what defines tennis athletic talent?

[user92626]

Vehemently disagree. Most people give up tennis after just a couple of tires. Some may give her to go for a few months before they give it up for good. Have you recently watched two novice players trying to sustain a rally? A rally of more than 1 or 2 balls us rare. A novice player might be able to sustain a little longer rally against a coach who is giving them very easy, well-controlled balls. But two novice players???

Fuggedaboutit! If they persist, it will take months before most novice players can develop enough control to sustain a rally with each other. Even then, most players will never progress beyond a low intermediate level of 3.0/3.5 ntrp.

Contrast this with badminton, table tennis, racquetball, soft tennis, pickleball and numerous other sports. Inside of 20 minutes, novice players can sustain a reasonable rally. It won't take them weeks or months.

Granted, volleyball skills and hitting a baseball isn't all that easy either. But shooting basketballs into a hoop is much easier to learn than sustaining a decent rally in tennis.

In my weekend games, I'd say more than 50% of points is 1 or 2 shots! And guess what? people are willing to go at it for hours.

You overestimate recreational tennis. Your requirement or bar for recreational tennis sounds delusional. People do not need to "sustain a decent rally" to keep at tennis. This is why you see old men, old women, 7 years ago kids at tennis courts. You don't see these groups at a basketball court.

If people enjoy tennis and keep at it for a year or so, which is a pretty low requirement for a sport if you wanna talk about requirement, they can literally hit the ball several times in a row which is perfectly good enough for a game or back and forth hitting.

 

[RVT]

So much nonsense in this thread it's hilarious. Starting to realize most of the people on this board are lower level players that have no clue what it takes to be a high level player. And this is not to diminish that type of play at all. Personally like to see people enjoy the sport no matter who they are. Realize Not everyone has time, interest or ability to get there.

What nonsense? Honestly, I think there are a few things you're missing. 1) you don't seem to understand what is "high level tennis" hint: it's not 4.5/5.0. 2) you don't seem to understand basic physiology very well. Most humans are much closer at all of the required abilities than you think. And lastly, you seem to struggle with reading comprehension...

So, just to be clear: I'm not saying anyone can start as an adult, play 4-5 hours a week and get to 4.5/5.0. Of course they can't. But it's not the "lack of athletic ability" that's keeping them from reaching that level. I'm talking about folks maximizing there play according to their ability. And for 99% of guys on here, who are rec players, it's not "athletic ability" that's the limiter. I get that it's a convenient excuse, but it's really not the case.

Also note, I'm not throwing shade on the 3.5 guy who plays for 5 hours a week and started in his 20's. The great thing about tennis is that all levels can enjoy it. The raw beginners I see out on the courts seem to be having more fun that the frustrated wannabe's yelling at themselves. So, good for them. But understand, it's a lack of training that's really limiting most people. Stop pretending otherwise.

Tennis has some pretty complex elements, particularly ball recognition/anticipation, which takes a ton of repetitions to refine. It also is pretty demanding physically as you go up levels, so it requires training off the court as well. And of course, diet and rest are a big part of the equation. If you're a 30 year old desk jockey who's never played sports, it's going to take a lot of time and effort. But 4.5/5.0 tennis does not require freakish athleticism. You're just deluded if you believe that. Getting into the top 1,000? That's a different story. Top 100, and almost all of those guys are outliers in some way or another.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

In my weekend games, I'd say more than 50% of points is 1 or 2 shots! And guess what? people are willing to go at it for hours.

But that's competition where you're trying to win the point. It sounds like @SystemicAnomaly was talking about cooperative rallies, which I'm sure your group could easily maintain for more than just 2 shots.

You overestimate recreational tennis. Your requirement or bar for recreational tennis sounds delusional. People do not need to "sustain a decent rally" to keep at tennis. This is why you see old men, old women, 7 years ago kids at tennis courts. You don't see these groups at a basketball court.

Kids love hitting the ball; it sometimes doesn't seem to matter where the ball goes. They are ideal for introducing to tennis. Perfectionist adults are not so ideal.

As far as BB goes, the oldsters could play HORSE rather than full-court. But you're right, I rarely see any oldsters playing BB.

