Practice for Smarter Targets

Discussion in 'Tennis Tips/Instruction' started by 5263, Feb 11, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    From the OP, for luvforty
     
  2. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    It is not going to matter how the opponent plays with these targets and they
    are still where the ball should go when you don't have a better idea.
    Hanging back, hugging BL, or rushing the net...these targets still give a nice
    margin for error and allow you to cut loose more with of your power.
     
  3. luvforty

    luvforty Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2012
    Messages:
    1,294
    thx for the replies.
     
  4. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    You are welcome and thanks for the comments/questions.
     
  5. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    I get your thinking here, but if it were that simple...they would never miss long.
    Misses long was one of the biggest motivators in working this out.
    I also think mis hits fly in many ways...not just short. Much different than
    golf where most shots are max range for the club.

    Either way, you seem to think the charts were used to locate the targets.
    They were not. I designed the targets based on charting result based on how
    points were ended and noticed some trends in the process. Some talented
    posters came up with the diagrams and overlays you see in the thread.
    I had been using my cones and hula hoops for a yr or two before even starting
    that thread or using any of those diagrams.
     
  6. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Glad you enjoyed the read and realize the avoid zone you found is quite
    similar! Pretty cool and we have all discussed how there is nothing ever
    really new.
    Hopefully you do see the the actual Smart Targets are quite different, and
    seem to lack some of the most important aspect of my Smart Targets,
    although I don't read German to be sure of any of this.
     
  7. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    yes, something like that...with some margin for error on the sides and more for
    depth.
    Simple on purpose for beginners, but has been well received by more experienced
    players as well. All the Jrs talk about how different it is than what they have used before.
    My oldest son who played and coached D1 loves my system.
    With any luck, my 14 yr old will be good enough to test it on some bigger stages.
    He is really doing some cool things at his current level and you can notice
    quite a difference between him and his opponents as to how they work pts.
    Kids coming off the court saying they have never worked so hard...win or
    lose. Some even sort of tank due to the workload.
     
  8. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    One of the key pts here is my charting proved to me hitting very near the lines
    was way overrated and likely caused way more misses for the hitter,
    than pts won due to the proximity to the lines. Basically a sucker bet imo.
     
  9. luvforty

    luvforty Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2012
    Messages:
    1,294
    mishits, (not shanks), can only fly short... simple physics of how much rebound provided on the sweet spot vs. bitter spot.

    they'd never miss long if they were not under the gun, on the run, off balance... a slight deviation of racket face angle can produce a long error.

    if you train a student with cones.... player's brain will adjust.... if the eyes see majority balls missing the cones short, he will aim at the cone by NOT aiming at the cone :)

    I bet if you take a good player with sound strokes, but who has never practiced cone hitting, the first 20 min he will miss the cone mostly on the shorter side.
     
  10. luvforty

    luvforty Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2012
    Messages:
    1,294
    there is a big area between your 'smart targets' and 'very near the lines'...

    if you get a good player with sound stroke, and just tell him to aim 3 ft inside both lines... (would be perfect to do this on clay).... let him hit for 5min, and look at the landing pattern... you will see it resembles the 'smart target' there...... the short balls are just a by product of contact on the bitter/dead spots.

    the center of the landing pattern will not be that spot 3ft inside both lines, it will be well short of that.

    it only makes sense, because long/wide balls immediately cost a point... short balls don't (at least not yet)
     
  11. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    A shank is a form of mis-hit. Look, I know you are a smart guy, but try to be a
    little less overbearing about what you think you know. I like addressing your
    questions and points and think it leads to good info. Many times you are quite
    right, but the way you state it...makes it so hard..... to stay polite. :)

    Really does not matter why they miss long...important aspect is they DO.
    That whole mis-hit thing is your deal. I don't care why they spray per this
    convo. Maybe on another topic, it might matter.

    As to cones... there use is common in tennis at all levels and many are quite
    successful with their use. My students do well with the way we use them.
    If you need some help with their implementation, I'm sure many on here can
    make suggestions. It's not a problem for us, but I do target in many ways
    besides cones.
     
  12. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Actually I did nearly exactly this and the experience did not match your
    expectations. This is part of what led to developing this target system.

    I know it was a long thread, but you seemed to have missed some very
    important parts to the system. The targets are a reference more than a target
    to try and actually hit.
     
