Tennis for Now or Later?*

Tennis for Now or Later?*
(or Should You Play to Win Today or Play for the “Long Run”?)

*Thanks to Ron Miller of GottaPlayTennis.net for suggesting this great topic and these questions!

Tailoring your game for the NOW, or maybe for LATER
This topic is probably closely related to the topic of tennis and aging. The two (2) primary competing views or camps seem to be: Play to “win now” and get results today (or real soon) vs. play for the “long run” or the “long view”, meaning play with measured intensity and pick your shots to go all-out for.

Many young people, juniors, high schoolers, college level, and lower-level pros on the challenger circuit, etc. might be playing to win now. Understandable. They are going for their goals now, be it college scholarship, ranking points, money, sponsors, shot at pros, etc. Temptations for performance-enhancing substances are also probably great.

As for the mechanics of how they might play tennis: well, it’s probably “go-for-broke”. Hit with power and spin, maybe that Far Western Grip or even that crazy Hawaiian Grip and blast away, shoulders, elbows, knees, joints etc. are a concern only for another day far into the future…Winning (and now) becomes the only issue…Thus, the biggest weakness of this camp might be the failure to properly recognize and heed the human body’s limitations over time…

Older players, say those in their 40s, 50s, and older, might not have that option or luxury. If they want to continue to enjoy the game and enjoy it for more years, they know they will need to pace themselves, go for shorter rallies, perhaps play on softer surfaces to help protect joints and ligaments, and even ease off their intensity at times. etc. Aging forces maturity in many players in how they play…However, the biggest limitation of this camp might be that some less-intense older players may short-change themselves about the value of competition – it’s challenges and lessons…

•Can you nurse a minor injury but still develop your game?
Possibly. It may depend on the type of injury, and what body parts the injury might implicate. For example, in my case, I had a finger injury to my pinkie on racket hand last year. I am still taking hand therapy, and it’s better. But in the interim, I still worked on other things such as footwork drills and shadow tennis.

•Is there a time to stop on the court, listen to your body, and make healing your primary concern?
Probably so. In my mind, good health and longevity over-ride winning a point, game or set. If your body is telling you something is wrong and especially if a doctor, nurse or medical professional is advising you, your game-playing must be secondary to healing and recovery. That does not mean you still cannot learn, improve and advance your game while mending- today, we have videos, blogs, books, discussion forums, podcasts and even Internet liveshows to help learn from while healing…

•What changes can you, or should you, consider making to add longevity on the court?
Tennis Magazine (October 2009) issue was dedicated to the topic of tennis and aging. Many people here probably saw it. Johnny Mac was on the cover smiling with the caption “Still Going Strong at 50″. Can one’s tennis get better with age? Can one make changes to add court longevity to their tennis game (no matter their age)?

The answer is probably a strong “yes”. Age usually means more experience, more time to gather knowledge about good technique, proper strategy, etc. Some observers say that many repetitive tennis injuries are simply the result of repeated poor technique in strokes. Correcting technique problems can, by itself, prolong tennis play over the years.

Warm ups, stretches and balance exercises probably become more important for older players, especially since joints, knees, shoulders and elbows are often a source of trouble. Injury prevention exercises, including building-up core strength with for example medicine ball exercises, likely become more important. Core strengthening enables better use of the larger body parts, and lesser use of the smaller body parts, thus also prolonging one’s tennis-playing years.

Click Here: Tennis Magazine article on “Rules for Keeping Fit as You Age”

Possible on-court changes to one’s tennis game to add longevity suggested in the article (regardless of age but especially if age is a concern): “shrink the court” by learning to play more in no-man’s land (though this is contrary to conventional teaching), lobs, slices, change-ups in speed and spin, etc.

•Should your physical age affect your shot selection or strategy?
Quite possibly. The older a player gets, we know people lose endurance, reaction time, muscle elasticity and recovery. He or she should be mindful of their limits, and thus try to close a point more quickly, perhaps look to volley more rather than get into long baseline rallies, and lob more.

•How much of a role does the mind play in your tennis age?
There is probably a direct relation between one’s mind and one’s “tennis age”. A mind-set of “go-for-broke” and blast away at the ball, without much regard for shot selection is many times a younger player’s mind-set. Older players tend perhaps to use shot selection strategy more, use slice and dice more, vary pace and spin more, value constructing a point to conclusion.

There are exceptions of course. And no “value judgment” is being made here. Power is the way of tennis now, and older players probably need to handle and generate some power at least some of the time to even hit with more powerful young hitters.

