The Forehand Volley

[johnyandell]

Would love to get your thoughts on Paul Cohen's latest "The Forehand Volley".

[don_budge]

Curiosity killed the Cat...but that CAT sure can volley!

Tremendously relieved that I didn't embarrass myself in my "my thoughts on the Volley". I didn't peek. The article itself has all of the components of a good volley. Succinct and to the point. All of the fundamentals covered...all of the bases as well.

A beautiful shot of the "model" of all time...Richard Gonzales. Like a cat...all of that feline grace. The big dark and swarthy puma with the killer looks, sizing up his prey then seizing the moment and executing the kill with primal and effortless instinct...the little white ball. It may as well have been a rabbit or a mouse or some other defenseless creature.

He poises himself first before he surges through the doorway. Shoulders turn 45 degrees to the ball then 22 1/2 degrees away from the ball at impact, front foot plants as the weight effortlessly shifts like a knife into soft butter...contact right in the middle of the strings just after the foot plant. Always moving forwards to collide with the approaching ball. Textbook execution. What balance...what timing! Pre-engineered tennis at its absolute marvelous best. Look at that puny little stick he is playing with...probably a Spalding. Modern tennis aficionados...eat your heart out. G.O.A.T.? Why not?

I would like to point out one "discrepancy" between the Jeff Greenwald execution of the forehand and that of the classic model of Richard Gonzales. Look at how much the level of Jeff's hand is descending into his stroke as compared to the Gonzales technique. This to me...looks like the arm, hand and racquet component of the swing has a little too much influence in the stroke and is overcompensating for the lack of shoulder turn back to the ball as personified by Gonzales. You can see this lack of rotation back through the ball by the position of Jeff's left hand as compared to the action of Gonzales as well. This may result is a bit too much spin and not enough penetration.

I like the sensation of the shoulder plowing into the ball as opposed to the hand doing too much knifing action. It looks as if Jeff's grip may be leaning towards the continental and I would advise playing around with a slightly more beefed up grip toward the eastern side to discourage that knifing action and encouraging more plowing motion. The beefed up grip will also encourage that nice 45 degree angle in the wrist that you are advocating and enable him to take the ball a bit earlier. It is imperative to take the volley earlier in the modern professional game because for every centimeter that you are later in volleying the ball it is dipping exponentially.

Paul Cohen is a classic...and a classy guy in my book. It is not only helpful to have a complete knowledge about the history of the game...it is absolutely imperative. The man speaks of the tennis eras with authority. The coach is Hopman. Nice job on your part of the Jeff Greenwald story. A super example of coaching an accomplished player. Such a wonderful collaboration between teacher and student...both parties doing their respective parts, putting egos aside to accomplish a worthy goal. Synchronicity. Thanks for your contribution Paul!

Just one more thing...that is some bad volley action and probably a bad example that Federer is displaying and it is no wonder that his successful trips to the net have diminished through the years. Roger stands straight up with no feline crouching or deft footwork for that matter. He doesn't exhibit much shoulder plow even on his good volleys. All arm and hands...the kiss of death when attempting to volley dipping bullets.

[stotty]

Sedgman...

I really enjoyed that article and agree with most it. don_budge and I have often lamented about the woeful standard of volleying in the pro game today,

I didn't realise the affect of separating the hands too early made a player late on the volley. That was new to me.

I'm on the same page as don_budge regarding the use of the shoulder in the volley. Frank Segdeman did it perfectly in some of the old clips I've seen. Other than those odd clips I have never seen Sedgman play much, but apparently he was the finest volleyer of them all…off both wings. I always felt Gonzales was more of a placer than a puncher, but he always seemed to get his first volleys remarkably deep, making him hard to pass in the days of wooden rackets.

I think Federer passed up the chance to be an excellent volleyer when he abandoned serve and volley early on in his career in favour of baseline tennis. However, he is still the best volleyer, thereabouts, on the tour. He's perhaps a little regal on low forehand volleys for my liking. The trouble with players with great hands like Federer is that those great hands can serve to be their undoing. Having great hands can make a player lazy on low volleys because they are apt to rely on their hands to do the work instead of the body and the knees....that's a mistake. Good volleyers get right under low balls. A great example of a player who got down to low volleys well was Pat Cash.

A slight issue I have is with the grip. A lot of players these days hold the grip very low with much of the heel of the hand hanging off the edge. This is fine with groundshots but not ideal for volleys, especially forehand volleys. It weakens the firm brace you need to firmly get hold of volleys to put them away, particularly those high awkward ones. A grip with the hand held higher is far stronger. I like the heel of the hand to be flush with the butt of the handle (the whole of the hand on the handle). It makes for a rock solid brace for contact. Just my two cents.

[nokomis]

forehand volley

Although I do not work with professional players, I do coach high school and middle school tennis teams that are very successful at the State level. I have also worked with and coached several very successful adult & senior level players in both singles and doubles.

I liked the article but wanted to comment on a couple of related issues. First, at the higher levels of the sport, taking a step forward on the volley is generally not possible because of the pace involved. Getting the shoulders turned to somewhere in the 45 degree range is a more realistic possibility - while keeping the hips square to the net. I find one of the biggest mistakes many make is rotating the hips with the shoulders rather than having the shoulders over-rotate the hips.

Secondly, and maybe this was indirectly stated, is keeping the bottom fingers loose - middle, ring and little fingers somewhat loose in the drop volley. In some (many) instances, keeping the last or last two fingers off the handle. The tight grip, although good in many instances, is simply not effective in any form of drop volley.

The last point is getting the head low or high depending on the height of the volley. When the racquet face drops below the wrist, the volley is generally very inconsistent, produces a sitter or weak response.

We train kids to hit the ball hard with lots of pace - unfortunately the touch game has suffered as a result. Using a strong grip, thinking of the stroke as a punch and stepping into the ball contribute to the problem.

[GeoffWilliams]

Although I do not work with professional players, I do coach high school and middle school tennis teams that are very successful at the State level. I have also worked with and coached several very successful adult & senior level players in both singles and doubles.

I liked the article but wanted to comment on a couple of related issues. First, at the higher levels of the sport, taking a step forward on the volley is generally not possible because of the pace involved. Getting the shoulders turned to somewhere in the 45 degree range is a more realistic possibility - while keeping the hips square to the net. I find one of the biggest mistakes many make is rotating the hips with the shoulders rather than having the shoulders over-rotate the hips.

Secondly, and maybe this was indirectly stated, is keeping the bottom fingers loose - middle, ring and little fingers somewhat loose in the drop volley. In some (many) instances, keeping the last or last two fingers off the handle. The tight grip, although good in many instances, is simply not effective in any form of drop volley.

The last point is getting the head low or high depending on the height of the volley. When the racquet face drops below the wrist, the volley is generally very inconsistent, produces a sitter or weak response.

We train kids to hit the ball hard with lots of pace - unfortunately the touch game has suffered as a result. Using a strong grip, thinking of the stroke as a punch and stepping into the ball contribute to the problem.

Listen to this guy. Nice post: articulate, detailed, accurate!

[don_budge]

Two Out Of Three Ain't Bad...Meatloaf

I liked the article but wanted to comment on a couple of related issues. First, at the higher levels of the sport, taking a step forward on the volley is generally not possible because of the pace involved. Getting the shoulders turned to somewhere in the 45 degree range is a more realistic possibility - while keeping the hips square to the net. I find one of the biggest mistakes many make is rotating the hips with the shoulders rather than having the shoulders over-rotate the hips.

Secondly, and maybe this was indirectly stated, is keeping the bottom fingers loose - middle, ring and little fingers somewhat loose in the drop volley. In some (many) instances, keeping the last or last two fingers off the handle. The tight grip, although good in many instances, is simply not effective in any form of drop volley.

Two Out Of Three Ain't Bad...Meatloaf

I want you, I need you
But there ain't no way I'm ever gonna love you
Now don't be sad
'Cause two out of three ain't bad
Now don't be sad
'Cause two out of three ain't bad

my version:

Two Out Of Three Ain't Bad...don_budge

Racquet in position, Shoulders are turned
But there ain't no way I can get my foot down
Now don't give up
'Cause two out of three ain't bad
Now don't give up
'Cause two out of three ain't bad

As Meatloaf points out in his lamentation about the arena of love...two out of three ain't bad. It would be futile to argue against what you have said about the speed of the game and how it makes it more difficult to execute fundamentally sound volleys. But on the other hand it doesn't get any easier if you don't try and don't practice.

Great volleyers historically have had a "nose" for the net. That is...you couldn't keep them off it. Pass them once or twice and they keep on coming. They didn't accomplish that by just making a 45 degree shoulder turn or a 180 degree return trip back to the baseline...they were courageous enough to push the agenda forward. Now the volleying of the past is a distant memory as we peer into the rearview mirror trying to conjure up images of once what was.

But much of this absence now can be attributed to the approach tactics as well as the engineering of the game. Subtle approaches used to be a hallmark of the game but the strong grips of the modern game leave little room for subtlety...because of its one dimensional mindset. The one dimensional aspect leaves little to the imagination. So perhaps our coaching techniques have been hijacked as well...and the younger coaches are clueless in this regard without any appreciation for the history of the game. McEnroe was a master of getting his opponents to hit up to him as he cruised forward for his coup de gras volley. So were Sampras, Becker, Edberg, Gonzales and so on.

Nearly every single time that I witness the volley being practiced nowadays I see players camped one and a half meters from the net, turning the aforementioned 45 degrees with or without the step forward...but I rarely see any drills as I illustrated in my "one hour imaginative workout" below in the forum. You must incorporate this surge forward into the practice of volleying or else you will find that practicing volleying is a waste of time. Much of the art of volleying is in the journey forward...deciding when to come in and how to come in.

I was hoping for a little more from the approach article in this months issue. Therein lies much of the problem with the lack of volleying issue...much of it lies in the lack of tactics in the approach game and much of that lies in the lack of touch, which as geoffwilliams points out you have eloquently addressed. These problems are all attributable to lack of coaching in this regard. Good points.

The three components of the volley motion are the arm, hand and racquet motion, the shoulder turn and the step into the ball. If time constraints prevent the volleyer from performing all three then resort to the 45 degree shoulder turn method but at the same time try to lean with the chest and shoulders in the direction of where the foot should have been. In this manner you will see that Meatloaf was correct in more ways than one...two out of three ain't bad whether it be in love from a man's point of view...or in volleying dipping bullets.

[stotty]

Grips

Tony Trabert in the book Tennis Strokes and Strategies advocated using mild eastern grips on both the forehand and backhand volley. As does our very own don_budge. Personally, I feel this may be disadvantageous on low volleys. I always teach a continental grip for volleys...with students that have the to capacity learn it.

I've seen talented players switch to a mild eastern backhand grip to be able to pick up very wide forehand volleys that come in very low. It's an instinctive net reaction that only really good players can do. I saw Nastase and McEnroe do it often at Wimbledon.

[blake_b]

Tactics for Approach Shots

Hi Don_Budge,

In your post above you make the following statement "much of it lies in the lack of tactics in the approach game and much of that lies in the lack of touch"

I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on approach tactics, since I enjoy playing an all court game, and I realize how important the approach is to successful volleys.

Thanks,
Blake

[makhan67]

Would love to get your thoughts on Paul Cohen's latest "The Forehand Volley".

You and Paul Cohen made it so simple to learn and then teach it to others. The good thing is that you learn it yourself and then make it quite simple to teach to others. Albert Einstein has said, "If you can't explain it simply, you have not understood it completely".

The TennisPlayer makes us understand it fully and then we are empowered to teach it to our students. The Tennisplayer is the best coach in the world.

Great work, as usual, John Yandell, and Paul Cohen.

Mahboob Khan
Director, Cardio Tennis
MKTA, Islamabad Club
Pakistan
Mobile: 0092 300 8568403

[tennis_chiro]

Cardio Tennis in Islamabad?!

Mahboob Khan
Director, Cardio Tennis
MKTA, Islamabad Club
Pakistan
Mobile: 0092 300 8568403

It is somehow very hard for me to imagine a Director of Cardio Tennis in Islamabad. Why is it so hard for me to imagine Pakistanis running around wily nily in a Cardio tennis class?! But at the same time, it is very encouraging. And by the nature of his comments, I bet Mahboob runs a great cardio class. Somehow, I am sure it is very demanding. We may be so different and yet we are at the core really so very much alike.

don

[nokomis]

reality of tennis at lower levels

Mahboob Khan & I go back many years in various tennis related things mostly on the web - Tennis Warehouse & others (Papa). Excellent insight into the game including a very sound understanding of stroke mechanics and strategies at the higher end of the game. He is an absolute gentleman who's daughter is/was a top level player - I certainly respect his opinion.

Regarding don budge's comments: He seems very knowledgeable about the game and has made many excellent points regarding the volley. Although "most" good coaches would support his "forward serge" theme, the primary reason we have players practice close to the net (service line in) is to get the mechanics of the stroke in place. Most often, the swing is way too big, no shoulder turn, players head stays too high, racquet head drops below way below the hand, player doesn't follow the ball into the racquet and so forth.

When (and in many cases if) we get the mechanics relatively correct we will get into the serge aspect of the volley. So, much like other strokes, we (coaches) have to get the basics on track before we move to move advanced aspects of the stroke - I consider the serge aspect/movement more advanced .

I should mention that many players (at the high school or middle school level) are just not comfortable at net - period. The ongoing changes in racquets and strings (and other equipment) has allowed players to hit winners on a regular basis from the baseline and beyond. Although I would agree with don's remarks, they probably are more applicable these days to doubles. Unfortunately match scoring in college and high school these days (most anyway) use 6 singles and 3 doubles pro sets - each getting one point so the emphasis is on singles, not doubles. The serve and volley game can be effective (very effective) at times. However, if used too much it seldom works (again, these days) because players, even at the high school level and below, can hit such effective passing shots and lobs.

So, has the game changed and continues to change because of equipment - my opinion would be yes. Is the S & V game still viable - yes, but to a much lesser extent than in the past. Are coaches at fault here - maybe to some extent. Most of us are not working with world class athletes. Our players are good and often get spots in college - however, the reality is, seldom, if ever, will most play at the professional (ATP or WTA) level.

[don_budge]

Conventional vs. don_budge

Regarding don budge's comments: He seems very knowledgeable about the game and has made many excellent points regarding the volley.

The key operative word is "seems"...I can appreciate your skepticism. But all of your points are well taken and represent the accepted conventional wisdom. The engineering has overwhelmed the evolution...to which I object. Racquets for the pros should be 80 sq. inches max. At that size they can use any string they want. They will have to retool the mechanics though. Evolution would be back in the equation.

Try these drills in the above post (now moved to the thread "My Thoughts on the Volley") with your students. Teach them to blend the journey to the net from the backcourt. Along the way they will work out those kinks in their volley techniques...the collision between man and ball will require that of them. Have a little fun with it.

[don_budge]

Hello Blake!

Hi Don_Budge,

In your post above you make the following statement "much of it lies in the lack of tactics in the approach game and much of that lies in the lack of touch"

I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on approach tactics, since I enjoy playing an all court game, and I realize how important the approach is to successful volleys.

Thanks,
Blake

I moved my response to the thread "My Thoughts on the Volley". Thanks for the question. It was a great one and it required a considerable amount of thought. Great questions are the key to good conversations.

[nokomis]

don's comments

Probably a poor choice of words ("seems") but I was looking at this from a lower level of coaching and how it might apply.

I have tried over the years to introduce the volley with the approach with mixed/disappointing results. A few get it while most don't and just run through the shot bi-passing the split step. Another key is getting them (or any player) not to stop on the split step. Unless the volley stroke is well developed, I've found that using/introducing the serge forward confuses the process quite a bit. I also don't want players to get so close to the net that they are easily lobed or more likely, passed. I like what your saying and believe it important but perhaps at much higher levels.

I probably have a half dozen players, mostly at the high school level, that incorporate your ideas well but that leaves the high majority that don't - about 50 at the high school and middle school level.

Look, I'm older than most and have been around this game more time than I care to admit but I'm always looking for ways to improve my players and coaching techniques - kinda why I like John and this site. Although I'm working with middle school kids at the moment (can't have contact with high school kids outside the season) I will again try to introduce these methods.

Regarding racquet size: I think the chances of reducing head size to 80 square inches is a pipe dream - its not going to happen. There isn't a current player using anything close to that today; would require massive retooling of molds; would significantly change teaching techniques (might be for the better); - IMO, just not a viable option that we will never see.

[privas]

Low Volley

Paul, excellent, most excellent work on this. A true gem.

As a weekend hacker anchored to the baseline, my biggest fear of serve and volley is the Low Volley. I've seen Edberg and Sampras and Rafter get tripped up on this one so many times on big points.

I would love to see a brief explanation on how to deal with this one.

Pedro