Frustrating match against pusher

[Crionics]

This is very good advice! Funny enough, I have been struggling with a pusher who also pancakes his second serve. I have changed my philosophy from trying to win all the time to looking at it as "this is helping me improve my weaknesses". I know eventually the matches will get closer and it will feel good knowing that I have improved but the other guy chose to stay the same (and still make a bold claim of being 4.0).

That is some old post you are digging up! I am not even quite sure anymore which guy I was actually referring to in my post (my tennis partners changed a lot over the years), but if it is the one I think it is, I beat him quite easily a year or two later..
In hindsight he wasn't such a tough pusher to beat. Last summer I participated to the local club tournament and to play a 50+ old guy who looked out-of-shape and his shots had no pace; during warm-up I was thinking "no way I can lose to this hack, this will be an easy win for me". Ha! Turned out I lost badly in 2 sets. In the second set I was leading 4-2 but then still managed to lose the set. Somehow he always got a lot of my balls back either with some moonball landing relatively quite deep in the field or some junk-sliced shots. It was hard to find the balance between playing it safe (but going for long rallies and eventually losing the point with some dumb mistake) or going for too much (and just missing badly most of the time).
Anyway, after the match we started playing regularly against each other. I still lost many times and it took me a while until I started scoring a win. I really enjoyed playing againt him and it really made me think how I should play differently in order to win. I started coming in to the net a bit more, something I hardly ever did before,

A lot of people talk about pushers in a derogative way and the reason for this, I believe, is that pushers ultimately hurt their egos. What pushers are doing to their opponents is exposing their weaknesses and showing them that they are simply not as good as they think they are.

 

[user92626]

That really doesn’t mean as much as you think, unfortunately. “Baseline basher” and “topspin monkey” can be (or in the case of the latter, is) a pejorative term for a certain type of player and neither term has a clear cut definition.

So while I agree that pusher can take a negative meaning especially when used by some salty hero who’s played one and lost, I don’t think it’s a meaningless term or a term that ought to be gotten rid of. People will continue to use the term in one of the aforementioned two ways, so it’s a matter of people like us to try influence the definition rather than to pretend that it doesn’t exist because even if you are able to eliminate the word, another one will take its place.

Why? Because pushing isn’t some figment of our imagination. It clearly exists and is prevalent. We can identify its features. We can predict with some degree of accuracy how a pusher will play. People who throw that word around willy-nilly as I said are ignorant, stupid, or I guess salty. If they’re ignorant, educate them. If they’re stupid...well you can’t fix that. If they’re salty, then you can lampoon them.

No we cannot. We CANNOT define what a pusher is. There's no one clear definition to agree on and therein lies the issue. Everyone, more like loser, has his own definition, and you'll call them ignorant, stupid? Based on what laws to give you that right? Basically It adds unnecessary confusion than helps anything. Same deal with "baseline basher" and "topspin monkey". All the terms do is instigate hatred and don't do anything to help.

 

[pico]

That is some old post you are digging up! I am not even quite sure anymore which guy I was actually referring to in my post (my tennis partners changed a lot over the years), but if it is the one I think it is, I beat him quite easily a year or two later..
In hindsight he wasn't such a tough pusher to beat. Last summer I participated to the local club tournament and to play a 50+ old guy who looked out-of-shape and his shots had no pace; during warm-up I was thinking "no way I can lose to this hack, this will be an easy win for me". Ha! Turned out I lost badly in 2 sets. In the second set I was leading 4-2 but then still managed to lose the set. Somehow he always got a lot of my balls back either with some moonball landing relatively quite deep in the field or some junk-sliced shots. It was hard to find the balance between playing it safe (but going for long rallies and eventually losing the point with some dumb mistake) or going for too much (and just missing badly most of the time).
Anyway, after the match we started playing regularly against each other. I still lost many times and it took me a while until I started scoring a win. I really enjoyed playing againt him and it really made me think how I should play differently in order to win. I started coming in to the net a bit more, something I hardly ever did before,

A lot of people talk about pushers in a derogative way and the reason for this, I believe, is that pushers ultimately hurt their egos. What pushers are doing to their opponents is exposing their weaknesses and showing them that they are simply not as good as they think they are.

Was it just coming to the net that helped? Did you try to outpower him or maintain slower rallies?

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

No we cannot. We CANNOT define what a pusher is. There's no one clear definition to agree on and therein lies the issue. Everyone, more like loser, has his own definition, and you'll call them ignorant, stupid? Based on what laws to give you that right? Basically It adds unnecessary confusion than helps anything. Same deal with "baseline basher" and "topspin monkey". All the terms do is instigate hatred and don't do anything to help.

So the way I get around your apparent dilemma is to define what I believe "pusher" means and go from there. If someone wants to disagree with my definition, fine: present an alternative one and we'll discuss that.

What I don't worry about is getting agreement because everyone's got an opinion. You're hung up trying to achieve consensus.

 

[user92626]

I did give you guys an alternative one which is not to denigratingly, narrowly, wrongly label players.

Focus on the shots, the results. That's what i did and i do great against anyone. My opponents are either faster, hit better and beat me or they dont and i beat them.

 

[dman72]

The fact that so many people complain about the pusher means, although you've figured it out, it's not "obvious" nor do they have mastery over the "dozens of shots" to counter.

My point isn't to praise the pusher or somehow imply your game has big holes; it's merely to point out why pushers are so successful. I think we actually agree on that; where you and I diverge is where you start judging them ["losers"; "only care about winning"; etc].