Is the mind and tennis related? Some believe that tennis can sometimes be similar to a game of chess and the art of thinking 2 or 3 moves ahead, and that learning chess pays off to improve one’s tennis game…

Click Here: Chicago Tribune article on Tennis and Chess

•Should the pro game come with the disclaimer, “don’t try this at home.”
Probably. Naturally, if we could all just “copy” the pros, the pros wouldn’t be pros. However, we can probably observe and learn from the “big things” that pros might do, namely the fundamentals of good tennis – sound footwork, racket preparation, watching the ball, etc. – and benefit from watching that.

Timeless Tennis : A Blog
www.timelesstennis.net

From Technique to Strategy

In the US, there is a rating system called the NTRP that classifies players between 1.0—a total beginner—to 7.0—a world class player. Most players fall between 2.5 and 3.5. 2.5 is someone that can get a few balls over the net, but likely lacks spin, consistency, placement, and knowledge of strategy. A 3.5 player is technically more solid, can rally and spin, has some pace, but doesn’t look as polished or as powerful as 4.0 or 4.5.   It’s hard to put a single number on a player since they may have on stroke that seems much stronger than their rating and another that might seem a lot weaker, and in the end, the NTRP rating measures wins and losses, not quality of strokes.

I’m not here to debate the merits or pitfalls of the NTRP system.  I just need an easy way to talk about a player’s skill.

Tennis is a challenging game. If you want to improve your rating especially if your rating is low (around 2.5), you need to have solid technique.  Sure, there are athletes with bad technique that nonetheless win matches, but if you’re looking to get better in the long haul, improving your technique is key.

Another way to get better is to learn tennis strategy. Strategy requires analyzing what you can do and what your opponent can do and developing a plan that plays to your strengths and to your opponent’s weaknesses. Surprisingly, many recreational players don’t think about strategy much.  They believe winning comes from within, and if they play well, it doesn’t matter what their opponent is doing.

Learning Tennis, Old School

If improving your technique and learning about strategy are two ways to get better, how do you learn more about both?

A few years ago, the only choices for learning about tennis were books on the one hand and expensive tennis lessons on the other.

Since lessons are out of most people’s budgets, books are a popular resource.  Unfortunately, many books, even fairly recent books, cover tennis instruction as if the game has not changed since 1970s.  Such books would advocated Eastern forehand grip and linear weight transfer, seemingly oblivious to the changes that revolutionized tennis in the 1980s then once again in the 1990s.

Even if books weren’t out of date with modern techniques, they have fundamental limitations.  A good tennis pro can spot problems, devise a plan to develop technique and consistency, provide encouragement and provide a real-life visual example which students can imitate.  When you use a book, you are your own coach.  A book can’t provide a years of teaching experience.  It’s difficult to spot problems when you don’t know what to look for, and it’s hard to look at yourself without a camcorder.

A book explains in words.  At best, you might see a stroke in a handful of photos.  From that, you’re expected to piece together how to his a complex stroke.  And that’s tough to do.  Books simply lack the dynamism of a real person.

Books have other problems.  Suppose you know the secrets of modern tennis.  Can you even get a book published? Some publisher would have to think you’re a tennis expert; they won’t publish just anyone.  It’s popular to pick ex-pros to write a book, but how much experience do they have teaching?  Are they keeping up with the latest techniques?  With a lot of money in the bank, there’s not an incentive to learn all there is to give an up-to-date advanced book.  Magazines on tennis have often done a better job describing the modern game.

And how often does a book get updated?  Lately, Spanish training techniques that emphasize movement have become popular, but are we likely to see any books on this soon?  Tennis Channel pounced on the idea featuring Emilio Sanchez teaching these novel techniques, but where are the books?

Beyond Books

Fortunately, tennis instruction recently underwent a revolution.  It was part of a revolution that extended far beyond tennis.

The Web.

All of a sudden, if you had tennis knowledge and good video editing skills, you could create and post videos that covered modern tennis as it’s being taught, stuff that’s barely seen in tennis books in the local Barnes and Noble.

The Web has transformed the way people get all sorts of stuff.  The idea was simple.  Let anyone who had access to an ISP or could host their own web pages do it.  This democratic way of letting everyone publish could have lead to chaos, but it didn’t.

