Dinkers Make My Blood Boil!!!
mzel...@wesleyan.edu
- the dinker! I just lost to a guy today who I out-classed in every
department: serve, backhand, forehand, and speed. He just sliced his backhand
and FOREHAND deep into the court while I kept driving the ball until I
eventually made an error. When I came to net, he always threw up a lob forcing
me to either hit a difficult over-head or retreat to the baseline where he
continued to grind away at my game with his infuriating brand of patty-cake
tennis. To me, dinkers are not true tennis players, but weak-willed babies
motivated more by their fear of losing than by the desire for victory.
Now that I got that off of my chest, can anybody offer some suggestions on how
to overcome these clowns?
Marek
vi...@maple.circa.ufl.edu
It sounds like this guy has a better understanding of the philosophy of
tennis than you do. Except for the highest levels of play, tennis pretty
much is a game of errors. When you see Monica Seles hit 50 winners and only
5 unforced errors, you are watching abnormality. Those people you see on TV
are not playing the tennis game that you and I know. Those people play
abnormal tennis!
I think it was Connors who said that the game is 90% mental and only 10%
physical. Don't you agree? Well, you might have this clown outclassed in
every other category, but he's got you beat in the most important one.
My suggestion: I was faced with a similar situation once. Give him a taste
of his own medicine. Patience! It worked for me! :)
-Elmo
Scott Patano
>Nothing is more irritating than losing to that pathetic breed of tennis player
>- the dinker! I just lost to a guy today who I out-classed in every
>department: serve, backhand, forehand, and speed. He just sliced his backhand
>and FOREHAND deep into the court while I kept driving the ball until I
>eventually made an error. When I came to net, he always threw up a lob
>forcing
>me to either hit a difficult over-head or retreat to the baseline where he
>continued to grind away at my game with his infuriating brand of patty-cake
>tennis. To me, dinkers are not true tennis players, but weak-willed babies
>motivated more by their fear of losing than by the desire for victory.
>
>Now that I got that off of my chest, can anybody offer some suggestions on how
>to overcome these clowns?
A couple of people have already responded to this, and I must say
that I agree with them. If a person can beat you by playing "dink"
tennis, then why shouldn't he? It might not be the most fun way
to play, but if it wins them the match, who cares?
I used to complain about the same thing; at one time, I had a
completely aggressive game that often fell victim to the "dinker"
because of my numbers of unforced errors. But eventually, after
many losses, I learned to be more patient and defensive. I
started to be more selective about when to go for big shots and
when to come to the net. This helped both my consistency and
mental toughness considerably. With these improvements to my
game, I now almost never lose to people below my skill level,
and sometimes pull off wins against people who are a level or
two above me.
Here's a very recent example of how I dealt with a completely
defensive player: I was playing in a tournament which was being
run by the Tennis Club here at U.T. Austin, and came up against
a player who was basically just a "retriever." All he did was
return the ball down the center of the court with a lot of spin.
I tried to play a rather aggressive game, going for the lines
and corners as much as possible. However, my consistency was a
little off that day, and he was very skillful at slicing the ball
back. It totally frustrated me, and I started to make more and
more errors. Before I knew it, he had taken the first set 6-0!!!
I knew I had to change my game somehow if I was to have any chance,
so I decided to just play his game. In the second set, I just
started to slice everything back to him; I sliced deep, short, and
side to side, forcing him to keep running around the entire court.
Since he was returning almost everything down the middle, I hardly
had to move at all. We had some extremely long rallies, and more
often than not, he ended up hitting a tired shot into the net.
This strategy worked; I won the second set 6-2, and the first two
games of the third set. I had turned the tables; he was actually
starting to get tired and frustrated himself. He started becoming
more aggressive, attempting to charge the net several times. This
took me by surprise at first, and he won a few games in a row.
However, I eventually started to find the passing shots, and since
he wasn't very comfortable at the net, he started returning to his
defensive baseline game. At 5-5 in the third set, he was forced
to retire because of cramps! I had out-lasted him, and had beaten
him at his own game! It felt great to come back in that match
like I did.
Wow, that was a long-winded story; well, hope the example helps
you. :-)
.
hemp...@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
players. I too loath playing dinky players. I once offered a dinky opponent
(during an interclub match) my grandmothers phone number citing that she
would be more at home with his pace than I was. This was totally uncalled
for, but hey, I was pissed off and losing!
Many people say that you don't have an all-round game until you learn to play
these sort of players. I know this is true, but I unfortunately lack the
patience (and sometimes, consistency) to deal with this. I suppose as I get
older, (I'm 22) as many dinky players are, I'll learn to deal with these
people. For now it's AGASSI ROCK 'N ROLL tennis for me! Why not, that's how
I enjoy the game, and we _ARE_ meant to enjoy sports aren't we?
Just one mans opinion...
Cheers...John.
hti...@vax.clarku.edu
had great success against them in tennis, but in ping-pong one of the best
things to do in the situation is to use alot of slice and make them provide
the pace. Moving them around the court is also a good idea.
I guess, in essence, beat them by playing the way they do!
Webb
James P. Taylor
Marek
The other responses you have gotten about strategy and tactics are valid.
One that people have missed is to force him to move him around particularly
up and back. Of course, from this requires that YOU can control the ball.
The main reason for my response is to suggest that you and I must be
playing different sports. My coaching advice to anyone who complains about
a "dinker, pusher, patty-cake, etc...." is that the don't give style points
in tennis. If you want to win on style take up diving or ice skating.
Given the "attitude" that you express about playing dinkers, you are
putting more pressure on yourself. As one responder has quoted Conners as
saying the game is very mental [at his level 90% -- at mine maybe 75%].
If you go on the court thinking that your "opponent" does not belong on the
same court as someone with your high quality game, than a) you have not
understood the basic premise of the game and b) you will find, much to your
anger, chagrin, frustration, that you will be much less effective than you
could be.
One of the great teaching elements of both Tennis and Squash is that the
person who wins is the person who hits the last ball fairly into the court.
No clock runs out; no judge says that your strokes are better thus YOU WIN.
You MUST hit the last ball in the court. So, not only do you have to get
over your misconception of what the game is, but you have to carry this out
for at least two sets. Sometimes tough. From the tone of your invective,
I think it will be very hard for you.
I am not "defending" dinkers. They don't need my defense. They have a
perfect right to exist and they have adopted as valid a paradigm as you or
I. [Note: I hit the crap out of the ball and love to play dinkers. It is
a good test of my skills.]
jim
Stefan Voss
|> - the dinker!
This is by far the funniest article that I ever have read on r.s.t. :-))
Just great! Wonderful subject line, wonderful description!
Marek, I feel with you.
|>
|> Marek
Stefan Voss
(vo...@ira.uka.de)
Graham Matthews
> [on the subject of dinkers]
Well for my two cents worth ... I think you need to improve your
own game. There is no way even the best of dinkers will, for example,
defeat a good (not professional, just good) serve and volleyer. A
dinker can only dink if they can reach the ball. Likewise for a good
groundstroker. The proof of this is in the play of the pros - no-one
at the pro level dinks because if they did they would get killed. So
dinking is only useful against players below a certain level, namely
say mid to top club level. So my advice is to improve your own game
to that level and then you will be able to eat the dinkers for
breakfast.
graham
--
You can tell how far we have to go when FORTRAN is the language of
supercomputers.
-- Steven Feiner
Eddie Hedges
> I have an aggressive power game which I like to play against other aggressive
> players. I too loath playing dinky players. I once offered a dinky opponent
Me too. This dinker discussion thread has been great!
> (during an interclub match) my grandmothers phone number citing that she
> would be more at home with his pace than I was. This was totally uncalled
> for, but hey, I was pissed off and losing!
> Many people say that you don't have an all-round game until you learn to play
> these sort of players. I know this is true, but I unfortunately lack the
> patience (and sometimes, consistency) to deal with this. I suppose as I get
> older, (I'm 22) as many dinky players are, I'll learn to deal with these
> people. For now it's AGASSI ROCK 'N ROLL tennis for me! Why not, that's how
Dude?...Duuddee...DUDE! :-) :-)
I enjoy the game, and we _ARE_ meant to enjoy sports aren't we?
> Just one mans opinion...
>
> Cheers...John.
has the HEAD emblem (logo) on it.
OK...OK...I'm finished. WHAT? Everyone's clapping because I'm through. :-)
Eddie
--
ed...@chpc.utexas.edu
o
the U.S. OPEN
/\O/
0 \\ one of the world's greatest attractions
//
Michael Lin
>Nothing is more irritating than losing to that pathetic breed of tennis playe
>and FOREHAND deep into the court while I kept driving the ball until I
>eventually made an error.
That means your opponent is not only using his skills but also
his head. It sounds to me that you are simply hacking away at
your shots, and because the balls kept coming back when YOU
think you should have a winner out of the many "harder" shots
you hit to your opponent, and for that YOU didn't take it very
well.
IMHO, your opponent is a better and smarter player than you are.
The fact that you hit considerably "harder" than he does tells him
that he can't trade outright winner with you. He must work for his
points by being very consistent and good placement. By being able
to put more balls in play, he forces you to hit one more ball than
him and hence, one extra chance for you to make an unforced error.
By putting the balls deeper in the court, he knows you can't hurt
him as much because he can't afford to give you short balls for one
simple reason, stroke for stroke, you are a better player and giving
you short balls is asking for trouble. However, you may be better
stroke for stroke, but this game is won by putting one more point
in play than your opponent not by how well you hit a particular shot.
Your inability to cope with the situation frustrated you, but please
do give your opponent a lot of credits for being a smart thinking
player. If you truly believe that you are a better player, then why
you are losing to him? Perhaps, you aren't a better player. Good
players must learn to accept that you can be beaten anytime. You just
have to come up with something to counterattack.
When I came to net, he always threw up a lob forci
>me to either hit a difficult over-head or retreat to the baseline where he
>continued to grind away at my game with his infuriating brand of patty-cake
>tennis. To me, dinkers are not true tennis players, but weak-willed babies
>motivated more by their fear of losing than by the desire for victory.
>
>Now that I got that off of my chest, can anybody offer some suggestions on
>how to overcome these clowns?
>
> Marek
First of all you must realize that your shots are not as hard for
him to handle as you might have thought it oughta be. It must be that
you don't hit as hard as you seem to claim that you do. Otherwise, he
wouldn't be able to consistently return your shots and place it deep.
When you play someone like this, if you can hit groundstrokes like
Courier, I don't think your opponent can CONSISTENTLY "dink" back your
shots. He may be able to do a few, but eventually he won't be able
to keep up with your pace. But pace alone won't solve your problem!
The best thing is to realize that your groundstrokes aren't a weapon as
you might think. Therefore, to outplay or outlast someone that consistent
with their groundstrokes is to be even more consistent than he is.
Unless, of course, you can hit winners at will. Then you can take your
chances. If those winners aren't coming, you 'll just have to take some
pace off your shots and go for consistency and placement.
Example: as you claimed, you are being lobbed over every time you
come to the net. This means that either he has an excellent
lob or your approach shot just wasn't good enough. It's hard
to lob consistenly if you put enough zip into your approach
shot. The fact that you are being lobbed over at will is
a sign of you are "dinking" your approach shots YOURSELF.
If you hit your approach shot with enough authority say
to his weaker side (usually backhand), forget about that
approach down-the-line theory (still holds but for weekend
hackers just play the weak side will win you fair share of
points), and make the following easy (usually) volleys, you will
win your points.
SO, acknowldege your opponent that he played a hell of a game.
Just because you think you SHOULD win doesn't mean you will. You have
to know that you CAN lose if you don't play better than your opponent.
It's got a lot to do with your attitude on the court. You think you
can easily blow one by your opponent. And when it keeps coming back,
you get irritated. Tell yourself, this guy can play tennis. Take your
time, and be patient with your shots. Set it up then blow one by him.
And go work on your own game - strive for consistency and placement
first then power.
michael Lin
Paul M. Wexelblat
|> Subject: Dinkers Make My Blood Boil!!!
|> From: mzel...@wesleyan.edu
|> Date: 10 Aug 93 20:48:28 EDT
|>
|> Nothing is more irritating than losing to that pathetic breed of tennis player
|> - the dinker! I just lost to a guy today who I out-classed in every
|> department: serve, backhand, forehand, and speed. He just sliced his backhand
Since you asked for suggestions -- I'd suggest that if the dinker can
consistently lob you when you come in, your approach shots are not
forcing enough (for him).
BTW have you seen this guy play other folks, does he dink everyone, or
just folks like you who get mad :-> Seriously, I've played a guy who dinks
against some folk and whales the ball against players who can deal with the
dinking, he's a real all-round player.
I've got a pretty good base-line drop volley just from learning to give
this guy some of his own medicine.
I notice that folks are being pretty hard on you, all trying to help.
--
...Wex
(Please note new domain name, now w...@cs.uml.edu)
(University of Lowell is now University of Massachusetts Lowell)
Kurt Chan
| him to handle as you might have thought it oughta be. It must be that
| you don't hit as hard as you seem to claim that you do.
Precisely.
Those that complain about losing to "inferior" opponents in reality don't
have the quality and/or quantity of weapons that they think they do. In
order to come up with a winning strategy, one must be realistic about one's
abilities relative to one's opponents.
A backup plan is in order, not just in the event one comes across a player
who's strengths/weaknesses match up favorably for your opponent, but in the
event one's weapons aren't functioning on all cylinders, for whatever
reason, on that particular day.
The players that have the "mental" edge are those who are willing to
sacrifice "looking pretty" to win, and will kick, bite, scrape, and claw to
prevent from losing a point, particularly when they are not playing their
best.
My motto: No whining!
---
Regards,
Kurt Chan
k...@core.rose.HP.com
John Cloyd
Fact is, it doesn't really happen. I've been using a pseudo-dinking
game lately due to a foot injury. Hitting higher, deeper and slower
gives me more time to recover between shots, compensating for my lack
of mobility. It's also helped me capitalize on my friends' lack of
consistency, or at least the ones who are an even match with me. As
we leave the '30-something' years behind us it's an effective tactic,
as long as it's not the only thing we can do.
It's a different story when I played a guy who truly outclasses me in
every way :-> He adapted by being more patient and more consistent than
me. He moved in and picked my high shots off in the air. I could not
get cheap points from him, so I had to play an aggressive game, forget
my injury and play to his strengths. It was a fun match, especially
the mental adjustments, but he was better than me and I lost. You were
unable to do this to your opponent either because your wicked groundies
are too inconsistent or because you were not mentally tough enough, but
the bottom line is you don't outclass him by as much as you may think.
I recommend drinking a beer or two before you play him next to try to
calm you down :->
john cloyd
David Hansen
harsh. The typical "he was better than you so quit whining" post
leaves a lot to be desired. Personally I agree both that being beaten
by a "dinker" is maddening and that a dinker that beats me is probably
a better player than I. Interesting that someone mentioned Connors
talking about the mental aspect of the game. Wasn't it Connors who
ranted at Lendl for "bunting" the ball.
Personally I don't like playing dinkers either, even if I beat them.
