PDA

View Full Version : What is the definition of a "pusher"


renstar
Jan 31st, 2010, 08:33 AM
Hi,

I often read in this forum that this player or that player is a pusher etc but really wondering what people consider to be a pusher!

To me I think people mean a player just gets the ball back in play without going for winners, BUT by the very nature of tennis a level of consistency is required to play and win, it would be virtually impossible to go for winners all the time. Look at Serena Williams she hardly goes for winners all the time, they are saved for every now and then, to do so all the time she would lose.

Also look at some of the best female players of the past such as Evert, Austin, Hingis, they were very consistent and didnt have huge weapons, yet their concentration and consistency often bought wins against most players.

I think people who call players "pushers" don't watch a lot of live tennis, because the speed they hit the ball is not appreciated on tv, and they still hit it preddy darn hard, hardly a push. Maybe they don't go for as many winners as say the Williams, but they hardly push the ball!

Caralenko
Jan 31st, 2010, 08:34 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pusher_%28tennis%29


"In tennis, a pusher is a player who "pushes" back any shot they can chase down, without deliberately hitting a winner. This style of play, likened to a "human backboard", often tires and frustrates more offensive opponents."

renstar
Jan 31st, 2010, 08:36 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pusher_%28tennis%29


"In tennis, a pusher is a player who "pushes" back any shot they can chase down, without deliberately hitting a winner. This style of play, likened to a "human backboard", often tires and frustrates more offensive opponents."

Hmmm in this case one would assume this sort of player would be a classic clay court player, and Nadal would be considered a "pusher"

Caralenko
Jan 31st, 2010, 08:40 AM
Hmmm in this case one would assume this sort of player would be a classic clay court player, and Nadal would be considered a "pusher"

Yes, most people do actually consider Nadull a pusher :lol:

thegreendestiny
Jan 31st, 2010, 08:40 AM
Denotata: Caroline Wozniacki

GeeTee
Jan 31st, 2010, 08:46 AM
It used to be called 'counter-puncher'

renstar
Jan 31st, 2010, 08:51 AM
It used to be called 'counter-puncher'

Oh yes remember that term, then Evert was the greatest pusher in female tennis history lol

SIN DIOS NI LEY
Jan 31st, 2010, 08:57 AM
Put "Wozniacki" on Youtube

Svetlana)))
Jan 31st, 2010, 09:00 AM
The Merriam-Webster defines pusher as Caroline Wozniacki.

darrinbaker00
Jan 31st, 2010, 09:26 AM
Yes, most people do actually consider Nadull a pusher :lol:
Referring to yourself as "most people," eh?

Caralenko
Jan 31st, 2010, 09:32 AM
Referring to yourself as "most people," eh?

No, I admire Rafael's defensive abilities and shot making :)

s_j
Jan 31st, 2010, 09:42 AM
I often see a 'pusher' as someone halfway between a 'hacker' and a 'counter-puncher'. For me, a 'counter-puncher' sounds like they have at least a little bit of offensive skills, ie. they can wait for the perfect opportunity to strike back after soaking up much of their opponent's power.

PalomaPiccaso
Jan 31st, 2010, 10:03 AM
Nadal almost always makes over 20 winners, he can hit a winner from anywhere from the court. He does play defensive tennis but he is not a pusher. He counter punches, constructs the point and when the moment is right he paints the lines. A pusher is a player who just returns the ball back in the court and waits for an unforced error from their opponent.

Classic example would be Caro Wozniacki(3 winners in a match) and the Rochus brothers.

Martina Hingis was not a pusher, neither was Chris Evert.
Hingis did not put a lot of speed on her balls but she still dictated play by taking the ball early and than painting the lines.
Chris Evert was a classic example of a counter puncher with a lot of finesse. She constructed the point and waited for the right opportunity to capitalize(ie. a shorter return).

The people calling Nadal, Evert, or Hingis pushers, have absolutely no idea of what they are talking about.

A pusher would be someone like Michael Chang(although he did have finesse at times).

By the way a counter puncher in today's game would be Jelena Jankovic.
Pusher would be Pin or Wozniacki

Szavay #1
Jan 31st, 2010, 10:04 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pusher_%28tennis%29


"In tennis, a pusher is a player who "pushes" back any shot they can chase down, without deliberately hitting a winner. This style of play, likened to a "human backboard", often tires and frustrates more offensive opponents."

and wins tons of matches and breaks into the top ten.

otoh, there are tons of big hitters and servers who can't even win half the matches or beat half the players that pushers can. :tape:

Break My Rapture
Jan 31st, 2010, 10:19 AM
Pusher = Caroline Wozniacki.

Btw, Nadal is not a pusher. He hits a lot of (amazing) winners and he's only defensive when his opponent attacks, Caro is always defensive even if her opponent doesn't attack.

eck
Jan 31st, 2010, 10:26 AM
I reckon Murray is a definition of pusher. He doesn't always play the game, but for the most part, he does.

PalomaPiccaso
Jan 31st, 2010, 11:12 AM
I reckon Murray is a definition of pusher. He doesn't always play the game, but for the most part, he does.

While I do not like Murray and today he went in to the match pushing. Murray is not a pusher, not at all. He can sometimes fall into that and play like that but overall he is not a pusher.

I mean pusher is Wozniacki, there is no one who fits so perfectly into that style of play. She is the perfect example.

watchdogfish
Jan 31st, 2010, 11:26 AM
Isn't a pusher the same as a moonballer?

Mikey.
Jan 31st, 2010, 12:36 PM
Isn't a pusher the same as a moonballer?

A moonballer comes under the umbrella term 'pusher'. :lol:

Slutiana
Jan 31st, 2010, 12:37 PM
It used to be called 'counter-puncher'

I often see a 'pusher' as someone halfway between a 'hacker' and a 'counter-puncher'. For me, a 'counter-puncher' sounds like they have at least a little bit of offensive skills, ie. they can wait for the perfect opportunity to strike back after soaking up much of their opponent's power.
Agreed 100%.

Dawson.
Jan 31st, 2010, 12:41 PM
Always makes me LOL when they call Nadal a pusher over at MTF

In fact, the term 'pusher' makes me LOL on its own - especially when used by some posters on this forum.

Serenita
Jan 31st, 2010, 12:58 PM
ugh, Murray is in his heart a pusher.In his match against Nadal, he showed that he can step up, and take control of the point. but tonight Pusher Murray came to play, and lost.

spec7er
Jan 31st, 2010, 01:31 PM
Murray's more of a counterpuncher and a tactician a la Hingis.

Monica_Rules
Jan 31st, 2010, 01:39 PM
yeah Murray is a classic counter puncher who sometimes falls into the habit of pushing. It gets quite annoying.

I don't really think Wozniacki is a pusher, she's maybe the modern day version but a classic pusher to me was Anna Smashnova.

Dementieva Guts
Jan 31st, 2010, 01:43 PM
A pusher is a player that have consistency, great change of speeds, doesnt make brainless errors. posters that laugh at this style of play are simply jealous that their *fav* isnt playing that way, there fav isnt able to stay in rallies, to move in a decent way because they bash the ball without looking at it, with no mindset whatsoever. Youre a basher, a pusher or a mix of the two. Posters who like brainless bashers (like cocktail sharapova) are beginning to see that the *pusher gamestyle* is the best way to play the game, and the most efficient.:wavey:

fouc
Jan 31st, 2010, 04:29 PM
a pusher - a caroline wozniacki-like player

Corswandt
Jan 31st, 2010, 06:32 PM
yeah Murray is a classic counter puncher who sometimes falls into the habit of pushing. It gets quite annoying.

I agree.

Nadal is a megapusher, nothing else. Sometimes he loops his moonballs a bit deeper, and people mistake that for "aggressive" play.

My own take on how to define "pusher", "counterpuncher", "moonballer", etc.:

http://www.tennisforum.com/showpost.php?p=17002228&postcount=13

PalomaPiccaso
Jan 31st, 2010, 06:52 PM
I agree.

Nadal is a megapusher, nothing else. Sometimes he loops his moonballs a bit deeper, and people mistake that for "aggressive" play.

My own take on how to define "pusher", "counterpuncher", "moonballer", etc.:

http://www.tennisforum.com/showpost.php?p=17002228&postcount=13

As much as I love power tennis, calling Rafa Nadal a mega pusher(someone who can make unbelievable winners, anywhere from the court, someone who makes over 20 winners a match.) That is mentally retarded you either know absolutely nothing about tennis or are a Rafa Nadal hater. :rolleyes:
Its fine to dislike a player but don't talk bullshit and please don't analyze things you have absolutely no idea about.

égalité
Jan 31st, 2010, 06:54 PM
Any player that a fan of brainless ball-bashers doesn't like.

Dementieva Guts
Jan 31st, 2010, 06:58 PM
Any player that the fan of brainless ball-bashers doesn't like.

exactly, thank you very much. Finally someone who gets it.

Keep up the good work:worship:

AnnaK_4ever
Jan 31st, 2010, 07:09 PM
Any player that a fan of brainless ball-bashers doesn't like.

Typical response from a fan of brainless pushers.

Dementieva Guts
Jan 31st, 2010, 07:15 PM
Typical response from a fan of brainless pushers.

so called *pushers* and the word brainless dont match together. If you play a great all around game like those *pushers*, you cant be brainless. Ball Bashers are brainless, its the way they play, without thinking, they have no idea how they play, they have no key how to win.:kiss:

dsanders06
Jan 31st, 2010, 07:16 PM
I think a counter-puncher is somone who actually has a proper punch. Players who, although usually start the points on the defensive, will seize control of the rally when they get an opening. Capriati, Clijsters, Nadal and I would even say Dementieva these days are examples of that.

On the other hand, I would class Wozniacki, Jankovic, Hewitt and Murray as more strictly defensive players (*not* "pushers"). Generally, they stay on the defensive pretty much all the time, and only really go for a big shot when there's a HUGE, basically can't-miss opening - which is a completely legitimate gamestyle btw.

Henin, the Williams sisters and Federer are very much aggressive players who just happen to move great as a bonus.

égalité
Jan 31st, 2010, 07:26 PM
Typical response from a fan of brainless pushers.

I hope you're not callling Hingis a brainless pusher :spit:

My favorite active players are Radwanska, Jankovic, Clijsters, and Dementieva, and only two of those are brainless pushers, so :nerner:

simonsaystennis
Jan 31st, 2010, 07:31 PM
On this board? Any player who doesn't blow you off the court with power/is able to get a lot of balls back into play.

I'm a fan of both "ball-bashers" and "pushers" I like seeing a variety of play.

Though they're not in my signature, I'm a fan of both Wozniacki and Radwanska.

PalomaPiccaso
Jan 31st, 2010, 08:07 PM
I think a counter-puncher is somone who actually has a proper punch. Players who, although usually start the points on the defensive, will seize control of the rally when they get an opening. Capriati, Clijsters, Nadal and I would even say Dementieva these days are examples of that.

On the other hand, I would class Wozniacki, Jankovic, Hewitt and Murray as more strictly defensive players (*not* "pushers"). Generally, they stay on the defensive pretty much all the time, and only really go for a big shot when there's a HUGE, basically can't-miss opening - which is a completely legitimate gamestyle btw.

Henin, the Williams sisters and Federer are very much aggressive players who just happen to move great as a bonus.


Jankovic and Murray are not pushers, they are counter punchers. When they are playing bad and slumping than they start pushing, when their games are on they are classic examples of a counter puncher.

Hewitt use to be a counter puncher and with the years he has turned into a pusher.:rolleyes:

Corswandt
Jan 31st, 2010, 09:38 PM
As much as I love power tennis, calling Rafa Nadal a mega pusher(someone who can make unbelievable winners, anywhere from the court, someone who makes over 20 winners a match.)

That must have been in five setters. Check last year's Shanghai final: Nadal hit 1 (one) winner in the first 8 (eight) games. At the AO, he got outwinnered in the last 3 rounds he played, against Kohlschreikersteinerdeicher, Dr. Ivo and GOATMuzza.

And your username is misspelt.

Hugh.
Jan 31st, 2010, 09:54 PM
That must have been in five setters. Check last year's Shanghai final: Nadal hit 1 (one) winner in the first 8 (eight) games. At the AO, he got outwinnered in the last 3 rounds he played, against Kohlschreikersteinerdeicher, Dr. Ivo and GOATMuzza.

And your username is misspelt.

In Shanghai Davydenko was playing the tennis of his life so Rafa could do nothing but defend nearly every point. Ivo is the ace machine which heavily inflates his winner count, and Rafa was injured against a Murray who was playing his best tennis of the tournament. Winners do not mean everything.

Please do not call Rafa a pusher...that is like calling Federer a ballbasher. :tape:

TheAllan
Jan 31st, 2010, 10:05 PM
That must have been in five setters. Check last year's Shanghai final: Nadal hit 1 (one) winner in the first 8 (eight) games. At the AO, he got outwinnered in the last 3 rounds he played, against Kohlschreikersteinerdeicher, Dr. Ivo and GOATMuzza.

And your username is misspelt.
Keep in mind that Karlovic has his winner stats padded by his ridiculous ace tally. Calling Nadal a pusher makes the term almost meaningless, at least if it's meant to be a derogatory way of describing players who cede the initiative even when it's handed to them. Nadal doesn't seek the initiative as actively as many other top players, but he will seize it and capitalize upon it when given the chance. Few players want to exchange lengthy rallies with him because of his defensive skills - which means they will often play a high-risk game by going for winners frequently. This obviously impacts Nadal's stats as well as he rarely goes for broke himself.

There's also a significant number of unreported "forced errors" in his matches, which is often a result of him outrallying an opponent, catching him on the wrong foot, getting a sharp angle in. They don't show up as winners but they can easily be a result of aggression on his part. That's why a mere reading of winners and unforced errors rarely tell a complete story.

dsanders06
Jan 31st, 2010, 10:43 PM
That must have been in five setters. Check last year's Shanghai final: Nadal hit 1 (one) winner in the first 8 (eight) games. At the AO, he got outwinnered in the last 3 rounds he played, against Kohlschreikersteinerdeicher, Dr. Ivo and GOATMuzza.

And your username is misspelt.

I usually find your posts VERY accurate and interesting for the most part, but you're just dead wrong. Just because Nadal uses a lot of topspin, that doesn't make him a pusher, nor does it mean he moonballs all the time. Seriously, go and watch highlights of the AO09 final: Nadal was turning defense into offense like no-one ever before him. Proper counter-punching at its very highest level, as well as pulling off the rare feat of outclassing Federer at the net. And this is coming from a diehard Federer fan.

Corswandt
Jan 31st, 2010, 11:12 PM
Nadal doesn't seek the initiative as actively as many other top players

Dingdingdingdingding.

manu32
Jan 31st, 2010, 11:16 PM
Woz....,Rad....., Janko....

The Dawntreader
Jan 31st, 2010, 11:17 PM
It's a misconception (or maybe even a blatant lie), that players play in a stilted defensive fashion because they are tennis 'intellectuals' who want to rise above the baseline bludgeoners. Quite simply- they cannot do anything else, or at least not consistently enough before returning to type.

And :lol: at the posters who call defensive play 'not brainless'. It's probably the most unthinking style of play possible, and the least rewarding ultimately IMO.

Corswandt
Jan 31st, 2010, 11:23 PM
And :lol: at the posters who call defensive play 'not brainless'. It's probably the most unthinking style of play possible, and the least rewarding ultimately IMO.

True in the sense that it can be played pretty much in autopilot. One of the reasons why pushers often give the impression of being mentally tougher than players who take more risks with their shotmaking.

TheAllan
Jan 31st, 2010, 11:35 PM
Dingdingdingdingding.
Non-response plus quoting out of context. Well done.

SIN DIOS NI LEY
Jan 31st, 2010, 11:36 PM
I agree.

Nadal is a megapusher, nothing else. Sometimes he loops his moonballs a bit deeper, and people mistake that for "aggressive" play.

My own take on how to define "pusher", "counterpuncher", "moonballer", etc.:

http://www.tennisforum.com/showpost.php?p=17002228&postcount=13



Comment made with the portuguese shirt :lol:

BuTtErFrEnA
Jan 31st, 2010, 11:55 PM
It's a misconception (or maybe even a blatant lie), that players play in a stilted defensive fashion because they are tennis 'intellectuals' who want to rise above the baseline bludgeoners. Quite simply- they cannot do anything else, or at least not consistently enough before returning to type.

And :lol: at the posters who call defensive play 'not brainless'. It's probably the most unthinking style of play possible, and the least rewarding ultimately IMO.

this

Dementieva Guts
Feb 1st, 2010, 03:35 AM
It's a misconception (or maybe even a blatant lie), that players play in a stilted defensive fashion because they are tennis 'intellectuals' who want to rise above the baseline bludgeoners. Quite simply- they cannot do anything else, or at least not consistently enough before returning to type.

And :lol: at the posters who call defensive play 'not brainless'. It's probably the most unthinking style of play possible, and the least rewarding ultimately IMO.

So call pushers wants to WIN, do whatever it takes to WIN, have a game plan TO WIN. So call pushers are WINNERS. Brainless bashers (like you) are playing tennis to make themself important, they seek the feeling to be important, they want to still the show, they dont care about winning, when theyre trailing or losing, they gave up or bathroom break quit, they have no energy or willingness to go deep with those wonderful *so call pushers*. They are afraid of them, and arent willing to put the effort to earn something in life. Thats why brainless bashers that you (dream sleeping with) want to end points before starting it

You need some tennis session, like those cocktail pova of this world:kiss:

Dementieva Guts
Feb 1st, 2010, 03:36 AM
True in the sense that it can be played pretty much in autopilot. One of the reasons why pushers often give the impression of being mentally tougher than players who take more risks with their shotmaking.

So call pushers wants to WIN, do whatever it takes to WIN, have a game plan TO WIN. So call pushers are WINNERS. Brainless bashers (like you) are playing tennis to make themself important, they seek the feeling to be important, they want to still the show, they dont care about winning, when theyre trailing or losing, they gave up or bathroom break quit, they have no energy or willingness to go deep with those wonderful *so call pushers*. They are afraid of them, and arent willing to put the effort to earn something in life. Thats why brainless bashers that you (dream sleeping with) want to end points before starting it

You need some tennis session, like those cocktail pova of this world:kiss:

cowking
Feb 1st, 2010, 04:06 AM
I guess it's someone who plays defensively and avoids errors in order to draw errors from their opponent.

I like seeing some defensive play, it can be exciting to watch a player run down seemingly impossible shots or frustrate their opponent into submission. Many people claim that it's always boring or cowardly, repetitive, etc. but that's not always the case and really, you could look at aggressive play or "ball-bashing" in the same way. It's great to watch a player with an offensive game plan hit spectacular shots and win with controlled aggression, but then there's the opposite end of the spectrum, where they hit cringe-worthy errors and the play is so disjointed that you can't really get into it at all. Each style of play has its own pros and cons, and I think the derogatory nature of terms like "pusher" and "brainless ball-basher" suggests that this all has more to do with favourtism than anything else.

simonsaystennis
Feb 1st, 2010, 04:41 AM
I guess it's someone who plays defensively and avoids errors in order to draw errors from their opponent.

I like seeing some defensive play, it can be exciting to watch a player run down seemingly impossible shots or frustrate their opponent into submission. Many people claim that it's always boring or cowardly, repetitive, etc. but that's not always the case and really, you could look at aggressive play or "ball-bashing" in the same way. It's great to watch a player with an offensive game plan hit spectacular shots and win with controlled aggression, but then there's the opposite end of the spectrum, where they hit cringe-worthy errors and the play is so disjointed that you can't really get into it at all. Each style of play has its own pros and cons, and I think the derogatory nature of terms like "pusher" and "brainless ball-basher" suggests that this all has more to do with favourtism than anything else.

This is the most intelligent post I've read in this thread. I completely agree with everything you said. :worship:

renstar
Feb 1st, 2010, 05:44 AM
Just a few points to note. First I was a kid in the 70's and 80's and remember players were either a "baseliner" or a serve volleyer". Maybe then the baseliner was seen as the more passive player, although they did win more points than today's "pusher" since they had to pass the incoming volleyer and thus this was classed as a winner, whereas today virtually everyone is a "baseliner"

Thus the "baseliners" were now virtualy everyone and had to be reclassified into those that went for winners and those that waited for mistakes.

I think another way to think of counter punchers is to think of Agassi he revolutionised taking the ball early so the harder someone hit the better because he was using their power, counter punching their power back to them. I remember Evert always loved playing players who hit the ball hard and not fed her junk, counter punchers loved the pace to use it.

So maybe today "pushers" are considered baseliners who do not take the ball early, who do not go for winners, but keep the ball in play waiting for opponents mistakes. Seemed to be effective for Wozniaki to get to the US open final.

Evert was the master of playing consistency and concentration and waiting for opponent errors, so much so she had the highest match winning percentage in history, man or woman.

HippityHop
Feb 1st, 2010, 06:14 AM
and wins tons of matches and breaks into the top ten.

otoh, there are tons of big hitters and servers who can't even win half the matches or beat half the players that pushers can. :tape:

This.

sorceress
Feb 1st, 2010, 08:32 AM
It's a misconception (or maybe even a blatant lie), that players play in a stilted defensive fashion because they are tennis 'intellectuals' who want to rise above the baseline bludgeoners. Quite simply- they cannot do anything else, or at least not consistently enough before returning to type.

And :lol: at the posters who call defensive play 'not brainless'. It's probably the most unthinking style of play possible, and the least rewarding ultimately IMO.
What you're saying doesn't make sense, if you're playing defensively, you've obviously going to have to use your head...and very quickly...
So basically lol@your post.
I guess it's someone who plays defensively and avoids errors in order to draw errors from their opponent.

I like seeing some defensive play, it can be exciting to watch a player run down seemingly impossible shots or frustrate their opponent into submission. Many people claim that it's always boring or cowardly, repetitive, etc. but that's not always the case and really, you could look at aggressive play or "ball-bashing" in the same way. It's great to watch a player with an offensive game plan hit spectacular shots and win with controlled aggression, but then there's the opposite end of the spectrum, where they hit cringe-worthy errors and the play is so disjointed that you can't really get into it at all. Each style of play has its own pros and cons, and I think the derogatory nature of terms like "pusher" and "brainless ball-basher" suggests that this all has more to do with favourtism than anything else.
Pretty much spot on.
Brainless ball basher and pusher are resentful names said by fans of those beaten severely by the other.
It's pretty ironic to bag out each other considering each has produced some of the greatest tennis stars ever.

ZeroSOFInfinity
Feb 1st, 2010, 09:14 AM
I often read in this forum that this player or that player is a pusher etc but really wondering what people consider to be a pusher!

It's simple really. A pusher is one who is playing "wall tennis" with his / her opponents, without any ounce of attack or defense at all.

Something like this.... :tennis: you get the idea...

bandabou
Feb 1st, 2010, 09:52 AM
Pusher is a player who NEVER pulls the trigger. Nothing bad playing defensive, but when you don't pull the trigger even with whole court open...then you're pusher.

BuTtErFrEnA
Feb 1st, 2010, 10:58 AM
Pusher is a player who NEVER pulls the trigger. Nothing bad playing defensive, but when you don't pull the trigger even with whole court open...then you're pusher.

exactly...and THAT is brainless pushing...don't understand why people think you can't be a brainless pusher :shrug: if you decide to sit back and never attack even when the opportunity presents itself, and instead wait until you get an error then how is that better than the player who refuses to take a little off the ball in order to just get it in?

both are doing things which will eventually cost them the match, and a lot of matches on the big stage

darrinbaker00
Feb 1st, 2010, 02:49 PM
If you're playing WTA Tour-level tennis, you are not a "pusher." Period. Next topic, please.

Bingain
Feb 1st, 2010, 03:49 PM
If you're playing WTA Tour-level tennis, you are not a "pusher." Period. Next topic, please.


In the strictest definition, your comment is correct.

However, since Nadal is called a pusher (on clay), and Murray is called a pusher (on anything), I guess a wider definition has already been implemented, for quite a while.

I think a new definition of a pusher is:
A counter-puncher, who doesn't attack enough (in the opinions of legends to ppls who have never picked up a racquet) and who has some significant success (therefore has enough fans/foes to criticize him/her.)

Pushers who play at club levels are now called jerks/bitches or hate crime victims.

LoveMeansZero
Feb 1st, 2010, 05:16 PM
If you want to see a pusher in action, just watch:
In the WTA: Caroline Wozniacki
In the ATP: Gilles Simon.

Szavay #1
Feb 1st, 2010, 09:46 PM
If you're playing WTA Tour-level tennis, you are not a "pusher." Period. Next topic, please.

:yeah:

it's as if they'd rather support someone in the challengers who hits tons of winners but loses in the qualies week in and week out than someone who made it to a gs final. :scratch:

dsanders06
Feb 1st, 2010, 10:26 PM
What no-one has answered is, if it's so easy to be a "pusher" like Wozniacki and requires little talent, why have Vaidisova and Chakvetadze not started playing like that?

Pops Maellard
Feb 1st, 2010, 10:59 PM
In Shanghai Davydenko was playing the tennis of his life so Rafa could do nothing but defend nearly every point. Ivo is the ace machine which heavily inflates his winner count, and Rafa was injured against a Murray who was playing his best tennis of the tournament. Winners do not mean everything.

Please do not call Rafa a pusher...that is like calling Federer a ballbasher. :tape:
You don't think Federer's a ballbasher? Maybe not at the slams, but outside the slams Federer's a total ballbasher IMO. Every second forehand landing like 5 meters out. Thank God for his serve outside the slams. :tape: