"pushing" vs "good strokes" and improving your game

[blueballs]

After reading all these pusher hating threads and my own experience playing mediocre tennis, it became very clear that these are just two sides of the same coin, a limited range of skills needed to play good tennis. We need good foot work, good anticipation, efficient movement, good ball placement, and good stroke mechanics. A pusher generally has good movement, anticipation and maybe ball placement. They may not have pretty strokes, since by shortening the backswing or eliminating it(blocking) gives them more focus on some other aspects of the game. while those who have good looking strokes may not move well or have poor anticipation. They may not even have good stroke mechanics on all the different shots leading to late back swing, mishits and inconsistency but maybe 70% of the time have a good stroke. Well it is very clear, statistics will favor the pusher who gets the ball back 95% of the time. So the pusher haters should really admire the pushers for their skills and the pushers should work on their stroke mechanics. Only then, will your game become more balanced instead of being stuck in a plateau. In the end, a higher level player is just a pusher and good strokes combined into one. Practice enables you to commit some aspects to be second nature, allowing attention to be devoted to other aspects that will also be second nature. Your brain can only process so many thing at the concious level at the same time, the unconcious mind, musle memory whatever you want to call it must take over more aspects of the game for improvement. A guy with good instincts has simply relegated part of the anticipatoin of where an opponent will hit the ball into the unconcious mind. That's why sometimes you can think too much and mishit since you're devoting attention where it's not needed. Any comments/additions are welcome.

 

[Superior_Forehand]

Very well said. This is the most thoughtful post on the pusher issue I have seen yet.

 

[Kaptain Karl]

... In the end, a higher level player is just a pusher and good strokes combined into one.

Even Mac stresses the advantage of "just getting the ball back one more time." It gives your opponent another opportunity to blow it.

Interesting summation....

- KK

 

[nViATi]

i think you are confusing pusher and counter puncher.

 

[x Southpaw x]

i think you are confusing pusher and counter puncher.

I agree.

In the end, a higher level player is just a pusher and good strokes combined into one.

That's a counter-puncher, not a higher level player. I think what really makes them pushers/counter-punchers is that they NEVER take risks. All winners they make are when they can make an easy winner. When the opponent comes up to the net, they won't try to hit a passing shot that has a risk of going wide, they will lob. When they are on the run, they won't take a risk of just returning, they will moonball.

Pushers/Counterpunchers are desperate to WIN more than they are desperate to get better. They love WINNING more than they love tennis. If every pro in the tournaments were counterpunchers, I don't think tennis will be so popular nor will people be inspired to play tennis nor will much people watch tennis at all.

Greatest example is Federer himself. He retrieves balls from difficult situations and hits as consistently as counterpunchers. But is he a counterpuncher? No! He's an allrounder, because he takes risks, goes for winners and changes his gameplan often!

EDIT:
One of the best rallies I've seen at the pro level was a 45-stroke rally between Federer and Hewitt. They were hitting fast and advance strokes, but none of them were aiming for the lines. If Federer didn't switch to a dropshot on the 35th stroke, they could have easily gone on to 200-stroke rally considering their consistency and ability to cover the whole court.

 

[friedalo1]

Pushing is part of a counterpunchers game plan to win matches. A aggressive base liner tries to hit winners on every shot. counterpunchers mix up speeds to frustrate the serve and volleyer, and aggresive baseliners. Couterpunchers hit winners in the match. They hit hard winners to confuse their opponents. These players are 4.5 and above. It your talking about 4.0 and below. These players have to many weaknesses to beat a good pusher.

 

[x Southpaw x]

Pushing is part of a counterpunchers game plan to win matches. A aggressive base liner tries to hit winners on every shot. counterpunchers mix up speeds to frustrate the serve and volleyer, and aggresive baseliners. Couterpunchers hit winners in the match. They hit hard winners to confuse their opponents. These players are 4.5 and above. It your talking about 4.0 and below. These players have to many weaknesses to beat a good pusher.

omg, half of your statements are sooo wrong... Counterpunchers hitting winners in a match.... aggressive baseliners hitting winners every shot... counterpunchers with hard winners too! What else can you think of friedalo1?

