PusherFest in club league - Help me understand

FedGR said:
The second " Between 2 players of the same level, the aggressor (usually wins)".
Click to expand...

I would amend this to: "Between 2 players of the same level, the probability that the aggressor wins rises with the level."

At a low level, the pusher who just blocks the ball back will likely beat the aggressor simply because the aggressor doesn't have the skills yet to competently attack whereas the pusher has already developed enough skill to defend.
 
S&V-not_dead_yet said:
I would amend this to: "Between 2 players of the same level, the probability that the aggressor wins rises with the level."

At a low level, the pusher who just blocks the ball back will likely beat the aggressor simply because the aggressor doesn't have the skills yet to competently attack whereas the pusher has already developed enough skill to defend.
Click to expand...

This sounds like my mixed doubles match last night. I was working with my partner on more aggressive positioning in a practice match. Our opponents were lobbers and played the "draw them in and lob them" game to perfection. So we lost 6-4 in the first set. Then I discussed things with my partner and told her not to enter the service box unless it's a sitter you can put away. Hang back a bit further. Then we started to hit the lobs out of the air and fared much better winning 6-1. Unfortunately our interest in the game sagged in the third set as I was tired of chasing lobs and playing vertical tennis and my partner lost her positional focus as well and we lost 6-3 in the final set.

But this couple never hit a hard ball you couldn't return. Just dinked and lobbed until you made an error and certainly they will beat any aggressor that gets fooled into their game. I've never played tennis like this before, just standing at the service line taking lobs one after the other. Important exercise but a lot less fun than my higher level tennis matches. But it's amazing what a consistent lobber can do to frustrate you and win.
 
nytennisaddict said:
If Ostapenko wanted to beat any one of us by just waiting for us to make a mistake... she could. would you still call her a pusher?
Pros who can hit winners is like having a higher gear... but they all have a "pusher" gear.... just later developed a "forced shot" gear.
Click to expand...

Well I would agree with that. But I think there is a difference between someone that always plays in pusher gear and someone that always plays in forced shot gear.

So it's probably better to state that all pros "can" be pushers rather than all pros "are" pushers. I think of pushing as a mentality not a skill set.
 
FedGR said:
quotes
Click to expand...
You wrote:
"I am not guessing, every coach out there, in person or youtube, will tell you "focus on the process, not the results" if you wanna improve. This is a fundamental of tennis. A pusher (that focuses mostly on winning and not improving) will eventually lose to a player that focuses mostly in the process of improving."


Dude, that's the kind of things that coaches say and say in practices. And they can say whatever they want. You cannot use that to argue against the result that's already taken place. ie someone has already proven their approach by having beaten you in a match. It's convoluted to debate the way you are. It's putting the chariot before the horse. An approach or coaching is validated only after it has produced results (wins). Until then, it's just talks.


"You are calling my logic faulty however you don't understand 2 of the tennis fundamentals. The first is "focus on the process, not the results". The second " Between 2 players of the same level, the aggressor (usually wins)"."

Once again, you have no idea what those you called pushers have gone through in their training, their process. What their focus in. That's why I said you were only guessing. However, what we know for sure, undebatable, is that they (the pushers) already have won. Thus, by your own definition, they have already followed whatever fundamentals that you claim.

I don't just play tennis. I philosophize it as well, to carve the most out of it per my background. That's how "crazy" I am about tennis. And believe it if someone is semi-intelligent and is obsessed over something, he tends to be quite good at it. :) Happy chatting.

 
Dartagnan64 said:
This sounds like my mixed doubles match last night. I was working with my partner on more aggressive positioning in a practice match. Our opponents were lobbers and played the "draw them in and lob them" game to perfection. So we lost 6-4 in the first set. Then I discussed things with my partner and told her not to enter the service box unless it's a sitter you can put away. Hang back a bit further. Then we started to hit the lobs out of the air and fared much better winning 6-1. Unfortunately our interest in the game sagged in the third set as I was tired of chasing lobs and playing vertical tennis and my partner lost her positional focus as well and we lost 6-3 in the final set.

