PDA

View Full Version : Is DTL the best option when you get a sitter?


Golden Retriever
02-06-2009, 01:44 PM
If you get a sitter and the opponent is at a neutral position, meaning that there is no opening for you to hit into, is DTL the best option?

Slicendicer
02-06-2009, 01:54 PM
On approach shots, I tend to hit to my opponents weakness, 90% of the time is the BH. Today, I approached with my BH flat to the middle of the court and got 3-4 lobs and 2-3 volleys.

As long as you can anticipate what the next ball is going to be, you can't really make a mistake, perhaps poor tactical execution. It's all part of learning the tennis. Don't get mad or down on yourself, continue to do what feels right to develop your game.

Your question is sort of generic, there is no rule of thumb... every opponent is different. If you can rip a DTL forehand, then yes, do so. If you can create a wide cross court angle, then do.

Best thing is for you to figure out what you do best, and what your opponent does worst.

Geezer Guy
02-06-2009, 01:59 PM
Generally, unless you have a huge opening, keeping the ball in front of you is best. If the opponent gets to it, you're pretty sure to have a play on the ball. If you hit wide and the opponent gets to it, they'll have a much easier passing shot.

mixertefera
02-06-2009, 02:01 PM
If you get a sitter and the opponent is at a neutral position, meaning that there is no opening for you to hit into, is DTL the best option?

i tend to go cross court cause i can open up and rip it as hard as i want with little fear of it going out. also where the ball is and what kind of shot you'll get back if they tend to hit high floating slice back hands and not drive it then go backhand but if the drive hard balls then go for what your best shot is and follow the ball to the that.

mixertefera
02-06-2009, 02:03 PM
oh my post is wrong i meant follow the ball to the net

oneguy21
02-06-2009, 02:07 PM
On approach shots, I tend to hit to my opponents weakness, 90% of the time is the BH. Today, I approached with my BH flat to the middle of the court and got 3-4 lobs and 2-3 volleys.

As long as you can anticipate what the next ball is going to be, you can't really make a mistake, perhaps poor tactical execution. It's all part of learning the tennis. Don't get mad or down on yourself, continue to do what feels right to develop your game.

Your question is sort of generic, there is no rule of thumb... every opponent is different. If you can rip a DTL forehand, then yes, do so. If you can create a wide cross court angle, then do.

Best thing is for you to figure out what you do best, and what your opponent does worst.


At lower levels, hitting approach shots to your opponent's weakness may be alright, but at higher levels players tend to have solid forehands and backhands and thus the best place to hit an approach shot is down the line since it cuts off the angles.

To the OP,

It depends. If your hitting an approach shot or a put away shot, yes, dtl is the best option. If your going to hit it cross then hit it deep with good pace, but try to stay in a neutral position.

Slicendicer
02-06-2009, 02:17 PM
At lower levels, hitting approach shots to your opponent's weakness may be alright, but at higher levels players tend to have solid forehands and backhands and thus the best place to hit an approach shot is down the line since it cuts off the angles.

To the OP,

It depends. If your hitting an approach shot or a put away shot, yes, dtl is the best option. If your going to hit it cross then hit it deep with good pace, but try to stay in a neutral position.


Yeah... I've played high level tennis and every player has a weakness... most I've played it is the BH... that is what I said.

You can't really say DTL is the best option, what if he's playing a lefty and hits a ball into the opponents strength. Sometimes, maybe... again, there is no definitive answer to that. My best advice is to hit your strength to your opponents weakness... in the point you are playing.

BullDogTennis
02-06-2009, 02:22 PM
Yeah... I've played high level tennis and every player has a weakness... most I've played it is the BH... that is what I said.

