What do you think about this strategy?

[oneguy21]

My coach told me that my strategy should be to always hit cross court if I get a deep ball and that I should hit an approach shot down the line when I get a short one and approach the net. He told me to never change the direction of the ball if it's deep. What I used to do was keep hitting cross court and eventually go for the down the line winner.

So what do you think? Should I stick w/ my coach's strategy for my upcoming tournament? Or should stick w/ my old one. I don't feel too comfortable at the net.

[Steady Eddy]

I could give my opinion, but really, it's whatever works the best. Maybe your coach is right. But I think he's probably wrong. There are advantages to hitting crosscourt, but those advatages become lost when the opponent starts to anticipate what you'll do. When you notice that he's positioning for a crosscourt shot, then go down the line. Why hit it to where he's standing and make things easy for him? I just read a book called "The Art of Strategy", it's in the economics section of the bookstores. It's worth looking at. Your coach should read it too.

[oneguy21]

I could give my opinion, but really, it's whatever works the best. Maybe your coach is right. But I think he's probably wrong. There are advantages to hitting crosscourt, but those advatages become lost when the opponent starts to anticipate what you'll do. When you notice that he's positioning for a crosscourt shot, then go down the line. Why hit it to where he's standing and make things easy for him? I just read a book called "The Art of Strategy", it's in the economics section of the bookstores. It's worth looking at. Your coach should read it too.

He wants me to hit cross court because its high percentage tennis. If you look at the dimensions of a tennis court, the length is 78 feet but a diagonal from one corner to another is 82.5. The net is also 6 inches lower in the center than in the posts. So when you hit cross court you have about four more feet in length and 6 more inches in height to work with. What I'm confused about is why doesn't want me to change the direction of the ball unless it's short.

[TonLars]

Its the best, most logical and generic strategy to follow. Depending on you and your opponent will determine when youll be going down the line based on following this strategy. This means what shots you are comfotable and able to successfully hit down the line well, and what your opponent is giving you and his court coverage speed.

It doesnt make sense to just at a random moment go for the winner down the line. Playing cross court as im sure you know is going over a slightly lower net, a fair amount longer court, and the shots are tailing away from your opponent off the court. By going down the line you are setting yourself up to get beat by the cross court figure 8 play that you yourself should try to execute. This play is to pound the ball deep cross court and eventually youll get a ball that is short or more towards the middle of the court, where you can then swing him to the other side cross court (or and especially later in the match, go behind him back to the same corner). His shots will then, on the run from your cross court shots or if he decides to go for it down the line, be tailing towards the middle to you while you control the center of the court and run him side to side until you can eventually hit a winner, either a good cross court ball that he cant run down or get the ball that you can take down the line when it is relatively easy and likely to be a winner. Also, you will be taking out his legs

[Moz]

If you change the direction of the ball to go down the line off a deep ball the chances are you won't be putting your opponent under pressure.

If you change direction on an average shot you are opening up the court for the opponent and essentially putting yourself out of position.

If you don't like to volley it's worth going down the line on a short ball if you can hit a forcing shot which will put you in a position to finish the point on your next groundstroke.

I think your coaches advice is pretty sound, albeit rather generalised. I can think of reasons to go down the line earlier off a deep ball, or to never go down the line - both depending on your opponent.

[LuckyR]

My coach told me that my strategy should be to always hit cross court if I get a deep ball and that I should hit an approach shot down the line when I get a short one and approach the net. He told me to never change the direction of the ball if it's deep. What I used to do was keep hitting cross court and eventually go for the down the line winner.

So what do you think? Should I stick w/ my coach's strategy for my upcoming tournament? Or should stick w/ my old one. I don't feel too comfortable at the net.


Your coach is absolutely correct. However, he is barely scratching the surface of tennis "strategy". There is much more to the game, but it is the correct first step.

[naylor]

there's quite a lot of information there as to when you SHOULD go back crosscourt (deep balls that cross in front of you), and when you have other options. You can also cut-n-paste the link below:-


http://hoskinsjohn.bizland.com/direc/

[raiden031]

I don't think its correct to say you should always hit cross-court. If you are a righty, then you should always hit forehands across your body to your left and backhands to your right. For instance, if you are pulled to the left and then opponent hits an inside shot to your forehand, you will change directions and not hit the ball inside-out cross-court back to them.

[JavierLW]

I don't think its correct to say you should always hit cross-court. If you are a righty, then you should always hit forehands across your body to your left and backhands to your right. For instance, if you are pulled to the left and then opponent hits an inside shot to your forehand, you will change directions and not hit the ball inside-out cross-court back to them.

I think that's right from a mechanics of best shotmaking standpoint. Although it should be noted that even if you do this, if you hit it down the line, you better get a good shot in, otherwise you are exposed to the deep cross court reply.

It's true that you may not get as good of shot in if you try to hit it inside out (which isnt necessarily inside out if you are facing your opponent, you're just facing him and hitting it back where it came from), but you are not as exposed to the cross court deep angle.

I think his coach is telling him this because even though it's pretty basic, it's still better than randomly hitting balls down the line, or doing what the second poster suggests which is try to make your opponent guess at random as if somehow it's horrible that they know you are hitting it back to them.

(it's not that big of a deal if they know where you are going with the ball if you can get your best shot in and keep them back or at least at a draw, it happens in the pros all the time that's why we see very long cross court rallys)

[AznRamenDude]

This is my advice: go with what your guts tell you. Its important to listen to all possible advices, but use it when you feel like it. Don't go to too much trouble on what is the best shot for when. It varies on the where you are on court and where your opponent is too. The most important thing is just to trust yourself and go with it.

[NightBandit]

oneguy21,

First off, if you don't feel comfortable at the net, I wouldn't be attacking the net every time you get a short ball. I'd stick with your strengths and work on your net game before attacking the net.

As for going cross court on a deep ball: I was taught while it's true that going cross court is a safer shot, the real reason the you want to go cross court is because the distance you need to move to recover (to the middle of all possible shots your opponent can hit back to you) is the shortest. If you take your opponent's cross court shot and hit it down the line, you'll need to run all the way to the other side of the court to recover to the middle of all possible shots your opponent can hit back to you.

I was taught that the only time you want to change the direction of the ball is if your opponent hits a shot into the middle third of the court (and you don't need to move at all to recover) or if they hit a short shot (ideally, you'd move in behind a short shot, but if you don't feel comfortable with it, I wouldn't do it).

Like LuckyR said, your coach is basically correct, but it's a very simplistic rule of thumb. There is a lot more you need to take into account.

NightBandit

[Ballinbob]

I would follow his advice. Its simple and it works, easy as that. Consistency beats winners anyday. If you get a short ball, go ahead and smack it dtl but only if its a short ball. Just play the percentages and you'll find everything going your way

[raiden031]

I would follow his advice. Its simple and it works, easy as that. Consistency beats winners anyday. If you get a short ball, go ahead and smack it dtl but only if its a short ball. Just play the percentages and you'll find everything going your way

There are people (usually pushers) who I cannot beat with just consistency. If I hit all high percentage shots, then I am guaranteed to lose if the player is more consistent than me. I think its wise to hit the majority of shots with high percentage choices, but you really have to take some risks to open up the court and generate some weak replies. Sometimes when you are in a forehand-to-forehand rally you have to hit it to their backhand otherwise you will hit the error first almost every time. I win most of my matches with winners and forced errors more so than being more consistent than my opponent because thats where my strengths are.

[smoothtennis]

This is basic Wardlaw Directionals. Do a search, there are some great threads on this in this forum from past posts.

I have used them, and the advice your coach gave you works.

Raiden031 -what you have to understand here, is the 'type' of ball his coach is telling him to not change directions on. If it's a deep ball cross court, don't change directions. This is very sound high percentage tennis, even if predictable. You are going to absolutely get a shot you can change directions when following this rule---eventually. They eventually give up a shorter ball, or an inside ball. On an inside ball (one which does not cross your body on the way to you), you can change directions no problem.

They key thing is, when hitting the cross court shot back, you have to get it back deep as well, and put some good spin or pace on the shot - I lean towards heavy spin vs. pace. You are hitting the high percentage shot, and cheating a little to the forehand side too. If he goes for DTL, you just forced him to hit the low percentage shot - let him try it. All day long.

I have implemented this strategy into my game this year- and even though I was uncomfortable with it at first, due to the 'seemingly' predictability, I was very surprised at the successful results. Keep this in mind, go play a match, and just count the number of times the opponent misses his shot, when breaking this rule.