You don't need to master dozens of shots to counter the mid court sitter. You need to practice one with maybe a drop shot thrown in occasionally. You can practice hitting hundreds of loopy forehands into the backhand corner (for righties) until it is simply muscle memory. Or practice just hitting short angled cross court forehands. Or practice a slice or backhand or forehand approach following into net. One shot that you have confidence in, that you can hit over and over.

My personal experience is that pushers (in my sense of the term mid court moonballs with no pace or spin) make USTA singles tennis in particularly suck. I was happy to get out of 3.5 to not see so many of these particular brand of pusher. I played one guy in 2 4.0 seasons who played this style. I played counter punchers who never missed, but that isn't the same thing. They at least moved the ball side to side or had net games or made some attempt to put short balls away.

I can't say anyone on my 3.5 teams actually lost to these guys, but they all came off the court saying "I wish I hadn't come here tonight". It was worse to play them on har tru...I had to play 3 of them on that surface. Same guys on hard court my teammates handled with fewer headaches, but all still had the same reaction. I guess the fact that no one lost to them is the reason we went to sectionals and 6 of our guys got bumped.

 

[Crionics]

Was it just coming to the net that helped? Did you try to outpower him or maintain slower rallies?

Nope, though the one time I came a lot to the net I nearly beat him (was leading 5-3 in the third set and lost it 5-7 ultimately). I just checked my notes (since a couple of years I like to take notes each time I play somebody, writing down scores and making a brief summary of the match and how I felt) and the one time I beat him I was actually feeling quite terrible, aha I could still feel the heavy breakfast in my stomach. So I played differently, that is with less risk, my focus was just trying to put the ball back in play. Also I didn't care about losing because I was feeling terrible.
There were also a couple of times I won the first set, but we couldn't finish the match because we got kicked off the court by the next people coming to play. So technically I only won once.
I think over time I learned to handle better his paceless lobs and junk-slices, something I had (and still have to a certain degree) a lot of trouble dealing with. As I said in an earlier post you are not used to these kind of shots when you take lessons with a tennis pro. I also believe a part of my losing was mental, I blew quite often leads. Deep inside me I always thought "No way in hell can I lose to this guy"; these are the kind of thoughts you should avoid IMO, because you end beating yourself. Maybe that is also the reason I won that one time I felt terrible, because that one time I wasn't thinking that I HAD to win, a completely different mindset.
Anyway last time I played him was september/early october, I hope I will get to play him next season (starting in April) plenty of times! It will be interesting to see if I'll be able to beat him consistently or not.

 

[dman72]

Also, I see a distinct difference between what I call a "pusher" and a "junk baller". A junk baller gives you spins, short balls, off speed crap to throw of your game, knowing that many people just practice hitting at the same pace. I have more respect for this than true pushing, because you are actually DOING something with the ball, instead of taking all offense out of the equation on your side of the net. I know, no one cares whether I respect it or not. I can only tell you, the true pushers I know..I wouldn't play in a casual match by choice. Especially someone who hits like that when you are playing just for fun.

 

[user92626]

Also, I see a distinct difference between what I call a "pusher" and a "junk baller". A junk baller gives you spins, short balls, off speed crap to throw of your game, knowing that many people just practice hitting at the same pace. I have more respect for this than true pushing, because you are actually DOING something with the ball, instead of taking all offense out of the equation on your side of the net. I know, no one cares whether I respect it or not. I can only tell you, the true pushers I know..I wouldn't play in a casual match by choice. Especially someone who hits like that when you are playing just for fun.

You're the 147962th guy with a special take on "pusher" and random labels. Nice, what does it feel like to be special?

Yesterday, I teamed up with a ball basher, topspin monkey and played against a junk baller, old geezer lobber. I played an all around pro-style tennis. Very correctly, good-looking and all. The proper tennis. My topspin monkey, ball bashing of a partner kept mistaking tennis for baseline and tried to hit homers. AGGHrrr.

Also, I told my junk baller opponent that it's very rude and wrong to send the ball short and everywhere when I was positioned correctly at the baseline. Stupid people. They kept doing it. I hate bad tennis sooo much.



btw, I don't mean any disrespect to anyone I play with. I express all this from a loving heart -- Joker's style.

 

[dman72]

You're the 147962th guy with a special take on "pusher" and random labels. Nice, what does it feel like to be special?

Yesterday, I teamed up with a ball basher, topspin monkey and played against a junk baller, old geezer lobber. I played an all around pro-style tennis. Very correctly, good-looking and all. The proper tennis. My topspin monkey, ball bashing of a partner kept mistaking tennis for baseline and tried to hit homers. AGGHrrr.

Also, I told my junk baller opponent that it's very rude and wrong to send the ball short and everywhere when I was positioned correctly at the baseline. Stupid people. They kept doing it. I hate bad tennis sooo much.



btw, I don't mean any disrespect to anyone I play with. I express all this from a loving heart -- Joker's style.

Didn't I say no one cares?

You're the 1,000,000,000 person on the internet with a level of hostility and smarm that comes solely as a result of your anonymity.

In imploring others to not "instigate such hatred", start with yourself. I offered practical advice to those who struggle with these kind of players. You basically said, "you aren't good", which is internet d-bag 101.

 

[user92626]

Didn't I say no one cares?

You're the 1,000,000,000 person on the internet with a level of hostility and smarm that comes solely as a result of your anonymity.

In imploring others to not "instigate such hatred", start with yourself. I offered practical advice to those who struggle with these kind of players. You basically said, "you aren't good", which is internet d-bag 101.

LOL. this is hostility? oh man sensitive much?

That was jokey sarcasm to dismantle the stupid pusher idea. You guys are nobody for me to hate.

 

[dman72]

LOL. this is hostility? oh man sensitive much?

That was jokey sarcasm to dismantle the stupid pusher idea. You guys are nobody for me to hate.

Being sarcastic is often a way of expressing hostility. If you don't like threads where the term "pusher" is used...don't click on them. It's a pretty standard term that's been used for decades at a minimum.

All of sudden you are the "special" transcendent one who will dispense all this pointless pusher talk by all the losers. See, that's jokey sarcasm.

 

[pico]

Nope, though the one time I came a lot to the net I nearly beat him (was leading 5-3 in the third set and lost it 5-7 ultimately). I just checked my notes (since a couple of years I like to take notes each time I play somebody, writing down scores and making a brief summary of the match and how I felt) and the one time I beat him I was actually feeling quite terrible, aha I could still feel the heavy breakfast in my stomach. So I played differently, that is with less risk, my focus was just trying to put the ball back in play. Also I didn't care about losing because I was feeling terrible.
There were also a couple of times I won the first set, but we couldn't finish the match because we got kicked off the court by the next people coming to play. So technically I only won once.
I think over time I learned to handle better his paceless lobs and junk-slices, something I had (and still have to a certain degree) a lot of trouble dealing with. As I said in an earlier post you are not used to these kind of shots when you take lessons with a tennis pro. I also believe a part of my losing was mental, I blew quite often leads. Deep inside me I always thought "No way in hell can I lose to this guy"; these are the kind of thoughts you should avoid IMO, because you end beating yourself. Maybe that is also the reason I won that one time I felt terrible, because that one time I wasn't thinking that I HAD to win, a completely different mindset.
Anyway last time I played him was september/early october, I hope I will get to play him next season (starting in April) plenty of times! It will be interesting to see if I'll be able to beat him consistently or not.

It's funny that you mentioned "didn't care about losing" because that is how I have started to approach these matches and it helps a lot. I actually have improved in how I deal with them - a huge part being the patience to hang in long rallies. The two guys I play are definitely more fit than me and ultimately I just can't run their balls down. They obviously conserve more energy in the course of the match because I usually put more into some shots in the quest of legit winners. I have also had days where my "don't care about losing" attitude has made me so aggressive on court that I am rushing them with approach shots and volleying more that it rattles them so much more. However, for me to maintain that consistency of style is too much again. So I am trying to find that balance. I guess my point is that it often can be when you are feeling ****ty or just not into it, that you can trouble them the most and potentially win.

 

[TennisDawg]

What I meant, was despite my opponent taking no risks and hitting the ball short and to the middle of the court all the time, I wasn't loosing. It finished dead level.

I finished the match playing a very aggressive style, hit the ball hard and not pushing. Normally that would be suicide against pushers, his low unforced error count would quickly lead to me loosing.

What actually happened was very long games. My unforced errors and winners almost perfectly balanced each other, hence the close score. The match was on my racket, because my opponents pushing style meant he hit hardly any winners, and virtually no errors.

That was why it was frustrating, a few points either was would have decided it. I was close to beating him, but I was also close to loosing.

I am finding that short pushy shots give me fewer problems. In doubles when I take them all on the forehand, I find them easy to deal with. In singles the backhand is still not reliable enough, but it is getting better.

I feel I am close to being able to beat these sorts of players, and to be honest I do find the playing style annoying. I know that is hypocritical, since I have used pushing, but it is a version of tennis which is limited, and relies completely on mistakes. It isn't as fun. My attitude is, playing a pusher, I will hit it properly, if I lose, so what. I can't be bothered poking the ball around.

What you just described is a match that could have gone either way. All recreational players have to deal with pushers and most dread playing them. My experience with pushers is to just respect their style and focus on your own game. Because of pushers I was able to develop a decent kick serve that allowed me to S&V so I could hold serve. I also had to put away volleys and OH. So, it was about attack and keep them off-balance. And yes I muffed some volleys and OHs in the learning process along the way, but I recognized the “strategy was the right one I just sucked at the execution” If I came to the net I knew he would lob and it could be a deep lob but if you hit the right approach it was also a putaway OH. As I improved pushers were much easier to beat, still did not enjoy playing them and had to deal with being down a break but able to still win the set. So, my advice is to respect your opponent and be honest about your own abilities.

 

[TennisDawg]

Get your games to this level and hit it with pace:

Even the best pusher will ask for mercy

Yea great video. I’m thinking both guys are at least 5.0. The guy in the green is the pusher but in 3.5-4.0 he would be considered an aggressive baseliner. So it’s all relative.

 

[user92626]

3virgul14 said:
Get your games to this level and hit it with pace:

Even the best pusher will ask for mercy

Yea great video. I’m thinking both guys are at least 5.0. The guy in the green is the pusher but in 3.5-4.0 he would be considered an aggressive baseliner. So it’s all relative.

What? One of these guys is a pusher? The green guy hits a winner at 0:30. Can't be.

Why would a 5.0 play with a 3.5?

 

[3virgul14]

Yea great video. I’m thinking both guys are at least 5.0. The guy in the green is the pusher but in 3.5-4.0 he would be considered an aggressive baseliner. So it’s all relative.

He also defines himself a pusher, whenever he is in trouble he moonballs or slices high and tracking down everyball like a bulldog just to return back. You `ll never see him hitting a down the line winner for instance. Maybe only some slices once in a while.

3virgul14 said:
Get your games to this level and hit it with pace:

Even the best pusher will ask for mercy







What? One of these guys is a pusher? The green guy hits a winner at 0:30. Can't be.

Why would a 5.0 play with a 3.5?

Younger guy shows something very important here, you can play better only if you have willpower to do so, go for your shots and get better at them.

