Etiquette of hitting at the net player in doubles

[FlyingBoat]

I am astounded by the absurd notion some people have here, that because a person is at the net, that you need to avoid hitting in that area. I play people like this too. They think that since they are standing there, that you need to make a more difficult angle shot. Really that is their strategy, stand at the net and force you to go around them, because it would be improper to hit in their direction on an easy serve or overhead opportunity. They even run to the position, say the middle of the court to cut off your most natural response, and they believe since they are there, that you now need to adjust to hit the overhead in a more difficult direction because it would be improper to hit it in their direction.

If you can't handle the heat get to the back of the court!!! It is as simple as that!

I have even had opponents tell me at times. Oh I hit that out because I didn't want to hit you. I always tell them, hit it at me, at least then I have a chance to get it back! If its a sitting duck, then turn your back or get off the court if you want to. I have had to do that as well.

It is not a matter of winning at any cost, it is a matter of fair and interesting play. Its like playing any game when you aren't trying your best, it just isn't fun. The appropriate response to someone who is serving soft short serves can be to hit it hard in the direction of the person at the net, trying to pass them. The other option when they have drawn you so close in with the serve and you hit it back to the server, they can easily lob over you because you were drawn so close in. If the net person can't handle it, then they should back off. Seriously, what is so difficult to understand about this? Some of you think the appropriate response is to let them stay at the net so if you flub a return they can put it away?

If you are so concerned about injury, then maybe you shouldn't hit it too far away from people either, because then they need to run and might pull a hamstring, hurt a knee, or slip trying to change direction. I have seen about 100 times more of this type of injury than from a ball hitting a person.

The other situation I run into is one up and one back. The back person has a deep lob to me. Now, I can overhead that from the baseline to the open area and the back person has an easy get to it, or I can try to pass the person standing at the net. There are those who believe I need to try to make the more difficult overhead into the open area. That I should now be limited to only half the court where the other person can easily respond instead of having the option to try to pass the person at the net. That person will stand there, fully believing I am not allowed to hit it in that direction from my baseline. I am standing here, so you can't hit it this way! Fortunately, there are only a few who have this entitlement view.

 

[rkelley]

All is fair. That being said, my wife, who is a 2.5 and I are starting to play mixed together. Since 6.0 isn't an option, we will play 6.5, which makes it likely we will face a 4.0 man (I'm a 3.5). Although it is certainly permissible, I might take exception to the 4.0 hitting full-swing forehands at her at the net. There are so many other ways to win (she probably has a far larger hole in her backhand volley than anywhere else), and playing like that shows a lack of grace and sportsmanship. I have yet to run into a higher-level male player who would stoop that low.

So if you put up a sitter (meaning any ball that the 4.0 guy can take a full cut at) in front of your wife while she's at net you'll do the gentleman-like thing and yield the point to your opponents, correct?

 

[Mauvaise]

I got tagged this weekend. Right in my mid-upper right thigh - I've got a tennis ball sized bruise. I think the guy hit the ball at about 70-80mph and I had been coming in to the net and just misjudged where the ball was. It took 10 minutes before I could put full weight on that leg without pain. Guy apologized immediately and several times after. I waved it off - it was a good shot! I also learned that I can not handle volleys when they come at me that fast, so I played back when my partner served to him since he always took a large crack at the ball.

Good news: we won the match in a close 3-setter (6-3, 4-6, 6-4) so my taking it on the chin (so to speak) didn't go in vain!

I certainly didn't hold it against the guy - hugs were exchanged at the net instead of handshakes

 

[Maui19]

...hugs were exchanged at the net instead of handshakes

Ewwwww      

 

[beernutz]

Ewwwww

I'm pretty certain Mauvaise is a woman so it isn't as icky as you might be picturing.

 

[Mauvaise]

I'm pretty certain Mauvaise is a woman so it isn't as icky as you might be picturing.

I am. It was a mixed doubles match. And if it makes Maui19 feel better, the men did exchange manly handshakes and not hugs.

 

[Cindysphinx]

I certainly hope the men didn't make eye contact during that handshake.

 

[jk175d]

at a match over the weekend after we won, one of the opponants said something like "if you hit at me again from when you're 5 feet away we're going to have a conversasion" to my partner. I said if you conceed the point then we won't hit the ball to places you don't want us to hit it.

I never TRY to go right at someone, to a fault I am drawn to the small spaces I see open (or imagine are open) just out of reach of the other players. But if you're charging to get a short ball and there are two guys right on top of the net, odds are pretty good it's going to go right at one of them, there just aren't as many options in that instance.