 

[dizzychump]

I play long strokes and focus a lot on technique by watching pro strokes etc, reading web sites etc. I also take coaching and do drills. I can look great on the practice court.

None of this stops me getting beaten by pushers, or put another way because they win, players that are better than me.

The last guy was really completementary about my game and strokes. He couldn't hit a proper stroke to save his life but would slap everything back with underspin from both sides with a really short swing - A shot you normally see when a player is stretched way off court was his bread and butter. Trouble was he could land the ball wherever he wanted and he could play it stretched and off balance and needed less time to prepare. He beat me easily.

Theres a few other guys at the club whose play i could describe who also have bad strokes but very effective games. They are mostly players who have played a lot of squash. They have good ball skills, perception and strong wrists and couldn't care less about tennis technique. Some of them have been playing tennis like this for 20 years and they are good at it.

Bottom line for me is - A good pusher is very difficult to beat. If every ball comes back with good placement it is very, very difficult not to make an error. I am not going to give up though. At the moment i am not good enough. I have decided to concentrate on seeing the ball early, improve my fitness and speed. I will overcome!

 

[blueballs]

Well my point is that a good player will be all around good. And any one aspect is not more important than another by itself since the opponent can attack the weakest link. Somehow pusher/counterpuncher has a negative tone, but they shouldn't. Maybe fed is a counterpuncher to some players who knows. Hmm, I think the trouble is that judging by strokes alone says pushers are lower level. While good stroke people consider themselves higher level. And when they are beat, they think pushers somehow are "playing cheaply" Well since pushers seem to be predictable, better anticipation should be helpful in dealing with them. For example if you know he will always lob when you come to net, just don't come to net without proper setup. Rally with good ball placement. Don't use too much power on every shot since you don't want ufe, try to make the other guy run more. hitting deeply is very important here since it takes away their angles. a slower deep ball away from him will probably mean a crosscourt short return or a lob from the pusher. Now you need to anticipate this early and kill it. trying to hit winners on everyshot is just dumb if you lack the skills, aggressive does not equal good player.

 

[x Southpaw x]

Maybe fed is a counterpuncher to some players who knows.

Ouch. I give up. How you play, what you think, what you know... I don't care, blueballs. All I can say is that aggressive baseliners don't try and hit winners on every shot, those are wild-hitting newbies. We aren't as absolute in gameplay as counterpunchers.

 

[Kaptain Karl]

i think you are confusing pusher and counter puncher.

That's a counter-puncher, not a higher level player. I think what really makes them pushers/counter-punchers is that they NEVER take risks.

I think you two are confusing them.

I don't think either of you has an accurate idea of a counter-puncher. A counter-puncher is most definitely a "higher level of play."

Hewitt is probably the purest current category example....

- KK

 

[x Southpaw x]

Yes KK. A counter-puncher is most definitely a higher level of play. But what me and Nviati are saying is that a higher level of play is not necessarily a counter-puncher.

Trying to say that:
In the end, a higher level player is just a pusher and good strokes combined into one.
Should be:
In the end, a counter-puncher is just a pusher and good strokes combined into one.

 

[SageOfDeath]

Yes KK. A counter-puncher is most definitely a higher level of play. But what me and Nviati are saying is that a higher level of play is not necessarily a counter-puncher.

Trying to say that:
In the end, a higher level player is just a pusher and good strokes combined into one.
Should be:
In the end, a counter-puncher is just a pusher and good strokes combined into one.

No no.... you got it wrong. What he meant in his post is that many players overhit thus causing them many unforced errors, mishits and such. And some players are just dinking the ball back but they at least do get the ball back.

A high level player is someone who can hit the ball back with fewer unforced errors AND good stroke mechanics.

The greatest difference in a 3.0 to a 4.0 player isn't really power. I've seen some very powerful 3.0 players that also have very good depth and directional control but dont' have consistancy.

I think the main point of his post is a consistant player is a high level player but a consistant player should also have good stroke mechanics to be a high level player.

 

[SageOfDeath]

Now let me give you some examples.... an agressive baseliner often makes errors right? Do they make errors because the pushers shot was so unbelievable fast or well placed? Most likely NOT. Basically pushers cause their opponents to defeat themselves. An agressive baseliner will overhit many shots that are just easy floaters.

So why does a 4.5-5.0 have no problem with pushers? Because they aren't overhitting anymore, that power of theirs is their natural and consistant.

If you think you aren't overhitting then you should at least substain a controlled rally with someone your level. NOT a match just a rally using the same ammount of power in a match. You have to hit baseline to baseline. But you have to keep the rally up for at least 15-20 hits. If you have trouble doing this then you don't have consistancy and you are obviously overhitting. If the ball goes into the net or out of the court due to your partner then you might want to find a better partner for this maybe even a coach just to test your consistancy.

 

[x Southpaw x]

Using the term "Pusher"

No no.... you got it wrong. What he meant in his post is that many players overhit thus causing them many unforced errors, mishits and such. And some players are just dinking the ball back but they at least do get the ball back.

A high level player is someone who can hit the ball back with fewer unforced errors AND good stroke mechanics.

The greatest difference in a 3.0 to a 4.0 player isn't really power. I've seen some very powerful 3.0 players that also have very good depth and directional control but dont' have consistancy.

I think the main point of his post is a consistant player is a high level player but a consistant player should also have good stroke mechanics to be a high level player.

Then what he is saying is right, EXCEPT he's using terms wrongly. A pusher is consistent, yes. But consistent players aren't necessarily pushers. A higher level player is more consistent, yes. But a higher level player isn't necessarily a pusher.

 

[Indiantwist]

So can some1 give me a definition of PUSHER , COUNTER PUNCHER , CONSISTENT players?. May be i am not JUST a pusher/Counter puncher after all (not that i have a problem with it. All i care is am i having fun on court....as long as it is the case, iam cool with any tag names)

 

[kevhen]

Yes, I was able to get to 4.0 with pusher groundstrokes and a big first serve (and good court coverage). Now to get to 4.5 (with slightly slower wheels), I have had to go back and work on the groundstrokes, add some power and placement to them but still remember to keep the ball in play while working on variations (spins) and placement of the serve while improving my second even more.

Pushers know how to play the winning percentages.

 

[x Southpaw x]

Brief definitions of Pusher, Counterpuncher and Consistent Play

Pusher is sort of a tennis slang. Counter-puncher is a style. Consistent plays is a trait.

Styles are more apparent at higher levels.
There are 4 main styles:
- Aggressive Baseliner: Sits at the baseline, tries to be the one dictating play, will aim for winners when comfortable, hits deep groundstrokes when not. Pro Example: Just about all the female pros. Andy Roddick was an outstanding one but he recently developed a more All-rounded play.
- Counter-puncher: Sits at the baseline, never aims for the lines, hits deep groundstrokes when opponent is at baseline, hits lobs when opponent comes to the net, only hits winners that are easy, always go for the safer option. Pro Example: Lleyton Hewitt
- Netrusher: Rushes to the net at every chance he gets. Serve&Volley, Chip&Charge are used very very often. Hits "first volleys" at the service line more often than any other style. Extraordinary with volleys. Pro Example: Tim Henman
- All-rounder: Huge amounts of variety in gameplay. Basically similar to Aggressive Baseliner but dares to do a lot more things. Willing to rush up to the net semi-often. Will mix in slice, drop-shots, lobs, passing shots. Pro Example: Roger Federer and a lot of other male pros.

