S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
Anyone notice Ben switched racquets in the 1st set [white racquet in the beginning, blue at the end]?
MEP vs ET Players - Original TT Epic
- Thread starter AnyPUG
- Start date
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
i'd say his OHs and movement are high 4.5/low 5.0; also his overall net game. But not his serve.
You guys realize MEP was a few points away from being double bagelled by both Ian and Scott, two 4.5s. The games he got off Ian were just rust from lack of match play by Ian. If Ian was playing as regularly as MEP, it would have been a double bagel for sure. He was winning games easily. No need to make any comments on Scott, he was destroying MEP and probably taking it easy even.
It's like when someone team loses the super bowl.. Hardcore fans will never accept reality.. The Ian hype worked -people became very invested in this. Tennis Troll is a big part of making it happen as well. I wonder if that 6-1, 6-1 loss to Boss of Atlanta was out there - would Ian have played MEP? I think he delayed that to help increase the hype. By the time the actual match happened - some 4.5 for ATL was thought to be some kind of pusher savior. MEP was the great hope of hackers everywhere..
Its not to be though - good strokes and textbook technique rules the day..
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
Not by Ian. Ben won the very first service game of the second set. So double bagel was never on against Ian.
Injured Again
Hall of Fame
You misunderstood my post ... I was talking about losing because of lack of movement, not winning because of it. Decent singles (even doubles) requires a "threshold" of court coverage. I see many good past players end up on the wrong side of that threshold ... or they just tire of being "Injured Again".
Yeah, from that viewpoint, it makes sense.
I play a lowly level and have little problem between doubles and singles. Federer, Djokovic, Nadal and lots of other pro's play elite levels and also switch to doubles from time to time with ease. He||, Fed even won some dubs Olympic.
So, you have some very low level and some very high level to suggest my point, but somehow YOUR OWN level, your own experience is one of the kind.
His experience is not one of a kind. It is fairly common among 4.5 level players who primarily play singles.
Every week, my son and I play another father and son duo - we call it clan wars. We are all 4.5 level singles players but we would (and have) get wiped by any mid-4.5 doubles team and probably would lose to the better 4.0 teams. As for myself, I've captained our club's 55+ 9.0 team the last three years but I am arguably the worst doubles player, including the two or three 4.0's that we carry to play with the 5.0's.
Without regularly playing doubles, there are too many unfamiliar things and too many shots that don't translate well. As a singles player, I concentrate on deep returns to neutralize. Doubles benefits from low returns to a small target.
When I'm at the net in singles and make a putaway volley, that exact same angle volley is very often right at the opposing net person's feet, where they just have to stick the racquet out to get strings on the ball. Having to think about hitting to a different location and then executing that unfamilar shot creates lots of errors.
Balls also come to me from unfamiliar angles. When I play singles, I know where I'm aiming and can see the trajectory from the moment the ball leaves my strings. Knowing how to move in response is instinctive. In doubles, I'm never sure where or how my partner is hitting the ball, and I don't know for sure jntil the ball has passed me or I can get a really good hint from how my opponent is preparing to hit the ball. That delays any reaction I can make and that difference in rhythm makes being out of position more likely. Add to that, that my opponent will hit a ball my partner hit to him from an area of the court very different than I may be, and that ball comes to me in a way it never could in singles.
Doubles is a different skillset than singles, and I agree that it takes time and repetition to play doubles at the same level as a singles player can play singles.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
If you, like, REALLY play doubles rather than playing both singles and doubles the same way, there is absolutely an adjustment required. You can't just watch the ball anymore, you have to watch your partner and you have to watch the non hitting partner of the opposing team. When you get an opportunity to make a volley or hit a groundie off a short ball, you have to really make it count. You have more margin to get away with passive tennis in singles. At the same time, you get to serve from much further away from the center line in doubles.