But this couple never hit a hard ball you couldn't return. Just dinked and lobbed until you made an error and certainly they will beat any aggressor that gets fooled into their game. I've never played tennis like this before, just standing at the service line taking lobs one after the other. Important exercise but a lot less fun than my higher level tennis matches. But it's amazing what a consistent lobber can do to frustrate you and win.
Click to expand...
You need to hit better overheads
 
jm1980 said:
You need to hit better overheads
Click to expand...

Because, the set where we stayed back, hit overheads and won 6-1 wasn't good enough?

we lost the set where we got into tight and they lobbed us over and over again. We lost the third set when we lost focus on what worked well in the second set.

I'll be the first to admit I'm not a great overhead hitter. I have terrible depth perception due to amblyopia and the lack perspective when looking up throws my timing off. Probably why I hate vertical tennis so much. But I still can hit OH's adequately to win points at my level. Just not my favorite thing to do in tennis.
 
S&V-not_dead_yet said:
I would amend this to: "Between 2 players of the same level, the probability that the aggressor wins rises with the level."

At a low level, the pusher who just blocks the ball back will likely beat the aggressor simply because the aggressor doesn't have the skills yet to competently attack whereas the pusher has already developed enough skill to defend.
Click to expand...
There's a lot of things that are undefined here and probably undefinable.

What exactly is "the aggressor"?

I know one man who always plays intensely, screams at his mistakes or lost points. His shot is fixed around 45 mph or something. He would beat those who hit out more or cannot keep up the moving, and he would lose to those who run a little faster and/or a bit more consistent. Is he an aggressor?

What's a "low level"?

A bunch of men at my court think they are playing real mean tennis, the level that they would never play with anyone who just pick up the racket for 3 years.


(but they are not high level to me either. I treat (beat) them worse than they beat 3-year players.)
 
S&V-not_dead_yet said:
I would amend this to: "Between 2 players of the same level, the probability that the aggressor wins rises with the level."

At a low level, the pusher who just blocks the ball back will likely beat the aggressor simply because the aggressor doesn't have the skills yet to competently attack whereas the pusher has already developed enough skill to defend.
Click to expand...

Low level only?


English translation for English speakers.
Coach: I understand. It's hard. She is a wall. Just play from the right corner- to the left corner, from the right - to the left.
Jelena: She is just nothing. She is not doing anything.
Coach: She is not doing anything, however you can beat her.
Jelena: She hits the ball without any pace.
Coach: No, she just doesn't make so many errors. Let her run. Just hit a target. There's no need to hit the ball hard. Play with an average pace and that's enough. She can not do anything by herself. Just give her an initiative a little bit. When you start accelerating the ball, she just places her racquet and gets her points.
Jelena: She is just playing for the hell of it.
Coach: She is craving your errors.
Jelena: She plays like an amateur.
Coach: She has only 3 or 4 winners throughout the whole match. The rest was just your errors.
Jelena: I play much better than she does. I'm just making errors.
Coach: Don't make errors.
Jelena: If I don't make errors, she will not have any options.
Jelena: She is not playing at all.
Coach: Learn how not to make errors. Don't give her presents. Let her deserve a point.
Jelena: She is not playing at all. She plays like an amateur. Our amateurs play better in Latvia.
Coach: Don't give her presents. Let her deserve a point.
Jelena: She is playing so sneaky(literally she said "sloppy"). That's so disgusting to play against her.
Coach: You hear me? Let her deserve it.
Jelena: Next time, I'm not even gonna step on the court to play against her. Such a shame to play against her.
 
eelhc said:
Low level only?


