Little off topic but curious since all the tennis experts are here..
If I would play like 5-10 hrs a week of tennis (half of it lessons) how long would it take me to go from like 1.5-2 player to a 4-4.5?

In my expert opinion it would take you exactly 1 year. Nah, super hard question to answer without knowing more about you. There are some people that could play 10 hours a week and literally never get there, for some the curve would be a lot faster.

^

How fast is "a lot faster than never"?

Joke aside, I'm interested too.
Say for someone who's always been athletic/physically active but wasn't born with an insane raw talent for that specific sport.

Is it realistic to think 6 months to a year?

I probably dont know him, but i did graduate in 2000. I was really burnt out on the sport by the time i got to highschool(had been playing since i was 3).We won states 3/4 years i was there. St Johns is in central massachusetts.

you can get to a 2.5-3 pretty easily. maybe 3.5.

anything higher and you really have to work hard and/or have a ton of talent for the game. "how long" is a tough-ass question to answer. you do it b/c you love it and you'll get there or you won't. but if you look at it like a chore, it'll be counterproductive. just do it and love playing and that's all there is to it (along w/ the physical fitness stuff which i presume you'd be doing anyways).

Jeremy, I'll give you 3-1, the doubles alleys, and three serves, in June. And I'll take one serve. I think you can improve quickly in tennis, but it might be the case that you had to have played when you were young. I think starting cold at 25/30 is tough. BA

No variance in tennis.

Pretty big difference between 5 hours a week and 10. If you're playing some 4-5 times a week an average athlete could probably get to 4.0 in a few years provided you're getting quality coaching, making good use of practice time, and gaining match experience. The 4.0 level is a lot tougher in reality than what it looks like on paper. These are players with solid fundamentals and experience and for the most part they will make you work hard to beat them.

Giving you a call tommorow Brandon. I want this offer!

i cant help but remember the time a few summers ago that tom bet dave 50K that he could beat a grandmaster(?) at chess (curtains from 2p2) if curtains only got one rook. we repeatedly told tom how ****ed he was while he laughed and skimmed google for tips. he got comically murdered and a good time was had by all (not tom, but still kinda tom).

i guess lesson one would be to actually prepare for this, which you seem to be planning for. lesson 2, which ive seen stressed already in this thread, is that if you truly believe youre significantly worse, youre gonna have a really hard time making up for that in complex games where there are so many ways for the superior player to be superior. im quite familiar with tennis and think this qualifies as a game where upsets are very hard to come by, especially since people vastly overestimate the difference in skill between #150 in the world and #5. theres a good chance theres a larger gap between you and patrik than that, relatively speaking.

certainly not a hater tho, i think this bet is awesome and will be really fun to watch/be a part of. i have no idea whos getting the best of it and will be interested to hear how it went. you will be one hell of a badass if you beat patrik out of a quarter mil in one game of tennis.

BA,

I asked my roomate for advice for you (obv delete if this is out of place/not acceptable).

He said the following:

gotta see patrik play, get reviews of his play etc. and ideally have somebody who really can see/understand and assess strategy watch him play. basically he said there's no blanket advice. you have to see the guy play. right now he coaches a 16 y/o kid who has the ability and drive to go pro. when they're in tournaments and the kid looks like he's gunna win, him and the other coach (who was a legit pro but hurt his shoulder) move to watch the next person he'd play if he won. they watch to look at all aspects of his game and develop a very specific strategy.

he gave like 5-6 examples but i don't think they apply here since it so highly depends on patrik's game.

he also said you being out of shape hurts a lot since it increases the chance of unforced errors, possibly make you try to go for too much too soon, and leave you unable to counter a strategy that patrik could use to extend rallies, keep pushing you back, and using that space to run you side to side.

one thing he said to do in this case is extend breaks (really push the limit here between sets and on changeovers) and realllllllyyyy take your time serving. like do what nadal did when he got called for it vs. djok a while back (something like 15-20 bounces per serve until the ump stepped in after djok complained). also negotiate for injury timeouts before the game and use them when you need to (this he said is a 'smarmy' tactic but you do what you gotta do to win and being out of shape means you'll need that time).

so see if you can find any tapes of patrik playing or better yet, see if you can scout him playing or have somebody who knows what they're doing scout him playing before the match.

the only general advice there is has been stated in the thread. get your ass in shape fast. run, sprint, lift, etc. and drop weight.

