2013 French Open...Roland Garros, Paris, France

[don_budge]

Super article...great comments: Shot Tolerance

I really like this concept of shot tolerance as a tool to analyze tennis players, matches, growth etc. What's more is that I really like the fact that it is more or less a tactical concept that of course takes technique factors into consideration. Very interesting...this sort of concept can pretty much be taken to the nth degree as far as expanding upon the premises that Elliot writes about in his article.

This is a really good observation as a derivative of Teltscher's article..."I like to say the way the more powerful player, A, beats the more accurate player, B, is A has to be consistent and accurate enough at his higher pace that he can push the weaker(although apparently more consistent and accurate) player into a pace where B is no longer the more consistent and accurate player."

One thing that I constantly try to emphasize to any tennis student that will listen is that tennis matches are won on a sum total of different aspects of the game. Certainly technique aspects are very important...that is being able to repeat the same motion under a variety of different conditions.

Perhaps the most important of the physical aspects of the game, all things being equal, is the ability to get yourself in position to make a balanced swing at the ball. It appears to me that this is the thing that separates the players at the top level of the game. When you discuss the top players whether it be Agassi, Federer, Djokovic or Nadal in the modern game or if you discuss Connors, McEnroe, Sampras or Borg from the more classic era you realize that the top players were not only extremely quick and mobile but they were extremely nimble and had a knack for getting themselves into position to make a great swing at the ball even if they were off balance or late getting in position. Shot tolerance is an incredible concept when you consider all of the things that can effect the shot tolerance from one player to the next.

This is a good reason that your observations about Ferrer being able to take advantage of his opponent and seizing the initiative and how we may underestimate his ability in this regard. Afterall...David "The Ferret" Ferrer has a ridiculously high shot tolerance and probably only a handful of players out excel him in this regard. Shot tolerance is a tactical concept...in many regards. A tennis player must always be patient and not try to make shots that they don't KNOW that they can make yet they have to recognize when there is an opportunity to seize the initiative and then have the ability to do it. Thanks...don for your discussion and food for thought.

[bottle]

I vote for "Ferret"

Who is Ferret?
Do you mean Ferrer?

I knew dis girl named Juliet. "What's in a name?" she said. And then, "But Bot, I'm only thirteen!" Just then the cops arrived, carrying a boombox that was blaring an old song from the nineteen-fifties: "Seventeen-and-a-half is s-still jail bait..." They started to carry me off. "But I thought her name was 'Lolita,'" I said.

[tennis_chiro]

Great article by Elliot

I think Teltscher just about covered it completely. I would simply highlight a couple of points that he brought out.

First of all, recognize that it is not just a choice of going for winners or playing completely reactively; there is such a thing as aggressively trying to take control of the point without going for winners, but working for the position where you can go for a winner or draw an error. This is what he was talking about with Gimelstob. Another player for whom I thought this was very true was Todd Martin. You think, perhaps, that it is just a question of athleticism and mobility, but I remember watching Todd when he was first hitting the pro tour and Robert Van't Hof was coaching him and I had a conversation with Robert about Todd. It was clear to me that Todd was very good when he had something he was trying to do with the ball, when he had a clear objective for his shot: a passing shot, an approach shot or something to set up control of the point. But if he became the least bit passive or reactive, he was dreadful; he would make unforced errors on balls that he was in perfect position to hit. Of course, Todd proved to be a great player pushing a lot of players around the court with his game.

Second, Elliot makes a good point about hitting to a player's weakness, doesn't mean feeding them setups; it means "all things being equal, you'd be better off playing this shot". Feeding a setup or an easy ball is not "all things being equal".

What I saw in Tsonga in his match with Chardy was that he is demonstrating a lot more patience, playing within himself; that is, showing a willingness to hit a lot more balls that he can hit very consistently while he waits for the chance to be aggressive. And with his natural power, his regular shot is still enough to eventually give him the upper hand against most players, but probably not against Djokovic or Nadal. And almost definitely not against Ferrer. The question becomes whether or not Tsonga can push the level of fireworks up high enough where he becomes the more effective player. I like to say the way the more powerful player, A, beats the more accurate player, B, is A has to be consistent and accurate enough at his higher pace that he can push the weaker(although apparently more consistent and accurate) player into a pace where B is no longer the more consistent and accurate player. Djokovic and Nadal routinely do that to Ferrer, but I don't think Tsonga can do that to him on red clay. But it's close.

don

[don_budge]

lobndropshot to tennis_chiro...

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/...tolerance.html

Nice post lobndropshot, thank you...Elliot Teltscher writes a rather comprehensive piece. I wonder if Don Brosseau has anything to add. I certainly am curious...there seems to be another aspect of "shot tolerance"...perhaps another connotation.

Shot tolerance relative to attack and defense. tennis_chiro is correct to in saying that we don't give Ferrer enough credit in his ability to attack and exploit weak balls. He isn't seeded fourth hitting moon balls. Perhaps a little more in depth analysis of Tsonga's shot tolerance compared to Ferrer's. They play completely different games so how does shot tolerance apply to both of them. The other two...Nadal and Djokovic have incredibly high shot tolerance any way you slice it with perhaps the edge going to Djokovic in this category as well based on his superior movement and ability to neutralize points when they seemed to have tipped the balance to his opponents.

Give it some thought Don...you probably have some really good ideas here.

[julian1]

Who is Ferret?

This Nadal/Djokovic match does look like it could be a great one. I am very anxious to see how Djokovic deals with king of clay at the FO 3 of 5 format. I picked Fed to make the final, I whiffed on that one, but I still like Nadal in this one. He does have the biggest weapon on the court with his fh.

The other semi has gotten even more interesting. Brad Gilbert mentioned during coverage of the 2 men's quarters yesterday that Tsonga, during his post march win over Fed interview, said that he is bigger and stronger, hits the ball harder, and serves better than Ferret. All that is true, but I'm not so sure he needed to say it.

Who is Ferret?
Do you mean Ferrer?

[bottle]

Don may or may not have something to add, but I think your link here goes a long way toward answering any question anybody has on this topic. Wow, I've been impressed before by Teltscher writing on one-handers. But have been tempted to revise my view into thinking he's just a big lug from watching instructional shorts on Tennis Channel. But here is the very best Teltscher all over again. I also like the last five letters of his name.

-- John Escher

P.S. My friend Jim, the USPTA pro who gave me 60 free lessons but never in his life had a one-on-one lesson or any kind of a lesson for himself (and was captain of Bates College and became a tour player!), used to say that when evaluating an opponent, feed him the same shot and count how many times he successfully returns it before he misses one. Four or five? Then hit it there five or six times when you need a point. He was open to the possibility as well that shot tolerance might end at four or five or whatever regardless of the nature of your shots.

[lobndropshot]

This match should have been the finals. It is due to a failure of the seeding process. #1 should play #4 in the semi's and #2 should play #3...in a perfect world. The discussion is first rate.

tennis_chiro...give us your definition of what you mean by "shot tolerance". I like that term and wish to know the full scope of your definition. Thanks.

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/...tolerance.html

[stroke]

This Nadal/Djokovic match does look like it could be a great one. I am very anxious to see how Djokovic deals with king of clay at the FO 3 of 5 format. I picked Fed to make the final, I whiffed on that one, but I still like Nadal in this one. He does have the biggest weapon on the court with his fh.

The other semi has gotten even more interesting. Brad Gilbert mentioned during coverage of the 2 men's quarters yesterday that Tsonga, during his post march win over Fed interview, said that he is bigger and stronger, hits the ball harder, and serves better than Ferret. All that is true, but I'm not so sure he needed to say it.

[don_budge]

The seeding miscue...

Well, who's your money on?
The Nadal/Djokovic semi could be the game of the century. If Djokovic gets it right and plays at the top of his game, he will win and there is nothing Nadal can do about it, unless uncle Tony has devised a game plan to combat Djokovic at his best.

It's a massive match. Both men know it. I can't think of a bigger match in the history of tennis other than Federer/Nadal at Wimbledon 2008 and Borg/McEnroe at Wimbledon 1980. The match is that BIG. And it's a semi.

Djokovic was unlucky last year at RG. He was wiping the floor with Nadal and that match was all over had it not been for that rain delay. I guess we cannot say for sure what might have happened...but it looked for all the world like Nadal was going to have his crown legitimately stolen from under nose.

I've got to agree with Stotty that Nadal/Djokovic will be a great match, but I think there are a couple of significant factors. This could be just as long and taxing as the six hour final they played in Australia a year and a half ago. But there is a serious question about Nadal's fitness.

With his special inspiration from the spirit of Jelena Jencic, I think his concentration and focus and commitment for this match will be as good or better than it has ever been before. Also have to note that I think Nadal is playing better tactically than he did before his injury hiatus, and he is playing a little more aggressively; but I still give the edge to Djokovic.

On the other hand, I don't think Tsonga can take out the Energizer Bunny - Ferrer. Tsonga has massively improved his shot tolerance and is making much wiser choices in how he plays the ball; I think it would have been better than Federer's even if Roger had had a good day (but maybe not a great day). And he certainly has greater power than Ferrer, but I don't think this forum gives Ferrer enough credit for how well he attacks whenever he gets any opportunity.

Which could be a little unfortunate for the final as it will be a disappointment after two great semis because either Nadal or Djokovic will routine Ferrer for these stakes. Tsonga would be a better match up against them and the French fans would go wild. But I don't think that will come to pass.

don

This match should have been the finals. It is due to a failure of the seeding process. #1 should play #4 in the semi's and #2 should play #3...in a perfect world. The discussion is first rate.

tennis_chiro...give us your definition of what you mean by "shot tolerance". I like that term and wish to know the full scope of your definition. Thanks.

