How many of you have gotten your fill of the French Open over the last two weeks? How many of you were able to find it on your television from round 1 to now? If you did, you're one of the lucky ones. This year Tennis Channel was the network that won the bid for television rights for the majority of the tournament, where in the past ESPN 2 and NBC televised the majority of the coverage, with Tennis Channel showing a few early round matches, rewind being relegated to replaying matches televised earlier by the other networks.
I for one, was unable to view any of the French Open, unlike in previous years. Tennis Channel, as many of you know, is considered a premium channel by both cable and satellite television providers, thusly, it costs significantly more per month to have access to the channel over basic tv packages. I am venturing merely an educated guess, but it is my assumption that the majority of cable or direct tv subscribers do not have tennis channel.
My fear for the game is that if the grand slams continue to allow Tennis Channel to win the bidding for the events, the events, and by extension, the sport, will regress and recess into mediocrity, ala the NHL. You simply cannot survive and grow as a sport when your major events are not televised on a major network (cbs, nbc, abc, or ESPN, ESpN 2). Your events leave the public consciousness. Die hards will always find a way to watch, it is the average fan, the casual fan, the type of people you want to attract to take up the sport - new customers - that will now never watch your events. Logically this means less and less participation, as you aren't gaining enough new viewers to make up for general attrition due to death, or for those that leave the sport for other reasons.
Those in charge of awarding television rights for the majors, in my opinion, should not simply award it to the highest bidder. When the highest bidder is a niche network that the majority of tennis fans don't get, you've made a serious miscalculation in your marketing of your sport or event. Perhaps awarding it to a lower bidder with more mass appeal, and more importantly, more ACCESS, would help further grow the sport. If the Masters golf tournament, US Open golf tournament, British Open, and PGA championships can see that keeping their majors on major networks is smart, even when they have a niche channel as a provider (Golf channel), one would think The Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon, and US open tennis slams would heed the wisdom of their marketing plan.
I realize the French Open in this case simply took the biggest check, and perhaps Tennis channel promised more hours of coverage overall than other bidders. But the fact that a vast majority of people, tennis players or not, don't get the channel, those hours of coverage become wasted hours, with no real return. Long term, it will hurt the sport, the tournament, and in the end everyone's pocketbooks.
Thursday, June 2, 2016
Thursday, December 31, 2015
Play tennis with your hands
Tennis is based off of an older French game, called "le jeu de paume," which in English means "the game of the hand. In order to improve your game or learn how to play the game from scratch, I highly recommend mastering biting all your strokes "sans raquette," which in English means "without racquet." The reason this is vital to your success is because whatever you are able to do technically with just your hands will simply be repeated once you place your racquet into your hands. Plus you will increase your hand's sensitivity to the stroke in question, which develops better touch and feel. Hand-eye coordination will also be drastically improved.
As a tennis professional, refining technique by having students make technical corrections with just their hands (I use the 10 & under orange balls for this regardless of level) gives students a better understanding of what their body is doing on a given stroke. It is also a sure fire way to get young kids to master the continental grip for volleys, serves, overheads and slices. And, as mentioned in the first paragraph, your student is learning touch and feel because there isn't a racquet to death grip.
Remember, any stroke on the forehand side, overheads and serves are struck with the palm side of the hand. One handed backhand strokes are struck with the knuckle side of the hand, while two handed strokes should be struck with both the palm side of the non-dominant hand and the knuckle side of the dominant hand.
As players improve improve their ability to play tennis with their hands, more and more movement, and more precise targets can be used. You can even play fun mini-tennis games using only your hands.
So bring the game back to its basic core - the hands - and see your game go to the next level and beyond!
As a tennis professional, refining technique by having students make technical corrections with just their hands (I use the 10 & under orange balls for this regardless of level) gives students a better understanding of what their body is doing on a given stroke. It is also a sure fire way to get young kids to master the continental grip for volleys, serves, overheads and slices. And, as mentioned in the first paragraph, your student is learning touch and feel because there isn't a racquet to death grip.
Remember, any stroke on the forehand side, overheads and serves are struck with the palm side of the hand. One handed backhand strokes are struck with the knuckle side of the hand, while two handed strokes should be struck with both the palm side of the non-dominant hand and the knuckle side of the dominant hand.
As players improve improve their ability to play tennis with their hands, more and more movement, and more precise targets can be used. You can even play fun mini-tennis games using only your hands.
So bring the game back to its basic core - the hands - and see your game go to the next level and beyond!
Tuesday, July 7, 2015
Why You Shouldn't Care That Nick Kyrgios Tanked A Return Game at Wimbledon
In Australian Nick Kyrgios's 4th round tilt vs Frenchman Richard Gasquet, it appears if Kyrgios, down a set and 2-0 at that point, tanks Gasquet's service game. You can watch the video here:
http://media.theage.com.au/sport/tennis/did-nick-kyrgios-tank-a-game-6666297.html
Now, I am not condoning his actions in anyway shape or form. But if you go to the Wimbledon website, and click on his post-match presser, he was getting questions that bordered on the absurd. For example - "Do you feel like you cheated the fans by tanking that game?" Now to be fair to the reporters, the crowd did boo Kyrgios when this transpired.
However, the fans weren't cheated by his performance. In fact, of all people, Roger Federer came to Kyrgios's defense.
http://www.businessinsider.com/roger-federer-defends-nick-kyrgios-over-tanking-2015-7
The idea that the fans were somehow cheated by his tanking is preposterous. The game in question lasted less than a minute. Kyrgios lost the set in question, but WON the third set, and fought hard going down in the fourth set. So to suggest the fans were cheated for the entire match is ridiculous. They got their money's worth, and frankly a whole lot more. The fact that that one game happened, gives those fans who watched something to talk about for the next year or two. Now that match is all over the news and those fans were THERE, and saw it first hand. It has become more memorable than it would have been had he NOT tanked.
Again, I'm not condoning his actions in any way, shape, or form. However, it is known that a player like Jimmy Connors, who we all think tried as hard as he could on every single point, was known to sometimes put less effort into a game after the first couple of points (down 30-0 on a return game) when he already had the break. He did it to conserve energy from time to time. He "threw" the game by going for low percentage returns that had little hope of being successful. He just did it in a less obvious way than Kyrgios. We don't chastise Connors, but kill Kyrgios. That's merely because what Kyrgios did "looks" bad. Optics.
Go back if you have 11 hours and watch the Mahut-Isner match that went 70-68 in the fifth. You'll see two tired guys who admitted after the match that if the score in any return game got to 30-0, they threw the remaining points to simply conserve energy so they could focus on holding serve. No one complained that they didn't get their money's worth after seeing 137 straight holds, many at love, with minimal effort being put forth in most of those service games by the returner. Even if half of those games were at love, that 136 tanked points to conserve energy, which equates to 34 games of tanked points, which equals almost 6 6-0 sets. Nobody complained. Kyrgios tanked four points. Not games, points.
Personally, I don't care if anyone tanks a match or a game, unless it's my player I'm coaching. If some professional player decides to tank, because he's irritated at the umpire, or has a bet in on the game for him to lose, or just doesn't want to be there - while I would prefer them to just retire, I take no personal offense if they instead choose to show up and put forth a measly effort. Now, IF that was the only match I paid to see, would i be disappointed? Sure, but that wasn't the case on this day, although I'm sure there were some people who went to his match and his alone. Perhaps some Aussie fans. That's part of the risk associated with buying a ticket to a live sporting event. The result will simply be he will have fewer fans. Free market at work.
We are all worried that somehow Kyrgios's tanking is going to send the worng message to young players that it's ok to tank a point, a game, a match. It has actually done the opposite. Kyrgios looks like a complete buffoon, especially after watching his response to the tanking allegations, and every coach in the world is having a conversation with their students about tanking, and what a bad thing it is to do.
We blow a player's actions way out of proportion out of our own self-importance, all the while neglecting that if there weren't people doing ridiculous things on the court like Kyrgios, we would never feel the need to talk about the behavior in question and ensure that the students we teach and the kids we raise never repeat that mistake.
Kyrgios has a lot of mental work to do to become a great player. The fact he let an umpire's call rattle him to the point of tanking a game speaks to the miles he must travel mentally and emotionally in order to become great. But let's not take it personally. Our lives move on, either with him as a favorite player, or more likely, not.
http://media.theage.com.au/sport/tennis/did-nick-kyrgios-tank-a-game-6666297.html
Now, I am not condoning his actions in anyway shape or form. But if you go to the Wimbledon website, and click on his post-match presser, he was getting questions that bordered on the absurd. For example - "Do you feel like you cheated the fans by tanking that game?" Now to be fair to the reporters, the crowd did boo Kyrgios when this transpired.
However, the fans weren't cheated by his performance. In fact, of all people, Roger Federer came to Kyrgios's defense.
http://www.businessinsider.com/roger-federer-defends-nick-kyrgios-over-tanking-2015-7
The idea that the fans were somehow cheated by his tanking is preposterous. The game in question lasted less than a minute. Kyrgios lost the set in question, but WON the third set, and fought hard going down in the fourth set. So to suggest the fans were cheated for the entire match is ridiculous. They got their money's worth, and frankly a whole lot more. The fact that that one game happened, gives those fans who watched something to talk about for the next year or two. Now that match is all over the news and those fans were THERE, and saw it first hand. It has become more memorable than it would have been had he NOT tanked.
Again, I'm not condoning his actions in any way, shape, or form. However, it is known that a player like Jimmy Connors, who we all think tried as hard as he could on every single point, was known to sometimes put less effort into a game after the first couple of points (down 30-0 on a return game) when he already had the break. He did it to conserve energy from time to time. He "threw" the game by going for low percentage returns that had little hope of being successful. He just did it in a less obvious way than Kyrgios. We don't chastise Connors, but kill Kyrgios. That's merely because what Kyrgios did "looks" bad. Optics.
Go back if you have 11 hours and watch the Mahut-Isner match that went 70-68 in the fifth. You'll see two tired guys who admitted after the match that if the score in any return game got to 30-0, they threw the remaining points to simply conserve energy so they could focus on holding serve. No one complained that they didn't get their money's worth after seeing 137 straight holds, many at love, with minimal effort being put forth in most of those service games by the returner. Even if half of those games were at love, that 136 tanked points to conserve energy, which equates to 34 games of tanked points, which equals almost 6 6-0 sets. Nobody complained. Kyrgios tanked four points. Not games, points.
Personally, I don't care if anyone tanks a match or a game, unless it's my player I'm coaching. If some professional player decides to tank, because he's irritated at the umpire, or has a bet in on the game for him to lose, or just doesn't want to be there - while I would prefer them to just retire, I take no personal offense if they instead choose to show up and put forth a measly effort. Now, IF that was the only match I paid to see, would i be disappointed? Sure, but that wasn't the case on this day, although I'm sure there were some people who went to his match and his alone. Perhaps some Aussie fans. That's part of the risk associated with buying a ticket to a live sporting event. The result will simply be he will have fewer fans. Free market at work.
We are all worried that somehow Kyrgios's tanking is going to send the worng message to young players that it's ok to tank a point, a game, a match. It has actually done the opposite. Kyrgios looks like a complete buffoon, especially after watching his response to the tanking allegations, and every coach in the world is having a conversation with their students about tanking, and what a bad thing it is to do.
We blow a player's actions way out of proportion out of our own self-importance, all the while neglecting that if there weren't people doing ridiculous things on the court like Kyrgios, we would never feel the need to talk about the behavior in question and ensure that the students we teach and the kids we raise never repeat that mistake.
Kyrgios has a lot of mental work to do to become a great player. The fact he let an umpire's call rattle him to the point of tanking a game speaks to the miles he must travel mentally and emotionally in order to become great. But let's not take it personally. Our lives move on, either with him as a favorite player, or more likely, not.
Saturday, March 14, 2015
How The Tallahassee City Championships Proved Me Right All Along
Vindication. It is a sweet word full of anger, joy, and of course that blissful feeling of knowing you were right all along. Yesterday's City Championships for high school tennis in Tallahassee vindicated yours truly from months, maybe even years, of dissenting opinions on how to handle a player and their decision on whether or not to play high school tennis.
Needless to say my approach to the player in question was not well-received by pros and high school coaches alike. Their opinion - which was often relayed to me in passive aggression, was that as the player's coach, it was my job to promote high school tennis to the player. Others insinuated that I needed to exercise some form of control over the player, and use my relationship with them to "force" the player to play high school tennis. Many believed that I was actively steering the player away from high school tennis, which to some was a form of disrespect to those within the high school tennis coaching circles and to the other players that were playing at the time.
The central disagreement that I had with the other pros and coaches alike, was that ultimately it is the player's decision to decide if high school tennis was a good fit for them. The tact I took with the player in question was one where I simply gave all the information regarding high school tennis, from an unbiased perspective. I gave the player the pros and the cons, and explained to the player how playing high school tennis could help achieve her goals, and how it could hurt those goals as well. I explained cases of players who played high school tennis and went on to play professionally, and also explained how many players that play professional tennis, and even college tennis at a high level, never played high school tennis. We even had an example in Tallahassee of players who didn't play high school tennis and are playing for FSU. I also explained to the player that for me personally, playing high school tennis was very important, but that I also understood why one may feel reluctant to do it at all.
Many of those who disagreed with my position, focused solely on my putting forth of the negatives of playing high school tennis. What they didn't want to understand, or didn't try to understand, was that my goal was not to make the decision for the player. My goal was to allow the player to make an informed decision on their own, where they would weigh their goals, and the pros and the cons, and come to a decision that they would feel comfortable with. Sometimes negatives are only negative as they pertain to someone's goals. If you think about it, I'm sure you can find a negative for anything, including winning the lottery.
Some thought that my approach meant that I felt that the player was "too good" for high school tennis. That was never the case at all. A good coach listens to what the player wants, what they like and what they don't like as far as the game, and then explains to them how the team activity will have parts they like and parts they don't like. That is primarily where the "negatives" come from. The other part that rubbed people the wrong way was my non-answers as to whether or not the player would play at all. My standard answer was always along the lines of "if [the player] decides it's best for [them] then they'll play." I honestly had no clue what the ultimate decision would be.
Some of my peers focused on the life lessons that high school tennis would teach the players. And that that alone was reason enough to "push" the player towards that end. However, if the goal of any coach is to make the player a better person, to lead them to becoming more and more self-sufficient, and to teach the player to take responsibility for their own path in life, then how could I in good conscious "make" the player do something? Rather it was all about the player learning to take responsibility for their own game, to take all the information into consideration, and make the best decision possible. After all, this is a skill that will help the player for the rest of their life.
So after the player won the City Championships yesterday, my first thoughts were about how the player made this decision themselves, and how I was right not to force them into anything. I was especially proud that the decision is one they are happy with, and even more proud that they are a more mature, well-rounded person for having to make the decision on their own. And I know in the future , that when it comes to making life decisions, the player will be more than capable of doing it themselves.
Tuesday, February 17, 2015
Why Winning Is So Hard, and Losing So Easy
The hardest thing to do on the tennis court is win - be it a point, a game, a set, or a match. So much must go right for you, and you must remain focused from the first point to the last. Your preparation leading into the match will predict your success or failure to a large degree. You must believe you can win, and be able to see the finish line at all times, and not doubt yourself once you arrive at the finis line. After all, it's one thing to get to the finish line, and still another to cross it.
Losing is easy. All it takes is a lack of focus, poor preparation, questionable (to be charitable) shot selection, and a love for the low percentage plays. It is aided by low self-esteem, lack of confidence, and believing you have zero chance to win. Self-doubt is something every player struggles with at some point. However, in order to win you must be able to manufacture self-belief and confidence when there is no positive experiential results to hang your hat on.
The bottom line is in order to win you must master EVERY aspect of what it takes to win. In order to lose, all you must do is fail at ONE. In tennis, at level, the margins are so small, all it takes sometimes to determine the winner and loser is one big point. Are you able to do what is necessary to win?
Winning takes an enormous amount of practice. Not only with the technical and tactical aspects of your game, but also with the mental and emotional parts of your game. Are you setting the right kind of goals that allow you to build confidence and trust in your abilities on the court? Are you playing the right kind of practice matches, ones where you know you can win, and ones that will be a serious challenge? If, for example, you play regular practice sets against players who are better than you, and you always lose, you will never learn how to win a match. All you will learn is how to lose, and that you aren't a good enough player to win those types of matches. Yes, your ability to hit the ball will improve, but being a better striker of the ball and winning do not necessarily equate.
