Got beat by a guy hitting slice forehands

[Power Player]

It really should not ruin your forehand to play pushers. You have all day to setup and move the ball around. There is a guy who slices like crazy and is really good in my club. He knows I love pace, so he gives me none, and that is ok. I can still drive the balls to the corners and crash the net behind those shots. That is how I have to play him. He can get you on a string chasing down all kinds of shots so you have to have the footowork and variety to counter that.

A lot of people complain about it, but it works for him because he has incredible hands and knows the game so well. He knows everyone sees topspin and rarely sees slice anymore. And that is why he does it.

[sundaypunch]

Originally Posted by Wuppy

I mean really, what kind of man hits forehand slices regularly? Is that really something they're proud of? Hey honey, I beat this guy who was running me all over. I hit slices to him until the eventually missed his winning shots by 3 inches.

Wife - "How did your match go?"

Wuppy - "I lost. The guy was a terrible player"

Wife - "How did you lose then?"

Wuppy - "He wouldn't hit the ball the way I wanted him to"

[Frank Silbermann]

Originally Posted by Wuppy

t it seems like if you want to beat a pusher you really need to be better than he is by 0.5 or so.

Actually, what's happening is he has 4.0 level slices and you have 3.5 level drives. To win with slices they have to be a half level better than the level of the opponent's drives. So the pusher ends up playing a half-level down and winning.

[bukaeast]

Originally Posted by Maui19

I regularly play with two guys who only hit slice from both sides (well one guy can hit topspin FHs but is loath to do so). The trick with both these guys is to NOT hit balls that bounce up, such as balls with lots of top, particularly to the FH side because that makes hitting the slice much easier for them. (On the BH side it is easier to slice off a low ball.) If I keep the ball low to their FH, I see a lot more errors and soft balls.

One more note: you have to be careful with your volleys because they leave your racquet at a lower angle than you expect.

No No No, you can't keep the ball low to their forehand. That is not tennis! They can't hit with Topspin. ONLY that is real tennis/

[oldhacker]

You are wrong to label someone who hits mostly slice as a pusher. One of the most aggressive players I know hits mostly slice forehands (pretty flat with an element of slice). He times it to perfection, just clearing the net and with great placement and hits more clean winners with it than most do with topspin forehands.

Steffi Graf only hit slice backhands and won the most singles Grand Slams by some distance.

I hit topspin from the baseline but have never been great as short ball putaways with topspin. I have developed a sliced forehand putaway instead which is very reliable. I saw Federer using exactly the same shot a few times at Wimbledon this year and he ain't no pusher !

Also don't kid yourself by labelling players who use long rallies to tire you out as pushers. I can play various styles to suit the situation. If I am playing someone which good groundstrokes but iffy fitness compared to me my goal in the first set is to make every rally as long as I can - even if that means prolonging points I could finish. If I can wind them in the first set then the next sets are a cakewalk. Ferrer and Nadal do the pro equivalent regularly enough.

[mightyrick]

Agree, somehow this got morphed into a implication of guys who use slice forehand being pushers. That is absolutely untrue. I play several older guys who also hit slice drives with the forehand -- as their primary shot.

These guys are not pushers. They have WEAPONS.

I think the important thing to remember is that a pusher really has no weapon. They just run for balls and float them back to in court. A pusher would not even understand how to do a slice forehand -- which requires a good amount of timing.

[tank_job]

I can't stand the snobbery around here when self-proclaimed 'proper tennis players' lose to those with greater consistency than themselves.

Consistency is part of talent. This is why Rosol is less talented than, I dunno, Ferrer for example.

You lack the talent to compete with these people you label as 'pushers', and, no the match is not even on your racket, because the 'pusher' is using your inconsistency against you. They are controlling you. Not the other way around.

Either get more consistent and beat them, or lose to them and have respect, don't lose to them and b!tch about it like you were the more 'worthy' winner of the match.

[oldhacker]

Pushers do have weapons but they are more subtle than a massive forehand or serve. Their weapons are fitness, movement, footwork, concentration and consistency. For stronger pushers I would add placement, court sense and anticipation to that list.

In some ways good pushers are high level players minus the strokes !

Originally Posted by mightyrick

These guys are not pushers. They have WEAPONS

[mightyrick]

Originally Posted by oldhacker

Pushers do have weapons but they are more subtle than a massive forehand or serve. Their weapons are fitness, movement, footwork, concentration and consistency. For stronger pushers I would add placement, court sense and anticipation to that list.

In some ways good pushers are high level players minus the strokes !

Yeah, this begins the debate on what is a pusher. I think it really comes down to "what defines a weapon". I don't consider those characteristics you are eluding to as "weapons", per se. But I understand the debate.

Some think pushers really can't exist beyond 4.0 (and rarely 4.5). Others think Rafael Nadal and Andy Murray are pushers.

[Venetian]

Originally Posted by tank_job

I can't stand the snobbery around here when self-proclaimed 'proper tennis players' lose to those with greater consistency than themselves.

Consistency is part of talent. This is why Rosol is less talented than, I dunno, Ferrer for example.

You lack the talent to compete with these people you label as 'pushers', and, no the match is not even on your racket, because the 'pusher' is using your inconsistency against you. They are controlling you. Not the other way around.

Either get more consistent and beat them, or lose to them and have respect, don't lose to them and b!tch about it like you were the more 'worthy' winner of the match.

This is my favorite post on TTW ever. It mirrors my thoughts exactly.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by oldhacker

Pushers do have weapons but they are more subtle than a massive forehand or serve. Their weapons are fitness, movement, footwork, concentration and consistency. For stronger pushers I would add placement, court sense and anticipation to that list.

In some ways good pushers are high level players minus the strokes !

Mats Wilander comes to mind. And he won 7 Grand Slams.

[TenFanLA]

I have a feeling that the guys who complain about pushers, dinkers, moonballers lose to them regularly. And the guys who call people who lose and complain snobs are probably pushers, dinkers and moonballers.

[purple-n-gold]

Knew a guy that predominately hit slice, chip forehands, very solid 4.5 that used to play Open in his youth. I would not ever consider labeling him a pusher though, has all the shots.

[Mick]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

Mats Wilander comes to mind. And he won 7 Grand Slams.

did you watch the match between Serena Williams and Sorana Cirstea at Stanford Bank of The West Classic tournament? Well, in the post match interview on ESPN2, Serena said she figured all she had to do was to keep the ball in play and Sorana would overhit the next ball. It works even for players who have massive weapons like her.

[Wuppy]

Here's the thing, if I had better consistency, I wouldn't be 3.5

I got beat recently again by a guy who hit slice moonballs for his forehands, and slice drops for his backhands. I spent half the time either running to the net or waiting while his ball fell out of the sky. It wasn't fun for me.

So I'm thinking I'll start playing at 4.0. I've been losing 6-3 6-3 to these slicing 3.5s. When I play a guy I know who wins 50% of the time at 4.0, he legitimately beats me 6-3 6-3 by hitting winners.

I'd rather lose to 4.0s who hit actual winners than 3.5s who hit a thousand moonballs until I get bored with the rally and dump one into the net.

Pushing is just sad, that's all. It's sad because I don't feel like I learn anything or get any better when I play these guys. When I play guys who are legitimately better than I, who hit harder shots, with more consistency, etc., I feel like I step up my game and improve. When I'm with these guys who win based upon my errors and nothing else, I play worse.

A female friend of mine watched a few games and later texted me saying, "You didn't play your best, he was hitting semi-lob slices every time, you couldn't get into a hitting rhythm."

[Power Player]

People will push you at 4.0 all day long as well. They will just be better at it and you will get even more frustrated.

[LeeD]

Good point and noted....I did the same thing 37 years ago.
But, sooner or later, you'll have to bear down and learn to beat soft hitting rabbits, whether you choose 4.0 or Open Q's. Soft hitting rabbits exist right up to the 7.0 levels....BradGilbert, MiraslavMecir, any of the Indian guys except old Vijay.

[Wuppy]

Originally Posted by Power Player

People will push you at 4.0 all day long as well. They will just be better at it and you will get even more frustrated.

Just so they don't hit moonballs and forehand slices, and actually can hit winners.

I play to improve, not to win.

I want to be able to say "Great shot" or at least "Great try" every couple of games. I can't say that to these guys. They have no great shots, and they don't even try.

[LeeD]

That sliced forehand can be a formidable weapon, and at pretty high levels, including 5.0.
I used to practice occasionally with an old feller by the name of TomBrown. He was so wrinkled and decrepit I was sure I could snuff him off the court. Guess what? Even winning 3 rounds in A/Open, I couldn't. His slices, angles, dink teasers and low level sliced lobs were confounding me, and most of the other A/Open players of the mid '70's. Not all, of course. The top 20 in NorCal would just hit winners against him. I was closer to bottom 200.

[vil]

Originally Posted by LeeD

Good point and noted....I did the same thing 37 years ago.
But, sooner or later, you'll have to bear down and learn to beat soft hitting rabbits, whether you choose 4.0 or Open Q's. Soft hitting rabbits exist right up to the 7.0 levels....BradGilbert, MiraslavMecir, any of the Indian guys except old Vijay.

Mecir wasn't soft hitter all the time. He used to change pace and could hit flat bullets if he wanted to. He had fantastic feel for the ball. I used to watch him practice with Marian Vajda (current Djokovich coach) when they were still juniors. The only shot that was always letting him down was his serve.