I think you will be surprised how well this works.

[raiden031]

Raiden031 -what you have to understand here, is the 'type' of ball his coach is telling him to not change directions on. If it's a deep ball cross court, don't change directions. This is very sound high percentage tennis, even if predictable. You are going to absolutely get a shot you can change directions when following this rule---eventually. They eventually give up a shorter ball, or an inside ball. On an inside ball (one which does not cross your body on the way to you), you can change directions no problem.


We are not in disagreement. When someone says "hit every ball cross-court" that would imply that you should also hit inside-out forehands because they are cross-court. How else would someone know that inside-out is lower percentage, unless you specify that as a case of when you shouldn't hit cross-court?

But my point in the next post was that if you follow Wardlaws on every shot, you will lose against a more consistent player. The only way to beat a more consistent player is to take risks.

[drakulie]

You pay your coach about how much?? 50 bucks an hour???

I'll give you advice when you pay me the same. Thanks. :)


BTW, Tonlars and Moz summed it up well. Perhaps you could pay them 25 each????

[matchmaker]

My coach told me that my strategy should be to always hit cross court if I get a deep ball and that I should hit an approach shot down the line when I get a short one and approach the net. He told me to never change the direction of the ball if it's deep. What I used to do was keep hitting cross court and eventually go for the down the line winner.

So what do you think? Should I stick w/ my coach's strategy for my upcoming tournament? Or should stick w/ my old one. I don't feel too comfortable at the net.

I think this advice is very generic and it does not make a lot of sense to me. You should hit cross court on deep balls and down the line on short ones? You have a lot less margin for error on short balls as the net is higher and the distance to the baseline is shorter when hitting DTL.

Off course it is generally advised to hit DTL approaches because you cut the angle for your opponent, but still, the advice as you describe it is too vague.

What about your opponent having a weak backhand and a strong forehand. Will you just keep playing cross court to his forehand waiting to be punished? Or will you change direction and go for his weaker backhand waiting for him to cough up a short ball and then hitting a cross court FH out of your opponent's reach.

I do understand the logic in your coache's advice but it could make you a too mechanical, uninspired player. Every rally is different. What you have to develop is a sort of intuition when and where to hit.

[Fedace]

I saw on tennis channel, this one Junior saying, " I just hit Crosscourt, crosscourt, then short ball, rip the next shot down the line, and come to net and easy Winner,, easy easy." This was a 12 or 14 year old i believe playing in the National tournament, orange bowl, i believe.

[Fedace]

^^Point is, you do have to have some confidence in your volleys. it is a must if you are a tournament player. even your weakest shot has to be pretty decent.

[Steady Eddy]

I saw on tennis channel, this one Junior saying, " I just hit Crosscourt, crosscourt, then short ball, rip the next shot down the line, and come to net and easy Winner,, easy easy." This was a 12 or 14 year old i believe playing in the National tournament, orange bowl, i believe.
Sorry, but these predictable strategies sound like football coaches who believe, "Run on first down and second down, then for third down, pass if it's 3rd and long, but run if it's 3rd and short." You think the defense won't figure that out? And then that changes everything, your runs won't work and you'll always face 3rd and long. You don't want to pass every 1st down either, that too will become predictable.

Yes, it's true, the net is lower in the middle and the hypotenuse of a right triangle is longer than either leg. So, in our first iteration, we might suppose that we should hit crosscourt. But just like the defense in football, we have an opponent who will become aware of our tendencies. Being obvious is not optimal against an opponent who is a challenge, (any strategy will "work" against an opponent who very inferior). He'll position himself to receive your crosscourt shot. This makes your crosscourt shot less effective and gives a higher chance to down-the-line being an outright winner. If he starts to do this, go down-the-line until he adjusts to that and allows your crosscourt shots to be more effective. In games like football, baseball, and even poker, you can't use a predictable strategy. Your opponent will react to you, and then you will react to your opponent, etc, etc....

Sure, if all factors are equal, the crosscourt shot is the percentage shot, but we never know a priori if all factors are equal.

[Bungalo Bill]

My coach told me that my strategy should be to always hit cross court if I get a deep ball and that I should hit an approach shot down the line when I get a short one and approach the net. He told me to never change the direction of the ball if it's deep. What I used to do was keep hitting cross court and eventually go for the down the line winner.

So what do you think? Should I stick w/ my coach's strategy for my upcoming tournament? Or should stick w/ my old one. I don't feel too comfortable at the net.

You might want to clarify what he means by "never" because many times players misinterpret what their coach meant or was trying to say.

Many times a coach will isolate training to reconfigure a players training in tennis.

Do not subscribe to the "whatever works" group. The "whatever works" group is a key member sub-group of the "How to Play Mediocre Tennis" parent group.

Ball movement and selection is very important. Learning the fundamentals on ball movement and control serves as the foundation of how you want to setup your points and get into the key matchups you have determined in your pre-match analysis. In other words, it crystalizes the importance in how to approach your match.

What players do not realize is that during a point, you will at times take on more risk in order to take advantage of poor positioning, poor recovery, poor shot selection, or that you feel you need to end the point because you are either overmatched or running out of gas. These are just a few of the things that will play into your match as the match progresses.

Getting back to your coach. Hitting crosscourt is important and so is knowing when to change the direction of the ball in order to get a better matchup. Changing the direction of the ball does not mean going for a winner. It simply means you are changing the direction because you feel you can win the point against your opponent if you go forehand to forehand or backhand to backhand. It also doesnt mean you have to wait for a ball that doesnt come in front of you. It simply means that a ball like this is the best, highest percentage, and most opportune time to change directions of the ball. Obviously, the ball you receive and your skill level with either increase or decrease this percentage.

Further, it is okay to change the direction of the ball if the ball does not cross in front of you. During this time, it is your higher percentage shot. For approach shots, your high percentage shot is to hit it straight and it also provides you the opportunity to close your court. Hitting straight does not mean hitting it at the line.

As you get better and stronger, you will be able to change direction of the ball on shots that previously were lower percentage shots for you because your skill level. However, the same mentality mentioned above should exist in your game plan for all your matches.

Wardlaws Directionals is something you should get. They have a video called High Percentage tennis that can help you. Remember this is a fundamental ball movement strategy. Match situations may call for you to take on more risk or slightly alter your initial plan in order to win the point. However, if you keep erroring at least you will understand why you might be erroring so you can make adjustments.

Review this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7PJ73e-iVU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbsDnSmsod8

[smoothtennis]

We are not in disagreement. When someone says "hit every ball cross-court" that would imply that you should also hit inside-out forehands because they are cross-court. How else would someone know that inside-out is lower percentage, unless you specify that as a case of when you shouldn't hit cross-court?

But my point in the next post was that if you follow Wardlaws on every shot, you will lose against a more consistent player. The only way to beat a more consistent player is to take risks.

It is just a foundation for shot selection. You will have take risks, we agree there. But most rec players don't understand when they are really venturing into that 'risk' territory. With this understanding, one can make an educated risk, and understand when it's working and when it is working against them in a particular match.

I don't think we are in dissagreement either. I just want to make clear how to make the Wardlaw information useful. :)

[TonLars]

You pay your coach about how much?? 50 bucks an hour???

I'll give you advice when you pay me the same. Thanks. :)


BTW, Tonlars and Moz summed it up well. Perhaps you could pay them 25 each????

I accept PayPal. Oh, and cash.

[raiden031]

It is just a foundation for shot selection. You will have take risks, we agree there. But most rec players don't understand when they are really venturing into that 'risk' territory. With this understanding, one can make an educated risk, and understand when it's working and when it is working against them in a particular match.

I don't think we are in dissagreement either. I just want to make clear how to make the Wardlaw information useful. :)

Right. But the advice the OP's coach gave him seems to not address the Wardlaw rule that I was referring to. I agree that it is useful and I follow it as long as I'm staying in control and not becoming too predictable. But I don't like when people say "hit every ball cross-court and you will win the match", because its not that simple.

[naylor]

... always hit cross court if I get a deep ball ... hit down the line when I get a short one ... never change the direction of the ball if it's deep ...

We're splitting hairs or talking about the same thing - the key is depth. On a deep ball that crosses (a standard crosscourt), you return a crosscourt back to the same place. On a deep ball that doesn't cross, the idea is to run around and play an inside-out shot, but being deep the safer shot is to play it inside-out and still cross-court from the position you play it from. Hence, on a deep ball, the safe play is to just send it back where it came from, and wait till you get something shorter to play any forcing shorts.

