This was good but could've been better if M had included more strategic commentary - like why someone missed a volley... maybe b/c they were out of position and shading line when they should've been in the hot seat, things like that, etc. This match would be great for a post-mortem replay with that kind of tactical insight for club players to learn from.
Great feedback! I definitely agree, and not an excuse but I was a bit under the weather plus it was my first time commentating a match, on not much sleep. But I would love to do it again and provide more strategery for sure :) I did throw some strategy in but could have done more. Thanks!! :)
It's 5.0 level! I didn't look up Richmond's players to confirm their ratings but I assume so as it was the 5.0 line. First set looked like a marked difference but second set was a great fight! I have played mixed many times with the 5.0 Montgomery ladies and it's always a tough scrap!
5.0 is pretty high rating. Often clubs have problems fielding much of a team at the 5.0 level. Agreed that the one side was much better than the other side. In my experience the two women that won, (Montgomery) were definitely 5.0. Aggressive volleys, decent serves, good ground strokes. The Richmond team was weaker all across. Especially the woman in the black tights, too often just looked like she was rallying rather than trying to put the ball away. Her volley's were often directly back to her opponent when she had every opportunity to put it away. Note that the opponents tended to pick on her. I'd say she was a decent 4.5, but whatever. Maybe she was playing up. Good to see them play better in the other set.
@@KentWood-OptimizeUTennis Thank you for your comment. I cannot speak for the Richmond team, but the two Mid-Atlantic ladies were on a Super Tri (5.0/4.5/4.0) team that got 2nd place at Nationals this past year in San Diego. They played on the 5.0 slot. And one of the players (Kate) went 5-1 and beat every team they faced (one team they lost to then beat in the finals). I personally watched the Mid-Atlantic team at Nationals and it was excellent tennis, most if not all of the 5.0 players played college. All I can say is sometimes matches on video can look less impressive than in person. Thanks for watching!
@@Tennisfiles i truly appreciate that perspective, but movement to me is the key...people look at ball speed and such..i look at the caliber of hip/shoulder proper movement and rotation, court positioning, good mechanics on natural body mechanics vs inefficient/award/mistake prone mechaincs....to determine what level someone is...i'm probably one of the few people on the internet capable of critiqueing all of that...and i see no 5.0 execution...espeaically a couple of the ladies were so bad at movement/execution, etc that I would call them a 3.5 with lots of experience and smarts and racquet control so they get away with bunting it back...anyhow...i coach 4.5 and 5.0 female players and some deserve their rating and some truly do not. Cheers
Very few women have a good serve, regardless of level, from amateur to pro. I wonder why that is. Certainly some have very good serve, like Serena Williams, Venus, Henin, Rybakina, etc... so it's not because they are women. It has to be because of the coaching in junior.
Great question! Perhaps more males perform the throwing motion and therefore are better at throwing, as the serve has many elements of throwing in it. And they are slightly better at using the kinetic chain, as some coaches have observed in serve techniques on WTA vs ATP tour (particularly timing the racquet drop and the pushing up of the legs iirc).
Maybe you had to announce with a soft voice because of proximity to the players, but your voice is already soft and it lacks energy/authority, give it an uptick...remember, this is video, viewers can see the action, so no need to repeat where shots are going, no new info there...needs more commentary on the tactics/strategy/alternatives on certain plays, more insight into the strengths/weaknesses of the players and how to exploit...most teams have habits, what are you observing, how do their tendencies compare to Will's "Tells" book? Ex's, serving wide on the deuce side - what opptys are created for the server, where should the return go, how are the players switching positions, good time to fake? etc Next time you watch a match on TV that has professional announcers, note what they cover, what they comment on and their pace...I think most of us just watch the matches on TV without paying detailed attention to the announcers...
Thanks for the feedback, some good stuff to think about there! You're right, I was very close to the players hence the soft voice. I may do a more in-depth strategy video from a few points of this match.
Since it's video, maybe you should consider adding some post-filming comments/observations from The Book of Tells where appropriate...looks like the gal in the gray dress is out of position when starting at the net...also, these indoor courts with sideline nets reduce the amount of space available...when I played 4.5/8.5/9.5 matches at SFTC, their guys always tried to serve opponents into the net...forcing the Away team to return closer to the baseline...
The person that didn’t like your commentary is a fool. Your pace and comments were on the mark. I liked everything.
Thanks so much, John! Very kind of you. I am glad you enjoyed it! :)
Loved watching this match! Thank-you for posting it.
My pleasure, very glad you enjoyed it! 😄
great upload, even better commentary! thank you
so great to see this !!
Glad you enjoyed, Harris! 😎
This was good but could've been better if M had included more strategic commentary - like why someone missed a volley... maybe b/c they were out of position and shading line when they should've been in the hot seat, things like that, etc. This match would be great for a post-mortem replay with that kind of tactical insight for club players to learn from.
Great feedback! I definitely agree, and not an excuse but I was a bit under the weather plus it was my first time commentating a match, on not much sleep. But I would love to do it again and provide more strategery for sure :) I did throw some strategy in but could have done more. Thanks!! :)
What level are these ladies? 4.5? There's such a level difference between the team closest to you and the other side.
It's 5.0 level! I didn't look up Richmond's players to confirm their ratings but I assume so as it was the 5.0 line. First set looked like a marked difference but second set was a great fight! I have played mixed many times with the 5.0 Montgomery ladies and it's always a tough scrap!
5.0 is pretty high rating. Often clubs have problems fielding much of a team at the 5.0 level. Agreed that the one side was much better than the other side. In my experience the two women that won, (Montgomery) were definitely 5.0. Aggressive volleys, decent serves, good ground strokes. The Richmond team was weaker all across. Especially the woman in the black tights, too often just looked like she was rallying rather than trying to put the ball away. Her volley's were often directly back to her opponent when she had every opportunity to put it away. Note that the opponents tended to pick on her. I'd say she was a decent 4.5, but whatever. Maybe she was playing up. Good to see them play better in the other set.
3.5 in my opinion
3.5 and 4.0
pretty low energy for a 5.0 level....
The video doesn't quite represent the pace as well as watching/playing live. It was a solid match!
So glad Montgomery County (Potapova/Batkins) ended up winning the celebration of the other team was unnecessary and unprofessional!
I am sure glad they won too! Thanks for watching.
That ball was not wide! Boo!
Volleying was first rate.. blue skirt foot fault habit
Agreed, great volleying in the match!
they are not 5.0
I can confirm this was a USTA 5.0 match :)
@@KentWood-OptimizeUTennis Thank you for your comment. I cannot speak for the Richmond team, but the two Mid-Atlantic ladies were on a Super Tri (5.0/4.5/4.0) team that got 2nd place at Nationals this past year in San Diego. They played on the 5.0 slot. And one of the players (Kate) went 5-1 and beat every team they faced (one team they lost to then beat in the finals). I personally watched the Mid-Atlantic team at Nationals and it was excellent tennis, most if not all of the 5.0 players played college. All I can say is sometimes matches on video can look less impressive than in person. Thanks for watching!
@@Tennisfiles i truly appreciate that perspective, but movement to me is the key...people look at ball speed and such..i look at the caliber of hip/shoulder proper movement and rotation, court positioning, good mechanics on natural body mechanics vs inefficient/award/mistake prone mechaincs....to determine what level someone is...i'm probably one of the few people on the internet capable of critiqueing all of that...and i see no 5.0 execution...espeaically a couple of the ladies were so bad at movement/execution, etc that I would call them a 3.5 with lots of experience and smarts and racquet control so they get away with bunting it back...anyhow...i coach 4.5 and 5.0 female players and some deserve their rating and some truly do not. Cheers
Very few women have a good serve, regardless of level, from amateur to pro. I wonder why that is. Certainly some have very good serve, like Serena Williams, Venus, Henin, Rybakina, etc... so it's not because they are women. It has to be because of the coaching in junior.
Great question! Perhaps more males perform the throwing motion and therefore are better at throwing, as the serve has many elements of throwing in it. And they are slightly better at using the kinetic chain, as some coaches have observed in serve techniques on WTA vs ATP tour (particularly timing the racquet drop and the pushing up of the legs iirc).
Maybe you had to announce with a soft voice because of proximity to the players, but your voice is already soft and it lacks energy/authority, give it an uptick...remember, this is video, viewers can see the action, so no need to repeat where shots are going, no new info there...needs more commentary on the tactics/strategy/alternatives on certain plays, more insight into the strengths/weaknesses of the players and how to exploit...most teams have habits, what are you observing, how do their tendencies compare to Will's "Tells" book? Ex's, serving wide on the deuce side - what opptys are created for the server, where should the return go, how are the players switching positions, good time to fake? etc Next time you watch a match on TV that has professional announcers, note what they cover, what they comment on and their pace...I think most of us just watch the matches on TV without paying detailed attention to the announcers...
Thanks for the feedback, some good stuff to think about there! You're right, I was very close to the players hence the soft voice. I may do a more in-depth strategy video from a few points of this match.
Since it's video, maybe you should consider adding some post-filming comments/observations from The Book of Tells where appropriate...looks like the gal in the gray dress is out of position when starting at the net...also, these indoor courts with sideline nets reduce the amount of space available...when I played 4.5/8.5/9.5 matches at SFTC, their guys always tried to serve opponents into the net...forcing the Away team to return closer to the baseline...
seen better 4.0 matches....no rallies and too many first serve faults for 5.0