Though I think in general there are usually better options than drilling at the net players, I don't think there is any ettiquette about hitting or not hitting at them. If they don't want to risk getting hit they can choose to stay back.

I guess I'd caveat that with if the person at net is really old, weak, or bad at tennis then it would be pretty unsporting. But one shouldn't be playing with the old, weak, or lousy unless they are among those ranks themselves in which case there's not of lot of danger from being hit by that person in the first place.

 

[Maui19]

I am. It was a mixed doubles match. And if it makes Maui19 feel better, the men did exchange manly handshakes and not hugs.

Thank goodness!

 

[stapletonj]

Were they manly men, men that enjoy the company of men, men that love the life of a ship at sea filled with men, no women?

With apologies to John Belushi

 

[sureshs]

Or were they synchronized divers in the Olympics?

 

[dlam]

This thread reminds me of the first time I got hit hard at the net during doubles
We(my friend and I playing at the courts some raw talent hitting the ball hard but new to tennis)somehow got a couple of skilled 5.0 players to share the court playing doubles
To even out the match we traded partners
I got hit in the chest with a hard return
I wasn't upset at the time but afterwards I realized that my "new" partner threw a weak serve on purpose to his buddy on the other side and use me for target practice
I still mad at that incident ,

On the flip side if I'm returning a weak serve I think it okay aim at the net man
I usually play CC but if he's poaching I dont see what wrong with hitting straight at where he was suppose to be

 

[NLBwell]

If you are at the same level, go for it. If a player is significantly weaker, then it is just beating up on them unnecessarily. In mixed, don't hit at the woman unless she is at least as good as the men on the court (higher NTRP rating).

 

[NTRPolice]

If you are at the same level, go for it. If a player is significantly weaker, then it is just beating up on them unnecessarily. In mixed, don't hit at the woman unless she is at least as good as the men on the court (higher NTRP rating).

You must not play mixed, or have a terrible record at it.

In mixed, its all about the women.

If a woman cant handle men hitting at her full blast she needs to get off the net. If that causes the team to lose she needs to get off the court and go play womens instead.

-If you dont like people hitting at you then dont play doubles.
-If you think men need to be nice to you and not hit at you dont play mixed.

Only "strong" women should play mixed. You need to be physically, mentally and NTRP strong to be able to play "mens doubles as a woman".

 

[dlam]

I think the man is the target in mixed.
Because usually the weaker serve is from the ladies
The stronger return of serve of the opposing team is usually from the man and goes who's at the net , the man not the woman.

 

[NLBwell]

You must not play mixed, or have a terrible record at it.

In mixed, its all about the women.

If a woman cant handle men hitting at her full blast she needs to get off the net. If that causes the team to lose she needs to get off the court and go play womens instead.

-If you dont like people hitting at you then dont play doubles.
-If you think men need to be nice to you and not hit at you dont play mixed.

Only "strong" women should play mixed. You need to be physically, mentally and NTRP strong to be able to play "mens doubles as a woman".

And you must either a jerk or a player with little control of his shots if you won't or can't win a point with angles, lobs, or passing shots that go past the woman on either side.

 

[NTRPolice]

And you must either a jerk or a player with little control of his shots if you won't or can't win a point with angles, lobs, or passing shots that go past the woman on either side.

Do you even play tennis? It doesnt sound like it... it look as easy as you say if you've never played before.

It if were that easy to "go around" someone, people wouldnt ever get beaned. People get beaned in singles. Do you know how much open court there is in singles compared to doubles? These guys are professionals and they still bean people and/or hit directly at them in singles.

They must all be "jerks" then, or "have no control over their shots" because they couldnt just "simply" lob/angle/pass their opponent. lol.

Anyone who isnt comfortable with challenging a net player should not play doubles because that just isnt a winning mindset.

 

[NLBwell]

Do you even play tennis? It doesnt sound like it... it look as easy as you say if you've never played before.

It if were that easy to "go around" someone, people wouldnt ever get beaned. People get beaned in singles. Do you know how much open court there is in singles compared to doubles? These guys are professionals and they still bean people and/or hit directly at them in singles.

They must all be "jerks" then, or "have no control over their shots" because they couldnt just "simply" lob/angle/pass their opponent. lol.

Anyone who isnt comfortable with challenging a net player should not play doubles because that just isnt a winning mindset.

So you would be in favor of pros hitting the schlubs playing with them in pro-ams? The other pros are at the same level as them. (Or are you just arguing for the fun of it and don't know what you are arguing about?)

 

[NTRPolice]

So you would be in favor of pros hitting the schlubs playing with them in pro-ams? The other pros are at the same level as them. (Or are you just arguing for the fun of it and don't know what you are arguing about?)

A pro-am? Geez. Why not just makeup a charity tennis event featuring Steven Hawking if you're going to go to extremes?

All pros are not the same level. Give me a break. You really must not play tennis if you think so. Are you seriously saying to say that Fed should not it at Mattek-Sands? They're definitely not on the same level.

In 6.0 doubles, should a 3.5 guy not hit at a 2.5 girl? What about a 3.0 guy hitting at a 3.0 girl?

Just because there are four 3.0's on the court do not make them all "equal". And just because a guy is a 2.5 and hes playing a 3.5 girl does not make them equal. It's quite possible that a 2.5 adult league player (male, national level) can be stronger than a 3.5 (female, never made a playoff) if shes a super senior. It's even possible you have a 2.5 male super senior who is being hit at by a 3.5 girl who played college 5 years ago. By your logic, that 3.5 girl shouldnt hit at the 2.5 old man. Unless... this is about gender, and your logic only works one way.

You didnt answer my question: Do you even play tennis? lol.

 

[Maui19]

I just got back from States (dubs). I must have seen a dozen guys get drilled in three matches. Apologizes after the drilling, and no one was upset in the least.

 

[sportlerin]

Do you even play tennis? It doesnt sound like it... it look as easy as you say if you've never played before.

It if were that easy to "go around" someone, people wouldnt ever get beaned. People get beaned in singles. Do you know how much open court there is in singles compared to doubles? These guys are professionals and they still bean people and/or hit directly at them in singles.

They must all be "jerks" then, or "have no control over their shots" because they couldnt just "simply" lob/angle/pass their opponent. lol.

Anyone who isnt comfortable with challenging a net player should not play doubles because that just isnt a winning mindset.

"It if were that easy to "go around" someone, people wouldnt ever get beaned." -- lol, yah, it takes skill to 'go around someone', that's what NLBWell is saying. "People get beaned in singles"?? You make it sound common. I have watched many many pro single matches and have never seen a beaning.

 

[NLBwell]

A pro-am? Geez. Why not just makeup a charity tennis event featuring Steven Hawking if you're going to go to extremes?

All pros are not the same level. Give me a break. You really must not play tennis if you think so. Are you seriously saying to say that Fed should not it at Mattek-Sands? They're definitely not on the same level.

In 6.0 doubles, should a 3.5 guy not hit at a 2.5 girl? What about a 3.0 guy hitting at a 3.0 girl?

Just because there are four 3.0's on the court do not make them all "equal". And just because a guy is a 2.5 and hes playing a 3.5 girl does not make them equal. It's quite possible that a 2.5 adult league player (male, national level) can be stronger than a 3.5 (female, never made a playoff) if shes a super senior. It's even possible you have a 2.5 male super senior who is being hit at by a 3.5 girl who played college 5 years ago. By your logic, that 3.5 girl shouldnt hit at the 2.5 old man. Unless... this is about gender, and your logic only works one way.

You didnt answer my question: Do you even play tennis? lol.

OK, you are just arguing for the fun of it.
I'll give it a go.
Of course a 3.5 guy should not try to peg a 2.5 woman. Assuming he is one of these guys with some amount of power despite the low level of play, he could seriously injure the beginner. I've seen too many of these pretenders be proud of themselves for hitting a defenseless woman with a tennis ball, claiming she should move away from the net to not get hit. Guys at this level of play don't realize how pitifully bad they are at tennis. Same for the 3.0 and 3.0 case. Do you strut around proud of yourself because you were able to hit a 3.0 woman? With a 3.5 gal and a 2.5 guy, he can probably take care of himself.

I've seen one of my friends permanently lose sight in one of his eyes from a thrown tennis ball. I also saw Russ Simpson almost die on the court at the Xerox tournament in Washington, DC when he was struck in the throat with a ball.

Hey, but you can think big of yourself for intentionally putting a bruise on a 2.5 woman, you jerk.

 

[samarai]

I pity the team that sets their teammate(usually the women) on top of the net thinking its gonna give them a statistical advantage. When I'm playing socially I wouldn't ever think of hitting down the line shots but in a competitive match I will go down the line and if she happens to be there well, it is what it is. Happened when we played state last month the partners kept pinning there partner on top of the net. I did test the volley skills and after a couple of hits they made sure to go back to the baseline.

 

[NTRPolice]

OK, you are just arguing for the fun of it.
I'll give it a go.
Of course a 3.5 guy should not try to peg a 2.5 woman. Assuming he is one of these guys with some amount of power despite the low level of play, he could seriously injure the beginner. I've seen too many of these pretenders be proud of themselves for hitting a defenseless woman with a tennis ball, claiming she should move away from the net to not get hit. Guys at this level of play don't realize how pitifully bad they are at tennis. Same for the 3.0 and 3.0 case. Do you strut around proud of yourself because you were able to hit a 3.0 woman? With a 3.5 gal and a 2.5 guy, he can probably take care of himself.

I've seen one of my friends permanently lose sight in one of his eyes from a thrown tennis ball. I also saw Russ Simpson almost die on the court at the Xerox tournament in Washington, DC when he was struck in the throat with a ball.

Hey, but you can think big of yourself for intentionally putting a bruise on a 2.5 woman, you jerk.

I... dont... even...

1) Hitting at the net person doesnt mean they will get beaned.
2) Hitting at the net person doesmt mean they will have a bruise even if they get beaned.
3) You have to hit really, really hard to be able to actually bean someone before they can block the ball or move out of the way. Not to mention that the ball has to be very accurately placed.

People are bad? Yes, they are. Means they cant aim. Means your net player should get as far away from the net as possible, not closer, if they're accident prone.

Your "friend" went permanently blind from getting hit in the eye from a tennis ball thrown at them? That's nice... not really a story I believe, but sounds to me like you're one of those "there's drunk drivers on the road so I dont drive a car" or "there are sharks in the water so I only swim in a pool" type of people. In that case, yeah, you must not play tennis, because your vision and family linage are very vulnerable on court.

"Think big of myself for intentionally putting a bruise on a girl?" nah.

I just think you're trolling.

Going from "hitting at the net player" to "that can kill someone" is such a huge leap you cant possibly be anything else. Beaning someone is very hard. You have to be way more accurate to bean someone (intentionally) than you do to when you try to avoid them. Thinking about that for 2 seconds, a person of average intelligence should be able to figure out.

A "person" is about the size of the doubles alley. Except your shot must be neither, too high nor, too low and must be fast enough that they cant move or block the ball.

Such a circumstance is more likely to happen on accident than intentionally. Anyone who plays tennis knows it.

 

[Cindysphinx]

If a 3.5 man like you aims at a 2.5 woman at net, you are very, very likely to hit her. This is due to a combination of your own lack of placement accuracy and her minimal volleying skills.

It's probably better to pick on someone your own size.

 

[NTRPolice]

If a 3.5 man like you aims at a 2.5 woman at net, you are very, very likely to hit her. This is due to a combination of your own lack of placement accuracy and her minimal volleying skills.

It's probably better to pick on someone your own size.

If a woman steps on the court for mixed doubles she is basically "entering the ring" as a willing combatant.. Everyone on the court is considered "fair game" beginning play.

Like I said, this "logic" seems to only work one way.

-What about a 2.5 super senior who is taking a BH DLT from a 3.5 former high school/college female?
-What about a 2.5 "power sprayer" 18 year old male vs. a 3.5 super senior woman?

I dont get it. Why do these supposed "weak and vulnerable women" want it both ways? They want to be able to put away shots at the net... but, of course, you're not allowed to hit at them (hit "DTL") because they might get hurt?

That makes no sense.

The less you hit a net person the more they tend to poach, especially at 6.0 and 7.0. At 8.0+ they just do their "thing" and trade some DTL for put-aways and getting beaned more or less doesnt phase people as long as its not really bad.

Why is a woman allowed to camp the net and put away balls, but a man cant hit DTL as a countermeasure? He's only allowed to go DTL (100% will not hit her) lob her, or go x-court back to the guy?

Please.

Gender equality works both ways.

If genders are created equal, then it doesnt matter what is standing there when I hit DTL. DTL is a legitimate shot and no one can be "expected" to not hit there especially if that person is putting away balls at the net.

 

[AlpineCadet]

I think the point is to consider their volley skills and play fair. Jamming someone who obviously can't volley is an easy point and the net player should know their limits according to the balls they receive. Hitting down the line is a fair play, as long as you aren't intentionally trying to hit someone. Just because you don't know how to volley or wear a usta rated 3.5-4.0 bra doesn't give you the right to tell opponents what shots are right or wrong for your game.

 

[Cindysphinx]

If a woman steps on the court for mixed doubles she is basically "entering the ring" as a willing combatant.. Everyone on the court is considered "fair game" beginning play.

Look. All I am saying is that you need to assess your own skill (ability to control your shot) and the skill of the person you are about to pick on. When you give me the most extreme example of a 2.5 woman and a 3.5 man . . . well, that is perhaps the most risky combination. She just learned to play tennis last week (and may not even understand the risks of being at net), and he has way more power than control.

That said, guys hit at me at net all the time. It's fine, I expect no special treatment and I get my fair share of reflex winners.

I do think the situation we are discussing calls for more caution on your part, though.

Also. . . . count me among those who thinks that mixed should be straight gender level. So 8.0 mixed can only be a 4.0 man and a 4.0 woman, period. No 4.5 men on the court with 3.5 women on the other side of the net. The imbalance of power is too great.

If that were the rule, NTRPolice, we wouldn't be having this discussion. You would be playing 7.0 mixed, and the 2.5 woman would be playing 6.0 mixed (since there is no such thing as 5.0 mixed). You would have to try to pick on a 3.5 woman, and she would handle your body shots reasonably well.

 

[NTRPolice]

Look. All I am saying is that you need to assess your own skill (ability to control your shot) and the skill of the person you are about to pick on. When you give me the most extreme example of a 2.5 woman and a 3.5 man . . . well, that is perhaps the most risky combination. She just learned to play tennis last week (and may not even understand the risks of being at net), and he has way more power than control.

I'm pretty confident I can "avoid" someone when hitting DTL, but, if I hit them, I dont feel too bad about it, unless its like their face or something. People hit me at the net all the time, ive been beaned, ive beaned, and its not that big of a deal.

If I go to net, I take the risk. If I ever feel like im in "danger" I play back. It's as simple as that. Should I expect people not to hit at me because im a terrible net player? No. If I get beaned, should they not every hit line again? No.

That said, guys hit at me at net all the time. It's fine, I expect no special treatment and I get my fair share of reflex winners.

And this is exactly how it should be. Why should it be any different for anyone else? Whether you're good or bad, you cant expect people to "not hit at you when you're at the net".

I do think the situation we are discussing calls for more caution on your part, though.

There is a time for caution and a time for playing nice. A league match isnt it, especially if its a match that affects standings.

Of course im not going to "risk it" if the match is inconsequential, but thats not the point. The point is: if you're at the net, you cant expect to not to be challenged.

Also. . . . count me among those who thinks that mixed should be straight gender level. So 8.0 mixed can only be a 4.0 man and a 4.0 woman, period. No 4.5 men on the court with 3.5 women on the other side of the net. The imbalance of power is too great.

The imbalance is too great between NTRP's period.

I watched some "8.0 mixed" on Youtube and that's like middle tier 7.0 here.

Once you take into account age, gender, and "NTRP dynamics" you can have someone very underrated on the court, in any age or gender bracket.

Point still is: If you're at the net, you're "trying" for points. If you're trying for points, then you're fair game. Any sitter at the net will be attacked by a net person at any level. That means, at any level, a net player is subject to the "balancing effect" of being attacked.

If that were the rule, NTRPolice, we wouldn't be having this discussion. You would be playing 7.0 mixed, and the 2.5 woman would be playing 6.0 mixed (since there is no such thing as 5.0 mixed). You would have to try to pick on a 3.5 woman, and she would handle your body shots reasonably well.

I've played against 2.5 adult men who are light years beyond some of the 3.5 women that I know. At this point, gender is regardless to me. It just so happens that the woman is almost always the weaker player if the NTRP's are "equal".

A while back we played the undefeated 7.0 team which was comprised of a 4.0 girl and a 3.0 guy. Guess who I picked on? The 3.0 guy, for the most part.

Strategy went like this:

Guy only slices fore/backhand, but hes very steady. Pound with him until one of the things occurs:

1) My partner can poach
2) The opponent poaches, and I pass her
3) He hits a slice too shallow into the court and I scoop it DTL and close in on her

The team lost overall, but we won our line.

She is one of the best 4.0 adult players here and her record at 7.0 and 8.0 is impressive to say the least. Still, she was the one I hit to when she was at net, provided I could turn it into a winner or an offensive play.

My ball has moderate pace and very high spin so it dips really hard. Your "average" 3.5 adult woman is going to completely whiff that ball. My partner, who is also a good 4.0 (she went to 3.5 nationals; got 3rd or 4th) and even she whiffs it sometimes.

 

[NLBwell]

IYour "friend" went permanently blind from getting hit in the eye from a tennis ball thrown at them? .

Sorry, didn't phrase that well, better to say that he lost visual acuity in the eye - uncorrectable - not total blindness. He basically has to function the rest of his life using one eye.

So basically, your excuse is that you really are bad at tennis and can't control your shots?

 

[Cindysphinx]

I've played against 2.5 adult men who are light years beyond some of the 3.5 women that I know.