Another thing. In singles, hitting closer to singles alley on either side is a better play. In doubles, it's hitting down the middle because you get to bisect the opposing team with minimum risk. But if you don't regularly play doubles and the other team does, it's a no brainer as to who is going to be sharper at making these appropriate adjustments.
FIRETennis
Professional
Impressive overheads and net game by Ian!
GSG had a good run in the second set.
The first thing that stood out the most for me were that GSG lobs were way too short and low, making them an easy put away for Ian.
The second thing was that a lot (most) of GSGs slices were short (inside service box or around T) and a lot of the blocks as well did not have enough height or depth.
It was rare to have Ian behind the baseline or even force him to drive volley some moon balls....
The above could have been a by-product of playing indoors, roof or nerves.
If GSG would have kept most of the balls deeper against Ian I think it would have been a different final result and maybe he would have gotten the exhaustion from Ian that he was looking for.
GSG had a good run in the second set.
The first thing that stood out the most for me were that GSG lobs were way too short and low, making them an easy put away for Ian.
The second thing was that a lot (most) of GSGs slices were short (inside service box or around T) and a lot of the blocks as well did not have enough height or depth.
It was rare to have Ian behind the baseline or even force him to drive volley some moon balls....
The above could have been a by-product of playing indoors, roof or nerves.
If GSG would have kept most of the balls deeper against Ian I think it would have been a different final result and maybe he would have gotten the exhaustion from Ian that he was looking for.
Dragy
Legend
It was fun series to follow, thanks @GSG !
Ian proved to be quite good, at least when prepared properly. Couple of things I noticed about Ben:
- in second set playing faster game - hitting the ball, not floating it back - immediately raised the level of challenge for Ian. And Ben was quite capable of that - imagine, if some focused work gets put into it.
- some winners in this match and previous ones didn’t look unreachable for Ben, yet he just let them go by. Court is fast, but it’s lack of split step which slowed Ben reaction if he didn’t guess correctly in advance. Same goes with many serves - slower than possible reaction. Some serves by Ian were just great though.
- not finishing at net is also an area of development. There were maybe not that many opportunities actually missed in those two sets, but being more capable and confident one can force much more and approach much more frequently.
@S&V-not_dead_yet yeah he switched the racquet, as he did in other matches as well. It looked like first service game by Ian, and some OHs as well hit his lighter one off his hand, while the blue seems more stable against the punch.
Ian proved to be quite good, at least when prepared properly. Couple of things I noticed about Ben:
- in second set playing faster game - hitting the ball, not floating it back - immediately raised the level of challenge for Ian. And Ben was quite capable of that - imagine, if some focused work gets put into it.
- some winners in this match and previous ones didn’t look unreachable for Ben, yet he just let them go by. Court is fast, but it’s lack of split step which slowed Ben reaction if he didn’t guess correctly in advance. Same goes with many serves - slower than possible reaction. Some serves by Ian were just great though.
- not finishing at net is also an area of development. There were maybe not that many opportunities actually missed in those two sets, but being more capable and confident one can force much more and approach much more frequently.
@S&V-not_dead_yet yeah he switched the racquet, as he did in other matches as well. It looked like first service game by Ian, and some OHs as well hit his lighter one off his hand, while the blue seems more stable against the punch.
Last edited:
heninfan99
Talk Tennis Guru
I thought you were gonna say that Ian purposely tanked a game in there. The one where he didnt come to net and made three or four forehand misses. I mean, he made a lot of money off of GSG so it was a nice gesture. However, I prefer to think that his head wasnt in the game for a few minutes.
ByeByePoly
G.O.A.T.
Good post. Up to three of us. Thank goodness ... I didn't want to feel alone. That said ... aren't we all unique snowflakes?
LOL ... you just listed the most important difference in doubles. That screwing up doubles partner they put on the court with you.
ByeByePoly
G.O.A.T.
