Whats a pusher?

[SuperDuy]

Always wondered this. Never quite sure what people are talking about when they refer to them.

[LeeD]

To me, anyone at any level who is just trying to get the ball back, not hit with winning or forcing shots to WIN THE POINT!
Rather, they choose to NOT LOSE the point, and hopefully, the opponent makes a MISTAKE, so they end up winning the point by basically... default.
There is a huge difference between playing WINNING tennis with shots over winning matches thru attrition of the mind or body.

[Nadalfan89]

Someone who hits the ball without the intention of hitting a winner, forcing an error or setting up a point. They win by grinding down their opponent.

It's all fine and dandy until the pusher realizes that they aren't progressing their game at all by playing this style of tennis and the people that they're currently beating, will eventually be able to easily beat them.

[SuperDuy]

I have played many of those in ping pong, its like you hit anything and they get it all. I hate players like that, they just keep the ball in play.

[Nadalfan89]

Originally Posted by SuperDuy

I have played many of those in ping pong, its like you hit anything and they get it all. I hate players like that, they just keep the ball in play.

There's a lot of animosity towards pushers in the tennis world because of that reason.

[LeeD]

Animosity?
HaroldSolomon and EddyDibbs were total pushers, both friends of mine.
AndyMurray is total pusher when receiving serve.
Nadal pure pusher! But the best pusher.
FernandoGonzalez with the big forehaned is a pusher.
DavidFerrer too.
Nalbandian.
All great players!

[LuckyR]

Originally Posted by SuperDuy

Always wondered this. Never quite sure what people are talking about when they refer to them.

It is a derogatory term used to define players that the user of the term feels they are "better" than, yet lose to.

[CallOfBooty]

it depends at which level. at the 3.5 level, it would probably be someone who just lobs, moonballs, dinks, slices, basically just gets the ball back in play no matter what. they don't have good form or follow through. their topspin backhand and forehand is non existent and they choose to either lob, tap the ball back with a really open racket face, or slice the ball. they can get to everything and the only reason they are at the level they are at is because of their fitness and agility, and it really annoys the hell out of people who can't beat them.

now when we look at the pro level, everyone has sound strokes and great form. the pushers are the ones who can't hit winners, and must rely on their opponents errors to win. now some refer to nadal and murray as pushers because they usually have low unforced errors or winners compared to the other player, which means all they do is get the ball back into play and let their opponent dictate the play, giving most of the errors and winners to their opponents. they seldom hit winners unless needed to like a passing shot or a nice lob, or off a really easy sitter which can be killed easily

[GuyClinch]

FWIW - (and with all due respect to Brad Gilbert and some other commenators) pusher is not really a useful term in describing pros..

Here is why ...

Every SINGLE pro - Federer, Del Porto, Verdasco - any of the "big hitters" will play defensive tennis (hit a good "rally ball" back) if they receive a good forcing shot.

This is why Federer has been in some very long rally's. For example his famous rally with Hewitt. Hewitt was simply NOT giving him any balls he could 'do anything' with.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tZhQi8aDcg

That's a 45 shot rally. The thing is neither Federer or Hewitt felt comfortable 'going for' much of those very solid early rally balls to start the point.

The vast majority of pro tennis rallys work like that. So to call one guy a 'pusher' while the other guy is not given that term is a bit foolish.

The major difference is that SOME players 'shot tolerance' is different. Some pro players have little patience and seek to go on offense earlier then others. But such distinctions are arbitrary can can change from match to match or even point to point.

If you call Nadal a "pusher" then every single pro on the tour is a pusher. Because every single pro plays defensive tennis and then switches to offense when they get a ball they think they can do something with. Yes Murray Nadal you name it. You will see plenty of winners hit by these guys when they are given the right ball.

So if Nadal is a pusher so is Federer etc etc. Thus the term loses all real meaning.

Pete

[LeeD]

Of course, every pro player chooses to PUSH at times, to stay in the point.
The difference is that aggressive hitters choose to START the point with a forcing shot or winner, while the pushers choose to start the point by probing for weaknesses.
I like to end all points within 3-6 shots. Doesn't mean I don't play 20 shot rallys! Circumstances dictate action, and if you can't figure that out, you don't play tennis.
I've played entire MATCHES just pushing the ball around with conti grips. Pure pushing, YES!
But by choice, I'd hit to end the point within 3 shots any day.
So am I a pusher?
Of course, YES at times, but mostly, more art form aggressive hitter.
This world, and this subject, is not black or white, rather, it's shades of gray and in between. Believe it.

[Mick]

to me, a pusher is a player whose strategy is to return all the shots and wait for his opponent to make the unforced errors.

if his opponent doesn't make many unforced errors then the pusher will have a problem.

[Ronaldo]

Originally Posted by Mick

to me, a pusher is a player whose strategy is to return all the shots and wait for his opponent to make the unforced errors.

if his opponent doesn't make many unforced errors then the pusher will have a problem.

Yes, plan Z when all else fails, get the ball back by any means necessary. You are hanging on to a razor's edge, best not slip.

[imalil2gangsta4u]

Originally Posted by Nadalfan89

Someone who hits the ball without the intention of hitting a winner, forcing an error or setting up a point. They win by grinding down their opponent.

It's all fine and dandy until the pusher realizes that they aren't progressing their game at all by playing this style of tennis and the people that they're currently beating, will eventually be able to easily beat them.

Good description

[5263]

Originally Posted by LuckyR

It is a derogatory term used to define players that the user of the term feels they are "better" than, yet lose to.

This is the best one i've seen.

[Blake0]

Might i refer you to the first thread, second or third post, on this page..

Basically someone who just taps the ball over just trying to get it in. Some people call pro's who play a defensive game just hitting the ball in as their game plan pushers too.

[GuyClinch]

The difference is that aggressive hitters choose to START the point with a forcing shot or winner, while the pushers choose to start the point by probing for weaknesses.

Well we can agree to disagree. All pros play the same style - they hit wait for weaker shots (while try to hit good solid rally balls) and then try to hit winners off of them. The fact that some pros wait for weaker shots then others - and some wait longer then others (and this varies from point to point and matchup to matchup) doesn't really make one set of pros "pushers."

Gilbert should be ashamed of himself for pushing such a ridiculous designation. Whereas a pro players switches effortlessly from defense to offense. The rec hack only plays defense against players who have no offensive game! Its not really the same style - not mentally and of course not physically..

Pete

[Ripper014]

I have been thinking this over... and I have friends that I have always considered pushers... but I am beginning to rethink this. The reason..? Well most of us when serving will use it as a first strike weapon... and in doing so we will press the issue until it is no longer in our favour at which point we may have to play some defensive tennis until we can again take advantage of a mistake.

My pusher friends play pretty much the same... though their serves are not outright weapons... they will still press the attack when an opportunity exists.

My new definition of a pusher is going to be a person that passes up an obvious opportunity to go to the offensive and just puts the ball back in play.

Players like Murray and the like are more counterpunchers than pushers... and that would include Harold Solomon and Eddie Dibbs as well... when given the opportunity they will attack if the percentages are in their favour. A pusher I believe will pass that opportunity up... because their game is to wear you down mentally and physically. Given my new definition... there are no pushers in the pro game.

[[d]ragon]

This is a good definition. Thanks to Kaptain Karl

6 - Pusher tennis players win by relying nearly exclusively on their opponent's unforced errors. They block, bunt or poke the ball with the goal of “just getting it back.” Pushers aim for just beyond the T in their opponent’s back court. This target gives them the largest margin for error.

They give you no power, no pace, no depth or placement. They just "get it back.” The strokes of the Pusher are never full and flowing. They have little ability to employ topspin. Any “passing shots” the Pusher hits are hardly intentional. (But they never act surprised when a shot of theirs becomes unreturnable.)

