Lobbers. We get no respect. No respect at all.

So I've got a question for the posters who feel that lobbing is a detriment to both the game and the player employing it, well, two actually.

How many players have you seen with consistently poor lobs? How do you improve from that position other than learning how/when and where to hit them in the pressure situation of a match? The practice court is great and all, but it is very difficult to mirror a match situation in temperament and sense of urgency.

Isn't part of improving in tennis also related in the terms of one's ability to adapt and put together a winning strategy over the course of a match in relation to what your opponents can't execute or counter as strongly?

Just as the lobber does to you, if you prefer not to play that style, adapt your strategy and stop letting them dictate their defensive play.

sphinx780 said:

So I've got a question for the posters who feel that lobbing is a detriment to both the game and the player employing it, well, two actually.

How many players have you seen with consistently poor lobs? How do you improve from that position other than learning how/when and where to hit them in the pressure situation of a match? The practice court is great and all, but it is very difficult to mirror a match situation in temperament and sense of urgency.

Isn't part of improving in tennis also related in the terms of one's ability to adapt and put together a winning strategy over the course of a match in relation to what your opponents can't execute or counter as strongly?

Just as the lobber does to you, if you prefer not to play that style, adapt your strategy and stop letting them dictate their defensive play.

Click to expand...

What I have seen over 40 years of tennis, is that lobbers have three strengths - quick legs, great hand-eye coordination and infinite patience. They use these skills to blunt the strengths of the typical tennis player - power, speed and quick strike capability. They also interrupt the natural timing most of us have. IMHO, you play tennis because you prefer speed, power and crisp execution to something like golf that rewards patience, mental toughness and a willingness to stay the course forever.

Someone once said that tennis is civilized boxing. If you agree with that analogy, then lobbing is the "rope a dope" strategy, which, IMHO, makes boxing dull and boring.

But heh, Harold Solomon made a great pro career out of being the consummate lobber, so it can be effective.

Play the way you want, and give the finger to anybody who whines at you.

-k-

Since I generally only play doubles, I usually stop people from lobbing by drilling overheads at their partners. They don't even have to be good overheads to scare them a little bit.

People complain about lobbers because they want to win. They hope embarassing you will make you quit lobbing so they can start winning.
Watch some old matches on youtube from the 60's - Laver, Rosewall, Newcombe, Roche, etc. where they are serving and volleying. Any time the ball is struck more than 3 or maybe 4 times, there is a lob. It is underutilized these days in most cases. Unfortunately, my lob isn't very good.

The TS lob is one of the most effective club tennis doubles shots

Some people hate it because they are constantly breathing on the net and then feel silly when the ball goes over their head for a winner.

Whenever my partner and I are both playing the net, if a weak ball goes to the opponent, I'm already backing up, anticipating the lob... as it's the highest percentage shot from the opponent.

IMO, too many people get caught up with what they see on a professional doubles court, where the opponents continue blasting balls at the other net opponents and rarely lob.

kylebarendrick said:

Since I generally only play doubles, I usually stop people from lobbing by drilling overheads at their partners. They don't even have to be good overheads to scare them a little bit.

Click to expand...

I guarantee you won't be hitting any overheads off a well-executed TS lob. The ball strikes deep in the court and then take off into the fence from the spin. You're lucky to even make contact.

Cindysphinx said:

I'm not willing to agree that it is lob abuse to hit a lot of lobs. The only thing that constitutes "lob abuse" in my book is hitting bad lobs. A good topspin lob/moonball can be terrific set up shot.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. One of my top double's strategies is Nadal's anti-Federer strategy. I continue going to the opponent's BH with high, deep, spinny shots. Eventually, they mishit or cough up a short ball.

IMO, a defensive lob (which is basically a high flat ball with little spin) and an offensive lob (in effect a deep ball with lots of spin that is too high to poach) are completely different shots.

kylebarendrick said:

Since I generally only play doubles, I usually stop people from lobbing by drilling overheads at their partners. They don't even have to be good overheads to scare them a little bit.

Click to expand...

Nowadays the best lobbers play doubles, and if you run into the good ones, you aren't going to be drilling any scary overheads since the lob will be too high to hit from close to the net and will land very close to the baseline.

ATP100 said:

You should lob more.

Click to expand...

yeah, they whined about it now feed them more, then drops...

LuckyR said:

Nowadays the best lobbers play doubles, and if you run into the good ones, you aren't going to be drilling any scary overheads since the lob will be too high to hit from close to the net and will land very close to the baseline.

Click to expand...

You are absolutely right - a good TS lob can be devastating. Punishing a weak lob, though, can reduce the number of lobs you have to face.

Playing singles against a good lobber can be a very interesting strategic battle. If someone is lobbing effectively, then I play much further from the net--maybe only slightly inside the service line (I have a reliable overhead, but I'm not that tall). Then I can get to the lob, but passing shote s, especially angled ones are much more difficult.

If the lobber switches to hitting angled passing shots, then I try to move closer to the net. It all becomes a guessing game for both of us. I'm guessing whether he's lobbing or not, he's guessing how close to the net I'm playing.

Against an incessant lobber (in singles) I slice the bejeezus out of the ball and keep it as low as possible - penetrating without lots of power. Wait for the inevitable high-bouncing ball that lands well inside of the service line and use the angles or go with power behind them when they are running to cover the open court. Drop-shotting a half-volley off their lob to draw them into the net is also a good move, then put the TS lob over them and show 'em how it's really done.

I find hitting topspin that kicks up is a lot easier for these kind of players to deal with than hard, skidding slice. There's a way to hit slice so that the ball just dies on the face of a racket if your opponent isn't swinging through with pace. I actually switch rackets to a 16x19 pattern from a 18x20 when I encounter this kind of player, because the extra spin is such a benefit when you're trying to dismantle them.

Cindysphinx said:

We're playing a lobber." The word "lobber" received special emphasis -- the same tone dripping with disdain one might use for the word "cheater."

Click to expand...

A little bit of history on the word "lobber". First of all, many people don't know this, but it is actually an acronym - L.O.B.B.E.R. Most people just say it as a word though instead of pronouncing each letter because that would take so long. Although, that is a way to tell if it is a good lob. If you can hit it, then say all the letters before the ball bounces, well done.

Anyway back to the etymology of L.O.B.B.E.R. The term is actually several hundred years old and stands for Losing to someone you think you should beat. For you anal-retentive folks out there, no, the words do not match up with the letters. That's because the phenomenon was first discovered by a Scotchman and his accent was so heavy that no one could really tell what he said, so they just started using L.O.B.B.E.R. As tennis spread around the world, different dialects changed the word slightly to such things as P.U.S.H.E.R. and D.I.N.K.E.R. and other variants. However, they still carried much the same meaning. Furthermore, it was originally a compliment as changing your game in order to win was considered a 'wise move'.

It is unclear when L.O.B.B.E.R. turned into a derogatory term. It is rather counter-intuitive because it appears the term became negative about the same time that winning at all costs overtook the social aspect of the game (see Sandbagging). So, why would using effective shots to win, be a negative, when winning is the ultimate goal.

Although not conclusive, the general consensus is that the term became derogatory in 1968 at the beginning of the Open Era. At this time, Professionals and Amateurs started to compete in the same tournaments. The story goes, a club pro, after losing to an amateur, went to the net to shake hands, and said to his opponent, 'you are such a L.O.B.B.E.R.' The local newspaper had a reporter at the event. However, as tennis did not get much respect in the newspaper, they sent someone who didn't know anything about tennis. When this reporter saw a pro losing to an amateur and then calling ham a L.O.B.B.E.R., he just assumed it was an insult. He didn't realize the pro was actually complimenting the amateur. Unfortunately, he wrote up his article that way, and even though a retraction was printed in the back of the classifieds a few days later, everyone had already started using L.O.B.B.E.R. as a derogatory term.

So, that is your history lesson. Next time someone calls you a L.O.B.B.E.R, remember, they probably think they are a pro, losing to an amateur. And in reality, they are actually giving you a compliment.

If I had a dollar for every time a lobber thinks their shot is actually a good one, id own TW by now. "Lobbers" are just another type of junk baller who thinks their forehand lob is the best shot invented since sliced bread.

The lob itself is a great shot when used properly and executed properly, just like the slice.

Want to know the difference between a "lobber" lob and a good lob?

1) A good lob is probably a clear winner for you. A bad lob is a lob that is returned as a lob, which is then re-lobbed, and again, and again, with one finally going 30 ft. in the air, catches a good gust of wind and manages to take a (misjudged) bounce higher than the player can reach resulting in a winner.

2) A good lob has a good amount of topspin. It will probably not have as much topspin as a good forehand drive, or a frame shot (you know what im talking about lol) but you still shouldnt be seeing the rotation on the ball. If you can see the actual rotation on the ball and it doesnt look like a blur you have just "lobber" lobbed.

3) 10 year old girls lob. 70 year old ladies lob. If you are not either, you shouldnt be "moon balling" or "lobber" lobbing. A good lob is effectively a passing shot and should be a winner like any other passing shot. If its not getting you points, it should be an absolute desperation shot that you play to just stay in the point. If you're using lobs as part of a rally, you're lobber lobbing.

^Heh, heh. I don't know if I agree with all of your lobbing theories, but you make a lot of good points.

1) A good lob is probably a winner. But lob wars can involve good lobs too. Like, my opponent hits a pitiful lob to the baseline. I lob it back, but my lob has topspin and backs them up. Their next lob is short, which is a put-away for me. If your opponent starts a lob war but you end it, you have a good lob.

2. I wouldn't judge lob quality by the rotation on the ball, necessarily. I would judge it by what it does after the bounce and how much bounce it generates for the height of the shot. A great lob is one that doesn't go up to the roof but bounces like it did.

3. I think moonballing is awesome. If my opponent has a 1HBH, she will definitely see topspin moonballs to her BH. I know she cannot take these as swinging volleys or overheads, and I know if it gets high to her BH she will be helpless.

A lob can be a great set-up shot. Why be shy about using it that way?

Hey Cindy did you feel it up there?

sureshs said:

Hey Cindy did you feel it up there?

Click to expand...

Yup. There's a thread in odds and ends.

Cindysphinx said:

Yup. There's a thread in odds and ends.

Click to expand...

I was referring to the lob

sureshs said:

Hey Cindy did you feel it up there?

Click to expand...

The lob is a great shot in appropriate situations. It is not a total match strategy that anyone should be proud of. OK, maybe if your knees, ankles and hips are shot. Maybe.

-k-

Cindysphinx said:

1) A good lob is probably a winner. But lob wars can involve good lobs too. Like, my opponent hits a pitiful lob to the baseline. I lob it back, but my lob has topspin and backs them up. Their next lob is short, which is a put-away for me. If your opponent starts a lob war but you end it, you have a good lob.

Click to expand...

"Lob wars" dont happen in top tier 3.0 adult league play where im from. The only time you see these "lob wars" are in 2.5 level players, or senior leagues. At 3.5 senior, your average player will be able to hit an overhead off a lob into the open court. It wont be fast, but it will land in and avoid the net person unless the net person poaches. At that level people hardly poach.

Cindysphinx said:

2. I wouldn't judge lob quality by the rotation on the ball, necessarily. I would judge it by what it does after the bounce and how much bounce it generates for the height of the shot. A great lob is one that doesn't go up to the roof but bounces like it did.

Click to expand...

Spin helps repeatability and adds to your shot %. Spin will not determine how high the ball goes or how far it bounces moreso than where the lob was hit from and where the lob landed.

A lob does not need to bounce to the roof. It just needs to go 15 ft. in the air, i.e out of reach for most people and needs to land in the court fast enough where the opposing team cannot make a play on the ball.

A good speed lob will have good spin because you're stroking the ball upwards. A bad speed lob (a lobber lob) will just use the racket to lift the ball upwards and not stroke it. Then any decent player will run back to the baseline, run around to the forehand side, and drill your net player with an overhead for a winner.

Unless you're playing a 10 year old girl or 70 year old lady.

Cindysphinx said:

3. I think moonballing is awesome. If my opponent has a 1HBH, she will definitely see topspin moonballs to her BH. I know she cannot take these as swinging volleys or overheads, and I know if it gets high to her BH she will be helpless.

A lob can be a great set-up shot. Why be shy about using it that way?

Click to expand...

Those types of strategies work well in senior league or JTT. Once those players try playing adult league it wont work. This is why I discourage the use of lobs and slices until my kids are experienced enough to know that those shots have a specific purpose.

