Going deep vs Going wide

Discussion in 'Tennis Tips/Instruction' started by luishcorreia, Jan 21, 2012.

  1. arche3

    arche3 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2009
    Messages:
    5,389
    Your nuts lol. On topic though I would imagine if any of your opponents hit a short cross court ball to you your head would explode because the shot is impossible! I see you dropping to your knees muttering to yourself something about is that rafa across the net from me? Then packing your stuff limping off the court back to your favorite chair to watch more Laver matches to think on the good old days.

    If you can't make a decent comment to my original post to yours why even bother making snide remarks ? It adds nothing to this discussion on the shorter ball theory. Just because you can't do it does not mean others can't . Which is why we are actually discussing it. I'm not on here asking, "should I or shouldn't I hit my 150 MPH serve more often?" I can't hit a 150 serve. But I can hit a short ts shot with angle and pace. Which is why I was discussing it. Stay out of here if all you have to say is that only pros can hit the shot. Its not even a hard shot lol.
     
    #51
  2. arche3

    arche3 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2009
    Messages:
    5,389
    I think with some posters it is because they can't control depth using top spin so from that perspective the shots are impossible. They need the full cross court length to get the ball in when hitting with pace. For anyone who can vary the spin rate the shots are elementary.
     
    #52
  3. papa

    papa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,071
    Good post. Racquet & string technology have, and will continue to be a big factor here.
     
    #53
  4. papa

    papa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,071
    I know its been mentioned many times that angles beget angles but it so true in the game even today. Racquets and string technology helps but one has to consider unforced errors.

    Actually, I like Lampins approah to this & think his approach sound.
     
    #54
  5. zcarzach

    zcarzach Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2005
    Messages:
    803
    I really like to picture a target that is 3 feet in from the baseline and three feet in from the appropriate sideline, whether singles or doubles. Three feet is quite a bit of margin for error but not so short that it is easily attackable. If you can hit this spot, corner to corner, you will win a lot of matches. I try to hit 70% pace to these spots as much as possible, which hopefully will generate a weak, attackable reply to be attacked down the line and followed into the net.

    The exception to this is if I'm trying to hit an inside-out forehand (rare, as I'm not that good at it, but I'm working on it), then I like to hit wide but inside the service box if I can. This generates angles but at my level not too many guys seem to be able to hit a winner down the line off a well-hit forehand like that. If they can, well, too good.
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2012
    #55
  6. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,419
    I hear the concern about angles bringing angles, but that is not really the experience we are seeing so much with the Jrs. Probably because we are not talking major angles to start with. I agree to restrict strong and severe angles to when you are confident they will do some damage.

    I saw so many great examples in the Fed match last nite and a couple really stood out. Fed took a Bh within a couple of feet of the BL and hit solid pace xct to Del's Bh. Feds shot bounced very near the svc line, and got a strong, but middle ball where he could take a Fh back the other way briskly, but again just past the svc line for the clean winner. Fed's shots were not exceptional in pace or spin, but were nice "line of shot".This type exchange was repeated over and over in that match, with Del clearly hitting harder and deeper during this match. I won't speak of the match results, but only mention that in these type exchanges, Fed fared very well. Fed did tend to struggle when he used the middle third of the court and went for more depth. Fed's misses were mostly due to going for depth and his middle balls even when deep, tended to get punished.
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2012
    #56
  7. onehandbh

    onehandbh Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2005
    Messages:
    3,101
    What stood out to me was that if you're going to hit short or near the
    middle of the court, hit away from the opponent. If you slice deep with
    nothing on it, you might still get away with it. The slice seems to be a shot
    a lot of the top pros have really good depth control over and can safely hit
    deep most of the time. Fed mixed in short slices very well to throw off
    Delpo's timing as well. Delpo also doesn't really have a good defensive
    slice, so when he's pulled out of position he either has to blast it back
    if he can or sometimes he ends up hitting it slightly softer and then Fed
    was able to attack. Fed also seemed to be hitting on the rise backhands
    done the line pretty well. Some of them were relatively flat compared to
    his regular heavy rally backhands. This is difficult shot to hit, but Delpo's
    flatter shots probably made it easier to time.
     