THe depth in men's pro tennis has gotten ridiculous. In that respect the game has changed a lot in the last 10 years , even last 3-5 years. I would say by most people's standards reaching the top 100 is considered making a good career out of tennis, I wish that number could be closer to 200. The prize money at the challenger level, which is like minor A in baseball, has not changed since I can remember, so it is rough griding up through those levels.

I cant believe i used to be rich enough/dumb enough that i bet on tom.

that was an awesome day.

Wow. Never heard that Durrrr story before. What was Durrrr's chess background?

i'm a 1350-1400 blitz player and i'd like to try that bet v curtains. it just seems so easy to force exchanges of a lot of the pieces. anyway if you search there's a thread about it in the chess forum i think

From what I read in this thread seems I would get crushed vs you. Lets make it interesting, start me off at 40 love too.

If this guy's really a GM and the only handicap he has is giving you rook-odds (1 rook down), I guarantee you have 0 chance of winning, ainec.

I reached 1700 in Blitz when I was playing a lot and I would give myself around 0% chance of beating a GM with rook-odds.
If he gives you 10,000 to 1 knowing your level (assuming he's a GM), he's scamming you.

I can't believe people think the better player is a complete lock. The rating system is so subjective it doesn't mean anything. I still love to watch tennis at the club when the 5.0 USTA comes around. which is crazy because I played some of them when we were 15 and they were 5.5+ 15 years ago. If these guys are 5.0 I'm a 3.0 and IMO I think I"d soundly beat 90% of players at the club without having picked up a racket in ages.

I had a friend who played NAIA which is a div. nobody has heard of but he had such a huge and volatile game he could lose to 5.5er but he also could beat top guys at a Div 1 school.

Showing my age I've watched Goran Ivanisevic play back in the 90's. Guy could beat just about anybody in the world and he could also lose to 200+ player 6-2 6-2 and he had the 2nd best serve in tennis behind Pete. Same with a Mark Philipoussis type guys. These guys were top 10 or 25 year in and out and they lost to plenty of far lesser players. A 5.5er has still many holes that a lesser 5.0 player with the right scouting report could handily still win.

goran was just awful if his serve didnt hit. he was pretty much not even average player from the line.

also goran stopped playing 2006 officially but i think he was pretty much not winning anything after 2004.

tennis changed so bad lately, most number ones from 10 years ago wouldnt be able to touch even djocovic

I dislike the trend tennis has taken in the last ten years or so. When you need a 200km serve that delivers at least one unreturnable a game just to be competitive it makes for some pretty dull matches.

That said, watching people like Soderling annihilate the ball off the ground is a sight to behold.

Also this thread has been extremely entertaining. Wish I had more to contribute, but there's obviously so many people here who know tennis better than me.

it's not that i actually believe i would win, more that i am just curious as to how i would lose.

curtains is an IM, peak rating 2461 in 2000 according to wiki. from what i have read i imagine you'd be a 55-60% favourite in this bet against him.

ok derail over.

so highly depends on what patrik's game looks like and how BA prepares/gets in shape (Along w/ what his game looksl ike). based on given info though 11-1 wasn't enough and PA clearly has the best of it here if everything stated was accurate.

Wrong, wrong and wrong. Sorry, just can't stomach reading that. The most ridiculous thing you said was #1's from 10 years ago wouldn't touch djokovic. You are talking about Sampras and Agassi. You know that right?

Patricks sparring partner is prolly Robin Soderling ( adecent swedish player ranked 4th in the world) or some other top pro that live in Monte Carlo, this will be a walk in the park for Patrick.