Hey ljubicic:

[GeoffWilliams]

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…

Listen to this guy. Lilliputian, not Lithuanian. (I miss Vitas Gerulaitus.)

[klacr]

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.

You are right. Not many big guys have won grand slams serving and volleying. Then again, how many of them are there. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with playing from the baseline but if you are getting the floating returns as often as Raonic, Isner and Karlovic get them, does it not make sense to move up to the net?
As far as tall being an advantage more at the baseline...sure It could be, but why then is 6'10" Karlovic losing 80% of baseline rallies? Its the mixture of size and speed and how you facilitate it. Karlovic has the size, but maybe not the speed.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[hockeyscout]

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.

Love it. Great you saw that parallel. It is an interesting one. Agassi's dad would string his rackets. Agassi was much better in next to next than Connors, however, you can see young Andre grabbed and enhanced a lot. Neat.

[hockeyscout]

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

We'd rather have Sampras 6'1, than Raonic at 6'5. BTW, Pete is a BIG MAN (he ain't no 170 pounds) and his frame is so projectable. Let me explain why. Yes, Milos is 6'5, however, we would not want his body type AT ALL. We'd stay clear. Way to many red flags, average ankle joint functionality and I do not like the proportion of his shin bone as it isn't going to be condusive to speed or balance. He'd get run over because his hips would always be out of position (just as they are in tennis all the time, its why he cannot get to that short ball) all the time.

Sampras. Pro NFL body. He's what we call projectable. Milos isn't. Sampras is big boned, durable and so well proportioned. He'd be in the ballpark for the NFL at the QB position, and he'd be intelligent and commited enough to make it (if of course he doesn't mind getting hit which is something that's a factor of course). Of course, he'd need a lot of optimization, however, he's a stud.

Size at the QB position in Sampras' day, what 20 years ago, well it was in the 6'1" range so he was in the right range. I feel 6'3" is the ideal size now for a NFL QB, and guess what, it could be the same with tennis. Federer and Sampras were the model at 6'1", and now Grigor Dimitriev is the model at 6'3".

Again klacr, lots of guys who are 6'5, big and strong on paper cannot functionally carry it over to the NFL field. Milos has developed some great, what I call tennis compensatory movements, however, if you did an actual Functional Movement Screen test he'd fail badly.

It is interesting you are bringing this all up right now as I am studying to get my certification in FMS (functional movement system), and figuring out how I can apply these principals over to tennis.

It's been interesting to study this, and I am fully understanding the technical reason's as to why players cannot get to a short ball, come into the net, pick up low balls or find consistency. Its nothing to do with their will, or anything like that, it's all about the chain, neurology, athletic sets ups and genetics.

For instance, how do you move a player into the net when he has small toes, the wrong body type, bad proportions for one step quickness, poor functional movement and is engaged in happy feet or and insane, bad shuffle steps as a result? You know all about this klacr as a guy who has likely played football.

Can you really move past all those faults? I am not so sure. However, he is a hell of a pro, and in a top position, and if luck falls on his side I am sure he could win a major if an out of the blue perfect storm arrives.

[GeoffWilliams]

Sampras' playing weight was 170lbs. Not now! More like my 230lbs!

They don't give top ten in the world away.

Ray man won't move higher unless he listens to this: String higher. Stand back further on returns. Come into the net more often esp. off the kick serve wide. Believe in yourself. Don't be so analytical during matches. Get some fire in the belly. Learn to become angry/fired up/something more than now. So do all that Ray man, and you will win a slam at Wimby.

[klacr]

We'd rather have Sampras 6'1, than Raonic at 6'5. BTW, Pete is a BIG MAN (he ain't no 170 pounds) and his frame is so projectable. Let me explain why. Yes, Milos is 6'5, however, we would not want his body type AT ALL. We'd stay clear. Way to many red flags, average ankle joint functionality and I do not like the proportion of his shin bone as it isn't going to be condusive to speed or balance. He'd get run over because his hips would always be out of position (just as they are in tennis all the time, its why he cannot get to that short ball) all the time.

Sampras. Pro NFL body. He's what we call projectable. Milos isn't. Sampras is big boned, durable and so well proportioned. He'd be in the ballpark for the NFL at the QB position, and he'd be intelligent and commited enough to make it (if of course he doesn't mind getting hit which is something that's a factor of course). Of course, he'd need a lot of optimization, however, he's a stud.

Size at the QB position in Sampras' day, what 20 years ago, well it was in the 6'1" range so he was in the right range. I feel 6'3" is the ideal size now for a NFL QB, and guess what, it could be the same with tennis. Federer and Sampras were the model at 6'1", and now Grigor Dimitriev is the model at 6'3".

