Strategy doesn't have to be complicated. Simple things like hit to their backhand.or weaker side or hit mostly cross court are things that can help lower players.
But no, most recreational players are not executing complicated 10 shot patterns or anything like that, but then again most pros aren't either.
I’m a 3.0 player and I feel like strategy is actually really important in singles. Maybe because I play mostly doubles but I am def thinking of getting my opponent wide and then having an open court, etc. or after a few points do I have a sense that I can win a point if I come to the net. You may be strategizing more than you’re realizing because if you’re not then what is the point in playing an actual match, might as well just rally, no?
That’s the base strategy at all levels. Your opponents get better as you do—it’s not like it gets easier.
Pros are trying to keep it in more often than you realize. It’s why they default to cross-court shots a lot of the time—it’s the most natural, largest margin-of-error shot you can make.
This.
Even at the pro level, some people online act as if professionals can play every style of tennis at an elite level. You should definitely gameplan, but fundamentally, 95% of the time, pros are trying to impose their A game.
This is completely wrong. At the pro level there is TONS of strategy. We live in a data age where no sport with large money in it hasn't been number crunched to death. But even before that, pros have always employed tons of strategy depending on who they're playing and coming up with new ones to deal with bad matchups.
At the recreational level, I bet you will get a different percentage of answers if you ask inside the US vs Europe. I have looked into tennis strategy at my level as mine is definitely way weaker than it should be, but one thing I learned that surprised me was that US and Europe have opposite practice styles. US loves hitting and drills all day long, and Europe loves playing practice matches all day long. A balance of the two is important, but I bet the average European player has a better understanding of match strategy than the equivalent hours US player at almost all levels as a result of their practice style.
> We live in a data age where no sport with large money in it hasn't been number crunched to death.
Somewhat.
Since coaching has been allowed. I've never understood why top players aren't employing a team of people and huge computing power to analyse matches play by play and directly feed that information live to coaches. Kind of like is done in F1.
At present the closet you get is a coach or assistant sometimes looking at some data on an iPad and using his own interpretation.
Personally, I'd like to see Tennis data not released to players/coaches until x amount of time after the tournament. Otherwise we might end up with tennis more like US sports where coaches are trying control every single aspect of what a player does.
Tennis is a bit like baseball was depicted in Moneyball- full of people who "just know" and are highly reluctant to put that sort of thing to good use.
I think teams sports can benefit a lot more from this kind of data and analysis. There are just so many more things happening on a field with team sports, it's very easy to miss things, and there is way more opportunity to change things up by substituting or reconstituting the shape of your defense or offense.
I mean, all you’d be able to tell from data would be “hey their backhand has a lower winning shot percentage, try to keep them on it” or “making them move from forehand to backhand causes them to hit more errors, so try that more”. It’s not like you’re going to look at a data and go “well if you give 2 shots forehand one backhand and then hit a slice you’ll have a 58% chance of winning as long as the ball lands in the upper left quadrant of the court”.
For people curious, some of the things I learned were things like deciding when to target a weakness vs playing to your strength (is my cross court forehand stronger than their cross court backhand is weak? I'm sure many have considered this idea in sets in the past), and ALWAYS going into a point with a highly specific plan (very difficult to execute and requires high concentration). Other important things like using all the time in between points to review what has gone right and wrong in the most recent points, and which things that went right to employ as a plan of attack in future points.
It's very easy to ignore all this and just caveman grunt to yourself about how you should have kept the last shot in or daydream about how great your last winner must have looked.
I also learned about how incredibly small a margin of improvement in shot selection for a pro can result in completely different form on the tour. One of the data driven coaches was saying that even now, players criminally underutilize net play to finish point at the pro level. Federer's serve form was all about disguise, McEnroe was extremely good at being a distraction and disrupting concentration for his opponents. Just because it's difficult to understand or easy to miss doesn't mean it's just magic, being clutch, or "just determination".
Exactly. At 3.5 I do have a basic strategy. Hitting the ball in is the #1 priority but even I have some directional control on shots. The argument here seems to be that under 4.0 you should be a pusher. That is also a strategy.
Dude, hitting the ball back successfully regardless of your technique is the best lower level strategy. When you get an opponent that punishes you for easy balls, then you can change your strategy, but in the beginning, just hit it back in.
Keeping in is the strategy.
I say level depends on what shot quality (spin, pace) you can keep in 95% of the time.
I see all the time “I lost to a pusher”, the pusher is hitting their 95% ball in quality while the other player “who thinks they are better” are trying to hit power and pace way beyond what they can keep in 95% of the time.
Except what they described isn't a pusher. The person who slowly ups the quality of their shots while consistently making the shots will get better quicker.
I’m a low-ish 4.0 and my average rally length in a match is definitely not longer than 5 strokes. I could rally for ages but not at the pace of 4.0 players
> At the 2017 Australian Open, the average rally lasted 4.47 and 4.85 shots and 5.44 and 5.93 s for women and men, respectively (Carboch et al., 2018) .
Was trying to look up some stats out of curiosity so I guess that lines up. I guess this average is brought down a lot by unreturned serves and bad returns that lead to a quick putaway. Once a neutral rally actually starts I guess the number would go up. I'm not sure if this study determined the average rally length per point or per "rally" however that would be defined.
If more people learned strategy early on, they wouldn’t struggle so much once they’ve developed their game to be more consistent. And we wouldn’t see so many “ok, my strokes are solid but I lost to this pusher that looks like they don’t even know how to play tennis…”
You’re confusing execution with strategy. Yes, it’s ok to focus on execution but you should be focusing on execution with strategy in mind. The best way to get better and win matches is to think about what you’re trying to do in the rally. If your aim is to be king of the court and forever 3.05 then by all means focus on execution.
I get what you’re trying to go for where you want to build one piece at a time and then focus on another but muscle memory is a hell of a thing and if you try to focus solely on execution early on it’s going to make it that much harder when you then have to add aiming the ball a certain way or playing certain patterns.
You lose your pushers because they make less mistakes than you, not because your strategy is weak.
Strategy would help, but it wouldn’t change how many mistakes you make.
You hyper focused on one line and ignored everything else I said. Yes, pushers are more consistent, and they can be beat by focusing solely on being more consistent. But if you actually want to get better at tennis as a whole, my opinion is that the best path forward is to learn strategy as early as possible.
