Give me one piece of advice to help me win tonight.

[LuckyR]

Originally Posted by JRstriker12

Maybe the advice should be - pick the weaker side.

As a 1hb player, even if I am hitting vs a 2hbh player, odds are their backhand still isn't as good as their forehand and my forehand is better than their back hand.

Depends on your defintion of "good". Lot's of folks' FH have way more pace than their BHs, but that ain't "better". The OP's FH had way more pace than his opponent's BH , but it was less consistant, so it was "worse" and he lost those points.

[JRstriker12]

Originally Posted by Surecatch

These are great pieces of advice, and ones I'm trying. I am working on the net game, at the right time of course, but I seem to get passed a lot. I think it's because I follow in a weak shot of mine off a short ball.

One of my greatest problems is positioning. I routinely find myself in the wrong part of the court. If i hit something short, they come in and drop and angle on me, and I'm back on the baseline. I'm fast, but I seem to be just a half step too behind the second bounce.

But thanks for the advice...I'll keep all of it in mind.

No problem. Keep working on that game. It will pay off in the long run.

Yeah, if you approach, you're going to want that ball to land fairly deep.

[Surecatch]

Originally Posted by JRstriker12

No problem. Keep working on that game. It will pay off in the long run.

Yeah, if you approach, you're going to want that ball to land fairly deep.

Yeah, those are the pieces of information that are starting to "come to me" like light bulbs, and this is how I know that my tennis IQ is improving. That's an important part of it too. You can have the shots, you can have the fitness, but you have to have the experience too, and that's what I have the least of. For the most part, I have the shots, by my tennis acumen is still developing and my fitness could definitely be improved on. I have the athleticism, but the fitness to go with it is a bit behind.

Thanks, bro'.

[JRstriker12]

Originally Posted by LuckyR

Depends on your defintion of "good". Lot's of folks' FH have way more pace than their BHs, but that ain't "better". The OP's FH had way more pace than his opponent's BH , but it was less consistant, so it was "worse" and he lost those points.

True, but there's always the possibility that if the OP hit to his opponent's forehand, his opponent would have smoked the ball back and hit winners instead of just bunting it back and keeping him in the point.... I don't know as the OP didn't comment on whether his opponent's forehand was more powerful and just as consistent.

Guess it just comes down to figuring out which side presents less of a danger even if you're against a better player.

[Big_Dangerous]

Originally Posted by spot

Serve every single ball to the backhand.

But I like going out wide on the deuce side.

[OrangePower]

Originally Posted by LuckyR

I would take the "just hit to the BH" advice with a gigantic grain of salt. Back in the day of one handed backhands, that may have worked at beginning levels, but in the Modern era, at the beginning levels the 2 handed BH is often more consistant than the FH, as the OP found in his matches.

The context here is non-USTA 3.5 level.
Based on the USTA 3.0 and 3.5 players I see at my club, hitting predominantly to the backhand would be a good strategy in 90% of cases.

[goran_ace]

If I had to give the OP one piece of advice to cross over that line and convert close losses into wins: put more balls in play. A lot more points are lost on errors within 2-3 shots than are won with brilliant (or lucky) shotmaking. So get more first serves in, limit errors on returns of serve. Make your opponent play, don't give him anything for free.

[Surecatch]

Originally Posted by goran_ace

If I had to give the OP one piece of advice to cross over that line and convert close losses into wins: put more balls in play. A lot more points are lost on errors within 2-3 shots than are won with brilliant (or lucky) shotmaking. So get more first serves in, limit errors on returns of serve. Make your opponent play, don't give him anything for free.

It's very true.......at this level, errors are much more prevalent than outright winners, and I follow that for the most part. But when I'm dialed in and grooving the forehand, when I feel the zen of supreme concentration within a rally coming over me, I will go for winners or more advanced strategic plays. I want to eventually be better than 3.5. The only way to get there is to take some chances, results be damned. I don't mind missing when I take a chance. I do mind missing when I try something because of fear or impatience.

[LuckyR]

Originally Posted by OrangePower

The context here is non-USTA 3.5 level.
Based on the USTA 3.0 and 3.5 players I see at my club, hitting predominantly to the backhand would be a good strategy in 90% of cases.

Maybe at your club, but in this case it wasn't. I attempted to explain why. Your thoughts why it didn't?

[LuckyR]

Originally Posted by JRstriker12

True, but there's always the possibility that if the OP hit to his opponent's forehand, his opponent would have smoked the ball back and hit winners instead of just bunting it back and keeping him in the point.... I don't know as the OP didn't comment on whether his opponent's forehand was more powerful and just as consistent.

Guess it just comes down to figuring out which side presents less of a danger even if you're against a better player.

Assuming that the OP has the accuracy to hit to whichever side he wants to, which I would assume reading between the lines of his postings, he (and his opponents) would likely improve their games by not concentrating on their opponent's strokes (weaker vs stronger) and do what everyone else is doing, namely hitting to the side of the court that the geometry of the court/net dictates is more likely to lead to a better shot from you, regardless of what side it is for your opponent. Since the better shot from you, is going to have a better time of leading to a weaker shot from him, regardless if he has to hit a FH or a BH.

[Govnor]

Originally Posted by LuckyR

Maybe at your club, but in this case it wasn't. I attempted to explain why. Your thoughts why it didn't?

Height of the bounce and depth of the shot are a pretty big deal at this level.

The absolute worst for someone with a weak back hand (read most 3.0-3.5 players) is a looping topspin with some depth. They cannot really just block it back and that causes problems that can't be solved in a match, on the fly. The result is very often an UE, or a very weak return that lands limply in the middle of the court, begging for a volley, drop shot or a wide angle put away.

If someone is able to block back shots with pace on them, do something different. That is not any kind of great insight or deeper level thinking, I realize.

[Surecatch]

Originally Posted by Govnor

Height of the bounce and depth of the shot are a pretty big deal at this level.

The absolute worst for someone with a weak back hand (read most 3.0-3.5 players) is a looping topspin with some depth. They cannot really just block it back and that causes problems that can't be solved in a match, on the fly. The result is very often an UE, or a very weak return that lands limply in the middle of the court, begging for a volley, drop shot or a wide angle put away.

If someone is able to block back shots with pace on them, do something different. That is not any kind of great insight or deeper level thinking, I realize.

I actually have less trouble with looping topspinning shots to my backhand than I do with shots to my backhand with pace. On the former, I usually slice bh it back as deep as I can. With harder, lower shots that force a rushed setup, I am frequently a split second too slow, and I hit it wide.

Good advice though...thanks.

[Govnor]

Originally Posted by Surecatch

I actually have less trouble with looping topspinning shots to my backhand than I do with shots to my backhand with pace. On the former, I usually slice bh it back as deep as I can. With harder, lower shots that force a rushed setup, I am frequently a split second too slow, and I hit it wide.

Good advice though...thanks.

Interesting. Are you tall by chance? Otherwise that is an advanced shot. because assuming it is a good deep shot with some top spin, you really have to time that correctly to get it right.

[OrangePower]

Originally Posted by LuckyR

Maybe at your club, but in this case it wasn't. I attempted to explain why. Your thoughts why it didn't?

My theory is that OP was trying just a bit too hard to hit winners.

I think most 3.5s and below have weaker backhands vs forehands, in that (1) they can't really hit winners from the backhand, and (2) they can't hit more than 5 or 6 solid BHs in a row during a rally without making an error. That is not to say that they can't block a few back.

In this case, sounds like OP's opponent would hit a few weak BHs, and then OP would go for too big of a forehand winner and make an error.

I think a better strategy for OP would have been to hit those forehands at 80% rather than 100%, and cut down on the errors. The opponent would not be able to attack the 80% shots to his BH, and would then more likely than not make an error before OP does.

Of course OP is also a 3.5 so easier said than done. Finding the right balance of being aggressive while still making high-percentage shot selection is hard at any level.

[Surecatch]

Originally Posted by Govnor

Interesting. Are you tall by chance? Otherwise that is an advanced shot. because assuming it is a good deep shot with some top spin, you really have to time that correctly to get it right.

I am not tall (5-10), and don't get me wrong, I have trouble with it as much as not. But there is something about the timing required of that shot that I seem to have learned better than the timing involved in a harder, faster, lower shot.

