Which NTRP Gap is biggest?

Which NTRP Gap is the biggest

  • 3.0 vs. 4.0

    Votes: 12 38.7%
  • 4.0 vs. 5.0

    Votes: 9 29.0%
  • 5.0 vs. 6.0

    Votes: 3 9.7%
  • 6.0 vs. 7.0

    Votes: 7 22.6%

  • Total voters
    31

tennisdad65

Hall of Fame
Which gap is the biggest?
3.0 vs. 4.0
4.0 vs. 5.0
5.0 vs. 6.0
6.0 vs. 7.0

I think 3.0 vs. 4.0 is the biggest difference in level. But it is easiest to bridge this gap ( 3.0 vs. 4.0 ). Your thoughts?
 
D

Deleted member 23235

Guest
6.0-7.0

imo, the gaps are bigger as you get better... and completely unattainable by many (eg. 5.5+)
 

mightyrick

Legend
Looking at results, I'd say they are all equal. The end results are going to be 0 or 1 (bagels and breadsticks) in all of those matches.
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
I can't imagine a match play scenario where a 3.0 can get more than 2 games per set against a 4.0. ALWAYS a bagel here.
But 6 vs 7, we see college player's lose to touring pros 3's all the time.
 

dman72

Hall of Fame
I can't imagine a match play scenario where a 3.0 can get more than 2 games per set against a 4.0. ALWAYS a bagel here.
But 6 vs 7, we see college player's lose to touring pros 3's all the time.
I agree. A 6.0 level serve is going to win games against anyone for the most part.
 

tennisdad65

Hall of Fame
I can't imagine a match play scenario where a 3.0 can get more than 2 games per set against a 4.0. ALWAYS a bagel here.
But 6 vs 7, we see college player's lose to touring pros 3's all the time.
True, especially college players with big serves can win a few service games against the pro's. So, the gap is fairly small between 6 & 7, but also it is difficult to bridge that small gap, and become a pro.
 

tennis4me

Hall of Fame
Isn't this the same as asking which one is heavier: a 1lb cotton balls or 1lb iron plate? :)

Having said that, if I have to pick one, I think I agree with nytennisaddict that the gap is largest between 6.0 and 7.0.

I've seen an NTRP-rated 6.0 player play in local open tournament. This person was ex-touring pro. Pretty much has undefeated record at the Open-level tournament. Yet, probably will get double bageled (or at least a breadstick) and be non-competitive at the current 7.0 touring level.
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
I suspect most good college players can make the top 1,500 in ATP, thus close to pro. Might take them 3 years of sustained effort after college, but most get to that level.
Of course, some of you would consider a top 1,500 player only a 6.0, and I won't argue that one.
I got to hit with a former ATP No.209 end of last year, just before playing a doubles set against him and an ATP former 1,200 player, both now around 47-52 years of age. So, 20+ years after their prime, but 40 years after my prime.
I'd do it again, they wouldn't, even though the set score was 5-7. Embarrassing for them, really fun for me and my partner, who is a big hitting, though erratic 4.0.
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
Once again, what do we consider 7.0?
Top 1,000 ATP?
Or top 100 ATP?
The former, most top singles D-1 can make it.
The latter, only the chosen few.
 

tennis4me

Hall of Fame
Once again, what do we consider 7.0?
Top 1,000 ATP?
Or top 100 ATP?
The former, most top singles D-1 can make it.
The latter, only the chosen few.
Good point/question.

USTA defined the 7.0 NTRP rating as 'current' top-400 players in the world. The same world-class players (top-400) at the age of 36-40 is 6.0.
 
Last edited:

LeeD

Bionic Poster
Thanks, T4me....
Explains how we can come close in a set against close to 50 year old ex ATP player's. They are really now closer to high 4.5, while we can get lucky and hit some 4.5 level shots.
 

tennis4me

Hall of Fame
Thanks, T4me....
Explains how we can come close in a set against close to 50 year old ex ATP player's. They are really now closer to high 4.5, while we can get lucky and hit some 4.5 level shots.
This is the USTA PDF file that outlines the rating with age-related factor. USTA has many different versions of the NTRP definitions. This one is the most detailed one, I think:

http://assets.usta.com/assets/1/USTA_Import/USTA/dps/doc_13_7372.pdf

It seems fairly accurate. They've done a good job mapping these ratings/age correlation. Of course, there's always exception.
 

