MEP is back !!!!!

socallefty said:
I feel the same way that the most efficient style to win is the most fun style to play in a particular match. I play every day in my mid-fifties and I am not going to try to prolong matches - find an opponent‘s weaknesses and if exploiting them is within my capabilities, execute that game plan relentlessly.

If an opponent can’t move up/down well, doesn’t like low balls and has lower shot tolerance than me, then moving the ball around with variety including a lot of slice is very efficient. I don’t think hitting a slice shot that works to win the point is any less fun than blasting a topspin shot as in either case you can force an error or hit a winner depending on how good your shot and target are - especially if you can vary the pace/depth of the slice and can hit driving slices. Apart from winning points, only hitting aces gives me a slight extra buzz on the court.
Click to expand...
Spoken like a true strong player!

Besides winning points due to a greater tactic or strategy, I think what gives me the most pleasure is winning a point finishing it with a great volley or smash.
 
dannyslicer said:
How so?
Tennis Youtube is saturated.
Not Ian's doing
Click to expand...

Agree. I like Ian and he was one of the first I watched. Unfort there are just so many other tennis instructors doing the same thing (with better tennis resumes ie Ex ITF/ATP players) that is hard to separate from the pack.
 
10sbeast888 said:
that may be true for some people.

you can even argue that if there is something on the line, sure, it is about hitting inside the lines one more time.. I mean if you are playing in the US open, that would make sense.

but, we are talking about winning some lousy 4.5 match, that means nothing at all. lol.

amateur tennis is about fun... it means different things for different people....

but judging from all the tt posts. I'd guess most people care about hitting the ball with power, spin... not seeing many threads about how to dink balls lol.

also these players are trapping themselves in playing the garbage style forever.... these guys are fit, there is nothing preventing them from learning to play correctly.

but their success in the 4.5 tour has become the biggest hurdle in their advance.. because learning to hit correctly will likely make their 4.5 records worse before better.

so they keep dinking, for the entire 4.5 career lol.
Click to expand...
You're confusing rallying and matchplay. The former is played for fun and the joy of a bonecrunching shot. The latter is played for winning. That's why juniors who want to hone strokes do drills and don't need matches. OTOH, once you possess a gamestyle if you're interested in winning, you play matches.

Commenting on style in matchplay is generally the realm of the loser.
 
The elephant in the room is consistency. Some players may have powerful shots but they cant reproduce them under pressure. They either spray long or hit the net.

That separates the true 4.5's from the pretenders.
 
Jono123 said:
The elephant in the room is consistency. Some players may have powerful shots but they cant reproduce them under pressure. They either spray long or hit the net.

That separates the true 4.5's from the pretenders.
Click to expand...
And keeping the same consistency you add more power to your strokes and you move from 4.5 to 5.0? A 5.0 will also defend much better of course. But if a 4.5 improves only his defence to 5.0 level will it be enough to get to 5.0?
 
Curious said:
Yellow shirt guy answers my question. You don’t have to hit hard to play at 5.0 level.
Click to expand...
You don't have to hit hard but you need a solid serve that can't be instantly punished and you need a way to reliably get the ball deep. Also gray shirt looks much more like you do on the FH and is the player you should be seeking inspiration from for that stroke.
 
Curious said:
Yellow shirt guy answers my question. You don’t have to hit hard to play at 5.0 level.
Click to expand...
Clay though , he is hitting decently hard and any harder would get absorbed by the clay, notice how his opponent hitting slightly harder, doesn't make a difference after the ball hits the clay.
 
Curious said:
Grey shirt looks like swinging at his max while yellow shirt swings at 70%. Yellow shirt shapes the balls much higher. Depth and high bounce seems to be more effective than fast low bouncing ground strokes.
Click to expand...
No fast and low bouncing is always better if you place it well because those are the ones people can't get too. Realistically I gave you bad advice earlier, you want to be able to do both somewhat equally. You can have a preference for one that is your personal identity but it can't be a weakness. Two different shots that do two different things are not pure substitutes for each other.
 
optic yellow said:
No fast and low bouncing is always better if you place it well because those are the ones people can't get too. Realistically I gave you bad advice earlier, you want to be able to do both somewhat equally. You can have a preference for one that is your personal identity but it can't be a weakness. Two different shots that do two different things are not pure substitutes for each other.
Click to expand...
I agree. They are different shots and both should be used.
He just made me realise again that all I have in mind when I’m hitting the ball is drive forward. I don’t really think about lifting the ball, aiming a target above the net. Just driving forward.
 
Curious said:
I agree. They are different shots and both should be used.
He just made me realise again that all I have in mind when I’m hitting the ball is drive forward. I don’t really think about lifting the ball, aiming a target above the net. Just driving forward.
Click to expand...
The difference between high and deep, and fast and low, is the high and deep is lower risk.

In most cases in rec tennis, the reduction in risk outweighs the lower offensive value.
 
travlerajm said:
The difference between high and deep, and fast and low, is the high and deep is lower risk.

In most cases in rec tennis, the reduction in risk outweighs the lower offensive value.
Click to expand...
Yes. It also buys you precious time for your recovery for the next shot, which helps in different ways: eases nerves because you’re less rushed, you’re more likely to be balanced at the recovery spot while split stepping, game slows down in general reducing risk of injury.
 
travlerajm said:
The difference between high and deep, and fast and low, is the high and deep is lower risk.

In most cases in rec tennis, the reduction in risk outweighs the lower offensive value.
Click to expand...
Aiming deep is always higher risk :eek:
Curious said:
I agree. They are different shots and both should be used.
He just made me realise again that all I have in mind when I’m hitting the ball is drive forward. I don’t really think about lifting the ball, aiming a target above the net. Just driving forward.
Click to expand...
Yes think about clearance point but alsonmore generally think about the entire trajectory you want your shot to take from your racquet to the target point you have selected.
 
Curious said:
Not when you get the hang of creating top spin.
Click to expand...
travlerajm said:
nah. Take it to the extreme, and you have a moonball, the lowest-risk offensive shot in tennis.
Click to expand...
If you miss a moonball then its weak and short and easy for the other players to kill. Topspin is just a tool to drop the ball out of the air quicker. Sometimes you want that, sometimes you don't. It still requires precise input control to get a shot with heavy topspin to land very near to the baseline (i.e. actually deep).
 
Last edited:
optic yellow said:
If you miss a moonball then it’s weak and short and easy for the other players to kill. Topspin is just a tool to drop the ball out of the air quicker. Sometimes you want that, sometimes you don't. It still requires precise input control to get a shot with heavy topspin to land very near to the baseline (i.e. actually deep).
Click to expand...
Sure you can miss a moonball. But there’s a reason why moonballers exist and win a lot at every level, from 12-year-old girls, to 4.5 ntrp league, to college players, to Michael Chang and Carlitos when they really want to win critical points in the 5th set at Roland Garros on the way to slam titles.

If you have a good set of wheels in your tool chest, a deep moderately spun safe moonball is your trump card.
 
travlerajm said:
Sure you can miss a moonball. But there’s a reason why moonballers exist and win a lot at every level, from 12-year-old girls, to 4.5 ntrp league, to college players, to Michael Chang and Carlitos when they really want to win critical points in the 5th set at Roland Garros on the way to slam titles.
Click to expand...
Beyond what height does a moonball become a lob? I guess speed and spin need to be factored in too.
Another question: can we say a good groundstroke shouldn’t reach its apex before crossing the net? Not to be short that is.
 
Curious said:
Beyond what height does a moonball become a lob? I guess speed and spin need to be factored in too.
Click to expand...
The ideal moonball should have a safe trajectory. Too high and it gets harder to control depth.

But at higher levels, the height is effectively capped not by depth control, but by risk that opponent can sneak in and volley it out of the air.

If you are playing an opponent who lacks the skillset to intercept your moonball out of the air, then the ideal trajectory for a moonball is higher, because the higher moonball is more difficult to deal with after the bounce, as it will bounce higher and deeper with more explosive bounce.

In WTA, you sometimes see higher moonballs because many players have surprisingly weak overheads.
 
travlerajm said:
The ideal moonball should have a safe trajectory. Too high and it gets harder to control depth.

But at higher levels, the height is effectively capped not by depth control, but by risk that opponent can sneak in and volley it out of the air.

If you are playing an opponent who lacks the skillset to intercept your moonball out of the air, then the ideal trajectory for a moonball is higher, because the higher moonball is more difficult to deal with after the bounce, as it will bounce higher and deeper with more explosive bounce.

In WTA, you sometimes see higher moonballs because many players have surprisingly weak overheads.
Click to expand...
Unless attacking or approaching I’m thinking of experimenting every groundstroke going 1.5-2m above the net. A good idea?
 
travlerajm said:
Sure you can miss a moonball. But there’s a reason why moonballers exist and win a lot at every level, from 12-year-old girls, to 4.5 ntrp league, to college players, to Michael Chang and Carlitos when they really want to win critical points in the 5th set at Roland Garros on the way to slam titles.

If you have a good set of wheels in your tool chest, a deep moderately spun safe moonball is your trump card.
Click to expand...
Okay I can accept it's the safest neutral rally option.
 
