The death of Serve and Volley

[GeoffWilliams]

Nice post. The death of skill sets is no difference than the death of serve and volley. Emerson had 12 slam singles titles. 16 doubles titles. But who cares about mixed and mens' doubles any more? No one in the stadiums, no one watching tv. Doubles is dying market share wise, and ticket sale wise, and no one cares. Although, most hackers play it, due to their need to feel as if they belong to a group, a team. Share the court as well, with your brothers in arms. Why make a big deal out of Federer coming into net 17 times (not all serve/volleys) in a match? He came in 139 times in 2000 or so when he beat Sampras at Wimby at the age of 19! But who is counting? Hopman is dead as well. 17 vs 139. (Ok, that's five sets worth.) I will give you that. Edberg was the best volleyer of all time, due to his extremely low split step coming into net. Fed has not copied that.

I was playing an open player a few days ago. I nailed a deep low forehand volley into the back hand down the line corner, deep as can be. He passed me and gloated over it. I nailed that shot. Emo would have been proud of it. Passed me and celebrated over it. Topspin back hand lob that hit the dead corner over my forehand down the line. No way to reach it in time for an over head. My shot was a foot from each line, but his was two inches from each line.

[tennis_chiro]

Nice post. The death of skill sets is no difference than the death of serve and volley. Emerson had 8 slam singles titles. 20 doubles titles. But who cares about mixed and mens' doubles any more? No one in the stadiums, no one watching tv. Doubles is dying market share wise, and ticket sale wise, and no one cares. Although, most hackers play it, due to their need to feel as if they belong to a group, a team. Share the court as well, with your brothers in arms. Why make a big deal out of Federer coming into net 17 times (not all serve/volleys) in a match? He came in 139 times in 2000 or so when he beat Sampras at Wimby at the age of 19! But who is counting? Hopman is dead as well. 17 vs 139. (Ok, that's five sets worth.) I will give you that. Edberg was the best volleyer of all time, due to his extremely low split step coming into net. Fed has not copied that.

I was playing an open player a few days ago. I nailed a deep low forehand volley into the back hand down the line corner, deep as can be. He passed me and gloated over it. I nailed that shot. Emo would have been proud of it. Passed me and celebrated over it. Topspin back hand lob that hit the dead corner over my forehand down the line. No way to reach it in time for an over head. My shot was a foot from each line, but his was two inches from each line.

that's 12 singles titles for Emmo, not 8. And included all surfaces of the time: clay at Roland Garros and grass for the other three.

don

[klacr]

Roy's Wins

Singles:
Australian Open (1961, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967)
French Open (1963, 1967)
Wimbledon (1964, 1965)
US Open (1961, 1964)

Doubles:
Australian Open (1962, 1966, 1969)
French Open (1960, 1961,1962, 1963, 1964, 1965)
Wimbledon (1959, 1961, 1971)
US Open (1959, 1960, 1965, 1966)

Nice resume.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[stotty]

Roy's Wins

Singles:
Australian Open (1961, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967)
French Open (1963, 1967)
Wimbledon (1964, 1965)
US Open (1961, 1964)

Doubles:
Australian Open (1962, 1966, 1969)
French Open (1960, 1961,1962, 1963, 1964, 1965)
Wimbledon (1959, 1961, 1971)
US Open (1959, 1960, 1965, 1966)

Nice resume.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Wonderful record. Not sure how it really rates in reality to other great records, as Emerson rarely played the best in his peer group. He was 5-34 down against the pro's he did actually play. I wonder how many of those slams may have been snatched from his grasp by Gonzales, Hoad and the like had they been eligible to compete. Still, you can only beat who is in front of you...

[GeoffWilliams]

Take a look at any pro sport played in the 60s, on video, and compare it to how they play now. The size, foot speed, change of direction, intensity, scariness has all sky rocketed. Even tennis, the low man on totem pole per player earning $ wise. No other sport has such a low average. No other sport has such a long duration match wise. No other sport has as much world travel. Or health risk: meningitis wise on plane travels. EVen the 100th richest business man is a billionaire.

