The myth of better strokes

[esprits4s]

The OP's post was ridiculous imho; who is advocating power and form over a balanced game? This is very different from pointing out that a pusher's upside is capped, and it's hard for many players to understand why they enjoy playing that way. Pushing is the fast track to 3.5/4.0 for those in shape and patient, but at what cost.

BTW, the OP is the same person who started the thread about the discussions here being too advanced for most players. How did he get "professional" status here?

 

[optic yellow]

The OP's post was ridiculous imho; who is advocating power and form over a balanced game? This is very different from pointing out that pushers upside is capped and it's hard for many players to understand why they enjoy playing that way. Pushing is the fast track to 3.5/4.0 for those in shape and patient, but at what cost.

He is just lashing out at discourse which simplistically talks about maximizing power.

BTW, the OP is the same person who started the thread about the discussions here being to advanced for most players. How did he get "professional" status here?

This is based on post count.

 

[AnyPUG]

Tennis goals in priority order:

1st: get it in
2nd: refine placement to hit targets
3rd: develop power

Good technique makes it easier to accomplish all 3 goals.

imo, power that you can judiciously employ takes more time and resources to develop than ability to merely get the ball in. Once you develop power, easy to work on placement of the ball anywhere (deep corners or short).
It's not trivial to hit the ball deep crosscourt on either wing (without semi lobbing at 25mh) unless the player has the skill to efficiently and constantly engage the power sources without backing up all the way to the back fence.
(ability to take the ball on the rise or at the top of the bounce and send it back deep at reasonable speed with enough rally tolerance)

 

[SV10is]

I don't buy this distinction between power =/= control. Don't be that bitter guy who names someone who knows how to strike a ball a ballbasher. If you need to slow down your strokes in order "to gain control" then you need to go back to the basics and learn proper striking mechanics. Swinging a tennis racquet in order to produce to quality strokes IS control. And proper swings are fluid and free and usually people who are able to generate them strike the ball harder and faster than most. If they miss it is not because they "hit to hard". It is usually because they were too late or their racquet head didn't meet the ball at correct angle. Slowing down your hand to "gain control" on groundstrokes is a round to nowhere. (I'm not talking about hitting a very short ball that you have to rush into because obviously in this situation you are on the run and need to be more careful).

There seems to be a confusion at play. Your ability to control the ball is greater when you can put some spin on the ball than when you just try to push it in play.

That requires you to swing fast enough, so you're going to be more accurate and more consistent swinging at moderate speed than at really low speed. The point I was making is that as you increase the speed of your swing, you will eventually hit a point at which you start being less consistent and loose control of the ball.

It's somewhere in between pushing and swinging as hard as you can, there's a window where you swing fairly fast, but you're comfortable and your shot is reliable. That would be 75-85% mental cue Karue Sell suggested. It's your neutral rally ball, the one you can hit confidently. Of course, you have some space to hit even harder, but you're less comfortable doing it. And, at 75 to 85% of your maximum pace, you're still committed to hitting freely with a full range of motion.

Ball bashing would be trying to hit almost 100% at all times.

Depends on your personality and tactic though as well. But in an ideal 5.0+ world you can do both when needed.

It is as if some people have never seen tennis being played before or have not played long enough to notice they themselves have ease to do things more than others.

There isn't a magical trade off between unforced error rates and shot quality that is somehow optimal for absolutely every tennis player.

Some people will play very effective tennis while committing more UEs, hitting fewer first serves in the box or double faulting more often than their peers. As long as the added risk earns you enough mistakes from your opponent, it's acceptable. A good example is Maxime Cressy hitting it big on both serves and playing a lot of serve and volley. It is error prone, but he no 32 in the world, so it's clearly working for him.

The problem isn't aggression and taking risk, but taking unnecessary risk. That's where amateurs get burnt by pushers.

 

[nyta2]

...that control doesn't matter
...
...I use to play as a pusher
...
...posters on here who don't think control matters,

imo the controversy is about how a player tries to keep the ball in the court.
"pushers" (eg. short choppy/blocky strokes with little to no topspin), have to control/keep the ball in the court primarily through gravity.
folks trying to emulate "pretty strokes" are really trying to control/keep the ball in the court, via topspin (except sometimes they ignore the topspin part, and overly focus on the part that happens to also give them pace.

