Nadal needed to use his slice much more

[kaennorsing]

Just rewatched the highlights. Pretty much every time Rafa hit a decent slice his odds of winning the point went up; he either got (a chance for) a winner on the very next ball or managed to turn defense into neutral or outright attack.

The slice vs Djoker is crucial for 3 main reasons;
- it doesn't allow him to counter attack as effectively by using the incoming pace and simply redirecting it into the open court where he is in control of the rally and yo-yoing the opponent around. Nobody redirects quite as well as Djoker on both sides on high paced shots.
- it forces Djoker to hit up and inject his own pace. This is not his strong suit. Never has been and still is not. When dealing with a slice Djoker's shots often fall much shorter and softer. Djoker is supreme at hitting high balls on both wings in either direction. His grip and swings are optimal for it.
- it changes up the rhythm of the rally and the match. You don't want Djoker to be totally comfortable with the pace of the rallies. Like Federer, in addition to variety in angles, depth and height mix up the pace by using the slice to slow the game down. There may be nobody better at playing at a certain steady, high pace then Djoker. Don't feed it to him! It's the reason why old Fed has played Djoker generally much closer than Rafa has. I believe 2017 Fed would have dealt with this zoning Djoker, partly because of his slice. In fact he nearly beat him at Paris last year, when Djoker was in much better form and with much more confidence than Fed was.

Rafa himself has a decent slice as well. If he can incorporate it more and stops overthinking he should be the favorite on clay this year. His movement on clay will probably be better than what we saw yesterday.

[TT]

kaennorsing kirjoitti 28.1.2019 klo 2:23:
> His movement on clay will probably be better than what we saw yesterday.

I think Rafa's movement was terrible, especially in the first set. I
think it was because of nerves.

Yes, Rafa can probably move better on clay & Djokovic's movement is less
optimal on the surface...

[TennisGuy]

You should get in touch with Team Rafa ASAP!
I'm sure they will be so grateful for your tips
moving forward.

[Whisper]

Excellent analysis. More of this please.



---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

[Sawfish]

Let's explore this a bit...

I'm not at this time sure that the slice affected Djokovich that much,
but for the sake of this discussion, I'll accept it as stated.

So *why* did Rafa not use more slice?

My guess is this: why he has a slice that's decent, it is not like
either Djokovich's (pretty good), or Federer's (even better), and
compared to his TB BH, he has little faith in it. He seems prepared to
use it as a change-up, but not prepared to use it in a consistent
strategic attack.

So I'm guessing that once under duress (and boy it didn't take long, did
it?) he basically tended to go to stuff he had confidence in, which was
the TS BH.

What are your thoughts?

Extra credit: *why* did Fed develop such a good slice BH? Or perhaps you
feel it's not that good?

Remember: this is me, Sawfish, you're dealing with, and I'm setting no
traps. I am not convinced I'm right and working thru these permutation
is how I get better.

>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"...and your little dog, too!"
--Sawfish

[Tuan]

Slices come much more naturally to those with a one-handed bh, I think.

[kaennorsing]

Op maandag 28 januari 2019 05:05:43 UTC+1 schreef sawfish:

I appreciate the question but don't really accept your premise: I actually think Rafa has a better slice than Novak. Fed probably has the best and most versatile slice but Rafa's slice is good enough to use as a tactical variation as well.

He just doesn't use it as much any more since he likes to keep points shorter and be aggressive as he's gotten a bit older. I suppose against most players this is indeed the right tactic, by far. Just not against Novak, who absorbs the pace like a sponge and often gets you in trouble for it.


I also remember Rafa using it effective against Novak before (I think 3-4+ years ago). I think it's a crucial element when facing Djoker for almost all players and it helped Rafa get some crucial wins over Novak before. If Djoker is playing that well you just can't allow him to get into that steady groove where he just won't miss. You have got to mix up the pace and depth of shot and/or overwhelm him with heavy flat shots, which is not Rafa's game.

[kaennorsing]

Op maandag 28 januari 2019 07:01:59 UTC+1 schreef Tuan:

True enough, but Rafa has pretty good feel on the slice as well. I'm not suggesting he uses the slice as the go to shot but as a tactical variation. Just enough to keep Djoker off balance.

[Sawfish]

They do, I feel sure.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. But give a man a boat,
a case of beer, and a few sticks of dynamite..." -- Sawfish

[kaennorsing]

Op maandag 28 januari 2019 01:40:06 UTC+1 schreef TT:

The defensive movement may have been the biggest part. Rafa said in the press conference his offense was great all week but the defense was not good enough yet, because of the long break and lack of match tightness and/or tight match situations… That won't fly vs zoning Djoker.

Just think some more slices would have bought him some time, chance to counter and get Djoker out of his comfy zone.

[Sawfish]

I'm postulating that Fed adopted a slice early on because he felt he
needed it against Nadal, especially against his FH, which means that Fed
Djokovich BH slices are natural x-court slices to the Rafa FH.

Until recently, Rafa needed no slice component to win consistently, and
hence developed late, and given that, has less natural confidence.

As opposed to both Fed and Djokovich, who will in some cases have an
extended BH rally using nothing but slice, with the occasional TS
thrown in--the inverse of what you suggest Rafa should do with BH slice.

Good exchange!

[Pelle Svanslös]

On 28/01/2019 15.09, Sawfish wrote:
> I'm postulating that Fed adopted a slice early on because he felt he
> needed it against Nadal,

Rogi's slice has been there since day 1.

[kaennorsing]

Op maandag 28 januari 2019 14:09:20 UTC+1 schreef sawfish:

Fed's slice is a natural part of his game but his cc slice has been a liability vs Nadal historically, apart from on grass (as Rafa's fh eats slice for breakfast). Rafa has effectively incorporated the slice himself as a tactical variation to win Wimbledon more than a decade ago. But he largely abandoned it, probably in order to shorten points/reduce the wear and tear on hardcourts. He needs to reintroduce it imo, even if just for facing Djoker.

[Sawfish]

OK, but he has evolved to playing it more frequently.

Not to get too personal, pelle, but are you a one handed or two handed
BH? I'm going to want to talk about mechanics, if you are willing.

To "pump the prime", I'll volunteer that I am, and always have been, a
card carrying one hander.

[Pelle Svanslös]

On 28/01/2019 16.23, Sawfish wrote:
> On 1/28/19 5:18 AM, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
>> On 28/01/2019 15.09, Sawfish wrote:
>>> I'm postulating that Fed adopted a slice early on because he felt he
>>> needed it against Nadal,
>>
>> Rogi's slice has been there since day 1.
>
> OK, but he has evolved to playing it more frequently.

Doubt that. But whatever.

[Sawfish]

Why would this be? One can observe Rafa's FH grip and stroke, and he
optimizes the high ball, not typically what you get out of slice.

It's true that an indifferently delivered slice might stay up, a bit,
which makes for a "sitter", but watching someone like Fed, I don't think
I see many such balls. His slices are more like Graf's, so far as the
rebound.

Bear in mind that slice does not run back toward the back fence, but
stays low, and think of where Rafa's standard court positioning is (far
back behind the baseline, even in most neutral rallies), so I'm having
troubles actually accepting this, as stated.

However, I'm not seeing it before my eyes and I'll accept that you have
observed this.

So given your observation that Rafa eats up slice on the FH, does this
mean that he actually might prefer to receive slice to TS on his FH
side? Or rather, that he handles slice much better than most, and so it
does not work as well against him as one might like--but hey! This is
*Rafa*; nothing much works well against him.

Quick aside: from memory, I believe that Rafa plays the low ball better
on his BH, which means that opponents would not use slice as much on
that side, I think.

Rafa has effectively incorporated the slice himself as a tactical
variation to win Wimbledon more than a decade ago.

Slice and Wimbledon are like strawberries and cream...in fact, I now
wonder if it's even possible to win Wimbledon without having slice in
one's toolkit.

Especially before the courts were slowed down some years back.

But he largely abandoned it, probably in order to shorten points/reduce
the wear and tear on hardcourts. He needs to reintroduce it imo, even if
just for facing Djoker.
>

Very interesting exchange! Makes me think!

Thanks!

[Geeam]

On Monday, January 28, 2019 at 1:23:08 AM UTC+1, kaennorsing wrote:
> Just rewatched the highlights. Pretty much every time Rafa hit a decent slice his odds of winning the point went up; he either got (a chance for) a winner on the very next ball or managed to turn defense into neutral or outright attack.

I think Nadal obviously tried to slice against Djokovic many times on HC (clay might be different), and there's a reason why he didn't try it too much yesterday. The fact that he was successful on the few occasions he tried, doesn't prove anything. He could even be successful with occasional serve & volley, if he used it as a SURPRISE tactic, but does that mean serve & volley is a good strategy against Djokovic? If we're looking for a good strategy against Djokovic, it's probably better to watch that YEC final against Zverev again.

> His movement on clay will probably be better than what we saw yesterday.

That's actually part of what he said in his press conference yesterday. Due to his injury he didn't have enough time to work on his defensive skills yet, also he didn't have any tough matches en route to the final, and he was generally lacking his best intensity. Maybe we should all remind ourselves this was his first tournament since September. But he also said that doesn't necessarily mean he could have won the match with better preparation.

[kaennorsing]

Op maandag 28 januari 2019 15:54:48 UTC+1 schreef Geeam:

Fair points. The slice should always (apart from perhaps grass) be used as a tactical variation of course, but I do believe it is an essential one for Rafa vs Djoker. Apart perhaps from on clay, but even there I would suggest Rafa use it regularly - as a change up - just to get Djoker off balance. Whatever he's been doing the last few years (being ultra aggressive and trying to overpower and outhit Djoker) certainly has not worked very well for him at all.

[kaennorsing]

Op maandag 28 januari 2019 15:40:36 UTC+1 schreef sawfish:

The incredible racquet head speed that Rafa (as well as Roger himself) generates makes it possible for him to scoop up from under the slice and viciously put it away in any corner. This is a large part of the reason the Fed-Rafa rivalry went the way it did the first 10 years or so. It wasn't just Fed choking/underperforming (at first), but one of Fed's main weapons (the slice) kamikaze diving into a bigger, meaner machine; the Rafa forehand.

:-)

[RaspingDrive]

The figure 7% conveys what you have said in a paragraph. In fact, more precisely. Rafa is simply not that good on HC for one to write on and on about him.

[SliceAndDice]

Djoker has won it 4 times with a below-average slice backhand. :) With the firmer bouncing grass courts these days, I don't think a slice backhand is as critical a weapon to have in one's repertoire.

[jdeluise]

On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 06:23:59 -0800, Sawfish wrote:


> Not to get too personal, pelle, but are you a one handed or two handed
> BH? I'm going to want to talk about mechanics, if you are willing.

I wonder that about *skriptis too... do you think he plays?

[*skriptis]

jdeluise <jdel...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

What happened, kitty ate your tongue so you can't ask for yourself?


--

[Sawfish]

Can't say for sure how far into the game he has gotten, personally.
There are a few here I think have played it enough to have become
obsessive about the mechanics, as I once was.

In reality, though, all that proves is that I can be pretty obsessive,
and not necessarily a good player.

The mechanics are what interest me the most, and I've read what I think
are profoundly ill-informed observations from time to time, spoken with
all the personal assurance of a Trump.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Give me Dadaism, or give me nothing!"
--Sawfish

[Pelle Svanslös]

On 28/01/2019 19.31, Sawfish wrote:
> On 1/28/19 9:04 AM, jdeluise wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 06:23:59 -0800, Sawfish wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Not to get too personal, pelle, but are you a one handed or two handed
>>> BH? I'm going to want to talk about mechanics, if you are willing.
>>
>> I wonder that about *skriptis too... do you think he plays?
>>
>
> Can't say for sure how far into the game he has gotten, personally.
> There are a few here I think have played it enough to have become
> obsessive about the mechanics, as I once was.
>
> In reality, though, all that proves is that I can be pretty obsessive,
> and not necessarily a good player.
>
> The mechanics are what interest me the most, and I've read what I think
> are profoundly ill-informed observations from time to time, spoken with
> all the personal assurance of a Trump.

Why don't you take them on when as they come up? Be brave, call BS. Hand
wringing grannies are boring.

In general, if you want to see discussions that interests you, the best
way is to start them yourself. The least obnoxious too. Post something
and see if anybody bites. Interest is the currency.

[Sawfish]

Hah!

Yep, I do that (post provocatively) to try to get a bite, because the
currency of groups now has evolved to attention-getting openers, or else
you'll get no response, and possible no views, even.

So it's gotten that you have to troll to survive, on groups like RST.

I'm reluctant to call BS too often or too harshly; I don't like the tone
it sets. But if I get bored enough...

Here's an extra thought for tennis physicists: consider what happens to
the rotation of a struck ball as it contacts the average hardcourt
surface on the opponent's side of the court. Assume any spin you want,
because each "spin" has different characteristics on the rebound. Assume
a deep fairly assertive shot.

I've carried certain assumptions for much of my life, because you can
see the incoming spin and the rebound tends to create a characteristic
arc within certain parameters, so I assumed a certain reality. But
watching slo -mo of certain shots, and their rebounds, I was shocked to
see the assumptions unravel.

So now I'm trying to work up a new model that is more accurate.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sawfish: He talks the talk...but does he walk the walk?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Pelle Svanslös]

On 28/01/2019 20.43, Sawfish wrote:
> On 1/28/19 10:23 AM, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
>> On 28/01/2019 19.31, Sawfish wrote:
>>> On 1/28/19 9:04 AM, jdeluise wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 06:23:59 -0800, Sawfish wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Not to get too personal, pelle, but are you a one handed or two handed
>>>>> BH? I'm going to want to talk about mechanics, if you are willing.
>>>>
>>>> I wonder that about *skriptis too... do you think he plays?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Can't say for sure how far into the game he has gotten, personally.
>>> There are a few here I think have played it enough to have become
>>> obsessive about the mechanics, as I once was.
>>>
>>> In reality, though, all that proves is that I can be pretty
>>> obsessive, and not necessarily a good player.
>>>
>>> The mechanics are what interest me the most, and I've read what I
>>> think are profoundly ill-informed observations from time to time,
>>> spoken with all the personal assurance of a Trump.
>>
>> Why don't you take them on when as they come up? Be brave, call BS.
>> Hand wringing grannies are boring.
>>
>> In general, if you want to see discussions that interests you, the
>> best way is to start them yourself. The least obnoxious too. Post
>> something and see if anybody bites. Interest is the currency.
>>
>
> Hah!
>
> Yep,  I do that (post provocatively)

That's how divorces happen. Nagging weeks afterwards and writing Kisted
John letters is the least productive way to do anything.

> to try to get a bite, because the
> currency of groups now has evolved to attention-getting openers, or else
> you'll get no response, and possible no views, even.
>
> So it's gotten that you have to troll to survive, on groups like RST.

What do you have to survive? Boredom?

Pick up a hobby.

> I'm reluctant to call BS too often or too harshly; I don't like the tone
> it sets. But if I get bored enough...
>
> Here's an extra thought for tennis physicists: consider what happens to
> the rotation of a struck ball

This is the problem with you, not just in tennis. If you don't mind my
saying.

It's complete utter pointlessness. The longer the post, the more likely
it is that it is a nothingburger. Why would anybody, out of the blue,
ask how a ball behaves on impact? Are these some kind of riddles to bide
your time? Because what you *are* asking here is for others to bide your
fucking time with you. That's not how it works.

> as it contacts the average hardcourt
> surface on the opponent's side of the court. Assume any spin you want,
> because each "spin" has different characteristics on the rebound. Assume
> a deep fairly assertive shot.
>

Yawners.

> I've carried certain assumptions for much of my life, because you can
> see the incoming spin and the rebound tends to create a characteristic
> arc within certain parameters, so I assumed a certain reality.

Do you yourself know what this sentence means?

> But
> watching slo -mo of certain shots, and their rebounds, I was shocked to
> see the assumptions unravel.

And what should anybody make out of this? I really don't know what
"certain assumptions" are and how they unravel.

My guess is, this is why nobody bothers with these posts.

>
> So now I'm trying to work up a new model that is more accurate.
>

Cool.

[Sawfish]

That's not how mine happened.

I started staying out nights and not coming home.

>
>> to try to get a bite, because the currency of groups now has evolved
>> to attention-getting openers, or else you'll get no response, and
>> possible no views, even.
>>
>> So it's gotten that you have to troll to survive, on groups like RST.
>
> What do you have to survive? Boredom?
>
> Pick up a hobby.

It's this.

>
>> I'm reluctant to call BS too often or too harshly; I don't like the
>> tone it sets. But if I get bored enough...
>>
>> Here's an extra thought for tennis physicists: consider what happens
>> to the rotation of a struck ball
>
> This is the problem with you, not just in tennis. If you don't mind my
> saying.
>
> It's complete utter pointlessness. The longer the post, the more likely
> it is that it is a nothingburger. Why would anybody, out of the blue,
> ask how a ball behaves on impact? Are these some kind of riddles to bide
> your time? Because what you *are* asking here is for others to bide your
> fucking time with you. That's not how it works.

But another way to look at it is that this lack of engagement is what
leads many posters here to publicly make observations that make no
sense, whatsoever, or are transparent re-hashings of the words they hear
spoken on TV by commentators...

...that they are too lazy, not imaginative enough--or even more
pathetic, haven't played enough to have any idea of what the the topic
encompasses--or some combo of the these feckless traits, and combined
with their vapid narcissism still want to express what they think is a
knowledgeable idea. Publicly.

Clear enough for you, pelle?

>
>> as it contacts the average hardcourt surface on the opponent's side of
>> the court. Assume any spin you want, because each "spin" has different
>> characteristics on the rebound. Assume a deep fairly assertive shot.
>>
>
> Yawners.
>
>> I've carried certain assumptions for much of my life, because you can
>> see the incoming spin and the rebound tends to create a characteristic
>> arc within certain parameters, so I assumed a certain reality.
>
> Do you yourself know what this sentence means?

Sho' 'nuff...

>
>> But watching slo -mo of certain shots, and their rebounds, I was
>> shocked to see the assumptions unravel.
>
> And what should anybody make out of this? I really don't know what
> "certain assumptions" are and how they unravel.
>
> My guess is, this is why nobody bothers with these posts.

My guess is that if they engage, they are afraid of perhaps showing that
they're not as knowledgeable as they claim.

So they pooh-pooh it, often. Or try to come on aggressively, but still
bobbin' and weavin'...

Anything other than actually addressing the topic that scares them.
Pretty obvious to all, I'd think.

>
>>
>> So now I'm trying to work up a new model that is more accurate.
>>
>
> Cool.

If I kept pigeonholes, you'd be flirting with a certain one, pelle.

Have a nice day! :^)

[Pelle Svanslös]

Ok. I see better now.

>>
>>> I'm reluctant to call BS too often or too harshly; I don't like the
>>> tone it sets. But if I get bored enough...
>>>
>>> Here's an extra thought for tennis physicists: consider what happens
>>> to the rotation of a struck ball
>>
>> This is the problem with you, not just in tennis. If you don't mind my
>> saying.
>>
>> It's complete utter pointlessness. The longer the post, the more
>> likely it is that it is a nothingburger. Why would anybody, out of the
>> blue, ask how a ball behaves on impact? Are these some kind of riddles
>> to bide your time? Because what you *are* asking here is for others to
>> bide your fucking time with you. That's not how it works.
>
> But another way to look at it is that this lack of engagement is what
> leads many posters here to publicly make observations that make no
> sense, whatsoever, or are transparent re-hashings of the words they hear
> spoken on TV by commentators...
>

Cool. The better way to correct what you think are misunderstandings, is
to do that on the spot. Afterwards, like now, nobody knows what the
hubbub is about.

And is likely not to care.

> ...that they are too lazy, not imaginative enough--or even more
> pathetic, haven't played enough to have any idea of what the the topic
> encompasses--or some combo of the these feckless traits, and combined
> with their vapid narcissism still want to express what they think is a
> knowledgeable idea. Publicly.
>
> Clear enough for you, pelle?
>

I read you.

BUt I still haven't got a clue what you mean. How about collecting all
these RST tennis offences into a notepad and writing a post where you
debunk all the misconceptions one by one.

That would be interesting :)

>>
>>> as it contacts the average hardcourt surface on the opponent's side
>>> of the court. Assume any spin you want, because each "spin" has
>>> different characteristics on the rebound. Assume a deep fairly
>>> assertive shot.
>>>
>>
>> Yawners.
>>
>>> I've carried certain assumptions for much of my life, because you can
>>> see the incoming spin and the rebound tends to create a
>>> characteristic arc within certain parameters, so I assumed a certain
>>> reality.
>>
>> Do you yourself know what this sentence means?
>
> Sho' 'nuff...
>
>>
>>> But watching slo -mo of certain shots, and their rebounds, I was
>>> shocked to see the assumptions unravel.
>>
>> And what should anybody make out of this? I really don't know what
>> "certain assumptions" are and how they unravel.
>>
>> My guess is, this is why nobody bothers with these posts.
>
> My guess is that if they engage, they are afraid of perhaps showing that
> they're not as knowledgeable as they claim.
>
> So they pooh-pooh it, often. Or try to come on aggressively, but still
> bobbin' and weavin'...
>
> Anything other than actually addressing the topic that scares them.
> Pretty obvious to all, I'd think.

Ok, so I failed the ball bounce test. I failed the tennis on paper test
too. I should be mortified.

But I'm not!

[Pelle Svanslös]

Oh yeah. I forgot. This ball bounce thing has been discussed in RST many
times before. Just like the 2hander v. 1hander, eastern v. western, ...

[Patrick Kehoe]

On Sunday, January 27, 2019 at 4:40:06 PM UTC-8, TT wrote:
> kaennorsing kirjoitti 28.1.2019 klo 2:23:

> > His movement on clay will probably be better than what we saw yesterday.
>

> I think Rafa's movement was terrible, especially in the first set. I
> think it was because of nerves.
>
> Yes, Rafa can probably move better on clay & Djokovic's movement is less
> optimal on the surface...

Interesting post...

My contention, based on this tournament, has been that Rafa's lost something moving to his left now... even before his rib twinge 'thingie', he's not quite as ROBUST getting out wide to his left any longer... so/meaning, to my eye he's lost 'some' coverage capasity out wide to his left...

P

[Pelle Svanslös]

Like this?

https://youtu.be/3p1xATcKR6g?t=87

[Patrick Kehoe]

LONG POST - SORRY

K, great point about the ability to scoop under the slice and be able to drive it into the corners... Feds, Rafa, Nole and Murray ALL had to learn that to create a 'offensive-defense" against being drop-shotted on during big points... BASICALLY all mastered this counter-point strike...

AND...

Nole v Rafa changed (first on clay) when Team Nole identified 3 elements to counter act Rafa's defensive-power tennis

The Game Theory was to turn exchanges into 'compositional points' with set responses to what Rafa did BEST...

1. Hit massive backhand crosses INTO Rafa's titanic forehand... Challening fortress Rafa...

- get a shortish reply and knock it away
- or, shot after shot angle Rafa more and more and then hit the final backhand strike down the line (into Rafa's backhand) for the counter winner... eventually Team Rafa saw this and tried (using sheer speed) to cover and get back to the opposite corner to counter... worked for a SHORT PERIOD, until Team Nole tried sprinkling in getting up to forecourt to punch away Rafa's backhand counter OR (as in more often), unload a final MONSTER forehand cross... THEN TEAM RAFA even found ways to GET THAT ONE and thus was created that those years 2011-2014 of LONG RAVAGING battles of UNGODLY exchanges...

During this period Team Nole came up with more definitive first strike set ups based off of his swinging off forehands which took Rafa out of court AND on serve the swining cut serve against taking Rafa out and then the third ball was the back into the same corner to work against Rafa's coverage/recovery speed... worked best against Murray and really tipped Nole against Rafa on clay for the first time ever...

Tactically, the slice of Rafa vs the Nole slice was almost cancelled out as a 'weaponized factor' in the macro sense... yes, there were time one or the other caught the other off guard BUT IN THE MAIN, it was not effective against one another... Edge to Rafa, he often won the points on the rare times when both were in the front court... and the short sliced ball (most identified with Federer) was largely ineffectual against one another because of how quickly both guys could identify it and get up to it and for the fact BOTH could counter spin it to produce a winner (mainly because they had so much experience countering the Federer short balls generally)

Nole back hand to Rafa forehand then became a tactical cage match to see WHO could get into a 'finishing position' after extended shot counter shot exchanges... that 'gaming' of the play meant that stamina + mental fortitude tended to determine many/most key outcomes in a tactical+pragmatic sense... AND NOLE was defining his career - in large part - as the guy who could actually DO IT successfully against the ROCK Nadal...

Now that Team Nole are making return (long/to the line and right in the middle returns) + big strike 3rd ball offernings THEE bedrock of their tennis (based of of his signature defense+spot serving), Team Nadal had to find a set of tinkering elements as counter agents... Top up the 1serve speeds, spread the massive forehands on 3rd ball sets, etc... well, it doesn't have much COUNTERING AGENCY against what Nole and his team have set up... CLEARLY, Team Nole watched what Federer and LUBO and Severn plotted for Rafa on hardcourt and meshed it with Nole's superior defensives coverages...

Team Fed topped up the 2nd serve, beefed up backhand into Rafa forehand and bumped the up to net short ball strikes as their basic formula vs. Rafa and those 3 key top ups have rewired the Feds-Rafa rivalry... For Team Nole they have refined it down to 1st serve spot serving (wideouts mainly) against Rafa, 3rd ball big strike returns, during longer rallies heavy into the stright neutral ball to take away Rafa's angled forehand and ONCE Nole digs out the ONE BIG Rafa shot pin Rafa deep to his left (where Rafa's not covering QUITE as well as he used to) to gain key mid-rally control and then unload...

Those 3 key counter measures have the basic advantage of 1) Feeding into and maximizingNole's evolved serving accuracy 2) allows those 3 counter patterns mid-rally to work to Nole's advantage based on the percentages of his backhand reliance and 3) allows for Nole to build his now well established mental dominance over Rafa - at least well established - on hardcourt...

THE KEY QUESTION NOW BECOMES, can Nole translate his advantages, strategic, mental and results based onto CLAY... MEANING Roland Garos???

P

[kaennorsing]

Op maandag 28 januari 2019 21:40:13 UTC+1 schreef Patrick Kehoe:

Thanks for that brief summary of their tactical exchanges over the years. :-) Just wondering what you mean by 3rd ball? The shot after the return? So the server's 1-2 punch?

Also, I recall Rafa effectively countering the big Djoker cc backhand with massive forehands up the line. Risky, but probably worth it once he finds that timing and required movement.

Plus I think Rafa using the slice not towards Nole's forehand but up the line as well, to Djoker's backhand. He doesn't have quite the same acceleration on his backhand to put a good slice away - if it stays low enough. Then Rafa can counter, which has always been his biggest strength anyway.

Another variation Rafa can use (which was effective in the past I believe) is the higher topspin ball deep up the middle, not giving Djoker the angle for a putaway/agressive set-up and giving Rafa (again) time to counter right after it.

[Whisper]

On 28/01/2019 11:50 pm, kaennorsing wrote:
> Op maandag 28 januari 2019 05:05:43 UTC+1 schreef sawfish:
>> On 1/27/19 7:50 PM, Whisper wrote:
>> What are your thoughts?
>>
>> Extra credit: *why* did Fed develop such a good slice BH? Or perhaps you
>> feel it's not that good?
>>
>> Remember: this is me, Sawfish, you're dealing with, and I'm setting no
>> traps. I am not convinced I'm right and working thru these permutation
>> is how I get better.
>
> I appreciate the question but don't really accept your premise: I actually think Rafa has a better slice than Novak. Fed probably has the best and most versatile slice but Rafa's slice is good enough to use as a tactical variation as well.
>
> He just doesn't use it as much any more since he likes to keep points shorter and be aggressive as he's gotten a bit older. I suppose against most players this is indeed the right tactic, by far. Just not against Novak, who absorbs the pace like a sponge and often gets you in trouble for it.
>
>
> I also remember Rafa using it effective against Novak before (I think 3-4+ years ago). I think it's a crucial element when facing Djoker for almost all players and it helped Rafa get some crucial wins over Novak before. If Djoker is playing that well you just can't allow him to get into that steady groove where he just won't miss. You have got to mix up the pace and depth of shot and/or overwhelm him with heavy flat shots, which is not Rafa's game.
>

Slice is very underrated in modern game. Don't understand why? Perhaps
because it's not an obvious way to win like aces & big winners.

A lot of Graf's massive success is due to a very effective slice bh.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

[Whisper]

On 29/01/2019 12:09 am, kaennorsing wrote:
> Op maandag 28 januari 2019 01:40:06 UTC+1 schreef TT:

>> kaennorsing kirjoitti 28.1.2019 klo 2:23:

>>> His movement on clay will probably be better than what we saw yesterday.
>>

>> I think Rafa's movement was terrible, especially in the first set. I
>> think it was because of nerves.
>>
>> Yes, Rafa can probably move better on clay & Djokovic's movement is less
>> optimal on the surface...
>

> The defensive movement may have been the biggest part. Rafa said in the press conference his offense was great all week but the defense was not good enough yet, because of the long break and lack of match tightness and/or tight match situations… That won't fly vs zoning Djoker.
>
> Just think some more slices would have bought him some time, chance to counter and get Djoker out of his comfy zone.
>

Absolutely. Hitting winners off low slice is incredibly difficult to
pull off regularly.

[The Iceberg]

On Monday, 28 January 2019 00:23:08 UTC, kaennorsing wrote:
> Just rewatched the highlights. Pretty much every time Rafa hit a decent slice his odds of winning the point went up; he either got (a chance for) a winner on the very next ball or managed to turn defense into neutral or outright attack.
>
> The slice vs Djoker is crucial for 3 main reasons;
> - it doesn't allow him to counter attack as effectively by using the incoming pace and simply redirecting it into the open court where he is in control of the rally and yo-yoing the opponent around. Nobody redirects quite as well as Djoker on both sides on high paced shots.
> - it forces Djoker to hit up and inject his own pace. This is not his strong suit. Never has been and still is not. When dealing with a slice Djoker's shots often fall much shorter and softer. Djoker is supreme at hitting high balls on both wings in either direction. His grip and swings are optimal for it.
> - it changes up the rhythm of the rally and the match. You don't want Djoker to be totally comfortable with the pace of the rallies. Like Federer, in addition to variety in angles, depth and height mix up the pace by using the slice to slow the game down. There may be nobody better at playing at a certain steady, high pace then Djoker. Don't feed it to him! It's the reason why old Fed has played Djoker generally much closer than Rafa has. I believe 2017 Fed would have dealt with this zoning Djoker, partly because of his slice. In fact he nearly beat him at Paris last year, when Djoker was in much better form and with much more confidence than Fed was.
>

> Rafa himself has a decent slice as well. If he can incorporate it more and stops overthinking he should be the favorite on clay this year. His movement on clay will probably be better than what we saw yesterday.

yes agree, noticed this too.

