Padel Grading
15/03/2026
NLTC PADEL GRADING REVIEW
Thursday 19-3-26
Groups & Times
| Group 1 (6:00-7:00 pm) |
Group 2 (7:00-8:00 pm) |
| Sean Madden |
John Murphy |
| Fiona Behan |
Aine Hennessy |
| Philip Bonner |
Eamonn McClelland |
| Jesmond Meli |
Cathy Healy |
| Paula Maguire |
Paddy Kelly |
| John Carey |
Sue McLoughlin |
| Catherine Cooper |
Wayne Quinn |
| John G Lawlor |
Wojciech Klonica |
| |
|
| Group 3 (8:00-9:00 pm) |
Group 4 (9:00-10:00 pm) |
| Oonagh Parent |
Declan de Kock |
| Robert Jacob |
Mark Maguire |
| Aoife Carey |
Adam Maguire |
| Olga Zuka |
Barry Maguire |
| Raoni Das Neves |
Paul Fitzpatrick |
| Michael Foley |
John Brophy |
| Tomas Sota |
Guy de Bromhead |
| Deirdre Lloyd Fermigier |
John Burke |
Order of Play
| Time |
Court 1 |
| 6:00-6:20 pm |
Sean Madden & John G Lawlor vs Jesmond Meli & Paula Maguire |
| 6:20-6:40 pm |
Sean Madden & Catherine Cooper vs Fiona Behan & Paula Maguire |
| 6:40-7:00 pm |
Sean Madden & John Carey vs John G Lawlor & Jesmond Meli |
| Time |
Court 2 |
| 6:00-6:20 pm |
Fiona Behan & Catherine Cooper vs Philip Bonner & John Carey |
| 6:20-6:40 pm |
John G Lawlor & John Carey vs Philip Bonner & Jesmond Meli |
| 6:40-7:00 pm |
Catherine Cooper & Paula Maguire vs Fiona Behan & Philip Bonner |
| Time |
Court 1 |
| 7:00-7:20 pm |
John Murphy & Wojciech Klonica vs Cathy Healy & Paddy Kelly |
| 7:20-7:40 pm |
John Murphy & Wayne Quinn vs Aine Hennessy & Paddy Kelly |
| 7:40-8:00 pm |
John Murphy & Sue McLoughlin vs Wojciech Klonica & Cathy Healy |
| Time |
Court 2 |
| 7:00-7:20 pm |
Aine Hennessy & Wayne Quinn vs Eamonn McClelland & Sue McLoughlin |
| 7:20-7:40 pm |
Wojciech Klonica & Sue McLoughlin vs Eamonn McClelland & Cathy Healy |
| 7:40-8:00 pm |
Wayne Quinn & Paddy Kelly vs Aine Hennessy & Eamonn McClelland |
| Time |
Court 1 |
| 8:00-8:20 pm |
Oonagh Parent & Deirdre Lloyd Fermigier vs Olga Zuka & Raoni Das Neves |
| 8:20-8:40 pm |
Oonagh Parent & Tomas Sota vs Robert Jacob & Raoni Das Neves |
| 8:40-9:00 pm |
Oonagh Parent & Michael Foley vs Deirdre Lloyd Fermigier & Olga Zuka |
| Time |
Court 2 |
| 8:00-8:20 pm |
Robert Jacob & Tomas Sota vs Aoife Carey & Michael Foley |
| 8:20-8:40 pm |
Deirdre Lloyd Fermigier & Michael Foley vs Aoife Carey & Olga Zuka |
| 8:40-9:00 pm |
Tomas Sota & Raoni Das Neves vs Robert Jacob & Aoife Carey |
| Time |
Court 1 |
| 9:00-9:20 pm |
Declan de Kock & John Burke vs Barry Maguire & Paul Fitzpatrick |
| 9:20-9:40 pm |
Declan de Kock & Guy de Bromhead vs Mark Maguire & Paul Fitzpatrick |
| 9:40-10:00 pm |
Declan de Kock & John Brophy vs John Burke & Barry Maguire |
| Time |
Court 1 |
| 9:00-9:20 pm |
Mark Maguire & Guy de Bromhead vs Adam Maguire & John Brophy |
| 9:20-9:40 pm |
John Burke & John Brophy vs Adam Maguire & Barry Maguire |
| 9:40-10:00 pm |
Guy de Bromhead & Paul Fitzpatrick vs Mark Maguire & Adam Maguire |
Purpose
This document explains how padel player ratings are reviewed at Naas Lawn Tennis Club (NLTC).
The aim is to ensure:
· Players are placed at a level that reflects their current technical and tactical ability.
· Players receive clear, practical feedback and a pathway to improve.
· Why? To keep club sessions, matches, leagues and tournaments competitive and enjoyable.
Why NLTC uses a coach-led review
NLTC uses a coach-led review process rather than an app-only, automated rating. We do this because:
-
Our approach is built around player development (how you play), not just match results (whether you win). We look at fitness, movement, technique and decision-making to give a more objective picture and to highlight specific areas to work on.
-
Padel is played as a pair. As well as individual skills, we assess how you function as a team: ability to play both sides, communication, support for your partner and the tactical choices you make together. These are often the difference in close matches and matter most in tournament play.
-
Current technological options are improving but can still be limited or misleading without coach context. Where useful, we may use video and data to support reviews, but the coach assessment remains the primary reference.
Overview of the NLTC rating system
The NLTC system has two linked parts:
A. The NLTC 1 - 7 Rating Matrix (what we expect at each level).
B. Coach-led assessment against the matrix and observed match performance.
1. NLTC 1 - 7 Rating Matrix
The Rating Matrix is reviewed each year to reflect how padel is progressing in Ireland and the standard of play within NLTC and the wider Irish player pool. NLTC uses a 1 - 7 scale that is widely used in club padel. Level 7 represents the top end of competition and provides a benchmark for the levels below.
For each level, the matrix sets out what a player should demonstrate across fitness, movement, technical execution and tactical awareness.
Half grades (e.g., 3.5, 4.5) are used where a player consistently meets the full requirements of a level and is starting to show some of the qualities of the level above. A half grade does not mean “nearly the next level” in every area; it means the overall profile is between the two levels.
As players move up the scale, progress typically slows. Developing from beginner levels can happen within months with regular play and coaching, while advancing through intermediate and higher levels often takes longer and requires targeted practice.
At every level, two factors are prioritised in reviews: (1) consistency under pressure and (2) fitness/movement. Padel rewards patient point construction, repeated quality contacts and the ability to stay effective during longer rallies. Without these foundations, technical and tactical improvements are harder to apply in match play.
Any updates to the matrix may lead to some players being re-categorised so that club sessions and competitions remain well matched.
2. Coach-led player assessment
Players can receive an initial rating in the following ways:
· New members: during a New Member Session & Experienced players: during a Level Up Session.
· Video review: players may submit match footage, or the club may record a match for review where appropriate.
Active players are reviewed every six months as part of NLTC’s player-review cycle. Reviews may be completed through recorded match analysis and/or on-court observation by the coaching team.
To support fairness and consistency:
· Each review is completed by at least two NLTC padel coaches & notes are kept, including key feedback and the rationale for the rating.
· Any upgrade or downgrade requires agreement from a minimum of two coaches, with the decision recorded.
3. Reviews outside the six-month cycle
Outside the scheduled reviews, a player’s level may be reconsidered in the following cases:
· Tournament performance (internal, external or international): consistently strong results (for example, reaching semi-finals or better in appropriate-standard events) may prompt a review.
· Increased training and match volume: players taking regular lessons and/or playing more than once per week often progress faster.
· Players who mainly compete at other clubs: where a player does not play regularly at NLTC but is active elsewhere, may request a review via match video or an arranged recorded match at NLTC.