What does "manufacturing self-confidence" mean exactly? Simply put it means placing trust in the process. It means believing in the process of actions instead of the results of those actions. It works because it the correct processes that beget the best results. Results, no matter how good we become as players, is very much out of our control. Remember Andy Roddick playing out of his mind in the 2009 Wimbledon Final? It was, according to him, the best match he ever played. He still lost. The fact that there is another person on the other side of the net trying to attain the same results as we are is why we cannot focus ourselves upon the results. The process is the only part of the results equation the we have 100% control over. Our focus should remain there.
Part of the process is making good shot selection decisions. Part of the process is having routines between every point that keep your focus off the previous point and instead focus you on the next one. It is about staying in the present.
Focusing on the result can lead to fear. The fear of losing, the fear of blowing opportunities like crossing the finish line in a match. It leads to nerves getting out of control. Focusing on the process can help mitigate nerves, and calm you down. It keeps you focused on what to do, and leads you to playing your best.
It is hard to focus on the process for an entire match. It takes practice, and lots of it. Everyone is results oriented at the end of the day. This is why coaches get hired and fired with absurd frequency. However, those that do find a way to trust the process will find the best results. It has been proven over and over again, not just in tennis, but in all sports.
Losing is what happens to all but one player in a tournament. 50% of the people in a given match lose. It takes quite a bit of mental and emotional fortitude to continually win every time you're on the court. A small hiccup in one area can cost you a match. A completely focused effort can earn you a win. Most of the time there is a strong correlation between your focus on the process and the level of your play, but even when you play poorly, if you focus on the process, it is very possible you still find a way to win.
Every decision we make, on the practice court and on the match court, directly influences our chances to win or lose. Be sure every part of your preparation builds your confidence, and find a process for matches that works best for you. Then you can turn frequent losing into frequent winning.
Losing is easy. All it takes is a lack of focus, poor preparation, questionable (to be charitable) shot selection, and a love for the low percentage plays. It is aided by low self-esteem, lack of confidence, and believing you have zero chance to win. Self-doubt is something every player struggles with at some point. However, in order to win you must be able to manufacture self-belief and confidence when there is no positive experiential results to hang your hat on.
The bottom line is in order to win you must master EVERY aspect of what it takes to win. In order to lose, all you must do is fail at ONE. In tennis, at level, the margins are so small, all it takes sometimes to determine the winner and loser is one big point. Are you able to do what is necessary to win?
Winning takes an enormous amount of practice. Not only with the technical and tactical aspects of your game, but also with the mental and emotional parts of your game. Are you setting the right kind of goals that allow you to build confidence and trust in your abilities on the court? Are you playing the right kind of practice matches, ones where you know you can win, and ones that will be a serious challenge? If, for example, you play regular practice sets against players who are better than you, and you always lose, you will never learn how to win a match. All you will learn is how to lose, and that you aren't a good enough player to win those types of matches. Yes, your ability to hit the ball will improve, but being a better striker of the ball and winning do not necessarily equate.
What does "manufacturing self-confidence" mean exactly? Simply put it means placing trust in the process. It means believing in the process of actions instead of the results of those actions. It works because it the correct processes that beget the best results. Results, no matter how good we become as players, is very much out of our control. Remember Andy Roddick playing out of his mind in the 2009 Wimbledon Final? It was, according to him, the best match he ever played. He still lost. The fact that there is another person on the other side of the net trying to attain the same results as we are is why we cannot focus ourselves upon the results. The process is the only part of the results equation the we have 100% control over. Our focus should remain there.
Part of the process is making good shot selection decisions. Part of the process is having routines between every point that keep your focus off the previous point and instead focus you on the next one. It is about staying in the present.
Focusing on the result can lead to fear. The fear of losing, the fear of blowing opportunities like crossing the finish line in a match. It leads to nerves getting out of control. Focusing on the process can help mitigate nerves, and calm you down. It keeps you focused on what to do, and leads you to playing your best.
It is hard to focus on the process for an entire match. It takes practice, and lots of it. Everyone is results oriented at the end of the day. This is why coaches get hired and fired with absurd frequency. However, those that do find a way to trust the process will find the best results. It has been proven over and over again, not just in tennis, but in all sports.
Losing is what happens to all but one player in a tournament. 50% of the people in a given match lose. It takes quite a bit of mental and emotional fortitude to continually win every time you're on the court. A small hiccup in one area can cost you a match. A completely focused effort can earn you a win. Most of the time there is a strong correlation between your focus on the process and the level of your play, but even when you play poorly, if you focus on the process, it is very possible you still find a way to win.
Every decision we make, on the practice court and on the match court, directly influences our chances to win or lose. Be sure every part of your preparation builds your confidence, and find a process for matches that works best for you. Then you can turn frequent losing into frequent winning.
Thursday, February 5, 2015
Focus on Your Responsibilities To Win More Doubles Matches
Doubles mirrors life in many ways. In both there is individual responsibility and also mutual responsibility. One's individual actions has a direct impact on the success of others. Understanding this concept is the key to being successful in doubles.
Let's look at each type of responsibility and what constitutes them.
Individual Responsibility
1) Your court position when the ball is on your side of the court. There is a right and wrong place to be. As an example, when you are up at net, and your partner is back at the baseline, and the ball has been hit to them, you must move to a defensive position near the middle T to protect against a potential poach. If you fail to do this, you leave the middle wide open for your opponent, and your team will more than likely lose the point.
2) Your court position when the ball is on your opponent's side of the court. This will depend on where you begin the point, and if you are up or back. If you are at the net and you fail to attack (move forward) when your partner hits to the baseline player, then you are forgoing opportunities to poach and putting more pressure on your partner to do more to win the point. If you fail to "shade the ball" when you are at net when the ball is on your opponents' side of the court, you open up space for your opponents to hit through for clean winners.
3) Where you serve. When you are serving, it is up to you to put the ball in positions that both accentuate your strengths and maximize your opponents' weaknesses. Failing to get the ball to your opponents' weakness gives them the opportunity to hurt you and your partner with their strengths. This is the one part of the game that you have almost 100% control over.
4)Where you return serve. Although it is entirely possible that the server hits a great serve and puts you into a reactive position where targeting becomes almost impossible, 80-90% of returns are such that you are balanced and have the opportunity to do the right thing. Returning the serve cross court should happen 90-95% of the time. This not only greatly improves your chances of starting the point on your end as it is the high percentage play, it also allows your partner to possibly pick off the next ball.
5)Your court position when you and your partner are at net. You have heard from tennis professionals and tennis commentators that you and your partner should be "attached by a string x feet apart" in order to ensure that you move together. This is works when the ball is on your side of the court only. When the ball is on your opponents' side of the court, the string analogy only works and makes sense if BOTH of you move to your individual correct spots. You wouldn't follow your partner if they go to the wrong spot. Therefore I recommend not focusing attention on where your partner needs to be or where they are at all, and instead ensure YOU are in the right place. This depends on whether or not you are cross court or down the line from the ball, and the effectiveness of the previous ball, just to name a few factors. If you and your partner focus on where you need to correctly be as individuals, you will APPEAR to be moving together.
6)Drifting and Poaching. Drifting is poaching the server's first ball after the serve. Poaching is picking off the return of serve. Both require the attacking player to move at the right time and move in the right path. It also requires the attacker to place the ball to certain areas of the court to ensure your team is in the best position for the next shot.
7) Shot Selection At any time in a doubles match, once you have the opportunity to hit the ball, the responsibility of where to hit the ball falls squarely on your shoulders. Your decision will positively or negatively impact your teams chances. Focusing on the correct locations for the situation will lead to better results, while not thinking or not hitting to the high percentage locations for the situation will lead to poorer results.
Mutual Responsibilty
1) Communication/reading your partner You and your partner before and after every shot must both communicate (verbally and non verbally) where you are moving and also be able to read the other in order to move to the correct locations and hit your next shots. The reason is many "plays" require two or three shot patterns, and you always want to ensure court balance when your team is forced to switch sides. This also includes any signals you and your partner may use.
2) Knowing each others' strengths and weaknesses In order for you and your partner to play at the peak of your abilities, you must not only understand your own strengths and weaknesses, but also understand your partner's strengths and weaknesses. This will allow you to only choose the correct sides to play, but also determine who should serve first, which partner sould return serve on any no-ad points, and also help your strategy (example: if your partner is a great poacher, then serve more up the middle, and return crosscourt every time so you set them up more to use their strength)
3) Knowing your opponents' strengths and weaknesses This is what allows you to force your opponents into what they do poorly, which gives you the best chance to win. Both you and your partner should understand this before the match or be able to determine it after four games.
4) Keeping each other positive/ offering support Both partners should be supportive of their partner after errors, give kudos when they play well, and keep each other pumped up and positive in between points as well as on change overs.
By understanding your individual responsibilities and what both of you are mutually responsible for, you will be better able to do the right thing during each point and during each match, thus improving your chances to win.
Let's look at each type of responsibility and what constitutes them.
Individual Responsibility
1) Your court position when the ball is on your side of the court. There is a right and wrong place to be. As an example, when you are up at net, and your partner is back at the baseline, and the ball has been hit to them, you must move to a defensive position near the middle T to protect against a potential poach. If you fail to do this, you leave the middle wide open for your opponent, and your team will more than likely lose the point.
2) Your court position when the ball is on your opponent's side of the court. This will depend on where you begin the point, and if you are up or back. If you are at the net and you fail to attack (move forward) when your partner hits to the baseline player, then you are forgoing opportunities to poach and putting more pressure on your partner to do more to win the point. If you fail to "shade the ball" when you are at net when the ball is on your opponents' side of the court, you open up space for your opponents to hit through for clean winners.
3) Where you serve. When you are serving, it is up to you to put the ball in positions that both accentuate your strengths and maximize your opponents' weaknesses. Failing to get the ball to your opponents' weakness gives them the opportunity to hurt you and your partner with their strengths. This is the one part of the game that you have almost 100% control over.
4)Where you return serve. Although it is entirely possible that the server hits a great serve and puts you into a reactive position where targeting becomes almost impossible, 80-90% of returns are such that you are balanced and have the opportunity to do the right thing. Returning the serve cross court should happen 90-95% of the time. This not only greatly improves your chances of starting the point on your end as it is the high percentage play, it also allows your partner to possibly pick off the next ball.
5)Your court position when you and your partner are at net. You have heard from tennis professionals and tennis commentators that you and your partner should be "attached by a string x feet apart" in order to ensure that you move together. This is works when the ball is on your side of the court only. When the ball is on your opponents' side of the court, the string analogy only works and makes sense if BOTH of you move to your individual correct spots. You wouldn't follow your partner if they go to the wrong spot. Therefore I recommend not focusing attention on where your partner needs to be or where they are at all, and instead ensure YOU are in the right place. This depends on whether or not you are cross court or down the line from the ball, and the effectiveness of the previous ball, just to name a few factors. If you and your partner focus on where you need to correctly be as individuals, you will APPEAR to be moving together.
6)Drifting and Poaching. Drifting is poaching the server's first ball after the serve. Poaching is picking off the return of serve. Both require the attacking player to move at the right time and move in the right path. It also requires the attacker to place the ball to certain areas of the court to ensure your team is in the best position for the next shot.
7) Shot Selection At any time in a doubles match, once you have the opportunity to hit the ball, the responsibility of where to hit the ball falls squarely on your shoulders. Your decision will positively or negatively impact your teams chances. Focusing on the correct locations for the situation will lead to better results, while not thinking or not hitting to the high percentage locations for the situation will lead to poorer results.
Mutual Responsibilty
1) Communication/reading your partner You and your partner before and after every shot must both communicate (verbally and non verbally) where you are moving and also be able to read the other in order to move to the correct locations and hit your next shots. The reason is many "plays" require two or three shot patterns, and you always want to ensure court balance when your team is forced to switch sides. This also includes any signals you and your partner may use.
2) Knowing each others' strengths and weaknesses In order for you and your partner to play at the peak of your abilities, you must not only understand your own strengths and weaknesses, but also understand your partner's strengths and weaknesses. This will allow you to only choose the correct sides to play, but also determine who should serve first, which partner sould return serve on any no-ad points, and also help your strategy (example: if your partner is a great poacher, then serve more up the middle, and return crosscourt every time so you set them up more to use their strength)
3) Knowing your opponents' strengths and weaknesses This is what allows you to force your opponents into what they do poorly, which gives you the best chance to win. Both you and your partner should understand this before the match or be able to determine it after four games.
4) Keeping each other positive/ offering support Both partners should be supportive of their partner after errors, give kudos when they play well, and keep each other pumped up and positive in between points as well as on change overs.
By understanding your individual responsibilities and what both of you are mutually responsible for, you will be better able to do the right thing during each point and during each match, thus improving your chances to win.
Sunday, January 18, 2015
Play Doubles Instincitively
Many a recreational doubles player, as well as many collegiate players, bemoan the fact that they should pick off more balls, cross more, be more aggressive with their movement, and move with their partner better. Many a tennis pro will work on poaching - how to poach, where to poach, and even when to begin moving on the poach. Your professional will also do drills with you on switching on lobs, moving together at net as well as various other tactical maneuvers. Yet the same problem remains when you play - you are a statue at the net, you only move between points, not during them. You also still fail to switch correctly on lobs, and still fail to move to the middle when your partner is pulled wide.
Why? You practice these precise movements weekly in your lessons - right? However, there is one aspect of match play that is far different from a lesson. Intensity and pressure. In a lesson, the environment is controlled. You know you are working on poaching - so you try to poach. In essence you are being forced to poach despite perhaps your better judgement. Usually in such lessons, the randomness that naturally occurs in a match is also stripped away to some degree, so your mind can ignore certain shots because they simply aren't allowed.
What each player must work on are their INSTINCTS in order to truly improve there doubles. Instincts can only be developed for match play at a speed of play greater than that of an actual match. Think of your instincts as how you react to situations during points on the court. Many of you reading this have slow, defensive, or passive instincts. This is why you do not move. When you do the lessons on these movements, the points are slower and less intense than match play. Because of this, your instincts never improve, despite the fact your knowledge base has improved conceptually.
If I asked any of you HOW to poach, when to poach, and where to poach, each one of you could verbatim regurgitate everything your coaches have ever told you. Likewise, if I asked where do you need to be on offense or defense on the court in a one-up one-back situation, most of you could easily tell me the answer. Your conceptual knowledge of where to be, what to do, and where to hit is not the problem. Not in the least. Instead, your problem is recognizing when to make a move, making the quick decision at match pace, and then just trusting yourself. That, in a nutshell is what instincts are.
So what is the answer to your poor instincts? How can we get you to tap into all that great knowledge your tennis coaches have been feeding you? The answer? Super fast paced point play with four to five extra balls to keep the points going that also increases the pace of play and raises your intensity level four to five times above what you tap into for one point in a match. Feedback only given between points, and during points only helpful "trouble" commands to help you recognize when your opponent is in trouble. Such drills confuse the brain, and force you to speed up your decision making processes, thus speeding up your reaction to stimuli and improving your instincts.
Such "lessons" should be 60 to 90 minutes long. You will get exhausted. The side benefit to such workouts is your physical fitness will improve tremendously. Long points will no longer be making you tired.
After at least one to two months do such lessons, you should see an improvement in your attempts and successes poaching, as well as you ability to move to the correct location on the court for each potential situation. All because you sped up your reactions and decision making time. The result will be better overall play, fewer errors, and more wins.
Why? You practice these precise movements weekly in your lessons - right? However, there is one aspect of match play that is far different from a lesson. Intensity and pressure. In a lesson, the environment is controlled. You know you are working on poaching - so you try to poach. In essence you are being forced to poach despite perhaps your better judgement. Usually in such lessons, the randomness that naturally occurs in a match is also stripped away to some degree, so your mind can ignore certain shots because they simply aren't allowed.
What each player must work on are their INSTINCTS in order to truly improve there doubles. Instincts can only be developed for match play at a speed of play greater than that of an actual match. Think of your instincts as how you react to situations during points on the court. Many of you reading this have slow, defensive, or passive instincts. This is why you do not move. When you do the lessons on these movements, the points are slower and less intense than match play. Because of this, your instincts never improve, despite the fact your knowledge base has improved conceptually.
