Can FTTM Peacefully Coexist with PIFHP?

[doubleshack]

Cindysphinx, while I don't care for your acronym (PIFHP), I do like your playing style.

I have no idea what the 'pros' would say, but for me, the person in front should take any shot they can get a racquet on.

I don't care if you win the point or not. While I am interested in the current point, my real goal is to win more points. If you are active at the net and jumping on everything, then the returner will be thinking about you. Ok, maybe you poached on a shot I might have won with my forehand, so what, that is just 1 point. In the long run, the returner will be thinking about you poaching, and we will win more points because they are thinking about you instead of the return. If you let it go, then the returner has a large target area and they will start to unload and we will have to work harder.

So yes, PIFHP....you go girl. And if your partner tells you to back off, acquiesce, be prepared to lose, and stop playing with that person.

[spaceman_spiff]

Originally Posted by J_R_B

Yeah, obviously, that's the judgment that you have to try to make as the close person. The question is whether, if a ball turns out to be a little more of a stretch than your partner thought it would be when he went for it, would you admonish him for trying and making an error? I would not.

Definitely not. If my partner is aggressive at net and makes a few bad choices here or there, it's no biggie. It's only if he/she is constantly going for bad shots when I've got it covered that I might have a word. That's pretty rare though.

[spot]

Cindy- I'm assuming that most CCTTM people are like me where its about positioning and playing the percentages. If a shot is slow enough that the Net person covering the line can get to it then by all means go for it. But when I am lined up cross court I am severely pinching the middle and giving up the wicked Cross Court angle encouraging the other team to try and hit the low percentage shot. But by setting up this way then the CC person takes pretty much every single ball down the middle unless its the weakest of floaters or on a poach- then I'm certainly not going to complain if my partner gets to it first.

[J_R_B]

Originally Posted by spot

Cindy- I'm assuming that most CCTTM people are like me where its about positioning and playing the percentages. If a shot is slow enough that the Net person covering the line can get to it then by all means go for it. But when I am lined up cross court I am severely pinching the middle and giving up the wicked Cross Court angle encouraging the other team to try and hit the low percentage shot. But by setting up this way then the CC person takes pretty much every single ball down the middle unless its the weakest of floaters or on a poach- then I'm certainly not going to complain if my partner gets to it first.

I think there is a philosophical difference in positioning between you and Cindy. Cindy plays the "staggered" doubles formation (ala The Art of Doubles) where the crosscourt person is vertically several feet deeper than the DTL person (i.e. the DTL person is at least half way up the box whereas the CC person is close to the service line). This is done so that the CC person can take any lob (that the DTL person can't smash) out of the air anywhere on the court, but in this formation, you would always want the DTL person to take any volleys he/she can get to since they are in the attcking position whereas the CC person is in more of a defending position. If you play more of a level vertical positioning, then I think you want the CC person to take the middle volleys for the reasons you gave.

[spot]

Originally Posted by J_R_B

I think there is a philosophical difference in positioning between you and Cindy. Cindy plays the "staggered" doubles formation (ala The Art of Doubles) where the crosscourt person is vertically several feet deeper than the DTL person (i.e. the DTL person is at least half way up the box whereas the CC person is close to the service line). This is done so that the CC person can take any lob (that the DTL person can't smash) out of the air anywhere on the court, but in this formation, you would always want the DTL person to take any volleys he/she can get to since they are in the attcking position whereas the CC person is in more of a defending position. If you play more of a level vertical positioning, then I think you want the CC person to take the middle volleys for the reasons you gave.

Personally I think how close the CC person plays to the net should be directly correlated to how comfortable they are taking a few steps back to hit an overhead. I think that many players play too far back which makes them too much of a target. So for women's I think its natural for them to play with the CC person further back or even to go 1 up and 1 back. Then again when I face other teams who go 2-up my first move will always be the Cross Court topspin lob to see if they do have the ability to move back and attack that ball.

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by Roforot

BTW, I'm curious as to how you "coach" or convince your team to follow strategy? I've learnt to not direct or offer unsolicited advice. I just try to be very encouraging whenever my netman moves even if they miss the ball.

