Diagnosis: Overhead

[Cindysphinx]

I was at 7.0 mixed practice today playing against a 3.5 female friend. Her overhead is not so good, usually. Today, it was up to its old tricks: Easy overheads putaways sent right to her racket were yanked into the bottom of the net or blasted well long. She missed them all.

After practice, she asked me to feed her some lobs so she could work on this. I had her stand on the T, and I fed high overheads as best I could, trying to get them so she wouldn't have to back up a lot. She asked me to watch for what she was doing wrong, and I noticed she wasn't turning/pointing and was hitting her overheads while spreadeagled to the net. This we fixed.

Then we saw two other issues. First, I told her that she was letting the ball get behind her, often staying on the T even if the lob was deeper. I suggested she try letting a few of them bounce right in front of her so she could the feeling for staying behind the ball.

She replied that her pro had told her you should let a lob go behind you so you can brush up on it and generate topspin. I was surprised -- no, make that shocked -- by this. I thought you shouldn't let an overhead get behind you if you can possibly help it because then you can't transfer your weight to the ball and will wind up hitting it defensively. Is there a type of overhead where you let the ball get behind you, or is that just bad advice?

The second issue was that all of her overheads -- 100% -- went to her left, even when she was trying to get them to go up the middle or to her right. She asked what was causing this but I had no idea and couldn't figure it out. Anybody got a theory on what could be happening there?

 

[larry10s]

its good to practice hitting overheads fallling backwards( think sampras sizzor overhead) since you may be in that position more often than you think. ideally you want the ball in front of you. her hitting to the left (assuming she is righty) she is probably using a continental grip(i hope) and slicing her over head rather than hitting it flat. btw both types of overheads are necessary depending on the situation your court position and your position relative to the ball

 

[dozu]

vids baby we need vids.

the ball get behind her thing - either she misunderstood the pro, or the pro stinks.

the ball goes to the left thing - without vids hard to tell... perhaps she is not rotating her forearm, and every one is hit like a slice serve, to the left.

 

[5263]

letting the ball get slightly behind and using TS on ovrheads is a method for very deep overheads, not from mid ct or closer.

hitting left means she is carving them and not pronating most likely.

 

[ronalditop]

I think I have the same problem as your friend. My overheads often go to the left, only very few go to the right, and that is when I have enough time to position myself facing more to the right. Also I often misshit on overheads, even though they go in, but with much less power than if they were hit clean. I dont know if the grip is the problem, I use a continental slightly towards eastern backhand.

 

[Cindysphinx]

She can't slice her serve (hits only topspin), and the ball didn't have slice on it. It just went that way.

Sorry, it was an impromptu thing. No video.

Thinking about it more, it probably was a failure to turn the shoulders. If you are facing the net, maybe it is hard to get the racket face headed toward your right?

 

[tikkimonkey]

Maybe the overheads go to her left because she used a continental grip on the overhead and doesn't pronate her racket, causing her to sideswipe the ball and send it to the left.

 

[ubermeyer]

I was at 7.0 mixed practice today playing against a 3.5 female friend. Her overhead is not so good, usually. Today, it was up to its old tricks: Easy overheads putaways sent right to her racket were yanked into the bottom of the net or blasted well long. She missed them all.

I don't think you can be a 3.5 without an overhead. Basically, anyone just starting to play tennis could beat your friend, since all they know how to do is hit weak lobs that bounce well inside the service line.

I don't mean to be mean, but I think your friend might be "overrating" herself. If she works on her overhead then maybe she would actually be a 3.5.

 

[Cindysphinx]

^She's a *computer-rated* 3.5 player without an overhead.

I also know a 3.5 guy with a big serve and no overhead. Some people just get the yips with overheads.

 

[Djokovicfan4life]

^She's a *computer-rated* 3.5 player without an overhead.

I also know a 3.5 guy with a big serve and no overhead. Some people just get the yips with overheads.

I love how people say you "can't be a 3.5 without X or Y". We're not exactly talking about the golden standard of tennis here.

 

[raiden031]

I love how people say you "can't be a 3.5 without X or Y". We're not exactly talking about the golden standard of tennis here.

Yeah you don't need an overhead to be a 3.5. Heck I sometimes go an entire match without even needing to hit an overhead. Not everyone lobs, so its not always used that much. Just depends on your opponents and also how your partner plays as well.

 

[FuriousYellow]

She replied that her pro had told her you should let a lob go behind you so you can brush up on it and generate topspin. I was surprised -- no, make that shocked -- by this. I thought you shouldn't let an overhead get behind you if you can possibly help it because then you can't transfer your weight to the ball and will wind up hitting it defensively. Is there a type of overhead where you let the ball get behind you, or is that just bad advice?

I've NEVER heard that advice before. The only reason I can think of for hitting an overhead with topspin is if you were trying an overhead from the baseline. From that distance, it's the same as if you were serving from the baseline. I've seen Federer do this a lot along with adding some sidespin.

From midcourt, I don't know why any player would want hit an overhead with topspin. You have less court to hit to, so you'd want to bring the ball down and into the court as quickly as possibly. Isn't that why it's called a "smash"?

 

[Blake0]

This is what i'd recommend.
Get her on the service line, like you did. Feed her balls. Make sure she turns sideways and is pointing her left hand (assuming she's righty) up at the ball and looking through the "window" between her head and arm to see the ball. Let her..shuffle (forgot what its called) to move her feet to get to the ball, and make her catch it with her left hand, which is up in the air. Make sure she doesn't lean forward or backwards (or sideways..), and she doesn't let the ball drop (so she catches it with her arm straight). Let her do that a couple times till she can get it right successfully a couple times in a row, then get her to hit overheads, and tell her to hit the overhead where she would catch the ball.

 

[Blake0]

She replied that her pro had told her you should let a lob go behind you so you can brush up on it and generate topspin. I was surprised -- no, make that shocked -- by this. I thought you shouldn't let an overhead get behind you if you can possibly help it because then you can't transfer your weight to the ball and will wind up hitting it defensively. Is there a type of overhead where you let the ball get behind you, or is that just bad advice?

Well there is an overhead like that..but thats 3x more difficult then a regular overhead...and it's not used offensively...ever. I've only used it a couple times, only when i have to. I used it when i'm almost on top of the net to put away a volley, but the opponent scrambles and lobs the ball back, and i'm shuffling back to try to get to it, but barely get to it and i don't want to have to hit a tweener (or attempt to anyways), then i jump and brush up the back of the ball to topspin overhead it back onto the court, to keep the ball in play. But yeah, it's not a shot you need, so tell her thats just bad advice..to hit all overheads like that..its just something you resort to in some situations which happen rarely.

 

[Steady Eddy]

I don't think you can be a 3.5 without an overhead. Basically, anyone just starting to play tennis could beat your friend, since all they know how to do is hit weak lobs that bounce well inside the service line.

I don't mean to be mean, but I think your friend might be "overrating" herself. If she works on her overhead then maybe she would actually be a 3.5.

I agree. In a normal match, maybe only a few points end on a smash. But if a player cannot hit the overhead, (you mentioned, she missed them all), in competition, an opponent would hit alot of lobs for an easy win. I know alot of people who go around with no overhead. You're not a player going around like that.

 

[Steady Eddy]

I love how people say you "can't be a 3.5 without X or Y". We're not exactly talking about the golden standard of tennis here.

It's not the golden standard, but a 3.5 has some sort of game. On the 7.0 scale, it's right in the middle, there are 3.5 leagues and tournaments, some people play as a 3.5 for years. Now everyone knows that the overhead is the reply to the lob. If you can't even get your overhead in, what else can you do with a lob but chase it back to the baseline? Someone with no overhead would be helpless against a drop shot/lob campaign. There'd be no point in hitting normal drives against them. This would be like a football team that couldn't defend against a pass. Who would run on them? If someone is unable to hit an overhead, they'd see nothing but lobs from a serious competitor.

Yeah you don't need an overhead to be a 3.5. Heck I sometimes go an entire match without even needing to hit an overhead. Not everyone lobs, so its not always used that much. Just depends on your opponents and also how your partner plays as well.

Sure, probably because you either have a reliable one, or your opponents believe you do. There was a time when my overhead was good in practice, (when I knew what was coming), but didn't work nearly as well during points. I made a point of taking overheads during the warmup in order to discourage my opponents from lobbing. That's the irony of the overhead. When you can't hit it, you get lobbed alot. You finally fix it, and then they quit lobbing you!

 

[Cindysphinx]

Sure, probably because you either have a reliable one, or your opponents believe you do. There was a time when my overhead was good in practice, (when I knew what was coming), but didn't work nearly as well during points. I made a point of taking overheads during the warmup in order to discourage my opponents from lobbing. That's the irony of the overhead. When you can't hit it, you get lobbed alot. You finally fix it, and then they quit lobbing you!

The reason Raiden never has to hit an overhead is because he is six feet tall and because he is a dude and plays primarily with/against other dudes. Dudes just don't lob.

I hardly ever hit an overhead in mixed, but I had better show up with my overhead if I want to play ladies doubles.

 

[raiden031]

It's not the golden standard, but a 3.5 has some sort of game. On the 7.0 scale, it's right in the middle, there are 3.5 leagues and tournaments, some people play as a 3.5 for years. Now everyone knows that the overhead is the reply to the lob. If you can't even get your overhead in, what else can you do with a lob but chase it back to the baseline? Someone with no overhead would be helpless against a drop shot/lob campaign. There'd be no point in hitting normal drives against them. This would be like a football team that couldn't defend against a pass. Who would run on them? If someone is unable to hit an overhead, they'd see nothing but lobs from a serious competitor.


Sure, probably because you either have a reliable one, or your opponents believe you do. There was a time when my overhead was good in practice, (when I knew what was coming), but didn't work nearly as well during points. I made a point of taking overheads during the warmup in order to discourage my opponents from lobbing. That's the irony of the overhead. When you can't hit it, you get lobbed alot. You finally fix it, and then they quit lobbing you!

Well I doubt there is even a 3.0 player out there who will miss 10 out of 10 overhead shots (except for rare occasions). So everyone will occasionally hit them in play, but just may not posess a good one or be able to end the point with one.

But even if I had one of these terrible overheads, there probably aren't alot of players at 3.5 that I think could pull off the lob attack because they just aren't good at it because its not their style. Someone with a very weak overhead could either 1) always let lobs go to their baseline partner or 2) let the ball bounce before striking it.

Sure this is a big liability at the higher levels to play like this, but I think you can get by at 3.5. 3.5 is a level where even the weirdest strokes and strategies you can think of will work if someone has enough competitive experience using them.

 

[raiden031]

The reason Raiden never has to hit an overhead is because he is six feet tall and because he is a dude and plays primarily with/against other dudes. Dudes just don't lob.

I hardly ever hit an overhead in mixed, but I had better show up with my overhead if I want to play ladies doubles.

Well not that I 'never' have to, but it depends on the match. Some matches I hit lots of overheads and others I hit almost none. I feel like my partner always hits more than me though for whatever reason. But then again I'm usually the stronger partner so I'm the one setting up causing the weak replies by my opponents for my partner to finish off.

 

[ubermeyer]

The reason Raiden never has to hit an overhead is because he is six feet tall and because he is a dude and plays primarily with/against other dudes. Dudes just don't lob.

i guess adult men don't lob... I primarily lob instead of pass, lobbing is much easier

 

[Steady Eddy]

Well I doubt there is even a 3.0 player out there who will miss 10 out of 10 overhead shots (except for rare occasions). So everyone will occasionally hit them in play, but just may not posess a good one or be able to end the point with one.

But even if I had one of these terrible overheads, there probably aren't alot of players at 3.5 that I think could pull off the lob attack because they just aren't good at it because its not their style. Someone with a very weak overhead could either 1) always let lobs go to their baseline partner or 2) let the ball bounce before striking it.

Sure this is a big liability at the higher levels to play like this, but I think you can get by at 3.5. 3.5 is a level where even the weirdest strokes and strategies you can think of will work if someone has enough competitive experience using them.

I have this brother who really doesn't play tennis, (he's a golfer). And he learned early that he can stay in a match by lobbing. He eventually got really good at it. Since he so rarely plays, he had no business entering his club's mixed tournament, but he entered it and even won the thing! I saw a write up of the final on-line, it said that he and his partner were "using a lob strategy", and I knew he was up to his old lobbing tricks. He won it against the club's teaching pro and his wife who win it every year, (that year they didn't). That showed me that even good players can really struggle against a lobber. It seems unfair, the smasher has to run back, set up, swing hard, take the risk, and all the lobber has to do is push a ball up in the air. Lobbing is relatively easy, smashing is hard. Except at higher levels the lobber has the advantage, IMO.

 

[ubermeyer]

But even if I had one of these terrible overheads, there probably aren't alot of players at 3.5 that I think could pull off the lob attack because they just aren't good at it because its not their style. Someone with a very weak overhead could either 1) always let lobs go to their baseline partner or 2) let the ball bounce before striking it.

I'm talking singles. I suppose in doubles you could just not hit the lob... but if in singles you waited for the ball to bounce first, you would be having much trouble against good lobs.

 

[Cindysphinx]

I have this brother who really doesn't play tennis, (he's a golfer). And he learned early that he can stay in a match by lobbing. He eventually got really good at it. Since he so rarely plays, he had no business entering his club's mixed tournament, but he entered it and even won the thing! I saw a write up of the final on-line, it said that he and his partner were "using a lob strategy", and I knew he was up to his old lobbing tricks. He won it against the club's teaching pro and his wife who win it every year, (that year they didn't). That showed me that even good players can really struggle against a lobber. It seems unfair, the smasher has to run back, set up, swing hard, take the risk, and all the lobber has to do is push a ball up in the air. Lobbing is relatively easy, smashing is hard. Except at higher levels the lobber has the advantage, IMO.

Yes, there is a woman on my team whose Plan A is lobbing. She lobs every ball she can reach, running opponents corner to corner. She wins many matches in this way.

This is a valid strategy and game plan for her. Personally, I won't partner with her. I just don't want to spend my tennis time waiting for anyone's ball to come down out of the clouds. It's no fun for me. I'd rather lose a more fast-paced match than win through 2 solid hours of lobbing with this player by my side.

 

[fruitytennis1]

Mabey your partner had lob mixed up with overhead. Like the toss during the serve. Im pretty sure no teaching pro would ever say that.

 

[Cindysphinx]

Mabey your partner had lob mixed up with overhead. Like the toss during the serve. Im pretty sure no teaching pro would ever say that.

Well, *somebody* was mixed up, that's for sure.

It really explains so many things, though. She and I partner sometimes. A lob would be coming to her, and she would assume the position of someone who is about to hit a smash, with all the fingerpointing and backing up. I would immediately come to the service line, anticipating an offensive shot. And then I would hear the ball bounce behind us because she whiffed the overhead completely. There were other times when she would set up for the overhead, realize at the last second that she'd never be able to reach it, and yell "Yours!" as she ducked out of the way -- which was of course way too late for me to have a play on the ball.

I just couldn't understand how someone with a good service motion could have so much trouble. Most people with bad overheads will miss with their location (long, into net), but they don't whiff a lot. All of this makes perfect sense if she was deliberately letting the ball get behind her and hoping to reach up and hit a topspin smash from the midcourt.

 

[moroni]

overheads are extremely important why? i sometimes play against an agressive baseliner but with no/bad overhead in this kind of situation when u r the weaker player from the baseline a simple drop shot then lop work i won a match where i won at least two points from lops every game it works when u are tired and wanna take some rest . so simply if u r good at overheads its not important cuz ur opponents wont lop you but when u are bad at it then just forfeit the match (JK) XD