BlueB

Legend
Hasn't it been said many times before, that after 5.5 NTRP becomes meaningless?

Without even ever playing a real 5.0 (where are they?) I'd say 4.0 to 5.0 is the biggest gap. You see a lot of 3.0 and 4.0 players around. Not too many 5.0 - just for that fact alone, the gap must be bigger.
 
Hasn't it been said many times before, that after 5.5 NTRP becomes meaningless?

Without even ever playing a real 5.0 (where are they?) I'd say 4.0 to 5.0 is the biggest gap. You see a lot of 3.0 and 4.0 players around. Not too many 5.0 - just for that fact alone, the gap must be bigger.
Agree. Many 4.0 can still turn into error machines, or lack variety and have clear weaknesses. It seems that at about high 4.5, the whole package starts to be well balanced. All this, according to Youtube clips. I've never played NTRP myself.
 

tennis4me

Hall of Fame
So Federer will soon be 6.0? And 1991 Connors reached USO semis as 6.0?
No, that's not what the chart says.

Connors was still a 7.0 at that moment - because he was still a "current" player and was still ranked in the top-400 at that time. That's why the word "CURRENT" is highlighted (in orange).

Same with Fed, as long as he's still a current/active ATP player and in top 400, he will still be considered a 7.0 - even if he's, say, 38yo.
 

Doubles

Legend
A difference of 3.0 to 4.0 is a matter of technique, footwork, stroke mechanics, etc. These are things that can be easy to fix, but the gap will be present.
6.0-7.0 on the other hand isn't necessarily based on strokes or footwork. Of course, that can be part of it, but here I think it's more about tennis iq, fitness, and certain aspects of the mental game that can't necessarily be taught.

It's difficult to say which is tougher however (for me anyway).
 
A difference of 3.0 to 4.0 is a matter of technique, footwork, stroke mechanics, etc. These are things that can be easy to fix, but the gap will be present.
6.0-7.0 on the other hand isn't necessarily based on strokes or footwork. Of course, that can be part of it, but here I think it's more about tennis iq, fitness, and certain aspects of the mental game that can't necessarily be taught.

It's difficult to say which is tougher however (for me anyway).
Mental part is definitely the toughest. That's what separates the best from the rest.
 

HtownTennis

New User
What are you asking? Hardest gap to bridge or biggest difference in tennis level?

If it's hardest gap to bridge, I would go with 6.0 to 7.0. There are so many journeymen pros and incredible tennis players who never make it to 7.0.

If it's biggest difference in tennis level, I would say 4.0 to 5.0. 4.0 is a level that can be achieved by just about anyone with enough practice/motivation, regardless of when they picked up tennis. 5.0 is RARELY (note I said rarely, not never) achieved by anyone who did not play competitively or receive formal training as a kid. It also, at least in singles, generally has a minimum level of athleticism required, which also limits the pool. There is such a big difference between quality of tennis and point construction from 4.0 to 5.0, that they can hardly be compared.
 

Phonco

Rookie
What are you asking? Hardest gap to bridge or biggest difference in tennis level?

If it's hardest gap to bridge, I would go with 6.0 to 7.0. There are so many journeymen pros and incredible tennis players who never make it to 7.0.

If it's biggest difference in tennis level, I would say 4.0 to 5.0. 4.0 is a level that can be achieved by just about anyone with enough practice/motivation, regardless of when they picked up tennis. 5.0 is RARELY (note I said rarely, not never) achieved by anyone who did not play competitively or receive formal training as a kid. It also, at least in singles, generally has a minimum level of athleticism required, which also limits the pool. There is such a big difference between quality of tennis and point construction from 4.0 to 5.0, that they can hardly be compared.
I agree with this statement. If you're young, and athletic, 5.0 is probably an obtainable goal. Decreasingly so if you're post-30 and trying to reach 5.0 for the first time.

In comparison, the margins of 6.0/7.0 are pretty much mentality and performing at a consistent level. Unfortunately this isn't something you can really work on or develop. Some players never figure it out while some just wake up, remove gluten from their diet and go on a rampage :)
 

GuyClinch

Legend
3 to 4. - I'd say 3.5 to 4.5 actually but since that's not an option 3.0 to 4.0. 3.0 is basically a guy who is not very good at tennis and a 4.0 is a rec player who is pretty good - so the gap is pretty huge.
 

Jay_The_Nomad

Professional
6.0-7.0

imo, the gaps are bigger as you get better... and completely unattainable by many (eg. 5.5+)
IMO the gaps are smaller as you get better.

Improvement is harder at the higher level.

Go high enough, you become limited by the quality of players you play with regular,y,
 
3 to 4. - I'd say 3.5 to 4.5 actually but since that's not an option 3.0 to 4.0. 3.0 is basically a guy who is not very good at tennis and a 4.0 is a rec player who is pretty good - so the gap is pretty huge.
Actually, 4.0 to 5.0 is the biggest gap. Typical 4.0s just think way too much of their tennis abilities. Fact is, 4.0 is still a club hack with lots of deficiences and one dimensionalities. A 5.0 is a REAL PLAYER, for g*ds sake!
 
D

Deleted member 23235

Guest
Interesting to see the diversity in what levels folks thinks are bigger gaps...

Based on what I'm seeing:
* at the lower levels, the gap between 3.0 and 4.0 or 4.0 and 5.0 is most obvious and easy to see/describe/fix/etc... (eg. glaring technical deficits), but
* at the higher levels, the gap between 6.0 and 7.0 (or even 500th vs. top 10) is so big (eg. some people never make pro, and most pros never make #1), but the gap of why is not easily discernible by us common folks (eg. not playing at that high a level), since they all seem to have to the same strokes (atp vs. wta style aside!)

On similar note, when friends and I are watching UFC fights, it's interesting to see the things that non-fighters (eg. bjj guys) make, vs. what I'm noticing and appreciating, and I'm sure high level bjj guys (eg. black belts) are noticing way more than I can even understand. The "gap" between good vs. better, might actually translate into raw talent (they may or may not have) and/or thousands of hours of the right training, etc...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

RyanRF

Professional
* at the lower levels, the gap between 3.0 and 4.0 or 4.0 and 5.0 is most obvious and easy to see/describe/fix/etc... (eg. glaring technical deficits), but
* at the higher levels, the gap between 6.0 and 7.0 (or even 500th vs. top 10) is so big (eg. some people never make pro, and most pros never make #1), but the gap of why is not easily discernible by us common folks (eg. not playing at that high a level), since they all seem to have to the same strokes (atp vs. wta style aside!)
Agreed 100%.
 

GuyClinch

Legend
Actually, 4.0 to 5.0 is the biggest gap. Typical 4.0s just think way too much of their tennis abilities. Fact is, 4.0 is still a club hack with lots of deficiences and one dimensionalities. A 5.0 is a REAL PLAYER, for g*ds sake!
This is true. But I think going from worse then most people at the club to better then most people is a huge jump. From 4.0 to 5.0 its going from better then most everyone to better then everyone who isn't getting paid to play..
 

Moveforwardalways

Hall of Fame
Actually, 4.0 to 5.0 is the biggest gap. Typical 4.0s just think way too much of their tennis abilities. Fact is, 4.0 is still a club hack with lots of deficiences and one dimensionalities. A 5.0 is a REAL PLAYER, for g*ds sake!
Wait. So you are saying that the biggest gap is because of one group's self perception? Non-sequitur much?

And from the perspective of a 6.0, a 5.0 is still a "club hack".
 

gregor.b

Professional
This is true. But I think going from worse then most people at the club to better then most people is a huge jump. From 4.0 to 5.0 its going from better then most everyone to better then everyone who isn't getting paid to play..
Or is trying to become good enough to get paid to play.
 
Top