Tactics are Overrated

[MeMyselfandI]

Many people on TalkTennis think that a tactical adjustment is all players need to beat certain opponents, this is not true.

When people lose to pushers posters will say "use angles, drop shots and then lob him, bring him into the net etc etc".

A player can make minor adjustments in tactics but nothing more.
From my experience playing you do not have enough time to think about all the tactics TalkTennis posters advise you to apply on the court.

Most of the time the best tactic is to play your game and hit to the open court and not to deviate from this unless there is a glaring weakness in his game.

Once the rally starts there is very little you can apply tactically and it would hinder your performance to consciously think about hitting short angles or drop shots.

If the shot is there play it but otherwise let your normal game take over.

There is not enough time to think mid rally when you are playing a peer imo, you just have to let your game flow and if you are good enough you will win.

 

[GoudX]

Many people on TalkTennis think that a tactical adjustment is all players need to beat certain opponents, this is not true.

When people lose to pushers posters will say "use angles, drop shots and then lob him, bring him into the net etc etc".

A player can make minor adjustments in tactics but nothing more.
From my experience playing you do not have enough time to think about all the tactics TalkTennis posters advise you to apply on the court.

Most of the time the best tactic is to play your game and hit to the open court and not to deviate from this unless there is a glaring weakness in his game.

Once the rally starts there is very little you can apply tactically and it would hinder your performance to consciously think about hitting short angles or drop shots.

If the shot is there play it but otherwise let your normal game take over.

There is not enough time to think mid rally when you are playing a peer imo, you just have to let your game flow and if you are good enough you will win.

I actually agree with this, often unless there is clearly a play that is working well or badly for you, you shouldn't change your tactics and should just focus on executing better.

Coming up with a plan before the points based on playing your game in a certain way, like pummel the 1hbh backhand with topspin shots, or run them wide on the forehand as they leave the side open to allow for more I/O forehands will often work well.

Also your name is literally MMI again this time. :lol:

 

[PhrygianDominant]

Also your name is literally MMI again this time. :lol:

This.


10c

 

[MeMyselfandI]

I will post this only once. I am not MMI, I have spoken with mods on this subject so please stop accusing me of being this poster.

Thanks

 

[Kalin]

No tactics is great if you're zoning and everything is going in.

However, if you continue with your tactics and you keep getting beat (whether by pusher or by an aggressive player) it does benefit one to try and change things at least a bit, IMO. I agree that switching to an entirely alien (to oneself) manner of play isn't good but a change of tactics can be much more subtle than that.

 

[adv-deuce_4ever]

Isn't planning not to have tactics in the match a tactic in itself?

 

[PhrygianDominant]

I will post this only once. I am not MMI, I have spoken with mods on this subject so please stop accusing me of being this poster.

Thanks

You said please.

good enough for me.

 

[goran_ace]

Tactics are only as effective as your ability to execute

 

[Ballinbob]

Tactics are only as effective as your ability to execute

Well said

End thread/

 

[MeMyselfandI]

Tactics are only as effective as your ability to execute

Which is why Nadal spent a year practicing his down the line forehand.
Which is why Murray spent years practicing to dictate with his forehand.

 

[RoddickAce]

Tactics are only as effective as your ability to execute

Agreed.

To the OP, assuming the execution is fine, then tactics can definitely be applied before the point starts, and although there is less time during points, you can still apply some tactics given the situation.

Eg) Loopy consistent exchanges from the baseline, low slices, serving and volleying, hitting riskier flat winners, going from side to side, or trying to wrongfoot more, dropshots/low slices to draw the opponent forward, etc.

When I'm defending, I find it harder to apply many tactics, but it is still possible. In recent times, I have adopted the forehand slice when pulled wide, and I can choose to use this defensive shot, or try to neutralize the rally with a loopy forehand, or drill a flat forehand down the line if I'm feeling in the zone that day.

When attacking or in a neutral position, then there really are lots of tactics open to you.

 

[MeMyselfandI]

Agreed.

