I don't need to hit accurately

TTMR

TTMR

Hall of Fame
Why do coaches still teach targeting, inside-out, inside-in, outside-in, upside down shots these days? Sure, I could understand in times past, when you had a minuscule racquet and inflexible strings, that hitting accurately was crucial in baseline rallies or setting up points. However, with the advent of the new racquets and strings, players discovered topspin. And yet, a lot of coaches are still using antiquated techniques from the days of flat drive hitting and targeting by deceleration.

I don't need to hit accurately. I just hit hard with a tonne of topspin and the ball lands in and the topspin accelerates the ball off the bounce with power. If I find I'm hitting long, I hit the ball harder. The harder I hit it, the more topspin I generate, the less drive and more arc I get with my shot, the less likely I am to hit out. Even depth doesn't matter too much. I can hit a hard deep shot and risk it going long, or hit a shorter shot harder and back up or jam my opponent on the bounce. I don't even really aim anymore. I just hit the ball as hard as possible and let physics do the rest.
 
TTMR said:
Why do coaches still teach targeting, inside-out, inside-in, outside-in, upside down shots these days? Sure, I could understand in times past, when you had a minuscule racquet and inflexible strings, that hitting accurately was crucial in baseline rallies or setting up points. However, with the advent of the new racquets and strings, players discovered topspin. And yet, a lot of coaches are still using antiquated techniques from the days of flat drive hitting and targeting by deceleration.

I don't need to hit accurately. I just hit hard with a tonne of topspin and the ball lands in and the topspin accelerates the ball off the bounce with power. If I find I'm hitting long, I hit the ball harder. The harder I hit it, the more topspin I generate, the less drive and more arc I get with my shot, the less likely I am to hit out. Even depth doesn't matter too much. I can hit a hard deep shot and risk it going long, or hit a shorter shot harder and back up or jam my opponent on the bounce. I don't even really aim anymore. I just hit the ball as hard as possible and let physics do the rest.
Click to expand...
Because coaches know what it takes to win at a higher level. And because for most people, hitting the ball "as hard as possible" isn't exactly worth playing tennis for. What level are you?
 
styksnstryngs said:
Because coaches know what it takes to win at a higher level. And because for most people, hitting the ball "as hard as possible" isn't exactly worth playing tennis for. What level are you?
Click to expand...

I don't believe in self-rating. However, based on observation and competition, I play at a high level.
 
TTMR said:
Why do coaches still teach targeting, inside-out, inside-in, outside-in, upside down shots these days? Sure, I could understand in times past, when you had a minuscule racquet and inflexible strings, that hitting accurately was crucial in baseline rallies or setting up points. However, with the advent of the new racquets and strings, players discovered topspin. And yet, a lot of coaches are still using antiquated techniques from the days of flat drive hitting and targeting by deceleration.

I don't need to hit accurately. I just hit hard with a tonne of topspin and the ball lands in and the topspin accelerates the ball off the bounce with power. If I find I'm hitting long, I hit the ball harder. The harder I hit it, the more topspin I generate, the less drive and more arc I get with my shot, the less likely I am to hit out. Even depth doesn't matter too much. I can hit a hard deep shot and risk it going long, or hit a shorter shot harder and back up or jam my opponent on the bounce. I don't even really aim anymore. I just hit the ball as hard as possible and let physics do the rest.
Click to expand...


This is a joke right?

If not, you are totally deranged and have no concept of how tennis is actually played at any level let alone a decent to high level.

I'm just going to assume this a troll attempt and move on.

15232095_10154016509091301_6329754289890606347_n.jpg
 
Last edited:
Once upon a time, players used to take advantage of the rule that allows one to hit the ball before it bounces. By placing oneself at the net, it made it imperative for the opponent to hit the ball with precise targeting and accuracy to avoid giving the player positioned at the net an easy angle-off winner out of the air. These easy winners were known as volleys.

But since volleys are now nearly extinct, the need for accuracy is perhaps no longer appreciated by all players.
 
travlerajm said:
Once upon a time, players used to take advantage of the rule that allows one to hit the ball before it bounces. By placing oneself at the net, it made it imperative for the opponent to hit the ball with precise targeting and accuracy to avoid giving the player positioned at the net an easy angle-off winner out of the air. These easy winners were known as volleys.

But since volleys are now nearly extinct, the need for accuracy is perhaps no longer appreciated by all players.
Click to expand...

