The Truth About Pushers

[Ash Doyle]

Here is a short excerpt from Allen Fox's "Think to Win". It's something I think players should read and take to heart. It's about a popular topic around here...the pusher.

---------------------------------------

Tennis matches are not won with great shots. They are won with many, many pretty good shots. It is like chopping down a tree. You don't do it with one tremendous stroke of the ax. You do it with the accumulated effect of many small strokes. There is no three-point play in tennis, as there is in basketball. You can hit the greatest shot in the world, and you still only get one point for it. And you can nullify this in one second by making an easy error.

Most players don't realize their strategic shortcomings becuase most of their opponents make the same mistakes they do. As long as your opponent can't hit the ball in the court more than three or four time per point, it won't be an obvious problem if you can't either. The outcome of such matches is random and usually depends on who happens to hit a few extra balls on a particular day.

The true defensive player (or "pusher" as he is unaffectionately called in recreational circles) is prepared to hit ten, twenty, or more balls in the court per point. It does not take a nuclear physicist to figure out what will happen if a player who misses every third ball meets a player who misses every tenth ball. Unless he can hit a winner on every second ball, the inconsistent player will get slaughtered.

Pushers are both feard and reviled. Just listen to the common complaints concerning pushers:

- Pushers dont play "right".
- Pushers will never get any better
- Losing to a pusher doesn't count, since he uses an inherently immoral style of play
- Pushers are cowardly little conservative people

But pushers understand the facts of life at the recreational level of tennis. As tennis guru Vic Braden has often pointed out, the defensive player has the advantage at this level of tennis, so it doesn't pay to take a lot of risks. He aptly advises the club player, no matter how much trouble he may be in, to always give his opponent another opportunity to miss. Pushers frustrate beyond endurance those many players who not figured this out yet. For every player who thinks he is capable of hitting his shots near the lines, the pusher simply shows him he cannot. Since most players are loath to face this unpleasant reality, they disparage the pusher.

Yet most great champions started out as pushers when they were young. They wanted to win and immediately understood that winning required consistency. As they grew and their games matured, they began to hit harder and take more risks. Yet because they learned first to be consistent, they were able to develop reliable strokes. It is more effective to learn to hit the ball in the court first and then to hit it hard, than to hit it hard and later learn to hit it in. Hitting easy and under control allows you work out a mechanically sound stroke. Then when you miss you can understand why and make adjustments. But when you slug the ball without proper control, there is a random aspect to your winners and errors. It is very difficult o adjust and correct your stroke because everything happens so quickly. Real understanding of stroke mechanics may never develop.

As a general rule, you should hit the ball as hard as you can as long as you can keep it in the court all the time. And there is a limit to how hard you can hit before you start to lose control of the ball. All players have only a certain range of comfortable power where they have relatively good control of the ball. Within this range their rate of error will be low. But if they try to play at a power which is above this range, their rate of error will increase dramatically.

 

[looseswing]

I don't think that great players started off as pushers. Counter punchers maybe, but not pushers.

 

[kicker75]

I think the term "pusher" is being confused in this article with "high percentage" tennis. Agassi (I think it's safe to say) never started his career playing like a pusher. (he was smacking the ball as hard as he could when he was a small child) Agassi, true enough, did improve and become more consistent when he adopted playing "higher percentage" tennis. However, IMO he never adopted a pusher's style.

(When I think of the way a pusher plays, he or she lobs the ball high in the air, with little to no spin or pace and let's gravity bring the ball into the court, usually in the middle of the court)

From what I have seen, pushers do win a lot of matches, but once they get to playing a 4.5 player and above, they lose, and lose very badly. The more advanced player knows how to combat a pusher and usually can crush those "lob" strokes. However, counterpunchers (not to be confused with a pusher), can beat advanced players, because I believe strong counterpunchers have weapons other than getting the ball back into play.

Higher percentage counterpunchers can win at any level including the pros...a pusher cannot. IMHO.

 

[darknight08]

If the clock aint broken dont fix it

Use whatever brings success, dont abandon it.

 

[tennisplayer]

Pushers are an extremely important part of the tennis ecosystem. They help the rest of us grow to be humbler and better tennis players. When you face that lollipop float over the net for the 10th time in a rally and hang in the air temptingly in front of your face, that's the moment of truth... that's when we all find out whether we have what it takes or not.

 

[LuckyR]

At the current time and especially in Forum-speak the term "pusher" is a pergorative term for someone who plays "high percentage tennis" that either beats you or you had a rough time with (typically at the recreational level). Other terms like counterpuncher and retriever are usually used for Club (not recreational) and Pro level players who have perfected "high percentage tennis". It's all really the same idea. The article refers to beginning tennis and is OK when viewed in that context, but doesn't really hold up at advanced levels.

