PDA

View Full Version : Tennis is a game of percentages!

sinneTennis
05-23-2007, 12:51 PM
That's what my coach always says... she's always ranting on about 8 out of 10 times, so and so will happen (like they will hit a passing shot), and 7 out of 10, they will hit crosscourt.. etc. Does anyone have a website where they explain the percentages?

Geezer Guy
05-23-2007, 01:00 PM
Almost 4 out of 5 new players ask that question.

warneck
05-23-2007, 01:10 PM
SinneTennis, no player is a 100% copy of another.. So a correct percentage calculation can't really be done. But it's about being aware of the PRINCIPLES..

sinneTennis
05-23-2007, 01:54 PM
SinneTennis, no player is a 100% copy of another.. So a correct percentage calculation can't really be done. But it's about being aware of the PRINCIPALS..

Im betting you don't know the principles seeing as you spelled it wrong.. :p

sinneTennis
05-23-2007, 01:55 PM
Almost 4 out of 5 new players ask that question.

I seriously doubt that seeing as not alot of people know about percentages..

Bodacious DVT
05-23-2007, 02:04 PM
5 out of 6 statistics are fake.

you cant really assume that something will always work say 6/7 times, etc, because a player can adapt to changes at any given time.

tennis is however, 90% mental, and im not making that up

mucat
05-23-2007, 02:08 PM
5 out of 6 statistics are fake.

you cant really assume that something will always work say 6/7 times, etc, because a player can adapt to changes at any given time.

tennis is however, 90% mental, and im not making that up

Yes, tennis is 90% mental and 80% racket. ;)

Bodacious DVT
05-23-2007, 04:49 PM
just remember, 60% of the time, it works every time

jasoncho92
05-23-2007, 04:50 PM
Yes, tennis is 90% mental and 80% racket. ;)
Of course since that makes so much sense -_-

All-court Hero
05-23-2007, 06:14 PM
^^
A Salute to the greatest movie of all time!

AngeloDS
05-23-2007, 06:18 PM
Tennis is indeed a game of percentages. However, you need to be aware of what you do and how people react. A lot of people are "reactive" tennis players, they aren't proactive. Thus, a lot of people will indeed just naturally hit cross-court or down the line depending on what shot you give them.

You just have to be more observant on what people do and how they respond to your shots.

The best is to go is go check a few books; one of them is Pressure Tennis and Think to Win.

sinneTennis
05-23-2007, 06:20 PM
hmmmm okay. i understand :-o

Mr. Sean
05-23-2007, 08:09 PM
If tennis were about percentages then everyone would be hitting moonballs and lobs during matches, which still happens when I play some people (SUCKS). I think its more rewarding and more competitive when you actually hit the ball harder and go for some angles especially during singles. What bothers me the most is when people watch these moonballers and lobbers and think that all tennis is played that way. Makes are sport look like a sissy sport. TENNIS IS MORE ABOUT PRECISION, NOT PERCENTAGES.

Noveson
05-23-2007, 08:45 PM
If tennis were about percentages then everyone would be hitting moonballs and lobs during matches, which still happens when I play some people (SUCKS). I think its more rewarding and more competitive when you actually hit the ball harder and go for some angles especially during singles. What bothers me the most is when people watch these moonballers and lobbers and think that all tennis is played that way. Makes are sport look like a sissy sport. TENNIS IS MORE ABOUT PRECISION, NOT PERCENTAGES.

You make OUR sport look dumb...

It is about percentages, if it weren't then people would be trying to slap winners all over the place and missing horribly(aka you).

mucat
05-23-2007, 08:50 PM
Me better... me hit hard, arrrh!! hungry, steak, now...

shindemac
05-23-2007, 09:03 PM
The way percentages work is simple. They add up to 100%. It's simple to understand. You make it sound like rocket science, like noobs can't understand this. 1+1=2.

Solat
05-24-2007, 02:45 AM
Me better... me hit hard, arrrh!! hungry, steak, now...

:grin: :grin: :grin: :grin:

Mr. Blond
05-24-2007, 03:10 AM
Ok....this is a potential flaming coming my way, but I will venture into this thread with some trepidation.

The percentages your coach is always touting are those of the safest shot from your opponent. The best way to explain this is with a scenario. Lets say you hit a deep topspin shot into the corner. This shot will obviously pull the player deep off court in that corner as he/she struggles to return your shot. That player has 3 options on that return.

1. hit a high lob moonball to allow them time to recover after hitting your shot. This is a good option for the slower player, but has some risks in that if the ball is not placed deep enough, you can smash it at the net, or kill it with a good drop volley. That is what you would like to happen to end the point.

2. The player can struggle to hit an offensive shot off of your deep shot. This typically will end up being a topsin shot down the line of the side of the court they are on. This is a very VERY low percentage shot because the ball will have the tendancy to slide wide on this because your shot has topspin on it. This scenario could work out for your opponent, but more than likely, the point will end on their error.

3. The highest percentage shot for your opponenet would be to return your deep topspin shot with a crosscourt topspin shot. There are many less uncontrollable variables in this shot for them, so statistically they can get it back with less error. Not to mention, corner to corner on the court is the longest distance, allowing them to return with less worry of hitting the ball deep.

The trick to playing these percentages is to realize that you have just played that aggressive deep topspin shot that will set one of these three events into motion. How you respond to either of these depends on if you recognize it.