 

[Pumpkin]

Depends on your personality and tactic though as well. But in an ideal 5.0+ world you can do both when needed.

For sure. If you can hit with power and control, all the better. I think the point trying to be made is not to sacrifice control in the pursuit of power.

 

[AnyPUG]

It depends on what "control" means to you. If control means getting the ball back in somewhere in the court at some random pace and spin, power is not necessary. If control means the ability to place the ball at specific areas of the court with the pace, spin and time in your average range, then power is needed to control the ball. For example, if your hitting ability range is 40MPH with moderate spin within 1.5 seconds, can you control the ball within the same pace, spin and time range from anywhere in the court? that's the question you got to ask yourself when you say you can control the ball. So power is needed for control if you desire to play with higher rally tolerance.

 

[mcs1970]

But some people like zaph don't want to move on because they find themselves winning too much. Winning reinforces their belief that pushing is the way to go.

You know, pushing and the topic of pushing will never die in rec. That's because rec tennis doesn't have one fixed principle or some sort of target. Some blokes can always say...well I prefer pushing to win and enjoy it (forever in the 3.5 pool), and they're not wrong.

It’s not about that as much as about the fallacy that is sometimes held as gospel that doing things a certain way will give you a higher ceiling. That is not necessarily true for the average rec adult.

Improving your strokes technically and then being able to actually pull it off in matches takes a lot of sweat equity and reps, maybe years, which most rec adults can’t commit to.

At the same time if one doesn’t want to improve in some way. why even be on this forum? If just pushing and winning is a priority ( I am not blaming anyone. I have a lot of respect for the 4.0 gatekeeper pushers) you don’t need to be on any forum. Literally just show up on the court, play, and forget about tennis the rest of the time you are off the court.

 

[Pumpkin]

It depends on what "control" means to you. If control means getting the ball back in somewhere in the court at some random pace and spin, power is not necessary. If control means the ability to place the ball at specific areas of the court with the pace, spin and time in your average range, then power is needed to control the ball. For example, if your hitting ability range is 40MPH with moderate spin within 1.5 seconds, can you control the ball within the same pace, spin and time range from anywhere in the court? that's the question you got to ask yourself when you say you can control the ball. So power is needed for control if you desire to play with higher rally tolerance.

I've got no idea what you are talking about.

 

[mcs1970]

That requires you to swing fast enough, so you're going to be more accurate and more consistent swinging at moderate speed than at really low speed. The point I was making is that as you increase the speed of your swing, you will eventually hit a point at which you start being less consistent and loose control of the ball.

It's somewhere in between pushing and swinging as hard as you can, there's a window where you swing fairly fast, but you're comfortable and your shot is reliable. That would be 75-85% mental cue Karue Sell suggested. It's your neutral rally ball, the one you can hit confidently. Of course, you have some space to hit even harder, but you're less comfortable doing it. And, at 75 to 85% of your maximum pace, you're still committed to hitting freely with a full range of motion.

Ball bashing would be trying to hit almost 100% at all times.

This advice is good in theory, and not blaming you as many throw this advice around, but implementing it to get what you want out of it (controlled power) is very difficult. What exactly is 50 or 60 or 80 percent of your power? Thinking of these things mess up your stroke more than help.

The reality is if you learn a good technical serve but if it is not winning you many points or giving you a clear advantage, you are not having more of an advantage than the guy serving with a frying pan technique. If you are hitting decent power balls with good clearance and margin for error, a good pusher is not going to be bothered.

The only way you break free of that level is to keep on improving so that you are comfortable at the net as well as the baseline. and keep on building up more pace as well. It is all about sweat equity and reps than consciously trying to control or think of power or placement. Muscle memory to get to that level where you are playing freely requires a lot of reps. That’s why kids progress much faster.

 

[AnyPUG]

I've got no idea what you are talking about.

Neither do I - no idea what I'm talking about and why. thanks for catching.

 

[zaph]

But some people like zaph don't want to move on because they find themselves winning too much. Winning reinforces their belief that pushing is the way to go.

You know, pushing and the topic of pushing will never die in rec. That's because rec tennis doesn't have one fixed principle or some sort of target. Some blokes can always say...well I prefer pushing to win and enjoy it (forever in the 3.5 pool), and they're not wrong.

What do you mean by moving on? I have just been promoted up 2 league groups based on results and I suspect that means I am going to meet a better quality of opponent and there is a good chance I am going to lose a lot of matches.

