How far can you go in tennis with pushing?

ptuanminh

Hall of Fame
and will never progress beyond it or have friends to hit with.
I doubt if this is true. Progress or not really depends on how much practice you put in. Having a pusher's mindset is far from a factor.
People love hitting with pushers because they get everything back and they don't hit big winners back. What could be better for practice?????
 
And the 5.0s, 5.5s don't want to play like the 6.0s who don't want to play like pro's?
You're going down a different path than I was treading. I was responding to your statement "We do NOT want to play the "tennis" that rec players xyz, abc here play -- two bounces, FH grip serving, on and on..."

You claim that we do not want to play rec tennis and went on to describe some elements of rec tennis. I countered that while I agree, there are rec players who I would like to emulate. Your statement is a non-sequitur.

What you and Dart don't get is, or still arrogantly refuse to admit is, if there's an aim for us to have -- and who doesn't if you compete--, it is to play higher tennis -- the same concept as the pro's. Now don't mistake that as the same implementation. Many of us never can.
I get that some people want to improve. I also get that some are happy just where they are. Haven't you yourself explained the group you play with and how some people make no effort to improve after years and years? They're competing but don't appear to have an aim to play higher level tennis.

I don't see why my thinking is arrogant; it simply reflects how I view tennis. OTOH, arguing that everyone follows the same goals as you do is arrogant, IMO.

In other words, we never, and can never, aim to play like, or learn from, some hackers. Rec hackers are deviations from tennis. They are rogue tennis. Niche tennis. Unimplementable.
I'd argue that we can learn from hackers: not stroke technique but dogged determination.

I'd also argue that they are not "deviations" or "rogue" or "niche": look how many there are of them. The dominate [in numbers] the tennis universe.

You have a stylized, ideal model in your head of what "real tennis" is which completely overlooks the fact that most don't adhere to that model.

As far as "unimplementable" goes, I'm not sure how you mean that: not teachable? Not reproducible? Neither of which are true, IMO.

Remember, a while back you guys were laughing and dismissing the two handed FH guy even though he has much success, even more success than many here?
Go back and read more carefully what I wrote: I absolutely did not dismiss his results. What I dismissed was his idea that the 2HFH was the sole reason for his success [I claimed he won because he was a better player than his opponents, now how many hands he used for his FH].

I also argued with his claim that the 2HFH was the future of tennis and that the success of 4 players [Seles, Hradecka, Bartoli, and Su-Weh] proved it, ignoring all of the traditional FHs.

Or the FH grip serving guy even though his style is closer to rec level in term of achievable, cost/benefit, etc.?
I don't remember that one. Are you referring to the guy who would spin 360 degrees after the serve and claimed that made his serve better?

Also, bringing up these 2 examples contradicts your main theme, which is that there is a "right" way to play and all other ways are wrong. These 2 clearly do things differently than mainstream so you should be rejecting them.

It's clear from these various arguments we've had that you and I think about and interpret things very differently. So be it.
 

Wise one

Hall of Fame
ask Beppe Merlo

"Merlo was a dapper little chap who defied most of the conventions except in his ability to put the ball where his opponents didn’t want it and, often, didn’t expect it. He used a short grip and had no more than a hint of a backswing. No more than a hint of a service, either. He just prodded the ball into play. Merlo’s racket was so loosely strung that his strokes were noiseless save for a muffled plunk. But he was an artful nudger commanding a deceptive variety of spin. Merlo’s tennis was so eccentric, so baffling, that opponents ran the risk of getting their legs knotted."
 

ubercat

Semi-Pro
Well I was playing a short long game because I saw somebody take him apart like that. So he didn't have a lot of choice
 

ChaelAZ

Legend
Pushing gets sorted out as they try to get through 4.0 players, unless they become strong back-board type players with good pace, placement, and consistency. Then that can be developed and used effeectively through WTA and ATP.

Most pushing types we have around flounder up and down between 3.5 and 4.0.
 

user92626

Legend
Pushing gets sorted out as they try to get through 4.0 players, unless they become strong back-board type players with good pace, placement, and consistency. Then that can be developed and used effeectively through WTA and ATP.

Most pushing types we have around flounder up and down between 3.5 and 4.0.
You also just described regular rec types.

Most regular rec types we have around flounder up and down between 3.5 and 4.0.


(If we're gonna describe dogs as any animals including as cats, what's the point of describing them? LOL)
 

ChaelAZ

Legend
You also just described regular rec types.

Most regular rec types we have around flounder up and down between 3.5 and 4.0.


(If we're gonna describe dogs as any animals including as cats, what's the point of describing them? LOL)

That is the point. Pushers only exists, and do no better than other 3.5 or 4.0. If the goal is to level up and stay a pusher needs to develop strokes with more pace and placement.
 

user92626

Legend
That is the point. Pushers only exists, and do no better than other 3.5 or 4.0. If the goal is to level up and stay a pusher needs to develop strokes with more pace and placement.
I thought you also said " unless they [pushers] become strong back-board type players with good pace, placement, and consistency. "

implying they would be pushers with better pace, placement and consistency, all the way up to WTA, ATP. This belief is in line with many people who also believe Nadal, Murray are pushers.



All of y'all's point about pusher is very convoluted and confusing. THAT is my point.
 

ChaelAZ

Legend
I thought you also said " unless they [pushers] become strong back-board type players with good pace, placement, and consistency. "

implying they would be pushers with better pace, placement and consistency, all the way up to WTA, ATP. This belief is in line with many people who also believe Nadal, Murray are pushers.



All of y'all's point about pusher is very convoluted and confusing. THAT is my point.

I think people confuse pushing and what is condiered a back-board defensive player. And yeah, people have called Nadal a pusher. FRICKEN NADAL for goodness sakes. I've always seen a clear line between pushers and good advanced defensive players. So pushers may get through to 4.0, but also drop as more solid players are used to their junk play.
 
Top