height over the net?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 23235
  • Start date
ChaelAZ

ChaelAZ

G.O.A.T.
Kevo said:
A lot of people are simply trained to work, play, eat, or do whatever the way they do it now. Doing it differently requires them to actually train something new. It requires concentrated effort. That's not easy for many adults. It's hard to break out of the deep ruts we build for ourselves over years and years.
Click to expand...

Very much agree.

Bad habits are formed exactly the same as good habits, but what you consistently do. For recreational players weak fitness causes us to compensate with reaching, leaning, falling backwards, etc. instead of forcing ourself to get into proper position and setup. So we get good at compensating, and some really good at it when we see those awkward strokes in 4.0 and maybe some in 4.5, but it is the most limiting factor for adult players. Interestingly I was just talking with a few of the college kids when I was doing a light hit with them about NOT hitting with lower players too much because the more often they do it, the more they end up playing down and that can also form bad habits.

I found it REALLY has effected me having not played at level or up for quite a few years now and helping with the high school and juniors players, that I have gotten both physically and mentally lazy and I caught myself with all the bad habits that forms in a recent match against a higher player getting bagelled the first set, grabbing a few the second, and like 1 the last set. Was a stark reminder that as much as I like hitting with anyone and everyone, if I do really want to continue to improve (still not 100% convivnced I care right now) I need a higher level of practice and play more often. I am impressed that full time coaches can hit with all those various levels and still manage their own game too.

Anyway, back to ball height, I found the video I did from a past thread on this. I went our to see how I could vary height and depth, and the first three or four shots are my basic neutral rally ball shots, but then I tried hitting flatter. On all shots the goal was service line or back for depth. As you can see, as I flatten out I start dumping in the net, so there is a diminishing return for me when trying to hit flat often. I also notice I was trying not to hit long when hitting flat, and consequencly I hit more topspin and looks like they were dropping short.

 
user92626

user92626

G.O.A.T.
Kevo said:
That is fun to think about it isn't it. Maybe if I needed to look into a new career I might go into data science and specialize in network effects or graph theory. I bet there are some fascinating things to learn from the way different people connect at different times. It's also amazing to think about how easily people can form themselves into a group no matter how varied their backgrounds if they are given a common interest or goal to form around.
Click to expand...

Data science is one of the fastest growing industries. Data is today's oil. It's definitely not a bad idea to dabble in it.

Lately I discovered that I am quite interested in human behaviors. I have a lot of fundamental questions, especially about my background, that I want answers for. And I think a way to get to them is to observe human behaviors.

While you may think people form groups easily, I find that people are generally very reserved, or perhaps my idea of group formation is higher than the average. I find that out of two dozen players at the court, less than 5 are willing to extend their socializing beyond tennis, eg going out for a lunch, drink.
 
user92626

user92626

G.O.A.T.
@ChaelAZ

Bad habits / techniques are constantly creeping in because there's only one or very few ways of doing the right, high-performance techniques while there's infinite ways of doing the bad things. It's a constant job for an athlete to rehearse the right ways and keep the bad ways at bay. That's why you see lots of pros are practicing seemly mundane shots, ie basic rallies, serves, etc. Lots of and lots of it.


I don't think it's about playing lower or higher level players. If it were, then you would see the levels of Federer, Nadal, any top pros' go down after the first rounds of tournaments.


What happens when you feel you play better against higher players is you simply try harder, and might overcompensate faulty techniques. Faulty (or correct) techniques don't suddenly change per the quality of a match. They take hard, correct training and time of it to change.
 
MajesticMoose

MajesticMoose

Hall of Fame
The large court side lights crack me up in this picture.

aminadream said:
I've recently been doing drills with the juniors over at my old academy and one day they had this setup. Hit above the tape for neutral balls, below it for attacking flat balls. Of course, none of these kids are Federer or Nadal (yet), but they'll be D1 players or above.

IMG-5834-1000.jpg
Click to expand...
 
Dartagnan64

Dartagnan64

G.O.A.T.
nytennisaddict said:
well, i can't argue with that.
if you're talented enough to hit consistently flat, then yeah, i think that is a more effective shot.

but in general, if you play poker with the same odds you do tennis (1in margin!), i'll take a seat your table any day :)
Click to expand...

I said "at least" an inch. I'm all for hitting it 30 feet over the net in the right scenario. My general approach to tennis is you first opponent is the net so you have to beat it. Then you can worry about the other guy or gal.
 
P

Pete Player

Hall of Fame
user92626 said:
Well, that's one way to explain it.

...

Actually I'm fully aware that there are all kinds of people out there. You have people that make a few dollars a day and people that make hundreds or thousands. People aren't equal.

I tend to get amazed and surprised, not frustrated or shunning, by the diversity of the people I come in contact, and by things that fall way outside of my expectation.

I hit and play with a lot of different people. It is a bit interesting to me that we all show up at the same place, play the same activities, know a bit about each other's backgrounds and a lot about each other's tennis, then disappear for a week! :)
Click to expand...

I have hobbied many sports quite seriously for the time being, but after the common thing, sport has gone, there is nothing left, except for few of the best of friends, who share views and gives something more than the surface small talk and tennis talk.

It is quite seldom though, that adults make new true friends or soul mates within their hobbies. At least to my experience. You don’t really get involved and keep it easy not sharing too much.




——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 
ByeByePoly

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
ChaelAZ said:
Very much agree.

Bad habits are formed exactly the same as good habits, but what you consistently do. For recreational players weak fitness causes us to compensate with reaching, leaning, falling backwards, etc. instead of forcing ourself to get into proper position and setup. So we get good at compensating, and some really good at it when we see those awkward strokes in 4.0 and maybe some in 4.5, but it is the most limiting factor for adult players. Interestingly I was just talking with a few of the college kids when I was doing a light hit with them about NOT hitting with lower players too much because the more often they do it, the more they end up playing down and that can also form bad habits.