  13. luvforty

    luvforty Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2012
    Messages:
    1,294
    no need to stay polite - waste of energy while risking not getting the point across.

    missing the sweet spot and shanks are not the same, 1 is still on the strings, 1 is on the frame... string bed is a plane facing the same direction.. the frame, well, not so much.

    why they miss long DO matter, in the sense that how much of a miss is expected. do you expect a good player to miss a target by 5ft 11 inches so you ask him to aim 6ft short of the baseline? that's a significant loss of penetration..... or do you expect him to miss by only 2ft 11 inches and therefore aiming 3ft inside is safe and has more penetration.
     
  14. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Good, I won't worry about it then.

    Ok, understand that it may be subtle, but I didn't say they were the same,
    I said a shank is a mis-hit, but no, they are not the same, as a mis-hit is
    not always a shank. Clearly a shank is poorly struck...thus is MIS-HIt.
    If you don't agree, that is fine. This is like Leonard explaining to Sheldon. lol

    This target system has been extremely helpful for limiting the depth risk errors,
    which was a big part of the WHY for it. Also if you learn to apply this system
    correctly, you will learn how the hitting short within this system is not the risk
    that many think.
     
  15. luvforty

    luvforty Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2012
    Messages:
    1,294
    good - you will notice that fingers flying much faster on the keyboard without that politeness thing getting in the way.

    couple of thoughts -

    1) perhaps, you are in the same trap as the mid ct ball theory, in the sense that the benefit of your target system is in the 'targeting', not the 'target'... i.e. player becomes more aware of a specific spot to shoot for, better concentration, better execution, (some golf teacher ask student to aim for a specific leaf on a tree 200 yards away..... same idea)......but there is no intrinsic benefit of where that target is, which leads to my 2nd thought..

    2) limiting depth risk, at what cost......... aiming 6ft-9ft short of the baseline sure will give up lots of short balls waiting to be pounded.... you say well, joker lands his balls there.... I am saying, yeah he lands them there, but he is not aiming there.
     
  16. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    just like for DJ, there is no cost. Depth is not what you have been told.
    Key in higher levels is the line of shot or vector, along with control of pace,
    with some exceptions of course like drops shots. Rally shots and mid ct
    attacks are about the shot line with good pace for the level of play.
     
  17. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    absolutely a major benefit to the location...did you not read the post of the
    players who are getting the idea of how this works? The payoff is enormous.
     
  18. luvforty

    luvforty Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2012
    Messages:
    1,294
    i haven't been told anything... i see what i see.

    runners run and hitters hit.... where is the 'smart' target that balances the penetration vs. the short ball? that target is different for any player/opponent combination.

    i am not saying location doesn't matter, I am saying your smart target is not the smart target.

    huge benefit - i don't doubt, but from the 'targeting' or the 'target'?

    tomorrow I can come up with a 'target smart' system and I am sure it will bring huge benefit too (seriously), but where is the cause-effect relationship?

    that's what I meant by 'the same trap as the mid ct ball'.
     
  19. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Good luck with your system! I hope it is great and you share it as I have. If it
    is better than mine, I benefit from a better system...it's all good :)

    On the other hand, I think it is clear from your questions and comments that
    your experience is shallow, you seem young, and you won't even share how long you have been
    playing, so you may need some seasoning I expect.
    Either way, best to you.
     
  20. sundaypunch

    sundaypunch Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,693
    I have a revolutionary new system that works just as well and is easier to learn.

    "Avoid The Middle 1/3 of the Court"

    That will be $100. Paypal is accepted.
     
  21. luvforty

    luvforty Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2012
    Messages:
    1,294
    simple - that 'no land area' is common knowledge... just 4-5 cones outlining the 'no landing area', you let players rally, you lose point if ball goes in there..

    stop putting yourself on the seniority high ground, i have played for 30 years... and it's irrelevant anyway... are you gonna ask a doctor not to treat you for cancer, unless he himself has had cancer?

    experience is one thing, logical thinking is another.... the 2 things are independent of each other... very few people have both.
     
  22. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Not really sure your point.

    I'm not selling anything. Just sharing for those might find it helpful.
    If you don't like it, don't use it.
     
  23. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    and you think your cancer example is logical? :???:

    I wouldn't choose a doc who had little experience or in your case,
    seemed to have little experience.
     
  24. luvforty

    luvforty Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2012
    Messages:
    1,294
    where is the illogical part in the cancer example?

    'seems inexperienced'... you are being polite again... no, I don't coach for a living, so in that sense I am inexperienced..

    but logical thinking is an independent quality.
     
