Last updated 7 months ago
I have recently thought,how should I structure the player profile for an opponent analysis,so that I can divide it into some atomic attributes.
For example,I think there should be something like "most used serve".
But what if the opponent evenly switches two or three serves?
I am trying to describe every player by some fixed set of values which have as exact meaning as possible.
I am doing this so that it can be filtered or sorted by machine,since I am an IT worker. I was thinking about something like this:
Dominant FH stroke
Dominant BH stroke
Rudimentary FH stroke
Rudimentary BH stroke
Dominant serve placement
Dominant stroke placement
But what causes problems is when some player has more than one value to each attribute?
For example Samsonov,whose wings are evenly matched? Matsudaira,who alternates between tomahawks and pendulum serve? Zhang Jike,who masks between pendulum and reverse pendulum? Ma Long and his changes within serve placement according to opponent type?
Related to this question is also this one:
How can I utilize the knowledge about a player when I am playing him/her?
Mostly even when I play a player who has some very visible weakness and I know everything about his/her game,I cant help myself and I play exactly what they want me to play. For example I know a player who always receives with a chop on his forehand and plays with weaker higher topspin throw, but I cannot force myself to aim for his forehand.
Or I know that a player ALWAYS uses backspin sidespin pendulum wide to my backhand.
But I am always half-surprised when he does it despite that he does it all the time.
I like your set out. Instead of having one serve you can always include a list of serves that they use as well as what is best to do to each of those serves.
Executing plans is something the comes with more play against each opponent. If that is not working you need to come up with a different solution that you can implement. That is matching your skills to theirs.
Become a free member to post a comment about this question.