Switching Receiving Sides for Match Tiebreak: We Need to Keep Track of This

[Cindysphinx]

The other night, my (7.0 mixed) partner and I won the first set 6-2. For unknown reasons, we lost the second set 2-6. We made more errors, they played better, who knows why? I suggested that we switch receiving sides for the match tiebreak. Sure enough, we won the match tiebreak in a rout, 10-4.

I swear, there is something to this idea of switching receiving sides for a match tiebreak when you have lost the second set. I have tried it several times over the last few years, and it really seems to work. And in the one case when it didn't work we ran up a good lead in the tiebreak and then they turned it around.

I think when a team comes back to win the second set, it means they have figured you out in some way. By switching receiving sides, you make them figure out out again, which is just disconcerting enough to allow you to get the ten points you need. Maybe the advantage is that on our new receiving sides, we have information about what to expect (because we have a conversation about how the server has served and his/her tendencies), whereas they know nothing about how we return from the new receiving sides?

Let's have a little experiment. If anyone else has tried this or tries it in the future, report your experience. I'd really like to know if this tactic is actually effective, or whether I've just been lucky.

 

[Robert F]

Funny with some recreational doubles, the times when I've gotten my butt kicked in the first set, we'd switch receiving just for the practice and often wind up stealing the second set.

 

[OnTheLine]

No doubt. In mixed and in single gender. If they have figured out your game in the 2nd set it is time to do something whether it is for breaker or for just the 2nd set if your team fell off in the first set.

My most recent match ... we were on serve to 3-3 in the 1st, they absolutely figured us out and closed out the next 3 games. I could almost feel it happen. They started with patterns that exploited our weaknesses and did a very good job of it.

At set break, I wanted to switch .... partner did not ... I deferred and we stayed .... got 2nd set shoved down our throats. After the match she said, yeah, we should have switched. yup. sure should have. But I am never forthright with a partner and will almost always bend to what they want ....

 

[TagUrIt]

Switching sides can revitalize your game. Give you both a chance to reset and your opponents a different look. I think it’s good idea if you drop the second set. If you’re winning, I say if it ain’t broke don’t fix it.

 

[Cawlin]

I've heard a lot of players talk about this, but only experienced it twice. Both times it was unsuccessful.

I can see how it could give a mental "reset" - and God knows how "mental" this game of tennis is, but I just haven't seen it work out that way. It could mean that in matches where I've been losing, either I, or my opponent were never going to win anyway due to skill imbalance, or that my own "match head" is not good enough to get back on track. I don't really know.

I do believe that some real consideration should be given to it, rather than just switching "because". I'd rather take a minute to try to objectively analyze what's going on and try to see what might be able to be fixed than to simply just default to "let's switch".

For instance, I'm a lefty and most of my partners are rightys. If the opponent has a slice serve for instance, that comes quick, short, and wide to my backhand in the deuce court, but can still go up the T with enough pace that I can't sell out and camp the wide serve, I'm pretty badly exposed there because my backhand isn't as good as my forehand. Obviously if I'm facing opponents that can do that in either the deuce or ad court, well then it doesn't matter too much, it's just going to be tough.

If the opponents are really good at sending balls up the middle, then as a left/right handed pair, I might try to put our forehands in the middle, presuming my partner's forehand is not their weakness.

Obviously as well, a 10 point tiebreaker set is a kind of different situation than a normal 3rd set, and there are lots of aspects to consider in the question of "should we switch or not".

I guess I think switching should be part of the conversation of what to do to try to get on top in a match, but shouldn't necessarily be the default answer for all situations.

Anecdote: a few weeks ago, my wife and I were playing a friendly match. She's a righty, I'm a lefty. The other team were both rightys. The guy had a pretty decent "can opener" slice serve that was eating my wife's lunch in the deuce court - with the serve breaking hard and wide to her forehand. He couldn't keep this serve in, going up the T in the ad court to my backhand and when he did, there wasn't much pace on it, so I could handle it there, and his wide ad court serve wasn't that big of a challenge, and was also to my forehand so I could easily handle it. Meanwhile, back to the deuce court, his "T" serve was to my wife's backhand and didn't have a lot of mustard on it either. After he aced my wife several times, wide to her forehand she was panicing and saying "we need to switch, this serve is killing me". I told her to just camp out wide and wait for it. If he goes up the T, it's not so fast you can't get a racquet on it even if you are 2 steps out wide... trust me. She trusted me and did what I said. He didn't hold his serve the rest of the night.

 

[ShaunS]

If the opponents are really good at sending balls up the middle, then as a left/right handed pair, I might try to put our forehands in the middle, presuming my partner's forehand is not their weakness.

This is where I'm going to fall with this discussion. I spend upwards of 3/4 my matches on the same side. My partner and I are playing where we are because it's the optimal positions for us as a team. I definitely wouldn't be willing to try switching for a third set tiebreaker because I think it's going to be more disruptive for me than the serving team. My position on the court is dictated by where my partner is and expecting them to cover certain shots, and I don't think I could deal with complicating that in the "high stakes" scenario of a tiebreaker. I'm usually very confident heading into a tiebreaker though with the mindset that as long as I don't make (more) dumb mistakes this will be a win shortly.

If we had gotten crushed in every return game for the first set then it's a maybe for the second set. I can only recall doing it once for exactly what you said. A guy with some odd spin serves exploiting your backhand, so my left-handed partner and I switch sides. We got to tee off on some nice forehands after that.

 

[MathGeek]

Great idea. Thanks for sharing.

 

[kevrol]

What side were you playing for the first 2 sets Cindy? Also did y'all change up service order?

 

[WhiteOut]

The other night, my (7.0 mixed) partner and I won the first set 6-2. For unknown reasons, we lost the second set 2-6. We made more errors, they played better, who knows why? I suggested that we switch receiving sides for the match tiebreak. Sure enough, we won the match tiebreak in a rout, 10-4.

I swear, there is something to this idea of switching receiving sides for a match tiebreak when you have lost the second set. I have tried it several times over the last few years, and it really seems to work. And in the one case when it didn't work we ran up a good lead in the tiebreak and then they turned it around.

I think when a team comes back to win the second set, it means they have figured you out in some way. By switching receiving sides, you make them figure out out again, which is just disconcerting enough to allow you to get the ten points you need. Maybe the advantage is that on our new receiving sides, we have information about what to expect (because we have a conversation about how the server has served and his/her tendencies), whereas they know nothing about how we return from the new receiving sides?

Let's have a little experiment. If anyone else has tried this or tries it in the future, report your experience. I'd really like to know if this tactic is actually effective, or whether I've just been lucky.

Nice post!

I prefer to follow the idea that if things are working, keep doing it till they don't. If we lose the first set by a single break or a set tie-break, and we're playing well, I tend to keep at it...at our level, a single bad service game, couple of DF's just happen...no need to freak out and switch the whole deal. Besides, if we're close, we've also figured them out...so by switching sides, now we have to get used to a different angle of the server's serve, tendencies, etc.

If we get blown out in the first set because we just stink out loud, then switch away! (and if it continues for two more games in the second, the beer is coming out early)...

As for switching right at the beginning of a match tie break, i don't think i've ever done that...that's pretty bold imo...i will say, it *seems* like the times we switch sides, we perform better than before we switched...so maybe there's something to that...if it happens in my 8.0 mixed match tonight, i'll post the outcome tomorrow.

 

[Cindysphinx]

What side were you playing for the first 2 sets Cindy? Also did y'all change up service order?

I was playing deuce.

We did not change the service order. It was mixed, and he had the better serve and groundies, and I had the better volleys. So it made sense for him to serve first.

 

[Cindysphinx]

Also, I don’t like it when my opponents switch receiving sides. I feel like I have to figure them out all over again. I know that I have different shots and tendencies depending on which side I receive on, and my opponents are the same way.

I also wonder if the team that switches gets a mental boost, like it helps them reset or something.

 

[Dartagnan64]

So I played my Saturday morning mens' doubles and my partner and I beat the young guys 6-3, 6-1. Decided to play a 3rd set and for fun, my partner and I switched receiving sides. Well we were awful returning serve (pretty awful serving too). Lost 6-2. They broke us twice and held all their serves. My inside out CC BH return needs clear work. And my partners inside out FH was trash as well. So they just served down the middle and owned us at the net.

So sometimes switching return sides is dumb if you are really good at one side. Fortunately it was for fun and I learned I need to practice more doubles receiving from the deuce side. But no I should not offer that as a solution in a TB.

 

[FedLIKEnot]

Unless the side you receive on are as a result of trying to hide someone’s weaker side i love this idea. Changes up the look, takes them out of your rhythm. Sometimes just looking out there and seeing a new person on a new side can be impactful.

 

[Cindysphinx]

That makes sense.

Even if you have chosen your original receiving sides because of your perceived weaker sides . . . well, your opponents have not seen you return on that side and may not get it sorted out before you win ten points.

Also, they have probably figured out that you prefer a certain wing and became adept at avoiding it, which may be why they were more successful in the second set.