· Long-term injury or return to play: where an injury significantly affects movement or performance, a temporary reassessment may be required for safety. Any return-to-level plan will be agreed with the player and monitored to reduce re-injury risk.
Once a player has been reviewed outside the regular window, the next additional review will normally be no sooner than four months later, unless there is clear evidence of change through structured coaching and increased play.
Common feedback areas
When reviewing matches, coaches most often comment on:
· Ready position and preparation.
· Groundstroke and volley technique.
· Court positioning relative to the ball, partner and opponents.
· Quality, selection and timing of lobs and overheads.
· Movement, balance and stability at contact.
· Defensive skills (single wall and double wall) and transitions.
· Shot consistency and error management.
· Tactical choices and point construction.
· Variation (speed, power, spin and height) and using the right option at the right time.
Final note
Coaches make the final decision on player ratings. We welcome respectful questions and discussions about feedback, but pressure on coaches or club volunteers to change a rating will not influence the outcome. The focus is always on helping players improve and ensuring that club play is well balanced for everyone.
Summary of the levels
Level 1 - Beginner: New to padel (often new to racquet sports). Rallies are short and slow, technique is very basic, and glass is confusing (often standing too close or too far). Net play and overheads are limited, positioning is unclear, and players tend to play “as individuals” with little tactical awareness.
Level 2 - Lower Intermediate: Can keep a steadier rally at a slow pace and starts to get basic glass defence going (especially on the forehand side). Volleys and bandeja are starting to appear but are inconsistent; movement and positioning improve but “no-man’s land” is common. Early signs of playing with a partner and using lobs, but tactics may still be reactive.
Level 3 – Upper Intermediate: Fitness and padel-specific footwork are improving, and players begin to understand spin and use glass more regularly, though reading direction/spin may still a challenge. Volleys and bandeja are used more often but may break down under pressure; unforced errors remain a factor. Players communicate and try simple tactics, with a growing focus on getting to/keeping the net.
Level 4 - High level club player: Comfortable in long rallies with faster, more accurate movement, and solid, consistent groundstrokes (especially flat/slice) with better control of placement and pace. Single and double glass defence is reliable, transition volleys are consistent, and bandeja/vibora is fairly dependable. Positioning at the net is strong and teamwork/tactics become more intentional, using lobs and better defence-to-attack transitions.
Level 5 - Advanced club player: High-intensity rallies are sustainable; strokes are technically solid with very few unforced errors and clear shot purpose under pressure. Glass defence is strong against most shots, lobs have variety, volleys are low/deep and used with intent (including occasional dropshots), and overheads are a real weapon (vibora, x3, rulo, etc.). Pair tactics are adaptable; positioning is almost always correct and point construction targets strengths/weaknesses.
Level 6 - Top competitive level: Excellent movement and footwork allow seamless transitions between defence, rally and attack, and shot selection is consistently “right” for the moment. Glass defence is controlled even against heavy spin and pace, net play is precise and relentless, and overheads often decide points. Teamwork is highly coordinated, and strategy can be adjusted mid-match to exploit opponents and shift momentum.
Detailed description of the levels
| |
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|
|
|
1. Fitness & Footwork
|
Limited physical endurance, affecting shot selection, and execution. Can sustain a short length rally at very slow pace. No understanding of padel specific footwork.
|
Limited physical endurance. Can sustain a medium length rally at a slow pace. Footwork may be better due to more practice, or coming from oter sports.
|
Limited physical endurance. Rallies are longer and fitness tends to determine who ends up losing the point. Footwork starts to be padel specific, but still needs work.
|
Can sustain comfortably long rallies. Court movement tends to be faster. Footwork is fast, accurate and helps them to execute better shots.
|
Can sustain high intensity matches where almost every rally is very long. Fast court movement and footwork
|
Can sustain high intensity matches, with very fast court movement, in fast paced and long rallies. Footwork is on point and allows them to transition excellently between phases of play.
