What skills are most important for singles specialists?

[goober]

Originally Posted by raiden031

This reminds me of a singles ladder match I played around September where I was warming up with the guy and right before the match he said something like "I can tell you are a better player than me, but I think this will be a good experience for me". Then he goes and kicks my ***. LOL.

That's some pretty low level gamesmanship.

Whenever somebody I don't know tells me that I am better than them or take it easy on them because they are not that good, old or whatever I know I better step it up a notch.

[JHBKLYN]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

Regarding the idea of having the players play each other . . . we're talking about women here. Women who are friends. Women who wouldn't want it known that this or that teammate whipped them in singles and as a result was chosen to be a singles specialist. I think everyone will be happier if I just pick four people without saying why, so no one loses face. People will be free to imagine that they weren't asked to play singles not because their groundstrokes bite but because they are so invaluable in doubles.

Losing face? Are you saying people on the team don't know who the better players are? Unless they are in a state of denial, they should know who can play and who can't.

Despite how good someone's stroke or technique is, you can't force someone to play singles when they don't want to. By picking randomly yourself, you might make some players unhappy. I say get your team together, by a show of hands or racquets, have those who want to play singles be heard and then decide if they are worthy.

Your team also need to decide whether they want to win or just play and don't care if they come in last place. If your team wants to win, then get the best singles players out there, win your league, get that t-shirt and water bottle, and try to make it to the Nationals. If the games don't matter, then pick whoever you want and let them experience what is like to hit the ball by themselves and do a lot of running around.

[MordredSJT]

I'll just throw my two cents in...consistency and movement skills.

That is all.

[JHBKLYN]

Originally Posted by goober

That's some pretty low level gamesmanship.

Whenever somebody I don't know tells me that I am better than them or take it easy on them because they are not that good, old or whatever I know I better step it up a notch.

That reminds me of this guy, right before the match, he was telling me how his feet was hurting and he had this huge headache. I'm already thinking if he had bad feet and a bad head, why would they put him in singles? He must've been a world class sprinter because during the match, with those bad feet, he was running around the court like Carl Lewis.

[raiden031]

Originally Posted by goober

That's some pretty low level gamesmanship.

Whenever somebody I don't know tells me that I am better than them or take it easy on them because they are not that good, old or whatever I know I better step it up a notch.

I don't think it was intent. He honestly believed I was better because my strokes were more consistent. But once the match started, he resorted more to blocking the ball because he lacked confidence in his strokes. But he was good enough to beat me doing that.

[goober]

Originally Posted by raiden031

I don't think it was intent. He honestly believed I was better because my strokes were more consistent. But once the match started, he resorted more to blocking the ball because he lacked confidence in his strokes. But he was good enough to beat me doing that.

If you keep playing and practicing you will beat these types of players easily. 3.0 and 3.5 is filled with players with bad strokes and all kinds of weaknesses in their game. Many of them have been playing that way for years so they are consistent in their style of play and enjoy beating younger up and coming players. But you absolutely need to learn how to beat these players to move up.
Nothing is more motivating than losing to some guy that is 20 years older than you, can barely move and hacking at the ball

[raiden031]

Originally Posted by goober

If you keep playing and practicing you will beat these types of players easily. 3.0 and 3.5 is filled with players with bad strokes and all kinds of weaknesses in their game. Many of them have been playing that way for years so they are consistent in their style of play and enjoy beating younger up and coming players. But you absolutely need to learn how to beat these players to move up.
Nothing is more motivating than losing to some guy that is 20 years older than you, can barely move and hacking at the ball

Well the good news is that I still play this guy on occasion. Last time we played 4 sets and I won all of them. He hits alot of short balls and I tore them up, which I wasn't able to do the first time we played.

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by JHBKLYN

Losing face? Are you saying people on the team don't know who the better players are? Unless they are in a state of denial, they should know who can play and who can't.

My players know who is strong and who is weak. What they (and lots of players, I'd say) can't stomach is having this proved all out in public and everything. It is easier for a player with poor mobility to believe they were not asked to play singles because they are too valuable in doubles than to face the hard truth that they are too slow.

Despite how good someone's stroke or technique is, you can't force someone to play singles when they don't want to. By picking randomly yourself, you might make some players unhappy. I say get your team together, by a show of hands or racquets, have those who want to play singles be heard and then decide if they are worthy.

All I can do is ask players to play singles. So far, both players I have asked have said yes. I just need 1-2 more (since I plan to play singles myself).

If I were to get everyone together and ask for a show of hands, then we would introduce the concept of "public rejection and humiliation." Everyone would know player A raised her hand and was passed over for someone else. That's not cool.

Your team also need to decide whether they want to win or just play and don't care if they come in last place. If your team wants to win, then get the best singles players out there, win your league, get that t-shirt and water bottle, and try to make it to the Nationals. If the games don't matter, then pick whoever you want and let them experience what is like to hit the ball by themselves and do a lot of running around.

As I said in a prior thread, I think there is a third choice: winning a decent number of matches and thereby putting in a respectable showing, all the while working to improve.

Coming in last place stinks. I was on such a team last year, and it just casts a pall over everything. I think some reasonable decision-making will put us in contention to win a few and lose a few, and that ought to be make it a good season for us.

[cak]

I'm still in awe you have a team where there are too many women that prefer to play singles. You might want to publish who your singles specialists are to the team just so those that want to play singles and didn't make the list can look for another team to play singles on. Make another captain's day, share the wealth.

[Cindysphinx]

CAK, I have heard that it gets harder to find singles players at 3.5 than 3.0. I even heard that some 3.5 teams are so desperate for singles players that they will use 3.0s, figuring a loss is better than a default.

I have two theories. One is that a fast way to move from 3.0 to 3.5 is to play singles, so perhaps 3.0s are more eager to make the leap than 3.5s would be to leap to 4.0.

The other is that 3.0 singles is significantly easier than 3.5 because at 3.0 you can just wait your opponent out and be a pusher.

But yeah, I seem to be lucky in the singles department, for sure.

[cak]

Well, here we had trouble finding 3.0 singles players, and it didn't get better at 3.5. And the horrendous 3 hour pusher game I refer to, I was playing 3.5, against a young lady that had just dropped from 4.0. (And no, she wasn't the one pushing.) In NorCal there are so many players that the areas are pretty small. And if you are willing to drive, say 20 minutes you can play at the same level on three different teams each season. So the singles players often play on multiple teams.

[JHBKLYN]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

My players know who is strong and who is weak. What they (and lots of players, I'd say) can't stomach is having this proved all out in public and everything. It is easier for a player with poor mobility to believe they were not asked to play singles because they are too valuable in doubles than to face the hard truth that they are too slow.

All I can do is ask players to play singles. So far, both players I have asked have said yes. I just need 1-2 more (since I plan to play singles myself).

I guess sometimes the truth does hurt so your way of dealing with it is a more diplomatic way to solve that situation, not to mention no hurt feelings.

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

If I were to get everyone together and ask for a show of hands, then we would introduce the concept of "public rejection and humiliation." Everyone would know player A raised her hand and was passed over for someone else. That's not cool.

Perhaps you can add that whoever wants to play singles will be playing each other for the slots? This way, if one wants to embarass themselves would think twice before showing their hands. Seriously though, the team should think as a team and no one should feel embarassed or humiliated. Everybody should know their strengths and weaknesses and all should be encouraging and not discouraging. I'm wondering, as the captain of the team (I assume you are), if someone who is weak at singles really wants to play singles, will you give that person a chance or will you not let them play?

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

As I said in a prior thread, I think there is a third choice: winning a decent number of matches and thereby putting in a respectable showing, all the while working to improve.

Coming in last place stinks. I was on such a team last year, and it just casts a pall over everything. I think some reasonable decision-making will put us in contention to win a few and lose a few, and that ought to be make it a good season for us.

I don't know what your league format is but I assume its 2 singles and 3 doubles? If that is the format, all you need is a good singles player and 4 good doubles players and try to win 3 out of 5 matches every time and you should be in the playoffs. What is your evaluation of your team? Do you think you have a chance to compete for the playoffs or do you think the season will be just winning a few matches here and there and putting in a respectable showing?

[JHBKLYN]

Originally Posted by cak

Well, here we had trouble finding 3.0 singles players, and it didn't get better at 3.5. And the horrendous 3 hour pusher game I refer to, I was playing 3.5, against a young lady that had just dropped from 4.0. (And no, she wasn't the one pushing.) In NorCal there are so many players that the areas are pretty small. And if you are willing to drive, say 20 minutes you can play at the same level on three different teams each season. So the singles players often play on multiple teams.

3 hours? That's a long match! Was it outdoors or indoors?

Do you ladies go 2 out of 3 sets or is there a 3rd set tiebreaker?

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by JHBKLYN

I'm wondering, as the captain of the team (I assume you are), if someone who is weak at singles really wants to play singles, will you give that person a chance or will you not let them play?

That's an interesting question. Say I have my 4-5 singles players and someone else wants to do it. (There is a player like this. I'm not asking her to play singles because I can't have all of my strongest players playing singles; someone has to play doubles on court one).

If she wanted to play singles, I would tell her what the singles players are expected to do. Our plan is to participate on a singles ladder in our area, in addition to regular lessons/clinics/practices. If she demonstrated her commitment to learning singles, then I'd take her on as an extra singles players, and we'd spread the matches around.

Do you think you have a chance to compete for the playoffs or do you think the season will be just winning a few matches here and there and putting in a respectable showing?

Boy. It's hard to say. We won the Fall division at 5.5, going 11-1. We have since parted ways with all of our 2.5 players and are doing 6.5this winter. We have only one 3.5 players, and we are 1-1 so far this season. Hopefully, the many months of doubles experience and the winter playing against superior 6.5 teams will pay off. Then again, the top 3.0 teams have been at the top for years, so imagine it would be difficult to dethrone them.

If we go .500 on the season, I'd be happy with that as a foundation for next season.

[cak]

Originally Posted by JHBKLYN

3 hours? That's a long match! Was it outdoors or indoors?

Do you ladies go 2 out of 3 sets or is there a 3rd set tiebreaker?

Outdoors, no time limit, and that was only two sets. As I told my captain this year. Well, yeah, I could play singles, but NO ONE wants to wait that long. The wine and appetizers were long gone, and the only spectators left were the captains. And my captain had to find her captain to get her down on the court when she went down. (For those not following in another thread, she cramped up and couldn't move, on my match point. She had to retire.)