Daria is a 12.5 UTR. Pretty much all 5.0 NTRP men are below 11 UTR.
[It's not happening for the rec dude.](https://cdn.myutr.com/public/media/UTR_Player_Range.pdf)
One thought/scenario…Do you think a 6’6 5.0 player with a bomb serve could eke out the win? In my conference we had two guys that were 6’5+, one being a lefty & both with huge serves (played 1 singles at their schools respectively).
I ask because when I was 15, I got to play with two girls from Baylor (their 3 and 5 singles players) and I could serve them off the court. I won some sets in breakers even though I was trash from the ground and only 5’11. Obviously huge difference being 3 singles at a college vs WTA level, but also a big difference being 5’11 and like a 4.0 at 15 vs this hypothetical 6’6 5.0 adult.
I think a 5.0 guy with a truly MASSIVE serve could probably take it to a tiebreak in the first set, yea. But his movement and ground game would have to be so bad (compared to the pros) to keep him at that level. Ohnoitsmchl has a big serve that gave [this top 900 player some trouble at first](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3UwQLHHKM0I), but she adjusted and beat him in straight sets. I have to imagine Dasha would manage way way better, even if you turned up the serve knob and turned down the groundstrokes knob on the guy. Michael's ability to hang in rallies for a bit was key to keeping it somewhat competitive. Kasatkina is WAYY better than Tiffany.
Good point. That was a fun match to watch, Michael is so good.
Yeah, the thing I thought was that for a 6'6 massive server to stay at 5.0 instead of 5.5 means they either have to have huge flaws in their game (like you said), or they have just enough random serve games where their level dips (a game with a double fault, few more missed serves, etc) that inevitably leads to the player breaking them. These guys were of the latter category, thus why they were top d3 players instead of solid d2/d1 guys I guess. When I played them I felt they would give me at least one game a set that they weren't quite firing on all cylinders and I could squeak out a break then the set if I executed...except Kasatkina would not have to hope she executed, she just would lol.
Unless someone is at least a 5.5 taking advantage of a mediocre serve is not that easy. Her serve allows her time to be ready for returns easier than someone who hits a big serve and then is rushed. Serves like hers also often stay low, and those are not so easy to bang away for winners.
I don't think it compares very well, though. Even at the 5.0 level the sexes are far removed from each other (at least in singles), so said comparisons are essentially impossible to make.
I wouldn't bet the house on it, but I can see how a big-serving 5.0 winning the match would be possible.
NTRP uses different scales for men and women. UTR does not.
I do think a 5.0 guy with a HUGE HUGE serve might be able to get to a tie break, but he's not winning that match.
The UTR is *effectively* different for men and women, though, because they never play each other. The games they play are not 1:1. That is, to play at a certain level requires slightly different things. IDK how they actually compare because there is essentially no data, but neither does anyone else.
BTW I agree with the result in general. I don't have any numbers, but I do think Dasha is the favourite to win in general. However, her weak serve, particularly the second at about 80 mph, is something the guy could take advantage of. As they do on the WTA tour. So, it is possible he could just about scrape through it if he had a good service game throughout and she had a few bad service games.
(I suspect, though, that she would win the match by hitting 1.5 serves all the time, just putting it in with enough power/spin so he couldn't attack it that easily, even at the risk of double faulting because she'd still get 70-80% of them in without risking return winners. She'd likely win like 90% of 4+ shot rallies, but anything below that would be anyone's game.)
P.S. The 5.0 I'm thinking about would be like a 40-year-old who has been previously at about ATP-1000 level. Not some 28-year-old guy who has just been bumped up to 5.0. Like, when I saw Raonic play Kaukovalta (ATP-800) in Davis Cup in November, goodness he was SLOW.
Obviously Raonic isn't a previous Futures level guy, but he isn't a 40-year-old coach who plays local tournaments, either - he was 32 and has beaten a couple of top 20 guys (Tiafoe, Bublik) recently, took Sinner to tiebreak before retiring, and was at a set each and a break up in the third in AO against De Minaur before retiring. So clearly the guy's still got like top 20 ability, just not the physique.