I found it REALLY has effected me having not played at level or up for quite a few years now and helping with the high school and juniors players, that I have gotten both physically and mentally lazy and I caught myself with all the bad habits that forms in a recent match against a higher player getting bagelled the first set, grabbing a few the second, and like 1 the last set. Was a stark reminder that as much as I like hitting with anyone and everyone, if I do really want to continue to improve (still not 100% convivnced I care right now) I need a higher level of practice and play more often. I am impressed that full time coaches can hit with all those various levels and still manage their own game too.

Anyway, back to ball height, I found the video I did from a past thread on this. I went our to see how I could vary height and depth, and the first three or four shots are my basic neutral rally ball shots, but then I tried hitting flatter. On all shots the goal was service line or back for depth. As you can see, as I flatten out I start dumping in the net, so there is a diminishing return for me when trying to hit flat often. I also notice I was trying not to hit long when hitting flat, and consequencly I hit more topspin and looks like they were dropping short.

Click to expand...

I have quality old 2004 Lobster ball machine feed compensation skills. It makes hitting with humans easy... other than the having to talk to them thing.

Man ... you guys think about the net a lot.

Your video made me think of a great prank/punk. Set it up like this one where the hitting is out of view. Show yourself running out of camera view at the start, and then have Nadal (best pro ... D1 you can find) do the hitting. Every now and then get back in camera view briefly. hehehe ... lol.
 
ChaelAZ

ChaelAZ

G.O.A.T.
ByeByePoly said:
I have quality old 2004 Lobster ball machine feed compensation skills. It makes hitting with humans easy... other than the having to talk to them thing.

Man ... you guys think about the net a lot.

Your video made me think of a great prank/punk. Set it up like this one where the hitting is out of view. Show yourself running out of camera view at the start, and then have Nadal (best pro ... D1 you can find) do the hitting. Every now and then get back in camera view briefly. hehehe ... lol.
Click to expand...

So you think I was hitting those shots? You think that is air you’re breathing Neo? hmmm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
K

Kevo

Legend
user92626 said:
While you may think people form groups easily, I find that people are generally very reserved, or perhaps my idea of group formation is higher than the average. I find that out of two dozen players at the court, less than 5 are willing to extend their socializing beyond tennis, eg going out for a lunch, drink.
Click to expand...

Yes, well in this case I think tennis is the common interest.
 
ChaelAZ

ChaelAZ

G.O.A.T.
user92626 said:
I don't think it's about playing lower or higher level players. If it were, then you would see the levels of Federer, Nadal, any top pros' go down after the first rounds of tournaments.
Click to expand...

D1 and up, you don't come up against junk ballers or players that don't have sounds strokes. I've seen pros boot hitting partners off the court when they couldn't challenge them enough and keep rallies going. So there is something there, but agree a player should hold themselves accountable for their game and their level of play. When running lessons and drills, you could have every level of player there, be feeding them the same ball, and it is their responsibility to hit their shots at their level.

My issue is that if you play down too much and the majority of your practice and matches are with lesser opponenets you lose your edge and that desire to push yourself to compete. At least anecdotally, and in what I have seen for players, it is always better to hit at level or up more often than not.
 
Curious

Curious

G.O.A.T.
OK, as promised I was at the Melbourne park the other day and stood right behind him at the same level and filmed this for you guys. This was exactly the start of his practice so nice and slow warm up shots. I will let you decide the height over the net but it looks quite high mostly. Next I will do the same when things heat up like a real rally. Stay tuned.

 
ByeByePoly

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
Curious said:
OK, as promised I was at the Melbourne park the other day and stood right behind him at the same level and filmed this for you guys. This was exactly the start of his practice so nice and slow warm up shots. I will let you decide the height over the net but it looks quite high mostly. Next I will do the same when things heat up like a real rally. Stay tuned.

Click to expand...

He is going to call security on you. 8-B
 
user92626

user92626

G.O.A.T.
ChaelAZ said:
My issue is that if you play down too much and the majority of your practice and matches are with lesser opponenets you lose your edge and that desire to push yourself to compete. At least anecdotally, and in what I have seen for players, it is always better to hit at level or up more often than not.
Click to expand...

Any player would lose his edge if he stops pushing and maintaining his upper limit. That's about keeping up your best, not about playing down with lesser opponents.

With lesser opponents you can still use your best tools and wrap up early. That's what happens at big tournaments. Top players dispatch first rounders in straight, lopsided sets. Then, they move on and play quality quarter finals and beyond.

Think about it, top players like Fed, Nadal, Djokovic plays many many more lesser opponents than players of their calibers. There are many crappy rounds before they reach seeded or top 10 players.

Federer probably has played hundreds or thousands of matches with lower rank players, which is many more times than his matches against Nadal, Djokovic combined, no?

Has Federer ever mentioned any adverse consequence of this?
 
Hmgraphite1

Hmgraphite1

Hall of Fame
I think you also see lower ranked players "going for broke" hitting out and challenging the seeded players. The higher ranked players always being gunned for, they pull out some tough matches not as easy as it seems for them.
 
FiReFTW

FiReFTW

Legend
user92626 said:
Any player would lose his edge if he stops pushing and maintaining his upper limit. That's about keeping up your best, not about playing down with lesser opponents.

With lesser opponents you can still use your best tools and wrap up early. That's what happens at big tournaments. Top players dispatch first rounders in straight, lopsided sets. Then, they move on and play quality quarter finals and beyond.

Think about it, top players like Fed, Nadal, Djokovic plays many many more lesser opponents than players of their calibers. There are many crappy rounds before they reach seeded or top 10 players.

Federer probably has played hundreds or thousands of matches with lower rank players, which is many more times than his matches against Nadal, Djokovic combined, no?

Has Federer ever mentioned any adverse consequence of this?
Click to expand...

What you said doesn't relate to @ChaelAZ 's post at all.

He is talking about rec players playing opponents much bellow their level, which is equalent to Federer playing D2 college players.

You can't say Fed is playing much down when he plays a top 50 player or top 150 player, you need to remember that a top 150 player hits the same pace shots as a top 10 player, infact there are some top 150 players who have bigger shots than the big 3.. at that level its more about other small differences like tactics, focus, mental strenght, placement, consistency..
So its not like when Fed plays a rank 69 or rank 253 that he plays someone who is much lower level, he still has the same shots a top 10 player might have or sometimes even a more powerful shot than some, but hes just not as consistent, doesn't have the same placement, same mental strenght and chokes alot, aswell as doesn't have the same fast thinking and problem solving and tactics.

In rec play when a 4.5 plays a 3.5, the 4.5 outpowers and outspins the lower player by ALOT, its a completely different game.

I doubt Chael meant someone at UTR 10 playing a UTR 8 or 9 and playing down alot... I think he meant more like an UTR 10 playing a UTR 5 or 6.
 
ChaelAZ

ChaelAZ

G.O.A.T.
Curious said:
OK, as promised I was at the Melbourne park the other day and stood right behind him at the same level and filmed this for you guys. This was exactly the start of his practice so nice and slow warm up shots. I will let you decide the height over the net but it looks quite high mostly. Next I will do the same when things heat up like a real rally. Stay tuned.

Click to expand...


Awesome. Love Goffin!
 
ChaelAZ

ChaelAZ

G.O.A.T.
user92626 said:
Any player would lose his edge if he stops pushing and maintaining his upper limit. That's about keeping up your best, not about playing down with lesser opponents.

With lesser opponents you can still use your best tools and wrap up early. That's what happens at big tournaments. Top players dispatch first rounders in straight, lopsided sets. Then, they move on and play quality quarter finals and beyond.

Think about it, top players like Fed, Nadal, Djokovic plays many many more lesser opponents than players of their calibers. There are many crappy rounds before they reach seeded or top 10 players.

Federer probably has played hundreds or thousands of matches with lower rank players, which is many more times than his matches against Nadal, Djokovic combined, no?

Has Federer ever mentioned any adverse consequence of this?
Click to expand...


Again, much different at pro levels than rec levels. Pros regularly practice and hit with college players, and they can keep consistency and pace for the most part. Yes, it isn't at the highest level, but they still get a decent workout and challenge. A 4.5 player trying to rally with a 3.5 who might get 3-6 balls back, cannot hit or serve with pace, and makes errors all the time is what I am refering to.
 
ByeByePoly

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
ChaelAZ said:
Again, much different at pro levels than rec levels. Pros regularly practice and hit with college players, and they can keep consistency and pace for the most part. Yes, it isn't at the highest level, but they still get a decent workout and challenge. A 4.5 player trying to rally with a 3.5 who might get 3-6 balls back, cannot hit or serve with pace, and makes errors all the time is what I am refering to.
Click to expand...

@FiReFTW

I have not found the direct correlation between pace and level (3.5 vs 4.5) to be as clear as many here. For sure, the biggest hitting 4.5 will have much more pace than the biggest hitting 3.5, but the vast majority of rec players hit no harder than you do. I could show you 100+ top 4.5 - 5.0 players from my tournament and USTA past experience that hit much less pace than you do. If you watched our 4.5 doubles USTA teams and leagues, you would see nobody missing and very little big pace. Singles is a bit different, but there it was a matter of recruiting 25 year old legs, they usually were not hitting bigger pace.

We have a player that just moved up to 4.0 a couple of years ago that hits his flat 2hbh as hard as any groundstroke I have seen in rec tennis. The reason he is a 4.0 is it's two wow shots and then a miss. That never beats the guys that don't miss, and can hit smaller targets. The exception to smaller targets ... imo is the rare rec player that can hit the heavy ball. The rec version of Nadal could take you out hitting everything down the middle all day long ... a painful tiring beating.

I think your Andrew videos are a perfect example of winning rec tennis. If you are the best mover (best rec movement on clay I have ever seen), play smart, and don't miss ... usually you win. Does he hit harder than the average 4.0 ... I doubt it.
 
FiReFTW

FiReFTW

Legend
ByeByePoly said:
@FiReFTW

I have not found the direct correlation between pace and level (3.5 vs 4.5) to be as clear as many here. For sure, the biggest hitting 4.5 will have much more pace than the biggest hitting 3.5, but the vast majority of rec players hit no harder than you do. I could show you 100+ top 4.5 - 5.0 players from my tournament and USTA past experience that hit much less pace than you do. If you watched our 4.5 doubles USTA teams and leagues, you would see nobody missing and very little big pace. Singles is a bit different, but there it was a matter of recruiting 25 year old legs, they usually were not hitting bigger pace.

We have a player that just moved up to 4.0 a couple of years ago that hits his flat 2hbh as hard as any groundstroke I have seen in rec tennis. The reason he is a 4.0 is it's two wow shots and then a miss. That never beats the guys that don't miss, and can hit smaller targets. The exception to smaller targets ... imo is the rare rec player that can hit the heavy ball. The rec version of Nadal could take you out hitting everything down the middle all day long ... a painful tiring beating.

I think your Andrew videos are a perfect example of winning rec tennis. If you are the best mover (best rec movement on clay I have ever seen), play smart, and don't miss ... usually you win. Does he hit harder than the average 4.0 ... I doubt it.
Click to expand...

There are alot of variety at each level.

There are some who PUSH and BUNT the ball and play total defense... then they are those who bash as hard as possible... so yes, there might be some 3.5 that hit harder than 4.5 in that regard.

But im talking in general, when you look at your average player that represents the majority of each level, then yes, 4.5 hit harder, but more importantly hit ALOT more spin, there are some 3.5 that hit as hard as they can and the speed of the ball is faster than 4.5s (even if they miss every 2nd shot) but its not nearly as heavy or have the same amount of spin, its the spin thats the biggest difference.

Ive hit with many different level players in the past year, and as you get up to better and better players (at least men, women are different) theres not a big difference in speed but theres a big difference in spin and heavyness.
 
ByeByePoly

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
What I find my eyes automatically go to in the Goffin video is where he is in backswing prep on both wings at the bounce, and his full 2hbh shoulder turn regardless how easy the swing. Easy swing ... scrambling wide ... he flashed some back to opponent on all 2hbhs. I still am beating this into my head ... it just seems you should be able to hit control/touch with two arms and a little turn ... two frickin arms. :mad:
 
ByeByePoly

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
FiReFTW said:
There are alot of variety at each level.

There are some who PUSH and BUNT the ball and play total defense... then they are those who bash as hard as possible... so yes, there might be some 3.5 that hit harder than 4.5 in that regard.

But im talking in general, when you look at your average player that represents the majority of each level, then yes, 4.5 hit harder, but more importantly hit ALOT more spin, there are some 3.5 that hit as hard as they can and the speed of the ball is faster than 4.5s (even if they miss every 2nd shot) but its not nearly as heavy or have the same amount of spin, its the spin thats the biggest difference.

Ive hit with many different level players in the past year, and as you get up to better and better players (at least men, women are different) theres not a big difference in speed but theres a big difference in spin and heavyness.
Click to expand...

Yes ... I'm two generations older. Big spin was not a common element of 4.5 - 5.0 ... and 40s age groups, although there were always some. We had a 5.0 - 5.5 player join our club one summer that came from clay court tennis. He destroyed our best 5.0 player with the insane spin. Not many adults add big spin later if they didn't start with it. Well ... that may be too general, many like me are hitting "more" now than we did, but games/styles not built around it. So yeah ... you will not find that 4.5+ heavy ball hitter at lower levels ... or with old guys. We are going to slice low and short to your ATP FH flippy ts thing. 8-B
 
D

Deleted member 23235

Guest
user92626 said:
Data science is one of the fastest growing industries. Data is today's oil. It's definitely not a bad idea to dabble in it.

Lately I discovered that I am quite interested in human behaviors. I have a lot of fundamental questions, especially about my background, that I want answers for. And I think a way to get to them is to observe human behaviors.

While you may think people form groups easily, I find that people are generally very reserved, or perhaps my idea of group formation is higher than the average. I find that out of two dozen players at the court, less than 5 are willing to extend their socializing beyond tennis, eg going out for a lunch, drink.
Click to expand...
5 is high! (for me)
i have dozens, (maybe 100+?) folks in my rolodex of names to call... i don't socialize with any of them.
meanwhile of the ~12 folks that i train martial arts with (where we try to punch/kick/sub each other weekly), i socialize with them all! (drinks, dinners, bday parties, etc...)
 
D

Deleted member 23235

Guest
ChaelAZ said:
Very much agree.

Bad habits are formed exactly the same as good habits, but what you consistently do. For recreational players weak fitness causes us to compensate with reaching, leaning, falling backwards, etc. instead of forcing ourself to get into proper position and setup. So we get good at compensating, and some really good at it when we see those awkward strokes in 4.0 and maybe some in 4.5, but it is the most limiting factor for adult players. Interestingly I was just talking with a few of the college kids when I was doing a light hit with them about NOT hitting with lower players too much because the more often they do it, the more they end up playing down and that can also form bad habits.

I found it REALLY has effected me having not played at level or up for quite a few years now and helping with the high school and juniors players, that I have gotten both physically and mentally lazy and I caught myself with all the bad habits that forms in a recent match against a higher player getting bagelled the first set, grabbing a few the second, and like 1 the last set. Was a stark reminder that as much as I like hitting with anyone and everyone, if I do really want to continue to improve (still not 100% convivnced I care right now) I need a higher level of practice and play more often. I am impressed that full time coaches can hit with all those various levels and still manage their own game too.

Anyway, back to ball height, I found the video I did from a past thread on this. I went our to see how I could vary height and depth, and the first three or four shots are my basic neutral rally ball shots, but then I tried hitting flatter. On all shots the goal was service line or back for depth. As you can see, as I flatten out I start dumping in the net, so there is a diminishing return for me when trying to hit flat often. I also notice I was trying not to hit long when hitting flat, and consequencly I hit more topspin and looks like they were dropping short.

Click to expand...
cool.
would be interesting to correlate ball speed and spin... as well as where on the court you're standing...
ie. folks who hit much harder/less-spin/closer-to-baseline likely need to hit flatter
 
FiReFTW

FiReFTW

Legend
ByeByePoly said:
Yes ... I'm two generations older. Big spin was not a common element of 4.5 - 5.0 ... and 40s age groups, although there were always some. We had a 5.0 - 5.5 player join our club one summer that came from clay court tennis. He destroyed our best 5.0 player with the insane spin. Not many adults add big spin later if they didn't start with it. Well ... that may be too general, many like me are hitting "more" now than we did, but games/styles not built around it. So yeah ... you will not find that 4.5+ heavy ball hitter at lower levels ... or with old guys. We are going to slice low and short to your ATP FH flippy ts thing. 8-B
Click to expand...

Its pretty fascinating to me how those older guys in their 50s or 60s that played decent level tennis can hit flat forehands and be so consistent, the ball doesn't have alot of spin but its fast and has penetration and more interestingly they consistently hit it over the net with low margin.. i guess thats what happens when you have 30 or 40 years experience behind you and have hit millions of shots :D
 
ByeByePoly

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
nytennisaddict said:
5 is high! (for me)
i have dozens, (maybe 100+?) folks in my rolodex of names to call... i don't socialize with any of them.
meanwhile of the ~12 folks that i train martial arts with (where we try to punch/kick/sub each other weekly), i socialize with them all! (drinks, dinners, bday parties, etc...)
Click to expand...

So if you hit each other after a match instead of the handshake, you are buying drinks? You are a strange little puppy, aren't you?
 
ByeByePoly

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
FiReFTW said:
Its pretty fascinating to me how those older guys in their 50s or 60s that played decent level tennis can hit flat forehands and be so consistent, the ball doesn't have alot of spin but its fast and has penetration and more interestingly they consistently hit it over the net with low margin.. i guess thats what happens when you have 30 or 40 years experience behind you and have hit millions of shots :D
Click to expand...

No ... it happens early on in the experience with little spin or you lost. Adapt or die. Connors made good $ at it.
 
D

Deleted member 23235

Guest
ByeByePoly said:
So if you hit each other after a match instead of the handshake, you are buying drinks? You are a strange little puppy, aren't you?
Click to expand...
i think training philosophies are different.

in martial arts, because we all have to go to work, care for fam, etc... while we're actively trying to hit each other, we don't want to kill each other, because we need each other the next day, to repeat the process of making each other better (sure there are accidents - eg. i've gotten my nose broken, and tweaked a knee not tapping), but in general the philosophy is to help each other get better (not beat each other up)

in tennis, i think the rec philosophy is largely to "beat my opponent" (in some cases (ahem cheaters) "at all costs")
had an argument with someone about this... ie. his idea of "coop" tennis, was hitting winners whenever he got the chance (you can guess/find thread on ttw).
IMO, that's a selfish way of thinking (ie you're nothing but my ball feeder) - but a way of thinking that alot of rec tennis players have (and that i had at one time as well) - as i seem to experience whenever i hit with a random person on the public court (which i don't do anymore - ie. let's just play sets, if you can't hit coop - because i'm not gonna feed you nice balls into your strikezone so you can showoff and crush winners/spray ence every 2nd ball)
(i'm not talking about point play... where both parties agree... ok 1 feed, then play out the point - or whatever the rule is... just talking about "coop hitting")
ironically, coop-practicing the selfish way is also detrimental because it means less balls hit per hour.

this 20y old article i found echoes my thinking: http://www.tennisserver.com/circlegame/circlegame_99_07.html

talking to the folks i trained with in spain, ex-d1/future pros around here, etc...
they had mentioned, if you're gonna only practice 3d a week.. you're better off hitting coop, 2/3 or 3/4 speed,... let the other person hit it, so you can hit more balls per hour (aim for 500-1000 balls hit per hour (if you can survive - i can't!). you can make the other guy move, but not straight out winners (to avoid wasting time picking up balls).
more reps to practice prep, feel the ball/contact, experiement with spins, contact spots, swing paths, etc...
then play matches once a week... or end your hitting session with point play... but not before hitting 750-1000+ balls.

this interview about flow popped up in my yt feed... highlights my philosophy:
(applies to martial arts and tennis IMO)

i guess i am a strange puppy.
 
user92626

user92626

G.O.A.T.
nytennisaddict said:
5 is high! (for me)
i have dozens, (maybe 100+?) folks in my rolodex of names to call... i don't socialize with any of them.
meanwhile of the ~12 folks that i train martial arts with (where we try to punch/kick/sub each other weekly), i socialize with them all! (drinks, dinners, bday parties, etc...)
Click to expand...
Interesting, isn't it?

Why is that? Why don't you socialize with 100+ tennis acquaintances ? Difference between tennis and martial arts?

I conservatively estimated 2 dozens but there are actually way more. I "forgive" those that show up inconsistently -- I simply don't know their schedules --, but it's relatively strange that most of the frequenters are very much anti-social or ultra frugal. I used to tell some of them ...let's grap a pizza after this. It's the end of year occasion anyway. No response!

(Not that I care about having pizza with any of these people. I'm interested in promoting a tighter knit, more competitive tennis group.)
 
ByeByePoly

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
FiReFTW said:
Its pretty fascinating to me how those older guys in their 50s or 60s that played decent level tennis can hit flat forehands and be so consistent, the ball doesn't have alot of spin but its fast and has penetration and more interestingly they consistently hit it over the net with low margin.. i guess thats what happens when you have 30 or 40 years experience behind you and have hit millions of shots :D
Click to expand...

Based on my experience, I don't view learning to play with flattish strokes any more or less difficult to learning to hit topspin. A big angle dipping cc FH is a high skill tennis shot, and a flattish dtl with control of depth by varying swing speed is a high skill tennis shot. You hone the skills required for a style of play. I saw @nytennisaddict kidding about lacking talent for a flat game ... but then the rebuttal is flat players lack the talent to hit topspin. When newbies at the park comment when I am hitting the ball machine, it's the topspin (and that's my moderate topspin ... NYTA would be a park rock star) that gets their attention. It does not compute ... topspin ... any topspin is a higher skill than most players that dabble in tennis will develop. There are always four firefighters playing doubles at my park. These guys are late 20s to late 30s ... awesome shape, several probably ex-high school athletes. No clue about technique ... nipples to the net FHs and serves. I have seen them rip FHs and serves (1st serve, 2nd is a pooch serve), but you will never see rotation on the ball. Tennis is hard ... topspin strokes are very hard.
 
user92626

user92626

G.O.A.T.
FiReFTW said:
What you said doesn't relate to @ChaelAZ 's post at all.

He is talking about rec players playing opponents much bellow their level, which is equalent to Federer playing D2 college players.

You can't say Fed is playing much down when he plays a top 50 player or top 150 player, you need to remember that a top 150 player hits the same pace shots as a top 10 player, infact there are some top 150 players who have bigger shots than the big 3.. at that level its more about other small differences like tactics, focus, mental strenght, placement, consistency..
So its not like when Fed plays a rank 69 or rank 253 that he plays someone who is much lower level, he still has the same shots a top 10 player might have or sometimes even a more powerful shot than some, but hes just not as consistent, doesn't have the same placement, same mental strenght and chokes alot, aswell as doesn't have the same fast thinking and problem solving and tactics.

In rec play when a 4.5 plays a 3.5, the 4.5 outpowers and outspins the lower player by ALOT, its a completely different game.

I doubt Chael meant someone at UTR 10 playing a UTR 8 or 9 and playing down alot... I think he meant more like an UTR 10 playing a UTR 5 or 6.
Click to expand...

Ahh I see. So you reduce (define) the "lower level opponents" to strictly pace of shots. Whereas I think level is correlated to the whole package.

Like Federer dealing with possible rank 253's high pace shots (as you suggest), I can also find 3.5 players that hit equal pace as 4.0 and 4.5s. What makes them 3.5 is, like you suggest, placement, consistency, tactics etc (specifically lack thereof). Do you know that there are soft hitters that reign supreme in 4.0, 4.5 tournaments? Ever heard of "pushers"? Crazy idea huh?
 
ByeByePoly

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
nytennisaddict said:
i think training philosophies are different.

in martial arts, because we all have to go to work, care for fam, etc... while we're actively trying to hit each other, we don't want to kill each other, because we need each other the next day, to repeat the process of making each other better (sure there are accidents - eg. i've gotten my nose broken, and tweaked a knee not tapping), but in general the philosophy is to help each other get better (not beat each other up)

in tennis, i think the rec philosophy is largely to "beat my opponent" (in some cases (ahem cheaters) "at all costs")
had an argument with someone about this... ie. his idea of "coop" tennis, was hitting winners whenever he got the chance (you can guess/find thread on ttw).
IMO, that's a selfish way of thinking (ie you're nothing but my ball feeder) - but a way of thinking that alot of rec tennis players have (and that i had at one time as well) - as i seem to experience whenever i hit with a random person on the public court (which i don't do anymore - ie. let's just play sets, if you can't hit coop - because i'm not gonna feed you nice balls into your strikezone so you can showoff and crush winners/spray ence every 2nd ball)
(i'm not talking about point play... where both parties agree... ok 1 feed, then play out the point - or whatever the rule is... just talking about "coop hitting")
ironically, coop-practicing the selfish way is also detrimental because it means less balls hit per hour.

this 20y old article i found echoes my thinking: http://www.tennisserver.com/circlegame/circlegame_99_07.html

talking to the folks i trained with in spain, ex-d1/future pros around here, etc...
they had mentioned, if you're gonna only practice 3d a week.. you're better off hitting coop, 2/3 or 3/4 speed,... let the other person hit it, so you can hit more balls per hour (aim for 500-1000 balls hit per hour (if you can survive - i can't!). you can make the other guy move, but not straight out winners (to avoid wasting time picking up balls).
more reps to practice prep, feel the ball/contact, experiement with spins, contact spots, swing paths, etc...
then play matches once a week... or end your hitting session with point play... but not before hitting 750-1000+ balls.

this interview about flow popped up in my yt feed... highlights my philosophy:
(applies to martial arts and tennis IMO)

i guess i am a strange puppy.
Click to expand...

strangeIntense Puppy. 8-B(y)

Most of my friends are from tennis, in particular from my tennis club years. Not the going out to dinner thing ... but have played tennis with many for 20+ years, sparred both playing and verbally, USTA team trips, etc. You lose track ... club closed, many had to quit tennis from injury, etc. Some of the best mutual b!tch slapping in our doubles leagues you would ever hear ... rinse and repeat the next week.
 
FiReFTW

FiReFTW

Legend
user92626 said:
Ahh I see. So you reduce (define) the "lower level opponents" to strictly pace of shots. Whereas I think level is correlated to the whole package.

Like Federer dealing with possible rank 253's high pace shots (as you suggest), I can also find 3.5 players that hit equal pace as 4.0 and 4.5s. What makes them 3.5 is, like you suggest, placement, consistency, tactics etc (specifically lack thereof). Do you know that there are soft hitters that reign supreme in 4.0, 4.5 tournaments? Ever heard of "pushers"? Crazy idea huh?
Click to expand...

No but you don't get the level difference, Chael means a big level difference.

If a 4.5 plays a 3.5 he won't get much out of it, actually he won't get anything out of it, and if he plays them constantly and then at tournaments he plays 4.5 hes going to be completely rusty.. compared to playing alot of players closer to his level.

Federer playing a rank 100 or tank 200 is like if a 4.5 plays another 4.5 thats 1 level bellow him and can constantly beat him bar an upset.
 
bitcoinoperated

bitcoinoperated

Professional
FiReFTW said:
What you said doesn't relate to @ChaelAZ 's post at all.

He is talking about rec players playing opponents much bellow their level, which is equalent to Federer playing D2 college players.

You can't say Fed is playing much down when he plays a top 50 player or top 150 player, you need to remember that a top 150 player hits the same pace shots as a top 10 player, infact there are some top 150 players who have bigger shots than the big 3.. at that level its more about other small differences like tactics, focus, mental strenght, placement, consistency..
So its not like when Fed plays a rank 69 or rank 253 that he plays someone who is much lower level, he still has the same shots a top 10 player might have or sometimes even a more powerful shot than some, but hes just not as consistent, doesn't have the same placement, same mental strenght and chokes alot, aswell as doesn't have the same fast thinking and problem solving and tactics.

In rec play when a 4.5 plays a 3.5, the 4.5 outpowers and outspins the lower player by ALOT, its a completely different game.

I doubt Chael meant someone at UTR 10 playing a UTR 8 or 9 and playing down alot... I think he meant more like an UTR 10 playing a UTR 5 or 6.
Click to expand...

Yeah you never see male pro players get legit overpowered like you do at (most) amateur levels.
 
user92626

user92626

G.O.A.T.
nytennisaddict said:
i think training philosophies are different.

in martial arts, because we all have to go to work, care for fam, etc... while we're actively trying to hit each other, we don't want to kill each other, because we need each other the next day, to repeat the process of making each other better (sure there are accidents - eg. i've gotten my nose broken, and tweaked a knee not tapping), but in general the philosophy is to help each other get better (not beat each other up)

in tennis, i think the rec philosophy is largely to "beat my opponent" (in some cases (ahem cheaters) "at all costs")
had an argument with someone about this... ie. his idea of "coop" tennis, was hitting winners whenever he got the chance (you can guess/find thread on ttw).
IMO, that's a selfish way of thinking (ie you're nothing but my ball feeder) - but a way of thinking that alot of rec tennis players have (and that i had at one time as well) - as i seem to experience whenever i hit with a random person on the public court (which i don't do anymore - ie. let's just play sets, if you can't hit coop - because i'm not gonna feed you nice balls into your strikezone so you can showoff and crush winners/spray ence every 2nd ball)
(i'm not talking about point play... where both parties agree... ok 1 feed, then play out the point - or whatever the rule is... just talking about "coop hitting")
ironically, coop-practicing the selfish way is also detrimental because it means less balls hit per hour.
Click to expand...

Omg, so it seems like I'm the only guy (and now you) that I know who has a different philosophy to tennis. Specifically, the unselfish, friendly, help each other philosophy / approach. :)

I kid you not. I want to my regular players to get better, much better tennis wise and to have better time at the court. I notice that they don't like rallying but only enjoy games so I suggest that:

We can play matches where I spot them advantages to level the field -- see, I'm not out to destroy anyone. If I win I will raise the advantages, until our matches seem balance.

That way, everyone, at almost any levels, gets to play. Reality is it's very hard if not impossible to find equal level players.

I advocate that we play hard since everyone has a real chance to sharpen our mind and body, instead of the b.s. lopsided matches that most people would tune out.

Also, psychologically if there's no stake, people don't care to try. Put in new cans of balls. The whole or half cost of a lunch. Then, everyone would try through out the best of 3!

I want my group to go out to lunch once a while for fun and to get to know each other so we will less misunderstand each other.

All of this seem like right things to do with people, regardless of tennis or place, but you are right. Who's like that around?
 
FiReFTW

FiReFTW

Legend
tlm said:
Here is a clip of some hitting. I think I clear the net around 5’ on average, I’m nowhere nears as good as nyta is but I understand what he means by if you keep good net clearance then you should get the depth your looking for.

Click to expand...

Well but you can get the depth too with a flat trajectory, you just need the right spin to pace ratio, i think its more important to add or take away spin in order to get depth.
 
ChaelAZ

ChaelAZ

G.O.A.T.
Interesting about the social aspect too. When I played leagues, and even in tournaments, I always invite opponents and opposing teams out for drinks after matches. Heck, even some teams/opponents I don't particular like.

Funny side note, our teams just got 'sponosred' by the local Chili's manager since we are there a few times a week with 5 to 20 people.
 
user92626

user92626

G.O.A.T.
FiReFTW said:
No but you don't get the level difference, Chael means a big level difference.

If a 4.5 plays a 3.5 he won't get much out of it, actually he won't get anything out of it, and if he plays them constantly and then at tournaments he plays 4.5 hes going to be completely rusty.. compared to playing alot of players closer to his level.

Federer playing a rank 100 or tank 200 is like if a 4.5 plays another 4.5 thats 1 level bellow him and can constantly beat him bar an upset.
Click to expand...
OK.

Anyway, moving on.


Re the issue of different level, I have long realized that it's very difficult to find similar level players at city courts. So, I take up the approach of playing any lower level players who are willing to play and take advantage handicaps. I wrote alot about this. There's plenty of lower level players. The only trick is to get them on the same page/mindset, ie have them forgo their pride.

Playing with enough handicaps, any better players can struggle and feel like they are playing against equal opponents.

That's how you solve this issue of playing lower level opponents.
 
ChaelAZ

ChaelAZ

G.O.A.T.
nytennisaddict said:
cool.
would be interesting to correlate ball speed and spin... as well as where on the court you're standing...
ie. folks who hit much harder/less-spin/closer-to-baseline likely need to hit flatter
Click to expand...


And have a ball machine without a lot fo flat balls that REALLY messes with the incoming height and depth. But I do alright mixing things up with height and depth if I have time to setup. I rarely try to hit super flat, but should start adding that into the mix.
 
tlm

tlm

G.O.A.T.
FiReFTW said:
Well but you can get the depth too with a flat trajectory, you just need the right spin to pace ratio, i think its more important to add or take away spin in order to get depth.
Click to expand...

This is true but if you get too low you then bring the net into play, with high net clearance your never hitting into the net.
 
D

Deleted member 23235

Guest
user92626 said:
Omg, so it seems like I'm the only guy (and now you) that I know who has a different philosophy to tennis. Specifically, the unselfish, friendly, help each other philosophy / approach. :)

I kid you not. I want to my regular players to get better, much better tennis wise and to have better time at the court. I notice that they don't like rallying but only enjoy games so I suggest that:

We can play matches where I spot them advantages to level the field -- see, I'm not out to destroy anyone. If I win I will raise the advantages, until our matches seem balance.

That way, everyone, at almost any levels, gets to play. Reality is it's very hard if not impossible to find equal level players.

I advocate that we play hard since everyone has a real chance to sharpen our mind and body, instead of the b.s. lopsided matches that most people would tune out.

Also, psychologically if there's no stake, people don't care to try. Put in new cans of balls. The whole or half cost of a lunch. Then, everyone would try through out the best of 3!

I want my group to go out to lunch once a while for fun and to get to know each other so we will less misunderstand each other.

All of this seem like right things to do with people, regardless of tennis or place, but you are right. Who's like that around?
Click to expand...
while our philosophies are similar, i think our execution/implementation of them are different.
i'm not a fan of "spotting" people (thoug the system in europe is based on spotting points per game, or games per set), only because it seems like an ego thing to say, "i'll spot you" (because i'm much better than you)...
vice versa, alot of folks don't like getting spots, and/or don't want to acknowledge that anyone is better than them...
so IMO the best way to solve that is to beat someone "normally" and if it's "easy" change your strategy without telling them, in such a way that equalizes the game, and improves something i need work on (ie. always hit dtl bh to their fh, or s&v if i'm a baseliner, or only slice, if i hit too big (or vice versa if they can't deal with slice)).
then the other side maintains their ego, if they lose... or has somethign to be happy about if they win (vs. how satisfying is it to "win" if i spotted you 9 points in a 10 point game?).
 
ByeByePoly

ByeByePoly

G.O.A.T.
FiReFTW said:
No but you don't get the level difference, Chael means a big level difference.

If a 4.5 plays a 3.5 he won't get much out of it, actually he won't get anything out of it, and if he plays them constantly and then at tournaments he plays 4.5 hes going to be completely rusty.. compared to playing alot of players closer to his level.

Federer playing a rank 100 or tank 200 is like if a 4.5 plays another 4.5 thats 1 level bellow him and can constantly beat him bar an upset.
Click to expand...

“If a 4.5 plays a 3.5 he won't get much out of it, actually he won't get anything out of it“

I found out otherwise this year, but you have to be creative. I reluctantly decided to hit with a “beginner” for 5 minutes after a ball machine session. That turned to into probably 20 hits and a new friend. He showed up with a FH good enough for good hits, and a serve and bh that were close to good enough. We worked on his serve and bh for probably a month... he hit a lot of balls on my ball machine. A couple of sessions of feeding him backhands (1hbhs) with suggestions of where he was slightly off (his unit turn was good, but then failed to rotate in the swing ... had not seen that before).

One month after ... I had a good practice partner. I would not call my regular friends because didn’t trust my hamstrings enough to play at that level. We did a bunch of win win drills .. just have to be creative. He needed to work on serve, and I needed 2hbh ros reps. He would serve 11 point games, all to my bh. I needed those reps, and he needed to develop a low UE serve to opponents bh.

By end of year, we just played 11 point games ... he was at the point he wanted to play matches. I just controlled how much practice I got by how much I hit to his FH ... hit to that side a lot (don’t think he knew that was on purpose at first).

So ... depending on lower level player, if you are creative you can both get something out of it.
 
tlm

tlm

G.O.A.T.
nytennisaddict said:
while our philosophies are similar, i think our execution/implementation of them are different.
i'm not a fan of "spotting" people (thoug the system in europe is based on spotting points per game, or games per set), only because it seems like an ego thing to say, "i'll spot you" (because i'm much better than you)...
vice versa, alot of folks don't like getting spots, and/or don't want to acknowledge that anyone is better than them...
so IMO the best way to solve that is to beat someone "normally" and if it's "easy" change your strategy without telling them, in such a way that equalizes the game, and improves something i need work on (ie. always hit dtl bh to their fh, or s&v if i'm a baseliner, or only slice, if i hit too big (or vice versa if they can't deal with slice)).
then the other side maintains their ego, if they lose... or has somethign to be happy about if they win (vs. how satisfying is it to "win" if i spotted you 9 points in a 10 point game?).
Click to expand...

Yep this is what good players do when hitting with lesser players. I hit with some guys that r definitely better than me and if they want to pound my weaknesses they will win easily. But instead they hit more to my strong side and work on different parts of their game so we both get something out of our practice session.
 
FiReFTW

FiReFTW

Legend
tlm said:
Yep this is what good players do when hitting with lesser players. I hit with some guys that r definitely better than me and if they want to pound my weaknesses they will win easily. But instead they hit more to my strong side and work on different parts of their game so we both get something out of our practice session.
Click to expand...

What if the weaker player has no weaknesses :-D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Minimum height
Replies
19
Views
2K
IowaGuy
IowaGuy
D
  • Poll
Depth and height over the net...
2 3
Replies
121
Views
10K
ByeByePoly
ByeByePoly
B
Thoughts on height over the net
2
Replies
54
Views
9K
5263
5263
T
Medium High ball sitter at near the net
Replies
11
Views
850
TennisCJC
T
D
Height of the ball over the net?
Replies
39
Views
18K
Cup8489
Cup8489
Top