Singles strategy and tips

[user92626]

OK, the grade school vs grad school analogy can only be applied to a certain extent, much like the Circle becoming obsolete, inappicable at certain level. Let's not get carry away with it I imagine at ATP level, the Directionals become a little crude themselves. It seems like to me that the winners at ATP are those who break the rules, take risks the most and somehow still manage to get another shot in. They're the successul models.

 

[HunterST]

Well I went 1-1. The first guy I played had a game similar to mine. Good groundstrokes (good pace and spin, fairly consistent).
The guy that beat me definitely didn't have the pace or spin that I do, but his consistency and placement were on another level. He could hit them on the lines and right in the corners, and he only made maybe 2 unforced errors the whole set. (maybe more, but I considered them forced errors).

I suppose now I need to get my consistency up to that level. Specefically, being able to continue to hit balls with reasonable depth and consistency when a ball lands deep or on the lines.

Any drills etc. I can do to get better at hitting tough balls? Or are time and match experience the only things that can get that.

 

[5263]

I suppose now I need to get my consistency up to that level. Specefically, being able to continue to hit balls with reasonable depth and consistency when a ball lands deep or on the lines.

Any drills etc. I can do to get better at hitting tough balls? Or are time and match experience the only things that can get that.

Yes, many ways to drill. A good one is to have someone feeding tough balls and you go get them with the intention of never missing. Develop hitting replies to these balls that you know you can make,
IE.. when you are taken out wide and deep by a ball near the sideline, you return a high heavy TS shot back cross ct. The TS gives you some margin for error and the height of the ball gives you time to recover for the next shot.

 

[GuyClinch]

OK, the grade school vs grad school analogy can only be applied to a certain extent, much like the Circle becoming obsolete, inappicable at certain level. Let's not get carry away with it I imagine at ATP level, the Directionals become a little crude themselves. It seems like to me that the winners at ATP are those who break the rules, take risks the most and somehow still manage to get another shot in. They're the successul models.

I disagree - and I think most good players would disagree as well. The pros use the directionals quite alot. Once you learn them you will see Wardlaw's pattern popping up all the time. Its his directionals that help explain why so much at the pro level guys seem to hit the ball right back towards the other guy..

What they actually do is try to goad each other into breaking the directionals. Thus they actually sit on the COD that you think 'wins' and instead they turn that DTL shot into a cross court winner. This can happen to amateur players as well. If you foolishly try to change direction of a nice deep forehand ball and hit DTL your actually giving your opponent a nice opening to rip a winner.

I personally never think about any 'circle' beyond the directionals - I also like to think of shot combinations. It might be just an ego boost but I am always trying to "pull off" combinations like slice serve out wide --> angled forehand short return -->DTL winner. There are lots of other ones of course. You have to build combos based on your game style.

Federer's favorite is his inside out forehand winner off of a backhand rally. That doesn't really work for me though because my forehand isn't such a weapon relative to my backhand..

Pete