[Whisper]

On 29/01/2019 2:40 am, kaennorsing wrote:
> Op maandag 28 januari 2019 15:40:36 UTC+1 schreef sawfish:
>>

>> Especially before the courts were slowed down some years back.
>>
>> But he largely abandoned it, probably in order to shorten points/reduce
>> the wear and tear on hardcourts. He needs to reintroduce it imo, even if
>> just for facing Djoker.
>>>
>>
>> Very interesting exchange! Makes me think!
>>
>> Thanks!
>
> The incredible racquet head speed that Rafa (as well as Roger himself) generates makes it possible for him to scoop up from under the slice and viciously put it away in any corner. This is a large part of the reason the Fed-Rafa rivalry went the way it did the first 10 years or so. It wasn't just Fed choking/underperforming (at first), but one of Fed's main weapons (the slice) kamikaze diving into a bigger, meaner machine; the Rafa forehand.
>
> :-)
>

Imo Fed's slice was pretty average. Graf's was deadly.

[The Iceberg]

yes Djoker proves this, it due to the courts.

[The Iceberg]

Good post even though it anti-Nadal(as usual), also the bit about "swining cut serve against taking Rafa out and then the third ball was the back into the same corner" - it did not tip the balance against Nadal at the FO, that was just out-of-sorts Nadal AND most importantly it certainly DID NOT "work best against Murray", Djoker lost to Murray on huge occasions, as Murray in the right mood and with crowd backing was clever enough to beat and counteract Djoker no matter what.

[Whisper]

Yes, sorry Sawfish but Pelle is on the money here, at least as far as
I'm concerned. A 6 yr old or a granny can hit the ball the way you
describe, so it kinda amounts to nothing. A player can hit a slice
that's much weaker than the way another guy hits a slice. It does
really lead to a nothingburger : )

I don't want to discourage you from posting as you're obviously a highly
intelligent guy with great insight & it's all tennis related : ). I
just don't feel inspired to contribute as I don't see much value for
myself, but happy to see other contribute if interested. I'm a big fan
of most of your posts.

: )

[Whisper]

On 29/01/2019 6:26 am, Sawfish wrote:
> On 1/28/19 11:02 AM, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
>> That's how divorces happen. Nagging weeks afterwards and writing
>> Kisted John letters is the least productive way to do anything.
>
> That's not how mine happened.
>
> I started staying out nights and not coming home.

You wanted a divorce? That's what my bro in law did to my sister.

[Sawfish]

You would want one, too.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I’ve seen things you people wouldn’t believe. Barbecue grills on fire
behind the condominiums that line the 9th fairway. I watched casual
strollers slip on dog excrement on the boardwalk near the amusement
pier. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.

Time for lunch."

--Sawfish

[Sawfish]

Fair enough, Whisper!

>
>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>

[kaennorsing]

Op dinsdag 29 januari 2019 12:32:51 UTC+1 schreef Whisper:

> Imo Fed's slice was pretty average. Graf's was deadly.

Fed's slice is incredibly effective in defense (best ever imo) and has great versatility; mixing up pace, spins, depth and angles. Graf's was more one-sided imo, though with more consistent bite. Both are/were highly effective. Both used it to set up their forehands beautifully though, as well as Sampras btw.

[SliceAndDice]

+1

[Whisper]

On 30/01/2019 2:03 am, Sawfish wrote:
> On 1/29/19 4:23 AM, Whisper wrote:
>> On 29/01/2019 6:26 am, Sawfish wrote:
>>> On 1/28/19 11:02 AM, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
>>>> That's how divorces happen. Nagging weeks afterwards and writing
>>>> Kisted John letters is the least productive way to do anything.
>>>
>>> That's not how mine happened.
>>>
>>> I started staying out nights and not coming home.
>>
>>
>> You wanted a divorce?  That's what my bro in law did to my sister.
>>
>>
>

> You would want one, too.
>

Yeah, seen many friends with horrible spouses. Divorce devastated them
financially, but overall they are happier. I got lucky with the Mrs who
pursued me from day 1 & is completely devoted to me to this day. Life
is so much easier when a very attractive woman is besotted with you &
stays that way for 30+ yrs. I think I just got lucky in that dept. Not
too hard rebuffing advances of hot women when you've got a super model
type at home.

: )

[Whisper]

That 'bite' is what made Graf's slice awesome - stayed low & biting.

Sampras' was a bit different - he used it to take pace off the ball &
force opponent to hit harder, which worked to his advantage.

[kaennorsing]

Op woensdag 30 januari 2019 10:40:08 UTC+1 schreef Whisper:

I think it's harder in men's tennis to put consistent bite on it like Graf did. Guys can hit it so big that you're not in position to carve through it as completely like that. That's why guys like Federer and Sampras use(d) it as a counter attack tool/take pace off; a way to turn defense into attack and/or just stay in the point a bit longer to draw an error or set up the big forehand.


I think even if it gets put away sometimes it is crucial to use vs guys who are just more effective trading high paced shots from the baseline. Djoker may be the best and most consistent baseliner ever and it's foolish to try to win by competing with that type of consistency. He's proven by now there's nobody better at it than him. Mixing up then is key and using the slice is just one way of doing it...

Unless of course if you can consistently crush the ball on both sides like peak Stanimal.

[Pelle Svanslös]

On 30/01/2019 13.49, kaennorsing wrote:
> Op woensdag 30 januari 2019 10:40:08 UTC+1 schreef Whisper:
>> On 30/01/2019 2:14 am, kaennorsing wrote:
>>> Op dinsdag 29 januari 2019 12:32:51 UTC+1 schreef Whisper:
>>>
>>>> Imo Fed's slice was pretty average. Graf's was deadly.
>>>
>>> Fed's slice is incredibly effective in defense (best ever imo)
>>> and has great versatility; mixing up pace, spins, depth and
>>> angles. Graf's was more one-sided imo, though with more
>>> consistent bite. Both are/were highly effective. Both used it to
>>> set up their forehands beautifully though, as well as Sampras
>>> btw.
>>>
>>
>> That 'bite' is what made Graf's slice awesome - stayed low &
>> biting.
>>
>> Sampras' was a bit different - he used it to take pace off the ball
>> & force opponent to hit harder, which worked to his advantage.
>
> I think it's harder in men's tennis to put consistent bite on it like
> Graf did.

ROgi's slice is the shot with the most RPM in it, IIRC. Can't have more
bite than that. Haven't seen a better slice than that. Equals, yes.

I'm not sure Graf's slice would survive in men's tennis. It has the
Rosewall kind of flailing in it. Might be great against flat balls waist
high, but ...

[Whisper]

On 30/01/2019 11:00 pm, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
> On 30/01/2019 13.49, kaennorsing wrote:
>> Op woensdag 30 januari 2019 10:40:08 UTC+1 schreef Whisper:
>>> On 30/01/2019 2:14 am, kaennorsing wrote:
>>>> Op dinsdag 29 januari 2019 12:32:51 UTC+1 schreef Whisper:
>>>>
>>>>> Imo Fed's slice was pretty average.  Graf's was deadly.
>>>>
>>>> Fed's slice is incredibly effective in defense (best ever imo)
>>>> and has great versatility; mixing up pace, spins, depth and
>>>> angles. Graf's was more one-sided imo, though with more
>>>> consistent bite. Both are/were highly effective. Both used it to
>>>> set up their forehands beautifully though, as well as Sampras
>>>> btw.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That 'bite' is what made Graf's slice awesome - stayed low &
>>> biting.
>>>
>>> Sampras' was a bit different - he used it to take pace off the ball
>>> & force opponent to hit harder, which worked to his advantage.
>>
>> I think it's harder in men's tennis to put consistent bite on it like
>> Graf did.
>
> ROgi's slice is the shot with the most RPM in it, IIRC. Can't have more
> bite than that. Haven't seen a better slice than that. Equals, yes.

Roger's slice isn't memorable at all imo.

>
> I'm not sure Graf's slice would survive in men's tennis. It has the
> Rosewall kind of flailing in it. Might be great against flat balls waist
> high, but ...
>

Far superior to Roger's slice imo.

[Pelle Svanslös]

You can make that judgement when you put Graf against Rafa.

Indirectly, you can make the case the other way around. Nobody hits it
the way Graf did in the men's game.

[Sawfish]

On 1/30/19 3:49 AM, kaennorsing wrote:
> Op woensdag 30 januari 2019 10:40:08 UTC+1 schreef Whisper:
>> On 30/01/2019 2:14 am, kaennorsing wrote:
>>> Op dinsdag 29 januari 2019 12:32:51 UTC+1 schreef Whisper:
>>>
>>>> Imo Fed's slice was pretty average. Graf's was deadly.
>>>
>>> Fed's slice is incredibly effective in defense (best ever imo) and has great versatility; mixing up pace, spins, depth and angles. Graf's was more one-sided imo, though with more consistent bite. Both are/were highly effective. Both used it to set up their forehands beautifully though, as well as Sampras btw.
>>>
>>
>> That 'bite' is what made Graf's slice awesome - stayed low & biting.
>>
>> Sampras' was a bit different - he used it to take pace off the ball &
>> force opponent to hit harder, which worked to his advantage.
>
> I think it's harder in men's tennis to put consistent bite on it like Graf did. Guys can hit it so big that you're not in position to carve through it as completely like that.

I agree with this observation, and note that so far as I can tell, slice
is a poor attack weapon *except* as used for approach. Outside of that,
it's a change up, and it's a neutral shot, at best, with big possible
downsides in that a poorly delivered rally slice is often sitter.

And this is why Graf's slice blew me away, and still does. What she did
routinely *should not* work.

But it did. She made it work.

That's why guys like Federer and Sampras use(d) it as a counter attack
tool/take pace off; a way to turn defense into attack and/or just stay
in the point a bit longer to draw an error or set up the big forehand.
>
>
> I think even if it gets put away sometimes it is crucial to use vs guys who are just more effective trading high paced shots from the baseline. Djoker may be the best and most consistent baseliner ever and it's foolish to try to win by competing with that type of consistency. He's proven by now there's nobody better at it than him. Mixing up then is key and using the slice is just one way of doing it...

I think that it's a step in the right direction, for sure, but when he's
zoned like he was on Sunday, it's grasping at straws, really.

>
> Unless of course if you can consistently crush the ball on both sides like peak Stanimal.
>

Wawrinka's an odd case though, isn't he? He is sorta a right handed
Vilas, in many ways.

--
"It is Pointless, and endless trouble, to cast a stone at every dog
that barks at you"

--Sawfish

[Sawfish]

But you're right on a very interesting question: what do you do with a
high backhand, shoulder high, or higher?

Not what the guys on TV do, what do the readers here do?

I'm a 1H BH, primarily TS. This is a very hard ball to do much better
than a neural return. Right at the end of when I played a dicked around
with some radical ideas (economic redistribution, Free Love, and a 2H
BH...), looking for a better answer, because the automatic answer to
high BH for a 1H BH is slice.

[Sawfish]

On 1/30/19 4:12 AM, Whisper wrote:
> On 30/01/2019 11:00 pm, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
>> On 30/01/2019 13.49, kaennorsing wrote:
>>> Op woensdag 30 januari 2019 10:40:08 UTC+1 schreef Whisper:
>>>> On 30/01/2019 2:14 am, kaennorsing wrote:
>>>>> Op dinsdag 29 januari 2019 12:32:51 UTC+1 schreef Whisper:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Imo Fed's slice was pretty average.  Graf's was deadly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fed's slice is incredibly effective in defense (best ever imo)
>>>>> and has great versatility; mixing up pace, spins, depth and
>>>>> angles. Graf's was more one-sided imo, though with more
>>>>> consistent bite. Both are/were highly effective. Both used it to
>>>>> set up their forehands beautifully though, as well as Sampras
>>>>> btw.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That 'bite' is what made Graf's slice awesome - stayed low &
>>>> biting.
>>>>
>>>> Sampras' was a bit different - he used it to take pace off the ball
>>>> & force opponent to hit harder, which worked to his advantage.
>>>
>>> I think it's harder in men's tennis to put consistent bite on it like
>>> Graf did.
>>
>> ROgi's slice is the shot with the most RPM in it, IIRC. Can't have
>> more bite than that. Haven't seen a better slice than that. Equals, yes.
>
>
> Roger's slice isn't memorable at all imo.

Hard to tell on TV with slice, though, unless the viewer is facing it at
ground level.

I'd characterize Fed's slice as extremely reliable and well under
control as relates to depth. This is about all you can hope for from
slice, except on approach.

Even at 4.0 people aren't scared of slice as a rally tool. The best that
can be said is that it's a rhythm-breaker, pace-absorber.

It's the re-set button, at best.

>
>
>>
>> I'm not sure Graf's slice would survive in men's tennis. It has the
>> Rosewall kind of flailing in it. Might be great against flat balls
>> waist high, but ...
>>
>
> Far superior to Roger's slice imo.

I think it was, but a big part of slice's effectiveness is what your
opponent *allows*. It's not an attack weapon, with the exception of
approach, ad nauseam...

...and poorly executed slice is like signing your own death warrant.
Often a bit short, sits up a bit, and being short, there are angles all
over the place. All your opponent has got to do is supply the pace.

>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>

[Sawfish]

Maybe now's the time to think about what she did with it, a bit...

Right now, the pictures I have in my head are long rallies that would
include slice keeping the ball deep, not a lot of air time, and reliable
as hell.

Then I see a particular point in a match at ground level, from behind
Graf's opponent, seeing what she was seeing, within reason.

Sure enough, the ball was staying low, getting there pretty fast
(although this was mainly due to lack of arc, not pace), and ALWAYS came
back. And it was pretty deep, too.

What I don't recall is Graf hitting baseline winners with slice. Passes,
yep, maybe, but not x-court, nor serious down-the-line (although this
may have been possible). I am unsure if she hit any drops with it--drops
being out of vogue at the time.

But she was fast as hell and slick around the court, and had a
DEVASTATING FH. I am now thinking that she may have used a reliable,
deep, low slice as a place-holder (neutral) until she got something on
her FH, and she'd go very offensive. Since she was super fast and quick,
these opportunities came up pretty often.

Can you help me to recall?

[Sawfish]

On 1/30/19 1:33 AM, Whisper wrote:
> On 30/01/2019 2:03 am, Sawfish wrote:
>> On 1/29/19 4:23 AM, Whisper wrote:
>>> On 29/01/2019 6:26 am, Sawfish wrote:
>>>> On 1/28/19 11:02 AM, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
>>>>> That's how divorces happen. Nagging weeks afterwards and writing
>>>>> Kisted John letters is the least productive way to do anything.
>>>>
>>>> That's not how mine happened.
>>>>
>>>> I started staying out nights and not coming home.
>>>
>>>
>>> You wanted a divorce?  That's what my bro in law did to my sister.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> You would want one, too.
>>
>
>
>
> Yeah, seen many friends with horrible spouses.  Divorce devastated them
> financially, but overall they are happier.

We amicably split, did the legal work ourselves. 50/50 of pretty much
nothing.

Haven't spoken to her or communicated with her in any way since then,
reasoning that if I didn't like dealing with her when we were married,
why would I like it any better afterward?

> I got lucky with the Mrs who
> pursued me from day 1 & is completely devoted to me to this day.  Life
> is so much easier when a very attractive woman is besotted with you &
> stays that way for 30+ yrs.

Speaking honestly, I can't see where it would be possible to be besotted
with me. I *can* see where I appear to be a cave-man provider, and on
the animal level, as skriptis often describes it, it has probably helped me.

>I think I just got lucky in that dept.  Not
> too hard rebuffing advances of hot women when you've got a super model
> type at home.
>
> : )

From what I see of Australia, it appears to be a Happy Hunting Ground.
Very.

:^)

>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>

[John Liang]

If I had to pick a backhand slice and complete package of a single handed backahnd from 80s player that player would be Edberg. Edberg had more variation and range of shots than just about anybody in that era. Graf's problem was that once she won 88 Wimbledon, she never thought there was a need to develop her top spin backhand, she rarely used top spin backhand in a match.

[Sawfish]

Agreed. I can recall seeing her incorporate it into her regular game
plan (seems to me it was late in her career), to me it looked like it
worked well, but she seemed to abandon it.

Slice by nature is defensive neutral, with a big penalty for poor
execution; TS pretty much has it all: offense, neutral, defense.

I'm not acting like a TS fan, here, but trying to objectively note its
characteristics vis-a-vis slice.

>>
>> --
>> "It is Pointless, and endless trouble, to cast a stone at every dog
>> that barks at you"
>>
>> --Sawfish

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Man! I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous!"
--Sawfish

[John Liang]

I remember after her losses to Martin N in 87 Wimbledon and USO, Graf thought it was important to have the top spin backhand so she can pass Martin, it worked very well at Wimbledon. It is rather strange that she abandon that shot and it could have worked well for her in later part of her career. But Graf's backhand as whole wasn't even in the same class as Edberg's .

[StephenJ]

>On 1/30/2019 8:09 AM, John Liang wrote:

> If I had to pick a backhand slice and complete package of a single handed backahnd from 80s player >that player would be Edberg. Edberg had more variation and range of shots than just about anybody in >that era. Graf's problem was that once she won 88 Wimbledon, she never thought there was a need to >develop her top spin backhand, she rarely used top spin backhand in a match.

Graf had about as good a rallying slice BH as we're ever likely to see.
I haven't seen a better one in 45 years of watching tennis.

Yes, it did become a liability vs Seles from 90 onwards, but you can't
be perfect at everything.


--
before agriculture, food-finding was the only occupation
for humans.

- Alan Weisman

[guypers]

Yes, agree totally!

[Hey Guys]

Graf's BH slice became less useful as the 90s progressed. In 99 she had a 50% win rate against the new crop of players while maintaining her high win percentage against the players she faced in the early/mid 90s. Of course it didn't help that her FH was matched by the new crop as well.

[SliceAndDice]

She retired in 99, so you would have factor in physical/mental wear and tear before drawing any conclusions from that.

[Hey Guys]

Sure, but not if you think she was primed to win several more slams as some here think.

[Whisper]

Don't think it was a liability v Seles - she thrashed her 60 61 & 62 61
in their Wimbledon clashes, & overall had a better h2h. Seles did well
because she was a great player, not due to Graf's slice deficiency.

[Pelle Svanslös]

If Whisper ever gets to see a +7k RPM slice, I think he'll remember it.

[Pelle Svanslös]

On 30/01/2019 15.26, Sawfish wrote:
> On 1/30/19 3:49 AM, kaennorsing wrote:
>> Op woensdag 30 januari 2019 10:40:08 UTC+1 schreef Whisper:
>>> On 30/01/2019 2:14 am, kaennorsing wrote:
>>>> Op dinsdag 29 januari 2019 12:32:51 UTC+1 schreef Whisper:
>>>>
>>>>> Imo Fed's slice was pretty average.  Graf's was deadly.
>>>>
>>>> Fed's slice is incredibly effective in defense (best ever imo) and
>>>> has great versatility; mixing up pace, spins, depth and angles.
>>>> Graf's was more one-sided imo, though with more consistent bite.
>>>> Both are/were highly effective. Both used it to set up their
>>>> forehands beautifully though, as well as Sampras btw.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That 'bite' is what made Graf's slice awesome - stayed low & biting.
>>>
>>> Sampras' was a bit different - he used it to take pace off the ball &
>>> force opponent to hit harder, which worked to his advantage.
>>
>> I think it's harder in men's tennis to put consistent bite on it like
>> Graf did. Guys can hit it so big that you're not in position to carve
>> through it as completely like that.
>
> I agree with this observation, and note that so far as I can tell, slice
> is a poor attack weapon *except* as used for approach.

I didn't mean that. But under what kind of pressure the shot itself
would be in the mens' game.

Since a high TS ball is better hit on the rise, this is the context. A
slice on the rise.

YT is full of Graf slices but they all are hit off a knee height ball.
That's fine, NP. Finding a point where she actually does hit a slice on
the rise might be impossible, FAIC. This is the best I could find. A
relatively high ball.

https://youtu.be/6PLh08ocKWc?t=427

The quality is poor but you can see enough. Graf drops the racquet head
(wrist) behind her back (ROgi does not) and the racquet follows a low to
high path from there up to impact. A slice with a low to high path!?

Her fist also starts low and ends up high. What?! Low to high!? The
underspin she gets is the result of her whipping the racquet quickly
slightly above the ball. She's usually pretty good at that, except that
the resulting shot here isn't that great. Does it even have underspin?

In general, this whipping thing is a no no. A good pro will spank you
for that.

