Paradigm breakthrough on groundstrokes (Aim 6 ft. above the net)

[TimeToPlaySets]

His video clearly mentioned that the moonball was a defensive shot that he's learned. I don't see anything wrong with that. He never claimed that was his bread and butter strategy from now on and his video clip clearly showed him come up to the net and put away the short balls.

There was no need to mock his game.

Glad someone is actually reading.

I never said moonball every point.
I said to moonball return high deep shots above the shoulders (defensive, I call this)
The alternative is to slice it back (short) and risk getting put away.
Other alternative is to try to topspin a shot over your head. UE galore.
Not my kill shot, I prefer to wait for a better shot.

Oh, and they can mock all they want.
I dish it out, and also can take it.
While I wish to remain anonymous, feel free to bash the person in the videos mercilessly.

I am only getting better. Are you?

 

[Deleted member 120290]

Anyone hitting with good amount of topspin from the baseline should be hitting 6' above the net on rally shots.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

For the record, I am being told to moonball by a UTR13.
He even said, "People will say you're a weak player, but all that matters is the W"

If is works for a UTR13 with a winning D1 record, it is fine for me.

 

[Deleted member 120290]

TTPS makes some wacky threads at times but I appreciate his PASSION for the game and the drive to improve.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

Someone's gotta keep things interesting around here!

 

[RetroSpin]

Certainly a 5.0+ player, even some 4.5's, will tee off on a high bouncing ball. I doubt seriously many 4.0's have the skill to do so consistently. if they did, they would be 4.5's. At 3.5, they're worried more about getting it back, not knocking off a winner.

A crucial skill in getting to 4.5 is the ability to keep the ball deep. The easiest way to keep it deep is to hit it high. As you improve, you can add spin and pace, but better players generally hit with more net clearance than hackers.

Below maybe 5.0, it is crucial to be able to reset the point during a match when you are out of position. The best way to do that is with a moonball. You see the pro's try low percentage shots like the squash slice FH because they know a moonball will get crushed for a winner, but that isn't happening at 4.0.

 

[Mark Asher]

Seems to me that if two players of more or less equal ability play, and one moonballs consistently and successfully, at most levels that that will tilt the odds in favor of the moonballer because it puts pressure on the non-moonballer to attack. At most levels the attacking player is going to hit more UEs than winners or shots that force errors.

I think the OP is helping himself practicing this way. He's learning consistency and patience. His moonball forehand looks like a solid stroke too. He won't have much trouble hitting flatter and with more pace with that stroke.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

Well said Retro.

Neutral: Depth
Lose: Hitting it out
Lose: Hitting it shallow (to a 4.0+)

This is why 3.5 players should not bother watching pro matches.
They should watch girl's college matches.
Or 4.5 matches, for that matter.
Or high school singles matches, actually.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

 

[LeeD]

Since I don't have a big serve or big GSs or heavy TS, the only way I can hang is:
- keeping the ball high, hope they can't take it on the rise, and hope for a short ball [there's a lot of hoping going on]
- keeping the ball low, short, and angled with slice and try to draw them in to the net and/or make them at least come forward to hit
- attack the net for all I'm worth and hope my net game is up to the task [there's that word again]

This is reasonably successful against Div III women; not so much vs Div I.

The first used to work, when she was 12. I'd twist a lefty out wide serve over her head, and she'd bunt the return after missing a few. BUT, she learned within one year, that's 2 year's ago, to get more sideways, step in, and really cream those high slow balls. Her high forehand groundie, above her head, is hit as fast as her fastest groundies now.
Notice how the entire WTA short of Vinci play their tennis. To counter most females, you don't give them those shots.
Volley is the single most effective shot a male has over a female. Sure, Martina Navritilova does OK at net, and I used her as an example for a reason.
And of course, there is a limit to what a lower level player can do against a much better female player. That's why, the Mom's, and Dad's of the young female player asks the male player to hit with their daughter's. It might take a few hitting sessions for the young player to figure out and overcome the smarter older player.

 

[LeeD]

Ok well then you are way better than the video of you in here. Those scores against typical 4.0 for a top 14 year old girl is what I would expect. I see it every week.