To the OP, assuming the execution is fine, then tactics can definitely be applied before the point starts, and although there is less time during points, you can still apply some tactics given the situation.

Eg) Loopy consistent exchanges from the baseline, low slices, serving and volleying, hitting riskier flat winners, going from side to side, or trying to wrongfoot more, dropshots/low slices to draw the opponent forward, etc.

When I'm defending, I find it harder to apply many tactics, but it is still possible. In recent times, I have adopted the forehand slice when pulled wide, and I can choose to use this defensive shot, or try to neutralize the rally with a loopy forehand.

When attacking or in a neutral position, then there really are lots of tactics open to you.

I agree, I find it really hard to think tactically however mid rally to the detail you describe.

Tactically if I get a chance I will hit to there weaker side, that is pretty much the only rally tactic I will use unless I discover they cannot return low slice or high topspin loopers or something.

I will plan out my serving and decide what I aim to do in the point but once the rally starts I am on auto pilot pretty much and then just adapt to what I see. I think this is what the pros do also, they have set patterns they practice and if the situation arises in a match they just rehash a practice scenario.

 

[anubis]

Depends on what game you're talking about.

If you're an open level, pro circuit player (5.5 and above), then tactics are extremely important. It's not enough to just get the ball in. It's not enough to just hit the ball deep.

However, if you're talking about rec league/USTA/club level players, then I agree that tactics aren't important at all. I don't use any tactics at all, and I have a win/loss ratio of around 0.77. I just hit the ball as hard and as deep as I can, every time. I don't think about anything but getting the ball in. I sometimes don't even care where I hit the ball, as long as it goes over the net and lands in beyond the service line, I'm happy.

I do attack short balls though, I guess that's a tactic. But it's more reactive: if I'm given a short ball, I attack it. I don't plan on making my opponent hit a short ball. if he does it, great. If not, then I'm happy to bash the ball from the baseline.

 

[MeMyselfandI]

Depends on what game you're talking about.

If you're an open level, pro circuit player (5.5 and above), then tactics are extremely important. It's not enough to just get the ball in. It's not enough to just hit the ball deep.

However, if you're talking about rec league/USTA/club level players, then I agree that tactics aren't important at all. I don't use any tactics at all, and I have a win/loss ratio of around 0.77. I just hit the ball as hard and as deep as I can, every time. I don't think about anything but getting the ball in. I sometimes don't even care where I hit the ball, as long as it goes over the net and lands in beyond the service line, I'm happy.

I do attack short balls though, I guess that's a tactic. But it's more reactive: if I'm given a short ball, I attack it. I don't plan on making my opponent hit a short ball. if he does it, great. If not, then I'm happy to bash the ball from the baseline.

Interesting take, I agree with the bold 100%.

The funny thing is I play at 5.5 level yet when I play against guys around the same level as me I dont have time to really apply tactics mid rally.

On serve yes, second serve return, yes. Mid rally I just hit whatever shot feels the best shot to hit and if the chance arises I will hit to his weaker side.

People think you should be able to hit short angled slices approach the net. Dropshot- Lob combo. One groundstroke angle with topspin, next one deep and flat. Realistically these sort of things are almost impossible to do well.

 

[sureshs]

I will post this only once. I am not MMI, I have spoken with mods on this subject so please stop accusing me of being this poster.

Thanks

How do you know about MMI and why did you speak with mods about this?

 

[arche3]

It could be another banned poster trolling pretending he is MMI trolling us that he is not MMI. The depth of trollery here is awesome.

 

[PhrygianDominant]

It could be another banned poster trolling pretending he is MMI trolling us that he is not MMI. The depth of trollery here is awesome.

I would be amenable to that

 

[3kids]

Many people on TalkTennis think that a tactical adjustment is all players need to beat certain opponents, this is not true.

When people lose to pushers posters will say "use angles, drop shots and then lob him, bring him into the net etc etc".

A player can make minor adjustments in tactics but nothing more.
From my experience playing you do not have enough time to think about all the tactics TalkTennis posters advise you to apply on the court.