    #57
  8. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    Thanks, Papa! It's nice to see that some posters respond to what was actually written rather than purposely misrepresenting what was written in order to manufacture a strawman to argue against.
     
    #58
  9. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,419
    Excellent observation above that may seem sort of obvious, but the subtle importance of it seems to be often missed by players.
     
    #59
  10. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,419
    addressing what was actually written-
    I coach and chart enough to know this is quite false, plain and simple.

    OP's link is his blog if I understand that correctly, and
    is deeply flawed throughout, including his diagram, unless you are viewing from a very basic 3.0- low 4.0 perspective. By his own admission he is a 4.0 somewhere, which I expect is far like a 3.5 in southern section. Maybe that is why your perspectives align so well. I expect as he gains experience, his ability to understand and use the court will grow, but it appears yours has reached a plateau.
    cheers
     
    #60
  11. thug the bunny

    thug the bunny Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2011
    Messages:
    813
    Location:
    Out of the comfort zone
    OK, before this gets ugly, here's the consensus:

    1) you don't necessarily have to hit deep all the time to keep your opp back as long as you put some pace and spin on the ball, and your opp is not Agassi

    2) short CC balls with TS are a good option (and are not pro level shots) when you are in the right position

    There. Let's move on.
     
    #61
  12. arche3

    arche3 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2009
    Messages:
    5,389
    ball hit from baseline (top of image) difficulty of shot is probably similar. Black lines going deep. Colored lines going short. the short angle would require an extra step or so. hit 2 shots like this away from opponent back to back its 2 steps your gaining versus going deeper in the court.


    [​IMG]
     
    #62
  13. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    If the OP is a 4.0, and his understanding of shot selection is typical of a being a 4.0, then you must be a 2.0, or perhaps a 1.0, because his understanding of shot selection is much more advanced than yours.
     
    #63
  14. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,419
    I didn't expect you to get it really, but thanks for the comments that help to flush out the idea more for others who have the vision to take advantage of it.
     
    #64
  15. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,419
    Fed used those two colored line shots almost exactly for one point against Del, starting with the one on the Bh side, then Del's return came back to that spot you have there at the middle Fh. Amazing that Fed's less than stellar Bh (according to limpy) could earn that center ball for Fed to hit that second colored line shot for a winner to the deuce side, given that from the middle of the court and behind the baseline you can't hit a ball to the svc line, 3' from the side T without missing or having it attacked for a more severe angle.

    But if you think that sequence above was impossible, another time he hit the same middle Fh shot for a winner, falling back, from 8-9' behind the baseline too. Just think how impressed I'd be if my 13 yr old didn't regularly make the same shots every time he plays (although not as many for clean winners I must admit).

    I believe it is pretty clear that a big reason Fed played so well against Del is that he worked these targets consistently all nite, and avoided going for the deep corner targets that he struggled with so in that US open final. In that Final the depth risk bit him often and at bad times. This match last nite reminded me much more of the ole 2004 Fed.
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2012
    #65
  16. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    36,455
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    Or, short angles tend to run the opponent wider than deep angles. A passing shot attempt CC is most effective as a short angle attempt. Most net players can cover the deep CC attempt.
     
    #66
  17. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,419
    Very good point lee.
    Which do you think would be easier, hitting that wider shot under pressure of a net rusher when it is not a usual angle and depth for you or if it is a normal part of your rally game? I agree with your point and think this is another reason we see the pros hit such amazing passing shots so often; because they use those same shot lines regularly in their game.
     
    #67
  18. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    36,455
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    For a net player like me, it's easier to hit the sharp angle short CC under pressure when a netperson is stationed at the correct location and close to the actual net.
    For most baseliners who hit aggressively, I'd think removing the net person would remove any outside distractions.
     
    #68
  19. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,419
    Yes, I agree that hitting with a net person there provides a certain reference point to help with a pass, but just stating that a person who regularly uses similar lines of shot in their game, might have an advantage over someone who predominantly focuses on depth with less angle for most of their shots.
     