[tennis_chiro]

Got to agree...almost

Well, who's your money on?

The Nadal/Djokovic semi could be the game of the century. If Djokovic gets it right and plays at the top of his game, he will win and there is nothing Nadal can do about it, unless uncle Tony has devised a game plan to combat Djokovic at his best.

It's a massive match. Both men know it. I can't think of a bigger match in the history of tennis other than Federer/Nadal at Wimbledon 2008 and Borg/McEnroe at Wimbledon 1980. The match is that BIG. And it's a semi.

This match will cement Nadal as utterly unconquered, save a blip with Soderling, or it will render him finally conquered by a man who has gradually improved and emerged to become a better player...on any surface.

Djokovic was unlucky last year at RG. He was wiping the floor with Nadal and that match was all over had it not been for that rain delay. I guess we cannot say for sure what might have happened...but it looked for all the world like Nadal was going to have his crown legitimately stolen from under nose.

I hope both players hit top form. I hope it's going to be game it looks on paper.

Can't wait....

I think Tsonga will beat Ferrer. He has the power game and the crowd behind him, and he's too daft to get nervous, which helps. If he can beat Federer, he can certainly beat Ferrer. Tsonga in the final will be interesting, and he has a bigger game than Ferrer to take to Djokovic or Nadal.

I've got to agree with Stotty that Nadal/Djokovic will be a great match, but I think there are a couple of significant factors. This could be just as long and taxing as the six hour final they played in Australia a year and a half ago. But there is a serious question about Nadal's fitness. He's shown he can handle a lot, but that may simply be too much. On the other hand, I think Djokovic has gotten even stronger physically than he was then and his game has improved. With his special inspiration from the spirit of Jelena Jencic, I think his concentration and focus and commitment for this match will be as good or better than it has ever been before. Also have to note that I think Nadal is playing better tactically than he did before his injury hiatus, and he is playing a little more aggressively; but I still give the edge to Djokovic. I think he will also be consumately committed because he knows how big a match it is.

On the other hand, I don't think Tsonga can take out the Energizer Bunny - Ferrer. Tsonga has massively improved his shot tolerance and is making much wiser choices in how he plays the ball; I think it would have been better than Federer's even if Roger had had a good day (but maybe not a great day). And he certainly has greater power than Ferrer, but I don't think this forum gives Ferrer enough credit for how well he attacks whenever he gets any opportunity. It will also be interesting to see if Tsonga can keep that serve up near and above 130 mph after David runs him around for almost 3 hours and the match is getting down to the "nitty gritty". It's so tough to put him away and tougher still on the red clay. Hot and dry but not too windy will help Tsonga. But if the conditions are a little damp or even windy, I think the odds swing heavily in favor of the Spaniard. I've chosen Ferrer in 4.

Which could be a little unfortunate for the final as it will be a disappointment after two great semis because either Nadal or Djokovic will routine Ferrer for these stakes. Tsonga would be a better match up against them and the French fans would go wild. But I don't think that will come to pass.

don

[stotty]

Match of the century

Well, who's your money on?

The Nadal/Djokovic semi could be the game of the century. If Djokovic gets it right and plays at the top of his game, he will win and there is nothing Nadal can do about it, unless uncle Tony has devised a game plan to combat Djokovic at his best.

It's a massive match. Both men know it. I can't think of a bigger match in the history of tennis other than Federer/Nadal at Wimbledon 2008 and Borg/McEnroe at Wimbledon 1980. The match is that BIG. And it's a semi.

This match will cement Nadal as utterly unconquered, save a blip with Soderling, or it will render him finally conquered by a man who has gradually improved and emerged to become a better player...on any surface.

Djokovic was unlucky last year at RG. He was wiping the floor with Nadal and that match was all over had it not been for that rain delay. I guess we cannot say for sure what might have happened...but it looked for all the world like Nadal was going to have his crown legitimately stolen from under nose.

I hope both players hit top form. I hope it's going to be game it looks on paper.

Can't wait....

I think Tsonga will beat Ferrer. He has the power game and the crowd behind him, and he's too daft to get nervous, which helps. If he can beat Federer, he can certainly beat Ferrer. Tsonga in the final will be interesting, and he has the bigger game to take to Djokovic or Nadal. I really like Tsonga...he seems an awfully nice man...I just hope he makes it.

[stotty]

Anyone else loving the 8 one-handers left on the men's side?

And then there were four...

And then there were two...tomorrow, perhaps none.

And then there were none!

Except for Tsonga's occasional one-handed effort.

[DougEng]

Anyone else loving the 8 one-handers left on the men's side?

Yes, noted that. Also 3 of 4 one-handed women made the Rd of 16. And the one-handers vs two-handers in the QFs.

[stotty]

or .5

Ok willing to give Tsonga 0.25...for occasional use.

[lobndropshot]

or .5