If the incoming ball is shorter (so it's more mid-court), then if you run around it you can still play it inside-out safely back where it came from, but it also gives you the angle to be more aggressive and whip it across to the corner on the same side you're on, to the open court. If you don't run around it (and let it cross in front of you), then here the safer play is to go down the line (to the open court) - you're out of position, so that gets your opponent out of position and buys you time (particularly, if you don't follow up to the net and instead opt to retreat back to the baseline).

[raiden031]

We're splitting hairs or talking about the same thing - the key is depth. On a deep ball that crosses (a standard crosscourt), you return a crosscourt back to the same place. On a deep ball that doesn't cross, the idea is to run around and play an inside-out shot, but being deep the safer shot is to play it inside-out and still cross-court from the position you play it from. Hence, on a deep ball, the safe play is to just send it back where it came from, and wait till you get something shorter to play any forcing shorts.


The inside-out shot is not the safe shot. If the incoming ball is an inside shot (doesn't cross your body), then you are supposed to change directions and hit your next ball across your body.

[smoothtennis]

Right. But the advice the OP's coach gave him seems to not address the Wardlaw rule that I was referring to. I agree that it is useful and I follow it as long as I'm staying in control and not becoming too predictable. But I don't like when people say "hit every ball cross-court and you will win the match", because its not that simple.

Agreed his coach is going to need to refine what he told him. It honestly is likely a case where the coach is just trying to break him out of his old habit, and force him to get started on basic Wardlaw. However, to be effective, he will need to add onto what he started with the OP.

If I were the OP - I would just bring up the topic of Wardlaw and ask him directly if that is what he is suggesting. Then work on it the right way. There is a lot of detail to Wardlaw and the coach likely may not have wanted to fill his head with too much yet. Maybe :)

OP - ASK YOUR COACH MORE ABOUT WARDLAW AND HIS ADVICE TO YOU.

[naylor]

The inside-out shot is not the safe shot. If the incoming ball is an inside shot (doesn't cross your body), then you are supposed to change directions and hit your next ball across your body.

What I meant here is your opponent has played a deep cross-court coming close to the baseline, but it doesn't go across enough to cross in front of you so you instead run around it - but you're still playing a forehand from deep on your backhand side (much more often than a backhand off the forehand side). In that situation, off a deep ball most players would opt for an inside-out forehand back to the opposite corner - it can be quite forcing, but you have more court to play with and you play it over the lowest part of the net.

If you go down the line, you have to be careful you don't hit too much across your body and hook it out. And even if you keep it in, it has to be a good short close to the corner, or else you expose yourself to be wardlaw'd to your open court! Here, clearly the shorter or closer to the centre the opponent's ball is (so running around it gets you less out of position), the better the chance to hit it across your body as raiden suggests (and the safer that option becomes).

[Geezer Guy]

I had a coach give me some pretty simple instructions recently. When I'm in a pinch I got to these, and they've bailed me out plenty. He said:
- Hit your returns down the middle.
- Hit your groundstrokes crosscourt.
- Hit your approach shots down the line.
- Hit your volleys to the open court.
It's not rocket science, but it's pretty effective.

[Ballinbob]

There are people (usually pushers) who I cannot beat with just consistency. If I hit all high percentage shots, then I am guaranteed to lose if the player is more consistent than me. I think its wise to hit the majority of shots with high percentage choices, but you really have to take some risks to open up the court and generate some weak replies. Sometimes when you are in a forehand-to-forehand rally you have to hit it to their backhand otherwise you will hit the error first almost every time. I win most of my matches with winners and forced errors more so than being more consistent than my opponent because thats where my strengths are.

How do you manage to win off winners and unforced errors? You must have a really aggressive style of play. How exactly do you play and what are these strengths? Do you just hit cross court for like 2 shots and pound it dtl?? I'm not saying your lying but to me thats kinda weird that you can do that. I'm a S&V player with good hands at the net and even I have trouble winning matches off of winners. And all a S&V player really does it attack too, I don't play much defensive tennis.

[raiden031]

How do you manage to win off winners and unforced errors? You must have a really aggressive style of play. How exactly do you play and what are these strengths? Do you just hit cross court for like 2 shots and pound it dtl?? I'm not saying your lying but to me thats kinda weird that you can do that. I'm a S&V player with good hands at the net and even I have trouble winning matches off of winners. And all a S&V player really does it attack too, I don't play much defensive tennis.

grrr...I typed a paragraph and my cat jumped on the keyboard and it left the page...let me do this again.