English translation for English speakers.
Coach: I understand. It's hard. She is a wall. Just play from the right corner- to the left corner, from the right - to the left.
Jelena: She is just nothing. She is not doing anything.
Coach: She is not doing anything, however you can beat her.
Jelena: She hits the ball without any pace.
Coach: No, she just doesn't make so many errors. Let her run. Just hit a target. There's no need to hit the ball hard. Play with an average pace and that's enough. She can not do anything by herself. Just give her an initiative a little bit. When you start accelerating the ball, she just places her racquet and gets her points.
Jelena: She is just playing for the hell of it.
Coach: She is craving your errors.
Jelena: She plays like an amateur.
Coach: She has only 3 or 4 winners throughout the whole match. The rest was just your errors.
Jelena: I play much better than she does. I'm just making errors.
Coach: Don't make errors.
Jelena: If I don't make errors, she will not have any options.
Jelena: She is not playing at all.
Coach: Learn how not to make errors. Don't give her presents. Let her deserve a point.
Jelena: She is not playing at all. She plays like an amateur. Our amateurs play better in Latvia.
Coach: Don't give her presents. Let her deserve a point.
Jelena: She is playing so sneaky(literally she said "sloppy"). That's so disgusting to play against her.
Coach: You hear me? Let her deserve it.
Jelena: Next time, I'm not even gonna step on the court to play against her. Such a shame to play against her.
Click to expand...

that is awesome! thx for the translation :)
 
user92626 said:
There's a lot of things that are undefined here and probably undefinable.

What exactly is "the aggressor"?
Click to expand...

The player, when given an opportunity to attack, takes it. The pusher, OTOH, will decline and push back a safe, very high % ball.

I know one man who always plays intensely, screams at his mistakes or lost points. His shot is fixed around 45 mph or something. He would beat those who hit out more or cannot keep up the moving, and he would lose to those who run a little faster and/or a bit more consistent. Is he an aggressor?
Click to expand...

No. His personality is irrelevant. I was only referring to style of tennis. What you described sounds like he is not the aggressor: he wins by keeping that 45mph shot in most of the time.

What's a "low level"?

A bunch of men at my court think they are playing real mean tennis, the level that they would never play with anyone who just pick up the racket for 3 years.


(but they are not high level to me either. I treat (beat) them worse than they beat 3-year players.)
Click to expand...

I was thinking specifically about beginners on one end of the spectrum; my money would be on the pusher vs the one who tries to attack but hasn't the skills yet.

At 5.0, my money would be on the aggressor. Not a sure thing, of course.
 
eelhc said:
Not my translation.... done by a Youtube Russian dude. It is hilarious...

Seriously... I don't know why the WTA allows coaching visits. It's an embarrassment. Not to hijack but here's one of my favorite.

Click to expand...
yeah, i agree with that... one of things i loved about tennis is that it's very much a mono-a-mono fight... even more so than boxing.
 
S&V-not_dead_yet said:
The player, when given an opportunity to attack, takes it. The pusher, OTOH, will decline and push back a safe, very high % ball.

#### An opportunity to one person may not be an opportunity to another person. Same thing with what is "safe, high %".

I don't know any idiotic player who refuses to win and simply keeps on playing for the sake of playing. Every player plays a match to win. The so called pushers, even without doing the kind of "aggressive" shot that YOU want to them to do (kinda ridiculous to require opponents to hit in a certain way), still do attacking tennis in their own ways and apparently aggressive enough to warrant them wins. No?







No. His personality is irrelevant. I was only referring to style of tennis. What you described sounds like he is not the aggressor: he wins by keeping that 45mph shot in most of the time.



#### Style of play goes hand in hand with personality. One spawns the other. Aggressor or not is a matter of perspective, is what I was trying to tell you. He's quite aggressive in the eyes of his losing opponents. His shots are just too fast and too consistent.







I was thinking specifically about beginners on one end of the spectrum; my money would be on the pusher vs the one who tries to attack but hasn't the skills yet.

At 5.0, my money would be on the aggressor. Not a sure thing, of course.

#### Level is irrelevant here. At any level, ATP included, the consistency of shots (of necessary quality of course) makes up the major part of success. A 3.0 ability to consistently puts 35mph ball in play that his opponent cannot return is no different than Federer consistently ripping, say, 75mph extreme angle shot that his opponent can't touch.
Click to expand...
 
user92626 said:
An opportunity to one person may not be an opportunity to another person. Same thing with what is "safe, high %".
Click to expand...

Fair enough. But I don't think the pusher opts not to attack because he doesn't recognize the opportunity. He opts not to attack because he'd rather hit the "safe, high %" shot. Either absolute definition could be debated which is why it's easier to see the difference when they are compared against each other.

I don't know any idiotic player who refuses to win and simply keeps on playing for the sake of playing. Every player plays a match to win.
Click to expand...

I do know people who refuse to alter their plan and, as a result, lose. They're not "refusing to win" or trying not to win. But they are inflexible. You could point this out after the match and they might even agree that they should have switched. But in the heat of the moment, it just doesn't occur to them. I've made that mistake before.

The so called pushers, even without doing the kind of "aggressive" shot that YOU want to them to do (kinda ridiculous to require opponents to hit in a certain way),
Click to expand...

I don't "want" pushers to hit any particular way. I'm describing how they do hit based on my perception. And I believe they choose the safe shot over the aggressive shot most of the time. That's not a value judgment.

still do attacking tennis in their own ways and apparently aggressive enough to warrant them wins. No?
Click to expand...

I don't define that style as attacking. I describe it as patient, defending, and reaping the benefit of opponent errors. It does win, at least up until a certain point.
 
user92626 said:
Style of play goes hand in hand with personality. One spawns the other.
Click to expand...

If by that you mean there is causation, I disagree. I can't 100% predict someone's playing style just by knowing their personality. Which is why I left it out of my analysis.

Aggressor or not is a matter of perspective, is what I was trying to tell you. He's quite aggressive in the eyes of his losing opponents. His shots are just too fast and too consistent.
Click to expand...

By your description, I'd describe his game as consistent, not too fast. If he puts the ball in the middle of the court, the opponents are not getting hit off of the court. They are self-destructing against superior consistency.

Level is irrelevant here.
Click to expand...

I disagree. At the beginner level, players struggle just to keep the ball in. I think learning how to block the ball back is easier than being aggressive and "hitting out" [successfully]. Which is why I think pushing does so well at the lower levels. The higher the level, the better a player is at attacking.


At any level, ATP included, the consistency of shots (of necessary quality of course) makes up the major part of success. A 3.0 ability to consistently puts 35mph ball in play that his opponent cannot return is no different than Federer consistently ripping, say, 75mph extreme angle shot that his opponent can't touch.
Click to expand...

My scenario was a 3.0 consistently putting a 35mph ball in play right back to the opponent. The aggressive opponent can easily get to the ball and make a play but he makes too many errors.

This is starkly different from Federer hitting an unreturnable shot.
 
Dartagnan64 said:
I think it's great to see that even at the pro level, disgust for pushers is genuine.
Click to expand...

Pushing = style of play
Pusher = player who exclusively uses the Pushing style of play only

There's this idea on TT that pushing and pushers are not effective past 4.5... Well pushing... exists at all levels.

Ostapenko's opponent in this case was Radwanska, one of my favorites. High tennis IQ, great touch, movement, court awareness, problem solving... absolutely maximizes whatever she can get out of her relatively diminutive physique. I don't consider her a pusher but if that's the style required to win... she's only happy to play it.
 
The video of that girl is shocking. She's some kind of pro, and still does not get it.
How can she get this far and not understand what it takes to win tennis matches?

I now realize that every single pro player is a pusher. Every single one.
For every ATP player in the top 200, there is some maniac who bombed out because he hits every shot harder.
That is why that player never cracked ATP 1000, and teaches 3.0 housewives at some club.
 
TimeToPlaySets said:
The video of that girl is shocking. She's some kind of pro, and still does not get it.
How can she get this far and not understand what it takes to win tennis matches?

I now realize that every single pro player is a pusher. Every single one.
For every ATP player in the top 200, there is some maniac who bombed out because he hits every shot harder.
That is why that player never cracked ATP 1000, and teaches 3.0 housewives at some club.
Click to expand...

She did win the French Open. So you can win without pushing.
 
user92626 said:
You wrote:
"I am not guessing, every coach out there, in person or youtube, will tell you "focus on the process, not the results" if you wanna improve. This is a fundamental of tennis. A pusher (that focuses mostly on winning and not improving) will eventually lose to a player that focuses mostly in the process of improving."


Dude, that's the kind of things that coaches say and say in practices. And they can say whatever they want. You cannot use that to argue against the result that's already taken place. ie someone has already proven their approach by having beaten you in a match. It's convoluted to debate the way you are. It's putting the chariot before the horse. An approach or coaching is validated only after it has produced results (wins). Until then, it's just talks.

I agree with the results talk 100%! And the results did talk. The first time we played he bageled me (almost twice) and the second time I lost the first set 6-4, and was winning the 2nd 4-0. Did I win? No. Was I considerably better the 2nd time? Yes. Why? Because I go and play tennis and go for my shots. I dictate the game. Once I play more and my level is consistently where it needs to be, there's literally nothing they can do because they haven't practiced anything different. They only practice pushing and when pushing doesn't work they can't rely on anything else because they don't know anything else.

So my argument is more in line with the concepts of improvement and progression rather did I win or lose. Long term is where it's at.


"You are calling my logic faulty however you don't understand 2 of the tennis fundamentals. The first is "focus on the process, not the results". The second " Between 2 players of the same level, the aggressor (usually wins)"."

Once again, you have no idea what those you called pushers have gone through in their training, their process. What their focus in. That's why I said you were only guessing. However, what we know for sure, undebatable, is that they (the pushers) already have won. Thus, by your own definition, they have already followed whatever fundamentals that you claim.

Lol no. I do know what the pushers went through in their training. They didn't train the groundstrokes, they didn't train their top spin, they didn't train coming to the net, they didn't train dtl shots, they didn't try dictating the game. They trained on serving, being in great shape, and returning slice low off pace balls to your backhand.

I don't just play tennis. I philosophize it as well, to carve the most out of it per my background. That's how "crazy" I am about tennis. And believe it if someone is semi-intelligent and is obsessed over something, he tends to be quite good at it. :) Happy chatting.
Click to expand...


(click to expand for answers to your questions)

I am glad you are crazy about tennis. That's how I feel about it too. Started playing recently after many many years and realize every day how much I have missed it. But even though your masterfully tried to avoid my question, it still stands! :):) What is the level you play, current and or/peak? Please don't get me wrong, not trying to make any comparisons, I am solely interested in your experience with the game and the challenges you have faced.

Happy chatting :):)
 
FedGR said:
(click to expand for answers to your questions)

I am glad you are crazy about tennis. That's how I feel about it too. Started playing recently after many many years and realize every day how much I have missed it. But even though your masterfully tried to avoid my question, it still stands! :):) What is the level you play, current and or/peak? Please don't get me wrong, not trying to make any comparisons, I am solely interested in your experience with the game and the challenges you have faced.

Happy chatting :):)
Click to expand...
You can safely guess 3.0-3.5 range for about 95% of players on this forum
 
FedGR said:
(click to expand for answers to your questions)

I am glad you are crazy about tennis. That's how I feel about it too. Started playing recently after many many years and realize every day how much I have missed it. But even though your masterfully tried to avoid my question, it still stands! :):) What is the level you play, current and or/peak? Please don't get me wrong, not trying to make any comparisons, I am solely interested in your experience with the game and the challenges you have faced.

Happy chatting :):)
Click to expand...

I played in a local league 4 years ago and rated over 4.5 though people said league rating was more lenient. I think I got (probably much) better now due to having played singles and doubles regularly. However, I really don't care about rating itself alone. I care about my level in the context of my groups. So I make sure I remain one of the top few players in my groups! :) You know we play for fun and some smack talks and it's important that we get respect for our level. LOL.

Anyway, I start to forget the points of all of our posts. Oh yeah, it's always convoluted to argue against the players that you lose to as inferior. Also, a tip that I have fortunately learned very early on is that I don't label player's styles with negative terms or pay attention to players. I'm not concerned with that. I play the ball (the shots) at hand and feel no pressure. Try that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Help me understand!
2
Replies
65
Views
5K
LeeD
L
F
Best doubles league system
Replies
6
Views
1K
10SNE1ELSE
10SNE1ELSE
dak95_00
What league?
Replies
4
Views
1K
dak95_00
dak95_00
Coach Carter
Mixed League ?
Replies
7
Views
1K
Coach Carter
Coach Carter
S
help in getting into league/club
Replies
21
Views
2K
Orange
O
Back
Top