Pushers have unshakable psyches. Mind games and insults about their lack of “real” tennis ability have no effect on them. (They tell anyone in the Club about the times they beat the local High School “hero” in straight sets.) Pushers are completely aware that tennis competitors are not scored on “style”. They care only about the “W / L column.” Pushers are content with the fact that they will never be at the top of the 4.0 ladder; they know most Club payers don’t advance beyond 3.5 ... and since they are in the upper third of the 3.5 ladder, they are content.

Pushers are some of the friendliest and most outgoing members of the Club. They are always willing to help fill-in to complete your doubles court (which usually elicits groans from the other two players on your court).

There are no pushers in the pro ranks. None. The Pusher tops out at the 4.0 level.

Note the red/bolded/italicized. Some people need to seriously read this thread and get their facts straight: http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=58284

DO NO CONFUSE PUSHER WITH OTHER TYPES OF PLAYERS THAT RELY ON CONSISTENCY. Pushers rely on 2 things. First is of course their ability to just get the ball back into play. Second, and more importantly I feel, is that they take advantage of their opponents lack of solid fundamentals. Their opponents miss these easy shots because they they don't have the high enough game to hit forcing shots (winners, aggressive approaches, ect). The key here is that the pusher lets their opponents miss.
They don't exist beyond the 4.0 level because at the higher levels, players are good enough to capitalize on weak shots. They have the footwork to get to a short floating ball quickly to set up properly and the strokes to execute an agressive putaway or approach.
A classic example of a pusher winning a point is by hit a high shot that lands in the middle of the court and his opponent hitting it out or into the net because they're fundaments in stroke mechanics and footwork are still flawed. That or they hit an approach and get lobbed repeatedly, making them miss overheads or have to run back to get them. How often do you see pro's miss slow balls that land short? How often do you see pros miss overheads? Rarely ever. Pro's and high level players have no problem being able to be aggressive with short floating shots.

I'm sick of people saying Murray and Nadal are pushers. THEY ARE NOT PUSHERS FOR PETE'S SAKE. Just because they are quick and and consistent doesn't make them pushers. They don't just "let" they're opponents miss, they force it. Forcing your opponent to miss doesn't always come with power and aggression.
I would say Nadal mostly a "machine baseliner." He hits with alot of spin and moves his opponents around the court to tire them out. The large amount of spin he puts on the balls pins them behind the baseline and he can break down their strokes by repeatedly hitting to one wing causing them to miss. He hits fairly aggressive shots but they are consistent because of the spin he gets on them.

Murray is rather difficult to classify because he hits with alot of variety. Nowadays, hee is mostly a retriever baseliner and soft baller. He can also play as a counter puncher, hitting high percentage shots, waiting for an attackable shot, and hitting agressively. When he's on fire, Murray can be very agressive. Alot of people say he is a pusher because he doesn't hit with alot of pace and plays a high percentage game but what he also does is plays with alot of variety. His shots aren't always the same. He varies the placement, spin, and power on his shots to destroy other players rhythms causing them to mess up. He forces his opponents errors in a very subtle way.

Both players are good at retrieving shots and hit high percentage shots, but they still force errors on their opponents in their own ways. Both also like to hit winners, something pushers rarely do.

[[d]ragon]

Originally Posted by Ripper014

My new definition of a pusher is going to be a person that passes up an obvious opportunity to go to the offensive and just puts the ball back in play.

Players like Murray and the like are more counterpunchers than pushers... and that would include Harold Solomon and Eddie Dibbs as well... when given the opportunity they will attack if the percentages are in their favour. A pusher I believe will pass that opportunity up... because their game is to wear you down mentally and physically. Given my new definition... there are no pushers in the pro game.

Good reasoning. That should be added to KK's definition. Pushers don't capitalize on weak shots. Pushers are lower end players who don't have the strokes to hit aggressively. In fact, most pushers have rather ugly/flawed mechanics and block, chip, poke the ball back and because they're stroke (if that's what you want to call it) is so simple, they can do it repeatly without missing.

[cl76]

While I agree 100% with what you have said about pushers being ugly, dinky low level club players, I also wonder if KK's definitiion should be taken as the one and only definition.