I hit effective flat dtl passing shots ... but ts for cc fh. I hit primarily dtl ... cc just if opponent left fh cc way open. Flat dtl passing shots do not require big pace ... just good precision. Keeping dtl passing shots low prevents easy put away if you don't get it past opponent. The low off pace down the middle can be a very effective setup for passing shot attempt on 2nd shot. That is one place a 1hbh slice really pays off ... take pace off low down the middle. Yes ... I posted it earlier, and Scott said it during Ian match ... lob will not get it done against good overhead.
Rubens
Hall of Fame
It was kinda funny to see a bunch of 4.0-4.5's show us three different ways (in a row) to beat a slightly overhyped slicer/lobber. That's the internet for you. As soon as somebody shows he's decent at doing something, people will keep challenging him until they defeat him repeatedly. The tennis troll channel started the process with the 50-year-old, the young lady, the boss of Atlanta, etc. But ET really took it to another level.
ByeByePoly
G.O.A.T.
One of those 3 took 3 1/2 hours.
ZanderGoga
Semi-Pro
He looked solid up there. His serve is pretty weak, but at least he knew enough to keep torturing his opponent’s “backhand” with it.
All in all, Ian seems like a pretty standard 4.5. Some developing weapons, some glaring weaknesses.
Adjusted for level:
Net game: A
Serves: B
Groundies: C
Fitness: F
Strategy: A
Looks like he’d probably be a fine doubles player, and might actually be able to stay on the court with 5.0’s in that realm, since you can hide his weaknesses.
Rubens
Hall of Fame
That would be the 4.0, yes.
ByeByePoly
G.O.A.T.
I noticed more that he seemed much slower in the last 2 matches then he did in the first 2 or on the matches I've seen from Tennistroll channel.
I don't see how you can discount the effect of playing that much in that short a period of time for someone of any age. I experienced it at USTA sectionals ...5 matches in 3 days, 3 of them singles matches including the last one that the other team brought in someone who hadn't played all week. My feet were torn to shreds and I had nothing left physically eventually losing in a super 13-11.
Fairhit
Hall of Fame
A gimmick, a good one but in the end just a gimmick.
Kudos to Ben for being such a good sport, he let the internet overanalize his game style with everything that goes with it, not for everybody.
As for the match vs Ian, the result was as expected, on one hand you have a rec player that has gained notoriety because of his unorthodox style, on the other hand a teaching pro, no matter how you slice it, Ben is a guy with a work, a family and plays tennis as a hobby, he traveled to another city to play 4 matches in 3 days in foreign conditions and without any training for those conditions or any knowledge about the style of play anyone he was facing on court, he had to adapt as the matches advanced; meanwhile, Ian had months of preparation, he plays tennis everyday, even if he hasn't played competitive in years, he plays every day, he was a college player, he's been playing for almost 30 years, even without all the prep for this match, Ian's background gave him an enormous advantage vs Ben, add to that the conditions of a familiar court to Ian, all the analysis he had done over months, the time and resources to train and prepare and the help from other teaching pros.
In the end playing that match without all the advantages in Ian's favor still would have seen Ian win.
It was a whole team of pros preparing another pro for a match with a rec player that had played 3 matches in the 48 hours previous to the main event, it was like preparing Usain Bolt for six months for the high school athletic week games and somehow convincing everyone that he may lose.
Kudos to Ben for being such a good sport, he let the internet overanalize his game style with everything that goes with it, not for everybody.
As for the match vs Ian, the result was as expected, on one hand you have a rec player that has gained notoriety because of his unorthodox style, on the other hand a teaching pro, no matter how you slice it, Ben is a guy with a work, a family and plays tennis as a hobby, he traveled to another city to play 4 matches in 3 days in foreign conditions and without any training for those conditions or any knowledge about the style of play anyone he was facing on court, he had to adapt as the matches advanced; meanwhile, Ian had months of preparation, he plays tennis everyday, even if he hasn't played competitive in years, he plays every day, he was a college player, he's been playing for almost 30 years, even without all the prep for this match, Ian's background gave him an enormous advantage vs Ben, add to that the conditions of a familiar court to Ian, all the analysis he had done over months, the time and resources to train and prepare and the help from other teaching pros.
In the end playing that match without all the advantages in Ian's favor still would have seen Ian win.
It was a whole team of pros preparing another pro for a match with a rec player that had played 3 matches in the 48 hours previous to the main event, it was like preparing Usain Bolt for six months for the high school athletic week games and somehow convincing everyone that he may lose.
Fairhit
Hall of Fame
Is true, I had to play once 5 matches in 2 days, the final match I could've won if I had tested but my feet were raw, my back was stiff and sore and my shoulder basically couldn't move, the guy that beat me, this was his second match in two days.
you know there is a ceiling........ lol
ByeByePoly
G.O.A.T.
fyi ... net players don't "prepare" or "analyze" ... they just run to the net to get as far away from their groundstrokes as soon as possible.
Last edited:
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
to be fair - if you are not used to playing indoor, then it can be difficult to judge how high the ceiling can be while you are hitting a lob.... that is probably why you see what you saw on the YT videos....
then again, the ceiling height can vary between different indoor courts...
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
I mean if the ceiling was that low and that much of a handicap, he wouldn't have got comfortable using it in previous matches. The issue is how much more effectively Ian was able to rush him. Maybe GSG was a little exhausted as well from the frightening amounts of tennis he played back to back.
Good lobs are not high enough to hit ceilings - they would give Ian too much time to run under. Like I said before GSG likely wins a lot of matches through lack of effort and novelty. If you are playing his team - stick your #2 guy on him - let him take the loss - and beat the rest of the guys. Evidently the algo detects this pattern and that's why he didn't get bumped up with his stellar record.
With USTA its not if you win or lose record wise - it's who you beat and by how much..
There were no year-end ratings adjustments in 2020, so unless I got DQ'ed (highly unlikely), it wouldn't matter how I did, I'd still be a 4.5
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
Wait, how can it be a good lob if it gives him enough time to get under? Have you seen a good lob?
ByeByePoly
G.O.A.T.
Indoor lobs ... tennis clubs usually have high enough ceiling ... it's the buildings that weren't built originally for tennis where I have run into the issue. I've played in a couple of the non-tennis club buildings where it pretty much took the lob out of play, other than the very low ones.
Fairhit
Hall of Fame
Confirming that good lobs are not high enough to hit the ceiling.
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
The dreaded 2-foot-wide horizontal beam running across the ceiling directly over the net has foiled many a lob attempt for me.
ByeByePoly
G.O.A.T.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
That's not the point here. The point is it wouldn't be a good lob if the opponent can get to it with time to spare.
ByeByePoly
G.O.A.T.
I played on a court that was in a fairgrounds building where they use to show livestock. Livestock obviously never had to hit lobs.
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
I dunno, the outdoor sky lob high into the wind (possibly aided by sun angle) can be an extremely effective shot when executed well.
Fairhit
Hall of Fame
Yes, off course.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
Again, that's not what I am debating at all. I know full well the effectiveness of the lob because my tennis partner loves to hit deep lobs. Read what GuyCinch says, "Good lobs are not high enough to hit ceilings - they would give Ian too much time to run under. " How would it be a good lob if Ian gets time to get under it? It should be deep enough that he has to run a long way to cover it or make an awkward jump to get the smash.
ByeByePoly
G.O.A.T.
You guys want me to go OT and mess with our racquet scientist brother @travlerajm?
I heard a yes.
Brother Trav ... in golf ... club customization involves matching swing speed to shaft stiffness. The faster the swing ... the stiffer the shaft. Old guys often have whippy shafts ... fast swinging young guys stiffer shafts. (hope Jolly doesn't see that sentence). Why hasn't racquet science caught up with golf science? Some of us need to be playing with RA 35. Can you research that for us?