Those junior girls hit the hell out of the ball and are fast. They also hardly miss. Not sure how you are keeping up with your limited movement. But ok. You must have a lot of skill.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

You also know how to make sets difficult for girls. You serve flats into their body to move them back, then you hit short skidding slices wide. You go back to flats when they "wise" up.
You ROS short angles ONLY. You play the lob game, but you gotta lob high and deep so they get to your lobs, extending their concentration time.....and yours too. You can attack their serves because they're not serving at 90+ with consistency. I"m not talking about Serena or Plishcova, I'm talking about amateur up and rising juniors.
You hit lots of short groundies, but never nearly up the middle. Heavy back/sidespin skidders, and topspin short angles. THEY OWN THE BASELINE. Don't hit to them there.
Then, once they start to get used to your "old man's game", you hit a few hard topspin groundies right into their body, so you take away their angles and you change your pace and gameplan for a FEW strokes, or until they start to counter.
Hopefully, that's enough for you to escape with a set. It might not work the second set, but it gives you games that other 4.0's, or 4.5's would not get against a Nationally ranked junior in the top 50's.

 

[LeeD]

Ok well then you are way better than the video of you in here. Those scores against typical 4.0 for a top 14 year old girl is what I would expect. I see it every week.

Those junior girls hit the hell out of the ball and are fast. They also hardly miss. Not sure how you are keeping up with your limited movement. But ok. You must have a lot of skill.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

As you know, scores are not always indicative of the actual set, but they ARE in my video.
Biggest reason for my walkabout, and that's what it was, is that Matt's DAD was moving around behind me filming the "action". He wore trouser's that swished, I could hear the click of the video recorder when he turned it on and off, and I'm not used to someone walking around behind me. Sure, 39 year's ago, I played some match's with ballboys and linesman, but that was then, this is now. Those people were not walking around behind me, but were stationary.

 

[5263]

I'm sorry, but this can't have happened.....I read very often on TT how all the 4.5s and every Jr in FL will kill every moonball for a clean winner.....must be photo shop....lol

 

[J J]

I'm sorry, but this can't have happened.....I read very often on TT how all the 4.5s and every Jr in FL will kill every moonball for a clean winner.....must be photo shop....lol

Moonballs are hard to play against. Especially against someone trained and patient.

I'll not sure how leeD and all these old guys can just easily beat it. But apparently they can all do it. [emoji58]

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[GuyClinch]

I'll take a coach who has coached juniors who have actually won something, and has seen that strategy work, over your opinion. As for even higher level players, Nadal hits a ton of moonballs. S&V style should have been easy to beat him...correct? No one argued that moonballs are easier to hit on topspin shots. It doesn't mean one can't hit them off slices, and yes, I've played plenty to know that rec level players don't make crisp volleys consistently like pros or slice like Rosewall/Steffi all the time.

Problem is you are pitting something that you are bad at - hitting moonballs off slices - against something they are good at - hitting high volleys and overheads. This is a matchup that will result in many L's. In tennis you want to do something you are good at - against something they are bad at. Additionally most old timers are slow of foot - so moonballs give them plenty of time to get to the ball - negating one of your advantages.

Against a slice and dicer you should simply attack them and overpower - when they come in - hit crisp passing shots - not moonballs. Make it harder for them to get to the net with deep solid shots. Use time to your advantage - and make theme run. Sure some guys do moonball - but its not how you beat LeeD.

It's a poor tactic - a poor strategy for such players - pushed by you - who evidently is not an experienced tennis player.. But hey good luck with the 'learn everything from youtube' theory..If you played more slice/dicers you would understand why your strategy is so stupid. The last thing you want to do against old men is give them all day to get to the ball. They have more experience and less athleticism..<g>

Now against fit men who have a one handed backhand hit topspin - moonball all day to the backhand. I do it all the time. Great strategy.

These players move well - have stronger serves and usually strong topspin forehands. You negate that and punish the weak backhand.. That's not LeeD though.

 

[Traffic]

I'm confused, are we calling topspin lobs "moonballs"?
I know that in HS, we used to have rallys to see who could execute the perfect TS lob that would bounce on the baseline and over the fence. The other use is when opponent is at net and he is super fast and will run back in time on a normal lob. So we'd add topspin to the lob to get over their reach and quickly come down.

And again, at the 3.0-3.5 level, they just look at that shot and wonder what just happened...

 

[mcs1970]

Problem is you are pitting something that you are bad at - hitting moonballs off slices - against something they are good at - hitting high volleys and overheads. This is a matchup that will result in many L's. In tennis you want to do something you are good at - against something they are bad at. Additionally most old timers are slow of foot - so moonballs give them plenty of time to get to the ball - negating one of your advantages.