Pusher is a slang, sometimes an insult, referring to the player that just pushes the ball back to the opponent, using hardly any skill, and always gives his/her shots HUGE margins of error. The lower the level of the player, the more often he moonballs. The worst kind moonballs even when an easy return is hit to them. Counter-punchers are sometimes referred to as pushers because their gameplay usually frustrates the opponent, and the opponent is pissed with them.

Consistent play is a trait. The more consistent you are, the higher level you are. Period. Being consistent means you can hit the same stroke, and the ball will fly to the same place, sometimes same pace, sometimes even same spin, OR in short, it means yoú are IN CONTROL of your play. Being inconsistent means you hit the same stroke, but one times it flies this way, another time it flies another way.

 

[Kaptain Karl]

There are 4 main styles:

I figured we'd have different descriptions of these. Here are MY categories and descriptions
Baseline Basher: Stays back and hits forcing shots -- running your butt all over the court -- until you drop from exhaustion. May even forgoe an obvious winner just to prolong your agony. Purest Examples: Andre Agassi, Jennifer Capriati
Counter-puncher: Converts all your power into well-placed shots of their own. Retrieves everything and can "turn on a dime" to switch from defense to offense at the slightest opening. Purest Examples: Lleyton Hewitt, can't name a WTA player who is "pure"
Attacker: Pressures you constantly with Serve & Volley, Chip & Charge. Mentally wears on you because you know he'll be attacking the net off any short ball you give him. Purest Examples: Tim Henman, Taylor Dent, Martina Navratilova
All-Court Player: Can employ all forms with good success. Chooses the strategy which fits the opponent (or the situation) and can vary the style even within the same point. Purest Examples: Roger Federer, Justine H-H.

Then there's the...
Pusher Usually a pegorative term for the player who merely converts all your power into their very safely placed shots into open territory. They are perfectly content waiting for you to get impatient and blow your attempt to increase your own tempo. They love enticing you into "going for" narrower margins out of impatience. They play pure percentage tennis, simply outwaiting you. They never seem out of position. They never seem to tire. They particularly love making mincemeat out of Baseline Bashers. The Pusher is the bane of the 4.0 player, who may even scream "HIT THE BALL!" at the Pusher who is already "cleaning the clock" of the 4.0 player.

- KK

 

[newshound]

I'm a 3.5 player, and I've lost to this kind of player. Very frustrating! But it feels good in someway to know that the higher level player also has trouble against them. We are all struggling with the same answer. Sometimes I wonder if those playes should be allowed to call their games tennis!

 

[Bungalo Bill]

...After reading all these pusher hating threads and my own experience playing mediocre tennis, it became very clear that these are just two sides of the same coin, a limited range of skills needed to play good tennis...

You know I like your post, but I can't seem to go all the way with you. It is a lot easier to push the ball then learn how to swing the racquet and generate and adjust power, spin, placement, and consistency on all your shots. This is why the pusher does so well in the lower levels. Developing players are willing to make an error technically even though they made the right shot selection. As players are developing their skills and choosing the "harder road", the pusher is satisfied just pushing the ball here and there and waiting for the error to rack up points.

Not all pushers are quick and and have good footwork. This becomes evident when playing a player with some power and the pusher ends up hitting balls off his heels. But like you said, at the "mediocre" levels the pusher has a good chance to win the match. However, if a player is "on", the pusher is out of luck.

I think consistency is the name of the game. But a pusher will only rise so high in the sport of tennis. So developing good strokes and consistency is the name of the game. I think this is what you are saying in all of this.

Yes, I agree with you whole heartedly. Consistency is the name of the game and as players who want to compete at a higher level learn to swing properly and learn from their errors, the pusher will have a good chance to win points until the player comes into his own. However, consistency changes as you get better. Advanced players have to learn to be consistent reading a fielding their opponents shots and also hitting balls they need to hit with power, spin, placement, and depth. This is much much harder to do!

We need good foot work, good anticipation, efficient movement, good ball placement, and good stroke mechanics. A pusher generally has good movement, anticipation and maybe ball placement. They may not have pretty strokes, since by shortening the backswing or eliminating it(blocking) gives them more focus on some other aspects of the game.