I heard a yes.
Brother Trav ... in golf ... club customization involves matching swing speed to shaft stiffness. The faster the swing ... the stiffer the shaft. Old guys often have whippy shafts ... fast swinging young guys stiffer shafts. (hope Jolly doesn't see that sentence). Why hasn't racquet science caught up with golf science? Some of us need to be playing with RA 35. Can you research that for us?
Purestriker
Legend
You guys want me to go OT and mess with our racquet scientist brother @travlerajm?
I heard a yes.
Brother Trav ... in golf ... club customization involves matching swing speed to shaft stiffness. The faster the swing ... the stiffer the shaft. Old guys often have whippy shafts ... fast swinging young guys stiffer shafts. (hope Jolly doesn't see that sentence). Why hasn't racquet science caught up with golf science? Some of us need to be playing with RA 35. Can you research that for us?
I don't know how stiff your shaft is, but in tennis the string tension and head size play equal or greater roles than the RA. I think the softest RA of existing graphite rackets is 50. I am not sure you can go softer than that and be able to manufacture a stable graphite frame.
megamind
Legend
I feel like half your posts have some sort of innuendo. But that is why you are the one true Internet Tennis GOAT
It is Poly who is like that. I just added that being very soft cannot result in a rigid shaft. It is just basic engineering.
What if MEP has been playing as long as Ian? (less than 10 years vs 30 for Ian). What if MEP had just focussed on Ian's serve and volley strategy for months prior to the match?
Who in the world conjures up only the negatives for less than reasonable cause? Is it envy or something similar?
I think it's an honor and an unparalleled learning experience for a rec player to get invited by a teaching pro with 245K+ yt subscribers and significant tennis background.
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
The two guys who have dominated tennis for the past decade have already been applying this to have an enormous technology advantage over the field.You guys want me to go OT and mess with our racquet scientist brother @travlerajm?
I heard a yes.
Brother Trav ... in golf ... club customization involves matching swing speed to shaft stiffness. The faster the swing ... the stiffer the shaft. Old guys often have whippy shafts ... fast swinging young guys stiffer shafts. (hope Jolly doesn't see that sentence). Why hasn't racquet science caught up with golf science? Some of us need to be playing with RA 35. Can you research that for us?
Djokovic strings his 95” head super dense 18x20 pattern at prestretched tension in the 60s, while most of his competition is following the lower-tension trend of stringing more open patterns in larger head sizes in the 40s and 50s.
Nadal strings with prestretched 15g full poly at higher tension, while most of his competitors are using thin 17g poly at low tension.
Rec players don’t swing as hard or face as heavy a ball, so lower softer stringbeds that feel better are less penalizing to performance.
This in incorrect. Easier to get elevation with a flat flick upwards. There is no topspin to control depth, but height is way easier. At the rec level, a high lob is both easier and more effective than a topspin lob. Easier to make an unforced error/poor lob trying to get over an opponent AND drop the ball in versus throwing a very high lob even if it only gets to the service line and the opponent having to put away an overhead.
Rec players don't generally have the skills to lob like Murray (GOAT lobber).
It's only tennis you know.
ByeByePoly
G.O.A.T.
Suresh muddied my "baiting" by throwing in strings.
I was trying for month+ Trav calculations on RA to swing speed analysis. fyi ... net players don't "prepare" or "analyze" ... they just run to the net to get as far away from their groundstrokes as far as possible.
Well, I thought attacking the net required advanced tactics and a wide variety of technique. I falsely believed attacking the net required you to know which balls to attack, where to direct your approach shot or serve, where to position yourself when you move to net and then you have to follow up the approach with good volleys, good half-volleys and good overheads. Thanks for letting me know that all they have to do is "just run to the net to get far away from their groundstrokes".
tlm
G.O.A.T.
Are you sure the pro players are having the strings prestretched?
Similar threads
