I had an argument with my new tennis coach today, because he was praising a ridicolous pusher who never had a chance against me in all of the matches we've played because his game was more natural and more suited to clay (we were playing in clay). I play a game suited to fast court with very fast racquethead speed and hes NEVER said anything good about it. Even in clay I blow that pusher out of the court. So the question is, don't you think that trying to play pretty tennis is a total waste of time? The more efficient, the better.
Oct 22nd, 2011, 08:02 PM
(I've missed your presnece on TF, Sammo)
I think there's a connection between "pretty tennis" and "good technique." I mean one of my favorite junior players has terrible-looking strokes, but it's efficient. At the same time, I don't really see her lasting long as a pro with those strokes (if she does turn pro). :shrug:
IMO, aggressive games don't necessarily make pretty tennis because it relies on brute force sometimes and is prone to uglier UE's. So sometimes, pretty tennis isn't a waste of time...
Pretty tennis translates best on clay, though. All the stroke production, fine touch, etc., is needed most on clay. I think that's something your coach doesn't notice.
Oct 22nd, 2011, 08:40 PM
Aw, thank you :) both for the answer and for the statement.
Oct 25th, 2011, 06:40 AM
well tennis is a good game i don,t know about you but i spend my most of the time in playing of tennis and arantxa rus is one of my most favorite celebrity and one of the top celebrity (http://www.fashiontrends.pk/fashion-world/top-celebrities/) of tennis she get many achievements in international titles so i follow her and now i can play better tennis ....