Mixed Doubles Tactics

[apor]

I don't always play the stronger player on that side. I think there are times when your partner is more comfortable on that side it is better to let them play there. The other reason is because it is easier for those that do not have a fully developed game to be able to hit their backhands cross court. The last reason I would consider doing it is to put strength in the middle of the court where most of the points are played.

This is how I have always dealt with which side to play.... usually my partner will say you have a really good backhand you play the AD side, and I always come back with "which side are you more comfortable with"?

This comes from my one-and-only MXD match.
My female partner took the Ad side. Why she wanted it? I don't know. But she has a wicked forehand, and this put it right in the middle of the court. I have a wicked backhand, with me playing deuce, it's right in the middle of the court. Besides, I love hitting sharp angles off serves coming to my backhand, setting up my partner at the net.
Don't the Bryans tend to put their forehands in the middle?

 

[5263]

This comes from my one-and-only MXD match.
My female partner took the Ad side. Why she wanted it? I don't know. But she has a wicked forehand, and this put it right in the middle of the court. I have a wicked backhand, with me playing deuce, it's right in the middle of the court. Besides, I love hitting sharp angles off serves coming to my backhand, setting up my partner at the net.
Don't the Bryans tend to put their forehands in the middle?

you guys did it right for your strengths, but often the guy's best shot is his Fh and the ladies tend to often do better with their 2handed Bh. Guy in the Ad court also sets up for him to hit overheads all over the court if he is right handed.

 

[Ripper014]

you guys did it right for your strengths, but often the guy's best shot is his Fh and the ladies tend to often do better with their 2handed Bh. Guy in the Ad court also sets up for him to hit overheads all over the court if he is right handed.

Like BB said, there are lots of ways to skin a cat. Finding what works for you is the key.

 

[5263]

Like BB said, there are lots of ways to skin a cat. Finding what works for you is the key.

yep, but what I posted are some of the reasons bb would expect the Guy in the Ad court to be standard and to adjust from there based on player strengths and chemistry.

 

[Topaz]

Topaz, what do you think about this? There has not been one time in one of my matches where I got mad and confronted a guy for hitting at me, nor has an opposing female done lectured my partner for it.
.

I had an issue with it once where I suspected head hunting.

This is where some men might have a problem. If the man is the better player, then the woman or the weaker player better listen and play as a team. The better players should generally be the leader and exhibit teamwork and direction.

Why is it up to the woman to 'listen and play as a team'? Why not *both of them*? If the guy, even if he is better, is suggesting something that the woman doesn't do well...uhhh, then she should just shut up and listen?

Why not encourage players to listen to each other and work together? Regardless of gender?

Like you later said...be encouraging and supportive of each other!

I once played on a mixed team that had this one guy that literally none of the women would play with...he yelled at his partner continuously in every match. He took absolutely no ownership of his own mistakes...and oddly enough, he is still down at 3.0, and *all* of the women from that team have since moved up to 3.5. No lie!

I am not trying to be rude... if you knew me it would be the last thing you would say about me.

And I consider myself to be that 5.0 guy... but most of the people that know me would say I am sandbagging and should be a 5.5

Well, I honestly didn't think you were trying to be...but again, do you see where maybe your comments are condescending? It is great that you love tennis and you have lots of experience...but you aren't the only one. And we all have different experiences and have the right to share them here.

And again, I still got my racquet on the 5.0 ball.

Thanks... I find it hard to post on this forum without sounding like I am some arrogant know it all. But some things to me seem rather obvious, but then as some here have said maybe I am just delusional.

The problem is that I had female friends that had scholarships with the U of Texas that I played with all the time and though they were pretty and hit the ball with some pace, they really were not much of a threat at the net unless you gave them a sitter. But I guess the women playing 3.5 are much better than I thought... and if that is the case. I owe someone an apology.

Well, that could be the case...I know here on TTW 3.5 is treated as the scourge of the levels, but it is usually people who don't play USTA and have no idea of the rating system (with all its ins, outs, and foibles) who have that view. Cindy and I (and Raiden) are all in the same section...and the mixed teams here are pretty darn solid. 3.5 covers a huge range of ability...as I'm sure you know. But generally speaking 3.5 players are solid intermediate level (assuming 4.5 as a high level).

you guys did it right for your strengths, but often the guy's best shot is his Fh and the ladies tend to often do better with their 2handed Bh. Guy in the Ad court also sets up for him to hit overheads all over the court if he is right handed.

With JRStriker, I played AD. We played to his strength, which also happened to line up with my strength (FH in the middle).

And, honestly...those of you who say a woman's BH is usually stronger, don't play much women's tennis do you? In my clinic groups, there isn't one of us who doesn't have a stronger FH than BH (me included), and at least three of us have FHs that you don't want to play to given the opportunity.

I think it is really kind of ignorant to continue making those kinds of blanket statements (about any gender at any level)....players are individuals.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Why is it up to the woman to 'listen and play as a team'? Why not *both of them*? If the guy, even if he is better, is suggesting something that the woman doesn't do well...uhhh, then she should just shut up and listen?

Topaz, I did indicate both and I think you should reread my post. Further down, I qualified that either player should be able to provide advice to their partner. However, the better player (whether male or female) should be considered more due to their experience and play. They in general will have played or play a more matured doubles game and whoever the weaker player is should consider the advice. In other words, odds are it will be good advice whether it might come across as criticism. There is nothing wrong with criticism as long as it is healthy and not self-serving.

I have played with women and I have rarely had a woman challenge me on the advice I gave concerning how we should play or if I tell her to reposition herself. However, I do realize we are living in a different age and some women may find that advice male chauvanistic. If they do, I start looking for another partner. I don't need the drama.

 

[5263]

With JRStriker, I played AD. We played to his strength, which also happened to line up with my strength (FH in the middle).

And, honestly...those of you who say a woman's BH is usually stronger, don't play much women's tennis do you? In my clinic groups, there isn't one of us who doesn't have a stronger FH than BH (me included), and at least three of us have FHs that you don't want to play to given the opportunity.

I think it is really kind of ignorant to continue making those kinds of blanket statements (about any gender at any level)....players are individuals.

I agreed that a team plays to it's strength and I agreed with BB that the man in the Ad court is considered standard. Of course you are correct that I don't play with 3.5 women mixed much. Actually none to be exact. I only play mixed with double AA, high level women, which are normally college or previous college players and I try to avoid even that for the most part. They tend to have stronger 2handed Bhs at this level, but also tend to be weak at net relative to the men. I'm sure I don't want to face your fiery Fh, but besides that, I do pretty well against the women's shots.

 

[Ripper014]

And, honestly...those of you who say a woman's BH is usually stronger, don't play much women's tennis do you? In my clinic groups, there isn't one of us who doesn't have a stronger FH than BH (me included), and at least three of us have FHs that you don't want to play to given the opportunity.

If you were my partner it would not be so much how good your forehand is as much as it would be how weak your backhand is. I would rather have you play the AD side where you could make the cross court backhand return and inside out forehand return opposed to you being able to hit big forehand returns off the deuce court but return every backhand to the net man.

For me it really is about minimizing our weaknesses, and then playing to our strengths... like has been mentioned all over this thread, just the way I like to do things. Not a strategy cut in stone... but it is what I lean towards as long as my partner is comfortable and confident with it.

 

[naylor]

One more thing about mixed...
You guys are being played. Totally... the next time a female opponent tries this gamesmanship... Let her say her piece... If you were hitting a legitimate shot, suggest that she move back to the baseline and then keep playing your game... There has not been one time in one of my matches where I got mad and confronted a guy for hitting at me, nor has an opposing female done lectured my partner for it... The only time I heard through the grapevine a woman take exception to being hit at was a particular lady who is hypercompetive... Which only bolsters my belief that these objections are all gamesmanship.

All I can say is, I'll be happy to play mixed doubles in your planet (please send invite and plane / rocket ticket). I played a mixed competition two weekends ago and this is just two incidents:-
1. I intercepted a high service return from the ad side from her partner, played a high-volley that landed two feet inside the baseline and singles sideline, and as she was standing in the middle of the deuce service box (wrong place when receiving) the ball whistled past her head - I was accused of headhunting;
2. the opposition woman intercepted a shot from my partner from the ad side baseline weakly just over the net, so I just moved across to drill a backhand past her - as soon as she saw my move, she just shrieked and charged the net (kamikaze-style, except she was Russian, what's the Russian equivalent?)... I missed... so I glared at her, turned to my partner and told her that if she did that again I'd just drill her well and good. Anyhow, the opposition woman stayed at the baseline from them on - either I can glare in perfect Russian, or her English comprehension was a few levels higher than her tennis...

Frankly, my main beef about mixed doubles is not about being in a position to drill the woman at the net - if I drill her, the ball is somewhere close to her racket, and it only takes a lucky move by her to somehow knock the ball over my side for a lucky winner, so I always play it down (or to dip quickly over the net) to her feet; if she gets it back, there's no luck involved, she just played it well. My beef is when MY partner forgets that doubles is mostly about playing cross-court tidily to avoid the opposition netperson, her bad shot gets intercepted and I get drilled.

Still, I regard myself as a true egalitarian, I get just as p*ssed off when my partner does likewise in men's doubles - the only difference is if he does it twice, then my next "cross-court" will result in him eating a dose of fluff when the opponent at the net picks him off...

 

[naylor]

If you were my partner it would not be so much how good your forehand is as much as it would be how weak your backhand is. I would rather have you play the AD side where you could make the cross court backhand return and inside out forehand return opposed to you being able to hit big forehand returns off the deuce court but return every backhand to the net man… it really is about minimizing our weaknesses, and then playing to our strengths... as long as my partner is comfortable and confident with it.

... Around here it is the consensus that the better player should play the ad side (can also be the girl) because that is where all the important points are played.

You can have the AD side so long as you are aggressive and take some risk on that side.

My feelings precisely, particularly Ripper's. I always play ad side in mixed, by I always go cross-court on returns (unless I get a short sitter where the better option to finish the point is to go past the netperson) and I always try to run around for an inside-out forehand to avoid the netperson and put the server under pressure (male or female).

However, when playing men's doubles, even though my backhand is the stronger side, if my partner is comfortable blocking backhand returns safely across and is aggressive enough with his forehand to run around to play it often from the ad side, then (unless we're playing a lefty with a swinging serve) I always let him play ad and take the deuce side. My own forehand returns are (not blistering, but) adequate and safe, my inside-out backhand returns (top or slice) are good, and I regularly drill topspin backhand returns down the line for winners to keep the netperson awake, so our team strengths cover the middle very well, and also any switches... only 1 loss in 30-odd competitive interclub men's doubles matches this year so far.

 

[Ken Honecker]

"If my friend heard you say that 3.5 guys play the net better than 3.5 women, she would probably throw a blood clot!"

But I think overall it is very likely they do. Certainly there are some exceptions and in league play I would expect the women to be of a more agressive skill set then say a 3.5 you might run into at the city park. If I am not totally lost on the whole rating deal 3.5 are rec players and I've played a lot of other coed rec sports. I've played coed softball since 1985 and out of those 24 years we've only had a woman pitcher 3 1/2 years because the majority of women simply aren't dumb enough to stand that close to the batter. Heck Jerry had to wear shin pads this year because they kept pegging him.

In Spokane I can calmly state that 2/3 of the female tennis populace isn't comfortable at the net. Now that is from a small family sampling but only my eldest daughter wants any part of it while my wife and youngest are baseliners all the way.

Like any coed sport it is all about the women folk. If you have good girls you can get by with adequate men. I just wish I lived in a bigger market where I could get in on some of the fun.

 

[Topaz]

Topaz, I did indicate both and I think you should reread my post. Further down, I qualified that either player should be able to provide advice to their partner. However, the better player (whether male or female) should be considered more due to their experience and play. They in general will have played or play a more matured doubles game and whoever the weaker player is should consider the advice. In other words, odds are it will be good advice whether it might come across as criticism. There is nothing wrong with criticism as long as it is healthy and not self-serving.

Yes, you did, and I had wanted to quote it, but I got all mixed up in the quoting...I did acknowledge that you said that and I think you are spot on (as usual).

The men who have been able to criticise in a healthy and not self-serving way in mixed, however, *in my experience*, are in the minority!

And the more mature doubles player, again, is not always the guy. Women around here play much more doubles and play many more doubles clinics than the men, who tend to go out and just 'hit around'. (yes, yes, generalization alert) But how many men will admit that to their female partner during a mixed match?

I have played with women and I have rarely had a woman challenge me on the advice I gave concerning how we should play or if I tell her to reposition herself. However, I do realize we are living in a different age and some women may find that advice male chauvanistic. If they do, I start looking for another partner. I don't need the drama.

Well, I imagine that you are also a supportive partner, and offer the advice in supportive way. JRStriker, again, was an awesome example of this. In devising strategy as a team, advice is going to be given...but it needs to be advice, and not 'orders'.

If you were my partner it would not be so much how good your forehand is as much as it would be how weak your backhand is. I would rather have you play the AD side where you could make the cross court backhand return and inside out forehand return opposed to you being able to hit big forehand returns off the deuce court but return every backhand to the net man.

For me it really is about minimizing our weaknesses, and then playing to our strengths... like has been mentioned all over this thread, just the way I like to do things. Not a strategy cut in stone... but it is what I lean towards as long as my partner is comfortable and confident with it.

Well, and that brings up an interesting point. Several people have said they put the guy in Ad automatically. If you put me in deuce, and we have smart opponents who serve down the T, the one return I do *not* have consistently is an inside out BH. I'd much rather return on the AD side (personally) because that is where I feel I'm the more effective returner.

 

[Topaz]

"If my friend heard you say that 3.5 guys play the net better than 3.5 women, she would probably throw a blood clot!"

But I think overall it is very likely they do. Certainly there are some exceptions and in league play I would expect the women to be of a more agressive skill set then say a 3.5 you might run into at the city park. If I am not totally lost on the whole rating deal 3.5 are rec players and I've played a lot of other coed rec sports. I've played coed softball since 1985 and out of those 24 years we've only had a woman pitcher 3 1/2 years because the majority of women simply aren't dumb enough to stand that close to the batter. Heck Jerry had to wear shin pads this year because they kept pegging him.

In Spokane I can calmly state that 2/3 of the female tennis populace isn't comfortable at the net. Now that is from a small family sampling but only my eldest daughter wants any part of it while my wife and youngest are baseliners all the way.

Like any coed sport it is all about the women folk. If you have good girls you can get by with adequate men. I just wish I lived in a bigger market where I could get in on some of the fun.

But Cindy, who *is* a 3.5 woman and plays lots more doubles with women than you do (I'm willing to bet) is telling you her experience (which includes about a million doubles matches)...maybe the areas are different, but I find it interesting that you guys challenge her observations. You don't have to be a 4.5 or higher to make intelligent observations about the tennis that you see and play.

3.5 in this area is 'recreational' but also highly competitive.

 

[Cindysphinx]

Eikel, I think you are missing the "joking" around in the posts. I am sure Cindy knows the stronger player plays the AD side. But you are right, the AD side should have the better player and some teams put the person who takes more risk and may not be as steady as his partner. Still other teams like the lefty in the AD court for various reasons.

No, I'm not joking. I play ad side in ladies and in mixed. The reason is that I like to hit my inside-out FH, and I like to hide my BH on the ad court (not good at inside-out BH). On good days, I can take my BH DTL to defeat a poacher. I lack confidence in my cross-court FH, and I tend to get seizures of stupidity and attempt to take my FH DTL too often. When I play ladies, I usually have the stronger overhead and can hit high BH volleys. So ad makes sense for me.

That said, I am learning the deuce side, but I rarely get an opportunity to play deuce in ladies matches. There are far more deuce players than ad players on my ladies team. In my last mixed match, however, I did play the second set on the deuce side (with a lefty partner!). I did really well, much better than when I played the ad side in the first set. So maybe there is hope for me?

 

[FloridaAG]

I play mixed with my wife, I am a much stronger player than she is. Through trial and error we have learned that she plays much better in the Ad court - I have no idea why - her backhand is better than her forehand but for whatever reason, she is more comfortable over there and it works better for us.

 

[Ken Honecker]

Maybe I come across as a doof but the doubles I see are on the public courts and in that situation quite often the women would just as soon not get too involved in the action. I'm sure it would be different if I belonged to a club but I don't, or if I played in a league but since I'm not sure if I want to sign up for a league that plays indoors in the winter I might never get that experience. As for tournements last year there was one in town and Jan. when there is 5 feet of snow on the ground isn't the heart of my tennis season.