In the high percentage event they return back cross court, if you are moving in to the net, a good volley will take care of their return. If they pop up the lob, again moving in will put that away.

If they do decide to go down the line and pass, you can reach for it to volley, or just hope the statistics and difficulty of the shot will pull it wide.

Note that I have been talking about the percentages the entire time, but have never given you any numbers....that is because depending on your opponenet, these percentages change according to their skill. Understanding the eb and flow of a point is something that comes with years of play and eventually you will see it without much struggle.

realize that this is just one shot in the thousands that can be hit, but it does illustrate the thinking beind high percentage tennis.

I hope this helps to clarify, and opolagize for any spelling errors it is 6 am when I am writting this.

zapvor
05-24-2007, 09:39 AM
i hate this....tennis is not a game of percentages. you go out there and you have fun and you hit and you play. i cant even explain it.

dman72
05-24-2007, 10:34 AM
If tennis were about percentages then everyone would be hitting moonballs and lobs during matches, which still happens when I play some people (SUCKS). I think its more rewarding and more competitive when you actually hit the ball harder and go for some angles especially during singles. What bothers me the most is when people watch these moonballers and lobbers and think that all tennis is played that way. Makes are sport look like a sissy sport. TENNIS IS MORE ABOUT PRECISION, NOT PERCENTAGES.

Actually, at the 4.0 level and below, it IS about percentages and it IS a sissy sport. The moonballer at 3.5 will beat the 3.5 wannabe-basher 8 out of 10 times. The only argument you can make against moonballers is that they will have a very hard time progressing past 4.0 because they are not shot makers. For the guy who plays once a week...maybe that's not reason enough to stop pushing.

I played a guy indoors as a sub in a 3.5 league back in January. The guy was quite overweight, slow, and about 5'8. I am 6'1 190lbs and at the time I was going to a gym 3 times per week. He had no stroke that would scare anyone. I have a forehand and first serve that makes people think I'm a sandbagger when they see me in warmup...unfortunately, the rest of my game sucks. :D

I swear to you that he didn't hit a single groundstroke that wasn't a moonball the entire match. The final score was 4-6 6-4-7-5 my favor. Almost every point was either my winner or my error....either blowing the ball past him in a corner, or it being 6 inches long or in the net. No one in their right mind seeing the 2 of us walk on the court would think that he had a chance against me, but I almost lost. That's tennis. It's not basketball or football where athleticism is a huge part of the equation, and that's actually why I like it.

GuyClinch
05-24-2007, 11:48 AM
I don't think moonballers are pushers - a moonball is hit with a full stroke. But I agree with what your saying. The downside of this is that you can lose to some really unathletic people. It's quite depressing sometimes.

Pete

dman72
05-24-2007, 11:56 AM
I don't think moonballers are pushers - a moonball is hit with a full stroke. But I agree with what your saying. The downside of this is that you can lose to some really unathletic people. It's quite depressing sometimes.

Pete

It can be, but not in the case of the guy I played. I think he had a fairly losely strung LM radical and he was basically just sending the ball about 20 feet in the air over the net, with it landing about 3 feet from the baseline. The fact that he didn't execute a full stroke and that it didn't have much topspin gave me opportunities to absolutely crush some of these..but again..some of my returns went long, some didn't clear the net, and he won points because of that.

Mr. Blond
05-24-2007, 12:29 PM
i hate this....tennis is not a game of percentages. you go out there and you have fun and you hit and you play. i cant even explain it.

I understand what you are saying about enjoying your play...but you at the same time must strive to improve your game would you not agree? The percentages theory is just one aspect of making yourself better by predicting your opponents replys. I don't know one sport where players do not try to predict their opponents move to their advantage. Why would you hate this?

SlapShot
05-24-2007, 12:45 PM
i hate this....tennis is not a game of percentages. you go out there and you have fun and you hit and you play. i cant even explain it.

That may work at lower levels, but as you move up, you need to begin building your points and playing your strength against your opponents weakness.

Tennis is a game of percentages - the two numbers to keep in mind when playing tennis are 3 and 4:

3 to 4 feet over the net at all times
3/4 pace
3-4 feet inside the baseline

That's how you win at 4.0 and below.

sinneTennis
05-24-2007, 01:00 PM
Too bad i'm higher then 4.0 haha.

SlapShot
05-24-2007, 01:20 PM
Too bad i'm higher then 4.0 haha.

Well, I was speaking in general terms because more people were asking about percentages.

If you want a good example, watch how Nadal plays - he is clearing the net by at least 3 feet on every shot. If you clip the tape, you didn't miss by a half an inch, you missed by at least a foot from where you should be aiming.

OrangeOne
05-24-2007, 02:04 PM
This thread really depresses me (and not just because people seem to miss all of the humour in the first few replies).

Anyone who thinks tennis is about hitting winners, at almost any level including pro, is kidding themselves. Tennis is about hitting back one more ball than your opponent, and at the upper levels, you can insert the word "quality" in there.

To the OP - your coach is right to talk of percentages, any good coach will teach a player the likely results of key shots, what to expect when certain things happen.

Oh - and to those insulting players that almost beat them... why? If someone almost beats you, and you weren't injured or ill, well they're as good a player as you. They may play differently, but that's tennis.

sinneTennis
05-24-2007, 02:15 PM
This thread really depresses me (and not just because people seem to miss all of the humour in the first few replies).

Anyone who thinks tennis is about hitting winners, at almost any level including pro, is kidding themselves. Tennis is about hitting back one more ball than your opponent, and at the upper levels, you can insert the word "quality" in there.

To the OP - your coach is right to talk of percentages, any good coach will teach a player the likely results of key shots, what to expect when certain things happen.

Oh - and to those insulting players that almost beat them... why? If someone almost beats you, and you weren't injured or ill, well they're as good a player as you. They may play differently, but that's tennis.

Agreed :)

dman72
05-25-2007, 05:08 AM
Oh - and to those insulting players that almost beat them... why? If someone almost beats you, and you weren't injured or ill, well they're as good a player as you. They may play differently, but that's tennis.

If someone hits a topspin lob on every shot, that may be a succesful strategy to not get killed, but it is boring tennis and you should be admonished for it. It's not fun at all for the other player. It would be the same if I hit drop shots against fat boy on every stroke because he can't move. That would not be in the "spirit" of amateur competition. This is where the "wimp tennis" attitude comes in. If a guy is going to hit a topspin lob on every shot, I'll give him his win and play somebody else, because he is a ****** and I don't feel like wasting my time.

OrangeOne
05-25-2007, 05:17 AM
If someone hits a topspin lob on every shot, that may be a succesful strategy to not get killed, but it is boring tennis and you should be admonished for it.

Say what? Who died and made you the judge of what is and isn't exciting tennis?

It's not fun at all for the other player.

Errr, sorry, but I play for my own fun and entertainment, this is usually by aiming to win. And I'll do it any way I see fit!

It would be the same if I hit drop shots against fat boy on every stroke because he can't move. That would not be in the "spirit" of amateur competition.

Well there's 'hitting' and there's 'competition'. Personally, if I'm competing to win, well I compete to win, employing the best strategy I can.

This is where the "wimp tennis" attitude comes in. If a guy is going to hit a topspin lob on every shot, I'll give him his win and play somebody else, because he is a ****** and I don't feel like wasting my time.

Why can't you just beat him? If someone hits a TS lob all the time, smash it back all the time! If TS lobs were the be-all-and-end-all of tennis, Fed would be using them exclusively.

I will never understand how people can think that some styles are 'right' and some are not! Tennis is hitting one more ball back than your opponent does, and doing so in whatever form you think you can win best with.

SlapShot
05-25-2007, 06:26 AM
Why can't you just beat him? If someone hits a TS lob all the time, smash it back all the time! If TS lobs were the be-all-and-end-all of tennis, Fed would be using them exclusively.

I will never understand how people can think that some styles are 'right' and some are not! Tennis is hitting one more ball back than your opponent does, and doing so in whatever form you think you can win best with.

Bullseye!

I play tennis because I enjoy it, yes, but I REALLY enjoy winning matches, and if I need to hit heavy topspin moonballs because the guy is sending every one of them into the net and giving me free points, that's what I'm going to do.

No one way of playing tennis is more "right" than another, provided you can win.

SlapShot
05-25-2007, 06:29 AM
If someone hits a topspin lob on every shot, that may be a succesful strategy to not get killed, but it is boring tennis and you should be admonished for it. It's not fun at all for the other player. It would be the same if I hit drop shots against fat boy on every stroke because he can't move. That would not be in the "spirit" of amateur competition. This is where the "wimp tennis" attitude comes in. If a guy is going to hit a topspin lob on every shot, I'll give him his win and play somebody else, because he is a ****** and I don't feel like wasting my time.

You're a young pup, aren't you?

Tennis is about using your game to win, and if that means hitting the ball softly and deep (read: pusher), so be it. If you can win like that, then it is a good strategy.

There is no "spirit" or "goodwill" when it comes to amateur competition - is your goal still not to win the match? If I'm playing someone who loves me hitting the ball with a good amount of pace and topspin, I'm not going to do that. I'm going to slice the ball back and take as much pace out of him as I can.

penpal
05-25-2007, 07:03 AM
The immature young man's preferred tennis scenario:

He's playing his match, the girl he likes has come to watch. His opponent hits a hard shot and he crushes a shot back -- hits it so hard it makes a loud pop when it hits the back fence. Hits it so hard it gets the girl's attention (she had previously been looking at a notebook and giggling with her girlfriend). This happens again and again during the match. After the match, the girl gushes over his power and strength - she can't get over how good he is.

It is irrelevant that he lost the match 2-6, 3-6.

The scenario the immature young man H-A-T-E-S:

The girl of his fancy is watching. His opponent hits a very soft looking ball his way, he winds up, takes a massively powerful swing, and his shot either plows into the bottom of the net or embarassingly sails beyond the confines of the fence altogether. He looks over and the girl is giggling with her girlfriend (she may or may not be giggling about his shot, as she is only half paying attention anyway, but he is sure she is laughing at him). This happens again and again during the match. After the match, the girl says "Oh, is it over already?" and announces she is "starving" for some french fries ... not a word about the match.

Again, it is irrelevant that he lost the match 2-6, 3-6.

:D

dman72
05-25-2007, 08:23 AM
Wow, we have some serious pushers here.

To me, there is a difference between a high percentage guy who just gets the ball back with moderate pace and a guy who lolipops over the net with no pace on EVERY stroke. I play a guy from this board regularly who calls himself a "pusher", but I don't view that as a negative...he wins more often than not, he gets to every ball and has no real exploitable weaknesses. When I'm on, I can beat him, but my consistency isn't there yet.