The success of the Web required three ingredients.  The first was a visual way to view the web: namely, the web browser.  Second, the Web needed content.  If a book required luck to get published, web pages could by authored by anyone with a computer and a little knowledge of HTML.  Third, users needed a way to find stuff they cared about: they needed the search engine.

The rudiments of all three pieces were available by 1995. Content on the Web grew exponentially afterwards.  But tennis instruction was still mired because web pages didn’t offer much beyond books.  They were still photos and words.  Tennis is a visual sport. People want to see how to hit the ball.  They wanted video.  They wanted slow motion analysis. Web pages in the mid 90s weren’t up to the task.

A Revolution in Tennis Instruction

Tennis instruction didn’t fully take off until a second revolution occurred.

Cheap ubiquitous video.

We’re talking about YouTube and its imitators like Vimeo.

Video had been around since the dawn of the browser, but it wasn’t available freely or easily to the masses.  Suppose you took a video.  How would you upload it?  How much did it cost?  It was challenging for the average person to post video.

That changed with YouTube.  YouTube brought easy video uploading to the masses and it forever changed how people provide videos to one another.

It’s hard to overrstate how important it was for YouTube to let people upload videos for free.  Had they even charged $1 for each upload, it would have greatly discouraged many people and there would only be a tiny fraction of the videos available now.  The public reacted by uploading millions of videos covering topics from the educational to the inane to the bizarre.

Tennis instruction didn’t make it to video sites right away.  Why not?  Remember November 2005?  That was when YouTube had its first posted video.  And because many homes lacked high-speed Internet and because high quality videos required tons of bandwidth, YouTube made a decision to allow only low-res video.

It goes without saying that low-res video sucks.  It’s particularly bad for tennis.  Some intrepid posters put videos of classic matches from the 1980s.  This was awful on two fronts.  The original videos were poor quality and YouTube made it worse because they wanted to scrimp on bandwidth.  The poor quality made it hard to see either player or ball making the experience like watching a match though a fogged up windshield.  Poor quality video wasn’t good for tennis instruction either.

Fortunately, YouTube’s competitors realized an opportunity.  If YouTube failed to deliver higher quality videos, then they would pick up the slack.  Companies like Vimeo filled a niche by hosting higher quality videos.  Pretty soon, YouTube had to allow high quality, often HD quality, video to compete.

Once high quality video was available, great tennis instructional content was quick to follow.  If you had the equipment and the know-how, you could create tennis videos that were worth watching.

Will Hamilton and Adam Sieminski seized this opportunity when they debuted their site, Fuzzy Yellow Balls, around July 2007.  They provided high quality tennis instruction with great production values for free.  Not only was the tennis instruction visual, it also taught modern tennis, the kind you see on TV.  Other tennis sites, many pay sites, sprouted up, trying to offer the “secrets” of tennis that books weren’t covering.  These sites feel the pressure to keep updating their content and making it relevant.

What’s Missing?

I’ve got a question for you.  Have you ever taken a tennis lesson?  You might think instruction videos would mimic a tennis lesson.  But they don’t.  Most lessons are about drill work.  You are given some basic instruction, then plenty of drills.  Unless you’re a beginner, you don’t spend much time on technique in a lesson.

By contrast, most tennis videos are about technique.  They teach you how you to hit a volley, a serve, a kick serve, a windshield wiper forehand.

Why the big difference between tennis instructional videos and tennis lessons?

A tennis lesson is a customized instruction tailored to you.  Although technique videos seem nice and short,  it requires lots of drill work to get technique down.  A lot.

On the other hand, a tennis video has to work for everyone. It’s far easier to demonstrate correct technique than produce videos covering every potential error.  By its very nature, a tennis video can’t be about your specific problems (without being prohibitively expensive, that is).  And unlike a lesson, a video is something you can go back to again and again, so it doesn’t matter that learning technique, for many people, is slow and take many lessons to master.

Many tennis players are uninterested in changing their technique.  But, even if few people want to change, tennis videos reach the masses.  Only a handful need to watch and learn for the video to be successful.  When the world can be your audience, even a small percentage of interested people is a large number of viewers.

Recently, videos on strategy have begun appearing.  Strategy is a difficult topic.  Suppose you’re told that an effective way to return serve is to chip and charge, that is, to slice your return down the line, come to net, and volley for a winning shot.  Sounds great, right?  But what if you don’t know how to hit the slice backhand, or your slice backhand isn’t accurate enough to hit down the line, or your volley sucks?

Strategy videos tell you how to play in a certain situation, but they often gloss over whether you have the strokes to pull it off.  And this observation is critical.  Indeed, it’s the thesis of this article.

Strategy is only as good as the strokes you have to back it up.

Even if the strategy is dirt simple, e.g., hit to the guy’s backhand, it can be difficult to execute in practice.  For example, your opponent notices you are attacking his backhand.  He responds by cheating to his left so he can hit more forehands.  He’s just made it harder for you to hit to his backhand.  How good’s your backhand?  Can you aim that precisely?

Should you even worry about strategy?  Maybe you’re a 2.5 player.  At that level, hitting a few balls without missing is a success.  Should a 2.5 player focus on improving their technique and consistency and give strategy the old heave-ho? Almost surely.  It’s not surprising that most strategies assume you have good ball control and good consistency, stuff a 2.5 player isn’t ready for.

The Missing Link

Even if you’re ready to learn about strategy, there’s something missing.  On the one hand, there’s plenty of videos on technique.  Technique videos describe how to hit the ball, how to turn the shoulders, how to rotate the core, when to swing, how to follow-through.

On the other hand, there is strategy.  A strategy video might explain how to attack the backhand, to chip and charge, to serve and volley.

But there’s something missing.  Technique and strategy videos are not enough.

What about videos that show you where to hit the ball?

Surprisingly simple, right?  Most technique videos don’t address this topic.  They tell you how to set up, how to swing, when to strike the ball, and how to follow through.  It’s all about you!  What about the ball?  Somehow, magic must happen because if you have great technique, the ball will surely go where it’s supposed to.  Few videos bother tracking the ball after it’s been hit.  They don’t talk about how hit a ball down the line vs. hitting it crosscourt.

The missing link between technique and strategy is, simply put, ball placement!

Let’s look at the problem of ball placement.  Part of placing the ball lies in good technique, but you still need to hit the ball somewhere.

Perhaps the most common way to teach ball placement is to have students aim at targets on the court.  You can spend a few dollars and buy small orange cones at a sports store or a tennis specialty shop, place it on the court, and use that to aim to.  If you’re cheap,  make a miniature pyramid using three balls to form a triangular base, and one ball sitting on top to form a pyramid and use that as a target.

As you practice your shots, try to hit the target, but do so with your natural stroke.  Over time, you’ll build consistency and accuracy.

Although target practice is an excellent way to improve ball placement, you should be a fairly advanced player, say, at 3.0 player or above.  If you’re still struggling with the basics, such as hitting forehands and backhands, make the target much bigger.

The problem with aiming at small targets for a beginner is its effect on the hitter.  When you’re worried about hitting a target, you tighten up.  If you’re going to get better, you need a relaxed swing.  Otherwise, you can’t hit both accurately and powerfully.

If you’re a beginner, make bigger targets.  Instead of hitting a cone, try to control the ball into the ad court or into the deuce court.  Or use several cones to make a large rectangular region to hit into.  Bigger targets allow beginners to hit freely and with margin for error, yet still hone ball control.  As you get accurate, make those targets progressively smaller.

Hitting Targets

But, let’s assume you’re good enough to aim for cones, that you’re 3.0 or above.

We’re going to look at 7 spots on the courts where you should aim.  Seven seems like a lot, but 5 spots are more critical while the other 2 are for specialty shots.

Where are the 5 spots?  Let’s assume we’re talking singles.  Look at the baseline on your opponent’s court.  There’s the left corner (where the sideline meets the baseline).  There’s the center mark.  There’s the right corner.  Those are 3 of the 5 spots.

The other 2 spots are half way between the corner and the center mark.

Let’s label these spots by giving them numbers.  1 is the left corner.  3 is the center mark.  5 is the right corner.  2 is halfway between 1 and 3.  4 is halfway between 3 and 5.

It doesn’t make sense to hit directly to the baseline, so move the 5 spots up 5 feet closer to the net.   And you shouldn’t aim for the sidelines (1 and 5 are now on the sidelines), so move Spots 1 and 5 several feet (say, 3-4 feet) to the center mark.  Those are the 5 spots you’ll aim for.

Let’s also number the spots on your baseline, 1-5.  1 is the left corner on your side of the court, 3 on the center mark, 5 is the right corner.  If your opponent was standing at Spot 1 on his side of the court and you were on Spot 1 on your side of the court, both of you would be on the left sideline (or close to it).

Just to make it easier to distinguish the two sides, let’s call the 5 spots on your side of the court A1, A2, A3, A4, and A5.  The 5 spots on the other side are B1, B2, B3, B4, and B5.

Suppose you’re standing at A4.  This means you’re in the deuce court, half way between the center mark and the right sideline.  If you aim your forehand to B1 or B2, that’s a crosscourt shot.  Hitting to B3 is up the middle.  Hitting at B4 doesn’t exactly have a name.  Hitting to B5 is hitting up the line.

If you’re standing at A2 and hitting a forehand, then hitting to B1 is an inside-in shot, as is hitting to B2.  Hitting to B4 or preferably B5 is hitting the ball inside-out.

Let’s label a few other spots.  AS1, AS2, AS3, AS4, AS5 are the same five spots on your side, but at the service line (that’s what the “S” stands for–service line).  BS1, BS2, BS3, BS4, and BS5 are the analogous spots on your opponent’s court.  We only care about two spots: BS1 and BS5.

BS1 is where the left sideline meets the service line (or a few feet to the center).  BS5 is where the right sideline meets the service line (or a few feet to the center).

If you’re at A4 hitting a forehand to BS1, that’s an extreme forehand angle.  Nadal often hits a forehand from A2 to BS5, a sharply angled inside-out shot (if he were a righty).   For now, don’t worry about BS1 and BS5. Add it to your repertoire as you get better.

If you’re at A4, hitting a crosscourt forehand means hitting to B1 or B2 (it’s really more general than that, and is anywhere in your opponent’s deuce court).  It’s funny, but many pros tell you to hit crosscourt.  Crosscourt is huge.  So let’s distinguish between B1 and B2.  A shot from A4 to B1 is a wide-angled crosscourt forehand.  A shot from A4 to B2 as a shallow-angled forehand.  A shot from A4 to BS1 is an extreme-angled forehand, which we won’t discuss much since it’s an advanced shot.

What’s the difference between hitting to B1 vs B2? In tennis, you can trade angle for pace. The more angle you have, the less pace you need for it to be effective. If you aim to B1, you create a bigger angle, which means your opponent has to run more. Furthermore, there’s more court to hit if you aim for B1 since it’s a bigger diagonal  If you want to learn a crosscourt shot first, learn to hit to B1.

Male pros often hit to B2 (in a crosscourt exchange) from A4. Why would they hit with such a shallow angle? Why not hit a sharp angle to B1 or even sharper to BS1? B2 is a neutral rally shot. At the pro level, not every shot a player hits is a winner. Some shots are meant to keep one more ball in play and wait for the error.

At the pro level, hitting to B 1 often escalates the play from neutral to offensive. With that angle, a pro might respond with a down-the-line shot, or a sharp crosscourt.  Pros will bide their time before they start taking more aggressive shots so they can find the shot they want.  On the other hand, a recreational player is better off aiming to B1 because they can take advantage of the angle.  If you hit to B2, then you have a safer shot, but a good opponent can hit that shot hard and start pressuring you.

Let’s see how strategy combines with ball placement.  A common but effective strategy is to hit to your opponent’s backhand.  If you’ve been practicing your backhand, then you’ll stand at A3 (center mark), recognize the backhand, move to A2 (half way in the ad court) and practice shots to B4 and B5.  As you get better at both, then you’ll have more confidence hitting them in game situations.

If your opponent starts to cheat to his left and stand at B4 so he can hit more forehands, you can aim the ball at B5, or if you’ve been practicing, hit to BS5.  By having a solid handle on hitting to these spots, you can now apply the “hit to the backhand strategy”.  If you don’t have good ball placement, then this strategy is harder to implement.

How the Pros do It

Let’s conclude by seeing how a pro like Roger Federer combines ball placement with strategy.

Roger Federer has a superb one-handed backhand, but his forehand is a much bigger weapon.  Players have been known to attack Federer’s backhand, so Roger counters this by his tremendous agility to play as many shots to his forehand as possible.  This means, he cheats to A2 leaving a great deal of court open to his right.

Most players who move to A2 are looking to hit to B5 or to BS5, that is, to hit an inside-out forehand.  A pro may realize this, and start to move to his left when Roger moves to his left, anticipating the inside out shot.

Roger has therefore developed two complementary shots.  Not only can he hit the inside out shot (he usually aims to B5 or halfway between B5 and BS5), but he can hit the inside-in shot, which is hitting from A2 to B1 or even to B2.  When Roger moves left, his opponent has to deal with a shot to B5 or B1 and Roger hits this shot very hard, so they can’t easily cheat to their left because Roger can hit inside-in too.

Although Federer is great at both shots, players have learned to hit to his backhand, by aiming for a sharper angle, and to hit the shot to A5 which Roger has left wide open.  As Roger has gotten older, he has decided it’s time to beef up his backhand.  Like the forehand, Roger needs two good shots off his backhand.  If he stands at A2, he needs the standard crosscourt to B5, but he also has to hit B1 well too.  In his down years, 2008 and 2009, Roger relied more on the crosscourt backhand.  Even his down-the-line backhand was a neutral hard shot.  He didn’t hit many winners off his backhand.

Over the 2009 winter break, Roger added more consistency and pace to his crosscourt backhand, but he also regained confidence hitting down the line.   While Roger is still happy running around his backhand, he’s decided it’s time to have a more powerful backhand so he doesn’t give up space on his forehand.  It’s noteworthy that Roger hit as many backhand winners as Andy Murray in the final.

In the Australian Open final, Murray decided to test the Federer backhand with his own to try to break it down. Federer could have tried moving the shot with his forehand, but his backhand had improved enough that he no longer has to run around his backhand all the time. Federer also used his slice quite a bit, perhaps the best slice in all of men’s tennis.  Roger develops his shots in groups so he can handle his opponent’s responses.

Federer’s strategy was built from the strokes he had. While Federer’s backhand is world-class, it was still attackable, so he opted to build a strategy that took advantage of his superior forehand. As Federer worked to improve his backhand, he could employ a new strategy that was not viable before.

Clearly, Federer’s strategy also depends on his opponents. If Roger Federer were playing a college level player, he could serve and volley all the time, or hit slice shots all the time. Strategies that would get him in huge trouble in the pros would be more than adequate against players with far less ability. This doesn’t mean you should do silly stuff with lower ranked players, but that strategy’s effectiveness depends on your opponent’s skill level.

Placement and consistency bridge the gap between technique and strategy. As you can place the ball better and more consistently (preferably without loss of power), you can apply more sophisticated strategies.

A 2.5 player should focus on improving technique. They should work on placing the ball to Spots B1, B3, B5 reliably. 2.5 players should keep strategy simple. Keep the ball in play crosscourt until the other player misses.

As you improve to 3.0 and 3.5, you can start using more strategy,

To conclude, I believe videos that instruct you how to control the shots to different parts of the court, whether it be serve or groundstrokes or volleys, will bridge the gap that lets you connect technique to strategy.

The first beautiful game…

Many people ask about the indoor sport of real tennis, also called court tennis, which is closely-related to today’s modern game of tennis, and often considered it’s forerunner.

Two hundred years before soccer was dubbed “the beautiful game”, real tennis or court tennis was called “the first beautiful game”…It went by different names in different countries – “royal tennis” in Australia, “jeu de paume” in France, and “court tennis” in the United States.

The scoring rules are very similar to modern tennis, with matches usually won at best of three sets. The ball is the old-style cork-based variety but an optic yellow color now, and slightly heavier and less bouncier than a standard tennis ball. The rackets are made of wood, tightly strung and bent slightly to make it easier to hit corners indoors and “slice” the ball.

There are about 42 courts worldwide that offer real tennis play. The oldest real tennis court in the world opened in 1539 and is located in England – Falkland Palace (Fife). One of the oldest real tennis courts in the United States opened in 1899 in Pennsylvania at the Racquet Club of Philadelphia.

Shakespeare first mentioned real tennis in his writings in Henry V, Act I, Scene II. King Henry responds to a gift of real tennis balls from the French Prince that he will use them to play a game that defeats France’s royalty.

Later, the poet William Lathum compared life to a tennis court in “Sick Verse”, the Penquin Book:

The world I sample to a Tennis-court,
Where fate and fortune daily meet to play,
…
All manner chance are Rackets, wherewithall
They bandie men, from wall to wall;
Some over Lyne, to honour and great place,
Some under Lyne, to infame and disgrace;
…

For anyone who wants to read more about the origins and stories of real tennis, please refer to a very nice book by a noted amateur player-author called: The First Beautiful Game: Stories of Obsession in Real Tennis, Roman Krznaric, Oxford: Ronaldson Pub. (2006).

Meantime, let’s get back to that court next chance we get, and practice that “first beautiful game”!

Timeless Tennis: A Blog
www.timelesstennis.net

A Brief History of Tennis*

(*or the Ten Minute Tennis Time Capsule)

*Tennis in Ancient History – Some historians trace the origins of tennis before the year 1000 to the Egyptian town of Tinnis on the river Nile, and the origin of the word “racquet” to the Arabic word for palm – rahat. Stronger historical evidence tracks tennis to the crude handball game of 11th and 12th century French monks which later became known as jeu de paume or “game of the hand”.

*Tennis is Patented in 1874: Major Walter Wingfield issued a British patent for the game of tennis. The game spread in a matter of weeks through Britain, Ireland and other English-speaking countries. Wimbledon is launched in 1877. Dr. James White is credited with bringing tennis to the USA, and became known as the “Father of American Lawn Tennis”.

*The 1880s Through Early 1900s: The Renshaw Brothers (William and Ernest) from Britain dominate Wimbledon singles and doubles in 1880s. Richard Sears wins the first U.S. Open Championship in 1881. The Doughtery Brothers (Reggie and Laurie) also from Britain dominate tennis in the early 1900s.

*The Roaring 1920s – The Golden Age of Sport and The Tilden Era. “Big Bill” Tilden of Philadelphia dominates the sport, and is the first American to win Wimbledon, then goes on to play essentially undefeated from 1920 to 1926. Tilden helps popularize lawn tennis in America with books such as the classic The Art of Lawn Tennis, and later dominates the thinking of the sport with the book many consider his masterpiece Match Play and the Spin of the Ball. Tilden’s influence on the sport is unmatched, and he is voted by ATP Sportwriters as greatest player of half-century later in 1950. Other top stars of the day – Suzanne Lenglen and French Four Musketeers (Lacoste, Borotra, Cochet & Brugnon).

*The 1930s and 40s – The War Years. The Tilden Era makes way for the Budge Era – Don Budge invents the “Grand Slam” – winning all 4 majors – with one of the best backhands in history. Other top stars of the day were Ellsworth Vines (California USA), Bobby Riggs (also California) and Fred Perry (Britain). The game of tennis evolves into largely a baseline game, emphasizing ball control. WWII interrupts tennis growth.

*The 1950s Jack Kramer-Pancho Gonzales Era. The game sees the start of a professional player circuit. Pancho Gonzales rises to No. 1 in the world for a record-setting 8 years in the 1950s, and is generally considered the game’s greatest player. Maureen Connelly wins the Grand Slam on women’s side. The game evolves into the serve-and-volley enterprise. The top players develop a serve-and-volley as a quick and effective means to win points, games and matches on the grass courts which tennis was played on. Dr. James Van Alen opens the International Tennis Hall of Fame in 1954 in Newport, R.I. USA as a “shrine to the ideals of the game.”

*The 1960s: The Aussies Rule. “Rocket” Rod Laver, Ken Rosewall, Frank Sedgman, Lew Hoad, and Roy Emerson dominate on the men’s side, essentially carrying forward the serve-and-volley tradition. And for women, Margaret Smith Court dominates. Laver wins all four majors in 2 years, 1962 & 1969, thus becoming first man (and only man) to win 2 Calendar Grand Slams. Laver is widely regarded as the game’s greatest player, inheriting that mythic mantle from earlier champions Bill Tilden and then Pancho Gonzales.

*The Open Era: 1968 and Early 1970s - Tennis allows both professionals and amatuers to compete together in the Grand Slams, and thus the “Open” Era is born. Laver, Arthur Ashe and Billie Jean King dominate. Margaret Smith Court wins the Grand Slam. John Newcomb and Stan Smith for the Aussies continue the Land-Down-Under’s winning tradition. In 1973, Billie Jean King beats Bobby Riggs in the “Battle of the Sexes”.

*The 1970s: The Connors-Evert Era. Tennis undergoes revolutionary changes: The tiebreak is introduced at the U.S. Open in 1970, the Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP) is born and computer rankings are started. In perhaps the biggest single change in tennis in decades, wood rackets make way for metal rackets (example the Wilson T-2000), then graphite and composite rackets (example Arthur Ashe Head). Two new superstars emerge, defining the sport for the decade: the fiery Jimmy Connors and the stoic Chris Evert, employing a two-fisted backhand and flat-ball baseline game. The other great champion of the era is: Bjorn Borg who established a record, in a relatively short career, as one of the all-time greats. More than that, Borg became the first “rock-star” and mega-bucks tennis player.

On the women’s side, Czech Martina Navratilova, the all-time serve and volleyer emerged. Near the end of the 70s, New Yorker John McEnroe, also one of the all-time top volleyers begins to rise. Other highlights: Arthur Ashe wins Wimbledon in 1975. Tracy Austin wins the U.S. Open twice, first in 1979 and later in 1981. Tennis takes on a soap opera feel, with on-court (and off-court) characters such as “Nasty” Illie Nastase, “He-Man” Guillermo Vilas, “Party Animal” Vitas Gerulaitis. Some 30 million people, an all-time record, are reportedly playing tennis in the USA, then a nation of some 250 million.

*The 1980s: Tennis Evolves – The Bjorn Borg vs. John McEnroe battles became part of tennis lore, together with the great battles between Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova. For the women, Navratilova went on to win 18 Grand Slam singles titles through the 80s. On the men’s side, the Wimbledon Final in 1980 in which Borg defeated McEnroe in a 5 set thriller is considered one of the best ever. After Borg left tennis in 1983, new faces began to be seen: Swedes Stefan Edberg (serve and volleyer) and Mats Wilander (baseline wizard), and later German Boris Becker (another serve and volley artist).

Czech Ivan Lendl developed a power baseline game, and became the Number One in the world in the mid to late 80s. Lendl is widely considered to be the forerunner of modern “power tennis”. Meanwhile, on a parallel track, McEnroe, Edberg and Becker moved tennis into the serve-and-volley style. McEnroe’s serve-and-volley skills, in particular, helped establish him, by most critics, as the top doubles player of all-time. Meanwhile, in a trend that started in the 70s, more court surfaces transitioned over to hard courts, as 3 of the 4 Grand Slams began being played on one form or other of hard courts.

*The 1990s: The Sampras Decade - The 1990s produced the greatest player of his generation “Pistol” Pete Sampras and the ultimate serve-and-volley game. He dominated the decade amassing 14 Grand Slam singles titles and No. 1 rank for 6 straight years, with a fiercely determined but unassuming temperament. Sampras was widely thought to be the greatest player of all-time. His rivalry with Two-Handed Backhand Baseliner Andre Agassi, career Grand Slam winner, made for some of the great matches of the decade. Steffi Graf on the women’s side establishes herself as one of the all-time greats, with 22 Grand Slam singles titles, and both a Calendar and Golden Slam. Other notables: Jim Courier and Monica Seles.

*The 21st Century – The 2000s: The Federer/Nadal/Williams Era. The new century saw the emergence of yet more dominant players and the development simultaneously of the All-Court Game and the Power & Spin Baseline Game. Many fans, critics and commentators say that Swiss great Roger Federer, the human whip in perpetual “kinetic-chain” motion with his all-time 16 Grand Slam singles title record, may be the finest player that the sport has ever produced. His elegant all-court game with all strengths and no weaknesses may have taken the sport to a new level.

In contrast, the Spanish swashbuckler Rafael Nadal and his power topspin baseline game with 6 Grand Slam titles, Olympic Gold and Davis Cup for Spain, firmly places this play style on the front burner also. His game on clay is unsurpasssed, earning him the title “King of Clay”. The Nadal vs. Federer rivalry produced what many consider the greatest match of all-time in the 2008 Wimbledon Finals, a 5 set masterpiece won by Nadal in the evening hour darkness.

On the women’s side, the sister pair of Serena and Venus Williams has established a new standard for the power baseline game in women’s tennis. Serena has amassed 12 Grand Slam singles titles, and Venus 7 Grand Slam singles titles. Other notables: Justin Henin, with 7 Grand Slam singles titles and a magnificent all-court game and one-handed backhand, Andy Roddick, 2003 U.S. Open Champ with the fastest recorded serve, and rising stars Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray. The 2000s also saw technology advance further in tennis, with developments such as Hawkeye & Shot-Spot computer systems for player challenges, more retractable roofs such as that at Wimbledon and new powerful string technology.

By the 21st century, tennis had grown into a global sport, second only to soccer in popularity, with top players coming from around the world. The game’s top stars win millions in tournament prize money, enjoy multi-million dollar endorsement contracts and bask in world-wide celebrity status.

Why is study of the past relevant? Does the past teach us anything? An argument can be made that the past defines where we came from and how we got here. And even more important, the past can sometimes be a prelude to the future…

I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know no way of judging the future but by the past. Patrick Henry, March 1775

Timeless Tennis: A Blog
www.timelesstennis.net