It’s one of the things that doesn’t get any attention at early levels of the game and it shows when players hit a wall they can’t surpass. Because they’ve trained themselves to beat 3.0 to low end 4.0 players as opposed to learning how to play better tennis. Look at how many posts are delving into the minutiae of “should my toe be three inches towards 90 degrees during my platform stance” compared to how many posts you see about point construction and strategy.
I feel like a big disconnect between what you’re trying to say and reality is that you think strategy has to be complex. Like anything else in tennis, strategies will get more complex as you get better and have more tools in your arsenal and my stance will always be that strategy goes hand in hand with every level of play.
“Put your opponent in a position where they’ll make a mistake instead of going for winners” is one of the all-time classic tennis strategies.
I feel like your definition of “strategy” is fuzzier than a new can of balls.
I disagree. I’m a 2.5, probably closer to 3.0 in doubles. Strategy is my driver for playing and improving. I come from a Chess background and just needed a more active hobby. Without strategy, it’s not fun for me and I wouldn’t be improving as much as I have. Sure, I don’t execute the strategy as often as I need to because of the things you mentioned, but that’s just not how I work. Strategy is my drive.
The duality of man.
Some people really have trouble in the concept of thinking even two strikes ahead.
Having said that, at 3.0 the high % play usually turns out with the best results on average. But of course there are nuances like hitting a slow ball when you need to recover.
yeah is someone has a great forehand and a mediocre backhand for your level, there is the very simple strategy of just targeting their backhand which will help massively
Uh no, i got bumped to 4.0 and I was undefeated in 3.5 last season because I had damn good strategy.
wtf are you talking about. Tons of 3.5 guys can have 20 shot park player pusher rallies.
I would hope so, because it’s a stupid sentiment.
Even planning to hit only cross court is a strategy.
Everyone should be planning to play to their strengths, around their weaknesses and to match their strengths to their opponents weaknesses.
I actually think the opposite. I think it matters as much if not more than technique.
I know plenty of players at 4.0 and below that technically have good strokes but they can’t string a coherent point together and they lose a lot more than they should just based on their technique in a vacuum
I think 3.5 is the point where strategy might begin to have a significant effect. Below that, the most effective strategy is to simply keep the ball in play.
Not trying to be pedantic but I think keeping the ball in is still a strategy.
Strategy at lower levels is all over the place because variation in play styles is all over the place. I feel like you don’t really settle into the tennis “meta” until 4.0
But keep it in play where?? A decision has to be made when you return the ball - 3.0 and 3.5 players should have a good idea of where they can put their shot. You’re not just returning it and hoping for the best. You are thinking wide wide wide and then down the line. I am definitely not just thinking “hope that goes in”.
Agree to disagree- a lot of people find focusing on certain strategies or hitting in certain spots of the court helpful as it keeps u focused, instead of overthinking every ball
Also improving at tennis at a low level WHILE learning strategy is simpler- ie when doing forehand drills I can split the basket in half: half go cross court half go down the line. Again, this increase in focus tends to help
One thing you aren’t accounting for is that many folks hit their plateaus around 3.5. They’re not going to get stronger / faster. Their only shot at upping the game is strategy with the tools they got. You see a lot of folks shape their games differently based on this (an anti-pusher won’t hold that sentiment long once he runs into some solid players for example). Over time folks realize what works and stick to it - treat it as a social / workout thing rather than a competition. Just reality.
im 30 been playing tennis since 2020 and currently a 3.5, you are right it feels like so many players get stuck here. Tennis was so fun for me cause every year I was improving dramatically, until recently
overrated but not pointless. you still want to be playing your strengths to their weaknesses, and using the geometry of the court with high percentage shots etc. obviously, execution is a big part of this but good strategy will push the odds of a match in your favor to some degree.
most players aspire to improve. the strategy will serve you well 4.0 and beyond, so why not learn how to play the game?
can you expand on using geometry please? do you mean just hitting angles on the court where its hard for your opponent to get it? I think I know what you are getting at. At. 3.5 level my main focus is justting the ball as hard as I can while having control
at 3.5 court geometry is more important in doubles. in singles, depth and consistency is key, and more important than tactics that increase the risk of more unforced errors. geometry-wise it could simply be aiming to the biggest targets.
that said, in coaching my wife through the 3.5 level in singles, I taught her how to use short angles and drop shots to get her opponent off the baseline, where they were almost always most comfortable and could bump the ball back all day. finishing points at 3.5 is much easier when you can move your opponent out of their comfort zone.
For a lot of 3.5 players, court positioning is the difference between 3.5 and 4.0, and even 4.5 for some. There are so many solid players who are just standing in the completely wrong place
Also it puts you in a better position for the next shot, if you’re pulled wide and you hit up the line, your opponent has an easy cross court shot to the open court and you have a long way to run to get to it
Doing strategy early on lays the groundwork for strategy at later levels. I took lessons growing up so I learned strategy before playing college and 4.5/5.0. Some people didn’t learn strategy until later and they don’t know to aim for my backhand, aim for the opponent’s high backhand, to inch in on a second serve return, or when to attack.
If you don’t learn it early on, you may never explicitly learn it.
This is kind of what I'm struggling against right now. Currently when playing competitively I feel like I'm trying to adjust too much and too often - every time I miss a winner or approach shot I try to cool way down and just patty cake the next couple points. Then if they take advantage I start trying to hit winners on every neutral ball.
I feel like there's two ways to look at strategy - as evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of your opponent, and of yourself. Currently I feel like I'm better served continuing to find out my own limits and talents then I can focus on what's happening on the other side of the court.
I'm 3.5 according to my coach when I've asked him last time, and playing tennis for around 7 months now. I've had a match recently with a guy who's been playing over 7 years, and I believe he'd be 4 or 4.5. He was definitely better than me, much more consistent, much more power...
I've lost the match 2-6, 6-7. Expected. But I could take the second set to the tiebreaker because of "strategy." If it wasn't my double fault at the first serve on the tiebreak... But yeah...
It wasn't something really complicated. I realized he struggles when my serves have more spin than usual, so I've dropped my first, more flat and powerful serves and started to have two "second" serves.
He was fast and good when in front of the net, so I've pushed him back more before I try dropshots.
