I Am Really Starting To Hate Mixed Doubles...

Max G.

Legend
The thing is, "Mixed tactics" and "Doubles tactics" are different.

Standard doubles tactics assumes that both players are reasonably similar in skill. In Mixed that's often not the case, with wide disparities. If both teams are good at Mixed, their tactics will be SIGNIFICANTLY different than doubles tactics.

If one team is playing mixed according to "standard doubles tactics", then AGAINST them the correct strategy will usually be just to hit with the weaker woman. But if both teams are playing good mixed, then that's actually pretty bad strategy, because the woman is probably very close to the net and will probably hit a winner off everything she gets a racquet on. The stronger player will have to be covering more of the court - thus leaving themselves more open and baiting the shot. So in the end, it's actually going to end up about 50-50 in terms of who gets hit to! But it gets to there via adjustment and counter-adjustment from both teams, not by both teams pretending it's standard doubles and then "being nice" by avoiding the right play.
 

Matthew ATX

Semi-Pro
There are also ways to pick on the weaker player without drilling them. If there is a 3.0 at the net, my returns/approaches will err far more toward the middle, encouraging them to poach. If I dip the cross court return properly, even if they make the right move they won't be able to do anything with it.
 
Last edited:

travlerajm

G.O.A.T.
The thing is, "Mixed tactics" and "Doubles tactics" are different.

Standard doubles tactics assumes that both players are reasonably similar in skill. In Mixed that's often not the case, with wide disparities. If both teams are good at Mixed, their tactics will be SIGNIFICANTLY different than doubles tactics.

If one team is playing mixed according to "standard doubles tactics", then AGAINST them the correct strategy will usually be just to hit with the weaker woman. But if both teams are playing good mixed, then that's actually pretty bad strategy, because the woman is probably very close to the net and will probably hit a winner off everything she gets a racquet on. The stronger player will have to be covering more of the court - thus leaving themselves more open and baiting the shot. So in the end, it's actually going to end up about 50-50 in terms of who gets hit to! But it gets to there via adjustment and counter-adjustment from both teams, not by both teams pretending it's standard doubles and then "being nice" by avoiding the right play.
Agreed. From a game theory perspective, if your opponents are hitting most of the balls to either you or to your partner, it means that you are not playing optimal tactics. In other words, if your opponents are hitting every ball at the 3.5 woman when she’s at net, then she is not playing close enough to the net.
 

stapletonj

Hall of Fame
ahem, here's my sexist take.

1. Guys who cant stand MXD usually don't tolerate playing with a lower level partner at all and are usually singles players.

2. The trick is to understand that you have to play and cover anywhere from 55 to 65 percent of the court.

3. Guys who try to cover 70% or more of the court are gonna get frustrated. The other team sees this and runs you like a rag doll.

4. Going into "Hero mode" as I like to call it, and trying to hit winners off of balls you can barely get to is the surest way in the world to lose the match, your cool, and your partner .

5. If your female partner cant handle the males pace on the serve, or her serve is getting creamed, you have to be able and willing to try unusual things, like playing 2 back, or Australian formation, etc., have her hit lobs on the guys serve and just know you are gonna get tagged a few times, but you might be able to get just enough points to get a break point or two, (btw, this is what makes MXD fun is the wild things you can try!, on the court that is).

6. Always Always Always Always be a cheerleader for your partner. Some guys dont like this, but I have yet to meet the female player who doesnt THRIVE on this before, during, and after the match,

7. A final key. Anticipate that you will need to run down a lob on your partners side. Do not assume and start running. You have to read your partner and the ball. When your partner starts to run it down and you have taken 2 or 3 steps already, you will both wind up in the corner of the court, flubbing over who should hit the ball, with both opponents waiting to block the ball back over into the open 95% of the court you just vacated.

Of course, if you are lucky enough to have a "studette" as a partner, none of this really applies, except number 6
 

kylebarendrick

Professional
I frankly don't see how mixed is wildly different than any other doubles match. Every player and every team has strengths and weaknesses. It is generally true that the team that does a better job of exploiting their opponent's weaknesses while protecting their own will win the match. This is true at any level. Even at the pros, when someone shows weakness at the net they get targeted. Not by trying to blow them up, but by being aggressive enough to draw errors.

Why would it be wrong to do the same thing against a really unbalanced mixed team? If I can win points exploiting a 3.5 lady vs. her 4.5 partner I'll do so. And she should expect me to do so. If she can't handle that then she shouldn't be playing. It is up to her and her partner to prevent me from following that strategy.
 

zaskar1

Semi-Pro
I had my 7.5 mixed match last night, and it was against one of the guys on my men's team (who I usually play ahead of in singles) and a lady who subbed on our mixed team last spring. My partner and I definitely had the advantage to begin with, and we still couldn't win the match.

I feel like there is more pressure on me, as the man, to make more forcing shots, and I always end up going for too much. When I play dubs in my men's leagues, I'm always a much better player because I don't feel like I have to make every single shot count.

Not to mention (and this was just last night) I was getting upset about missing some really easy shots, and my partner says "I know you don't like playing with me, but at least give me some encouragement." I had to explain to her that I was upset that I had about 6 shots that were wide open, and I either sent 6" wide, or dropped into the net.
slapshot
it sounds like you put too much pressure on yourself, but in mixed they are usually trying to get the ball back to the girl, so you can be a bit more aggressive.
it sounds like you are not blaming your partner for missed shots, but being accountable for your play which is positive.
just dont get down on yourself for missing, as everyone misses shots.
tennis is a game of less errors, especially at the rec level.
try to have a more positive attitude, dont dwell on the mistakes

z
 

zaskar1

Semi-Pro
I frankly don't see how mixed is wildly different than any other doubles match. Every player and every team has strengths and weaknesses. It is generally true that the team that does a better job of exploiting their opponent's weaknesses while protecting their own will win the match. This is true at any level. Even at the pros, when someone shows weakness at the net they get targeted. Not by trying to blow them up, but by being aggressive enough to draw errors.

Why would it be wrong to do the same thing against a really unbalanced mixed team? If I can win points exploiting a 3.5 lady vs. her 4.5 partner I'll do so. And she should expect me to do so. If she can't handle that then she shouldn't be playing. It is up to her and her partner to prevent me from following that strategy.
kyle
mixed is different that mens doubles, you cant hit overhead smashes at the lady and not be viewed as an "jackass"
while in mens doubles, its expected and when its done, you just hold up your hand to say i apologize.
also in mixed, the man usually has to cover more court
z
 

kylebarendrick

Professional
kyle
mixed is different that mens doubles, you cant hit overhead smashes at the lady and not be viewed as an "jackass"
while in mens doubles, its expected and when its done, you just hold up your hand to say i apologize.
also in mixed, the man usually has to cover more court
z
I play plenty of mixed. There are definitely some women that take offense at overheads hit in their direction - even if it never actually gets that close to them. I'm not going to let that affect my shot selection or concede large parts of the court to their fear. If that makes them consider me a jerk, then fine. That minority of players probably won't like me for many reasons. I've also seen enough women's matches to see players freak out over getting hit in the foot by a volley from a woman. I have no tolerance for that nonsense.

Otherwise, my point was (from a purely strategic standpoint), mixed is no different than any other doubles match. You want to cover your team's weaknesses (which may involve one player covering more court) and you want to exploit your opponent's. Saying "I won't hit in the direction of the net player because that's bad doubles" is a bad decision if their partner is really strong and the net player has proven themselves a liability. Doesn't matter what their gender is. Or their level - I've seen it at the pro level.
 

jsm1373

Rookie
Here's why I quit playing 8.0 mixed after a couple years in SoCal... In 99% of the matches I played, two unwritten rules/norms existed (presumably derived from well-meaning chivalry). First, the men always took the ad court (to let women have FH side). And the men always served waaaay harder to the opposing man than woman...

Why were these two seemingly harmless things a dealbreaker for me?? After a few close calls the the worst happened one night. An opposing man had a laserbeam frozen rope of a 100++ mph serve he kept attacking my 2HBH wide on the ad side... Fair play, but problem was at night, with less than perfect lights -- one time my footwork/swing were a little bit late, the serve skidded wide off the line - somehow I made clean albeit late solid contact "judoing" all of the serve pace back in an instant - and utterly drilled the opposing woman at net *hard* in the shoulder dropping her and racquet to the ground.

Given the low light, skid, pace, and angle - fact is it was a blind luck miracle I got any strings on the ball, let alone clean sweetspot. My only intent was putting some racquet on ball and avoiding another ace - hadn't targeted her once the entire match prior. I immediately said oh s#it I'm so sorry, but she starts crying, her partner got pissed and wanted to fight... Eventually everyone cooled down but it sucks to be the guy who knocked a woman down on the tennis court...

Just a few games before she had said something to the effect of "I'm tough and won't get mad if you guys hit hard"... UhhHunh... They all say that until getting a backwards ProPenn 3 tattoo on the shoulder...

Soo, no more mixed for me. Sorry/not sorry if its sexist, but now I can only hit full-power shots against other guys. My normal doubles crew is primarily comprised of ex-college baseball and football players who aren't gonna cry/fight when someone gets inadvertently tagged by a soft fuzzy ball. Or even on purpose - such is the nature of competitive doubles...

To be fair, I also once played with a 4.5 woman who got drilled by an opponent's ball and immediately shook it off and said good shot... Regardless, "fair play" or not, I don't want to ever hit another woman with a ball that hard again - and the only way to ensure that is only play with guys...
 

grhcan99

Semi-Pro
tagged by a soft fuzzy ball.
Have you actually ever been hit hard by this soft fuzzy ball in any sensitive parts of your body? I've been hit right there at my ahem by an OH smash by a woman college player. We were both at the net. If I had not been incapacitated and writhing on the ground for 3 minutes I would have jumped over the net and killed her :) I have been hit on the eye by a ricochet off my racquet. I've been hit on the ear while at the net by my partner serving 100+mph. I blacked out for how long I couldn't remember (don't know if he had figured out why I'm finding every polite excuse in the world to not play doubles with him anymore haha). In all these instances that soft fuzzy ball felt like ROCKS instead.
 

miki

New User
i regularly play mixed with 4.5 ladies and enjoy that. The best when we have new man playing at 4.0+ level and they try to 'blast' at woman at the net and she will easy volley those balls for clean winners. Woman at that level are very good doubles players and it's enjoyable game.
 

jsm1373

Rookie
Have you actually ever been hit hard by this soft fuzzy ball
Have you actually read the context I said that in? *Relative to* a baseball, YES it is soft and fuzzy. Have you actually ever been hit hard by a baseball, even a non-sensitive part? I have and promise you a tennis ball is relatively soft and fuzzy. Let me know when batting helmets become mandatory for tennis :-D Imagine each of the three scenarios you mentioned but with a baseball - the eye and head shots could have potentially been fatal. And the other would've been on you for not wearing a cup.

What exactly did you mean by "I would have jumped over the net and killed her :)"?? Obviously hyperbole, but would you actually have whined/protested/complained to her in any way because *you* didn't defend/volley/turn away from her fair shot which hit your "ahem"? Why didn't you "kill" your partner for serving you up on a silver platter for her OH smash while you were at the net?
 

jsm1373

Rookie
i regularly play mixed with 4.5 ladies and enjoy that. The best when we have new man playing at 4.0+ level and they try to 'blast' at woman at the net and she will easy volley those balls for clean winners. Woman at that level are very good doubles players and it's enjoyable game.
I've also seen that scenario and laughed when the guys think they are going to intentionally blast the woman at net only to get destroyed with a volley clinic :-D
Agreed many/most 4.5 women are great players and the game can be enjoyable the vast majority of the time... But for me personally, I don't ever want to hit a woman that hard with *any* ball or anything ever again. And as such can't hit full-power shots in Mixed and it just isn't as fun. You might feel the same if you experienced how bad it feels to accidentally hit a woman really hard with a tennis ball. Maybe I'm being sexist applying more weight to that than hitting a man in the same way, but is what it is...
 

zipplock

Hall of Fame
I'm playing mixed now on a team in the highest level of the league. A lot of the women are former college players. There is NONE of the sexist BS described in this thread. It's just doubles tennis. No serving "softer" to anyone. Just tennis players, not men or women. I'm having more fun that I thought I would going in, having all the preconceptions of the gender crap mentioned here NOT play out. Maybe the answer is to play up as high as you can till you get to people that just want to play tennis.
 

grhcan99

Semi-Pro
Have you actually read the context I said that in? *Relative to* a baseball, YES it is soft and fuzzy. Have you actually ever been hit hard by a baseball, even a non-sensitive part? I have and promise you a tennis ball is relatively soft and fuzzy. Let me know when batting helmets become mandatory for tennis :-D Imagine each of the three scenarios you mentioned but with a baseball - the eye and head shots could have potentially been fatal. And the other would've been on you for not wearing a cup.

What exactly did you mean by "I would have jumped over the net and killed her :)"?? Obviously hyperbole, but would you actually have whined/protested/complained to her in any way because *you* didn't defend/volley/turn away from her fair shot which hit your "ahem"? Why didn't you "kill" your partner for serving you up on a silver platter for her OH smash while you were at the net?
No she was a very dear friend hahaha. And we were playing singles. So nobody to blame but me. But hey no offense intended. Just couldn't help it when I saw you refer to the ball as soft and fuzzy :)
 

V-Werks

New User
Here's why I quit playing 8.0 mixed after a couple years in SoCal... In 99% of the matches I played, two unwritten rules/norms existed (presumably derived from well-meaning chivalry). First, the men always took the ad court (to let women have FH side). And the men always served waaaay harder to the opposing man than woman...

Why were these two seemingly harmless things a dealbreaker for me?? After a few close calls the the worst happened one night. An opposing man had a laserbeam frozen rope of a 100++ mph serve he kept attacking my 2HBH wide on the ad side... Fair play, but problem was at night, with less than perfect lights -- one time my footwork/swing were a little bit late, the serve skidded wide off the line - somehow I made clean albeit late solid contact "judoing" all of the serve pace back in an instant - and utterly drilled the opposing woman at net *hard* in the shoulder dropping her and racquet to the ground.

Given the low light, skid, pace, and angle - fact is it was a blind luck miracle I got any strings on the ball, let alone clean sweetspot. My only intent was putting some racquet on ball and avoiding another ace - hadn't targeted her once the entire match prior. I immediately said oh s#it I'm so sorry, but she starts crying, her partner got pissed and wanted to fight... Eventually everyone cooled down but it sucks to be the guy who knocked a woman down on the tennis court...

Just a few games before she had said something to the effect of "I'm tough and won't get mad if you guys hit hard"... UhhHunh... They all say that until getting a backwards ProPenn 3 tattoo on the shoulder...

Soo, no more mixed for me. Sorry/not sorry if its sexist, but now I can only hit full-power shots against other guys. My normal doubles crew is primarily comprised of ex-college baseball and football players who aren't gonna cry/fight when someone gets inadvertently tagged by a soft fuzzy ball. Or even on purpose - such is the nature of competitive doubles...

To be fair, I also once played with a 4.5 woman who got drilled by an opponent's ball and immediately shook it off and said good shot... Regardless, "fair play" or not, I don't want to ever hit another woman with a ball that hard again - and the only way to ensure that is only play with guys...
I've played Mixed 7.0 for one season and, like you, decided against it for several reasons. First, as the USTA has acknowledged, genders of equal rating are not of equal ability. Women in the 3.5 - 4.0 level are more competitive with Men's 3.0 - 3.5. My own experience has proven this to be true. So, a team of two 3.5 players is actually of much lower ability from the male players' perspective. Second, I find myself cuffing shots (especially at the net) in fear of hitting the female opponent with my preferred shot selection and location. Equal Rights don't seem to apply to Mixed Doubles play. Lastly, I've found women to be emotionally unstable on the court and such behavior dampens the fun of it.
 
Last edited:

S&V-not_dead_yet

Talk Tennis Guru
I've played Mixed 7.0 for one season and, like you, decided against it for several reasons. First, as the USTA has acknowledged, genders of equal rating are not of equal ability. Women in the 3.5 - 4.0 level are more competitive with Men's 3.0 - 3.5. My own experience has proven this to be true. So, a team of two 3.5 players is actually of much lower ability from the male players' perspective. Second, I find myself cuffing shots (especially at the net) in fear of hitting the female opponent with my preferred shot selection and location. Equal Rights don't seem to apply to Mixed Doubles play. Lastly, I've found women to be emotionally unstable on the court. They struggle to keep it grounded and focused and such behavior dampens the fun of it.
The higher the level, the less of that you see: I saw some in 8.0 and very little at 9.0. I suspect there would be even less at 10.0.
 

OnTheLine

Hall of Fame
I've played Mixed 7.0 for one season and, like you, decided against it for several reasons. First, as the USTA has acknowledged, genders of equal rating are not of equal ability. Women in the 3.5 - 4.0 level are more competitive with Men's 3.0 - 3.5. My own experience has proven this to be true. So, a team of two 3.5 players is actually of much lower ability from the male players' perspective. Second, I find myself cuffing shots (especially at the net) in fear of hitting the female opponent with my preferred shot selection and location. Equal Rights don't seem to apply to Mixed Doubles play. Lastly, I've found women to be emotionally unstable on the court and such behavior dampens the fun of it.
I don't understand this pretty much at all.

Certainly at 7.0 the strongest pairing is a 4.0M/3.0F ... with one exception ... a pair of very high 3.5s will beat that pairing most of the time.

What is with trying to avoid hitting a strong shot to the woman on the court?
A. I don't understand why you wouldn't play the best possible tennis shot in a game of tennis regardless of who is standing where and of what gender.
B. I have rarely seen a woman in mixed complain about getting tagged ...

Are you kidding me with the emotionally unstable comment? Played mixed 7.0 today. Male opponent starts having a melt down. First hits 2 double-faults back to back. then barks at his partner after she hits a volley because it was "his" ball. We win first set 6-1 ... and he storms off ... leaves court and goes home!

I have played only about 6 seasons of mixed now .... in thinking about any drama on the court ... only a few instances come to mind ... all of them by men having melt downs. With the glaring exception of a husband/wife pairing who just went after each other.

So defend this "women are emotionally unstable" comment. Or is that just pure misogyny?
 

Matthew ATX

Semi-Pro
Yea, almost every emotional outburst I saw on the court at 7.0 came from a man; mostly the dude being a complete jerk off to his partner when she made a mistake.
 

user92626

G.O.A.T.
Obviously mixed is a different game, but it is still fun tennis. If you don’t like it, don’t play.
In recreational tennis, every d@mn game seems different.

In my group, there's a fat midget whose attitude is literally the worst I ever see in a person, a priest who's like a fake diva. All smiling and friendly on the outside but very selective of games, partners. And, a pot head and two mortal enemies who used to be best friends in the world a couple years ago!

Other members are ok but it's like no matter how good a big pot of stew is, it only takes a poison pill, let alone 2 or more, to *** it up good!

So, I don't think our games are normal. Players cuss, cheat, quit over drop shots, head hunt or act out on any random things that fit their moods at the time.

I tolerate all this cuz......................... I'm crazy about tennis.
 

1HBHfanatic

Legend
@user92626
you just descrived "everyones", tennis groups.. haaa
develop a thick skin, don't mind the BS!!
stay correct with your lines calls, over rule on second infraction if you need to
TRY to remember its just a recreational game, no money involved,
play for fun!,, use a lot of "lets!!"/do-overs,,
if ppl wanna fight, let them!, take yourself and 3 others to another court to keep playin, dont get sucked into their BS!!
OR,open up a beer and watch the fireworks :)
like i said, this is a common issue with many groups ive been to; people being people!!
 

user92626

G.O.A.T.
@user92626
you just descrived "everyones", tennis groups.. haaa
develop a thick skin, don't mind the BS!!
stay correct with your lines calls, over rule on second infraction if you need to
TRY to remember its just a recreational game, no money involved,
play for fun!,, use a lot of "lets!!"/do-overs,,
if ppl wanna fight, let them!, take yourself and 3 others to another court to keep playin, dont get sucked into their BS!!
OR,open up a beer and watch the fireworks :)
like i said, this is a common issue with many groups ive been to; people being people!!
You are 100% right in your outlook and approach.

I'm aware of most of it.

For the most part I still can keep a lid on it. It's definitely tough to "always rise above the negatives".
 

glenWs

Rookie
For me to enjoy mixed doubles, I have to modify my expectations of what I expect out of a match. I have to look at mixed as "social tennis" and decide that I'm going to have fun if I win OR lose.

Beer helps.;)
at 7.0 I find myself playing singles and planting my partner in a small area to do what she can. Just hit it deep I tell her so I can run around and cut off angles and reset points.
 

user92626

G.O.A.T.
I like mixed dubs or any kind of lopsided partners dubs. It don't matter as long as the two teams are similar in sum.

With that said it's also my nature to be lazy. :) When I don't feel like to extend myself very hard to cover a 3.0 players just to be competitive with two 3.5s (me being a 4.0) then all bets are off.

Question for everyone,

Do you all understand the concept that in a similar level match, you will have to try very hard, go the extra mile, sprint that last mile, kinda over exert yourself at key points, in order to get ahead?

I ask because it seems like everyone I play with just plays in their normal mode, go thru their usual motions or at best maybe try slightly different things, and hope for a positive change? Very few people know that they need to shift into their top gears, and yes, there will be some pain.

Maybe only exceptional players know and follow this concept?
 

Max G.

Legend
Question for everyone,

Do you all understand the concept that in a similar level match, you will have to try very hard, go the extra mile, sprint that last mile, kinda over exert yourself at key points, in order to get ahead?
How is that any different than, well any match?


I ask because it seems like everyone I play with just plays in their normal mode, go thru their usual motions or at best maybe try slightly different things, and hope for a positive change? Very few people know that they need to shift into their top gears, and yes, there will be some pain.

Maybe only exceptional players know and follow this concept?
If your "normal mode" is trying very hard, going the extra mile, exerting yourself, then you'll do that in close matches and not-close matches. If your "normal mode" isn't doing that, then you won't do that in close or not-close matches.

Obviously, having a lot of energy and playing hard is a good thing, just like being fast or having a good forehand, backhand, serve, volley, or mental toughness.
 

S&V-not_dead_yet

Talk Tennis Guru
at 7.0 I find myself playing singles and planting my partner in a small area to do what she can. Just hit it deep I tell her so I can run around and cut off angles and reset points.
I'm assuming you're the 4.0 with a 3.0 partner.

Try playing 9.0 [or, if you're a 3.5, play 8.0]; your perspective will change.
 

S&V-not_dead_yet

Talk Tennis Guru
Question for everyone,

Do you all understand the concept that in a similar level match, you will have to try very hard, go the extra mile, sprint that last mile, kinda over exert yourself at key points, in order to get ahead?

I ask because it seems like everyone I play with just plays in their normal mode, go thru their usual motions or at best maybe try slightly different things, and hope for a positive change? Very few people know that they need to shift into their top gears, and yes, there will be some pain.

Maybe only exceptional players know and follow this concept?
USTA league and tournaments are pretty competitive and most people are out to win. What you described sound like social tennis.

I doubt only exceptional players are aware of the above; seems more common sense than exceptionality.
 
D

Deleted member 765266

Guest
I like mixed dubs or any kind of lopsided partners dubs. It don't matter as long as the two teams are similar in sum.

With that said it's also my nature to be lazy. :) When I don't feel like to extend myself very hard to cover a 3.0 players just to be competitive with two 3.5s (me being a 4.0) then all bets are off.

Question for everyone,

Do you all understand the concept that in a similar level match, you will have to try very hard, go the extra mile, sprint that last mile, kinda over exert yourself at key points, in order to get ahead?

I ask because it seems like everyone I play with just plays in their normal mode, go thru their usual motions or at best maybe try slightly different things, and hope for a positive change? Very few people know that they need to shift into their top gears, and yes, there will be some pain.

Maybe only exceptional players know and follow this concept?
If they had another gear they probably wouldn't be 3.0 level players.
 

n8dawg6

Legend
In recreational tennis, every d@mn game seems different.

In my group, there's a fat midget whose attitude is literally the worst I ever see in a person, a priest who's like a fake diva. All smiling and friendly on the outside but very selective of games, partners. And, a pot head and two mortal enemies who used to be best friends in the world a couple years ago!

Other members are ok but it's like no matter how good a big pot of stew is, it only takes a poison pill, let alone 2 or more, to *** it up good!

So, I don't think our games are normal. Players cuss, cheat, quit over drop shots, head hunt or act out on any random things that fit their moods at the time.

I tolerate all this cuz......................... I'm crazy about tennis.
im the drunk guy w the pouty attitude
 

n8dawg6

Legend
you just hold up your hand to say i apologize
apologize?? i usually say BOOYAH!!

if its me getting hit by the overhead, otoh, i usually berate my partner for hitting a lob. tell them how fat their mom is, etc. anything but accept the fact that i could have deflected the shot w my racquet if my hands were quicker and my feet werent set in cement
 

user92626

G.O.A.T.
If they had another gear they probably wouldn't be 3.0 level players.
You know, if people don't have higher gears in the technicals, they should at least have more gears in other areas, say, craftiness, shrewdness and whatnot.

Everyone regardless of level eventually reaches his full potentials. Then, it's time to think up how to best preserve energy. When to mix up all one's stupid serves, at what point in the score to mess around with opponents games, etc. I can think of a lot more :)
 

user92626

G.O.A.T.
I'll give one anecdote of getting more shrewd which everyone can do if they pay attention.

There's this older, competitive guy who naturally doesn't move as well as the younger guys.

One younger guy said all it took for him to beat the older guy was drop shot.

And, they got on a handicap game where the older guy was given the largest court area and only a couple points left to win. If the older guy could get his racket on the ball to make his shot, 80% of time he would win the point. Ie too much for the young guy to cover and return.

The d@mn problem is the younger guy was able to do the drop shots on the older guy very well, who stayed back at the baseline far enough. But, he's not perfect. He still made enough bad drop shots.

I jumped and told the older guy...It's correct that you cannot get to those good drop shots, but how about you start guessing when your opponent is about to do a drop shot and move in earlier. If you guess correctly more times than wrong, you will win. Simple, eh? Stop trying to do your normal move which your opponent had already figured out.

This has nothing to do with technical skills. It's just being adaptive, observing and calculating one's odds.
 

S&V-not_dead_yet

Talk Tennis Guru
Everyone regardless of level eventually reaches his full potentials.
i think the opposite: no one ever reaches their full potential because incremental improvement is always possible, even for Federer [I think even he has said things to this effect].

And rec players who don't train, don't condition, don't pay attention to diet, don't get enough sleep, don't video and analyze their matches, don't get feedback from a coach, etc: there's no way they have reached their full potential. Maybe 3/4 - 4/5 of the way for the dedicated amateurs.

Note this does not mean everyone can surpass their level when they were young/healthy/had good knees/etc. Just that from this point today they could improve.
 

user92626

G.O.A.T.
i think the opposite: no one ever reaches their full potential because incremental improvement is always possible, even for Federer [I think even he has said things to this effect].

And rec players who don't train, don't condition, don't pay attention to diet, don't get enough sleep, don't video and analyze their matches, don't get feedback from a coach, etc: there's no way they have reached their full potential. Maybe 3/4 - 4/5 of the way for the dedicated amateurs.

Note this does not mean everyone can surpass their level when they were young/healthy/had good knees/etc. Just that from this point today they could improve.
I know this logic of yours. You have used this before to justify why you're not at x high level. Because you "chose" not to.

Such logic has no practical purpose, because everyone and anyone can claim such logic. I could have become the best brain surgeon in the world if I tried. I could have surpassed Federer if...

Such logic is unprovable thus worthless. Impractical. Not admissible in any debate.
 

S&V-not_dead_yet

Talk Tennis Guru
I know this logic of yours. You have used this before to justify why you're not at x high level. Because you "chose" not to.

Such logic has no practical purpose, because everyone and anyone can claim such logic. I could have become the best brain surgeon in the world if I tried. I could have surpassed Federer if...

Such logic is unprovable thus worthless. Impractical. Not admissible in any debate.
Look at the relative claims:
- You claim you could have surpassed Federer
- I claim I could improve incrementally

Without proof, who has the more easily provable claim?

The logic is simple: could you improve? If yes, then you haven't reached your ceiling yet.

Some believe they've reached their ceiling so they can feel justified about not improving.
Some believe they can always improve.

I want to hang out with the latter group even if they are wrong.
 

user92626

G.O.A.T.
This is why I don't mix in with you guys, S&V, ptuaminh, etc. ptuaminh claims 4.5 takes no talent, only takes hard work but yet he hasn't reached it, after almost 10 years. He asks to give him 10 years. It's like you S&V who thinks you can reach higher but have not, chose not. :)

I'm a matter of facts person. Most players play at 3.5 to 4.0 and that's where their full potentials are, for practical purposes. No if's or whatever.
 

user92626

G.O.A.T.
Look at the relative claims:
- You claim you could have surpassed Federer
- I claim I could improve incrementally

Without proof, who has the more easily provable claim?

The logic is simple: could you improve? If yes, then you haven't reached your ceiling yet.

Some believe they've reached their ceiling so they can feel justified about not improving.
Some believe they can always improve.

I want to hang out with the latter group even if they are wrong.
We're not talking about "wanting to hang out with whom".


We're not talking about "believe" either.


We're talking about reaching one's potential. That means, have done it. Have reached it. Are living it.
 

S&V-not_dead_yet

Talk Tennis Guru
This is why I don't mix in with you guys, S&V, ptuaminh, etc. ptuaminh claims 4.5 takes no talent, only takes hard work but yet he hasn't reached it, after almost 10 years. He asks to give him 10 years. It's like you S&V who thinks you can reach higher but have not, chose not. :)
I can't speak to @ptuanminh's argument since I don't recall it and you're probably mis-characterizing it anyway. I don't recall him writing that 4.5 takes no talent.

As for me, I had the same attitude about improvement when I wasn't yet 4.5. So if I was correct then [I did iimprove], whose to say I'm wrong now?

Is it likely that I make it to 5.0? No.

Could I have @schmke quantify it for me to show how steep the odds are against me? Yes.

Is that going to change my attitude about potential for improvement? No.

It doesn't even have to be an NTRP level; maybe I just get better at 4.5. Maybe I develop a new skill.

Colin Powell said something like "Give me the unrealistic optimist any day. Spare me the hard-nosed realist; I'll get them jobs with my competitors."

I'm a matter of facts person. Most players play at 3.5 to 4.0 and that's where their full potentials are, for practical purposes. No if's or whatever.
Sure: if you want to play by the statistics, the one sigma band is around 3.5 so the further above you move, the fewer the people. If you want to assume you fit the curve, then you've already reached your full potential.

One parting thought: take any of those players and ask them "Could you improve incrementally in some aspect of your game?" How many would answer "no"?
 

user92626

G.O.A.T.
I can't speak to @ptuanminh's argument since I don't recall it and you're probably mis-characterizing it anyway. I don't recall him writing that 4.5 takes no talent.


One parting thought: take any of those players and ask them "Could you improve incrementally in some aspect of your game?" How many would answer "no"?
You can't speak to his argument, can't recall anything but you already have bias against me. Nice way of arguing. LOL.

You probably missed my post #92. We ain't talking about could, would have or leaping logics.

If you have done 4.5 then you can claimed whatever you want about 4.5. Don't claim something that you haven't reached.


Even promise on future stuff is tough to keep. (that's why there are so many liars around)
 

ptuanminh

Hall of Fame
You can't speak to his argument, can't recall anything but you already have bias against me. Nice way of arguing. LOL.
If you have done 4.5 then you can claimed whatever you want about 4.5. Don't claim something that you haven't reached.
Even promise on future stuff is tough to keep. (that's why there are so many liars around)
I am pretty sure i wrote something along the line "From an average starting point, 4.5 is very much within reach with the right training."
 
Top