Old school or modern game for long-term improvement?

[daved]

Should I go old school or new school for continuous improvement for the longest possible time?

I'm 47, started playing (for real...previously just hacked around for laffs) four years ago. I'm 5'11", 155#, fit, good but not great lifetime athlete in many sports.

Got to 3.5 almost immediately after taking up the game. Now winning 90%+ of 3.5 level matches and struggling to break through the 4.0 ceiling.

My coach says "stick with the program," the program being the modern game of strong grips, wraparound finishes and heavy topspin.

By "sticking with the program" and committing to hit bigger shots, I do find I'm progressing and winning more against 4.0 players.

BUT, and it's a big "but":

The physicality of the modern game is not something I'm going to be able to sustain for that much longer, even if I stay fit, AND...

...the best players I've seen over 50 (McEnroe maybe the best ever, a local player still kicking butt at Open level with slice and volleys at mid 50s plus) play a simpler game, with weaker grips, compact strokes and a much great emphasis on placement over topspin and pace, AND...

...the one time I've beaten one of my strongest regular opponents (legit 4.0 without trying, 4.5 when he's paying attention) was playing Mac style with one grip, inside the baseline.

I'm at a crossroads. I need to choose to commit to old school (crowding the baseline, always moving forward, weaker grips, placement over power) or new school (mostly behind the baseline, stronger grips, swinging big for spin and pace over placement).

I'm confident I can get to 4.0 by "sticking with the program," but it will be painful to get there and stay there past 50, and I don't see any upside beyond 4.0 -- I just don't think my body can take the modern game at a level above that.

What's the right path?

For the record, if I could play great in either style, I would pick old school...in my dreams I play like Mac/Leconte/Nastase.

 

[5263]

Actually playing the modern game is way easier on the body. Just tone it
down a bit. I play much higher and bet I don't work near as hard to hit it
or move as you do at the point. It take you more work because it's new.
Your idols hit pretty modern as well and there is more to modern that you
know so far.

Stay the course and look how to use modern all court in a flowing easy style!
Strong 4.5 is much more likely with modern game and strokes.

 

[LeeD]

I think a mix of old and new.
Since volleying needs to be implemented, some of that too.
But a forehand needs only to work. I've seen plenty of short stunted, but direct forehands working at 4.5 and better levels. Don't need the full swing if your shoulder has arthritis or is stiff all the time.
Same with backhands. We're talking trying to get to 4.5, not 5.5. A slice backhand does the job plenty well if you can lob with it, dropshot with it, and hit low angles and DTL passes. Don't need the topspin whatsover at 4-4.5.
The modern groundies just takes more out of your body, which gives less with older age and injury.

 

[Limpinhitter]

. . . My coach says "stick with the program," the program being the modern game of strong grips, wraparound finishes and heavy topspin. . . .

Your coach is right. If you want to be the best player you can be, stick with the program and learn modern technique.

 

[monomer]

By far, your physical fitness is what will determine how well you play as you get older. Keep your weight down, do some strength training and cardio. I'm a couple of years younger than you and plan to stick with a modern FH.

 

[BevelDevil]

Keep in mind it's not an either/or thing. Agassi and Sampras had in-between forehands.

 

[boramiNYC]

your style is your style is your style...meaning to keep building game you have to do it around your style. think what kind of shots you like to hit, are good at hitting, and wish you'd like to hit. what's your strength and weakness? there is no 'have to's that make you pause and rethink your style. focus on what kind of style you like that opimizes your strengths and that direction will present to you what youll have to do and those wont be stressful but more challenges you wouldnt mind taking to refine your style of play. have fun play the game make friends while learning and playing the style that's you.

 

[Hi I'm Ray]

IMO its much easier to play using modern strokes. I used western FH when I was younger, Eastern when I started over, and now switched to a Semi Western. The eastern grip produced an effortless smooth swing but was by far the most difficult to use. Against slow paced or high bouncing shots it just wasn't natural, and nowadays high bouncing shots are very common. It only really felt right against fast, low bouncing shots. I had the same experience with backhands - eastern 1H was by far the most difficult to time, and most awkward against high bouncing shots.

BTW IMO style of play is different from modern or classic strokes. I use modern strokes but crowd the baseline and step inside the court to attack even good incoming shots when possible. I try to be the aggressor & put pressure on the opponent to prevent being attacked myself, but will step back a few feet and grind it out waiting for a weak ball if I'm not in a position to be aggressive.

Perhaps your coach is concentrating on developing your stroke first, not so much on placement yet. When you played "Mac style" is it possible that you were concentrating more on placement and not so much on taking a full stroke? Maybe you are confusing this and thinking modern = power > placement and oldschool short swings = placement > power. There's no reason to choose between power or placement, you should try for both. I try to hit aggressively but without placement the ball just keeps coming back. For example there is a pretty aggressive player I hit with who is very fast on his feet. If I hit hard & fairly deep but with only moderate angles, the ball will keep coming back and soon it will come back as an attack and put me on defense. If I hit using the same speed but place them towards "smart targets" (as 5263 puts them) the guy will have a ton of trouble staying in the point.

Baseline play doesn't have to mean grinding it out and running all day, it can be aggressive and setting up to end the point quickly. Approaching the net often involves very fast movement and intense moments, so that can be pretty tiring too. Take what works for you of the old and new and mix together

 

[TomT]

Regarding the phrases strong grip and weak grip, do modern pros hold the racquet tighter then their predecessors?

 

[ATP100]

Is playing doubles an option, learn that.

 

[Limpinhitter]

Regarding the phrases strong grip and weak grip, do modern pros hold the racquet tighter then their predecessors?

Noooooo. I'm pretty sure the OP was talking about SW and W vs. Eastern or Continental, not how tightly the handle should be squeezed. Traditionally, it has been taught to slightly squeeze the grip at contact. It was also taught to keep the racquet head above the hand at all times. But, a tight grip is a stroke killer in the modern game. The proper execution of modern strokes requires a loose relaxed grip through contact.

 

[rkelley]

Stay the course. Go with the modern game. I'm almost 50. I play with a couple of guys who are also about my age. We all play a modern game with high racquet head speeds, modern grips, lots of spin.

Honestly it isn't swinging the racquet that's physically taxing. That's more a timing and technique thing, and even swinging easy I can get more power and spin with modern technique than old school. The real physicality is getting to the ball and getting set-up, and that's not going to change regardless of whether you use old school or new school strokes.

Moving into our 50's does not necessarily mean that you have to start slowing your game down. Just hit the ball and have fun. Your body will tell you when you're doing too much.

 

[Fusker]

I'm younger than you are (34 y.o., NTRP 4.5) but committed to a more modern approach a couple years ago. I grew up serving and volleying but found it increasingly difficult to do as my primary game plan recently. My approach was pretty old school - get to the net as fast as possible and end the point.

What I have found is that my old chip and charges were getting ripped past me more frequently for winners. Approach shots that used to be effective can now be returned more effectively thanks to string and swing changes. So basically, I adapted.

I learned how to hit a windshield wiper forehand. In my matches with friends I committed to staying at the baseline to gain greater comfort and ability in rallying and constructing a point. In my competitive matches, I'm still looking to move forward and mix in serve and volleys to keep the returner off guard. My approach shots are now less likely to be sliced and are more often hard topspin balls that pull the opponent off the court.

Frankly, I think this approach will let me play at a higher level for longer than my old school approach. So my suggestion would be to learn the modern game and hybrid it with the game you play naturally. If you're aggressive, stay that way and leverage the advantages that modern strokes and equipment give you.

 

[sureshs]

Actually playing the modern game is way easier on the body.

As Nadal is realizing right now.

 

[sureshs]

Should I go old school or new school for continuous improvement for the longest possible time?

I'm 47, started playing (for real...previously just hacked around for laffs) four years ago. I'm 5'11", 155#, fit, good but not great lifetime athlete in many sports.

Got to 3.5 almost immediately after taking up the game. Now winning 90%+ of 3.5 level matches and struggling to break through the 4.0 ceiling.

My coach says "stick with the program," the program being the modern game of strong grips, wraparound finishes and heavy topspin.

By "sticking with the program" and committing to hit bigger shots, I do find I'm progressing and winning more against 4.0 players.