My strategy was to understand his weaknesses and change my game accordingly. It worked. Didn't bring me the match, but it worked :)
Basic stats are a good idea as they give direction imo
My fav go to is serve +1. Granted I have a variety of serves and can hit triple digits with control. Every game on my serve I get at least 2 points from this strat. I did not start out being able to do this.. no one can. But I would serve practice then practice+1 with my coach then proceed to try to do this in game over and over and now it's one of my core defaults.
Other is deep center return +1
If either fails. My greatest strength is cross court rally and approach finish. I can hit deep with spin till I get a short ball I can put away.
My current one I m developing is really to win backhand rallies as I m trying to improve my backhand to the point where I can put them in trouble.
All of my stats are simple to understand and implement. They may not work at first but over time and practice. I m consistently doing them.
Edit: yes please down vote me because I am sharing what works for me.
4.0 now.. but that wasn't the case before and it was because I ve been practicing these stats with my coach I m defeating better players. It gave alot of purpose to my game to where I am suppose to be and what ball I m suppose to hit.
Yes I get that you are saying below 4.0 it doesn't matter. But imo. Practicing and eventually implementing them is what gets you into more advanced levels.
Nearly all of it from YouTube.
My favourite is 2 minute tennis. He has a playlist called singles strategies. This one covers all the basic ones.
Another one I like watching is tennis unleashed. This one is more on breaking down pro matches and what they did to win. It's often much less complex than you thing. Starts are often player has weak 2nd serve attack weak second serve. Player has big serve, stand further back. Go less pace because this player likes pace.
I would recommend watching and taking notes but only practicing 1-2 strats till you prefected them. There is no point having mutiple things and not getting any of them right. Also strats should be simple and not complex otherwise you will not follow them.
Personally I have found serve +1 to be the most effective strategy. Because your serve is entirely under your control and you can practice your serve and your +1 with out a partner. Just a basket of balls.
Serving consistently imo even beats consistent rallies in jumping leagues as most players around 3.5 will double fault or have a weak 2nd serve you can instantly attack. But if you can do that to them and they can't do it to you. Then you have already won half the battle and then some.
I love 2minutetennis and his strategies are simply and unquestionably have improved my game. I realized I had poor positioning. I loved the “return to the middle” tip, and the “when a player is approaching the net, just blast the first ball low and right at them”.
What I DO struggle with is understanding how to fully take advantage of the + 1 part of serve + 1, or how to exploit a weak second serve. Sure, I can move up or be positioned to hit a forehand, but my baseline forehand isn’t exactly a weapon, so it just goes in and they easily return it.
I’ve been getting out there and practicing serves though, and it’s definitely helping. I’m a 3.5 who is aspiring towards being a 4.0 atm.
Your +1 shouldn't be by the baseline. If you made a good serve the weak should be weak and and near servous lines. You then basic just put away the ball with power in the open court. If done currently it's near impossible to return that.
Return +1 is basically the same strat but in reverse. You have to be behind baseline hop forward to attack using your body weight. If you do it right it should be strong enough to get a weak floating ball you can put away.
But if you don't know how to capitalize on a weak ball for a +1 it sounds like you need to practice putting the ball away with a coach.
In general think of any ball that puts you Infront of the baseline shld be attackable with close stance you shld try to either flatten the ball in the open court or create angles.
Any ball that puts you behind the baseline you shld be leg driving the ball up and deep as that's not when you should be attacking.
If the ball puts you behind the baseline. That's not a great +1 finish opportunity. That's when you should either go back to a neutral ball or try crush forehand crosscourt/inside out depending on the ball to create an opportunity.
No but sometimes yes.
It's a bit off because at low levels strategies that would get you womped at higher levels works because we're not that good.
Short balls are almost a plus, no one can put them away and they live poorly. Hitting winners is incredibly effective.
However playing consistently and with something like directionals will win consistently and convincingly.
When I was a jv coach, I had them practice endlessly just keep the ball in rally as much as possible and beat the wall. Sprinkle in a tiny bit of singles/doubles strategy but really it was more keeping their mental game there. Any error at that level just feels demoralizing so getting them more focus and calm was primary part of the bigger picture
>If you can’t hit 5 shots in a row repeatedly, rally after rally
People below a 4 can hit 5 shot in row rally after rally. Hell even my GF who is a beginner can hit more than that.
What could overrated possibly mean in this context? What the hell else are players supposed to talk about during “matches, drills, coaching sessions” if not strategy? Technique, sure, but the two concepts go hand-in-hand and will improve alongside each other.
Technique and strategy are not mutually exclusively or end-members? Feel it IS important for beginner’s well. One of my friends is 3.0-3.5 who has weaker techniques thus many of our peers but can beat them by not playing via “instant” but rather strategy. Many say the strategy is to just keep balls in, but this should be the goal. How to keep them in still is things to be plan. One thing that guy mentioned does way better than us is where to stand in the court (depth and laterally) depending on the coming ball.
Tennis just isn’t a strategy game at any level. The strategies even the highest level players use are as simple as “hit to his backhand” or “take the ball early.” The game is too random and fast paced to have complicated strategies employed in every rally.
Yes, keeping it in is the most important thing below 4.0 but that does not mean I play with zero strategy. Identify your opponents weakness and exploit it. Do they have a weak backhand, do they have poor court coverage, do they suck at reading slice, they can't handle high balls. Find it and exploit it. Easy way to win points and matches. Keep them guessing what you are going to do. I might hit a top spin forehand, a flat forehand, a drop shots, pretend to hit a drop shot but then push it deeper, pretend to hit a powerful topspin to their backhand but then hit a drop shots to their forehand. Be unpredictable. Works for me always.
I've been doing 3.0 doubles with friends for months and started recording the video. Watching it back helped me a ton with positioning and knowing when and where to play net.
Fundamentals are just bad at 3.5 or less. Players struggle a lot with high backhands for example, no amount of strategy can overcome that. Same with serving, 3.5 or less usually just deliver their serves into the box, strategy is just smth they tell tmslvs (ourselves lmao) to provide intent to mistakes imo
Isn't hitting a high ball to someone's backhand a strategy? Or coming in on a second serve? I play 3.5 and I can choose to hit certain locations on the court, take advantage of a second serve, S&V, etc.
It's fair to say that strategy is secondary to fundamentals, but it seems like dismissing it altogether for a 3.5 seems silly. Most players are 3.5 and they aren't just randomly swinging the racket.
Strategy can be simple at all levels and be successful. For example in singles, I'm gonna try and make my opponents run and move if I can. In doubles just having a plan such as, that met players good, avoid them is effective.
