I'd like to ask if you know about a source of tactical combinations for advanced players. To make it clear, what I want is combinations described like this: 1 on 1, combination starts with high serve and then goes like this: cross-court drop -> straight lift -> straight clear and then cross-court drop again... the combination has 2 directions (it is different when serving from right and left side of the court) Key points: - if the lift is fast and flat enough, it gets the other player into much trouble - other tactical moment in the combination: the trajectory of the cross-court drop. It can be played very fast, sliced, and then the other player is under high movement pressure - the clear should be played defensively So: not only a basic tactical combination, but with deeper insight how to play each shot, what are the problematic moments, what to avoid and how it can be useful in the game. Do you know a source of combinations like this, or can you suggest me some in this topic?
yeh theyr pretty simple drills dude. when i started training for nationals one drill i did for singles was. serve high>crosscourt drop>Net shot> crosscourt net shot>net shot>Straight lift>straight clear> and it resets. Seems pretty complicated but when you get it on a roll with a couple of good players its sooooooooo good/hard. Great for singles. The idea of the drill is moving around the entire court quickly. 1 player is attacking with drops crosscourt nets etc the other player is just basic defending with straightshots.
i'm not a fan (neither is my coach) of set drill patterns. yes, they're good for increasing stamina, making you aware of what the shots do and expected reply, but i've seen so many of my friends just follow these drills blindly and get nailed for it. for example, a very common drill is drop>net shot> lift>drop>net shot> lift. this means it's almost imprinted in peoples minds that once you drop, you just charge into the net and play a lift. when they start playing the top national players (juniors) they start getting mowed down for charging into the net before the opponent makes a shot. i think that set routines are nice and all especially when you're initially learning the shot, but mixed routines are better. e.g. one player plays to the front forehand corner. the partner can play to 3 points on the court in any order he wants. this creates a free flowing, changing drill which helps consistency, stamina and doesn't follow some set routine.
I think both repetitive drill patterns and mixed routines are good to be used. And i don't think it will make one follow them blindly in a real game. I think they're useful as you can become much smoother once these drills become sort of muscle memory for you. And i agree that mixed routines are better, but they're also more tiring and difficult, thus you won't be able to last as long. Many people start out doing fixed routines, then going on to 2 points on court, 3 points, 4 points and so on...it's a progressive thing. And there's so many combinations.
Fixed patterns can be useful for developing accuracy and precision in your strokes, at the expense of shot reading and deception. It can also be good for concentration and stamina, since those are the two most likely causes of error for these exercises once you get a feel for the pattern. You would think that when not under pressure to get to the shuttle, every shot should end up perfectly placed in the corner. However, this is rarely the case and these drills give you an opportunity to work on that. I don't know why Tomus calls this a tactical exercise, because it is quite the opposite. There is no element of decision making, or reacting to the opponent's shots, which are fundamental to developing tactical skills.
Ok two of my coaches have totally different views on badminton :O One a former national player - believes in set drills , WHY? Because he has been trained nationally , thats what he used to learn and do , so he coaches that. The other , believes in mixed , he wants to confuse the players mind , so he keeps guessing - Just like a real game! I believe in the second coach - because its more like a game. But both of them have advantages as previously stated , so I think a mixture is very important.
In my opinion both types of drills seem to be very important. I find it weird that junior national players blindly apply a drill pattern when they play at such high level. I think that the simple drills with patterns might be good right after the warm-up as it makes you focus only on your shots, so that when you do the mixed (harder) routines where you have to face other factors (footwork, deception etc), you can already rely on your shots and you can focus on the other aspects of the drills. Also, when you're trying to learn or master a new shot, its good to have those simple drills so you can focus entirely on the shot itself and add the footwork etc once you are comfortable with the shot.
i meant when juniors around here play people at such a high level, get stuck by routines. i didn't say they were all wrong. i know they're useful, i just don't like doing them.
There definetely is a tactical element in fixed combinations. They learn not only the technique of each shot, not only the footwork - they also, if played properly, help to show different ways of putting movement or shot pressure on opponent. It makes the player enrich their game: they can then choose which combination to play, or try more and then focus on the one their opponent has problems with and so on... And I would like to react to the critics of fixed combinatios as a whole concept: yes, if you play always the same (lob - clear - drop, lob - smash - drop etc., we all know them), you may end up blindly following them in your game. But there are so many fixed combinations, you can make one to simulate every situation in the game. Also I would like to point out, that I didn't ask for fixed combinations only: I asked for combinations described with tactical approach. It might be also something like this: "two player play clears on half court, each of them may play dropshot any time, followed by net shot, lift and then clears again..." or even "two player on full court, one of them plays offensive shots, one plays defensive shots" or something like this. I just want to dig deeper...
I see fixed drills beneficial for teaching the basics of stroke making. After that, they should be set to random drills to make sure that these strokes can be produced on all occasions.
I still don't see the technical benefits that you ascribe to fixed routines. Tactical routines need to be more mentally engaging. Let's consider open 2-point drills, where a stationary feeder has the option of playing shots to one of two corners (A or B) for the worker to retrieve. The basic pattern is usually: ABABABAB..... if the worker is always slow to recover back to the centre but if he anticipates B after A or vice versa, you might throw in: AAB or ABB ... to catch him off guard this forces him to recover to the centre at a moderate pace that allows him to get to either corner. So, you might now adopt this strategy: AAAAAB ... multiple consecutive shots to one corner until he starts underrecovering, then you change up with a shot to the other corner Of course, you can use deception, so maybe you hold A and hit B, or fake B and hit A to make your play more effective. at this point, maybe he's getting tired so the basic ABABAB pattern becomes effective, but then again you need to mix in some changeups to keep him more on guard... and the cycle continues. In theory, you could do these as separate drills, or perhaps as separate components of one single drill, but the fact is that you need to make a decision for each shot that you make. You have to watch your opponent's position and velocity, try to imagine what he's feeling and thinking and use that to play a shot that you think will be most effective for the given situation. Then, you use feedback from your opponent's reactions to refine your assessments. This is how you develop tactical sense, and you don't really get this from fixed patterns. Also, keep in mind that this is for one of the simplest possible patterns, when you consider adding more corners, pressure shots, partner position, etc things can get so complicated that fixed patterns by themselves are not very effective. However, they do still have a role because at a high enough level tactics and technique become increasingly dependent.
shifty the point of the drills is overlooked by alot of people. The main problem people see is from their shot to the next point they move to they dont think about anything in between. EG when doing drop net lift people hit a drop then charge the net to take a quick net shot. Instead i tell people i train with to hit their shot move to their recovery/safezone in centre court. Wait for the other person to hit the drop then lunge forward to take the net shot. Just like with footwork aswell. People go to 1 corner then run diagnally across to the net point without stopping. I get people to go to the back corner. then move to the centre safezone. Stop. Then move off to the net point. come back to the safezone. Stop. Then head back to the back corner again. Just teaches you to wait for the shot rather than thinking its gona be a net if i hit a drop etc. Also teaches you to quickly recover to the same spot all of the time.
well, naturally they helps, and it's something i try and do even in fixed drills. however, no matter how much you do that, your mind is already set on a target, and will not wonder off easily. and being a 17 year old, i don't hold much authority over my peers. so they do whatever they want, and they just like to charge around.
I think running drills to get some movement going while practicing different shots and different strokes even if its predictable is good and beneficial. At some point yes you want to run drills where you have to guess where your coach or practice partner is going to hit, while your shots stay consistent, ie drop/cross court drop, clear/diagonal clear.
