Tennis Techniques: Aggression Gets Replaced By Survival

There are the hunters and then there are the hunted. If you take a look at animals, it is pretty diffcult at first sight to say why the predator would ever lose his battle.

The prey is never designed to fight. It is designed to run away. The predator either wins or doesn't win, but by no means does the prey win.

But that is an old story. The game's changed. Now the prey wins if it just escapes. It also got some designer shoes from Nike to do the running. The forest surface has changed. Instead of mud and grass, it is now concrete.

The Luxilons have reduced the net-height effectively. The predator cannot ambush from behind it anymore.

Yes, survival is the key nowadays.

With changes made to the court surfaces and racquet technology, the focus has shifted from attacking tennis and aggression to survival - out-survive your opponent and win the game.

Once upon a time there was a man called Johny Mac. That is how fairy tales start normally. Seems our story is no different.

Anyways, when Mac was playing, the strings were different from what we use now. You couldn't put so much spin on the ball. And with only gravity to guide the trajectory of the ball, you could not impart power/depth without taking away the elevation of the ball.

This means that your margin for error was less. You gained elevation, the ball went out. You were stingy on elevation, the ball clipped the net.

During the long life of tennis, the way racquets are gripped during the major part of the play has changed from Continental (variety) to Eastern (pace and low bounce) to Western (Top Spin and height). Note that the Continental grip is still used for serves and volleys.

The days are gone when one could see a Continental-slice on the backhand followed up with a surge to the net. Or an "Eastern-forehand-ripper" with a net-attack.** Then the ball used to keep low.

Now the ball bounces higher and slower, allowing more set-up. The result is always the same - a viciously spinning stroke (Semi-western/Western grip) - put the racquet on to it and watch the ball fly away. There are of-course more players now who can keep passing day in and day out - but that is again because you have more time and lesser margin for error.

Yes, spin is the name of the game. With higher spins, the aerodynamics comes into effect. The spin makes the ball drop dead, and gives it more bounce.

With the net effect that you can strike the ball with all the power in the world, clear the net with a lot of height, and still gleefully watch it drop down near the baseline. If you are at the receiving end, the ball bounces much more - it jumps up in your face if you are on clay. Sometimes it feels like you have been thrown an upper cut.

At the net, the ball feels "heavier", and more difficult to control. Also you could make the ball dip heavily close to the net.

About grips - now at the baseline, against a high bouncing ball, you would feel clumsy using the Eastern Grip on the forehand or the back-hand side. It is just not mechanically suited for the purpose.

You are forced to use the semi-western or the western grip. When you play with that grip, why not use its advantages? So you send the ball back also with the heavy spin.

But these latter ones are not at all suited for balls that keep low. So, isn't there a catch? Why not then use the low bouncing strokes as a weapon against the players trained for top-spin? The see-saw can tilt both ways, surely.

The answer is "No" due to three reasons.

One - no openings. Where do you start? You need a low ball to give back a low ball. You are not allowed that when there are only kick-serves and top spinning returns.

Two - risk. Why would you want to use that, when what you send back has a lesser probability of reaching the right place (remember the lower net clearance thing?)?

Three - technology and skill-set. Balls bounce higher, and slower, and you are taught to be on the safer side rather than try to be clever and be stupid - due to point two.

(Of course there are exceptions to the above. For example, you can slice a high ball on your back-hand side which would keep low. But how effective is the slice off a high ball?)

Volleys as stated, by themselves have become more difficult. Also, most people do not just spend enough time on the approach shots. You need to be even better nowadays on volleys than when volleying was in its prime, to succeed with it.

Overall it has become more difficult with technology aiding base-line play, to perfect a technique of attacking play. You can pass with safety, lob with top-spin and run around with more speed and for longer.

Perhaps no one has pursued this path for as long as it takes to make it the feared approach to playing the game. Perhaps given the technology, and the operational parameters of the human physique it is just not possible for it to be dominant. Perhaps it is just the attitude.

As you grow older, it is said that you become more mature and less reckless. You become more aware of the risks, and take lesser of them. You develop patience, and learn to wait for a more opportune moment.

Tennis has definitely aged over the years. But is this maturity?

Johny Mac too has aged, but still plays. Does he play this way?

Get a grip