Against a slice and dicer you should simply attack them and overpower - when they come in - hit crisp passing shots - not moonballs. Make it harder for them to get to the net with deep solid shots. Use time to your advantage - and make theme run. Sure some guys do moonball - but its not how you beat LeeD.

It's a poor tactic - a poor strategy for such players - pushed by you - who evidently is not an experienced tennis player.. But hey good luck with the 'learn everything from youtube' theory..If you played more slice/dicers you would understand why your strategy is so stupid. The last thing you want to do against old men is give them all day to get to the ball. They have more experience and less athleticism..<g>

Now against fit men who have a one handed backhand hit topspin - moonball all day to the backhand. I do it all the time. Great strategy.

These players move well - have stronger serves and usually strong topspin forehands. You negate that and punish the weak backhand.. That's not LeeD though.

LOL...You're stating that I 'pushed a moonball strategy against slice and dice players'? Please point to me where exactly I said that. Saying that one can hit moonballs off weak slices/volleys...which you see a lot even in 4.0 level tennis and 'pushing' that strategy are two different things. Learn to read before you rant off. The first time you posted some insulting comments, I didn't stoop down to your level to respond in kind, because it was obvious that you didn't read clearly or comprehend what I posted. Yet you continue to embarrass yourself.

First of all Coach Capestany is a well known coach. You even took a shot at him. If you don't know about him, go and check his resume. If you have something comparable in your resume, feel free to counter. Else pipe your nonsense down. Next, the video posted was specifically called 'Sabotage'. It talked about things in your arsenal, ONE OF WHICH was hitting moonballs along with Slices and Volleys as change of pace things to throw your opponent off their games. No one ever said to exclusively play that style. So stop attributing that nonsense to me. What coach Capestany was saying is just another variation of Brad Gilbert's winning ugly...to have things in your arsenal to muck up the game when things are not going well for you. Also, I never said that style by a 3.5 player would beat LeeD or any S&V guy. All I said was I'm not buying that it will 'never' bother LeeD, and then I'd added but just like anything else one does, there is a limit to how much it can be used. LeeD has gloated plenty of times before on how he beats hard hitting youngsters by playing junkballs and giving them no pace. Yet for all his skills he will lose to a player ranked higher than him. It's not just about hitting moonballs or hitting hard or S&V. A player is usually ranked higher because they have a combination of skills along with a combination of mental and physical superiority over a lower ranked player. A lot of high ranked players have moonballs in their arsenals and use it judiciously during rallies for defensive purposes. Are you arguing to the contrary?

LeeD seems like a nice guy and moves amazingly well for his age. However his videos are out there, both singles and doubles. None of his slices look penetrating or anything special. There's video evidence of him flubbing a simple lob. Are you really arguing something for which video evidence is out there? Yet I never doubted that he'll beat most 3.5s. All I said was that most rec level players don't hit penetrating slices or volleys unless you are going higher up in the ranks. 4.5 to 5.0 is when you start seeing really good slices. At lower levels the approach shots tend to sit up and you can absolutely lob off that. Again, that was just countering your absolute statement that moonballs will never work against S&V guys. I never advocated that slice or volleys have to be countered with moonballs the majority of the times.

As for repeatedly insulting my level of play because you couldn't comprehend a simple point, what's your level? Are you a 4.0, 4.5, 5.0? There will be players better than you who think you are a pretty spare player. As I said, there's nothing to gloat about being a 4.5 player in the grand scheme of things. BTW..Don't assume things about my game or my style of play because I feel a moonball is a valid tool in your arsenal to have that can be used judiciously against any type of player. I play a different style but yet am open enough to understand that there is a time and place for it.

Back to TTPS...I'm glad he's practicing the way he's doing. I can see great improvement in his game, and hopefully he continues along this path.

 

[GuyClinch]

LOL...You're stating that I 'pushed a moonball strategy against slice and dice players'? Please point to me where exactly I said that. Saying that one can hit moonballs off weak slices/volleys...which you see a lot even in 4.0 level tennis and 'pushing' that strategy are two different things. Learn to read before you rant off. The first time you posted some insulting comments, I didn't stoop down to your level to respond in kind, because it was obvious that you didn't read clearly or comprehend what I posted. Yet you continue to embarrass yourself.