And at my level, players can be "baited" into hitting shots they aren't comfortable with in an attempt to exploit a perceived weaknesses. For example, if you play two back some players will be baited into hitting drop shots they don't own. Regarding service return, a server might start pressing to try to reach that weaker wing if you have switched sides before the tiebreak. A match tiebreak may not be a great time to start pressing.

And come on. At 4.0+, is your "weaker side" really all that weak?

 

[eelhc]

The other night, my (7.0 mixed) partner and I won the first set 6-2. For unknown reasons, we lost the second set 2-6. We made more errors, they played better, who knows why? I suggested that we switch receiving sides for the match tiebreak. Sure enough, we won the match tiebreak in a rout, 10-4.

This is the problem.

Switching sides may have unwittingly solved an issue but the first problem to solve is to know why one is winning/losing. I have found that most people do not play tennis consciously and have little/no idea what's happening on the court, what they are trying to do, what their opponents are trying to do etc. As important as any shot/stroke skill, is to have a "tennis computer" running in the background.

A classic example is a team that wins say.... 8/9 points aggressively switching/poaching. The minute their opponent returns DTL, they stop. Why? Simply because "they're onto us?". The math says they won 8/10 points. They might want to throw in a fake once in a while but until the math drops below 50%, why give up on a successful strategy?

A good rule of thumb is that if a lot of points go beyond 6 shots in doubles (both teams), it's really not doubles... not consciously anyway.

 

[SavvyStringer]

I personally don't switch for tie breaks. Only occasionally during a match in general and really only when playing with someone I don't typically play with. For instance, the other night I played with a guy that I had only played with one previous time in the last 4 years. We lost the first set 6-3. Neither of us was returning well on our specific side IMO so I suggested we switch sides for the second set. We managed to win the second set 7-6 (7-4 tiebreak). The switch clearly helped our games for that set but we ended up losing the match tie break 10-4 or 10-5. I think a majority of the reason we managed to get the second set is that my partner woke up a bit after switching sides. He had difficulties returning one of the opposing players serves and it basically ruined his whole game. We switched and he could get balls in play. In the match breaker, everything just kind of spiraled out of control fast. Playing on clay, they hit a couple lines, hit a couple let cord winners, we both botched an easy volley or two and basically went down without a fight. I think it was like 9-1 before we rattled off a few points to make it look like we were even still playing. The switch between sets sort of revitalized us but I haven't ever done it before a match tie break. I prefer to see the same serves and serve from the same side during the entirety of a doubles match so switching for the match tie break where I can't get a game or two to adjust I think would be difficult for me.

 

[Deleted member 23235]

never saw a specific correlation to switching sides... if anything, you should always play the side you're most comfortable returning cc from... and in dubs, if i'm the stronger player, i always take ad side... bigger points, arguably better bh, etc... other thoughts:

* in general you should be more specific about exactly how you're winning/losing points...
* maybe switching receiving sides is exploiting a serving weakness (ie. good deuceT, but poor adWide), or
* you're putting your strength where they were previously attacking you (eg. on deuceT, put a good bh returner or lefty)
* or you're putting a weakness where it's less liable (eg. for many an inside out bh return can be tough, and oft not practiced... thus easily poached (because the tendency is to want to go or straight)... but a cc bh return, even if it's weak (a) allows you to return to it's "natural" direction (b) because the poacher usually has to travel further if your'e returning cc (which naturally goes away from the net poacher)

or all of the above.

 

[kylebarendrick]

If you go with the idea that you are supposed to hold serve and getting your serve broken causes you to lose sets (less true at lower levels but still...), then switching receiving sides does nothing to address why you lost a set - you didn't hold serve enough.

Obviously that can be counteracted by breaking your opponent's serve more, so as others have said if they are successfully exploiting weaknesses in your return games then switching can make sense. Otherwise I prefer not to lose what I've learned about returning from the side I'm on.

 

[Cindysphinx]

If you go with the idea that you are supposed to hold serve and getting your serve broken causes you to lose sets (less true at lower levels but still...), then switching receiving sides does nothing to address why you lost a set - you didn't hold serve enough.

The highest level I played was ladies 4.0. And at that level and below, the serve is not a weapon. This is because the serves are weak and the returns are strong.

In other words, if one team served every game the final score would be the same as had they alternated. If anything, it is easier to win a return game because you have so many options. Also, coming in behind a return is easier than coming in behind a serve. The server has to stand at the baseline and hit a short ball. The receiver can stand in no mans land and hit all the wat to the baseline.

And erhlc?

I know why we lost the second set. I was trying to be discreet.

 

[Dartagnan64]

I know why we lost the second set. I was trying to be discreet

Stupid Becky again.

 

[Cindysphinx]