    #69
  20. Bobby Jr

    Bobby Jr Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,446
    Federer hits his forehand, on average, deeper than any of his peers. It's one of the reasons it is so strong. Watch the longer rallys of the Tomic or Del Potro matches and you'll notice he'll keep the foot down not by hitting hard necessarily, but by hitting consistently deeper than his opponent.

    Sure, he may not hit it there all the time but you can be sure in any lengthy exchange he will eventually find his depth as a way to get on top of situation.
     
    #70
  21. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,419
    I guess you didn't watch the match against Del Potro then.
    There is truth to what you say about Fed since he got mono, Although clearly Nole was the deepest hitter on avg prior to last year.

    IMO Fed may have tried to do deeper more often to shorten points when his stamina was low for a year or so there during the mono, but he did not in the Del P match and he didn't hit deep so often during his best years before the bout with mono.
    He also may have tried to go deeper sooner to try and take that deeper tack with Rafa who has always had his number from early on, but it has not been effective really.

    Nole, was the deepest hitter, but shortened it up last year, got more consistent, and what a year that led to!
     
    #71
  22. Bobby Jr

    Bobby Jr Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,446
    I did, and just watched a highlights package in the last hour as well. Time and time and time again when he won longer points it was due to his hitting the ball within 1 foot of the baseline while Del Potro hitting the ball a foot past the service line. Depth kills. It wasn't just hitting winners, it was that he was able to by forcing Del Potro back with deep hitting on many occasions.

    For sure, I agree. Djokovic has improved markedly but forehand vs forehand Federer still wins - as I said in my first post: Federer's forehand. It's just that Djokovic also hits deep off his backhand too - whereas Federer often falls short - so has the edge over Federer overall, at least in the past year.
     
    #72
  23. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    Agreed! Although, I saw more good deep cross court bh's than usual from Fed in that Delpotro match, which drew short replies setting up some devastating DTL bh winners from Fed. Overcoming his usual weakness in this match might explain his dominating straight set win in which he only lost 9 games.
     
    #73
  24. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,419
    Traditional wisdom has blinded to what you are seeing on the court.
    I have most of the Fed-Del match recorded and am recording DJ as we speak.

    The stats will show how far off you are I expect, but if I'm wrong, I'll be sure to post that as well.
    cheers
     
    #74
  25. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,419
    Due to tm constraints, I picked 5-5 in second set to chart the rest of the set for DJ vs Ferrer. I figured they were both well into it and a lot was on the line related to who took this important set. Just counted for DJ who you claimed hit so deep from his Bh. I also didn't want to chart a stretch were DJ was cruising and could afford to cut loose without regard for intelligent play.

    18 Bhs on the shorter side that I considered pretty close to the svc line.
    14 Bhs more in the middle between short and deep, but still on or very near my targets
    9 Bhs that were of excellent depth, but not using your radical 1 foot from BL
    .........more like the last 3-4 feet

    So here is the scoop-

    Taking out 5 shots from the total middle balls, with leaves about 9 that would hit on or near my target gives me 27 of 41 Bhs to smart target depth, which is about 66% or a full 2/3s.

    Also what is very interesting is that of the mere 9 Bhs (22%) that were clearly of aggressively depth, at least 3 (or 1/3) were misses long! So there were only 6 (<15%) Bhs of excellent depth that stayed in the court during these important, set ending games, and the tiebreaker!
    I hit more to that depth trying to avoid extreme depth!

    And I'm pretty sure that no deep Bhs were point enders or clean winners, but didn't notice that till just prior to mid way in my charting when I realized that I was not seeing any of these "great Deep Bhs" winning points. From the pt I thought of that, none were winners. A couple may have set up a winner, but not after I started looking for that. He had only hit 3 Bhs with excellent depth at that point so they surely were not much of a factor. It seem the Bh won more points with the charted short balls, followed by med depth balls, with none from the deep category.
     
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2012
    #75
  26. thug the bunny

    thug the bunny Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2011
    Messages:
    813
    Location:
    Out of the comfort zone
    Yup, So, as before,

    1) you don't necessarily have to hit deep all the time to keep your opp back as long as you put some pace and spin on the ball, and your opp is not Agassi

    2) short CC balls with TS are a good option (and are not pro level shots) when you are in the right position

    Let's move on.
     
    #76
  27. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,419
    I agree that you state it fairly well,
    if includes accounting for the risk of excessive depth.
     
    #77
  28. papa

    papa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,071
    Three feet in from the sidelines may be a bit too much IMO - baseline is ok but you should trust your strokes a little bit more than keepingin the ball so far in from the sidelines.
     
    #78
  29. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,419
    He's already having to cut power to 70% to make these and I bet he's not that consistent really still. Why would you push him closer to the lines?
     
    #79
  30. papa

    papa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,071
    Well, some of this has to do with level of play and whether we're talking singles or doubles.

    I do a lot with kids and they tend to go for too much at times but that's how they learn. Its very difficult to get adult players to work the angles if they arent used to it. I do several large clinics weekly and although its something I constantly stress, results are generally dissapointing.
     
    #80
  31. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,419
    I know what you mean.
     
    #81
  32. papa

    papa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,071
    your right, not all angles are equal. Closer one get to net the sharper/better the angle.
     
    #82
  33. papa

    papa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,071
    Well, you've been around this suff long enough now to see this materal realistically. As you very well know and understand cosistency wins tennis matches - great shots are nice but consistency wins.

    I do some clinnics, as I mentioned, with young kids, probably not as good with it/effectice as I think I am with the older ones. Some of you guys probably do more with kids below Middle School, so you know better what works for them.
     
    #83
  34. papa

    papa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,071
    I like Limpins comments on the issue at hand and think players level is a huge factor in understanding this stuff. Players that reach the 4 - 4.5 level tend to become students of the game and strive for a better underdanding of the why's & how's associated with the game - they ask the deeper questions and become the students of the game itself.
     
    #84
  35. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,419
    Yes, I agree his comments are very much in line with that 4.0-4.5 level on things, which is fine, but I figure some of the regulars here like Archie, could be interested in just how Nadal, DJ, and Ferrer can be amazing top 10 players while breaking all the rules by hitting short balls left and right without getting punished, and doing it against the best short ball attackers of all time. As Archie alluded to, if anything, hitting shorter is far less risky at the lower levels, cause very few 4.0s have any real effectiveness at attacking short balls anyway. The fear of getting short balls attacked well is way overstated right up thru the ranks.
     
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2012
    #85
  36. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    36,455
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    My answer to the last post....
    Nadal, Ferrer, Verdasco can get away with short loopy balls because they can hit short loopy passing shots.
    You can attack those guys all you want, and all you will get are low, heavy topspin low and half volleys, or topspin lobs.
    You will lose the majority of interactions.
    And why did Sampras and Haas manage to get away with slow, moderate bouncing 1hbh slices? Because they can back up their weak shot with huge CC 1hbh passes, or a run around backhand to crush any weak angled approach.
     
    #86
  37. thug the bunny

    thug the bunny Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2011
    Messages:
    813
    Location:
    Out of the comfort zone
    Stragely, watching the women's draw at the AO (Clijsters/Azarenka, Sharipova/Kvitova), I noticed that the girls seem to hit more consistently deeper than the guys!

    What's the take on that?
     
    #87
  38. chico9166

    chico9166 Guest

    I tend to agree with this. The men's game (because of the much higher spin rates) play more of an side to side, east-west game. The girls still tend to try to punish there opponents, by hitting thru the court.
     
    #88
  39. arche3

    arche3 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2009
    Messages:
    5,389
    not enough top spin.
     
    #89
  40. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,419
    I think you are correct and it is an excellent observation.
    Also worth noting here is that many feel the less than top tier players
    (Men) should look to the women's game more for guidance.
    I would agree it is a good place for one to look if a man sees the game,
    and tends to hit the shots more like the women. Yes, the women generally
    have lower spin rates and do hit for more depth on avg. So if you hit that
    way, learn from the pro women. A lot less to learn that way too.

    As you might expect, I'm not a big fan of the women's game just for these
    reasons. I don't care to watch 2 big girls bash it as hard and deep as they
    can till one misses. For me, the men's game with it's mix of spins, power,
    and playing for superior position, is far more interesting to watch.
    It's awesome to watch the men work in transition and then at net.
    The men can target more spots on the court, because their topspin is
    NOT loopy, but nasty biting spin that makes the ball dive to the court
    like crazy, then explode off the bounce. Maybe we don't quite get the
    rpms of the best pros on our TS shots, but we are
    not facing the best pros either, so the pop we get
    can be plenty to make the ball hop up on our opponents.
    It gives the game more depth strategically and
    will win out over the baseline bashing nearly every time.
     
    #90
  41. thug the bunny

    thug the bunny Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2011
    Messages:
    813
    Location:
    Out of the comfort zone
    Spot on. My hard TS shots landing just beyond the SL rise all the way to the BL. Which is the same reason that the same shot put near the SL/sideline is not an easy attack ball.

    Sorry to deviate, but sadly the only way I will be able to watch the women's final is with the sound off..
     
    #91
  42. papa

    papa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,071
    OK, fair enoungh. I think many of us are dealing with that level of play also for the most part. As you realize, the pros, for a variety of realsons are able to execute shots and use methods that are not appropriate for the majority in the tennis community at large. Lampins comments/op
    ionions are in line with reality - at least that's my opinion.


    So many times we're asked why can't we copy the pros - its my experience
     
    #92
  43. papa

    papa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,071
    sorry, got cut off.

    Anyway, players want to play like the pros and unfortunately, despite the claims of some, its just not realistic or even remotely possible. Most pros are world class athletes (probably all of them), and capable of doing things that they rest of the tennis world can't - sad but true.
     
    #93
  44. papa

    papa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,071
    Well, I would agree but of course DTM is a viable option in doubles. Shaprp angles are of course great but often not possible as you know.
     
    #94
  45. papa

    papa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,071
    Thug, do you really believe this? I wouldn't come to the same conclusion but its an interesting thought.
     
    #95
  46. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,419
    Really? I have not charted a comparison to be sure, but it really jumps out at me that way. Even with net clearance that put quite a few in the net, they missed a ton of UEs long and rarely worked an angle outsite the deep corner.

    My understanding is that a ball that barely clears the net from BL to BL without using TS can only be 62mph and stay in the court. These girls are working both ends against the middle and paying a high price for it with UEs. Only thing saves them is that both girls are doing the same things.
     
    #96
  47. Roy125

    Roy125 Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    944
    Location:
    San Diego, California
    It's interesting how when a player such as Wozniacki uses topspin to make angles and hits balls that barely go past the service line, she gets punished for it.
     
    #97
  48. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,419
    Worth noting for sure, but she has spent quite a bit of time at #1 in the world and has been the most consistent female player for quite awhile. The other ladies punish everything, deep and short, and they miss quite often doing it; so it's not like they are just jumping on her shorter ones. They jump on everything pretty much.

    Another factor is that Woz does hit more of a rolling, loopy TS and doesn't get the bite on it like most men can.
     
    #98
  49. arche3

    arche3 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2009
    Messages:
    5,389
    her top spin is not a heavy shot. the spin rate is not like even a good college male players. Guys are stronger, hit harder, generate more spin. cant compare men to women in the tennis game and skills. too much of a physical difference.

    If you watch the top ATP men play they cannot attack the majority of short balls hit. Its only the ones that ease up a bit in pace that they can step into and punish.
     
    #99
  50. onehandbh

    onehandbh Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2005
    Messages:
    3,101
    Since the women hit less hard in general, wouldn't you think that ones
    hitting heavier topspin -- especially on a slow court like the Australian Open's
    courts -- would in theory be able to beat Sharapova, who's a slow, big
    hitter?

    Yes, but the WTA move slower and even their flat shots are less hard
    than the ATP's flat shots. So in the commonly accepted theory, the
    WTA players hitting short spinny shots wouldn't have to hit as much
    spin to succeed. This hasn't proven to be the rule, though.
     

Share This Page