Again klacr, lots of guys who are 6'5, big and strong on paper cannot functionally carry it over to the NFL field. Milos has developed some great, what I call tennis compensatory movements, however, if you did an actual Functional Movement Screen test he'd fail badly.

It is interesting you are bringing this all up right now as I am studying to get my certification in FMS (functional movement system), and figuring out how I can apply these principals over to tennis.

It's been interesting to study this, and I am fully understanding the technical reason's as to why players cannot get to a short ball, come into the net, pick up low balls or find consistency. Its nothing to do with their will, or anything like that, it's all about the chain, neurology, athletic sets ups and genetics.

For instance, how do you move a player into the net when he has small toes, the wrong body type, bad proportions for one step quickness, poor functional movement and is engaged in happy feet or and insane, bad shuffle steps as a result? You know all about this klacr as a guy who has likely played football.

Can you really move past all those faults? I am not so sure. However, he is a hell of a pro, and in a top position, and if luck falls on his side I am sure he could win a major if an out of the blue perfect storm arrives.

Good response. Thanks Hockeyscout. I'm not sure how you are able to know Raonic's ankle joint fuctionality or any of that other stuff. You also mentioned about small toes. How do you know he has small toes? I wear size 16's and have large toes. I can nearly palm a basketball with my feet (I'm the missing link) All I'm saying is that if Raonic's movement is such an issue, why would he be better suited for the baseline in which rallies last longer and therefore he'd have to move more, which apparently he is not equipped to do.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[hockeyscout]

Good response. Thanks Hockeyscout. I'm not sure how you are able to know Raonic's ankle joint fuctionality or any of that other stuff. You also mentioned about small toes. How do you know he has small toes? I wear size 16's and have large toes. I can nearly palm a basketball with my feet (I'm the missing link) All I'm saying is that if Raonic's movement is such an issue, why would he be better suited for the baseline in which rallies last longer and therefore he'd have to move more, which apparently he is not equipped to do.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Kyle:

I can see it in two seconds. A track coach can see it in a split second. I am not yet at the level of a 100 meter sprint coach, however, I will get their. I am 41 now, so I have a bit of a quick eye, and I have seen enough athletes fail to understand the holes in my coaching game, and to know realistically what athletes can do, and can't do.

I'd need to see you play Kyle to figure out a few things. If you have long toes, that is great as their is a bit of propensity for speed. I'd have to see your proportions, belly button position and a few other things to determine how I could enhance your technical gifts, however, yes, you cannot teach 6'5, and its a benefit if you have the patience (and know-how) to get things set up in the correct manner.

Alignment and proportions, I say it over and over again, it will make or break an athlete.

You can palm a basketball with the feet, great, I take it you can pick up everything with your feet! How do you do with a soccer ball where you need to raise the toes when juggling, and engaging? What's your MMA and Tennis field speed like, and what held you back as an athlete. Once you know that as a coach, you'll make leaps. For me, it was hard coming to terms with it, however, when I did, I went to a whole new level. Likely your next is the same as mine (in terms of development as a coach). Its great you are in MMA, many answers in this sport for tennis coaches.

Serve and volley - without being way to analytical and going into a long winded drawn out thought process!

Milos will never get to a low ball because he has can't get down low! That's Captain Obvious. Now let me put meat behind it. He can't drop his hips quick enough when required, the shin bone proportion is off and as a result his hips are always in the wrong place. On the baseline he has more time to get himself set correctly (which by the way, he doesn't do as much as everyone wants, especially on ball number 3 when he is serving, or ball number 2 when he is return to serve).

The issue why he cannot move quickly get the return to serve is because of his running and movement biomechanics, and an inability to get the hips to the correct functional position to drive offense. So, he's naturally defensive, and he backs off. Its a smart move. He compensated and is smart enough to know the limits and boundries. Don't think he doesn't have this well planned out in his head. However, the question is, can he improve these areas or get inventive? Is he on it like a hound? Are his people committed to making this really all work, or do they come and get a paycheck, call themselves tennis coaches and not search out experts for answers and solutions like you do klacr?

It goes to show you how good an athletes survival function is doesn't it? I call it compensatory movements, and Milos to his credit has figured out staying on the baseline will give him his best chance and time to get his athletic house in order (hips, feet, whatever).

Serve and volley is actually VERY COMPLICATED. I am not sure an athlete like Milos would be suited to it as he does not understand time and space. You come from MMA, so you know how important it is to roll, cartwheel, fall and all the rest. Milos cannot do this, and that's death for a serve and volley player. The number one thing I would focus on with a serve and volley player is MMA and Judo principals (spacial awareness). Watch the NFL kids, they get hit and they roll with the ground. Watch Ozzie Smith, he can fall into the ground chest first and bounce up to his feet and throw to first base. Milos cannot do this, so putting him into a serve and volley situation would not work for me as he is not loose enough, aware of his surroundings, unable to properly place his feet rhythmically and just not in control. I would worry about him getting hurt, and I am not even getting into how his foot strike position hurts his continuity of momentum as well (heel striker), however, I need to screw off and drink lots of beer with my buddies right now and do some midnight fishing. I am going to chew a tin of Skoal, and think about wild and crazy things to do this week at tennis so my team doesn't get bored!