Yeah this is very general. A lot of pushers are flat footed and simply wait for the error. Shortening the back swing isn't the only thing a pusher does differently in the swing pattern. They also "check" their swing as they hit. So a short backswing is not just lmited to a pusher, a short backswing can still happen and deliver a nice stroke with power.

while those who have good looking strokes may not move well or have poor anticipation. They may not even have good stroke mechanics on all the different shots leading to late back swing, mishits and inconsistency but maybe 70% of the time have a good stroke. Well it is very clear, statistics will favor the pusher who gets the ball back 95% of the time. So the pusher haters should really admire the pushers for their skills and the pushers should work on their stroke mechanics.

Actually I don't admire pushers. I admire their approach to tennis (to be consistent) but not their game. Being stuck at a certain level is not admirable. Not learning to hit shots properly is not admirable.

The only admirable trait of a pusher is their mental approach to be consistent - that is about it. If a player wants to get better, they will improve in their speed, footwork, strokes, strategy, adjustments, and all other aspects that will eliminate pushers from advanced levels.

I also admire players who are willing to take the right shot even though they may miss the shot. I admire players that punish the short ball or finesse a drop shot. I admire players that have a fast swing for their second serve. I admire players that come to net and make a crisp volley to pressure their opponent. These are the players that want to get better, that are paying their duee, have improved and keep improving. These are the players I admire. I like players that are not afraid to take a risk and learn to improve. They may lose to a pusher at the 3.5 - 4.0 level - whoopie.

In the end, a higher level player is just a pusher and good strokes combined into one.

Ummm....no...sorry. Can't get there. A higher level player learns that all aspects of tennis are important and sets a course to improve in the areas of:

1. Conditioning

2. Mental preparation

3. Game strategy and tactics

4. Technique on all strokes

5. Learning to compete with consistency, placement, depth, spin, and power. Also learning to adjust or combine these aspects to beat another player.

6. Learning to lose and win respectably.

There is no way you can ever say an advanced player is just another pusher. There is no "end" to an advanced player but there is an "end" to a pusher.

I understood appreciate what you were trying to say and that was to elevate the importance of consistency. I agree with that, but to admire a pusher? Sorry.

 

[nViATi]

what i am trying to say =
pusher = junky person who doesn't know how to hit a stroke. they just 'tap' or 'push the ball'
counter-puncher = doesn;t mean good or not it's just another type of play like aggressive baseliner or serve & volley

 

[Indiantwist]

All this definitions still circled back to same Q for me. Iam not sure of my playing style.


If i take an example and say if the Pusher starts working on his shots and say Pushing game is plan B would he still be a pusher?.

For example during a rally a player plays a PUSHING game until he gets a weaker return and then goes with a Agressive winning shot would that be a counter punching style?

Most of the 3.0-4.0's cant hit a winner of every ball and win every rally. What if they are on defensive?. What if opponent is ripping deep rallies and this player has to run end -end just to stay in the point. With a limited skill at his dispoasl what else would he be able to do other than offer defensive replies or Pushes sometimes?

 

[Bungalo Bill]

All this definitions still circled back to same Q for me. Iam not sure of my playing style.


If i take an example and say if the Pusher starts working on his shots and say Pushing game is plan B would he still be a pusher?.

Usually a pushers game is plan A. Plan B is to work in the background and develop their strokes. However, because of a pushers need to be ultra conservative they usually do not let themselves transfer what they do in practice to a match. They remain a pusher.

For example during a rally a player plays a PUSHING game until he gets a weaker return and then goes with a Agressive winning shot would that be a counter punching style?

Well any pusher can hit a ball hard on occasion. But the underlying characteristics still puts them in the category of a pusher. In other words, if they played a pushing game at an advanced level, they probably would not have the chance to hit hard because the point would be thoroughly be controlled by the advanced player.