Can and should are totally different things in tennis - you should learn the difference. You can hit moonballs off crappy slices and volleys that sit up. But you should learn to attack those shots. If you watch the TTPS video you will see that he wasn't exactly under attack. He had easy balls that he moonballed off of. This is not a great tactic against a better player - especially one that slice and dices.

As for repeatedly insulting my level of play because you couldn't comprehend a simple point, what's your level? Are you a 4.0, 4.5, 5.0? There will be players better than you who think you are a pretty spare player. As I said, there's nothing to gloat about being a 4.5 player in the grand scheme of things. BTW..Don't assume things about my game or my style of play because I feel a moonball is a valid tool in your arsenal to have that can be used judiciously against any type of player. I play a different style but yet am open enough to understand that there is a time and place for it.

I didn't insult your level of play.. I said that you haven't played alot of players if you think moonballing is a viable strategy for TTPS against LeeD. It's playing into LeeD's hands. Its what LeeD would like to see out of TTPS.

The fact that Nadal can moonball LeeD to death - who cares. When the skill gap is great you can win with ANY strategy/tactic.

 

[mcs1970]

TTPS is building his stroke from scratch. If what he is doing now is his final product, of course it won't be good enough. At the same time, be open enough to look at some of the finer details in that video. He does move in on shorter balls and finishes them off. Sure he has to add more pace. Hopefully it will come with time.

I never said anything about TTPS vs LeeD. Just as you correctly say one can't compare Nadal vs LeeD (not sure where that came from, I pointed to Nadal hitting moonballs against other highly talented pros to state that there is absolutely room for that shot in the game...I didn't say anything about Nadal vs LeeD), why would you compare Lee to TTPS or to any other 3.5? At the same time, Lee looked outclassed against someone higher ranked than him. So should he give up S&V since that style can't match up against hard hitting baseliners as you go up the ranks? Compare players of the same level. If Lee plays someone his level who can also judiciously hit moonballs, of course it will bother him. Now if his opponent makes a habit out of it, Lee will adjust and force the opponent to come up with some other shots, No disagreements there. Improving and getting to a certain level be it 4.0, 4.5, 5.0 is not just about not hitting moonballs or hitting hard or any one simple thing. There's a combination of things that are needed, and for anyone to categorically state that someone rebuilding a stroke a certain way will never get to a certain level is IMO wrong. It's true he might never progress to a very high level, but if that happens it will be due to a combination of many things...and strokes might be the least important part of it.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Can and should are totally different things in tennis - you should learn the difference. You can hit moonballs off crappy slices and volleys that sit up. But you should learn to attack those shots. If you watch the TTPS video you will see that he wasn't exactly under attack. He had easy balls that he moonballed off of. This is not a great tactic against a better player - especially one that slice and dices.



I didn't insult your level of play.. I said that you haven't played alot of players if you think moonballing is a viable strategy for TTPS against LeeD. It's playing into LeeD's hands. Its what LeeD would like to see out of TTPS.

The fact that Nadal can moonball LeeD to death - who cares. When the skill gap is great you can win with ANY strategy/tactic.

I can't speak for @mcs1970 but I wasn't thinking of @LeeD or anyone else on this board for that matter. I was thinking @TimeToPlaySets' response [pull back and moonball it] was a vast improvement over "try to crush the ball" that he characterized 3.5s being guilty of. I don't know how the thread then morphed into you claiming that this wouldn't work against LeeD. I don't care if it works against LeeD. That's not the opponent nor the goal I had in mind. I just wanted TTPS to be more consistent and he appears to be accomplishing that.

I think that's what mcs was commenting on. It certainly is what I was commenting on. You're commenting on something different and more advanced. [not that I necessarily disagree with you: it probably would fail vs LeeD but that's not apropos to my response]

 

[mcs1970]

Yep..I think it was a misunderstanding. I have consistently said Lee would whup up on the 3.5 types. I never said TTPS's moonballs would bother him. However, if Lee's playing another similarly ranked player that player will cause some problems if he uses the moonball judiciously. It's just one of many things a player needs to have.

I think the only disagreement I have is in terms of sheer pace on your strokes needed to progress to advanced levels. Ironically, Lee himself is the perfect example favoring my argument. Sheer pace or brute force is not the be-all/end-all. That's why I feel that strokes (in the way that the average rec level players measures them) are not the most important factor in moving up. We've all seen guys who mindlessly bash the ball, are very consistent, and still playing local tourneys while there are certain pros who have made a career with a finesse game. What is required is defense...you need to be able to handle pace and high balls coming back at you...that is a must. Other than that there are so many other variables that go into someone moving up at every level. If you watched Johhny Mac or Mecir or Ramesh Krishnan or Santoro in practice, you'd never even think they're 5.0s, let alone guys who made a lot of money as pros. It's sad that overcoaching has removed some of that finesse /individuality element from the game so much so that a lot of players and fans feel you have to PoMo every short ball you get.

