I used to play competitively with some 3.5s and our scores were about even, though i win most of the time with scores like 6-4s. Recently, I've been winning with 6-0s and 6-1s. I want to know if I've improved or they are just playing bad. What would be the usual scores if you were 4.0 vs someone who are 3.5 or 3.0? How about 4.5 vs 4.0?
You scores vs. someone your level?
- Thread starter luckyfool
- Start date
Gee Willikers Batman!
Professional
Are you serious?
No one player plays exactly like another. Scores can not be predetermined by rankings or anything.
No one player plays exactly like another. Scores can not be predetermined by rankings or anything.
did you even read my question? ::rolls eyes::
Gee Willikers Batman!
Professional
Did you read mine?
You asked "what are the usual scores between 3.5 or 3.0 if you were a 4.0 and you also asked about 4.5, 4.0"
There are not USUAL Scores that come up. Everyones game is different and scores will be so also.
You asked "what are the usual scores between 3.5 or 3.0 if you were a 4.0 and you also asked about 4.5, 4.0"
There are not USUAL Scores that come up. Everyones game is different and scores will be so also.
Steady Eddy
Legend
If this was statistics class, we'd say that one set is too small a sample size to make inferences. Check it out with a random number generator on a computer. Play "sets" and watch how streaky it can get. Also, set it for one "player" to win 55% or even 60% of the points, and notice that sometimes it's a close set anyway. If your chance of winning each point are 65% or higher, that's when the results start to become routinely lopsided. But with equally matched players, sometimes the sets will be a blow out for one player simply through chance.
ChocolatePie
Semi-Pro
A 4.5 can bagel a 4.0 sometimes.
But Gee Willikers Batman is right. I've played against people my level, but I've lost 6-7, 6-7 at times or won 6-0, 6-0.
But Gee Willikers Batman is right. I've played against people my level, but I've lost 6-7, 6-7 at times or won 6-0, 6-0.
i'm not saying all the 3.5s and 4.0s play the same game.. lol geez
if you have a consistent tennis partner in your level who plays with you for a long period of time, you'd know what the usual scores would end up in matches. obviously this doesn't apply to you since you clearly don't know what's going on here.
Steady Eddy
Legend
Then you're clealy above the 3.5 level.
It's possible that you match-up with someone where they can't really compete with others at your level, but where they play you close, for whatever reason.
It's also possible that you've found a style or strategy that works really efficiently against people at your level, such that you start routing them.
In neither case do you get any conclusive evidence, either way.
The only way to know for sure is to play someone who wins quite a bit at his level, and beat him like a rug. As in he struggles to get points off of you because he's either going for broke or totally defensive against you. If someone has no room to breathe, can't even render a rally neutral, then you're better. If not, then you really can't say anything either way off of only a few sets.
Now, if you beat them in close matches several times, then it's clear you're better. Doesn't mean you can play at the next level, though, as your game might not scale.
Mastermind
Rookie
I'm a 4.0 player, so here's a brief synopsis of how it works for me:
against a 3.0- 6-0, 6-0
against a 3.5- generally its in the area of 6-2, 6-2 or 6-3, 6-2
against a 4.0- it can go either way, depending on how they play. I beat a S&V player 6-3, 6-2. Lost to a baseliner 2-6, 0-6 (in defense of that score, he was really tough, one of the strongest 4.0's around). I most recently split sets with the best 4.0 in our club (my biggest rival and also good friend) 4-6, 7-5 (then we had to stop).
against a 4.5- I've only ever played one 4.5 player and lost 1-6, 0-6.
against a 5.0- again, I've only ever played one 5.0 player and lost 1-6, 1-6.
It all comes down to style of play and who can exploit weaknesses best when you play against players of your own level. Can you take them out of their comfort zone before they take you out of yours.
against a 3.0- 6-0, 6-0
against a 3.5- generally its in the area of 6-2, 6-2 or 6-3, 6-2
against a 4.0- it can go either way, depending on how they play. I beat a S&V player 6-3, 6-2. Lost to a baseliner 2-6, 0-6 (in defense of that score, he was really tough, one of the strongest 4.0's around). I most recently split sets with the best 4.0 in our club (my biggest rival and also good friend) 4-6, 7-5 (then we had to stop).
against a 4.5- I've only ever played one 4.5 player and lost 1-6, 0-6.
against a 5.0- again, I've only ever played one 5.0 player and lost 1-6, 1-6.