If people enjoy tennis and keep at it for a year or so, which is a pretty low requirement for a sport if you wanna talk about requirement, they can literally hit the ball several times in a row which is perfectly good enough for a game or back and forth hitting.

We've got the perfect lab: masses of people took up tennis during the pandemic [instructors I know say they have more business than they can handle; courts are more crowded than pre-pandemic]. We'll see how many keep at it.

 

[user92626]

I've heard that comment from more than one player. There are so many things to do wrong if one is trying to learn traditional strokes: "racquet back early", "bend your knees", "keep your eye on the ball", "unit turn", "hey, you're not bending your knees". It's enough to drive someone crazy.

When I was learning to juggle, I spent more time picking up balls than juggling them. But I stuck with it and got past that. But how many tennis players get frustrated in the "picking up" phase and move on to something else?

You and I or any blokes here have a lifetime to focus on and dissect "bend your knees" or any techniques if we so choose. It's an infinite route to go down.

However, none of these techniques is a requirement or a bar, again, if someone chooses to see it that way, to start playing tennis recreationally.

Speaking of sticking to a hobby, in hindsight I see that it wasn't so much about mastery of techniques. It was really about one own's competitiveness and group / people drama. I was lucky that I started out with an interesting group of people. Their tennis sucked -- I surpassed them quickly -- but the dynamics was pretty interesting that I kept coming back.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

What nonsense? Honestly, I think there are a few things you're missing. 1) you don't seem to understand what is "high level tennis" hint: it's not 4.5/5.0. 2) you don't seem to understand basic physiology very well. Most humans are much closer at all of the required abilities than you think. And lastly, you seem to struggle with reading comprehension...

BTW: what is your definition of "high level"? Everyone probably has a different definition, the most common being "two levels above where I am".

70%? 4.0.
90%? 4.5.
97%? 5.0.

I think the point is that there's no universally agreed-upon definition. So make your argument but define your assumptions.

To a beginner, 4.0 could be high level.

To an intermediate, 5.0 is probably high level.

 

[user92626]

So much nonsense in this thread it's hilarious. Starting to realize most of the people on this board are lower level players that have no clue what it takes to be a high level player. And this is not to diminish that type of play at all. Personally like to see people enjoy the sport no matter who they are. Realize Not everyone has time, interest or ability to get there.

LOL. First you threw out insults then reversely said "not to diminish". Does anyone like someone to call their POV "nonsense" or their plays "lower level"?

I don't think even 5.0s like to be called low level even factually by 6.0s. That's an insult to all their efforts which might have taken them a lifetime to achieve.


Anyway, back to the topic. Tennis is very easy and accessible. It's like soccer!!!!!

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

It is along that thought but even further, too. It's quite common to see 2 people or 4 people wacking the ball with the consistency of 1 or 2 shots. Is that not a game? Is that any less fun, less workout? Less tennis than anyone else's here?

I don't know what @hypercube means by "hardest sports to play, more so in terms of pure technique".

I would definitely put tennis in the top 10 of common sports that are difficult to master / play. Difficult to master the skills well enough to control the ball.

Hitting a fastball or a curveball with a round bat is undoubtedly one of the most difficult tasks. But once you successfully hit that ball (or fail to hit the ball). You don't need to do that again for another 20 minutes or so. Hitting the ball in tennis is a challenge cuz you are often doing it while moving to intercept an incoming ball. And after hitting the ball successfully, you often need to do it again (and again) in less than 2 seconds.

Takes most people quite a while to accomplish that -- if they ever do at all.

 

[RVT]

BTW: what is your definition of "high level"? Everyone probably has a different definition, the most common being "two levels above where I am".

70%? 4.0.
90%? 4.5.
97%? 5.0.

I think the point is that there's no universally agreed-upon definition. So make your argument but define your assumptions.

To a beginner, 4.0 could be high level.

To an intermediate, 5.0 is probably high level.

fair point. I consider "high level" to be 6.0 and above. And to get to that level and above, I believe that there are certain athletic requirements that are outside of the norm--and that the majority of athletes can't reach that level no matter what they do. You better be on the correct side of the bell curve...

I also think that 99% of recreational tennis players aren't coming remotely close to maximizing the ability they do have (again, not judging. If they're having fun, that's all that matters). That doesn't mean there isn't variation in ability.

Let me ask you a question: how much time per week do you think the average adult would have to put towards training to maximize the natural ability they have? At what point will the amount of training they're doing be counter-productive, in your opinion?

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

fair point. I consider "high level" to be 6.0 and above. And to get to that level and above, I believe that there are certain athletic requirements that are outside of the norm--and that the majority of athletes can't reach that level no matter what they do. You better be on the correct side of the bell curve...

Wow, that's a pretty high bar! OK, fair enough.

I also think that 99% of recreational tennis players aren't coming remotely close to maximizing the ability they do have (again, not judging. If they're having fun, that's all that matters). That doesn't mean there isn't variation in ability.

On this we agree. The average rec player wants to play, not drill and condition and work out. True, they may get annoyed when they miss certain shots repeatedly but not annoyed enough to put the time in to fix it.

Let me ask you a question: how much time per week do you think the average adult would have to put towards training to maximize the natural ability they have? At what point will the amount of training they're doing be counter-productive, in your opinion?

I wouldn't frame it as a "black and white" minimum level. It's more like "for every hour you put in, what are you getting in return?" For different people, this answer will vary.

I think for the average rec player who doesn't train or practice at all, just a few hours per week would result in tangible improvement.

I don't know if too many hours would be counter-productive unless it led to injury or burnout. More like it would hit diminishing returns and would someone be willing to continue to put the work in if the extra improvement kept getting smaller?

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

In my weekend games, I'd say more than 50% of points is 1 or 2 shots! And guess what? people are willing to go at it for hours.

You overestimate recreational tennis. Your requirement or bar for recreational tennis sounds delusional. People do not need to "sustain a decent rally" to keep at tennis. This is why you see old men, old women, 7 years ago kids at tennis courts. You don't see these groups at a basketball court.

If people enjoy tennis and keep at it for a year or so, which is a pretty low requirement for a sport if you wanna talk about requirement, they can literally hit the ball several times in a row which is perfectly good enough for a game or back and forth hitting.

No, I actually see many people giving up tennis after just a few tries or a few months because it is too difficult.

No delusion here.

Not talking about matches where your rally length is short. I'm referring about the ability, the potential, to sustain a rally at all. As S&V puts it, a cooperative rally. I assume that you and your playing buddies are capable of that. Most people who attempt tennis never get to that level.

I assume that you can keep the ball going during a warm up or during practice sessions. Were you able to do that when you first tried the game? For many ppl, the ability to control the ball well enough for even a short rally might take weeks or months. Some never get there.

Quite often I will see a couple of novice players show up to the court and try to hit for a while. Almost no rallies. Not much exercise. Not sure that they really having fun either. Hard to tell. Many leave the court in less than 20 minutes of frustration

As far as participation goes, by the general public, tennis might be in the top 10 in the world. But I'm pretty certain there are more people engaged in soccer (futbol), badminton, volleyball, basketball and table tennis.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Quite often I will see a couple of novice players show up to the court and try to hit for a while. Almost no rallies. Not much exercise. Not sure that they really having fun either. Hard to tell.

This is the problem when it comes to retention: if they don't have fun the first or second time out, they won't stick with for weeks let alone a year.

 

[soft_manatee]

as some1 who works w children on a daily basis, the kids who improve quickly & excel r those who can mimic and incorporate motions/techniques/corrections almost immediately

the ones i can trust to keep practicing correctly when im not watching



on a more "athletic" level, reception (tracking + movement) skills

dear god pls play catch w ur child at least once b4 sending them to class

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

@user92626

This is the problem when it comes to retention: if they don't have fun the first or second time out, they won't stick with for weeks let alone a year.

I've met tons of people, probably hundreds, who have told me that tried tennis a couple of times but found that it was too hard. They usually volunteer this information after they find out that I am (was) a tennis player.

I've read that something like 80 million people play (or have played) tennis on a regular or occasional (semi-regular) basis. That represents a little bit more than 1% of the global population. I suspect a far greater percentage than that have attempted to play tennis.

Badminton, an easier game to pick up initially, has something like 220-230 million participants globally. Soccer participation is greater than 260 million according to a couple of sources.

 

[user92626]

No, I actually see many people giving up tennis after just a few tries or a few months because it is too difficult.

No delusion here.

Not talking about matches where your rally length is short. I'm referring about the ability, the potential, to sustain a rally at all. As S&V puts it, a cooperative rally. I assume that you and your playing buddies are capable of that. Most people who attempt tennis never get to that level.

I assume that you can keep the ball going during a warm up or during practice sessions. Were you able to do that when you first tried the game? For many ppl, the ability to control the ball well enough for even a short rally might take weeks or months. Some never get there.

Quite often I will see a couple of novice players show up to the court and try to hit for a while. Almost no rallies. Not much exercise. Not sure that they really having fun either. Hard to tell. Many leave the court in less than 20 minutes of frustration

As far as participation goes, by the general public, tennis might be in the top 10 in the world. But I'm pretty certain there are more people engaged in soccer (futbol), badminton, volleyball, basketball and table tennis.

@user92626

I've met tons of people, probably hundreds, who have told me that tried tennis a couple of times but found that it was too hard. They usually volunteer this information after they find out that I am (was) a tennis player.

I've read that something like 80 million people play (or have played) tennis on a regular or occasional (semi-regular) basis. That represents a little bit more than 1% of the global population. I suspect a far greater percentage than that have attempted to play tennis.

Badminton, an easier game to pick up initially, has something like 220-230 million participants globally. Soccer participation is greater than 260 million according to a couple of sources.

Geez, get your facts straight. TEnnis is #4 in the world.

The Most Popular Sports In The World

The most popular sports in the world include basketball, cricket, hockey, and tennis, which all have millions of devoted fans.

www.worldatlas.com

1 billion out of ~7 is far from 1%.

And while we're at ..rudimentary logics. The "attempt" circle is always bigger than the "in" circle because before one is "in" he has to go thru attempt first, no? You do not need to suspect.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Geez, get your facts straight. TEnnis is #4 in the world.

The Most Popular Sports In The World

The most popular sports in the world include basketball, cricket, hockey, and tennis, which all have millions of devoted fans.

www.worldatlas.com

1 billion out of ~7 is far from 1%.

And while we're at ..rudimentary logics. The "attempt" circle is always bigger than the "in" circle because before one is "in" he has to go thru attempt first, no? You do not need to suspect.

Get your own facts straight.

Read my post again and the point I was trying to make. I was referring to participation. Not how many people watch the sport. Not the number of fans. Notice how many times I mentioned the word participants or participation in that post.

As to my other point, I believe that a large % of those who give up tennis after a short time is because they find that it is harder than it looks. I have seen this and heard this from numerous ppl -- tennis is too difficult.

In case you missed my point, it's not just that more ppl have attempted tennis than play. The point was that considerably more have attempted and have quit (after a short time) than have attempted & continue to play. Perhaps that wasn't clear enuff. Seems you misinterpreted my intent there.

Let's lose the attitude.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

dear god pls play catch w ur child at least once b4 sending them to class

I've said this to parents an kids numerous times. Some boys and a fairly high percentage of girls have done very little, or no, throwing and catching opportunities prior to attempting tennis.

I've taught tennis to some 7 year olds but, usually, I'm not working with kids under 8. I've had a number of parents who wanted me to teach tennis to their 4 or 5 yr old. I let them know that kids that age are not my specialty but I do give them a few drills / exercise to try.

I stress that they should be playing "catch" with their kid to develop their hand-eye coordination as well as their throwing and catching skills. I also suggest that their kids learn how to catch a ball after a single bounce.

I also suggest that they get a volleyball to develop some rudimentary soccer (futbol) skills and some hand dribbling drills. (And some additional bouncing drills with a tennis ball and racket).

 

[ChaelAZ]

To me there are three different components or talents in tennis - skill, fitness, and athleticism.

Athleticism is the overall control and adaptability of your bodies movement through proprioception. Athletic people pick up sports easier than most and usually can play at beyond a basic beginner level. It is not fitness or skill, per say as those are developed, or can be developed in a sport, but athleticism is inherent.