PDA

View Full Version : Federer's specialty shot


Rickson
01-27-2006, 11:35 AM
Federer looks for around the post shots to hit. I wish I could find some around the post opportunities in doubles, let alone singles, but Federer got his second AO atnp shot. We'd be lucky to get one... ever.

vkartikv
01-27-2006, 11:37 AM
he makes it look easy, doesn't he? and we go out to the court and come back disappointed, shoulder shrugged because we couldn't even set up that shot, let alone execute it..

@wright
01-27-2006, 11:45 AM
I've gotten a couple in doubles, don't think I've ever had the opportunity in singles. I was mad because a couple years ago I was playing doubles and got the chance to hit on, but it was just a forehand so I blasted it at the ground and one of my opponents didn't even know you could do that so he let it go. It kind of ruined it for me.

Keifers
01-27-2006, 12:01 PM
Yeah, a great shot. The pace of it surprised and really impressed me. Whoa!...

arosen
01-27-2006, 12:04 PM
Hewitt also loves to hit that shot on his forehand side, so much so that I often wonder if he practices it intentionally. He lines it up and puts it in the corner 4 out of 5 times, but he lacks the pace on it. Very consistent though.

TennisAsAlways
01-27-2006, 12:20 PM
I've gotten a couple in doubles, don't think I've ever had the opportunity in singles. I was mad because a couple years ago I was playing doubles and got the chance to hit on, but it was just a forehand so I blasted it at the ground and one of my opponents didn't even know you could do that so he let it go. It kind of ruined it for me.Yeah, don't you just hate that? Nevermind the ATNP shots but even for other situations. Sometimes when I play against people I'll get cheap winners. I'll make a huge save, running into the fence and bouncing off of it in order to stop my momentum and then that throws off my opponent. When they see things like that they don't even anticpate the ball coming back to them. This happens alot when I make diving retreivals as well. When someone sees a person on the ground, they tend to just freeze and just stare, thinking that the person on the ground is going to lose the point. I hate cheap points.

Rickson
01-27-2006, 12:25 PM
I've gotten a couple in doubles, don't think I've ever had the opportunity in singles. I was mad because a couple years ago I was playing doubles and got the chance to hit on, but it was just a forehand so I blasted it at the ground and one of my opponents didn't even know you could do that so he let it go. It kind of ruined it for me.
A winner's a winner, any way you get it.

TennisAsAlways
01-27-2006, 12:36 PM
A winner's a winner, any way you get it.Yeah well of course in a serious match, anyone would take a point that's deemed fair by both ends.

It's just that cheap points are different. When you get the freebies, you can't really guage how effective the shot you pulled off was because you then think to yourself that it could have been the distraction that caused the opponent to stop playing, resulting in the winner. It's not a huge deal but can be frustrating in practice matches or pratice play. You want everyone to be trying. That's the point of practicing.

Rickson
01-27-2006, 12:53 PM
Yeah well of course in a serious match, anyone would take a point that's deemed fair by both ends.

It's just that cheap points are different. When you get the freebies, you can't really guage how effective the shot you pulled off was because you then think to yourself that it could have been the distraction that caused the opponent to stop playing, resulting in the winner. It's not a huge deal but can be frustrating in practice matches or pratice play. You want everyone to be trying. That's the point of practicing.
Then you should play Raul because he calls all line balls out. Raul will take a point any, and I mean any, way he can get it. I once aced him with the ball crashing the fence and Raul called the serve out because he refused to get aced with a serve that hit the fence. Raul's philosphy; it's better to cheat and win then to play fair and lose.

TennisAsAlways
01-27-2006, 01:24 PM
...................

TennisAsAlways
01-27-2006, 01:46 PM
Then you should play Raul because he calls all line balls out. Raul will take a point any, and I mean any, way he can get it. I once aced him with the ball crashing the fence and Raul called the serve out because he refused to get aced with a serve that hit the fence. Raul's philosphy; it's better to cheat and win then to play fair and lose.So are you saying that I should play against Raul because I am cheap like him?.....or are you saying that I should play against Raul because I am looking for more of a challenge and Raul would be someone who could provide that challenge to me because of his bad line calls? :confused:

I said I don't like taking cheap points, not that I purposely go for them. I don't intentionally distract people when I am playing. For example, when I make the around the post shots, that throws people off guard and so I get easy winners from the fact that they are off guard. That's what I meant by cheap points. I don't go around making bad line calls.

Also, my previous example of running into the fence and diving down into the ground; I never said I did those things on purpose to throw people off. Those were defensive saves, last resort, ball retreival efforts. I was stating that my opponents don't usually expect anyone to even bother chasing tennis balls under those circumstances and so when they witness me doing it, by that time, they had all ready acted like the point is over when in fact it's not because I actually went the extra mile making the save and then that results in a cheap winner which I do not like. I like to make clear winners, when I am trying my best and when my opponent is trying his best. Like I said earlier though, for serious matches (for USTA points), that's when I said I don't care, that I'll take any points.

You see, in practice, I want my opponents to get better so that we push one another. Basically, all the scenarios that I've mentioned are technically not "cheap" points. If I won those types of points in a serious match then that could be considered good strategy, making the opponent think the point is over when it's really not. I only call them cheap points when it happens in practice for the most part because I like practice to be much more serious to allow improvements on both ends. I don't want it to be that every time I make those big saves or when I make big shots -- such as the ATNP shots -- that I then become accustomed into thinking to myself that I'm going to get a winner out of it. That's why in practice I don't want my opponents to give up too soon. They should never act like the point is over! That's my point. This type of mindset would be great practice of always staying alert and prepared. It's more of a mental thing, preventing yourself from getting lazy.

Your post just confused me. I don't know what you're saying.

You also refer to "Raul" (I have no clue who he is. I assume that he's a practice partner of yours.) in the third person and so that makes things a bit more confusing. I'm thinking to myself, "I wonder if Rickson thinks he knows me (or has misktaken me as being someone else), thinking that I should know him and his friend, and so that is why he is referring to him (Raul) in the third person?" :confused: [scrathes head]

Rickson
01-28-2006, 05:07 AM
So are you saying that I should play against Raul because I am cheap like him?.....or are you saying that I should play against Raul because I am looking for more of a challenge and Raul would be someone who could provide that challenge to me because of his bad line calls? :confused:
I would say the latter. What I meant was that if you played Raul the cheat, you wouldn't be so quick to discredit your own easy winners because how many easy winners would you get, hitting to the middle of the court? Raul forces you to hit away from the lines because if you hit the ball he can't get to, that lands close to, not even past but close to, the baseline, he calls it out. If Raul can't get to a ball that lands near, not wide but near, the sideline, you guessed it, he calls it out. If you played Raul the cheat and you happened to hit an atnp shot, Raul would certainly call the ball out unless you got that ball clearly inside the line by 3 or more feet. Do you understand now? There are no cheap winners with Raul, everyone who's played against him has said that his line calls are so bad, they feel relieved when he doesn't say anything after they win a point against him. BTW, everyone knows about Raul the cheat.

Grimjack
01-28-2006, 06:53 AM
These opportunities are not actually all that rare, in the event that...

1) you play on courts with a lot of sideline room

and

2) you try your damnedest to run down every ball.

Lots of balls go wide every match. It's just that most players shrug and let them go for winners, rather than hustle. I've had probably 100 balls where I was in position to hit that kind of shot. Now, of course, generally I end up floating it back for an easy knock-off volley for my opponent. And even when I do actually nail one down the line and in, it's usually high enough to go over the net anyway. But even I've hit a couple around the post. And speed and shotmaking are by no means my forte.

I've got a little mosquito of a friend who seems to do this about every other match. Runs down everything, so he's always getting his racquet on a ball way wide of the alley.

TennisAsAlways
01-28-2006, 10:15 AM
I would say the latter. What I meant was that if you played Raul the cheat, you wouldn't be so quick to discredit your own easy winners because how many easy winners would you get, hitting to the middle of the court? Raul forces you to hit away from the lines because if you hit the ball he can't get to, that lands close to, not even past but close to, the baseline, he calls it out. If Raul can't get to a ball that lands near, not wide but near, the sideline, you guessed it, he calls it out. If you played Raul the cheat and you happened to hit an atnp shot, Raul would certainly call the ball out unless you got that ball clearly inside the line by 3 or more feet. Do you understand now? There are no cheap winners with Raul, everyone who's played against him has said that his line calls are so bad, they feel relieved when he doesn't say anything after they win a point against him. BTW, everyone knows about Raul the cheat.I'm sure you have told him to get his eyesight checked out once before?

Rickson
01-29-2006, 11:22 AM
I wish I could repeat the things I told Raul, but I would surely get banned with that kind of language.

Federer did it again! Another around the net post shot for Federer against Baghdatis so that makes 3 atnp shots in 2 AOs. Give me just one of those so I could watch my opponent's face, not to mention the inevitable rule question unless of course my opponent's been following the AO.

FedererUberAlles
01-29-2006, 11:50 AM
That was crazy. I am in disbelief. No way!

okdude1992
01-29-2006, 11:59 AM
well back to the original post (not this heated argument) yes fed is brilliant we've heard it a million times...the reason rec. players never even get a chance to hit around the post is because our opponents never hit with such angle...on that particular point when fed did it (and all other around the post shots) your opponent has to hit an incredible angle to get you beyond the sideline-no rec players have that shot, which might be just as well cuase it often gets burned, and nothing pumps you up like a freakin sick winner... Anyway from experience its not that hard to hit while inside the court, but way behind the baseline its nearly impossible especially if youre on the run....actually roddick time and time again can hit this (if he must)...

The best ive ever seen was at the 2003 US Open...Ginepri hit the shot (a winner) while jumping over his chair, before lokking up to see winner, and ducking under the umpires chair...for those of you who are wondering it was vs. Tod Martin in the 4th round i think -Ginepir ended up loosing in 4

TennisAsAlways
01-29-2006, 12:10 PM
I wish I could repeat the things I told Raul, but I would surely get banned with that kind of language.

Federer did it again! Another around the net post shot for Federer against Baghdatis so that makes 3 atnp shots in 2 AOs. Give me just one of those so I could watch my opponent's face, not to mention the inevitable rule question unless of course my opponent's been following the AO.Let me guess...Raul is like a brother to you. You can't stand his ways and you guys argue with one another yet you always somewhow remain friends. Any grudges you have you can shrug it right off.

Is that right? ...Actually, I don't even have to ask....the answer is "yes".