With the person I played in the league, I'm talking about one specifically annoying player, and you dopes are are wipping out your dime store psycho analysis and jumping to conclusions about my age. :rolleyes:

I've played another guy who I work with who is rated 5.5 and has won tournaments in doubles and singles, although his age is starting to catch up with him. He described what I'm saying in this way: tennis for most of us is recreational sport...you play to enjoy the game and be competitive. You "play to play". These are the people you enjoy playing whether you win or lose.

There are some guys who only "play to win" no matter what the circumstances. Again, if I wanted to against the guy I was describing earlier, i could have simply hit topspin lob/drop shot combo on every point, and eventually..well, he may have died from cardiac arrest because he was about 40 lbs overweight. I would have gone home that night bored as hell. Instead, I barely won but I had FUN. I'd probably never play the guy again if he called me to play because it is LAME to play that way.

I compare it to this..lets say I'm playing basketball, and a guy on my team is 6 foot 8, while no one else on the court is over 6 foot. Do we just feed him in the post all night and win by a large margin..in a recreational game? I go home taking no shots and not even getting a workout? Well, I had no fun, but winning is everything!!

z-money
05-25-2007, 08:29 AM
just remember, 60% of the time, it works every time

best post EVER

Serve em Up
05-25-2007, 08:38 AM
My pro says you play the percentages to select the best shot that it takes to win the point. Give enough effort to win, not more.

In othe words, if moonballing is your highest % shot, and your opponent can't hit them back. Hit moonballs.

Once your opponent shows you he can beat your best % shot. You hit something else (maybe faster, deeper, harder) that might not be as high % as a moonball but will make your opponent miss.

Never show your best stuff, most aggressive lower % shot unless needed to win.

Rachet up your risk and you effort level until you are winning or until your opponent proves that he is better than you that day.

He told me this because I have a tendency to be very aggressive and hit hard all the time. I go for everything, hit deep and hard, go for lines. His point was that I would win more (less unforced errors) if I played smarter and hit the highest % shots that I needed to still win. Doing so has decreased my unforced errors and helped me to improve my game. Why go for the lines and risk missing if your opponent has troulble with consistency to good paced shots hit in the middle of the court?

05-25-2007, 08:52 AM
If someone hits a topspin lob on every shot, that may be a succesful strategy to not get killed, but it is boring tennis and you should be admonished for it. It's not fun at all for the other player. It would be the same if I hit drop shots against fat boy on every stroke because he can't move. That would not be in the "spirit" of amateur competition. This is where the "wimp tennis" attitude comes in. If a guy is going to hit a topspin lob on every shot, I'll give him his win and play somebody else, because he is a ****** and I don't feel like wasting my time.

Since when is it your opponent's job to make sure you have fun?

Win or lose, I want to make sure that my opponents realize that stepping on court with me is going to be WORK. I'm going to find their weak backhand, or their lack of patience or shot tolerance, their poor footwork, their overplaying in positioning - you name it - and I'm going to chip and nag at it until the cows come home.

In fact, by doing this, I'm doing my opponents a SERVICE. They need to shore up that weakness, and it does their game no favors to politely set them up for shots they already own (assuming they even own it - which they often don't).

Often, this approach coincides with what some one call "pushing" - but it doesn't have to. It could be S&V, could be lobs, could be short angles - whatever it takes. The point is your "fun" tennis buddies are doing nothing more than letting you stagnate at your level, complacent.

SlapShot
05-25-2007, 08:57 AM
Since when is it your opponent's job to make sure you have fun?

Win or lose, I want to make sure that my opponents realize that stepping on court with me is going to be WORK. I'm going to find their weak backhand, or their lack of patience or shot tolerance, their poor footwork, their overplaying in positioning - you name it - and I'm going to chip and nag at it until the cows come home.

In fact, by doing this, I'm doing my opponents a SERVICE. They need to shore up that weakness, and it does their game no favors to politely set them up for shots they already own (assuming they even own it - which they often don't).

Often, this approach coincides with what some one call "pushing" - but it doesn't have to. It could be S&V, could be lobs, could be short angles - whatever it takes. The point is your "fun" tennis buddies are doing nothing more than letting you stagnate at your level, complacent.

+1 to this whole post. Hit the nail on the head.

If I'm out hitting with a hitting partner, that's one thing, and I'm still going to work on my weaknesses and hope that whoever is hitting with me is going to make me work.

If I'm playing a match, I want to pit my strength against your weakness. I'm not feeding you short balls on your forehand side if you have slapped 4 of them in a row for winners - I'm going to find a new strategy.

05-25-2007, 09:01 AM
you can have more winners than your opponent but still lose the match.
you can more more unforce errors than your opponent but still win.

tennis statistics doesn't mean a whole lot.

LuckyR
05-25-2007, 09:49 AM
If a guy is going to hit a topspin lob on every shot, I'll give him his win and play somebody else, because he is a ****** and I don't feel like wasting my time.

Hhmmm... how does it feel to be a worse tennis player than a "******"?

SlapShot
05-25-2007, 10:12 AM
Hhmmm... how does it feel to be a worse tennis player than a "******"?

:-D

Post of the month.

If you lose to someone, you aren't a "better player" than they are that day.

/pusher argument

dman72
05-25-2007, 10:21 AM
Hhmmm... how does it feel to be a worse tennis player than a "******"?

Your reading comprehension might not be too good, so I'll repeat once again that I won the match against the moonballer.

I've been beaten plenty of times by guys who actually play the game. I've never once said that a guy who has beaten me is an inferior tennis player to me...I've never lost a match to an "inferior" player. If they beat me, they aren't inferior. I don't play those guys that I beat regularly anymore. I only play people on my level or better now, and hence there is a lot more losing then there was when I played friends who picked up a racquet now and again..and I'm improving because of it.

The phenomenom of the aging out of shape club moonballer apparently is quite prevalent judging from the responses here. It must be a riveting match when two of these strategic geniuses mix it up. They probably time out after one set. :smile:

The moonballer stayed in the match longer than he would have if I had simply used similar tactics against him, but I wouldn't have gotten anything out of hitting drop shots all match and watching him fall over himself trying to get to them. I already know that I can hit a topspin lob and a dropshot.

That may make you guys feel like strategic geniuses, but it would make me feel bored. "Let's see, overweight, mid 40's, I'll hit one deep shot followed by a drop shot, and he will be done after one set." Good thing I read Sun Tzu!!

penpal
05-25-2007, 10:46 AM
There are some guys who only "play to win" no matter what the circumstances. Again, if I wanted to against the guy I was describing earlier, i could have simply hit topspin lob/drop shot combo on every point, and eventually..well, he may have died from cardiac arrest because he was about 40 lbs overweight. I would have gone home that night bored as hell. Instead, I barely won but I had FUN. I'd probably never play the guy again if he called me to play because it is LAME to play that way.

Confusing, to say the least. You admittedly had fun, yet you wouldn't play the guy again "because it is LAME to play that way." And what makes you so sure that your topspin lob/drop shot combo would have worked? Isn't it possible that, had you tried this, your opponent might have switched tactics as well?

I compare it to this..lets say I'm playing basketball, and a guy on my team is 6 foot 8, while no one else on the court is over 6 foot. Do we just feed him in the post all night and win by a large margin..in a recreational game? I go home taking no shots and not even getting a workout? Well, I had no fun, but winning is everything!!

Not a representative analogy IMO. A better analogy might be a one-on-one match between the 6'8" player who can dunk and is a shot blocker extraordinaire and a 5'9" player who is a decent mid-range shooter but not great, can't even touch the rim, but is quick as lightning/great at stealing the ball off the dribble, thereby making it very difficult for the bigger player to get close enough to make his short-range shots. The taller player can probably still beat the smaller player, but he's going to have to overcome some embarrassing steals and harrassing play. He cannot, however, legitimately fault the 5'9" player for employing tactics that give him the best chance of beating the taller player.

Now, on one point we do agree -- you have no obligation in rec tennis to play people you don't enjoy playing against (unless maybe you are playing in a USTA league, but that's a different matter). Again, you said you had fun, but if you didn't really have fun then by all means, if he calls you up to play turn him down. All of us have probably turned down matches because we didn't think they would be fun. Personally, there are some players who I refuse to play because of personality issues, and I don't particularly like playing the role of ball feeder to the guys who enjoy hitting every shot as hard as they can while I stand idly by watching their shots rocket into the tarp/fence.

If you aren't having fun, you shouldn't bother playing this guy ... just don't blame it on the flawed notion that he's not playing tennis the way it's supposed to be played, whatever that might be.

05-25-2007, 10:59 AM
Your reading comprehension might not be too good, so I'll repeat once again that I won the match against the moonballer.

I've been beaten plenty of times by guys who actually play the game. I've never once said that a guy who has beaten me is an inferior tennis player to me...I've never lost a match to an "inferior" player. If they beat me, they aren't inferior. I don't play those guys that I beat regularly anymore. I only play people on my level or better now, and hence there is a lot more losing then there was when I played friends who picked up a racquet now and again..and I'm improving because of it.

The phenomenom of the aging out of shape club moonballer apparently is quite prevalent judging from the responses here. It must be a riveting match when two of these strategic geniuses mix it up. They probably time out after one set. :smile:

The moonballer stayed in the match longer than he would have if I had simply used similar tactics against him, but I wouldn't have gotten anything out of hitting drop shots all match and watching him fall over himself trying to get to them. I already know that I can hit a topspin lob and a dropshot.

That may make you guys feel like strategic geniuses, but it would make me feel bored. "Let's see, overweight, mid 40's, I'll hit one deep shot followed by a drop shot, and he will be done after one set." Good thing I read Sun Tzu!!

I swear to you that he didn't hit a single groundstroke that wasn't a moonball the entire match. The final score was 4-6 6-4-7-5 my favor.

Your own spurious line of reasoning suggests that there's some relationship between wins and losses and who's a better or an "inferior" player. And yet, you barely beat this guy. If you're better than the ******, it's not by much. Maybe you're ******+. Maybe.

If you're not drilling people by at least two service breaks every set for 6-3, 6-2, or 6-1, you're not better than them. If you can only get past them with a single service break or in a tiebreaker or as you did, by dropping the first set, here's a hint: you're not better than them. They're at your level.

Like the rest of your game, you're trying to take a shortcut. You barely escaped this guy and now you won't deign to play him? Please. You're ducking him because you know it's more than possible you'll lose to him.