I've seen people have a hard time even in seniors. There are some in shape 50-somethings who you'd think are too young to be playing!

I've started playing 4.5 recently, and now there are even less lobbers then 4.0. I'm pretty sure it's just because the quality of return off a lob is pretty deadly! Just wanted to point it out, that from the 15-20% of people at 4.0 that were lobbers, there is only about 5-10% of lobbers at 4.5 now, but now they are just really accomplished junk ballers who have a great TS lob in their arsenal along with great drop shots and slices.

-Fuji

Man, I'm confused limibeans. No lob wars at 3.0? Really? You sure you're talking about USTA ratings?

For whatever it's worth, I am a 3.5 guy, and I see some lobs without a ton a spin still have some effectiveness (at least in that the shot frequently results in the point remaining relatively neutral) just as long as they're deep. High groundstrokes or overheads from the baseline aren't as simple to just smack for winners as you make it seem, even for adults, at the 3.5 level and lower imo.

I'm pretty sure Cindy is also a 3.5 woman who is likely to be bumped up to 4.0 due to a strong winning record at 3.5, so your lectures to her about what simply won't work in adult 3.5 leagues are probably not going to be very convincing if she has direct evidence from the courts to the contrary.

Cindysphinx said:

I had a funny 7.0 senior mixed match over the weekend. I was playing with my regular 3.5 partner, a great guy. He drapes himself all over the net and terrorizes our opponents, so we do very well together. Opponent was a nice 3.5 lady, a teammate of mine, and her partner was also a sweetheart.

We were dominating in the first set, and I was serving it out at 5-1, set point. I served, she returned. I meant to hit a groundstroke with lots of topspin to her BH, but I instead hit some ridiculous topspin moonball that fell just behind the service line. She set up to hit a smash. Alas, she misjudged the topspin and it kicked high over her outstretched racket for a winner. She was not happy.

So. We are playing the second set, and a ball came to rest behind their baseline. We asked her partner at net if the ball was a problem, and he said it was OK.

She then said, loud enough for me to hear: "You'd better get it. We're playing a lobber." The word "lobber" received special emphasis -- the same tone dripping with disdain one might use for the word "cheater."

Come on, now. Folks need to start respecting a good topspin lob. It's not like I am lobbing every ball or anything. I lob (1) when my opponents come in on a ball that sits up, (2) when my opponents drape themselves on the net and leave the entire back court undefended, or (3) when my opponents lob first because they can't think of any other way to deal with my huge-wingspan 6'4" partner at the net.

In those situations, my opponent are practically begging for me to lob, so why are they getting so frustrated when I lob?

So, all you lob haters. Knock it off. Respect my topspin lob, understand your role in triggering a lob, and figure out a way to make me stop. And stop yer complaining already.

Click to expand...

is it like slice lob or topspin lob ? I have not met one 3.5 player that can hit a proper topspin lob.

dcdoorknob said:

Man, I'm confused limibeans. No lob wars at 3.0? Really? You sure you're talking about USTA ratings?

For whatever it's worth, I am a 3.5 guy, and I see some lobs without a ton a spin still have some effectiveness (at least in that the shot frequently results in the point remaining relatively neutral) just as long as they're deep. High groundstrokes or overheads from the baseline aren't as simple to just smack for winners as you make it seem, even for adults, at the 3.5 level and lower imo.

I'm pretty sure Cindy is also a 3.5 woman who is likely to be bumped up to 4.0 due to a strong winning record at 3.5, so your lectures to her about what simply won't work in adult 3.5 leagues are probably not going to be very convincing if she has direct evidence from the courts to the contrary.

Click to expand...

It happens in 3.0 seniors, but top tier 3.0, it simply doesnt work. I see it all too often. You have these 3.0/3.5/4.0 senior women who play 6.0/7.0/8.0 adult/mixed leagues and get absolutely rolled because they think that 3.5 super seniors section champs strategies work across the board. There are just as many 3.0 self-rates high school aged kids who would put grandmas eye out off hitting an overhead from her terrible lob even though shes a 3.5 super senior section champ.

What im saying is that "lobbers" work effectively in JTT and senior leagues. In 3.0 adult, top tier, it wont work. In 3.5 adult, upper tier, it wont work. In 4.0, average tier, it wont work. In 4.5, you're going to get someone hurt.

And, I know, hitting a piercing forehand off a lob may be hard for a lot of 3.5 players. What I try to encourage is for the player to learn the harder shot, which is probably the overhead, vs. playing the easy shot which is to re-lob.

Just because you have a "winning" record doesnt mean you're good. Just because you got bumped doesnt mean you're good either. It's all about how you did against the top tier of your bracket. Did you make it to sectionals? did you do well? If you blew away everyone in your flight but lost every match 0-5 (or 0-3) in sectionals that should tell you something. Did you go to nationals? Did you win?

Also, the skill, variety, and consistency between a good 3.0 and a bad one is pretty big. Same thing can be said about 3.5 and 4.0. After 4.0 is mostly about team work, strategy and consistency. After 5.0 its about results.

4.5 topspin lobs

Fuji said:

I've started playing 4.5 recently, and now there are even less lobbers then 4.0. I'm pretty sure it's just because the quality of return off a lob is pretty deadly! Just wanted to point it out, that from the 15-20% of people at 4.0 that were lobbers, there is only about 5-10% of lobbers at 4.5 now, but now they are just really accomplished junk ballers who have a great TS lob in their arsenal along with great drop shots and slices.

-Fuji

Click to expand...

However, 4.5 lobbers are more offensive minded. If I'm trying to change the dynamics of the point, I'll throw up a deep topspin lob (usually over the net guy if they are playing 1 up 1 back). I use it to get into the heads of the opposing team. I want them to know that shot is in my arsenal and they better be expecting it

Many times, it will draw an outright error or a short ball from the guy playing back as he's not expecting it. Give it a try.

Limibeans said:

It happens in 3.0 seniors, but top tier 3.0, it simply doesnt work.

Click to expand...

Ok, well if your really just talking about nationals or something for 'top tier 3.0s', then fine. Those guys are probably playing closer to a 4.0 level anyways. If you're talking about people actually playing at a 3.0 level, then your 'lobber' lobs will still be at least somewhat effective.