[don_budge]

Roy Emerson serving and volleying…his way to the Promised Land

I asked him about Serve and Volley. There was a slight pause. Then a monologue that sounded as if he had been asked or pondered it for the past decade. A monologue that I'll try to summarize for you...
He talked about the tennis of today. How much it has changed in the last 10 years. 15 years. 20 years. It's unrecognizable compared to when he played.

Technology has changed things.

That's Roy. 28 Grand Slam Titles. For a reason.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Wonderful record. Not sure how it really rates in reality to other great records, as Emerson rarely played the best in his peer group. He was 5-34 down against the pro's he did actually play. I wonder how many of those slams may have been snatched from his grasp by Gonzales, Hoad and the like had they been eligible to compete. Still, you can only beat who is in front of you...

Listen to these guys…

It was the amateur era of tennis. Roy and his posse. Harry Hopman at the helm. The professional game was a traveling circus show. It was truly a unique part of this wonderful game…when it was untouched by money. At least on the surface. Clean…like the white clothes and the balls. Sportsmanship…it was a contest as to who was the humblest…yet the best. The Aussies certainly held their own in both regards. EVERYONE served and volleyed. EVERYONE played all court tennis.

Enter the Open era. Enter the dollar…the money. Sold down the river. Betrayed. Corrupted. It only took 16 years…from 1968 to 1984. Orwell had it right more ways than one. It's a repetitious theme in the human experience. It isn't tennis anymore…not by the original definition. It hasn't evolved…it has been reinvented. I hate to fly in the face of conventional wisdom…but somebody has to do it. The dog and pony show. I hate to break it to you…the game has devolved. It's the junior game on testosterone. With regards to the men's and women's game…same game, different clothes.

It's the future! Gender sameness! Yippee!

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/champions/Ed_Atkinson/Ed_Atkinson_Difference_is_the_Clothes/Ed_Atkinson_Difference_is_the_Clothes.html

Roy Emerson. What a lucky man you are to know such a fellow. A reality check. He is incredulous on the inside. However he has to keep his tongue in check…afterall you cannot bite the hand that feeds you. Poor klacr…still a kid at heart. Don't you lose heart Kyle…it isn't only serve and volley that has died. What about all-court tennis in general? What about tennis etiquette? What exactly is "truck driver tennis"? The game has lost it's elegance…save one Roger Federer. The game has lost it intellectual appeal…despite the technology. The game has lost it's connoisseurs touch. Enter the mad scientists…at the expense of the artist. The politician at the expense of the poet.

It doesn't matter…the herd goes one way. Stick to your guns…you know in your heart what is right and what is wrong. You don't need a computer to have that kind of knowledge. You don't have to be certified either. Stick with your elders. Like the Indians did. Show a little respect…it comes back to you…you know.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsRNqF0CbC8

Don't listen to anyone telling you otherwise…false prophets.

[gzhpcu]

Look at pro tennis. In the old days, you had the Kramer circus with a small group of players. Look at how many pro players you have today. The survival of the fittest gets tougher nowadays. Better training, nutrition, equipment, etc. The quality of modern tennis is better than in the old days. When one talks of the "old days", it is always the same players mentioned: Kramer, Gonzalez, Laver, Budge, etc. Certainly talented players, but one tends to forget the rest. Not so memorable. Easier for the good players to play serve and volley in addition to all the reasons already mentioned.

[GeoffWilliams]

The truth is, even in local norcal 4.5 matches, or open matches, if you serve and volley you don't win the tournament without an extraordinary serve. How many can accurately hit 120mph firsts and 100mph kicks? IF those bombs are not near the lines even these players can dominate with their returns if you are coming in. Most of the practice these days goes to ground stroke heavy topspin shots, hour upon hour. Few work on serves. Fewer on serve and volley. Fewer on volleys/over heads period. Because if you do come in, even on great approaches, you get beaten, even on great volleys, you get passed.


The only thing you need now a days: heavy topspin ground strokes and superior consistency and movement.... That is the sad state of things. EVery time I go out I practice serve and volley, and get passed and beaten by all types. I keep hoping to develop a deadly serve and volley but so far it's a pipe dream.

[gzhpcu]

As we have discussed previously: learning serve and volley is more difficult then learning topspin groundstrokes. Little kids can't do it in tournaments because they are too small and can't cover the net enough. They will lose their matches until they grow bigger. So the emphasis on topspin groundstrokes is born...

So is it also in part that tournament players started playing tennis at a younger age than in the old days? Could be, Stan Smith started pretty late, for example...

[hockeyscout]

As we have discussed previously: learning serve and volley is more difficult then learning topspin groundstrokes. Little kids can't do it in tournaments because they are too small and can't cover the net enough. They will lose their matches until they grow bigger. So the emphasis on topspin groundstrokes is born...

So is it also in part that tournament players started playing tennis at a younger age than in the old days? Could be, Stan Smith started pretty late, for example...

Agreed. Great post.

[hockeyscout]

Most of the practice these days goes to ground stroke heavy topspin shots, hour upon hour. Few work on serves. Fewer on serve and volley. Fewer on volleys/over heads period. Because if you do come in, even on great approaches, you get beaten, even on great volleys, you get passed.

We do. I've got the brains to listen to the vets like you Geoff. We spend so much time on return to serve, volley's, 1 (baseline), 2 (mid court ball), 3 (finish). Its the future of the game. All court player who can open up the court (in woman's tennis that is).

I noticed what you said a lot when I went to Czech and watched a lot of the top pro's and junior's, baseline to baseline exchanges. We watched, and for us, that was just crazy. It wasn't what we called tennis. It was a whole different game. Lazy as shit. It drives a hockey coach nuts watching tennis practice.

[klacr]

I think this spin crap is the reason Russia and Ukraine are not producing great players, and as well, 99 percent of these coaches cannot play the game at a high level, and I don't care for that! You can't find many guys here that can deliver a ball like EdWeiss, like christ, that guys is spectacular on the feeds! I've seen the importance of it, and really focused my people into the importance of scientific feeding and proper rhythm, and this is where Ed is so flipping good. I imagine klacr is the boss in this area as well, as rhythm and consistency are so important in swim development.

hockeyscout,

I deal with grading and certifying teaching professionals every month. We do have a section of the USPTA Exam that deals with feeding. Feeding is definitely a major point of discussion for us during the weekend long tests. Feeding a ball is an art. It's funny how many people think feeding a ball is easy, until they actually try it themselves. I usually know within the first 30 seconds of grading a lesson how the teaching professional will do overall based on their feeds. Being able to put a ball in a specific location each and every time as well as being able to change paces and heights is a skill that requires practice.

The original USPTA tester and man responsible for creating the original certification course and guidelines was a professional named George Bacso. Mr. Bacso was tough. Real tough. He had to be. Kept the standards high. He would fail any applicant who gave a topspin feed to a student they were teaching during the private or group lesson portion of the test. He was adamant that the feed needs to be a flat ball that lands in the right location and bounces into students strike zone. Many students who volunteer as students for the lessons are a 3.0-4.0 level. No crazy spins or advanced feeds needed.

There is now a portion of the test for coaches looking to upgrade and achieve a certification level of "elite professional" of a Elite Feeding exam. That requires a series of drills and feeds much more advanced. Serpentine drills and low volley, high volley, lob placements as well.

During the stroke production exam of the test when coaching applicants must hit a variety of shots the tester (yours truly) must feed them a specific ball. On a testing day, I'll feed an average of 10,000 balls to the applicants as a group as they must execute forehands, backhands, volleys, drop shots, lobs and overheads to specific target areas.

Yes, feeds are critical. Yes, I have to feed a lot.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[stotty]

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

About time you posted your serve, Klacr. You did promise Phil and me you would...remember?

[klacr]

Stotty,

You read my mind.
I did not forget. Multiple business ventures and desire to take over the world have kept me from recreational play. Feel my ubiquity.
Have plans to film strokes this weekend. Look for a post or private message early next week.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[don_budge]

The Death Bell...

The Death Bell tolled in 1968 at the dawning of the Open Era. Big money began licking their chops at the prospects of fighting over the corpse of tennis. It spelled the doom of serve and volley tennis or more correctly…all-court tennis.

Interestingly it took only 16 years to complete their mission…complete ruin of the game. That was a real lesson in modern philosophy…if you were old enough to comprehend what was going on. Not to mention…aware enough…intelligent enough.