Posts always have a life of their own and often times go in a direction very different from the first post. Enlightening for me in this thread has been the way players perceive themselves. It seems natural when one plays against a known player, and that player has a standard or rating, that we judge ourselves comparing our play to theirs, and then assume, we are a player in a certain range. Obviously those who play in sanctioned events and have multiple games with various players are the best judge of knowing their true skill level.
Is there a need for a less formal, uniform standard, sanctioned, second tier rating system that would be easier for more players to play? A way for most all players to universally play so a rating/ranking standard was established. TT is an international sport with no universal standard.
What about the mass of people, the majority of people who actively play 3-4 times a week, who only have their local clubs, and other clubs they visit and play, as a barometer to judge their skill. Question: In the US, of all the table tennis clubs, how many have sanctioned tournaments vs. how many have local non-sanctioned tournaments? If such a second tier was created it would seem to be a strong promotion for the sport by allowing players advance and eventually join the governing TT bodies. In the US, college football is the feeder system for the NFL. D League feeds the NBA, and Rookie, A, High A, AA, AAA feeds MLB. And what about TT? What feeds it?