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2.Groundstrokes
|
Players do not have a racquet sports background, hit with basic flat forehands, with limited or no technique and very low ability to execute any backhand.
|
Some racquet sports experience from any sport (including padel for a while). More understanding of the connection between racquet, ball and outcome, but still inconsistent results as a whole.
|
Difference between the three spins, sliced, flat and top spin is starting to be understood, but technique is still a problem, and so are the results, with many unforced errors
|
Flat and sliced strokes are consistent, they are more comfortable with backhand flat groundstrokes due to more practice and experience. Variation in power, placement and spin with less UE Groundstrokes are quite consistent in most situations.
|
Technically solid in flat and sliced shots on both sides. Uses chiquitas and topspin only when needed, with very few unforced errors. At this level, the player has multiple winning, very reliable shots even under pressure.
|
Shot selection is on point, groundstrokes are super consistent with flat, slice, topspin and chiquita shots used appropriately. Speed, effects and angles are handled perfectly
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
3.Glass defence
|
Players have limited understanding of the ball bounce off the glass, and are either too close, or too far to be able to return even medium height balls at slow to medium speed. Double glass defence is not understood at this point.
|
Can defend balls against a single wall, although forehand is stronger than backhand. Start to get some success in defending the double glass. Turning at the corners rarely happens. Lobs are used but without much control over them.
|
Consistently defending against a single wall, but struggle to read direction and spins fr3om their opponents. Double wall defence starts to happen more often but can't control the way they hit after turning or stepping away. Lobs are a basic defence tool
|
Single glass defence is very consistent using sliced shots. Double walls, turns in both directions are the norm in long rallies but can break down under pressure. Lobs are high and relatively deep but lack variety.
|
Single and double glass are well understood only struggling with maximum spin or speed from their opponents. Consistent lobs, with variation in height, speed and angle.
|
Perfect control of double wall defence, regardless of the receiving shots' spin (vibora, bandeja etc). They can defend to obtain an advantage. Lobs are deep, a little sliced, high and very well placed
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
4.Net play
|
Very limited ability to execute volleys and no evidence of technique. Occasionally prefer to let the ball bounce in front of them instead of taking it on the rise.
|
Forehand volleys are better than backhand ones. Slicing their forehand is somewhat understood and occasionally applied, but backhands are a struggle. Usually, don't hold a strong READY POSITION, hence the poor contact points.
|
Forehand volleys start to be sliced regularly and backhand volleys become a bit less uncomfortable. Still have to get reminded of holding their racquet when preparing their backhand shot, hence the inconsistent results
|
Consistent in medium to low height sliced volleys, not many translating into winners. Transition volleys are well understood and produced with consistency.
|
Volleys are low, sliced and overall, DEEP. They understand the difference between transition and winner volleys, and when to use them. Can dropshot occasionally.
|
All volleys are very sliced, fast paced and extremely consistent. Direction is precise and can dropshot at ease.
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
5.Overheads
|
No understanding of overheads, inconsistent results.
|
Bandeja is starting to be understood, but players struggle with basic technique. They may rely on power smash as a winning shot.
|
Bandeja is used regularly, though with inconsistent execution, not great depth and not as sliced as it should be. Flat smash used regularly but many times leading to losing the point instead of winning it.
|
Bandeja is used regularly and always relatively sliced. Viboras have started to appear, but are quite inconsistent. Smash is flat if it exists, topspin smash not understood. At this stage, the smash is not consistently effective and can lead to them losing the point against better or fitter players
|
Bandejas are no longer a problem and most times are substituted with viboras which remain low, are heavily sliced and very deep. Great understanding of all overheads including x3 smashes, flat smashes, rulos (fence smashes), ganchos(hooks), etc. Shot selection tends to be on point.
|
Shot selection is on point and overheads tend to dictate who wins the point. Extreme slices and a lot of spin on every shot they play.