It all comes down to style of play and who can exploit weaknesses best when you play against players of your own level. Can you take them out of their comfort zone before they take you out of yours.
very useful information, thanks.
i've also played against someone who appears to be a 4.5 or 5.0. I could not get more than 2 games off him in a set, and we've played quite a few sets. Statistically speaking, can we predict that:
you beat someone 6-0 most of the time -- you are 1.0+ level higher than him
you beat someone 6-2 most of the time -- you are 0.5 level higher than him
you lose to someone 2-6 most of the time -- you are 0.5 lower than him
you lose to someone 0-6 most of the time -- you are 1.0+ lower than him
just something i notice over the years.
Gee Willikers Batman!
Professional
If your not going to listen to reason, no use in trying to explain. Things arent always going to come out a certain way. I will beat someone 6-1 6-2 one day, and lose to the same person 3-6 0-6 the next day. It depends on alot of factors.
what is your level Gee Willikers Batman? I really like to know...
P
ProStaff Legend
Guest
they could be in the slump. my friend and i are always playing matches and we;re never both @ our best. our scores are always fluctuating, dependin on whos doing horribly. part of the year, i;ll bagel him and the other part of the year hes bageling me
Hot Sauce
Hall of Fame
please state your level
P
ProStaff Legend
Guest
we;ve both been rated 4.0s the local pro. to clarify, i dont mean we'll always bagel each other. its just that when one of us is playin in our prime, the other isnt having a good day. its always like this, we've never been both playing normally @ the same time.
In 4.0+ tennis, when you play against someone at a lower level, your game is not supposed to be sporadic like you said. for instance, you don't get bageled the next day after you beat them the day before!! it's possible but the chances are astronomically slim! you can ask any genuine 4.0+ players out there -- have they ever get beaten by a 3.0 or 3.5 consistently?
Gee Willikers Batman!
Professional
My level? I'm sorry, but Juniors don't have NTRP ratings. But honestly, if I was to be assesed, it would be around the 3.0 level. I'm not going to lie like 75% of the juniors on this board and say "yeah man I gots a 100 mph serve and a 80 mph Kick serve and im a 5.0, chyea dude."
P
ProStaff Legend
Guest
every1 has off days. i didnt say i would always bagel him and he would always bagel me
Gee Willikers Batman!
Professional
I wish I had an EDIT button x_X
By the way - by that post, don't even start bashing my skill. Being as you haven't even seen me play.
And I might not be a Pro, but I know what i'm talking about. Listen to the other posters when they say i'm right - because I am.
By the way - by that post, don't even start bashing my skill. Being as you haven't even seen me play.
And I might not be a Pro, but I know what i'm talking about. Listen to the other posters when they say i'm right - because I am.
++
I can beat players far better than myself. I can also lose to embarassingly bad players who take advantage of my weakness(es) properly. NTRP should not be taken seriously as anything other than a broad rating for the type of competition you prefer to play against.
Don't be afraid, i'm not going to eat you.
Consistency and dependable strokes aren't part of 3.0 players' game. of course your game is going to be fluctuating, especially against people at your own level. But what about people at a lower level? none you except 1, has answered my question.
Gee Willikers Batman!
Professional
Lol. See? I was being humble when I said I was a 3.0.. Lol, but whatever. Think down on me however much you want. Until you show us your game (video) you can't say anything.
Tennis_Monk
Hall of Fame
NTRP ratings are a guide line. I play 4.0+ level. I personally think i am a 4.25. I have beaten a 5.0 player once 6-3, 7-5(he probably is having a bad day and he "Chose" not to exploit my Backhand.).
