If Your Doubles Partner Could Talk . . .

[escii_35]

My partner would say.

Wow, "you have a lousy first step and glacial reactions times at the net."

"Why do you think I play singles and mxd. If my lanky 6'2"+ in shoes is standing at the net with your cute 5'4" self, who are they going to hit it at?"

The nice thing about mxd is no one will think less of you for standing back while your female pard is serving to a 4.5 guy.

[Caesar]

Originally Posted by escii_35

The nice thing about mxd is no one will think less of you for standing back while your female pard is serving to a 4.5 guy.

That's not a good move, IMO. It just takes her easy serve and makes his return 100 times easier because you're not a poaching threat at the net. He's got all the court room in the world to set up his shot.

I have never really understood why people stand back if their partner is a weak server. I suppose it's ostensibly so they can relieve the pressure of the subsequent groundstroke rally on their partner. But then, if the serve doesn't put the receiver under pressure they're not going to have any trouble hitting it back crosscourt to your partner anyway - so you still don't end up getting involved.

If anything you have more opportunities to get involved in and dominate the point from up at the net.

I suppose by being back you're protecting against the lob. But that's a pretty low percentage play anyway.

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by Caesar

That's not a good move, IMO. It just takes her easy serve and makes his return 100 times easier because you're not a poaching threat at the net. He's got all the court room in the world to set up his shot.

I have never really understood why people stand back if their partner is a weak server. I suppose it's ostensibly so they can relieve the pressure of the subsequent groundstroke rally on their partner. But then, if the serve doesn't put the receiver under pressure they're not going to have any trouble hitting it back crosscourt to your partner anyway - so you still don't end up getting involved.

If anything you have more opportunities to get involved in and dominate the point from up at the net.

I suppose by being back you're protecting against the lob. But that's a pretty low percentage play anyway.

Well, there are situations -- rare ones, granted -- where it makes sense to be at the baseline when your partner is serving.

I had a partner who had a middling serve. The returns were too hot for me to handle. Not a problem, though. I can always stay at net and try to get the next ball, right?

Nope. My partner was struggling to sustain any kind of authoritative rally. Every now and then a ball would stray to the net person, who won points by pounding the ball at me. In addition, a lot of the opponents' shots were going much higher than I could possibly reach. My choices were to play deeper in the court (say, service line) or move to the baseline.

I moved back. I wasn't doing anyone any good up there if I couldn't reach a ball. By playing two back, at least we had a wall and could advance together.

Yes, they might steer it to my partner anyway at the baseline, but if I am at baseline then I have time to contest the volleys and overheads and the opponents no longer have that easy diagonal poach alley available to them.

[escii_35]

I'm a singles player with a bad first step/reaction time. I have gone to playoffs twice and sectionals once in mxd and won -every- match. (10-6 league, 4-0 in post season.) Why do I win? I play mine and my partners strengths.

For me, standing at the net taking a 4.5 laser is a fail strat.

After lessons and many years of mens night dubs I finally realized it's not that I can't execute a volley it's because my reactions are so darned slow I'm never in position. If the USTA goes to a split rank policy I may try competitive mens dubs again but for now I stick with singles and mxd.

Women are cuter and they bring cookies.

[Caesar]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

Yes, they might steer it to my partner anyway at the baseline, but if I am at baseline then I have time to contest the volleys and overheads and the opponents no longer have that easy diagonal poach alley available to them.

I guess that's the main thing. My response presupposed that despite a weak serve, my partner is nonetheless capable of keeping the ball in a crosscourt rally and away from their net player.

If they can't do that then you're right, being further back probably makes more sense. Although in that situation it sounds like you're probably on a hiding to nothing anyway.

[sureshs]

My partner would say "I sense that you have a low opinion of me" and he/she would be right.

[MNPlayer]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

^Yeah, there's something to this.

My partner is amazing and supportive and all of that.

Still, I think I subconsciously know that she won't be happy if I get passed DTL.
And if truth be told . . . I get annoyed if my partner gets passed DTL *if* it wasn't for a good reason. If she is up there zigging and zagging and trying to make something happened, fine. She can get passed and that is OK.

A lot of people get passed, however, because they are flat-footed or out to lunch. They don't move with the ball. When those partners get passed -- Doh!

I guess if I already feel like I'm not poaching enough (and therefore not doing enough up there), then it would be a felony to get passed while not doing enough up there. Which makes me poach even less.

If you don't get passed once or twice DTL (or your opponents don't try for it at least), you probably aren't poaching enough. I've heard this wise dictum more than once from teaching pros and try to keep it in mind during matches. You've gotta make your opponents afraid of the poach. They'll miss way more returns just thinking about it.

[kylebarendrick]

Until my opponent successfully passes me down the line 3 or 4 times, I pretty much ignore it as a possibility and focus my attention on the center (shrinking the court). Once they prove they can consistently make the DTL shot I will adjust.