Most of the time the best tactic is to play your game and hit to the open court and not to deviate from this unless there is a glaring weakness in his game.

Once the rally starts there is very little you can apply tactically and it would hinder your performance to consciously think about hitting short angles or drop shots.

If the shot is there play it but otherwise let your normal game take over.

There is not enough time to think mid rally when you are playing a peer imo, you just have to let your game flow and if you are good enough you will win.

I'm not a big Mike Tyson fan but few wiser words have been spoken: "Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth"

 

[Dendiu]

I agree with the OP. I was rated a 5.0 for a while in Arizona. Take that for what it's worth. I rarely used tactics. I just tried to keep the ball in play until I got a short-ball that I could jump on. If I played someone very consistent, I would try very hard to hit ad-court, deuce-court, ad-court, etc. Perhaps that's a tactic. I found that when I played very consistent players, I wouldn't move them around. I would almost always hit the "safe shot." But I found that really consistent players make errors, just like me, when they get tired. And one of the best ways to get them tired was to move them around, no matter what. Another thing that really helped me against very consistent players was the swinging volley. Perhaps that's a tactic, too. Maybe I was wrong: maybe I actually DO use tactics. Ha!

 

[GoudX]

Playing completely without tactics means always trying to hit exactly the same shot in every single situation. Like blasting the ball randomly at the court on every single shot, or punting every shot weakly over the net without placement.

Any decent player plays with tactics whether they know it or not. If you vary your court positioning, shot depth, spin, and power for any reason - you are using tactics. Rushing the net to finish a point, or throwing up a defensive lob when you are run wide is a tactical play.

Really good players build up more flexible and effective tactics. Countering the opponents tactics and opening up opportunities to win points.

 

[mightyrick]

Depends on what game you're talking about.

If you're an open level, pro circuit player (5.5 and above), then tactics are extremely important. It's not enough to just get the ball in. It's not enough to just hit the ball deep.

However, if you're talking about rec league/USTA/club level players, then I agree that tactics aren't important at all.

Because of your above statements, I have always been in favor of splitting the Tennis Tips/Instruction into two or three different sections -- by skill level.

There are tactics at all skill levels of tennis. But to the 5.0+ player, a "tactic" at 3.5 will seem to be more like a "fundamental".

There are way too many 5.0+ GOATs on this forum who give 5.0+ advice to players who are 3.0+ and still struggle to keep a sustained rally going. It is totally inappropriate and can seriously mess up someone's game.

 

[PhrygianDominant]

Because of your above statements, I have always been in favor of splitting the Tennis Tips/Instruction into two or three different sections -- by skill level.

There are tactics at all skill levels of tennis. But to the 5.0+ player, a "tactic" at 3.5 will seem to be more like a "fundamental".

There are way too many 5.0+ GOATs on this forum who give 5.0+ advice to players who are 3.0+ and still struggle to keep a sustained rally going. It is totally inappropriate and can seriously mess up someone's game.

this is pretty good stuff

 

[anubis]

Because of your above statements, I have always been in favor of splitting the Tennis Tips/Instruction into two or three different sections -- by skill level.

There are tactics at all skill levels of tennis. But to the 5.0+ player, a "tactic" at 3.5 will seem to be more like a "fundamental".

There are way too many 5.0+ GOATs on this forum who give 5.0+ advice to players who are 3.0+ and still struggle to keep a sustained rally going. It is totally inappropriate and can seriously mess up someone's game.

Exactly. It's something I've noticed over the past 2+ years i've been on this forum. When I was first starting out, I couldn't discern between the two different types of levels: open and rec. I just assumed that any advice was good advice (and it is, to an extent).

Maybe the mods could separate this section out:

Tennis Tips/Instruction: Open Level
Tennis Tips/Instruction: Recreational Level

A 3.0 that wanders into the Open Level forum isn't likely going to understand nor be able to employ the tactics that are discussed. It's not fair to him or her, and it makes it more difficult for those who give the advice, when the audience isn't ready for the new skill level.

 

[blip]

How about everyone put their level in their sig? O wait that will cause too many sandbagger threads LOL

 

[TennisCJC]

I agree to a certain extent. The first and foremost tactic is to just get the ball into the court one more time than your opponent and at lower levels this is key to winning.

But, I think simple tactics begin to appear even at 3.0 level. Some example of simple tactics:

1. serve wide to FH to open open opponent's BH for the next shot.
2. hit firm CC until I get a short ball and then smack it down the line (or optionally to opponents weaker side) and come to net.
3. vary spins by mixing in some BH slices with topspin FH and BH
4. vary pace by hitting short replies from opponent with slightly more pace
5. vary height by throwing in occassion high loopy topspin shots.
6. direct serves with purpose: serve to weaker side. Serve at body to jam opponent. Mentioned above: serve wide to open court for next shot. Take pace off serve and try to get high bounce to throw off returner's rhythm.

Some of the simple tactics are very manageable from 3.0 level upward and certainly very evident in 4.0 level play and above.

 

[user92626]

Because of your above statements, I have always been in favor of splitting the Tennis Tips/Instruction into two or three different sections -- by skill level.

There are tactics at all skill levels of tennis. But to the 5.0+ player, a "tactic" at 3.5 will seem to be more like a "fundamental".

There are way too many 5.0+ GOATs on this forum who give 5.0+ advice to players who are 3.0+ and still struggle to keep a sustained rally going. It is totally inappropriate and can seriously mess up someone's game.

I don't get the impression that there are many contributing 5.0's here. Forget the lurking ones. There are a handful of good and willing coaches here.

Can you give examples of 5.0 advices, besides coaches like Ash? (This is not a challenge to you, I'm just curious about the advices.)

 

[Topspin Shot]

It could be another banned poster trolling pretending he is MMI trolling us that he is not MMI. The depth of trollery here is awesome.

Well, I'm calling this poster MMI regardless of whether he says he's MMI or not. And the best part is he can't say anything about it because he's calling himself MMI! :twisted:

 

[CoachingMastery]

Tactics are only as effective as your ability to execute

Correct. Most club, recreational players don't have the skill levels to be very creative or able to command variation in tactics. (They usually can attempt to execute a different tactic, have some limited success, but not a mastery of different skill sets to be overly effective against players who are good pushers.)

Thus, in time, the pusher forces the player to try too hard to make a specific shot (drop shot, lob, angle), or strategy, (serve and volley, chip and charge, drop and lob, etc.), eventually resulting in enough misses that the player doubts their ability to sustain a different tactic.

 

[mightyrick]

I don't get the impression that there are many contributing 5.0's here. Forget the lurking ones. There are a handful of good and willing coaches here.

Can you give examples of 5.0 advices, besides coaches like Ash? (This is not a challenge to you, I'm just curious about the advices.)

One example are things like pusher threads. There is no universal solution to beat a pusher. There are 3.0 level solutions for beating 3.0 pusher. There are 4.5 level solutions to beating a 4.5 pusher.

You can't ask a 3.0 to beat a 3.0 pusher by using 4.5 tactics and strategy. A 3.0 simply does not have the strokes. A 3.0 coming to net to finish a point? Um, no. That is certain failure. However, a 4.5 pulling a pusher wide and coming to net? Absolutely reasonable.

In this forum, people giving advice do not often differentiate their advice to fit the skill level of the player. I think it does a great disservice to those players.

 

[anubis]

I don't get the impression that there are many contributing 5.0's here. Forget the lurking ones. There are a handful of good and willing coaches here.

Can you give examples of 5.0 advices, besides coaches like Ash? (This is not a challenge to you, I'm just curious about the advices.)

I can give you an excellent example of advice that has no business being explained to rec level players.

Imagine two people standing on their baselines, exchanging forehand to forehand rallies. 5.0s and beyond can actually control how high up in the air their shots bounce on the other side of the net, without changing their shot preparation or shot velocity, or height over the net.

A good 5.0 or beyond can hit three balls, all the same height and speed, and have one bounce up to my knee, one to my hips, and one bounce up to my shoulder.

They do this consciously to figure out where their opponent is most comfortable in hitting the ball. They mix this up throughout the match to make sure that their opponent doesn't have anything "good" to work with.

You can't possibly expect rec-level guys to be able to execute that. Guys like me (3.5s) are lucky to get the ball over the net. once it's over, I don't care where it goes or how high it bounces, nor could I change it anyway.

 

[LuckyR]

The tactics thing is like the equipment thing: if you have the strokes and the consistancy (which dictate rec level wins) then they can start to play a role in wins. The better your strokes (and your opponent's strokes) the more these things matter.

 

[Topspin Shot]

I can give you an excellent example of advice that has no business being explained to rec level players.

Imagine two people standing on their baselines, exchanging forehand to forehand rallies. 5.0s and beyond can actually control how high up in the air their shots bounce on the other side of the net, without changing their shot preparation or shot velocity, or height over the net.

A good 5.0 or beyond can hit three balls, all the same height and speed, and have one bounce up to my knee, one to my hips, and one bounce up to my shoulder.

They do this consciously to figure out where their opponent is most comfortable in hitting the ball. They mix this up throughout the match to make sure that their opponent doesn't have anything "good" to work with.

You can't possibly expect rec-level guys to be able to execute that. Guys like me (3.5s) are lucky to get the ball over the net. once it's over, I don't care where it goes or how high it bounces, nor could I change it anyway.

How is this physically possible? To make the ball bounce higher, you have to hit it higher.

 

[LeeD]

Change the spin....
Even on a slice shot, you can change the spin to affect it's bounce height.
Topspin, sidespin, slice, and a combination of the 3 all affect bounce height to the same location.
The swing needed is NOT exactly the same, but is well within the capabilities of the players.

 

[Topspin Shot]

Change the spin....
Even on a slice shot, you can change the spin to affect it's bounce height.
Topspin, sidespin, slice, and a combination of the 3 all affect bounce height to the same location.
The swing needed is NOT exactly the same, but is well within the capabilities of the players.

But topspin by itself doesn't make a ball bounce higher. It pulls the ball down into the court sooner, so you can hit higher over the net, and the ball won't fly out. Because you've hit it higher, the ball bounces higher.

 

[Ballinbob]

Topspin is right on this. To make the ball bounce higher, hit it higher. I can hit a heavy topspin shot that clears the net by an inch and it won't bounce up much. It's not just spin

 

[MeMyselfandI]

A good 5.0 or beyond can hit three balls, all the same height and speed, and have one bounce up to my knee, one to my hips, and one bounce up to my shoulder.

That sounds extremely hard to do.

There is no secret 5.0+ tennis or tennis at any level. If you put the work in you will improve if you have talent you will improve faster than others and are not limited like others may be.

 

[MeMyselfandI]

But topspin by itself doesn't make a ball bounce higher. It pulls the ball down into the court sooner, so you can hit higher over the net, and the ball won't fly out. Because you've hit it higher, the ball bounces higher.

The reaction of the topspin hitting the ground kicks it up after the bounce. Do you know that two balls of the same trajectory wont bounce the same height if one is loaded with spin and the other is not.

 

[Topspin Shot]

The reaction of the topspin hitting the ground kicks it up after the bounce. Do you know that two balls of the same trajectory wont bounce the same height if one is loaded with spin and the other is not.

Do you know that the topspin ball will actually bounce lower than the flat ball, and the sliced ball will bounce higher?

 

[ProgressoR]

The reaction of the topspin hitting the ground kicks it up after the bounce. Do you know that two balls of the same trajectory wont bounce the same height if one is loaded with spin and the other is not.

er...what??

If one is loaded with spin and the other is not, they by definition will not have the same trajectory....

 

[Topspin Shot]

er...what??

If one is loaded with spin and the other is not, they by definition will not have the same trajectory....

He may be referring to the angle at which the ball strikes the court, that is, the very end of the trajectory. I'm assuming that's what he's referring to anyway.

 

[MeMyselfandI]

Do you know that the topspin ball will actually bounce lower than the flat ball, and the sliced ball will bounce higher?

Actually wow, I never realised that. That is why slice lobs sit up while topspin lobs run away from you.

 

[user92626]

I 'm glad Topspin is asking that question cuz I immediately have doubts as soon as I read anubis' reply to me.

" 5.0s and beyond can actually control how high up in the air their shots bounce on the other side of the net, without changing their shot preparation or shot velocity, or height over the net.

A good 5.0 or beyond can hit three balls, all the same height and speed, and have one bounce up to my knee, one to my hips, and one bounce up to my shoulder. "


That's quite a claim!

 

[MeMyselfandI]

I 'm glad Topspin is asking that question cuz I immediately have doubts as soon as I read ****' reply to me.

" 5.0s and beyond can actually control how high up in the air their shots bounce on the other side of the net, without changing their shot preparation or shot velocity, or height over the net.

A good 5.0 or beyond can hit three balls, all the same height and speed, and have one bounce up to my knee, one to my hips, and one bounce up to my shoulder. "


That's quite a claim!

A good 7.0 cant do that.

 

[LeeD]

If the common denomintor is ONLY net clearence and ball speed, it's doable.
However, a change has to made for swingpath, swingspeed, grip pressure and shot speed.

 

[user92626]

One example are things like pusher threads. There is no universal solution to beat a pusher. There are 3.0 level solutions for beating 3.0 pusher. There are 4.5 level solutions to beating a 4.5 pusher.

You can't ask a 3.0 to beat a 3.0 pusher by using 4.5 tactics and strategy. A 3.0 simply does not have the strokes. A 3.0 coming to net to finish a point? Um, no. That is certain failure. However, a 4.5 pulling a pusher wide and coming to net? Absolutely reasonable.

In this forum, people giving advice do not often differentiate their advice to fit the skill level of the player. I think it does a great disservice to those players.

See, I don't buy this. It's my belief that, barring extreme cases, the only difference between advanced level and lower level is the speed. What pros have over us mortal players is their speed and athleticism.

In your example, coming to the net is 4.5 and not 3.5? Not my experience. There are many entry players who play and enjoy the net better than they do ground strokes. It's just preference.

 

[LeeD]

So, only speed and athleticism?
Their years of coached tennis, decades of practice, hundreds of thousands of hit tennis balls don't factor in? Good one!
So, we can take UsainBolt, and say he's a great tennis player? Based on speed and atheticism?

 

[GoudX]

But topspin by itself doesn't make a ball bounce higher. It pulls the ball down into the court sooner, so you can hit higher over the net, and the ball won't fly out. Because you've hit it higher, the ball bounces higher.

Topspin pulls the ball down and thus makes the ball fly into the court at a higher speed. This means it bounces up higher.

 

[GoudX]

Do you know that the topspin ball will actually bounce lower than the flat ball, and the sliced ball will bounce higher?

If they came in at the same speed and the same angle this would be the true, but the spin also changes the trajectory of the shot.

 

[psv255]

Just as an aside, a cool way to think about topspin and backspin in relation to tennis is that slice tends to exaggerate the bounce angle, and topspin tends to even it out - so a high backspin shot's angle of bounce w/ the court will be even higher after it bounces, or if it's low it will be even lower after the bounce. On the other hand a high topspun ball will bounce more forward, closer to 45 degrees off the ground, and a low ball w/ topspin will bounce closer to 45 degrees off the ground than before it bounced.

Note: trajectories not correct

 

[5263]

Just as an aside, a cool way to think about topspin and backspin in relation to tennis is that slice tends to exaggerate the bounce angle, and topspin tends to even it out - so a high backspin shot's angle of bounce w/ the court will be even higher after it bounces, or if it's low it will be even lower after the bounce. On the other hand a high topspun ball will bounce more forward, closer to 45 degrees off the ground, and a low ball w/ topspin will bounce closer to 45 degrees off the ground than before it bounced.

very nice graphic!