Pusher / Hacker

[cork_screw]

What playing style do you hate and why. I'm a very strong player and can crush the ball or play with junk, I usually mix it up. If I encounter a junk player, I'll usually counter punch or play junk until I find a moment to make a move. But many junk players expose the inconsistencies in all of our games. These players are the ones that I hate playing with, but don't really have problems beating, it just seems to take a bit longer. I also feel like they don't have a good offensive weapon so they resort to hacking the ball and exposing your weaknesses. My question is, what style do you typically hate and why? Loopers? Spinners? Flat ball hitters? I can generally play all these and come out with good results, but there are those that I would rather get into a good rally with and hit a winner than to lollipop and look for an opening. BTW, I'm not talking about people who change pace and have weapons, I'm talking about those who just hack, drop and lob and have little weaposn to work with.

 

[Viper]

Spinners, spinners, spinners. It's just an ugly game and doesn't promote improvement.

 

[JavierLW]

Who do you hate playing (style) and why. I'm a very strong player and can crush the ball or play with junk, I usually mix it up. If I encounter a junk player, I'll usually counter punch or play junk until I find a moment to make a move. But many junk players expose the inconsistencies in all of our games. These players are the ones that I hate playing with, but don't really have problems beating, it just seems to take a bit longer. I also feel like they don't have a good offensive weapon so they resort to hacking the ball and exposing your weaknesses. My question is, what style do you typically hate and why? Loopers? Spinners? Flat ball hitters? I can generally play all these and come out with good results, but there are those that I would rather get into a good rally with and hit a winner than to lollipop and look for an opening. BTW, I'm not talking about people who change pace and have weapons, I'm talking about those who just hack, drop and lob and have little weaposn to work with.

I think the people who have no skills but just try to hit it hard are hackers. (and they are not pushers)

They are usually the ones that the pushers manage to beat all the time.

They are also usually the people who cant warm up with you (for different reasons then why the pushers dont give you a warmup), because they spray balls all over the court and they need to "hack around" for 60 minutes before they can keep the ball in the court.

They also can not construct points well, and they turn a lot of otherwise normal players into pushers when they are matched against them. (usually anyone who's not hacking it around and makes the ball come back against them are "pushers" to them)

I'd rather not play either of those, but if I have to, I have too.

 

[JavierLW]

Spinners, spinners, spinners. It's just an ugly game and doesn't promote improvement.

Are you kidding? Not hitting with any spin doesn't promote improvement, not the other way around.

Tennis on TV doesn't really show how much spin is put on the ball but it's a lot.

 

[cork_screw]

I wouldn't call people to blast the ball "hackers" I don't consider them quality players compared to pushers, but I would say that they are either impatient or immature at constructing points, whereas I believe pushers haven't developed the mindset that they can win points on their own. Ball blasters think that that's the only way they can win points and want to do it without working for it.

I think the people who have no skills but just try to hit it hard are hackers. (and they are not pushers)

They are usually the ones that the pushers manage to beat all the time.

They are also usually the people who cant warm up with you (for different reasons then why the pushers dont give you a warmup), because they spray balls all over the court and they need to "hack around" for 60 minutes before they can keep the ball in the court.

They also can not construct points well, and they turn a lot of otherwise normal players into pushers when they are matched against them. (usually anyone who's not hacking it around and makes the ball come back against them are "pushers" to them)

I'd rather not play either of those, but if I have to, I have too.

 

[Viper]

Are you kidding? Not hitting with any spin doesn't promote improvement, not the other way around.

Tennis on TV doesn't really show how much spin is put on the ball but it's a lot.

I should have been more clear. CHOPPERS don't promote improvement.

 

[tennis tom]

FRAMERS! Someone who ALWAYS hits the ball with the frame and you can't predict the shot by watching the swing. The ball always goes short. I know it's hard to believe that this feat can be done consistently, but I play a lady that does this.

She consistently hits off the frame. I have to keep reminding myself to move in and watch very intently. This is her game and unless I over-power her, it's ALWAYS coming back. She also has a slew of other bad habits, such as calling the score out with great confidence, WRONGLY, and never apologizing when we all have to conference at the net to correct her error. Let's not even discuss her bad calls. She does have an endearing habit of storing the balls in her bosom though.

I'm gonn'a rent the ball-machine and practice my framers, it's another shot to add to the quiver.

 

[raiden031]

I hate playing against players with a big serve. The reason being that I have a lousy return of serve and I can't stand giving away so many free points.

 

[podge]

- people who don't play often: I just try to counter-punch and give them easy floaters
- players with REALLY improper form/odd technique (aka hacker/spin docterz): I just focus on and practice my positioning and footwork while trying to hit proper shots. Can be a bit frustrating, though
- bad sports: I practice keeping a level head because these guys are the worst imho.. I don't have much fun playing them..

The one guy I play is a combination of the last two and it's hard for me to keep my concentration.

 

[penpal]

I enjoy playing against all styles, but I dislike playing people who never smile. I imagine there must be some at every club ... the guy or girl who always looks upset/angry and never seems to be having any fun playing the game.

My displeasure is based in lack of understanding. I just don't get how they can seem so sullen playing a sport that they have obviously invested a lot of time in.

 

[Majik]

Are these guys who never smile any good? I find the easiest way to get out of the zone is to start laughing and smiling and conversing with your opponent. As soon as egos get in the way, focus goes out the window.

 

[Steady Eddy]

They also can not construct points well,

Can anybody "construct points"? Like "these 4 shots eventually lead to a win"? The most I can see it 2 shots. For example, a wide serve followed by a volley to the open court. After returning a shot, you're supposed to recover to the center of the court, so how can points be constructed? This makes tennis sound like chess, or like a long football drive. I think tennis is best understood, whether playing or watching, as each exchange being independent of the others. After a long rally, when one player finally hits a ball over the baseline and loses, that was due only to that shot. It wasn't somehow set up at the very beginning of the rally. This myth that points can be constructed needs to be exposed, or give an example of say, an 8 shot plan that leads to a winner in the open court.

 

[Ken Honecker]

No, no, even at the 3.0 level if one carefully scripts the first 20 shoots like some football coaches do it is possible to completely dimantle an opponant. Any day now I am waiting for someone to simply doff their cap and onceed the match when I come stumbling onto the court. lol

I hear what you are saying and I'm not quite sure what is meant by constructing points rather than the obvious idea of moving them around the court till a hole opens up.

 

[TheOneHander]

EDIT: Delete post

 

[nickarnold2000]

This is why tennis is such a wonderful game because you can have many different styles of play. I've found that as I've improved through the years, the junk/pusher type players just don't give me the problems that they used to.

 

[heninfan99]

I've come to savor the challenge of playing a pusher. There are many good threads on this here or you can buy WINNING UGLY.

Much more annoying is being paired with a James Blake wannabe in doubles. They just waste points and games disintegrate within seconds while they swing for glory. The James Blake wannabe is what I consider a hacker.

 

[raiden031]

Can anybody "construct points"? Like "these 4 shots eventually lead to a win"? The most I can see it 2 shots. For example, a wide serve followed by a volley to the open court. After returning a shot, you're supposed to recover to the center of the court, so how can points be constructed? This makes tennis sound like chess, or like a long football drive. I think tennis is best understood, whether playing or watching, as each exchange being independent of the others. After a long rally, when one player finally hits a ball over the baseline and loses, that was due only to that shot. It wasn't somehow set up at the very beginning of the rally. This myth that points can be constructed needs to be exposed, or give an example of say, an 8 shot plan that leads to a winner in the open court.

I don't think you should take 'constructing points' too literally. Its true that you can't map out several shots ahead, but really its about being able to read your opponent's position, the incoming ball, and determine the best shot to take in order to open up an opportunity to end the point, as opposed to forcing the end of the point prematurely. Also if you fail to open up the court, you need to have the patience to try a couple of different shots (ie. shot to weaker side, mixing in some slice, etc.) to get your opponent to hit a weak shot to set you up.

 

[BobFL]

I do not like ('hate' is too strong) talkative style of play. I also do not like TMI players. You know, when you come to play in really good mood and in the first 5 minutes you get overwhelmed with unnecessary and unwanted information about: bad knee, wrist, neck, lower back, hip, high mortgage payments, timing belt on his chevy, poor string job, insomnia that happened last night....

 

[forehandshanker]

Brainless ball badgers are my least favorite players because they're inconsistent during a warmup. It's tough to establish any rhythm with them.

Yesterday I played with one for a few hours and he admitted that if I got his balls back, he knew he would eventuallybe dead meet because I was less likely to miss than he. Most ball badgers are only good at taking big cuts at balls that come right to them. So the best ways to beat them is to move 'em side to side (b/c they're often poor movers), mix it up with low slices and high bouncers (b/c they tend to overhit stuff out of their strike zone) or bring 'em with drop shots or short choppers (b/c they often have weak net games).

 

[RogerRacket111]

This is why tennis is such a wonderful game because you can have many different styles of play. I've found that as I've improved through the years, the junk/pusher type players just don't give me the problems that they used to.

So what is the key to beating pushers? I find when I construct points to find the opening and hit a good strong shot it works. But when I try to play their game it frustrates the hell out of me. Pushers also like a consistent even powerful ball that they can use so I try to mix it up by slicing some.

 

[coloskier]

So what is the key to beating pushers? I find when I construct points to find the opening and hit a good strong shot it works. But when I try to play their game it frustrates the hell out of me. Pushers also like a consistent even powerful ball that they can use so I try to mix it up by slicing some.

Best way to beat a pusher is to never give him the same type of ball twice in a row. Make him lose his rhythm. Most pushers thrive on blocking back hard balls hit at them. Give them heavy topspin, followed by a flat ball, followed by a looper. They will be hitting the fences after about 3 or 4 games of this.

Or, you can play serve and volley and try to end the points quickly. Bring them to the net. Most pushers hate hitting volleys, and HATE hitting short, low balls. If they can't block the ball back, they are clueless.

 

[Carlito]

So what is the key to beating pushers? I find when I construct points to find the opening and hit a good strong shot it works. But when I try to play their game it frustrates the hell out of me. Pushers also like a consistent even powerful ball that they can use so I try to mix it up by slicing some.

Hit Winners. If the guy really is a pusher then you shouldn't have any problems doing that right? Unless you are a pusher also.

 

[beernutz]

Hit Winners. If the guy really is a pusher then you shouldn't have any problems doing that right? Unless you are a pusher also.

That is a myth imo. Some players who people here insist on classifying as pushers are very adept at hitting deep balls or deep lobs which are not easy to hit winners off of.

Just because they are not looking to hit winners themselves doesn't mean "pushers" are serving up weak sitters for you to hit winners on.

 

[Steady Eddy]

I don't enjoy playing an inconsistent power player. Some guy who hits tons of winner and tons of losers. After you hit the ball to him, you might as well get ready to receive serve, because he'll either hit an ace or make an error. For these guys, what I do doesn't matter, he either has a good day or a bad day. I might as well stay home and ask if he won or beat himself.

Pretty boring tennis. With these guys the time seems to be mostly spent picking up balls.

 

[mm916157]

I don't enjoy playing an inconsistent power player. Some guy who hits tons of winner and tons of losers. After you hit the ball to him, you might as well get ready to receive serve, because he'll either hit an ace or make an error. For these guys, what I do doesn't matter, he either has a good day or a bad day. I might as well stay home and ask if he won or beat himself.

Pretty boring tennis. With these guys the time seems to be mostly spent picking up balls.

How do we define pusher and hacker?

I agree with the statement above. At some point, it is up to an individual player to hit winners and create points themselves.

In my game, sometimes i hit winners, sometimes i get to the net, but i always get the ball over the net so my opponent has a chance to screw up.

 

[Steady Eddy]

How do we define pusher and hacker?

I agree with the statement above. At some point, it is up to an individual player to hit winners and create points themselves.

In my game, sometimes i hit winners, sometimes i get to the net, but i always get the ball over the net so my opponent has a chance to screw up.

I don't know the definition of hacker. I just know I don't like to play a guy who'll get 4 aces and next time get 4 doubles. It's like I'm not even there. These types are usually very self involved and never say anything like "good shot". They're just in their own world.

 

[Kavala]

That is a myth imo. Some players who people here insist on classifying as pushers are very adept at hitting deep balls or deep lobs which are not easy to hit winners off of.

Just because they are not looking to hit winners themselves doesn't mean "pushers" are serving up weak sitters for you to hit winners on.

Correct. First, don't let them draw you into wasting energy and taking too much risk. only when you have a real opening should you go for a winner. they tend to be fast.
if they hit a high loop consider giving that right back with a bit added topspin. they will freak out eventually. hackers are not immune from pressure. when they give you an opening go for it.
also, if they hit short consider slicing an angle rather than blasting it to a corner, which they are expecting and which will cause you to take too much risk for nothing
since hackers don't even swing for the ball they can get their racket in front of quite a surprising number of shots and lob it right over you.
make them pay with their own anxiety.

 

[jga111]

I don't hate any style. I think it's all good. The fact is if you want to self-develop and play competitive players then you will have to play against all styles. Embrace them, use them to help improve your game and when you do beat them you will feel all the better for it. If you lose, quite simply its not because you have a better style and bad matchup - its simply because you're not good enough. Period.

 

[cknobman]

Played a pusher/hacker/deflector the other day for the first time in a while.
I forgot just how unbelievably frustrating it is to play them.
He had a very effective game and executed it very well. Took me 100% out of my comfort zone and had me ready to pull my hair out.

It took me a while to wise up and instead of trying to hit through him and eventually making an error I came to the net and put the pressure on him to hit past me or lob me.
Since he had no truly aggressive shots the net rush worked quite well and I ended up winning the match.
He lobbed me a few times but I did not deviate from my plan and he eventually caved into the constant pressure.

Playing pushers/hackers is a mental game. Can you be mentally stronger than they are? They are counting on you not being able to, their game is built around it.

 

[edathompson2]

I like playing any style. I really like playing against the styles I have the most trouble with. I have a big first serve. I hit with allot of topspin and depth. I just struggle occasionally with consistency. I always have problems with a short high ball. My plan is to take private lessons and drill the crap out of that.

I hate playing with people that are ugly on the court. That aggressively challenge shots. That try to turn a recreational match into Wimbledon. I avoid those people at all costs. When I play against them in a USTA match I just laugh at them. I know they are trying to get in my head by getting all angry and if they are truly getting angry even better. I play to have fun and I'm not going to allow someone to ruin it for me.

 

[Bionic slice]

I'm a not a pro, I'm not someone who has ever had lessons, I don't claim to be someone who has clean or flawless technique. So, yes on the tennis court i could be someone who is critical about someone else's game, style, strokes, movements. I am not classically or professionally trained by a coach but i do have a degree in Kinesiology. Do i attend a drill yes, is there instruction, no, its just court time and doing drills with some 3.0-4.5 range players so i can be more prepared to facing various players, their shots, etc as tennis has so many people with such a variety of shots.
Some might call you a hacker, pusher, junk baller too. They might call me the same thing too but do i care? I can play a variety of styles, i love playing a hard hitting playing as its great to swing and steal their pace to send back some more bombs on my shots.
I used to hate those players some of you have posted about but ive learned how to play them, i need to hold serve, get them out of their comfort zone, and be aggressive.

 

[JackB1]

I don't mind playing different styles, but I hate playing guys that aren't competitive and don't seem to care if they win or lose.
I also hate playing guys that don't call "impossible to tell" balls "in". Or guys that try stupid "gamesmanship" things to irritate you and get an edge. We are out there to have fun, compete and play some tennis. Not to irritate each other. I play a guy who always goes for a bathroom break after we complete our warmups. How annoying is that? He couldn't use the bathroom before coming out on the court?

 

[eelhc]

Spinners, spinners, spinners. It's just an ugly game and doesn't promote improvement.

Is that why Rafa is sliding down the rankings?

Getting back to the OP... I don't have a problem with any particular style but I generally do not like players who are not evenly matched against me. No fun winning or losing 6-0/1, 6-0/1. I prefer playing guys slightly better than me even if I lose.

 

[darrinbaker00]

What playing style do you hate and why. I'm a very strong player and can crush the ball or play with junk, I usually mix it up. If I encounter a junk player, I'll usually counter punch or play junk until I find a moment to make a move. But many junk players expose the inconsistencies in all of our games. These players are the ones that I hate playing with, but don't really have problems beating, it just seems to take a bit longer. I also feel like they don't have a good offensive weapon so they resort to hacking the ball and exposing your weaknesses. My question is, what style do you typically hate and why? Loopers? Spinners? Flat ball hitters? I can generally play all these and come out with good results, but there are those that I would rather get into a good rally with and hit a winner than to lollipop and look for an opening. BTW, I'm not talking about people who change pace and have weapons, I'm talking about those who just hack, drop and lob and have little weaposn to work with.

I hate players who not only have the capacity to beat me, but exercise that capacity on a regular basis.

 

[heninfan99]

super-fit, consistent players are tough.

 

[wings56]

super-fit, consistent players are tough.

totally agree. i'd happily play someone who attacks (groundstrokes or net) any day over the fit, consistent player.
When a player plays within himself, it becomes extremely difficult to take control and try to win the match with offense. Even at the highest levels, the counterpunchers often come on top.