Barring routine, no pressure wins of 6-3, 6-3 or better (where both sets feature 2 service breaks, aka 6-2, 6-2 or 6-1, 6-1, they're really all the same - just like 7-5, 7-5 is potentially no different than 6-3, 6-3), there's still plenty of game in any given opponent. 4-6, 6-4, 7-5 to someone who sucks? You should be making appointments to play this guy, because you merely survived him, and there's a big difference between escape and a no hope routine beat down.

Right now, you and the ****** are like a coin flip. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

dman72
05-25-2007, 11:07 AM
Confusing, to say the least. You admittedly had fun, yet you wouldn't play the guy again "because it is LAME to play that way." And what makes you so sure that your topspin lob/drop shot combo would have worked? Isn't it possible that, had you tried this, your opponent might have switched tactics as well?

Because I tried that tactic with him on 2 consecutive points in a game and he almost killed himself trying to get to them and had to take an extensive break aftewards before my next serve. There would have been no second or third set if I continued to do that. I felt bad for him after that and didn't use that tactic again, when looking back he really deserved it. Answer your question? Lesson learned: don't be nice in club play.

Not a representative analogy IMO. A better analogy might be a one-on-one match between the 6'8" player who can dunk and is a shot blocker extraordinaire and a 5'9" player who is a decent mid-range shooter but not great, can't even touch the rim, but is quick as lightning/great at stealing the ball off the dribble, thereby making it very difficult for the bigger player to get close enough to make his short-range shots. The taller player can probably still beat the smaller player, but he's going to have to overcome some embarrassing steals and harrassing play. He cannot, however, legitimately fault the 5'9" player for employing tactics that give him the best chance of beating the taller player.?

Even though at face value you probably think your one on one analogy is better, it isn't because inherent physical traits are far more important in a basketball game than in tennis. I used basketball as an example of a recreational game that would be made intensely boring by using the most succesful tactic to win.

And, I used to play one on one with a guy who is 5'6". We had competitive games as long as I didn't just back him down and shot baby hooks and bank shots. I won about 60% of our games. I probably would have won 85% if I backed down on every shot. Guess what? That would have been boring for me and frustrating for him, and we probably wouldn't have played as often because of it.

Now, on one point we do agree -- you have no obligation in rec tennis to play people you don't enjoy playing against (unless maybe you are playing in a USTA league, but that's a different matter). Again, you said you had fun, but if you didn't really have fun then by all means, if he calls you up to play turn him down. All of us have probably turned down matches because we didn't think they would be fun. Personally, there are some players who I refuse to play because of personality issues, and I don't particularly like playing the role of ball feeder to the guys who enjoy hitting every shot as hard as they can while I stand idly by watching their shots rocket into the tarp/fence.

The only reason I had fun was because I used his moonballs to practice hitting service line to baseline high bouncing balls for winners. If I had just used the drop shot tactic that would have led to a 6-2 6-1 match, I don't think i would have gotten that much out of the match. Luckily I didn't have to pay a dime to play. If this was in a league that I was paying for, I'd probably have had some words for him at the end regardless of what I had to do to win.

Anyway, this thread has turned into silliness. I agree with the idea that percentage tennis is more important than winners or precision at most peoples level, and still remains important at higher levels. If you want to win in a league under 4.0, just hit the ball over the net and deep with a shot that has the most margin for error and you have the best chance of winning. Against fat guys, hit drop shots.

Golden Retriever
05-25-2007, 11:07 AM
It can be, but not in the case of the guy I played. I think he had a fairly losely strung LM radical and he was basically just sending the ball about 20 feet in the air over the net, with it landing about 3 feet from the baseline. The fact that he didn't execute a full stroke and that it didn't have much topspin gave me opportunities to absolutely crush some of these..but again..some of my returns went long, some didn't clear the net, and he won points because of that.

Well, look at it that way, your overhead and high forehand must have improved by 200 percent at the least. Maybe you should thank him. I would pay good money for practices like that.

Golden Retriever
05-25-2007, 11:12 AM
Anyway, this thread has turned into silliness. I agree with the idea that percentage tennis is more important than winners or precision at most peoples level, and still remains important at higher levels. If you want to win in a league under 4.0, just hit the ball over the net and deep with a shot that has the most margin for error and you have the best chance of winning. Against fat guys, hit drop shots.

You make it sound like it is unsportsmanlike to dropshot fat guys. How about tall guys? Is it unsportsmanlike to give them low slices? How about short guys? Is it unsportsmanlike to hit them kickers that kick over their shoulders? Maybe the fat guy wants some exercise and actually likes being dropshot.

dman72
05-25-2007, 11:18 AM
You make it sound like it is unsportsmanlike to dropshot fat guys. How about tall guys? Is it unsportsmanlike to give them low slices? How about short guys? Is it unsportsmanlike to hit them kickers that kick over their shoulders? Maybe the fat guy wants some exercise and actually likes being dropshot.

I think, in the spirit of amateur competition, to dropshot a fat guy on every point is unsportsmanlike, yes. It proves something you already know...he's fat. Big deal.

OrangeOne
05-25-2007, 11:21 AM
Wow, we have some serious pushers here.

Ahh, the famous pusher line. Interesting that I suggested you smash TS lobs away for winners....

With the person I played in the league, I'm talking about one specifically annoying player, and you dopes are are wipping out your dime store psycho analysis

You drew your experience out from the specific to the general, we're out here commenting on that, and now you're trying to draw it from the general back to the specific?

