Padel Hypothetical Question

Are people in this thread not realising that the proposed match is a full court 2v1? Playtomic 5.8 (especially in Spain) is semi-pro level. These guys are Really good, they are not going to miss and they can play very well tactically. No one, including Tapia, would be able to 1v2 such players, although it would probably be good practice for him. I’d say it’s going to be like 6-2 6-3 for the semi-pros

There’s a book about golf (google golf greatness pyramid paper tiger if you want to see the whole thing) that had a nice way of explaining how good the pros are at their sport: think about the “best player you know”. The player in your club everyone would trade with in terms of speed, technique, you name it. These guys are closer to a beginner than they are to the top of the sport at the professional level. They basically can’t play if you are comparing it to the top of the world. 

Tapia 6/0 6/0 until the end of time. He and the others on that level aren’t just better and more athletic than the rest of ha—they’re like superheroes.

Are people still taking their playtomic levels seriously?

That's a really great question and I also wondered the same... 5.8 is pretty high so quite frankly I doubt Tapia would win, let alone 6-0 6-0 like others are saying. At 5.8 you have mastered all shots and make few mistakes. Add that to the fact that when playing 2 v 1 the single player will aim to stand in the middle of the court to get maximum coverage, but this also means that staying at net is exponentially harder so likely he would need to stay more at the back making it very hard to win points.

I can compare with a similar sport: squash.  I once saw an exhibition game: #100 worldwide vs #1. It looked like a beginner vs a pro. It was impressive. #1 (Thierry Lincou) was taking breaks, waving at the public, "acting", etc. Woke #100 was fighting for his life. They were good friends, so it was very fun to watch, but it looked like they played different sports  It is not exactly the same, but I still expect a similar outcome. Maybe not 6-0 6-0, because of the court size and physical limitations of running across the court all the time, but still.  The thing is that any ball that is not perfect exposes the "amateurs" to a violent return, potentially X3.

Playtomic rating doesn't matter on a professional level. Player like Tapia have been playing in the professional circuit and collecting ranking points and experience in different FIP tournaments against other professionals that are best in their countries. They train with the best coaches of the world and have an intense training regime. You can't compare them to a 5.8 player that plays on a recreational or regional level.

Methodical breakdown….. the 5.8s win. If you break this down methodically, the two players have a clear and simple game plan: get to the net and hold it. Against a single player that’s far easier than normal. From there, Tapia can’t drive flat through two experienced players at the net comfortably, so he’s forced to lob. But as a solo player every lob he hits just gives them time to reset and pick a side. He physically cannot cover both. The serve advantage disappears too. In normal doubles the danger isn’t the serve itself, it’s the net player punishing a weak return. Remove that partner and a scrappy return just lands on an open court. The receiving pair can return without fear and just focus on getting the ball back anywhere. His shot selection is also built entirely around knowing where his partner is. A cross court ball is a perfectly valid shot when your partner is already covering the line. Without that cover, a simple flat return down the line puts him completely out of position. Geometry that works in his favour in doubles actively works against him here. The paradox is that the better the opposition, the worse his situation. Against weaker players he could overpower through. Against two 5.8s at net, the flat drive stops working and the lob becomes his only option, which is exactly the shot that exposes the coverage problem most. Even his more creative options like chiquitas or playing to feet, which work at pro level because they create half chances for a partner to finish, just aren’t enough against two experienced players who can reset comfortably and immediately exploit the open court. Geometry is simply too punishing to overcome as a single player at this level of opposition. Every structural element of the game works against him and his dominant skill level can’t compensate enough against two strong players. That’s my take anyway! Others may disagree.

Some of us are wondering if one really good player can play Vs two players on the double court. I have seen this on a badminton court. A world champion came to my country for a visit. He played Vs 2 other really good players. He's been giving some technical advice to us and told us the importance of hitting the sweet spot on the racket. He then used a stick to play Vs the two other players. Those two were running for their life all over the court while he's using a stick to play badminton. Back to op question. Any pro players will be able to cover the entire court Vs 2 other amateurs on the other side. Easily. Go watch any pro game. See how they can cross the entire court in 1 second to save a shot. However, I would love to watch this match.

Tapia will win, reasoning is playtomic ratings rarely matter, the experience your friend and his partner will have no matter how good their opponents have been doesn’t compare to the experience Tapia has who plays against other say Galan and chingo, the hours tapia has been playing all his life will give him several hundred of hours of advantage va new comers

The pro level is so vastly different he might be able to get a few points in a game but 6:0 in the end. I'm 5.5 playtomic and played against 125 ranking FIP and was able to win a few games because the guy had weaker partner and wasn't too switched on in a friendly game - if he did play full strength tournament level then no chance. If we are talking about top 10 imagine the step up

Agustín would win easily. By the way he is not called whatever you wrote.

The amount of people who didn't read proper is mindblowing. Anywhos the 2 vs Tapia win allday. It might be close for a game or 3 but after that Tapia will be completely exhausted. He'd be basically running from corner to corner in every rally.

So I have a little personal insight into this, I play at the 5.something level and have had the pleasure of competing in national seniors tournaments against semi-pro players by luck of the draw. On tv or outside the court it might look like the same sport we play, but it's not. These were not even top 500 players in the world and I could barely touch a serve, let alone return it properly. I can't describe how underwordly low their balls stay and how quick they still are. One team beat me 6-0/6-0 and then went to properly warm up against each other. If a pro (any pro, not even the undisputed world #1) is playing against someone who can't apply equal pressure, they can place the ball in any square millimetre of the court, at any speed and spin they choose. You could have 5 people on your side of the court against a solo pro, you're still not getting a point unless they let you. Edit: Every point will either be serve +1 (if +1 is even necessary) or lob return within an inch of the left-side corner +1. Repeat till 6-0/6-0. I can't put into words how hopeless this would feel.

Uhm, I don’t know if am reading this wrong, but your friend and his duo would win. From a certain level it is impossible to cover the court with only one person. He can’t come to the net since he will get passed most of the time. You won’t give him any lobs because why would you have him time. They would just play low and they can defeat him. Playtomic does not always have acurate ratings, I don’t often play with it but i am around a 5-5.3 i guess. I’ve play against some top 200 fip players, they are really good(not tapia level ofcourse) but I could defeat them 2v1. The court just isn’t made for one person.

Tapia 6/0 6/0 or not too far. I took a lot of lessons when I began playing, and also after a few years of practice. Some Spanish players, not even in the top 10 but let’s say in the top 200 would absolutely destroy me and any other player with 60% court coverage rule. We barely landed a single point…

Not everyone seems to agree on that subject, I’d love to know pro’s or top level coach thoughts about it !

Nobody could cover a whole court against 2 decent players. I played like this with beginners and beat them easily but after a while they started to catch on and play a bit softer into the spaces and it makes things way trickier. 2 experienced players would make it impossible

In your hypothetical situation. Does tapia on the one sided court only have to cover half each point? (Ie not the full court)? Like American singles ? If only having to cover the half the point is on. I think tapia would stand a good chance. If he has to cover the full court then no, of course no

Im the friend, and if we don’t give tapia any lobs, we are skilled enough to place into corners, both of us can hit X3, obviously tapia is much better but its just too difficult to cover the court against two regional players. 6-3 6-2 for us imo

I decided to talk to gemini about this. That is the outcome: **The two 5.8 Playtomic players would win this match comfortably, and the score would likely be something like 6-1, 6-0.** While Agustín Tapia is an absolute alien and arguably the most physically gifted player in the history of the sport, padel is fundamentally a game of geometry. When you put a single player on a full 20m x 10m doubles court against two highly advanced amateurs, the math simply makes it impossible for the solo player to win over the course of a 3-set match. Here is the tactical breakdown of why your friend and his partner would walk away with the victory. # 1. Context: What is a Playtomic 5.8? A 5.8 is not a casual weekend warrior. On the Playtomic scale (which goes up to 7.0), a 5.8 is an advanced tournament-level amateur. They have excellent spatial awareness, they rarely make unforced errors on standard balls, their bandejas and víboras are highly consistent, and they know how to hit their spots. If you give a 5.8 an open gap on the court, they are going to hit it 9 out of 10 times. This is the crucial foundation of why they win. # 2. The Geometry Problem A padel court is 10 meters wide. In normal doubles, each player is responsible for roughly 5 meters of width. Tapia is fast, but he cannot cover 10 meters of width against players who know how to place the ball. * **If Tapia takes the net:** He has to guess a side. If the 5.8s just hit a passing shot down the line (the side he isn't covering), the point is over. * **If Tapia stays back:** The two 5.8s will take the net side-by-side. From there, Tapia has to hit a perfectly placed passing shot or a lob. If he lobs, he gives two advanced players an overhead smash or a bandeja, and they can simply direct the ball into whichever 5-meter gap Tapia just vacated. # 3. The Serve Advantage Disappears In a normal game, the server has a massive advantage because they rush the net and lock it down alongside their partner. In this 2v1 scenario, Tapia's serve is actually a liability. When Tapia serves, he must serve diagonally. If he rushes the net to follow his serve, the entire parallel side of the court is completely wide open. The receiving 5.8 player doesn't even have to hit a difficult return; they just have to bunt a flat ball down the line, and Tapia is hopelessly out of position. # 4. Tapia's Weapons Become Useless In pro padel, Tapia uses incredible tools like the *chiquita* (a soft, dipping shot to the opponents' feet) or aggressive flat drives down the middle. Why do these work? Because they create chaos that **his partner** can capitalize on. * If Tapia hits a brilliant chiquita in this 2v1, the 5.8s will just pop it up into the empty half of the court. There is no partner to step in and finish the point. * To survive, Tapia would be forced to constantly lob to buy himself time to run from corner to corner. Over the course of a best-of-3 sets match, running 10 meters side-to-side on every single rally would physically exhaust even the fittest athlete on earth. # The Verdict Could Tapia win a game? Yes. He might string together four points of pure, highlight-reel magic—blasting a smash from behind the baseline or hitting a winner directly off the glass. But padel is about sustained pressure. Your friend and his partner have a very simple game plan: **Take the net, hold the net, and hit the ball to the 50% of the court that Tapia isn't standing in.** Because they are 5.8s, they possess the technical skill to execute that simple plan consistently without missing. Geometry wins, and the 5.8s take the match.