I don't hit winners for the heck of it. I will usually hit high percentage cross-court shots and if they keep getting it back, I will change directions. I don't go for an actual winner until I get a short ball. When I go for a winner shot, I usually approach the net in case they get it back. If they get it back its usually a weak shot that I can put away on the next shot or two. Lets not forget that the majority of players I go against are worse than me. I have probably won 90% of all practice and league matches played in 2008.

Against better players or even solid pushers, I get less opportunities to end points on my terms and usually just rally until I eventually hit a UE. So the only way I can win sometimes is to S&V every chance I get because my serve is good and I'm not consistent enough to just outlast them at the baseline.

[mordecai]

To the people saying that the wardlaw directional are too predictable:

It doesn't matter really. Below the highest levels, if a player is hitting well, he could use nothing but the wardlaw directionals and probably win no matter what. So what if your opponent knows your next shot will be cross-court? They still don't know if it will be flat or heavily spun, deep or with a wide angle, fast or slow. And what's more, so what if they are in place for a great shot you hit? If they want to try to play the risk tennis and change directions with their added time, then you have an inside ball to pull to the open court. Percentage tennis really does win. You also have to keep in mind that just like you, your opponent can't exactly be Sun Tzu out there on the tennis court when they're coping with the logistics of returning a well-struck shot. Percentage tennis wins.

[Bungalo Bill]

Right. But the advice the OP's coach gave him seems to not address the Wardlaw rule that I was referring to. I agree that it is useful and I follow it as long as I'm staying in control and not becoming too predictable. But I don't like when people say "hit every ball cross-court and you will win the match", because its not that simple.

Yes, you are right, and if he didnt, he isn't quite explaning how to change the direction of the ball from a Wardlaw perspective properly. The problem is we dont know what for sure nor what the coach is really trying to do.

However, some people do base their shot placement strategy on hitting up the middle or cross-court only and can be successful doing so especially at lower levels where many players assume too much risk on many of the balls they hit.

[Bungalo Bill]

To the people saying that the wardlaw directional are too predictable:

It doesn't matter really. Below the highest levels, if a player is hitting well, he could use nothing but the wardlaw directionals and probably win no matter what. So what if your opponent knows your next shot will be cross-court? They still don't know if it will be flat or heavily spun, deep or with a wide angle, fast or slow. And what's more, so what if they are in place for a great shot you hit? If they want to try to play the risk tennis and change directions with their added time, then you have an inside ball to pull to the open court. Percentage tennis really does win. You also have to keep in mind that just like you, your opponent can't exactly be Sun Tzu out there on the tennis court when they're coping with the logistics of returning a well-struck shot. Percentage tennis wins.

Yes, you are exactly right. Wardlaw Directionals are often marred by false assumptions and conclusions. The Directionals are not about being predicatble, they are about being more consistent and taken the high percentage shot for yourself.

The Directionals give a player a foundation to play from. A foundation to develop a game plan around and a way to execute this game plan. If I can hit crosscourt and recover properly, I really don't care if my opponent knows this. What I care about is beating the other player by playing a high percentage game for me, being more consistent, guarding the amount of unforced errors I make, and letting my opponent take on more risk.

The trouble with some players is they do not have enough faith in the fact that tennis is game of errors. Therefore, "high-percentage" tennis is just an unrealized concept. In other words, it sounds great but it is still an illusion. So they go out and try to win the game by out hitting the other player without thinking about the amount of unforced errors they are making.

This is because players rarely count how many unforced errors they make compared to winners. However, if you watch a pros match, they utilize the Directionals as a foundation and they do count the errors/winners ratio.

[Charlzz]

There are a lot of topics swirling around. The most obvious unsaid goal of playing tennis is to win. As Worf (of STTNG) says, "if you're not keeping score, why bother". However, there are other goals players also have. In addition to (or possibly instead of) winning, players want to hit hard. They want to hit winners, dictate play. Because of this, they trade off the safe shot for the risky shot. Because there's risk involved, there's risk of failure, but if they succeed, there's a thrill. The thrill, I suspect, that drives many to casinos odds are not in their favor (and people should know this), and yet the thrill of winning on low percentage outcomes outweighs the high probability of losing.

A high percentage shot depends on how skilled the player is. If you can't hit a normal topspin forehand crosscourt over the net at an average pace three times over the net without missing, but you can hit a sliced forehand over the net ten times, then high percentage would argue for the sliced forehand.

Pushers depend on high percentage shots, although, for a pusher, their high percentage shot lacks speed. Their shots are built off poor (though reliable) technique with little room for future improvement. Most tennis experts tell you that "you don't want to be a pusher" even if it leads to wins. Instead, what you want is solid technique that produces a reliable shot with decent pace, under pressure.

Assuming you have reliable shots that work well under pressure, high-percentage strategy can then try to maximize your game.

Although the directionals prescribe a high percentage way to play balls, I think it's still useful to practice the lower percentage change of direction shots so that they don't become complete liabilities. There will be occasions such as a weak reply, a short ball, where the risk of changing directions is offset by either hitting a winner or setting up a high percentage volley.

I believe strategy and technique complement each other. Better strategy helps you maximize what strokes you do have, and better strokes improves the effectiveness of a strategy. Better strokes also opens up strategies that might otherwise have been too risky (e.g., improved volleys and chipping makes chip and charge a viable strategy, but doesn't make sense if you can't chip well nor volley well).

[Ballinbob]

grrr...I typed a paragraph and my cat jumped on the keyboard and it left the page...let me do this again.

I don't hit winners for the heck of it. I will usually hit high percentage cross-court shots and if they keep getting it back, I will change directions. I don't go for an actual winner until I get a short ball. When I go for a winner shot, I usually approach the net in case they get it back. If they get it back its usually a weak shot that I can put away on the next shot or two. Lets not forget that the majority of players I go against are worse than me. I have probably won 90% of all practice and league matches played in 2008.

Against better players or even solid pushers, I get less opportunities to end points on my terms and usually just rally until I eventually hit a UE. So the only way I can win sometimes is to S&V every chance I get because my serve is good and I'm not consistent enough to just outlast them at the baseline.

I forgot, you just got bumped to the 4.0 level didn't you? I see how that can work then. So you have trouble with people who consistently hit deep.. but I think most us have the problem too lol.

Completley forgot that you moved up, so my bad. Was just curious

[raiden031]

I forgot, you just got bumped to the 4.0 level didn't you? I see how that can work then. So you have trouble with people who consistently hit deep.. but I think most us have the problem too lol.

Completley forgot that you moved up, so my bad. Was just curious

Yep I did. I don't consider myself a player who wins with consistency, but I'm one who wins by pressuring my opponents. If my opponent is consistent and not feeling the pressure, then it is hopeless for me to just hit high percentage shots because I'm not as good at it as them. Instead I go for high risk and if I lose then at least I win a few games in the process instead of getting bageled. I have alot to learn at 4.0, so we'll see what happens.

[Rickson]

What if you get a deep ball while your opponent is deeply committed to the xcourt corner? I say do whatever the situation allows you.

[Bungalo Bill]

Although the directionals prescribe a high percentage way to play balls, I think it's still useful to practice the lower percentage change of direction shots so that they don't become complete liabilities. There will be occasions such as a weak reply, a short ball, where the risk of changing directions is offset by either hitting a winner or setting up a high percentage volley.

Charlzz, do you know what the Directionals are? Have you studied them? I do not mean picking up a mag with an article on them. I mean have you studied them to the point where you can see it played out at the pro level and can see what they are doing in relation to their matchup strategy?

The reason I say this is you have conflicting information regarding what the Directionals are in your post. It is a post that seems to once again polarize high-percentage tennis and risk taking. The "occasional weak reply", the short ball, etc...

Once again, the Wardlaw Directionals ARE NOT about not ever taking risk. They are about knowing what is the most optimal direction you need to hit the ball towards for maximum control based on what ball you recieved.

Many players can not hit more than 6 balls in a rally. The Directionals help you take the least path of resistance so you can be more consistant in a rally. It means you are playing to reduce your unforced errors. However, it does not mean you dont take risk or dont take advantage of a short ball.

[Alexio92]

When I play, I usually use the directionals on my groundstrokes mostly but that means hitting the ball hard using them and deep not just pushing it back.