There are some guys who only "play to win" no matter what the circumstances. Again, if I wanted to against the guy I was describing earlier, i could have simply hit topspin lob/drop shot combo on every point,

You couldn't use the match to teach yourself to be able to smash back the lobs? to hit the lobs back with pace and depth to the corners, forcing a short ball as you job in and put-away the volley? If you're so far in front of the guy you're able to revert to a winning strategy, why not work on other strategies too?

OrangeOne
05-25-2007, 11:24 AM
I think, in the spirit of amateur competition, to dropshot a fat guy on every point is unsportsmanlike, yes. It proves something you already know...he's fat. Big deal.

Again, you act as if there is only one strategy, to be employed every point.

Why not work on many strategies? Sure, if you *need* to win, the you could employ your *best* strategy on key points, but work on other strategies at other times?

Golden Retriever
05-25-2007, 11:29 AM
With all due respect, if a guy who is so fat that he can't get to any of my dropshots, which is a low percentage play on hardcourt by the way, he really has no bidness playing matches with me.

SlapShot
05-25-2007, 11:30 AM
The phenomenom of the aging out of shape club moonballer apparently is quite prevalent judging from the responses here. It must be a riveting match when two of these strategic geniuses mix it up. They probably time out after one set. :smile:

FWIW, your attacks on people fall short - I'm far from aging (24) and far from out of shape (6' and 185) and far from a moonballer. I'll hit a heavy topspin FH if it works, but I grew up playing with some kids who went to D1 and D2 schools, so I'm used to pace and can produce a fair amount on my own.

Tennis is not a sport of outhitting someone else - it is about outplaying someone else, which involves playing what is successful.

You can go ahead and blast away, an dI'll go ahead and slice everything back, and we'll see who ends up coming out ahead.

If you want a sport where hitting the ball hard is the only way to play, go take up softball or racquetball.

SlapShot
05-25-2007, 11:31 AM
With all due respect, if a guy who is so fat that he can't get to any of my dropshots, which is a low percentage play on hardcourt by the way, he really has no bidness playing matches with me.

A big 'ol +1 to that sentiment.

dman72
05-25-2007, 11:34 AM
[QUOTE=OrangeOne;1469044]Again, you act as if there is only one strategy, to be employed every point.

[QUOTE]

No, this is what HE implied by his game. I could have used that implication to use a strategy that maybe ended with him taken off on a stretcher. Again...this was supposed to be fun. There's no money riding on it.

dman72
05-25-2007, 11:35 AM
FWIW, your attacks on people fall short - I'm far from aging (24) and far from out of shape (6' and 185) and far from a moonballer. I'll hit a heavy topspin FH if it works, but I grew up playing with some kids who went to D1 and D2 schools, so I'm used to pace and can produce a fair amount on my own.

Tennis is not a sport of outhitting someone else - it is about outplaying someone else, which involves playing what is successful.

You can go ahead and blast away, an dI'll go ahead and slice everything back, and we'll see who ends up coming out ahead.

If you want a sport where hitting the ball hard is the only way to play, go take up softball or racquetball.

I slice almost every backhand.

:confused:

dman72
05-25-2007, 11:37 AM
With all due respect, if a guy who is so fat that he can't get to any of my dropshots, which is a low percentage play on hardcourt by the way, he really has no bidness playing matches with me.

It's not a low percentage play against a guy this overweight.

SlapShot
05-25-2007, 11:40 AM
I slice almost every backhand.

:confused:

You junk-baller. :)

I was simply making an example - we have people who come on here and proclaim "Pusher" whenever someone plays percentage tennis. I hate playing people who hit to my weakness and drop shot me, moonball me, etc, but I am always trying to find a way to beat them and not have a weakness anymore, and I strongly suggest that method to everyone who plays tennis with any level of competency.

Golden Retriever
05-25-2007, 11:41 AM
With all due respect, overweight guys deserve to lose. Tennis matches at least.

Jyles
05-25-2007, 11:44 AM
hmm did this topic end up going off the main topic lol.

anywho, i believe any game can be a game of percentages, but you have to take into factor every thing that can happen on the court >, every move etc, and mostlikely in some situations plays are going to be forced etc, depending on ones skill.

dman72
05-25-2007, 11:52 AM
You junk-baller. :)

I was simply making an example - we have people who come on here and proclaim "Pusher" whenever someone plays percentage tennis. I hate playing people who hit to my weakness and drop shot me, moonball me, etc, but I am always trying to find a way to beat them and not have a weakness anymore, and I strongly suggest that method to everyone who plays tennis with any level of competency.

I don't have any problem with any of that.

I play arnz..a TW forum member...I've won maybe 6 sets against him in 5 or 6 sessions. He calls himself a pusher. If he's a pusher, so be it, but his game is superior to mine because he has no glaringly weak shots, he gets around the court with ease, and he gets almost everything back. There's nothing to disrespect there at all. However, he can put a short ball away and hit an effective volley, and doesn't just hit a moonball on every shot.

Sorry guys, I just don't have any respect for people who do things like that, especially if they can't even beat me doing it, and if I pulled a similar tactic on them, I wouldn't be too proud of it. Maybe I'll try it against arnz and see how it works.

dman72
05-25-2007, 11:52 AM
With all due respect, overweight guys deserve to lose. Tennis matches at least.

LOL. Nice edit.

sinneTennis
05-25-2007, 12:01 PM
I just made this thread to ask a simple question. Then it turned into some ugly dispute between board members. Sheesh... (Btw - im the OP)

OrangeOne
05-25-2007, 12:02 PM
There's nothing to disrespect there at all.