Also the green guy is a 5.0 , he started from 3.5 and with the pusher abilities and athleticism he made it to 5.0 so far, no real serve, no forehand etc..

The pusher guy in our club who is currently at 3rd place on the ladder, with a win % of 50/140 maybe, is such a pusher that he never hit a winner against me, although I lost at least 4 matches to him so far, will surely lose more because I cant execute with high percentage yet. My win % is 38/47 btw , he also beats once in a while those guys whom I lost the other 5 matches.


After I watched this video I swore to myself to add more power and penetration to my forehand and sharpen my backhand angles with heavier shots, even changed my very flexible(52ra) frame with stiffer ones (62ra) . Will get there soon I hope.

 

[user92626]

He also defines himself a pusher, whenever he is in trouble he moonballs or slices high and tracking down everyball like a bulldog just to return back. You `ll never see him hitting a down the line winner for instance. Maybe only some slices once in a while.



Younger guy shows something very important here, you can play better only if you have willpower to do so, go for your shots and get better at them.

Also the green guy is a 5.0 , he started from 3.5 and with the pusher abilities and athleticism he made it to 5.0 so far, no real serve, no forehand etc..

The pusher guy in our club who is currently at 3rd place on the ladder, with a win % of 50/140 maybe, is such a pusher that he never hit a winner against me, although I lost at least 4 matches to him so far, will surely lose more because I cant execute with high percentage yet. My win % is 38/47 btw , he also beats once in a while those guys whom I lost the other 5 matches.


After I watched this video I swore to myself to add more power and penetration to my forehand and sharpen my backhand angles with heavier shots, even changed my very flexible(52ra) frame with stiffer ones (62ra) . Will get there soon I hope.

Willpower is a fluid thing. It's an interconnected factor. When two guys are nearly equal in technical skills and physical skill, I guess it'll come down to willpower. But, when you're head and shoulder above the other guy, you'll plow thru them without resorting to any willpower!

We don't need any younger guy to show us that. Any real competitors would eventually find out on their own.


Tennis isn't a game of one dimension. It doesn't favor "only the FH" or "only the serve" styles. If it does, Isner or Anderson would have ruled the tours.

Sure the players can have differently developed strokes, but in the whole context, the difference btw individual items seem small. Eg, Isner's serve itself won't be able to help him prevail against Nadal whose serve is much weaker.

To be top dogs, players have to have the whole package. Djokovic, Nadal, Federer, Thiem.. have everything together.


That said, when you lose to your so called pusher guy in your ladder, your stuff as a whole is much more inadequate than just your power like you think. Likewise, your pusher winner beat you with more than his "pushing" abilities (whatever that means).

Personally I know it takes a lot of movement skills (not just athleticism), anticipation skill to run to opponent's fast shots (you hit dangerously fast and non-pushing, right? ) and then calculation, hitting skills to hit the ball back to the other side.

 

[TennisDawg]

3virgul14 said:
Get your games to this level and hit it with pace:

Even the best pusher will ask for mercy







What? One of these guys is a pusher? The green guy hits a winner at 0:30. Can't be.

Why would a 5.0 play with a 3.5?

At that level he is a pusher. Are you saying you can’t be a pusher at a high level? Wrong! Are you saying a pusher can’t hit winners? Wrong! I didn’t say the green guy would enter a 3.5 tournament or league. I’m saying it’s all relative. Theoretically if he did play at 3.5 he would no longer be considered a pusher he would a strong baseliner blowing his opponents off the court, theoretically. Relative relative it’s all relative.

 

[dman72]

Yea great video. I’m thinking both guys are at least 5.0. The guy in the green is the pusher but in 3.5-4.0 he would be considered an aggressive baseliner. So it’s all relative.

Shot at 4:33? No one who hits that shot in a match would be labeled a pusher in 3.5 or 4.0, that's for sure. He hits a lot of defensive pushing shots against a guy who is cranking the ball but again, this is where using that term is silly. A 3.5 pusher who played the non green guy would have no chance to push anything as every ball forehand would be past him.

 

[dman72]

At that level he is a pusher. Are you saying you can’t be a pusher at a high level? Wrong! Are you saying a pusher can’t hit winners? Wrong! I didn’t say the green guy would enter a 3.5 tournament or league. I’m saying it’s all relative. Theoretically if he did play at 3.5 he would no longer be considered a pusher he would a strong baseliner blowing his opponents off the court, theoretically. Relative relative it’s all relative.

We're going down the road where people ended up calling Murray a pusher. If a guy puts short balls away with intention the term pusher should be retired. But this is going to get tedious as it always does.

 

[TennisDawg]

We're going down the road where people ended up calling Murray a pusher. If a guy puts short balls away with intention the term pusher should be retired. But this is going to get tedious as it always does.

Yes, it is tedious. The guy in the green is athletic, moves well and is a great retriever. He plays smart and has a moonball that frustrates opponents. He has a patience style and lets his opponents beat themselves. He can hit winners. That’s his style. I’m not disparaging him at all.

 

[user92626]

At that level he is a pusher. Are you saying you can’t be a pusher at a high level? Wrong! Are you saying a pusher can’t hit winners? Wrong! I didn’t say the green guy would enter a 3.5 tournament or league. I’m saying it’s all relative. Theoretically if he did play at 3.5 he would no longer be considered a pusher he would a strong baseliner blowing his opponents off the court, theoretically. Relative relative it’s all relative.

Every guy and their mother come in with a different definition for a pusher. See, dude Bender and dude Pico in post #58, 59. 100% opposite to yours. To Bender and Pico, pusher has "inability" to go on offense or hit topspin.

Whatever!

That's why I've been calling bulls$%$^$ on the whole pusher thing.

@dman72 seems to finally catch up to my idea that is the term should be retired.

 

[TennisDawg]

Every guy and their mother come in with a different definition for a pusher. See, dude Bender and dude Pico in post #58, 59. 100% opposite to yours. To Bender and Pico, pusher has "inability" to go on offense or hit topspin.

Whatever!

That's why I've been calling bulls$%$^$ on the whole pusher thing.

@dman72 seems to finally catch up to my idea that is the term should be retired.

Okay I respect your opinion. Peace man!

 

[TennisDawg]

That is some old post you are digging up! I am not even quite sure anymore which guy I was actually referring to in my post (my tennis partners changed a lot over the years), but if it is the one I think it is, I beat him quite easily a year or two later..
In hindsight he wasn't such a tough pusher to beat. Last summer I participated to the local club tournament and to play a 50+ old guy who looked out-of-shape and his shots had no pace; during warm-up I was thinking "no way I can lose to this hack, this will be an easy win for me". Ha! Turned out I lost badly in 2 sets. In the second set I was leading 4-2 but then still managed to lose the set. Somehow he always got a lot of my balls back either with some moonball landing relatively quite deep in the field or some junk-sliced shots. It was hard to find the balance between playing it safe (but going for long rallies and eventually losing the point with some dumb mistake) or going for too much (and just missing badly most of the time).
Anyway, after the match we started playing regularly against each other. I still lost many times and it took me a while until I started scoring a win. I really enjoyed playing againt him and it really made me think how I should play differently in order to win. I started coming in to the net a bit more, something I hardly ever did before,

A lot of people talk about pushers in a derogative way and the reason for this, I believe, is that pushers ultimately hurt their egos. What pushers are doing to their opponents is exposing their weaknesses and showing them that they are simply not as good as they think they are.

You nailed the part about pushers exposing their weaknesses. If you can be honest about your game playing a pusher can actually improve your tennis. I’ve played many pushers and I was demoralized when they beat me. I don’t know which was worse to be beat in straight sets or a long three setter, both bruised my ego. I credit myself with being able to sort it out. I devised a plan to deal with the pusher. I won’t go into the boring details, but I was able to improve my focus and stay in the present moment and not worry about my opponent but my own game. I realize that a big problem I had was poor execution, not so much poor strategy. So, putting ego aside I corrected those weaknesses so playing pushers helped me improve greatly. The first thing I did was to respect my opponent and focus on my own shortfalls.

 

[Powderwombat]

I note that ballbashers have a habit of calling anyone with a modicum of consistency a "pusher" because they can make more than 2 balls in a rally. Look at Agassi's career for a guy who scaled back on over-aggressiveness under Brad Gilbert and honed in on smart percentage tennis for an example of what consistency can do for someone.

Pushers don't really exist above 3.5 level, as their technique by definition is very poor, they don't have full fluid strokes and just bunt the ball over the net.

 

[dman72]

I note that ballbashers have a habit of calling anyone with a modicum of consistency a "pusher" because they can make more than 2 balls in a rally. Look at Agassi's career for a guy who scaled back on over-aggressiveness under Brad Gilbert and honed in on smart percentage tennis for an example of what consistency can do for someone.

Pushers don't really exist above 3.5 level, as their technique by definition is very poor, they don't have full fluid strokes and just bunt the ball over the net.

I think for the sake of argument and to avoid the tedium on this site, their should be a sticky that states that anyone who progresses past 4.0 cannot be called a pusher.

That way hopefully you stop the "Adam Murray was a pusher" or video showing some 4.5 who hits with good technique into corners is a "pusher" BS with a simple link to the sticky.

 

[dman72]

By the way, a modified version of the drill in this video

....where you toss the ball slightly behind the T or even slice it to yourself like he does.... and don't try to crush the ball but place it with a full stroke...works wonders against learning how to deal with dead mid-court pusher type balls.

 

[user92626]

Pushers don't really exist above 3.5 level, as their technique by definition is very poor, they don't have full fluid strokes and just bunt the ball over the net.

I think for the sake of argument and to avoid the tedium on this site, their should be a sticky that states that anyone who progresses past 4.0 cannot be called a pusher.

That way hopefully you stop the "Adam Murray was a pusher" or video showing some 4.5 who hits with good technique into corners is a "pusher" BS with a simple link to the sticky.

Way to marginalize , discriminate us lower guys.

We're humans too, you know.


All 3.5 and under, let's rise up! Like peasants we should be overwhelming in number. @Curious , I elect you to lead the way.

 

[dman72]

Way to marginalize , discriminate us lower guys.

We're humans too, you know.


All 3.5 and under, let's rise up! Like peasants we should be overwhelming in number. @Curious , I elect you to lead the way.

I am a USTA 4.0 with a losing record last year. I'm low level. A pusher under my definition (hits with no pace to mid court high over net on every shot, makes no attempt at offense no matter what kind of ball he/she gets) cannot get past 4.0.

 

[user92626]

I am a USTA 4.0 with a losing record last year. I'm low level. A pusher under my definition (hits with no pace to mid court high over net on every shot, makes no attempt at offense no matter what kind of ball he/she gets) cannot get past 4.0.

Depending on my interest and passion I am anywhere from 3.5 to 4.5.

Like today when I'll be playing with my friend, anytime I give him a short ball or I let up my shot power, that he can hit from his no man land, I'll pay dearly.

Likewise, on days that he goes on defense most of the time, ie retrieving my shots all day, he'd be in a world of pain. (a little overdramatic there but that's how we like to see our tennis, otherwise it's very lonely for two guys at an empty site @ 12 noon! )

So, while you guys are concerned about styles, pushing and whatnot -- and I don't know what kind of "pushing" you're referring to -- , we mainly focus on out-pacing, outrunning each other, and alot of that is looking soft pace, easy balls from each other. We'd welcome "pushing-type" balls because that's our window for scoring.

 

[dman72]

Depending on my interest and passion I am anywhere from 3.5 to 4.5.

Like today when I'll be playing with my friend, anytime I give him a short ball or I let up my shot power, that he can hit from his no man land, I'll pay dearly.

Likewise, on days that he goes on defense most of the time, ie retrieving my shots all day, he'd be in a world of pain. (a little overdramatic there but that's how we like to see our tennis, otherwise it's very lonely for two guys at an empty site @ 12 noon! )

So, while you guys are concerned about styles, pushing and whatnot -- and I don't know what kind of "pushing" you're referring to -- , we mainly focus on out-pacing, outrunning each other, and alot of that is looking soft pace, easy balls from each other. We'd welcome "pushing-type" balls because that's our window for scoring.

So we circle back: People are 3.5 because when they get low pace easy balls, they screw them up enough to lose at least 50% of the points. The pusher, in my definition, has this math in mind, plus doesn't care about playing the actual game in an enjoyable manner or improving, and gets joy solely out of winning or thinking they are smarter than everyone else, and says "I'll take all my errors out of the equation by taking 0 risks".

That's not the same as playing with intent on easy short balls and minimizing errors, which is how it appears you play. I play guys in my club ladder (3.5-4.0) who I could use this strategy against and never lose, 3 balls in they will make an error on 80% of points. But I refuse, not out of a sense of superiority, because I feel it would be a waste of time and unenjoyable for both of us. A point here and there I might go that route as everyone does.

Now, one of the guys in the same ladder uses exactly that strategy. He strictly pushes in singles. Even when I've won the first set 6-0 or 6-1 in past matches...he keeps pushing. And that's what he does with everyone. Hence, no one wants to play him, whether they win or lose. After 6 sets he won a total of 3 games, I told the guy running the ladder that even if he is within striking distance of me based on standings, i refuse to play him again based on that pointlessness of it. I received no argument. The guy went 5-3 at singles 3.5 in my area last year. There are 3 or 4 more carbon copies of this guy in 3.5 in our region. One guy's teammates called him "the chess master" after I won although it was closer than I'd have liked. I said something like "in chess, there isn't only one move".

Now you take that style, and add higher level athleticism, you can have a guy who gets to 4.0. At 4.5, guys know how to put the garbage away consistently.

 

[Curious]

All 3.5 and under, let's rise up! Like peasants we should be overwhelming in number. @Curious , I elect you to lead the way.

I’d rather leave this ‘losers’ club as fast as possible and avoid the abuse!

 

[user92626]

So we circle back: People are 3.5 because when they get low pace easy balls, they screw them up enough to lose at least 50% of the points. The pusher, in my definition, has this math in mind, plus doesn't care about playing the actual game in an enjoyable manner or improving, and gets joy solely out of winning or thinking they are smarter than everyone else, and says "I'll take all my errors out of the equation by taking 0 risks".

That's not the same as playing with intent on easy short balls and minimizing errors, which is how it appears you play. I play guys in my club ladder (3.5-4.0) who I could use this strategy against and never lose, 3 balls in they will make an error on 80% of points. But I refuse, not out of a sense of superiority, because I feel it would be a waste of time and unenjoyable for both of us. A point here and there I might go that route as everyone does.

Now, one of the guys in the same ladder uses exactly that strategy. He strictly pushes in singles. Even when I've won the first set 6-0 or 6-1 in past matches...he keeps pushing. And that's what he does with everyone. Hence, no one wants to play him, whether they win or lose. After 6 sets he won a total of 3 games, I told the guy running the ladder that even if he is within striking distance of me based on standings, i refuse to play him again based on that pointlessness of it. I received no argument. The guy went 5-3 at singles 3.5 in my area last year. There are 3 or 4 more carbon copies of this guy in 3.5 in our region. One guy's teammates called him "the chess master" after I won although it was closer than I'd have liked. I said something like "in chess, there isn't only one move".

Now you take that style, and add higher level athleticism, you can have a guy who gets to 4.0. At 4.5, guys know how to put the garbage away consistently.

I dont' know what to tell you.

Since this is recreational tennis in which players don't make any money so they make FUN/ENJOYMENT as their central tenet -- which you practice 100% here -- , it's hard to argue right / wrong.

At my court, there's one man who thinks games aren't fun, not tennis for him. It's rallying. Another old man who thinks he's superior, a good coach always ready to coach anyone, and never plays set. He prefers rallying but only his own way -- dropshot often and laughs when the other rallyers fail to return, and he enjoys that as if he has won the point.

Then there are those who think as we pass certain age, real tennis is doubles, singles no longer counts because what old men can play singles as it intends!!!!

There there's me who think doubles is just jokey and pointless. What separates players' skill is the singles!!!!


That seems to be the real pattern, the core issue here. Not really over a specific hitting style.

I don't know. It's fun to define our own craps. I may appear argumentative, but you don't know, it's quite interesting for me to observe people's behaviors, thinking, beliefs. It's like watching good movies or reality shows.

 

[travlerajm]

I am a proud pusher. I am currently rated high 4.5 (if you believe TLS and TR).

 

[RayPS97]

It's not a stupid term, it's a perfectly valid term that describes a certain type of player at the amateur level. It is stupid, however, when you call a professional player a pusher.

Pushing isn't defined by a lack of power in itself, it's just part of a wider description, which include:

• the inability / conscious decision to not go on the offence
• lack of any weapon or other putaway shot other than consistency
• lack or inability to create angles or play at net
• conscious decision to win points off the opponent's inconsistency by hitting passive shots
• poor technique (chop and dink shots in the place of proper groundstrokes and slices)
• good to great lateral movement

It works at the amateur levels because contrary to popular belief, none of us are as good as we think, and at certain levels (3.0-4.0) players try to hit shots that they do not realise they don't actually have. Said nonexistent shots typically are the ultra-aggressive, "hero tennis" shots that pushers keep inviting from their victims with their short dink shots up the middle.

Trying to outpush a pusher when that's not your natural / chosen style doesn't work because it's just like arguing with an idiot on the internet: they will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Pushing in tennis was summarized as:

• the inability / conscious decision to not go on the offence
• lack of any weapon or other putaway shot other than consistency
• lack or inability to create angles or play at net
• conscious decision to win points off the opponent's inconsistency by hitting passive shots
• poor technique (chop and dink shots in the place of proper groundstrokes and slices)
• good to great lateral movement

In a scaled down game of table tennis, you often meet people who play are the equivalent to the pusher(red items). The two games are not exactly mirrors as each other as lateral movement is not as much a differentiator in the less advanced stages(green item). Ironically, the table tennis pusher (TTP) does place close to the table (i.e. net) to take time away and hit sharper angles(blue item). Poor technique (yellow items ) is not really an issue at the more elite level but can replaced by "better technique" as in power and spin (think Nadal).

At the most elite levels, the small margins wrought in table tennis are not, so much,the prime determinants as having a strong mind. Dick Miles was a ten time US National Champion that was one match away being a World Champion. I posted a thread, yesterday, that Dick recounts , when as a talented 13 year old, he first met and eventually overcame his nemesis Herb Fink (great name for the villain) in an article he penned for Sports Illustrated titled " Elminating the Ping-Pong Pest ". It might help your tennis and have you take a long look in the mirror. Cheers.

 

[movdqa]

In a scaled down game of table tennis, you often meet people who play are the equivalent to the pusher(red items). The two games are not exactly mirrors as each other as lateral movement is not as much a differentiator in the less advanced stages(green item). Ironically, the table tennis pusher (TTP) does place close to the table (i.e. net) to take time away and hit sharper angles(blue item). Poor technique (yellow items ) is not really an issue at the more elite level but can replaced by "better technique" as in power and spin (think Nadal).

At the most elite levels, the small margins wrought in table tennis are not, so much,the prime determinants as having a strong mind. Dick Miles was a ten time US National Champion that was one match away being a World Champion. I posted a thread, yesterday, that Dick recounts , when as a talented 13 year old, he first met and eventually overcame his nemesis Herb Fink (great name for the villain) in an article he penned for Sports Illustrated titled " Elminating the Ping-Pong Pest ". It might help your tennis and have you take a long look in the mirror. Cheers.

In table tennis, you have choppers too. These guys drive aggressive players nuts as it takes less effort to chop and it takes a lot of effort to counteract it. They are fantastic to practice against though as it really improves your offense and fitness. Similar to playing against pushers.

People accuse me of being a pusher from time to time - I like to think that I'm patient.

 

[Ruark]

I agree with a previous poster that there is some difference between the "pusher" and the "junkballer," and to that I would add, the guy that just flat doesn't know how to play. I used to have a playing partner like this. Short, overweight, big belly hanging out. He would just stand there and chop down on EVERY SINGLE ball, except on some rare occasion when he'd hit a lob, which would go halfway to the moon. 80% of his shots would barely clear the net, then die. I got exhausted from constantly running up to the net to return them. Sure, I could strategically "outscore" him (I hate to dignify it with "beat him"), but it wasn't even slightly fun, it was too much work.

 

[ubercat]

Junkballer s normally have something to admire

 

[zaph]

I actually made the original post, the irony is am now a bit of pusher myself. Oh I still have offensive shots if I really want to play them but I have found simply being a wall far more effective. Basically I have done allot of practice were my practice partner can hit where they like and I just have to relentless get everything back to where he is standing, in the middle of the baseline.

I've got quite good at this and generally manage 20 shots before I miss, quite often allot more. That kind of consistency is enough to drive allot of opponents at my level nuts. Can't say it has made me popular to play though.

 

[Morch Us]

My definition of a pusher is "some one who likes to play in a pushed position" as much as possible.

There is a difference to that from "shot tolerance". Shot-tolerance relate to how long you can remain in a neutral position without loosing patience and doing something stupid. But still constantly trying to watch for mistakes (like short balls) from opponent to have that opportunity to move to offense.

On the other hand a "pusher" is not really looking for opportunity to move to offense. Most invites from opponent which enable him to move to offense will be responded with a neutral ball back, essentially rejecting the invite, and going back to neutral. He is expecting his opponent to make an unforced error when the opponent is trying to move to offense, or use his extreme defensive skills to win against the offense.

Essentially shot-tolerance vs pusher is purely in the mentality, and not in how good or how bad one's technique looks. This is exactly why I claim there are pushers even in professional levels and it is not really a "bad thing". It is a style of play.

Now I do agree that generally for same level, a pusher stroke technique is less formed than most other player styles at that same level, but I bet the pushers lob is probably higher percentage and more accurate than his opponents.

 

[Luke Yonex]

Pushing in tennis was summarized as:

• the inability / conscious decision to not go on the offence
• lack of any weapon or other putaway shot other than consistency
• lack or inability to create angles or play at net
• conscious decision to win points off the opponent's inconsistency by hitting passive shots
• poor technique (chop and dink shots in the place of proper groundstrokes and slices)
• good to great lateral movemen

That's not what I thought a pusher was, I always thought it was someone who tended to push the ball with the racket instead of striking it with some power (swinging the racket)
Maybe I am wrong???

 

[Morch Us]

i guess everyone can have their own definisions. But the biggest issue I see in @RayPS97 description above is the use of the word "inability". You just don't know what a guy is capable of or not by looking at a play style. Using the phrases like "conscious decision" in his description is better suited to describe playing style.

 

[RayPS97]

i guess everyone can have their own definisions. But the biggest issue I see in @RayPS97 description above is the use of the word "inability". You just don't know what a guy is capable of or not by looking at a play style. Using the phrases like "conscious decision" in his description is better suited to describe playing style.

That descriptor is not mine but @Bender in post #58. Whether by inability or or conscious decision the player that so irks players with more offensive groundshorts(depth and speed) is the fact that he competes. For what follows, I will call the opponent of "Pusher" by the name "Betterer". Now "Pusher" obviously has less time to react given that "Betterer" is closer to the net and hits more offensive. The equalizer in this game has to be Pusher's better anticipation and quicker reaction if the scores are close. Pusher will get to balls late and the only recourse, just as the Pros do, is to hit a high floating groundstroke with limited pace to buy time.

The other losing strategy that is often tried is that Betterer will adopt and hit a similar non pacy ball back to Pusher. The problem is that Pusher now has "plenty of time" and can now come in and take time away from Pusher....lose-lose proposition....Betterer has met his match.

There are many instances in this type of matchup where Betterer will beat this type of player but, well, this is just tennis and we do not thump are chests about those victories. It is only against Pusher where the score is close (and his innate compete level of better anticipation and buying time) that Betterer laments. Time for a brewsky

 

[Luke Yonex]

Everybody debating something that everybody has a different interpretation of what it exactly is. How can you build a house without solid foundations???

 

[zaph]

Everybody debating something that everybody has a different interpretation of what it exactly is. How can you build a house without solid foundations???

OK I can define pusher. Player somebody thinks they can beat that they actually lose too.

A bit cynical but there is a grain of truth to it. The reality of tennis is you rarely meet a player who total falls into one of the textbook definitions. Take pushers, the textbook says pushers can't volley or pass. So take them to the net or get to the net. Now in my experience that isn't entirely true. Most rec tennis is doubles, so it is very difficult not to pick up some volleying skills. Especially when the default formation is one up and one back.

I mean I play as a pusher in singles but I have been known to serve volley and chip and charge in doubles. So would taking me to the net guarantee an easy point?

Most players are a mixture of styles, sure some do more pushing/defensive tennis but you rarely encounter an absolute pure pusher.

 

[pencilcheck]

My interpretation:

If tennis is a game of mental capacity management, then pusher is simply doing so to drain your mental quickly so you will make mistake often. Not all pushers are 3.0 pushers. But at the highest level pusher is less effective, I would say most pusher die around 4/4.5 level.

A lot of good pusher (around 3.5/4 level) doesn't necessary lack other shot in the book, they do this based on their opponent's game plan to disrupt their rhythm. This definitely work for rec tennis since most people are in the 3/3.5 range where they not only haven't mastered their technique, control but also has no experience in mental training as well.

 

[zaph]

My interpretation:

If tennis is a game of mental capacity management, then pusher is simply doing so to drain your mental quickly so you will make mistake often. Not all pushers are 3.0 pushers. But at the highest level pusher is less effective, I would say most pusher die around 4/4.5 level.

A lot of good pusher (around 3.5/4 level) doesn't necessary lack other shot in the book, they do this based on their opponent's game plan to disrupt their rhythm. This definitely work for rec tennis since most people are in the 3/3.5 range where they not only haven't mastered their technique, control but also has no experience in mental training as well.

It simpler than that. When I push I am picking a very safe shot I can make 85-90% of the time. Now if my opponent is hitting aggressive shots they can make 60% of the time, unless those aggressive shots can either get through my defence or put me in such a bad court position that my opponent has a very easy put away, I am pretty much guaranteed to win the majority of the points.

In short you can only play high risk aggressive tennis if you can actually hit winners.

 

[pencilcheck]

It simpler than that. When I push I am picking a very safe shot I can make 85-90% of the time. Now if my opponent is hitting aggressive shots they can make 60% of the time, unless those aggressive shots can either get through my defence or put me in such a bad court position that my opponent has a very easy put away, I am pretty much guaranteed to win the majority of the points.

In short you can only play high risk aggressive tennis if you can actually hit winners.

Of course. And even worse, the more you do it, the less likely they can make aggressive shots in (even if they are also placing it safe) because you drain their mental capacity away by making them repeat to execute well placed shots multiple times throughout the course of the match, they simply don't have that capacity to maintain the shot quality. You essentially cut their tennis level by 1 or 2 depending on how well they are disciplined.

That's why I said this is only applicable in 3.5/4 at the highest, since any higher than that you will get retaliated very quickly.

 

[zaph]

Of course. And even worse, the more you do it, the less likely they can make aggressive shots in (even if they are also placing it safe) because you drain their mental capacity away by making them repeat to execute well placed shots multiple times throughout the course of the match, they simply don't have that capacity to maintain the shot quality. You essentially cut their tennis level by 1 or 2 depending on how well they are disciplined.

That's why I said this is only applicable in 3.5/4 at the highest, since any higher than that you will get retaliated very quickly.

It works at all levels, look at some videos of Murray playing. At his level, allot of the time, he is playing safe shots. His consistency is enough to grind people down.