Rate the kid again

Vince64 wrote: Hey Ben would 2100 player out of Seattle happen this have the initials BC and when he wasn't up here going to school lived down there?

fatt wrote: benfb wrote: Vince64 wrote: Hey Ben would 2100 player out of Seattle happen this have the initials BC and when he wasn't up here going to school lived down there? Actually, i was thinking of a certain professional poker player. Is that enough of a hint? the one with a beard? come on! he is not 2100 yet; also he is a pro at venting only; and I do not say from where.

Yes it is. His initials would be CS. The player Mr. fatt is thinking about is one of the players CS makes the match last 5 games. He can be up 2-0 and 10-6 and yet it amazingly ends up going 5 games! Lol

fatt wrote: benfb wrote: Vince64 wrote: Hey Ben would 2100 player out of Seattle happen this have the initials BC and when he wasn't up here going to school lived down there? Actually, i was thinking of a certain professional poker player. Is that enough of a hint? the one with a beard? come on! he is not 2100 yet; also he is a pro at venting only; and I do not say from where.

ahsq wrote: NextLevel wrote: mts388 wrote: NextLevel wrote: I won't keep the video posted for long but I would like the ratings experts (LuckyLoop, bes, benfb) and anyone who guessed that kid as being under 1500 in any manner possible to review that video quickly and post their estimate.  I want to take the video off after a day or two. I see a lot of kids in Northern California and although it's very difficult to guess ratings from a video, I think the kid is better than 1700.  The OP or the kids above?  <span style="line-height: 1.4;">By the way, don't let that giant fool you - both kids are 12 or younger... this is from the mini cadets at Nationals last year.  </span> Here is another video from 4 years ago of two 2000+ juniors.  If you adjust for the opposition level, do they look that much better than the OP? These are two of the best cadets in the country today and they were good players four years ago. Again, anyone see a major difference between what they are doing and what the OP kid is doing when you account for the fact that the OP kid is playing higher level opposition?  these 2 are good. powerful and low acr loops on both wings. too bad I cannot see the ball landings.

Have you ever considered the way the rally went, there was little variance to how the ball was flying, everything was like a drill. I'm even certain that every time these boys play at their respective club, the type of balls they get are all similar to the video you presented. The same kids would have difficulty playing consistent unorthodox players like the OP kid is playing.

hard to tell the OP Kids rating. but I'm guessing he was around 200 to 300 points lower than his opponent.

NextLevel wrote: <span style="line-height: 1.4;">This comment about the kid teeing off on "easy balls" is an interesting one.  How many of you face people at your level who give you "hard balls" when you topspin to them?  And how many of you notice how much slower your loops look on video?</span> <span style="line-height: 1.4;"> </span> The kid managed to get her to miss by topspinning the ball directly into her forehand a couple of times.  Surely, that should count for something when measuring the quality of his topspin. Whether I could beat this kid or not, I wouldn't enjoy playing him, that's for sure.  He is clearly at that level that Cheng Yinghua says that you have to do something to trouble him and make him miss.  That level is well above 1200 (it's about 1600).

Well, most of the opponents I play against counterhit against loops, or block aggresively. The lady in the video mostly did soft, medium paced blocks, or took a step back and lift the ball back with, what seemed like, mild topspin. This is pretty much what I do against the kids I train. Although none of them is as good as this kid, the exercise makes them look a whole lot better then watching them play matches against each other.

As for loops looking slower on vid, I rarely have the priviligie to watch myself on video, but Ive found that how the speed is perceived is more about the angle of the video then anything else. Cant say it looks slower, or faster.

And, for the record, I would have put the OP kid above 1200, cause from what Ive seen of 1200, consistancy is almost none existing. Its Also true that I would have put him below 2000, Well below actually. 1500-1700 seems reasonable, defending on how he handle opponents of his own level and opponents who actually try to put pressure on him.

NextLevel wrote: Impressive. Would be nice to see him play other kids.