Are strategies relevant today in Modern Tennis?

TomT · Jan 9, 2013

sureshs said:
...
To summarize, big serve, a desperate return to hang in there, and devastating winners. Strategy seems to be an afterthought. I think most players are too exhausted with the big play to even think of strategy.

I believe that the importance of a strategy (and the tactics that a strategy might entail) increases as the difference in technical ability between two players decreases.

So, it follows that strategy can be important on any level.

Do pros employ strategies in their matches? I believe that they do (at least some of the time during some of their matches). But I think that much of the time the difference between two players boils down to technique and execution. And I think this is true on any level.

Difficult question sureshs.

sureshs said:
On the WTA:

Essentially the above, with the difference that getting the serve is a huge obstacle for the women. The ones with a smooth serve motion can be counted on one hand. Is something seriously screwed up about their serve training?

I wouldn't think so.

sureshs said:
Or is it just that the ATP men are just so much superior?

In general, men are bigger, stronger, quicker, faster, more powerful, more agile, etc., due, I would guess, to generally much higher testosterone levels in men as well as the physiological blueprint that results in somewhat different musculature, bone density, etc., etc.

sureshs said:
I look at the average WTA service motion and I notice an errant toss and an awkward attempt to correct it, and the body parts moving awkwardly. They have somehow turned this into a high probability success event. Perhaps this is what male club players should aspire to? Just admit that ATP-style serves are not possible and focus on maximizing the returns on a flawed serve like the WTA?

Working on maximizing service return technique and effectiveness would seem to be important on any level.

Just as there are natural (and essentially unalterable) differences between men and women, there are also many variations among men and many variations among women. Some women can serve like men. Most can't. Some men have the potential to hit 120 mph serves. Most don't.

treblings · Jan 9, 2013

tennis_balla said:
I post once in a while and mostly just read and sometimes add my 2cents. Sometimes people like it, other times they don't. That's fine. I don't agree with everything such as with a lot of the MTM stuff but I still respect 5263 & Oscar as coaches because they know how to teach tennis and have been in the trenches so to speak (for lack of a better term which I can't think of right now).

What would open a lot of peoples eyes on here that aren't in the business is give them a racket, a bucket of balls, a bunch of players they have to work with individually for the next say 6 months and see how smart they will be then. I'm not talking a 1 hour lesson they can BS their way through, say some generic tips and thats its. I'm talking about developing a road map for each of those players, analyze the different playing levels and work with them to develop their game to the next level, and have to produce results. Maybe then they will realize what tennis is all about. Instead all I see on here is comments being made from what they think they see on tv, what they see other coaches doing, what they saw at a tournament, how taking lessons isn't necessary and so on. Outside looking in.

I'm not trying to come across as a smart ass, and I don't mean to suggest coaches know it all (far from it) and everyone else should shut up. Its fun to debate, but sometimes this gets way out of hand with ridiculous comments being made. Yea I get it, you follow the game and are passionate about it. The internet has given you an anonymous voice to express yourself. Do us all a favour and use it wisely. Instead of trying to tell others your opinions all the time, just sit back, relax, have a Coke and a smile, read more instead and you might actually learn something worthwhile.

agreed 100 hundred percent
some of the posts here i can´t read without the google translator

so many difficult words to describe the obvious.
and then you have the same posters not recognizing simple footwork drills on video
the best advice when i started posting was to just lighten up and not take everything too serious that happens here. sometimes i remember that advice, sometimes i sadly forget

sureshs · Jan 10, 2013

TomT said:
Some men have the potential to hit 120 mph serves. Most don't.

That is a very honest statement.

Do you think no amount of coaching and practice can achieve that? I think so. There must be some genetic component present.

Relinquis · Jan 10, 2013

sureshs,

a couple of quick questions:

- do you play tennis, even recreationally?
- have you seen pros play live? male pros.

tennis viewed form the angle that is broadcast on most TV channels is very different from being court-side. you lose a lot of perspective and basically have very little idea of what kind of shot the players are hitting from that angle and how they are moving.

to see what i mean, check out these warm-up/practice points.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyGpK3Kd1GU

They look far more intense, complicated and have a lot more subtleties that most matches shown on TV because the angle is more realistic.

strategy matters, otherwise you wouldn't have 30 year olds double bageling 23 year olds at the pro level.

Relinquis · Jan 10, 2013

also, where do you think "devastating winners" or "unforced errors" come from? are they random, do they result from superior (or flawed) technique or are they set-up from a sequence of preceding shots and court positioning, i.e strategy/tactics?

At the pro level, probably even at the high-level juniors level, it's the latter.

it may surprise you to learn that given enough practice, most pro players can get used to retuning 120+ mph (or whatever speed) serves effectively.

bad_call · Jan 10, 2013

watched an Aussie qualie last night. appeared that shot consistency was needed more than strategy...just saying.

sureshs · Jan 10, 2013

Relinquis said:
sureshs,

a couple of quick questions:

- do you play tennis, even recreationally?
- have you seen pros play live? male pros.

tennis viewed form the angle that is broadcast on most TV channels is very different from being court-side. you lose a lot of perspective and basically have very little idea of what kind of shot the players are hitting from that angle and how they are moving.

to see what i mean, check out these warm-up/practice points.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyGpK3Kd1GU

They look far more intense, complicated and have a lot more subtleties that most matches shown on TV because the angle is more realistic.

strategy matters, otherwise you wouldn't have 30 year olds double bageling 23 year olds at the pro level.

I know. I am just saying strategy is overrated. Some coaches may be emphasizing it too much to enhance their earnings, and they will get upset if such things are said.

The young ones getting trashed is often due to impatience and anger. Some might consider mental poise and delayed gratification as strategies, but I don't.

You need to look at it the other way - how did these young ones beat out the other young ones just to be there? Would Isner be around without his serve? Yes, a strategic older player can beat him, but how did Isner get there? Would Serena be around without her serve and forehand? How does a single strategy Karlovic stilll be around? Huge serve, and volley. When it works, it works.

sureshs · Jan 10, 2013

Relinquis said:
also, where do you think "devastating winners" or "unforced errors" come from? are they random, do they result from superior (or flawed) technique or are they set-up from a sequence of preceding shots and court positioning, i.e strategy/tactics?

At the pro level, probably even at the high-level juniors level, it's the latter.

it may surprise you to learn that given enough practice, most pro players can get used to retuning 120+ mph (or whatever speed) serves effectively.

No, it doesn't surprise me, as they are pro players. But a club player with "strategy" sure is not going to be able to do it.

To your first question: both. But the strategy is often as simple as a hard serve or hitting where the other guy isn't. Einstein not needed.

sureshs · Jan 10, 2013

bad_call said:
watched an Aussie qualie last night. appeared that shot consistency was needed more than strategy...just saying.

That is the truth, whether "coaches" like to hear it or not.

LeeD · Jan 10, 2013

Spinal flexibility..
Women have it is spades over men. Yoga is the reason.
You don't need flexibility to serve a tennis ball.

tennis_balla · Jan 10, 2013

bad_call and sureshs how can you state this without knowing what went on in the match inside the players' heads?

bad_call · Jan 10, 2013

tennis_balla said:
bad_call and sureshs how can you state this without knowing what went on in the match inside the players' heads?

just observing a qualie match...not trying to be a "shrink" or guess if a player had eaten a bean burrito before playing (tho probably would have heard barking frogs :mrgreen: )

(phffffffttt) ...that wasn't me...(this time).

dominikk1985 · Jan 10, 2013

bad_call said:
watched an Aussie qualie last night. appeared that shot consistency was needed more than strategy...just saying.

shot consistency is dependent on the opponents strokes. take the losing Q player against a 5.0 player and he will make like 3 UEs in a match.

jakeytennis · Jan 10, 2013

pros use directionals a lot. and when they have their opponent wide enough, they go down the line for a lot of winners

LeeD · Jan 10, 2013

D1985 nailed it.
Any of us can look like GOD to a lower level player.
Every single on of us struggle against our peers and better players.
Nobody plays without a game plan.

dominikk1985 · Jan 10, 2013

jakeytennis said:
pros use directionals a lot. and when they have their opponent wide enough, they go down the line for a lot of winners

yes but the greats can go for the winner also in low percentage situations. feds inside in forehand defies any percentage tennis strategy but he can pull it off.

that doesn't mean that simple strategies don't work. nadal made a living out of pounding millions of CC shots to feds BH.

treblings · Jan 10, 2013

LeeD said:
D1985 nailed it.
Any of us can look like GOD to a lower level player.
Every single on of us struggle against our peers and better players.
Nobody plays without a game plan.

that is the simple truth. if you play competitive tennis you know that or learn it the hard way

TomT · Jan 10, 2013

sureshs said:
That is a very honest statement.

Do you think no amount of coaching and practice can achieve that? I think so. There must be some genetic component present.

It's honest in the sense that it's what my limited experience leads me to believe, but I have no idea if it's actually true.

I'm just spouting more or less common sense stuff. But since you asked, I believe that, except for some pretty rare cases, good coaching and lots of practice is necessary to achieve a consistent 120 mph serve (for women or men). I agree with you that no amount of coaching and practice will ever enable most women to hit 120 mph. Given more or less equally good coaching and diligent practice, then the genetic components have everything to do with it.

LeeD · Jan 10, 2013

Coaching will always help some amount, maybe adding another 5-10 mph on your fastest serves, but mostly in consistency, which allows you to hit your hard serves.
Genes determine the majority.
And prior experience in throwing games.

Michael Merriweather · Jan 10, 2013

Sureshs, if I have a big serve and forehand, is there a better strategy than hitting a big serve and putting the weak reply away with my forehand? It's a strategy and it works if you can execute it.

You're right that it doesn't require much brain power to figure this out, but that's because tennis is a fairly simple game to think about off the court, it's the physical component, which you seem to disdain that is hard.

While some strategic and tactical things in tennis may not be obvious or intuitive to all people, they don't require a Ph.D in the sciences to understand. Though some of us struggle.

If there was NO strategy as you say, play would be random: players would underhand serve and volley, lob off short balls, instead of putting them away, hit drop shots from 20 feet behind the baseline, hit overheads from waist height, etc. Clearly they DON'T do that. In fact, as you say, they play within a framework, of placing the serve and opening up opportunities for their forehand. If strategy had 1% importance, that would mean that it wouldn't matter what shots a player hit, they would all work EQUALLY well and ONLY the ability to execute them would be important. This clearly isn't true.

To me it sounds like what you're saying is that the strategy in Men's tennis is too simplistic and homogenous to enjoy. That's fine, but it has nothing to do with a lack of strategy. You're also right that tennis commentary is sometimes shallow, but so is internet commentary. What else is new?

sureshs · Jan 10, 2013

Michael Merriweather said:
You're right that it doesn't require much brain power to figure this out, but that's because tennis is a fairly simple game to think about off the court, it's the physical component, which you seem to disdain that is hard.

Other way around. I believe that the physical component (athletic ability, racket skills, endurance) is the main thing. The strategies are either very simple, or don't seem to be as important as claimed.

TomT · Jan 10, 2013

Relinquis said:
sureshs,

a couple of quick questions:

- do you play tennis, even recreationally?
- have you seen pros play live? male pros.

tennis viewed from the angle that is broadcast on most TV channels is very different from being court-side. you lose a lot of perspective and basically have very little idea of what kind of shot the players are hitting from that angle and how they are moving.

to see what i mean, check out these warm-up/practice points.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyGpK3Kd1GU

They look far more intense, complicated and have a lot more subtleties that most matches shown on TV because the angle is more realistic.

Great vid(s) Relinquis. Roddick has awesome technique. Thanks.

Relinquis said:
strategy matters, otherwise you wouldn't have 30 year olds double bageling 23 year olds at the pro level.

I would rather say it that strategies matter because good players use strategies. They use strategies as a guide to producing a competitive edge from some existing condition or situation.

TomT · Jan 10, 2013

sureshs said:
I believe that the physical component (athletic ability, racket skills, endurance) is the main thing. The strategies are either very simple, or don't seem to be as important as claimed.

Yeah, agree.

LeeD · Jan 10, 2013

Geez, I guess it's a waste of time to study video of your opponent and prepare your game accordingly.
Better to hit an all nighter and play the match of your life.

TomT · Jan 10, 2013

LeeD said:
Spinal flexibility..
Women have it is spades over men. Yoga is the reason.
You don't need flexibility to serve a tennis ball.

.............

TomT · Jan 10, 2013

LeeD said:
Geez, I guess it's a waste of time to study video of your opponent and prepare your game accordingly.
Better to hit an all nighter and play the match of your life.

Seems like a bit of a leap, from what was said.

LeeD · Jan 10, 2013

No better player than DeonSanders said preperation and film work is much much more important than any other factor. He was one of the most gifted players ever physically.

TomT · Jan 10, 2013

LeeD said:
No better player than DeonSanders said preperation and film work is much much more important than any other factor. He was one of the most gifted players ever physically.

Who's DeonSanders?

sureshs · Jan 10, 2013

TomT said:
Great vid(s) Relinquis. Roddick has awesome technique. Thanks.

I would rather say it that strategies matter because good players use strategies. They use strategies as a guide to producing a competitive edge from some existing condition or situation.

I think many pro players just rely on their strengths and play a reactive game. They don't seem to be thinking at all. Commentators keep speculating on their strategies and contradicting themselves frequently as they try to find a pattern where there is none.

sureshs · Jan 10, 2013

LeeD said:
No better player than DeonSanders said preperation and film work is much much more important than any other factor. He was one of the most gifted players ever physically.

However, RogerFederer or RafaelNadal did not say it, which is the point.

TomT · Jan 10, 2013

sureshs said:
I think many pro players just rely on their strengths and play a reactive game. They don't seem to be thinking at all. Commentators keep speculating on their strategies and contradicting themselves frequently as they try to find a pattern where there is none.

Regarding today's top level tennis, I basically agree. Though I think they do also employ strategies.

Like some MMA guy said, "Everybody has a plan ... until they get hit."

sureshs · Jan 10, 2013

The smartest ones employ strategies. They actually change things over a match. Fed and Nadal are good examples. I am not sure about others. Roddick seemed to be a guy who did not do much thinking.

sureshs · Jan 14, 2013

Great example yesterday. Andy Roddick was tweeting to the Tennis Channel about how well Djokovic was playing. Then he adds:

When I would be playing, experts would say he needs to go for more on his shots instead of holding back. The moment I missed one of them, they would switch to: he needs to play safe with high percentage tennis. It is a easy game on the couch.

Shows how a lot of this strategy stuff is BS.

LeeD · Jan 14, 2013

Sorting strategy from BS, or armchair QB's from the real thing.
One of my best tennis adversaries can return my serves with his forehand every time aggressively with great placement...low and away from me.
My strategy. Don't hit to this guy's forehands when I need the point, but hit there occasionally to keep him honest and from camping on his backhand side....
Strategy.

ollinger · Jan 14, 2013

TomT
The quote about everyone having a plan is generally attributed to Mike Tyson.

5263 · Jan 14, 2013

ollinger said:
TomT
The quote about everyone having a plan is generally attributed to Mike Tyson.

Yep and it goes back even further in different versions like in battle, where there
is a plan till the shooting starts.

treblings · Jan 14, 2013

sureshs said:
Great example yesterday. Andy Roddick was tweeting to the Tennis Channel about how well Djokovic was playing. Then he adds:

When I would be playing, experts would say he needs to go for more on his shots instead of holding back. The moment I missed one of them, they would switch to: he needs to play safe with high percentage tennis. It is a easy game on the couch.

Shows how a lot of this strategy stuff is BS.

No it doesn´t. it shows how everybody has an opinion, and how important it is for a player to find his own strategy, based on his own abilities and what he feels comfortable doing.

Mick3391 · Jan 14, 2013

sureshs said:
What I see in the ATP:

Unreturnable first serve
Serve which can just be returned weakly
Weak return is put away with a stroke to which it is humanly impossible to get
Forehand and backhand winners which are humanly impossible to get
Very simple strategy - put the ball where the other guy isn't, which covers drop shots, lobs, open court shots, and angled shots.
Maybe catch him wrong footed once in a while.

The entire game is based on statistical output of serve and its return, and after that the statistical nature of groundies - meaning you can't do anything with them most of the time if they are hit right.

The players don't seem to use their brains at all. Perhaps it is not needed? It is about serves, desperate returns, and the ability to run to get to a shot with no guarantee of success. My observation is that trying to "hit one more ball" seems to be a failure most of the time, with the small number of successes touted by commentators.

To summarize, big serve, a desperate return to hang in there, and devastating winners. Strategy seems to be an afterthought. I think most players are too exhausted with the big play to even think of strategy.

On the WTA:

Essentially the above, with the difference that getting the serve is a huge obstacle for the women. The ones with a smooth serve motion can be counted on one hand. Is something seriously screwed up about their serve training? Or is it just that the ATP men are just so much superior? I look at the average WTA service motion and I notice an errant toss and an awkward attempt to correct it, and the body parts moving awkwardly. They have somehow turned this into a high probability success event. Perhaps this is what male club players should aspire to? Just admit that ATP-style serves are not possible and focus on maximizing the returns on a flawed serve like the WTA?

There is strategy, but not much. Mainly it's who is in better mental and physical shape, it's SO BORING, only player I can watch is Fed because he once in awhile comes forward, and does incredible shots.

I mean who can watch this? 15 shot rallies, waiting for someone to make a mistake, what a bore!

Wegner · Jan 15, 2013

This is a great thread, with some great observations as well. It is so interesting that the top four have been so dominant, and that their tactics are so different.

In my opinion, they operate in the Zone more often than the rest of the field, seeing the ball slower and much more in present time. They are also more complete technically, have less weaknesses to exploit. They serve consistently well, both in power and accuracy.

i like Sureshs analysis. Players are going for more winners, more forceful shots, and still, some incredible long rallies between the top players occur over and over. Such is the speed and the brilliance of the top four.

bad_call · Jan 15, 2013

watched a 1st round AO match and strategy didn't help get the win but it got a few games.

Larrysümmers · Jan 15, 2013

i see a lot of strategy. i see player A trying to move his opponent around to force an error or hit a winner. this isnt football where the tactic is obvious, every shot is in its own an Independent strategy.

luvforty · Jan 15, 2013

to put things in perspective.... THIS is a strategic game.. tennis is not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WI8Od4jBpUc

tennisfan69 · Jan 15, 2013

Larrysümmers said:
i see a lot of strategy. i see player A trying to move his opponent around to force an error or hit a winner. this isnt football where the tactic is obvious, every shot is in its own an Independent strategy.

unpredictability and disguising your shots are the two major strategies the top players employ. either one of the above will draw an UE from the opponent or a weak reply which you can capitalize. Agassi used to gain control of Cross court rallies and move the opponent around (insult strategy). but that is now very predictable.

treblings · Jan 15, 2013

luvforty said:
to put things in perspective.... THIS is a strategic game.. tennis is not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WI8Od4jBpUc

or you might try this..... the strategies in badminton are easier for you to detect

luvforty · Jan 15, 2013

treblings said:
or you might try this..... the strategies in badminton are easier for you to detect

the problem is - when I sit in my magic couch and want to just relax and enjoy a good match, I don't want to detect strategy.

I want strategy to present itself to me! Lin and Lee always do.

luvforty · Jan 15, 2013

how do you put a baby to sleep - with a monotonous repetitive motion/sound at fixed beat..... that's what tennis sounds like on TV... I fall asleep in no time.

Relinquis · Jan 15, 2013

I'm re-posting this from a previous post of mine, Tennis can be like Chess:

let me clarify the chess analogy, in chess one of the basic strategies is to control the centre of the board in a way that allows your pieces there the maximum attacking angles and at the same time is protected by the pieces behind. this allows you to gradually build up pressure on your opponent as you move pieces forward or open up more angles. chess players have a lot of sequences that they put into play to gain position and adapt as the match goes on.

In tennis, you construct points by positioning yourself in a manner where you have attacking angles and can use various shots to put pressure on your opponent. you build this gradually one shot at a time picking from the arsenal of shots that you have (your pieces) e.g. serve out wide, move into position, hit inside-out forehand and then you have an easy winner into an open court. Tennis players have a lot of sequences that they put into play to gain position/footing and adapt as the match goes on.

in tennis as in chess, you have to adapt to your opponent's strategy. it's dynamic. it requires focus. it requires mental toughness.

your skill and fitness will determine what types of shots you have in your arsenal (what chess pieces you have remaining). your movement, focus and the sequence of shots will determine where you are on the court (angles and lines of attack/defense); all adjusted for what your opponent does. it is dynamic.

i can see all of this even at my lowly level of tennis. yeah, there is strategy in badminton too, very obvious. there is also strategy in squash even though there are even fewer winner-type shots in that sport (not just reflexes). strategy is less obvious in squash and tennis, but it is beautiful when you start to see the game at that level.

bad_call · Jan 15, 2013

^ allow an iteration of arche3 post...

arche3 said:
Well this thread was about ATP and WTA players.

Larrysümmers · Jan 15, 2013

idk. i see plenty of strategy when watching pro tennis. its all about perspective i guess.

5263 · Jan 15, 2013

Larrysümmers said:
idk. i see plenty of strategy when watching pro tennis. its all about perspective i guess.

Part of the problem is so rarely are the players an equal match about hitting.

Fed suffers against the top 4 because he has to do so little thinking about
strategy in the early rds. Mainly just hits them off the court to the Bh corner with
his fh & serves. Notice Nadal, DJ, and Murray are all extremely strong from that corner
along with excellent rtns.
After 3-4 rds of the same basic tactic, imo Fed is often at a bit of a loss on
what to do when the serves are coming back and the Fhs to Bh corner are getting
punished.

Point is the strategy is often shallow when the talent is a mis-match and the
hitting seems more key. When the match-ups are better, the strategy gets
more evident imo and critical to the outcome. Last nite Murray was talking
of his strategic change in big matches after losing at Wimbledon; How he
needed to play differently in finals. Subtle things still though.

Are strategies relevant today in Modern Tennis?

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Legend

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Legend

Legend

Rookie

Bionic Poster

Legend

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

New User

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Hall of Fame

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Professional

Rookie

Legend

Hall of Fame

Banned

New User

Hall of Fame

Banned

Banned

Hall of Fame

Legend

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Similar threads