BUT, and it's a big "but":

The physicality of the modern game is not something I'm going to be able to sustain for that much longer, even if I stay fit, AND...

...the best players I've seen over 50 (McEnroe maybe the best ever, a local player still kicking butt at Open level with slice and volleys at mid 50s plus) play a simpler game, with weaker grips, compact strokes and a much great emphasis on placement over topspin and pace, AND...

...the one time I've beaten one of my strongest regular opponents (legit 4.0 without trying, 4.5 when he's paying attention) was playing Mac style with one grip, inside the baseline.

I'm at a crossroads. I need to choose to commit to old school (crowding the baseline, always moving forward, weaker grips, placement over power) or new school (mostly behind the baseline, stronger grips, swinging big for spin and pace over placement).

I'm confident I can get to 4.0 by "sticking with the program," but it will be painful to get there and stay there past 50, and I don't see any upside beyond 4.0 -- I just don't think my body can take the modern game at a level above that.

What's the right path?

For the record, if I could play great in either style, I would pick old school...in my dreams I play like Mac/Leconte/Nastase.

What is effective? Can you effectively play the game serve and volleying? Or are you more effective with baseline topspin? Is your topspin effective or just something your coach likes? Is your serve and volley for feeling good or is it effective?

Serve and volley has its own taxation on the body, but keeps the point short. Can you get to those passing shots without twisting your back?

Baseline topspin has its own tradeoffs as well. Can you end points with it? Or do you end up trading several groundies, running laterally and ruining your knees like Nadal?

The tradeoff between effectiveness and health will determine the play, since you are not going on the tour.

 

[Off The Wall]

Some factors to consider:

IMO:
A lot of your physicality will be determined by your backhand. If 2h, more physical; not so much if 1h.

Forehands can be modern and still be comfortable.

Modern strokes were developed for increased topspin which reduces UEs. That means longer rallies. That's its nature. Old school requires more control to keep the ball in; that usually means 'experience.' (Oh, you don't need to crowd the baseline in OS.)

If you're a singles player, tennis will be more physical just because of that. Add to that the longer rallies and maybe a 2hbh....very physical.

If you're a doubles player, moving forward and placement will be more important. It doesn't mean 'not modern.' It's just a different mindset.

 

[5263]

IMO its much easier to play using modern strokes.

BTW IMO style of play is different from modern or classic strokes. I use modern strokes but crowd the baseline and step inside the court to attack even good incoming shots when possible. I try to be the aggressor & put pressure on the opponent to prevent being attacked myself, but will step back a few feet and grind it out waiting for a weak ball if I'm not in a position to be aggressive.
If I hit using the same speed but place them towards "smart targets" (as 5263 puts them) the guy will have a ton of trouble staying in the point.
Baseline play doesn't have to mean grinding it out and running all day, it can be aggressive and setting up to end the point quickly.

Great post and important recognition of difference between modern game and modern stokes!
I just realized I switch over fully to modern strokes when older than the OP.

 

[guitarplayer]

Actually playing the modern game is way easier on the body. Just tone it
down a bit. I play much higher and bet I don't work near as hard to hit it
or move as you do at the point. It take you more work because it's new.
Your idols hit pretty modern as well and there is more to modern that you
know so far.

Stay the course and look how to use modern all court in a flowing easy style!
Strong 4.5 is much more likely with modern game and strokes.

This!!!!

I am now 57 and playing the best tennis of my life with the MTM. I am doing a lot of the dictating on court now. Running less, moving my opponent all over the place, and feeling less tired.

 

[guitarplayer]

Stay the course. Go with the modern game. I'm almost 50. I play with a couple of guys who are also about my age. We all play a modern game with high racquet head speeds, modern grips, lots of spin.

Honestly it isn't swinging the racquet that's physically taxing. That's more a timing and technique thing, and even swinging easy I can get more power and spin with modern technique than old school. The real physicality is getting to the ball and getting set-up, and that's not going to change regardless of whether you use old school or new school strokes.

Moving into our 50's does not necessarily mean that you have to start slowing your game down. Just hit the ball and have fun. Your body will tell you when you're doing too much.

This too! So much great advice.

 

[guitarplayer]

IMO its much easier to play using modern strokes. I used western FH when I was younger, Eastern when I started over, and now switched to a Semi Western. The eastern grip produced an effortless smooth swing but was by far the most difficult to use. Against slow paced or high bouncing shots it just wasn't natural, and nowadays high bouncing shots are very common. It only really felt right against fast, low bouncing shots. I had the same experience with backhands - eastern 1H was by far the most difficult to time, and most awkward against high bouncing shots.

BTW IMO style of play is different from modern or classic strokes. I use modern strokes but crowd the baseline and step inside the court to attack even good incoming shots when possible. I try to be the aggressor & put pressure on the opponent to prevent being attacked myself, but will step back a few feet and grind it out waiting for a weak ball if I'm not in a position to be aggressive.

Perhaps your coach is concentrating on developing your stroke first, not so much on placement yet. When you played "Mac style" is it possible that you were concentrating more on placement and not so much on taking a full stroke? Maybe you are confusing this and thinking modern = power > placement and oldschool short swings = placement > power. There's no reason to choose between power or placement, you should try for both. I try to hit aggressively but without placement the ball just keeps coming back. For example there is a pretty aggressive player I hit with who is very fast on his feet. If I hit hard & fairly deep but with only moderate angles, the ball will keep coming back and soon it will come back as an attack and put me on defense. If I hit using the same speed but place them towards "smart targets" (as 5263 puts them) the guy will have a ton of trouble staying in the point.

Baseline play doesn't have to mean grinding it out and running all day, it can be aggressive and setting up to end the point quickly. Approaching the net often involves very fast movement and intense moments, so that can be pretty tiring too. Take what works for you of the old and new and mix together

Wow, this is me. So much good info. With the MTM, I fear no one now. Sure, a 5.0 and up will beat me, but I am so consistent now, I still give them a great match. Could not do that 6 months ago.

 

[daved]

great thread

Mr. Original Poster sending a quick addition to say:

1. Thanks so much for all the thoughtful feedback -- very helpful.
2. I will stick with the modern strokes (not "modern" to me, as they're what I was taught when getting serious a few years ago...and it's really just the FH, as I have always had a natural, flowing, topspin 1HBH, even when I only messed around once a year on someone's backyard court).
3. I see that the key is putting it all together. Experimenting with playing Conti on everything has helped me get more skills all over the court but keeping my windshield wiper modern forehand is not going to do anything but help me.
4. Truth be told, my natural style is to rely on impenetrable defense, and it's stupid to think that this is going to change regardless of stroke skills I learn.
5. I will continue to work toward what I conceived as my ultimate game style when I started playing a few years ago, what I call "The Great White" -- like the sharks off the N. California coast, I lurk unseen at the bottom (baseline) and then explode to the surface (net) at the slightest opening to kill the hapless sea lion (my poor opponent).

 

[TomT]

Noooooo. I'm pretty sure the OP was talking about SW and W vs. Eastern or Continental, not how tightly the handle should be squeezed. Traditionally, it has been taught to slightly squeeze the grip at contact. It was also taught to keep the racquet head above the hand at all times. But, a tight grip is a stroke killer in the modern game. The proper execution of modern strokes requires a loose relaxed grip through contact.

Thanks L. I thought he was talking about type of grip (SW ... etc.), but wasn't sure since I'm not well read on it and he didn't specify.

 

[daved]

grips and games

Yes, "strong" meaning further from Continental.

Modern game requires v. loose grips...(look at Fed), whereas at least some great old-school players gripped the racquet very tightly all the time. Pancho G., for example, used the "hammer" grip (Conti with fingers bunched up) and in his instruction writings says he grips the racquet as tightly as possible.

 

[Frank Silbermann]

If you're really concerned about aging, versus maximizing your current ranking, you should develop flexibility -- i.e. learn it all. What you lose with age is court coverage. You can compensate for that with variety.

For example, learn to hit the high forehands solidly and on-the-rise with a semi-western grip so you don't have to retreat way behind the baseline and then run back in to guard against the drop shot. Learn to lift the skidding slices with a semi-continental forehand and one-handed sliced backhand so that a slicer won't make you bust your knees getting down to the ball on routine rally shots. Learn a modern backhand so you can end the point when you have the opportunity. Learn a net game so you can put away pushers without having to develop exhausting "patience."

 

[LuckyR]

Mr. Original Poster sending a quick addition to say:

1. Thanks so much for all the thoughtful feedback -- very helpful.
2. I will stick with the modern strokes (not "modern" to me, as they're what I was taught when getting serious a few years ago...and it's really just the FH, as I have always had a natural, flowing, topspin 1HBH, even when I only messed around once a year on someone's backyard court).
3. I see that the key is putting it all together. Experimenting with playing Conti on everything has helped me get more skills all over the court but keeping my windshield wiper modern forehand is not going to do anything but help me.
4. Truth be told, my natural style is to rely on impenetrable defense, and it's stupid to think that this is going to change regardless of stroke skills I learn.
5. I will continue to work toward what I conceived as my ultimate game style when I started playing a few years ago, what I call "The Great White" -- like the sharks off the N. California coast, I lurk unseen at the bottom (baseline) and then explode to the surface (net) at the slightest opening to kill the hapless sea lion (my poor opponent).

What I am getting from your information: wins > 90% at 3.5 but having difficulty at 4.0, Modern FH but Classic BH, and your last paragraph. I wouldn't worry too much about your stroke style for now, since you don't mention any arm problems. Sounds like you have a FH weapon, with which you eliminate sea lions at 3.5 but don't have the overall game to hang with 4.0s who likely just outlast you.

I would just work on your weaknesses instead of making your weapon better.

 

[daved]

Again, great support and advice here.

Had a 90-minute lesson yesterday with my main coach, former tour pro and D1 NCAA semifinalist and AAC nat'l champ in singles.

He doesn't care HOW I hit the ball, just cares about consistency, results.

My biggest weakness is hitting off the back foot, getting pushed back, camping behind the baseline. Not going to worry about strokes for a good long time and going to spend that time and energy working on court positioning and movement.

The better I get, the more I realize that grips, strokes, racquet and string choice (the things people obsess about on the TT boards) are secondary or even tertiary to footwork, court positioning and tactics.

McEnroe and Agassi are great examples to consider. Their groundstrokes couldn't be more dissimilar, but their fundamental tactic (take the ball early and take time away from your opponent) is the same, even if one is more likely to finish with a volley and the other with a short-court forehand.

 

[maverick66]

He doesn't care HOW I hit the ball, just cares about consistency, results.

The better I get, the more I realize that grips, strokes, racquet and string choice (the things people obsess about on the TT boards) are secondary or even tertiary to footwork, court positioning and tactics.

I dont really know if I agree with the first part as you said long term improvement. Sacrificing that to win at a lower level when your goal is to play at a higher level I dont know if I can agree with.

However I do agree that consistency will get you to a very high level. Being able to keep the ball in the court is something a ton of players struggle with even at the higher levels.

The second part is also kinda true. Footwork is extremely under appreciated. Everyone is so worried if they hold a racket this way or that way or finish over the shoulder/across the shoulder they forget that they have to get there and be in position.

 

[mightyrick]

However I do agree that consistency will get you to a very high level. Being able to keep the ball in the court is something a ton of players struggle with even at the higher levels.

Yep. A really good example of this is that pro tennis players have repeatedly beat recreational players using a FRYING PAN. Does it get more ridiculous than that?

 

[ATP100]

Again, great support and advice here.

Had a 90-minute lesson yesterday with my main coach, former tour pro and D1 NCAA semifinalist and AAC nat'l champ in singles.

He doesn't care HOW I hit the ball, just cares about consistency, results.

My biggest weakness is hitting off the back foot, getting pushed back, camping behind the baseline. Not going to worry about strokes for a good long time and going to spend that time and energy working on court positioning and movement.

The better I get, the more I realize that grips, strokes, racquet and string choice (the things people obsess about on the TT boards) are secondary or even tertiary to footwork, court positioning and tactics.

McEnroe and Agassi are great examples to consider. Their groundstrokes couldn't be more dissimilar, but their fundamental tactic (take the ball early and take time away from your opponent) is the same, even if one is more likely to finish with a volley and the other with a short-court forehand.

Smart Coach...