Talking about which side a person plays on is interesting to me because believe it or not dispite the fact that I played a ton of doubles (mostly men) I never really equated side with ability. I played the deuce side because that felt right to me. Maybe my left leg is shorter because I also liked to play on the right side in football.

Now that I have been playing more mixed doubles with my family I have been taking the Ad side just because I have a better chance of not losing the final point on an ugly return.

 

[Cindysphinx]

Back to net play, I don't think strength is what makes the men generally better. It is agility, quickness, and killer instinct.

Killer instinct? Sorry, but I don't think there is a gender difference here at all. Believe me, 3.5-4.0 women *want* to hit the ball hard, *want* to finish points with their overheads, *want* to have their volleys land for winners. They might or might not have the skills to make that happen, just like the men.

I think it is quaint and outdated in a competitive sport to suggest one gender doesn't have the "killer instinct." I have played with some mighty passive men, let me tell you. In fact, many of the errors I see in myself and my female partners are in trying to kill the ball too much.

Let me tell you about my net game. The biggest weakness in my net game is that I have poor hand-eye coordination and so I have a hard time taking on hard shots from too close to the net, something I think many women at my level or even below can do better than me. However I make up for it by being quick enough to close in on the net as soon as I see a shot that is weak from any position on the court. I can regularly hit putaway volleys on my first volley after serving. And when I hit putaways, people turn around because they know its coming hard and there's that intimidation factor.

Let me tell you about my net game. My biggest weakness at net is for shots to my body, as I tend not to get out of my own way and simply block the ball. I make up for it by being quick enough to close in on the net as soon as I see a shot that is weak from any position on the court. I can regularly hit putaway volleys on my first volley after serving (but I am learning that it is actually better to hit a deep slice approach volley instead). When I hit putaways, people don't tend to turn around and concede the point, but that's OK because I still win the point anyway.

Am I blowing smoke?

Last night, I played a 7.5 combo match. My opponents were a good 4.0 and a middle 3.5, and my partner was a middle 3.5. On my first service game, I stayed back and was broken.

For every single serve and return for the remainder of the match, I came to net immediately. Long story short: I played the net great, and I was really proud that I was brave enough to S&V consistently and effectively against a 4.0 with some fierce groundstrokes. And of course I follow good shots/lobs to net. I've been doing that for years.

Oh, well.

 

[raiden031]

With JRStriker, I played AD. We played to his strength, which also happened to line up with my strength (FH in the middle).

And, honestly...those of you who say a woman's BH is usually stronger, don't play much women's tennis do you? In my clinic groups, there isn't one of us who doesn't have a stronger FH than BH (me included), and at least three of us have FHs that you don't want to play to given the opportunity.

Almost every mixed partner I've played with prefers the AD side. I prefer the deuce side, but usually base my decision around what my partner prefers. If they are better on the ad side, then I'm not going to make them play on their worst side.

Because I have better results in 8.0 mixed verses 7.0 mixed, I think the conclusion for me is that the weaker player makes the team. I might be the strongest player on the court in a 7.0 match and we'll still lose badly. Yet in 8.0 I can win or play a tight, competitive match even when the male opponent is better than me. So this is why I put more emphasis on my partner playing to their strengths than me playing to my strengths.

Also on the FH/BH thing, I too notice that the women tend to have more solid BHs. I think one generalized weakness of 3.5M league players is the un-developed one-handed backhand. They just arm the ball or block it just good enough to get the job done. I think the women can't really arm the ball because they don't have the strength, so you see them developing more 2-handers, which due to the stroke's restrictiveness, actually forces them to hit more properly. Although one weakness I notice with 3.5W is over-use of two-handed swinging volleys.

 

[Cindysphinx]

I am not trying to be rude... if you knew me it would be the last thing you would say about me.

And I consider myself to be that 5.0 guy... but most of the people that know me would say I am sandbagging and should be a 5.5

Ripper, I think one issue we are having is that this board contains players from 2.5-6.0. As a result, it is always necessary to view everyone's remarks in light of their level.

If I say 3.5 men are not necessarily stronger at net than 3.5 women, that cannot be viewed through the lens of someone who is used to 5.0 men and women. If Topaz says she has a killer FH, she means she has a killer FH for her level -- obviously Nadal wouldn't be troubled by it.

So if I have way more experience in competitive matches at 7.0 mixed and I tell you something about how the 3.5 men tend to play, there might be something to my observations. Similarly, if you told me something about how 5.0 women play, I'd have to respect that because I have no experience with it.

One more thing: I think it is important that folks not "pull rank" in these discussions. I mean, some technical stuff people say is objectively wrong, and someone who is an instructor or a high-level player would likely know more. But much of what is discussed is level-specific. If I am discussing something with someone who is a 3.0, it is hardly helpful for me to bolster my argument with "Puh. I play 3.5 and 4.0, so what I say has more weight."

 

[raiden031]

Killer instinct? Sorry, but I don't think there is a gender difference here at all. Believe me, 3.5-4.0 women *want* to hit the ball hard, *want* to finish points with their overheads, *want* to have their volleys land for winners. They might or might not have the skills to make that happen, just like the men.

I think it is quaint and outdated in a competitive sport to suggest one gender doesn't have the "killer instinct." I have played with some mighty passive men, let me tell you. In fact, many of the errors I see in myself and my female partners are in trying to kill the ball too much.