Most of the 3.0-4.0's cant hit a winner of every ball and win every rally. What if they are on defensive?. What if opponent is ripping deep rallies and this player has to run end -end just to stay in the point. With a limited skill at his dispoasl what else would he be able to do other than offer defensive replies or Pushes sometimes?

Let's put it this way, a player plays someone at their 3.5 level and hits out and hits winners. Then he goes against someone clearly better then him. The player is on his heels and his only choice is to just get strings on the ball and get the ball back. He resorts to pushing so as to not make a mistake. Is he a pusher? In the match he is, but not overall. He just was clearly out played and all he could do was push balls back in desperation.

A counter-puncher is NOT a pusher. A pusher is classified by the way you hit a ball - not by your playing style.

A pusher has short pushing strokes that have an ultra high percentage chance of landing somewhere in the court.

A counter puncher takes full strokes, goes for their shots, hits out on the ball, goes for his second serve and clearly goes through the ball. His playing style dictates to have the point last longer because usually a counterpunchers major weapon is their ability to fight, last long, and their conditioning. But they absolutely dont push. Otherwise, based on how fast and coordinated the top pros are they would have them for lunch.

 

[x Southpaw x]

A counter-puncher is NOT a pusher. A pusher is classified by the way you hit a ball - not by your playing style.

Thank you. At least Bill agrees that pusher is generally lower-level and is different from a counter-puncher. Kaptain Karl, meanwhile, almost worships pushers and always seems to enjoy making up his own definition of everything. However Bill says he respects the pusher for wanting to be consistent. Well, they are consistent in returning the ball back to the other court, but that doesn't mean they have a proper or consistent stroke. And don't disparage other players for not wanting to be consistent. I'm sure everyone wants to be. The best learners want to develop a consistent stroke for returning, not consistently return the ball anyhow. Not only do I not admire pushers, I will say outright that I despise them, precisely because they want to win more than they want to get better.

And sadly it seems that even if I try to use my own words to rephrase definitions of certain terms to explain them more and make it easier to understand, nobody will listen because it's not from an established credible source.
So fine, I'll copy and paste directly from tennis.com

http://www.tennis.com/ME2/Audiences...52&tier=4&id=E7ABA1B2F019444D9C0FC52E45D6E76D

POWER BROKERS
The M.O. They dictate play by standing close to the baseline and pushing their opponents around the court with big ground strokes. They can string together sensational winners, but they'll also make numerous errors.
SPEED MERCHANTS
The M.O. Using great court coverage, they'll chase down every ball, get them back in play any way they can, and wait for you to make the error. This relentlessly steady play tests your mental resolve more than anything. At the club level, this can be the toughest player to face.
ALL-PROS
The M.O. They have all the shots. They're versatile enough to win from the baseline, net, or with stamina. These are the best players at the club.
CRASH-AND-DASHERS
The M.O. These guys want to blitz the net. They like to pressure their opponents using either their serve or a big weapon.

This article only describes them briefly, but at least correctly. Full definitions are out there somewhere, this article happens to be the first I found.

EDIT: Also note that this definitions define the style of players for a wide range of roughly between 4.0 and 7.0. Aggressive Baseliners at 5.5 and above really don't make many unforced errors. And yes I noticed that in my previous post of my own words describing them, I forgot to add that counterpunchers are very fast and fit. (I think I forgot to add it because I was a lot faster and fitter than a counter-puncher that recently defeated me)

 

[Kaptain Karl]

Usually a pushers game is plan A. Plan B is to work in the background and develop their strokes. However, because of a pushers need to be ultra conservative they usually do not let themselves transfer what they do in practice to a match. They remain a pusher.

Yes. The Pusher always "intends" to employ full strokes, like they use in practice, but (Lack of confidence? Fear of Failure?) something makes them decide, "I'll do that *next match....*

And some pushers seem to think, "I can beat several of those Hotshots at the Club. Why change?" They are happy with that level of play. It's okay with me that they're happy. I would not be....

A counter-puncher is NOT a pusher.

Agreed.

Then there's this...