However I was getting fed up of being stuck in the land of pushers and junkers, so a new challenge will be refreshing.

You all seem to have this bizarre idea that I rely on gravity to get the ball in or I win by pushing. You don't beat pushers by pushing back, well at least not easily. What I do is use spin to control where the ball goes and that means I don't always hit it as hard as I am capable of.

People have criticised this thread because they say it blatantly obvious that players should be able to control the ball and not simply mindlessly bash it. Alas it doesn't seem to be obvious to some posters here. Being able to control the direction and placement of a shot is not the same as pushing. Why is that such a difficult concept for many of you to grasp?

 

[zaph]

He talks a lot about beating the pusher in the OP for someone who supposedly prefers it.

What I dislike is the disrespect directed towards pushers, which is especially laughable from those who can't beat them. Yes I also think that people should try pushing, for two reasons.

The first is it helps develop defensive skills. It doesn't matter how good you get, you are going to face a ball you struggle to reach or have to play off balance. Being able to chip the ball back or hit a moonball back to buy time is legit tennis at any level.

The second is, it helps you understand why you are struggling against pushers. Before I tried pushing I was a frustrated ball basher, I couldn't understand why my aggressive shots were so ineffective, then I had ago at pushing and realised that those aggressive shots were much easier to defend than I thought they were. I began to understand why I was loosing against pushers.

 

[AnyPUG]

^^^

seriously? nobody cares how you play by reading your words. If you want serious comments on your style, post a video and stop bashing everyone claiming they are assuming wrong things about you.
Don't make this a pointless thread.

 

[zaph]

^^^

seriously? nobody cares how you play by reading your words. If you want serious comments on your style, post a video and stop bashing everyone claiming they are assuming wrong things about you.
Don't make this a pointless thread.

Saying that control matters as much as power is pointless? I will give you the fact that it is a basic tip and shouldn't really be necessary but there do seem to be a lot of posters who think that can smack the ball at max power and one day they will magically develop the ability to control where it goes and keep it in.

I mean how long have many of the posters here being trapped in development mode, were they lose to pushers because they are taking the loses to become a better player one day?

How long should that take? Months, years, decades? Surely at some point it would be a good idea for such players to try something different? Like learn to actually control where the ball goes and be able to actually keep it in the court?

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

Saying that control matters as much as power is pointless? I will give you the fact that it is a basic tip and shouldn't really be necessary but there do seem to be a lot of posters who think that can smack the ball at max power and one day they will magically develop the ability to control where it goes and keep it in.

I mean how long have many of the posters here being trapped in development mode, were they lose to pushers because they are taking the loses to become a better player one day?

How long should that take? Months, years, decades? Surely at some point it would be a good idea for such players to try something different? Like learn to actually control where the ball goes and be able to actually keep it in the court?

You make some pretty good points with your posts, not sure why there is such a strong reaction, it's the same things people say in a lot of pusher related threads.

 

[Pumpkin]

Saying that control matters as much as power is pointless? I will give you the fact that it is a basic tip and shouldn't really be necessary but there do seem to be a lot of posters who think that can smack the ball at max power and one day they will magically develop the ability to control where it goes and keep it in.

I mean how long have many of the posters here being trapped in development mode, were they lose to pushers because they are taking the loses to become a better player one day?

How long should that take? Months, years, decades? Surely at some point it would be a good idea for such players to try something different? Like learn to actually control where the ball goes and be able to actually keep it in the court?

Pro tennis players can hit the ball really really hard and not miss. It's easy for them. There's no need for them to tone things down. Rec players want to copy pros and hit hard. Well I'm sorry, you are not copying pros if you are missing all the time, because they are not. Rec players have to find a pace they can hit at where the ball is kept in.

If you had to describe tennis to an alien you would say it's a game where you hit a ball over a net and into the court. Not out. Not into the fence or over the fence..If you are making errors all the time you are not even playing tennis as you would describe it to someone from out of space!.

 

[AnyPUG]

Saying that control matters as much as power is pointless? I will give you the fact that it is a basic tip and shouldn't really be necessary but there do seem to be a lot of posters who think that can smack the ball at max power and one day they will magically develop the ability to control where it goes and keep it in.

I mean how long have many of the posters here being trapped in development mode, were they lose to pushers because they are taking the loses to become a better player one day?

How long should that take? Months, years, decades? Surely at some point it would be a good idea for such players to try something different? Like learn to actually control where the ball goes and be able to actually keep it in the court?

Sure, saying that control matters as much as power lacks merit because you need power to control the ball. imo, no serious poster thinks they can smack the ball at max power unless they are able to have a stable RF and swing path.
Provide one piece evidence before saying "a lot of players think they can smack at max power".

How long should the development take? It's similar to asking how long should one go to college before starting full time job or work before retiring. It could be 0, 2, 4,6, or 9-12.
It depends on the goal, resources and ability.
The more you write the more you prove that this is a pointless thread since you are talking about opinions and mental makeup of folks without considering what people many have in mind.

 

[FuzzyYellowBalls]

Pro tennis players can hit the ball really really hard and not miss. It's easy for them. There's no need for them to tone things down. Rec players want to copy pros and hit hard. Well I'm sorry, you are not copying pros if you are missing all the time, because they are not. Rec players have to find a pace they can hit at where the ball is kept in.

If you had to describe tennis to an alien you would say it's a game where you hit a ball over a net and into the court. Not out. Not into the fence or over the fence..If you are making errors all the time you are not even playing tennis as you would describe it to someone from out of space!.

Whenever I see a new opponent with a pure drive....it's rec player 100% swing at every ball time and easier match to win.

 

[ballmachineguy]

Power and control are not mutually exclusive. It is what everyone that plays wants. If you don’t like dealing with those that are misfiring on their way to getting there, play someone else.

 

[user92626]

People have criticised this thread because they say it blatantly obvious that players should be able to control the ball and not simply mindlessly bash it. Alas it doesn't seem to be obvious to some posters here. Being able to control the direction and placement of a shot is not the same as pushing. Why is that such a difficult concept for many of you to grasp?

Alot of time on here, after a while I don't know what we're talking about anymore. The more we say the less clear things become.


You're now harping on control -- as opposed to what I originally understood single minded no-err playing, ie pushing -- well, what else to argue about. Control is in everything we do in life, not just tennis. It's trivial to talk about.

 

[user92626]

At the same time if one doesn’t want to improve in some way. why even be on this forum? If just pushing and winning is a priority ( I am not blaming anyone. I have a lot of respect for the 4.0 gatekeeper pushers) you don’t need to be on any forum. Literally just show up on the court, play, and forget about tennis the rest of the time you are off the court.

As I have said, rec tennis really doesn't have any fixed rules or principles.

Who said you cannot improve from (and on) pushing even if you solely focus on pushing as your primary tennis? MEPs come in different levels and qualities as well.

There's not really a rule or a thing that says a player must stay with the same mindset forever. Perhaps by going to this forum and possibly being influenced someone will uncover something else about himself.

 

[Fxanimator1]

^^^

seriously? nobody cares how you play by reading your words. If you want serious comments on your style, post a video and stop bashing everyone claiming they are assuming wrong things about you.
Don't make this a pointless thread.

You will never see this happen. That's like Kryptonite.

 

[Chas Tennis]

....................... What I am responding to is this idea I have seen in threads, that control doesn't matter and what players should be going for is explosiveness, aggression and nicer looking shots.
.....................................................

Why not quote some of those threads, so that the readers see what you are objecting to? And who posted those views.

Who said or has the idea, 'that control doesn't matter'?

Directly quoting as a norm on the forum would also cut down on the number of strawman arguments posted on the forum.

(Worse yet, there are unconscious strawman arguments where the posters are not aware that they themselves have created the viewpoint that they are now criticizing.)

Straw man - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

When I re-learned what a strawman argument was, I looked at my own posts. When I checked what was actually said by other posters, I found that I was often throwing in things that I thought had been said but were not - my own creations or errors. I have tried to stop that by using direct quotes.

 

[zill]

Depends on your personality and tactic though as well. But in an ideal 5.0+ world you can do both when needed.

It is as if some people have never seen tennis being played before or have not played long enough to notice they themselves have ease to do things more than others.

There isn't a magical trade off between unforced error rates and shot quality that is somehow optimal for absolutely every tennis player.

Some people will play very effective tennis while committing more UEs, hitting fewer first serves in the box or double faulting more often than their peers. As long as the added risk earns you enough mistakes from your opponent, it's acceptable. A good example is Maxime Cressy hitting it big on both serves and playing a lot of serve and volley. It is error prone, but he no 32 in the world, so it's clearly working for him.

The problem isn't aggression and taking risk, but taking unnecessary risk. That's where amateurs get burnt by pushers.

Looks like you are describing players below 5.0

 

[Fxanimator1]

Why not quote some of those threads, so that the readers see what you are objecting to? And who posted those views.

Who said or has the idea, 'that control doesn't matter'?

Directly quoting as a norm on the forum would also cut down on the number of strawman arguments posted on the forum.

(Worse yet, there are unconscious strawman arguments where the posters are not aware that they themselves have created the viewpoint that they are now criticizing.)

Straw man - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

When I re-learned what a strawman argument was, I looked at my own posts. When I checked what was actually said by other posters, I found that I was often throwing in things that I thought had been said but were not - my own creations or errors. I have tried to stop that by using direct quotes.

LOL! I love the thread title, "The Myth of Better Strokes".
I mean who in their right mind would want better strokes? Asking for a friend.

 

[SV10is]

Looks like you are describing players below 5.0

Yes. Maxime Cressy is below 5.0.

 

[SV10is]

LOL! I love the thread title, "The Myth of Better Strokes".
I mean who in their right mind would want better strokes? Asking for a friend.

You can hit 70 mph rally balls? The horror!

 

[zaph]

Why not quote some of those threads, so that the readers see what you are objecting to? And who posted those views.

Who said or has the idea, 'that control doesn't matter'?

Directly quoting as a norm on the forum would also cut down on the number of strawman arguments posted on the forum.

(Worse yet, there are unconscious strawman arguments where the posters are not aware that they themselves have created the viewpoint that they are now criticizing.)

Straw man - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

When I re-learned what a strawman argument was, I looked at my own posts. When I checked what was actually said by other posters, I found that I was often throwing in things that I thought had been said but were not - my own creations or errors. I have tried to stop that by using direct quotes.

I didn't make any assumptions regarding your style. Just going by face value in OP.

Nicer looking means nicer looking without worrying about control and result.

So you want to be known as a hacker or something else? Make up your mind and go around trolling or lying about it accordingly as that seems to be the point of your thread.

Really? This is an example of what I am talking about, this poster was being explicit but it is an attitude that many share.

You are seeing it here, the moment that I suggested that it was better to control the ball to beat a pusher, instead of just smacking it, the reaction was PUSHER.

Posters are right that you need racket head speed to generate spin but one of the purposes of that spin is to give you control over the ball so you can hit it harder and still keep the ball in the court.

Though those who say this debate is pointless are correct, at the end of the day you can beat a pusher or you you can't. If you can't, you need to take an honest look at your game.

 

[AnyPUG]

Really? This is an example of what I am talking about, this poster was being explicit but it is an attitude that many share.

You are seeing it here, the moment that I suggested that it was better to control the ball to beat a pusher, instead of just smacking it, the reaction was PUSHER.

Posters are right that you need racket head speed to generate spin but one of the purposes of that spin is to give you control over the ball so you can hit it harder and still keep the ball in the court.

Though those who say this debate is pointless are correct, at the end of the day you can beat a pusher or you you can't. If you can't, you need to take an honest look at your game.

Wasn't too sure about this because I am a bit of an untrained hack who honestly would struggle to tell you whether I hit open or closed stance. Let alone stuff about racket lags and whether I waiter serve. So I feared a one sided thrashing.

The reality is that most players find your approach boring and not worth pursuing in the larger schema of things. If you enjoy hacking style of tennis, more power to you. Most players dread that approach and like to have nice looking strokes even if it means losing very often.

I hit with a topspin and slice, using that control the ball.

1. OP claims he is an untrained hack and wouldn't worry about technique.
2. When a few posters said players do what they like, if OP likes to be a hack as he claimed, it's more power to him .
3. OP responds saying he hits with topspin and slice.

Now the question is whether OP is a hacker as he claimed originally or someone who knows how to hit with topspin, and slice to control the ball?
This poster didn't call OP a pusher (not that anything wrong with it, though some take it as an insult), but merely believed his original claim of being a hacker who can win against players who know all the technique and do so in practice.

So, the least OP could do is stop bashing the posters who responded to his pointless thread because OP has been constantly putting the foot in his mouth.

 

[zaph]

1. OP claims he is an untrained hack and wouldn't worry about technique.
2. When a few posters said players do what they like, if OP likes to be a hack as he claimed, it's more power to him .
3. OP responds saying he hits with topspin and slice.

Now the question is whether OP is a hacker as he claimed originally or someone who knows how to hit with topspin, and slice to control the ball?
This poster didn't call OP a pusher (not that anything wrong with it, though some take it as an insult), but merely believed his original claim of being a hacker who can win against players who know all the technique and do so in practice.

So, the least OP could do is stop bashing the posters who responded to his pointless thread because OP has been constantly putting the foot in his mouth.

I am hack in the sense that I will freely admit a lot of the technical discussions and language on the forum go over my head. As for the footwork, I would be lying if I told you I knew what my feet were doing when I am playing. It is the same with my shots, a lot is kind of done on autopilot.

However that isn't the same as not being able to hit with spin, you don't need that level of technical awareness to see you're doing that. I can see that from the flight of ball.

I am achieving that by hitting from underneath to get topspin and above to get slice. That what I mean by being a hack, I have no more understanding that than about how it works.

Take my western grip forehand, players have asked me how I hit with such an extreme grip and I really couldn't tell you. I mean I can feel my forearm turning as I hit the ball but it isn't a conscious action on my part. My arm just does it by itself, basically muscle memory I suppose.

 

[AnyPUG]

I am hack in the sense that I will freely admit a lot of the technical discussions and language on the forum go over my head.

Not just technical discussion and language, a whole lot more is going over your head because very little of what you write is based on reality around here.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

The problem isn't aggression and taking risk, but taking unnecessary risk. That's where amateurs get burnt by pushers.

Furthermore, many aren't even aware they're taking unncessary risk: they make an error and think it was simply an execution issue.

"You don't know what you don't know."

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

It’s not about that as much as about the fallacy that is sometimes held as gospel that doing things a certain way will give you a higher ceiling. That is not necessarily true for the average rec adult.

I think it's true...in theory. But as we all know, there's often a big gap between theory and practice.

Improving your strokes technically and then being able to actually pull it off in matches takes a lot of sweat equity and reps, maybe years, which most rec adults can’t commit to.

At the same time if one doesn’t want to improve in some way. why even be on this forum? If just pushing and winning is a priority ( I am not blaming anyone. I have a lot of respect for the 4.0 gatekeeper pushers) you don’t need to be on any forum. Literally just show up on the court, play, and forget about tennis the rest of the time you are off the court.

Surely there is a sub-forum somewhere for pushers? Or is that only on the dark web?

 

[Dragy]

Surely there is a sub-forum somewhere for pushers? Or is that only on the dark web?

They get together every day after matches for a 10-mile run and jiggles, when you crawl back home exhausted and humiliated

 

[AnyPUG]

Furthermore, many aren't even aware they're taking unncessary risk: they make an error and think it was simply an execution issue.

"You don't know what you don't know."

And also "You don't know that SV10is is a nothing burger and an eristic".

Eristic - a person with the tendency to debate to win an argument and values that more highly than arriving at the truth.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

And also "You don't know that SV10is is a nothing burger and an eristic".

Eristic - a person with the tendency to debate to win an argument and values that more highly than arriving at the truth.

Hmm, disagree on your conclusion but I learned a new word today.

 

[SV10is]

Furthermore, many aren't even aware they're taking unncessary risk: they make an error and think it was simply an execution issue.

"You don't know what you don't know."

"Let me punish this sorry excuse for a ground stroke and make you regret your impudence for daring to push a ball against me."

Three fences, two nets and one ball out of the park later:

"My ground stroke technique must be breaking down. I can't reliably hit a 90 mph winner off a mid court ball I scooped off my calves."

Then, he lost the set trying to kill a moonball from behind the baseline.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

"Let me punish this sorry excuse for a ground stroke and make you regret your impudence for daring to push a ball against me."

Three fences, two nets and one ball out of the park later:

"My ground stroke technique must be breaking down. I can't reliably hit a 90 mph winner off a mid court ball I scooped off my calves."

Then, he lost the set trying to kill a moonball from behind the baseline.

- "It's my new strings; I haven't broken them in yet."
- "It's my new socks; they're not absorbent enough."
- "I took some allergy meds last night and they're still affecting me."
- "I had to go to a different Starbucks this morning and it threw off my rhythm."
- "It's the increased sunspot activity."

 

[SV10is]

And also "You don't know that SV10is is a nothing burger and an eristic".

I have conceded many points and expressed many times that others made good points in threads. You're also talking about a PhD candidate in economics whose entire career is dedicated to careful data analysis: I spend my time trying to figure out if some of my views are wrong and routinely find issues and limitations with them.

But I have a low tolerance for disrespectful idiots.

 

[Morch Us]

So what is new?

Before I get outraged replies, I am not denying that some people hit the ball better than others or there is better technique. What I am responding to is this idea I have seen in threads, that control doesn't matter and what players should be going for is explosiveness, aggression and nicer looking shots.

The problem I have with this idea is too often it is players deluding themselves. I use to play as a pusher and only really gave that up because I ended up in a league of pushers and out pushing a pushing is very tough. So when I was pushing did I have superhuman defensive skills that made me a wall impossible to pass and beat with "proper" tennis? No, good clubs didn't just beat me, they blew me off the court. So if they can bagel a pusher, why are your "explosive" shots so completely useless against such players?

Well the difference isn't just pace and spin, so hitting it was ever more explosiveness or nicer, as one poster put it, isn't going to work. The difference is, a good good player can do more than hit the ball hard, they have control. They can place the ball, they can put a pusher in an awkward position and they have control to find angles that ball bashers can't find. They also don't struggle generate their own pace and see the short ball as an opportunity, not something to be dreaded.

What they are not doing is trying to produce nicer shots, which leads them to miss every second ball and then complain about pushers ruining tennis. Neither do they use the excuse that they are playing a more attractive game or developing their strokes, so need to take loss. Better players don't struggle with hacks and pushers.

So frankly those posters on here who don't think control matters, who think they can succeed by mindlessly hitting the ball as hard as possible need to be honest with themselves. How long has their tennis development plan to finally beat the hacks and pushers they look down upon being going on for? Months, years, a decade? At some point taking loses to develop better strokes must turn into not actually being very good at tennis.

Is it really so outrageous to suggest that a good player should be able to control the direction the ball goes and be able to keep it in the court? That there is more to tennis than hitting the ball hard?

 

[Morch Us]

please point out one....

those posters on here who don't think control matters

 

[SV10is]

please point out one....

You didn't hear? We built underground altars to ball bashing. On the night of the winter solstice, we descend into the darkness and slaughter a goat by bashing balls at it. It needs to die an agonizing death so we can summon the forces of darkness to curse pushers.

I think we didn't slaughter enough goats yet.

 

[Dragy]

I think we didn't slaughter enough goats yet.

Fed is done, Nole is close. Rafa tried to slaughter himself with his racquet…

 

[user92626]

please point out one....

Now let's not corner brother zaph.

 

[Fxanimator1]

But I have a low tolerance for disrespectful idiots.

Irony level 10,000 right here.

 

[ubercat]

Personally in my game I find its pretty easy to decide. Rally, defence, attack or Hail Mary coz I m so out of position

 

[SV10is]

Irony level 10,000 right here.

It would be ironic if I was an idiot. Unfortunately, I'm just a d*** and it's probably a bit worse because I can't say I don't understand when I'm being kind of a d***.

 

[optic yellow]

It would be ironic if I was an idiot. Unfortunately, I'm just a d*** and it's probably a bit worse because I can't say I don't understand when I'm being kind of a d***.

How many beers deep were you when you wrote this haha? My guess is 2.5.

(It is Friday night and you are in grad school so please do not try to pretend you were sober )

 

[zaph]

- "It's my new strings; I haven't broken them in yet."
- "It's my new socks; they're not absorbent enough."
- "I took some allergy meds last night and they're still affecting me."
- "I had to go to a different Starbucks this morning and it threw off my rhythm."
- "It's the increased sunspot activity."

Yes there does seem to be disconnect from reality here. You would think that the best way to rate someones tennis ability would be, you know, winning tennis matches but apparently not.

Maybe, however, such players are on to something, after all courts are terribly expensive, so lets get rid of them. Instead posters could send in slow motion videos of their shots to a panel of judges and the one who manages to imitate Federer, Nadal, Djokovic most convincingly wins. No need to worry about the ball actually landing in a court.

This could revive the sport of tennis and open it up to the masses.