Dinkers win by not losing, not by winning. And having been beaten by
a dinker or two I can say that it's the most frustrating experience
I can remember. It's frustrating precisely because I LOST, they did
not win. The entire match consisted of points I lost, not points
they won. That may be a good strategy for wining a match, but IMO
it's a poor strategy for becoming a better tennis player. It's like
a baseball player who can bat .400 by always bunting the ball and
beating the throw to first base. Successful? Yes. Likely to get
you a major league contract? No. In fact at some level such a
strategy will fail to take the player any further.
Personally I'm working on handling dinkers better because I've run
across so many lately. But I hope I never have to resort to being
a dinker just to win a match. Sorry, but I don't think that winning
is everything. I'd much rather get shutout by a normal player
than beat a dinker. And to those of you good players who admited to
dinking on occasion, may your strings break with frequency and all
your lobs be long! ;-)
- David
--
David M. Hansen | Department of Computer Science and Engineering
| Oregon Graduate Institute of Science & Technology
dha...@cse.ogi.edu | PO Box 91000
(503) 690-1121 7341 | Portland, OR 97291-1000
Tanprasert Thitipong
writes
>Dinkers win by not losing, not by winning. And having been beaten by
>a dinker or two I can say that it's the most frustrating experience
>I can remember. It's frustrating precisely because I LOST, they did
>not win. The entire match consisted of points I lost, not points
>they won.
It's the dinkers who make you lose! It's because they can get the ball
back more than you (at least until you make a mistake). They just
learn the fun of playing the game in a different way from what you do.
When they PLAY the game better, they WIN! That's it. You don't like
this kind of losing..fine. But by any official standard, they win.
>it's a poor strategy for becoming a better tennis player. It's like
I don't think the one who cannot control the ball in the court longer
than the dinker (who just doesn't even hit difficult shot to him)
will soon become a better player too.
I'm a serve-and-volleyer and don't dink the ball. But I have respect on
any type of players.
T Tanprasert
James P. Taylor
Personally I'm working on handling dinkers better because I've run
across so many lately. But I hope I never have to resort to being
a dinker just to win a match. Sorry, but I don't think that winning
is everything. I'd much rather get shutout by a normal player
^^^^^^^
than beat a dinker. And to those of you good players who admited to
dinking on occasion, may your strings break with frequency and all
your lobs be long! ;-)
Please define a "normal player". The definition of the game is quite
simple: you hit the ball over a barrier into a bounded zone. Someone who
does that is a tennis player. Someone who gets mad and belittles someone
who does that is something else.
jim
Christopher Smith
I know there have been a lot of posts already in this thread...
In article <57...@ogicse.ogi.edu> dha...@cse.ogi.edu (David Hansen) writes:
>
>Personally I don't like playing dinkers either, even if I beat them.
>Dinkers win by not losing, not by winning. And having been beaten by
>a dinker or two I can say that it's the most frustrating experience
>I can remember. It's frustrating precisely because I LOST, they did
>not win. The entire match consisted of points I lost, not points
>they won. That may be a good strategy for wining a match, but IMO
>it's a poor strategy for becoming a better tennis player. It's like
>a baseball player who can bat .400 by always bunting the ball and
>beating the throw to first base. Successful? Yes. Likely to get
>you a major league contract? No. In fact at some level such a
>strategy will fail to take the player any further.
My two responses: (1) A majority of us will never play tennis at the pro
level; we play at the local tournament level or we are just recreational
"hackers" out to have fun. Who is to say that my strategy will work
for you, or vice versa, or that there is one "correct" way to play?
(2) Rather than analyzing what is WRONG with a dinker's game, people who
complain about dinkers should probably spend more time analyzing what is
RIGHT about their approach and learn how to adapt their style accordingly.
Scott Patano posted an excellent article on this very subject describing
his experience.
..Chris
--
Christopher Smith -- Georgia Tech csm...@cc.gatech.edu (r.s.t FAQ keeper)
David Hansen
>
>I know there have been a lot of posts already in this thread...
>
>
>level; we play at the local tournament level or we are just recreational
>"hackers" out to have fun. Who is to say that my strategy will work
>for you, or vice versa, or that there is one "correct" way to play?
It must not have come across clearly in my original post, but this is
exactly my point. I'm out playing to have FUN and I would argue that
I have much more fun getting clobbered by a player who's outhitting
me, outpassing me, even outserving me than I ever have when playing
someone who's out to win-at-all-costs and thus resorts to dinking. I
may not be a pro, but the greatest thrill I get is when a point has
some great pro-like elements in it (a guy I used to play used to shout
"now THAT was tennis!" after such a rally). That's what I play for, and
frankly a dinker deprives me of most of the enjoyment of playing tennis.
>
>(2) Rather than analyzing what is WRONG with a dinker's game, people who
>complain about dinkers should probably spend more time analyzing what is
>RIGHT about their approach and learn how to adapt their style accordingly.
>Scott Patano posted an excellent article on this very subject describing
>his experience.
>
>..Chris
>
>--
>Christopher Smith -- Georgia Tech csm...@cc.gatech.edu (r.s.t FAQ keeper)
I never said there was anything WRONG with a dinker's game, just that
I don't enjoy playing a dinker and wouldn't resort to that tactic to
win a match. As to what's right about their style I already know what
they're doing right. It's called consistency and playing to
your opponent's weakness (which for most of us non-pros is inconsistency).