 

[D-man]

it's not just about winning... it's about feeling good the way you won

 

[RiosTheGenius]

I think you should do whatever works for you... I don't get any more upset losing to a pusher than to a guy who put 48 winners away and made me look like an idiot.
I hit big forehands because it is my only weapon, they win me matches, so I run around it whenever possible, and when I try to push I start netting balls or getting tight... but maybe if I were good at pushing I would do it... there's nothing in tennis written about how you should play, just go with yourself

 

[drakulie]

Pushers are an extremely important part of the tennis ecosystem. They help the rest of us grow to be humbler and better tennis players. When you face that lollipop float over the net for the 10th time in a rally and hang in the air temptingly in front of your face, that's the moment of truth... that's when we all find out whether we have what it takes or not.

That is awesome! Everyone on this board that has complained or made excuses about losing to a "pusher" should tattoo this to their inner eyelids.

 

[~RoWE~]

I don't think that great players started off as pushers. Counter punchers maybe, but not pushers.

I agree with loose.

 

[topspin kid]

I don't think that great players started off as pushers. Counter punchers maybe, but not pushers.

maybe if they started off by taking lessons but most young kids i see they just try to get the ball back.

 

[Kaptain Karl]

it's not just about winning... it's about feeling good the way you won

I disagree. And I have had days when "nothing seemed to work" ... so guess what? I PUSHED. It's about finding ANYway to win, IMO.

Here's my definition of Pushers ... and their two types.

- KK

 

[Tennis_Monk]

Everyone has their own definition of pushers i Guess. Regardless it is a style of play that is here to stay (regardless of who likes it or not).
Any decent player worth his salt will accept that style of play and learn to work a strategy to win against a Pusher opponent.
If one cant do that .....then one is not a Good enough player(against that opponent).

 

[Saito]

If the clock aint broken dont fix it

Use whatever brings success, dont abandon it.

Couldn't have been said any better.

Great article too, BTW. I have always believed that there is nothing wrong with pushers, because the fact of the matter is that if you can't beat them, then there is no reason to say they suck. It's all about getting one more ball in than the other...

I disagree. And I have had days when "nothing seemed to work" ... so guess what? I PUSHED. It's about finding ANYway to win, IMO.

Here's my definition of Pushers ... and their two types.

- KK

KK,

Your definition belongs in Webster's.... nice

 

[Roforot]

I used to become nervous or upset about playing pushers till I realized that they can't hurt me. In other words I can return a short or medium paced ball to the center of the court and not worry that he'll hit a winner or a tough shot and come into the net. Once you realize that he can't hurt you, you can relax and wait for him to hit a lollipop that's shorter and easier to attack.

Now a counterpuncher is different; they can attack a short ball... although they do sometimes make an error when they have to generate their own pace. Other than this though they are also very consistent.

 

[mrcapslock]

well during the season I was able to see a pusher that everybody in the high school district was talking about mainly because he was unseeded and he beat the 3rd seed in districts.

he had the funniest game ever... all he did was lob and backspin and he hits the ball with 2 hands. it was obvious he had no short of fundamental and he only cheered when the opponent messed up.

 

[Captain America]

I think "pushers" are disdained simply because they expose the weaknesses of people who believe they are better than they really are. Pushers don't make errors and they force their opponents to take the intiative to win points - and those who can't, lose.

I've lost to pushers plenty of times and once the blow to the ego wears off I realize that I simply wasn't good enough to hit the shots consistently needed to dictate play - I either tightened up, went for too much, or simply lost form. All you can do at that point is commit to practicing more....

 

[BeachTennis]

Beat the Pusher

Beat the pusher!

Make the pusher run!

take them away from the center of the court

They love to make 5-6 steps to hit the ball!

Make them go 8-12 steps for the retrieve

bring them up and push them back!

Pass them low or high.

pushers win because people start to push with them

its all emotions

win/loose

take a risk or not

Fear and greed

 

[LuckyR]

Excellent poem...

 

[Tennismastery]

If the clock aint broken dont fix it

Use whatever brings success, dont abandon it.

Unfortunately, this axiom doesn't cross over into the aspect of 'skilled tennis.'

Whatever brings success at one level may not bring any success at a higher level. While a player can indeed win many matches at initial levels they may be introduced to, if their technique will not allow them to progress further against better players, than this phrase is completely wrong.

I don't know too many players who pick up a racquet and say, "gee, I want to play tennis, but I really don't want to get very good." If two players start learning the game at the same time, (and all things such as athleticism, effort, etc. are equal), then here is what one common scenario looks like: the player who 'pushes' the ball over the net using comfortable technique will almost always beat the other player who is attempting to use good form and recognized more advanced technique. Because more effective technique usually takes much longer to develop and become familiar with and master, the more consistent 'pusher' will win. Over time, however, as the player working on more effective technique will not only become more familiar with it, they will hit more consistently these effective shots. (Bigger topspin, more pace, more angles, more disguise, more finesse, etc.)

Every player must understand this phrase if they indeed want to reach their potential in tennis:

Skilled tennis is about hitting more effective shots more consistently. And, as players improve, they will also need to DEFEND more effective shots more consistently.

At the 3.0 levels, balls come slower, higher, less spin, less depth, less pace, and less diversity. When a 3.0 level player attempts to hit beyond their 'consistent' pushing-type stroke, they lose their consistency. However, when a player commands consistent stroke form, they can hit many shots with more effect more consistently.

Pushers are what I call 'Gravity Reliant' players. That is, they usually hit hard enough and high enough to clear the net from where they are, yet, soft enough that gravity can bring the ball down into the court. Advanced players can hit with much more spin and thus 'create' their own gravity by getting the ball to drop faster with significant pace. This ability increases the effect of drop shots, angles, and other facets of the game which a weaker player must now defend in addition to the pace and depth that comes from a stronger player.

Hence, the 3.0 player wins lots of 3.0 tournaments. BUT, the player working on more advanced techniques will not stay in the 3.0 level tournaments. But, the pushing 3.0 player will not be able to compete at higher levels of tournament play.

There are exceptions to this. But, they are few and far apart.

 

[LuckyR]

I have read this logic on many posts and it is true as far as it goes, but it ignores one simple fact. Namely, that while the other guy is perfecting his advanced game with consistency, depth, spin and power, what do you think the pusher is doing, twiddling his thumbs? No, they are improving as well, and they morph into a retriever, then later a counterpuncher. They continue to play high percentage tennis, they've just got better weapons to bring to bear. So, you may lose to the same guy at 3.5 and at 4.0 and beyond if you don't watch out.

 

[Tennismastery]

I have read this logic on many posts and it is true as far as it goes, but it ignores one simple fact. Namely, that while the other guy is perfecting his advanced game with consistency, depth, spin and power, what do you think the pusher is doing, twiddling his thumbs? No, they are improving as well, and they morph into a retriever, then later a counterpuncher. They continue to play high percentage tennis, they've just got better weapons to bring to bear. So, you may lose to the same guy at 3.5 and at 4.0 and beyond if you don't watch out.

This is very true if indeed they are using appropriate strokes within their counterpunching strategies. Leyton Hewitt is a counter puncher. His technique is far from that of the typical 3.0 level player who pushes the ball in match play.

My advice stems from the millions of players who are stuck playing at the 3.0 or 3.5 levels because their adopted form did not and COULD NOT 'morph' into anything else. A person who dinks their second serve will NEVER spontaneously morph into a prolific server unless they change their technique (and then, of course, practice such technique until mastery.)

For every player who indeed did 'morph' into a skilled player thousands perpetually stagnate at levels far below their potential BECAUSE of the way they introduced themselves into the game.

Because change is the hardest thing for a player to indoctrinate into their competitive game, most players will revert back to whatever is most comfortable...which is usually the way they first played or learned to hit a ball over the net.

Pushers get flak because they are indeed frustrating to those who have not yet mastered a more effective game. However, for many instructors, it is more frustrating to see a completely able person play a ruedementary strategy just to 'play the game' because they didn't learn a more progressive, productive way to play.

Having taught thousands, and observed thousands more play, it is clear to me that for the vast majority of players, learning more effective methods will help them surpass such a simpleton method of playing the game.

To me, a pusher is similar to a person who hunts and pecks on a key board to type...Sure, they will probably type faster for a few weeks or months compared to the person who is learning to use all his fingers in a proper typing method. But, will the hunt and peck person type at their typing potential? Never. (Unless he only has two fingers!)

These are my points from 32 years of teaching tennis...from kids of 5 to seniors of 90, from beginners to several top 100 world-ranked players. And again, I will say there are exceptions...but, even within these 'exceptions', you have to wonder that if they got that good 'pushing' the ball, imagine how good they could have been with proper learning patterns?

 

[LuckyR]

Well, again if you set up a straw man scenario you can always have your way. Say you have someone with the potential to be a great power player, who is currently a beginner. No doubt if the future power player loses to a "pusher" who has no desire to improve his game, then yes later when the power player comes into his own he will easily dominate the "pusher" who never improved.

The problem with these scenarios is that too many folks assume that someone using a pushing or high percentage tennis stroke selection must also be weak or frail in their ambition or drive to improve their game. Apples and oranges. It's weird really. Noone seems to have trouble with the idea that a budding power player would practice, improve and add weapons to his repertoire, nor a serve and volleyer, nor a finesse, spin artist. There is something about high percentage tennis, I can't quite put my finger on it, that just makes you want to assume the worst.

Or look at it the other way around. Say you've got a great, highly skilled retriever of the first order. What do you call that guy as a beginner with limited stroke skills?

 

[Tennismastery]

Well, again if you set up a straw man scenario you can always have your way. Say you have someone with the potential to be a great power player, who is currently a beginner. No doubt if the future power player loses to a "pusher" who has no desire to improve his game, then yes later when the power player comes into his own he will easily dominate the "pusher" who never improved.

The problem with these scenarios is that too many folks assume that someone using a pushing or high percentage tennis stroke selection must also be weak or frail in their ambition or drive to improve their game. Apples and oranges. It's weird really. Noone seems to have trouble with the idea that a budding power player would practice, improve and add weapons to his repertoire, nor a serve and volleyer, nor a finesse, spin artist. There is something about high percentage tennis, I can't quite put my finger on it, that just makes you want to assume the worst.

Or look at it the other way around. Say you've got a great, highly skilled retriever of the first order. What do you call that guy as a beginner with limited stroke skills?

No one has implied that a pusher is 'weak' or 'frail' or that they lack ambition. It is a simple fact that the act of 'pushing' a ball over the net is the least difficult and requires the least skill. (Pushing a ball uses a linear stroke that enlarges the contact zone and puts little intentional spin on the ball.) In fact, in my experience, it is just the opposite: the pushers are the ones who indeed take lessons and clinics only to continue to fall back to their most familiar pattern of play. (If pushing is how they first learned the game, then that is what they will fall back on.)

Most all natural retrievers will still be exactly that even when they learn proper stroke mechanics. I will say this: I would never assume a player is incapable of learning proper strokes. Proper strokes have never prevented a player from being a good retirever, counterpuncher, serve and volley player, baseliner, or any combination of these strategies. However, to simply assume that a player is going to reach such skills through simply pushing balls over the net is ignorance. Proper stroke mechanics have never prevented a player from reaching higher levels of skilled play. However, improper stroke mechanics, those typical of what I would call a 'pusher' (if you are talking about a counterpuncher than say that...a pusher is exactly that...a pusher.) have seldom led a player to reaching skilled levels of competitive play.

I have seen some players overcome the pushing mentality, gaining techniques that allow them to not just push balls...but to hit effective slices, lobs, drops, etc. However, even these players have limitations when facing those who can add topspin, pace, angles, etc.

It goes back to what the player wants to achieve: if they want to achieve relative skilled play, they will need to learn, practice and impliment skilled strokes in competitive play.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

No one has implied that a pusher is 'weak' or 'frail' or that they lack ambition. It is a simple fact that the act of 'pushing' a ball over the net is the least difficult and requires the least skill. (Pushing a ball uses a linear stroke that enlarges the contact zone and puts little intentional spin on the ball.) In fact, in my experience, it is just the opposite: the pushers are the ones who indeed take lessons and clinics only to continue to fall back to their most familiar pattern of play. (If pushing is how they first learned the game, then that is what they will fall back on.)

Most all natural retrievers will still be exactly that even when they learn proper stroke mechanics. I will say this: I would never assume a player is incapable of learning proper strokes. Proper strokes have never prevented a player from being a good retirever, counterpuncher, serve and volley player, baseliner, or any combination of these strategies. However, to simply assume that a player is going to reach such skills through simply pushing balls over the net is ignorance. Proper stroke mechanics have never prevented a player from reaching higher levels of skilled play. However, improper stroke mechanics, those typical of what I would call a 'pusher' (if you are talking about a counterpuncher than say that...a pusher is exactly that...a pusher.) have seldom led a player to reaching skilled levels of competitive play.

I have seen some players overcome the pushing mentality, gaining techniques that allow them to not just push balls...but to hit effective slices, lobs, drops, etc. However, even these players have limitations when facing those who can add topspin, pace, angles, etc.

It goes back to what the player wants to achieve: if they want to achieve relative skilled play, they will need to learn, practice and impliment skilled strokes in competitive play.

Pushers beat people that are on a steeper learning curve.

 

[LuckyR]

I understand what you are saying and I appreciate your obvious familiarity with how large numbers of beginners move through the ranks. Few of us have coached World ranked players.

I don't disagree with your basic message about probabilities based on your (extensive) experience. My point wasn't to quibble with what the average pusher evolves (or doesn't evolve) into. Rather I just didn't want this thread to miss the point that pushers, can and do have a natural outlet in skilled tennis play. Whether few or many pursue it is a different matter.

I just didn't want a youthful and or less experienced player to read this thread and lose hope of ever advancing through the ranks, since that point was not made previously.

 

[GuyClinch]

No one has implied that a pusher is 'weak' or 'frail' or that they lack ambition. It is a simple fact that the act of 'pushing' a ball over the net is the least difficult and requires the least skill. (Pushing a ball uses a linear stroke that enlarges the contact zone and puts little intentional spin on the ball.) In fact, in my experience, it is just the opposite: the pushers are the ones who indeed take lessons and clinics only to continue to fall back to their most familiar pattern of play. (If pushing is how they first learned the game, then that is what they will fall back on.)

You have to try new things to advance your game and there will be learning period. At the same time I think people have different levels of 'risk aversion" and that's a reason why they play differently.

I imagine some opponents think I am a pusher but I like to play to win. It's a personality thing. I know my big first serve doesn't really go in enough to use so I serve to second serves most of the time. I know my opponent has a shaky forehand or backhand so I just hit it back to their weak shot.

The point the original writer was making is that pushing is often smart tennis and if you can't beat someone who pushes your probably not that good is an accurate one. Pushing IS playing percentage tennis.

Also I would point out that switching from hack strokes to real ones isn't that easy for most people. That bad pattern gets burned into your memory sad to say.

Pete

 

[buder]

most of the people I know who use the term pusher are inconsistent players who can't finish effectively.

Learn how to finish!

 

[brucie]

I never doubt that a player as a pusher can have sucess!
However I am glad i am not one!

They are cowardly, ugly, here we go again! Kidding

There is no shame in playing consistant, I easily last 10 shots rallys especially on clay! But I am no pusher and would prefer to give it my best shot being aggressive when necessary! rather than trying to win through unforced errors, forcing errors is different.

However despite this pushers have less control over the outcome of a point rather than the way attackers do.

I am not overly aggressive can play as counter puncher, or agressive baseline, or net player depending on suface and opponant.

I could never be a pusher as seeing a winner hit past me when I am teeing guys up rather than trying to hit past them is something I could not bear to do!

 

[Jay27]

I played a 4.0 pusher a little while back. He was a little out of shape and didn't even look like a tennis player. It was our first time playing. My best shots are my forehand and serve. I am more of a baseliner and so was he. As we were rallying, I felt so good against this guy. We had great rallies and I thought I could beat this guys so easily. Well, we played for one hour, and he beat me 13 to 3 (we were in a league that doesn't play sets--just play for one hour). After the match, I felt like I played a good match, but was horrified at the thought of losing to this guy--especially that bad. I then realized that it wasn't him that beat me, it was me. I made very very very dumb errors, went for shots when I shouldn't have, and didn't ever come to the net--not even on floaters.

The second time I played him, it was a different story. I was relaxed because I knew he wasn't going to hit winners on me. I wasn't trying to hit winners at first, and I wasn't trying to pound my serve down his throat. I started throwing in a bunch of kick serves and saw that he was floating them to me (so I came to the net a lot more). In the end, I played one hell of a match and won 8 - 6...lol. So, I guess the moral to this story is...consistency is key to beating a pusher. Be relaxed, don't overplay, and move your ass to the net.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Neutral Post

I just didn't want this thread to miss the point that pushers, can and do have a natural outlet in skilled tennis play. Whether few or many pursue it is a different matter...

I can understand your point, but on the other hand I wouldn't want to tell a pusher that they will reach their goals if they keep doing the things they are doing!

If you would can you name the successful pushers in the world? Why deceive a player into thinking their pushing skills is what tennis is about and that they will go far with these skills? Wouldn't that be ashame as well?

 

[North]

This is very true if indeed they are using appropriate strokes within their counterpunching strategies. Leyton Hewitt is a counter puncher. His technique is far from that of the typical 3.0 level player who pushes the ball in match play.

My advice stems from the millions of players who are stuck playing at the 3.0 or 3.5 levels because their adopted form did not and COULD NOT 'morph' into anything else. A person who dinks their second serve will NEVER spontaneously morph into a prolific server unless they change their technique (and then, of course, practice such technique until mastery.)

For every player who indeed did 'morph' into a skilled player thousands perpetually stagnate at levels far below their potential BECAUSE of the way they introduced themselves into the game.

Because change is the hardest thing for a player to indoctrinate into their competitive game, most players will revert back to whatever is most comfortable...which is usually the way they first played or learned to hit a ball over the net.

Pushers get flak because they are indeed frustrating to those who have not yet mastered a more effective game. However, for many instructors, it is more frustrating to see a completely able person play a ruedementary strategy just to 'play the game' because they didn't learn a more progressive, productive way to play.

Having taught thousands, and observed thousands more play, it is clear to me that for the vast majority of players, learning more effective methods will help them surpass such a simpleton method of playing the game.

To me, a pusher is similar to a person who hunts and pecks on a key board to type...Sure, they will probably type faster for a few weeks or months compared to the person who is learning to use all his fingers in a proper typing method. But, will the hunt and peck person type at their typing potential? Never. (Unless he only has two fingers!)

These are my points from 32 years of teaching tennis...from kids of 5 to seniors of 90, from beginners to several top 100 world-ranked players. And again, I will say there are exceptions...but, even within these 'exceptions', you have to wonder that if they got that good 'pushing' the ball, imagine how good they could have been with proper learning patterns?

Perceptive observations - very spot-on I think. I guess this pretty much defines the reasons pushers are so ubiquitous in 3.0 - 3.5 (even up into 4.0) tennis. To do what it takes to break out of the pusher style takes a lot of time and work. It also takes a strong enough ego to be willing to lose a lot before the wins start happening - you have to have the long-range view and confidence to know the work will pay off down the road (very delayed gratification). This also requires some fairly unshakeable faith in your own abilities and basically dogged persistence.

The disappointment of losing so much (big psychological ouch to the ego for many people) for longer than they anticipated can be intolerable for some. Or it may simply be for many pushers that they have chosen other priorities in life (eg: family, work) so they are content to remain at a limited skill level.

What I have noticed in my own play and in friends who have also chosen long-term skill development over pusher winning is that most pushers will refuse to play you anymore once you beat them a couple of times and it is clear they can't win anymore - lol!

Do you ever point out to the people you teach all that you have summarized here? Just curious about the responses you'd get.

 

[BillH]

First of all, I have a lot of respect for the pusher in my club's league. He's a very nice guy who gets more out of his ablility than anyone else in the league. He's athletic and sets the tone through his play that he's willing to run-down anything you hit. You can never relax while playing this guy because he will get back shots you think are put-aways. He has recognized that he can't match the hard groundstrokes of some of us in the league and that his weapon is to take away pace and make us provide that pace which, of course, often leads to errors. He has a gameplan and he is very smart in his shot selection and knowing what other players have trouble with. This pusher is not "twiddling his thumbs" while the rest of us try to improve - he is also taking lessons to get that bigger forehand and serve and slowly is working some of those shots into his game.

Yes, I'm like everyone else - I get frustrated playing him. That frustration comes from the fact the pusher exposes the weaknesses in my game. If I play my game - full strokes, make him move, open up the court, come to the net - I beat him. If I get lazy and try to beat him by playing his game, I lose.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

BB Plays Devils Advocate

This pusher is not "twiddling his thumbs" while the rest of us try to improve - he is also taking lessons to get that bigger forehand and serve and slowly is working some of those shots into his game...

I have been involved in this game to long to buy this. A pusher is a pusher, one who improves to a point to push the ball. That is it.

A pusher simply takes advantage of a player that desires to go past the 3.5 level. That is it, it is as plain as that.

Yes, I'm like everyone else - I get frustrated playing him. That frustration comes from the fact the pusher exposes the weaknesses in my game. If I play my game - full strokes, make him move, open up the court, come to the net - I beat him. If I get lazy and try to beat him by playing his game, I lose.

Isn't this what we are trying to say? So if you beat him when you are playing the right way, how is the pusher improving? What you just said is, the pusher beats you when you are not improving!

 

[Arafel]

It's not always about winning. It's about how you play and whether you have fun. I can usually beat a pusher if all it comes down to is playing to win. But I play tennis now to have fun; I'm out of juniors, I don't do a full tournament circuit anymore.

Playing a pusher provides absolutely no enjoyment. It becomes a test of wills and endurance. I'd rather get my teeth pulled with no anesthetic.

And that, more than anything else, is why I hate pushers. I'd rather play someone who can crush the ball and beat me 1 and 1 than play a pusher who runs down every shot and hits a moonball back that lands in between the service line and baseline and bounces 6 feet straight up in the air.

Pushers do well because they break up your rhythm and get you to beat yourself. And there will be days I lose to them because I don't have the will to do what it takes. I feel bored to death and just want to get off the court.

When I was a junior, tennis was all about winning. Now it should be about fun. Playing a pusher is like being dragged back to juniors when it was all about winning.

 

[kevhen]

So if the ball bounces 6 feet up why not hit a putaway overhead with it? I am sure Federer would do something like that and finish off the pusher in short order.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

So if the ball bounces 6 feet up why not hit a putaway overhead with it? I am sure Federer would do something like that and finish off the pusher in short order.

A ball that bounces only 6 feet is not a good ball to hit an overhead. It is better to feed it back as a groundstroke, take it out of the air, or hit an overhead while it is in the air.

 

[tennisplayer]

I've realized one thing about playing pushers - it's better to move forward, and take the ball as it is rising, or near the top. If you wait, you are going to get a ball that's falling rather steeply, since pushers don't use any power. It is harder to be consistent with a ball that's falling steeply, especially if you have big topspin strokes. Same reason why some of those lobs that come down vertically on one's head are so hard to smash...

 

[kevhen]

ok, 6 feet may be a little low for an overhead even with knees bent. I guess I would either hit the ball back similar to how it came in (moonball) or slice approach it and get to net against this pusher and then take the next ball in the air and finish with an overhead.

 

[topspin kid]

its about the person

im just saying that some pushers dont really have the heart to change.(good thing i did) i first was a pusher because i didnt have any lessons. but then i started to lose a lot. so i decided to change up my style and went to the western grip.(just to tell you some people say its hard to change but it matters about the person's will.) when i used the western grip i got better but not to the point where i could really crush the ball or hit a winner. Then i read that article from that guy that talks about how americas tennis juniors are in trouble because of the western grip. then i switch to semi-western and now im really stroking the ball well and now i can hit just as hard as the people that took lessons but, im still working on better consistency, but it isnt bad.(by the way this is all in 3 1/2 months).

 

[ATXtennisaddict]

i hate playing pushers but I value my time on court with them because I know it's good training for me.

 

[BillH]

I have been involved in this game to long to buy this. A pusher is a pusher, one who improves to a point to push the ball. That is it.



A pusher simply takes advantage of a player that desires to go past the 3.5 level. That is it, it is as plain as that.



Isn't this what we are trying to say? So if you beat him when you are playing the right way, how is the pusher improving? What you just said is, the pusher beats you when you are not improving!

Well, that may be the case in most circumstances - all I'm saying is that this group of guys has been playing in the singles league at my club for a couple years now. Everyone has gotten progressively better, including the pusher. As I said, he's now taking lessons and is amping up the forehand and serve.

The pusher is improving also, it is not a matter that everyone in the league could beat him somewhat easily last year and can now beat him very easily. Although everyone else hasinproved it still takes a great deal of patience and effort to beat this guy. I may not admire his strokes but I admire his tenacity and his thinking on the court.

The only point I'm trying to make is this - in my practice of law, it is sometimes easy to dismiss your opponent thinking his case isn't that good or he isn't that great of lawyer. Sometimes when you do that, you get burned by understimating your competition. Some of the comments on this Board re pushers seem to understimate the skill of the pusher. His skill may not be evinced through his polished strokes, but many pushers are out-thinking the rest of us. They may not advance as quickly as the rest of us, but they still have a good idea of what it takes to beat us.

 

[ta11geese3]

So if the ball bounces 6 feet up why not hit a putaway overhead with it? I am sure Federer would do something like that and finish off the pusher in short order.

I'm sure Federer doesn't play pushers... not to mention he would finish anyone off in short order..

 

[topspin kid]

I'm sure Federer doesn't play pushers... not to mention he would finish anyone off in short order..

obviously he dosent because hes a pro and all the pro hit with pace theirs not one that just pushes.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

ok, 6 feet may be a little low for an overhead even with knees bent. I guess I would either hit the ball back similar to how it came in (moonball) or slice approach it and get to net against this pusher and then take the next ball in the air and finish with an overhead.

Exactly, when you have to bend down lower on an overhead to hit the ball:

1. You place yourself in an awkward position to hit through the ball

2. An overhead has more flattness in it then loopyness to clear the net (it makes it a low percentage shot).

3. There are better options such as swinging volley or let it bounce and hit your forehand (looking to restart the point or take advantage of the opponent depending on the situation).

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Another FRIENDLY RESPONSE FROM GOOD OL' BB

Well, that may be the case in most circumstances - all I'm saying is that this group of guys has been playing in the singles league at my club for a couple years now. Everyone has gotten progressively better, including the pusher. As I said, he's now taking lessons and is amping up the forehand and serve.

The pusher is improving also, it is not a matter that everyone in the league could beat him somewhat easily last year and can now beat him very easily. Although everyone else hasinproved it still takes a great deal of patience and effort to beat this guy. I may not admire his strokes but I admire his tenacity and his thinking on the court.

The only point I'm trying to make is this - in my practice of law, it is sometimes easy to dismiss your opponent thinking his case isn't that good or he isn't that great of lawyer. Sometimes when you do that, you get burned by understimating your competition. Some of the comments on this Board re pushers seem to understimate the skill of the pusher. His skill may not be evinced through his polished strokes, but many pushers are out-thinking the rest of us. They may not advance as quickly as the rest of us, but they still have a good idea of what it takes to beat us.

Well I understand what you are saying. However, a player that takes full strokes as compared to the pusher isn't necessarily being out smarted. It could very well be that the person who does take full strokes is actually outsmarting the pusher but simply hasn't matured yet to execute what he wants to do. He hits it wide, or long, or leaves the ball in a place for the pusher to scramble to.

It could also be areas of play that the player with full strokes loses to the pusher. For instance, if the player is hitting deep groundstrokes putting the pusher on his heels, sooner or later the full stroke player will get the ball they want, they come in, then hit it long. What happened? Did the pusher outsmart the other player? Absolutely not. It will take more practice putting away that short ball to eventually once and for all beat that pusher. The pusher is not improving. He is still playing the same way, waiting for everyone else to make the mistake. Smart but stagnant play.

Pushers do have skill, skill to push. A lot of pushers are smart and will dink and lob players who think their strokes are mature enough to beat a pusher. I agree with you that players overestimating their own abilities can be in for a rude awakening when faced with someone who rarely hits out and gets the ball to land in.

I don't think it is a matter of players underestimating a pusher, I think it is a matter or overestimating themselves. They believe they have enough consistency to beat a pusher only to find out they still have more work to do.

So in essence, a pusher will improve slowly and only within his pusher realm. While a player equally smart, will lose to the pusher at first, but over time will put the little pusher to bed.

 

[LuckyR]

I can understand your point, but on the other hand I wouldn't want to tell a pusher that they will reach their goals if they keep doing the things they are doing!

If you would can you name the successful pushers in the world? Why deceive a player into thinking their pushing skills is what tennis is about and that they will go far with these skills? Wouldn't that be ashame as well?

Well, we all know Pros who are retrievers. Yeah, I know, I know "they're retrievers not pushers, say what you mean!" Well, those Pros when they started out, weren't power players, and folks who lost to them in the Juniors probably bellyached about how they had just lost to a guy with crappy strokes, and they probably were ridiculed as "pushers" too. Kind of like a lot of posts in this thread.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Well, we all know Pros who are retrievers. Yeah, I know, I know "they're retrievers not pushers, say what you mean!" Well, those Pros when they started out, weren't power players, and folks who lost to them in the Juniors probably bellyached about how they had just lost to a guy with crappy strokes, and they probably were ridiculed as "pushers" too. Kind of like a lot of posts in this thread.

A person that does not have power is not necessarily a pusher. You are confusing the two things. A player that takes full strokes in the ball but doesn't necessarily have overwhellming power (aren't tall enough, heavy enough, not as fast swing speed, etc.) are not pushers. A retriever in the classic sense is not a pusher and niether is a counterpuncher. These are all legitimate styles of play.

A pusher does not take full strokes. They push, do you know the difference? When a pusher decided to hit out on the ball and take full strokes, they are no longer a pusher. How many do you know at the top ranks were clearly pushing the ball when they were younger?

 

[Tennis_Monk]

The pusher defiition is a seperate topic and has been debated many times. Even in pushers we have varieties. There are some players who resort to pushing until they get the right ball and rip it for a winner. I dont call them pushers though they do push the ball. To me they are setting up their point (because they feel they dont have a good shot ) by pushing the ball just like a decent tennis player would setup an approach shot.


I dont believe pushers progress any slower than normal players. Comparing two players progress is very relative and no two players are made same. Their mental /physical/work ethics can be entirely different regardless of the coaching. [if anything pushers might have an edge from a mental aspect]

 

[LuckyR]

A person that does not have power is not necessarily a pusher. You are confusing the two things. A player that takes full strokes in the ball but doesn't necessarily have overwhellming power (aren't tall enough, heavy enough, not as fast swing speed, etc.) are not pushers. A retriever in the classic sense is not a pusher and niether is a counterpuncher. These are all legitimate styles of play.

A pusher does not take full strokes. They push, do you know the difference? When a pusher decided to hit out on the ball and take full strokes, they are no longer a pusher. How many do you know at the top ranks were clearly pushing the ball when they were younger?

Well, we are all entitled to our definitions. But all of the folks who complain about what they call "pushers" rarely, if ever talk about how full of a stroke their opponent took, rather they talk about the high percentage tennis shot selection. That is the definition I am using because of it's practicality. But of course, your post is completely accurate, as far as it goes, namely that if someone has absolutely terrible strokes, they are terrible, and the minute they don't have terrible strokes, they are no longer terrible...