Hey ljubicic:

[bottle]

~

Very good dance lessons could be the answer at any age. Like anything really worthwhile however good results can take a very long time.

Forgive me, hockeyscout, if you feel like it, for thinking that rhythm can be taught.

I find that impossible steps begin to get nailed (by me) almost two years later but only if I have the confidence to persist and return to them.

You could say that far beneath my ungainliness I have a store of natural rhythm as deep and secret as the well of Democritus, but my Swiss ancestors wore horns on their helmets and I doubt it.

The challenge here more likely has to do with reinforced brain paths and myelination. But we could always have the traditional argument about heredity vs. environment (for which I would NOT forgive you).

One tennis point: If a big guy is awkward and does not move well, he damned well better deliver a great serve and then keep his initiative; otherwise, the little dancers who are closer to the ground will pick him to pieces.

[hockeyscout]

My grandma and grandfather were Canadian Champions in ballroom dancing. I learned from the best. They made it with zero talent, and outstanding work habits. By the way, they did not start until they were in the 50\'s. However, they were VERY smart. And, durable as hell. Their grand-daughter became a professional ballerina, and she was a rare breed at 6\'4\". Not the most talented girl, however, anal retentive when it came to sport, strong and tremendously durable and it took her a lot further than many expected. 25 years in Europe, and still working in Germany last I heard. I got a big family, mom has 18 brothers and sisters, and about their must be at least 200 grand-kids so you kind of lose touch with that mass amount of people.

[bottle]

Cool.

[klacr]

They can be willing, ready and able!

However, if they lack rhythm it won\'t work (no matter how great their hands work or how long their wingspan is or how great they have been coached to technically understand where to be in terms of court positioning).

Watch Ali, he\'s got it.

Not many big guys have it, however, the ones that do have a GREAT life (on and off the court).

I haven\'t met many NBA or NFL kids who can\'t dance, and that\'s why they are so darned good, injury free and durable.

If you watch Raonic closely you will see he cannot hunt, and he\'s got zero rhythm, and is simply not engaging the small muscle groups.

The last thing I would do is serve and volley him! Last.

He waits because he cannot rhythmically hunt, pounce and move in for the kill.

He\'s a nice white kid from the big city

If you watch Agassi, you will see he gets it.

Mrs Agassi (Andre\'s mom) was a hell of a good looking woman when younger (a 10 - 10), Mike can sing - dance, the guy was an Olympian boxer and he taught his son how to move like a man should move. His son dated some fabulous woman, and life was good to him.

You simply cannot improve someones strokes when they are chaotic with rhythm, and do not know how to place their feet to the time of music.

1-2-3-4, 1-2-3-4, 1-2-3-4 -- you gotta be able to do it.

You know, you have to be very brave, relaxed and confident to run or dance well, and that is not Milos.

If he was seven or eight years old it could have been enhanced a lot, however, maybe his serve would have never developed into such a great weapon if he was more rhythmic with the balls of his feet!

So if they have no rhythm and are too chaotic, you want them to attempt to sustain longer rallies and stay on baseline against smaller and faster guys?

bottle said \"everyone\". I assumed that meant...everyone, including us. Guess I misinterpreted.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[10splayer]

They can be willing, ready and able!

However, if they lack rhythm it won\'t work (no matter how great their hands work or how long their wingspan is or how great they have been coached to technically understand where to be in terms of court positioning).

Watch Ali, he\'s got it.

Not many big guys have it, however, the ones that do have a GREAT life (on and off the court).

I haven\'t met many NBA or NFL kids who can\'t dance, and that\'s why they are so darned good, injury free and durable.

If you watch Raonic closely you will see he cannot hunt, and he\'s got zero rhythm, and is simply not engaging the small muscle groups.

The last thing I would do is serve and volley him! Last.

He waits because he cannot rhythmically hunt, pounce and move in for the kill.

He\'s a nice white kid from the big city

If you watch Agassi, you will see he gets it.

Mrs Agassi (Andre\'s mom) was a hell of a good looking woman when younger (a 10 - 10), Mike can sing - dance, the guy was an Olympian boxer and he taught his son how to move like a man should move. His son dated some fabulous woman, and life was good to him.

You simply cannot improve someones strokes when they are chaotic with rhythm, and do not know how to place their feet to the time of music.

1-2-3-4, 1-2-3-4, 1-2-3-4 -- you gotta be able to do it.

You know, you have to be very brave, relaxed and confident to run or dance well, and that is not Milos.

If he was seven or eight years old it could have been enhanced a lot, however, maybe his serve would have never developed into such a great weapon if he was more rhythmic with the balls of his feet!

Totally subjective, but do you really think Andre was a great mover?

[don_budge]

Milos Ranoic…when you get tangled up you just tango on.

So if they have no rhythm and are too chaotic, you want them to attempt to sustain longer rallies and stay on baseline against smaller and faster guys?

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

No…that doesn't make any sense. Does it? I always wonder why guys like Raonic and Berdych play the game in the manner in which they do. It could be that they were starting at a young age and enjoying a lot of success so why bother to convert? It could be an oversight in the modern paradigm of tennis.

Milos Raonic most certainly has rhythm…or cadence…or whatever you want to call it. When he prepares to go into his service motion he gives the racquet a couple of "bobs" and he does it with his body and shoulders. Most certainly his whole body and being are engaged in his service motion. That is the definition of rhythm. Timing.

His backcourt play is rather excellent as well as he competes with smaller and innately quicker opponents thereby spotting them the advantage in this department…in this facet of the game.

Tennis is a game where the relative weaknesses and relative strengths of players are pitted against one another. GeoffWilliams ofter refers to racquets and equipment as weapons…but the true weapons of any tennis player are their "strokes". Thus you have the relative strengths and weaknesses.

Obviously the major weapon of Milos Raonic is his nuclear serve and motion. The question is to how best to utilize this wondrous weapon tactically speaking. Traditionally any coach worth his salt would be licking his chops to have a protege that possessed such a weapon and the best way to employ it would have been to serve and volley.

Domination of your service game in such a matter can have a demoralizing effect on your opponent. It puts so much pressure on him to hold his own serve it can have a disruptive effect on his tactics or even his service motion itself. Given that tennis is such a psychological battle as well it is best to play with the intent of demoralizing your opponent in order that he will doubt his capacity to match his relative strengths and weaknesses you that of his opponent.

Pete Sampras made a living out of doing just that. So did John McEnroe and Richard Gonzales as well. These are just a few to mention as the game used to be played wholly in this manner. Granted you have to back some in time to realize it…which is another good reason to be a sound student of the game.

I am watching Milos Raonic play against Berankis as I type on my keyboard so furiously…60+ words a minute…and on virtually every single serve he would merely be mopping up. It makes all the sense in the world for him to serve and volley except he wasn't initiated in this type of play as evidenced by his two hand backhand…which is perhaps his biggest liability.

[GeoffWilliams]

His biggest liability is his return game. We are often taught to relax during the serve motion. No one talks about relaxing during the return, but it's necessary to relax the arms/upper body in order to achieve full potential, while the legs remain fast and springy.


Upper and lower body are two different stories on the return game.

All the pros are taught to bend over at a 90 degree while in ready position receiving serve. Why is that? So they can place their chest "on top" of the ball when contact occurs, and to add momentum into the shot during stutter step/split forward. If you are holding at 90% and breaking at 10% you are going to play a lot of tie breakers. Ask Isner and Ray man about that.

All these bigger guys have the same issues: they don't break as much. They stand too close to the baseline.. They take too big a swing. Bigger arms, longer legs equal: slower on their return reactions. So why is Nadal the only top player crouching 10-15' off the line? He's also the player with the most rpms on his returns. That's not a coincidence.

If I had Ray man's serve, I'd be coming into the net on all my serves. The bigger guys cannot dominate from the line. They lose almost all the bigger matches. So it would seem to add up: play lessor opp. from the line and the more dangerous opp. coming in. No one teaches that. No one is teaching them to stand 10' off the line on returns either.

HOw about setting up short fh with the first serve, and serving/volleying on their seconds, with heavy twister/kicks?

[klacr]

His biggest liability is his return game. We are often taught to relax during the serve motion. No one talks about relaxing during the return, but it's necessary to relax the arms/upper body in order to achieve full potential, while the legs remain fast and springy.


Upper and lower body are two different stories on the return game.

All the pros are taught to bend over at a 90 degree while in ready position receiving serve. Why is that? So they can place their chest "on top" of the ball when contact occurs, and to add momentum into the shot during stutter step/split forward. If you are holding at 90% and breaking at 10% you are going to play a lot of tie breakers. Ask Isner and Ray man about that.

All these bigger guys have the same issues: they don't break as much. They stand too close to the baseline.. They take too big a swing. Bigger arms, longer legs equal: slower on their return reactions. So why is Nadal the only top player crouching 10-15' off the line? He's also the player with the most rpms on his returns. That's not a coincidence.

If I had Ray man's serve, I'd be coming into the net on all my serves. The bigger guys cannot dominate from the line. They lose almost all the bigger matches. So it would seem to add up: play lessor opp. from the line and the more dangerous opp. coming in. No one teaches that. No one is teaching them to stand 10' off the line on returns either.

HOw about setting up short fh with the first serve, and serving/volleying on their seconds, with heavy twister/kicks?

Great comments Geoff. As usual.

Big guys that possess the bomb like Isner and Raonic almost have to have an attacking instinct. The amount of returns they get floating back should not be handled from baseline. Given their lack of court speed and big swings, it's better if they keep points short. Raonic has begun to venture into the net way more than he used to and I know Ivan Ljubicic is encouraging that.

I think these guys can use their big kick 2nd serve 75% of the time to come in after and keep that 1st serve % high. And then go for the big bomb when they need it and that speed will seem even more due to increase in pace.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[don_budge]

Case in point…David and Goliath

His biggest liability is his return game. We are often taught to relax during the serve motion. No one talks about relaxing during the return, but it's necessary to relax the arms/upper body in order to achieve full potential, while the legs remain fast and springy.


Upper and lower body are two different stories on the return game.

All the pros are taught to bend over at a 90 degree while in ready position receiving serve. Why is that? So they can place their chest "on top" of the ball when contact occurs, and to add momentum into the shot during stutter step/split forward. If you are holding at 90% and breaking at 10% you are going to play a lot of tie breakers. Ask Isner and Ray man about that.

All these bigger guys have the same issues: they don't break as much. They stand too close to the baseline.. They take too big a swing. Bigger arms, longer legs equal: slower on their return reactions. So why is Nadal the only top player crouching 10-15' off the line? He's also the player with the most rpms on his returns. That's not a coincidence.

If I had Ray man's serve, I'd be coming into the net on all my serves. The bigger guys cannot dominate from the line. They lose almost all the bigger matches. So it would seem to add up: play lessor opp. from the line and the more dangerous opp. coming in. No one teaches that. No one is teaching them to stand 10' off the line on returns either.

HOw about setting up short fh with the first serve, and serving/volleying on their seconds, with heavy twister/kicks?

Milos Raonic loses to Rikardas Berankis from Lithuania at the Kremlin Cup…ranked #116 in the world. A bit of a blip on the radar screen of Milos Raonic who has had some pretty consistent results as of late. He may be still suffering the effects of some bug he picked up in Asia. What a life…Asia one week, Russia the next. Raonic has had some pretty darned consistent results the last six months or so.

Here is a good case in point though in advocating that he serve and volley. If he wasn't feeling well it would behoove him to keep the points shorter. The "Big Lug" loses to a 5' 9" and 155 pound Lithuanian. Hmmm…

[hockeyscout]

Great comments Geoff. As usual.

Big guys that possess the bomb like Isner and Raonic almost have to have an attacking instinct. The amount of returns they get floating back should not be handled from baseline. Given their lack of court speed and big swings, it's better if they keep points short. Raonic has begun to venture into the net way more than he used to and I know Ivan Ljubicic is encouraging that.

I think these guys can use their big kick 2nd serve 75% of the time to come in after and keep that 1st serve % high. And then go for the big bomb when they need it and that speed will seem even more due to increase in pace.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

I agree.

What you say makes sense, however ...

- I do not think you are going to turn a 6'6" Endomorph body type into a serve and volley player EVER.

- I don't think you could EVER develop an aggressive serve and volley player from Metro Toronto, Canada.

- He's not a naturally aggressive kid. If he was, he'd play hockey. Tennis and soccer players from Canada play those sports for a reason BTW.

It's a great idea with his serve to get him to the net, however, however, he's not going to be able to run his route, turn, stop, start and flow. It just isn't going to happen. Is he intelligent enough to make it work? I am not sure.

Another issue, I do not think he is durable enough to be a serve and volley player. Sampras was! NFL body. He could put in the hours and not break down. Milos can't. You want to be a serve and volley player? Better be willing to really put in the hours, and be a relentless prick. It takes a lot of work, and even more confidence and arrogance.

The most important observation.

How could Milos develop a serve and volley game in Metro Toronto? Practice time? Not enough of it. Tennis Canada won't sponsor anyone at the important stages (6 to 13). Plus gas, traffic is backed up night and day and getting home is always a major distance.

Remember, Sampras lived a block or two from the tennis courts as a kid, and so did Austin and Davenport.

The hours add up, and you can't suddenly change when you turn pro.

Now to Agassi, and his foot speed. Agassi had his own court (and a dad who was an Olympic level boxer who revolutionized coaching), and while he did not become a great server or volley type he did revolutionize the sport in other ways due to the fact he had opportunity.

Last as for Agassi, no he was not fast. However, his field speed was outstanding. Its not about speed, its how you use what you got, and apply it to your specific sport. Andre's speed was above average, however, nothing to write home about I agree. However, he was perfectly ALWAYS under control, no one in the history of tennis has ever started - stopped - dropped better coming out of corners and turns better, his understanding of evasion theory in getting to the ball was light years ahead of his competition, his flow from next to next to next was innate and his continuity of momentum was as good as it gets. Before Agassi even hit the ball he'd know where his feet needed to go next to win the point. His feet were ten miles ahead of any competitor, I call them Smart Feet. As well, Agassi's gait was unbelievable and he approached balls at perfect pace. He basically mastered boxing principals, and wasn't technically playing the same game of classical tennis every player of his generation was playing. His gait was so good he was durable as well, which resulted in more practice time and no major stalls in his career trajectory.

[klacr]

Lost

Hockeyscout,

Maybe I'm lost.

Raonic will never be a complete serve and volleyer. However, his inability to run, turn, stop and flow would probably be exploited even more in a baseline rally wouldn't it? With a serve that creates floating returns, isn't it beneficial for him to get to net, keep the points shorter to limit his movement.

You make an interesting point regarding NFL bodies. You say Sampras has an NFL body more than Raonic. Sampras was listed at 6'1" 170lbs. Raonic listed at 6'5" 215lbs. Assuming we are talking about the same NFL, are we? I think football coaches may want a 6'5" 200+lbs on their team rather than 6'1" 170lbs. If I saw a guy at 6'1" and 170lbs on the field I'm going to blow him up and snap him in half.
Am I missing something here? Bueller...Bueller?

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[GeoffWilliams]

Big guys that possess the bomb like Isner and Raonic almost have to have an attacking instinct. The amount of returns they get floating back should not be handled from baseline. Given their lack of court speed and big swings, it's better if they keep points short. Raonic has begun to venture into the net way more than he used to and I know Ivan Ljubicic is encouraging that.

I think these guys can use their big kick 2nd serve 75% of the time to come in after and keep that 1st serve % high. And then go for the big bomb when they need it and that speed will seem even more due to increase in pace.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Excellent point about the high percentage, which would be practiced against guys you know you are going to beat. Taller guys who have deadly kicks/twists are too addicted to their big bombs.

Nishikori has the fastest unit turn now, and a very fast, body fly forwards ground stroke of fh. Which is why he beats Ray man. N. return is far deadlier/faster/sideways turn and unturns are more producible under pressure.
Hockeyscout is right about Agassi's foot work, but he learned that from Connors. C. had the best foot work of his generation, with multiple smaller steps, and an excellent transition game forwards, which he did not get credited for.

[klacr]

Excellent point about the high percentage, which would be practiced against guys you know you are going to beat. Taller guys who have deadly kicks/twists are too addicted to their big bombs.

Sampras used the tactic often. He always hit a high percentage of first serves in, and although he was capable of getting much more juice on the serve he resisted. Then, on a crucial point he'd amp it up into the high 120's and to his opponent it would seem like 140. Being a great server is more than just pure power. It is a strategy all its own.

When I was growing up and playing juniors, I would test out my serve by only use 2nd serves for both first and second. I knew that if I could compete and win with just my second serve I would be well on my way. I'd use the big bomb sparingly but it was that restraint that made it more effective when I did unload the cannonball. I found that my 2nd serve would give many of the other juniors issue and set me up perfectly for a volley or easy put away. I loved my 2nd serve in juniors and it gave me a great deal of confidence going into every match.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[lobndropshot]

I really like the point about heaviness on the serve and a high 1st serve percentage. I will incorporate that idea into my next match.

Haven't more big guys had success winning grand slams from the baseline then by serving and volleying? But I guess it depends on what you define as a big tennis player. 6'3"and up? I think a big guys have just as many if not more advantages at the baseline. Mainly with reach and high balls.

Big guys have trouble bending down for low balls at their feet. They are hard to go around but easy to go under or through. 6'1 or 6'2 is the best height to be a serve and volley-er. Part of this debate also comes down to the relative pace of the ball depending on were the player is receiving the ball. For instance, a ball hit 65 mph is going to feel like its hit 87 mph when receiving at the service line, or a ball hit 45 mph from the service line is going to be like receiving a ball hit 65 mph at the baseline.

[GeoffWilliams]

When I was growing up and playing juniors, I would test out my serve by only use 2nd serves for both first and second. I knew that if I could compete and win with just my second serve I would be well on my way. I'd use the big bomb sparingly but it was that restraint that made it more effective when I did unload the cannonball.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

This is one of the smartest things anyone can do in a match: but: the second has to have a very fast hand, and a high rpm, and be accurate and producible under pressure. Most don't reach back far enough on their seconds. Most don't use a fast enough hand. Most aren't accurate enough, ie, wide to their fh.

My nfl body is: 6'0'' at 230lbs! A blazing fast safety who can bring the body check. When these younger guys see me serving and volleying they are shocked. Especially when they can't handle my twist serve. (How in the hell is this fat old guy beating me? I suck.)

Rafter said about his serves: "I don't know where they are going or what they will do, but neither does my opponent!" He was the heaviest guy ever to win a slam, serving/volleying, or from the line.

Safe and aggressive is the way to go in any sport. The more aggressive/safe ratio you have on your serve, the easier you will hold. Or break.


Hence Rafa's total domination of head to head combat against top 30 opponents. He has a higher net clearance: .99 meters average. ON all his ground strokes, yet has more action and dynamic violence than anyone.

I did not start to learn to volley until I was in my thirties. Takes thousands of reps, against someone who is trying to beat you with good returns, to learn at all: given real match pressure, real difficult shots. Even with my speed gone, it takes a very accurate return to beat me, or a very low one. I can only hope for a bomb like Ray man. Still learning how to serve.

Sampras did what no one had done before him: develop a very accurate slice serve, at 120mph, and seconds at 108mph, that he could hit the lines with at will with high rpm. The heavy ball placed at will on the lines. Average rpm firsts: 2800: seconds: 4,800.

That is my vow: to develop an extremely aggressive and very safe serve/volley game. Geoff Williams: will develop a world class serve at the age of 58, the only man in the worlds' history to do so. (hear me god of tennis.)