Forehand Volley Article

[timnoonan]

John,

I just read your article about volleys and had a couple of comments.
First of all, you are right about laying your wrist back, but I think you
missed the boat dismissing the "firm wrist". You can do both. Lay the wrist
back to set the racket properly, then keep the wrist firm through the volley.
Secondly, I think most players today, even the pros, have poor technique on
their volleys. Kids can't volley because of the lack of doubles, and even the
pros of today don't have what I would call textbook volleys.

Even Federer's volleys look shaky at times to me. The way he turns his wrist under at impact is not something I would teach (other than drop shots). If you are going to show a picture of Agassi volleying, it should have had a caption underneath it saying "this guy has no idea how to volley". Anyway, I enjoyed the article and volleying technique will always be debatable.

I spent some time with Ray Ruffels a few years ago and found him quite knowledgable on the subject. Maybe you can collaborate with him sometime in the future. Thanks for a great website.

Tim Noonan

[airforce1]

Tim,
what is laid back about the wrist? I'm looking here at Johnny Mac, and I just don't see it. Maybe I don't understand the term as it is being used.
Looks to me like the stick is just held as I would if I were holding a sign for someone to read. Maybe you guys can help me to understand this very common descriptor on wrist position.

[uspta3688360552]

The title should be : Dealing with Floating Forehand Volley's

John,
It appears that most of the examples you use for this aticle involve players moving forward and dealing with a ball that they can attack "floating" and above the net. I like the info and it probably applies well to the high volley.

I think that dealing with a stationary player position at the net, a harder incomming ball, and how pro's make that volley is worth exploring. That info would also be highly appicable to teaching doubles/singles net play.

"How to hit a volley from an established net position". I see this volley situation as a higher % of volley's hit by most of my clients, and would welcome any info on that volley technique.

Thanks for doing what you do.

John Vigil
Sacramento

[johnyandell]

It's great to get some comments about the article!

The wrist lay back just means the angle between the wrist (or racket) and the forearm-usually 60 degrees or so-to be rough.

You can't make contact in front of the body or at the front edge of the body with the U shape unless the wrist is at least somewhat laid back.

I guess the term "firm" is susceptible to much interpretation. You have to use enough contraction--however much that is-to keep the wrist back as it moves to contact. But often you actually see the contact cause the lay back to increase-so it can't be that "firm." But firm enough!

To me though the negative connotation of "firm" is when it creates tension throughout the arm. Most people are way too tense anyway and "firm" can translate into rigid. Just my opinion.

The other thing that happens is that players don't relax their arms sufficiently to set up the U. They end up with the arm straight and make contact behind the front edge of the body. The shoulder can't push.

I'd have to agree that the volley is a rare art. The 45 or so examples in the high speed archive-that came out of studying a few DOZEN matches.

Also I think Federer tends not to turn as well as the other players--crazy to criticize Roger I know--but this ends up causing more play and flex in his arm.

Hey give Andre a break-at least he tried to go to the net sometimes-and he has the U somewhat working at least in that volley!

Funny you should mention Ray! I tried to hook up with him a couple of year's ago about the volley on Elliot Teltscher's rec. Didn't happen but I will keep trying-you're not the only one who thinks he's knowledgeable so I want to check that out...

Glad you like the site!

[johnyandell]

As to the floating ball question.

What I tried to present is the most minimal elements. These are balls where the players are basically in good position and have a nice shoulder high ball. But many or most are on solid balls-just not balls positioned to force the volleyer-and that's the point.

I think the exact elements apply on a standing volley in dubs. Watch the Henman warmup volley for that. In my opinion that arm shape and the push from the shoulder form the basis for building all the variations. We'll see how the elements change in response to other types of balls soon.

[airforce1]

John, I agree with what you are saying about using this info as the basis for all the volleys. Maybe people should focus on closing, moving forward to volley, and not being stationary when they volley. Sure there are times when you don't have time to move, but this is when anticipation is required and more often than not, there is time to move forward, even if is only just a little.

[uspta2331024484]

John,

1) Thanks as always for your continued hard work that we all benefit from.

2) I believe what your findings concerning the FHV were all correct but, all those volleys were shoulder high and above. When I see a player use this U-shape on balls lower chest level and below I know they are going to hit many balls in the net and many balls short and the balls that they do hit deep usually have to much spin and don't get through the court fast enough.

In many of the strokes in your stroke archives that the racquet is only just slightly above the hand and racquets starts directly behind and even slightly below the ball and then drives directly through the middle of the ball resulting in solid deep volleys. I feel that this is the core of the FHV and the U-volley is then taught when working on higher balls.

I know you don't miss much and will address this issue on the lower balls for sure but in my opinion the U-volley should be taught after the more basic volley.

3) About a year ago I emailed the forum asking if there was any significance to the little foot movement at the beginning of the Roddick serve. No one responded but a few months later the Tennisplayer.net news letter had an article on how Roddick actually moved his foot backwards, which I never noticed, and this helped get his legs in better position to drive upward into the ball. This might be 100% on the mark but when I went out to the courts with a few of my good juniors and tried this we all noticed that it also acts as a drop-step which causes your weight to go forward which we felt actually made it possible to get more into the ball by simply using that simple move of bringing the front foot back slightly behind our center of gravity in turn propelling us forward.

I look forward to hearing your comments. You have changed my opinion on other strokes and issues so if you do it on this it won't be the first time and I'm sure it won't be the last.

Thanks,

Ed Wolin

[johnyandell]

So you finally figured out that you inspired the Roddick article...Just kidding Ed. Keen perception, but I honestly don't remember that post. Saw that reverse move with his foot a couple of years ago--had been talking about it with USTA and other coaches for a while...filmed it in Montreal in 2005.

In any case, regarding the volley you are right about the differences in the hand (and racket) height. And also that the hand drives thru the ball.

What I believe is that the core forward push involves shoulder rotation on most balls. This can be seen, felt, and developed best in the simplest incarnation-a shoulder high volley where the U stays most in tact.

I also agree you can't hit a low or a stretch ball with the U in tact. So I plan to explain how the players expand the basic shape with the variations. Most times you see the U shape flash at least briefly before this happens.

[timnoonan]

Tim,
what is laid back about the wrist? I'm looking here at Johnny Mac, and I just don't see it. Maybe I don't understand the term as it is being used.
Looks to me like the stick is just held as I would if I were holding a sign for someone to read. Maybe you guys can help me to understand this very common descriptor on wrist position.

I am not specifically talking about Macs volleys. Most pros would agree that his volley technique is rather unique to him and difficult to teach (which could be said about his entire game). My point was that it is possible to lay the wrist back (the hand leading the racket) and still keep the wrist firm as you push the racket slightly down through the ball (imparting a little underspin). I haven't looked at all of the video on the site, but I am certain there will be some supporting this position. Thanks

[pratteps]

Volley article--thanks and Dennis Ralston

John,

Thank you so much for tackling the forehand volley. I have commented several times that I rarely see a model forehand volley compared with many excellent backhand volleys and, of course, the other strokes. The shot I see most often botched by the pros is the FH volley including marvelous Roger.

As you might expect, I feel the most uncertain on the forehand volley. I feel that I know how to hit all the other shots (now that I have belatedly learned the modern forehand at age 63), but the forehand volley never feels natural. The backhand volley action seems a lot more natural even though most players can really kill a forehand volley more often. They also miss sitters with this side a lot.

Just one request. The high forehand volley I have most coveted over the years belonged to Dennis Ralston. Any chance you can find some clips of his high put-aways and share what you learn from them?

Thanks. Keep up the good work.

[pratteps]

High vs. Low FH volleys



I agree with those who indicate we have to modify basic technique for low balls, but I should have said in my previous post,

the embarrassing forehand volley errors I see and I make are more often on the high, even floating FH volleys.

Yes, I know a lot of us don't get down to low balls and many of us let our form deteriorate on those balls, but not so much as those tantalizing high floating balls. I think we all think we should put them away whereas on low balls or waist high balls, we tend to business more consistently if our knees will cooperate.

And then there are those balls that look like they will be overhead height and end up just low enough to catch one in between a full overhead and either a three quarters "overhead" or a last second high forehand volley.

[johnyandell]

Not unless you fly to Colorado and film him.

One thing that I have to continually explain about our filming--to be of value the clips have to be shot with a high speed shutter. Old clips unless they are high speed movie film are of very limited value.

[johnyandell]

Actually the only thing unusual about John's volleys in my opinion is his casual low ready position. He also has a relatively mild grip which gives them a slightly different look. But you can see the same core elements in his motion that the article identified.

I think we are agreed about the positioning laid back wrist, if "firm" means keeping it at least at some angle of lay back through the hit. I'm just not in love with the term for the reasons outlined above.

[pratteps]

High vs. Low FH volleys

Trying to post this again as previous one got lost.

I agree with those who indicate that things change when we hit low volleys.

But the volleys I see botched most often and the ones I mess up most often are high FH volleys. I think that when we get a low one or waist high one, we tend to take care of business and not kill it (so long as our knees will allow us to get down). With high ones, we think we should end the point and either overswing or don't move our feet or something.

In my case, I think my angle of contact changes. It is obvious that the racket should be open a bit on balls near or below net height. On high balls, many hackers do okay, they do just that--hack with grips that work on high balls but not on other balls. Some play so close to the net that they can gobble up gimme shots, but they don't have FH volleys any real player wants.

I feel uncertain how to hit hard on a high ball and still keep that slight underspin. If you hit too hard, the ball goes long, especially if your bigger swing or stretch causes you to lose alignment even a bit.

Another problem with a high ball that is a bit wide, the arm has to straigthen out and this can open the face of the racket even more.

I hope you will address these issues soon.

[pratteps]

Ralston

Sorry about the Ralston request, but I was hoping.

Actually the clips on Hoad in Tennis History are quite exciting although obviously not in slow motion. That one that quickly shows his serve and both his volleys is quite impressive and could be instructive if we had his strength and timing.

I would be happy with something like that of Ralston. Perhaps he will read this and respond.

I used to know him (slightly) but have lost track except I think he is still at the Broadmoor. I doubt his volley is still the same, but who knows?