Taking risky shots in a game?

At the beginning of a point (serve or return) in a close game your chances are roughly even, so i would say that there's no reason to stray from your usual risk-taking approach - don't try to adjust in either side. As the point develops you should probably revisit the situation: if you managed to take an initiative and start attacking (so you chances have risen to  - say - 70%) my main concern would be not to give my opponent a gift and I would lean a bit on a "safe shot" side (this is still an offensive shot in this situation);on the other hand, if I find myself on the receiving end in this situation (an opponent is attacking and my chances dropped to 30%) then (assuming that your opponent plays calmly and you cannot reasonably expect that he will blow his chances) risky shots are a viable option as long as their success rate is higher then one in three.  

NextLevel wrote: BizLawProf wrote: Last tournament--my third--I played a a guy about 170 pts higher.  Fought back from something like 4 - 7 down in game five to 9 - 10 down.  He was obviously feeling pressure more than me.  But I made the mistake of thinking: "Oooh, rating points!" At match pt, down 9-10, I hit to his BH and ran him out of position, he hit a weak BH nice and floaty high cross table and I stepped up to rip a hard BH winner...and just missed long, maybe an inch.  I should've maybe run around the shot and hit FH, but my BH's better, so I felt confident.  I didn't choke, really had nothing to lose.  But I blew it, it was a set up shot for me, but I tried to hit too hard a shot, didn't do what got me there.   Which is why sometimes, it makes sense to forget the ratings and ask simple questions like "where am I winning most of my points and how can I recreate those situations?"  Playing to rating is dangerous, and assuming that one is playing above one's head because the game is tight with a higher rated player can be a mistake because you might be playing at your level, but just be in the game because you are taking advantage of a matchup that hasn't been read properly yet by yourself or your opponent.

Yep, you're right, can't pay too much attention to ratings.  I'm going to try and pay no attention at next tournament to ratings and just play opponents as they come.  I'll check ratings afterwards.

When I played competitive golf, I often saw people getting out of their comfort zones because they were playing really well, and they'd almost invariably blow a hole or three and get back to a score with which they were more familiar.  Perhaps they were legitimately getting better, but some part of them would be psychologically incapable of internalizing it and it might take a few rounds playing "over their heads" before they could come to terms with the fact and they'd finally finish the round off in the manner in which they were capable--and then truly do move up to a higher level of play.  I think it's why people, as they get better, tend to plateau. 

Maybe I'm actually even starting to play 170 pts higher that my USATT, but I wasn't yet mentally ready to acknowledge it and impulsively went for a shot that truly was above my head and insured I wouldn't take that leap.  John McEnroe discussed this phenomenon in his own game when he lost for a few years consistently to Jimmy Connors, Bjorn Borg and others who he'd probably passed up (but as yet wasn't psychologically ready for that step up to world #1), and when he finally did fully realize his skill level, perhaps at Wimbledon in '81, he blew by everyone and became #1 for four solid years.


Edited by BizLawProf - 10/25/2012 at 12:41pm

NextLevel wrote: The description "risky" only applies to what you don't practice.  If you nail it in practice consistently, then it isn't risky.

This is absolutely true.  The risk I am wondering about arises when you are pushing yourself to do something just a bit "extra" to close out a match.  For example, you say to yourself, ok, this time i need an extra-spinny serve because it's 9-9; something you don't always do, or at least, haven't been doing up to that time in a given match.  Maybe even more so if it's not your home court and/or the opponent is not familiar.  Personally I think that particular psychology is hard to resist, but is also going to lose more than it wins.

Baal wrote: NextLevel wrote: The description "risky" only applies to what you don't practice.  If you nail it in practice consistently, then it isn't risky.  This is absolutely true.  The risk I am wondering about arises when you are pushing yourself to do something just a bit "extra" to close out a match.  For example, you say to yourself, ok, this time i need an extra-spinny serve because it's 9-9; something you don't always do, or at least, haven't been doing up to that time in a given match.  Maybe even more so if it's not your home court and/or the opponent is not familiar.  Personally I think that particular psychology is hard to resist, but is also going to lose more than it wins.

Baal wrote: blahness wrote: it's always good to surprise your opponent when trying to end the set IMO.... I always do something completely different like fast down the line serves, fast underspin reverse serves or short no-spin (unless there are already clear point winning strategies that you can follow). Strategy is always king! Of course you run the risk of surprising yourself by not adequately executing the surprise -- maybe serving off the table, or long but not long enough.  Or a super spinny serve that comes back in a strange and unexpected way that you have not seen previously in the match.  Even harder to execute some of those if you are nervous too.

The decision is also based on how strong or how good is the push and how effective is the loop, and how comfortable is one executing the strokes.

 

I look at the percentages from both your shots and your opponent.

 

Generally speaking I choose loops over pushes.  I say 80% for loop is high enough for me to loop.  I will have a high percentage of winning that point.  Often time I see players try to hit the 50% power loops.  I advise against those.  There are some shots being placed in awkward positions that I would push or do a transitional loop, instead of risking for a power loop.  Sometimes a slow low loop is just as effective. 

 

I suppose when we lose those close games, that’s when we have to evaluate our selection of shots.  If we lose by a large margin, either it is a matter of different level of skills or we are taking too many risky shots.