Your assertion that the only time you see lob wars is in 2.5 leagues or senior leagues is still pretty far off the mark as far as I'm concerned though.

dcdoorknob said:

Ok, well if your really just talking about nationals or something for 'top tier 3.0s', then fine. Those guys are probably playing closer to a 4.0 level anyways. If you're talking about people actually playing at a 3.0 level, then your 'lobber' lobs will still be at least somewhat effective.

Your assertion that the only time you see lob wars is in 2.5 leagues or senior leagues is still pretty far off the mark as far as I'm concerned though.

Click to expand...

This says it all.

They are 3.0 players. You are not the judge over what NTRP a person is. You may think they're 4.0 players playing 3.0 ball but the reality is that everyone in 3.0 is a 3.0 unless they're cheating.

Claiming people are playing below their level does nothing and means nothing. Ever wonder why when you file a grievance that you can only do so based on incorrect or missing information? Because grievance committees are tired of hearing about how someone is too good to be playing at a particular level.

99% of all tennis players on the planet think they've lost to a sandbagger.
1% of the tennis players that are left realize they lost because they wernt good enough.

That 1% will come back (maybe with an appeal lol) after lots of hard work and determination to actually advance to a play off, while the other 99% are still complaining about how everyone else who beats them are sandbaggers.

Ok, I'm not even sure what we're arguing about.

I just thought it was weird that you said you never see lob wars at adult 3.0. I still think its weird.

But now apparently I never realized that I lose because I'm not good enough, and so now I am destined to never win nationals. Ok. That's fine too. Whatever.

dcdoorknob said:

Ok, I'm not even sure what we're arguing about.

I just thought it was weird that you said you never see lob wars at adult 3.0. I still think its weird.

But now apparently I never realized that I lose because I'm not good enough, and so now I am destined to never win nationals. Ok. That's fine too. Whatever.

Click to expand...

Because I think you may be personally insulted by the things ive said, im going to make one more post here directed at you in an attempt to clarify the things ive said. Nothing here was meant to be a personal attack, rather I wanted to point out the differences between your mindset and mine.

You attempted to define success for Cindy by having a "strong record at 3.5" and is likely to be bumped up to 4.0 based on her performance. My last post attempted to demonstrate the difference between your definition of success and mine.

I define success differently in this case, as I dont see "being promoted" necessarily means "success". For example: A player who plays 3.5 for 10 years who finally earns enough points to be a 4.0 next year isnt necessarily "successful". A player who is a 3.5, who cruises through the regular season nearly undefeated who then goes to sectionals and has a winning record would be. In some cases, players would need to win nationals to be considered "top tier" to me, because ive seen some flights with only 3 teams in them. Sometimes, there isnt even sectionals. You go straight to nationals.



Anyway, I never said that you dont see those shots at the 3.0 level. People in 4.0 still push/slice lob, but thats not what im talking about. The original concept of this thread is to discuss the stigma of being a bad player when you push/lob in a match. In my post, I attempted to describe the difference between a real lob and a push/lob.

Top tier 3.0 players can put away a bad lob, even women. I know a 6.0 husband a wife couple that won nationals. You know how they practiced? She only practiced overheads and volleys. The husband just rallied until someone hits a lob that she immediately puts away anywhere on the court. If the lob is deep, hes gets it, and he hits it at the net person.

To contrast with this I went over how tactics in senior league dont work well across the board. I've been on too many teams that had older women on them who thought they were B.A only to be reality stricken in 6.0 adult mixed where their cheap tactics (in this case, bad lobs) would cause them to lose 1-1 all day long.



I post not to discourage you. I post to help you realize that junkballing will only get you so far. My whole last post was my final illustration where above all else we are different in the way we perceive tennis.

Anyway, good luck with your game.

I was pretty much always just more confused than actually offended. I think (tho I could still be wrong) that most of the confusion came from my thoughts about a typical 3.0 player, or even an above average one, and you focusing more on the >1% who actually compete for or win national championships, and how those 2 things just where not meshing. The vast majority of 3.0 players can't consistently put away a deepish lob (that lands closer to the baseline than the service line), even if the lobber doesn't have wicked topspin on his lob. I'm sure there are exceptions, and I'm sure those exceptions are more likely than most others to win nationals, but they are surely still the very rare exception rather than the rule.

That 3.0 guy must have had one heck of a baseline overhead. Returning a deep lob to the opposing the netman when you are at or behind the baseline (where it will be difficult to make it a low volley, and netman has time to react) still seems like a pretty dicey proposition to me, unless its just a cannon baseline overhead that he also makes most of the time.

What a weird direction we have taken!!

First, attempting to draw a distinction between 3.5 ladies adult and 3.5 senior ladies is crazy. The exact same doubles tactics work. You want to know why? Because the same people play both.

Second, if you think 3.0 male or female players are able to hit overheads off of topspin lobs . . . No way. I was a 3.0. Most players that level are quite timid about taking any ball out of the air and will opt to bounce it. They often have a frying pan grip, and their overhead is defensive. This is not intended to insult 3.0 players. There is no way that 3.0 players can win a lob war against anyone who hits topspin.

I don't want to pull rank here, but I am a high end 3.5. I won my four matches at Districts, went 14-0 in the regular season and haven't lost any kind of match in the last 8 weeks.

Any time I needed a guaranteed winner, I knew I could get it with a topspin lob to someone's BH. The only players who were able to beat that shot were 4.5 guys who would overhead it, and 4.5 men and women who kept the ball low or short so I couldn't easily lob.

dcdoorknob said:

That 3.0 guy must have had one heck of a baseline overhead. Returning a deep lob to the opposing the netman when you are at or behind the baseline (where it will be difficult to make it a low volley, and netman has time to react) still seems like a pretty dicey proposition to me, unless its just a cannon baseline overhead that he also makes most of the time.

Click to expand...

Of course he didnt make it every time and it certainty wasnt a "cannon".

In doubles, id say a good lob lands 1-1.5 ft. from the baseline. If the ball landed in that area, she has a hard time. Any ball that wasnt ~1ft. from the baseline and ddint force her to get there in a hurry she could put away.

There are a lot of variables in this scenario.

Since we're talking about "lobber lobs" compared to good ones, even if the lobber lob landed on the paint, it probably went 30 ft. into the air and has no spin on it, in which case a play on that ball would be much easier than a lob that landed 1 ft. from the baseline, went only 15 ft. high, and had 1500 rpms.