But just to clarify...any backhand shot is a liability for me right now. I just need to practice it more. I practiced my forehand and it got better, than my serve, and it too improved greatly. I know I can do the same for the backhand, but I'm finding that it's harder to practice without a regular hitting partner. I do a lot of wall-hitting practice, but you know how that is.......it's harder on the weaker side, so you get less meaningful practice overall.

[goran_ace]

Originally Posted by Surecatch

It's very true.......at this level, errors are much more prevalent than outright winners, and I follow that for the most part. But when I'm dialed in and grooving the forehand, when I feel the zen of supreme concentration within a rally coming over me, I will go for winners or more advanced strategic plays. I want to eventually be better than 3.5. The only way to get there is to take some chances, results be damned. I don't mind missing when I take a chance. I do mind missing when I try something because of fear or impatience.

Allow me to clarify. I was specifically referring to limiting errors early on in the point. Too many points are ended on an error before they are even really begun. In a close match, playing out more points could be the difference-maker.

If you want to hit more winners, taking more chances isn't the answer, you have to learn to construct a point. Let the point develop, open up the court, don't force something that isn't there.

[Surecatch]

Originally Posted by goran_ace

Allow me to clarify. I was specifically referring to limiting errors early on in the point. Too many points are ended on an error before they are even really begun. In a close match, playing out more points could be the difference-maker.

If you want to hit more winners, taking more chances isn't the answer, you have to learn to construct a point. Let the point develop, open up the court, don't force something that isn't there.

You're right. I'm still in the early stages of being able to execute point construction. Sometimes when things are going well I feel like I just have to "go for it." haha. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

[tennismonkey]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

That's the number: Four. Four quality balls in a row.

okay i stole from cindy but i think i can make it even more dead simple.

hit THREE balls in play. not even three quality shots. just three shots have to be in play any way you can reliably do so. so slice, moonball, lots of clearance topspin - anyway you want to hit it but those first three balls of every point absolutely without fail has to be IN. doesn't matter dead center of the court, or short or deep or low or high or ugly as sin -- just IN.

IF your opponent magically makes you hit a 4th shot you can then go for anything you want -- ridiculous attempt at a winner, drop shot, sky lob, passing shot or anything whatsoever.

[LuckyR]

Originally Posted by OrangePower

My theory is that OP was trying just a bit too hard to hit winners.

I think most 3.5s and below have weaker backhands vs forehands, in that (1) they can't really hit winners from the backhand, and (2) they can't hit more than 5 or 6 solid BHs in a row during a rally without making an error. That is not to say that they can't block a few back.

In this case, sounds like OP's opponent would hit a few weak BHs, and then OP would go for too big of a forehand winner and make an error.

I think a better strategy for OP would have been to hit those forehands at 80% rather than 100%, and cut down on the errors. The opponent would not be able to attack the 80% shots to his BH, and would then more likely than not make an error before OP does.

Of course OP is also a 3.5 so easier said than done. Finding the right balance of being aggressive while still making high-percentage shot selection is hard at any level.

Only the OP knows for sure if he was going 100%, but one thing is for sure, in that match, his opponent's BH was more consistant than the OP's FH and was therefore a better shot.

Another reason why the: "hit it to the 'weak' side" strategy is less effective than, say a variant like: "hit approach shots, overheads and first serves on game point to the 'weak' side", is that anyone who hits a bunch of anything, grooves that shot and becomes accustomed to hitting it better over time.

[Surecatch]

Originally Posted by LuckyR

Only the OP knows for sure if he was going 100%, but one thing is for sure, in that match, his opponent's BH was more consistant than the OP's FH and was therefore a better shot.

Another reason why the: "hit it to the 'weak' side" strategy is less effective than, say a variant like: "hit approach shots, overheads and first serves on game point to the 'weak' side", is that anyone who hits a bunch of anything, grooves that shot and becomes accustomed to hitting it better over time.

I really did think about the "hit to the backhand" and 75% rule at the beginning, but I tend to abandon pre-match strategies and go with the flow. Although my earlier example mentioned pummeling forehands to his backhand, I did not really do that the whole match. The one thing I always try to do for the entire match though is hit deep and in play.