Two players can have the same rating but play completely differently. One is super consistent, just keeps the ball in play. The other is aggressive, goes for winners, misses more but can dominate points.
And then everyone thinks they’re better on the left…
So you end up with “balanced” games that feel completely off depending on styles, sides, and who you’re paired with.
At that point the rating doesn’t really mean much. And the games just suck
Ratings work to a degree. Sometimes they are off, sometimes pretty accurate. A very useful tool in general. But has downsides and you have to learn how to use it properly.
Yesterday I (3.6) played with a guy (2.9). He said his actual level is way higher. After a few points it becomes clear, that his rating is fair.
I think you have to allow at least 0.5 either way as being potentially off in terms of accuracy. What I mean is if you're level is 3 exactly it's possible that someone with a rating of 2.5 could be better than you (and conversely someone 3.5 could be worse)
I think it's highly unlikely that as a 3, someone who's a 4 is worse and also unlikely someone as a 2 is better.
And then it's just bit a random in between hopefully at some point it leads to good matches
I'm 2.2 and I'm better than many 3.5. and I keep losing when I partner with a 3.xx which deducts too many points because he's and idiot 😅.
The problem is that these ratings depend a lot who you play with generally. If i always play with the same group of people. The rating is related to that group. If you move away from the group you're resting won't match the others cohort.
It's like you being the best player in a pound of bad players and then, when moving to a pound of better player you are the worst, but your rate is not aligned with that.
So yes, rating doesn't make sense and I'm sorry for all of you without a good group of people to play with away from playtomic bullsh*t
2.2 after how many competitve games? If you've played a lot of games and you think your rating is this low due to bad luck then you should probably consider a levelling session
The error range is much higher. I have a rating of 0,6 in Playtomic due to some bad matchups early on and only 15ish ranked games, meanwhile I play in intermediate trainings every week and am ranked in the top 3 of my club’s beginner/low intermediate tournament standings. Pretty sure my actual rating is around 2.
The inherent issue is that players play within player pools on their same region/club/days of the week/time bracket.
Like, maybe you only play mornings from Monday to Friday and you win all those matches you may go up to a 4 but then a 2.8 that only plays on the weekends crushes you.
This happens with online games too where server regions will naturally develop their different ranks
Any actual solution would need cross polination of player pools and to some extent being ok with your score being influenced by other players matches
Ratings can only ever work after a significant number of games AND playing comp games outside your circle.
Ive got a friend who is almost rated a 5 and can barely hit the ball over the net because he beats his even worse mates every week on repeat.
Our allow for "0.5 eqeuivalent" is a level within a category. We use the same Category system as Argentina uses. So a Cat 6 can be low, mid, or high. A low 6 is closer to beginner level where a high 6 is definitely a lower intermediate level. A big difference.
But aside from the level difference, someone thinks they are a high 6 but really they are a mid 6, those of us who play both sides can be rated differently per side.
I am at least one of these levels higher (maybe 2) on my better side just due to how often I play it and how I dont play the other side nearly as often. But that variability is part of the fun.
In the uk, every time I’ve known a player who has gone for a levelling session, the coach has just bumped them up playtomic points independent of ability. Small sample size but I’ve seen it half a dozen times now.
Then they quickly go back to where they were as the reliability score goes down to 50% I believe.
I had an open match this week where we signed up to an evenly matched pair, then when we got there they had shot up a full point above me and my partners level. We won relatively comfortably.
I don’t understand why players want to jump above their actual level or coaches do it.
At certain levels, all the playstyles you mention work. The higher your ranking is, the more consistent people play. You won't see baseline players or people who just go for winners on advanced levels
I find most ratings are of as some players will get their ratings increased by coaches everytime they loose a game on platforms like nettla. The reliability score on Playtomic is a little bit more accurate, but players still can adjust the rating.
Would you say Galan and Chingotto have the same level (since they have the same ranking)? You could argue that Galan is the better one since he is the more aggressive one with more finishers. But I could also argue that Chingotto is the better one because he builds the point for Galan to finish and is very consistent.
In the end, ratings are just for guidance. What will determine your level will be how you play together with your partner. I can play much worse or better, depending on who I partner up with and the side of the court.
In the end, it all boils down to your chemistry and complimentary skills.
If you don't want to have surprises, find a partner that compliments you and stick to them.
That’s a really good point actually.
Do you think at a certain level ratings stop mattering as much and it becomes more about chemistry and how players complement each other? And if that’s the case, what happens if partners change every set just like in certain formats that clubs organize; given they’re almost at the same rating just like you mentioned….. does it balance out over time or still feel inconsistent?
I feel like all we want as padel players is a fast convenient method to join a match and be confident that in the next 1.5-2hrs we will have a very very solid game that’s tough challenging memorable you either leave saying damn I’m shit at this game or leave like woahhh that was tough game but we won
You also have to realize that so much of this game is mental fitness and not just technique or otherwise - a 5 can play like a 3 on a bad day and a 3 can play like a 4 on a good day, what your partner does can greatly affect your level as well so i do agree with you that the current system is flawed and is not accurate in most cases
Ratings are based on results. People can win matches with different styles init? I dont know what you are complaining about, a more aggresive player need not have a better rating. Actually screw ratings, play tournaments, you will stop being so worried about ratings
This is me and my partner, I am the aggressive one he is the more consistent one, but I think we are are the same level just better at different things. This works well for us though.
I also find because here in Australia if you go to different clubs people ratings are highly inflated compared to my main club I play at.
They usually work in a closed environment and eventually you find your group of known people you play with, or tournament levels. It’s not bad though , there isn’t really a better alternative
lol no they’re not, they just require large amounts of matches to be reliable, and work better the higher level you are. In Spain any 5 with hundreds of matches is very likely to be at the exact level you expect a 5. Yes a 1.5 with 6 matches could be anything from 0.5 to a 2.5 but that’s the nature of ratings