What's this "volley" thing of which you speak?
 
styksnstryngs said:
Based on observation and competition, I have an iq of 240+.
Click to expand...
To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand TTMR. His humour is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of tennis theory, most of the jokes will go over a typical player’s head. There’s also his nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into his posts - his personal philosophy draws heavily from Agassi's autobiography, for instance. His followers understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these posts, to realise that they’re not just funny- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike TTMR truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn’t appreciate, for instance, the humour in his existential catchphrase “I don't believe in self-rating” which itself is a cryptic reference to Rene Descartes' Discourse on the Method. I’m smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as TTMR’s genius wit unfolds itself on their computer screens. What fools.. how I pity them.

And yes, by the way, I DO have a TTMR tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It’s for the ladies’ eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that they’re within 0.5 NTRP points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid
 
Bender said:
To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand TTMR. His humour is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of tennis theory, most of the jokes will go over a typical player’s head. There’s also his nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into his posts - his personal philosophy draws heavily from Agassi's autobiography, for instance. His followers understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these posts, to realise that they’re not just funny- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike TTMR truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn’t appreciate, for instance, the humour in his existential catchphrase “I don't believe in self-rating” which itself is a cryptic reference to Rene Descartes' Discourse on the Method. I’m smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as TTMR’s genius wit unfolds itself on their computer screens. What fools.. how I pity them.

And yes, by the way, I DO have a TTMR tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It’s for the ladies’ eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that they’re within 0.5 NTRP points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid
Click to expand...

TLDR...OP was a troll post.
 
TTMR said:
Why do coaches still teach targeting, inside-out, inside-in, outside-in, upside down shots these days? Sure, I could understand in times past, when you had a minuscule racquet and inflexible strings, that hitting accurately was crucial in baseline rallies or setting up points. However, with the advent of the new racquets and strings, players discovered topspin. And yet, a lot of coaches are still using antiquated techniques from the days of flat drive hitting and targeting by deceleration.

I don't need to hit accurately. I just hit hard with a tonne of topspin and the ball lands in and the topspin accelerates the ball off the bounce with power. If I find I'm hitting long, I hit the ball harder. The harder I hit it, the more topspin I generate, the less drive and more arc I get with my shot, the less likely I am to hit out. Even depth doesn't matter too much. I can hit a hard deep shot and risk it going long, or hit a shorter shot harder and back up or jam my opponent on the bounce. I don't even really aim anymore. I just hit the ball as hard as possible and let physics do the rest.
Click to expand...
Makes sense if we consider the entire picture:

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/i-no-longer-play-with-other-people.572637/
 
I still rely on accuracy in doubles - to place the CC return away from the poacher or to sneak it down the alley or to bisect the middle. In singles, accuracy has greatly diminished in value - just being able to hit approximately to where the opponent isn't is more than enough.
 
It is like automatic vs stick shift gearing. Stick shift is not a sought-after skill anymore. Even driving itself will be optional with all the driverless cars coming.
 
Bender said:
To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand TTMR. His humour is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of tennis theory, most of the jokes will go over a typical player’s head. There’s also his nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into his posts - his personal philosophy draws heavily from Agassi's autobiography, for instance. His followers understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these posts, to realise that they’re not just funny- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike TTMR truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn’t appreciate, for instance, the humour in his existential catchphrase “I don't believe in self-rating” which itself is a cryptic reference to Rene Descartes' Discourse on the Method. I’m smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as TTMR’s genius wit unfolds itself on their computer screens. What fools.. how I pity them.

And yes, by the way, I DO have a TTMR tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It’s for the ladies’ eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that they’re within 0.5 NTRP points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid
Click to expand...
Well done. *golf clap*
 
travlerajm said:
Once upon a time, players used to take advantage of the rule that allows one to hit the ball before it bounces. By placing oneself at the net, it made it imperative for the opponent to hit the ball with precise targeting and accuracy to avoid giving the player positioned at the net an easy angle-off winner out of the air. These easy winners were known as volleys.

But since volleys are now nearly extinct, the need for accuracy is perhaps no longer appreciated by all players.
Click to expand...

The obsolescence of the volley and general net play confirms my original point, though. In order to beat the net man with a small wooden racquet, you needed to be ultra precise. What killed the net game? Topspin--lots of it. How? Hit extremely hard with extreme topspin causing the ball to drop short quickly; the net player will have to hit a half-volley and/or volley up, giving you an easy putaway. Instead of aiming for lines, you can often win points just by jamming the net guy with huge topspin. If you're having trouble with old school serve and volley types, you're clearly not hitting hard enough (not generating enough topspin).
 
TTMR said:
The obsolescence of the volley and general net play confirms my original point, though. In order to beat the net man with a small wooden racquet, you needed to be ultra precise. What killed the net game? Topspin--lots of it. How? Hit extremely hard with extreme topspin causing the ball to drop short quickly; the net player will have to hit a half-volley and/or volley up, giving you an easy putaway. Instead of aiming for lines, you can often win points just by jamming the net guy with huge topspin. If you're having trouble with old school serve and volley types, you're clearly not hitting hard enough (not generating enough topspin).
Click to expand...
Topspin did not kill the net game on the ATP tour. It will resurface as soon as the next great S&V’r arrives. There is no current pro with the attacking-game skill set remotely approaching the caliber of McEnroe, Edberg, Sampras, or Rafter. A player will come along soon with athleticism and net skills like rafter and a serve like Raonic - when he finally arrives and starts to dominate, it will inspire a new generation of players, and the long lost art will have a Renaissance.
 
travlerajm said:
Once upon a time, players used to take advantage of the rule that allows one to hit the ball before it bounces. By placing oneself at the net, it made it imperative for the opponent to hit the ball with precise targeting and accuracy to avoid giving the player positioned at the net an easy angle-off winner out of the air. These easy winners were known as volleys.

But since volleys are now nearly extinct, the need for accuracy is perhaps no longer appreciated by all players.
Click to expand...
4k Video else it didn't happen.
 
Shroud said:
Click to expand...

Nadal's topspin is less effective on grass. Does that mean his strategy was ineffective? No, only his execution was. If he hit harder, with more topspin, he would have prevailed. Perhaps Nadal is no longer able to generate the topspin and pace he used to, which would explain his decline on grass. His muscle mass has declined compared to his youth, and his footspeed is slower, preventing him from transitioning from defense to offense as well as he could in the past.
 
TTMR said:
Nadal's topspin is less effective on grass. Does that mean his strategy was ineffective? No, only his execution was. If he hit harder, with more topspin, he would have prevailed. Perhaps Nadal is no longer able to generate the topspin and pace he used to, which would explain his decline on grass. His muscle mass has declined compared to his youth, and his footspeed is slower, preventing him from transitioning from defense to offense as well as he could in the past.
Click to expand...

Brown played exceptionally well and seemed to have Nadal on the defensive much of the time. Not only on the defensive but not very well-positioned also.
 
S&V-not_dead_yet said:
Brown played exceptionally well and seemed to have Nadal on the defensive much of the time. Not only on the defensive but not very well-positioned also.
Click to expand...

But in many ways it's the exception that proves the rule. The odd flashy upset by a Brown or Llodra is so notable and so referenced precisely because it bucks the overwhelming trend that topspin baseline power is the most effective strategy with today's racquets and strings, on all surfaces. Net play as a consistently winning strategy will only return when the power of the racquets is reduced, either through restrictions on the specs and material of the frame or strings. To paraphrase James Carville: It's the technology, stupid.
 
TTMR said:
But in many ways it's the exception that proves the rule. The odd flashy upset by a Brown or Llodra is so notable and so referenced precisely because it bucks the overwhelming trend that topspin baseline power is the most effective strategy with today's racquets and strings, on all surfaces. Net play as a consistently winning strategy will only return when the power of the racquets is reduced, either through restrictions on the specs and material of the frame or strings. To paraphrase James Carville: It's the technology, stupid.
Click to expand...

I think that analysis gets more and more accurate the higher the level. At median rec level around 3.5, S&V is effective because, in spite of the technology, people aren't utilizing it optimally. I'd say the technology advantage is dwarfed by the 3 Fs [footwork, focus, fitness, and spacing].
 
S&V-not_dead_yet said:
I think that analysis gets more and more accurate the higher the level. At median rec level around 3.5, S&V is effective because, in spite of the technology, people aren't utilizing it optimally. I'd say the technology advantage is dwarfed by the 3 Fs [footwork, focus, fitness, and spacing].
Click to expand...

That very well may be true about lower levels; I wouldn't know. As I said, I play at a high level.
 
TTMR said:
The obsolescence of the volley and general net play confirms my original point, though. In order to beat the net man with a small wooden racquet, you needed to be ultra precise. What killed the net game? Topspin--lots of it. How? Hit extremely hard with extreme topspin causing the ball to drop short quickly; the net player will have to hit a half-volley and/or volley up, giving you an easy putaway. Instead of aiming for lines, you can often win points just by jamming the net guy with huge topspin. If you're having trouble with old school serve and volley types, you're clearly not hitting hard enough (not generating enough topspin).
Click to expand...

Can you show us some video of your huge topspin shots against a serve and volley player?
 
travlerajm said:
Topspin did not kill the net game on the ATP tour. It will resurface as soon as the next great S&V’r arrives. There is no current pro with the attacking-game skill set remotely approaching the caliber of McEnroe, Edberg, Sampras, or Rafter. A player will come along soon with athleticism and net skills like rafter and a serve like Raonic - when he finally arrives and starts to dominate, it will inspire a new generation of players, and the long lost art will have a Renaissance.
Click to expand...

^This. 1hbh was proclaimed dead a few years ago. Then Wawrinka won his GSs and Fed had his resurgence. As you've written, once the next great comes along with that style, people will then jump to that bandwagon. The only thing is that type of player (1hbh or S&V) will have to be very determined or have strong support from his family, as most coaching stables or coaches will try to gently steer a younger player towards a baseline, 2hbh style of play.
 
It is still important to create feel for young players. Yeah there are many massive topspin shots but there are also volleys, drop shots, a little short angle flick as a counter for a dropper, half volleys and many other shots.

Sure especially on the wta tour there are some successful players without a lot of feel who basically can just hit forehand,backhand, serve but the top atp players all can hit massive spin but they also have tremendous feel for soft flicks and other stuff. I think it is important that players still learn no spin shots and feel shots even if they wont use them all that often in games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tlm
TTMR said:
I don't need to hit accurately. I just hit hard with a tonne of topspin and the ball lands in and the topspin accelerates the ball off the bounce with power. If I find I'm hitting long, I hit the ball harder. The harder I hit it, the more topspin I generate, the less drive and more arc I get with my shot, the less likely I am to hit out. Even depth doesn't matter too much. I can hit a hard deep shot and risk it going long, or hit a shorter shot harder and back up or jam my opponent on the bounce. I don't even really aim anymore. I just hit the ball as hard as possible and let physics do the rest.
Click to expand...

This is definitely true at the 3.0 level. Once you improve past that, your opponents will stop being bothered by pace if you can't control the placement.
 
dominikk1985 said:
It is still important to create feel for young players. Yeah there are many massive topspin shots but there are also volleys, drop shots, a little short angle flick as a counter for a dropper, half volleys and many other shots.

Sure especially on the wta tour there are some successful players without a lot of feel who basically can just hit forehand,backhand, serve but the top atp players all can hit massive spin but they also have tremendous feel for soft flicks and other stuff. I think it is important that players still learn no spin shots and feel shots even if they wont use them all that often in games.
Click to expand...

I hit drop shots. But instead of flicking my wrist, I use my regular form and hit the ball so hard it lands super short, just past the net. The key is to hit the ball at a slight angle and generate a significant amount of side/spiral spin in addition to heavy topspin so the ball takes a crazy bounce after impact with the ground. I achieve this by producing even more racquet head speed over a typical groundstroke, as opposed to the standard method of decelerating in order to create backspin. Again, with today's tech, there isn't a tennis problem that can't be solved by hitting with more power. Tim Taylor Tennis.
 
Really, wow that is a new amazing way to hit a drop shot. I got a new name for the technique HTDP (heavy topspin drop shot).
TTMR said:
I hit drop shots. But instead of flicking my wrist, I use my regular form and hit the ball so hard it lands super short, just past the net. The key is to hit the ball at a slight angle and generate a significant amount of side/spiral spin in addition to heavy topspin so the ball takes a crazy bounce after impact with the ground.
Click to expand...
 
I play 4.0. Just beat a guy who had big shots on both wings by moving him around. My most effective shot was a banana FH slice, he d try and take it out of air or hit hard off his feet. Because it was low slow and sidey he would dump or shank.
 
travlerajm said:
Topspin did not kill the net game on the ATP tour. It will resurface as soon as the next great S&V’r arrives. There is no current pro with the attacking-game skill set remotely approaching the caliber of McEnroe, Edberg, Sampras, or Rafter. A player will come along soon with athleticism and net skills like rafter and a serve like Raonic - when he finally arrives and starts to dominate, it will inspire a new generation of players, and the long lost art will have a Renaissance.
Click to expand...

I’ve been hearing this dream for 15 years now and still nothing to even close to confirming it. Sorry but the extreme topspin and angles that can be hit today do have a lot to do with SnV’s death.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

myalterego
How to hit more topspin instead of flat?
Replies
38
Views
12K
tailofdog
tailofdog
1
Decisions/Decisions - When to hit a flat return?
Replies
7
Views
892
Bagumbawalla
B
Headshotterer
Hitting harder for topspin
Replies
13
Views
1K
LuckyFrame
L
FiReFTW
Some people underestimate topspin and think pro players hit flat
2
Replies
57
Views
8K
StringSnapper
StringSnapper
krnboijunsung
I have to change the way I hit
Replies
14
Views
965
mucat
mucat
Back
Top