Steady Eddy
Legend
People always say, "Yeah, that can work, but not at the higher levels."
How high is that level?
How high is that level?
I haven’t hit a topspin forehand in doubles in years (I push every forehand return with slice, usually as a lob), yet according to TLS I’m a borderline 5.0 based on my doubles results from this year.Certainly falls apart in doubles pretty quickly at 4.0. Competent net men devour pusher strokes for breakfast. Moonball groundstrokes just don't get it done like they do in singles. And I don't care how fast you can run in doubles I'm just hammering that weak stroke at your net person's feet.
Dude, in this place, if you can hit two shots in a row against someone who messes up on their 2nd shot, you're a pusher.People always say, "Yeah, that can work, but not at the higher levels."
How high is that level?
I haven’t hit a topspin forehand in doubles in years (I push every forehand return with slice, usually as a lob), yet according to TLS I’m a borderline 5.0 based on my doubles results from this year.
And then you wait back at the baseline for the moonball return and moonball another slice back CC?
You aren't fooling anyone T. You follow that return in like the solid doubles player you are and take the next ball out of the air. That's not pusher doubles.
True pushers quickly learn to lob just as good doubles players quickly learn to develop their OH's to deal with this pusher default. Once the true pusher has failed with his groundstrokes and failed with his lobs, he has nothing left to fall back on. He either remains a 3.5 doubles player forever or takes the time to learn a net game.
I play these singles pushers all the time in doubles. It's rarely even close to competitive.
Why can't he learn 4.5 level groundstrokes and lobs and continue to be a pusher?
I think that's what I did I continued to push with very high quality groundstrokes and lobs. I won all important matches last weekend. LOL.
Because doubles forces you to hit to tighter windows than a pusher is comfortable with.
Some people are confusing pushing with consistency. Pushing is a mindset of always hitting a conservative low risk shot and never taking advantage of an offensive opportunity. Hitting solid consistent deep groundstrokes that keep your opponent back and then attacking weak balls is counterpunching and what most of you are likely doing.
If you tell me you won your 4.5 doubles by hitting TS groundstrokes 4 feet over the middle of the net and 5 feet from any line, never poached at the net, never moved in from the baseline, hit lobs to the middle of the court, spun all your serves in, etc., then I'm impressed. I've watched the good players at our club (mostly 4.5 and above) and their doubles is won at the net and they pounce on anything not hit precisely away from them.
yes a 4.0 pusher could learn to play doubles by learning different strokes, but most became pushers because they didn't want to develop their game but rather take the expedient route to victory by letting others implode. Pushing is a mindset. We all can become different people but we rarely do.
If your opponents allow you to score with low risk stuff, why would a smart player take higher risk? I wouldn't. So you gonna call a smart player "a pusher"?
If you constantly get destroyed by hitting low risk shots all the while you're capable of hitting better shots, aren't you describing stupid players? Or, he's normal intelligent but being outplayed because he cannot hit better shots. I don't see either choice being "a pusher"
I haven’t hit a topspin forehand in doubles in years (I push every forehand return with slice, usually as a lob), yet according to TLS I’m a borderline 5.0 based on my doubles results from this year.
Why can't he learn 4.5 level groundstrokes and lobs and continue to be a pusher?
.
Some opponents make me feel like a pusher. I got killed by this kid who has great topspin and always manages to hit everything near a line. I've got a vid where he lands a shot right on my feet. I dropped backwards and hit a high bouncing lob into his back hand corner I couldn't have hit it any better and he takes it as an inside out forehand winner into my backhand corner.
I'm definining "pusher" to be someone who:
- hits with little pace
How do you define little pace since its based on an individuals perspective?
What is a fast heavy shot for you is an easy little pace shot for federer.
I agree with @Topspin Shot
There are "pushers" at every level, meaning players who play ultra defensive and are all about safety and long rallies and outlasting the opponent.
But at different levels there are different types and different skill levels of pushers.
A 3.5 pusher just bunts the ball in and keeps it in and all he does is try to bunt it in and make no errors.
A 6.0 pusher has heavy deep spin and keeps the ball in but his ball is heavy, and unlike a 3.5 pusher he is not limited to just defense and keeping the ball in play, but he actually knows how to attack and finish short balls, overheads etc.. its just that his main strstegy is defense and outlasting the other player.
A 6.0 might be a defensive specialist. But I wouldn't call that player a pusher just because his/her style is predominantly defensive. Someone hitting the tar out of the ball and keeping it in with a lot of topspin and clearance is not a pusher...at least not for me.
A 6.0 might be a defensive specialist. But I wouldn't call that player a pusher just because his/her style is predominantly defensive. Someone hitting the tar out of the ball and keeping it in with a lot of topspin and clearance is not a pusher...at least not for me.
Thats why there are different definitions of pushers by people, everyone has his own definition, which is why its hard to really tell who is a pusher actually.
Thats why there are different definitions of pushers by people, everyone has his own definition, which is why its hard to really tell who is a pusher actually.
Thats why there are different definitions of pushers by people, everyone has his own definition, which is why its hard to really tell who is a pusher actually.
Slow enough that even a beginner and certainly an intermediate could react in time. A pusher's opponent does not lose because he's overwhelmed by the pace; he loses because of his own UEs.
But isn’t that why they invented UTR?a youngster shouldn't be playing against an immobile geezer.
They also invented walls and many people call it tennis. Your point?But isn’t that why they invented UTR?
Anybody who doesn't come to the net on his own serve or on his serve return (first and second) is a pusher - only difference is the number of strokes you wait before pulling the offensive trigger, if at all. In the current tour, Karlovic might be the only true non-pusher.
In a truer match, the levels should be very close or similar, especially THE HITTING part.
Nobody should be overwhelmed by pace, if they are, it's a lousy mismatch and that's not what tennis competition is intended.
Pros don't lose to one another by being overwhelmed by pace. They're outplayed after many shots exchanged (strategies, skills, etc.)
Likewise, a youngster shouldn't be playing against an immobile geezer.
@S&V-not_dead_yet
No, a truer match is one that truly resembles competition. It's just a concept. "Closely matched" is just an effect.
I'm not talking about or narrowing my idea to NTRP or whatever specific. They're all artificial constructs to accommodate some purposes, and as any artificial construct people can win or lose pretty randomly. Eg. a 5.5 can manipulate his playing so he can forever play, "compete" in 4.0 segment. That's no competition, is it? So, I'm not talking about ntrp and whatnot.
Why I bring up pro level is that level reflects the most what tennis is intended/designed for.
Tennis isn't meant for someone to blow away an opponent with pace or even for someone to ace (that's speed serving) an opponent all day long despite there are many good servers. Tennis is meant to be competed on a whole: part speed, part strength, part skills, part trickeries, etc. And some luck, too. That's why someone like Nadal, a more complete package, is 100x more successful than Isner.
That's my point.
However, S&V is also correct that a pusher (and again, I don't consider any high level players as pushers) are ones who are content to just hit the ball back into the court, and patiently wait for their opponent to make a mistake, even when they have a golden opportunity to move in and finish the point. That's why I've never categorized someone like Navigator as a pusher, because while he plays finesse strokes, he is actively forcing the issue whenever the opponent hits a short ball.
Rec tennis is completely wacky and weird, no boundary on weirdness and randomness that it's basically moot to argue about it. That's why I went with the pro level, or how TENNIS is intended to be played because at least we'd have some definitive idea.
On the other hand,
"Especially on a recreational tennis players forum where the vast majority of players are 3.5-5.0" is just pure guessing, man.
It's true that pros are super minority but everyone (us, etc.) is gearing toward playing like them. Given opportunity we all want to serve, hit, move, act like them. So, at least everyone is going on the same track. Thus, that's how we define "tennis".
I assert that we simply don't know (enough) about people here, lacking any statistics or surveys. You're equating my "don't know" assertion to saying people are trolls. Comon!
The point here is, we are gearing toward one definitive type of tennis (powerful, topspin, good placement hitting, more mph serving, etc....)
We want to play the tennis that pros play -- the ideas, the philosophies, the physics though we can only achieve a fraction of theirs. We do NOT want to play the "tennis" that rec players xyz, abc here play -- two bounces, FH grip serving, on and on...
Watched an itf singlesOn TT forum, pushing is considered a disease like AIDS or herpes. Meanwhile, the pushers keep racking up wins in his (her) level.
Pros are just far ahead in the track, the same track
The point here is, we are gearing toward one definitive type of tennis
On TT forum, pushing is considered a disease like AIDS or herpes. Meanwhile, the pushers keep racking up wins in his (her) level.
Certainly falls apart in doubles pretty quickly at 4.0. Competent net men devour pusher strokes for breakfast. Moonball groundstrokes just don't get it done like they do in singles. And I don't care how fast you can run in doubles I'm just hammering that weak stroke at your net person's feet.
For all but a very few of us rec players, we are in a totally different track with an entirely different destination. There is no top pro that a) didn't start as a junior at a young age, b) show exceptional athleticism from said young age, c) was coached extensively and spent uber amounts of money and d) spent more time on the tennis court than in school. How many of us were ever on that track? Some of us were good juniors, some of us started as adults, some are multisport athletes trying something new, some of us enjoy competition at whatever level.
Every track is different and every destination is different. On this forum the common link is we all want to be better. But getting there will be a hugely different journey for us than the one's most pros took.
I don't think we are. If I tried to hit like a 20 something pro, i'd seriously break something. Lotta miles on this frame. My route to a better game won't be developing massive topspin groundstrokes with polyester strings and hitting 120+ mph serves. It will be developing consistent placement on my serve and improving my volleys and overheads.
We want to play the tennis that pros play -- the ideas, the philosophies, the physics though we can only achieve a fraction of theirs. We do NOT want to play the "tennis" that rec players xyz, abc here play -- two bounces, FH grip serving, on and on...
True. But there are plenty of rec players at the 5.0 & 5.5 level that I admire and I'd like to play like them [I use "rec" to mean "doesn't make a living off of winning tournaments"; ie not pro].