  25. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    It is illogical to think that having cancer would make a doctor a better with
    treating cancer, as compared to say...a far more experienced Doc who had successfully
    treated many patients with cancer.
    Imo it is illogical to think that merely having had cancer alone would make a doc
    better. That doc likely trusted a experienced cancer doc to treat him and likely
    would be a completely different type of doc, since that is only one of many kinds
    of Doc. He also likely had a different cancer since there are so many
    types and likely each of them had only one type.
    But those ARE good examples of the things like we see in your stat analysis
    on serving. Major unsound assumptions..illogical conclusions.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2013
  26. luvforty

    luvforty Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2012
    Messages:
    1,294
    lol... you completely missed the point of the cancer doctor.
     
  27. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    A good point raised, but not entirely true. The thread discusses how to use
    the targets to hit smartly away from the foe for most instances. While this
    is not intended to tell you where and how to hit on the rise vs on the drop, it
    does address how direction shot line, with good solid pace will give you more
    time and challenge the foe. It also addresses coming in to attack mid ct balls,
    which also deals with managing time.
     
  28. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    I agree Ash, but serves are tough to target more than a foot off the line don't
    you think...1st serves?
     
  29. Ash_Smith

    Ash_Smith Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Messages:
    3,941
    Location:
    A green and pleasant land
    ^^^Sorry, do you mean when serving on when receiving? If you're referring to when serving I encourage players to target where they want the opponent to make contact as opposed to a specific spot in the box.

    Cheers
     
  30. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Yes, I was talking of when serving and how that normally ends up quite near
    a line on 1st serve. I wish I could find a way around it to help to avoid bad calls,
    but seems like there is little that can be done.
     
  31. Ash_Smith

    Ash_Smith Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Messages:
    3,941
    Location:
    A green and pleasant land
    ^^^Oh, I see. Yeah you're probably right, I wonder if that's because people consciously think about hitting to the lines rather than thinking of the path of the ball to where they want the opponent to hit.
     
  32. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    I do think I tend to focus on the line or path of my serves, just like on other strokes, but
    never really realized that consciously as a serving cue I don't think.
    thanks :)
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2013
  33. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    In thinking more about this and using it in serving practice. I realized how much
    I focus on the path of serve, much like with groundstrokes.
    I also focus on clearing the net in a way that supports bringing the ball down
    quickly in most cases...again like with groundstrokes.
    For example, I tend to use a top slice most often, which blends pace, slice, and
    topspin aspect to get the ball coming down faster.
    On flatter serves, I tend to try and hit much closer to the net top; which
    is another perspective on getting it down soon.
    Ash, Thanks for the tip on seeing this very similar to how I do the other strokes.
     
  34. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,813
    I find that deeper serves have more cred in the club game, probably because weak serves often land short. Shorter angled serves can be more effective, but deeper ones cause a higher bounce and look more professional.

    I am also surprised by how many of the deep serves land very close inside the line, and I am not being misled by ignoring the faults. It seems to be a miracle which defeats the laws of probability. I think it is due to subtle feedback obtained over the years that somehow gets it right. Yet it seems that for every serve which lands 2 inches inside, there should be one which lands 2 inches outside, but that does not happen.
     
  35. Cheetah

    Cheetah Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3,987
    Location:
    San Diego
    Welcome back 5263.
    You picked a good time to vanish. It wasn't pretty.
     
  36. Ash_Smith

    Ash_Smith Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Messages:
    3,941
    Location:
    A green and pleasant land
    You're welcome!

    Oh, and welcome back btw! You've missed some fun times, but no doubt there will be many, many more :evil:

    cheers
     
  37. millardus

    millardus Rookie

    Joined:
    May 20, 2011
    Messages:
    117
    What an excellent piece of analysis! I refer to the very first page of this long thread, having not read through all the other bits of it!

    But purely based on that initial analysis, I am very impressed.
     
  38. NLBwell

    NLBwell Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    Messages:
    7,190
    I hope you guys realize that all this really shows is that most shots are cross-court rally balls.
     
  39. sundaypunch

    sundaypunch Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,693
    We have a winner!
     
  40. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    While I agree that most rally balls are cross court as they should be (few argue
    this I expect), this chart does not distinguish that they are rally balls or whether
    they are cross court. Just shows where balls were bouncing during a match.
    Many of these are mid ct attacks and/or dtl shots.

    I expect most can see what it does show is how few balls land very close to the
    baseline along with how they tend to keep the bounce away from the center T.
    And no, this is not to be an earth shattering find, but just a simple way to share
    what many experienced good players know on one level or another.
     