I don't know why you make indefensible statements like this.

I don't think you can find a computer-rated 2.5 adult man who is lightyears ahead of a computer-rated 3.5 woman. I mean, wow. My husband does not play tennis and therefore has no form or technique or footwork. He cannot get a serve into the box consistently and cannot volley without being directly on top of the net. He would definitely be a 2.5 (although not a computer-rated one), although I am sure he would get better if he got instruction and gave a fig about tennis.

If I had to pick between my dear, sweet, wonderful 2.5 husband and *any* 3.5 woman you found walking down the street as a doubles partner for match, I would pick the 3.5 woman. She would be lightyears stronger.

 

[spot]

I've played against 2.5 adult men who are light years beyond some of the 3.5 women that I know

Does anyone know any guys who play 2.5? I've met a ton of tennis players and I personally have never met one. I simply cannot fathom how bad a guy woudl have to be to play 2.5.

 

[Mongolmike]

I don't know why you make indefensible statements like this.

I don't think you can find a computer-rated 2.5 adult man who is lightyears ahead of a computer-rated 3.5 woman. I mean, wow. My husband does not play tennis and therefore has no form or technique or footwork. He cannot get a serve into the box consistently and cannot volley without being directly on top of the net. He would definitely be a 2.5 (although not a computer-rated one), although I am sure he would get better if he got instruction and gave a fig about tennis.

If I had to pick between my dear, sweet, wonderful 2.5 husband and *any* 3.5 woman you found walking down the street as a doubles partner for match, I would pick the 3.5 woman. She would be lightyears stronger.

I agree. I'm trying to think of some of the really weak 3.0 men (who might be 2.5's... if there even is a 2.5 ranking for men)... their egos might lead them to think that no woman could possibly beat them... but reality is... no way. They may not get bageled vs a 3.5, but they make way, way, way too many errors. Again, inflated egos get in the way of reality.

 

[spot]

SO lets say that a 3.5 guy plays left handed as that would probably be the playing level of a 2.5 guy. What do people think the score would be against a 3.5 woman?

 

[Mongolmike]

Doesn't matter what level I'm playing against, if I'm hitting left handed, I'm losing. If I'm playing against a 2.5 woman, I might get one game because she made too many errors... but I think I would still get bageled. No serve, no backhand, no overheads, a weak punchy type of forehand.... left handed I get crushed.

 

[leroy_sunset]

I couldn't beat a 5 year old playing left-handed.

3.5 woman trounces a "2.5" man, and probably a 3.0 man as well. I know 3.5 women that can beat me on their good day.

 

[Cindysphinx]

I couldn't beat a 5 year old playing left-handed.

3.5 woman trounces a "2.5" man, and probably a 3.0 man as well. I know 3.5 women that can beat me on their good day.

Puh. I could *destroy* a five-year-old playing left-handed.

 

[Nostradamus]

Puh. I could *destroy* a five-year-old playing left-handed.

just don't aim at the head or eye. if somebody hits me in the head, i would call the police immediately and file charges.

but if you just get hit in the hips or family jewel, i think it is fair play.

 

[sureshs]

Does anyone know any guys who play 2.5? I've met a ton of tennis players and I personally have never met one. I simply cannot fathom how bad a guy woudl have to be to play 2.5.

Cindy's husband is one.

Or would be if he played.

 

[blakesq]

What if your partner hits you in the ear when he is serving, are you going to call the police? What if your opponent hits a lob to you, and you fall down, calling the police? What if your opponent serves you out wide, and you run into the bench between courts and hurt yourself, calling the police? Are the cops tired of you calling them when you play tennis?

just don't aim at the head or eye. if somebody hits me in the head, i would call the police immediately and file charges.

but if you just get hit in the hips or family jewel, i think it is fair play.

 

[Mongolmike]

Doesn't matter what level I'm playing against, if I'm hitting left handed, I'm losing. If I'm playing against a 2.5 woman, I might get one game because she made too many errors... but I think I would still get bageled. No serve, no backhand, no overheads, a weak punchy type of forehand.... left handed I get crushed.

I gotta admit, I thought about this... playing left handed... and I think if I switched to a two-handed back hand... that puts my dominant hand (R) back on the racquet.... and I think in very short order I would be hitting pretty decent shots.... so if I went two-handed on both wings... technically would I still be playing left handed? If I was playing one handed left hand... I lose. If I'm playing two-handed on both wings... I beat a 2.5 man or woman, beat some 3.0s.... probably still lose and possibly bageled to 3.5s...

For the poster saying if they got hit in the head they'd call the police???? Really? They might show up, eventually, but I think once they find out you got hit playing tennis.... I think they might have a problem with YOU!

 

[sureshs]

What if your partner hits you in the ear when he is serving, are you going to call the police? What if your opponent hits a lob to you, and you fall down, calling the police? What if your opponent serves you out wide, and you run into the bench between courts and hurt yourself, calling the police? Are the cops tired of you calling them when you play tennis?

That was just Fedace being funny, no need to take it seriously.

 

[slymule]

Next season I hope to play on my first ever league. I haven't played competitive tennis since I played in college. Probably haven't even picked up a racquet a half a dozen times since college, and that was 37 years ago. Both my sons have shown an interest in learning the game and the oldest boy and I have been playing about 3 times a week for almost three months now. I'm really surprised how fast he's picking up the game. I'm old school, an all court player, hit the net at the first opportunity and I'm teaching him the same game. Granted my game is really rusty but one thing I haven't lost is being able to hit with alot of power. Reading this thread has been kind of unsettling because I was taught if you don't have a nice opening to hit too, put one at your opponents feet or thereabouts. My son is very athletic and we are both very competitive. We both love going to the net, and believe me I don't cut him any slack when he's there. Didn't take him very many of my best rifle shots just clearing the net before his reflexes got REALLY REALLY FAST. In fact it really blew my mind how fast that kid got. I'm sorry but I just can't seem to ease up on a shot when somebody is standing at the net, its almost like they're daring me to see if I can get one by them. I don't head hunt but they better be expecting that ball to be doing Mach 1 when its coming their way. It's like its an ingrained subconscious thing. Can you join a league and not have to play mixed doubles? I'd sure hate to have some little old gal standing there at the net in front of me and find out I just rifled a ball directly at her without even giving it any thought - I'd feel terrible. Think I should stay away from the leagues if you have to play mixed doubles? I'm serious. Thirty seven years later and I still have this put the ball away killer instinct.

 

[NTRPolice]

So basically, your excuse is that you really are bad at tennis and can't control your shots?

You're just being stupid. I'm still not sure you even play tennis, or if you're just trolling. I mean, if you hit enough overheads/passing shots/rally balls or what have you, you will eventually hit someone, especially in doubles. Anyone who plays tennis knows this. Even the pros bean each other on accident FFS. If they know the serve is weak, or the return is strong, their net players plays back. Even if you just watch tennis on Youtube you'd know this. lol.

I don't know why you make indefensible statements like this.

I don't think you can find a computer-rated 2.5 adult man who is lightyears ahead of a computer-rated 3.5 woman. I mean, wow. My husband does not play tennis and therefore has no form or technique or footwork. He cannot get a serve into the box consistently and cannot volley without being directly on top of the net. He would definitely be a 2.5 (although not a computer-rated one), although I am sure he would get better if he got instruction and gave a fig about tennis.

If I had to pick between my dear, sweet, wonderful 2.5 husband and *any* 3.5 woman you found walking down the street as a doubles partner for match, I would pick the 3.5 woman. She would be lightyears stronger.

Your husband is not a good 2.5, obviously.

If you take a 2.5 sectional/national level player, who is 18 years old, athletic, and put him up against an overweight 3.5 senior lady, he can definitely be well above her level. He's faster, stronger, just less experienced.

I've played 3.5 seniors in adult league as a 3.0, and there is no comparison. Imagine me up against a 3.5 senior LADY who has never made a playoff. Yes, id be light years ahead of them.

It's not a "normal" circumstance, but it definitely isnt that rare to see young, athletic, "adult" players who are playing against older "senior" players especially in low levels of mixed doubles.

I agree. I'm trying to think of some of the really weak 3.0 men (who might be 2.5's... if there even is a 2.5 ranking for men)... their egos might lead them to think that no woman could possibly beat them... but reality is... no way. They may not get bageled vs a 3.5, but they make way, way, way too many errors. Again, inflated egos get in the way of reality.

Ego's work both ways.

There are a lot of 3.5 old people who think they can beat young players because they make too many errors. When they lose, they complain about that person being underrated or whatever.

I've played a lot of older 3.5 men in adult league as a 3.0 and let me tell you... they think they're going to just "rally" with me and watch me make errors all day. When I rally with them, then punish a short ball for a clean winner, they become confused. They try to shift to a gear they dont have, that is, "hit winners" and they end up losing frustrated... then they complain. lol.

As a "top tier" 3.0 (C) player, I can say that ive seen some older 3.5 and 4.0 women who would not have a chance in hell against me, especially not in singles. Some older 4.0 guys give me "problems", but none of the 3.5 men have.

As I said, NTRP's are not "standard" across the board.

Cindy's husband is NOT a 2.5 in my eyes. You should see the 2.5's at the national level. lol. They are the 2.5's.

 

[Cindysphinx]

Your husband is not a good 2.5, obviously.

Nice try.

You did not say "a good 2.5." You said "a 2.5." Besides, if a guy is playing 2.5 at nationals, he is at the top of his level. If you take a 3.5 woman who is playing at nationals, she is also at the top of her level. The disparity in ability remains, and she is lightyears stronger. Apples to apples, my friend.

If you take a 2.5 sectional/national level player, who is 18 years old, athletic, and put him up against an overweight 3.5 senior lady, he can definitely be well above her level. He's faster, stronger, just less experienced.

Apples to apples, please.

If you take an average 2.5 man against an average 3.5 woman, she crushes him. Even if we agree he is faster and stronger, he lacks one critical thing tennis players must have: The ability to keep the ball in the court.

I've played 3.5 seniors in adult league as a 3.0, and there is no comparison. Imagine me up against a 3.5 senior LADY who has never made a playoff. Yes, id be light years ahead of them.

Apples to apples.

You are a 3.0C who, by your own description, is really a 3.5. You choose to compare yourself to a 3.5 senior woman.

Well, a 3.5C man should be about one USTA rating level above a 3.5 woman, perhaps a tad more for a senior woman (although the man's advantages in strength/speed would be somewhat less in doubles than singles).

Now, I am a 4.0 senior woman, probably in the 40th percentile of my rating level. If you are truly a 3.5 guy at the middle of 3.5 . . . I wouldn't be at all nervous about playing you in doubles. I am playing 7.5 mixed combo right now with 3.5 male partners. I am enjoying it very much, but the main thing I worry about is making sure I duck quickly enough to avoid their wild shots that land six feet out.

Cindy's husband is NOT a 2.5 in my eyes. You should see the 2.5's at the national level. lol. They are the 2.5's.

Actually, they are *not* the 2.5s. You seem to be basing your assessments of various rating levels based on what would be seen at Nationals (although I cannot help but notice that when you claim you can destroy women, you do not assume they have Nationals skills but instead are old and feeble).

True 2.5 men are as rare as spotted owls. This is why there are few leagues for them. The one guy I heard of who was a legit 2.5C was very old, and he won at 6.0 mixed based on the bashing ability of his 3.5 female partner (who is now a 4.0 and competes in 9.0 mixed). I can promise you that he would stand no chance against her, in singles or doubles.

 

[spot]

Seriously... an athletic 18 year old is not a 2.5. You think that an athletic 18 year old would be crushed at 3.0 so badly that he would get bumped down to 2.5? A guy with good athletic ability is a 3.0 as soon as he starts playing. He likely can be 3.5 within a couple months of playing. If he plays very regularly then he can be 4.0 within a year.

If you want to say that there are guys who self rated at 2.5 who can beat 3.5 women then sure. But that has absolutely nothing to do with what a 2.5 guy would do against a 3.5 woman.

 

[NLBwell]

You're just being stupid. I'm still not sure you even play tennis, or if you're just trolling. I mean, if you hit enough overheads/passing shots/rally balls or what have you, you will eventually hit someone, especially in doubles. Anyone who plays tennis knows this. Even the pros bean each other on accident FFS. If they know the serve is weak, or the return is strong, their net players plays back. Even if you just watch tennis on Youtube you'd know this. lol.
.

Once again, you change the subject. The question is about intentionally targeting hard hit balls at a much weaker player - say a 2.5 woman by a 3.0 or 3.5 man. You seem to be able to keep this straight when talking with Cindysphinx, but not me.
You are just being a jerk when you do that, trying to think big of yourself despite your very low level of tennis ability. Try to become a better player instead of resorting to creepy and possibly dangerous tactics.

 

[leroy_sunset]

right now with 3.5 male partners... the main thing I worry about is making sure I duck quickly enough to avoid their wild shots that land six feet out.

True story.

NTRP, if you're as good as you say you are (beating 4.0 computer-ranked players) as a 3.0, then you're a sandbagger plain and simple. Sorry to call you out, but thems the breaks. Play at your level and rate yourself properly.

 

[Roforot]

Why the heck do they even have nationals for 2.5s... that's bloody ridiculous.

 

[tennis tom]

Why the heck do they even have nationals for 2.5s... that's bloody ridiculous.

They are competing to be the best of the mediocre and like travelling with their buds to get away from the li'l woman.