4.5 junkball pusher with a 7:4 winning record

[Digital Atheist]

There are sane people here? Name one.

If I know I'm going crazy then I must not be insane (Mary Jane).

 

[Digital Atheist]

Touch (especially against heavy spin like Nadal) becomes a lot easier when you string at 80 lbs.

Holy smoke, Dustin Brown strings at 80?

 

[ByeByePoly]

Not a coach but here's my 2 cents.

The hand-eye coordination Mr Green possesses, combined with his learned ability to consistently get the ball back (frequently from difficult positions, and sometimes so well that he hits a winner) makes him a skilled player. Maybe not in the traditional sense where form is often thought to play a significant role in that equation, but what he does on the tennis court is far from easy. He also has good anticipation and movement. Yes I'm repeating what some others have said.

Edit: I also think there are lots of players out there that look like Mr Green, some strong players, but very few are as good. which leads me to the flip side below.

Now, for the flip side. Had he taken frequent lessons from a good coach earlier on in his tennis career, I suspect he would be at least a 5.0 player with "high level" strokes, because to me it looks like he has that kind of ability. Yep, that's a repeat too.

Now the kicker. Given the number of high level players with good technique that we see versus the very few who turn out like Mr Green, which is the best way to maximise your chances of learning to play high level tennis? I'm not saying we need huge flips or major lag on our forehands or 3000+ rpms, but some solid fundamentals with more than just great touch and amazing racquet control are surely advisable.

I agree with all of your post.

Oh yeah ... don't plan on being as good as Mr Green playing like Mr Green ... that would be a bad bet. It does beg the question on what is fundamentals though ... does Mr Green do any of them?

 

[Steady Eddy]

I agree with all of your post.

Oh yeah ... don't plan on being as good as Mr Green playing like Mr Green ... that would be a bad bet. It does beg the question on what is fundamentals though ... does Mr Green do any of them?

Well, he hits the ball into the court. That has to be one of the fundamentals.

 

[ByeByePoly]

Well, he hits the ball into the court. That has to be one of the fundamentals.

racquet ✔
strings ✔
ball ✔

 

[travlerajm]

Holy smoke, Dustin Brown strings at 80?

His Pure Drive was at 79 lbs, typically, based on reports.

 

[user92626]

Of course, most of those old guys like to stand farther away from the net than they should. That way they don’t have to move back for those overheads.

But they sure can overhead (with certain balls), right?

 

[user92626]

OK ... I should have given it more context. I am always thinking singles ... and by definition that means some degree of backpedaling ability.

Does EVERY oh require backpedaling?

Answer is no.

There's still a bunch of oh that one can do well without backpedaling, or to some extent good moving (ptuans assertion). Examples easy ones, ones in front coming to u, ones u only need to take one step forward, etc.


I think if you want to set a precondition for good OH, that would be a good, healthy neck. Lol. Can you do good OH if you cannot bend your neck to look up? D@mn i can't even drive. Hehe

 

[StringSnapper]

Brother snap ... look closer ... you missed the inner beauty.

I am picturing you playing green on a windy day with the pirate boats going by. Brad Gilbert is calling the match ... and over and over he is saying "The Choppa". You are very frustrated ... at one point you yell at a pirate boat and tell it to F off ... and then you hurl your racquet over the fence at it. Good stuff ... the type of beauty best enjoyed while someone else is playing The Choppa.

I will not tolerate such filthy fantasies, nor would I ever yell at the beloved local pirates

 

[Digital Atheist]

His Pure Drive was at 79 lbs, typically, based on reports.

So you and @Shroud are in good company. Next you will be telling me he used kevlar!

 

[FiReFTW]

@Digital Atheist good post I agree there are many people like the green shirt guy but not many are as good as him, they all look the same but some get beat much more easily while some are very tough to beat even for solid 4.5 players like on the video, they are deceptively good.
But of course its easy to talk about it on a forum and say that the orange guy did this bad or that bad and if he did this or if he had that he would crush him and blabla.. and I know players who would crush this guy blabla

 

[Topspin Shot]

Orange should have hit his approaches shorter, green was waiting behind the baseline and throwing up lobs. Chip some of the approaches short and green is toast because if he compensates by standing in a few more steps, orange's power game will be too much for him.

 

[ByeByePoly]

I will not tolerate such filthy fantasies, nor would I ever yell at the beloved local pirates

Well ... the story is out there now. The Choppa has pirate family members.

 

[ByeByePoly]

Orange should have hit his approaches shorter, green was waiting behind the baseline and throwing up lobs. Chip some of the approaches short and green is toast because if he compensates by standing in a few more steps, orange's power game will be too much for him.

No grasshopper ... Choppa will just then hit a low bunt lob 1" out of your reach that lands on your baseline. Don't even try your weak Crapa on Choppa.

 

[ByeByePoly]

Does EVERY oh require backpedaling?

Answer is no.

There's still a bunch of oh that one can do well without backpedaling, or to some extent good moving (ptuans assertion). Examples easy ones, ones in front coming to u, ones u only need to take one step forward, etc.


I think if you want to set a precondition for good OH, that would be a good, healthy neck. Lol. Can you do good OH if you cannot bend your neck to look up? D@mn i can't even drive. Hehe

No ... every oh does not require backpedaling ... but most of our ttw posts do.

 

[jhick]

I like the guy in blue's game style. My strokes aren't as good as his but I take a similar approach. Good serve, try to hit a deep angle to get the opponent to move, follow with a shorter harder angle or driving shot. Occasional approach to the net. Not trying to end the point with one shot, but also not trying to have a 10+ shot point.

I am very similar to the guy in blue, except I'm a bit older, I'm left handed, and I've only been 5.0 for about a year and a half. But I play a similar style, although I rely more on my serve, and probably close the net a bit more often.

 

[jhick]

Dustin Brown would be my definition of high level touch shot maker. Just look at first point of the match.

I love watching Dustin Brown. He can be brilliant at times.

 

[jhick]

Yes exactly ... invitation to the net with passing shot in your pocket. I confused a few with that tactic ... didn't see those passing shots coming did you with these groundstrokes. lol ... ropa dope.

I played a guy like this once many years ago at 4.5 singles. He was a 5.0 who had gotten bumped down. He intentionally hit short shots to the middle of the court to get me to come in. I like coming to the net so I thought he was playing right into my hands. I would hit an approach shot making him run and then he'd unload on his passing shot. He was ridiculously fast and hit better on the run. I won my fair share of points at the net but he also passed me quite often. He probably would have destroyed me if I didn't have a good net game.

I think I lost in a tight 3 setter, but the guy also got into my head. He played all kinds of mind games. Continually questioned my line calls, and actually tried to make my calls for me (he would hit a shot and say "that was in" at the same time I was calling the shot out). That part was frustrating.

 

[ByeByePoly]

I played a guy like this once many years ago at 4.5 singles. He was a 5.0 who had gotten bumped down. He intentionally hit short shots to the middle of the court to get me to come in. I like coming to the net so I thought he was playing right into my hands. I would hit an approach shot making him run and then he'd unload on his passing shot. He was ridiculously fast and hit better on the run. I won my fair share of points at the net but he also passed me quite often. He probably would have destroyed me if I didn't have a good net game.

I think I lost in a tight 3 setter, but the guy also got into my head. He played all kinds of mind games. Continually questioned my line calls, and actually tried to make my calls for me (he would hit a shot and say "that was in" at the same time I was calling the shot out). That part was frustrating.

I was very lucky in local tournaments ... very few experiences with "bad sport" players. I ran into that when I would go play at another city in the state, but even then it was the exception. There was one ... did not like that guy.

I met my twin "playing style" in this other city ... became good friends. I was watching him play control baseline tennis ... maybe keeping it deep, but including entire court (short near sidelines) making his opponent move. There was no indication in the rally strokes he would have a good passing shot ... and then there it was. What a pain in the *** to play ... I suddenly had pride in my game. Many of us came to the conclusion that @travlerajm did ... no payoff for hitting more pace in the general rally ball ... none of us could hit a heavy enough ball to bother an opponent on one swing. BUT ... if we got you out of position (too wide) ... then we would hit our version of "max pace". All you needed was enough pace to close out the point when it was wide open ... or just come in and hit the usual easy volley. Yep ... some could hit good passing shots on the move, most of us road warrior types pretty much had to have that, too many s&v and c&c back in my ancient tournament days. We didn't play like Green btw ... we had decent "fullish" strokes ... we just played control tennis at about 50% rhs ... control and UE won tournaments, at least then.

If you would made a list of the top 10 city (or state) 4.5 tournament singles players when I was playing ... age 25-35ish (80s ... early 90s) ... pretty much 50/50 s&v vs baseliners. I bet that is less than 10% s&v these days.

 

[jhick]

I was very lucky in local tournaments ... very few experiences with "bad sport" players. I ran into that when I would go play at another city in the state, but even then it was the exception. There was one ... did not like that guy.

I met my twin "playing style" in this other city ... became good friends. I was watching him play control baseline tennis ... maybe keeping it deep, but including entire court (short near sidelines) making his opponent move. There was no indication in the rally strokes he would have a good passing shot ... and then there it was. What a pain in the *** to play ... I suddenly had pride in my game. Many of us came to the conclusion that @travlerajm did ... no payoff for hitting more pace in the general rally ball ... none of us could hit a heavy enough ball to bother an opponent on one swing. BUT ... if we got you out of position (too wide) ... then we would hit our version of "max pace". All you needed was enough pace to close out the point when it was wide open ... or just come in and hit the usual easy volley. Yep ... some could hit good passing shots on the move, most of us road warrior types pretty much had to have that, too many s&v and c&c back in my ancient tournament days. We didn't play like Green btw ... we had decent "fullish" strokes ... we just played control tennis at about 50% rhs ... control and UE won tournaments, at least then.

If you would made a list of the top 10 city (or state) 4.5 tournament singles players when I was playing ... age 25-35ish (80s ... early 90s) ... pretty much 50/50 s&v vs baseliners. I bet that is less than 10% s&v these days.

Out of college I used to exclusively serve and volley, probably 90% of the time. But now in my 40's as I've slowed down and am not as proficient at S&V I probably do it about 20% of the time. I still look to come in but not on serve, it's just not as effective of a strategy.

 

[Topspin Shot]

No grasshopper ... Choppa will just then hit a low bunt lob 1" out of your reach that lands on your baseline. Don't even try your weak Crapa on Choppa.

Nah I've played guys like that before, you can Get to the Choppa!!!

 

[ByeByePoly]

Nah I've played guys like that before, you can Get to the Choppa!!!

You are going to get to him on changeovers aren't you? You are going to tell him the statistical probabilities of his swing and shots landing in.

 

[Topspin Shot]

You are going to get to him on changeovers aren't you? You are going to tell him the statistical probabilities of his swing and shots landing in.

Lol that guy breaks any statistical model, my only hope is to go full Schwarzenegger.

 

[ByeByePoly]

I am very similar to the guy in blue, except I'm a bit older, I'm left handed, and I've only been 5.0 for about a year and a half. But I play a similar style, although I rely more on my serve, and probably close the net a bit more often.

I never wanted to be a power baseliner, or a heavy hitter (rec version of Nadal), but I always wanted that finishing pace on call (finishing FH) with just a small opening. That's what stands out to me with Blue ... with small opening he can end point from baseline. That's like cheating.

 

[travlerajm]

Out of college I used to exclusively serve and volley, probably 90% of the time. But now in my 40's as I've slowed down and am not as proficient at S&V I probably do it about 20% of the time. I still look to come in but not on serve, it's just not as effective of a strategy.

I’m similar. Used to have S&V game built around my serve. Explosive serve motion of my youth is now too hard on body, energy expending, and injury-risking to practice it several times a week. So I can’t trust my serve as a foundation for my game anymore. I had to rebuild my game around my other strengths - more comfortable in singles now as a defensive counterpuncher, but I like to take the net ops when presented.

 

[ptuanminh]

Bad legs as in bad movements, running. Like, we often understand bad strokes as ..inefficient or bad looking strokes. Do you think bad strokes as injured arm?

"to be considered having good OH, you have to move well too. "

Not necessary. Alot of people play dubs and no singles, and they have developed good OH with minimal movements. Just about almost every older players prefer dubs as opposed to singles.

I guess i don't play dubs with old folks too often so i don't know.
Can I also say: I am a great tennis player when the ball is hit near me? When its far away and i have to move, i am not too good.

 

[ByeByePoly]

Out of college I used to exclusively serve and volley, probably 90% of the time. But now in my 40's as I've slowed down and am not as proficient at S&V I probably do it about 20% of the time. I still look to come in but not on serve, it's just not as effective of a strategy.

Yeah ... I don't remember exactly when s&v became the lesser option for me, but I know I tried to revive it at 55. I got back into great shape ... was jogging ... back down to fighting/tournament singles weight 155lbs. I was moving great (turns out only for 55) ... no problem getting drop shots or covering wide at baseline. So I thought ... let's go back to s&v. Full of confidence ... had been beating other seniors (one a previous 5.0) easily ... ex-5.0 guy 6-1,6-1ish. Doesn't mean anything at that age ... it's all about who can still run in senior singles. Anyway ... s&v was a no go. I'm 5' 8" ... so my good s&v results were always about foot speed and agility ... not reach. What was decent doubles s&v ... was not for singles. Instincts still there ... legs wouldn't get me there in time. Add to that ...
IMO ... my groundstrokes are better now (or say 7 years ago at age 55) then my s&v tournament days ... and my best play/odds was scrap s&v. Man do I miss it ... I always enjoyed the court coverage part of tennis more than the hitting.

 

[ByeByePoly]

I guess i don't play dubs with old folks too often so i don't know.
Can I also say: I am a great tennis player when the ball is hit near me? When its far away and i have to move, i am not too good.

Oh great ... now we have to start being honest in this thread.

 

[user92626]

No ... every oh does not require backpedaling ... but most of our ttw posts do.

Not bad.
grade you A- for some wittyness.

 

[user92626]

I guess i don't play dubs with old folks too often so i don't know.
Can I also say: I am a great tennis player when the ball is hit near me? When its far away and i have to move, i am not too good.

Yes u can say that.

And you let listeners decide for themselves..

That would probably be how isner describes his tennis. Those of us , familiar with him, would understand.

 

[user92626]

Oh great ... now we have to start being honest in this thread.

Haha..that's a danger from conversing with me. I can call out your bs and eventually you'll have to come clean

@ptuaminh
There's alot of ..duality in life. Most of the time u will need to provide contexts or clarification.

For example you can say Sampras generally was a great player but he was very mediocre on certain surface. Never ever got past FO quarters.

 

[ByeByePoly]

Haha..that's a danger from conversing with me. I can call out your bs and eventually you'll have to come clean

@ptuaminh
There's alot of ..duality in life. Most of the time u will need to provide contexts or clarification.

For example you can say Sampras generally was a great player but he was very mediocre on certain surface. Never ever got past FO quarters.

I can't even call out my bs anymore ... you might prove to be useful. Does seem a bit cruel that as I transition from being a tennis player you are the guide.



My intention is to leave some breadcrumbs for fellow hack rec tennis travelers ... some crumbs are bound to be dried and stale.

 

[5263]

That's because a big serve and forehand are offensive weapons, and you can't be a pusher if you're playing offensive tennis.

yes, but Pete was also a master of these short chips and volleys that he used against superior groundstrokers like Agassi.

 

[5263]

For example you can say Sampras generally was a great player but he was very mediocre on certain surface. Never ever got past FO quarters.

I've always said way too much public opinion is based on results in Major titles, which ironically comes back to bite Pete since Imo he was the one who really drove that idea home and sold folks on the importance of the number of majors a player wins.

Yep, but now you need to come clean, lol.....but while Pete may have not had to stamina to grind it out on the clay for 2 weeks or caught the right draw in the right year...... he was not even close to mediocre on clay. He was incredible and a Titan of the sport on clay. Sampras beating FO champs Bruguera and Courier, made it past the quarters to the SemiFinals at FO in 96 and knocked off several top clay specialists such as Rios and Costa in straights at the FO as well. He won the Italian Open in 94 beating Corretja, then Becker in the Final. His clay-court record, (62-24), during that period was the 4th best.
Only Muster (277-69), Bruguera (205-65), and Courier (74-25) managed to do better. You will notice that Pete's record on clay is overall superior to Agassi, another FO champ!

Maybe one of the greatest clay court feats in history outside of what Rafa and Borg did, was during Davis Cup FINALs in 95, by winning both singles matches and the doubles on doctored/wet red clay against Russia, by beating FO champ Kafelnikov in 3 straight sets, along with another excellent clay court specialist for the other singles match.

He beat Muster on clay as well others like Rios, Corretja, Kafelnikov, Bruguera, Coria, Courier, Norman, Chesnokov, and Muster.

 

[zipplock]

yes, but Pete was also a master of these short chips and volleys that he used against superior groundstrokers like Agassi.

Yes. He used those strokes in an offensive, attacking way.

 

[Curious]

He beat Muster on clay as well others like Rios, Corretja, Kafelnikov, Bruguera, Coria, Courier, Norman, Chesnokov, and Muster.

 

[ptuanminh]

must be Muster's evil twin.

 

[Digital Atheist]

Hehe! The irony of Mr Dogma pointing that out.

 

[Curious]

Hehe! The irony of Mr Dogma pointing that out.

Who’s Mr Dogma?

 

[user92626]

... he was not even close to mediocre on clay. He was incredible and a Titan of the sport on clay. Sampras beating FO champs Bruguera and Courier, made it past the quarters to the SemiFinals at FO in 96 and

I see. So he did reach SF in one FO

I went by this article which turns out all wrong. Anyway, Pete Sampras was well "before my time" so that's my excuse of being careless. As for mediocre or not, it's arbitrary. For Pete's caliber, not winning a FO was mediocrity.

Ranking the 10 Most Disappointing Performances in French Open History

The second week of the French Open is about inspiring success stories and glorious feats. However, the first week is often about disappointing performances...

bleacherreport.com

.

 

[Digital Atheist]

Who’s Mr Dogma?

Aren't you the guy who made the claim that Fed, Sampras, Safin, Becker, and many many other "open droppers" have a flaw in their service motion, and that it is the remnant of a waiter's tray? Not a shred of evidence for any of those claims, yet you stick to them like glue. Dogma.

I might be wrong, and if so then I apologise in advance, but I'm pretty sure in another thread long long ago (maybe it was another universe which is where I'm getting confused) you said you don't care about evidence that goes against some of your tennis beliefs, and you are just going to continue to believe them regardless? I believe there are others that witnessed that also.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dogma

1a and 1c appear relevant.

 

[Curious]

Aren't you the guy who made the claim that Fed, Sampras, Safin, Becker, and many many other "open droppers" have a flaw in their service motion, and that it is the remnant of a waiter's tray? Not a shred of evidence for any of those claims, yet you stick to them like glue. Dogma.

I might be wrong, and if so then I apologise in advance, but I'm pretty sure in another thread long long ago (maybe it was another universe which is where I'm getting confused) you said you don't care about evidence that goes against some of your tennis beliefs, and you are just going to continue to believe them regardless? I believe there are others that witnessed that also.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dogma

1a and 1c appear relevant.

How can that be true if I’m changing my views every second day?? Think again.

 

[Digital Atheist]

How can that be true if I’m changing my views every second day?? Think again.

It's true because people (I said "you" originally but didn't mean you specifically) can be willing to change some views while holding steadfast to others, no matter what the evidence, so that is a non sequitur. Dogma does not pertain to every and all of an individuals beliefs, just some, and that's the point and the problem.

So back to my first question. Aren't you the guy who made the claim that Fed, Sampras, Safin, Becker, and many many other "open droppers" have a flaw in their service motion, and that it is the remnant of a waiter's tray?

Is that still true or have you changed your mind?

 

[Curious]

So back to my first question. Aren't you the guy who made the claim that Fed, Sampras, Safin, Becker, and many many other "open droppers" have a flaw in their service motion, and that it is the remnant of a waiter's tray?

Is that still true or have you changed your mind?

No I haven’t!

 

[Digital Atheist]

No I haven’t!

I know I probably give you too much sh*t on the racquet drop issue and I am confident you will never change your mind, so I will now desist.

As an FYI, I will finish with this. There was an article on tennisplayer.net many moons ago and iirc it compared timing of the legs and the drop, and used pro player models (Sampras included) against a high level college player. In that article it made mention of the two different styles of entering the drop and concluded both were mechanically sound. @JohnYandell may be able to confirm (or refute) this, since my memory isn't what it used to be.

 

[Curious]

I know I probably give you too much sh*t on the racquet drop issue and I am confident you will never change your mind, so I will now desist.

As an FYI, I will finish with this. There was an article on tennisplayer.net many moons ago and iirc it compared timing of the legs and the drop, and used pro player models (Sampras included) against a high level college player. In that article it made mention of the two different styles of entering the drop and concluded both were mechanically sound. @JohnYandell may be able to confirm (or refute) this, since my memory isn't what it used to be.

Yeah I believe it’s a flaw. Just like the club player level ESR of Federer being another flaw. You might say it could be an anatomical limitation for him. I highly doubt it though.

 

[Digital Atheist]

Yeah I believe it’s a flaw. Just like the club player level ESR of Federer being another flaw. You might say it could be an anatomical limitation for him. I highly doubt it though.

I wonder, why do you doubt it could be anatomical?

 

[Curious]

I wonder, why do you doubt it could be anatomical?

I take it that you think it might be an anatomical limitation. I can't argue. Maybe. I just thought it's less likely to be the case given the level of his athleticism.

 

[Digital Atheist]

No I haven’t!

Found this:

1998 and 2000 (serve at 49s in particular) appear to be very on edge regarding his drop (you know how to frame advance). So it seems, somewhere along the way he actively "developed" the open drop he now possesses. I am curious to hear your thoughts on this, since it seems diametrically opposed to your WT remnant theory.

Edit: In 2002 and 2003 you can see his takeback is starting to change, and that is the same time he begins to show signs of his now open drop. In 2005 it is quite apparent and the thing you now call ugly and flawed!

 

[Digital Atheist]

I take it that you think it might be an anatomical limitation. I can't argue. Maybe. I just thought it's less likely to be the case given the level of his athleticism.

I really don't know and can't say for sure, but I am interested in why you don't think it's likely; I am not an ISR/ESR expert, but I have seen it proposed as the reason. You don't think that ESR position has a "range of motion/flexibility" component?

So yes, I would say it is a possible explanation and might be anatomical (it's also possible you are right and it's not).