorite shots. Hit some good backhands too. But the volleys... I try to practice those a bit, so that when the time comes in an actual match or practice set I won't screw it up as much.

All this with a sore hip that I think came from an awkward sleeping position. I dunno.

Tbh I think instead of the money you're spending on lessons, go on a talktennis world tour challenging players to matches. It will be fun. and I'll even volunteer for it (~3.5/4.0)

And our made up word if the day is shroudenfreude

 

[wings56]

Both players play at 4.0
I rated the far player as 3.25
Far player is 4.0 playoff or something.

Link to this guys results?

 

[tennis tom]

All this with a sore hip that I think came from an awkward sleeping position. I dunno.

You CAN'T hurt your hip sleeping in bed! Read a book by Dr. John Sarno, M.D., "HEALING BACK PAIN".

His KNOWLEDGE PENICILLIN will relieve the majority of your tennis injuries for life :

https://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&k...vtargid=kwd-4427364643&ref=pd_sl_1fm4yhymks_b​

 

[time_fly]

Both players play at 4.0
I rated the far player as 3.25
Far player is 4.0 playoff or something.

I'm not surprised. If this is the best tennis the guy on the far side ever played or if his serve and net game were terrible (not shown) then he could be a 3.5, but it looks like both guys are hitting pretty casually so I discounted some of the lazy footwork and mishits. Aside from that, he has smooth and consistent swings, decent preparation, uses his front hand well on the forehand, and hits both topspin and slice off both wings. My bet in the poll was 4.0.

 

[g4driver]

I'm not surprised. If this is the best tennis the guy on the far side ever played or if his serve and net game were terrible (not shown) then he could be a 3.5, but it looks like both guys are hitting pretty casually so I discounted some of the lazy footwork and mishits. Aside from that, he has smooth and consistent swings, decent preparation, uses his front hand well on the forehand, and hits both topspin and slice off both wings. My bet in the poll was 4.0.

A 3.5 could hit smoothly off those weak short feeds the guy in white is putting up for the near side guy to T up.

A descent 4.0 would put more than 70% of the balls past the service line. The guy in white put what maybe 20-25% past the service line. How is that 4.0 anywhere ? [emoji102] How is that is even 3.5 ?