I'm forgetting the rest - because this is the key part of your debate that I (and apparently others) disagree with.

I don't disrespect the game of my opponents. Any game they bring is fine. If they bring something they think they can beat me with - great! I play an opponent, and I try to win. If it's a social match, I may not care too much about the outcome, but I still play to win.

You know why I play to win? Because among my mates, playing at the peak of one's abilities - trying as hard as you can - is seen as respecting each other. If someone doesn't try, doesn't play to their best - that's when disrespect comes into play.

OrangeOne
05-25-2007, 12:06 PM
I just made this thread to ask a simple question. Then it turned into some ugly dispute between board members. Sheesh... (Btw - im the OP)

You sound somewhat surprised? I notice you're new-ish, but as you stay longer you'll note that it's common for threads to move on & off topic, and the odd discussion to develop. This one is, as they go, certainly not at the 'ugly dispute' level (yet!) :|

penpal
05-25-2007, 02:31 PM
dman72 - I'm sincerely trying to understand the point you are trying to make, but I'm afraid I'm still just not getting it. So please, help me out here.

What do you think this particular opponent should have done differently in your match? How could he have gained your respect?

- Should he have hit all out, even if he knew he couldn't control those shots and would lose 6-0, 6-0 because the majority of his shots would go long or into the net?

- Should he have tried to hit more angled shots? Again, it doesn't sound from your description like he would have been able to hit these very well and he might very well have lost 6-0, 6-0, but would you have had more respect for him afterwards?

- Should he have forfeited the match during the warm-up, when your obvious skill advantage became demonstrably evident, and suggested instead a practice session?

In short, is there anything he could have done, given his limited abilities, to have earned your respect/made you happy?

r2473
05-25-2007, 02:57 PM
Actually, at the 4.0 level and below, it IS about percentages and it IS a sissy sport. The moonballer at 3.5 will beat the 3.5 wannabe-basher 8 out of 10 times. The only argument you can make against moonballers is that they will have a very hard time progressing past 4.0 because they are not shot makers. For the guy who plays once a week...maybe that's not reason enough to stop pushing.

I played a guy indoors as a sub in a 3.5 league back in January. The guy was quite overweight, slow, and about 5'8. I am 6'1 190lbs and at the time I was going to a gym 3 times per week. He had no stroke that would scare anyone. I have a forehand and first serve that makes people think I'm a sandbagger when they see me in warmup...unfortunately, the rest of my game sucks. :D

I swear to you that he didn't hit a single groundstroke that wasn't a moonball the entire match. The final score was 4-6 6-4-7-5 my favor. Almost every point was either my winner or my error....either blowing the ball past him in a corner, or it being 6 inches long or in the net. No one in their right mind seeing the 2 of us walk on the court would think that he had a chance against me, but I almost lost. That's tennis. It's not basketball or football where athleticism is a huge part of the equation, and that's actually why I like it.

The only problem I have with this story is when you say, "The moonballer at 3.5 will beat the 3.5 wannabe-basher 8 out of 10 times." It is probably closer to 97 out of 100.

It is what makes tennis hard. Most folks starting out want to hit hard. Soon they discover that, not only do they lose nearly every match, but no on will play with them. So, they eventually learn that they have to slow down and just keep it in play.

Promlem is, most folks don't progress beyond this point and are terminal intermediates, forever at the 3.5 / 4.0 level. Forever just "pushing and retreiving".

My solution was to purchase a ball machine. I hit on the thing for 2 solid years. I also practiced hitting serves all that time. After two years, I could really bash the ball and was ready for some real players.

What happened? I got killed every time. I could not handle the variety they threw at me and still hit the ball out all the time.

However, I stuck with it. Now I play at a competitive 4.5 level and have advanced far past the "terminal intermediates". I was lucky enough to find a few good partners that also wanted to play agressively and advance.

So, I guess I have no respect or patience for mindless ball bashers. But, I hold the "terminal intermediates" in contempt as well.

warneck
06-01-2007, 12:26 PM
Some posts in this thread certainly has amused me.

Well, here goes a story, you = player A, and me = player B.
Player A hits a short ball.
Player B runs to the net, hits and deep approach shot with topspin into the backhand corner of player A.
Player A merely returns it with low pace and sliced.
Player B easily puts the volley down.

This goes on 5 times. Would you now hit MORE short balls? Or would you employ ANY (!) other tactic, so you actually might win?

Would you want to hit high short balls to Gonzales forehand, instead of giving Ljubicic the kick-serve down his backhand?

Unless I am practicing - And don't get me wrong, even then I want to get matching on difficult shots and variety - I wouldn't want ANYONE to play their worst tennis, so I can play my best.. That's just riddiculus. And btw, there are SEVERAL well-working tactics against ALL 4.0 pushers. Just name me one which have the footwork and defensive abilities of someone like Nadal.

And who says you can't play defensive tennis above 4.0 btw? It's just about having the abilities to turn his weaknesses into your strengths.

I certainly play the defensive tennis at it's very best, but I still got a blasting serve, consistent 2HBH and killer forehand. It's actually A NEED to be good at defensive play for the level of 4.0 and above... What good are you if you NEVER can win when put onto defence? Geez.. You going to hit that 130mph serve which aces once every set? - and has an hit percentage of 20%