A little experiment

[LuckyR]

Yeah definitely. I hit with a SW and windshield wiper motion. I was told I often hit with too much topspin. I think the too much spin problem causes 1) sometimes I brush too much and net the ball, and 2) when I do go a really big shot, I inadvertently hit a loopy topspin that doesn't have enough pace to really harm the opponent. But I think I hit long a lot because I'm trying to keep the ball deep and over-compensate. I don't think its a matter of low-percentage vs. high-percentage, but a lack of execution.

I think your assessment of problem #1 is right on and probably can be eliminated by focusing on your preperation, not the execution of the shot.

Problem #2 is likely not as much of a problem as hitting long when your spin production doesn't pull your ball back into the court.

Your insight is pretty good and I guess I agree with your original premise, that is that your problem is not over aggressiveness, rather it is execution of the shots. So I would ramp up your drilling and leave your tactics alone.

 

[chico9166]

Chico, I don't know which era you learned your tennis from, but I learned in the mid '70's.
RoscoeTanner, StanSmith, JohanKriek, IlieNastase, JohnNewcombe were the good players. They didn't rally like girls or hit softy puff balls.
Of course, the KenRosewalls were still around, but would you rather play like a tiger or a lamb?
You practice your shots in practice. Practice means hitting hard, deep, angled, forcefully, and with a purpose in mind (win the point, NOT hang in there hoping for your opponent to miss).
You play your matches using only your forcing shots. Why practice rallying during a set? If you want to practice rallying, go find a weak hitting tiny person to hit with.

Well I have worked with quite a few 4 and 5 star recruit girls over the years, who, in your words, hit "softy, puffy balls". And I'm quite sure they wouldn't have a hard time dealing with your "first strike capabilities". I know this, because much of their early development revolved around RECEIVING skills. You know, the much maligned, rarely emphasized, often bypassed, skills associated with actually controlling the ball in all situations, consitency, playing defense, not breaking down, movement, neutralizing, etc. etc.

I've dealt with more than my fair share of "4.0 first strike guys" like you over the past 20 years. If you want to play with the patience and dicipline of a crackhead in need, than go for it. If you think, that you can play the game like Agassi, with your skill set. Than, by all means. But please, don't advocate this to the general playing public. Please don't mock the concept of the "rally ball", which again, is just the speed that you can go aat any given ball, under varying conditions, and control. And this varies from person to person and level to level. This self awareness, though, is an important part of development.

Improvement comes as you increase the value and quality of your stock/rally ball.

 

[LeeD]

You talk like the lamb ready to be slaughtered.
Try looking at the thread about "best feeling shots"....
There are few "rally balls" included.
That's all I've got to say, you may inherit the earth someday, but I can take it NOW.

 

[chico9166]

You talk like the lamb ready to be slaughtered.
Try looking at the thread about "best feeling shots"....
There are few "rally balls" included.
That's all I've got to say, you may inherit the earth someday, but I can take it NOW.

Your right, I am a lamb.

 

[tricky]

Rally ball is the basic foundation of point construction. You may develop an aggressive attacking style, but that's a progression, not the starting point.

 

[LeeD]

What, you read that straight from the USTA Junior Development program?
The one that's sooooo successful lately, promoting all those rally ball groundstrokers who are breaking into the pro levels.
You now, the rally ball Isner and Querry's. Hit it consistent, hit it in, and you can follow the list ahead of you lead by DonaldYoung.
Great idea, groove the opponent so he can pass you.

 

[chico9166]

What, you read that straight from the USTA Junior Development program?
The one that's sooooo successful lately, promoting all those rally ball groundstrokers who are breaking into the pro levels.
You now, the rally ball Isner and Querry's. Hit it consistent, hit it in, and you can follow the list ahead of you lead by DonaldYoung.
Great idea, groove the opponent so he can pass you.

Actually, the criticism of American instruction, is that there is too much empasis on sending skills, and not enough on receiving skills. But again, LeeD, play however you wish. Doesn't necessarily make it right, though. Comparing what your trying to do/develope on the court, with that of a high caliber junior and or pro is pretty laughable. The skill set is just a little different. As such, the areas of focus are quite different. Wouldn't you agree? On second thought, forget it, I know the answer. Anyhoo, off to the slaughter house.

 

[raiden031]

So today I was playing against a guy who always beats me, but sometimes I win a set, and usually the sets are competitive (6-4 or closer). He has some great shotmaking ability, and always hits like 10-15 clean winners against me. I have absolutely no choice but to play aggressive against him otherwise he will blow me off the court.

I attempted exactly 8 winners, and ended up with 5 forehand winners, 1 backhand winner, and 2 missed forehand winner attempts (1 net, 1 deep). Other than that I was trying to hit hard shots to set up the point. Anytime I hit something weak he immediately takes control and I'm purely defensive, but he hits enough UEs to balance things out.

In the first set, I missed at least 60% of my service returns, and these were almost exclusively because I was late on my forehand and the ball went too high and sailed long. I missed a bunch of slice backhand returns as well by netting them. I lost it 6-4.

In the second set I did everything better and was able to win it 7-6.

We then started a 10-pt tiebreak but ran out of time, but I had a good lead.

I definitely feel like strategically I'm as good as I can be with my current skillset. The big thing I think is improving my return of serve because that gives up way too many free points.

Shot tolerance is really lacking overall for me. I really think this is the most important aspect of a club player's tennis game. Its not whether they play too aggressively or conservatively, but really whether they can adapt to the types of balls their opponents are hitting and not have their strokes break down.

 

[tfm1973]

raiden -- i've played you quite a few times and i think:

1 -- you hit too many unforced errors. because you are not comfortable rallying you feel the need to hit "aggressively" at all times since you know rallying is a losing battle for you. "aggressive" hitting to you means going for winners and hitting hard shots with pace. this ironically makes you hit more unforced errors. so your solution to hitting too many unforced errors . . . is to hit more unforced errors. the only way this strategy works for you is if you are on top of your game.

2 -- you go for too much when you have the opening. a typical scenario. you hit a forcing shot to my backhand side that pulls me wide past the doubles alley. my backhand shot floats and lands inside your service line. you have literally the entire court to hit into. you aim for a dime sized patch of court in the corner. you hit wide by about 5 feet.

3 -- you place a premium on hitting hard. you often hit beautiful shots struck with good pace right to me. i don't even have to move a step to get to it. i don't have to swing at all and can just redirect that pace back. a shot hit with half as much pace but making me move would be more effective.

4 -- you have a hard time with retrievers/pushers/counterpunchers because they can all force you to hit 3 or more shots to win a point. you have an easier time with power baseliners because they likely hit as many errors as you do going for their shots.

solution: play less matches. practice more?

i don't know. i got nuttin. i've got my own tennis issues i'm working on. oh also -- did you play schap yet?

 

[raiden031]

raiden -- i've played you quite a few times and i think:

1 -- you hit too many unforced errors. because you are not comfortable rallying you feel the need to hit "aggressively" at all times since you know rallying is a losing battle for you. "aggressive" hitting to you means going for winners and hitting hard shots with pace. this ironically makes you hit more unforced errors. so your solution to hitting too many unforced errors . . . is to hit more unforced errors. the only way this strategy works for you is if you are on top of your game.

2 -- you go for too much when you have the opening. a typical scenario. you hit a forcing shot to my backhand side that pulls me wide past the doubles alley. my backhand shot floats and lands inside your service line. you have literally the entire court to hit into. you aim for a dime sized patch of court in the corner. you hit wide by about 5 feet.

3 -- you place a premium on hitting hard. you often hit beautiful shots struck with good pace right to me. i don't even have to move a step to get to it. i don't have to swing at all and can just redirect that pace back. a shot hit with half as much pace but making me move would be more effective.

4 -- you have a hard time with retrievers/pushers/counterpunchers because they can all force you to hit 3 or more shots to win a point. you have an easier time with power baseliners because they likely hit as many errors as you do going for their shots.

solution: play less matches. practice more?

i don't know. i got nuttin. i've got my own tennis issues i'm working on. oh also -- did you play schap yet?

I figured you might chime in...I still don't think I'm causing myself more UEs with my shot selections. I still think that a good majority of my UEs are when I'm not going for that much. With my big loopy takeback on my forehand, sure I tend to put alot of racquet-head speed even on moderate shots, but I wouldn't say I'm trying to hit big all the time. By trying to slow down even more, I would start hitting really weak shots.

Remember that 21-drill we played a while ago and I purposely played more conservatively, and I did just as bad against you score-wise as when I played normally.