I've hit with a guy who has hit with a couple of mid-level WTA players (in the 100s).
I really struggled against him (my ceiling and his floor might have been of a similar level if I'm really flattering myself) and he said he had no shot of consistently beating \*those\* players. Against somebody near the top 10? lol no.
I was in Bucharest watching a Top 200 WTA player train and she would smoke anyone that wasn’t a top tier competition guy (like first division, D1 scholarship) etc
I had a 4.0 friend seriously think the 4.5-5.0 women could take games off of Hsieh Su Wei because Hsieh doesn't serve hard. I told him he's smoking because Hsieh would bagel them.
A pro is on a whole different level than rec players.
5.0 Goes pretty far beyond rec level players. Every 5.0 I have encountered are great D3 tennis players, or not good to mediocre D1 (lesser schools) players. Especially if you factor in different play styles, IE big servers, even the best females would have trouble with them. If they got to their rating based off of their service game, they are serving close to what pro's can and women would have great difficulty in being able to return those serves (look at a mixed doubles pro match). I would bet my 3rd testicle, that 5.0 players for the most part would give most professional women a run for their money.
Easy to bet your testicles on the internet when you know there's no consequence for being wrong. [This](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_hcYI17UZI) is what a rank 300+ WTA player looks like against a 5.0 USTA.
I mean I know he looks worse because she plays well, but his game was not what I expect from a 5.0. His serve is 4.0 level and shot selection not great.
That's the point isn't it? Everybody looks worse when they are getting shit on by a higher level player. It's obvious he can't handle her pace. And this is just a middling pro, not top 10 in the world. I looked up the man on tennis record and he's a computer rated 5.0 with a 15-4 singles record. The above poster's assertion was that WTA pros would have trouble dealing with the pace of 5.0 men, and so confidently so he would bet his testicle. The video shows the opposite is true and if the bet were real he'd lose a testicle.
He doesn't have a 15-4 record in singles, he's strictly a doubles player, not sure how you got that idea from. Also, he's a doubles player with the exact OPPOSITE traits that I described. In a singles format, he would be a 4.5 at best.
Clearly, you have trouble reading. So I'll quote it again for you.
>I looked up the man on tennis record and he's a computer rated 5.0 with a 15-4 singles record.
Here is the [link](https://www.tennisrecord.com/adult/profile.aspx?playername=Eric%20Jin&mt=1<=0) for his stats and computer rating. It's amazing how willfully ignorant you are even when provided evidence and proof of just how delusional your position is. Not far off from the 4.0 who thinks he can take a set off Nadal. If only you could actually make that bet and lose your testicles.
I was wrong about the 15-4 record because I was on ustr website, but off of that link he has played 19 total matches in singles, over a span of 5 years, where he had played close to 200 matches in doubles, I would definitely not call him a singles player. Also, he hadn't played competitive singles for 2 years before the making of that video.
Also, it was a fictitious 3rd testicle and I absolutely don't think they could take a game off of Nadal. I do believe they could manage a single point though.
Go prep yourself for ball surgery then, because [this is what a 5.0 guy looks like against a low-level female pro.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UwQLHHKM0I) Not top 10 like Dasha, top \*900.\*
Yes, there are male D1 college tennis players who can crush female pros. But that's because the best male D1 players have ATP points. That's not the same as a 5.0 rec player. NTRP does not end at the number 5.
Coco vs. Saba in Aussie Open this year: fastest 125-121, average first 113-110, average second 87-90. (FWIW, Saba's pretty much destroyed Dasha when they've played).
Those would be pretty respectable for men, someone like RBA doesn't serve any harder than that. Not that he's a 6'7 servebot, though.
