mightyrick
Legend
I'm feeling a Smart Net Targets™ thread coming.
Excellent point GuyClinch...It's not like this is some new idea that a player should come in to net to apply pressure or when he expects a weaker return....Is it? Doesn't every tennis book ever written cover this??
Come to net more?? More than what? Like you say Guy...the ones who can approach and volley come in now....but the ones who don't likely can't approach or volley so well. :???:
.... enters the thread in attack mode. A stunning development.
Not really.
Anyway, I addressed those exact points multiple times, so he most likely came in with trolling intentions and did not read the thread.
....Jealous...
Well, at least I am saying that there is a potential strategic blind spot in regards to how one should come to net, although not many in this thread agree. I am saying that it is a good strategy to hit a relatively easy shot like a moonball to bh and come into net and force your opponent to hit a more difficult shot. In fact, I think this works better than a more traditional approach, which in itself is a risky shot.
Excellent point GuyClinch...It's not like this is some new idea that a player should come in to net to apply pressure or when he expects a weaker return....Is it? Doesn't every tennis book ever written cover this??
Come to net more?? More than what? Like you say Guy...the ones who can approach and volley come in now....but the ones who don't likely can't approach or volley so well. :???:
10isfreak, I totally get what you are saying. Just to be clear, my point about the DTL backhand being a 4.5 level shot is simply based on the USTA parameters for ranking.
I know a lot of posters throw around ratings and shot correlation based on opinion so I don't want to do the same.
Ok so ordinary people are able to counter approaches because of their racquets and technique but are not able to make weapons out of their approach shots?
Does that even make sense to you?
This post really doesn't add much, nor does it contradict PP's original premise, which is that capable players who CAN volley and CAN hit approach shots still don't come to the net.
I find that people like to win - and are pretty good at picking ways that help them win. But you only have the strategic options that your skill set allows. For net play to be a real option you had better be excellent at it. It needs to be an actual weapon because the shots need to get to the net are higher risk.
I think, maybe, you refer my thread?There was a really great post recently about tips on the serve and volley somewhere and I can not find it.
This guy knows where it is at.PP you hit it on the head with this thread, and now you're predictably getting lower rated players with grandiose notions of 4.5+ players coming into the thread telling you people are going to be ripping passing shots. It's simply not true, and even if you haven't seen much 4.5 tennis, all you need to do is look at the YouTube videos of 4.5 matches and see few are ripping outright pace from the baseline.
I'm a 4.5, I played college golf and dated two different female college tennis players at two schools inside the top 25, and I've watched more 4.5+ tennis than I care to admit, and your basic premise is right on point: in terms of court position and finishing aggression, most people play way too cautiously with an anchor on the baseline. The most precious asset someone can have on a tennis court is time to set up for the next shot. Even at 4.5 or 5.0, if you can take that time away and force an opponent to hit off balance or without being set, you're going to raise their error rate and force weak replies.
At 4.0, coming to the net on an opponent's backhand is still a money play. Most 4.0s can't hit consistent winners off their backhand, and the better players who run around their backhand are conceding a cross court volley winner if you get a frame on it. Even to the forehand side, if you keep a guy behind the baseline when he hits it, you're no worse than neutral in the overwhelming majority of matches.
At 4.5, guys still aren't blasting their backhands. They're no doubt more consistent with them and they can usually generate good depth by raising the clearance over the net, but only the better 4.5s are flattening the ball out and skimming the net for passing shots with their backhand. Forehand is a different story, but you're not advocating for consistent approaches to the forehand.
It's a grand myth that you need to hit perfect approaches, perfect volleys, and perfect overheads to come to the net. Instead, your approach shot and first volley need to be no better than the other guy's passing shots. Even if the strokes are equal, you've still taken time away from him or her in the initial exchange. And lobs? Same basic premise. If a guy doesn't have time to set up for a lob, then he's not hitting a good one. And a 4.5 player will win the point far more often than not when the opponent resorts to lobbing.