Kaptain Karl, meanwhile, almost worships pushers ...

Huh?

... and always seems to enjoy making up his own definition of everything.

Wow! Doctor, am I being charged for this? "Always?" "Everything?" (And BTW, do you disagree with my descriptions?)

... Not only do I not admire pushers, I will say outright that I despise them, precisely because they want to win more than they want to get better.

My turn to psycho-analyze: Your tone makes me suspect you've been "victimized" by some pushers lately. Hmm???

I'll copy and paste directly from tennis.com ...

Those are pretty good.
____________

The #1 player on my Boys HS team was more of a counter-puncher than anything ... and cocky as anything. (Which amused me a little and saddended me more. He wasn't willing to work on his game.)

He was *certain* he could take "Coach". After all, I'm old and graying.... I'd hit him deep soft slices the whole time and barely break a sweat. He'd exhaust himself by suddenly having to supply his own power. His accusation, each time he'd lose a set to me (usually at least two breaks of serve a set) would be to call me a "Pusher". I'd tell him I was merely giving him what he didn't like to hit.

(My natural "style" is All Courter ... with an emphasis on Attacking.) I could not convice him to work on his game. I understand he's quit tennis now. *That* bothers me more than anything....

- KK

 

[x Southpaw x]

Okay.

No matter how I find, there doesn't seem to be a definite definition of a "pusher" on any credible online resource.

So I'll explain myself, players that play around me have mostly agreed and refer the term "pusher" as a derogative slang/nickname for low-level players with horrible strokes that do anything to get the ball back, example moonball an easy return, push the ball back over the net, dink upwards and do such rubbish shots every gameplay. They usually don't bother much with getting coaching, maybe once a week large group coaching at most. Some of them slice a lot, wrong kind of slice but slices are the highest percentage play at low levels. The highest level of pushers are usually the oldest people aged 35-55, but we don't call them pushers because they've used their rubbish unorthodox shots so much that they've developed placement and sometimes power with it, and they have a wrong but consistent serve.

KK, I've lost to one counterpuncher recently, but I consider him a counterpuncher and not a pusher. He won me because he played clay-court style with overwhelming topspin that kicks the ball up above head level. Because of specific reasons, he will only give me a very short period to warm-up my strokes, thus I couldn't get my timing down to hit on the rise consistently. Only played with him twice and he's the first person to use such a gameplay against me, I crush most other counterpunchers with superior groundstrokes. So... I couldn't come up with a good strategy during the two times I met him. Only games I won from him were my service games where I served&volleyed successfully. I punish his predictable weak serves but he retrieves quite a few of my return of serves. Doesn't matter though. I want to beat him by taking my GS to a higher level: hitting on the rise and returning high&accelerating shots consistently. Until then, I will lose to him because of his superior gameplan: making me uncomfortable when returning.

And KK, you could consider my posts on this thread overreacting. I'll admit it. I think I'm a perfectionist at everything that I enjoy. And I enjoy and love tennis. :mrgreen:

 

[Indiantwist]

That is what i readfrom tennis mag and assumed that Pusher is synonymous with Counter Punching.

Respect or not .its upto the individual. Improvement. how can one define improvement. There is no guarantee that by going with aggressive strokes every time one is going to improve (improve to what ? bcome a pro?..i feel this is again upto the individual opinion). No one can predict a pusher is not going to improve.

In the end it all boils down to playing style. There was a time when Serve N Volley was the name of the game. Then there were Baseline slug fests. S & V doesnt work successfully anymore cause ppl can return well and aggressively.

Regardless in the lower levels of tennis Pushers rule the rooost. Until they are proven otherwise that style is here to stay.


At a higher levels, These pusher have learned more techniques (ie they can hit better, run better, defend better and their strokes wont give more time to opponents).
After all a moonball to a 5.5 player is most likely a winner for 5.5 with a overhead smash. Hence the pusher would have to come up with something better (a topspin lob may be). Its ironic that he isnt called a pusher anymore ..

 

[blueballs]

Hey sorry guys I didn't seem to have the right def of pusher when I started the thread. I think Kapt. Karl nails it on the head when he says *****Yes. The Pusher always "intends" to employ full strokes, like they use in practice, but (Lack of confidence? Fear of Failure?) something makes them decide, "I'll do that *next match....* And some pushers seem to think, "I can beat several of those Hotshots at the Club. Why change?" They are happy with that level of play. It's okay with me that they're happy. I would not be.... ***** Many think pushers are cowards for staying in their confort zone and, add to the fact that the pusher usually wins in the "I hate pusher" threads, just adds fuel to the fire.

My point was that pushers possess some skills that can also be found in a more advanced player. For example they are determined to run down every ball, they try to anticipate the opponent's shots (making it easier for them to get to every ball) and use tactics to win. Although these tactics maybe very predicable such as always lob someone at net or even just get the ball back against inconsistent/impatient hitters they do work and any player should be thinking of how to win games with what they have got.

I agree that the pusher, if he stays one, will never have a chance of beating a say 5.0 player. Because such a player has the strokes to hit overheads for winners from anywhere in the court, they will be able to anticipate and quick to get in position ready to pounce any short high balls. In fact less experienced players have trouble hitting these since they must generate their own power, they usually wait for the ball to drop into their comfort zone but by this time the ball is almost going straight down making it hard to hit in the sweet spot with a vertical racquet face. The same with overheads since they're also dropping fast at contact. A faster ball that travels more horizontally in the "strike zone" is definately easier to hit for a lot of mediocre players, even it may be moving several times faster than a pushed ball. Pushers "pushes" players to develop skills such as hitting on the rise and to have full swings that add tremendous pace to any slow ball and unfamiliar strokes such as the overhead smash, which is a very valuable service.

So next time playing a pusher think of it as practice session and don't put too much weight on the outcome of the match. This will enable you to beat them later on. And pushers should also try to gain confidence in their strokes and move up a notch so that they won't get bashed so much on message boards and more importantly become a better player. Thanks for everyone's input so far.

 

[x Southpaw x]

This thread is turning into a rant... someone remind me, what's the purpose of this thread again? What are the tennis tips/instruction given...?

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Yes. The Pusher always "intends" to employ full strokes, like they use in practice, but (Lack of confidence? Fear of Failure?) something makes them decide, "I'll do that *next match....*

ROFLOL!!!! Very funny!

 

[Bungalo Bill]

And some pushers seem to think, "I can beat several of those Hotshots at the Club. Why change?" They are happy with that level of play. It's okay with me that they're happy. I would not be....

Yes, pushers will always have a good chance to knock off the more aggresive players at the lower levels. It is a risk/reward sort of thing. At lower levels with players trying to become more consistent with "real" strokes, errors do pile up. This frustrates these players because they think they are better then they really are.

A counter punchers style utilizes the rally speed stroke a lot. They do not over hit and most of them move the ball around well with different balls speeds from the baseline. Most counterpunchers have a more lateral game (side to side) then a come forward game (S&V) or even an all-court game like Federer. They can hit deep and many hit with authority which seperates them from pushers.

They aim to tire you, get you off the court so they can hit to the open court, get you off balance, wrong foot you, or out last you going stroke to stroke. They will take dvantage of your weak wing. These are the characteristics that make them "seem" like a pusher.

When a counterpuncher hits the ball it is with a full stroke with intention to put pressure on their opponent. Hewitt, Agassi, and many others play a counter-puncher game that primarily is designed to initiate and execute "body-blows". Just one controlled hit after another. Looking to wear out their opponent.

Then there's this...
Huh? Wow! Doctor, am I being charged for this?

Karl, I think most of us know you are a good player and a smart coach. I do not believe one bit that you "worship" pushers. As a high school coach, it is most likely that you may tolerate them on your team but based on the posts you have provided, I know you would want to see these players develop a fuller game. So no worries. Just keep posting.