In comparison, ROgi's slice is compact and as uncomplicated as can be.
Racquet up, then down. No further complications in the backswing. Quick,
compact, controlled and tons of bite, +7k RPM off a topspin ball. My
take on Graf is that she wants to increase racquet head speed. But you
don't need that in a slice.

It's impossible to say what Graf woulda done if she would regularly have
had to hit head height top spin. My guess is, she would have changed
things a bit. But since you never see any of that, this is how the ball
rolls. And as such I will have to see her slice.

I don't think I've ever seen a red headed step slice like that in the
men's game.

[John Liang]

On Thursday, January 31, 2019 at 3:10:46 AM UTC+11, StephenJ wrote:
> >On 1/30/2019 8:09 AM, John Liang wrote:
>
> > If I had to pick a backhand slice and complete package of a single handed backahnd from 80s player >that player would be Edberg. Edberg had more variation and range of shots than just about anybody in >that era. Graf's problem was that once she won 88 Wimbledon, she never thought there was a need to >develop her top spin backhand, she rarely used top spin backhand in a match.
>
> Graf had about as good a rallying slice BH as we're ever likely to see.
> I haven't seen a better one in 45 years of watching tennis.

But if we view the backhand as a whole package then Edberg's backhand is head and shoulder above Graf's, Edberg has great slice backhand and could do a lot more on his backhand than what Graf could do with her backhand.

[*skriptis]

John Liang <jlia...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

> On Thursday, January 31, 2019 at 3:10:46 AM UTC+11, StephenJ wrote:
>> >On 1/30/2019 8:09 AM, John Liang wrote:
>>
>> > If I had to pick a backhand slice and complete package of a single handed backahnd from 80s player >that player would be Edberg. Edberg had more variation and range of shots than just about anybody in >that era. Graf's problem was that once she won 88 Wimbledon, she never thought there was a need to >develop her top spin backhand, she rarely used top spin backhand in a match.
>>
>> Graf had about as good a rallying slice BH as we're ever likely to see.
>> I haven't seen a better one in 45 years of watching tennis.
>
> But if we view the backhand as a whole package then Edberg's backhand is head and shoulder above Graf's, Edberg has great slice backhand and could do a lot more on his backhand than what Graf could do with her backhand.

I think comparing men's and women's records and making combined
lists of greats is ridiculous enough on itself. And we see that
sadly quite often.

They don't play against each other, but are together on the lists?
Yeah, sure.


However, the joke persists and goes beyond. Somehow nowadays you
aren't even seen as a psycho when you start comparing their
shots?

I wonder why is that so?


I mean, other than examining some technical quirks on their own,
which might be an option, ie which players land on their right
feet after serve, etc directly comparing their strokes e.g. whose
backhand was actually better, I don't think such posters are
serious.

I know it's trolling so I don't reply.
--


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[John Liang]

On Thursday, January 31, 2019 at 9:10:11 PM UTC+11, *skriptis wrote:
> John Liang <jlia...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
> > On Thursday, January 31, 2019 at 3:10:46 AM UTC+11, StephenJ wrote:
> >> >On 1/30/2019 8:09 AM, John Liang wrote:
> >>
> >> > If I had to pick a backhand slice and complete package of a single handed backahnd from 80s player >that player would be Edberg. Edberg had more variation and range of shots than just about anybody in >that era. Graf's problem was that once she won 88 Wimbledon, she never thought there was a need to >develop her top spin backhand, she rarely used top spin backhand in a match.
> >>
> >> Graf had about as good a rallying slice BH as we're ever likely to see.
> >> I haven't seen a better one in 45 years of watching tennis.
> >
> > But if we view the backhand as a whole package then Edberg's backhand is head and shoulder above Graf's, Edberg has great slice backhand and could do a lot more on his backhand than what Graf could do with her backhand.
>
>
>
> I think comparing men's and women's records and making combined
> lists of greats is ridiculous enough on itself. And we see that
> sadly quite often.

We are comparing slice and backhand as a tennis shot not Graf's record vs Edberg's record. If you have reading and comprehension skill get educated, I am not prepare to educate idiot. Get fucked.

>
> They don't play against each other, but are together on the lists?
> Yeah, sure.
>
>
> However, the joke persists and goes beyond. Somehow nowadays you
> aren't even seen as a psycho when you start comparing their
> shots?

Joke aside, you don't need to continue put up this show of stupidity.

[Sawfish]

On 1/31/19 1:35 AM, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
> On 30/01/2019 15.26, Sawfish wrote:
>> On 1/30/19 3:49 AM, kaennorsing wrote:
>>> Op woensdag 30 januari 2019 10:40:08 UTC+1 schreef Whisper:
>>>> On 30/01/2019 2:14 am, kaennorsing wrote:
>>>>> Op dinsdag 29 januari 2019 12:32:51 UTC+1 schreef Whisper:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Imo Fed's slice was pretty average.  Graf's was deadly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fed's slice is incredibly effective in defense (best ever imo) and
>>>>> has great versatility; mixing up pace, spins, depth and angles.
>>>>> Graf's was more one-sided imo, though with more consistent bite.
>>>>> Both are/were highly effective. Both used it to set up their
>>>>> forehands beautifully though, as well as Sampras btw.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That 'bite' is what made Graf's slice awesome - stayed low & biting.
>>>>
>>>> Sampras' was a bit different - he used it to take pace off the ball &
>>>> force opponent to hit harder, which worked to his advantage.
>>>
>>> I think it's harder in men's tennis to put consistent bite on it
>>> like Graf did. Guys can hit it so big that you're not in position to
>>> carve through it as completely like that.
>>
>> I agree with this observation, and note that so far as I can tell,
>> slice is a poor attack weapon *except* as used for approach.
>
> I didn't mean that. But under what kind of pressure the shot itself
> would be in the mens' game.
>
> Since a high TS ball is better hit on the rise, this is the context.

Let's consider this for a sec, Pelle.

Hitting on the rise is relatively hard to do, and especially so is you
wish fine control on direction. I'm saying that it's hard to go for, let
alone hit, lines off the rise. Not even pros can do this with any degree
of consistency.

But you're correct in saying that it's better to hit an incoming TS on
the rise, and that's because if you don't, and wait for it to top out,
it'll often be too high to deal with authoritatively, and alternatively
if you wait for the descent, like Nadal, you'll often give up too much
court position because you'll be well behind the baseline.

Very mobile players can get away with it.

Slice on the rise is possible but not optimal. Short balls automatically
invite slice as an option, so these are often not too high.

> A slice on the rise.
>
> YT is full of Graf slices but they all are hit off a knee height ball.
> That's fine, NP. Finding a point where she actually does hit a slice
> on the rise might be impossible, FAIC. This is the best I could find.
> A relatively high ball.
>
> https://youtu.be/6PLh08ocKWc?t=427
>
> The quality is poor but you can see enough. Graf drops the racquet
> head (wrist) behind her back (ROgi does not) and the racquet follows a
> low to high path from there up to impact. A slice with a low to high
> path!?

I watched for a while and I'm not sure I saw that, Pelle. I'll not give
up on it, but...

What I believe that I *did* see was sorta odd: on routine slices she
seemed to contact the ball well toward the end of the head--not the
normal sweet spot ("sweet spot" and "slice" are almost meaningless terms
when used in conjunction), but well toward the end.

Too, on relatively higher balls, there seemed to be an odd "mini-loop"
that flicks the racquet head a bit higher.

I'll have to check more...

>
> Her fist also starts low and ends up high. What?! Low to high!? The
> underspin she gets is the result of her whipping the racquet quickly
> slightly above the ball.

YEP!

*That's* the odd "mini-loop",  think...

Then the head goes down.

There's definitely a LOT of acceleration of the head on contact. She
most certainly does not "carve" the slice, like most players. She's
attempting something much more aggressive. She is "popping" it...

> She's usually pretty good at that, except that the resulting shot here
> isn't that great. Does it even have underspin?

I'd have to see that, but all the indications of the mechanics seem to
me to imply a lot of underspin. The head acceleration implies this,
although the angle of the racquet face is the main determinant, and I
couldn't swear to it at this time.

>
> In general, this whipping thing is a no no. A good pro will spank you
> for that.

He could try... :-)

>
>
> In comparison, ROgi's slice is compact and as uncomplicated as can be.
> Racquet up, then down. No further complications in the backswing.
> Quick, compact, controlled and tons of bite, +7k RPM off a topspin
> ball. My take on Graf is that she wants to increase racquet head
> speed. But you don't need that in a slice.

Agreed in both instances.

>
> It's impossible to say what Graf woulda done if she would regularly
> have had to hit head height top spin. My guess is, she would have
> changed things a bit. But since you never see any of that, this is how
> the ball rolls. And as such I will have to see her slice.

Not sure, having watched the clip only once, but I think she hit TS
twice: once very early on, and later on a pass, I believe.

I wasn't watching for anything but slice so I'll have to look again.

>
> I don't think I've ever seen a red headed step slice like that in the
> men's game.

Hah! Good one!

Always liked that expression--it's visually vivid and loaded with
implication...


--
--Sawfish
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Life is a tragedy to those who feel, a comedy to those who think."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Sawfish]

On 1/31/19 2:01 AM, John Liang wrote:
> On Thursday, January 31, 2019 at 3:10:46 AM UTC+11, StephenJ wrote:
>>> On 1/30/2019 8:09 AM, John Liang wrote:
>>> If I had to pick a backhand slice and complete package of a single handed backahnd from 80s player >that player would be Edberg. Edberg had more variation and range of shots than just about anybody in >that era. Graf's problem was that once she won 88 Wimbledon, she never thought there was a need to >develop her top spin backhand, she rarely used top spin backhand in a match.
>> Graf had about as good a rallying slice BH as we're ever likely to see.
>> I haven't seen a better one in 45 years of watching tennis.
> But if we view the backhand as a whole package then Edberg's backhand is head and shoulder above Graf's, Edberg has great slice backhand and could do a lot more on his backhand than what Graf could do with her backhand.

Does anyone remember the Arthur Ashe backhand?

>> Yes, it did become a liability vs Seles from 90 onwards, but you can't
>> be perfect at everything.
>>
>>
>> --
>> before agriculture, food-finding was the only occupation
>> for humans.
>>
>> - Alan Weisman

[John Liang]

On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 2:04:16 AM UTC+11, sawfish wrote:
> On 1/31/19 2:01 AM, John Liang wrote:
> > On Thursday, January 31, 2019 at 3:10:46 AM UTC+11, StephenJ wrote:
> >>> On 1/30/2019 8:09 AM, John Liang wrote:
> >>> If I had to pick a backhand slice and complete package of a single handed backahnd from 80s player >that player would be Edberg. Edberg had more variation and range of shots than just about anybody in >that era. Graf's problem was that once she won 88 Wimbledon, she never thought there was a need to >develop her top spin backhand, she rarely used top spin backhand in a match.
> >> Graf had about as good a rallying slice BH as we're ever likely to see.
> >> I haven't seen a better one in 45 years of watching tennis.
> > But if we view the backhand as a whole package then Edberg's backhand is head and shoulder above Graf's, Edberg has great slice backhand and could do a lot more on his backhand than what Graf could do with her backhand.
>
> Does anyone remember the Arthur Ashe backhand?

He is a bit before my time,so I can't comment on that.

[Sawfish]

On 1/31/19 7:27 AM, John Liang wrote:
> On Friday, February 1, 2019 at 2:04:16 AM UTC+11, sawfish wrote:
>> On 1/31/19 2:01 AM, John Liang wrote:
>>> On Thursday, January 31, 2019 at 3:10:46 AM UTC+11, StephenJ wrote:
>>>>> On 1/30/2019 8:09 AM, John Liang wrote:
>>>>> If I had to pick a backhand slice and complete package of a single handed backahnd from 80s player >that player would be Edberg. Edberg had more variation and range of shots than just about anybody in >that era. Graf's problem was that once she won 88 Wimbledon, she never thought there was a need to >develop her top spin backhand, she rarely used top spin backhand in a match.
>>>> Graf had about as good a rallying slice BH as we're ever likely to see.
>>>> I haven't seen a better one in 45 years of watching tennis.
>>> But if we view the backhand as a whole package then Edberg's backhand is head and shoulder above Graf's, Edberg has great slice backhand and could do a lot more on his backhand than what Graf could do with her backhand.
>> Does anyone remember the Arthur Ashe backhand?
> He is a bit before my time,so I can't comment on that.

I'm having trouble recalling it myself. It was *supposed* at the time to
be his best stroke, and I'm looking to see if anyone can come up with
comparisons.

What little I can recall, it was very smooth and effortless, flat (no,
or very little TS), hit with a continental grip, seems like...

Very much a 60s/70s S&V hard court stroke.

[StephenJ]

On 1/31/2019 9:04 AM, Sawfish wrote:
> On 1/31/19 2:01 AM, John Liang wrote:
>> On Thursday, January 31, 2019 at 3:10:46 AM UTC+11, StephenJ wrote:
>>>> On 1/30/2019 8:09 AM, John Liang wrote:
>>>> If I had to pick a backhand slice and complete package of a single
>>>> handed backahnd from 80s player >that player would be Edberg.
>>>> Edberg had more variation and range of shots than just about anybody
>>>> in >that era. Graf's problem was that once she won 88 Wimbledon, she
>>>> never thought there was a need to >develop her top spin backhand,
>>>> she rarely used top spin backhand in a match.
>>> Graf had about as good a rallying slice BH as we're ever likely to see.
>>> I haven't seen a better one in 45 years of watching tennis.
>> But if we view the backhand as a whole package then Edberg's backhand
>> is head and shoulder above Graf's,  Edberg has great slice backhand
>> and could do a lot more on his backhand than what Graf could do with
>> her backhand.
>
> Does anyone remember the Arthur Ashe backhand?

I remember. Ashe's BH, a one-hander, was beautiful but it's also no
longer relevant to today's game. It's an example of the tradeoff in
skill/elegance that power has brought in to the game.

Ashe didn't typically hit a topspin BH though on occasion he would. If
he was at the baseline and in a center position, he'd usually slice to
to the ad court or inside-out side-spin to hit to the deuce court. Of
course what he really sought to do was chip the BH and close to the net.

Of course, he was doing this with a 68" wood racket at a time when
nobody had much power by today's standards even off the FH side, so a
variety of shots could work. Nowadays, you really can only fight power
with power.

[Pelle Svanslös]

It's more challenging than not hitting on the rise, sure. But it's
relatively easy considering other shots on the rise, like for instance
1H BH topspin.

If it's a complicated slice, then it becomes as difficult as anything.

>
> Slice on the rise is possible but not optimal.

Meaning what?

First, it certainly has to be around. I need it, pros need it more.
Second, it's not as difficult as you think, every pro hits it if asked
to do. Third, it's in fact is in perfect synergy with topspin. No power,
spin needs to be generated.

Other considerations, not relevant here, apply. No doubt.

>
>> A slice on the rise.
>>
>> YT is full of Graf slices but they all are hit off a knee height ball.
>> That's fine, NP. Finding a point where she actually does hit a slice
>> on the rise might be impossible, FAIC. This is the best I could find.
>> A relatively high ball.
>>
>> https://youtu.be/6PLh08ocKWc?t=427
>>
>> The quality is poor but you can see enough. Graf drops the racquet
>> head (wrist) behind her back (ROgi does not) and the racquet follows a
>> low to high path from there up to impact. A slice with a low to high
>> path!?
>
> I watched for a while and I'm not sure I saw that, Pelle. I'll not give
> up on it, but...
>

You only need to consider two points. The lowest point of the racquet
head (waist height) and the point at impact (head height). The racquet
head needs to be higher than impact at some point for (good) downspin.

>
> There's definitely a LOT of acceleration of the head on contact.

Which is unecessary. Especially in the on the rise context.

>> She's usually pretty good at that, except that the resulting shot here
>> isn't that great. Does it even have underspin?
>
> I'd have to see that, but all the indications of the mechanics seem to
> me to imply a lot of underspin. The head acceleration implies this,
> although the angle of the racquet face is the main determinant, and I
> couldn't swear to it at this time

1) The motion of the head determines the spin, not the angle of it.
2) The motion here is from low to high. From only impact on does it go
downwards. Not convincing.
3) The final arbitrer is the resulting ball. The ball here is a short
nothingburger.
4) This isn't a particularly high ball either.

[Sawfish]

Meaning that the margin for error is slight for slice. It's relatively
easy to get it into play, but unless it's very well hit, it invites an
aggressive reply. You move instantly to defense, no matter what the
previews state was.

>
> First, it certainly has to be around. I need it, pros need it more.

It's existence is granted; you can see it readily enough, but outside of
pros, the quality is all over the place.

> Second, it's not as difficult as you think, every pro hits it if asked
> to do. Third, it's in fact is in perfect synergy with topspin. No
> power, spin needs to be generated.

And there are lots and lots of players who love to do this, take an
incoming ball with little pace and hop all over it, generating their own
pace and direction.

Let's be really sure where each of us is coming from, because I think
that our paradigms are diverging...

I'm seeing you considering only optimal slices--ones that are
well-struck and turn out well. Of these, virtually none are better than
a placeholder--a neutral shot, with perhaps a chance of some kind of
misplay by the opponent, but in my experience this happens seldom.

The only optimal slice that is consistently offensive is as an approach.

I'm seeing a less than optimal slice, and this is relatively easy to do,
hit a non-optimal slice. If you are off in any way, you'll end up with a
weak shot, and slice does not self-correct, as TS does. So you have to
be dead on the money. If you slip up, at all,  the point goes defensive
from whatever state it previously was.

That's where I'm coming from. Personally, I  *liked* to see slice coming
to me. For sure I was not going to get backed off the court, and there'd
be a very good chance that not only would I be inside the baseline when
I struck it, but I'd be able to safely tee off on it. With an eastern FH
grip, this ends up right about where you'd want it.

It would work optimally against me as an approach, or as you've noted,
as a rhythm breaker, assuming the point had gone on for a while from the
baseline, and it was a power rally. But I could probably get that by
going with a hard FH to their deep BH; I could probably force a change
in rhythm.

Last, I'm not talking about pros here, Pelle; they can do pretty much
anything they want. I'm talking about club-level. 4.0 or so.

Agreed, but angle comes into to play when considering trajectory, which
is pivotal in slice in ways that are much less restrictive with TS. TS
tends to be self-correcting, self-limiting, whereas slice does not. It's
less forgiving.

So both head motion and racquet face angle must be considered. High to
low, at knee level, with a 90 degree face from just inside the baseline
will back spin but is unlikely to clear the net. Change face to 10
degrees open, and it probably will clear the net.

>
> 2) The motion here is from low to high. From only impact on does it go
> downwards. Not convincing.
> 3) The final arbitrer is the resulting ball. The ball here is a short
> nothingburger.
> 4) This isn't a particularly high ball either.

You obviously have a specific shot in mind. To help me to speedily
clarify this, can you state the timestamp? I'm willing to search it out
myself, but it will same us a lot of time and likely frustration if I
know exactly what you're referring to.

This has been very useful to me Pelle. In looking at the clip, I can
certainly see oddities in her slice that I had forgotten. You have some
valid points, for what it's worth.


--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant was awful--but at least the portions
were large!" --Sawfish

[Pelle Svanslös]

But this is a known known. And applies to both a "badly" hit slice and
an exceptional slice. And it's beyond RST because the what/why/whens of
what you do decide to play is case by case opponent by opponent specific
and is impossible to reduce into paper play.

So that is ruled out (by me). Instead, the premise is clearly stated
above. It was about whether the actual stroke production of a Graf slice
would be under immense pressure by men's topspin or not. HIgh topspin to
be even more specific. I've already said there's no problems with the
knee hight one. Which is what the shot is made for.

Me answering what is below leads you further and further astray. Come
back here if you need a reminder what this was all about. BUt there's a
lot of hokey pokey which can't be left standing.

>>
>> First, it certainly has to be around. I need it, pros need it more.
>
> It's existence is granted; you can see it readily enough, but outside of
> pros, the quality is all over the place.
>
>> Second, it's not as difficult as you think, every pro hits it if asked
>> to do. Third, it's in fact is in perfect synergy with topspin. No
>> power, spin needs to be generated.
>
> And there are lots and lots of players who love to do this, take an
> incoming ball with little pace and hop all over it, generating their own
> pace and direction.
>

I didn't frase it in terms of what you should or should not do, but I've
listed the lack of those as advantages of a slice. That kind of says:
don't do that.

> Let's be really sure where each of us is coming from, because I think
> that our paradigms are diverging...
>

I wish I knew what yours are.

> I'm seeing you considering only optimal slices

I wouldn't use the word "optimal". Technically reasonable, yes.

--ones that are
> well-struck and turn out well. Of these, virtually none are better than
> a placeholder--a neutral shot, with perhaps a chance of some kind of
> misplay by the opponent, but in my experience this happens seldom.
>

I'll pretend I didn't hear this.

> The only optimal slice that is consistently offensive is as an approach.
>

Oh, my.

> I'm seeing a less than optimal slice, and this is relatively easy to do,
> hit a non-optimal slice.

There's so many ways to fuck up, so few to do it correctly.

> If you are off in any way, you'll end up with a
> weak shot, and slice does not self-correct, as TS does.

Self-correcting? Oh, my.

> So you have to
> be dead on the money. If you slip up, at all,  the point goes defensive
> from whatever state it previously was.

Oh, my.

> That's where I'm coming from.

Ok. There's one thing you forget though. If there's one shot picked from
the pro game that a rec play has every chance of mastering, it's the
Federer slice. And do it relatively quickly too.

While the TS guy is struggling with his shot, the slice guy is doing
what is fun: playing. And making the shot that is reliable to begin with
even more reliable.

Just saw an eight year old Federer hit the shot almost exactly as he
does it today. Can't say the same about the rest of it.

> Personally, I  *liked* to see slice coming
> to me. For sure I was not going to get backed off the court, and there'd
> be a very good chance that not only would I be inside the baseline when
> I struck it, but I'd be able to safely tee off on it. With an eastern FH
> grip, this ends up right about where you'd want it.
>

Tee off? Ok.

> It would work optimally against me as an approach, or as you've noted,
> as a rhythm breaker, assuming the point had gone on for a while from the
> baseline, and it was a power rally. But I could probably get that by
> going with a hard FH to their deep BH; I could probably force a change
> in rhythm.
>

Ok.

> Last, I'm not talking about pros here, Pelle; they can do pretty much
> anything they want. I'm talking about club-level. 4.0 or so.

I'm not either. I'm talking about how the (high) slice is produced using
the pros as and example. You can easily check what is talked about with
something you can see. I said this already too.

That's right. The stringbed (or a line prepedicular to it) has a
tendency to point where the ball will go. Or maybe the oher way round.

> which
> is pivotal in slice in ways that are much less restrictive with TS. TS
> tends to be self-correcting, self-limiting, whereas slice does not. It's
> less forgiving.
>
> So both head motion and racquet face angle must be considered.

Not really. Try hitting a slice with a closed racquet face and you'll
quickly notice it's absurd. Not everything needs to be considered.

> High to
> low, at knee level, with a 90 degree face from just inside the baseline
> will back spin but is unlikely to clear the net. Change face to 10
> degrees open, and it probably will clear the net.

Exactly. But this is because you need to hit up to clear the net => you
make the strings point up. The ball will end up in yuor foot if you hit
it with a closed face.

But this opening up has nothing to do with spin. (Wait! It does!) It
certainly does not determine spin. You have to open the face up for a
topspin lob.

[Sawfish]

Interesting stuff...

Below...

I *believe* I understand what you're saying, and it's this:

"But this is a known known. And applies to both a "badly" hit slice and
an exceptional slice."

This means that the player, on selecting slice, realizes that the margin
fr error is slight.

"And it's beyond RST because the what/why/whens of what you do decide to
play is case by case opponent by opponent specific and is impossible to
reduce into paper play."

This means that whatever the player does is up to him, even to select a
shot with a small margin for error.

Is this correct?

Assuming it is, I'd say that selecting a shot with a smaller margin for
error when an alternative exists that has a higher probability of going
over the net, saying in bounds, staying deep, and has enough pace to
challenge the opponent (cannot freely "tee off"), is what I'd normally do.

That to do otherwise is what I'd do when desperate.

>
> So that is ruled out (by me). Instead, the premise is clearly stated
> above. It was about whether the actual stroke production of a Graf
> slice would be under immense pressure by men's topspin or not. HIgh
> topspin to be even more specific. I've already said there's no
> problems with the knee hight one. Which is what the shot is made for.

OK. Thanks for re-stating. This helps.

>
> Me answering what is below leads you further and further astray. Come
> back here if you need a reminder what this was all about.

OK.

> BUt there's a lot of hokey pokey which can't be left standing.
>
>>>
>>> First, it certainly has to be around. I need it, pros need it more.
>>
>> It's existence is granted; you can see it readily enough, but outside
>> of pros, the quality is all over the place.
>>
>>> Second, it's not as difficult as you think, every pro hits it if
>>> asked to do. Third, it's in fact is in perfect synergy with topspin.
>>> No power, spin needs to be generated.
>>
>> And there are lots and lots of players who love to do this, take an
>> incoming ball with little pace and hop all over it, generating their
>> own pace and direction.
>>
>
> I didn't frase it in terms of what you should or should not do, but
> I've listed the lack of those

For clarity, please" what are "those", in this context?

> as advantages of a slice. That kind of says: don't do that.

Please again: specifically, don't do what, in this case?

>
>> Let's be really sure where each of us is coming from, because I think
>> that our paradigms are diverging...
>>
>
> I wish I knew what yours are.

You saw them below, I'm sure...

>
>> I'm seeing you considering only optimal slices
>
> I wouldn't use the word "optimal". Technically reasonable, yes.
>
> --ones that are
>> well-struck and turn out well. Of these, virtually none are better
>> than a placeholder--a neutral shot, with perhaps a chance of some
>> kind of misplay by the opponent, but in my experience this happens
>> seldom.
>>
>
> I'll pretend I didn't hear this.

That opponents tend not to mis-play slice of the technically reasonable
(i.e., well-struck and well-delivered)?

If so, why? It's been my experience at club level that few competent
(4.0) players mishandle slice. The most you can reasonably hope for is
that they do not take the point aggressive, that the state of the point
remains neutral.

That's fine, but it's a fairly low bar, in my opinion.

>
>> The only optimal slice that is consistently offensive is as an approach.
>>
>
> Oh, my.

Does this mean that you have troubles returning well-struck rally slice?
To me, receiving a ball like that is just the opponent telling me that
he's getting desperate.

>
>> I'm seeing a less than optimal slice, and this is relatively easy to
>> do, hit a non-optimal slice.
>
> There's so many ways to fuck up, so few to do it correctly.

Agreed.

>
>
>> If you are off in any way, you'll end up with a weak shot, and slice
>> does not self-correct, as TS does.
>
> Self-correcting? Oh, my.

Maybe it's unclear to you why I refer to TS as "self-correcting"? If so,
I'll explain it next post...

>
>
>> So you have to be dead on the money. If you slip up, at all,  the
>> point goes defensive from whatever state it previously was.
>
> Oh, my.

On *this* particular "oh my" I cannot even guess what you mean by it.

That you have to be dead on the money hitting a slice, or else the point
will quickly go neutral? That's really what happens and I believe you've
seen it and know why I'm saying it, so when you express surprise, I
think I'm mis-communicating my point to you, Pelle.

>
>> That's where I'm coming from.
>
> Ok. There's one thing you forget though. If there's one shot picked
> from the pro game that a rec play has every chance of mastering, it's
> the Federer slice. And do it relatively quickly too.

Yes. It is easy to hit the BH slice and have it go over the net. That's
what I did as a beginner because I couldn't do anything else.

But going over the net is not enough. Mediocre slice is something a
decent player will *dine* on. They will run around their backhand as
fast s they can and forcefeed the return to--guess where?--your BH,
because the slice you just hit TELLS them that you do not own a backhand
to worry about.

If by luck you get that one back, you'll get another helping of exactly
the same.

>
> While the TS guy is struggling with his shot, the slice guy is doing
> what is fun: playing. And making the shot that is reliable to begin
> with even more reliable.

I see your point, Pelle. You are saying that you can have immediate
success when beginning by hitting  slice BH. This is correct, and it i
OK for a while.

Maybe I'm missing your point because I'm viewing from a 4.0+ POV.

>
>
> Just saw an eight year old Federer hit the shot almost exactly as he
> does it today. Can't say the same about the rest of it.

I get it now.

>
>> Personally, I  *liked* to see slice coming to me. For sure I was not
>> going to get backed off the court, and there'd be a very good chance
>> that not only would I be inside the baseline when I struck it, but
>> I'd be able to safely tee off on it. With an eastern FH grip, this
>> ends up right about where you'd want it.
>>
>
> Tee off? Ok.

A colloquialism like "hop on it", "jump all over it"...

>
>> It would work optimally against me as an approach, or as you've
>> noted, as a rhythm breaker, assuming the point had gone on for a
>> while from the baseline, and it was a power rally. But I could
>> probably get that by going with a hard FH to their deep BH; I could
>> probably force a change in rhythm.
>>
>
> Ok.
>
>> Last, I'm not talking about pros here, Pelle; they can do pretty much
>> anything they want. I'm talking about club-level. 4.0 or so.
>
> I'm not either. I'm talking about how the (high) slice is produced
> using the pros as and example.

OK. I want clarity now so no further misunderstandings, which only will
piss both of us off.

"how the (high) slice is produced"

To mean, this means either a) how to play a high-bouncing ball on your
side by slicing it back to your opponent; or b) how to strike the ball
with slice so that the ball so that it will bounce high on your
opponent's side.

I'm reading it as "a" because "b" is so suicidal that if you really want
to lose the point that badly, it would much less embarrassing to just
concede the point, rather than hit something like that back over the net.

> You can easily check what is talked about with something you can see.
> I said this already too.

How pros ply a high ball on their side of the net using a slice return,
right?

If so, 1H BH players have little choice other than to slice sharply as
they can x-court. If you are  1H BH TS player, a ball at shoulder level
is almost impossible to drive with TS.

And THIS is why Nadal went to Federer's BH with high bounce TS. It took
away Federer's BH TS drive--or drove him back to play the ball on the
descent.

These are tendencies, BTW, and not all points of this basic description
play out that way, it it *is* the tendency.

That's exactly why I said:

"...angle comes into to play when considering trajectory,"

> Not everything needs to be considered.
>
>> High to low, at knee level, with a 90 degree face from just inside
>> the baseline will back spin but is unlikely to clear the net. Change
>> face to 10 degrees open, and it probably will clear the net.
>
> Exactly. But this is because you need to hit up to clear the net =>
> you make the strings point up. The ball will end up in yuor foot if
> you hit it with a closed face.
>
> But this opening up has nothing to do with spin. (Wait! It does!) It
> certainly does not determine spin. You have to open the face up for a
> topspin lob.

TS lob is a whole other topic in my opinion, Pelle. Let's save it for
another discussion because it will quickly draw us away from resolution
of the current topic.



--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"If we use Occam's Razor, whose razor will *he* use?" --Sawfish
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~