If I asked any of you HOW to poach, when to poach, and where to poach, each one of you could verbatim regurgitate everything your coaches have ever told you. Likewise, if I asked where do you need to be on offense or defense on the court in a one-up one-back situation, most of you could easily tell me the answer. Your conceptual knowledge of where to be, what to do, and where to hit is not the problem. Not in the least. Instead, your problem is recognizing when to make a move, making the quick decision at match pace, and then just trusting yourself. That, in a nutshell is what instincts are.
So what is the answer to your poor instincts? How can we get you to tap into all that great knowledge your tennis coaches have been feeding you? The answer? Super fast paced point play with four to five extra balls to keep the points going that also increases the pace of play and raises your intensity level four to five times above what you tap into for one point in a match. Feedback only given between points, and during points only helpful "trouble" commands to help you recognize when your opponent is in trouble. Such drills confuse the brain, and force you to speed up your decision making processes, thus speeding up your reaction to stimuli and improving your instincts.
Such "lessons" should be 60 to 90 minutes long. You will get exhausted. The side benefit to such workouts is your physical fitness will improve tremendously. Long points will no longer be making you tired.
After at least one to two months do such lessons, you should see an improvement in your attempts and successes poaching, as well as you ability to move to the correct location on the court for each potential situation. All because you sped up your reactions and decision making time. The result will be better overall play, fewer errors, and more wins.
Monday, January 5, 2015
The State of Tennis Commentary on Television
Televised professional tennis, quite possibly, has the worst commentators of any professional sport on television. One thing that is appalling is the lack of insight into the technique that each player utilizes. This is true, despite the fact that each telecast has former players and professional coaches (usually people who are both) bloviating about the matches in incoherent rants.
The majority of the viewing public are tennis hacks - recreational players whose technique is best described as "far from professional." While it sometimes is instructive to explain why Nadal pounds the Federer backhand, once it has been stated (and is stated in every match they play) the routine viewer has no use for such analysis. They know what Nadal does to Federer too.
When the telecasts attempt to go into the technique of each player, we are given generalities rather than specifics. Things like "He keeps his head still," "look at the acceleration," or "great little steps." All this is fine and good, unless someone is actually trying to understand WHAT makes the professional technique so good and so efficient. In that regard we learn nothing for the commentators. There is no discussion of the elements of each stroke that make them so powerful and efficient.
I believe most viewers want to know how to hit a forehand like Federer, a two handed backhand like Novak's, a one handed backhand like Wawrinka, a serve like Isner, a volley like.. ok so maybe some archive footage of Mcenroe, Edberg, and Rafter should be included. The same should be done during women's matches. But you understand my point. Viewers want to emulate their favorite players and improve. Since most people are visual learners, getting some breakdowns of professional technique during a broadcast would be extremely beneficial.
Considering the broadcast time of a tennis match - sometimes 5 hours during a 3 out of 5 Grand Slam match, surely there is time to fill with better technical discussion.
So what is the solution? Add a developmental coach to the broadcast team, whose sole role is to discuss modern tennis technique using slow motion video of the players at hand. The addition of such a coach to the team would give the instruction real credit. In general players are terrible instructors, which is why we get such lame discussions of technique on current telecasts. The people who know what is going on are the best developmental coaches in the world. Find those with limited egos who won't make the discussions excuses to bash others. What is needed is someone who truly wants people to understand what exactly is going on on the court.
Technique is not an agenda either. In the past we've seen ESPN get bamboozled by the USTA to shill for 10 and under tennis, by virtue of ESPN's relationship with Patrick McEnroe. Good technique can be developed with any type of ball, so in discussing technique, pathways should be excluded from the discussion.. Fundamentals, rather than style should be emphasized - so while Nadal's lasso forehand is pretty cool looking and works for him, restrict the conversation to what he does fundamentally correct. After all, it is because he has great fundamentals that he can hit his forehand with that flair and be successful.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the late 70s and through the 80s and early 90s, Tony Trabert was the analyst for CBS's telecast of the US Open. Not only was he excellent in his discussions of the tactical and mental side of the game, he would give you great technical breakdowns in language anyone could understand. He was the last of the great analysts.
His partner in those tennis broadcasts was Pat Summerall, a former NFL kicker for the New York Giants, and well known as John Madden's broadcast partner for NFL games. What made Summerall such a good anchor for the telecasts was he never insinuated that he knew anything about tennis. He allowed Trabert to teach us what was going on. Sure, Summerall would get excited about a great shot, and had a great respect for the abilities of the players, but he never pretended to know what was going on in a player's head, ala Chris Fowler. Today, the ESPN broadcasts are sad attempts to manufacture some sort of drama, where the broadcasts of Summerall and Trabert allowed the drama to unfold on its own - therefore you were drawn into it.
Tennis as a television product is much worse today than it was in the days of Trabert and Summerall. Part of that may well be that society's attention span is significantly less today than it was in the past. If you believe that is true, and therefore the length of a tennis match is part of the problem with the current product, then you must also admit that the sports' own efforts to lengthen points by slowing down the court surfaces is also a factor in its demise as a product. However, the way it is being covered on television by ESPN is a cog that is sorely in need of radical change.
Tabloid tennis coverage is the mantra of the day. Make drama, and viewers will watch. The problem with this idea is it diminishes the actual drama that occurs on the court. Not every match has drama, nor is every match must see television, but I believe if you constantly try to create and manufacture drama where none exists, then when there is an actual dramatic tennis match, it diminishes its impact. It's along the lines of the girl who cried wolf. Eventually the viewer simply tunes you out. That's what has happened to ESPN's tennis coverage.
If I were in charge of ESPN tennis telecasts, I would let Fowler go. Next to go would be Brad Gilbert, Chris Evert, Patrick McEnroe, Jim Courier, and Pam Shriver. I would keep Mary Joe Fernandez, and Darren Cahill. Even though they used to be great commentators, John McEnroe and Cliff Drysdale have got to go.
I would attempt to hire Mike Breen of ABC and ESPN's NBA coverage as my #1 anchor for matches. Initially I would put him with Darren Cahill. The third person on the team would be a developmental coach (male or female). In the studio, I would hire Mike Greenberg & Sage Steele since Greenberg used to play tennis and has a true love for the sport, and Steele is a great anchor on NBA countdown. They would go solo, alternating during the day. Initially at least, for the reboot, I would see if Frank Deford from Sports Illustrated is available to do retrospectives on current and former players, as well as the game itself. This would mean replacing Tom Rinaldi, who is too melodramatic in my opinion. Lastly, Sally Jenkins of the Washington Post would do all in studio interviews, as she used to cover the tour and is very good at what she does. Gone would be discussing matches with former players in studio. The match commentators and analysts would take care of that.
The approach would be streamlined, and the hires would be an attempt to make coverage less in your face, instead accentuating the on court product.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The final piece of the puzzle will be to come to terms with the fact that no one in this country cares about sub-standard American professional tennis players. If we had a plethora of top ranked players who had a legitimate chance to win a major, then showing Americans over other great players would make sense. Today, Serena Williams is the only player that should get such treatment from ESPN. All other featured match decisions should be based on three questions for each tour (ATP & WTA).
ATP
1) Is Roger Federer playing? Show live
2) Is Rafael Nadal playing? Show live
3) Is Novak Djokovic playing? Show live
WTA
1) Is Serena Williams playing? Show live
2) Is Maria Sharapova playing? Show live
3) Is Eugenie Bouchard playing? Show live
All other decisions should be based on either the highest ranked player that is on court, or the best match-up, determined by lowest combined ranking or seeding.
These are the players people want to see. On scale, no one cares about Sloane Stephens, or John Isner, or anyone else from the American camp. The American fan likes champions, winners. No longer should ESPN forbid the viewers from seeing one of the six players mentioned as must see TV in order to give us Sloane Stephens or John Isner. If and when an American breaks through and plays a match that is already going to be featured, like a semi-final or final, then they get their moment in the sun.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lastly, ESPN needs to forbid its analysts from propping up American players as great, when in fact they are mediocre on the tour (Save for Serena), Coverage should be realistic and not hopeful. You can discuss a country's hopes for a player, but the commentators shouldn't be actively rooting for someone, or explaining to us why so and so is going to be a top 10 player, when they have zero results to justify it. Let that kind of thing play itself out on court - there is no need to embellish the truth with fiction.
At the end of the day, we all want Americans to do well, but America doesn't prefer to watch mediocre Americans that will be out of a tournament by the 3rd round over the top players in the world. And we aren't naive enough not to be able to tell that a player has zero shot of becoming a grand slam champion. So please stop patronizing us.
Better television coverage of tennis requires a complete reboot of the television product by ESPN. Hopefully, they are having discussions, but I think we're going to get the same old tired garbage again this year.
The majority of the viewing public are tennis hacks - recreational players whose technique is best described as "far from professional." While it sometimes is instructive to explain why Nadal pounds the Federer backhand, once it has been stated (and is stated in every match they play) the routine viewer has no use for such analysis. They know what Nadal does to Federer too.
When the telecasts attempt to go into the technique of each player, we are given generalities rather than specifics. Things like "He keeps his head still," "look at the acceleration," or "great little steps." All this is fine and good, unless someone is actually trying to understand WHAT makes the professional technique so good and so efficient. In that regard we learn nothing for the commentators. There is no discussion of the elements of each stroke that make them so powerful and efficient.
I believe most viewers want to know how to hit a forehand like Federer, a two handed backhand like Novak's, a one handed backhand like Wawrinka, a serve like Isner, a volley like.. ok so maybe some archive footage of Mcenroe, Edberg, and Rafter should be included. The same should be done during women's matches. But you understand my point. Viewers want to emulate their favorite players and improve. Since most people are visual learners, getting some breakdowns of professional technique during a broadcast would be extremely beneficial.
Considering the broadcast time of a tennis match - sometimes 5 hours during a 3 out of 5 Grand Slam match, surely there is time to fill with better technical discussion.
So what is the solution? Add a developmental coach to the broadcast team, whose sole role is to discuss modern tennis technique using slow motion video of the players at hand. The addition of such a coach to the team would give the instruction real credit. In general players are terrible instructors, which is why we get such lame discussions of technique on current telecasts. The people who know what is going on are the best developmental coaches in the world. Find those with limited egos who won't make the discussions excuses to bash others. What is needed is someone who truly wants people to understand what exactly is going on on the court.
Technique is not an agenda either. In the past we've seen ESPN get bamboozled by the USTA to shill for 10 and under tennis, by virtue of ESPN's relationship with Patrick McEnroe. Good technique can be developed with any type of ball, so in discussing technique, pathways should be excluded from the discussion.. Fundamentals, rather than style should be emphasized - so while Nadal's lasso forehand is pretty cool looking and works for him, restrict the conversation to what he does fundamentally correct. After all, it is because he has great fundamentals that he can hit his forehand with that flair and be successful.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the late 70s and through the 80s and early 90s, Tony Trabert was the analyst for CBS's telecast of the US Open. Not only was he excellent in his discussions of the tactical and mental side of the game, he would give you great technical breakdowns in language anyone could understand. He was the last of the great analysts.
His partner in those tennis broadcasts was Pat Summerall, a former NFL kicker for the New York Giants, and well known as John Madden's broadcast partner for NFL games. What made Summerall such a good anchor for the telecasts was he never insinuated that he knew anything about tennis. He allowed Trabert to teach us what was going on. Sure, Summerall would get excited about a great shot, and had a great respect for the abilities of the players, but he never pretended to know what was going on in a player's head, ala Chris Fowler. Today, the ESPN broadcasts are sad attempts to manufacture some sort of drama, where the broadcasts of Summerall and Trabert allowed the drama to unfold on its own - therefore you were drawn into it.
Tennis as a television product is much worse today than it was in the days of Trabert and Summerall. Part of that may well be that society's attention span is significantly less today than it was in the past. If you believe that is true, and therefore the length of a tennis match is part of the problem with the current product, then you must also admit that the sports' own efforts to lengthen points by slowing down the court surfaces is also a factor in its demise as a product. However, the way it is being covered on television by ESPN is a cog that is sorely in need of radical change.
Tabloid tennis coverage is the mantra of the day. Make drama, and viewers will watch. The problem with this idea is it diminishes the actual drama that occurs on the court. Not every match has drama, nor is every match must see television, but I believe if you constantly try to create and manufacture drama where none exists, then when there is an actual dramatic tennis match, it diminishes its impact. It's along the lines of the girl who cried wolf. Eventually the viewer simply tunes you out. That's what has happened to ESPN's tennis coverage.
If I were in charge of ESPN tennis telecasts, I would let Fowler go. Next to go would be Brad Gilbert, Chris Evert, Patrick McEnroe, Jim Courier, and Pam Shriver. I would keep Mary Joe Fernandez, and Darren Cahill. Even though they used to be great commentators, John McEnroe and Cliff Drysdale have got to go.
I would attempt to hire Mike Breen of ABC and ESPN's NBA coverage as my #1 anchor for matches. Initially I would put him with Darren Cahill. The third person on the team would be a developmental coach (male or female). In the studio, I would hire Mike Greenberg & Sage Steele since Greenberg used to play tennis and has a true love for the sport, and Steele is a great anchor on NBA countdown. They would go solo, alternating during the day. Initially at least, for the reboot, I would see if Frank Deford from Sports Illustrated is available to do retrospectives on current and former players, as well as the game itself. This would mean replacing Tom Rinaldi, who is too melodramatic in my opinion. Lastly, Sally Jenkins of the Washington Post would do all in studio interviews, as she used to cover the tour and is very good at what she does. Gone would be discussing matches with former players in studio. The match commentators and analysts would take care of that.
The approach would be streamlined, and the hires would be an attempt to make coverage less in your face, instead accentuating the on court product.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The final piece of the puzzle will be to come to terms with the fact that no one in this country cares about sub-standard American professional tennis players. If we had a plethora of top ranked players who had a legitimate chance to win a major, then showing Americans over other great players would make sense. Today, Serena Williams is the only player that should get such treatment from ESPN. All other featured match decisions should be based on three questions for each tour (ATP & WTA).
ATP
1) Is Roger Federer playing? Show live
2) Is Rafael Nadal playing? Show live
3) Is Novak Djokovic playing? Show live
WTA
1) Is Serena Williams playing? Show live
2) Is Maria Sharapova playing? Show live
3) Is Eugenie Bouchard playing? Show live
All other decisions should be based on either the highest ranked player that is on court, or the best match-up, determined by lowest combined ranking or seeding.
These are the players people want to see. On scale, no one cares about Sloane Stephens, or John Isner, or anyone else from the American camp. The American fan likes champions, winners. No longer should ESPN forbid the viewers from seeing one of the six players mentioned as must see TV in order to give us Sloane Stephens or John Isner. If and when an American breaks through and plays a match that is already going to be featured, like a semi-final or final, then they get their moment in the sun.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lastly, ESPN needs to forbid its analysts from propping up American players as great, when in fact they are mediocre on the tour (Save for Serena), Coverage should be realistic and not hopeful. You can discuss a country's hopes for a player, but the commentators shouldn't be actively rooting for someone, or explaining to us why so and so is going to be a top 10 player, when they have zero results to justify it. Let that kind of thing play itself out on court - there is no need to embellish the truth with fiction.
At the end of the day, we all want Americans to do well, but America doesn't prefer to watch mediocre Americans that will be out of a tournament by the 3rd round over the top players in the world. And we aren't naive enough not to be able to tell that a player has zero shot of becoming a grand slam champion. So please stop patronizing us.
Better television coverage of tennis requires a complete reboot of the television product by ESPN. Hopefully, they are having discussions, but I think we're going to get the same old tired garbage again this year.
Tuesday, December 23, 2014
25 Random, Yet Sage, Thoughts on Tennis
Here below I have compiled a list of some of my most sage thoughts. Enjoy!
1) If you think you can win, you have have a chance to win. If you think you won't win, you have no chance to win.
2) Without change there can be no improvement
3) Playing with one doubles partner for at least a year is the only proven way to play your best doubles.
4) Doubles and singles tactics are irrelevant if you can't get your serve or return of serve in.
5) You win the vast majority of points due to errors by your opponent. So try to force errors rather than hit winners.
6) Losing and winning are both states of mind
7) If everyone only played with people better than themselves, no one would play with anyone at any time.
8) If you can rationalize losing 45-55% of the points at the baseline and still play a counter punching game from the back of the court, why can't you rationalize that losing 45-49% of the points at net is a great result and keep attacking the net?
9) Respect everyone's game, fear no one's game.
10) Cheating is a display not only of poor sportsmanship, but more importantly, lack of confidence.
11) How you respond to and deal with events on court is more important than the events themselves.
12) A losing strategy is one that cannot win you more than 49.99% of the points.
13) Ball machine practice makes anything more permanent, including bad technique.
14) Power without consistency is like driving 120mph without being able to control the car - it ends badly for you.
15) Your opponents should not have a better idea of your strengths and weaknesses than you do.
16) The server's partner in doubles is more responsible for holding the serve than the server, provided the server is not a double fault machine.
17) The number one reason people don't poach or pick off enough balls is they fear getting passed up the line.
18) The shots you use the least in a match require the most practice.
19) Bad footwork often causes bad technique, but bad technique never causes bad footwork.
20) Decide where you're hitting the ball BEFORE you move to the ball.
21) A low-percentage game will always yield you low-percentage results.
22) Right now, someone is working harder than you, and wants it more than you.
23) Learning from failure is the key to future success.
24) Spin the racquet and choose servers and sides BEFORE you begin to warm up for a match
25) When you do lose, focus you're ire on yourself - in singles and doubles.
11) How you respond to and deal with events on court is more important than the events themselves.
12) A losing strategy is one that cannot win you more than 49.99% of the points.
13) Ball machine practice makes anything more permanent, including bad technique.
14) Power without consistency is like driving 120mph without being able to control the car - it ends badly for you.
15) Your opponents should not have a better idea of your strengths and weaknesses than you do.
16) The server's partner in doubles is more responsible for holding the serve than the server, provided the server is not a double fault machine.
17) The number one reason people don't poach or pick off enough balls is they fear getting passed up the line.
18) The shots you use the least in a match require the most practice.
19) Bad footwork often causes bad technique, but bad technique never causes bad footwork.
20) Decide where you're hitting the ball BEFORE you move to the ball.
21) A low-percentage game will always yield you low-percentage results.
22) Right now, someone is working harder than you, and wants it more than you.
23) Learning from failure is the key to future success.
24) Spin the racquet and choose servers and sides BEFORE you begin to warm up for a match
25) When you do lose, focus you're ire on yourself - in singles and doubles.
Tuesday, December 9, 2014
Doubles 101 Tactics -The Three Ts
When playing doubles, or taking a doubles lesson, invariably you have heard your pro or partner say "get them (your opponents) out of position." Essentially, they are imploring you to hit the ball somewhere that forces your opponents to move in a way that should open up space for you to exploit on the next shot. But what does this really mean? HOW can you accomplish this?
What will allow you to do what is being asked of you is to target and exploit the three T's on the court. They are the middle T where the service line and center line meet, and the two side T's where the singles line and service line meet. The Bryan Brothers have used this theory of doubles to win a record number of grand slams, and it will help you win vastly more matches. Check out the diagram below
Now you know visually the targets you are trying to exploit. Next is to know which T to exploit and when.
Serve: At a high level, servers will attempt to hit their serves to either the middle T or the side T to get the returner out of position, either moving them outside the alley, or towards the center of the court. This makes the "second shot" during the point self explanatory. If the server serves out wide to the deuce court for example and the returner returns up the line, the server's partner should attack the middle T. If the return goes cross court, and server's partner can pick it off, the ball goes to either the middle T or the side T on the ad court. If the return is low to the server as he comes in to net, he must put the ball back to the side T on the deuce court. If the return is high to the middle of the court and the server has the shot, he should go to the middle T. If the ball is high to the outside cross court toward the alley, the server should volley down the line to the side T on the ad court.
As you can see you are simply moving the ball from T to T, playing the high percentage shot each time.
Return of Serve - Returners should be aiming for the side T cross court. This target should keep the ball away from server's partner and get your partner active in a "drift" (returner's partner poaching the server's first volley or groundstroke). If the server volleys up the line and your partner is there, your partner attacks the middle T. If your partner drifts to pick of the server's cross court volley or groundstroke he attacks either the middle T or the side T that is in the direction he is moving.
Poaching - Almost all poaches attacke either the middle T or the side T to the side you are moving. What determines your shot selection is whether or not you have crossed the center line or not. The middle T should be attacked if you pick off the ball but are still on "your side" of the court. The side T to the side you are moving should be attacked if you are able to cross over the center line to pick off the ball, as volleying to the middle T in this scenario opens up space for your opponent to attack the space you vacated.
Overheads - Overheads should always be hit to the middle T or the side T to the "short side (side where the volleyer is)" if you are on "your side" of the court or the side T in the direction you are moving if you are crossing. If both your opponents are at net or the person in front of you is at the net, then you may hit the overhead to the side T on your half of the court.
Approach Shots - Like the return of serve, approach shots should be hit to the side T cross court if you are engaged in a cross court ground stroke rally. If the rally is down the line (after a switch for example) then your approach shot should attack the side T down the line.
There isn't much tactically to doubles when it gets broken down in this manner. Attack the appropriate T to get your opponents out of position, then attack another to try to finish the point. If you play the high percentage shot each time, you will not only get your opponents in poor positions, you will also reduce your own errors.
I encourage you to apply the theory of the three T's to your game, your match results and ratings will be happier for it.
What will allow you to do what is being asked of you is to target and exploit the three T's on the court. They are the middle T where the service line and center line meet, and the two side T's where the singles line and service line meet. The Bryan Brothers have used this theory of doubles to win a record number of grand slams, and it will help you win vastly more matches. Check out the diagram below
Serve: At a high level, servers will attempt to hit their serves to either the middle T or the side T to get the returner out of position, either moving them outside the alley, or towards the center of the court. This makes the "second shot" during the point self explanatory. If the server serves out wide to the deuce court for example and the returner returns up the line, the server's partner should attack the middle T. If the return goes cross court, and server's partner can pick it off, the ball goes to either the middle T or the side T on the ad court. If the return is low to the server as he comes in to net, he must put the ball back to the side T on the deuce court. If the return is high to the middle of the court and the server has the shot, he should go to the middle T. If the ball is high to the outside cross court toward the alley, the server should volley down the line to the side T on the ad court.
As you can see you are simply moving the ball from T to T, playing the high percentage shot each time.
Return of Serve - Returners should be aiming for the side T cross court. This target should keep the ball away from server's partner and get your partner active in a "drift" (returner's partner poaching the server's first volley or groundstroke). If the server volleys up the line and your partner is there, your partner attacks the middle T. If your partner drifts to pick of the server's cross court volley or groundstroke he attacks either the middle T or the side T that is in the direction he is moving.
Poaching - Almost all poaches attacke either the middle T or the side T to the side you are moving. What determines your shot selection is whether or not you have crossed the center line or not. The middle T should be attacked if you pick off the ball but are still on "your side" of the court. The side T to the side you are moving should be attacked if you are able to cross over the center line to pick off the ball, as volleying to the middle T in this scenario opens up space for your opponent to attack the space you vacated.
Overheads - Overheads should always be hit to the middle T or the side T to the "short side (side where the volleyer is)" if you are on "your side" of the court or the side T in the direction you are moving if you are crossing. If both your opponents are at net or the person in front of you is at the net, then you may hit the overhead to the side T on your half of the court.
Approach Shots - Like the return of serve, approach shots should be hit to the side T cross court if you are engaged in a cross court ground stroke rally. If the rally is down the line (after a switch for example) then your approach shot should attack the side T down the line.
There isn't much tactically to doubles when it gets broken down in this manner. Attack the appropriate T to get your opponents out of position, then attack another to try to finish the point. If you play the high percentage shot each time, you will not only get your opponents in poor positions, you will also reduce your own errors.
I encourage you to apply the theory of the three T's to your game, your match results and ratings will be happier for it.
Tuesday, November 25, 2014
Giving Thanks - The Most Important Person in My Tennis Development
For most players who achieve even a fairly high level of play, either their mom or dad or their coach would be considered the most important person in their tennis development. After all, some moms and dads spend literally hours a day on court with their children, driving their kids to tournaments, dealing with the aftermath of wins and losses, and helping shape the character of their child. The Coach spends hours a week with the player, guiding and shaping their games into the flower that blossoms before our eyes on the court.
My parents, though supportive of my efforts to play tennis, did not spend hours on the court with me each week. Yes, they drove me to the courts when necessary, took me to tournaments and club matches when necessary. But they didn't stay on the court when I took clinics, or hover around practices, and aside from "mother or father son time" when I was 6 or 7, never took me out on the court to hit balls. During my "formative years" 12-17, I was my own transportation to the swim and racquet club we belonged to. I rode my bike everywhere; to club matches at various clubs within our city, and got rides with other families if the club matches or tournaments were away and my mom couldn't take me. I solely dictated when I played, how I played, and with whom I played, my parents never suggested that I go play. And I played every day of every summer from 6-14, and virtually every day of the year from age 14-18. If I wanted to go play, my parents always let me go. But as far as being INVOLVED in my actual tennis development, neither played a vital role.
I never had a coach who was responsible for my tennis development. Yes, I had team coaches, both at our swim and racquet club, and at our high school. While great people, none of them were coaches in the sense of doing things that could help improve your game technically, tactically, emotionally, or physically. I never took a private lesson growing up. In fact the first lesson I ever took was at age 22 with nothing specific in mind. The second and last private lesson I took was to learn how to hit a one handed slice at age 24 so I could pass the USPTA exam. I had the occasion to take two indoor high performance clinics sessions - One 8 week session at age 14 and another at age 17 that was cut short by an MCL tear. About 5 times I went to a weekend High Performance clinic with the best players in our area, but I can't say they had a profound impact on my tennis. None of those clinics or teams had a radical effect on my tennis development, other than to give me the opportunity to compete against different players than I normally played against.
I learned how to play primarily from watching matches on TV and then spending hours upon hours on the court trying to somehow replicate what I saw. Some of this time involved me hitting against the wall at our swim and tennis club, and some of it involved me taking two cans of tennis balls with me to the courts and serving for an hour. I did these things frequently.
However, there was also a person with whom I played tennis with four to five times a week for almost 6 years. I met him when I was 11 and he was 10. We met at the swim and racquet club as part of our club team. Perhaps ironically, our older brothers were doubles partners for one year and during that season won the District high school championship and represented our high school at the state championships. Like our brothers, Ken and Paul, respectively, Steve Soliday and I won the district doubles title two years in a row and represented the same high school two years in a row at the state championships.
Not only were Steve and I tennis practice partners, we were best friends. His mother was essentially a second mother to me, as I spent a lot of time at his house. We played tennis probably 320 days out of 365 together for 5-6 years. Many times we would play for 3-4 hours at once. It was my time on the court with Steve that I developed my game. My father used to ask me "Can't you find someone else to play with?" Perhaps, but he was always willing and available. Reliable. That was important to me.
As kids, through high school, we would read Tennis Magazine (wen it was actually interesting) and try out some of their games and drills. The "ultimate game of touch" was a favorite. We would play best 3 of five sets, thus pushing ourselves physically and mentally. We did a lot of "pepper" or quick volleys, we both liked playing the net. These games are responsible for what at one point were very good hands and pretty good volleying skills for me.
Steve was always a good returner of serve, so it forced me to improve both my first and second serve. As a younger player, I was more of a "pusher" and Steve was a more aggressive player. I would get the better of him just because of consistency. When Steve would beat me, and this happened five or six times during those 5-6 years, I would get so irritated that I lost to him, that I would make some radical change so it wouldn't happen again. One in particular I remember, was he beat me at an indoor tournament when I was 15. Straight sets. Was only the second time he'd ever beaten me. The fallout from that match was severe. I can remember my father saying to me when I got home (I rode my bike to the tournament) "How are you losing to Steve?" Since I had no coach, I to come up with a solution. In my mind, if he could beat me once, he could beat me again, and I did not want that to happen.
So after a few months of closer matches which I was again winning, but now in three sets instead of two, I decided that I needed to follow my heart and start serving and volleying, at least on the first serve. I would also start attacking the net on second serves. Soon I was again beating him as I had been prior to the indoor loss. My game had improved.
Even though I got the better of our matches growing up, he was the standard by which I measured my game. I knew that he could beat people I had no chance of beating, because his game was always "bigger" than my game. The guys he struggled with, the guys he would lose to but "should" have been beating, I would always beat those players. But he had wins against players I went 0-for against. Even then, I knew his ceiling was higher than mine. At that time, all that was important to me was staying one step ahead.
He was more natural athlete, the more gifted player. I was the workhorse. To stay ahead of him I played and practiced perhaps twice as much as he did. If that ever was to stop (which it did) by virtue of me not practicing or he practicing more, I knew he would overtake me. That's how much respect I had for him and his game. You can just see things when you play someone alnost every day for that long a period of time.
Eventually he would overtake me. He smartly left FSU and played four years of college tennis at Salisbury university. Once that happened, he would either beat me or I would somehow get lucky and split sets. Wins for me were no longer part of the dynamic. But he was still the measuring stick by which I would judge my own success.
So fast forward to 2014. I move to Charlotte to take a tennis teaching job, and Steve is living in Charlotte. He invites me to play in a 12 person doubles "league" on Wednesday nights. Knowing that he is playing at a higher level than me now, my sole goal in this league is to somehow play well enough to move "up" within the group in order to play on his court, and then to win one set of doubles AGAINST him. He STILL is the measuring stick of my tennis at age 40. Some things are just hardwired in your psyche. Pretty unbelievable when I sit back and think about it.
So without a doubt, the most important person in my own tennis development is Steve Soliday. I doubt he knows that, but it is the truth. Without him being such a big part of my life, I'm not sure I'd even be a tennis teaching professional. That's how important he was to my tennis. So this Thanksgiving, I'm giving much thanks to having him as a friend and tennis partner. Happy Thanksgiving. .
My parents, though supportive of my efforts to play tennis, did not spend hours on the court with me each week. Yes, they drove me to the courts when necessary, took me to tournaments and club matches when necessary. But they didn't stay on the court when I took clinics, or hover around practices, and aside from "mother or father son time" when I was 6 or 7, never took me out on the court to hit balls. During my "formative years" 12-17, I was my own transportation to the swim and racquet club we belonged to. I rode my bike everywhere; to club matches at various clubs within our city, and got rides with other families if the club matches or tournaments were away and my mom couldn't take me. I solely dictated when I played, how I played, and with whom I played, my parents never suggested that I go play. And I played every day of every summer from 6-14, and virtually every day of the year from age 14-18. If I wanted to go play, my parents always let me go. But as far as being INVOLVED in my actual tennis development, neither played a vital role.
I never had a coach who was responsible for my tennis development. Yes, I had team coaches, both at our swim and racquet club, and at our high school. While great people, none of them were coaches in the sense of doing things that could help improve your game technically, tactically, emotionally, or physically. I never took a private lesson growing up. In fact the first lesson I ever took was at age 22 with nothing specific in mind. The second and last private lesson I took was to learn how to hit a one handed slice at age 24 so I could pass the USPTA exam. I had the occasion to take two indoor high performance clinics sessions - One 8 week session at age 14 and another at age 17 that was cut short by an MCL tear. About 5 times I went to a weekend High Performance clinic with the best players in our area, but I can't say they had a profound impact on my tennis. None of those clinics or teams had a radical effect on my tennis development, other than to give me the opportunity to compete against different players than I normally played against.
I learned how to play primarily from watching matches on TV and then spending hours upon hours on the court trying to somehow replicate what I saw. Some of this time involved me hitting against the wall at our swim and tennis club, and some of it involved me taking two cans of tennis balls with me to the courts and serving for an hour. I did these things frequently.
However, there was also a person with whom I played tennis with four to five times a week for almost 6 years. I met him when I was 11 and he was 10. We met at the swim and racquet club as part of our club team. Perhaps ironically, our older brothers were doubles partners for one year and during that season won the District high school championship and represented our high school at the state championships. Like our brothers, Ken and Paul, respectively, Steve Soliday and I won the district doubles title two years in a row and represented the same high school two years in a row at the state championships.