Here's a vintage Krishnan match...just casually move the opponent around from one side to the other, and wait for a short ball to move in..imo something that a lot of rec players can emulate well:

 

[VexlanderPrime]

Moonballs are hard to play against. Especially against someone trained and patient.

I'll not sure how leeD and all these old guys can just easily beat it. But apparently they can all do it. [emoji58]

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

You spend literally a week learning how to tee off on shoulder high balls like any decent player does. And if they hit even goofier moonballs you blast an over head. This is pretty basic stuff once you develop a forehand. The higher and slower a ball, the easier it is to blast a winner.

 

[GuyClinch]

You spend literally a week learning how to tee off on shoulder high balls like any decent player does. And if they hit even goofier moonballs you blast an over head. This is pretty basic stuff once you develop a forehand. The higher and slower a ball, the easier it is to blast a winner

Interestingly we had a 4.0 post here (TLM) who likes to hit well - high topspin shots - and he showed us some video of a guy literally just taking him a part. Was pretty brutal...if I remember right. What that guy did is just volley the moonballs out of the air.. Which is tough for most people but not for a slicer..

Most pros default to a safe net clearance shot - that's well short of a moonball even Nadal is just like three feet.. This is probably the rally ball you want to have..

 

[NLBwell]

But, as seems to be your MO, you ignore or reject advice until you are ready to accept it.

This is true of everyone all the time.
Humans vary in how open they are to change depending upon their circumstances and personality.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

This is true of everyone all the time.
Humans vary in how open they are to change depending upon their circumstances and personality.

If you could rate stubbornness and unwillingness to take advice on an NTRP scale, TTPS would be a 5.0.

However, as he improves his tennis game from 3.5 ---> 4.0, his stubbornness rating is dropping [although not proportionally].

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

Perfect example of a defensive moonball.

 

[DNShade]

Perfect example of a defensive moonball.

You might want to learn your terminology...that's not a "defensive moonball" - that's what's known as a lob.

Moonballing is when both players are on the baseline.

Can seem like the same shot - and can be - but moonballing is specific tactic from the baseline. And not a very good one to be honest.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

moonballing is specific tactic from the baseline. And not a very good one to be honest.

It depends on your opponent, though: if he's a power hitter who has a hard time with pushy strokes, he may overhit and give away points. OP is a self-described 3.5 and that level still has a lot of people who haven't learned to deal with such shots. It certainly beats his original MO of just trying to crush everything.

 

[DNShade]

It depends on your opponent, though: if he's a power hitter who has a hard time with pushy strokes, he may overhit and give away points. OP is a self-described 3.5 and that level still has a lot of people who haven't learned to deal with such shots. It certainly beats his original MO of just trying to crush everything.

Haha. You're probably right. But it's a not a great recipe for long term development or to becoming an actual decent level player - but hey, gotta learn to walk before you can run and all that stuff...

 

[zalive]

I think the key difference between players like us and 5.0s is not that they swing hard, but that they swing fast. It's more about the rhs...fast swing with a very loose, relaxed grip. Players like us tend to arm the ball much more because we see the pace and mistakenly think that they are swinging hard. Even the grunt...folks here have explained how that is used a lot for letting out the pressure, and is more a breath control thing to not get tight than an indication that someone is straining to hit the ball hard.

Swinging fast requires consistency to work. Consistency when swinging fast requires lot of practice. There's no 4.5 level without a lot of practice (unless you have some special god given talent).

 

[zalive]

I feel the first methodology tends to be better geared toward slow, steady improvement that doesn't compromise results during the process.

The second is better suited to rapid improvement, so long as you're willing to sacrifice results in the meantime.

Of course, those won't be true for all students and players, but the trend is strong. And which is "right" depends entirely on the player.

No one is coaching the middle path? Some sensible speed from begenning, but not at all cost? Inducing some topspin and a higher net clearance for a safety margin at (initial at least) cost of some directional speed? Why wouldn't that be a fast and quslity way to advance?