Let me tell you about my net game. My biggest weakness at net is for shots to my body, as I tend not to get out of my own way and simply block the ball. I make up for it by being quick enough to close in on the net as soon as I see a shot that is weak from any position on the court. I can regularly hit putaway volleys on my first volley after serving (but I am learning that it is actually better to hit a deep slice approach volley instead). When I hit putaways, people don't tend to turn around and concede the point, but that's OK because I still win the point anyway.

Am I blowing smoke?

Last night, I played a 7.5 combo match. My opponents were a good 4.0 and a middle 3.5, and my partner was a middle 3.5. On my first service game, I stayed back and was broken.

For every single serve and return for the remainder of the match, I came to net immediately. Long story short: I played the net great, and I was really proud that I was brave enough to S&V consistently and effectively against a 4.0 with some fierce groundstrokes. And of course I follow good shots/lobs to net. I've been doing that for years.

Oh, well.

What you describe of yourself doesn't fit the profile of what I've played against. There are always exceptions. It could be all relative as well...maybe what you consider quickness and aggressiveness aren't what I consider them to be.

You also talk about signals and aussie formation like its commonly used, but in 3 seasons of men's, combo, and mixed, I've rarely come across opponents who utilize these strategies.

 

[Cindysphinx]

Although one weakness I notice with 3.5W is over-use of two-handed swinging volleys.

Truer words were never spoken.

I am feeling some frustration today. I played last night with a woman who takes clinic with me. We do great together. She has great groundstrokes. Great serve. Great 1HBH approach volley. I love her to death.

But despite the fact that she can dig out low 1HBH approach volleys that are below net level, when she is close to the net and she has a high volley she hits a 2HBH volley. And these 2HBH volleys find the bottom of the net a high percentage of the time. It is her Achilles heel. I hit a good serve, a floater comes to her BH when she is right on top of the net, and her 2HBH volley takes it into the net.

After our match, I finally said something. She was expressing frustration about missing so many easy volleys, and I suggested she would do better to hit all of her volleys with 1H like her approach volleys. She said what everyone says when given this advice: "My arm/wrist isn't strong enough and I wouldn't get enough pace with just 1H." Gah! If you are strong enough to zing low approach volleys from deep in the court with 1HBH, how can it be tougher when you are right on top of the net finishing a high volley? I told her to talk to our pro about it; don't know if she will.

Serious question: Why is it that people have such a hard time finishing a head-high volley with 2HBH? I have seen this problem with a lot of men and women.

 

[Topaz]

Maybe I come across as a doof but the doubles I see are on the public courts and in that situation quite often the women would just as soon not get too involved in the action. I'm sure it would be different if I belonged to a club but I don't, or if I played in a league but since I'm not sure if I want to sign up for a league that plays indoors in the winter I might never get that experience. As for tournements last year there was one in town and Jan. when there is 5 feet of snow on the ground isn't the heart of my tennis season.

Talking about which side a person plays on is interesting to me because believe it or not dispite the fact that I played a ton of doubles (mostly men) I never really equated side with ability. I played the deuce side because that felt right to me. Maybe my left leg is shorter because I also liked to play on the right side in football.

Now that I have been playing more mixed doubles with my family I have been taking the Ad side just because I have a better chance of not losing the final point on an ugly return.

Ok, there is a *big* difference between the type of competitive league mixed that Cindy, Raiden, and I are talking about and what you are observing.

I hear 'ya on the weather...feels like we're in the middle of monsoon season here!

In women's doubles, which side I play is different depending on partner. With some, we click one way, and with others, we work a different way. That's part of the challenge of doubles...figuring out how best you work *as a team*.

 

[Topaz]

Serious question: Why is it that people have such a hard time finishing a head-high volley with 2HBH? I have seen this problem with a lot of men and women.

In my clinics, when we work on high volleys, we concentrate on keeping the 'other' hand high (high with the racquet hand) to keep the body balanced. For me, that also helps keep me from swinging...most of the time. So, when that high volley comes, both hands go up.

And, FYI, probably took me at least a good year to transition my BH volley from a two hander to a decent one hander. I would imagine many players who are happy where they are are not going to put in that blood, sweat, time, and tears to change the stroke.

 

[raiden031]

Serious question: Why is it that people have such a hard time finishing a head-high volley with 2HBH? I have seen this problem with a lot of men and women.

Are you talking about swinging volleys? Those are what I was referring to, and they are much more difficult to time correctly, which is why they always get dumped into the net. I've actually done swinging volley drills with my ball machine (although one-handed on both sides) and it always starts off with like 10 of them at the bottom of the net until I figure out the right timing.

 

[Nellie]

Serious question: Why is it that people have such a hard time finishing a head-high volley with 2HBH? I have seen this problem with a lot of men and women.

Because people start low and finish below the ball (thereby having a swing path that sweeps way up vertically to contact, and then sweeps back down vertically), leading to a very hard shot to time. People also try to hit down at the ball instead of through the ball (gravity will bring it down). If, instead, you start high, hit straight through the ball and finish high, the shot is pretty easy.

P.S. - I have been hitting a swinging slice volley in this situation (kind of like a backhand overhead), which I find to be much easier to hit with a little bit of practice.

 

[Cindysphinx]

Are you talking about swinging volleys? Those are what I was referring to, and they are much more difficult to time correctly, which is why they always get dumped into the net. I've actually done swinging volley drills with my ball machine (although one-handed on both sides) and it always starts off with like 10 of them at the bottom of the net until I figure out the right timing.

Swinging volley? Really?

I'm not sure how much that happens. Either my partner is at net and is most likely to hit a regular volley, or she is at baseline and is loathe to take a ball out of the air, but I wouldn't know because I am in front of her. So I don't see that very often.

BTW, you mentioned earlier that I said I see a lot of people playing Australian and doing signaled poaches. If I said that, I misspoke. I mean that *I* like to do signaled poaches and play Australian. I get the impression that many of my opponents do not have much experience with it, which is why it has been helpful in turning around a match and getting some cheap points.

I am starting to see a bit of signaling from some opponents at 7.5 combo. Twice so far this season, out of three matches played (one that was an exhibition that didn't go into TennisLink). In the exhibition match, they only started signaling because we did it first!

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Yes, you did, and I had wanted to quote it, but I got all mixed up in the quoting...I did acknowledge that you said that and I think you are spot on (as usual).

The men who have been able to criticise in a healthy and not self-serving way in mixed, however, *in my experience*, are in the minority!

And the more mature doubles player, again, is not always the guy. Women around here play much more doubles and play many more doubles clinics than the men, who tend to go out and just 'hit around'. (yes, yes, generalization alert) But how many men will admit that to their female partner during a mixed match?

Well, I imagine that you are also a supportive partner, and offer the advice in supportive way. JRStriker, again, was an awesome example of this. In devising strategy as a team, advice is going to be given...but it needs to be advice, and not 'orders'.

Got to be. Nothing worse than a demanding nitwit that makes mistakes themselves bossing their partner around. This happens both from men and women. They are the ones that blame you for not being able to defend the net because of their poor serve placement or pace. You get killed and blamed for not handling it!!! lol

And yes, on court, when playing with a player that is rated lower, whether male or female, I move into a mode where I would rather develop teamwork and enjoyment rather than just have a goal of winning. Dont get me wrong, winning is important, but teamwork and mutual respect is more important to me in that situation.

Recently, there was an elderly lady, very nice person, wanting to play tennis. She was getting up in age and didnt have that spring in her step. However, she really wanted to play. Age has settled into her joints and she didnt have the elasticity in her muscles she once had, but she was just a great person.

It was a pleasure to play along side her and be her partner. She really wanted to improve and compete. Her serve was nothing special of course, and instead of telling her "serve here, with this pace" or getting on her because she didnt know where to be at certain times, I just enjoyed the spirit she brought to the table.

We lost, but we had fun playing as a team.

 

[Ripper014]

Ripper, I think one issue we are having is that this board contains players from 2.5-6.0. As a result, it is always necessary to view everyone's remarks in light of their level.

If I say 3.5 men are not necessarily stronger at net than 3.5 women, that cannot be viewed through the lens of someone who is used to 5.0 men and women. If Topaz says she has a killer FH, she means she has a killer FH for her level -- obviously Nadal wouldn't be troubled by it.

So if I have way more experience in competitive matches at 7.0 mixed and I tell you something about how the 3.5 men tend to play, there might be something to my observations. Similarly, if you told me something about how 5.0 women play, I'd have to respect that because I have no experience with it.

One more thing: I think it is important that folks not "pull rank" in these discussions. I mean, some technical stuff people say is objectively wrong, and someone who is an instructor or a high-level player would likely know more. But much of what is discussed is level-specific. If I am discussing something with someone who is a 3.0, it is hardly helpful for me to bolster my argument with "Puh. I play 3.5 and 4.0, so what I say has more weight."

Actually I find it difficult to find people that play at my level anymore... the higher you go the fewer people there are around. I have moved since coming back to tennis... and the level of play here is not that high. I do get a chance to play with a lot of 3.0 and 3.5 players because they are the majority of the people that play. As I mentioned earlier... I play for fun... and I genuinely like these people and live vicariously through their successes. Yes I do patronize them to some point since I do not blast the ball past them, but they are not so delusional that they think they play at my level. We enjoy the game... I always leave them openings to hit winners and when they do I see a fist pump or a big smile (love to see that).

I guess my point is that I am not totally out of touch with players at lower levels of play. It is sometimes what you thing you have experienced is not really what it is. An example is that you may think you are having a great day at the net... but if you actually tracked your points... half your shots were errors.

I like to tell a story of when I first started playing... I could play for an hour and a half... make one great shot... and that memory would bring me back to play. If I ever looked at my overall play and thought of all the horrible shots I made I may never have come back.

Just one last story... I was at a local court the other day and was just finishing up when I noticed someone hitting serves on another court. He had been there since we started our last set of play. So I asked him how he was doing and if he was with anyone. He said he was there for a 4.0 match but it didn't seem like his opponent was going to show up. So being the friendly guy I am I asked if he would like to hit for a bit. I took out a old wooden frame from my bag, an old Slazenger. We hit for a little while and then he asked if I would be willing to play a set with him. Again I am not one to say no... I ended up beating him 6-1 6-0, I did not aggressively go after him, he just did not have any weapons that could hurt me. Afterwards he said to me it was the most enjoyable tennis he had maybe ever played.

My point is that I am not a bad guy... and I really do not have anything to prove. As you stated... our viewpoints are our viewpoints. But give us some credit too... we have played with other levels of players, even if it was not last week... at one time we were the 3.5 player.

Looking over this post I think I talk too much.. lol

 

[Ripper014]

It was a pleasure to play along side her and be her partner. She really wanted to improve and compete. Her serve was nothing special of course, and instead of telling her "serve here, with this pace" or getting on her because she didnt know where to be at certain times, I just enjoyed the spirit she brought to the table.

We lost, but we had fun playing as a team.

I like this guys attitude, there are times you play for the enjoyment of the game... and there are times you play to compete.

I would play with that woman anytime as long as she had a good attitude.


There is one more point I would like to make... and it might come back to bite me in the ass. As mentioned I am sure everyone on the forum has seen or played with members of both sexes in most of the levels. Especially if you have played the game long enough. But consider this... don't you think maybe... just maybe some of these people are better to evaluate your level of play and skills since they have less invested?


<<< Bending over preparing to get bitten.

 

[naylor]

... there are times you play for the enjoyment of the game... and there are times you play to compete...

Absolutely right. A (male) friend and I - we're 4.5 and doubles specialists - got paired with a couple of 3.0 ladies to play mixed for half-an-hour at our club. The first couple of points (one of the ladies serving) soon developed into baseline-to-baseline high cross-court loops between the girls - he and I just stood in the service boxes, looked at each other and watched the exchange. What we then did is to fit in some control practice for ourselves. First, every time the serve came to one of us, we'd return to the man (if serving, to force him to pick up a volley at his feet when coming in, and then a second volley at the net; if at the net, then one volley to the forehand and one to the backhand). By that time, we knew where our partners were, so at that point whoever was hitting would play to the opposition girl, close enough for her to be able to get to the ball and hit it, but also forcing her to move for each shot. Then, the rally would continue. If it was between the girls, then we simply waited for play to switch to us naturally or for an easy intercept, we tested each other with a couple of volley/pass routines, and back to the girls. But if the girl started rallying with one of us, then we'd keep rallying back to her, forcing her to stay in the point for an extra shot, and another, and another. Serving was strictly seconds, with a bit of kick to force the receiving girl to watch the ball for the break.

The end result is that we had lots of pretty long rallies, and the mistakes that ended them were fairly evenly spread amongst the 4. At the end of the game, one of the girls said she'd enjoyed it tremendously - she'd probably hit twice as many balls (so played about twice as much tennis) as she would have hit in an all-3.0 foursome. And my mate and I didn't disagree with her assessment, we'd also got good value from keeping the ball going for long rallies.

 

[Cindysphinx]

But consider this... don't you think maybe... just maybe some of these people are better to evaluate your level of play and skills since they have less invested?

Only if they have actually seen me play.

 

[Ripper014]

Only if they have actually seen me play.

Sorry when I said you... I meant it in a generic way towards all 3.5 players, not you specifically.

 

[Ripper014]

Absolutely right. A (male) friend and I - we're 4.5 and doubles specialists - got paired with a couple of 3.0 ladies to play mixed for half-an-hour at our club. The first couple of points (one of the ladies serving) soon developed into baseline-to-baseline high cross-court loops between the girls - he and I just stood in the service boxes, looked at each other and watched the exchange. What we then did is to fit in some control practice for ourselves. First, every time the serve came to one of us, we'd return to the man (if serving, to force him to pick up a volley at his feet when coming in, and then a second volley at the net; if at the net, then one volley to the forehand and one to the backhand). By that time, we knew where our partners were, so at that point whoever was hitting would play to the opposition girl, close enough for her to be able to get to the ball and hit it, but also forcing her to move for each shot. Then, the rally would continue. If it was between the girls, then we simply waited for play to switch to us naturally or for an easy intercept, we tested each other with a couple of volley/pass routines, and back to the girls. But if the girl started rallying with one of us, then we'd keep rallying back to her, forcing her to stay in the point for an extra shot, and another, and another. Serving was strictly seconds, with a bit of kick to force the receiving girl to watch the ball for the break.

The end result is that we had lots of pretty long rallies, and the mistakes that ended them were fairly evenly spread amongst the 4. At the end of the game, one of the girls said she'd enjoyed it tremendously - she'd probably hit twice as many balls (so played about twice as much tennis) as she would have hit in an all-3.0 foursome. And my mate and I didn't disagree with her assessment, we'd also got good value from keeping the ball going for long rallies.

That is pretty much exactly what I do... except I will play it back until they hit a winner or they miss the ball. And I have been there with the cross court rallys... standing there feeling like a stick of furniture... and then perhaps a lob into the other corner, and the cross court play starts all over again.

 

[tennytive]

I hit a good serve, a floater comes to her BH when she is right on top of the net, and her 2HBH volley takes it into the net.

I sympathize.

If it's really a high floater, she should have time to slide over a few steps and hit a forehand. Otherwise blocking the ball to the open court with a firm backhand and essentially no swing at all should be the easiest option. It isn't how hard she hits the ball, it's where that's most important.

Many players see some of the pros using a swing volley and think that's the answer, when it's really one of the hardest shots to make because of the exact timing required.

Good luck when you play with her next.

 

[J011yroger]

Wow...surprised to find so few positive responses. In the last year or so, I have been practicing a lot with the local 9.0 and 10.0 teams. Has been an absolute blast, and the girls are great.

*shrug*

As far as strategy, I just play like normal dubs. Doesn't matter if the opponent/partner is a guy or gal, I just look at strengths/weaknesses. I just don't get the guy this girl that strategy, I mean, if you can serve, return, and volley, then it shouldn't matter who is on the other side of the net, just hit your shots.

J

 

[GuyClinch]

There is a huge gap between college women - and older late 30 - 50 something women with almost nothing in between, IMHO. Be happy you get a chance to hit with that first crowd..

Pete

 

[naylor]

There is a huge gap between college women - and older late 30 - 50 something women with almost nothing in between... Pete

You're absolutely right there. On Friday, I watched our top women in a club match - they and the opposition were not a day past 21 (average age, about 18 ). Yesterday, I watched a match played by their reserves, if anything the avearge age was lower, but there was the odd granny in her late 20s (the team captain!). The women in the next team down in my club (who play top interclub mixed), the average age is 40-45.

Looks like tennis becomes a no-no sport for women between the ages of 20 and 40. Obviously, other interests and priorities kick in.

 

[Ripper014]

There is a huge gap between college women - and older late 30 - 50 something women with almost nothing in between, IMHO. Be happy you get a chance to hit with that first crowd..

I would not put it this way... it is more about skill than age. You can be 30-50 and still be skilled... Stefi Graf is half way to 50... she can serve and return and she is an "OK" volleyer.

I am glad someone resurrected this thread... it is my favorite, seems to almost get personal... I kind of like that. I like to have people say what is on their mind.

 

[J011yroger]

Stefi Graf is half way to 50.

Isn't half way to 50 25?

J

 

[Topaz]

Looks like tennis becomes a no-no sport for women between the ages of 20 and 40. Obviously, other interests and priorities kick in.

Hmmm, and what do you think they might be?

I'm 34, started playing again at 29. At that time, and even still now, I'm the youngest woman on my USTA team!

 

[maverick66]

Isn't half way to 50 25?

J

Maybe in your twisted world but in the real world half way to 50 makes her anywhere between 20-49.

As for having a mixed doubs partner give me a girl that can play angles over a blaster anyday. Very few female players play angles anymore. If you find one that does dont ever let her play with someone else as you want to hold onto her for future winning.

 

[Ripper014]

Isn't half way to 50 25?

J

Ya sorry I was thinking of her being between 40 and 50... I think she is 45.

 

[5263]

Sure, go ahead and generalize. I certainly do.

Just a point that may have been mentioned in this thread somewhere.

The NTRP system accounts for gender , at a minimum. Not saying women or men are higher on the scale (i won't go there), but when looking at your rating, it is figured against your own gender. So if a gal is out there winning some and losing some against 4.0 men, that does not mean she is a 4.0
My guess is she would be higher rated against against the proper measurement based on playing other ladies , and how she fares at the different levels with them.

Also says you are the rating of your best, either doubles or singles. So a guy like me, who plays more doubles and is not really in shape for tough singles running, might get whacked good in a singles match at my level, whatever that is, based on doubles.
Very interesting...

 

[GuyClinch]

^^^ I have never heard of any age modifier. NTRP based on competition. If your a 60 year old guy and you consistently lose to a 3.0 20 year olds - your not a 4.0 just because of your age.


As for the "gender" modifier.. It just reflects that women lose to men rated .5 to 1 level lower then them. Thus a 3.5 women can lose to a very athletic younger guy who is just starting out (2.5) - or a 3.0 male "hacker" and Serena gets smacked down by a chain smoking '200' ranked pro..

Pete

 

[naylor]

... As for the "gender" modifier.. It just reflects that women lose to men rated .5 to 1 level lower then them...

OK, just so that I undertand you correctly, let's assume you have 4 men, who all know how to play doubles, and all ranked 4.0. Then, in principle, a doubles match between them will be reasonably balanced.

Now, let's pick any two of them, and pair them with two women, who again know how to play doubles, to play a mixed match. If I understand you correctly, for that mixed to be reasonably balanced again (with the women not being the "weak link" in each pairing), the women have to be graded 4.5 or 5.0. Have I got it right?

Thanks!

 

[5263]

Pete, looks like I mis-read it.
instead of your age, it was
ANy age... lol.
I was surprised too when I mis-read this, as I had never heard any ref to age before.
Oh well, thanks for pointing it out.

 

[papa]

One of the things that happens is that players do not like (except in tournaments) like to be ranked lower as they age. They, again most, feel that "by God I got to that level (whatever it may be) and I'll be damned if I'm going backward". I think they look at it like a educational degree - doesn't seem to matter that kids today might be exposed/challenged more or more might be expected of them. I've know players who have actually quit the game because they were going to be demoted/asked to play at a lower level -- hard for many to accept that their skill levels have fallen off.

There is also this "the older I get the better I was concept".

Also, for many, where they play (geographical speaking) creeps into the picture. For instance is a 4.0 player from the mid-west (doesn't matter what area you choose) equal to a 4.0 from Florida or Russia? Its supposed to be the same but is it?

So the bottom line is that everything in life is relative. When we say someone is good, we are measuring them to some standard and most of time its a local measure. We also have this "self rated" business going on which really messes up the whole picture. When the player really get good locally and start to travel they more often than not, find they aren't quite as good as they/others thought. So the argument goes on and on.

 

[Roland G]

Tactics for mixed? Sure!

1. The guy is going to overhit. Try not to let this bother you.

2. The guy is going to play the net poorly, or on a good day average. He has good groundies and a good serve, but he is just not comfortable up there. He will not transition to net, ever.

3. The guy will not know how to poach using signals or play Australian. He will not fake or otherwise try to bother the returner. He will not understand the benefits of playing two-back. He may start every point on your serve with one foot in the doubles alley. He is not especially knowledgeable about doubles, as he doesn't consider it "real tennis" and he's not a fan of all that book learnin'.

4. He will not know the Rules or the Code. See Rule 3 about book learnin'.

5. He would rather die than be seen hitting a lob.

I think that about covers i!

Sounds about right!

 

[Steady Eddy]

Wow! A nine year gap between posts.

 

[user92626]

Wow! A nine year gap between posts.

Maybe they just had a successful case of bringing a patient out of a coma and that guy just remembered he hadn't finished his thought on a TT thread!

If you're living long enough -- and I think you are -- you'll see everything.