Ultimate Fundamentals: Forehand Volley

[johnyandell]

CMS,
I think we must be seeing different things. On the forehand volleys with the bigger swings if you look at the elbow you can see the backward rotation comes from the shoulder--might be some additional wrist lay back but minimal.
As for all those biomechanical wrist motions...research has shown that if anything players are inhibiting the wrist on the forehand and the serve. In general they are consequential actions. Biomechanical numbers show their contributions but the key point is how to create the stroke patterns and manipulating the wrist is a negative.

Klacr DB,
Thanks!!!!

[stotty]

We all know what a great volleyer McEnroe was (and still is), but I forgot how classic Lendl's volley form was. He would be an even better model than Johnny Mac for someone to copy volleying form. Notice how much he keeps the racket parallel to the net as he completes his volleys...and the way he prepares the racket head behind the ball for each volley. Excellent model!

don

Yes Lend's volley is text book on the forehand while McEnroe's is not exactly what you would teach, the way he lowers the racket as he initiates the backswing. Despite this, McEnroe was infinitely the better volleyer. Just shows...don't put all your trust in a text book.

I love McEnroe's backhand volley.

The take home point from the clips I posted of Rosewell and Hoad versus John's clips, is the 'basic' volley has hardly changed one iota in all those years. Unlike the baseline game, which has changed significantly, in terms of swing paths and grips, etc.

[don_budge]

Yes Lend's volley is text book on the forehand while McEnroe's is not exactly what you would teach, the way he lowers the racket as he initiates the backswing. Despite this, McEnroe was infinitely the better volleyer. Just shows...don't put all your trust in a text book.

I love McEnroe's backhand volley.

The take home point from the clips I posted of Rosewell and Hoad versus John's clips, is the 'basic' volley has hardly changed one iota in all those years. Unlike the baseline game, which has changed significantly, in terms of swing paths and grips, etc.

The below post written in August of 2011...

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/...eys_large.html

By now all readers of Tennisplayer.net are well aware of my admiration for the series of McEnroe and Lendl tennis music videos produced, created and conceived by John Yandell. Using tennis, music and video for the higher expression of tennis as an art form, surely must have of been some kind of ecstatic surge of inspiration. Divine? I remember John writing in one of his comments that it was one of his first works and if that is so...talk about lightning in a bottle, talk about divine inspiration! Do you believe?

If you have not already done so...John, please put all of this work together in one piece, perhaps in the form of some avant gar-de and revolutionary tennis documentary (please consider me for any voice over, my voice will not disappoint you), maybe you have a couple of comments from the boys on tape from back then...get a couple of comments from the boys now that they are so much older on the piece as an introduction, and submit this work of art at some film medium venue for consideration of some kind of prize or recognition. This work taken in its entirety, given the participants and their relationship to tennis history, their relationship as adversaries...and at a time when tennis was being engineered away from the classical mode to the present day modern version, is worthy of some serious consideration. It is...an original.

The truly beautiful thing about these videos is this...on top of their intrinsic value as a work of art, there lies within a truly valuable tennis lesson in each segment. The true masters of the game are able to elevate their talents to an art form...to be perceived as such by true connoisseurs. As a master of your craft...you have done the same. You have done the game a great justice with this body of work alone...not to mention the rest.

By the way...perhaps adding to the Federer classic, “Forehand not Gone”, with all of the different strokes of his game set to some rock classics, might be another gem...in the rough. What the heck...in addition, get Nadal together with Federer to produce another “lightning strike” in a separate series to showcase their rivalry. Modern tennis' answer to the classic righty vs. lefty matchup. It could end up being timeless and priceless...as your McEnroe and Lendl series are.

Volley commentary by yours truly...ala McEnroe and Lendl

The Forehand Volley-McEnroe style

The footwork of "Johnny Boy" is uncanny...and catlike, the manner in which he places his feet so delicately in place as he is moving forward and diagonally towards the ball is the first thing that strikes me as I am watching him volley. By planting the front foot so delicately yet firmly, he is easing his weight into his shot and he has created a virtual wall of his entire structure...his foot base and legs, his body and shoulders, along with his arm, wrist and racquet unit...for the ball to rebound against with a maximum of control and placement. The combination of delicacy and firmness is what gives the volley of McEnroe it's distinctive genius. Power in volleying is not the deal breaker...placement and crisp contact is. Synchronizing the descending movement of his racquet head with the planting of his front foot and the movement of his body, particularly with the almost gentle rotation of the shoulders, is what makes his volley so special, so brilliant. So touchy, feely. McEnroe’s head and his chest appear to me to be more centered on the ball than does that of Lendl’s technique...an indication of a more superior and more subtle weight transfer.

The racquet head take back of McEnroe actually has a slightly forward emphasis. I use that expression from theworldsbestcoach vernacular...because it looks to me that his first move to the ball as it comes to him is to go forward to meet it. McEnroe sets the racquet head above and behind the ball, using only his shoulders and body to push the racquet and his arm back, and in one movement...without any discernible “help” from his wrist, he delivers the racquet head down and through the ball, leaving the racquet head down through the ball. Just as he has taken the racquet back into position with his shoulders, notice how he has delivered the racquet head to the ball with a subtle movement and rotation of his shoulders. His arm and wrist are virtually stationary and moved only by the shifting of his shoulders. After he completes his volley, the racquet head is only moving back to ready position...his shot has been completed before the racquet is coming back, but it may appear that this movement has been blended into his follow through. I can see where his volley has finished and he has left his racquet down into the ball...it is much easier to see on the backhand side.

The Forehand Volley-Lendl style

The footwork of "Ivan the Terrible" on the forehand side is a little suspect to say the least...just short of being terrible. Ivan’s move to the ball appears to be from a rather upright position and he is moving directly to the sideline, instead of diagonally to intercept the ball early towards the net. The front foot, in his case, has not yet been planted by the time he is making contact with the ball. To attempt to volley without having both feet on the ground from a stationary position indicates there are going to be some issues once he is really on the move to volley a speeding ball in the air...to say nothing of the lack of use, or missing... of the truly smooth weight transfer.

My eye also tells me that Lendl’s use of the racquet head leaves something to be desired. His backswing, in contrast to McEnroe’s, appears to be more of a movement with his arm, independent of his shoulders and body, and it doesn’t appear to me that he truly completes turning his shoulders which is indicated by the way his left hand is left waving at the camera. When Lendl makes his move on the ball it looks as if it is with a noticeable action attributed mainly to the motion of his arm...and finished with a bit of a flourish from his wrist...notice that after he has made contact with the ball he is making a visible lifting motion with the racquet head upward. One may want to use this technique on a lower volley as a means of lifting the ball up over the net, but this kind of action is unnecessary when the ball is above the net and the player has the opportunity to hit down on the ball...crisply. I see that motion on many of the junior players that I have inherited from other coaches and it seems to be a carryover from their playing strictly from the backcourt and learning to follow through above the ball on every shot. Also, from the action of his racquet head we can see that Lendl correctly starts his volley swing with the racquet head higher than his hand but by the time he makes contact with the ball the racquet head is level with his hand...an indication of too much wrist action common to many mediocre volleyers. Lendl had a larger reputation of carrying out his game plan from the backcourt as opposed to being a natural volleyer. He more or less made his living from the baseline.

Lendl’s overall posture at the net looks to be less committed to his shots than that of McEnroe’s as well. He is more upright and it doesn’t appear that his head and chest are as close to the ball as McEnroe’s, which is also an indication that he will not see the ball as clearly, because his eyes will not be as close to the ball. By not turning his shoulders to the ball initially Lendl’s action is lacking the subtle shoulder rotation that is so fundamental to great volleyers...like McEnroe.

Backhand analysis to follow.

[don_budge]

Backhand analysis to follow.

As promised...

The Backhand Volley...ala McEnroe and Lendl

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

The Backhand Volley- McEnroe style

The technique of John McEnroe when he is performing the backhand volley is that of a virtuoso, with the lethal consequences of a matador’s final stab. One sweet ole! The Bad One’s simple technique is apropos for arguably the simplest shot in tennis...the backhand volley. Tony Roche...the ancient Australian had the reputation of possessing the backhand volley of all time but I think that McEnroe may even of surpassed him as the standard for this shot. He was a true artist at the net with this shot and he used his racquet as a razor sharp stiletto or dagger...thrusting it with deadly consequences into the heart of his opponents.

The first move that McEnroe makes when he recognizes that the shot to be played is a backhand volley is to simply turn his body sideways to form a wall to the oncoming ball and to place his racquet in position with the help of his right hand...in one simple motion. Once he has himself in position, his move to the ball is a very simple one and a beautiful model for anyone attempting to hit the ball in the air on the backhand side. With his instant shoulder turn and racquet position he does what he does best...he gets his feet into position and goes forward. With his weight transfer sinking onto his front foot he is virtually sinking the racquet head into the ball to give it just enough underspin to control his shot and to hit it just hard enough to put it out of reach of his opponent. With such perfect control of his racquet head and the simultaneous placement of body and feet he is left with a number of options for his shot...leaving his opponent to guess where he was going as their own hapless option. Coupled with Johnny’s unpredictable nature in general...the whole ball of wax had the tendency to leave his opponent’s mystified, off balance and somewhat frustrated. He was so capable of hitting any point on the court, deep or short, straight or angled, that he was impossible to read. His ability to anticipate and quickly close on the net is what made him a lethal force. He set you up to have limited feasible options.

The Backhand Volley- Lendl style.

Ivan looks very comfortable hitting his backhand volley...compared to his forehand volley. Even so, his technique looks very polite to me, that is, he doesn’t look to be so aggressive in going forward when compared to a McEnroe. Ivan takes full advantage of the simplicity of this shot to give himself the appearance of some comfort when he is playing a backhand volley.

That being said, he still has the appearance of being a trifle upright when a bit more crouched stance is advantageous in terms of balance and providing the lower center of gravity that is needed when moving around at the net trying to stab at speeding bullets that are passing shots. Somehow he doesn’t look as comfortable with his grip on this shot and his move on the ball is perhaps too much arm oriented as opposed to the McEnroe method of utilizing his shoulders, body and feet together with the racquet head.

Approach Shots...Getting there

If a tennis player is intent on hitting the ball in the air...first he must get himself in position to do so and this involves hitting an effective approach shot that puts his opponent off balance or out of position by a combination of three elements for hitting a shot with pace, spin and placement. Much of the McEnroe artistry is attributed to his genius for playing such shots and moving in behind them. His ability to hit the ball early and on the rise, while moving forward and controlling the three elements of approach shots is in large degree the key to his productivity at the net. His service motion was also conductive to serve and volley tennis as his motion was designed to propel him into the court to land with his feet churning their way to the net. His anticipation of passing shots was second to none.

Lendl on the other hand struggled with the concept of the approach shot and finishing volley. His service motion did not seem particularly conducive to volley tactics either. He made his living controlling play from the baseline...and it was considerable. He tried in vain throughout his career, particularly later on, to retool himself as a serve and volley player in order that he might capture the elusive Wimbledon title to his resume but it was not to be. He was a bit of a fish out of water when it came to playing grass court tactics...the all court game. This lack of comfort is barely noticeable to the untrained eye in the music videos but this subtle defect in his game is noticeable as he appears to be dancing ever so slightly out of step to the music...of The Cars.

Johnny Boy, on the other hand, looks as if he is capable to dancing to any tune, rhythm or beat...around the net. He's got "Twinkle Toes". Aggressive feet...which frequently found their way into his aggressive mouth.

Their Rivalry and Relative Status in the History of the Game...

Lendl ended up with a 21-15 winning record head to head against McEnroe. He finished with nine victories in the last ten matches that they played, perhaps an indication of better physical conditioning...and a tougher and more stable mental capacity. On the other hand, Lendl defeated Jimmy Connors the last 17 times that they played...just to give you an idea about what a hard nosed competitor Lendl was.

Both players had long and productive careers over virtually the same span of time. But if you are asked who was more successful the nod must go to Ivan Lendl. His career record included a 1,071 win and 239 loss match count, 94 career titles and and an astounding 21,262,417 dollar prize money take! John McEnroe may have had some singularly more brilliant moments but his career record is only a bit less impressive with a 875 win and 198 loss match record, 77 titles (not including his 71 doubles titles) and his comparably paltry 12,552,132 dollar prize money.

Their countenance on the court were as dissimilar as night and day...McEnroe the mad genius and rascal while Lendl had the reputation of being a bit of a humorless Darth Vader. The dour Czech. In fact, both of these men are very interesting characters with their own individual sense of humor which had a lot to say given their relative experiences and parallel existence. The music videos do the whole story a wonderful justice...as an image of a moment in time. 1984 interestingly enough.

[bottle]

Other forehand volleys start with tip of racket pointing more at right fence.

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members/new_issue/2017/november/

This one starts with racket skunk-tailed.

How come no one noticed that before. Huh, huh?

[cms56]

Don and Johnny Yandell:

"Sounds great! What does it mean?

..."supination, pronation, flexion and extension, and radial and ulnar deviation." Impressive you put all of these terms in the same sentence. Who are you talking to? Not to students...that's for sure.

It sounds super intelligent...maybe you could dumb it down a bit for us "students of the game".


As to Don's question and comment: "Who are you talking to? Not to students...that's for sure."

Point well taken, and true. If you break down possible audiences at this site, it might look something like this: analysts, teachers, coaches, players, students. I'm confident that many of the readers of TennisPlayer are in the first two groups, and my comments are principally directed to that audience. From your various forum entries, I'm also pretty confident I can count you among them. I admit, though, that the terms I used in describing my own observations of the exemplary volleys may be familiar mainly to analysts (and even among those, mainly those familiar with structural kinesiology), and so I would concede that the technical jargon may be lost on others or simply uninteresting. So be it. But I truly I don't mean to be pedantic in the least (as I think is implied in your note); rather, I'm merely trying to be precise. And that effort is directed to better understanding the role of the wrist in some of the stroke patterns, a role I think is entirely downplayed, or more accurately, denied. I think it's because most of the wrist motions get lost amidst the are natural consequences of larger muscle motions, but the actions are nonetheless clear on careful observation. John Yandell has been gracious enough to hear me out on this, though he entirely disagrees with my analysis. And he's right in his comment in this particular forum: that is, I am seeing something he's not seeing. The question is why, when the motions are so very conspicuous and easily demonstrated.

But I'll take the blame myself and concede that the problem is in my own failure to get my point across clearly.

Then, and by way of correction, I erred in indicating that wrist flexion was demonstrated in the volley. It is not. I put that in inadvertently. It doesn't belong. I don't think that was the cause of any confusion in my note, though it could have been if someone were actually trying to identify each of those movements in Federer's volley -- flexion would be found. The note itself was confusing enough. I was being lazy and trying to compress my note about wrist actions into a summary statement, intended simply to correct an omission that I firmly believe is deserving of correction, a statement I thought might stimulate some consideration. That was yet another error on my part. Which thus inclines me to recast your own question, perhaps in a form even more apt: it's not so much, "who are you talking to", but "who cares?" The resolution of the question really won't have much of an impact in any event, so ... never mind.

[stotty]

I don't like to see too much wrist layback on the volley. I think it leads to errors. I find Roger's volley at 3:36 actually quite ugly (did I just say that?). The other end of the continuum on the matter would be McEnroe, who laid his wrist back hardly at all.

And why is Roger doing that? Is it because he is square on? If he was more to the side of the ball, backwards rotation and subsequent wrist layback would be less, right?

[don_budge]

Truly excellent footage and analysis, as usual. A small point, but worth noting: at 3:16-3:42, in the section entitled, Backward Arm Rotation Variations, it is stated that "the U-shape can rotate backwards as a unit in the shoulder joint." Shortly thereafter, while showing Federer as an example [see 3:33 et seq], Yandell indicates: "this backward rotation can be a few degrees or it can continue until the racquet face is literally parallel to the court" [clearly meaning the plane of the court surface]. I believe this indication is in error, at least to the extent that it fails to recognize that the backward rotation in the volley is predominantly supination with a small amount of wrist flexion and external rotation at the shoulder joint. Looking at all the video examples for confirmation, you can see that in the U-shaped configuration, with any appreciable bend at the elbow, external rotation at the shoulder will cause the entire forearm to move backward. I suggest anyone try the experiment themselves to experience the actions.

Instruction does seem to shy away from certain wrist actions, particularly including supination, pronation, flexion and extension, and radial and ulnar deviation. Extension plays little to no role in most shots prior to and through contact, but the other wrist motions most definitely do. There does seem to be a little reluctance to acknowledge those actions, seeing all clockwise rotation of the hand and forearm as originating at the shoulder. I believe a careful analysis shows there to be considerable, positive, and important contributions to nearly every stroke in wrist actions, some having to do with the production of increased velocity, some with the use of muscle stretch as a source of feel for better locating the racquet, and thus enhanced positioning for impact.

Sounds great! What does it mean?

..."supination, pronation, flexion and extension, and radial and ulnar deviation." Impressive you put all of these terms in the same sentence. Who are you talking to? Not to students...that's for sure.

It sounds super intelligent...maybe you could dumb it down a bit for us "students of the game".

Point well taken, and true. If you break down possible audiences at this site, it might look something like this: analysts, teachers, coaches, players, students. I'm confident that many of the readers of TennisPlayer are in the first two groups, and my comments are principally directed to that audience. From your various forum entries, I'm also pretty confident I can count you among them. I admit, though, that the terms I used in describing my own observations of the exemplary volleys may be familiar mainly to analysts (and even among those, mainly those familiar with structural kinesiology), and so I would concede that the technical jargon may be lost on others or simply uninteresting. So be it. But I truly I don't mean to be pedantic in the least (as I think is implied in your note); rather, I'm merely trying to be precise. And that effort is directed to better understanding the role of the wrist in some of the stroke patterns, a role I think is entirely downplayed, or more accurately, denied. I think it's because most of the wrist motions get lost amidst the are natural consequences of larger muscle motions, but the actions are nonetheless clear on careful observation. John Yandell has been gracious enough to hear me out on this, though he entirely disagrees with my analysis. And he's right in his comment in this particular forum: that is, I am seeing something he's not seeing. The question is why, when the motions are so very conspicuous and easily demonstrated.

But I'll take the blame myself and concede that the problem is in my own failure to get my point across clearly.

Then, and by way of correction, I erred in indicating that wrist flexion was demonstrated in the volley. It is not. I put that in inadvertently. It doesn't belong. I don't think that was the cause of any confusion in my note, though it could have been if someone were actually trying to identify each of those movements in Federer's volley -- flexion would be found. The note itself was confusing enough. I was being lazy and trying to compress my note about wrist actions into a summary statement, intended simply to correct an omission that I firmly believe is deserving of correction, a statement I thought might stimulate some consideration. That was yet another error on my part. Which thus inclines me to recast your own question, perhaps in a form even more apt: it's not so much, "who are you talking to", but "who cares?" The resolution of the question really won't have much of an impact in any event, so ... never mind.

Actually cms56, I meant exactly what I said. Here's our conversation so far and I am looking forwards to your response. Excuse me if I came across as being ironic...but I am honestly looking forwards to you clearly explaining each of the terms that you used and how they relate to volleying.

You made no mistake except maybe you overestimated some of the audience's vocabulary. I am anxiously and respectively asking for clarification. I didn't understand what you wrote. Thank you.

Who was it that said, "If you wish to speak with me first define your terms"?

http://liamscheff.com/2007/08/voltai...he-scientists/

I appreciate the response that you made but am truly interested in a detailed explanation of the technical thoughts you are expressing.

[don_budge]

Would love to discuss my latest article, "Ultimate Fundamentals: Forehand Volley"

The transcript...

What are the ultimate forehand volley fundamentals? Watch Roger Federer in our new high speed footage hit this virtually perfect forehand volley. Love it. Gorgeous. Let’s see how you can develop the same impeccable technique as Roger or other world class players such as Alexander Zverev and Dominic Thiem on this surprisingly misunderstood shot. It’s not a punch...you’ve probably been taught the wrong grip and never taught the critical role of the shoulders. Mastering the real keys is simpler than you may think and the result can be dramatic and amazing.

Mild Grip
Most players are taught a forehand volley grip that is slightly too strong. The index knuckle should be on bevel two and the heel pad very slightly on top, just creasing the edge of bevel one. The term continental is too general and usually leads to placing too much of the heel pad on top of the frame. As we’ll see the actual forehand volley grip is what makes the fundamentals of the stroke work so beautifully.

Preparation...Unit Turn
The first fundamental is the unit turn. Watch Roger’s feet, hips and shoulders and left arm all turn together. They rotate until they are all at about a 45 degree angle to the net. (1.41) This turn automatically prepares the racquet, there is little to no independent arm movement. Often players are taught the first move is to push that racquet out front. This destroys the body turn. In reality...the arm and racquet turn with the body until the racquet face is about even with the front edge of the front shoulder.

Hitting Arm...”U” Shape
The second component in the preparation is the hitting arm shape. The upper arm, forearm and racquet form a “U”. The forearm is roughly parallel to the court with the racquet tip either straight up and down or tilted slightly to the player’s right. Watch again how the preparation happens and how compact it really is. The unitary body turn and the creation of the hitting arm shape.

Forward Swing
The forward swing is the least understood component in the forehand volley. The common idea of a punch implies arm extension from the elbow. In reality...the elbow rarely extends fully and the hitting arm keeps the fundamental “U” shape. The real driving force in the motion is a push of the entire hitting arm shape, forward and around, driven by the rotation of the shoulders. The technical end of the forward swing is with the butt of the racquet pointing just across the edge of the front leg.

Backward Arm Rotation Variations
A major additional component that causes confusion in understanding the forward swing is the backward rotation of the hitting arm structure. The “U” shape can rotate backwards as a unit in the shoulder turn. The hitting arm then rotates back forward into the hit, adding additional racquet speed to the drive already coming from the shoulder. This backward rotation can be a few degrees or it can it can continue until the racquet face is literally parallel to the court. Critically though, the racquet hand itself, stays forward. Staying close to the edge of the front shoulder or at most moving back between the shoulders. This backward and then forward rotation is a variable. A supplement to the role of the forward shoulder motion. It is typically common on high balls and virtually absent on balls that are below waist level. It also tends to happen naturally and automatically once the underlying fundamentals are sound.

Wrist
With the relatively mild grip and the rotational push from the shoulder, the wrist stays partially laid back in the forward swing before, during and after contact. This allows the body to drive the swing. It goes against the old idea of “keeping the wrist firm” and using a stronger grip which usually leads to later contact and less natural leverage.

Underspin
The forehand volley is usually hit with mild underspin. Less than a thousand rpm’s, even at the pro level, far less than any other shot in the game. This underspin is generated by pushing the racquet head through the motion...with the shoulder...with the face only slightly open. Emphasis is on moving the racquet head forwards and only slightly down.

Step
The forehand volley can be hit with a variety of stances. It can be hit with an open stance, it can be hit with a neutral stance and it can also be hit with a closed stance. The variations usually depend on the distance of the player to the ball. Closer in can be open...wider can be closed. Often the player can step directly forward. Although it is probably a positive to step forward, the step is not a fundamental power source and usually the landing is after the hit.

Modeling
To model the forehand volley you need two positions. The turn with the shoulders and feet turned about 45 degrees and the hitting arm in the “U” shape. Second...the push with the back shoulder. Work to create the feeling and the mental image of these positions using the checkpoints we’ve outlined and your forehand volley will be compact, powerful and consistent.

[don_budge]

I think it's great that you delve into the realm of hitting the ball in the air. Seeing as this aspect of the tennis game has been virtually engineered out of the modern game. It's been so long that there are very few coaches that can teach the concept of hitting the ball in the air let alone teaching a player to get into position to make such a play on a ball.

The problem of coaching a nonexistent aspect of the game is that number one...as I mentioned there are few that can teach or even see it as a viable part of the game. But number two and probably even more important and currently disastrous is that there are no good models available. Dominic Thiem and Alexander Zverev are not poster boys for the volley stroke and in fact they rarely and if ever venture to the net unless they are forced to come forwards to chase down a drop shot or extremely short ball.

Even Roger Federer has lost his past flair at the net. In the year 2001 he played Pete Sampras in the quarterfinals at Wimbledon in five scintillating sets of nonstop serve and volley action. Goran Ivansievic defeated Patrick Rafter in one of the ugliest Wimbledon finals ever to compel the ATP braintrust to engineer the courts so that it played like velcro. It was the end of the post classic era of tennis which lasted approximately 17 years starting in 1984. Federer is not the volleyer he once was and even now he only uses it to mix up he tactics to keep his opponent off balance. He doesn't use it consistently to "maintain pressure on his opponent". Lack of models is going to make any transition back to the all court game nearly impossible in the foreseeable future.

One problem with the video presentation here on the volley here is that the players are stationary. You do touch on most of the fundamentals but one fundamental is missing and that is this shot is more often hit with the player advancing forwards. This may change the fundamentals slightly or it might just change the jargon. But whatever...it does change something. When teaching the volley...as soon as the stroke is discussed and experimented with just standing still...as the models in this video are...the student must learn to hit this ball while trying to get as close to the net as possible. This will help to discourage them from swinging at the darn thing.

Another point that I would like to see discussed in the forehand volley is the role of the opposite hand and how this can help to get the student to understand the all important shoulder rotation that you effectively emphasize through out the video. I think there is a bit more discussion left in this volley presentation. Take it with a grain of salt.

Thoughts to follow.

[johnyandell]

DB,
Yep this article is pure fundamentals. Check out the classic articles in this issue on the forehand volley which touch on many of your points. Great point about the opposite arm.

[klacr]

I think it's great that you delve into the realm of hitting the ball in the air. Seeing as this aspect of the tennis game has been virtually engineered out of the modern game. It's been so long that there are very few coaches that can teach the concept of hitting the ball in the air let alone teaching a player to get into position to make such a play on a ball.

The problem of coaching a nonexistent aspect of the game is that number one...as I mentioned there are few that can teach or even see it as a viable part of the game. But number two and probably even more important and currently disastrous is that there are no good models available. Dominic Thiem and Alexander Zverev are not poster boys for the volley stroke and in fact they rarely and if ever venture to the net unless they are forced to come forwards to chase down a drop shot or extremely short ball.

Even Roger Federer has lost his past flair at the net. In the year 2001 he played Pete Sampras in the quarterfinals at Wimbledon in five scintillating sets of nonstop serve and volley action. Goran Ivansievic defeated Patrick Rafter in one of the ugliest Wimbledon finals ever to compel the ATP braintrust to engineer the courts so that it played like velcro. It was the end of the post classic era of tennis which lasted approximately 17 years starting in 1984. Federer is not the volleyer he once was and even now he only uses it to mix up he tactics to keep his opponent off balance. He doesn't use it consistently to "maintain pressure on his opponent". Lack of models is going to make any transition back to the all court game nearly impossible in the foreseeable future.

One problem with the video presentation here on the volley here is that the players are stationary. You do touch on most of the fundamentals but one fundamental is missing and that is this shot is more often hit with the player advancing forwards. This may change the fundamentals slightly or it might just change the jargon. But whatever...it does change something. When teaching the volley...as soon as the stroke is discussed and experimented with just standing still...as the models in this video are...the student must learn to hit this ball while trying to get as close to the net as possible. This will help to discourage them from swinging at the darn thing.

Another point that I would like to see discussed in the forehand volley is the role of the opposite hand and how this can help to get the student to understand the all important shoulder rotation that you effectively emphasize through out the video. I think there is a bit more discussion left in this volley presentation. Take it with a grain of salt.

Thoughts to follow.

Great volleys, especially the first one are often hit in transition. Good post don_budge! Love John's focus on the volleys right now, starting with the fundamentals.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[stotty]

The problem of coaching a nonexistent aspect of the game is that number one...as I mentioned there are few that can teach or even see it as a viable part of the game. But number two and probably even more important and currently disastrous is that there are no good models available. Dominic Thiem and Alexander Zverev are not poster boys for the volley stroke and in fact they rarely and if ever venture to the net unless they are forced to come forwards to chase down a drop shot or extremely short ball.

Even Roger Federer has lost his past flair at the net.

True. Today's players aren't the best at transitioning to the net.

Actually, I think Roger has regained some of his past flair at the net. I watched serve volley a number of times this week and saw some of that lovely composure and 'time' that he used to have. I think he could totally regain the skill with little problem. You don't just lose a skill like that, do you? It must still be there, close to the surface, when you think about it.

A very helpful transcript by the way....thank you.

[stotty]

Jana Novota just died. What a shame.

She had the best forehand volley you are ever likely to see. Fundamentally sound.

[don_budge]

DB,
Yep this article is pure fundamentals. Check out the classic articles in this issue on the forehand volley which touch on many of your points. Great point about the opposite arm.

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...nd_volley.html

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...nd_volley.html

Gotcha Boss. Good stuff. Rock solid stuff. What is it going to take to resurrect tennis to the way it should be played? The way Richard Gonzalez played?

You are a solid fundamental guy and your study of video has reinforced your teaching. Many thanks of the website...and the forum. Where decent people can talk tennis in their spare time.

Just to sum up in a nutshell...the left arm.

From the ready position to the unit turn...as you turn take the left hand from the throat of the racquet to the right shoulder. Touch the left shoulder with the left hand. The 45 degree shoulder turn is perfect as the standard...lay the racquet on a line parallel to the shoulders. In the "U" shape. Push forwards with the right shoulder and "swing" the arm holding the shape and finish with the strings towards the target.

This left hand to the shoulder is an excellent exercise that has been around for many years. It's a great method to get the student to rotate the shoulders away from and back towards the ball. I love it on high balls...it sort of gives the player the correct length of backswing.

The left hand to shoulder is an exercise. But if the player is to hold on to the concept and keep that left hand more in front of him you could see that both hands are moving simultaneously together which is indicative of shoulder rotation. I don't like to see that left hand off to the left of the player's body as if to wave "Hi Mommy" in the audience.

By engaging the left hand in this manner it encourages the player to use both hands (shoulders) in the most efficient manner. No independent arm swing in the hitting zone. There is minimal swing in the backswing and the follow through. Afterall it is a swing...a short swing.

Excellent articles. I think of all of the volleys that are in the video presentation I like Taylor Dent's the best. Fundamentally it looks to be the most efficient motion of them all. It's classic.