LitlBuck;1776609; said:
I don't want to turn this thread into a Tennis for Dummies thread but if all the big-time high school players are good offensively what makes one better defensively than another
I mean they all have coaches and I would assume that they practice major minutes so why aren't they that much different. I can understand the difference from college to the Features and to the ATP but having a hard time understanding how a guy could be so dominant in one aspect and not good at the other.
This is an intriguing question that has been hanging for awhile, and a definitive answer is probably not easy to articulate and I am not as in tune with the junior and developmental scene to answer with any level of expertise.
Here's my random thoughts on style of play and how that translates in the D1 level.
Defensive players generally have several presenting qualities--foot speed, court coverage, exceptional hand eye coordination, consistent shot making and low percentage of unforced errors. Their game is predicated around the strategy of forcing long points, hitting low risk/low reward returns and forcing opponents to hit multiple high risk aggressive shots to win a point.
This style of play is prized by those who we not so lovingly describe as "pushers", "loopers", etc.
This style is highly effective against certain aggressive offensive players and especially those who are inconsistent, get impatient or are easliy frustrated. Michael Chang and Mats Wilander won with this style of play although pros today realize the limitations for its success on the tour.
Offensive and power players generally hit with pace, high risk/high reward. They often are not needing to cover the court as a priority because their pace and power usually are dominant to force soft returns or errors.
They generally sacrifice consistency for high levels of winners and forced errors.
On the pro circuit, the games of Andy Roddick, Taylor Dent, and Pete Sampras are good examples of this style of play.
Re. a high school players transition to D1 level. Big time offensive players usually discover that the power, shot speed and defensive skills are greater at the next (college) level. Everyone serves faster, hits harder, more consistently, and covers the court better. The possibility for cranking winners drops. What was high risk/ high reward at the junior level has now become high risk/low reward.
Transition crisis sets in and it either requires perfecting the aggressive high risk style or developing other skills and strategies to complete the package. Sometimes juniors have already peaked and can't do either.
One other note, generally big time junior players may go to a club for instruction and lessons but typically don't have coaches available to travel with them to tournaments. (Pros usually want cash, not v-bucks):(
Professional instruction (not intended as a slam at mom and dad's advice) :! for specific opponent or match strategy is typically not happening.
I would think there would be a better way of setting such a tournament up.