 

[SinjinCooper]

Either inspiration or deinspiration. Not sure. But here's the 2017 NCAA Men's Singles Championship match. The winner from UVA is a kid who will frequently change pace in his matches, throwing moonballs in with blistering flat balls. In this highlight reel, he loses the point where he does it, but it's high-level validation, as if any more were needed. See point starting at 1:55.

 

[zalive]

6' above the net is a total of 9' high as the ball crosses the net.
I"ve seen some topspin hitter's go there, like Nadal, and a few other's, but the most impressive hitting I"ve seen is the Monfils vs Dolgopolov hitting video of Monaco, hitting hard, deep, FLATTISH shots with lots of depth and low net clearance.
With supreme fitness, you can hit heavy loopy topspin shots to sustain 25 shot rallies, and tire out your opponent....and yourself.
OR, you can go the Berdyk/DelPo route, hit low, hit hard, hit deep, and hit into the corner's to WIN the point before both of you get tired from sustaining a long rally.
OR, you can go a combination of the two, hitting high softer rally balls, then going for low screaming meenie winners when the situation presents itself.

Bigger players will naturally look for the ways to make points shorter. They can't outrun opponents of the perfect size, they must either outshoot them, or at least slow the pace down enough so they can stay.in point. On the other hand you have Nadal or Novak like players whose first goal is never to kill the opponent with one or two bullets, because they know they fare pretty good at long exchanges. So it's horses for courses. You assess your strengths and weaknessess and then choose tactics accordingly. Bullets tactics is useful when combined with going for corners, pace without placement is meaningless. On the other hands some players almost always go for big targets because they're comfortable in long exchanges and they will make sure with placement that their opponent doesn't have too good high percentage opportunities.

So, a moonballer or a 'moonballer' must ensure his balls always have sufficient depth. Moonballs don't have to be this, they can be just high clearance decent topspin good depth balls which doesn't quite allow the opponent pace to work with, a comfortable ball height, or lower depth to attack from within the court - you keep your opponent back making him harder (and riskier) to kill you, so if he wants to fire with all arms...good luck.

 

[Steady Eddy]

6' above the net is a total of 9' high as the ball crosses the net.
I"ve seen some topspin hitter's go there, like Nadal, and a few other's, but the most impressive hitting I"ve seen is the Monfils vs Dolgopolov hitting video of Monaco, hitting hard, deep, FLATTISH shots with lots of depth and low net clearance.
With supreme fitness, you can hit heavy loopy topspin shots to sustain 25 shot rallies, and tire out your opponent....and yourself.
OR, you can go the Berdyk/DelPo route, hit low, hit hard, hit deep, and hit into the corner's to WIN the point before both of you get tired from sustaining a long rally.
OR, you can go a combination of the two, hitting high softer rally balls, then going for low screaming meenie winners when the situation presents itself.

True, that is where he is aiming. But that is not how high it will be as it crosses the net because of gravity. If the ball is traveling at a rate of 80 ft/sec it will clear the net by 2 ft. At that rate the ball will also land inside the baseline.

What I take away from the OP tip is that if you aim only 1 or 2 feet above the net, you'll hit many short balls and also alot into the net. Even without topspin you need to aim way over the net to be consistent and have depth.

 

[LeeD]

True, that is where he is aiming. But that is not how high it will be as it crosses the net because of gravity. If the ball is traveling at a rate of 80 ft/sec it will clear the net by 2 ft. At that rate the ball will also land inside the baseline.

What I take away from the OP tip is that if you aim only 1 or 2 feet above the net, you'll hit many short balls and also alot into the net. Even without topspin you need to aim way over the net to be consistent and have depth.

Can you hit any softer?

 

[mcs1970]

Swinging fast requires consistency to work. Consistency when swinging fast requires lot of practice. There's no 4.5 level without a lot of practice (unless you have some special god given talent).

I agree, but in this thread TTPS was talking about just a defensive shot and also he was trying to rebuild his game, which is why I was defending him. Baby steps. However, in a more recent video that he posted which included rally balls he was still hitting moonballs, and I did point out that I didn't believe that was a tactic he should pursue. He countered saying his coach, a 5.0 said those balls were coming with good speed. Personally, if I were his coach, I'd be playing my best than sauntering around, and taking those balls in mid air to show him that tactic won't work as he progresses on so that he would tighten up some of those rally balls.

In any case, it looks like he is improving, especially on his serve. Serve looks like a solid 4.0 right now.