You can't really say DTL is the best option, what if he's playing a lefty and hits a ball into the opponents strength. Sometimes, maybe... again, there is no definitive answer to that. My best advice is to hit your strength to your opponents weakness... in the point you are playing.

strength or weakness. when yuo play a high level. there WEAKNESS can still be able to hit winners easily. what hes trying to get through your head is, the person is probably gonna get to EITHER ball you hit. so whats better for you. you hit cross court, he cranks one by you bc chances are the WHOLE court is open. or you hit it DTL and they have to come up with an imposible shot to hit a passing shot, or hit it right back to you for an easy volley.

oneguy21
02-06-2009, 02:24 PM
The "hit to your opponent's weakness" is beginner instruction. Ball placement on the right parts of the court is more important.

mucat
02-06-2009, 02:32 PM
In general, hitting DTL when coming to the net. This also applies when there is no opening to hit into.

However, where is this sitter? How close is this ball to the net? Also, if it is a sitter, there are always openning(s)... :twisted:

Slicendicer
02-06-2009, 02:33 PM
strength or weakness. when yuo play a high level. there WEAKNESS can still be able to hit winners easily. what hes trying to get through your head is, the person is probably gonna get to EITHER ball you hit. so whats better for you. you hit cross court, he cranks one by you bc chances are the WHOLE court is open. or you hit it DTL and they have to come up with an imposible shot to hit a passing shot, or hit it right back to you for an easy volley.

If the whole court were open, then hitting to your opponent wouldn't be "his weakness".

Again... in the point you are playing, hit to your opponents weakness. If he/she is out of position on the FH, go cross court. If out of position on the BH, go DTL.

I have played high level tennis, a lot of matches under my belt... this really is the only way to look at tennis strategically. 90% of opponents I've played, the weaker side all things equal, is the BH. Maybe your experience is the other way around, I don't know.

What I'm telling the OP is to assess the best shot selection, based on the opponents weakness... in the point that you are playing. To only say, DTL at alltimes, is incorrect... all due respect to you.

LeeD
02-06-2009, 02:40 PM
Sorta on the fence toppling over towards Slicendicer....
You make your opponent play his worse game. You try to apply your best game.
BUT, some basic tenets like short approaches down the line can apply.
Sitters, of course you PUT THEM AWAY anywhere you think you can, since it's YOUR SITTER to put away.
My notion of hitting to backhand is a little askewed..... I hit there KNOWING it's more consistent than the forehand, but I also know fewer outright winners are coming from the backhand side. Forehands, even with my pathetic stroke, I can hit outright winners easily 40% of the time if someone tries an approach I can reach (topspin lob is one of my strengths).
Now if I played against someone with an actual stronger as in winner ratio backhand, then I'd pick hitting to his "weaker" or more consistent side so I get to hit another ball and play another day:):)

Bud
02-06-2009, 02:41 PM
On a short ball/approach shot... a DTL is much riskier since you're going over the part of the net that is approximately 6" higher.

If you have the control to hit DTL without netting or hitting long, that's the shot you want. Otherwise, play percentage tennis and go cross court and deep.

junbumkim
02-06-2009, 02:43 PM
On approach shots, I tend to hit to my opponents weakness, 90% of the time is the BH. Today, I approached with my BH flat to the middle of the court and got 3-4 lobs and 2-3 volleys.

As long as you can anticipate what the next ball is going to be, you can't really make a mistake, perhaps poor tactical execution. It's all part of learning the tennis. Don't get mad or down on yourself, continue to do what feels right to develop your game.

Your question is sort of generic, there is no rule of thumb... every opponent is different. If you can rip a DTL forehand, then yes, do so. If you can create a wide cross court angle, then do.

Best thing is for you to figure out what you do best, and what your opponent does worst.

I agree with this. I think you develop an instinct or ability to quickly assess the situation as you play and watch a lot of matches.

Sometimes you can even go to their strength if you can handle their response. For example, if your opponent tends to hit a wicked angle shot to your crosscourt position, you can defend it (or you might not be able to).

This can have even more devastating effect on your opponent b/c his strength is not working and he will try to do more with the ball.

LeeD
02-06-2009, 02:47 PM
Bud, after 4,200 odd posts, are you sure?
Do you want to qualify that statement? Like when you decide to STAY BACK, then go crosscourt the majority of the time?:)

mucat
02-06-2009, 02:52 PM
Have you guys see how Roddick approach the net? Just do the opposite.

Bud
02-06-2009, 02:53 PM
Bud, after 4,200 odd posts, are you sure?
Do you want to qualify that statement? Like when you decide to STAY BACK, then go crosscourt the majority of the time?:)

Sorry, not following you :)

I thought his question dealt with a short ball... i.e. going forward.

Bud
02-06-2009, 02:54 PM
Have you guys see how Roddick approach the net? Just do the opposite.

:lol::lol::lol:

LeeD
02-06-2009, 02:59 PM
Sorry Bud, I'm not making myself clear....

SITTER... you move into position, put the ball away where you want:)
Basic tenet for approach shot..... go low and deep down the line, to cover than possible angles of his passing shots. When you approach crosscourt, you expose more open court for his passing shot, since you are now moving diagonally across the court, rather than moving almost straight towards the ball.
Your choice of course. Key is depth. Secondary is pace and spin.

Bud
02-06-2009, 03:03 PM
Sorry Bud, I'm not making myself clear....

SITTER... you move into position, put the ball away where you want:)
Basic tenet for approach shot..... go low and deep down the line, to cover than possible angles of his passing shots. When you approach crosscourt, you expose more open court for his passing shot, since you are now moving diagonally across the court, rather than moving almost straight towards the ball.
Your choice of course. Key is depth. Secondary is pace and spin.

I agree, if you're at a level where you can hit DTL effectively. Otherwise, going crosscourt allows much more room for error. You have a lower net and more court to work with.

LeeD
02-06-2009, 03:07 PM
Remember the other post about one handed backhand slice shots?
The pros all have a low approach because that is the basis for volleying from groundie positioning. And easternbackhand approach is HARD to control depth. A cont with forehand twist is much easier to control depth, as more spin is applied, and you have a feel for it's depth because you're swinging much fuller and harder.

oneguy21
02-06-2009, 05:01 PM
Have you guys see how Roddick approach the net? Just do the opposite.

I agree his approach shots are horrible. Forehand is too spinny and his backhand slice almost always goes crosscourt.

LeeD
02-06-2009, 05:06 PM
But picking Roddick as an approach shot example is just not fair. He's a bad net player, but worse trying to get there!
Why not pick Courier or Borg for an equally bad example? Those guys all hit the snot out of the "approach" shot and really want it to be a winner, they don't want it to set up the next volley.
Roddick, crosscourt approach....bad, dumb, not smart, losing strategy....

oneguy21
02-06-2009, 05:09 PM
But picking Roddick as an approach shot example is just not fair. He's a bad net player, but worse trying to get there!
Why not pick Courier or Borg for an equally bad example? Those guys all hit the snot out of the "approach" shot and really want it to be a winner, they don't want it to set up the next volley.
Roddick, crosscourt approach....bad, dumb, not smart, losing strategy....

I haven't seen Borg play too much, but did he hit approach shots? lol

LeeD
02-06-2009, 05:15 PM
With Borg's heavy deep topspins, he often solicited short weak returns. He'd step in and pound a topspin shot to the open court, and actually volley the weak return pretty well. He'd go either cross or DTL.
Connors would hit deep sidespin, mostly down the line, move in and volley well even with his two handed backhand volley.
Best volleyers for his time was Nastase. He'd often, during the middle of a baseline rally, just slap a short backspin ball up the middle, approach to the service line, read the direction of the return, get there ahead of time, and volley away a winner.
After a few years of heavier alcohol, it worked less often and with less success, of course. And of course, he was an aberation player.

oneguy21
02-06-2009, 05:18 PM
With Borg's heavy deep topspins, he often solicited short weak returns. He'd step in and pound a topspin shot to the open court, and actually volley the weak return pretty well. He'd go either cross or DTL.
Connors would hit deep sidespin, mostly down the line, move in and volley well even with his two handed backhand volley.
Best volleyers for his time was Nastase. He'd often, during the middle of a baseline rally, just slap a short backspin ball up the middle, approach to the service line, read the direction of the return, get there ahead of time, and volley away a winner.
After a few years of heavier alcohol, it worked less often and with less success, of course. And of course, he was an aberation player.

According to wikipeda, Nastase was a horrible volleyer and if wikipedia says it it has to be true.

John McEnroe was the best volleyer of that era.

LeeD
02-06-2009, 05:29 PM
WRONG !!
If you read it, it must not be true.
Nastase played early '70's, got alcoholic by the late '70's. McEBoy was still in junior high when Nastase was #1. Whole different generation.
Nastase had great volleys. Sometimes, he'd swing tru with topspin on his volleys, backhand or forehand. He was known for his volleying. And he had a great first serve. Before the AA anyways:evil:
I watched Nastase demolish Tanner, Stockton, and Smith in 3 rounds. Just mesmerized them with nothing approaches followed by clean angled putaway volleys. Bad for me, I strung the Wilson team rackets except for Smiths.
I think most of us oldtimers still revere Nastase's knack for putaway volleys from untenable positions.
Maybe by '79, too much alcohol got to him, and partying of course. By then, he was easily 5 years past his top years.

oneguy21
02-06-2009, 05:32 PM
WRONG !!
If you read it, it must not be true.
Nastase played early '70's, got alcoholic by the late '70's. McEBoy was still in junior high when Nastase was #1. Whole different generation.
Nastase had great volleys. Sometimes, he'd swing tru with topspin on his volleys, backhand or forehand. He was known for his volleying. And he had a great first serve. Before the AA anyways:evil:
I watched Nastase demolish Tanner, Stockton, and Smith in 3 rounds. Just mesmerized them with nothing approaches followed by clean angled putaway volleys. Bad for me, I strung the Wilson team rackets except for Smiths.
I think most of us oldtimers still revere Nastase's knack for putaway volleys from untenable positions.
Maybe by '79, too much alcohol got to him, and partying of course. By then, he was easily 5 years past his top years.

I haven't watched Nastase play so I wouldn't know. But then how do you explain why wikipedia claims Nastase's volleys were weak?

LeeD
02-06-2009, 05:39 PM
Perhaps Wip wasn't invented back then, when he played tennis WELL. Remember, he played years and years as an alcoholic, too drunk and one cigarette in his left hand, partying till 4 the previous nights, and lived on his notoriety established in the early '70's. His career didn't last as long as others, not successful winning tennis anyways. He got the girls, he gots the flash, he's kinda like the pre Safin!
How can you believe what you read? Try the history of WW11 from France's perspective, or Germany's, or Austrias. Totally different from what we learned in Americanhistory.
OK, too old for you?
Read the history of the VietnamConflict from US and then from Vietnamese perspectives.

oneguy21
02-06-2009, 05:42 PM
Perhaps Wip wasn't invented back then, when he played tennis WELL. Remember, he played years and years as an alcoholic, too drunk and one cigarette in his left hand, partying till 4 the previous nights, and lived on his notoriety established in the early '70's. His career didn't last as long as others, not successful winning tennis anyways. He got the girls, he gots the flash, he's kinda like the pre Safin!
How can you believe what you read? Try the history of WW11 from France's perspective, or Germany's, or Austrias. Totally different from what we learned in Americanhistory.
OK, too old for you?
Read the history of the VietnamConflict from US and then from Vietnamese perspectives.

Alright, but Nastase was a player wasn't he? He supposedly with over 2000 women? How's that possible?

LeeD
02-06-2009, 05:44 PM
Well, Wilt the Stick Chamberlain claims 10,000, so there!:shock: