A post on pushers

[UBER Forehand]

It's that, having came across some lesser educated and civilized individual that I won't name, but that might still present himself here, I heard and read of rants about them. On other occasions, I see the total opposite of it, which is also stunning: people hailing and almost praising them.

Let us fix a misconception about tennis that I see as one of the issue here. Some people think that tennis is a game of errors -- hear the buzzer please, as it is not. Others will speak in a way almost as to convince you it's about outhitting your opponent -- again wrong. Tennis is, like all sports, a problem of optimization: we compare gains and loss for the opponents in the likelihood of success. Each shot you play affect your likelihood of ending the rally in your favor as well as that of your opponent. It's a good choice whenever you increase your chances further than that of your opponent. For instance, if you go for a more conservative shot, you lessen the chances of a mistake, but grants your opponent better chance to take the lead and attack; it's a good idea if you favored your odds further than you favored that of your opponent.

Suddenly now, because I bother being more precise than most people, we can see both offensive and defensive tactics working and be able to explain their success, as well as perceive them as logical choices. All then, depends on when and how, but we can see both. It also tells you something about offensive: you should be aggressive whenever you lessen the odds of your opponent further than the risk you undertake lessens yours -- we're trying to get the optimal balance so that you, in the long run, tend to win most of these rallies. Furthermore, it tells you something about how to play in general as, depending on the situation, you might optimize the system in your favor in being more conservative or more aggressive -- and choosing properly the "when" as well as the "how" of it makes a huge difference.

You might wonder how it relates to pushers. Well, it's elementary my dear Watson... what characterizes pushers? They hardly ever if at all take the offensive, so there is a tactical mistake here -- they do not play optimal tennis as they do not affect the likelihood of success their opponents has when statistics show they should (such as on a short ball). At first, I will deal with praises right now: hailing pushers for winning and calling that a playing style is as dumb as saying ball bashing is efficient -- both are fundamentally flawed.

The second thing I will be dealing with are insults. The theoretical model I here present explains how statistical tendencies will favor any type of player of all levels and in all situations... It also explains why pushers can win: as always, they tend to win more over the long run whenever they are playing closer to the optimal tennis tactic than their opponents are. It tells something about your butt (I talk to those who rant): they upfront play a fundamentally flawed tactic and not only do you fail to exploit it, but you also show more flaws than them. The reason they are able to do what they do is for you to not make an appropriate evaluation of your skills and apply them in situations that optimize your chances.

And I will end with a tip to beat pushers: they can't hurt you, so why are you all in a hurry to hit a winner? Be patient and they'll give you a ball you can take.

 

[user92626]

Just hit one more shot than the other guy does. If that requires you to hit harder, softer or trickier and what not, that's what it takes. That's all there is.

 

[Swissv2]

Just hit one more shot than the other guy does. If that requires you to hit harder, softer or trickier and what not, that's what it takes. That's all there is.

Easier said than done. Looks like you have the recipe for being the pusher yourself!

 

[user92626]

Easier said than done. Looks like you have the recipe for being the pusher yourself!

That's a recipe for ...all styles, you bum

Yeah, easier said than done. But why do you need to have all the so called "theoretical models" instead of something you can sum up much simplier? hehe To match the complexity?

 

[UBER Forehand]

Easier said than done. Looks like you have the recipe for being the pusher yourself!

Not necessarily. You can hit shots that will act as change-ups... when you play pushers and dinkers or even counter-punchers, sometimes they do not quite have the hang of generating pace and spin themselves -- they'll feed off of yours without much issue, but they won't generate. When that occurs, you do have the option of slicing balls at an angle so that they are forced to move and get the ball up a bit which does tend to **** them off, if done properly; or, you can try to hit more spin... take some pace off your shot to privilege the effect and accentuate it and see how they manage to attack that ball.

Many players that even hit quite well have trouble adjusting to the shift in pace... it's not completely dead, but it's high and, if well placed, it will be annoying to attack, even perhaps send back decently. So, it's not an option to neglect. However, if you're looking after progressing and doing more than hitting junk all the time, you might want to use these are components of variation (like one out of 8 to 10 shots), just to keep your opponent working.

You aren't force to pin the back fence off the first bounce on all strokes to not be considered a pusher, nor to play decent tennis tactically speaking.

 

[UBER Forehand]

That's a recipe for ...all styles, you bum

Yeah, easier said than done. But why do you need to have all the so called "theoretical models" instead of something you can sum up much simplier? hehe To match the complexity?

A theoretical model is a long expression which means an abstract representation... it tells you how certain things will behave following a change in specific factors. It's not complicated, it's just abstract.

Say that you rally with someone. If you hit a forehand cross-court to respond his cross court forehand and keep it just well centered in the diagonal with some nice margin over the net -- you know, very safe shot -- you have 10% chance of messing up and your opponent has 10% chance of messing up on the reply. But what if it was a short ball? Then, hitting out on it could still give you only maybe 20% chance of messing up while it gives your opponent 60 or even 70% chance of messing up.

In the second case, you see how your risk rose less than that of your opponent? Whenever this could happen, you should attack.

It's not complicated... you're just comparing how likely messing up is and you try to find the best combination. In the long run, if you do it well all the time, you win most of these -- that's how statistics work, basically.

 

[UBER Forehand]

I gave you an example with made up numbers, but it's just to show how it works. Once you understand it, you understand how to play anything and you see as instrumental what is instrumental and as ends what are ends.

 

[anubis]

I think there's something intangible that makes some pushers seem to win more often than everyone else.

I play frequently with a kid who is 23, just picked up tennis 4 months ago. He has no footwork, all-out runs to each shot (never misses an opportunity), and serves like an over-hand badminton shot. His serves are about 30mph, his forehands have no spin, his backhands are gentle and he hits every shot to the middle of the court. Yet, he beats me every time.

he just started in our men's 3.0 league and so far has won his first 1-Singles match 6-1/6-3, has beaten everyone else on our team, and is likely to get benched soon since he's winning too often.

When I don't play against him, I do pretty well. But when I do play against him, most of my shots go long. There's just something about his play that makes me hit errors every other shot.

/endrant

 

[user92626]

I know this joker that many here would call him a pusher (but I don't care to be judgemental on the 'style" of any players). I told me he had played for the same amount of time as i had, 4-5 years. He's skinny and fit and undoubtedly a very good ball retriever and manipulates the ball back by smoothly tapping/punching, bh slicing and whatnot, but he's really good and calm at vollyeying and inside the service box.

I'm the opposite. I am bad at volleying and only love aggressive groundstrokes which I think is beautiful tennis!

That guy and I have played singles against each other about 3 times. It was the same theme everytime. I kept hitting aggressive groundstrokes virtualy the whole time and he kept defending, returning, drawing me to the net, lobbing or volleying away and virtually no other offensive shots. Guess what, both of us still haven't lost to one another!!!! In all 3 occassions we offered truce after 3-3 or 5-5. LOL. I offered one time and he happily agreed. He offered the other two times. Funny as hell.

 

[UBER Forehand]

I think there's something intangible that makes some pushers seem to win more often than everyone else.

It's not intangible... it's written right above: they play less risky shots and you don't play the ball back well enough to less their efficiency further than the increased risk you take. In the long run, you make more mistakes than winners and they earn the match.

Bellow around 4.0, it's hard to be able to do anything standard and still beat pushers on a regular basis. It's not that it takes a big game to do it; it's just that it takes good execution on so many different things to do it that most people fail at it -- and it's worst once you get frustrated.

 

[Mick]

That's a recipe for ...all styles, you bum

Yeah, easier said than done. But why do you need to have all the so called "theoretical models" instead of something you can sum up much simplier? hehe To match the complexity?

I believe Miloslav Mecir had said the same thing when he was asked about match strategy (at the 1986 US Open). He said he aimed to hit one more shot over the net than his opponent

 

[Mick]

And I will end with a tip to beat pushers: they can't hurt you, so why are you all in a hurry to hit a winner? Be patient and they'll give you a ball you can take.

the reason why some people can't execute this strategy is they lack consistency, so they feel they have to go for a winner as soon as possible and doing so sometimes causes them to lose the sets. If you are consistent and can also hit winners then pushers are at your mercy (unless they are extra-ordinary pushers)

 

[Djoker91]

Draw them to the net. Hit short. Our you yourself rush the net. Pushers are comfortable rallying. Moon balls and what not. I serve and volley against these guys. Makes em uncomfortable.

 

[oragne lovre]

And I will end with a tip to beat pushers: they can't hurt you, so why are you all in a hurry to hit a winner? Be patient and they'll give you a ball you can take.

the reason why some people can't execute this strategy is they lack consistency, so they feel they have to go for a winner as soon as possible and doing so sometimes causes them to lose the sets. If you are consistent and can also hit winners then pushers are at your mercy (unless they are extra-ordinary pushers)

Excellent tips!
Thanks.

 

[Connors Fan]

I really find it amazing this pusher talk obsession.

Tennis comes down to one rule, be the last one to hit it in the court on the other guys side. Everything else is just chest pumping and rationalizing losing or winning.

 

[Limpinhitter]

It's that, having came across some lesser educated and civilized individual that I won't name, but that might still present himself here, I heard and read of rants about them. On other occasions, I see the total opposite of it, which is also stunning: people hailing and almost praising them.

Let us fix a misconception about tennis that I see as one of the issue here. Some people think that tennis is a game of errors -- hear the buzzer please, as it is not. Others will speak in a way almost as to convince you it's about outhitting your opponent -- again wrong. Tennis is, like all sports, a problem of optimization: we compare gains and loss for the opponents in the likelihood of success. Each shot you play affect your likelihood of ending the rally in your favor as well as that of your opponent. It's a good choice whenever you increase your chances further than that of your opponent. For instance, if you go for a more conservative shot, you lessen the chances of a mistake, but grants your opponent better chance to take the lead and attack; it's a good idea if you favored your odds further than you favored that of your opponent.

Suddenly now, because I bother being more precise than most people, we can see both offensive and defensive tactics working and be able to explain their success, as well as perceive them as logical choices. All then, depends on when and how, but we can see both. It also tells you something about offensive: you should be aggressive whenever you lessen the odds of your opponent further than the risk you undertake lessens yours -- we're trying to get the optimal balance so that you, in the long run, tend to win most of these rallies. Furthermore, it tells you something about how to play in general as, depending on the situation, you might optimize the system in your favor in being more conservative or more aggressive -- and choosing properly the "when" as well as the "how" of it makes a huge difference.

You might wonder how it relates to pushers. Well, it's elementary my dear Watson... what characterizes pushers? They hardly ever if at all take the offensive, so there is a tactical mistake here -- they do not play optimal tennis as they do not affect the likelihood of success their opponents has when statistics show they should (such as on a short ball). At first, I will deal with praises right now: hailing pushers for winning and calling that a playing style is as dumb as saying ball bashing is efficient -- both are fundamentally flawed.

The second thing I will be dealing with are insults. The theoretical model I here present explains how statistical tendencies will favor any type of player of all levels and in all situations... It also explains why pushers can win: as always, they tend to win more over the long run whenever they are playing closer to the optimal tennis tactic than their opponents are. It tells something about your butt (I talk to those who rant): they upfront play a fundamentally flawed tactic and not only do you fail to exploit it, but you also show more flaws than them. The reason they are able to do what they do is for you to not make an appropriate evaluation of your skills and apply them in situations that optimize your chances.

And I will end with a tip to beat pushers: they can't hurt you, so why are you all in a hurry to hit a winner? Be patient and they'll give you a ball you can take.

Or you could have simply said that tennis is a percentage game and the player who understands, and employs, high percentage tactics has an advantage over the player who does not.

Proof of the value of brevity. Thank you! Thank you!

 

[NJ1]

I really find it amazing this pusher talk obsession.

Tennis comes down to one rule, be the last one to hit it in the court on the other guys side. Everything else is just chest pumping and rationalizing losing or winning.

Agreed. One exception though, I choose not to often play with guys who loop/moon ball every shot as it's no fun. A buddy of mine who used to play for Duke but is now too lazy to show his "proper" form even though it makes for some great points when he does (and he wins more when hitting without 20' loop). I can beat them, but have no fun doing so.

 

[Connors Fan]

I agree, the guys who really loop every shot are not very fun to play against, I just find that the term is starting to be used here by anyone who gets beat by a more consistant player, they label them a no skill pusher. I find it humorous, especially those who brag about just quiting if they play one. I mean, now quiting is an admirable quality?

 

[jdubbs]

I don't get it...if you put a lot of pace and spin on the ball, most pushers can't put much on the reply.

Get the short ball, hit it sharply to the corner. They may hit a short lob, but just put it away.

This works on 99% of pushers. Wait until you get that short ball, and put it away. Play with a lot of pace and spin.

Oh, and learn how to hit with topspin and lots of it.

If you're still rockin the conti grip, well, the 1970's called and they want their forehand back.

 

[1HBH Rocks]

I agree, the guys who really loop every shot are not very fun to play against, I just find that the term is starting to be used here by anyone who gets beat by a more consistant player, they label them a no skill pusher. I find it humorous, especially those who brag about just quiting if they play one. I mean, now quiting is an admirable quality?

It's social tennis... if you cannot enjoy yourself hitting, it's not worth your time. In competition, I agree that you take whatever your opponent wants to do, but for the fun of it, you are in all your right to choose with who you play. Some people pay to have access to their court and I'd say that it must be pretty annoying to spend your money on trying to attack junk balls all day long. It's not really enjoyable for most people, even if it's played within the rules.

The term "pusher" doesn't apply to someone who hits the ball with pace and spin, even if it's mild and the intent is outlast the opponent. I played a coach who does that: she sends you the ball back. It's not huge, but she never misses and can hit high loops or drives to annoy you. I wouldn't call her a pusher because she hits the ball in play, she doesn't push it in play: she's not simply junk-balling you; she's hitting actual ground strokes, although the aim is to be consistent.

Many people consider tennis is an art, others think it is more like a competition. If you think it's a competition, the victory weights more than performance; if you think it's an art, the performance weights more than the victory. Of course, there will always be someone to slander their opponent, but there IS a point in saying that this tactic isn't viable beyond a certain level and that it doesn't make the sport fun or enjoyable for many people.

 

[5263]

I don't get it...if you put a lot of pace and spin on the ball, most pushers can't put much on the reply.

Get the short ball, hit it sharply to the corner. They may hit a short lob, but just put it away.

This works on 99% of pushers. Wait until you get that short ball, and put it away. Play with a lot of pace and spin.

Oh, and learn how to hit with topspin and lots of it.

If you're still rockin the conti grip, well, the 1970's called and they want their forehand back.

Most players don't have the strokes and mindset to execute in the critical moments of a point, and then the pusher gains the upper hand.

 

[Funbun]

There's a point of your developmental skill in tennis where your technique can transcend your emotions.

At that point, you can be both happy, calm, angry, hopeless, and still hit the ball correctly.

Eventually, you can disregard your opponent's little ticks and just focus on yourself, your technique, and the ball.

Even when I'm relatively frustrated, I hit harder and put more topspin, still goes in. Sitters from the baseline, whether with topspin or underspin, are very easy to put away if you have the correct technique.

 

[DeShaun]

Good post.
Optimization seems to be the key, and is closely related to adaptation capacity. My friend who took second place in his 3.5 league last year has jumped up to the 4.0 level this year. He almost looks like a pusher against these 4.0 guys. They can hit may more better/harder balls in a row than most of the the 3.5s.

I have had the chance to watch a couple of his matches recently and there have been times when he seemed to be getting worked over roundly this year by the 4.0s. What seems to be his biggest issue is that his old style which was wildly successful against most of the 3.5s doesn't produce a heavy enough ball for him to stay in the rally long enough before the 4.0s can attack it. . .and they are attacking him after fewer than ten rally strokes.

He has always had much more solid than average volleys in terms of angling them off and he is quite resourceful when holding his ground at net, but his transition game has proven ineffective this year, as he's not hitting nearly enough very solid first volleys. But this is partly due to his insistence on hugging the baseline especially on his backhand corner; he may not even see or realize just how close he stands to there in rallies, and I certainly did not realize or notice this about him last year.

But now that he's playing opponents who can hit a rally ball much deeper with much more consistency, his "advance forwards and do so artistically" instinct needs to give way to having greater patience from his backcourt, because his ground strokes were never terribly menacing to begin with.

I want to share this all with him without offending him because he's a good guy and extremely fun to play (his game is very free flowing, and he is very generous with his compliments whenever you hit a nice shot) but he has always been a skill level above me until very recently, and I'm not sure how he might take my advice. Although I am positively certain about what I have noticed in terms of how, exactly, his 4.0 opponents have been picking on him.

To optimize his chances of winning, he should bolster his defense by playing farther back and catching the balls, to his backhand for instance, (NOT ON THE RISE but) while they're actually dropping (like Guga), particularly as his deepest ground strokes are still somewhat feathery and never really explode off the court.

 

[jdubbs]

Good post.
Optimization seems to be the key, and is closely related to adaptation capacity. My friend who took second place in his 3.5 league last year has jumped up to the 4.0 level this year. He almost looks like a pusher against these 4.0 guys. They can hit may more better/harder balls in a row than most of the the 3.5s.

I have had the chance to watch a couple of his matches recently and there have been times when he seemed to be getting worked over roundly this year by the 4.0s. What seems to be his biggest issue is that his old style which was wildly successful against most of the 3.5s doesn't produce a heavy enough ball for him to stay in the rally long enough before the 4.0s can attack it. . .and they are attacking him after fewer than ten rally strokes.

He has always had much more solid than average volleys in terms of angling them off and he is quite resourceful when holding his ground at net, but his transition game has proven ineffective this year, as he's not hitting nearly enough very solid first volleys. But this is partly due to his insistence on hugging the baseline especially on his backhand corner; he may not even see or realize just how close he stands to there in rallies, and I certainly did not realize or notice this about him last year.

But now that he's playing opponents who can hit a rally ball much deeper with much more consistency, his "advance forwards and do so artistically" instinct needs to give way to having greater patience from his backcourt, because his ground strokes were never terribly menacing to begin with.

I want to share this all with him without offending him because he's a good guy and extremely fun to play (his game is very free flowing, and he is very generous with his compliments whenever you hit a nice shot) but he has always been a skill level above me until very recently, and I'm not sure how he might take my advice. Although I am positively certain about what I have noticed in terms of how, exactly, his 4.0 opponents have been picking on him.

To optimize his chances of winning, he should bolster his defense by playing farther back and catching the balls, to his backhand for instance, (NOT ON THE RISE but) while they're actually dropping (like Guga), particularly as his deepest ground strokes are still somewhat feathery and never really explode off the court.

This a good example of why not to push. It leaves you ill equiped to play at higher levels. Id rather hit hard and continuously refine my game and lose to a few pushers along the way than just be a 3.5 my whole career.

 

[Limpinhitter]

Most players don't have the strokes and mindset to execute in the critical moments of a point, and then the pusher gains the upper hand.

I would disagree that most players don't have the strokes. I agree that many lack the correct mindset - which is to FOCUS on executing your strokes one shot at a time, and your gameplan one point at a time, no matter who the opponent or what the score.

Many who have the strokes don't execute them when under pressure because they're not focusing on EXECUTION. They're focusing on the score, the opponent, the situation, everything but their stroke production and gameplan.

 

[Limpinhitter]

* * * Eventually, you can disregard your opponent's little ticks and just focus on yourself, your technique, and the ball.

Even when I'm relatively frustrated, I hit harder and put more topspin, still goes in. Sitters from the baseline, whether with topspin or underspin, are very easy to put away if you have the correct technique.

You can do it right now. It's a matter of understanding that you have that option and electing to do it. Focus on executing your shots, one shot at a time, and on your gameplan, one point at a time. If you do that, you will always play the best you are able to play on that day. Everything else is irrelevant.

 

[tennisfreak3]

On the tennis ladder in my town. A pusher never lost a match during one summer. He played against someone who's good at the net and he got crushed 6-2 6-0! I believe, if a pusher can't lob you, you win the match.

For my part, I don't even play pushers when I can. I play for fun!

 

[jdubbs]

Played a pusher/counterpuncher yesterday. He's a 4.5, as am I.
I easily won the first set 6-1.
My game sort of fell apart in the second and I got caught trying to push the ball back to him. I was trying to hit to his backhand and it didn't work. I lost 6-3.

In the third I made 2 adjustments: Hit cross court almost exclusively to cut down on my errors in trying to hit to his BH, and come to net on his floaty balls and put the pressure on.

I dominated with this newfound strategy and easily won 6-1.

Figure out what works for you, and definitely get to net against these pushers and show them who's boss!

 

[1HBH Rocks]

Played a pusher/counterpuncher yesterday. He's a 4.5, as am I.
I easily won the first set 6-1.
My game sort of fell apart in the second and I got caught trying to push the ball back to him. I was trying to hit to his backhand and it didn't work. I lost 6-3.

In the third I made 2 adjustments: Hit cross court almost exclusively to cut down on my errors in trying to hit to his BH, and come to net on his floaty balls and put the pressure on.

I dominated with this newfound strategy and easily won 6-1.

Figure out what works for you, and definitely get to net against these pushers and show them who's boss!

I used to play a guy who pushes most of his shot, but could at times hit decent passing shots. I worked a ton on my footwork, specifically the sequences of steps I needed to hit while moving forward. Then, it was a brutal offensive festival... You don't need to overdo it with pushers: they get back more shots than most people because they don't do anything fancy with it. Keep hitting the high percentage ball and, as you mention, using the net forces them to be more honest with their strokes -- you can't hit half paced shots if the guy follows behind his strokes whenever he sees a short ball and hit volley winners...

Players cheat over positioning, placement and preparation whenever you allow them to do it -- well, they go against the textbook method. It's not a textbook method by coincidence: just see why it's one and use a little variation to compel them to play your game.

And, well, they're pushers: they can't hit winners by your side. Of course, I use the word pusher to mean a literal junk-baller, someone who pushes the ball in play instead of striking it in play. I wouldn't call counterpunchers pushers since they play rallies and take the offensive when they have the chance to.

 

[5263]

I would disagree that most players don't have the strokes.

Interesting, because I would expect the really nice strokes are one of the rarest things I see in rec tennis, but it is really hard to quantify I suppose.
Even though most players never seem to get much past stroke production in practice, it is usually for pretty good reason Imo. I would have expected you to
be more picky about strokes than me, lol.

 

[Cheetah]

Of course, I use the word pusher to mean a literal junk-baller, someone who pushes the ball in play instead of striking it in play. I wouldn't call counterpunchers pushers since they play rallies and take the offensive when they have the chance to.

Not to pick on you but a junk baller is not a pusher. junk ballers are crafty, usually have skilled strokes and use varying spin as their major weapon.

from the following thread "The 6 Playing Styles Described"
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=58284

"4 - Junk Ball players can drive the “purists” among us into the Nut House. These players never allow you to get into a rhythm. They vary the height, depth, angles and quantity of spin so much your “strokes” fall apart ... right after your brain explodes. Junk Ballers seem never to be out of breath and play high-percentage tennis when it comes to “court position.” When you do manage to get them on the run, you learn they are also very quick on their feet."

and

"Junk Ballers:

JB's are tough to play against, until you can learn to read their game. Machine base liners, Attack the Net, Pushers, Counter Punchers and Soft ballers have the greatest chance of victory against them. While JB's don't have the strongest play style, they do often evolve into Counter Punchers. Basically if you are able to read the stroke timing, and attack their weaknesses such as power it's going to be a good day. ATN can put way more pressure on their shots, it's going to be favorable. Junk Ballers really can cause damage to Blasters I find, but that is about it. "

edit: btw, that thread i posted is very good if you haven't seen it yet

 

[Zachol82]

I just focus on footwork and blasting the ball. Seriously, I usually will start out all my matches by blasting the crap out of that ball. This usually warms me up properly for hitting winners later and gets the jitters out of my system. If by any chance your opponent thinks that you're just one of those idiots who will attempt to hit every single shot at 100% then that's even better =]

Intimidation goes a long way. It really does. I usually will continuously blast every ball until I lose a game and then switch my game up.

Worst thing you can do for yourself is have a 1-dimensional game. Vary it up!

 

[1HBH Rocks]

Not to pick on you but a junk baller is not a pusher. junk ballers are crafty, usually have skilled strokes and use varying spin as their major weapon.

I should have said "almost a junk-baller"... you see, many people could start saying this or that player is just a pusher because they're just keeping the ball in play -- that's not what I call a real pusher. A pusher won't execute the stroke in a technically sound way. I can't recall who wrote this, but it was something like "he doesn't hit the ball in play, he pushes it in play."

That's the expression "pusher" started: it's someone who bunts, blocks, slices and lobs the ball back in play instead of striking it. I see what you mean by saying junk-ballers tend to overuse different spins to throw you off whereas pushers really try to keep the ball in play, doing the bare minimum and waiting for your mistakes. I just wanted to be sure people wouldn't have in mind something like an amateur version of Andy Murray... that player could still attack and still hits very sound strokes -- it's not because consistency is your major weapon that you're a pusher; you're a pusher is you content yourself of pushing the ball in play. Anyway, the correction is worth my attention. Thanks.

If not, I have a question for you. These players who just bunt the ball back with only little spin or pace whom we call pushers, do you think that it's the fear of missing paired with the incapacity of producing a consistent top spin ground stroke that lead them this way? It makes me think about this post someone left in an other question:

You do NOT want to be good at being bad, which is exactly a ball machine can make you into if you don't have a good form to begin with.

They just got good at doing the wrong thing and as we'd predict seeing their technique, they can't hit much pace and spin at the same time, hence they just resort to the last thing they can do: bunting and blocking it back.

I can and should deal with these balls regardless, but there has to be a reason for why they behave like this on the court. Let's loose some rigidity and speculate just to see what sorts of possible explanations we could come up with.