I love pushers

[Mick]

Originally Posted by InspectorRacquet

I don't think you've ever met an athletic pusher. The athletic types don't care how good you can volley - it just means they have to run a little bit more. You make volleying sound easy, but it really is a skill to volley well. Pushers don't allow you to end the points quickly when not volleying, unless you make an unforced error.

Pushers are great to test the solidity of one's strokes and if you can actually execute the same stroke over and over again.

Well, if someone could return a putaway volley, that means it wasn't hit/placed very well (it's returnable) and i can see how such a player would have a problem playing against pushers.

[goeblack]

If a guy beats you then he is a better tennis player on that day.
How could anyone blame it on someone style of play??

[TeflonTom]

nah dood. smart inferior player can beat stupid superior player because result = ability + tactics. pushing is poopy tactics, but even poopy tactics beat no tactics. most rec players = no tactics

that is the way of the pusher

learn to execute tactics and u have nothing to fear from the pusher

[Dave_D]

Originally Posted by DeShaun

Really tough pushers are not as annoying to play as I once thought, because this type of pusher usually has more game than they are showing but realized that they could beat me simply by playing good smart defense and by pushing deep fluffy balls ad nauseum corner to corner against me; so, good on them.
What gets me though are those pushers who, when pressed into counterpunching reflexively, they clearly do not even have the strokes needed to hit for pace if they had to do so to save their own mother's life, yet they still manage to beat me by their playing with a more powerful frame and having great retrieving skills. Those are the pushers who make playing tennis less fun for me, because I feel like they cannot seriously trouble me at anytime in most rallies, and if we were to lay our strokes side by side and be judged on the merits of technique, I would seem to have a decided edge over them; but because they are so cagey and more clever than me, it burns me to lose against them. It's as though their entire game has been built not around developing technique but around frustrating the opponent so as to secure the victory for themselves, which outlook strikes me as being results-oriented or as justification of the means used in attaining some end, as opposed to being process-oriented or geared to making constant-improvement. That's why I dislike playing pushers whose whole game consists only of pushing, because it forces me to question my own values.

Isn't the point of tennis to win the match? It doesn't matter how you go about it, but winning is the point. I believe everyone wants to get better, but that's what you have practice for. If you come up against someone who doesn't have the firepower to beat you, but you're beating yourself, then you have to change tactics so that you can win the match.

[Mick]

Originally Posted by Dave_D

Isn't the point of tennis to win the match? It doesn't matter how you go about it, but winning is the point. I believe everyone wants to get better, but that's what you have practice for. If you come up against someone who doesn't have the firepower to beat you, but you're beating yourself, then you have to change tactics so that you can win the match.

the way i see it, not only the pusher doesn't have the firepower but the player who loses to a pusher doesn't have the firepower either. Also, if i lose to a pusher, I would say the pusher beat me, i would not say i beat myself

[jk816]

Originally Posted by Mick

Well, if someone could return a putaway volley, that means it wasn't hit/placed very well (it's returnable) and i can see how such a player would have a problem playing against pushers.

I agree, if a “pusher” can handle a good approach and put away volley combo he’s likely: 1) not a pusher or 2) it wasn’t a good approach and the pusher found a hole in your game.

Playing a real pusher tests your ability to play well in the mid court and see if you are found wanting (playing a tactician who will employ pushing as a technique but has other game is a tougher thing to solve).

It should be considered a good test of patience and your ability to alter your tactics to suit the situation even if it is not to your strength or liking. If you play into the pusher’s hands, who’s fault is that? (Mine too often, as a decent pusher loves the hard, deep balls from my beloved baseline bashing and I really am not great in the midcourt at swinging volleys….) But I know where my technique needs serious upgrading (too many places…rats!).

[beernutz]

A guy at my club is the textbook definition of a pusher. He self-rated last year at 3.0 and went 6-0, never dropping a set and also went 1-0 in doubles where he dropped his only set. At the same time he played up at 3.5 and went 6-0 in singles and didn't drop a set, then went 1-1 at 3.0 state. In one of those weird NTRP algorithm outcomes, he got benchmarked as a 3.0 and this year he played up at 3.5 and is 5-1 with his one loss being decided in a 10 point tiebreaker 10-8 to a pretty good 3.5.

His M.O. is that he is cat-quick and runs everything down and gets it back and deep. He really doesn't have much offense other than the ability to hit the ball repeatedly where you don't like it (e.g. high bouncing shots to your backhand). Many people would say he'll have a difficult time should he ever get to 4.0 but I know of a 4.0 here who plays with a very similar style and is very successful with it. To play either one of them YOU'D BETTER BE IN TOP CARDIOVASCULAR SHAPE.

I've never played either one but have played on adjacent courts to both of them several times so I've been able to see the vanquished looks of their opponents as they walk off the court, shaking their heads and wondering WTF just happened?

[Mick]

Originally Posted by beernutz

His M.O. is that he is cat-quick and runs everything down and gets it back and deep. He really doesn't have much offense other than the ability to hit the ball repeatedly where you don't like it (e.g. high bouncing shots to your backhand). Many people would say he'll have a difficult time should he ever get to 4.0 but I know of a 4.0 here who plays with a very similar style and is very successful with it. To play either one of them YOU'D BETTER BE IN TOP CARDIOVASCULAR SHAPE

some of the guys I know could destroy that guy without spending too much energy because they got the weapons to finish him off: Big serve, powerful groundies, strong net game, reliable overhead, and amazing drop shots.

However, those guys are 4.5 not 3.5. I agree, it would be pretty tough for an average 3.5 player to beat the guy from your club because normally they do not have those weapons. Most probably would walk away frustrated and resent pushers

[Mick]

Originally Posted by jk816

It should be considered a good test of patience and your ability to alter your tactics to suit the situation even if it is not to your strength or liking. If you play into the pusher’s hands, who’s fault is that?

some people care too much about winning. They don't like it when other players give them a hard time but that's what good tennis players do: they produce the shots that they know their opponents do not like

[mhj202]

Originally Posted by Larrysümmers

i dont mind playing pushers who are worse than me. but when im playing a pusher who is as good as me, well its a war

+1! So true.

Pushers who are 4.0 or less are good practice. Pushers who are 4.5 or better with some really crafty tricks, good movement and variety are a test of mental and physical endurance.