Serve and Volley: Summary

[don_budge]

Jose Higueras...clay court specialist

What a tale the draw sheet can tell. Well, well...who is this. Why it is none other than Jose Higueras...the clay court specialist. He occupied the number 80 spot in the singles draw and he was seeded number 12.

But Jose was a clay court specialist by definition. Typical of the Spanish players back then when the differences between court surfaces were appreciable. The play on clay and grass were different propositions and all of the players could make the switch more or less...more or less. Most of Higueras' success was on the dirt. Some better than others. Borg for instance...adapted perhaps better than the rest. All of those Wimbledon trophies to go along with all of those French Open trophies. Somehow he had a bit more difficulty in getting it right in the big ones when it came down to Deco Turf. Such was the nature of the game...back then.

But back to Jose...isn't he someone very high up in the echelon of junior development in the United States of America. Very interesting...as if we need more encouragement for developing players to stay back on the baseline. Jose lost in the third round to John Sadri...who was probably more adapted to the Wimbledon style of play...serve and volley. Keeping things on thread. And the like.

It pays to know your history...boys and girls.

[don_budge]

Staying on line...I mean on thread. Into the future we row...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLVnrUKL8yY

The first comment below the video was interesting...but he is obviously "living in the past". Isn't he?

@ jefdarcy. If you think that the tennis of today is more exciting than the real tennis of the wood era, then you are deluding yourself! The tennis of the wood era was vastly more interesting to watch with its' greater diversity of playing styles than the one-dimensional, tediously boring baseline grinding, power-hitting style of today. Yeah Tanner hit his serves with tremendous power, but it was much harder to generate power with wood or metal rackets than with the too powerful, ultra-light graphite rackets of today.

Roscoe also had the reputation for his serve and volley game but he could back it up with the rest of his all court game. I was impressed in particular with his backhand which he seemed to be pretty comfortable driving on the lawn...the patchy lawn. Back in the days...of you know what.

The singles draw of the 1979 Wimbledon Championships...

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Share/Event-Draws.aspx?e=540&y=1979

The doubles draw of the 1979 Wimbledon Championships...

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Share/Event-Draws.aspx?Year=1979&EventId=540&Draw=md

Every draw sheet tells a story...Rod Stewart 1971

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmyGa29zIqk

Yes...by all means let's keep everything on thread. That way we can go through life with blinders on. We know the way...we've been here before. The river of life never ends up in the same place twice.

I recognized four names from the draw sheets of players that I had played in college or in practice by coincidence.

I knew virtually every name in those draws...that's history. The draw sheets definitely tell a story. Even the doubles draw does...it tells a story. But nobody even glances at the doubles anymore. Rumor has it they don't play the doubles at the net anymore either.

But back in 1979 virtually everyone of the players played in the doubles too and every player was a complete tennis player in their own right. The game was different back then. Some guy commented on the video that was posted...he seemed to think along the same lines as I do. Take for example Roscoe Tanner's semifinal opponent Patrick Dupre. Patrick was a beautiful player, a big guy with a big game...he took out another beauty in Adriano Pannata in the round before. A five setter probably worth watching too. I may be going out on a limb here...again.

Position number 23 in the singles draw...Gene Mayer. One of the first "rats" to play with the Prince Graphite 110. He should have taken out back...well they should have done something to him. It would be interesting to interview him. I wonder if he caught any flak for playing with the "Princess" back in those days. You know...the expression "politically correct" wasn't being used then. It wasn't needed.

Check out the doubles draw...check out the champions of the 1979 Wimbledon Doubles Championships. None other than the...dare I say it...oh, why not? The Great John McEnroe and Peter Fleming...one of the greatest doubles teams ever. All-American tennis.

McEnroe was upset in the round of sixteen by Tom Gullikson...I wonder what kind of racquet he was using. I mean Gullikson...I know John was using a Wllson Pro Staff...wood model.

I'll take Rod Stewart over any of the current pop acts out today. His music sort of withstands the test of time...much as these classic tennis videos do. I wonder if in the future thirty years hence if they will be pulling out the finals of current Slams...as if they were classics. I have my doubts...it will be against the law by then.