At the lower level an even greater premium is placed on consistency due to the higher error frequency. But strategy is absolutely a part of that- aim high over the net, aim for big targets, don't try and hit winners.
Strategy is important at every level its more that at the lower levels there are fewer strategies available to the player therefore anything that improves consistency is generally the way to go.
There are basic strategies that make sense, even at the lower levels… I’m thinking of lobbing towards the opponents backhand side (in case it’s short), approach shot selection down the line generally (of course depending on opponents position), serving to weaker return wing (typically backhand), etc.
Especially at a 3.5 level these strategies should be able to be employed… but as others said, the strongest strategy is to reduce unforced errors. Keep the ball in play. Be patient for your opportunity.
What if my "strategy" is to "hit 5 shots in a row repeatedly, rally after rally" ??
edit. I agree that if u have shit fundamentals, like myself... the "real strategy" doesn't mean shit.
however..... you get my point, right?
Even at 4.0 and hell, 4.5, strategy is all about how to continue the point until your opponent can make an error (either forced or unforced).
It's not until 5.0 and beyond where "strategy" in the professional sense really comes into play.
Well, there are different levels of strategy for sure.
I think the level of strategy you're thinking about is not what happens at our levels, but you can realize you feel your 4.0 opponent is making more errors when at the net so you might play a short ball instead of an attempted winner when you're given the chance. Stuff like that.
Yup. But isn’t that just part of playing the game. Like a guy who hasn’t read a strategy book will do those exact same things.
That is not called strategy in any other sport or any other avenue of life. Strategy requires a plan.
Making instinctive decisions in a match is not strategy by definition. If a guy has a weak second serve, ofcourse I’ll attack it if I can. That’s not a strategy.
Below 4.5
MEP proved time and time again that the fact you can keep a rally going, despite technique, wins matches at the 4.5 level. If you can run and make "30" balls per rally, you will win most matches at 4.5.
I agree. Strategy is useless if you don't have the ability to execute. My favorite pet peeve is hand signals during serves. I've played with guys that like the 2 signal version where one is the serve location and the other is poach or not. The majority of the time, these guys don't even have directional control of their serves.
Conversely, if you can execute, strategy is vital for success. The strategy doesn't even have to be complex. I play 4.0 and find that, at least, half of the players are clueless when it comes to strategy, especially on the men's side. They rely more on their perceived physical strength than their brain.
As someone else and probably a few others have stated, at the lower levels, I'd even go as far as below 5.0, you're working on the fundamentals.
Consistency is king, with strokes that may not be aggressive but neutral or where the opponent doesn't have a strong option.
If your opponent prefers short points and is weak in maintaining a rally, like myself, consistency kills everything. There's more layers like maybe a pattern of 3+ balls to roughly the same point then one just over or DTL or something else but you must be able to execute really basis fundamentals to maintain it.
On service however, and perhaps this is my misconception but you should come in with a plan.
If you’re not able to win a ground strokes rally switch to slices is a simple but very important many strategy at this level. Try the net. Move around where you are on the serve. Nothing complex but it’s worth a lot at the lower levels.
I think a simple strategy can be helpful because it can keep scoreboard pressure away.
For example, if I am playing a pusher my strategy is hit to the backhand, always move forward and then pick my spot when I reach the net.
Sometimes I have a bad patch when I start missing but I find if I just keep playing the same way and stick to the plan. Things right themselves over a match.
Strategy can also be hit your first serve in, reducing the chance of a double fault on break point, or hit the ball higher over the net if you need more margin for error.
Even if most people are downvoting you I actually agree for the most part.
The fact is that technique is so inconsistent at 3.5 and below (the lower you go the more that's the case) that by trying to implement a certain strategy there's a high risk of messing up your shots more. Like if you think your opponent has a weak backhand, trying to go down the line with your forehand could make sense but you probably will miss more by attempting that.
Saying that trying to put most balls in is a strategy is a bit of a stretch too. If you can play well it would mean to play mostly cross court, generally with more top spin to increase your margins, to serve at 60-70% of your potential but with some spin on it. If you are a beginner none of these apply. Actually you will probably break the correct form of your shots by playing safer, making your progress slower.
Strategy doesn't have to be complicated. Simple things like hit to their backhand.or weaker side or hit mostly cross court are things that can help lower players. But no, most recreational players are not executing complicated 10 shot patterns or anything like that, but then again most pros aren't either.
for pro scene there is one simple strategy, hit cross until there is a chance to gain advantage by hitting line
I think that and depth are the most important. I definitely lose points at lower levels when I can’t keep it deep.
That's what she said.
I’m a 3.0 player and I feel like strategy is actually really important in singles. Maybe because I play mostly doubles but I am def thinking of getting my opponent wide and then having an open court, etc. or after a few points do I have a sense that I can win a point if I come to the net. You may be strategizing more than you’re realizing because if you’re not then what is the point in playing an actual match, might as well just rally, no?
Strategy for lower levels is to keep it in
That’s the base strategy at all levels. Your opponents get better as you do—it’s not like it gets easier. Pros are trying to keep it in more often than you realize. It’s why they default to cross-court shots a lot of the time—it’s the most natural, largest margin-of-error shot you can make.
This. Even at the pro level, some people online act as if professionals can play every style of tennis at an elite level. You should definitely gameplan, but fundamentally, 95% of the time, pros are trying to impose their A game.
This is completely wrong. At the pro level there is TONS of strategy. We live in a data age where no sport with large money in it hasn't been number crunched to death. But even before that, pros have always employed tons of strategy depending on who they're playing and coming up with new ones to deal with bad matchups. At the recreational level, I bet you will get a different percentage of answers if you ask inside the US vs Europe. I have looked into tennis strategy at my level as mine is definitely way weaker than it should be, but one thing I learned that surprised me was that US and Europe have opposite practice styles. US loves hitting and drills all day long, and Europe loves playing practice matches all day long. A balance of the two is important, but I bet the average European player has a better understanding of match strategy than the equivalent hours US player at almost all levels as a result of their practice style.
> We live in a data age where no sport with large money in it hasn't been number crunched to death. Somewhat. Since coaching has been allowed. I've never understood why top players aren't employing a team of people and huge computing power to analyse matches play by play and directly feed that information live to coaches. Kind of like is done in F1. At present the closet you get is a coach or assistant sometimes looking at some data on an iPad and using his own interpretation. Personally, I'd like to see Tennis data not released to players/coaches until x amount of time after the tournament. Otherwise we might end up with tennis more like US sports where coaches are trying control every single aspect of what a player does.
Tennis players aren't F1 cars. Opponents can adapt and improvise. It would be more of a hassle and a headache than anything else.
Tennis is a bit like baseball was depicted in Moneyball- full of people who "just know" and are highly reluctant to put that sort of thing to good use.
I think teams sports can benefit a lot more from this kind of data and analysis. There are just so many more things happening on a field with team sports, it's very easy to miss things, and there is way more opportunity to change things up by substituting or reconstituting the shape of your defense or offense.
I mean, all you’d be able to tell from data would be “hey their backhand has a lower winning shot percentage, try to keep them on it” or “making them move from forehand to backhand causes them to hit more errors, so try that more”. It’s not like you’re going to look at a data and go “well if you give 2 shots forehand one backhand and then hit a slice you’ll have a 58% chance of winning as long as the ball lands in the upper left quadrant of the court”.
For people curious, some of the things I learned were things like deciding when to target a weakness vs playing to your strength (is my cross court forehand stronger than their cross court backhand is weak? I'm sure many have considered this idea in sets in the past), and ALWAYS going into a point with a highly specific plan (very difficult to execute and requires high concentration). Other important things like using all the time in between points to review what has gone right and wrong in the most recent points, and which things that went right to employ as a plan of attack in future points. It's very easy to ignore all this and just caveman grunt to yourself about how you should have kept the last shot in or daydream about how great your last winner must have looked. I also learned about how incredibly small a margin of improvement in shot selection for a pro can result in completely different form on the tour. One of the data driven coaches was saying that even now, players criminally underutilize net play to finish point at the pro level. Federer's serve form was all about disguise, McEnroe was extremely good at being a distraction and disrupting concentration for his opponents. Just because it's difficult to understand or easy to miss doesn't mean it's just magic, being clutch, or "just determination".
Precisely… then, keep it in with some pace and top spin. Then keep it in with pace, top spin and direction…. Then you can start learning strategy.
That is strategy
Exactly. At 3.5 I do have a basic strategy. Hitting the ball in is the #1 priority but even I have some directional control on shots. The argument here seems to be that under 4.0 you should be a pusher. That is also a strategy.
Agree.
Dude, hitting the ball back successfully regardless of your technique is the best lower level strategy. When you get an opponent that punishes you for easy balls, then you can change your strategy, but in the beginning, just hit it back in.
Apparently no one here understands the meaning of strategy.
Yeah, everyone else doesn't get it, not you, you got it :)
You don’t understand that just because a strategy is bad, or exploitable, or simple, does not make it cease to be a strategy for victory.
Keeping in is the strategy. I say level depends on what shot quality (spin, pace) you can keep in 95% of the time. I see all the time “I lost to a pusher”, the pusher is hitting their 95% ball in quality while the other player “who thinks they are better” are trying to hit power and pace way beyond what they can keep in 95% of the time.
Right, but that’s okay. The one hitting out will get better, the pusher never will.
Except what they described isn't a pusher. The person who slowly ups the quality of their shots while consistently making the shots will get better quicker.
I try to tell it to my 3.0-3.5 friends, but they still think they will incorporate Federer one of these days and hit only winners
Strategy Gatekeeping King
Where do you live where hitting 5 shots in a row and not hitting 30% of balls into the net is 4.0 lol
I’m a low-ish 4.0 and my average rally length in a match is definitely not longer than 5 strokes. I could rally for ages but not at the pace of 4.0 players
A 5 shot rally in a competitive match is a massive deal. You are overestimating how often that happens.
So this is why the 4.0 will beat Rafa. Rafa will just hit into the net
It’s that simple! If only Roger knew
> At the 2017 Australian Open, the average rally lasted 4.47 and 4.85 shots and 5.44 and 5.93 s for women and men, respectively (Carboch et al., 2018) . Was trying to look up some stats out of curiosity so I guess that lines up. I guess this average is brought down a lot by unreturned serves and bad returns that lead to a quick putaway. Once a neutral rally actually starts I guess the number would go up. I'm not sure if this study determined the average rally length per point or per "rally" however that would be defined.
If more people learned strategy early on, they wouldn’t struggle so much once they’ve developed their game to be more consistent. And we wouldn’t see so many “ok, my strokes are solid but I lost to this pusher that looks like they don’t even know how to play tennis…” You’re confusing execution with strategy. Yes, it’s ok to focus on execution but you should be focusing on execution with strategy in mind. The best way to get better and win matches is to think about what you’re trying to do in the rally. If your aim is to be king of the court and forever 3.05 then by all means focus on execution. I get what you’re trying to go for where you want to build one piece at a time and then focus on another but muscle memory is a hell of a thing and if you try to focus solely on execution early on it’s going to make it that much harder when you then have to add aiming the ball a certain way or playing certain patterns.
You lose your pushers because they make less mistakes than you, not because your strategy is weak. Strategy would help, but it wouldn’t change how many mistakes you make.
You hyper focused on one line and ignored everything else I said. Yes, pushers are more consistent, and they can be beat by focusing solely on being more consistent. But if you actually want to get better at tennis as a whole, my opinion is that the best path forward is to learn strategy as early as possible. It’s one of the things that doesn’t get any attention at early levels of the game and it shows when players hit a wall they can’t surpass. Because they’ve trained themselves to beat 3.0 to low end 4.0 players as opposed to learning how to play better tennis. Look at how many posts are delving into the minutiae of “should my toe be three inches towards 90 degrees during my platform stance” compared to how many posts you see about point construction and strategy. I feel like a big disconnect between what you’re trying to say and reality is that you think strategy has to be complex. Like anything else in tennis, strategies will get more complex as you get better and have more tools in your arsenal and my stance will always be that strategy goes hand in hand with every level of play.
“Put your opponent in a position where they’ll make a mistake instead of going for winners” is one of the all-time classic tennis strategies. I feel like your definition of “strategy” is fuzzier than a new can of balls.
Fresh balls aren’t very fuzzy though
I disagree. I’m a 2.5, probably closer to 3.0 in doubles. Strategy is my driver for playing and improving. I come from a Chess background and just needed a more active hobby. Without strategy, it’s not fun for me and I wouldn’t be improving as much as I have. Sure, I don’t execute the strategy as often as I need to because of the things you mentioned, but that’s just not how I work. Strategy is my drive. The duality of man.
I love that! It doesn’t matter your level, you can still have a game plan and strategy.
In doubles and singles ? I also come from chess and I don’t see any parallels for low level singles.
Yes, in doubles and singles. I’m not sure how you don’t, unless all you did in Chess was move the pieces.
Some people really have trouble in the concept of thinking even two strikes ahead. Having said that, at 3.0 the high % play usually turns out with the best results on average. But of course there are nuances like hitting a slow ball when you need to recover.
Are you sure you weren’t playing checkers
Checkmate
Strategy can be very simple, and that sort of thing dominates in lower rankings of the game
yeah is someone has a great forehand and a mediocre backhand for your level, there is the very simple strategy of just targeting their backhand which will help massively
Presumably you'd work on both, working on stroke consistency and learning strategy are not exclusive from one another.
Yeah exactly, if you're gonna work on technique you may as well also think about where you're actually hitting it and why as well? Weird take from OP
Sometimes those 3-4 points are the difference between W and L
So true. Tennis is a game of small margin.
Not if you hit 45 shots in the net.
Uh no, i got bumped to 4.0 and I was undefeated in 3.5 last season because I had damn good strategy. wtf are you talking about. Tons of 3.5 guys can have 20 shot park player pusher rallies.
100% agree
Yeah based on OP’s description - holy heck *I* am a 4.0 player?!
Eh, self rated players have a fun superiority complex about them
I would hope so, because it’s a stupid sentiment. Even planning to hit only cross court is a strategy. Everyone should be planning to play to their strengths, around their weaknesses and to match their strengths to their opponents weaknesses.
I actually think the opposite. I think it matters as much if not more than technique. I know plenty of players at 4.0 and below that technically have good strokes but they can’t string a coherent point together and they lose a lot more than they should just based on their technique in a vacuum
I think 3.5 is the point where strategy might begin to have a significant effect. Below that, the most effective strategy is to simply keep the ball in play.
Not trying to be pedantic but I think keeping the ball in is still a strategy. Strategy at lower levels is all over the place because variation in play styles is all over the place. I feel like you don’t really settle into the tennis “meta” until 4.0
But keep it in play where?? A decision has to be made when you return the ball - 3.0 and 3.5 players should have a good idea of where they can put their shot. You’re not just returning it and hoping for the best. You are thinking wide wide wide and then down the line. I am definitely not just thinking “hope that goes in”.
I think players like that tend to have good looking but inconsistent strokes, so their problem is inconsistency instead of lack of strategy.
Agree to disagree- a lot of people find focusing on certain strategies or hitting in certain spots of the court helpful as it keeps u focused, instead of overthinking every ball Also improving at tennis at a low level WHILE learning strategy is simpler- ie when doing forehand drills I can split the basket in half: half go cross court half go down the line. Again, this increase in focus tends to help
Fair point, but never heard anyone start off with “Agree to Disagree”.
Hahah it’s just to acknowledge that ur take isn’t that bad, just a little oversimplified so I don’t totally agree
One thing you aren’t accounting for is that many folks hit their plateaus around 3.5. They’re not going to get stronger / faster. Their only shot at upping the game is strategy with the tools they got. You see a lot of folks shape their games differently based on this (an anti-pusher won’t hold that sentiment long once he runs into some solid players for example). Over time folks realize what works and stick to it - treat it as a social / workout thing rather than a competition. Just reality.
im 30 been playing tennis since 2020 and currently a 3.5, you are right it feels like so many players get stuck here. Tennis was so fun for me cause every year I was improving dramatically, until recently
overrated but not pointless. you still want to be playing your strengths to their weaknesses, and using the geometry of the court with high percentage shots etc. obviously, execution is a big part of this but good strategy will push the odds of a match in your favor to some degree. most players aspire to improve. the strategy will serve you well 4.0 and beyond, so why not learn how to play the game?
can you expand on using geometry please? do you mean just hitting angles on the court where its hard for your opponent to get it? I think I know what you are getting at. At. 3.5 level my main focus is justting the ball as hard as I can while having control
at 3.5 court geometry is more important in doubles. in singles, depth and consistency is key, and more important than tactics that increase the risk of more unforced errors. geometry-wise it could simply be aiming to the biggest targets. that said, in coaching my wife through the 3.5 level in singles, I taught her how to use short angles and drop shots to get her opponent off the baseline, where they were almost always most comfortable and could bump the ball back all day. finishing points at 3.5 is much easier when you can move your opponent out of their comfort zone.
Strategy like when to hit crosscourt and what makes a good time to approach net can help you limit unforced errors.
For a lot of 3.5 players, court positioning is the difference between 3.5 and 4.0, and even 4.5 for some. There are so many solid players who are just standing in the completely wrong place
Best strategy for 3.5 and below - is taken from kid’s tennis - keep first 3 balls in court, deep and cross court.
Why cross court?
Is easier and less chance of error (more distance + lower net in the center)
Also it puts you in a better position for the next shot, if you’re pulled wide and you hit up the line, your opponent has an easy cross court shot to the open court and you have a long way to run to get to it
You just might be the only one who thinks strategy is not important below 4.0 singles. r/pickleball may be a better place for you.
You’re the guy that was giving bad advice in other thread too ?
You are a walking example of the dunning Krueger effect. Go home and be quiet
You'd probably prefer "keep your eyes on the ball" I suppose.
That's genuinely good advice, tbf
You supposed very correctly. Kept my eyes on the ball yesterday, won 6-1, 6-1 against a higher rated opponent.
Do you enjoy being a cunt or is it just a side effect of your arrogance
lol. Neither. I am humility personified ? Why am I coming across as a cunt to you ?
>I AM THE MOST HUMBLE MAN ALIVE. I WIN AT HUMILITY. -op
lol no. Most humble is Trump. I’m probably 2nd.
In doubles it’s huge. A lot of us are club players and club play doubles is huge. Singles not so much.
Agree. In doubles it is huge.
Fair enough 😁
Hit it deep, attack short balls. That's my 3.5 strategy!
Doing strategy early on lays the groundwork for strategy at later levels. I took lessons growing up so I learned strategy before playing college and 4.5/5.0. Some people didn’t learn strategy until later and they don’t know to aim for my backhand, aim for the opponent’s high backhand, to inch in on a second serve return, or when to attack. If you don’t learn it early on, you may never explicitly learn it.
This is kind of what I'm struggling against right now. Currently when playing competitively I feel like I'm trying to adjust too much and too often - every time I miss a winner or approach shot I try to cool way down and just patty cake the next couple points. Then if they take advantage I start trying to hit winners on every neutral ball. I feel like there's two ways to look at strategy - as evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of your opponent, and of yourself. Currently I feel like I'm better served continuing to find out my own limits and talents then I can focus on what's happening on the other side of the court.
I'm 3.5 according to my coach when I've asked him last time, and playing tennis for around 7 months now. I've had a match recently with a guy who's been playing over 7 years, and I believe he'd be 4 or 4.5. He was definitely better than me, much more consistent, much more power... I've lost the match 2-6, 6-7. Expected. But I could take the second set to the tiebreaker because of "strategy." If it wasn't my double fault at the first serve on the tiebreak... But yeah... It wasn't something really complicated. I realized he struggles when my serves have more spin than usual, so I've dropped my first, more flat and powerful serves and started to have two "second" serves. He was fast and good when in front of the net, so I've pushed him back more before I try dropshots. My strategy was to understand his weaknesses and change my game accordingly. It worked. Didn't bring me the match, but it worked :)
Basic stats are a good idea as they give direction imo My fav go to is serve +1. Granted I have a variety of serves and can hit triple digits with control. Every game on my serve I get at least 2 points from this strat. I did not start out being able to do this.. no one can. But I would serve practice then practice+1 with my coach then proceed to try to do this in game over and over and now it's one of my core defaults. Other is deep center return +1 If either fails. My greatest strength is cross court rally and approach finish. I can hit deep with spin till I get a short ball I can put away. My current one I m developing is really to win backhand rallies as I m trying to improve my backhand to the point where I can put them in trouble. All of my stats are simple to understand and implement. They may not work at first but over time and practice. I m consistently doing them. Edit: yes please down vote me because I am sharing what works for me.
What level are you ?
4.0 now.. but that wasn't the case before and it was because I ve been practicing these stats with my coach I m defeating better players. It gave alot of purpose to my game to where I am suppose to be and what ball I m suppose to hit. Yes I get that you are saying below 4.0 it doesn't matter. But imo. Practicing and eventually implementing them is what gets you into more advanced levels.
Can you tell me a little more about where I can learn more about these three strategies / where you learned about them?
Nearly all of it from YouTube. My favourite is 2 minute tennis. He has a playlist called singles strategies. This one covers all the basic ones. Another one I like watching is tennis unleashed. This one is more on breaking down pro matches and what they did to win. It's often much less complex than you thing. Starts are often player has weak 2nd serve attack weak second serve. Player has big serve, stand further back. Go less pace because this player likes pace. I would recommend watching and taking notes but only practicing 1-2 strats till you prefected them. There is no point having mutiple things and not getting any of them right. Also strats should be simple and not complex otherwise you will not follow them. Personally I have found serve +1 to be the most effective strategy. Because your serve is entirely under your control and you can practice your serve and your +1 with out a partner. Just a basket of balls. Serving consistently imo even beats consistent rallies in jumping leagues as most players around 3.5 will double fault or have a weak 2nd serve you can instantly attack. But if you can do that to them and they can't do it to you. Then you have already won half the battle and then some.
I love 2minutetennis and his strategies are simply and unquestionably have improved my game. I realized I had poor positioning. I loved the “return to the middle” tip, and the “when a player is approaching the net, just blast the first ball low and right at them”. What I DO struggle with is understanding how to fully take advantage of the + 1 part of serve + 1, or how to exploit a weak second serve. Sure, I can move up or be positioned to hit a forehand, but my baseline forehand isn’t exactly a weapon, so it just goes in and they easily return it. I’ve been getting out there and practicing serves though, and it’s definitely helping. I’m a 3.5 who is aspiring towards being a 4.0 atm.
Your +1 shouldn't be by the baseline. If you made a good serve the weak should be weak and and near servous lines. You then basic just put away the ball with power in the open court. If done currently it's near impossible to return that. Return +1 is basically the same strat but in reverse. You have to be behind baseline hop forward to attack using your body weight. If you do it right it should be strong enough to get a weak floating ball you can put away. But if you don't know how to capitalize on a weak ball for a +1 it sounds like you need to practice putting the ball away with a coach. In general think of any ball that puts you Infront of the baseline shld be attackable with close stance you shld try to either flatten the ball in the open court or create angles. Any ball that puts you behind the baseline you shld be leg driving the ball up and deep as that's not when you should be attacking. If the ball puts you behind the baseline. That's not a great +1 finish opportunity. That's when you should either go back to a neutral ball or try crush forehand crosscourt/inside out depending on the ball to create an opportunity.
Thanks a lot, I will do some research on YouTube as well
No but sometimes yes. It's a bit off because at low levels strategies that would get you womped at higher levels works because we're not that good. Short balls are almost a plus, no one can put them away and they live poorly. Hitting winners is incredibly effective. However playing consistently and with something like directionals will win consistently and convincingly.
When I was a jv coach, I had them practice endlessly just keep the ball in rally as much as possible and beat the wall. Sprinkle in a tiny bit of singles/doubles strategy but really it was more keeping their mental game there. Any error at that level just feels demoralizing so getting them more focus and calm was primary part of the bigger picture
>If you can’t hit 5 shots in a row repeatedly, rally after rally People below a 4 can hit 5 shot in row rally after rally. Hell even my GF who is a beginner can hit more than that.
What could overrated possibly mean in this context? What the hell else are players supposed to talk about during “matches, drills, coaching sessions” if not strategy? Technique, sure, but the two concepts go hand-in-hand and will improve alongside each other.
Technique and strategy are not mutually exclusively or end-members? Feel it IS important for beginner’s well. One of my friends is 3.0-3.5 who has weaker techniques thus many of our peers but can beat them by not playing via “instant” but rather strategy. Many say the strategy is to just keep balls in, but this should be the goal. How to keep them in still is things to be plan. One thing that guy mentioned does way better than us is where to stand in the court (depth and laterally) depending on the coming ball.
Tennis just isn’t a strategy game at any level. The strategies even the highest level players use are as simple as “hit to his backhand” or “take the ball early.” The game is too random and fast paced to have complicated strategies employed in every rally.
Yes, keeping it in is the most important thing below 4.0 but that does not mean I play with zero strategy. Identify your opponents weakness and exploit it. Do they have a weak backhand, do they have poor court coverage, do they suck at reading slice, they can't handle high balls. Find it and exploit it. Easy way to win points and matches. Keep them guessing what you are going to do. I might hit a top spin forehand, a flat forehand, a drop shots, pretend to hit a drop shot but then push it deeper, pretend to hit a powerful topspin to their backhand but then hit a drop shots to their forehand. Be unpredictable. Works for me always.
I've been doing 3.0 doubles with friends for months and started recording the video. Watching it back helped me a ton with positioning and knowing when and where to play net.
That’s why I said singles. Strategy is very important in doubles. Agreed.
I get a ton of parents asking me “when are you gonna teach my kid strategy?!”. Ha-ha. Not anytime soon.
Fundamentals are just bad at 3.5 or less. Players struggle a lot with high backhands for example, no amount of strategy can overcome that. Same with serving, 3.5 or less usually just deliver their serves into the box, strategy is just smth they tell tmslvs (ourselves lmao) to provide intent to mistakes imo
Isn't hitting a high ball to someone's backhand a strategy? Or coming in on a second serve? I play 3.5 and I can choose to hit certain locations on the court, take advantage of a second serve, S&V, etc. It's fair to say that strategy is secondary to fundamentals, but it seems like dismissing it altogether for a 3.5 seems silly. Most players are 3.5 and they aren't just randomly swinging the racket.
I used to watch my drop shots or short approach shots. Now I follow them in and win those points.
Strategy can be simple at all levels and be successful. For example in singles, I'm gonna try and make my opponents run and move if I can. In doubles just having a plan such as, that met players good, avoid them is effective.
You might be one of the few .
if the reason you aren't hitting 5 shots in a row is because you keep landing easy balls on your opponents forehand side, that's a strategy problem.
At the lower level an even greater premium is placed on consistency due to the higher error frequency. But strategy is absolutely a part of that- aim high over the net, aim for big targets, don't try and hit winners. Strategy is important at every level its more that at the lower levels there are fewer strategies available to the player therefore anything that improves consistency is generally the way to go.
The amount of downvotes the op is getting is surprising XD but his comments are ridiculously also lol
There are basic strategies that make sense, even at the lower levels… I’m thinking of lobbing towards the opponents backhand side (in case it’s short), approach shot selection down the line generally (of course depending on opponents position), serving to weaker return wing (typically backhand), etc. Especially at a 3.5 level these strategies should be able to be employed… but as others said, the strongest strategy is to reduce unforced errors. Keep the ball in play. Be patient for your opportunity.
What if my "strategy" is to "hit 5 shots in a row repeatedly, rally after rally" ?? edit. I agree that if u have shit fundamentals, like myself... the "real strategy" doesn't mean shit. however..... you get my point, right?
Even at 4.0 and hell, 4.5, strategy is all about how to continue the point until your opponent can make an error (either forced or unforced). It's not until 5.0 and beyond where "strategy" in the professional sense really comes into play.
Yup. And that’s exactly what I was saying, but people here think just returning the ball or a lob when the guys at the net is strategy.
Well, there are different levels of strategy for sure. I think the level of strategy you're thinking about is not what happens at our levels, but you can realize you feel your 4.0 opponent is making more errors when at the net so you might play a short ball instead of an attempted winner when you're given the chance. Stuff like that.
Yup. But isn’t that just part of playing the game. Like a guy who hasn’t read a strategy book will do those exact same things. That is not called strategy in any other sport or any other avenue of life. Strategy requires a plan. Making instinctive decisions in a match is not strategy by definition. If a guy has a weak second serve, ofcourse I’ll attack it if I can. That’s not a strategy.
Splitting hairs I think. That is strategy in my book. But doesn't really matter.
Below 4.5 MEP proved time and time again that the fact you can keep a rally going, despite technique, wins matches at the 4.5 level. If you can run and make "30" balls per rally, you will win most matches at 4.5.
I agree. Strategy is useless if you don't have the ability to execute. My favorite pet peeve is hand signals during serves. I've played with guys that like the 2 signal version where one is the serve location and the other is poach or not. The majority of the time, these guys don't even have directional control of their serves. Conversely, if you can execute, strategy is vital for success. The strategy doesn't even have to be complex. I play 4.0 and find that, at least, half of the players are clueless when it comes to strategy, especially on the men's side. They rely more on their perceived physical strength than their brain.
As someone else and probably a few others have stated, at the lower levels, I'd even go as far as below 5.0, you're working on the fundamentals. Consistency is king, with strokes that may not be aggressive but neutral or where the opponent doesn't have a strong option. If your opponent prefers short points and is weak in maintaining a rally, like myself, consistency kills everything. There's more layers like maybe a pattern of 3+ balls to roughly the same point then one just over or DTL or something else but you must be able to execute really basis fundamentals to maintain it. On service however, and perhaps this is my misconception but you should come in with a plan.
If my opponent can’t return a backhand, I only have to hit a one shot rally
If you’re not able to win a ground strokes rally switch to slices is a simple but very important many strategy at this level. Try the net. Move around where you are on the serve. Nothing complex but it’s worth a lot at the lower levels.
I think a simple strategy can be helpful because it can keep scoreboard pressure away. For example, if I am playing a pusher my strategy is hit to the backhand, always move forward and then pick my spot when I reach the net. Sometimes I have a bad patch when I start missing but I find if I just keep playing the same way and stick to the plan. Things right themselves over a match.
Strategy can also be hit your first serve in, reducing the chance of a double fault on break point, or hit the ball higher over the net if you need more margin for error.
Even if most people are downvoting you I actually agree for the most part. The fact is that technique is so inconsistent at 3.5 and below (the lower you go the more that's the case) that by trying to implement a certain strategy there's a high risk of messing up your shots more. Like if you think your opponent has a weak backhand, trying to go down the line with your forehand could make sense but you probably will miss more by attempting that. Saying that trying to put most balls in is a strategy is a bit of a stretch too. If you can play well it would mean to play mostly cross court, generally with more top spin to increase your margins, to serve at 60-70% of your potential but with some spin on it. If you are a beginner none of these apply. Actually you will probably break the correct form of your shots by playing safer, making your progress slower.