L*********n
发帖数: 185 | 1 I wrote this just to discuss usta rating in real world.
First of all, it's not a bible. Theoretical USTA rating sometimes fail to
reflect the reality. Please allow me to introduce how it's used between
players.
4.5: going through systematic training for tennis for at least couple of
years. Mastered everything aspect of technical skills at the very least.
Div III and club players might fall into.
5.0: from 5.0 on, IT'S ALL ABOUT CONDITIONAL. TRUNK, SHOULDER, ARM, CORE,
LEG, HIP, AGILITY, FLEXIBILITY and mental/emotion come into play. DIVIII
AND II PLAYERS.
>Take 2nd serve for example, if you stay right on the baseline and the ball
should bounce over your head w/ strong top spin and side spin everytime.
5.5: less in DIV III, more in DIV II, I.
>2nd serve: You must step into the court instead of stay right on the base
line otherwise the ball will bounce over the reach of your racket.(
especailly true when you try to return the serve with a good athletic
posture, lower then standing still.)
6.0: Strong DIV II, I players, attending FUTURES SERIES, into main draw.
>Milen made it to the main draw 18 times but won 4, he is like 5.5+ or 6.0-.
It's interesting that it's called futures because if you can't stand out
in these series, you have no future for playing pro unless you family's rich
already.
6.5: (Note that USTA RATING specifies no college players should be 6.5 or 7.
0, it's generally true but not exactly. )
Top 20 DIV I school accept only 2 students per year and they play NCAA,
futures and challenger qualifying games.
>Example: Challenger @ UIUC:
http://www.illinoischallenger.com/pdfs/X%20&%20QX.pdf
a) Bruno vs 559: 1/6; 4/6
b) HOH VS MILTON(398) 2ND ROUND: 6/4; 3/6; 2/6
c) KOPINSKI VS BRADLEY (MAIN DRAW): 2/6; 3/6
d) Childers VS HARRISON(479), 2ND ROUND QUALIFY: 1/6, 0/6
e) HILTZIK VS GUCCIONE(549), 2ND ROUND: 67; 46
f) JESSE VS RICE(605), 2ND ROUND: 6/3; 0/6; 4/6
I was volunteering as a caddie for about 8 matches in this event, I would
say they are a generally weaker than ATP 400~600, but they should be around
800~1000 ATP skill level.
Challenger seeds are generally ATP 100~292, normally ATP TOP 100 will not
attend.
>another example:
Amer Delic:
ATP FROM 1500+ TO 848 during 2000~2003 seasons @ UIUC.
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/De/A/Amer-Delic.aspx
7.0: TOP DIV I PLAYERS. ATP TOP 400, no need to explain.
>Example: Kevin Anderson: 2005~2007 playing for university of Illinois @
Urbana & Champaign, for 3 seasons, ranked ATP 398 @ the end. | K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 2 辛苦，mark一下，虽然偶始终认为你的rating定义偏高。
【在 L*********n 的大作中提到】
: I wrote this just to discuss usta rating in real world.
: First of all, it's not a bible. Theoretical USTA rating sometimes fail to
: reflect the reality. Please allow me to introduce how it's used between
: players.
: 4.5: going through systematic training for tennis for at least couple of
: years. Mastered everything aspect of technical skills at the very least.
: Div III and club players might fall into.
: 5.0: from 5.0 on, IT'S ALL ABOUT CONDITIONAL. TRUNK, SHOULDER, ARM, CORE,
: LEG, HIP, AGILITY, FLEXIBILITY and mental/emotion come into play. DIVIII
: AND II PLAYERS.
| r*********x
发帖数: 3016 | 3 rating这东西就是随便一说，不用认真。大家Happy就好。无所谓3.0还是6.0。
先暴扁6.0再小负3.0也是可能的。 | a*m
发帖数: 6253 | 4 整个usta rating的意义就是league和tournament按照这个来分级决定给你和什么水平
的选手一块儿打球玩，这个会决定你的乐趣有多少，竞争有多激烈。。。
5.5以上有半毛钱意义么？ 到了那个之上，没有人按照usta的rating来比赛。。。基本
就是open，future，satellite，100，250，500，那些才是rating。
所以对usta来说5.0 就是rating的头了，剩下没有任何意义。。。usta对亚洲/欧洲/其
他大部分的世界来说，一文不值。。。
纠结这个所谓技术细节对应的数值完全没有意思。。。
对业余的来说，统计意义上的比赛结果才是有意义的。 对职业的来说，最高成就和奖
金/赚到的钱才是最重要的。。。 | b*********s
发帖数: 6757 | 5 4.5 "Mastered everything aspect of technical skills at the very least"
not sure the definition of "mastered", It's a bit vague to me. does it
meant no fundamental flaws in their strokes? I still see many 4.5s that has
all kind of strokes, they mastered their own style of strokes, but
fundamentally there are flaws, thus at 5.0 or above, these flaws get
amplified and exploited.
5.0 on, IT'S ALL ABOUT CONDITIONAL
do you meant conditioning? The difference between a 5.0 and a solid 4.5, i
don't see it largely contributed to conditioning, from my experience, it's
still more of better preparation, better anticipation and better accuracy or
placement of the ball. I do see a huge conditioning or physical difference
at 5.5 level though.
I think one key difference between each level is 0.5 higher level does not
miss easy shots. (obviously easy shots at different level means different
thing) | b*********s
发帖数: 6757 | 6 lol nicely put! 赞一个！！
【在 a*m 的大作中提到】
: 整个usta rating的意义就是league和tournament按照这个来分级决定给你和什么水平
: 的选手一块儿打球玩，这个会决定你的乐趣有多少，竞争有多激烈。。。
: 5.5以上有半毛钱意义么？ 到了那个之上，没有人按照usta的rating来比赛。。。基本
: 就是open，future，satellite，100，250，500，那些才是rating。
: 所以对usta来说5.0 就是rating的头了，剩下没有任何意义。。。usta对亚洲/欧洲/其
: 他大部分的世界来说，一文不值。。。
: 纠结这个所谓技术细节对应的数值完全没有意思。。。
: 对业余的来说，统计意义上的比赛结果才是有意义的。 对职业的来说，最高成就和奖
: 金/赚到的钱才是最重要的。。。
| a**s
发帖数: 9606 | 7 5.0+没啥可讨论的，离俺们业余的太远。打usta的5.0+全美国都没多少，
版上99%不会有的。你怎么定义意义不大。
换句话来说你觉得Alex在你的标准里应该是多少吧？4.0还是4.5还是5.0？
【在 L*********n 的大作中提到】
: I wrote this just to discuss usta rating in real world.
: First of all, it's not a bible. Theoretical USTA rating sometimes fail to
: reflect the reality. Please allow me to introduce how it's used between
: players.
: 4.5: going through systematic training for tennis for at least couple of
: years. Mastered everything aspect of technical skills at the very least.
: Div III and club players might fall into.
: 5.0: from 5.0 on, IT'S ALL ABOUT CONDITIONAL. TRUNK, SHOULDER, ARM, CORE,
: LEG, HIP, AGILITY, FLEXIBILITY and mental/emotion come into play. DIVIII
: AND II PLAYERS.
| a*m
发帖数: 6253 | 8 这个版上有不少hardcore的常年比赛的选手，所以都是见了面也许会是兵器招呼，而且
更看重成绩，实战，会讨论各种技战术，比赛心得，裸奔求板砖；
还有不少理论专家，所以喜欢探讨各种知识，见闻，做各种分析，发表见解；
更有只看不打球的粉丝团，到了大赛期间会出来直播，评球，为自己喜欢的球员加油，
或者对自己不喜欢的球员嘘嘘。。。当然粉丝之间也会互相攻击。。。
作为公共版面，我们是都欢迎的。。。
另一方面，希望大家都能多点包容。 每个人都有自己不同的价值观，不同的生活，请
不要随便judge其他人，更不要把网上的争执带到生活里来。。。
打球看球聊球就是为了享受乐趣，灌水也是。。。 | U******u
发帖数: 5829 | 9 Totally agree.
【在 a*m 的大作中提到】
: 整个usta rating的意义就是league和tournament按照这个来分级决定给你和什么水平
: 的选手一块儿打球玩，这个会决定你的乐趣有多少，竞争有多激烈。。。
: 5.5以上有半毛钱意义么？ 到了那个之上，没有人按照usta的rating来比赛。。。基本
: 就是open，future，satellite，100，250，500，那些才是rating。
: 所以对usta来说5.0 就是rating的头了，剩下没有任何意义。。。usta对亚洲/欧洲/其
: 他大部分的世界来说，一文不值。。。
: 纠结这个所谓技术细节对应的数值完全没有意思。。。
: 对业余的来说，统计意义上的比赛结果才是有意义的。 对职业的来说，最高成就和奖
: 金/赚到的钱才是最重要的。。。
| t******n
发帖数: 38 | | | | K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 11 Milen has never made it to the main draw of a futures event.
His best record is qualifying 3rd round of a futures event, one
win away from the main draw, or two wins away from getting an
ATP point. Unfortunately he lost that match 1-6, 2-6.
That means Milen was probably 5.5 at his peak (4 years ago).
【在 L*********n 的大作中提到】
: I wrote this just to discuss usta rating in real world.
: First of all, it's not a bible. Theoretical USTA rating sometimes fail to
: reflect the reality. Please allow me to introduce how it's used between
: players.
: 4.5: going through systematic training for tennis for at least couple of
: years. Mastered everything aspect of technical skills at the very least.
: Div III and club players might fall into.
: 5.0: from 5.0 on, IT'S ALL ABOUT CONDITIONAL. TRUNK, SHOULDER, ARM, CORE,
: LEG, HIP, AGILITY, FLEXIBILITY and mental/emotion come into play. DIVIII
: AND II PLAYERS.
| b*********s
发帖数: 6757 | 12 future is consider as a lower event than challenger right?
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: Milen has never made it to the main draw of a futures event.
: His best record is qualifying 3rd round of a futures event, one
: win away from the main draw, or two wins away from getting an
: ATP point. Unfortunately he lost that match 1-6, 2-6.
: That means Milen was probably 5.5 at his peak (4 years ago).
:
| c****1
发帖数: 5654 | 13
agree, wonder how many trophies do the best players here can or have won
in tennis?
prof.s play for $$, amateurs play for medals/trophies, haha
【在 a*m 的大作中提到】
: 整个usta rating的意义就是league和tournament按照这个来分级决定给你和什么水平
: 的选手一块儿打球玩，这个会决定你的乐趣有多少，竞争有多激烈。。。
: 5.5以上有半毛钱意义么？ 到了那个之上，没有人按照usta的rating来比赛。。。基本
: 就是open，future，satellite，100，250，500，那些才是rating。
: 所以对usta来说5.0 就是rating的头了，剩下没有任何意义。。。usta对亚洲/欧洲/其
: 他大部分的世界来说，一文不值。。。
: 纠结这个所谓技术细节对应的数值完全没有意思。。。
: 对业余的来说，统计意义上的比赛结果才是有意义的。 对职业的来说，最高成就和奖
: 金/赚到的钱才是最重要的。。。
| K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 14 Yes. Leon's another misconception is that it takes several wins in
futures main draw to get 1 ATP points. It actually only takes 1 win..
Yet another one is that top 100 players don't usually attend challengers.
That's not true. This week the following top 100 ATP players are attending
challengers.
Sousa #84
Lacko #89
Goffin #99
Overall I feel his rating definition is on the high side.
【在 b*********s 的大作中提到】
: future is consider as a lower event than challenger right?
| b*********s
发帖数: 6757 | 15 Just to be clear, to get 1 ATP point you need to qualify in a Future event
and win a match? What if you qualified for a Challenge event, do you also
need to win a match to get a APT point? (assume you didn't play any Future
events)
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: Yes. Leon's another misconception is that it takes several wins in
: futures main draw to get 1 ATP points. It actually only takes 1 win..
: Yet another one is that top 100 players don't usually attend challengers.
: That's not true. This week the following top 100 ATP players are attending
: challengers.
: Sousa #84
: Lacko #89
: Goffin #99
: Overall I feel his rating definition is on the high side.
| L*********n
发帖数: 185 | 16
1. Yes, you are right, Future $10000~15000 SERIES you can get 1 points from
1/32, 1st main draw. Milen told me he used to be 5.5 @ his best , now
without any injuries he would be 5.0 and w/ injuries 4.5. So he recommended
me try Futures after beating him like 6:2, 6:2.
2. "Yet another one is that top 100 players don't usually attend
challengers."
For the event in UIUC,http://www.illinoischallenger.com/pdfs/X%20&%20QX.pdf,
RUSSELL, Michael, 103, highest seed.
You mentioned yourself
Sousa #84
So USUALLY, top 100 don't attend challenger is ok right?
3. To Black,
ATP regulates Challenger and Championship and ITF regulates Futures events.
Challenger qualifing members are normanlly ATP 500~1500, everyone one get 3
points automatically, but I don't know how to even qualify for qualifying
matches, it's too far. But I'll ask to see how it goes......
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: Yes. Leon's another misconception is that it takes several wins in
: futures main draw to get 1 ATP points. It actually only takes 1 win..
: Yet another one is that top 100 players don't usually attend challengers.
: That's not true. This week the following top 100 ATP players are attending
: challengers.
: Sousa #84
: Lacko #89
: Goffin #99
: Overall I feel his rating definition is on the high side.
| K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 17 I am more targeting your statement that challenger's seeds are usually
#150-299. In this week's all 5 challenger events, the #1 seed is less
than #150.
Yes, it's might be OK to say top 100 don't usually attend
challengers. However, a #100 player will need to attend a lot of challengers
to make a living.
Take a look at last week's #100 Lacko. He attended 5 Challenger events
this year.
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/La/L/Lukas-Lacko.asp
In some weeks, you can see players at high as #50 in the challengers.
【在 L*********n 的大作中提到】
:
: 1. Yes, you are right, Future $10000~15000 SERIES you can get 1 points from
: 1/32, 1st main draw. Milen told me he used to be 5.5 @ his best , now
: without any injuries he would be 5.0 and w/ injuries 4.5. So he recommended
: me try Futures after beating him like 6:2, 6:2.
: 2. "Yet another one is that top 100 players don't usually attend
: challengers."
: For the event in UIUC,http://www.illinoischallenger.com/pdfs/X%20&%20QX.pdf,
: RUSSELL, Michael, 103, highest seed.
: You mentioned yourself
| L*********n
发帖数: 185 | 18
challengers
1. "Challenger seeds are generally ATP 100~292", not 150~292, that's my
statement.
2. "Future main draw players are like 6.0s", not 6.5s, you can check my
previous statement.
I'm not saying I'm 100% right, but I'll correct it if anything's wrong.
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: I am more targeting your statement that challenger's seeds are usually
: #150-299. In this week's all 5 challenger events, the #1 seed is less
: than #150.
: Yes, it's might be OK to say top 100 don't usually attend
: challengers. However, a #100 player will need to attend a lot of challengers
: to make a living.
: Take a look at last week's #100 Lacko. He attended 5 Challenger events
: this year.
: http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/La/L/Lukas-Lacko.asp
: In some weeks, you can see players at high as #50 in the challengers.
| L*********n
发帖数: 185 | 19
challengers
Challenger events seeds are normally 100~292, but top 100 will definitely
need Challenger to earn, it's $50000 Prize money and atp points.
The majority of good ATP can just play challenger series and make a living,
that's for sure. Even top 100 players can only play challenger, don't get
me wrong, challenger is already a extremely strong tournament.
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: I am more targeting your statement that challenger's seeds are usually
: #150-299. In this week's all 5 challenger events, the #1 seed is less
: than #150.
: Yes, it's might be OK to say top 100 don't usually attend
: challengers. However, a #100 player will need to attend a lot of challengers
: to make a living.
: Take a look at last week's #100 Lacko. He attended 5 Challenger events
: this year.
: http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/La/L/Lukas-Lacko.asp
: In some weeks, you can see players at high as #50 in the challengers.
| b*********s
发帖数: 6757 | 20 There is a Challenger event in Austin in October. Before the actually event
there is a WC qualify tournament (I assume a lot Futures guys plays in it),
and before that qualify tournament, there is a USTA 100 points tournament
where if you get into the finals of that one, you'll get a WC to play in the
qualify tournament.
from
recommended
【在 L*********n 的大作中提到】
:
: challengers
: Challenger events seeds are normally 100~292, but top 100 will definitely
: need Challenger to earn, it's $50000 Prize money and atp points.
: The majority of good ATP can just play challenger series and make a living,
: that's for sure. Even top 100 players can only play challenger, don't get
: me wrong, challenger is already a extremely strong tournament.
| | | K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 21 Alright, my bad. So is it concluded that you only need to correct the
following 3 mistakes that I listed below?
http://www.mitbbs.com/article/Tennis/31992023_0.html
http://www.mitbbs.com/article/Tennis/31992043_0.html
1. "Milen made it to the main draw 18 times but won 4"
2. "Challenger... normally ATP TOP 100 will not attend."
3. "我知道哪怕一分的ATP 积分也要大好几轮的FUTURE 正塞或者CHALLENGER
的正塞才行，"
【在 L*********n 的大作中提到】
:
: challengers
: Challenger events seeds are normally 100~292, but top 100 will definitely
: need Challenger to earn, it's $50000 Prize money and atp points.
: The majority of good ATP can just play challenger series and make a living,
: that's for sure. Even top 100 players can only play challenger, don't get
: me wrong, challenger is already a extremely strong tournament.
| K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 22 Futures:
You get 1 ATP point by winning 1 match in the main draw, no matter you
qualify the main draw first or directly go into main draw.
Challengers:
You get 3-5 ATP points by qualifying the main draw.
You get another 6-10 points by winning 1 match in the main draw.
However, if you directly go into the main draw and lose in 1st round,
you get no points.
【在 b*********s 的大作中提到】
: Just to be clear, to get 1 ATP point you need to qualify in a Future event
: and win a match? What if you qualified for a Challenge event, do you also
: need to win a match to get a APT point? (assume you didn't play any Future
: events)
| K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 23 The UIUC challenger is near the bottom of the spectrum. That's probably why
your tend to underestimate the average level of competition in challenger
events.
Challengers prize money could be anywhere from $35k to $125k.
,
【在 L*********n 的大作中提到】
:
: challengers
: Challenger events seeds are normally 100~292, but top 100 will definitely
: need Challenger to earn, it's $50000 Prize money and atp points.
: The majority of good ATP can just play challenger series and make a living,
: that's for sure. Even top 100 players can only play challenger, don't get
: me wrong, challenger is already a extremely strong tournament.
| L*********n
发帖数: 185 | 24 1. "Milen made it to the main draw 18 times but won 4"
yes, my mistake, he told me he only won 4 out of 18 futures, I didn't ask if
it's main draw or qualify. Since he said @ his best, he is 5.5, I should
have noticed that he means qualify.
2. "Challenger... normally ATP TOP 100 will not attend."
This is right right?
3. "我知道哪怕一分的ATP 积分也要大好几轮的FUTURE 正塞或者CHALLENGER
的正塞才行，"
Yes, it's my mistake, It takes 1 round Future or Challenger qualifier.
Sometimes qualifier get 3 points, not 5 points, I guess it varies.
It's tricky that If you won the 1st round main draw in Challenger, you don't
get the atp points for winning the 1st main draw, I didn't explain it in
detail and that's my fault.
Winner $7,200 atp points: 80
Finalist $4,240 atp points: 48
Semi-Finalist $2,510 atp points: 29
Quarter-Finalist $1,460 atp points: 15
2nd Round $860 atp points: 7
1st Round $520 0
Qualify:
Qualifier 3
Finalist $0 0
2nd Round $0 0 | b**********s
发帖数: 9531 | | K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 26
As I mentioned, this is a misleading statement and it's best to rephrase
it. A typical #100 attends challengers regularly on a yearly basis. I
listed an example. Again, you base your assumptions on your observations
from one low-end challenge event, which is slightly away from the whole
picture.
't
Your understanding is incorrect. "1st Round 0 point" means losing in 1st
round, not winning 1st round. Also, the "3 points" example you mentioned
is just from this particular UIUC event. As I said in another post,
Challenger qualification gets you 3 points OR 5 points. In facts, 5 points
is the more common case. All the point numbers you listed above are just
one example from a low-end Challenger event.
【在 L*********n 的大作中提到】
: 1. "Milen made it to the main draw 18 times but won 4"
: yes, my mistake, he told me he only won 4 out of 18 futures, I didn't ask if
: it's main draw or qualify. Since he said @ his best, he is 5.5, I should
: have noticed that he means qualify.
: 2. "Challenger... normally ATP TOP 100 will not attend."
: This is right right?
: 3. "我知道哪怕一分的ATP 积分也要大好几轮的FUTURE 正塞或者CHALLENGER
: 的正塞才行，"
: Yes, it's my mistake, It takes 1 round Future or Challenger qualifier.
: Sometimes qualifier get 3 points, not 5 points, I guess it varies.
| o**h
发帖数: 246 | 27 不得不佩服老肯知识的丰富！
大开眼界之余，不禁感慨”吾等“在此争强斗狠的，莫非叫花子斗富？ |
|
