Interactive Forum December 2013: Tim Henman Serve and Volley

[don_budge]

In lieu of the "Split Step"...

Split step...I don't believe that I have uttered those words.

Two things Tim exhibits here that I try to get students to buy into...

One is that the "weight shift" on volleys occur in a different manner then on groundstrokes. The net game is so dynamic that different stances, weight shifts, etc are used, but as a general tenant, the ball is struck in the middle of the weight shift, or midstride. (before the front foot lands) By doing so, the momentum continues to move forward. The legs can drive and propel through the shot.

On the groundstrokes, the weight shift occurs BEFORE the hit. Essentially, the front foot is established as an axis point to rotate around. Problem is, if one uses this fundamental on the volley, the front foot is used as braking mechanism...a real bad thing.

Secondly, Tim demonstrates perfectly one of the keys to hitting low volleys...which is to hit the ball on the descending part of the swing arc. If one thinks of the swing path as a slight high to low to high movement (smile pattern) it is important to strike the ball on the descending part of that path with an open racquet face so that ample backspin is applied.

30 years ago, Chris Burr was one of the best practitioners of this skill as he dominated SoCal senior tennis and carried me to a Sectional Championship and a number one ranking in 35 doubles. But I don't think any of us really completely understood exactly what we were doing. We didn't have the benefit of video slow motion to take things apart the way we do now.

One variation to the "float step" is to take lots of very little steps as the return is being struck so you can still change direction very quickly and I think that is what Tim is doing. But even then, it is not that he is landing in a "split position" and then exploding to the ball as he sees the return. He is actually floating on those little steps at the critical time and then making his move once he sees the return.

Now here is where I am going to disagree with conventional wisdom. In a best case scenario, I want that left foot to land and stabilize me before I strike the volley. Unfortunately, we only are able to get that foot down in a minority of opportunities and we usually have to hit the volley with that front foot stlll in the air. So it seems we are trying to step into the ball and create power from that lunge. And it does add some small amount of power, but not to the degree that "stepping in" is so emphasized. Much more important is balance and the degree to which I can get down to the low volley ala Edberg. I don't want to hit that volley with my foot in the air any more than I want to hit my forehand with my front foot in the air (when I do have time to step in and choose too which is less often in today's game) or any more than I want my weight to be transferring from back to front as I'm making contact with my forehand; I want that transfer to be at least 90% complete by the time I meet my forehand. Just like any other stroke, the body generates force with torques; in this case the right side of the body torques around a planted left foot and stabilized shoulder as the "u" structure (see JY's description of the "u" in the volley) tries to maintain the racket face perpendicular to the intended path of the ball. You are never going to be able to "stick" a low volley if you are trying to generate your power on the shot with your lunge forward.

I fully expect to get a lot of comments and disagreement on what I've just said. Look forward to hearing what you all have to say.

don

It's nice to hear of your association with cburr from the past. No doubt you two were a formidable team. It is also great to hear his comments...obviously this is a veteran student of the game and he has really delivered some gems here to the forum. I have a question for you too....why did you leave John McEnroe off of your list of all-time great volleyers? Mere oversight? Just curious.

As for this thread...let’s just say it has really blossomed as klacr observed. This particular video was really rich in content and I second the notion that it was a great choice by John for the sake of discussion. What a great discussion it has been too with some really solid observations about the stroke, the use of the body and tennis_chiro’s and 10splayer’s discussion of footwork. In fact it seems that all of the contributors to this thread have chimed in with some great insight into what the makeup of a good, solid volley technique consists of. In my estimation...it’s a really educational thread about a subject that no longer gets much attention in the tennis world. It’s too bad to...any worthy student of the game realizes at this point that there is something fundamentally fucked up in the tennis world when the dimension of hitting the ball in the air has dissipated into rather thin air.

“Float steps”. That’s a great concept. Brings to mind the greatest volleyer that I have ever witnessed to play the game...one John Patrick McEnroe. An acrobatic genius if you ask me. Approaching the net on tippy toes. That is precisely the impression that he always gave me...it was as if he was floating on into the net and into position to apply the knife. The stiletto. The surgeons scalpel. So many times he was able to get his feet under him under so many circumstances and under pressure too. As if his Nike’s actually were air cushioned. When the pressure is on that is often when the footwork goes to pot...but Johnny never shied away from the task at hand. And for him the task was taking the net. He floated like a butterfly...stung like a nasty little wasp.