Old saying, there is nothing new under the sun.Excellent point GuyClinch...It's not like this is some new idea that a player should come in to net to apply pressure or when he expects a weaker return....Is it? Doesn't every tennis book ever written cover this??
There is a reason S&V is most masculine form of tennis. As Becker used to say, you need big brass balls. Make your opponent beat you. At rec levels, it will often pay off.
Admit, that last line a little... funny. Not so serious. But still, I think, S&V very masculine - proactive. To attack - requires courage. To keep attacking when you lose points - requires more courage. There is saying in movie - when the game is on the line, winners want the ball. Men, want to control destiny. I come to net, I am saying - beat me or lose. If I die, I will die on feet.I like your points about net play, but I don't know about this specific remark. Most male rec players I see give matches away because they try to play too "manly" and end up beating themselves up against players with a little more common sense.
Not sure what the thread has turned into, but I know my main weakness when I play a singles match is staying at the baseline the whole time and not move in. Trying to work on it, I have good enough groundstrokes that I can really punish people by coming into the net..
problem is I have 0 faith in my volleys.
geez, how many ATP matches have the folks on here played lately w/ prize money on the line? it won't kill you to develop a second instinct in your game. At worst you add to your set of tools to counter different types of players, at best you move up a level and make it your strength...
Admit, that last line a little... funny. Not so serious. But still, I think, S&V very masculine - proactive. To attack - requires courage. To keep attacking when you lose points - requires more courage. There is saying in movie - when the game is on the line, winners want the ball. Men, want to control destiny. I come to net, I am saying - beat me or lose. If I die, I will die on feet.
Of course, always play smart tennis. Courage without intelligence, just stupid. But smart not always conservative. This is what I say. Easy to think smart tennis is hit high % shots and wait for error. Sometimes smart tennis, play in way increases chance opponent make error.
Me, playing aggressive S&V, I concede many more winners than a lot of players. Such is life. But also, opponents make more errors against me. Me, I feel the trade is a net positive given my skills on baseline. If it wasn't, would be stupid tennis.
Old saying, there is nothing new under the sun.
Me, I think, comments by GuyClinch in this thread very telling.
Maybe or maybe not, but it mirrors pretty much the type comment he has repeatedly made related to my threads. So I appreciate your point here and agree that there is little reason to come in and be negative, even if you feel that the topic has been widely covered throughout history and is blatantly obvious. There are always some players that it hits home with for a new perspective...to bad he couldn't realize that in the post of others. That said, I didn't just come in with that point, but really feel Guy made an excellent point that went right to the heart of things. I guess we can just disagree.
Not sure what the thread has turned into, but I know my main weakness when I play a singles match is staying at the baseline the whole time and not move in. Trying to work on it, I have good enough groundstrokes that I can really punish people by coming into the net..
problem is I have 0 faith in my volleys.
realize that my post is an observation with no intention besides discussion and needs no capitalization or catchy title to brand throughout the boards. ...But I appreciate you coming in, and trying to give me a "taste of my own medicine", as that comes off as really mature
GuyClinch is telling me, he is afraid of his opponent. Afraid of his ability to pass him, lob him, hit winners. And it is very common attitude, which is why I think this thread very good.I agree....there is very little that is new under the sun...but PP has made comments as though something needs to be new to have a thread, so I was just wondering if he thought this thread was unique or new.
So what is GuyClinch in this thread telling you?
GuyClinch is telling me, he is afraid of his opponent. Afraid of his ability to pass him, lob him, hit winners. And it is very common attitude, which is why I think this thread very good.
I say, why be afraid? If you lose, does it matter if you do it getting passed at net or by unforced error on baseline? I would rather see my opponent hit a winner than me hit a UE.
High percentage tennis takes many forms depending on your skills and skills of opponent.
For example, is not high percentage to stay in baseline rally with opponent who will out grind more than 50% of time.
My experience, up to university level, serve and volley can be very high percentage strategy.
Based on what, you say they likely not wrong?The players who are staying back have more faith in their ability to grind out then they do coming to the net. They are likely not wrong.
There are no guarantees in life. Nobody speaks of guarantees. But - attacking, forcing player to hit winners - good strategy against better players. It is harder for a better player to hit lots of pass/lob winners than it is for him to wait for inferior player to make UE on groundstroke rally.Sure if you can't out rally someone - you might try S and V and coming in. But its not a guarantee of success - often times the guy who can out rally you is the superior player.
I say, you are confusing intelligent strategic choice with conservative thinking. Ooooh, look, these players have good groundstrokes! Ooooooh, look, these players on ATP not attack net!I never said it isn't. I said that for the players that choose to stay back on more balls (not all balls) it can be the more intelligent strategic choice. Because for THEM its a percentage play. I don't think you read my post.
If it is stupid, how come I beat many better players than me with S&V up to university level? How come Power Player is beating players he struggle against before?my point is that NO - rec players don't need to be going to the net more. Rec players usually play the best way for their game. This idea that there are all these awesome 4.0 - 5.0 net players who are hanging back because no one ever told them they could attack the net is just stupid.
Rec players are not good players. Even many college players are not good players.Let's keep it real - the good players all understand their strategic options. They understand when to come to the net for their game - to make sure they win most of the points they come in on..
The guts part can be trained. A lot of rec players play the way they see on TV and see other play and most importantly follow the initial few lessons they take from a pro (almost all of which start with hitting forehands and backhands from baseline; i am yet to see a pro that starts his adult beginner by making him hit volleys first even though it is intuitively and technically an easier stroke to learn than a full fledged fore-hand or a backhand). No one is taught or told to be gutsy. This is only occassionally self taught, rarely a pro teaches the mental part to a rec player.
... Also, it is really fun to hit volleys, 1/2 volleys, approach shots, overheads and to mix in S&V...
Personally, I think aggressive tennis is still the high percentage play. But, it comes down to personality and skill set. Some people just don't like taking risk and will not play attacking tennis.
Exactly. And those are the people you want to attack. They sit back and grind with safe balls and wait for you to make a mistake. Just like you said, they are not going to attack, so that means their passing shots are not going to be very consistent. The %s will be in your favor if you hit to the open court and follow that shot to net.
But, just like Edburger clearly misread what GuyClinch's post shared, the above comments are wrong at least as often as they are right at any reasonable level of tennis.
Edburger made assumptions about GuyClinch that Guy addressed as incorrect. Guy covered them clearly imo.
Tell us what a reasonable level of tennis is.
Because I rarely encounter a player who can grind as effectively as you described at 5.0 or below. And I play in FL where the talent pool is pretty vast.
They can not grind with perfect angles as you are describing, and they most likely have not seen a lot of guys crashing the net.
Does it clarify anything for you?
Haha, more made up stuff....nowhere did I reference "perfect angles" or even suggest it, but nice distraction.
And it doesn't clarify because it is off topic. Edburger made false assumptions about Guy's game, based on the posts....Guy addressed that...maybe you missed it
GuyClinch is telling me, he is afraid of his opponent. Afraid of his ability to pass him, lob him, hit winners.
If anything for me with my size - it might be different. But I don't mock players who are less aggressive. Very often being less aggressive is smart.
.
Let me explain what I mean. Guyclinch says that the guy who can out rally you from the baseline is the better player. First of all, that glosses over my OP which stated that many players are content to simply use your power to get balls back until you make a mistake. Are they actually a better player or you playing into their hands and allowing this to happen?
I have been trying something similar. I have lost a lot of matches, even to players who i regularly beat from the baseline. But i have been improving. What gives me motivation is that i see almost everyone at the other end of the net utterly pi$$ed - during and after the match, even if they had won. It seems they did not feel like they played tennis! And i love it. I would love it even more when i start winning. Yes i am wicked.