I hit with Schap in a group lesson once. Haven't played a competitive match yet.

 

[LeeD]

Chico, you make an excellent counterpoint there, I"ll say.
Skillset of a developing top junior or higher is much higher than mine, YES. Meaning they might be able to hit a harder ball ??????
Huge difference between WINNING, and not losing.

 

[tfm1973]

raiden -- if you are taking lessons with some pros. what do they think? you should go get a professional opinion.

 

[chico9166]

So today I was playing against a guy who always beats me, but sometimes I win a set, and usually the sets are competitive (6-4 or closer). He has some great shotmaking ability, and always hits like 10-15 clean winners against me. I have absolutely no choice but to play aggressive against him otherwise he will blow me off the court.

I attempted exactly 8 winners, and ended up with 5 forehand winners, 1 backhand winner, and 2 missed forehand winner attempts (1 net, 1 deep). Other than that I was trying to hit hard shots to set up the point. Anytime I hit something weak he immediately takes control and I'm purely defensive, but he hits enough UEs to balance things out.

In the first set, I missed at least 60% of my service returns, and these were almost exclusively because I was late on my forehand and the ball went too high and sailed long. I missed a bunch of slice backhand returns as well by netting them. I lost it 6-4.

In the second set I did everything better and was able to win it 7-6.

We then started a 10-pt tiebreak but ran out of time, but I had a good lead.

I definitely feel like strategically I'm as good as I can be with my current skillset. The big thing I think is improving my return of serve because that gives up way too many free points.

[QUOTE]Shot tolerance is really lacking overall for me.  I really think this is the most important aspect of a club player's tennis game.  Its not whether they play too aggressively or conservatively, but really whether they can adapt to the types of balls their opponents are hitting and not have their strokes break down.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

Bingo. Especially true, as the level of play increases. You have to get better at the above mentioned. Have followed some of your posts, and have no doubt you will. You have made study progress.

 

[raiden031]

raiden -- if you are taking lessons with some pros. what do they think? you should go get a professional opinion.

Well one guy I play with is a teaching pro (although he doesn't give me any lessons), however I've asked for his opinion a few times. He thinks I'm too passive on my second serve. He is big on going for shots and thinks that I let down when I have a lead against him (but I think he actually picks up when I have a lead against him). So yeah he's not going to tell me I'm going for too much.

The guy I take the lessons with is solid 5.0 player. He hasn't said much about my overall shot selections, but likes that I am aggressive. If I make a stupid shot selection, he'll tell me, but he often is pointing out things I'm doing wrong in my shot preparation. Sometimes I might try to take something too early and end up shanking it, and he will point out I didn't need to rush to get that shot, etc.

But I am pretty much convinced the fact that I can dial down my shots without consistency improvements just shows that my problems are deeper than a matter of low-percentage shot selections.

 

[LeeD]

Problem for me, is when I dial down the shots, my technique has to CHANGE, for the weaker ball.
Don't make sense to adapt to hitting a weaker ball, I'd rather hit the stronger ball every time and up the consistency of the stronger ball.
And I don't have to hit harder to hit a stronger ball, I can use placement or varying spins to achieve that.
Glad to see both teaching pros NOT advise you to push and boop.
The weak may inherit the earth...someday, but the STRONG can grab a big junk of it RIGHT NOW! :shock::shock:

 

[gameboy]

Sounds like you are hitting too flat of a shot, not giving yourself enough margin for error when you hit full out.

I've seen a lot of players like you. They hit a pretty good flatter stroke with good pace. But because it has so little margin for error, they produce a lot of UE. Going for more spin will give a very heavy ball that will be tough to handle yet give you more consistency.

 

[raiden031]

Sounds like you are hitting too flat of a shot, not giving yourself enough margin for error when you hit full out.

I've seen a lot of players like you. They hit a pretty good flatter stroke with good pace. But because it has so little margin for error, they produce a lot of UE. Going for more spin will give a very heavy ball that will be tough to handle yet give you more consistency.

Nah my shot is far from flat. Its not that, but really that my trajectories are inconsistent. On one shot I hit with too much spin and the ball lands short into the net because I didn't hit through it enough or aimed too low over the net. On another shot I try to hit it higher and deeper but then it sails. Its finding the right balance and executing consistently that is difficult.

 

[LeeD]

I can't do it, but maybe you can.
Try thinking about posture. Adopt the exact same posture (body) on every shot. Don't lean back, don't lean forwards. Don't tip either way, just stay balanced.

 

[gameboy]

Nah my shot is far from flat. Its not that, but really that my trajectories are inconsistent. On one shot I hit with too much spin and the ball lands short into the net because I didn't hit through it enough or aimed too low over the net. On another shot I try to hit it higher and deeper but then it sails. Its finding the right balance and executing consistently that is difficult.

Still sounds like it is too flat. Hitting it higher should not cause it to sail if it has good amount of spin. And also the fact that your hitting partner said he can block back your hard shots easily tells me that your big shots are relatively flat.

How high is your bounce when you hit it deep? Does it at least bounce up to your opponent's shoulders? If not, there is a lot of room for you to put additional spin.

 

[raiden031]

I can't do it, but maybe you can.
Try thinking about posture. Adopt the exact same posture (body) on every shot. Don't lean back, don't lean forwards. Don't tip either way, just stay balanced.

I was talking about balance as in balance of spin, height, and depth of my shots.

 

[LeeD]

I was talking about posture, which allows you to hit consistent spins, heights, depth, and angles.

 

[raiden031]

I was talking about posture, which allows you to hit consistent spins, heights, depth, and angles.

Ok, I was thinking you were commenting from my use of the word 'balance' which was used differently.

 

[raiden031]

Still sounds like it is too flat. Hitting it higher should not cause it to sail if it has good amount of spin. And also the fact that your hitting partner said he can block back your hard shots easily tells me that your big shots are relatively flat.

How high is your bounce when you hit it deep? Does it at least bounce up to your opponent's shoulders? If not, there is a lot of room for you to put additional spin.

I dunno, nobody has ever said I hit a flat ball, but people always comment on the topspin (I had to switch to poly mains because I was breaking strings alot). Maybe its a lesser amount than you do, but I guess for playing with mostly 3.5 and some 4.0s, its alot.

 

[LeeD]

I have great balance. I snowboard, ski, race motocross and roadracers, surf, windsurf, kiteboard, waterski jump, and a host of other sports BUT....
Posture is the one aspect I cannot replicate in tennis! Low balls, high balls, fast movers and slow bouncers, short and long, me moving, it's the hardest for me to replicate CONSISTENTLY. Now add in mixes of spins, court and air temps differences, ball bounce (Wilson, Dunlop), court grit and speed, cracks in courts, mishits, and POSTURE is the one thing that could possibly bring me back to higher levels.
If I can hit every ball with perfect posture, given my mix of 5.5 and 3.5 strokes, I'd be easily 5.5.

 

[Ripper014]

Playing neutral tennis does not mean you have to push or bop the ball... I suggest for most people to hit something at about 80-85% with topspin about 4 feet over the net.... this should place the ball somewhere between the service line and baseline. You do not need to hit excessive topspin but something comfortable... play the ball somewhere around 5 feet from the sidelines... this should give you plenty of room for error.

I find most people have problems controlling the ball when pushing or overhitting... so hit everything at a comfortable pace where you are still making shots.

When the opponent gives up a weak ball... or something you feel comfortable attacking... flatten out your shot and go on the offensive.

In the meantime challenge yourself with playing that deep neutral ball... I find it more challenging than hitting winners. Hitting winners is easy... keeping your opponent in a neutral state is a challenge... and something I have come to enjoy. But don't get me wrong... if you give me something to attack I will transition in a hurry.

 

[LeeD]

Funny you are extolling virtures of the rally ball now, while on the "feel good" thread, you're talking about putting away an angled volley with precision, not necessarily big pace.
So why not hit to a corner, move to net, and hit the volley? Hit deeper approaches with increasing skills.
And rally ball 4' over the net? That's a boop/poop ball. When a better player than me hits this, I go right into forcing shot mode, wide backhand or forehand, making him run once. If he sharply answers, I'm gonna lose to him. If he gets it back, I can come in to attempt your "precious putaway volley". :shock::shock:
My normal "rally ball", which I can replicate no more than 7 times in a row, goes 2' over the net, lands well within 6' of the baseline, and often forces a weak return. If I really wanted to extend the rally, I'll half swing, go short to the service line, and then the rally can start.

 

[MNPlayer]

I dunno, nobody has ever said I hit a flat ball, but people always comment on the topspin (I had to switch to poly mains because I was breaking strings alot). Maybe its a lesser amount than you do, but I guess for playing with mostly 3.5 and some 4.0s, its alot.

If you are like me, you tend to produce a lot of topspin but not a consistently "heavy" ball. I think learning to hit consistently deep, reasonably heavy balls is the key to improving your shot tolerance because you will give yourself enough time to set up each shot. Nobody has good shot tolerance under pressure.

I am working on the same thing at a similar level to you (middling 4.0), but coming from the other direction. I have always had a "consistent" game, but it often degenerates under pressure, where I hit far too many short balls. Against 3.5 players this generally works fine since they usually have poor approach games, but as I play more decent 4.0 players, it no longer works as well. I tend to create emergency situations for myself constantly with all those short(ish) balls.

In a recent practice, I focused on heavier rally balls crosscourt and it worked pretty well. I was able to give myself enough time to get into the rallies and wait for the other guy to give me a short ball to attack. At our level, you will get a short ball pretty quick even with moderate pace rallying.

 

[MNPlayer]

Funny you are extolling virtures of the rally ball now, while on the "feel good" thread, you're talking about putting away an angled volley with precision, not necessarily big pace.
So why not hit to a corner, move to net, and hit the volley? Hit deeper approaches with increasing skills.
And rally ball 4' over the net? That's a boop/poop ball. When a better player than me hits this, I go right into forcing shot mode, wide backhand or forehand, making him run once. If he sharply answers, I'm gonna lose to him. If he gets it back, I can come in to attempt your "precious putaway volley". :shock::shock:
My normal "rally ball", which I can replicate no more than 7 times in a row, goes 2' over the net, lands well within 6' of the baseline, and often forces a weak return. If I really wanted to extend the rally, I'll half swing, go short to the service line, and then the rally can start.

Nadal hits almost all his shots more than 4' over the net. Those are not "boop/poop" balls. And they often land as short as the service line! His shots are just so extremely heavy, they are very difficult to attack.

For players with SW or more extreme grips, all your rally shots should be fairly high over the net. That's how you get depth and safety with topspin.

 

[LeeD]

There is only one Nadal in the world.
He is injured constantly trying to swing hard.
You are not Nadal. Neither is anyone else on this planet, not me, not other posters.

 

[MNPlayer]

There is only one Nadal in the world.
He is injured constantly trying to swing hard.
You are not Nadal. Neither is anyone else on this planet, not me, not other posters.

Almost all pros (and the higher level players I know, like TonLars) do a milder version of the same thing. Swinging fast to generate lots of topspin high over the net is standard practice in the modern game. They will selectively flatten out their shots when in position to do so, but the bread-and-butter rally ball passes high over the net. How else do you think they achieve such ridiculous consistency?

I'm not advocating attempting to play like Nadal. I would suggest going for 4' over the net landing within 6' of the baseline, not 6' over the net landing near the service line (which is what Nadal does).

 

[chico9166]

Almost all pros (and the higher level players I know, like TonLars) do a milder version of the same thing. Swinging fast to generate lots of topspin high over the net is standard practice in the modern game. They will selectively flatten out their shots when in position to do so, but the bread-and-butter rally ball passes high over the net. How else do you think they achieve such ridiculous consistency?

I'm not advocating attempting to play like Nadal. I would suggest going for 4' over the net landing within 6' of the baseline, not 6' over the net landing near the service line (which is what Nadal does).

Don't use the term "rally ball" with LeeD. He starts foaming at the mouth, and will refer to you as some kind of slaughter house animal. I'm a lamb.

 

[Ripper014]

Funny you are extolling virtures of the rally ball now, while on the "feel good" thread, you're talking about putting away an angled volley with precision, not necessarily big pace.
So why not hit to a corner, move to net, and hit the volley? Hit deeper approaches with increasing skills.
And rally ball 4' over the net? That's a boop/poop ball. When a better player than me hits this, I go right into forcing shot mode, wide backhand or forehand, making him run once. If he sharply answers, I'm gonna lose to him. If he gets it back, I can come in to attempt your "precious putaway volley". :shock::shock:
My normal "rally ball", which I can replicate no more than 7 times in a row, goes 2' over the net, lands well within 6' of the baseline, and often forces a weak return. If I really wanted to extend the rally, I'll half swing, go short to the service line, and then the rally can start.

If you are talking about me... you better go back into the thread and reread... I am pretty sure I wrote something much different than what you are implying. Actually... here you go...

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=311601&page=2

But if you are talking about me agreeing that I like to bunt a ball into an open court... yes I like doing that too.

I doubt you would be able to easily attack what you call my rally ball... it has enough topspin... usually lands about a foot or two from the baseline with pace, enough to back most of the 4.5 players I play with about 3-4 feet off the baseline. Now if you are better than the 4.5's I play with... then maybe you can do this. But don't think you are going be able to do enough to back me off the baseline, you will probaby just get another ball about 4 feet over the net that lands about a foot from the baseline with spin and pace. If you want to follow a shot to the net from the baseline I will probably pass you, or stretch you out of position on the first return... and pass you on the second.

For all this attacking tennis you love to talk about, and how the tennis of the 70's were played... have you forgotten about your heroes... Harold Solomon and Eddie Dibbs...?

I have played my whole life looking for an opportunity to get the first strike in... and press the attack. I think that is why it is so gratifying for me to be able to sit back and play effective neutral tennis, still knowing I can be aggressive when required. If you ask me how I enjoy playing... I like to play neutral tennis and attacking on my terms... if you are asking how I normally play... attacking tennis employing first strike tactics at any given opportunity only because it is the creature I know. If I had to do it all over again I would learn the former.

 

[Ripper014]

Almost all pros (and the higher level players I know, like TonLars) do a milder version of the same thing. Swinging fast to generate lots of topspin high over the net is standard practice in the modern game. They will selectively flatten out their shots when in position to do so, but the bread-and-butter rally ball passes high over the net. How else do you think they achieve such ridiculous consistency?

I'm not advocating attempting to play like Nadal. I would suggest going for 4' over the net landing within 6' of the baseline, not 6' over the net landing near the service line (which is what Nadal does).

I would say that Nadal probably hits it higher than that... 6-8 feet over the net, except when hitting an offensive shot.

 

[LeeD]

Harold and Eddy would often hang out at our string booth at the TransAmericaOpen. They both termed themselves, and each other, as "pushers'. 3 years in a row, they'd come by, hang out, and alternatively look for practice partners on the curtained court behind the main courts.
Dibley also hung out some, and being Aussie, would extoll the virtues of Aussieland and AussieBear.
But we mainly strung for the lower level Wilson team, like Stockton, Ramerez, and MikeCahill some somewhere SE. Stockton was tense and direct, Rameriz chatty and hard to understand, and Cahill was sullen and silent.
Regardless of who came by, we have to choose for ourselves what kind of game we wanted to play. Since we both came from the '70's, first strike S/V was favored over all court or baseline games.
I like playing tennis, but I hate to stand around the court for 3 hours hitting a million balls.

 

[MNPlayer]

I would say that Nadal probably hits it higher than that... 6-8 feet over the net, except when hitting an offensive shot.

yeah, that was kind of my point - Lee was saying that 4' over the net is a poof ball when in fact that is probably near the minimum for a rally ball if you want it to be deep enough.

 

[LeeD]

NOPE...
LeeD was saying 4' over the net is a poof ball if you swing controlled and softly! My statement was in reply to a poster who said he doesn't swing faster using a W grip than any normal player.

 

[Ripper014]

Harold and Eddy would often hang out at our string booth at the TransAmericaOpen. They both termed themselves, and each other, as "pushers'. 3 years in a row, they'd come by, hang out, and alternatively look for practice partners on the curtained court behind the main courts.
Dibley also hung out some, and being Aussie, would extoll the virtues of Aussieland and AussieBear.
But we mainly strung for the lower level Wilson team, like Stockton, Ramerez, and MikeCahill some somewhere SE. Stockton was tense and direct, Rameriz chatty and hard to understand, and Cahill was sullen and silent.
Regardless of who came by, we have to choose for ourselves what kind of game we wanted to play. Since we both came from the '70's, first strike S/V was favored over all court or baseline games.
I like playing tennis, but I hate to stand around the court for 3 hours hitting a million balls.

That is fine... and I appreciate that this is the way you enjoy playing tennis... but that is no reason to belittle others that like to play the game strategically different than yourself. Or to impose that the way you play the game is the best or only way it needs to be played. Though first strike tennis was the order of the day... it was by no means the only effective tennis being played... Solomon, Dibbs, and Borg were all in the top 10 at one point, none of whom I could consider first strike tennis players.

 

[LeeD]

I think you assume I say that YOU should play aggressively.
Notice there are many gazelles in the African bush, but only 1/100th the number of lions.
Lots of us humans swimming around the shores, but only a few white sharks.
Millions of ants, very few anteaters.
How many shrimp does it make to make a meal?
Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

[Ripper014]

yeah, that was kind of my point - Lee was saying that 4' over the net is a poof ball when in fact that is probably near the minimum for a rally ball if you want it to be deep enough.

I could not agree with you more... if I hit a ball with solid pace and topspin 4 feet over the net I know it will land within a few feet of the baseline. This is the ideal neutral ball if someone was to ask me, now if I hit the same ball with slice... the ball would be closer to 2 or 3 feet over the net with the same depth.

 

[Ripper014]

I think you assume I say that YOU should play aggressively.
Notice there are many gazelles in the African bush, but only 1/100th the number of lions.
Lots of us humans swimming around the shores, but only a few white sharks.
Millions of ants, very few anteaters.
How many shrimp does it make to make a meal?
Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Not exactly an accurate analogy... how about one human acting beyond what we consider socially acceptable... we put them in jail. We are either all gazelles or all lions... we may be faster gazelles or better co-ordinated lions... but we are all out of the same gene pool.

 

[gameboy]

OK, I am not going to get in the middle of this hot debate, but here is all I am trying to say.

You say that your shots are inconsistent because you go for big shots, but when you try to rally, your opponents take advantage of your weak balls.

What I am trying to say is that your rally ball swing should be just as hard as your "kill shot" swings. They should just be at a more oblique angle so that the spin will bring the shot down and give you a greater margin for error. If you do this, your opponents would not be able to take advantage like they do with slow paced "rally balls".

 

[raiden031]

OK, I am not going to get in the middle of this hot debate, but here is all I am trying to say.

You say that your shots are inconsistent because you go for big shots, but when you try to rally, your opponents take advantage of your weak balls.

Not really. I said my shots are inconsistent regardless of whether I'm only attempting a rally ball as opposed to a big point-ending shot. Also if I dial down my shots to be too conservative, then I will hit more weak balls in the process, and any amount of consistency I gain by dialing down will be offset by me hitting weaker shots.

What I am trying to say is that your rally ball swing should be just as hard as your "kill shot" swings. They should just be at a more oblique angle so that the spin will bring the shot down and give you a greater margin for error. If you do this, your opponents would not be able to take advantage like they do with slow paced "rally balls".

Yeah I think the point here is that I try to hit high-percentage shots that land deep and have enough pace and spin to keep from getting attacked, but because I'm inconsistent and maybe hit harder than others at the same level, its often said that I'm beating myself with my shot selections. I wanted to prove that its not my strategy that causes me to lose matches, since I'm often told my strategy needs to change (not by teaching pros, but by other players, captains, etc.). Plus I see lots of praise for conservative strategy as if you can instantly raise your NTRP by hitting all Wardlaw shots at a moderate pace. Easier said than done.

 

[Cindysphinx]

Raiden, I'm curious to know what you think you have learned from your experiment and the discussion of same (other than that Chico is a lamb or a gazelle or an ant or something)?

I agree with your conclusion that you are equally inconsistent on kill shots and rally balls (correct me if I am misstating). I guess I am wondering what you think the fix is, how you plan to play in the future, etc.

 

[raiden031]

Raiden, I'm curious to know what you think you have learned from your experiment and the discussion of same (other than that Chico is a lamb or a gazelle or an ant or something)?

I agree with your conclusion that you are equally inconsistent on kill shots and rally balls (correct me if I am misstating). I guess I am wondering what you think the fix is, how you plan to play in the future, etc.

Well I just think the stereotypical winner-on-every-shot type of player often mentioned on the boards is an exaggeration. I think in most cases every club player is going to miss more shots for no other reason than failed stroke execution rather than from just going for too much.

Since I don't get nearly enough opportunities to drill and have to resort to match play for alot of my practice time, I think this is a good exercise for me to use on people who I can normally beat with my A game because it levels out the playing field and helps me work on staying in the point longer such that I will fare better against a player who my A game isn't all that effective against.