The comments of tennis_chiro are not arguable...there is absolutely nothing to disagree with. In the dimension of net play there is no room for the concept of perfect on any sort of consistent basis when it comes to footwork. I am not certain what percentage of the time that the best volleyer ever was able to glide into that front foot perfectly as the racquet was knifing into the ball, but certainly it was probably less than fifty percent of the time. Certainly back in the days of Classic Tennis volleyers were more consistently successful in getting that front foot down as there was a bit more time when they were playing with bits of wood and not graphite howitzers. Since it is not a thing that one can expect to be perfect at most of the time, there must be some kind of axiom to follow when all is not perfect.

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/music_videos/federer_fh_not_gone/index.html

My favorite music tennis video of all time. Roger Federer slamming forehands from less than perfect stability and less than perfect positon...yet on every single shot he is simulating perfect footwork and balance even if he cannot achieve it as he delivers the racquet to the ball. Here is the metaphor for volleying...getting the chest squarely over the spot where the front foot would have been planted had there been time to plant it there.

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/music_videos/winning_edge/winning_edge_mcenroe_lendl_volleys_large.html

Volleying consists of three movements performed simultaneously. Just watch Johnny from basically a still position. The arm, wrist, hand and racquet action which is a rather short and descending action giving the ball spin and direction. The rotation of the trunk or shoulders which is bearing the bulk of the load that is the definition of power or speed to the shot. The placement of the feet that makes it possible to deliver the payload of rotation and arm action. See Johnny place all of his weight on his front foot when he is spoon fed the ball in the air. In all of tennis there is maybe no better feeling than “sticking” a volley as tennis_chiro likes to put it. My coach used to refer to this type of contact as “crisp”. Crisp volleying. If you are a crisp volleyer you are somehow delivering the payload on a rather consistent basis and this of course means from all sorts of positions, deviations, acrobatic stunts, leaping, pouncing, stretching. You are living on the edge if you are living and dying by the volley or the net attack. Nobody was better at living on the edge than McEnroe. Even in the sanity department. But of course nobody does it anymore...volley on a consistent basis that is. Another indication that something is “rotten in Denmark”...or all fucked up in the world of tennis.

If you cannot achieve all three of what I consider the fundamental objectives of a volley stroke of arm, body and feet...make like Meatloaf does in “A Bat Out of Hell” as he laments to his parting lover...two out of three ain’t bad. If you can’t get that front foot down make damn certain the other two actions are accomplished...rotating shoulders with accompanying arm and racquet action. You’ll be all right.

The last fundamental to get in place is that darned front foot tennis_chiro writes about and 10splayer refers to. If you cannot get that front foot down...do as the Swiss Maestro does. Make do. Simulate that foot being in position with the body as much as possible and get that chest on the ball. Get your center of gravity forwards and lean on that stroke as the forward momentum. Don’t run through it...don’t fall on it. Lean. Gather yourself just before or at impact and “Stop the World”...make yourself into a wall at impact. A structure of balance and solid integrity. Deflect that ball to your tactical objective. After all...the world’s best volleyer may not be John McEnroe at all. The worldsbestvolleyer may just be any old tennis wall...the wall never misses you know. Feet or no feet...just as tennis_chiro suggests.

[klacr]

I was really hoping for more of a response to my comments about the volley in post #28. KLACR, don_budge, Stotty .... what do you think

don

don,

thanks for the post. The split-step, float steps or whatever else you want to call it is crucial. There are many ways to get to the ball with different types of footwork. Some being more or less effective than others. I don't think anything you said in the post was wrong or blasphemous by any means. I will be briefly touching on the "split-step" in a future article on my serve and volley series for tennisplayer.net (stay tuned).
The key is to get players to learn the timing and kinesthetic feel for any type of footwork, especially if approaching the net. In an ideal situation, one specific type of footwork pattern may be preferred, but how often do we get the ideal shot? There are many variables involved. The float step is a very cool maneuver, But Edberg and McEnroe did this the best. So smooth and elegant.

Can you master this without the basic and fundamental understanding and application of a regular split step and how that is supposed to work? Clearly, this comes down to the level of player but since this thread began from Henman's advanced serve and volley, I'll try to focus on that. The timing of the volley in conjunction with the footwork is critical and and don is right when he talks about the landing on the front foot. I doubt don was looking for a debate, even if he was, he won't find one with me. This footwork, timing and landing is something I wholeheartedly support and teach my players. I don't really get into the technical variations too much I just make sure they understand what should be expected and they can work within those parameters. I improve, adjust or evolve their footwork from there.

Also, don_budge is correct, the best volleyer in the world that I've ever played against was that tennis wall. It made me so much better but the more I improved, the more it improved. I could never surpass that wall.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton