redrealist
New User
K. I've posted here on something comparable, but want to make the focus more specific.
I rarely watch pro tennis (when I do, I root for Sascha Zverev), and have never watched it live. What I'm wondering is this ... During a typical rally with forehand, cross-court smashes, how much net clearance will pros get on deep shots? I'm guessing 8-10 feet. No?
The reason I ask is that when I started playing the sport 6 years ago, I valued low, angled shots without a lot of topspin, and in fact got quite good at hitting these. In fact, most the 4.5/4.5 USTA opponents I play struggle with this shot, and often pop it up or end up close to the net, where I easily pass or lob them on the ensuing shot. So my question is this ... Why in a routine rally, is it preferred to hit more of a looping, deep shot that an opponent can easily get to, as opposed to a low, flat, hard to reach shot? I'm guessing when you play higher levels, maybe 5.5 and up, who are fit and have great footwork, that they recognize the flat, low balls and come in quickly and put them away with angled shots.
Are there any pros in recent history who hit more flat, low balls as part of their baseline game? If so, who?
I know I'm going to get hammered with comments that good players will punish anything short, but I'd be a bit surprised if that was true with a well-paced, flat shot that barely clears the net. In fact, much of me thinks the pros play the way they do with 8-10 feet of net clearance on baseline rallies (if that's what it is), because it's a higher percentage shot than trying to barely clear the net with a flat shot. Right?
OK. Hammer away ...
I rarely watch pro tennis (when I do, I root for Sascha Zverev), and have never watched it live. What I'm wondering is this ... During a typical rally with forehand, cross-court smashes, how much net clearance will pros get on deep shots? I'm guessing 8-10 feet. No?
The reason I ask is that when I started playing the sport 6 years ago, I valued low, angled shots without a lot of topspin, and in fact got quite good at hitting these. In fact, most the 4.5/4.5 USTA opponents I play struggle with this shot, and often pop it up or end up close to the net, where I easily pass or lob them on the ensuing shot. So my question is this ... Why in a routine rally, is it preferred to hit more of a looping, deep shot that an opponent can easily get to, as opposed to a low, flat, hard to reach shot? I'm guessing when you play higher levels, maybe 5.5 and up, who are fit and have great footwork, that they recognize the flat, low balls and come in quickly and put them away with angled shots.
Are there any pros in recent history who hit more flat, low balls as part of their baseline game? If so, who?
I know I'm going to get hammered with comments that good players will punish anything short, but I'd be a bit surprised if that was true with a well-paced, flat shot that barely clears the net. In fact, much of me thinks the pros play the way they do with 8-10 feet of net clearance on baseline rallies (if that's what it is), because it's a higher percentage shot than trying to barely clear the net with a flat shot. Right?
OK. Hammer away ...