Yes, you have identified a big part of the problem.

I don't tell my partners what to do. I don't scold or correct them when they do something that I consider bad tactics. Most of the time, I can just deal with it or adjust my own play.

My partners, however, will tell me that I shouldn't have taken a particular ball because FTTM. Most of the time I will nod and ignore this (and try to make sure I hit a good volley so they cannot complain). In a recent match, I actually argued the point. I said, "I think it works better if the player in front takes everything she can reach." The partner came back with, "The coach said FTTM." I then said, "Well, let's do this. Whoever wants a ball can call it."

This did not work well. I am not used to calling balls, and neither is she. We just kind of got through the match and never really handled middle balls all that well.

[kylebarendrick]

So after you hit a backhand volley winner off a ball in the middle, tell your partner "sorry about that, I should have left it for you" and do exactly the same thing next time.

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by J_R_B

I think there is a philosophical difference in positioning between you and Cindy. Cindy plays the "staggered" doubles formation (ala The Art of Doubles) where the crosscourt person is vertically several feet deeper than the DTL person (i.e. the DTL person is at least half way up the box whereas the CC person is close to the service line). This is done so that the CC person can take any lob (that the DTL person can't smash) out of the air anywhere on the court, but in this formation, you would always want the DTL person to take any volleys he/she can get to since they are in the attcking position whereas the CC person is in more of a defending position. If you play more of a level vertical positioning, then I think you want the CC person to take the middle volleys for the reasons you gave.

Yes, I do play the staggered doubles formation. This is described in Art of Doubles (2nd ed.) , but it is not described all that well. And the rest of the second edition contains a lot of errors and things with which I disagree.

The biggest problem with staggered doubles formation is that no one understands it. The only partners I have who understand staggered net formation are the four women with whom I take a clinic where the pro teaches it.

When I have a new partner, it all works fine when I am the deep player who is coming to net on the diagonal. She is instinctively mirroring the ball and is closer to net, and I don't come any closer to the service line and am ready to try to smash or volley balls that go over her head. So far, so good.

The trouble starts if I hit a lob over the net player in front of me -- one of my go-to shots. My goal in doing this is to get the opponent running back to retrieve this ball with her BH. For staggered doubles, this means I should run straight ahead to the middle of the service box.

My partner should then move toward the T because she is now defending the crosscourt. She should adjust backward also, no closer than the service line to cover the lob over my head. But if she hasn't learned staggered doubles (and isn't confident in her deep/defensive volley), she remains close to net so we have formed our wall too close to net. We get lobbed. Ugh.

Then, out of fear of the lob, my partner gets reluctant to be closer to net, so we wind up with two people playing from the service line. Ugh.

I wish more of my teammates understood staggered formation. It really does work great when both people get it.

[Roforot]

Cindy, I absolutely believe and recommend the book "Art of Doubles." Unfortunately I tend to mix doubles partners based on availability. I do suggest it as a great read on strategy or a starting point.

One time, I had a fellow guard his alley so well that they never hit the ball there. Unfortunately, he let several floaters go by the middle. I struggled to hold serve. On his serve, though it had less pace/spin, I aggressively poached and we held it pretty easily. They made several return errors as well trying to avoid the poach. Unfortunately, the thing that stuck in his head after the match was that they passed me twice in my alley...

[SuzukiSS]

I was told to always be able to back up what I teach with tangible credible evidence which is why I always teach the staggered formation. I would challenge your partners as I do my students to show you any books or videos teaching other strategies at net? I really believe the problem is that people are taught to close in the net and they or many coaches do not understand the term! With this said, Cindy is handling the situation of having to play with partners who don't understand doubles net positioning admirably. One of my ladies actually gave out copies of The Art of Doubles as gifts.

[Cindysphinx]

Which version of Art of Doubles?

The second edition contains a lot of weird advice (topspin isn't necessary for playing good doubles, the lob is the most devastating shot in tennis?).

We had a nice discussion of the second edition a while back. Here's the link, for anyone who is interested:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showt...art+of+doubles

Also:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showt...art+of+doubles

[SuzukiSS]

The first book is the best as the strategies promoted have proved timeless so far. She seems to focus more on tactics in the second which are dated! Tennis is much more powerful today even at the recreational level than when the book was written. The staggered formation is very versatile!

[spot]

Cindy- maybe its been a long time since I've read the 2 editions but I thought that the Staggered net play was a 2nd edition thing in order to counteract the topspin crosscourt lob. I don't recall the first edition ever talking about the CC player playing significantly further back than the DTL player. Of course its been at least 4 years since I've read either book so maybe I've just gotten things crossed up in my mind.

[stapletonj]

IF you ain't clacking racquets every now and again on down the middle shots, you ain't doing it right!

[Roforot]

Cindy, I believe I have the 2nd edition (on Kindle).

I don't think she is quite as dogmatic as people seem to believe. I do think that she is right most of the time and suggests making adjustments based on the situation.

I will also say that I typically hit only 5-6 groundstrokes in a doubles match. Even my return is a chip so I can see how she would say topspin isn't essential. Most of these groundies occur basically on a switch after a lob, and truthfully I probably could slice lob it back, but it's good to have options. Right now when I drill or practice, it's 80% baseline/20% net play; if I was only going to play doubles, it'd be flipped or even 90/10 for netplay.

I think she is right especially about the cc-lob being devestating. If I see both opponents closed in at net, my goto shots are the cc-lob and the down the middle pass. Whether intentional or not though I notice smart teams begin to stagger their formation after the first time.

I'm a 4.0 player and can't speak to other levels. I have watched some college tennis though since reading her book and was felt like the successful teams were using similar positions/tactics as she describes.

[Cindysphinx]

On this question of whether topspin is essential . . .

Well, nothing is really essential except getting the ball over the net and into the proper court.

But I would say that if you told me I had to pick between having only topspin or only slice in a doubles match, I would pick topspin every time. Slice is a nice tool to have.

But relying only on slice is a tough way to earn a living, if you ask me. If you were to poll my 4.0 pals, I would bet most of them would tell you they dream of the ability to hit topspin well.

So for Blaskower to list learning topspin as something not worth the bother . . . I dunno.

I also do not think the lob is the most devastating shot in doubles. It is only devastating to players who cannot hit a volley unless they are draped on the net.

[Roforot]

Ask your friends if they'd rather volley a heavy topspin shot or a heavily sliced ball? I've learned to be more patient when opponents give me that shot; it's not as easy as it looks. And for those who didn't follow their serve, which ball would you rather deal with? With all this said, I enjoy hitting forehands/backhand topspin shots and feel it's better to develop as a complete tennis player.

I suppose a smash at your opponent's feet is probably the most intimidating shot, like a dunk in basketball. For me a lob is more of a strategic victory. It breaks up their formation. Forces them to move. Tests their confidence. I don't care how well your ladies volley if they aren't 6'4", I can lob them. The next time you practice opponents that aren't staggered, try a few lobs and see what it effects. I don't expect the lob to be an outright winner BTW, but it does open opportunities to poach or lanes to hit groundies if you choose.

[Cindysphinx]

No question, I would rather volley a heavily sliced shot than a heavy topspin ball. The chance that I would whiff the topspin ball is pretty high. With slice, the trajectory is more straight, so it is more easy to line it up and make decent contact.

I need to go find my copy of AofD. I wonder if any of my opinions have changed.

[spot]

Originally Posted by Roforot

Ask your friends if they'd rather volley a heavy topspin shot or a heavily sliced ball?

I think that it would be pretty close to unanimous that people would rather face the sliced ball. If for no other reason than the topspin drives below net level even with pace and it makes the volley dramatically more difficult.

[Roforot]

I guess we'd have to agree to disagree then. It may be that both of you are far better at dealing w/ slice shots than I and if your opponents are feasting on slice then giving them topspin is in order.

I prefer volleying topspin drives in doubles. Even half volleys are a lot easier b/c the ball provides the energy. Picking up a sliced shot below my knees is tough (for me) especially if their netman is active. I don't think I've ever had to half volley a sliced shot fortunately...