I beat 3.5's fairly consistently but i dont agree with scores you put in. Most of 3.5ppl i play with are my friends. Since i knew i can win anytime, i am not going to bring my A game every time. I try new things.(eg: play more backhands, try kick serves into a particular spot, S&V etc). In that process i give some easy points which i wont do with a diff competitor.
I have beatn and lost to 4.0+ players. scores dont mean much. Eg: I am a baseliner but i do extremely well against S*V players. I easily beat this friend who is a S&V. This guy beats the crap out another baseliner against whom i dont have a stellar record.
In general ,i beat 3.5's easily and they wil probably win 1 or 2 games whole match.
I beat 3.5's fairly consistently but i dont agree with scores you put in. Most of 3.5ppl i play with are my friends. Since i knew i can win anytime, i am not going to bring my A game every time. I try new things.(eg: play more backhands, try kick serves into a particular spot, S&V etc). In that process i give some easy points which i wont do with a diff competitor.
I have beatn and lost to 4.0+ players. scores dont mean much. Eg: I am a baseliner but i do extremely well against S*V players. I easily beat this friend who is a S&V. This guy beats the crap out another baseliner against whom i dont have a stellar record.
In general ,i beat 3.5's easily and they wil probably win 1 or 2 games whole match.
D
DraGoNoFfiR3
Guest
i've bagelled 4.5's and i'm a 4.0
If you're a good 3.5 you should be competitive with 4.0's and be able to at least get a couple games off a 4.5. At the 4.0 level consistency is the most important thing so if you condition your legs especially you can have the confidence to hit shots and step in to them.
burosky
Professional
The trouble with NTRP is it is open to interpretation. Although it gives a general guideline as to what specific strokes a certain NTRP level player should be capable of executing, it still can not be used as a hard and fast means to determine one's level of play. A 4.0 in one section may rate as a 3.5 or even a 4.5 in another section. I know someone from another state who relocated to Northern California and didn't take long to get bumped because she was beating up on people at the same level and very competetive against others at the next higher level. Apparently, in her home state she was just mid-level that's why she stayed at her level. However, within her new circle of competition, she was at the high-end of her level or maybe even at the low-end of the next level.
Point I'm trying to make is NTRP is all relative. In the situation I mentioned. The player got bumped up to the next level because of the change in the skill level of her competition. Had she stayed in her home state, she probably would have stayed in her level until she had better success against her competition. Gee_Wilkers has a good point. There are several factors that need to be considered. Scores are not always a solid indicator of one's progress. For that matter neither does one's NTRP rating.
By the way, why is someone's rating so important in this discussion? One could be a lower level NTRP player but with high tennis IQ or has lots of tennis knowledge and for one reason or another (could be medical) is at that lower level. Conversely, one could be a gifted pro who can't explain what he does because it all just come naturally to him.
Point I'm trying to make is NTRP is all relative. In the situation I mentioned. The player got bumped up to the next level because of the change in the skill level of her competition. Had she stayed in her home state, she probably would have stayed in her level until she had better success against her competition. Gee_Wilkers has a good point. There are several factors that need to be considered. Scores are not always a solid indicator of one's progress. For that matter neither does one's NTRP rating.
By the way, why is someone's rating so important in this discussion? One could be a lower level NTRP player but with high tennis IQ or has lots of tennis knowledge and for one reason or another (could be medical) is at that lower level. Conversely, one could be a gifted pro who can't explain what he does because it all just come naturally to him.
Last edited:
Steady Eddy
Legend
I think it's because people at the recreational level have put alot of effort into their tennis and want something to show for it. Golfers get a score, they can tell people what their handicap is. This NTRP rating system is supposed to address this. But it doesn't work too well. Where I live they watch you play 4 points against another player, and then rate you both. What do they look for? Power. They don't see enough play to distinguish decent consistency from awesome constistency, but they do notice if you hit it hard. That's why where I live you'll see 3.0 easily beating 4.5s.
burosky
Professional
This is exactly what I mean by NTRP being relative. It all depends on the competetion in your own area.
burosky
Professional
Looks to me like this is just ego trip. I'd rather be rated at a lower level and viewed as playing at a higher level than being rated at a higher level and viewed as not worthy of that level. Don't get me wrong. I don't mean I prefer to sandbag. I just don't put that much emphasis on someone's NTRP level.
Last edited:
ego trip for whom?
ratings/rankings are intended as benchmarks to let you know approximately of where you stand in the crowd. Mind you, there are always oddballs out there who just dont fit into the equation. I don't know how this whole rating business got so carried away... the original intend was to ask how you'd fare against players who are not as good as you, by means of ratings (since there are not other ways to benchmark a person's ability), in matches.
ratings/rankings are intended as benchmarks to let you know approximately of where you stand in the crowd. Mind you, there are always oddballs out there who just dont fit into the equation. I don't know how this whole rating business got so carried away... the original intend was to ask how you'd fare against players who are not as good as you, by means of ratings (since there are not other ways to benchmark a person's ability), in matches.
burosky
Professional
Ego trip for whom? To those who flaunt their NTRP rating. NTRP is not a benchmark. It is a guideline. If you notice it doesn't take into account other factors that truly determine a player's skill such as consistency, shot selection, etc...
The ratings actually would not have come into play this way if you hadn't asked for the rating of other posters like Gee_Willikers. You made it appear to have a bearing on the discussion.
burosky
Professional
So much for that NTRP side discussion.
Let's just make sure we are clear about your question. Is it:
I want to know if I've improved or they are just playing bad.
Or:
What would be the usual scores if you were 4.0 vs someone who are 3.5 or 3.0? How about 4.5 vs 4.0?
If you want to know if you've improved or if they are just playing bad, only you can answer that question. Scores can really be deceptive. One can win a match even if the opponent has more total points won. One can also lose 6-0, 6-0 but if every game goes to a deuce which fortunately went the other person's way, that doesn't necessarily mean the winner blew the other player away. This is why you can't really rely on the scores.
If you want to know the "expected" scores when a higher NTRP level player goes against a lower NTRP level player, that can even be trickier. Again, the interpretation of the NTRP guideline plus the fact that each level has it's own spread makes it difficult. If you look at a match say a 4.0 vs. 3.5, it doesn't automatically mean you are comparing apples to apples. Keep in mind, a 4.0 player could be anywhere from 4.0 - 4.49 while a 3.5 player could be anywhere from 3.51 - 3.99. If the 4.0 player is really a 4.0 and the 3.5 player is actually a 3.99 player, as you can see, there isn't much of a difference. I hope this helps.
Let's just make sure we are clear about your question. Is it:
I want to know if I've improved or they are just playing bad.
Or:
What would be the usual scores if you were 4.0 vs someone who are 3.5 or 3.0? How about 4.5 vs 4.0?
If you want to know if you've improved or if they are just playing bad, only you can answer that question. Scores can really be deceptive. One can win a match even if the opponent has more total points won. One can also lose 6-0, 6-0 but if every game goes to a deuce which fortunately went the other person's way, that doesn't necessarily mean the winner blew the other player away. This is why you can't really rely on the scores.
If you want to know the "expected" scores when a higher NTRP level player goes against a lower NTRP level player, that can even be trickier. Again, the interpretation of the NTRP guideline plus the fact that each level has it's own spread makes it difficult. If you look at a match say a 4.0 vs. 3.5, it doesn't automatically mean you are comparing apples to apples. Keep in mind, a 4.0 player could be anywhere from 4.0 - 4.49 while a 3.5 player could be anywhere from 3.51 - 3.99. If the 4.0 player is really a 4.0 and the 3.5 player is actually a 3.99 player, as you can see, there isn't much of a difference. I hope this helps.
Rickson
G.O.A.T.
I've been playing since the summer of 03 and although my friends and I all started around the same time, I have a nearly spotless record against them. I bagel them quite often and I get some 6-1, 6-2 type scores.
goober
Legend
Rickson
G.O.A.T.
What! Nearly spotless? You mean Raul finally managed to hook a set off of you?
Yeah, back in 03.
goober
Legend
Yeah, back in 03.
I thought you started 200-0 or something or were you counting after the hook job.
Similar threads