William T Grayhack
Since he always lobs onyou when you come in to the net, be ready for it. You
can either just be ready to back-pedal or set up further back from the net. You
might even want to hang out more in no-man's land, ready to move in on those
soft floaters he returns or to hit overheads off his lobs. Another strategy
along these lines is to sneak into the net. When you hit a good deep ball, wait
for him to take his eyes off you and sneak into the net for a put away of his
weak, floating return. To do this effectively, you may want to take some pace
off of you ball.
BTW dinkers have been known to win even at the pro level,-> Pernfors just did it
the other week, didn't he?
--
&*******************************************************&
& Bill Grayhack phone: (515)294-8140 &
& Dept. of Mathematics fax: (515)294-5454 &
& Iowa State University email: gray...@iastate.edu &
& Ames, IA 50011 &
&*******************************************************&
Stanford Guillory
>talking about the mental aspect of the game. Wasn't it Connors who
>ranted at Lendl for "bunting" the ball.
Before this becomes an Urban Legend, Connor didn't rant at Lendl
for bunting the ball. After losing to Lendl at the US Open, he
told a reporter that Lendl was just bunting the ball. This
apparently was meant to make Jimmy feel better, since Lendl had
just soundly whipped him.
>Dinkers win by not losing, not by winning. And having been beaten by
>a dinker or two I can say that it's the most frustrating experience
>I can remember. It's frustrating precisely because I LOST, they did
>not win. The entire match consisted of points I lost, not points
>they won.
Tennis matches at every level, including pro is determined by
errors, not winners. Statistically, at any point in a match between amateur
players, there is a high (VERY HIGH) probability that an error will
occur on the very next shot. If you doubt this, have someone keep score
in the next match that you don't play against a dinker. You may hit
some shots you are proud of, but you both will hit more errors than
winners.
>it's a poor strategy for becoming a better tennis player. It's like
>a baseball player who can bat .400 by always bunting the ball and
>beating the throw to first base. Successful? Yes. Likely to get
>you a major league contract? No.
Uh, excuse me? If you can bat .400, you can stick the bat up your
ass and run on your hands, and you WILL get a major league contract.
Michael Ratner
I have seen plenty of questionable calls in various matches and I have
seen players frustrated over them and sometimes appealing to the
umpire but I've NEVER seen a call overruled after player had
questioned it. Sometimes the umpire would overrule a call without a
player asking him but has anyone ever seen a call overruled because
player raised hell ? If not, why do they bother appealing at all ?
-- Mike Ratner
--
*****************************************************************************
Michael B. Ratner Associate Programmer, Advanced Network & Services (ANS)
Office: rat...@ans.net (914) 789-5363 100 Clearbrook Rd. Elmsford, NY10523
"The Road goes ever on and on..." - J.R.R. Tolkien
Matt Dick
I dink pretty often when faced with a better player and I win most of the
time. You see I am meant to enjoy tennis and I enjoy winning. Dinking
is as much to frustrate as to exploit inconsistancy.
Anyway, dinking and a 110 MPH serve helped me attain a pretty lofty
junior ranking. The problems came when I entered a seving contest in
Montreal and stretched my ulnar nerve on the winning serve (107 MPH). I
couldn't play for over a year and now I am a Software Engineer with
Motorola. My game is pretty good now, but my serve will never again be
what it was :(
matt dick
ma...@comm.mot.com
Mikhail V. Solodov
So , you lost to a dinker ? Chances are
(a) you are really a better player, but you had a bad day.
relax, even Michael Stich has bad days ! :)
just try to do your best and you'll blow him out of
the court next time !
(b) you aren't as good as you think you are.
in this case none of the many advices will help.
chances are you won't be able to execute whatever
smart strategy other people suggest. Over-the-net
advices don't make much of a sense, cause nobody knows
what your level is and what you can and can't do on the court...
Michael.
Mikhail V. Solodov
>Hi !
>
>I have seen plenty of questionable calls in various matches and I have
>seen players frustrated over them and sometimes appealing to the
>umpire but I've NEVER seen a call overruled after player had
>questioned it. Sometimes the umpire would overrule a call without a
>player asking him but has anyone ever seen a call overruled because
>player raised hell ? If not, why do they bother appealing at all ?
>
Also it's a bit of a good strategy (yes!) to put some pressure
on the umpire. So that next time he/she will think twice before
making a call against you :)
Michael.
A73...@hasara11.sara.nl
w...@cs.ulowell.edu (Paul M. Wexelblat) writes:
>
>In article <1993Aug10...@wesleyan.edu>, mzel...@wesleyan.edu writes:
>|> Subject: Dinkers Make My Blood Boil!!!
>|> From: mzel...@wesleyan.edu
>|> Date: 10 Aug 93 20:48:28 EDT
>|>
>|> Nothing is more irritating than losing to that pathetic breed of tennis player
>|> - the dinker! I just lost to a guy today who I out-classed in every
>|> department: serve, backhand, forehand, and speed. He just sliced his backhand
Wilander too when he won Paris the first time.
The majority of the women players are dinkers as well,
that is what makes it so dull to watch.
Frans
Mike Quesnal
guy was driving me crazy, all he would do was hit little soft shots (not
quite drop shots) which I would follow into the net with an approach, and
then lob over me. I was able to overhead smash a good percentage of the
lobs, and was able to get back and return most of the others (which started
the dink cycle all over again).
Anyhow, to make a long story short - I was winning the match, but I wasn't
having any fun. Eventually I started to ask myself, "Do I really ENJOY
doing this? Do I really care if I win?". Since it was a round robin
match, and I didn't really _need_ to win (my place in the final standings
was already set), I finally answered those questions "no", and sorta gave
up and let the dinker have his day.
Unfortunately, I had to face this guy again in a tournament where I HAD to
beat him. And I did, but I was so exhausted after all those charges to
the net and back to the baseline again that I lost my next match.
Personally, I would never play against these guys by choice. I don't see
why anyone would want to (as this thread suggests). How do these guys
ever find someone to practice with??????
Mike Q
Raolin Darksbane
<whining zapped> =)
>Now that I got that off of my chest, can anybody offer some suggestions on how
>to overcome these clowns?
> Marek
Well look at it form his point of view, obviously you're a 'BASHER'
quick to go from point to point. And you seem to have lost your concentration
against him. Exactly what he wanted. AS for noe being a 'real' player,
well who WON the match?
But Arthur Ashe suggests(april/93 issue of Tennis) suggests:
bring HIM to the net, then LOB him. Move hime around. Try to speed up play.
--
| Donald Chow | dc...@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca |
| I'll get some sleep when I'm dead! |
\ De-Alcoholized Beer? What's up the point? /
|| "Tia mi aven Moridin isainde vadin!" ||
Tanprasert Thitipong
>Personally, I would never play against these guys by choice. I don't see
>why anyone would want to (as this thread suggests). How do these guys
>ever find someone to practice with??????
I know a dinker who is a really nice guy. Dinking is just the way he plays.
Actually, he can hit winner once in a while. He's 60 years old and he
enjoys the game that way. In fact, he doesn't have enough energy to keep
playing like a young boy. However, he has NTRP rating of 4.5 and always
gives me a good match. Of course, high speed and high power game is
fun, and I usually enjoy that kind of game, but the fact is - there exist
other fun things in tennis too. And while some don't see them, others do.
Someone dinks not because he wants to win real bad but because he thinks
it's a fun way to make tennis a *game*.
T Tanprasert
Pinaki Mazumder
In article <1993Aug10...@wesleyan.edu> you write:
|> Nothing is more irritating than losing to that pathetic breed of tennis player
|> - the dinker! I just lost to a guy today who I out-classed in every
|> department: serve, backhand, forehand, and speed. He just sliced his backhand
|> and FOREHAND deep into the court while I kept driving the ball until I
|> eventually made an error. When I came to net, he always threw up a lob forcing
|> me to either hit a difficult over-head or retreat to the baseline where he
|> continued to grind away at my game with his infuriating brand of patty-cake
|> tennis. To me, dinkers are not true tennis players, but weak-willed babies
|> motivated more by their fear of losing than by the desire for victory.
|>
|> Now that I got that off of my chest, can anybody offer some suggestions on how
|> to overcome these clowns?
|>
|> Marek
All I can say is that grapes are sour! Who you call dinkers
may be in actuality are far better players than some players
like you who think power and spin are everything one should
boast off in a tennis game. The main thing what makes a
player superior to others is not the repertoire of strokes,
but the control over shots one possesses to outmanoeuvre an opponent.
So brood over your limitations - may be you are indecisive, may
be your strokes lack consistency, may be you are not as good
as you think you are, ... Here, in Ann Arbor City Tournament,
I easily beat a solid tennis player with prettiest looking
forehand, backhand, serve-and-volley game and powerful kick
serves in a quarter final match (in the NTRP 4.0-4.5 category),
winning in straight sets: 6-1, 6-4. But in the semi-final match
I dueled with a guy for four hours who
can be labeled as a dinker by your terminology - he had a
bizzare set of grips - single-handed forehand, double-handed
forehand, double-handed backhand and occassionally a
single-handed backhand. He can return any ball from any
where and he will wait until you outhit a ball. After
playing first two games, I went all out to bulldoze him and
I succeeded, winning the first set at 6-1. In the second set,
he got better adjusted and we went on serve until 4-4. Then,
he showed what I can describe an indomitable spirit of not
letting go any ball. Some games even lasted for fifteen
minutes having as many as twelve deuces. In the process, we
broke each other and then we held to decide the set on tie breaker.
I lost in the tie breaker. After 3 hours of playing, we were
dead even. Finally, in the third set after a four-hour
match, I lost. There is very little I can bemoan. You have
to accept that tennis is not just a bunch of pretty looking
shots; to win a match you require a whole bunch of other
things - stamina, atheleticism, patience, selection of
strokes, control on ball, and finally an immense desire to
win and not to throw in your towel even when the chips are
down. So have some heart after loosing a tennis match and
give credit where it belongs. That is what recreational
tennis is all about.
P. Mazumder
Univ. of Michigan
Ann Arbor
Mikhail V. Solodov
{ some more stuff about dinkers deleted }
>where and he will wait until you outhit a ball. After
oh, come on ! nobody can do this :-)
ESPECIALLY a dinker ... there is only so much they can do.
Michael.
Probal Kumar Bhattacharjya
>mzel...@wesleyan.edu writes:
><whining zapped> =)
>against him. Exactly what he wanted. AS for noe being a 'real' player,
>well who WON the match?
> But Arthur Ashe suggests(april/93 issue of Tennis) suggests:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
-- What !!!! Arthur Ashe suggesting ways to play against dinkers !
That too after the 1975 Wimbledon final :-) ... anyway, Ashe was supposed to
be a hard-hitter otherwise.
>bring HIM to the net, then LOB him. Move hime around. Try to speed up play.
>--
> | Donald Chow | dc...@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca |
--P.
Pinaki Mazumder
Well, figuratively so. I understand "dinker" is a relative
term. Often we have a propensity to classify a guy who hits
relatively weak but significantly more steadier shots, and
often can frustrate others with drops, lobs, passing shots,
..., as a dinker. McEnroe once got totally frustrated with
Ramesh Krishnan's controlled, powerless game and virtually
berated him in the tennis court, even though at the end he
won by feeding him back a large dosage of equally obnoxious
junk shots. But the same Ramesh, when he played against
Goran Ivanesivich in the Australian Open, completely
bamboozled him with his "dinker" type of game and after
losing the match very soundly, Goran commented that the
match taught him a great lesson and as if he had taken that
from a great tennis teacher!
The point is that there are players whose games lack power
and elegance, and often some cocky players tend to underrate
their playing abilities, but when it comes to showdown these
"dinkers" can beat those cocky players frustrating them,
hurting their big ego. The guy I played with had tremendous
atheletics ability and that often put pressure on me,
especially in long rallies. I am pretty sure that if I play
with this guy regularly, I shall have better winning statistics;
but, in a match, when you play an unknown tough guy, you can
screw up! Fortunately, tennis players are not like Roman
gladiators of the yore where the vanquished often had to succumb
to death. In tennis you can redeem yourself from a loss and profit
from your past mistakes. So analyze your game when you lose a
match against a player who can break the rythym of your game
by frustrating you with his weak but winning shots, and determine
what you needed to win. There is always a next time when you
will play against a "dinker" like that in some tournaments.
Pinaki Mazumder
The University of Michigan
Ann Arbor
Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum.
> has the HEAD emblem (logo) on it.
Is it just my sexually depraved overactive imagination, or has anyone else
noticed that that logo is quite phallic?!
--Dennis
Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum.
story...
I've been playing tennis several times a week for several months now...and I
think I'm getting to be pretty good. I probably serve consistently around 40
mph...I've learned to hit powerful shots...and my aim is usually great.
I recently played a friend of mine who hadn't played tennis since high school
(about 8 years ago)...and he was a total dinker...and he beat me: 7-5,6-4.
It was in no way skill on his part...it was damned dinker dumb luck.....and
also a bad day in general for me. I must say he made my blood boil too.
Probably about 3 or 4 times per set, his return would hit the tape and drop
onto my side leaving me no chance of returning it.
I don't like playing him very much because his style is so irratic and
unpredictable.....even he admits most of hits shots don't go anywhere near
where he intended to hit them. I much prefer losing to better players than
me...because they force me to improve my game.
Dinkers forcing me to dink them back isn't exactly what I'd consider
"improvement" of my game. Just my two cents...
--Dennis
Arijit Das
In article <57...@ogicse.ogi.edu> dha...@cse.ogi.edu (David Hansen) writes:
>talking about the mental aspect of the game. Wasn't it Connors who
>ranted at Lendl for "bunting" the ball.
Very true, also his loss in Wimbeldon final to Aurther Ashe has been
attributed to balls with with no pace in them, so definitely Connors is
not an authority in dealing with 'dinkers' :-).
Anyway how does one deal with balls with no pace ? I am great on the run
(that's because I don't have to think about the shot), but once the
the ball has slowed down I have time to think about the shot which means
that it ends up in the net or beyond the baseline. When I get a slow ball
I always try to go for an outright winner and end up making an error.
One good aspect about the original article on 'dinkers' is that
atleast now people have gotten off mundane tennis topics and have started
discussing how to play the game better.
---
arijit
Manuvir Das
|> I recently played a friend of mine who hadn't played tennis since high school
|> (about 8 years ago)...and he was a total dinker...and he beat me: 7-5,6-4.
|>
|> It was in no way skill on his part...it was damned dinker dumb luck.....and
|> also a bad day in general for me. I must say he made my blood boil too.
|> Probably about 3 or 4 times per set, his return would hit the tape and drop
|> onto my side leaving me no chance of returning it.
|>
|> I don't like playing him very much because his style is so irratic and
|> unpredictable.....even he admits most of hits shots don't go anywhere near
|> where he intended to hit them. I much prefer losing to better players than
|> me...because they force me to improve my game.
|>
|> Dinkers forcing me to dink them back isn't exactly what I'd consider
|> "improvement" of my game. Just my two cents...
|>
I think you should play your own game against the dinkers rather than try to
out-dink them. After all, they have more practice at dinking than you do, so
they'll probably beat you if you try that.
You might be better served (no pun intended) to improve the consistency of
your game so you can beat your dinking friend. Anyone can hit a forehand
winner or backhand winner etc once in a while, but you're only as good as
your ability to repeat it.
It all depends on whether you're playing to win or not. From what you've
said it sounds like you don't care about winning so much, or you would
appreciate the fact that your opponent was doing what he could to win. But
if that is so, why do you report the score and bemoan the fact that you
lost? There seems to be a contradiction in your thoughts here.
I used to feel the same way as you, and I'd end up losing to every dinker
I played, because I'd be disgusted that I was giving him free points and
I'd try to play safe and as a result I'd end up choking on all my shots.
I was too worried about what people would think if I lost. Is it the same
with you? It's a horrible attitude and I hope I don't have it anymore.
Maybe you should get rid of it too....
- Manuvir
Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum.
> said it sounds like you don't care about winning so much, or you would
It would be more proper to say...I don't care about losing so much.
> appreciate the fact that your opponent was doing what he could to win. But
Bzzzzzzzt! That's my point exactly. He wasn't trying to win! (Hell, he
doesn't even know how to keep score!) All he wanted to do was dink!
> if that is so, why do you report the score and bemoan the fact that you
> lost? There seems to be a contradiction in your thoughts here.
What do you want?!?! A dissertation on the psychology of my tennis game
and mental attitudes toward my opponent?!
Let me ask you this...suppose you're a physics grad student taking a multiple
choice final in Subatomic and Nuclear Physics.....and your 10 year old nephew
was taking the final too...randomly picking answers. Wouldn't you bemoan the
fact if he beat you on the test?! Well...that's why I bemoan the fact that
my friend beat me in tennis...
--Dennis
Raolin Darksbane
You could also add conotations of the name 'HEAD'....=)
>--Dennis
C.S. Sudarshana Bhat
>> It all depends on whether you're playing to win or not. From what you've
>> said it sounds like you don't care about winning so much, or you would
>
>It would be more proper to say...I don't care about losing so much.
>
>
>> appreciate the fact that your opponent was doing what he could to win. But
>
>Bzzzzzzzt! That's my point exactly. He wasn't trying to win! (Hell, he
>doesn't even know how to keep score!) All he wanted to do was dink!
>
>
>> if that is so, why do you report the score and bemoan the fact that you
>> lost? There seems to be a contradiction in your thoughts here.
>
>What do you want?!?! A dissertation on the psychology of my tennis game
>and mental attitudes toward my opponent?!
>
>Let me ask you this...suppose you're a physics grad student taking a multiple
>choice final in Subatomic and Nuclear Physics.....and your 10 year old nephew
>was taking the final too...randomly picking answers. Wouldn't you bemoan the
>fact if he beat you on the test?! Well...that's why I bemoan the fact that
>my friend beat me in tennis...
by randomly picking answers in a multiple choice test. I would say that
your grasp of Subatomic and Nuclear Physics is sub-par. You can't cry
foul on that one. I would suggest that you brush up your knowledge of the
subject. Now, turning the analogy back to Tennis (yes, we still are talking
tennis here :), you need to improve your game, not cry out that your
opponent is not playing 'good' tennis. Heck, I guess you would say next
that Chrissie is (was) a dinker (I can already hear you say that!!).
Ciao.
Porky!
PS: Actually, I feel that a player who is seeking to improve his/her Tennis
game ought to play 'quality dinkers' more than 'good' players. Of
course, if you don't want to lose, just stop keeping tab of the score
(like the dinker friend you referred to above - he did not know how to
keep scores!). Think of Mr. Dinker as a movable backboard, and test
your skill at keeping the ball in play, while playing 'good' tennis.
If you keep practising, you'll get better at playing 'good' tennis,
and it will be pleasure all around!! :-)
>
>--Dennis
Dexter Medley
> keep scores!). Think of Mr. Dinker as a movable backboard, and test
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> your skill at keeping the ball in play, while playing 'good' tennis.
There's another good point. Seems to me that the same dimwits who cry
about losing to dinkers are the folks who don't have the slightest idea
how to work on a tennis wall. You see them out there, as far away from the
wall as they can get, just slamming the ball hard until it gets past them.
Move them up withing ten feet of the wall and they can't control the ball
at all. Put in the effort to learn to control the ball so that they
can go non-stop against the wall for at least ten minutes? Not them!
I play a fairly strong game, but I take great pleasure in learning what is
required to beat a given opponent. If he can't handle slices and other
off-speed shots, that just makes the task easier and gives me more options.
Grow up, whiners! If a guy can beat you with junk, you just aren't as
good as you think you are. Look at a detailed USTA rating chart. The
phrase "is able to force his opponent" appears in several places, and it
is significant. The game is about the interaction of two persons' abilities
and styles. If you lose to someone having what you think is less ability,
you're missing something. Learn from the experience...
William T Grayhack
1) For group(net) that was bombasting Courier's style of play as just plain
dull slug it out, you all sure do like to slug it out yourselves.
2) Maybe you should give yourself more credit. Perhaps the dinker was a
patient player just waiting for an opening, a short ball or the likes, to be
more agressive, but you didn't give him that opening. Good for you. Good depth
consistently is hard for me to manage. Unfortunately for you, his patience for
the opening outlasted your control, but I'm sure he was feeling badly because he
wanted to get in and "win" some of the points.