[klacr]

hockeyscout,

Thanks for the great response. Your clarification helped greatly. I couldn't grasp why you would say a man of Raonic's size and ability wouldn't flourish with S&V but what you say makes sense the more I read it. I'll have to take you for your word on being able to see it that quickly (I can relate as it seems like it takes me only a few seconds to recognize a great teacher when I do my testing and certification for USPTA). Unfortunately for Raonic, due to his serve, the opportunity to get to the net presents itself often so if he's not built for it or has skills that can be a problem

As for me, I have not forgotten the promise I made to one of my favorite forum contributors Phil (gzhpcu) about how I will get myself hitting on video. Trying to find the time. Gotta make the time. That video will show you a lot hockeyscout.
As to what held me back as an the athlete...my choice to play tennis probably did it. Ha. I was a much better swimmer than I ever was or ever will be as a tennis player. But I loved tennis more. As I got older and into college and business school the economics of playing tennis for not guaranteed money or teaching tennis (which I was passionate about) and entrepreneurship I took the road of the latter and thankful for that. No Regrets.

MMA is a great exercise and although it could be beneficial for tennis, I just use it for stress relief. Getting in the octagon, what a thrill.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[hockeyscout]

Swimmer. Interesting. That's a tough transformation - swimming to tennis. VERY tough. Impossible. You must have been a hell of a gifted athlete if you could make that kind of adjustment. Mind sharing with me what kinds of times you swam? The set up from taking a kid who has swam a lot to a sport like tennis, hockey, MMA or whatever is SO difficult.

[don_budge]

"The Spin of the Ball"...

Unfortunately for Raonic, due to his serve, the opportunity to get to the net presents itself often so if he's not built for it...
Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

http://www.tennisplayer.net/bulletin/showthread.php?t=1857&highlight=milos+raonic+serve&page=2

Speaking of the Milos Raonic physique…take a look at this thread. Interactive forum May 2011. It is now nearly November 2014. Notice any changes in the Milos Raonic physique. Quite a radical departure in only three years…to my eye.

Long, long legs. I wonder if he was ever nicknamed "High Pockets". The calf muscles have morphed into a different dimension. The long legs look designed to propel the body forwards and not to be jerked from side to side. The hips in a vulnerable position for side to side motion…particularly when thinking about "tennis movement". It is a game of balance as Welby Van Horn submits in his teachings. I might add that it is also a game of energy…which is also saying a lot.

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.

Interesting comments lobndropshot. There are relative advantages and disadvantages to being tall or small…and not being 6' 1" tall. This is not only related to technique discussions but also encompass tactics as well…but few speak of tactics these days. Which is a mistake of course.

Another question for me regarding the Milos Raonic game is his use of the two hand backhand. As with the other tall players on the tour these days that are using two hands…this restricts their reach which is one of their more obvious advantages as lobndropshot notes. More importantly, it also restricts their tactical choices with regards to approaching the net…regardless of their shoe size. It limits their fundamental being as a tennis player by being defined as a two handed backhand player. It relegates them to the baseline. I think it is more of a matter of "The Spin of the Ball" than anything else.

So when taken as a whole…the entire scope of coaching Milos Raonic is not one of a "small feat". Ivan Ljubicic was more or less a baseline player…he approached the net selectively. This job of coaching Milos may have been more appropriately been give to someone of Stefan Edberg's ilk. He seems to have provided Roger Federer with the motivation to conclude things at the net. So "hey ljubicic" may should have been more appropriately "hey edberg" if you think about it. Without getting distracted by this…and that…and the other thing.

[GeoffWilliams]

Two handed back hand players don't become serve volleyers. (Singles) It takes too much familiarity with a one handed approach/grip change/volley/transition game and they just don't develop the confidence to handle heavy passes off the bh side, nor the bh over head, nor the touch required to handle heavy shots at the ankles. They can hit drops off the base line ala Joker, but that's about it.

Edberg
Sampras
<Mc enroe
Rafter
Laver

Current: Stepanek, Lopez, and that's about it. Bryans are also one handers. Almost all great volleyers were one handers. It's all about confidence and reactions at the net, and thousands of hr. of practice there.

The variety of reaction, of shot, of response is so much more difficult at net. Made even more so by tech/equip/player evolution. When the ball does not slow down to half speed, even easy shots can be missed.

Apologies to Frew McMillan, one of the best two handed serve volleyers of all time. (He stuck with the two hander at net, something that all of them should do.)