 

[NLBwell]

Worked pretty good for Harold Solomon. Your game at that point is, as LeeD said, running around in 25 shot rallies. If you are consistent enough and in good shape enough, and can hit good passing shots and lobs, you can win. These days, with so few players having decent attacking net games, it can be a good winning formula but you have to be really good at it to keep the rallies neutral against baseline power players.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

The main point of my post was about hitting rally balls high and deep. Not lobs, but high.
Not low bullets that barely clear the net and then land on service line.

 

[Steady Eddy]

I agree, but in this thread TTPS was talking about just a defensive shot and also he was trying to rebuild his game, which is why I was defending him. Baby steps. However, in a more recent video that he posted which included rally balls he was still hitting moonballs, and I did point out that I didn't believe that was a tactic he should pursue. He countered saying his coach, a 5.0 said those balls were coming with good speed. Personally, if I were his coach, I'd be playing my best than sauntering around, and taking those balls in mid air to show him that tactic won't work as he progresses on so that he would tighten up some of those rally balls.

In any case, it looks like he is improving, especially on his serve. Serve looks like a solid 4.0 right now.

A moonballer doesn't hit moonballs when their opponent comes to the net.

Can you hit any softer?

The lower limit is about 60 ft./second.

 

[Kavala]

Since I've never seen good players play (TV doesn't count), today I finally redefined my entire lifelong perception of what a good tennis shot is. My old perception was that a low speeding bullet with massive wristy topspin that barely clears the net and lands at service line.... that was the ideal bad-ass shot. In reality, this is a useless shot that is waist high for your opponent and simple to hit back.

The new mindset that has been drilled into me by my coach is that the ideal shot is a much slower high arcing mildly spinning shot...that lands at the baseline. Almost a pseudo-lob (a real ***** pusher looking shot) that lands at baseline....that is the ideal shot. Relaxed and controlled. And probably lower UE rate.

For some reason, I was always focusing on the swing itself (relax, low to high, takeback, unit turn, high follow through, etc) But, aiming 6 ft. over the net just made a lot of it automatic. So, yea, it finally clicked. I know I must think....hit high over the net. That will land the ball deep. I will muscle it less. Don't get me wrong, many balls still land in the net, or end up wristy shots that land shot.....and let's face it, this was all nice easy feeds. But it's a step in the right direction, since my coach knows how to play winning tennis.

The "badass" shot landing around baseline is good if you have previously moved your opponent around to one side or other and this shot is hit w angle that makes them move out of position and also need to change grip. Make your opponent change grip again and again - this will cause breakdown in their pattern and give you opportunities for winners.

 

[tlm]

Interestingly we had a 4.0 post here (TLM) who likes to hit well - high topspin shots - and he showed us some video of a guy literally just taking him a part. Was pretty brutal...if I remember right. What that guy did is just volley the moonballs out of the air.. Which is tough for most people but not for a slicer..

Most pros default to a safe net clearance shot - that's well short of a moonball even Nadal is just like three feet.. This is probably the rally ball you want to have..

Yes and the guy I was playing was a strong 4.5 level player that has excellent volley skills. I don’t remember him taking many out of the air though, he would wait until he could make a good approach and follow it into the net. I think your wrong about him taking those topspin shots out of the air, maybe he did that a couple times but that’s not how he beat me.

 

[rogerroger917]

Yes and the guy I was playing was a strong 4.5 level player that has excellent volley skills. I don’t remember him taking many out of the air though, he would wait until he could make a good approach and follow it into the net. I think your wrong about him taking those topspin shots out of the air, maybe he did that a couple times but that’s not how he beat me.

The juniors do this to counter moonballers. Swinging volleys. Doesnt even need to be hit hard. Just in. The court position and taking it early in the air gives it an advantage.

Just old dweebs can't do it. So we are safe to moonball all day.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

 

[tlm]

The juniors do this to counter moonballers. Swinging volleys. Doesnt even need to be hit hard. Just in. The court position and taking it early in the air gives it an advantage.

Just old dweebs can't do it. So we are safe to moonball all day.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

I have played against some juniors that will take them out of the air with swinging volleys, but only if they are short balls. But if they are short your right they can hit excellent swinging volleys and put those moonballs away.

 

[5263]

You guys realize that one of the greatest ball strikers in history got knocked out of the US Open by a moonball tactic right? I just think if AA could get taken out by it, that it might could work in any match......maybe not for sure every time....but you can't be sure it won't work often as well.