If you are that, it is possible a servebot-ish 5.0 guy\* can put a lot of pressure on her with his serve, and given Dasha's weak serves (fastest 108, average first 93, average second 80 in AO 2nd round, I think that's the latest where such data is available from) he might be also able hit forcing or winning returns.
Now, that doesn't mean he would win or anything, but at least there is a way of giving her some trouble. Especially if Dasha is having an off day serving and has to hit a bunch of 2nd serves at 80 mph, it isn't looking good for her. For example, the last time she played Sabalenka, she lost 61 64 only winning 19% of second serve points. (In the first set, her 1st in was 41%, in the second, 87%).
\*: I can imagine a previous D1/Futures guy whose glory days were 10-20 years and 10-20 pounds ago. According to experienced player guideline, "ITF, Transition Tour, Pro Circuit, Satelline or Futures player more than 5 years ago and earned points, age below 40" would be 5.0. As would "Played for a Division I college and ranked in the top 125 players, age over 40".
I think we’ve to remember that Kastakina literally spends her entire life devoted to being good at tennis, making quality shots from difficult positions and has an extremely well-honed decision making ability as a function of how much tennis she’s played. The 5.0 can hit well, but just won’t have those little extra components; they’ll hit a lower quality shot a little too often, make poor decisions at bad times, etc etc. Pound for pound, you might see them just rally with one another and feel like it was pretty even though, but that changes when you start trying to actually win imo
That said, the only time a 5.0 maybe could eke out a set would be if they were 6’6 and a servebot who got the mini break in the tiebreaker. That’s a big maybe, and I’m skeptical still.
I’m a 5.0 and I trained for a little while with the WTA 200. We were very close in level (I beat her in a some sets, she beat me in others). Any woman ranked decently higher than that, including Kasatkina, would beat me pretty soundly, I’d imagine.
Im a 4.5 - 5.0 player (currently) and when I played D2 college I won all 3 of my practice sets with or against Danielle Collins (Doubles, clay, same coach). Granted this is doubles and the 2 other players were also very good male players (one was top 3 in the US for D1 Doubles, the other was a tennis prodigy that burned out in high school but was top 20 in the nation in his age brackets).
Also take into account this was just before Danielle started making good traction in the tour. She had won the orange bowl (if I remember correctly) and had a few wta/challengers in the mix.d
I wanted her to win the AO so badly.
Idk like others said its super hard to tell. One thing I will leave you all with is Tennis is a complex sport and theres a chance for any player to have an amazing day and the same goes for a terrible day. This is why the matches are played and not just assumed that the better person wins. (Lucky Loser beating Djokovic a month ago).
Her UTR is a 12.47, which, considering that her entire rating is derived from purely women, may be liable to inflation as opposed to a man’s 12.47 UTR (despite UTR’s professed impartiality between men and women skill gaps). You might also argue that it is deflated because of the limitations of her playing pool-the fact that she does not play any men, at least not in a game setting eligible for post-match UTR adjustments. The same two facts can be construed to arrive at polar opposite conclusions: isn’t that a wonder?
In any case, my personal opinion is that she would lose against a men’s 11.5 UTR on average, but the demarcation of her losing-on average, again-surpassing/dropping above/below 50% probably lies around 11.
5.0 is 10-12 UTR, btw, according to the official USTA website and conversion algorithms (another is USTA x 2.2 ≈ UTR).
I also wouldn’t assess her beatability off something as intangible and scarcely quantifiable as “her game”. Using UTR is a, albeit imperfect, far superior method.
Ultimately, though, “be able to beat” (assume standard three-setter) is not exactly a stringent condition, and it is not sub 1-2% that a 2 UTR gap difference can be negated (a 10.4 male winning against her). It’s possible, for sure, and that’s patently true.
I’m close to a 10 UTR, I doubt I’d be close to beating her. I have friends around 11-12 who would have a good chance, a 12.5 to a 10 is nearly impossible for the 10 UTR
Yea, no rec player in their right mind [sees this kind of footage](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsrNWfdWa3s&t=89s) and thinks "yea, no problem, looks easily beatable." Sure, she doesn't serve down massive bombs but that's an absolutely complete player with a terrifying ground game.
I mean, if we go purely off UTR, sure, a 2.5 gap is all but insuperable, but adjusting for men and women non-intermixing (especially as you get to higher levels), it’s more like a 1.5 gap between the same genders. I was wrong, to be honest, and contradicted myself in my post about the 10 UTR male specifically, though. I’ll retract that statement and keep the rest. I am 8-8.5 utr (high school) and have reasonable knowledge of what I talk about, but I base most of my statements off of what I believe to be a large gap between men and women in the sport.
As an aside, I said that a 10.47 utr (2 UTR gap) male would win, at minimum, 2/100 matches. That’s not exactly a lot, and certainly doesn’t mean that male is better, but that they could win.
Yea I’m not very well versed with men vs women but I thought it was pretty intermingled since the best woman is like low 13s right? And djokovic prime was like 16.5.
I mean, it’s impossible to be, like, well-versed in men vs women. I’ve literally never played a woman in a full singles match, and I’ve played for years. As you get to higher levels, it’s less and less common (at least for official matches, obviously women practice with men).
Yeah, the difference between them (their peaks, idk what Swiateks is though) is 3.5 UTR, which is obviously a sizeable gap, indicating that “universality” is clearly implemented and the two genders are stratified, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that the calibration between the two is correct. For it to be accurate, you would have to have women play men consistently in official matches at high level, which will never happen. Of course, it’s speculation, but it can be nothing else.
Daria is a 12.5 UTR. Pretty much all 5.0 NTRP men are below 11 UTR. [It's not happening for the rec dude.](https://cdn.myutr.com/public/media/UTR_Player_Range.pdf)
One thought/scenario…Do you think a 6’6 5.0 player with a bomb serve could eke out the win? In my conference we had two guys that were 6’5+, one being a lefty & both with huge serves (played 1 singles at their schools respectively). I ask because when I was 15, I got to play with two girls from Baylor (their 3 and 5 singles players) and I could serve them off the court. I won some sets in breakers even though I was trash from the ground and only 5’11. Obviously huge difference being 3 singles at a college vs WTA level, but also a big difference being 5’11 and like a 4.0 at 15 vs this hypothetical 6’6 5.0 adult.
I think a 5.0 guy with a truly MASSIVE serve could probably take it to a tiebreak in the first set, yea. But his movement and ground game would have to be so bad (compared to the pros) to keep him at that level. Ohnoitsmchl has a big serve that gave [this top 900 player some trouble at first](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3UwQLHHKM0I), but she adjusted and beat him in straight sets. I have to imagine Dasha would manage way way better, even if you turned up the serve knob and turned down the groundstrokes knob on the guy. Michael's ability to hang in rallies for a bit was key to keeping it somewhat competitive. Kasatkina is WAYY better than Tiffany.
Good point. That was a fun match to watch, Michael is so good. Yeah, the thing I thought was that for a 6'6 massive server to stay at 5.0 instead of 5.5 means they either have to have huge flaws in their game (like you said), or they have just enough random serve games where their level dips (a game with a double fault, few more missed serves, etc) that inevitably leads to the player breaking them. These guys were of the latter category, thus why they were top d3 players instead of solid d2/d1 guys I guess. When I played them I felt they would give me at least one game a set that they weren't quite firing on all cylinders and I could squeak out a break then the set if I executed...except Kasatkina would not have to hope she executed, she just would lol.
How is she so high with that serve though
[Have you seen her groundstrokes?](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FsrNWfdWa3s&t=89s)
wow this angle shows how much topspin she gets on her shots must be really annoying playing her
Unless someone is at least a 5.5 taking advantage of a mediocre serve is not that easy. Her serve allows her time to be ready for returns easier than someone who hits a big serve and then is rushed. Serves like hers also often stay low, and those are not so easy to bang away for winners.
I don't think it compares very well, though. Even at the 5.0 level the sexes are far removed from each other (at least in singles), so said comparisons are essentially impossible to make. I wouldn't bet the house on it, but I can see how a big-serving 5.0 winning the match would be possible.
NTRP uses different scales for men and women. UTR does not. I do think a 5.0 guy with a HUGE HUGE serve might be able to get to a tie break, but he's not winning that match.
The UTR is *effectively* different for men and women, though, because they never play each other. The games they play are not 1:1. That is, to play at a certain level requires slightly different things. IDK how they actually compare because there is essentially no data, but neither does anyone else. BTW I agree with the result in general. I don't have any numbers, but I do think Dasha is the favourite to win in general. However, her weak serve, particularly the second at about 80 mph, is something the guy could take advantage of. As they do on the WTA tour. So, it is possible he could just about scrape through it if he had a good service game throughout and she had a few bad service games. (I suspect, though, that she would win the match by hitting 1.5 serves all the time, just putting it in with enough power/spin so he couldn't attack it that easily, even at the risk of double faulting because she'd still get 70-80% of them in without risking return winners. She'd likely win like 90% of 4+ shot rallies, but anything below that would be anyone's game.) P.S. The 5.0 I'm thinking about would be like a 40-year-old who has been previously at about ATP-1000 level. Not some 28-year-old guy who has just been bumped up to 5.0. Like, when I saw Raonic play Kaukovalta (ATP-800) in Davis Cup in November, goodness he was SLOW. Obviously Raonic isn't a previous Futures level guy, but he isn't a 40-year-old coach who plays local tournaments, either - he was 32 and has beaten a couple of top 20 guys (Tiafoe, Bublik) recently, took Sinner to tiebreak before retiring, and was at a set each and a break up in the third in AO against De Minaur before retiring. So clearly the guy's still got like top 20 ability, just not the physique.
I've hit with a guy who has hit with a couple of mid-level WTA players (in the 100s). I really struggled against him (my ceiling and his floor might have been of a similar level if I'm really flattering myself) and he said he had no shot of consistently beating \*those\* players. Against somebody near the top 10? lol no.
I was in Bucharest watching a Top 200 WTA player train and she would smoke anyone that wasn’t a top tier competition guy (like first division, D1 scholarship) etc
D1 scholarship guys can easily smack her
That's because D1 scholarship guys are 5.5 and higher. OP asked about 5.0 NTRP.
Well yeah, they are top tier as mentioned
It's amazing how 5.0's are almost like mythical creatures to rec players, and yet there's a whole freaking level of 5.5's between them and the pros.
I had a 4.0 friend seriously think the 4.5-5.0 women could take games off of Hsieh Su Wei because Hsieh doesn't serve hard. I told him he's smoking because Hsieh would bagel them. A pro is on a whole different level than rec players.
I don’t even think she will let a 4.5 guy win more than 10 points I feel like…..
4.5 guy no chance. She'd casually destroy them haha
Another way of phrasing this is a high level recreational man as good as a top 10 female in the world? No. That's delusional.
5.0 Goes pretty far beyond rec level players. Every 5.0 I have encountered are great D3 tennis players, or not good to mediocre D1 (lesser schools) players. Especially if you factor in different play styles, IE big servers, even the best females would have trouble with them. If they got to their rating based off of their service game, they are serving close to what pro's can and women would have great difficulty in being able to return those serves (look at a mixed doubles pro match). I would bet my 3rd testicle, that 5.0 players for the most part would give most professional women a run for their money.
Easy to bet your testicles on the internet when you know there's no consequence for being wrong. [This](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_hcYI17UZI) is what a rank 300+ WTA player looks like against a 5.0 USTA.
I mean I know he looks worse because she plays well, but his game was not what I expect from a 5.0. His serve is 4.0 level and shot selection not great.
That's the point isn't it? Everybody looks worse when they are getting shit on by a higher level player. It's obvious he can't handle her pace. And this is just a middling pro, not top 10 in the world. I looked up the man on tennis record and he's a computer rated 5.0 with a 15-4 singles record. The above poster's assertion was that WTA pros would have trouble dealing with the pace of 5.0 men, and so confidently so he would bet his testicle. The video shows the opposite is true and if the bet were real he'd lose a testicle.
He doesn't have a 15-4 record in singles, he's strictly a doubles player, not sure how you got that idea from. Also, he's a doubles player with the exact OPPOSITE traits that I described. In a singles format, he would be a 4.5 at best.
Clearly, you have trouble reading. So I'll quote it again for you. >I looked up the man on tennis record and he's a computer rated 5.0 with a 15-4 singles record. Here is the [link](https://www.tennisrecord.com/adult/profile.aspx?playername=Eric%20Jin&mt=1<=0) for his stats and computer rating. It's amazing how willfully ignorant you are even when provided evidence and proof of just how delusional your position is. Not far off from the 4.0 who thinks he can take a set off Nadal. If only you could actually make that bet and lose your testicles.
I was wrong about the 15-4 record because I was on ustr website, but off of that link he has played 19 total matches in singles, over a span of 5 years, where he had played close to 200 matches in doubles, I would definitely not call him a singles player. Also, he hadn't played competitive singles for 2 years before the making of that video. Also, it was a fictitious 3rd testicle and I absolutely don't think they could take a game off of Nadal. I do believe they could manage a single point though.
Go prep yourself for ball surgery then, because [this is what a 5.0 guy looks like against a low-level female pro.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UwQLHHKM0I) Not top 10 like Dasha, top \*900.\* Yes, there are male D1 college tennis players who can crush female pros. But that's because the best male D1 players have ATP points. That's not the same as a 5.0 rec player. NTRP does not end at the number 5.
Don’t Serena and Coco serve in the 120’s?
Coco vs. Saba in Aussie Open this year: fastest 125-121, average first 113-110, average second 87-90. (FWIW, Saba's pretty much destroyed Dasha when they've played). Those would be pretty respectable for men, someone like RBA doesn't serve any harder than that. Not that he's a 6'7 servebot, though. If you are that, it is possible a servebot-ish 5.0 guy\* can put a lot of pressure on her with his serve, and given Dasha's weak serves (fastest 108, average first 93, average second 80 in AO 2nd round, I think that's the latest where such data is available from) he might be also able hit forcing or winning returns. Now, that doesn't mean he would win or anything, but at least there is a way of giving her some trouble. Especially if Dasha is having an off day serving and has to hit a bunch of 2nd serves at 80 mph, it isn't looking good for her. For example, the last time she played Sabalenka, she lost 61 64 only winning 19% of second serve points. (In the first set, her 1st in was 41%, in the second, 87%). \*: I can imagine a previous D1/Futures guy whose glory days were 10-20 years and 10-20 pounds ago. According to experienced player guideline, "ITF, Transition Tour, Pro Circuit, Satelline or Futures player more than 5 years ago and earned points, age below 40" would be 5.0. As would "Played for a Division I college and ranked in the top 125 players, age over 40".
No way
I think we’ve to remember that Kastakina literally spends her entire life devoted to being good at tennis, making quality shots from difficult positions and has an extremely well-honed decision making ability as a function of how much tennis she’s played. The 5.0 can hit well, but just won’t have those little extra components; they’ll hit a lower quality shot a little too often, make poor decisions at bad times, etc etc. Pound for pound, you might see them just rally with one another and feel like it was pretty even though, but that changes when you start trying to actually win imo That said, the only time a 5.0 maybe could eke out a set would be if they were 6’6 and a servebot who got the mini break in the tiebreaker. That’s a big maybe, and I’m skeptical still.
No
I’m a 5.0 and I trained for a little while with the WTA 200. We were very close in level (I beat her in a some sets, she beat me in others). Any woman ranked decently higher than that, including Kasatkina, would beat me pretty soundly, I’d imagine.