But make no mistake...my comments are definitely on thread. I guarantee you that every single player in both the singles and the doubles draw used serve and volley tactic predominately throughout the tournament. That's a fact...Jack.

[klacr]

Borg seemed impervious to nerves and emotion, until this match. Candid of Borg to admit that after the match.

And don't worry, I'm not too concerned with this thread staying on topic. We all have license to stray away from the center line. I've done it plenty of times on here. These threads are for us to have fun, share information, guidance and learn something along the way. We are all here for one reason...we love this sport.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[stotty]

Love seeing Borg serve and volley on that double break point. Tanner played the right shots and gave Borg a handful. But Borg just held tough. Tanners backhand was a very nice weapon and Borg knew that match was a little too close for comfort. You can see the relief in Borg's face as he sat down after the match.

Borg said after it was one of only a few matches where he became nervous. He could struggle against good left handed servers like Tanner and McEnroe. Borg came to thoroughly dominate Connors, but Connors may as well have been right handed because he never really had a good lefty serve. He paid the price for that against Borg.

I wouldn't worry about staying on thread. Once a thread has run it's course, let it meander. It can always be brought back on thread at any time either by the owner or any other poster.

[klacr]

Love seeing Borg serve and volley on that double break point. Tanner played the right shots and gave Borg a handful. But Borg just held tough. Tanners backhand was a very nice weapon and Borg knew that match was a little too close for comfort. You can see the relief in Borg's face as he sat down after the match.

In today's game, I'd love to see players serve and volley even if it isn't their "style". Nothing wrong with being a complete player is there? At any level?

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[don_budge]

Roscoe Tanner vs. Bjorn Borg...1979 Wimbledon Finals

Tanner certainly had a quicker wind up and delivery, but that may have been a cause of a lower ball toss.

Trying to keep this thread on track...

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLVnrUKL8yY

Roscoe Tanner decided to add a perm to his hairdo for this 1979 Wimbledon Final. He lost to Bjorn Borg in a 5-set epic at the All-England Club to give Borg his fourth straight Wimbledon.

But yes...we must keep things on track. Mustn't we? Tanner's toss was very low...is he actually hitting the ball on the way up? He uses the pinpoit which usually encourages a higher ball toss...study his delivery a bit in this pretty decent resolution to understand his cadence and rhythm. His backswing seems pretty deliberate.

But very interestingly...look at that racquet he is playing with. It is of the PDP brand. A sort of less popular and more obscure model to the Red Head metal racquet that was somewhat more popular.

The first comment below the video was interesting...but he is obviously "living in the past". Isn't he?

@ jefdarcy. If you think that the tennis of today is more exciting than the real tennis of the wood era, then you are deluding yourself! The tennis of the wood era was vastly more interesting to watch with its' greater diversity of playing styles than the one-dimensional, tediously boring baseline grinding, power-hitting style of today. Yeah Tanner hit his serves with tremendous power, but it was much harder to generate power with wood or metal rackets than with the too powerful, ultra-light graphite rackets of today.


Roscoe also had the reputation for his serve and volley game but he could back it up with the rest of his all court game. I was impressed in particular with his backhand which he seemed to be pretty comfortable driving on the lawn...the patchy lawn. Back in the days...of you know what.

[klacr]

Tanner certainly had a quicker wind up and delivery, but that may have been a cause of a lower ball toss. I'd say Ivanisevic had a stronger shoulder turn and deeper knee bend.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qS5AM-2gc-w

How we all remember Goran...A Champion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hECNfj5G_s

Trying to keep this thread on track, Interestingly, Wimbledon was really the only tournament he primarily served and volleyed at. Most hard court and clay court events he stayed back. But at Wimbledon, his serve mixed with the grass mixed with his mentality created a magical elixir of memorable tennis.


Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[stotty]

At least it was girls in his room and not boys! He and Roscoe tanner should be timed to see who had the fastest wind up/delivery.

Nice comparison. I'm backing Tanner.

[GeoffWilliams]

At least it was girls in his room and not boys! He and Roscoe tanner should be timed to see who had the fastest wind up/delivery.

[klacr]

Goran Ivanisevic had more mph's on his serve than Sampras but not as much spin. A big reason why his serve was so effective was more mental. He was a lefty that possessed a good serve, which made it a great serve to his opponents facing it. "Like staring down the barrel of a gun" is how a friend of mine, coach and former tour player Cyril Saulnier describes facing the Ivanisevic serve. They practiced numerous times on tour but actually had only faced each other once in Singles. Saulnier told me the most dangerous part of the Ivaniesevic serve was that the shot and the person delivering it were both unpredictable. Patterns, trends and location preferences were not something you could count on with Goran on the serve.

Ivanisevic has a very quick motion, something that I'm a fan of aesthetically. It's a quick motion and a quick ball, add a lefty spin and you have a legitimate weapon.

Many people write Ivanisevic off as just a serve. But the guy got to #2 in the world at a time when Sampras, Agassi, Courier, Chang and every other great player was still around in the early 90's. You can't make it to #2 in the world with just that serve. Nick Bollettieri said that Goran was one of the most talented players he ever had at his academy, unfortunately he had to kick him out because he kept having girls over in is room.

Goran was one of a kind. He understood he had to get to the net as well from his serve. He also had a legitimate ground game that he could survive with. He understands serve and volley better than most people give him credit for. In a way, his serving success diminished the other strokes he had. Also, His personality on court overshadowed his true ability level. He's coaching Marin Cilic now on tour and Cilic has shown some signs of the game that took him to the Top-10 earlier in his career. Cilic also credits Ivanisevic with helping him understand the forecourt and volleys better and has implemented it more this season to good success.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[stotty]

It's the good speed mixed with that spin that made the ball feel like a bowling ball off the strings. A specific combination/ratio of those components made that ball dangerous. When I worked at the Harry Hopman Academy at Saddlebrook I remember watching Sampras hit serves. When he practiced serves with no returner and the ball would hit the fence, it made a different sound than any other serve I can remember. It was as if someone catapulted a cannon ball into the fence. The sound was deep, thick and muddled from the reverberations from the entire fence absorbing the force, not just the windscreen and a small pocket of the fence.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

I witnessed much the same thing watching Sampras serving on the practice courts at Wimbledon. I witnessed Goran on the same day whose serve seem as quick but lighter. The fence didn't shake as much. Weird this heavy ball stuff.

[klacr]

It's the good speed mixed with that spin that made the ball feel like a bowling ball off the strings. A specific combination/ratio of those components made that ball dangerous. When I worked at the Harry Hopman Academy at Saddlebrook I remember watching Sampras hit serves. When he practiced serves with no returner and the ball would hit the fence, it made a different sound than any other serve I can remember. It was as if someone catapulted a cannon ball into the fence. The sound was deep, thick and muddled from the reverberations from the entire fence absorbing the force, not just the windscreen and a small pocket of the fence.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[gzhpcu]

This is addressed nicely in John's article: http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/..._and_spin.html

[stotty]

Sampras's serve was such a weapon. He really had no other choice but to come in and volley those balls away. That Sampras serve is legendary. Arguably the greatest single weapon in tennis history. Just flawless.

Sampras was more of an incredible athlete and clutch performer than a great tennis player. He understood and utilized his serve and volley because that was the game that he knew he could win with. Serve and voley helps when you have a great serve. Remember great does not mean fast. Sampras would hit serves, in the teens and 120's and that's what he needed to get himself to the net. He could wind up and hit in the high 130's and even the 140's with ridiculous ease. But he chose to make the serve one piece of the dynamic puzzle, not just the whole puzzle.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Good analysis.

Tim Henman described his serve as heavy, heavier than all the others.

[klacr]

Sampras's serve was such a weapon. He really had no other choice but to come in and volley those balls away. That Sampras serve is legendary. Arguably the greatest single weapon in tennis history. Just flawless.

Sampras was more of an incredible athlete and clutch performer than a great tennis player. He understood and utilized his serve and volley because that was the game that he knew he could win with. Serve and volley helps when you have a great serve. Remember great does not mean fast. Sampras would hit serves, in the teens and 120's and that's what he needed to get himself to the net. He could wind up and hit in the high 130's and even the 140's with ridiculous ease. But he chose to make the serve one piece of the dynamic puzzle, not just the whole puzzle.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton