Bad doubles partner stories

[Dartagnan64]

It's relative: the 4.5 guy might not view his potential 3.5 female partner as "good". The difference in skill level is vast. So I could have similarly written "9.0 >>>>> 8.0".

And granted, my experiences have been markedly different between 8.0 and 9.0 but fun just the same.

But there is a certain level required to have a reasonable competence for doubles and it's usually the good 3.5 level. I can face off against 4.5 level players in dubs and hold my own against their serves and groundstrokes. That was hard for me when I started as a 3.0 and didn't understand doubles.

A 4.5 male player is going to have his pick of the good 3.5 ladies, the ones that won't make awful decisions and understand the game. That makes all the difference in how much fun you can have.

My rando partner was 6'3" 250 lbs. He stood at the net, near the alley, and never moved. If the ball was hit to him or I set him up, he put it away. The rest of the time it was singles for me. I stopped counting his double faults. They say you can win with any partner. I beg to differ.

You've described like 90% of the 3.5 males at my tennis club. The fact that I move as a net player, shocks most of my competitors, they are so used to statues.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

But there is a certain level required to have a reasonable competence for doubles and it's usually the good 3.5 level. I can face off against 4.5 level players in dubs and hold my own against their serves and groundstrokes. That was hard for me when I started as a 3.0 and didn't understand doubles.

OK; you and @Cawlin have pointed out where my understanding was lacking. I can see where you both are coming from.

 

[Cawlin]

OK; you and @Cawlin have pointed out where my understanding was lacking. I can see where you both are coming from.

I think we all just sort of spoke from our own perspective without considering the rest of the spectrum. There's nothing nefarious about intent there, just the usual internet forum habits where you're basically having a conversation with yourself until or unless someone else chimes in. Nevertheless, the worthwhile take-home lesson is twofold:

#1 - ALL sweeping generalizations are ALWAYS WRONG!
#2 - Mixed probably doesn't suck at higher levels of play like it does at lower levels

 

[Dartagnan64]

#1 - ALL sweeping generalizations are ALWAYS WRONG!
#2 - Mixed probably doesn't suck at higher levels of play like it does at lower levels

Rule #1 should be a sticky for the entire internet. But it still doesn't mean that generalizations are not useful because they generally do represent either the mean or the majority in most cases.

 

[Cawlin]

Rule #1 should be a sticky for the entire internet. But it still doesn't mean that generalizations are not useful because they generally do represent either the mean or the majority in most cases.

Yeah, that's probably tied to some axiomatic concept like "cliche's exist for a reason" and so forth... mostly though, I was poking fun at myself with that rule...

 

[chatt_town]

wow it's amazing that you're still single.

So two things are clearly obvious....You don't know me and you clearly don't know what the hell you are talking about.

 

[Flootoo]

So two things are clearly obvious....You don't know me and you clearly don't know what the hell you are talking about.

one thing is clearly obvious... why you're still single.

 

[socallefty]

I was playing an USTA league doubles match a couple of years ago and we were up a set and a break when my partner who is a big-hitter made some FH errors by trying to hit too hard. He decided then to swing for the fences on all his FHs including returns and we lost the set quickly. During the break before the 3rd set, I made the comment that we should get back to the more conservative style of play that won us the 1st set easily. His reply was that he didn’t care if we won or lost the league match and he just wanted to “fix” his FH. I was dumbfounded and didn’t know what to say and we went out and lost the third set in about 20 minutes as I couldn’t focus either after that. Since it happened in an USTA league match for a team competition, it has got to be my worst doubles partner story.

All I ask from my doubles partners is that they keep trying till the end to see if we can somehow win the match together even if overmatched against tough opponents. Most of my worst experiences are related to playing with partners who don’t seem to care about their doubles results either from the start or because they are playing badly during the match. If I play with a player who is trying hard even if their level is lower than everyone else on the court, I don’t get too frustrated as I’ve been in their shoes sometimes also.

 

[tenapasi]

On tournament, having a double partner you trust is often overlook.
If both of you participating for fun or experience, it's not a problem.

However, if one of the player NTRP level is 4.5+, then he/she playing striving to win, having a double partner mindset that's playing for fun or experience, is a big no no.
The higher level player usually will get frustrated in the end.

 

[Jono123]

By far the most annoying for me is the 'coach'. He gives you unsolicited advice you never wanted or asked for. The fact he is also the weakest player with gaping holes in his own game eludes him as he focuses on the perceived shortcomings of those unfortunate enough to be partnered with him.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

I was playing an USTA league doubles match a couple of years ago and we were up a set and a break when my partner who is a big-hitter made some FH errors by trying to hit too hard. He decided then to swing for the fences on all his FHs including returns and we lost the set quickly. During the break before the 3rd set, I made the comment that we should get back to the more conservative style of play that won us the 1st set easily. His reply was that he didn’t care if we won or lost the league match and he just wanted to “fix” his FH. I was dumbfounded and didn’t know what to say and we went out and lost the third set in about 20 minutes as I couldn’t focus either after that. Since it happened in an USTA league match for a team competition, it has got to be my worst doubles partner story.

All I ask from my doubles partners is that they keep trying till the end to see if we can somehow win the match together even if overmatched against tough opponents. Most of my worst experiences are related to playing with partners who don’t seem to care about their doubles results either from the start or because they are playing badly during the match. If I play with a player who is trying hard even if their level is lower than everyone else on the court, I don’t get too frustrated as I’ve been in their shoes sometimes also.

Wow: I can see someone stubbornly doing this when playing singles; I've done it myself. But I've never seen someone do it in doubles. That's a "partner" to be avoided.

[I use the term loosely because a partner is someone to collaborate with and support. He was obviously in it just for himself.]

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

On tournament, having a double partner you trust is often overlook.
If both of you participating for fun or experience, it's not a problem.

However, if one of the player NTRP level is 4.5+, then he/she playing striving to win, having a double partner mindset that's playing for fun or experience, is a big no no.
The higher level player usually will get frustrated in the end.

Why would the level of player determine whether he's striving for a win?

I would think it more important that both partners are on the same page, whether it's going for the win or having fun.

 

[chatt_town]

one thing is clearly obvious... why you're still single.

smh...and where did you get that information? Apparently you pulled that out of your @$$ because again...you don't know what you are talking about. lol Is this one of those Trump like things where you just say some **** and hope and pray that no one fact checks you or just throw it up on the wall and see if it sticks and since you are throwing **** on the wall let me do the same...I'm guessing you are female...because only a female would yell out some **** like "that's why you're single"....if I were single....when did men ever take that to heart like that?lol You probably should stop while you are ahead and save that so called insult for one of your female opponents who you may actually p*SS off with that comment. lol

 

[Chalkdust]

And in 9.0 I've been able to play against 5.0 guys, opportunities I would not have had otherwise. Everything about their games is next level so I enjoyed that challenge.

I presume from context that you are a 4.5 guy... Your best opportunity to play against 5.0s is in 9.5 combo. Much better tennis than 9.0 mixed. And if you want to challenge yourself play with your 4.5 partner. Playing 9.5 together might result in butt kickings but will make you a stronger team when you then play 4.5 dubs.

 

[tenapasi]

By far the most annoying for me is the 'coach'. He gives you unsolicited advice you never wanted or asked for. The fact he is also the weakest player with gaping holes in his own game eludes him as he focuses on the perceived shortcomings of those unfortunate enough to be partnered with him.

Aye. Often the less skill they are, the better they "coach". And if the dude blaming you for the lost, better not partnering with him anymore.

Why would the level of player determine whether he's striving for a win?

I would think it more important that both partners are on the same page, whether it's going for the win or having fun.

I usually see players with NTRP level around 3.0-3.5 usually doesn't play to win. Especially if they facing better opponents.

Yes. I agree about both partner should be on the same page. But, if one NTRP is around 3.0-3.5, and the other is around 4.5-5.5, i seldom see both are on the same page.
Unless the weaker one paying the tournament fee for both. Which makes that count as carrying your partner.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

I usually see players with NTRP level around 3.0-3.5 usually doesn't play to win. Especially if they facing better opponents.

Most 3.0-3.5 I see are playing to win. They're obviously not as good as the 4.5+ but they still want to win.

Yes. I agree about both partner should be on the same page. But, if one NTRP is around 3.0-3.5, and the other is around 4.5-5.5, i seldom see both are on the same page.
Unless the weaker one paying the tournament fee for both. Which makes that count as carrying your partner.

The only times you'll get such a mismatched partnership are:
- MXDs
- Combo
- Social

I've played both MXDs and Social with a much weaker partner and my partners and I were on the same page; it was mainly up to me to adapt.

 

[Turbo-87]

The particular guy I mentioned is famous for his bad line calls, and questioning the opposite side's calls. His excuse is that he has bifocals so he can't see well! Then why doesn't he give the benefit of the doubt to his opponents.

That guy plays at my club too. Same excuses. He gets around.

 

[Cawlin]

I usually see players with NTRP level around 3.0-3.5 usually doesn't play to win. Especially if they facing better opponents.

Yes. I agree about both partner should be on the same page. But, if one NTRP is around 3.0-3.5, and the other is around 4.5-5.5, i seldom see both are on the same page.
Unless the weaker one paying the tournament fee for both. Which makes that count as carrying your partner.

Most 3.0-3.5 I see are playing to win. They're obviously not as good as the 4.5+ but they still want to win.

I've played both MXDs and Social with a much weaker partner and my partners and I were on the same page; it was mainly up to me to adapt.

I've excerpted both of your posts here - not trying to quote you out of context or anything, but only to add:

As a 3.5 player - I can tell you that I never walked out onto a court and didn't play to win - as far as I knew what was required to win. The trouble is - I don't always know HOW to win. Most of us just don't know what we don't know.

Example: I've seen lots of advice on dubs and mixed dubs on this forum, and the strategies they have suggested never even occurred to me.

The big issue in a lot of rec tennis is that anyone below 4.0 is probably not getting coached and/or probably not really doing things like looking into/reading about strategies. They're just out there for the exercise and a sport they enjoy - they want to win... but they don't know what to do to win, and don't necessarily have the time/energy/inclination to learn.

As Joe Paterno said: The will to win is important, but the will to prepare is vital.

Rec dubs tennis players below 4.0, in my limited experience, all seem to have the will to win, but lack the will to prepare, and perhaps more accurately, they lack the knowledge of how they should spend their time/energy/resources in that preparation.

 

[sureshs]

LOL my thread is alive after 11 years!