Cindysphinx said:

First, attempting to draw a distinction between 3.5 ladies adult and 3.5 senior ladies is crazy. The exact same doubles tactics work. You want to know why? Because the same people play both.

Click to expand...

The same people play both, yes. Except in addition to the old people you have people 1/3 of their age on the opposing side. You can see great contrast anytime someone carries over their senior league team to adult. they usually get destroyed.

20 year old 3.0 adult male (self-rated) backhand vs. 65 year old, fat, 3.0 super senior females (section champ) best first serve? There is no comparison in mixed.

Cindysphinx said:

Second, if you think 3.0 male or female players are able to hit overheads off of topspin lobs . . . No way. I was a 3.0. Most players that level are quite timid about taking any ball out of the air and will opt to bounce it. They often have a frying pan grip, and their overhead is defensive. This is not intended to insult 3.0 players. There is no way that 3.0 players can win a lob war against anyone who hits topspin.

Click to expand...

There are 2.5 girls that can hit overheads from the baseline. I think you're comparing everything to senior league and assuming that everyone fits exactly into the NTRP guidelines.

When I was a 2.5 player over 10 years ago, I had a 120 mph first serve. When I tell people that they say "wow you must have been a sandbagger" but I actually wasnt. I had a big serve and a massive forehand. Nothing else. That's why I was a 2.5 and thats why you cant go by NTRP guidelines. If my 110% forehands and serves were not working, it was a sure loss. In doubles it was even more apparent I was a 2.5 because I had no concept of teamwork and no net game.

Cindysphinx said:

I don't want to pull rank here, but I am a high end 3.5. I won my four matches at Districts, went 14-0 in the regular season and haven't lost any kind of match in the last 8 weeks.

Click to expand...

I'm unable to dispute any of that without knowing your name or where you live. Since im not about to ask that, im just going to ask you some other Q's which arnt related to personal information.

Regular season play doesnt mean much. You can have an undefeated regular season and lose every single play off match because the flight that you had was very weak. In contrast, you can have a record like 7W 2L and go straight to nationals if you're a 5.0 because there are only 3 other teams in your area, and you play each team 3 times. You could then say, effectively, that you're a 5.0 section champ. And no one has to know that you lost every single match at nationals 0-3.

NTRP ranges vary from section to section. You may be the best 3.5 woman your section has ever seen. When you go to a playoff or a championship you'll see how good you really are compared to the very best.

I'm not trying to take anything away from you. I'm just trying to put it into perspective outside of the competition you may have seen so far.

Cindysphinx said:

Any time I needed a guaranteed winner, I knew I could get it with a topspin lob to someone's BH. The only players who were able to beat that shot were 4.5 guys who would overhead it, and 4.5 men and women who kept the ball low or short so I couldn't easily lob.

Click to expand...

And what im saying is that here a 4.5 player would injure your partner for doing that. A 4.5 adult league player would just run around it and drill an overhead. If it was in reach of a backhand overhead because its low enough, they would just play the short angle cross court knocking your partners shoes off.

You seem to think that a backhand overhead has to be hit with the backhand. I can tell most of the people you lob are either inexperienced in that they dont run around it, or they have mobility issues, like seniors.

If the ball is hit with a handhand overhead, it obviously didnt go high enough to go over them because they're playing the ball before it bounces.

If a ball must be forcefully played with a backhand overhead while on the run after it bounces then the lob is perfect. The chance of this happening even at the pro level is slim and they're probably going to do a no-looker, tweener, or pan-handle it anyway.

This is like players who say "I always hit to the backhand". They make it sound like you can actually do that without hitting a good solid 70mph ground stroke rally hitting it perfectly in backhand only range. Even with 70 mphs strokes, unless that ball is perfectly play in a way which forces them to hit a backhand... you can just run around it and hit a forehand.

You could just check Cindy's posting history. She's been pretty forthright with her results, where she's from, etc. I've never corroborated it myself and just believed her, but there are others on here who obviously know her personally (Topaz comes to mind). Fwiw she plays somewhere in the Maryland/Virginai/DC area if I recall correctly, where there are tons of leagues, lots of teams and players in every league. And she said in her post that she DID go to postseason and was 4-0 there too.

Also, is there really a location in the US where you can just win a 3 team local league and then just go straight to nationals? I really don't think so, I'd be pretty shocked if that was actually the case.

Anyways, I also think that lost in all this hubub is an appreciation for a quality defensive lob. In doubles it may not be a winner every time, but if you are in a tough situation it can surely often a great tool to have, even if that one 3.0 lady who won nationals once would put it away no problem every time.

Limibeans said:

There are 2.5 girls that can hit overheads from the baseline. I think you're comparing everything to senior league and assuming that everyone fits exactly into the NTRP guidelines.

When I was a 2.5 player over 10 years ago, I had a 120 mph first serve.

Click to expand...

Oh, man. You really had me going for a minute there.

A 2.5 player with a 120 mph serve. That's a hot one!

Well played, sir. Well played!!

Come on, how hard is it to admit that we all get a little annoyed when people throw lobs at us? If it is a tactical lob over a volleyer, then of course it is to be expected.

But some old hags who can't handle my topspin will practically lob my topspin groundstrokes back at me all day. I'm not saying it's not a legit stroke, but out of human nature I do feel annoyed.

Another younger lobber always starts dinking the ball high without pace and spin back to you whenever he gets a ball higher than his waist. Come on, yo're young and fit, you can do better than that.

While I recognize that lobs are a part of the game, it is obvious that some people are too lazy to set up to hit a ball which is only slightly harder to handle, and resorts to lobbing. Their laziness and the unwillingness to develop proper technique to handle a higher incoming ball leaves me disgusted.

Limibeans said:

When I was a 2.5 player over 10 years ago, I had a 120 mph first serve.

Click to expand...

LMAO

Question: What does a 2.5 beginner have in common with a certain world #2 / former #1, current holder of 10 slam titles, all time king of clay, and possible GOAT candidate?

Answer: A 120 mph first serve!

Bud said:

However, 4.5 lobbers are more offensive minded. If I'm trying to change the dynamics of the point, I'll throw up a deep topspin lob (usually over the net guy if they are playing 1 up 1 back). I use it to get into the heads of the opposing team. I want them to know that shot is in my arsenal and they better be expecting it

Many times, it will draw an outright error or a short ball from the guy playing back as he's not expecting it. Give it a try.

Click to expand...

Exactly! Like I totally respect an awesome lob that just kills the competition, but at 4.5 there are less just out right lobbers then 4.0 and much less then 3.5, by that I mean someone who lobs every shot, or any shot that could be hit with either a normally rally shot.

(Just wanted to add, I lob if I'm out of position by a fair margin to "reset" the point, such as drawn out really wide and what not! )

-Fuji

dcdoorknob said:

Also, is there really a location in the US where you can just win a 3 team local league and then just go straight to nationals? I really don't think so, I'd be pretty shocked if that was actually the case.

Click to expand...

It happens.

The very first time I played league, was USTA 6.0 mix. We went straight to sectionals. I played 0 matches previous to sectionals. I was a 2.5 S. And no, I didnt lie about my name, use a fake name, or otherwise fraudulently participate. When I asked the captain why we were going straight to sectionals all he said was "There were no team close enough to where we were to play in the regular season. That's it."

In 2.5 and 5.0 sometimes there arnt enough teams to have a sectionals. This means if you win your regular season you go straight to nationals. Our 3.0 adult league was like this last year. They had 4 teams total. They played each team 3 times for a total of 9 matches. There was only one other 3.0 team in the section and it was decided (for reasons I dont know) that they would not play each other, instead, both would go to nationals, because the other team "opted out".

dcdoorknob said:

Anyways, I also think that lost in all this hubub is an appreciation for a quality defensive lob. In doubles it may not be a winner every time, but if you are in a tough situation it can surely often a great tool to have, even if that one 3.0 lady who won nationals once would put it away no problem every time.

Click to expand...

I covered that too in my post. There are offensive lobs that are usually a clear winner for you. There are defensive lobs that are played usually out of desperation.

In singles usually they would just choose hard angle cross or line. In doubles usually both are covered so they would instead play a lob.

Cindysphinx said:

Oh, man. You really had me going for a minute there.

A 2.5 player with a 120 mph serve. That's a hot one!

Well played, sir. Well played!!

Click to expand...

That's me on the left in my avatar pic. On the right is Andy Roddick.

I was a 2.5 in that picture I think, or a 3.0.

Limibeans said:

That's me on the left in my avatar pic. On the right is Andy Roddick.

I was a 2.5 in that picture I think, or a 3.0.

Click to expand...

I have to ask something...

Do you actually string at 75lbs???

And, what in the world is 2.5? Like what type of playing is that? I think the lowest level recognized here is 3.0....

-Fuji

Fuji said:

I have to ask something...

Do you actually string at 75lbs???

And, what in the world is 2.5? Like what type of playing is that? I think the lowest level recognized here is 3.0....

-Fuji

Click to expand...

No, I string at 67 now, different string, different swing. My Sig is not up to date. My equipment has been redone many times over since I made that sig in like 2008.

I should fix that. Thanks for reminding me.

2.5 is practically the lowest a male can go. I've seen 2.0 but those are usually women who appealed down from 2.5. There is really no benefit of being a 2.0 because the most gap you can have between NTRP's is 1.0 if you play a doubles league. Below 2.0 is wheelchair tennis.

The advantage of being a 2.5 is that you can play with a 3.5 in 6.0, so you can have one 3.5 player for ever 2.5 player instead of just trying to find only 3.0's.

In 6.0, 2.5 males and 3.5 females are gold.
In 7.0, 3.0 males and 4.0 females are gold.
Ect. ect.

They had to make the 1.0 maximum NTRP difference between players because people like me (at 2.5) would play with 4.5 club pros in 7.0 and just roll people.



To actually answer your question...

2.5 adult league is like 5.0. You have 1 singles, 2 doubles. I never played 2.5 adult because its dead. I used the 2.5 rating to play doubles only, mixed, and other doubles leagues that use NTRP for ratings but are not otherwise a part of USTA.

3.0 is the new 2.5
3.5 is the new 3.0
4.0 is the new 3.5


With the new ratings changes people are moving up.

I'm still chuckling at this idea that you don't see lob wars at 2.5 and 3.0 because the overheads at that level are too fierce.

It would be a great lot of fun to set up some challenge matches with some of Limibeans friends. Like, the "high 3.0" non-senior women who can supposedly punish overheads from anywhere on the court. Or the 6.0 mixed team where the 2.5 woman has a mean overhead at the net while her male partner patrols the baseline and hits overhead winners at the net player from the baseline.

I would take that bet. My 3.5 (senior) female partner and I (10-1) would take on your 3.0 non-senior ladies. To keep it interesting, I would be willing to promise to hit a lob off of *every* ball that landed deeper than the service line unless I was already at net.

My partner and I would destroy your 3.0 ladies. Your ladies would serve, and we would smack the return and then stand at the service line to hit a winner off of the next ball, just for starters. We would probably kill your mixed doubles pair also, provided they are truly a 6.0 mixed pair. If all they practice is overheads, they probably have awful passing shots, serves and returns, so they probably wouldn't get many chances to hit overheads.

The biggest problem, though, is that even if your pairs know a topspin lob is coming, players at that level lack the strokes to punish a good topspin lob. If they bounce it, they will be climbing the back fence or trying to hit on the rise. If they take it as a swinging volley, they will miss because players at that level lack proper swing mechanics. If they try to overhead it, they will need some serious footspeed to get into position, and if they overhead it to my partner from the baseline, she will probably reflex it for a winner.

Finally, I will contest your assertion that in 7.0 mixed, the 3.0 male/4.0 female pairing is "gold". Actually, it is the opposite of gold. My 3.5 mixed partner and I would *crush* such a pairing because the 4.0 woman is not good enough to compensate for the avalanche of errors her 3.0 male partner will produce.

You live in a strange tennis world, Limibeans. A peculiar land where 2.5 or 3.0 male players have 120 mph serves. Where people with 2.5 ratings appeal *down.* Where lobs get punished by 2.5/3.0s so routinely that no one dares start a lob war.

Well, I guess it's interesting in that part of the world . . . .

Cindysphinx said:

I'm still chuckling at this idea that you don't see lob wars at 2.5 and 3.0 because the overheads at that level are too fierce.

Click to expand...

Yeah - lol. I worked my little tail off to get out of 3.0 ASAP to leave the lob wars behind.

This has been an interesting thread but I haven't seen too much about how to prevent people from lobbing. I like to play aggressive singles, using S&V and finishing points at net. I am also 5'2" so get lobbed all the time. I have learned not to approach too close, can hustle back to get a deep lob, and have a good overhead. But now I am trying to prevent the opponents from being able to lob (except for weak defensive short fluffy little lobs).

People seem to have trouble throwing up good lobs off shots that stay low - flat or low slice shots at the shoetops that sort of skid away. Topsin body shots that bounce up shoulder high also seems to produce weak lobs at best in many people. As a dedicated lobber, what shots do you have trouble hitting good lobs off of?

North said:

Yeah - lol. I worked my little tail off to get out of 3.0 ASAP to leave the lob wars behind.

This has been an interesting thread but I haven't seen too much about how to prevent people from lobbing. I like to play aggressive singles, using S&V and finishing points at net. I am also 5'2" so get lobbed all the time. I have learned not to approach too close, can hustle back to get a deep lob, and have a good overhead. But now I am trying to prevent the opponents from being able to lob (except for weak defensive short fluffy little lobs).

People seem to have trouble throwing up good lobs off shots that stay low - flat or low slice shots at the shoetops that sort of skid away. Topsin body shots that bounce up shoulder high also seems to produce weak lobs at best in many people. As a dedicated lobber, what shots do you have trouble hitting good lobs off of?

Click to expand...

Low skidding slice is the worst, especially if it is a little short. That is the lob killer. I played an older 4.5 guy, and I spent the whole first set trying to deal with his slice. He would slice and follow it to net. Every instinct in my body said to lob, but I couldn't get under it to produce enough topspin to hit a good one. After a while, I gave up and just hit an approach slice volley right back to him, and that worked much better.

Usually, my opponents will start trying to hit their returns short to prevent me from lobbing. This works well to stop the lobbing but then they have hit a short shot, which gives them a whole different set of problems!

Cindysphinx said:

Low skidding slice is the worst, especially if it is a little short. That is the lob killer.

Click to expand...

That's what I've noticed. Especially to a 2hbh or forehand with W or SW grip. I use the low short skidding slice to approach but have to take the opponent's posititon into account also.

Limibeans said:

No, I string at 67 now, different string, different swing. My Sig is not up to date. My equipment has been redone many times over since I made that sig in like 2008.

I should fix that. Thanks for reminding me.

2.5 is practically the lowest a male can go. I've seen 2.0 but those are usually women who appealed down from 2.5. There is really no benefit of being a 2.0 because the most gap you can have between NTRP's is 1.0 if you play a doubles league. Below 2.0 is wheelchair tennis.

The advantage of being a 2.5 is that you can play with a 3.5 in 6.0, so you can have one 3.5 player for ever 2.5 player instead of just trying to find only 3.0's.

In 6.0, 2.5 males and 3.5 females are gold.
In 7.0, 3.0 males and 4.0 females are gold.
Ect. ect.

They had to make the 1.0 maximum NTRP difference between players because people like me (at 2.5) would play with 4.5 club pros in 7.0 and just roll people.



To actually answer your question...

2.5 adult league is like 5.0. You have 1 singles, 2 doubles. I never played 2.5 adult because its dead. I used the 2.5 rating to play doubles only, mixed, and other doubles leagues that use NTRP for ratings but are not otherwise a part of USTA.

3.0 is the new 2.5
3.5 is the new 3.0
4.0 is the new 3.5


With the new ratings changes people are moving up.

Click to expand...

Hrmmm makes sense!

Btw, nice equipment! I use the Pure Storm LTD, non GT along with my KPS88's!

So what happened with the ratings? How come it seems everyone got moved down a step?

-Fuji

pennc94 said:

If all you care to do is the bare minimum to win at the expense of improving your game to be able to compete against better players, then stick with your lobbing.

Sounds like you were in a social or friendly match. Why not try something new? Do you need to win most of the points as a result of your opponents errors? So what if you lose trying a bit more aggressive play?

Click to expand...

you're playing matches to win. many people work on things like strategies that help improve their win %. if I was playing someone that played back and it seemed they'd struggle with a higher ball (and if my aggressive play was for whatever reason not bothering them or helping me progress in a positive way thru the match)...then I feel confident with my stronger strokes that I could hit nice deep, heavy topspin lobs that could make their lives suck.

Cindysphinx said:

I'm still chuckling at this idea that you don't see lob wars at 2.5 and 3.0 because the overheads at that level are too fierce.

It would be a great lot of fun to set up some challenge matches with some of Limibeans friends. Like, the "high 3.0" non-senior women who can supposedly punish overheads from anywhere on the court. Or the 6.0 mixed team where the 2.5 woman has a mean overhead at the net while her male partner patrols the baseline and hits overhead winners at the net player from the baseline.

I would take that bet. My 3.5 (senior) female partner and I (10-1) would take on your 3.0 non-senior ladies. To keep it interesting, I would be willing to promise to hit a lob off of *every* ball that landed deeper than the service line unless I was already at net.

My partner and I would destroy your 3.0 ladies. Your ladies would serve, and we would smack the return and then stand at the service line to hit a winner off of the next ball, just for starters. We would probably kill your mixed doubles pair also, provided they are truly a 6.0 mixed pair. If all they practice is overheads, they probably have awful passing shots, serves and returns, so they probably wouldn't get many chances to hit overheads.

The biggest problem, though, is that even if your pairs know a topspin lob is coming, players at that level lack the strokes to punish a good topspin lob. If they bounce it, they will be climbing the back fence or trying to hit on the rise. If they take it as a swinging volley, they will miss because players at that level lack proper swing mechanics. If they try to overhead it, they will need some serious footspeed to get into position, and if they overhead it to my partner from the baseline, she will probably reflex it for a winner.

Finally, I will contest your assertion that in 7.0 mixed, the 3.0 male/4.0 female pairing is "gold". Actually, it is the opposite of gold. My 3.5 mixed partner and I would *crush* such a pairing because the 4.0 woman is not good enough to compensate for the avalanche of errors her 3.0 male partner will produce.

You live in a strange tennis world, Limibeans. A peculiar land where 2.5 or 3.0 male players have 120 mph serves. Where people with 2.5 ratings appeal *down.* Where lobs get punished by 2.5/3.0s so routinely that no one dares start a lob war.

Well, I guess it's interesting in that part of the world . . . .

Click to expand...

You're confusing stories here. You're thinking about it like im talking about the same group of people. I'm talking about all of the top 3.0/6.0 teams and players in my area, not the ones you just see in the park on Wednesday afternoons.

The whole business about whos team would beat whos im going to ignore. I mean, really? My dad would kick your dads butt? Lets not even go there. This isnt personal. I dont play 3.0, I dont "have" any 3.0 teams. I just watch 3.0/6.0 play because at the big events we all share the same 20 courts. All im saying is that your 3.0 moonballs would lose to top tier play in my area, especially against an adult team because I assume you to be playing senior league. I'm not saying me vs. you, im saying you vs. "the good teams in my area". I'm only trying to convince you to learn something else other than moonballing because you arnt going to win any championships with it.

It's not just "you" either. Lots of people in the lower range of NTRP's will just try to do the minimum to get by. Eventually, when they start winning, they choose not to progress. They then stick to their (bad) habits forever.

6.0 mix teams here have guys that serve 80-ish mph kicks to the backhand every single time. You may think you can "punish" these serves, but you'll probably lob them. On a weak lob, his partner puts it away. On a not-weak (I dont want to call it a good lob, because its not) lob he hits an overhead at your net player. I can already see how many of the points would unfold.


You still seem to think that NTRP's are set in stone. A 4.0 girl and a 3.0 self rate guy playing at sectionals would likely steamroll a 3.5 pair. You assume that the 3.0 guy is the weaker player, but you couldnt be more wrong. In such a pairing, they are very likely both solid players or the woman could very well be the weaker player even though her NTRP is higher.

Finally, when I was a 2.5 all I had were good serves and a good forehand. Any other shot I was weak in. In some cases I refused to play up because I couldnt volley yet. I had little concept of strategy, teamwork, and I used to think that I could hit a winner off every shot.

What I fail to understand is how TT people seem to think its impossible for a low rated player to have a few high quality strokes. It honestly seems to me like everyone who is a 3.0 has to have all 3.0 strokes.



No one ever thinks about the 3.0 player who has a 5.0 serve and forehand, but with 2.5 consistency, and no other shots. That players performance would overall be a 3.0 level.

For the record, I play adult, senior, mixed and ladies combo.

What is weird to me is how you keep holding 6.0 mixed up as some sort of Tennis Promised Land. No offense, but 6.0 is the absolute lowest mixed USTA level that exists in the US. Sorry, but I have a very hard time buying these tales of the awesome awesomeness of the 6.0 pairs in your area given that my topspin lobs win me a lot of points at 7.0, 7.5 and 8.0 mixed.

More likely, I would say, is that your tennis experience is confined to the very lowest levels of USTA tennis. Again, there is nothing wrong with that -- we all gotta start somewhere.

Regarding the idea that a 4.0 gal and "self-rated 3.0 guy" could steamroll the 3.5 competiton, ya got me. Just get Roger Federer to self rate at 3.0.

Now, if you want to get serious, let's ask this: if you have a 4.0 woman/3.0 man against two 3.5s *and we assume all four are properly rated and are at the very top of their level*, which team will be stronger?

Since most of your experience is at 6.0 mixed, let me tell you the answer for 7.0 mixed: the 3.5s will win nine times out of ten. When I play 7.0 mixed, I am delighted to see the rare combination that has a higher rated woman. That combination is vulnerable.

The problems start when someone at a lower level starts to embelish his own tennis skills (120 mph, really?) And then declare what does and doesn't work to others who are playing at higher levels.

Cindysphinx said:

For the record, I play adult, senior, mixed and ladies combo.

What is weird to me is how you keep holding 6.0 mixed up as some sort of Tennis Promised Land. No offense, but 6.0 is the absolute lowest mixed USTA level that exists in the US. Sorry, but I have a very hard time buying these tales of the awesome awesomeness of the 6.0 pairs in your area given that my topspin lobs win me a lot of points at 7.0, 7.5 and 8.0 mixed.

More likely, I would say, is that your tennis experience is confined to the very lowest levels of USTA tennis. Again, there is nothing wrong with that -- we all gotta start somewhere.

Regarding the idea that a 4.0 gal and "self-rated 3.0 guy" could steamroll the 3.5 competiton, ya got me. Just get Roger Federer to self rate at 3.0.

Now, if you want to get serious, let's ask this: if you have a 4.0 woman/3.0 man against two 3.5s *and we assume all four are properly rated and are at the very top of their level*, which team will be stronger?

Since most of your experience is at 6.0 mixed, let me tell you the answer for 7.0 mixed: the 3.5s will win nine times out of ten. When I play 7.0 mixed, I am delighted to see the rare combination that has a higher rated woman. That combination is vulnerable.

The problems start when someone at a lower level starts to embelish his own tennis skills (120 mph, really?) And then declare what does and doesn't work to others who are playing at higher levels.

Click to expand...

Sigh, stop trying to passively-aggressively insult me by hinting at claims that ive only played 6.0, and that im "confined to the very lowest level of tennis". Claiming that im "embellishing" my own tennis skills? Really?

You're becoming very petty and turning this personal.

I'm just gonna straight up say it already...

Senior lady tennis is the lowest level of tennis on the NTRP scale across the board. A 3.5 senior lady is about as good as a 2.5 adult guy, or a 3.0 adult lady, if I had to make a generalization, and some how balance out actual NTRP's vs. rated NTRP's. Now, of course, this is only a generalization, and there could be exceptions.

I really hate to practically insult you, but your idea that a 3.5 senior lady is anywhere near as good as a 3.5 adult male is simply delusional.

Cindy does not need me to defend her and while I often disagree with her, I will say this:

Cindy is very experienced in USTA play and certainly understands the style of play of both men and women from her mixed doubles experience. Trying to portray her as an elderly player who only knows what 3.5 seniors women's tennis is like is simply wrong.

Oh, and I play 4.5 men's doubles in Florida and both see a lot of lobs and win points with lobs (not always but often)

And now all the top 3.0 guys this guy knows have 80mph kick serves. Wow.