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
6.Court Position
|
Limited understanding of where to stand in defence or at the net. Do not come to the net after they serve.
|
Net position is slightly better more often. Defence down the line is slightly better, but cross court defence position is poor. They come to the net after they serve, but find themselves in no man's land zone too often
|
They always come to the net after they serve. Net position is now good but the defence not as much: they stay in an accurate position when down the line and cross court are starting to understand where to stand so they can deal with opponents more efficiently and read balls
|
Net position is great and they understand when to close in after a good volley. Down the line defence is no longer a problem, but cross court they still find themselves out of position and not being able to defend more difficult shots, or becoming too inconsistent in them.
|
Net position is perfect depending on the phase of play. They may need minor adjustments when defending cross court, but overall they position themselves perfectly.
|
Seamless transition from defence to attack and back, when appropriate. Always in the best possible position according to the phase of play they are at: Attack, Rally or Defend.
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
7.Partner Work
|
Play as individuals, rather than as a team, and are focused on their shots with limited awareness of their partners' shots. No understanding of moving in partnership depending of where the ball is, or the game situation.
|
They start to move in tandem with their partner front and back, but inconsistently, and not as much sideways. They start to understand when to attack or defend depending on their partner's position but again, partner work is embryonic at this stage. Limited understanding of roles of left vs right player
|
They communicate with their partner and design some sort of strategy. They show some consistency on how they play their role on court (left/right side), and adjust their game in relation to their partner. As a pair, they may struggle to cover the middle effectively and leave too many gaps on court, which can be easily exploited by slightly better opponents.
|
Effort to develop tactics with their partner on a consistent basis. They are aware of each other’s' court position at most times and adjust their individual game and shot selection accordingly. The players understand their role (left vs right) and adapt their tactics based on that most of the time.
|
They adapt their game to complement their partner, spot patterns and devise strategy. They may break traditional court formation if and when required. Will cover empty court spaces when their partner is under pressure. As a pair, they attempt, regardless of the partner, to cover up their joint weaknesses.
|
Can alter their game to fit their agreed strategy. Can perform in any court formation (i.e. front and back) and adjust to the opponent’s game. Will cover any space left by their partner and also will modify their opponent’s choice selection by faking moves or making faints.
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
8.Strategy and Point Construction
|
They don't adjust their game in relation to their cross-court opponent. Limited understanding of attack vs defence and therefore, unable to use shots to turn defence into attack.
|
They start to adjust their game in relation to their opponents. Lobs are used but consistently and struggle to play slightly sliced shots off the glass to take advantage (i.e. bajadas). They can identify stronger players and try to avoid them but results are still inconsistent.
|
They react to the opponent, but are unable to anticipate, take control and dictate. They understand opponents' strengths, but cannot see their weaknesses. They start to play off the glass in a way that can help them building the point (i.e. using sliced instead of top spin shots) or choosing lobs instead of bajadas, but tactically still choosing lobs instead of bajadas, but tactically still struggle to choose the best option. They understand how to transition between defence and attack and start focusing on retaining the net position, though they struggle to do so consistently.
|
Good point construction, using lobs to regain the net and transitioning well between defence and attack. They may attempt more complex strategy, but in a trial-and-error fashion. They can see opponents' strengths and occasionally can identify their weakness, but may not be fully able to adjust their game. Their shot selection supports their tactical choice, not the other way around. Still some technical deficiencies separate them from the level above
|
Accurate point construction, but rushed at times especially in defence when opponents put more pressure with spins and angles. They can locate opponents’ strengths, weaknesses, and can exploit their own strengths accordingly. Weaknesses are still visible. Shot selection supports their tactical approach and there is clear intent and purpose in every shot.
|
Player can readjust their strategy as many times as necessary "on the go" in order to in the match. They avoid their opponents' strengths and exploit their weaknesses. They can anticipate their opponents moves several shots ahead and change the pace, dynamic or situation in a way that favours them and gets them out of a losing streak.
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|