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2013
  41. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,813
    Does it? How do you know where the ball came from? Can you tell which one was a DTL and which one was a CC?

    I agree with your conclusion though, but I think what matters are the winners. Many of them are DTL, despite the old advice of it being low %tage etc. The trademark backhand winners of Djokovic and many of the 1 handers like Haas, Fed, Blake etc are DTL shots.
     
  42. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Couple of questions-

    What do you mean by winners are what matters?
    Matters where winners bounce? or
    If they are dtl? or
    How many winners a player can hit?

    I don't think most winners are dtl or Bhs. Most winners seem to be Fhs I/O or
    crosscourt imo & more dependent on the aspect of being a mid ct attack than where
    they are directed. Also, Imo winners are not what really matter, as they tend to
    be rare overall when you factor out the serve and often more by chance than
    design unless the court was just forced wide open.
    I also think most Bh winners tend to be slight I/O shots from more near the
    ct center than dtl.

    I do agree it is VERY important how to target winner opportunities, so if that
    is what you mean, then yes....
    As for what matters most; Imo it is the aggressive rally shots and 2ond serves, around
    which, a good players game tends to revolve.
     
  43. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,813
    Most winners are not necessarily BHs. I mentioned DTL BHs as an example. There are many DTL forehand winners also.

    The DTL winners seem to be disproportionate to the negative advice given about them. I think in these days of powerful frames and spin, the arguments of greater net height and shorter available distance are not that important.

    Lots of winners are also angled cross court shots.

    Apart from the balls being DTL or CC, a large number of winners/forcing shots are inside-outs, which can be called CC also, but generally they are not.
     
  44. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Imo you are right that dtl is often a strong choice when going for a winner, but
    the confusion may be that players should be going for winners on mid ct, and
    short balls which often are dtl,
    and the negative advice of not hitting dtl is based on rally shots.
    Rally shots normally are used for around the BL, and are not advisable to intend winners.
    So it seems you are taking the advice of minimizing dtl for rally shots, and
    applying it to mid ct attacks... but that IS where you often will go dtl...Shorter balls
    showing the normal advice is accurate when used in the proper context of a BL rally.
     
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2013
  45. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,813
    Is mid ct = short ball?

    I see the pros put away short balls all over the place - CC, DTl, IO, or short angled, depending on where the opponent is (not).
     
  46. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Yes, I agree, most mid ct and short balls get put away in a variety of ways,
    which is basically what I was saying.

    The reason I separate mid FROM short balls into 2 categories is just an instructional
    point. By short ball, I'm referring to real short, but with mid ct, they can
    be a bit deeper, with the hitter attacking from on or barely inside the baseline.
    It helps to separate this to realize it's not a rally ball or a real short sitter.

    I find mid ct, deeper rips actually works real well, even better at times for the big hitters,
    as the court is too short often when they go with big power on a
    shorter sitter. There is a range that fits most of the big hitting jrs and it helps
    them to get more familiar with that, along with knowing how to work with it.
    They have to be more aware on the shorter ones that they can't use full pace and
    may use more spin and angle instead.
     
    Last edited: Apr 15, 2013
  47. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Thanks, I appreciate it.
    I hope you got a chance to look thru more of the thread.
     
    Last edited: Apr 15, 2013
  48. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,813
  49. Power Player

    Power Player Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2008
    Messages:
    20,217
    Location:
    On my iPhone
    Nice find. This illustrates exactly what I saying earlier in this thread. DTL backhand at the 4.0-4.5 level is a devastating shot. I spend a lot of time practicing that shot and I firmly believe it takes your game up a half level once you can hit it when needed.

    Furthermore, Djoker hits deep, flatter and with more precise angle while still utilizing heavy spin. That is why he is beating all the "play it safe" topspin loopers in todays game.
     
  50. mightyrick

    mightyrick Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    4,877
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    You had it right in the first paragraph of your post.

    Actually, the real reason why Djokovic is having so much success is because of his backhand. There are many deep, flat, heavy hitters in the game -- not just Djokovic. They do not enjoy the same success that he has. Some of those have better serves than Djokovic.

    The big difference is the backhand. Djokovic has the best backhand in the game right now. Not only can he drill it cross-court, he also can go down the line and change directions with ease. This is something the game hasn't seen since peak Federer and peak Agassi.

    Without that backhand, Djokovic is Andy Roddick.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page