LuckyR said:
You're confusing rallying and matchplay. The former is played for fun and the joy of a bonecrunching shot. The latter is played for winning. That's why juniors who want to hone strokes do drills and don't need matches. OTOH, once you possess a gamestyle if you're interested in winning, you play matches.

Commenting on style in matchplay is generally the realm of the loser.
Click to expand...
No. You guys give dinkers way too much credit by mention of Santorini and Hsieh. Pros slice by choice. They actually play with choice of style. Amateur dinkers dink due to limitations. Eg inability to drive the ball.

Santoro and Hsieh reached their true tennis ceilings. Amateur dinkers are Far from their true ceiling due to self imposed limitations.

Completely different scenarios.
 
toth said:
I have watched Ian - MEP video, Ian won convincing with attak the net style.
So i think it is a good tactic dispite giving a target.
Click to expand...
Attacking the net is the tactic that on paper should win against MEP. It is more difficult and takes a higher level of skill to play attacking tennis. I counted how many points they both won when they came to net from about the middle of the 1st thru the end of match and I think it was about -5 meaning they lost 5 more points when coming in than they won. A good attacking player should win 60% or more when moving in. In the majority of the lost net points, it was either an unforced error on a volley or a weak volley that gave the opponent a fairly easy opportunity to pass. I was watching 2 other players recently and one was a strong attacking player and one was a pusher/defender but they were playing about even. The attacking player got in position to win a lot points at the net but then proceeded to miss a volley or overhead, or to hit a weak volley or overhead. Playing effective attacking tennis is difficult as you need approach shots, volleys and overheads off both sides but if you have it, yes, it is the perfect tactic against MEP as Ian demonstrated.
 
Last edited:
TennisCJC said:
Attacking the net is the tactic that on paper should win against MEP. It is more difficult and takes a higher level of skill to play attacking tennis. I counted how many points they both won when they came to net from about the middle of the 1st thru the end of match and I think it was about =5 meaning they lost 5 more points when coming in than they won. A good attacking player should win 60% or more when moving in. In the majority of the lost net points, it was either a unforced error on a volley or a weak volley that gave the opponent a fairly easy opportunity to pass. I was watch 2 other players recently and one was a strong looking attacking player and one was a pusher/defender but they were playing about even. The attacking player got in position to win a lot points at the net but then proceeded to miss a volley or overhead, or to hit a weak volley or overhead. Playing effective attacking tennis is difficult as you need approach shots, volleys and overheads off both sides but if you have it, yes, it is the perfect tactic against MEP as Ian demonstrated.
Click to expand...
No one can defend the entire court reliably against you if you are not a ***** with your shot targets. This is an insight I think lost on the broader rec tennis world at times.
 
TennisCJC said:
Attacking the net is the tactic that on paper should win against MEP. It is more difficult and takes a higher level of skill to play attacking tennis. I counted how many points they both won when they came to net from about the middle of the 1st thru the end of match and I think it was about -5 meaning they lost 5 more points when coming in than they won. A good attacking player should win 60% or more when moving in. In the majority of the lost net points, it was either an unforced error on a volley or a weak volley that gave the opponent a fairly easy opportunity to pass. I was watching 2 other players recently and one was a strong attacking player and one was a pusher/defender but they were playing about even. The attacking player got in position to win a lot points at the net but then proceeded to miss a volley or overhead, or to hit a weak volley or overhead. Playing effective attacking tennis is difficult as you need approach shots, volleys and overheads off both sides but if you have it, yes, it is the perfect tactic against MEP as Ian demonstrated.
Click to expand...

nowadays generally people have less practice at the net due to the game shifting to the baselines among the pros, and the amateurs monkey see monkey do.

MEP is a 4.0, so Ian should win, regardless of tactics.

but 4.5 should have baseline game solid enough not to missed if not pressured... dinkers can't hurt you! remember that you will have no trouble at all.. control the middle, hit to big targets 3ft inside the lines and there is absolutely NOTHING he can do to you.

maybe the only weapon he has is a drop shot, for that you stand right on top of the baseline and take away that as well... so now what. you are just gonna run them left and right like a yo-yo.

can you, under no pressure, hit 20 balls in a row to the target without missing. most 4.5s can do that no problem... otherwise you'd just be a 4.0 and lower, in the same rating where MEP is.
 
10sbeast888 said:
No. You guys give dinkers way too much credit by mention of Santorini and Hsieh. Pros slice by choice. They actually play with choice of style. Amateur dinkers dink due to limitations. Eg inability to drive the ball.

Santoro and Hsieh reached their true tennis ceilings. Amateur dinkers are Far from their true ceiling due to self imposed limitations.

Completely different scenarios.
Click to expand...
Ok but do you beat MEP? You are also 4.5 right?
 
10sbeast888 said:
nowadays generally people have less practice at the net due to the game shifting to the baselines among the pros, and the amateurs monkey see monkey do.

MEP is a 4.0, so Ian should win, regardless of tactics.

but 4.5 should have baseline game solid enough not to missed if not pressured... dinkers can't hurt you! remember that you will have no trouble at all.. control the middle, hit to big targets 3ft inside the lines and there is absolutely NOTHING he can do to you.

maybe the only weapon he has is a drop shot, for that you stand right on top of the baseline and take away that as well... so now what. you are just gonna run them left and right like a yo-yo.

can you, under no pressure, hit 20 balls in a row to the target without missing. most 4.5s can do that no problem... otherwise you'd just be a 4.0 and lower, in the same rating where MEP is.
Click to expand...
I like how you are always taking 0.5 from MEP.
You are confusing him with your own level.
 
TennisCJC said:
Attacking the net is the tactic that on paper should win against MEP. It is more difficult and takes a higher level of skill to play attacking tennis. I counted how many points they both won when they came to net from about the middle of the 1st thru the end of match and I think it was about -5 meaning they lost 5 more points when coming in than they won. A good attacking player should win 60% or more when moving in. In the majority of the lost net points, it was either an unforced error on a volley or a weak volley that gave the opponent a fairly easy opportunity to pass. I was watching 2 other players recently and one was a strong attacking player and one was a pusher/defender but they were playing about even. The attacking player got in position to win a lot points at the net but then proceeded to miss a volley or overhead, or to hit a weak volley or overhead. Playing effective attacking tennis is difficult as you need approach shots, volleys and overheads off both sides but if you have it, yes, it is the perfect tactic against MEP as Ian demonstrated.
Click to expand...
My own experience is, much easier to attak the net to the oppenent weak backhand even if he has good forehand than if he has good passing shot and lobs from his both wings (3,5- 4 level)
 
Daniel Andrade said:
He's just projecting his own level onto MEP.
Click to expand...

Better_Call_Raul said:
?
MEP is at 4.5 and winning 60% of his matches.

@FuzzyYellowBalls already fact checked that.

but that's not important. as I said, dinkers have self imposed limitations. and their current ceiling will just get lower the more they play in the 4.0/4.5 tour.. once dinkers get 'figured out' they have nothing to turn the table with.
 
Last edited:
Pushers / dinkers etc have a 4.0 ceiling. You can't progress beyond that point without the correct mechanics .

Let alone the all you can eat 4.0 UE buffet they feast on.
 
10sbeast888 said:
Better_Call_Raul said:
?
MEP is at 4.5 and winning 60% of his matches.

@FuzzyYellowBalls already fact checked that.

but that's not important. as I said, dinkers have self imposed limitations. and their current ceiling will just get lower the more they play in the 4.0/4.5 tour.. once dinkers get 'figured out' they have nothing to turn the table with.
Click to expand...
This is true but it doesn't change the fact that the people want to see your showdown with MEP and won't accept any excuses for someone of your proclaimed financial state.
 
optic yellow said:
This is true but it doesn't change the fact that the people want to see your showdown with MEP and won't accept any excuses for someone of your proclaimed financial state.
Click to expand...

life is a b**** we can't get everything we want.

get a bet together I will do it.

meanwhile - hitting with someone like Jolly wouldn't be a waste of time and I will be glad to have it filmed and posted.

meanwhile - anyone coming to/in the Philly/Princeton area if you need hits reach out... we have a group of 4.0 guys here all can hit well.
 
Jono123 said:
Pushers / dinkers etc have a 4.0 ceiling. You can't progress beyond that point without the correct mechanics .

Let alone the all you can eat 4.0 UE buffet they feast on.
Click to expand...
You can be a pusher at any level with 10/10 technique. The difference is that your quality ball will be higher while still playing 99% percentage. It's still about waiting for the opponent's error.

Gotta say, good striking level pushers, are a pleasure to train against.

BTW, I do not say pusher in a despective way. But I do not share that tennis mindset.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

E46luver
Tennis Doubles Strategies ... "What's The Right Shot?"
Replies
0
Views
289
E46luver
E46luver
heretoserve
Federer's Grip Shifts During Contact
Replies
4
Views
1K
mike53
M
Lilguy1456
New TW reviews on youtube! (all Graphenes, all Techs)
Replies
3
Views
1K
Tan
T
J
Doubles version of MEP
2
Replies
50
Views
2K
Clay lover
Clay lover
A
MEP vs MEP clone !!!
3 4 5
Replies
224
Views
10K
user92626
user92626
Back
Top