Proud Pusher I guess?

[Dartagnan64]

This pushing tactic only works because they get shots that can be lobbed.

These guys used to give me trouble as well until I put in the effort to develop better footwork and a flat forehand drive which is also works to handle the short, soft sitters (those gave me trouble as well).

I hit a lot of hand toss shots - start near the service line, hand toss a high ball behind towards the service line, footwork to get into position, then drill a flat hard shot. To me, this has been much more effective than hitting against a ball machine.

Sadly I have the most difficulty with those shots due to shoulder surgery. I'm much better swinging low to high. Anything flatter tends to tweak my shoulder and risk dislocation. So I'll probably always be vulnerable to the lobber. But admittedly, they have to be a really good lobber to beat me these days.

 

[Dartagnan64]

OK, I get it. However, I'll take the low skill 6'10 BBall player on my team in a rec league But at 47, I will point out that being the "athletic guy" does take a tremendous amount of work and dedication to stay that fit and explosive. Sure, you can say lucky genetics but that is minimizing the effort involved in staying that way. I do understand though, that tennis skill gets you more "props" than hard work and heart. Prettier to watch and easier/ more fun to play against.

I think the hardest opponent to play against is the athletic guy with skill. He of course is a 5.0 and would rip to shreds all us lowbie rec players. The 3.5-4.0 world that is the majority of rec tennis is filled with athletic pushers, slow shotmakers, error-prone power hitters, etc because if we fixed our weaknesses we wouldn't be intermediates any more.

 

[Moonarse]

Sadly I have the most difficulty with those shots due to shoulder surgery. I'm much better swinging low to high. Anything flatter tends to tweak my shoulder and risk dislocation. So I'll probably always be vulnerable to the lobber. But admittedly, they have to be a really good lobber to beat me these days.

Sir, if you are doing your best to play the best tennis you have, dont feel attached to labels and feel demiore about it! For real!!!

I think that what people seem to hate is the ones that play a soft game intentionally, that do not want to evolve their tennis skills and just plateau in a boring but winning style.

If you are pushing your limits and always trying to be a better tennis player, why should you bother? not everyone can go to open level and play relying on winners. But sure you can play great enough tennis to feel like you did the best with whatever you got in you!

 

[eelhc]

So... I just got done watching the Keys-Stephens final for the second time.

Color Analyst (not sure who)...

"Right now Sloan is probably only hitting at 70%. She could go bigger"

The match stats tell the story.

Keys: 18 winners, 30 UFE, 39 total points won
Stephens: 10 winners, 6 UFE, 60 total points won

50% of the points won by Stephens came from Keys UFE.

Stephens didn't do anything spectacular - just played high percentage, high margin tennis. Keys just kept ball bashing even when it wasn't working. One can argue whether Stephen is a pusher/counter puncher/retriever... Whatever label... she just allowed Keys to self-destruct.

One doesn't necessarily have to become a pusher to employ the pushing style of play. If your opponent can't keep the ball in the court, why take any chances? Just hit the ball back neutral and deep. and just take advantage of high percentage situations to hit the winner.

Keys played with the thought process and strategy of a low level club player - "hitting hard isn't working, so hit it harder until it does". She applied more of what didn't work in the 1st set in the 2nd.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

So... I just got done watching the Keys-Stephens final for the second time.

Color Analyst (not sure who)...

"Right now Sloan is probably only hitting at 70%. She could go bigger"

The match stats tell the story.

Keys: 18 winners, 30 UFE, 39 total points won
Stephens: 10 winners, 6 UFE, 60 total points won

50% of the points won by Stephens came from Keys UFE.

Stephens didn't do anything spectacular - just played high percentage, high margin tennis. Keys just kept ball bashing even when it wasn't working. One can argue whether Stephen is a pusher/counter puncher/retriever... Whatever label... she just allowed Keys to self-destruct.

One doesn't necessarily have to become a pusher to employ the pushing style of play. If your opponent can't keep the ball in the court, why take any chances? Just hit the ball back neutral and deep. and just take advantage of high percentage situations to hit the winner.

Keys played with the thought process and strategy of a low level club player - "hitting hard isn't working, so hit it harder until it does". She applied more of what didn't work in the 1st set in the 2nd.

Then again, didn't Ostapenko follow a similar strategy to Keys to beat Halep at the French? Huge # of UEs but she kept firing away and eventually won.

If so, is the strategy necessarily the problem or the execution?

 

[eelhc]

Then again, didn't Ostapenko follow a similar strategy to Keys to beat Halep at the French? Huge # of UEs but she kept firing away and eventually won.

If so, is the strategy necessarily the problem or the execution?

Little bit of both I guess...

But if I recall correctly, Ostapenko was never more than 1 break down the entire match. Against a weak server, I'm not sure if the match was ever getting away from her.
Keys goes 2 breaks down to lose the 1st set, then immediately goes down a break in the 3rd set. The match was running away from her quickly at that point. Stick to the strategy still? Yes I guess... because it's the only one she knows how to play.

 

[Kozzy]

If you lose to a so-called "pusher", that just means they played better than you that day. That's the hard thing to swallow for many people, admitting that someone else who they didn't think was as good a player as them could beat them. Sure, it's a blow to the ego, but I think you're much better off using it as a way to fix holes in your own game. I play a few "pusher" types with regularity, and I find them to be a great barometer for my game (as others have said earlier). In each case, I went from having tight, sometimes losing outings to eventual, consistent dominance, and my game overall improved. Anyway, I think that's kind of the beauty of tennis - to get better you have to learn out to play in different ways - you can't just execute one game plan and always succeed.

 

[Kozzy]

I'd also add to the OP that you don't sound like a pusher in my book, and even if you were, I'd love to play you (and probably lose to you

 

[chatt_town]

I'm officially too old to play basketball now so I'm trying singles tennis. I started this spring at 3.0 and am now playing 4.0 compass and have surprised myself going 5-1 so far. However, my opponents seem to be irritated with me compared to the 3.5 level and I've heard the term "pusher" a few times. I take lessons, hit on a ball machine etc and I have a full swing (although I admit it isn't overly aggressive) finishing high and all the way over my shoulder, not a short choppy push. I focus on hitting with controlled topspin as close to the baseline as I can, emphasizing way more on placement than power. Due to this, I hit very few baseline winners but when I get short balls I do come behind good approach shots and put away easy volleys for winners. So does pushing mean slowly pushing your shots like it sounds, or does it mean just not trying to bang baseline winners and making a lot of unforced errors like my opponents seem to do when they get frustrated? In basketball if someone doesn't have a smooth looking stroke but they hit it regularly, then you better guard him or you will get torched. There seems to be a focus on aesthetics that I have seen in my fairly limited tennis experience, but this isn't a pageant, it is an athletic competition. BTW, I'm new to the forums, and I'm excited to learn and improve at tennis (practicing/playing 6 days a week).

def of pusher= excuse a player uses when playing someone that they can't force to hit the ball back to them at the baseline or c*ck high to their forehand to allow them to do what they wish to do.


don't ever change your mentality. Some players are dumb. They think it's your job to hit the ball to them or the way they have been taught. I've beaten all kinds of guys that thought they were so good hitting balls they think look impressive to everyone on the sidelines. I even won a 4.5 league here and the guy I beat in the finals had a winning record with me, but I that night started slicing balls up his forehand side to get him out of the backhand corner and it worked to perfection. beat him 2-6 62 62.....I played baseball until I was about 42 and never had a pitcher ask me where I wanted the pitches. I play tennis the same way I was pitched to which is give them whatever was hardest to get back that day. some pros don't even realize this. I watched Kevin Anderson try to hit balls past Nadal and Nadal was damn near behind the ball kids retrieving balls and he kept hitting them back there. Venus plays the same way. so keep doing whatever it takes to win. Pay no attention to people that haven't figured out the object of the game is to get the ball back, not hit him the ball he wants to hit back.

 

[darkhorse]

I wonder what the player type is called when the strategy is to hit short slice backhands to get the opponent to the net because they either a.) can't put away the short ball or b.) can't handle any of my passing shots on the forehand side? I've had to do that like three matches in a row.

 

[_Jaq]

I'd also add to the OP that you don't sound like a pusher in my book, and even if you were, I'd love to play you (and probably lose to you

Thanks man

 

[_Jaq]

I wonder what the player type is called when the strategy is to hit short slice backhands to get the opponent to the net because they either a.) can't put away the short ball or b.) can't handle any of my passing shots on the forehand side? I've had to do that like three matches in a row.

This strategy works against me at my stage of development. If I get short slices, it is hard for me to put them away consistently so I'm often brought into the net. If my approach is good, I get manageable volleys or overheads. If I don't do enough with the initial approach, then I usually lose that point. I am more likely to lose to someone who employs this strategy than to someone who just keeps it deep. I do expect to get better at punishing these short balls, but I have definitely found 3.5 and even 4.0 players aren't good at doing this regularly. I have determined that putting away short balls is not as easy as it looks.

 

[Dartagnan64]

This strategy works against me at my stage of development. If I get short slices, it is hard for me to put them away consistently so I'm often brought into the net. If my approach is good, I get manageable volleys or overheads. If I don't do enough with the initial approach, then I usually lose that point. I am more likely to lose to someone who employs this strategy than to someone who just keeps it deep. I do expect to get better at punishing these short balls, but I have definitely found 3.5 and even 4.0 players aren't good at doing this regularly. I have determined that putting away short balls is not as easy as it looks.

I've found that the secret to winning off the short ball is to not focus on "Putting it away". Focus on setting up the putaway shot. It's all about hitting a forcing shot, coming in and volleying away the poor reply. So get the opponent running and use either a low ball or a fast ball to take away their ability to hit a passing shot. At worse you get a lob. At best you get an error. In between you get a weaker reply that can then be put away with a crisp volley or overhead.

 

[darkhorse]

I've found that the secret to winning off the short ball is to not focus on "Putting it away". Focus on setting up the putaway shot. It's all about hitting a forcing shot, coming in and volleying away the poor reply. So get the opponent running and use either a low ball or a fast ball to take away their ability to hit a passing shot. At worse you get a lob. At best you get an error. In between you get a weaker reply that can then be put away with a crisp volley or overhead.

Very good advice, aim at a corner of the court to take away the opponent's options. They'll either go for too much or not enough.

One thing that helps me when coming to net is the realization that sometimes, you're opponent will hit an amazing shot that goes by you and you can't do anything about it. But unless they're doing that consistently, you'll be able to live with them doing that 1 out of a dozen times.

 

[_Jaq]

Update. Been playing 2 yrs now, initially at USTA 3.0, 3.5 last year, and bumped to 4.0 for this year. Playing 4.5 players in compass tournament and shocked myself going 3-1. Now I like pace and I am the one getting annoyed when I play people that don't hit with any raquet head speed and take all of the pace off of the ball. I have come full circle and haven't been called a pusher in a long time. IMO the term pusher basically is a way of trying to demean someone that you feel isn't as good of a player as you but creates a tough match for you anyway. I think they are smart, savvy (although highly annoying) players and if you dismiss them, they can take you out. So in some ways, being called a pusher isn't such a bad thing at all, and its all relative.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Update. Been playing 2 yrs now, initially at USTA 3.0, 3.5 last year, and bumped to 4.0 for this year. Playing 4.5 players in compass tournament and shocked myself going 3-1. Now I like pace and I am the one getting annoyed when I play people that don't hit with any raquet head speed and take all of the pace off of the ball. I have come full circle and haven't been called a pusher in a long time. IMO the term pusher basically is a way of trying to demean someone that you feel isn't as good of a player as you but creates a tough match for you anyway. I think they are smart, savvy (although highly annoying) players and if you dismiss them, they can take you out. So in some ways, being called a pusher isn't such a bad thing at all, and its all relative.

The people who think "pusher" is an insult tend to be those who lose to pushers. A minority of those might be people who just dislike playing against that style, even if they win.

 

[dgold44]

I'm officially too old to play basketball now so I'm trying singles tennis. I started this spring at 3.0 and am now playing 4.0 compass and have surprised myself going 5-1 so far. However, my opponents seem to be irritated with me compared to the 3.5 level and I've heard the term "pusher" a few times. I take lessons, hit on a ball machine etc and I have a full swing (although I admit it isn't overly aggressive) finishing high and all the way over my shoulder, not a short choppy push. I focus on hitting with controlled topspin as close to the baseline as I can, emphasizing way more on placement than power. Due to this, I hit very few baseline winners but when I get short balls I do come behind good approach shots and put away easy volleys for winners. So does pushing mean slowly pushing your shots like it sounds, or does it mean just not trying to bang baseline winners and making a lot of unforced errors like my opponents seem to do when they get frustrated? In basketball if someone doesn't have a smooth looking stroke but they hit it regularly, then you better guard him or you will get torched. There seems to be a focus on aesthetics that I have seen in my fairly limited tennis experience, but this isn't a pageant, it is an athletic competition. BTW, I'm new to the forums, and I'm excited to learn and improve at tennis (practicing/playing 6 days a week).

Wow that is a massive leap from 3 to 4.0
Very impressive
Your style just irritates folks because they know they have to work much Harder to win and people don’t like that

 

[tennis tom]

Wow that is a massive leap from 3 to 4.0
Very impressive
Your style just irritates folks because they know they have to work much Harder to win and people don’t like that

Yah, people who bad mouth "pushers" have a term too, "bad sports" or "poor losers".

 

[Dartagnan64]

The people who think "pusher" is an insult tend to be those who lose to pushers. A minority of those might be people who just dislike playing against that style, even if they win.

There are two types of pushers: Pushers and Damn Pushers.

The former are good defenders and win by defending everything and consistently returning. The latter are the guys that you feel you should beat but you self destruct and lose.