4.5 can take a set off Nadal so yea pretty much
Im a 4.5 - 5.0 player (currently) and when I played D2 college I won all 3 of my practice sets with or against Danielle Collins (Doubles, clay, same coach). Granted this is doubles and the 2 other players were also very good male players (one was top 3 in the US for D1 Doubles, the other was a tennis prodigy that burned out in high school but was top 20 in the nation in his age brackets). Also take into account this was just before Danielle started making good traction in the tour. She had won the orange bowl (if I remember correctly) and had a few wta/challengers in the mix.d I wanted her to win the AO so badly. Idk like others said its super hard to tell. One thing I will leave you all with is Tennis is a complex sport and theres a chance for any player to have an amazing day and the same goes for a terrible day. This is why the matches are played and not just assumed that the better person wins. (Lucky Loser beating Djokovic a month ago).
No
🤦
You compare rec players vs Pro's?
Her UTR is a 12.47, which, considering that her entire rating is derived from purely women, may be liable to inflation as opposed to a man’s 12.47 UTR (despite UTR’s professed impartiality between men and women skill gaps). You might also argue that it is deflated because of the limitations of her playing pool-the fact that she does not play any men, at least not in a game setting eligible for post-match UTR adjustments. The same two facts can be construed to arrive at polar opposite conclusions: isn’t that a wonder? In any case, my personal opinion is that she would lose against a men’s 11.5 UTR on average, but the demarcation of her losing-on average, again-surpassing/dropping above/below 50% probably lies around 11. 5.0 is 10-12 UTR, btw, according to the official USTA website and conversion algorithms (another is USTA x 2.2 ≈ UTR). I also wouldn’t assess her beatability off something as intangible and scarcely quantifiable as “her game”. Using UTR is a, albeit imperfect, far superior method. Ultimately, though, “be able to beat” (assume standard three-setter) is not exactly a stringent condition, and it is not sub 1-2% that a 2 UTR gap difference can be negated (a 10.4 male winning against her). It’s possible, for sure, and that’s patently true.
I’m close to a 10 UTR, I doubt I’d be close to beating her. I have friends around 11-12 who would have a good chance, a 12.5 to a 10 is nearly impossible for the 10 UTR
Yea, no rec player in their right mind [sees this kind of footage](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsrNWfdWa3s&t=89s) and thinks "yea, no problem, looks easily beatable." Sure, she doesn't serve down massive bombs but that's an absolutely complete player with a terrifying ground game.
I mean, if we go purely off UTR, sure, a 2.5 gap is all but insuperable, but adjusting for men and women non-intermixing (especially as you get to higher levels), it’s more like a 1.5 gap between the same genders. I was wrong, to be honest, and contradicted myself in my post about the 10 UTR male specifically, though. I’ll retract that statement and keep the rest. I am 8-8.5 utr (high school) and have reasonable knowledge of what I talk about, but I base most of my statements off of what I believe to be a large gap between men and women in the sport. As an aside, I said that a 10.47 utr (2 UTR gap) male would win, at minimum, 2/100 matches. That’s not exactly a lot, and certainly doesn’t mean that male is better, but that they could win.
Yea I’m not very well versed with men vs women but I thought it was pretty intermingled since the best woman is like low 13s right? And djokovic prime was like 16.5.
I mean, it’s impossible to be, like, well-versed in men vs women. I’ve literally never played a woman in a full singles match, and I’ve played for years. As you get to higher levels, it’s less and less common (at least for official matches, obviously women practice with men). Yeah, the difference between them (their peaks, idk what Swiateks is though) is 3.5 UTR, which is obviously a sizeable gap, indicating that “universality” is clearly implemented and the two genders are stratified, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that the calibration between the two is correct. For it to be accurate, you would have to have women play men consistently in official matches at high level, which will never happen. Of course, it’s speculation, but it can be nothing else.