Not only were Steve and I tennis practice partners, we were best friends. His mother was essentially a second mother to me, as I spent a lot of time at his house. We played tennis probably 320 days out of 365 together for 5-6 years. Many times we would play for 3-4 hours at once. It was my time on the court with Steve that I developed my game. My father used to ask me "Can't you find someone else to play with?" Perhaps, but he was always willing and available. Reliable. That was important to me.
As kids, through high school, we would read Tennis Magazine (wen it was actually interesting) and try out some of their games and drills. The "ultimate game of touch" was a favorite. We would play best 3 of five sets, thus pushing ourselves physically and mentally. We did a lot of "pepper" or quick volleys, we both liked playing the net. These games are responsible for what at one point were very good hands and pretty good volleying skills for me.
Steve was always a good returner of serve, so it forced me to improve both my first and second serve. As a younger player, I was more of a "pusher" and Steve was a more aggressive player. I would get the better of him just because of consistency. When Steve would beat me, and this happened five or six times during those 5-6 years, I would get so irritated that I lost to him, that I would make some radical change so it wouldn't happen again. One in particular I remember, was he beat me at an indoor tournament when I was 15. Straight sets. Was only the second time he'd ever beaten me. The fallout from that match was severe. I can remember my father saying to me when I got home (I rode my bike to the tournament) "How are you losing to Steve?" Since I had no coach, I to come up with a solution. In my mind, if he could beat me once, he could beat me again, and I did not want that to happen.
So after a few months of closer matches which I was again winning, but now in three sets instead of two, I decided that I needed to follow my heart and start serving and volleying, at least on the first serve. I would also start attacking the net on second serves. Soon I was again beating him as I had been prior to the indoor loss. My game had improved.
Even though I got the better of our matches growing up, he was the standard by which I measured my game. I knew that he could beat people I had no chance of beating, because his game was always "bigger" than my game. The guys he struggled with, the guys he would lose to but "should" have been beating, I would always beat those players. But he had wins against players I went 0-for against. Even then, I knew his ceiling was higher than mine. At that time, all that was important to me was staying one step ahead.
He was more natural athlete, the more gifted player. I was the workhorse. To stay ahead of him I played and practiced perhaps twice as much as he did. If that ever was to stop (which it did) by virtue of me not practicing or he practicing more, I knew he would overtake me. That's how much respect I had for him and his game. You can just see things when you play someone alnost every day for that long a period of time.
Eventually he would overtake me. He smartly left FSU and played four years of college tennis at Salisbury university. Once that happened, he would either beat me or I would somehow get lucky and split sets. Wins for me were no longer part of the dynamic. But he was still the measuring stick by which I would judge my own success.
So fast forward to 2014. I move to Charlotte to take a tennis teaching job, and Steve is living in Charlotte. He invites me to play in a 12 person doubles "league" on Wednesday nights. Knowing that he is playing at a higher level than me now, my sole goal in this league is to somehow play well enough to move "up" within the group in order to play on his court, and then to win one set of doubles AGAINST him. He STILL is the measuring stick of my tennis at age 40. Some things are just hardwired in your psyche. Pretty unbelievable when I sit back and think about it.
So without a doubt, the most important person in my own tennis development is Steve Soliday. I doubt he knows that, but it is the truth. Without him being such a big part of my life, I'm not sure I'd even be a tennis teaching professional. That's how important he was to my tennis. So this Thanksgiving, I'm giving much thanks to having him as a friend and tennis partner. Happy Thanksgiving. .
Monday, November 17, 2014
Improve Your Match Play By Changing How You Play Practice Matches
Regardless of what type of player you are - junior player, USTA league player, ladies' league doubles player, or recreational player - you can improve your play substantially by using your practice matches to improve some aspect of your game.
What is a practice match? Any match whose result makes no difference to you or you and your partner whatsoever. In other words, your overriding goal is not winning the match. This is an important distinction for one reason - when you mentally choose to focus on winning - you stop focusing on improving, and instead just do what "feels right." You resort to your normal habits. If you can make improvement the overriding goal, and put winning on the back burner, then you can use match play to your advantage.
Players who always focus on winning in every match never improve their level of play.
So what to work on? That is up to you. You can choose something technical, tactical, or mental/emotional. Let's tackle them one at a time, and give you some suggestions for each.
Technical - Regardless of what you are working on, your goal is the production of the correct technique on every point. This means you attempt the proper technique every opportunity you have. You do not waver from this approach, even if you are making errors. The purpose is to get better at the new technique, not win the match. The only way to make new technique "match tough," is to force yourself to use in in matches. Plus, when you are learning new technique, if you resort beck to your "old" technique in order to win, you are making it more difficult to learn the new technique. You would actually set yourself back. Remember, it's OK to lose a match, and it's ok to make errors while you are learning a new technique. If you play doubles, it will suffice for you to be upfront with your partner that you are going to be practicing a new technique. This way, your partner's expectations for winning are lowered, and you might even convince them to work on something also. If you are able to win or at least play well using the new technique, just think about the confidence that will give you.
Tactical - My personal term for this is called "playing with restrictions." Essentially you force yourself to do certain patterns of play, no matter the outcome. As an example, imagine you want to improve hitting your return of serve and attacking the net - "chipping and charging" so to speak. Well, you would attempt this tactic on every service point, and force yourself to get to the net. If you blow three returns in a row, or dump the volley in the net three times in a row, the fourth point you chip and charge again. No conscience. You are there to work on your game. Even if your long term goal is not to use this tactic on every point, you are certainly going to get comfortable doing the tactic under match conditions. In this case, you are playing the practice match with your "B or C" game, and improving it. This will only serve to improve the effectiveness of your "A" game by giving you more options and variety. If you start winning practice matches with your B or C game, you will know your overall game improved tremendously.
Mental/Emotional - This part of your game needs to be practiced to perfect as well. Whether you are working on routines between points, or working on breathing out wen your opponent strikes the ball and when you strike the ball, or working on staying calm through adversity, you must practice them to improve them. Like the technical and tactical items, you must force yourself to practice them no matter the result or outcome of the point/match. If you are working on a set routine between every point, then this is your focus for the match - not where your return serve, not how you serve, not the success or failure of your volleys. Only the routines matter.
As you can tell, focusing on something in your matches rather than the outcome takes great mental focus and attention. That alone will improve your ability to focus in a match that DOES count.
Improvement can happen in lessons, in the gym, or in matches. No matter the venue, you must be attentive toward what you are trying to improve. Most professional and top level junior players target certain events so they have their peak performance occur at those events. As an example, Pete Sampras would use non majors to work on his game. Hence a reason he only won 64 tournaments in his illustrious career that saw him win 14 majors. But it is instructive that one of the greatest players of all time didn't make winning every event his priority. Instead, his goal was winning one or more of four tournaments a year.
We are just as capable as Pete Sampras to not only target certain events/matches to play our best and focus on winning, but also use other matches and events as practice to help us improve enough to play our absolute best at the targeted events. So next time you're playing a practice match, practice something, it will help you win later.
What is a practice match? Any match whose result makes no difference to you or you and your partner whatsoever. In other words, your overriding goal is not winning the match. This is an important distinction for one reason - when you mentally choose to focus on winning - you stop focusing on improving, and instead just do what "feels right." You resort to your normal habits. If you can make improvement the overriding goal, and put winning on the back burner, then you can use match play to your advantage.
Players who always focus on winning in every match never improve their level of play.
So what to work on? That is up to you. You can choose something technical, tactical, or mental/emotional. Let's tackle them one at a time, and give you some suggestions for each.
Technical - Regardless of what you are working on, your goal is the production of the correct technique on every point. This means you attempt the proper technique every opportunity you have. You do not waver from this approach, even if you are making errors. The purpose is to get better at the new technique, not win the match. The only way to make new technique "match tough," is to force yourself to use in in matches. Plus, when you are learning new technique, if you resort beck to your "old" technique in order to win, you are making it more difficult to learn the new technique. You would actually set yourself back. Remember, it's OK to lose a match, and it's ok to make errors while you are learning a new technique. If you play doubles, it will suffice for you to be upfront with your partner that you are going to be practicing a new technique. This way, your partner's expectations for winning are lowered, and you might even convince them to work on something also. If you are able to win or at least play well using the new technique, just think about the confidence that will give you.
Tactical - My personal term for this is called "playing with restrictions." Essentially you force yourself to do certain patterns of play, no matter the outcome. As an example, imagine you want to improve hitting your return of serve and attacking the net - "chipping and charging" so to speak. Well, you would attempt this tactic on every service point, and force yourself to get to the net. If you blow three returns in a row, or dump the volley in the net three times in a row, the fourth point you chip and charge again. No conscience. You are there to work on your game. Even if your long term goal is not to use this tactic on every point, you are certainly going to get comfortable doing the tactic under match conditions. In this case, you are playing the practice match with your "B or C" game, and improving it. This will only serve to improve the effectiveness of your "A" game by giving you more options and variety. If you start winning practice matches with your B or C game, you will know your overall game improved tremendously.
Mental/Emotional - This part of your game needs to be practiced to perfect as well. Whether you are working on routines between points, or working on breathing out wen your opponent strikes the ball and when you strike the ball, or working on staying calm through adversity, you must practice them to improve them. Like the technical and tactical items, you must force yourself to practice them no matter the result or outcome of the point/match. If you are working on a set routine between every point, then this is your focus for the match - not where your return serve, not how you serve, not the success or failure of your volleys. Only the routines matter.
As you can tell, focusing on something in your matches rather than the outcome takes great mental focus and attention. That alone will improve your ability to focus in a match that DOES count.
Improvement can happen in lessons, in the gym, or in matches. No matter the venue, you must be attentive toward what you are trying to improve. Most professional and top level junior players target certain events so they have their peak performance occur at those events. As an example, Pete Sampras would use non majors to work on his game. Hence a reason he only won 64 tournaments in his illustrious career that saw him win 14 majors. But it is instructive that one of the greatest players of all time didn't make winning every event his priority. Instead, his goal was winning one or more of four tournaments a year.
We are just as capable as Pete Sampras to not only target certain events/matches to play our best and focus on winning, but also use other matches and events as practice to help us improve enough to play our absolute best at the targeted events. So next time you're playing a practice match, practice something, it will help you win later.
Wednesday, November 5, 2014
Playing Against Players Above Your Level
We've all been in this situation. You're engaged in a match against players that are clearly above your level. You probably realized this during the warm up, or you knew before you played that you had virtually no chance to win. It is a tough mental hurdle to overcome for sure. It's also an almost impossible task to ask you to try to win the match.
So, what can you do? How can you attempt to make the match competitive, or at least comport yourself in the best possible way - playing to your best capabilities?
First let's talk about the mental side of this. You can only control a few things on the court - what you try to do with your shot selection and movement after each shot. The serve is the only time you have complete control of your own shot. You also have control over your court positioning at the beginning of every point. Where players immediately put themselves in a deeper hole is by thinking about everything that is out of their control. That the other team is at a higher level is a fact, and you can't change it. You can't control when they ace you, or blast return winners, or hit majestic overheads. You can't control the fact that their slice is difficult for you to return or that you can't handle their pace from the back of the court.
When you play players your own level, you might be the most consistent player from the back of the court, but against players above your level, your stroke inefficiencies come out due to the speed of the ball and quality of the shot that forces you to move into uncomfortable positions. So engaging said players in groundstroke to groundstroke cross court rallies in a one up one back set is a recipe for a quick match.
Chances are, because your opponents are at a higher level, they will move more at the net, poach more, and generally be more aggressive and successful wit that aggression. So being in the "hot seat" is likely not where you want to be.
So here are some tactical considerations if you find yourself outgunned and over-matched -
Get to net - Hit the return and come in (unless you give them a short lob), serve, and hit the next ball and come in. Lob the net player and get in. Just don't engage in a losing crosscourt groundstroke rally. This tactic assumes you can handle the pace of their groundstrokes with your volley. If you or your partner simply cannot, you may have to choose the next tactic on the list. Getting to the net eliminates your weakness (groundstrokes) from being an element of the match. Now, you get to see who the better team is at net. Chances are, you will still lose the match simply because the other team is better all around, but perhaps this tactic will win you a few more points. Consider this, if your success rate (points won) at the net is 45% and your success rate at the baseline hitting groundstrokes is 20%, which position will make the match more competitive? Always do what wins the highest percentage of points.
Play two - back - This is smart if the opposing team has really great serves that you might be able to get a racquet on, but can't consistently control the direction of the return. Playing both back against big servers saves your partner from getting obliterated in the "hot seat." It also may relax you just enough to start directing the return with more confidence, knowing you aren't setting up your partner to get another tennis ball tattoo. In addition, if you cannot control your volley because you are being overpowered by the groundstrokes of your opponent, this tactic will allow you to get a few more balls back, lengthening the points. Remember, the longer the point, the better chance they might make an error. Of course, don't get upset when they start hit short angles and dropshots on you.
Lob - A lot - Lobbing will eliminate two potential strengths from your opponent - their groundstrokes and their volleying. They may still beat you with good overheads, but at least you did something to take away their strengths. For you and your partner, you effectively slow the game down to a more manageable pace. You just might frustrate the other team enough into losing it mentally and making boatloads of errors. Or you might lose every point after they hit their first overhead. Wouldn't you like to find out? If choosing this strategy, I would play both back on their serve AND yours.
Gamesmanship - Nothing gets a player out of the "zone" like having to think about what it is they're doing to play so well. On the changeover, ask the other players "Man you're serving great today, what are you doing on your serve that makes it so precise?" Or something like "I wish I had volleys like yours, what are you doing that makes them so good?" These comments are benign really, but you may just get them to start thinking about how they hit the ball, which can be disastrous during a match. You may just start seeing a few more errors creep into their game, or more first serves being missed. People tend to frown upon "gamesmanship," but when framed as a compliment to your opponent, it usually goes undetected.
Gamesmanship #2 - Take extra time between every point. Put your hand up like you're not ready to receive serve before every point. Take extra time before you serve each point. If the team is going to kill you, make them stay out there as long as possible. The better players will usually want to play fast. Don't let them dictate the pace of the match between points. You dictate to them! Don't give them what they want, give them what you want. This slowed down pace of play may get them out their rhythm, or frustrate them just enough to get you a few more points and maybe even a few more games. A lot of this can be done by simply meeting with your partner before every point. After you meet, still put your hand up like you're not ready if the other team is serving.
You may try one or all of these in your match and still get blown out. If that's the case, you had no chance to win, but at least you tried to do something different to make their life more difficult and yours a little more livable. Sometimes that's all you can do.
So, what can you do? How can you attempt to make the match competitive, or at least comport yourself in the best possible way - playing to your best capabilities?
First let's talk about the mental side of this. You can only control a few things on the court - what you try to do with your shot selection and movement after each shot. The serve is the only time you have complete control of your own shot. You also have control over your court positioning at the beginning of every point. Where players immediately put themselves in a deeper hole is by thinking about everything that is out of their control. That the other team is at a higher level is a fact, and you can't change it. You can't control when they ace you, or blast return winners, or hit majestic overheads. You can't control the fact that their slice is difficult for you to return or that you can't handle their pace from the back of the court.
When you play players your own level, you might be the most consistent player from the back of the court, but against players above your level, your stroke inefficiencies come out due to the speed of the ball and quality of the shot that forces you to move into uncomfortable positions. So engaging said players in groundstroke to groundstroke cross court rallies in a one up one back set is a recipe for a quick match.
Chances are, because your opponents are at a higher level, they will move more at the net, poach more, and generally be more aggressive and successful wit that aggression. So being in the "hot seat" is likely not where you want to be.
So here are some tactical considerations if you find yourself outgunned and over-matched -
Get to net - Hit the return and come in (unless you give them a short lob), serve, and hit the next ball and come in. Lob the net player and get in. Just don't engage in a losing crosscourt groundstroke rally. This tactic assumes you can handle the pace of their groundstrokes with your volley. If you or your partner simply cannot, you may have to choose the next tactic on the list. Getting to the net eliminates your weakness (groundstrokes) from being an element of the match. Now, you get to see who the better team is at net. Chances are, you will still lose the match simply because the other team is better all around, but perhaps this tactic will win you a few more points. Consider this, if your success rate (points won) at the net is 45% and your success rate at the baseline hitting groundstrokes is 20%, which position will make the match more competitive? Always do what wins the highest percentage of points.
Play two - back - This is smart if the opposing team has really great serves that you might be able to get a racquet on, but can't consistently control the direction of the return. Playing both back against big servers saves your partner from getting obliterated in the "hot seat." It also may relax you just enough to start directing the return with more confidence, knowing you aren't setting up your partner to get another tennis ball tattoo. In addition, if you cannot control your volley because you are being overpowered by the groundstrokes of your opponent, this tactic will allow you to get a few more balls back, lengthening the points. Remember, the longer the point, the better chance they might make an error. Of course, don't get upset when they start hit short angles and dropshots on you.
Lob - A lot - Lobbing will eliminate two potential strengths from your opponent - their groundstrokes and their volleying. They may still beat you with good overheads, but at least you did something to take away their strengths. For you and your partner, you effectively slow the game down to a more manageable pace. You just might frustrate the other team enough into losing it mentally and making boatloads of errors. Or you might lose every point after they hit their first overhead. Wouldn't you like to find out? If choosing this strategy, I would play both back on their serve AND yours.
Gamesmanship - Nothing gets a player out of the "zone" like having to think about what it is they're doing to play so well. On the changeover, ask the other players "Man you're serving great today, what are you doing on your serve that makes it so precise?" Or something like "I wish I had volleys like yours, what are you doing that makes them so good?" These comments are benign really, but you may just get them to start thinking about how they hit the ball, which can be disastrous during a match. You may just start seeing a few more errors creep into their game, or more first serves being missed. People tend to frown upon "gamesmanship," but when framed as a compliment to your opponent, it usually goes undetected.
Gamesmanship #2 - Take extra time between every point. Put your hand up like you're not ready to receive serve before every point. Take extra time before you serve each point. If the team is going to kill you, make them stay out there as long as possible. The better players will usually want to play fast. Don't let them dictate the pace of the match between points. You dictate to them! Don't give them what they want, give them what you want. This slowed down pace of play may get them out their rhythm, or frustrate them just enough to get you a few more points and maybe even a few more games. A lot of this can be done by simply meeting with your partner before every point. After you meet, still put your hand up like you're not ready if the other team is serving.
You may try one or all of these in your match and still get blown out. If that's the case, you had no chance to win, but at least you tried to do something different to make their life more difficult and yours a little more livable. Sometimes that's all you can do.
Wednesday, October 29, 2014
Trouble - What to do in doubles when you're opponent is in trouble
In doubles, "trouble" as it pertains to your opponent, means anytime they are off balance, stretching, or retreating. It also means anytime the net player has a ball at their feet or at least very low in relation to the net. In these circumstances, your opponent's ability to accurately control the direction and intent of their shot is limited at best. What does this mean for you?
If you are playing at net, and are down the line from the ball, it means attack! Close the net (move forward) immediately upon seeing your opponent's in trouble, before they strike the ball. Look to cross and take the next ball wherever it may go. This is your team's offensive opportunity to end the point now!
By not attacking, you allow your opponents to recover and get back into the point. This lengthens the point, and increases your chance of losing the point. Attacking when your opponent is in trouble increases the odds of you winning the point.
Here are a few examples of players "in trouble:"
In the above photograph, David Ferrer is on the full stretch to the forehand side. He is about to hit a squash shot of some kind, with a continental grip, which is not his normal forehand grip. This is important, because anytime a player, especially a recreational player, switches their grip to hit a ball back, this means they are in trouble. In the above picture Ferrer is also "in trouble" because e is on the full stretch and will be off balance after this shot.
In the above photograph, Agnieszka Radwanska is about to hit a forehand slice from a slightly stretched out open stance position. This is her "in trouble." Again, this is not her normal forehand by any stretch of the imagination. In single she might get away with this shot, but in doubles, if you recognize the trouble, this shot is easy pickings for a net player.
In the above photograph, the player is fully stretched out to the backhand side, and the racquet and arm create a 180 degree angle. He is "in trouble." In other words, there is no L to create stability. This will be a weak reply. Your net partner, if they recognize this poor position before they strike the ball, will easily pick this off.
Learn to recognize when your opponent is in trouble, and attack, and your poaching rate of success will go up astronomically!
If you are playing at net, and are down the line from the ball, it means attack! Close the net (move forward) immediately upon seeing your opponent's in trouble, before they strike the ball. Look to cross and take the next ball wherever it may go. This is your team's offensive opportunity to end the point now!
By not attacking, you allow your opponents to recover and get back into the point. This lengthens the point, and increases your chance of losing the point. Attacking when your opponent is in trouble increases the odds of you winning the point.
Here are a few examples of players "in trouble:"
Learn to recognize when your opponent is in trouble, and attack, and your poaching rate of success will go up astronomically!
Monday, October 6, 2014
Au Revoir Tallahassee!
October 3rd, 2014 was my last day as a City of Tallahassee employee, and a Tallahassee resident. I now live in Charlotte., North Carolina, having accepted the Head Tennis Professional/ Jr Development Coordinator position at Providence Plantation Racquet & Swim Club.
The new position offers greater opportunity to expand my knowledge base in the game, as well as to implement programming without the stringent bureaucracy of city government. In other words, more freedom, opportunity, and potential earnings.
I leave behind my father, and many friends, coworkers, and clients that have helped make the past nine years in Tallahassee (last four with the city) some of the most enjoyable and wonderful times of my life. I am grateful to so many people, I couldn't have made this move without your influence on my teaching, my outlook, and my life.
There were many successes over the past nine years - I helped usher in a slew of Super Series to Tallahassee for Junior Tennis in 2006. I ran three Super Series, a local and a rookie USTA junior tournament. When I was hired by the City, Lenin Mongerie and the Tallahassee Tennis Association took over those same events.
Junior Match Play, first ushered in to Tallahassee when I was running my teaching business at Chiles High School was an enormous success. 18 kids on 6 courts for two hours on non-tournament Saturday mornings. It took nearly four years, but the City Of Tallahassee finally approved a similar program on Fridays, and with any luck and drive Lenin Mongerie will keep my program alive and well going forward.
In 2012, the City finally raised private lesson rates for the pros, for the first time in 23 years! Not sure if my complaining (and the complaining of the other pros) had any influence on this or not, but it makes a huge difference to the life of the pro to be making more money, even if the rate is still at least a 25% discount from the going private marketplace rate.
At Forestmeadows, I was able to put my footprint on the Adult clinic program, changing how the clinics were run from a court management perspective. Cooperative drills, everyone active, lots of balls being hit back and forth, with lots of points and games, Sounds "normal" but you'd be surprised how many clinics aren't run that way. I can tell you, almost no one else in Tallahassee does their clinics that way. The fact that at one point for two straight sessions I had 16 people in my intermediate class on Tuesdays with no help, and no one complained is a testament to my on court strategy for player management.
In addition, the assessments for adult clinics that every non-computer rated player must take prior to joining a clinic was at my urging. Prior to the assessments, people were signing up for any clinic they desired, and the levels at the clinics were nowhere near accurate or consistent. Today, I am proud to say the levels are much more even, which makes the clinics more fun for everyone.
The City now has a high performance junior tennis program. Lenin Mongerie and myself had been pressing for this for sometime provided we got a pay and pricing structure that was commensurate with the private marketplace. Thanks to the hard work behind the scenes of Glen Howe, Superintendent, we were able to begin High Performance this fall.
Brett Landau and Chris Perrigan, two of my students since 2006 won the Team State Doubles Title for 1A in 2012. Both played the 14's Zonals for Florida in 2008. Both play collegiate tennis, Brett at UNC-Asheville, and Chris at Florida Gulf Coast University. They teamed up this summer and won the ITA summer circuit event at Florida State this year in doubles.
Estella Waczewski was the highest ranked 12 and Under girl in Tallahassee when she aged up, and played 14's Zonals, as well as numerous national events. Very proud of her considering I started her as a raw beginner on my very first day with the city in 2010.
I would like to credit Lori Cartwright for pulling out of me the equivalent of tennis lesson gold. She began working with me weekly last fall, and was determined to ave a physical lesson, in which she would work on movement and shot selection in a fast paced, instinctual way. The format I came up with to meet her needs, was the reason the search committee members I taught at my interview loved the lesson I gave - an identical lesson to what I did with Lori. If you want to know what the lesson was like, talk to Lori - she might tell you unless she plays you frequently :-)
Working for the city expanded my friendships and helped me find some great friends I hope I never lose contact with.
In hindsight, Tallahassee was the perfect place at the right time in my life. I loved it - more and more the longer I stayed. I will miss it and everyone I taught. You are all part of me now, like it or not.
Au Revoir!
The new position offers greater opportunity to expand my knowledge base in the game, as well as to implement programming without the stringent bureaucracy of city government. In other words, more freedom, opportunity, and potential earnings.
I leave behind my father, and many friends, coworkers, and clients that have helped make the past nine years in Tallahassee (last four with the city) some of the most enjoyable and wonderful times of my life. I am grateful to so many people, I couldn't have made this move without your influence on my teaching, my outlook, and my life.
There were many successes over the past nine years - I helped usher in a slew of Super Series to Tallahassee for Junior Tennis in 2006. I ran three Super Series, a local and a rookie USTA junior tournament. When I was hired by the City, Lenin Mongerie and the Tallahassee Tennis Association took over those same events.
Junior Match Play, first ushered in to Tallahassee when I was running my teaching business at Chiles High School was an enormous success. 18 kids on 6 courts for two hours on non-tournament Saturday mornings. It took nearly four years, but the City Of Tallahassee finally approved a similar program on Fridays, and with any luck and drive Lenin Mongerie will keep my program alive and well going forward.
In 2012, the City finally raised private lesson rates for the pros, for the first time in 23 years! Not sure if my complaining (and the complaining of the other pros) had any influence on this or not, but it makes a huge difference to the life of the pro to be making more money, even if the rate is still at least a 25% discount from the going private marketplace rate.
At Forestmeadows, I was able to put my footprint on the Adult clinic program, changing how the clinics were run from a court management perspective. Cooperative drills, everyone active, lots of balls being hit back and forth, with lots of points and games, Sounds "normal" but you'd be surprised how many clinics aren't run that way. I can tell you, almost no one else in Tallahassee does their clinics that way. The fact that at one point for two straight sessions I had 16 people in my intermediate class on Tuesdays with no help, and no one complained is a testament to my on court strategy for player management.
In addition, the assessments for adult clinics that every non-computer rated player must take prior to joining a clinic was at my urging. Prior to the assessments, people were signing up for any clinic they desired, and the levels at the clinics were nowhere near accurate or consistent. Today, I am proud to say the levels are much more even, which makes the clinics more fun for everyone.
The City now has a high performance junior tennis program. Lenin Mongerie and myself had been pressing for this for sometime provided we got a pay and pricing structure that was commensurate with the private marketplace. Thanks to the hard work behind the scenes of Glen Howe, Superintendent, we were able to begin High Performance this fall.
Brett Landau and Chris Perrigan, two of my students since 2006 won the Team State Doubles Title for 1A in 2012. Both played the 14's Zonals for Florida in 2008. Both play collegiate tennis, Brett at UNC-Asheville, and Chris at Florida Gulf Coast University. They teamed up this summer and won the ITA summer circuit event at Florida State this year in doubles.
Estella Waczewski was the highest ranked 12 and Under girl in Tallahassee when she aged up, and played 14's Zonals, as well as numerous national events. Very proud of her considering I started her as a raw beginner on my very first day with the city in 2010.
I would like to credit Lori Cartwright for pulling out of me the equivalent of tennis lesson gold. She began working with me weekly last fall, and was determined to ave a physical lesson, in which she would work on movement and shot selection in a fast paced, instinctual way. The format I came up with to meet her needs, was the reason the search committee members I taught at my interview loved the lesson I gave - an identical lesson to what I did with Lori. If you want to know what the lesson was like, talk to Lori - she might tell you unless she plays you frequently :-)
Working for the city expanded my friendships and helped me find some great friends I hope I never lose contact with.
In hindsight, Tallahassee was the perfect place at the right time in my life. I loved it - more and more the longer I stayed. I will miss it and everyone I taught. You are all part of me now, like it or not.
Au Revoir!
Thursday, September 25, 2014
Choosing A Tennis Professional As An Adult
Choosing a tennis professional as an adult can be almost as daunting as choosing one for your son or daughter. In Tallahassee in particular, there are numerous choices. How can one make the best decision possible?
A few days ago I had a wonderful conversation with Gina Herring, Tallahassee's USTA adult league coordinator, about just this topic. She told me that she has taken lessons with virtually everyone in town (save yours truly). She explained that at different points in her tennis career, different pros were perfect for where she was at the time.
I know another person who is a frequent lesson taker, that has also taken from most of the pros in town, and she has told me that each pro has given her something that she finds useful to her game - even implying that in her mind every pro has their strengths, and when she feels her game could use a dose of a specific strength of a specific pro, she will do lessons with that person.
There are many ways to decide what professional is best for you. The simplest way is to take a lesson from every person and make your best judgement based on those experiences. However here is a simple checklist that may aid you in determining the best professional who can help improve your game.
1) Punctuality- Hopefully the professional arrives early if you are his first lesson. Does your lesson start on time? This is your first indication of how responsible the professional really is.
2) Brevity - Does the professional spend half the lesson explaining what he /she wants and expects of you? Do they give long winded explanations? Is half the lesson taken up with talking rather than playing and drilling? Your professional should be able to explain things succinctly and quickly, and transition you quickly between drills without needing a dissertation. After all, you're there to hit balls, not chat.
3) Court/ player Management - Does the professional involve everyone in the activity? Do they have cooperative, interactive drills? Or, do they use lines where player stand around waiting for the person in front of them to finish the activity. The best professionals keep everyone active throughout the lesson. The only appropriate lines during a lesson or clinic are the white ones on the court.
4) Corrective Techniques - Does the professional tell you WHAT to do, or HOW to do it? Most people know what to do, but the art of teaching is getting the student to do what it is you want them to do. That involves the HOW - how will I get Judy to poach on the deuce court? Telling her to move forward at an angle is the what, but how can I get her to remember that movement pattern? A good professional will have different HOWS for different types of learners. Some people are visual learners, while others are kinesthetic learners, and still others are auditory learners. Your professional needs to be able to connect with the type of learner you are.
5) Progression - Does the lesson have a theme, and beginning, middle, and end? Your lesson should be focused on one item, unless you choose to effectively take two half hour lessons in one hour. That one item is the theme. A theme is not "forehands." A theme is specific to your needs. A theme could be "cross court forehands for doubles focusing on point of contact." That's just a basic example. In a strategy lesson, a theme could be " down the line lob returns focusing on court positioning after the lob."
6) Tailoring - Does the pro listen to what you say you want to learn or do they do what they want? As professional and student, you are a team. We need your guidance as much as you need ours. At least that's how the relationship works best. A good professional, always listens closely to your suggestions and problems, and tailors the lesson to fit your needs.
7) Price, Availability - While these things are important, they should only come into play if you feel you have two or more excellent professionals that you have taken from, and cannot decide between them because they are that close in your mind. In that situations price and availability come into play.
As you search for the professional for you, take time to consider the above suggestions. If nothing else, maybe it will open your mind to new possibilities.
A few days ago I had a wonderful conversation with Gina Herring, Tallahassee's USTA adult league coordinator, about just this topic. She told me that she has taken lessons with virtually everyone in town (save yours truly). She explained that at different points in her tennis career, different pros were perfect for where she was at the time.
I know another person who is a frequent lesson taker, that has also taken from most of the pros in town, and she has told me that each pro has given her something that she finds useful to her game - even implying that in her mind every pro has their strengths, and when she feels her game could use a dose of a specific strength of a specific pro, she will do lessons with that person.
There are many ways to decide what professional is best for you. The simplest way is to take a lesson from every person and make your best judgement based on those experiences. However here is a simple checklist that may aid you in determining the best professional who can help improve your game.
1) Punctuality- Hopefully the professional arrives early if you are his first lesson. Does your lesson start on time? This is your first indication of how responsible the professional really is.
2) Brevity - Does the professional spend half the lesson explaining what he /she wants and expects of you? Do they give long winded explanations? Is half the lesson taken up with talking rather than playing and drilling? Your professional should be able to explain things succinctly and quickly, and transition you quickly between drills without needing a dissertation. After all, you're there to hit balls, not chat.
3) Court/ player Management - Does the professional involve everyone in the activity? Do they have cooperative, interactive drills? Or, do they use lines where player stand around waiting for the person in front of them to finish the activity. The best professionals keep everyone active throughout the lesson. The only appropriate lines during a lesson or clinic are the white ones on the court.
4) Corrective Techniques - Does the professional tell you WHAT to do, or HOW to do it? Most people know what to do, but the art of teaching is getting the student to do what it is you want them to do. That involves the HOW - how will I get Judy to poach on the deuce court? Telling her to move forward at an angle is the what, but how can I get her to remember that movement pattern? A good professional will have different HOWS for different types of learners. Some people are visual learners, while others are kinesthetic learners, and still others are auditory learners. Your professional needs to be able to connect with the type of learner you are.
5) Progression - Does the lesson have a theme, and beginning, middle, and end? Your lesson should be focused on one item, unless you choose to effectively take two half hour lessons in one hour. That one item is the theme. A theme is not "forehands." A theme is specific to your needs. A theme could be "cross court forehands for doubles focusing on point of contact." That's just a basic example. In a strategy lesson, a theme could be " down the line lob returns focusing on court positioning after the lob."
6) Tailoring - Does the pro listen to what you say you want to learn or do they do what they want? As professional and student, you are a team. We need your guidance as much as you need ours. At least that's how the relationship works best. A good professional, always listens closely to your suggestions and problems, and tailors the lesson to fit your needs.
7) Price, Availability - While these things are important, they should only come into play if you feel you have two or more excellent professionals that you have taken from, and cannot decide between them because they are that close in your mind. In that situations price and availability come into play.
As you search for the professional for you, take time to consider the above suggestions. If nothing else, maybe it will open your mind to new possibilities.
Saturday, September 13, 2014
Early Start NTRP Ratings - What They Are, What They Aren't
A few weeks ago the USTA published the Early Start 2015 NTRP Ratings for Adult League players. If you played Adult gender leagues (combo excluded) in 2014, and your rating was either bumped up or down, your name appears on this list.
What does it mean?
The Early Start Rating means that if you plan to play in a 2015 league that starts prior to the end of year ratings that come out in December, then the rating listed on the early start list will be your rating for that league ONLY. If your name does not appear on the list, it means that for early start leagues, your rating remains the same.
What DON'T they mean?
The Early Start Ratings do not mean that your rating has changed at all for 2015 leagues that begin in 2015. In fact, just because your name appears on the Early Start list as having been bumped up or down, your rating might still remain unchanged from your 2014 rating when the FINAL ratings come out in December. In addition, they also do not mean that you won't be bumped up or down once the final ratings come out in December.
Huh? How is that Even Possible?
Remember that your rating is DYNAMIC. Your current "Early Start Rating" is merely a snapshot in time. It changes percentage points with each match you play, each match your opponents play. So if your team played in an Adult League Sectional, and you played the team that won and went to Nationals, those players have yet to play Nationals, and those matches will affect your rating.
NTRP Tournament matches also affect your final yearly rating. The Early Start Ratings do not take tournament matches into account. This is important not only if you yourself have played an NTRP tournament, but also if your opponents had played any NTRP tournaments.
Because of the above reasons, after Nationals, the USTA computer will take into account ALL the matches from 2014, including Nationals and tournaments (which are not taken into consideration for the Early Start Ratings), and will spit out your final rating for 2015 Leagues in December. That will be the rating that actually counts.
Can I Appeal An Early Start Rating?
Yes, you can. However, you can only appeal down. You do this when signing up for an Early Start 2015 League. Simply attempt to register for the league in question, and if you are ineligible due to your rating being too high, click the appeal rating button. The appeal will be answered instantaneously.
Final Thoughts
As a player, it is easy to get excited, upset, anxious, or fearful about your rating going up, going down, or staying the same. While the Early Start Ratings may be useful in giving you an IDEA if your rating is moving up, down, or staying put, at the end of the day it has little to no real value as Tallahassee does not have Early Start 2015 Leagues. Ignore them, and by all means put no stock or emotional energy into them. Be patient, and wait for the end of the year ratings to come out. Those are the ratings that make a difference. Though investing a ton of emotional energy into a rating isn't rational or worth it in the end, many players attach their self esteem and self worth to their rating. For those players, save yourself three months of an emotional roller coaster of jubilation and/or turmoil and just wait for the end of year rating.
What does it mean?
The Early Start Rating means that if you plan to play in a 2015 league that starts prior to the end of year ratings that come out in December, then the rating listed on the early start list will be your rating for that league ONLY. If your name does not appear on the list, it means that for early start leagues, your rating remains the same.
What DON'T they mean?
The Early Start Ratings do not mean that your rating has changed at all for 2015 leagues that begin in 2015. In fact, just because your name appears on the Early Start list as having been bumped up or down, your rating might still remain unchanged from your 2014 rating when the FINAL ratings come out in December. In addition, they also do not mean that you won't be bumped up or down once the final ratings come out in December.
Huh? How is that Even Possible?
Remember that your rating is DYNAMIC. Your current "Early Start Rating" is merely a snapshot in time. It changes percentage points with each match you play, each match your opponents play. So if your team played in an Adult League Sectional, and you played the team that won and went to Nationals, those players have yet to play Nationals, and those matches will affect your rating.
NTRP Tournament matches also affect your final yearly rating. The Early Start Ratings do not take tournament matches into account. This is important not only if you yourself have played an NTRP tournament, but also if your opponents had played any NTRP tournaments.
Because of the above reasons, after Nationals, the USTA computer will take into account ALL the matches from 2014, including Nationals and tournaments (which are not taken into consideration for the Early Start Ratings), and will spit out your final rating for 2015 Leagues in December. That will be the rating that actually counts.
Can I Appeal An Early Start Rating?
Yes, you can. However, you can only appeal down. You do this when signing up for an Early Start 2015 League. Simply attempt to register for the league in question, and if you are ineligible due to your rating being too high, click the appeal rating button. The appeal will be answered instantaneously.
Final Thoughts
As a player, it is easy to get excited, upset, anxious, or fearful about your rating going up, going down, or staying the same. While the Early Start Ratings may be useful in giving you an IDEA if your rating is moving up, down, or staying put, at the end of the day it has little to no real value as Tallahassee does not have Early Start 2015 Leagues. Ignore them, and by all means put no stock or emotional energy into them. Be patient, and wait for the end of the year ratings to come out. Those are the ratings that make a difference. Though investing a ton of emotional energy into a rating isn't rational or worth it in the end, many players attach their self esteem and self worth to their rating. For those players, save yourself three months of an emotional roller coaster of jubilation and/or turmoil and just wait for the end of year rating.
Saturday, September 6, 2014
The Circle of Life - Reinventing Your Game At 40 - A Personal Story
For those of you who have known me and my tennis game for a long time, you are well aware of my affinity for the net, volleying, and the serve and volley style of play. I have been a serve and volley player since age 16.
Prior to age 16, I was a very good counter-puncher who could run all day, play three matches in a day (back when the USTA had junior players playing 2 out of 3 sets) and be fine for the next day's tennis. I would ride my bike 2 miles to get to the courts to play practice matches, club matches or just to hit on the wall. Without having a private coach or being part of a group clinic, save for one two month stint at an indoor club in the winter of 1988, I was one of the best players in our area in Maryland.
John McEnroe was my favorite player growing up. I never paid much attention to his explosions, I was enamored with how he played the game. So much feel, so much thought went into his game. He wouldn't overpower anyone, instead relying on great hands, great movement, great anticipation, and a keen sense for the geometry of the court. It was on September 2, 1990, which happened to be my 16th birthday, that I watched McEnroe play a 5 set thriller at the US Open against Emilio Sanchez in the the 4th round on TV. Immediately after, I called a friend, rode my bike to the swim and racquet club, and played a match against him, forever discarding my counter-punching game, and resolving to serve and volley like my idol. I never looked back. The style of play was exciting, creative, and I saw no decrease in my level of play at the time.
Now, fast forward to July 2014. I play a match on court 19 against Brett Landau, a student of mine who I have taught since he was 12, who now plays collegiately for UNC-Asheville. He literally does not sweat one drop in completely humiliating me 6-0, 6-1. My worst loss in singles since I foolishly tanked a consolation match at the Maryland State closed tournament in 1991. However, there was no tanking in this match versus Brett. I was trying my hardest, but came to the realization that I just couldn't compete with him anymore.
I was tired after every point, serving and volleying as I have for 24 years. I was slow, couldn't get into the net close enough to hit a volley - I was more likely to be trapped in no man's land at 3/4 court. My lateral movement at the baseline reminded me of semi truck being pulled by an 8 year old. I couldn't recover to get into position, and felt like a spectator rather than a player.
Something had to change. It was embarrassing. I came home from teaching that evening, and after showering, looked at myself in the mirror. Where was the slender, athletic, younger version of myself that I remember from age 18-24? From the look in the mirror, he was suffocating beneath layers upon layers of fat. I weighed myself immediately: 231lbs. Ouch. I had weighed this much before, but I had been lifting weights and had more muscle mass. Even in that case, I remember complaining about being slow and trying to play tennis with a 25lb dumbbell attached to my waist. If you don't understand how that feels, try it sometime, I guarantee your level of tennis will fall off significantly.
My first order of business before I ever played another second of tennis? Lose weight. The goal? Get down to 205. Only then would I put myself through any tennis practices or matches for that matter. The gut that had swelled in size over the years was public enemy #1. I immediately instituted an 18 hour daily fast on the weekdays and Sundays, meaning I would eat food in a 4-6 hour window at night after I taught. Water only throughout the day. No bread, no candy, no soda, no beer - except on Friday night and Saturday. Saturday would see me eat three squares. My diet would shift to rice based meals almost exclusively and more fruits and vegetables. I increased the amount of seafood I would eat as well.
For about a week, the fasting diet was difficult. I was hungry, no doubt, I was used to eating far more than essentially one meal a day. However, I felt better. Drinking water throughout the day, especially when I felt hungry, had significantly improved my hydration level. And after week 1 I had lost 3.5 lbs. I continued the fasting diet for one month. After that month I had shed 21 of the 26 lbs.
I would come back from vacation determined to lose the next 5 lbs, but by restoring a more normal eating schedule,but still reducing my caloric intake and limiting my food choices. At 210 lbs, I chose to start hitting tennis balls, and playing matches as well.
The first order of business on the tennis court, regarding my game, was to see if I felt more spry, and to determine if my serve and volley game would improve now that I lost the weight. After all I should move faster and more quickly without 20 lbs, right?
The answer of two weeks time was yes and no. Yes, I was moving faster, better. No, it still wasn't good enough to continue utilizing a style of play that demands you be at your most athletic an quickest to succeed. I felt I would not only continue to lose the practice matches I was losing, but I would be doing a disservice to the style of play that I love and respect so much. In other words, continuing to play serve and volley without being physically capable anymore was disrespecting the game. After losing a practice match to Allen Vinson, I decided that both my style of return of serve, and my style of game must change.
So how would I proceed? Those who know me and my game know I do not have overpowering groundstrokes by any stretch of the imagination. So transforming my game to that of an aggressive baseliner just wasn't going to happen. So my next practice match, I decided to go back to the 15 yr old version of myself. You know, the one who was a good counter-puncher who stayed back all day and retrieved balls. That guy, I thought, had pretty good results. So I played the practice match from the back of the court. I served and stayed back for the first time in 24 years. I stopped moving forward on my split step on returns, and instead began backing up as I split step, to give me more time to see the ball and give myself more time to take a bigger swing. I ran down all the balls. No more spectating. Low and behold, 15 yr old Matt finally won the almost 40 yr old version a practice set! I weighed myself that night...205lbs! My goal attained!
The good news was I also wasn't getting all that physically tired anymore. Thank you diet. Now, truth be told, I learned that staying back and retrieving all day is extremely mentally taxing. Mentally, I was exhausted. However, I was committed to continuing with this change. Next practice match, I again played from the back of the court. Again, I won! Happy birthday me!
My tennis has essentially come full circle. What once was old is new again. The past has become the present. For me, the net is a place I will always love, but like a beautiful woman with whom you have a bad relationship, sometimes you just have to let her go. I will live vicariously through Brett Landau, who carries my serve and volley torch at the collegiate level.
I feel better about myself for having not only lost the weight, but also sticking with the goal and seeing it to fruition. I had thought for sometime that my tennis wasn't that big a deal to me, but I learned the truth is, my esteem is directly linked to my tennis. This process is bringing me much joy, and needed exercise. I'm having fun playing tennis again, which in and of itself is a gift.
Anything is possible if you put your mind to it. No one can make you do it, it must come from within.
Prior to age 16, I was a very good counter-puncher who could run all day, play three matches in a day (back when the USTA had junior players playing 2 out of 3 sets) and be fine for the next day's tennis. I would ride my bike 2 miles to get to the courts to play practice matches, club matches or just to hit on the wall. Without having a private coach or being part of a group clinic, save for one two month stint at an indoor club in the winter of 1988, I was one of the best players in our area in Maryland.
John McEnroe was my favorite player growing up. I never paid much attention to his explosions, I was enamored with how he played the game. So much feel, so much thought went into his game. He wouldn't overpower anyone, instead relying on great hands, great movement, great anticipation, and a keen sense for the geometry of the court. It was on September 2, 1990, which happened to be my 16th birthday, that I watched McEnroe play a 5 set thriller at the US Open against Emilio Sanchez in the the 4th round on TV. Immediately after, I called a friend, rode my bike to the swim and racquet club, and played a match against him, forever discarding my counter-punching game, and resolving to serve and volley like my idol. I never looked back. The style of play was exciting, creative, and I saw no decrease in my level of play at the time.
Now, fast forward to July 2014. I play a match on court 19 against Brett Landau, a student of mine who I have taught since he was 12, who now plays collegiately for UNC-Asheville. He literally does not sweat one drop in completely humiliating me 6-0, 6-1. My worst loss in singles since I foolishly tanked a consolation match at the Maryland State closed tournament in 1991. However, there was no tanking in this match versus Brett. I was trying my hardest, but came to the realization that I just couldn't compete with him anymore.
I was tired after every point, serving and volleying as I have for 24 years. I was slow, couldn't get into the net close enough to hit a volley - I was more likely to be trapped in no man's land at 3/4 court. My lateral movement at the baseline reminded me of semi truck being pulled by an 8 year old. I couldn't recover to get into position, and felt like a spectator rather than a player.
Something had to change. It was embarrassing. I came home from teaching that evening, and after showering, looked at myself in the mirror. Where was the slender, athletic, younger version of myself that I remember from age 18-24? From the look in the mirror, he was suffocating beneath layers upon layers of fat. I weighed myself immediately: 231lbs. Ouch. I had weighed this much before, but I had been lifting weights and had more muscle mass. Even in that case, I remember complaining about being slow and trying to play tennis with a 25lb dumbbell attached to my waist. If you don't understand how that feels, try it sometime, I guarantee your level of tennis will fall off significantly.
My first order of business before I ever played another second of tennis? Lose weight. The goal? Get down to 205. Only then would I put myself through any tennis practices or matches for that matter. The gut that had swelled in size over the years was public enemy #1. I immediately instituted an 18 hour daily fast on the weekdays and Sundays, meaning I would eat food in a 4-6 hour window at night after I taught. Water only throughout the day. No bread, no candy, no soda, no beer - except on Friday night and Saturday. Saturday would see me eat three squares. My diet would shift to rice based meals almost exclusively and more fruits and vegetables. I increased the amount of seafood I would eat as well.
For about a week, the fasting diet was difficult. I was hungry, no doubt, I was used to eating far more than essentially one meal a day. However, I felt better. Drinking water throughout the day, especially when I felt hungry, had significantly improved my hydration level. And after week 1 I had lost 3.5 lbs. I continued the fasting diet for one month. After that month I had shed 21 of the 26 lbs.
I would come back from vacation determined to lose the next 5 lbs, but by restoring a more normal eating schedule,but still reducing my caloric intake and limiting my food choices. At 210 lbs, I chose to start hitting tennis balls, and playing matches as well.
The first order of business on the tennis court, regarding my game, was to see if I felt more spry, and to determine if my serve and volley game would improve now that I lost the weight. After all I should move faster and more quickly without 20 lbs, right?
The answer of two weeks time was yes and no. Yes, I was moving faster, better. No, it still wasn't good enough to continue utilizing a style of play that demands you be at your most athletic an quickest to succeed. I felt I would not only continue to lose the practice matches I was losing, but I would be doing a disservice to the style of play that I love and respect so much. In other words, continuing to play serve and volley without being physically capable anymore was disrespecting the game. After losing a practice match to Allen Vinson, I decided that both my style of return of serve, and my style of game must change.
So how would I proceed? Those who know me and my game know I do not have overpowering groundstrokes by any stretch of the imagination. So transforming my game to that of an aggressive baseliner just wasn't going to happen. So my next practice match, I decided to go back to the 15 yr old version of myself. You know, the one who was a good counter-puncher who stayed back all day and retrieved balls. That guy, I thought, had pretty good results. So I played the practice match from the back of the court. I served and stayed back for the first time in 24 years. I stopped moving forward on my split step on returns, and instead began backing up as I split step, to give me more time to see the ball and give myself more time to take a bigger swing. I ran down all the balls. No more spectating. Low and behold, 15 yr old Matt finally won the almost 40 yr old version a practice set! I weighed myself that night...205lbs! My goal attained!
The good news was I also wasn't getting all that physically tired anymore. Thank you diet. Now, truth be told, I learned that staying back and retrieving all day is extremely mentally taxing. Mentally, I was exhausted. However, I was committed to continuing with this change. Next practice match, I again played from the back of the court. Again, I won! Happy birthday me!
My tennis has essentially come full circle. What once was old is new again. The past has become the present. For me, the net is a place I will always love, but like a beautiful woman with whom you have a bad relationship, sometimes you just have to let her go. I will live vicariously through Brett Landau, who carries my serve and volley torch at the collegiate level.
I feel better about myself for having not only lost the weight, but also sticking with the goal and seeing it to fruition. I had thought for sometime that my tennis wasn't that big a deal to me, but I learned the truth is, my esteem is directly linked to my tennis. This process is bringing me much joy, and needed exercise. I'm having fun playing tennis again, which in and of itself is a gift.
Anything is possible if you put your mind to it. No one can make you do it, it must come from within.
Tuesday, August 26, 2014
How to Use USTA Combo League Matches To Improve Your Game
USTA Combo doubles league is now upon us. This is the league where (generally) you play with either a player one level below you or with a player one level above you. If you are fortunate enough to play in both scenarios, chances are you will see the greatest overall improvement, provided you follow a few simple suggestions.
If you are the lower-rated player
In this scenario, what is most important is to be consistent, especially when you are engaged in baseline rallies with the higher rated player on the other team. Your opportunities to outright win a point will be few and far between, so don't play outside of your limitations. Use the match as an opportunity to work on your consistency at a higher level.
Returning the serve of the higher rated player will also be challenging. Again, don't try to win the point with the return. Follow the sage advice - "make them play" - just put it in play somewhere. Cross-court is always best, but it's ok if you accidentally make the net player hit volleys. Just don't try to crush the returns out of a need to match pace and prove you belong. You are rated lower for a reason.
Your goal is to set up the higher rated player on your team so THEY can hit winners and try to outright win the point. As the lower rated player, this is your opportunity to "play up" and challenge yourself. Make the most of it by simply trying to be a complimentary player to your higher rated partner.
In addition, write down every part of your game that broke down when playing against the higher rated player. These are the parts of your game that need the most work if you want to get to the next level.
If you are the higher rated player
In this scenario, you must play slightly outside your comfort level if you really want to improve. What this means is when you are at the net, poach and cross more often, damn the consequences - especially against the lower rated player's groundstrokes. This is the best way to gain confidence and become more confident as a poacher.
You must work on "taking over the court" and work at being the best player on the court. Any "50/50" ball is yours. Don't let your weaker partner hit a groundstroke if you even have an inkling you can get to the volley.
Learn the word "Mine" and the words "I got it" and use them frequently and without hesitation. You should take more balls - you're the better player.
Attack the weaker player - strategy 102. Especially if you have a volley above the net and the weaker player is at the net. This applies to overheads as well.
Go for bigger serves against the weaker player, in order to improve your first serve pace. You'll be less nervous serving to the weaker player, so there is less pressure.
Focusing your game on being more aggressive will help you improve, and you will see the results once regular adult league rolls around and you see yourself moving slightly more, taking more poaches, and putting away more balls,
Write down every part of your game that broke down when you increased your aggressiveness. These are the parts of your game that need to improve if you want to get to the next level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the end of the day, combo league, if used properly, can vastly improve your game if you choose to look at the game in the above manner. Remember, between now and next USTA Adult league season is the time to be making necessary changes to your game in order to improve upon your individual success in Adult League play. Talk to your pro about your game, and work on the areas you and he/she feel are necessary to get to the next level.
If you are the lower-rated player
In this scenario, what is most important is to be consistent, especially when you are engaged in baseline rallies with the higher rated player on the other team. Your opportunities to outright win a point will be few and far between, so don't play outside of your limitations. Use the match as an opportunity to work on your consistency at a higher level.
Returning the serve of the higher rated player will also be challenging. Again, don't try to win the point with the return. Follow the sage advice - "make them play" - just put it in play somewhere. Cross-court is always best, but it's ok if you accidentally make the net player hit volleys. Just don't try to crush the returns out of a need to match pace and prove you belong. You are rated lower for a reason.
Your goal is to set up the higher rated player on your team so THEY can hit winners and try to outright win the point. As the lower rated player, this is your opportunity to "play up" and challenge yourself. Make the most of it by simply trying to be a complimentary player to your higher rated partner.
In addition, write down every part of your game that broke down when playing against the higher rated player. These are the parts of your game that need the most work if you want to get to the next level.
If you are the higher rated player
In this scenario, you must play slightly outside your comfort level if you really want to improve. What this means is when you are at the net, poach and cross more often, damn the consequences - especially against the lower rated player's groundstrokes. This is the best way to gain confidence and become more confident as a poacher.
You must work on "taking over the court" and work at being the best player on the court. Any "50/50" ball is yours. Don't let your weaker partner hit a groundstroke if you even have an inkling you can get to the volley.
Learn the word "Mine" and the words "I got it" and use them frequently and without hesitation. You should take more balls - you're the better player.
Attack the weaker player - strategy 102. Especially if you have a volley above the net and the weaker player is at the net. This applies to overheads as well.
Go for bigger serves against the weaker player, in order to improve your first serve pace. You'll be less nervous serving to the weaker player, so there is less pressure.
Focusing your game on being more aggressive will help you improve, and you will see the results once regular adult league rolls around and you see yourself moving slightly more, taking more poaches, and putting away more balls,
Write down every part of your game that broke down when you increased your aggressiveness. These are the parts of your game that need to improve if you want to get to the next level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the end of the day, combo league, if used properly, can vastly improve your game if you choose to look at the game in the above manner. Remember, between now and next USTA Adult league season is the time to be making necessary changes to your game in order to improve upon your individual success in Adult League play. Talk to your pro about your game, and work on the areas you and he/she feel are necessary to get to the next level.
Tuesday, August 19, 2014
There Can Be Only One - US. Open Preview
Bonsoir Rafa! The King is dead! Long live the king! Uh...Wait a minute, who is next in line to the throne? I don't know - let us have a tournament of knights to determine the heir to the throne!
And so it begins. 128 enter, one remains. Many have a good claim to be named the new King of New York. However, as it usually does, it boils down to three or four who have a chance at the semis, and only a few have what it takes to win.
Pretenders
1. Anyone who has the letters USA (Used to Succeed Annually) next to their name. Don't expect any great showings. Isner will be out before the 4th round begins, and that will be the best showing by an American.''
2. All the rest of the Spanish Players, including David Ferrer. I include Ferrer because he can't beat Djokovic or Federer, so he may make the semis, but he has zero shot to go further, unless he gets divine assistance.
3. Jo-Wilifried Tsonga. Yes he won the Canadian Masters series event. Yes he beat Djokovic, Murray, and Federer along the way. He followed it up with a first round loss in Cincinnati. That is normal for Tsonga. In a three out of five set format, he loses to Djokovic, Ferrer, Murray. He might have a chance against Fed. Quarterfinalist.
4. Anyone in the top 10 not named Djokovic, Federer or Raonic. No one in the top 10 is getting by these guys. Murray is still not 100% in my opinion. He's not moving as well as he did when he won Wimbledon last year. Mauresmo thus far has not been the answer for him. Stan Wawrinka seems content now that he's won a major. He's done absolutely nothing since, and I expect that trend to continue. Berdych has an outside shot at a semi-final depending on the draw, but he's fragile in the early rounds. Don't count on him being there on Semi-final Saturday.
Contenders
Milos Raonic - He's having an incredible year is he not? A semifinalist at Wimbledon, and he's risen to #6 in the world. He's got a huge serve, and has seriously improved both his return game and his fitness, footwork, and movement. I love the fact that he says his current success is not his goal. He wants to be #1 in the world. I foresee multiple slams for him, is first coming by 2016. Could it be this year's open? If and ONLY if Federer and Djokovic lose before they would play him. If that scenario happens, look for the Canadian Cannon to win his first slam.
Roger Federer - Heck of a summer for the old man. Unfortunately all it has proven to me is he still chokes in big matches against Djokovic, and can't beat him at all in a final, and still struggles to beat anyone else in a final. He's 4 for his last 13 finals. I don't expect Federer to win, even if I think he'll make the final. And save for Fed-Raonic final, I expect him to lose to whomever he might face. Agassi won his last major at 33, at the 2003 Australian Open, but he had fewer miles on his body than fed, and was a better player later in his career.. Fed is 33 now, and is a shell of himself. I hope he wins, but I wouldn't bet a dime on him.
Novak Djokovic - Has marriage and a pregnancy changed the crazy man's perspective on life? He wins Wimbledon, gets married, and subsequently loses early in the master series hard court events. The good news is he didn't play too much leading up to the open, so his body got a nice break. He should be in tip top physical shape. Nadal isn't here, so his biggest obstacle mentally isn't here. He's got Federer's number in majors now, so he has no fear of a "hot" Roger. Plus he knows he's got celebratory crack courtesy of Boris Becker should he hoist his second Us Open trophy. (This is called historical sarcasm) Should he avoid an early upset, he should win the title. Prediction: Champion.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the women, I will make this brief. There are really four women who can win the title this year:
1. Simone Halep - She has the game, but does she have the belief? If she can get a win vs Sharapova, having lost in 3 sets the last few times they've played, I like her chances.
2. Maria Sharapova - Se won the french, but fizzled out early at Wimbledon. She has never won two majors in the same year. Will she buck the trend? Not if she plays Serena Williams, who has beaten her 14 times in a row. There's no overcoming that for Sharapova, save an on court coaching visit from Tonya Harding. Check her coaches' box Serena!
3. Eugenie Bouchard - The girl doesn't do very much unless it's a major. She has been the most consisten player in the slams this year, having reached the semi-finals of the Australian and French Opens, and the final of Wimbledon. Her hard court prep leading in the Open doesn't lend me to be super excited about her chances, but even I can see she trains to peak at the slams, not win the tune-ups. I expect a semi-final.
4. Serena Williams - As long as she's playing, you have to go with her. Though she's had a terrible year by her standards, her hard court tune-ups after Wimbledon has produced much improved results. Her serve looks to be getting back to the weapon we all expect from her, and if that's the case, just write her name on the trophy now. When Serena says she has no pressure, it means she's put in an enormous amount of extra work in order to win a slam, and she wants it badly. I remember her saying she had no pressure in 2007 before the Australian open, when her ranking had dropped to 81 in the world due to injury and lack of play. She dominated the tournament, and the final against the reigning US Open Champion Maria Sharapova 6-1, 6-2. I see a similar result. Prediction: Champion
And so it begins. 128 enter, one remains. Many have a good claim to be named the new King of New York. However, as it usually does, it boils down to three or four who have a chance at the semis, and only a few have what it takes to win.
Pretenders
1. Anyone who has the letters USA (Used to Succeed Annually) next to their name. Don't expect any great showings. Isner will be out before the 4th round begins, and that will be the best showing by an American.''
2. All the rest of the Spanish Players, including David Ferrer. I include Ferrer because he can't beat Djokovic or Federer, so he may make the semis, but he has zero shot to go further, unless he gets divine assistance.
3. Jo-Wilifried Tsonga. Yes he won the Canadian Masters series event. Yes he beat Djokovic, Murray, and Federer along the way. He followed it up with a first round loss in Cincinnati. That is normal for Tsonga. In a three out of five set format, he loses to Djokovic, Ferrer, Murray. He might have a chance against Fed. Quarterfinalist.
4. Anyone in the top 10 not named Djokovic, Federer or Raonic. No one in the top 10 is getting by these guys. Murray is still not 100% in my opinion. He's not moving as well as he did when he won Wimbledon last year. Mauresmo thus far has not been the answer for him. Stan Wawrinka seems content now that he's won a major. He's done absolutely nothing since, and I expect that trend to continue. Berdych has an outside shot at a semi-final depending on the draw, but he's fragile in the early rounds. Don't count on him being there on Semi-final Saturday.
Contenders
Milos Raonic - He's having an incredible year is he not? A semifinalist at Wimbledon, and he's risen to #6 in the world. He's got a huge serve, and has seriously improved both his return game and his fitness, footwork, and movement. I love the fact that he says his current success is not his goal. He wants to be #1 in the world. I foresee multiple slams for him, is first coming by 2016. Could it be this year's open? If and ONLY if Federer and Djokovic lose before they would play him. If that scenario happens, look for the Canadian Cannon to win his first slam.
Roger Federer - Heck of a summer for the old man. Unfortunately all it has proven to me is he still chokes in big matches against Djokovic, and can't beat him at all in a final, and still struggles to beat anyone else in a final. He's 4 for his last 13 finals. I don't expect Federer to win, even if I think he'll make the final. And save for Fed-Raonic final, I expect him to lose to whomever he might face. Agassi won his last major at 33, at the 2003 Australian Open, but he had fewer miles on his body than fed, and was a better player later in his career.. Fed is 33 now, and is a shell of himself. I hope he wins, but I wouldn't bet a dime on him.
Novak Djokovic - Has marriage and a pregnancy changed the crazy man's perspective on life? He wins Wimbledon, gets married, and subsequently loses early in the master series hard court events. The good news is he didn't play too much leading up to the open, so his body got a nice break. He should be in tip top physical shape. Nadal isn't here, so his biggest obstacle mentally isn't here. He's got Federer's number in majors now, so he has no fear of a "hot" Roger. Plus he knows he's got celebratory crack courtesy of Boris Becker should he hoist his second Us Open trophy. (This is called historical sarcasm) Should he avoid an early upset, he should win the title. Prediction: Champion.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the women, I will make this brief. There are really four women who can win the title this year:
1. Simone Halep - She has the game, but does she have the belief? If she can get a win vs Sharapova, having lost in 3 sets the last few times they've played, I like her chances.
2. Maria Sharapova - Se won the french, but fizzled out early at Wimbledon. She has never won two majors in the same year. Will she buck the trend? Not if she plays Serena Williams, who has beaten her 14 times in a row. There's no overcoming that for Sharapova, save an on court coaching visit from Tonya Harding. Check her coaches' box Serena!
3. Eugenie Bouchard - The girl doesn't do very much unless it's a major. She has been the most consisten player in the slams this year, having reached the semi-finals of the Australian and French Opens, and the final of Wimbledon. Her hard court prep leading in the Open doesn't lend me to be super excited about her chances, but even I can see she trains to peak at the slams, not win the tune-ups. I expect a semi-final.
4. Serena Williams - As long as she's playing, you have to go with her. Though she's had a terrible year by her standards, her hard court tune-ups after Wimbledon has produced much improved results. Her serve looks to be getting back to the weapon we all expect from her, and if that's the case, just write her name on the trophy now. When Serena says she has no pressure, it means she's put in an enormous amount of extra work in order to win a slam, and she wants it badly. I remember her saying she had no pressure in 2007 before the Australian open, when her ranking had dropped to 81 in the world due to injury and lack of play. She dominated the tournament, and the final against the reigning US Open Champion Maria Sharapova 6-1, 6-2. I see a similar result. Prediction: Champion
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
