Ultimate Fundamentals: Backhand Volley

[jeffreycounts]

Would love to get your thoughts on my latest article, "Ultimate Fundamentals: Backhand Volley"

[robhiggins]

John. New subscriber and loved BH and FH volley articles. I recently injured my elbow and have been forced to hit my BH volley with two handed grip, as I do my BH groundstroke. I have found surprising results. Keeping the U shape as instructed I can now hit with more power and miss less balls into the net. I think this is because my racquet is flatter on contact and I don’t have a tendency to follow through low breaking my wrist downward. I’m going to keep working on the shot, but do you have any suggestions for a 2 handed BHV as far a technique?

[johnyandell]

Rob,
Yeah just use both arms but keeping front arm in U shape. Push with the back left arm as well as pull with the front. Let the torso naturally rotate max of 45 degrees. And yes, most club players try to hit too much downward. The two handed bhv is even flatter than the one hander. Thanks for the great words on the articles!

[doctorhl]

Concentrating on pulling non racket arm back really helped keeping my shoulder closed through contact. Eureka! BH volleys at the service line finally started going deeper with correct power to spin feel!

[johnyandell]

Doc hl,
Yes this is true.

[EdWeiss]

Really enjoyed the article. One question for the Forum: there is a good deal of downward motion in the volleys shown, esp. Berdych and Dimitrov. The "classic" style of volleys had the racket more lined up behind the ball and it was more of a through motion. I have pasted in below a clip of Sedgman and Segura as a point of comparison. Which style would you teach an aspiring junior?


http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/vi...tage/594665767

[stotty]

Really enjoyed the article. One question for the Forum: there is a good deal of downward motion in the volleys shown, esp. Berdych and Dimitrov. The "classic" style of volleys had the racket more lined up behind the ball and it was more of a through motion. I have pasted in below a clip of Sedgman and Segura as a point of comparison. Which style would you teach an aspiring junior?


http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/vi...tage/594665767

Great clip.

tennis_chiro has raised this issue a couple of times. I don't think there is any question yesteryear's volleyers had it right. Sedgman is absolutely sublime on both wings. His volleys are so penetrating and effortless. He moves so well at the net. I could watch him all day. He is on this clip at 1:27. Look at his backhand volley at 1:38...compact yet penetrating. Sedgman is the best, the very, very best.

http://commerce.wazeedigital.com//license/clip/48050258_9800.do?assetId=clip_8903884&keywords=sedgman

[seano]

I like the teaching cue of imagining you're invisible with a racquet in each hand. Execute the volley motion with each hand. The person looking at you shouldn't be able to tell which is the FH volley and which is the BH volley. FH volleys are more level, while the BH volley tends to be more high to low.

[tennis_chiro]

Great clip.

tennis_chiro has raised this issue a couple of times. I don't think there is any question yesteryear's volleyers had it right. Sedgman is absolutely sublime on both wings. His volleys are so penetrating and effortless. He moves so well at the net. I could watch him all day. He is on this clip at 1:27. Look at his backhand volley at 1:38...compact yet penetrating. Sedgman is the best, the very, very best.

http://commerce.wazeedigital.com//li...ywords=sedgman

Sedgeman's volleys are so clean and his movement is so efficient. Stotty is absolutely right. The best ever. We need some video nerds to go into the original videos and "mine" some closeup footage of those Sedgeman volleys and his volley technique. Essentially, it is a lost art.

don

[don_budge]

Really enjoyed the article. One question for the Forum: there is a good deal of downward motion in the volleys shown, esp. Berdych and Dimitrov. The "classic" style of volleys had the racket more lined up behind the ball and it was more of a through motion. I have pasted in below a clip of Sedgman and Segura as a point of comparison. Which style would you teach an aspiring junior?


http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/vi...tage/594665767

One of the more remarkable videos to be posted here on this forum. Some actual telling footage of the Francisco Segura game. I was very impressed with his service motion. Despite a somewhat unorthodox beginning to his windup it is a beautiful backswing and a fluid and efficient delivery of the racquet head to the ball. Certainly good enough to prevent his opponents to taking advantage of his serve. Talk about backhand volleys too...we see a couple of very capable backhands from the spindly legged Ecuadorean. Not to mention those of Sedgman.

There is no question in which what should be taught to any aspiring junior. These two exhibit the ultra classic beauty on the backhand side. This is the crown jewel. Once you teach this sort of classic fundamental motion and delivery of the racquet head to the ball it will make it possible for individual embellishment or additional bells and whistles if needed. But the truth is...nothing more is needed. Everything is a variation off of the fundamental. Situational.

I wouldn't teach the extreme "downward" modern volley to anyone that is serious about playing the net. One might get away with that sort of motion on a situational basis...i.e. when you have sufficient time, but for the repeatable, consistent volley stick with the classic.

Truly remarkable video...very impressive. Sedgman was of course a tremendous volleyer. You can teach his fundamentally correct (FC) motion to the end of time. When I was at the Don Budge Tennis Camp in 1973...good old Don was playing doubles in the Senior Wimbledon with Frank Sedgman. Don really knew how to pick his partner. They beat Borg's coach Lennart Bergelin and Drobny from Czechoslovakia in the finals.

[stotty]

Why is Something So Simple So Hard to Do?

http://commerce.wazeedigital.com//li...ywords=sedgman

Sedgeman's volleys are so clean and his movement is so efficient. Stotty is absolutely right. The best ever. We need some video nerds to go into the original videos and "mine" some closeup footage of those Sedgeman volleys and his volley technique. Essentially, it is a lost art.

don

There is no question in which what should be taught to any aspiring junior. These two exhibit the ultra classic beauty on the backhand side. This is the crown jewel. Once you teach this sort of classic fundamental motion and delivery of the racquet head to the ball it will make it possible for individual embellishment or additional bells and whistles if needed. But the truth is...nothing more is needed.

I wouldn't teach the extreme "downward" modern volley to anyone that is serious about playing the net.

Truly remarkable video...very impressive. Sedgman was of course a tremendous volleyer. You can teach his fundamentally correct (FC) motion to the end of time.

Let's take Frank Sedgman's backhand volleys at 1:33 and 1:38. He hits both volleys so cleanly and beautifully with the minimum of backswing. The volley at 1:38 is played from a fraction outside the service box yet still the backswing is weeny and the volley powerful. The volley at 1:33 is a deep, penetrating bullet. Not one player in the world today can do that, not one. Roger would take a huge cut at the 1:38 volley in comparison to Frank. Roger, great though he is, is not in the same hemisphere as Frank in the volley department, not really.

The thing with Frank is he is equally good off both wings. His forehand volley is equally as good as his backhand....played with the minimum of fuss.

So how do you cultivate a volley like Frank's? I can only assume patience and never allowing yourself to be tempted to take a big "cut" no matter how easy a volley looks. He must have stuck by that motto like glue in his formative years. I wonder if a young player would have the patience and discipline to stick by such a method. Most want power immediately...from aged 8. Frank is all technique, timing and weight transfer.

For me Frank stands completely alone. He gets so much power from such minimum racket movement. He's the greatest.



"Nothing truly worthwhile in life ever comes easy, son" - Stotty's dad.

[don_budge]

Why is Something So Simple So Hard to Do?

http://commerce.wazeedigital.com//li...ywords=sedgman






Let's take Frank Sedgman's backhand volleys at 1:33 and 1:38. He hits both volleys so cleanly and beautifully with the minimum of backswing. The volley at 1:38 is played from a fraction outside the service box yet still the backswing is weeny and the volley powerful. The volley at 1:33 is a deep, penetrating bullet. Not one player in the world today can do that, not one. Roger would take a huge cut at the 1:38 volley in comparison to Frank. Roger, great though he is, is not in the same hemisphere as Frank in the volley department, not really.

The thing with Frank is he is equally good off both wings. His forehand volley is equally as good as his backhand....played with the minimum of fuss.

So how do you cultivate a volley like Frank's? I can only assume patience and never allowing yourself to be tempted to take a big "cut" no matter how easy a volley looks. He must have stuck by that motto like glue in his formative years. I wonder if a young player would have the patience and discipline to stick by such a method. Most want power immediately...from aged 8. Frank is all technique, timing and weight transfer.

For me Frank stands completely alone. He gets so much power from such minimum racket movement. He's the greatest.



"Nothing truly worthwhile in life ever comes easy, son" - Stotty's dad.

The forehand volley he hits at 1:52 is nothing to sneeze at either. He anticipates correctly and his racquet is already in position. It's a reflex volley buy he makes it look routine and bunts it past his opponent who had moved forwards for the earlier shot. The backhand volleys you reference are just beauties. Supremely simple without any fanfare or unnecessary motion. Just weight going forwards and making himself into a wall at impact. Super video. Wonderful examples of volley technique...perfect examples.

The volley has been successfully engineered out of the modern game. It's a ridiculous game as it is played now. No wonder a 37/38 year old superstar with his roots in classic tennis is able to dominate the way he has. The way that he turned the tables on Nadal this year was a wonder to behold. All he had to do was bring his equipment up to date and retool his game accordingly.

Still...he doesn't volley like he used to. He doesn't approach as effectively as he used to. Players like Sedgman just never stopped coming forwards. It was second nature. It was in the DNA. Crisp volleying. Shorter backswing...better the chance of meeting the ball on the sweet spot of the racquet. Meet the sweet spot...voila. Placement, spin and speed. In that order.

After looking at the video yet another time...maybe a dozen altogether. And counting. The similarities in the backhand at 1:33 and the forehand at 1:52 are compelling. There you are...perfect fundamentals. Both volleys just pop off of the strings leaving the opponent looking at the ball racing past him.

[tennis_chiro]

The forehand volley he hits at 1:52 is nothing to sneeze at either. He anticipates correctly and his racquet is already in position. It's a reflex volley buy he makes it look routine and bunts it past his opponent who had moved forwards for the earlier shot. The backhand volleys you reference are just beauties. Supremely simple without any fanfare or unnecessary motion. Just weight going forwards and making himself into a wall at impact. Super video. Wonderful examples of volley technique...perfect examples.

The volley has been successfully engineered out of the modern game. It's a ridiculous game as it is played now. No wonder a 37/38 year old superstar with his roots in classic tennis is able to dominate the way he has. The way that he turned the tables on Nadal this year was a wonder to behold. All he had to do was bring his equipment up to date and retool his game accordingly.

Still...he doesn't volley like he used to. He doesn't approach as effectively as he used to. Players like Sedgman just never stopped coming forwards. It was second nature. It was in the DNA. Crisp volleying. Shorter backswing...better the chance of meeting the ball on the sweet spot of the racquet. Meet the sweet spot...voila. Placement, spin and speed. In that order.

After looking at the video yet another time...maybe a dozen altogether. And counting. The similarities in the backhand at 1:33 and the forehand at 1:52 are compelling. There you are...perfect fundamentals. Both volleys just pop off of the strings leaving the opponent looking at the ball racing past him.

Does a tree fall in the forest if no one hears it? I feel like we are a couple of old men crying out in the wilderness. No one is listening. And a great art is being lost. I still teach the volley like this, but I have to warn my students that they won't see any pros hitting the ball like this. Even when you look at the best of the current front court players (you can't call them serve and volleyers except for maybe Mischa Zverev and Ivo Karlovic), they all use this extreme high to low action on their backhand volleys. Even the best of the volleyers of the last 20 years were well behind the likes of Edberg, Cash, Newcombe, Rosewall, etc in this area of their games, much less Frank Sedgeman. Now it is not even close.

Stepanek: https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...splayer440.mov

Henman comes close: https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...THBHVSide5.mov''

But more often, he follows through well under the ball: https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...THBHVSide3.mov

Federer - see the length of Roger’s backswing on this high BHVollley, the racket head is behind and beyond his left shoulder: https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...HVBHVFront.mov

Here’s a pretty good BHVolley from Max MIrnyi, but when you look at it frame by frame you see how much length there is to the stroke and how much high to low; this would probably be an ideal model of what they are striving for today and yet this is nowhere near as clean as those Sedgeman volleys and it won’t hold up when the ball gets quicker and lower: https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...MMBHVSide2.mov

I wish I could see some clear clips from some Pat Cash volleys when he was playing those tough matches and volleying from below his knees against Lendl and Connors

Going through the shot archive, it is pretty hard to find a low volley for Sampras, but that was the beauty of his game - his serve protected him from having to hit low volleys. Notice how short the follow through is here and how little the racket head drops below horizontal in the follow through: https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...evelFront4.mov

But wait a minute, JY did find some lower volleys for Pete and you can see the abbreviated technique here and also the way he sets up the racket head behind and below the oncoming ball as opposed to up above his shoulders, not as good as Sedgeman, but better than anybody else in today’s game and certainly better than Roger:

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/pro_men/petesampras/ps_volleys_overheads/ps_bh_volley/ps_bh_volley.html?PSBHVLowFront1.mov

Go to the last page and you will see a ton of low volleys from Pete. The technique he is demonstrating there is almost a lost art:

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/pro_men/petesampras/ps_volleys_overheads/ps_bh_volley/ps_bh_volley.html?PSBHVLowRear4.mov

Notice here that the racket head does not touch the ground: https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...tLevelSide.mov

Hoping to hear some comments!

don

[stotty]

The forehand volley he hits at 1:52 is nothing to sneeze at either. He anticipates correctly and his racquet is already in position. It's a reflex volley buy he makes it look routine and bunts it past his opponent who had moved forwards for the earlier shot.

That forehand volley, in a way, is the best of the lot. Many players would fade that one out but Frank hits it firmly and straight. Spot on.

It's so great to be able speak to people who truly appreciate how great Frank's volleys were, who understand.

The Sampras clip cited by tennis_chiro is unusually good. I didn't realise Pete possessed that skill. Pat Cash could certainly do the same, better actually. I will see if I can source a clip from somewhere. I spoke to Ian Barclay, who coached Cash, and now lives in London, some years ago. He said Cash hit low volleys the best of his generation simply because he got down to the ball better than anyone else. On low backhand volleys he would virtually skim his knees getting under the ball.

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...tLevelSide.mov

Barclay was also a fan of getting grass court players to cut inside sliced backhand approach shots, creating an inside out spin. He would demonstrate this shot himself. He could hit it effortlessly but very hard. It was a great shot to approach the net on.

It's tricky as a coach. I have faithfully pulled the Sedgman clip out to show juniors how to volley but they don't get it. They cannot bring themselves to give the older guys any credit. The younger coaches don't help as they always cite today's tennis as the most advanced.

I learnt my volleys against a wall. I spent hours doing it. It's great way to learn because a big backswing isn't possible if you stand 8 feet back and volley at pace...cures the disease completely. I wonder what Frank did? Wouldn't you just love to have the chance to ask him that? Was it taught or self-learnt, or both?

I have another clip to post...just can't remember where I pasted it. Back soon...

...Found it....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Maqsk5nrLt0

Go to 12:13 ....4:55 is pretty good too. I haven't been through the whole clip but there is quite a bit on there.

I found an article about Frank. It was a wall after all!! How to become a great volleyer...find a bloody wall!

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis/sedgmans-golden-period-of-triple-crowns-and-few-comforts-183098.html

[don_budge]

Does a tree fall in the forest if no one hears it? I feel like we are a couple of old men crying out in the wilderness. No one is listening. And a great art is being lost. I still teach the volley like this, but I have to warn my students that they won't see any pros hitting the ball like this.

don

It is ironic that you make the mention of the tree falling in the forest. I've been spending a minimum of two hours a day out in the forest with my dog. Never a soul around. I've been giving a lot of thought as to the trees. I pet the branches that are in our way as we make our way. Talking to them a bit. They're living things. What the heck...it isn't hurting anyone. Plus there is anyone there to hear me...so did I really talk to them. We are taking paths...some manmade for foresters from years ago or animal trails. Have to be a bit careful to not get lost. Today I found myself petting the branches that were in our way as I brushed them aside. Feeling a certain love for them.

I'm on the same page with you tennis_chiro. Amazing isn't it that in such a short span of time the "classic volley" has become extinct. Scary too. Even scarier is the fact that if the volley doesn't exist in the game today...who is going to teach it tomorrow?

No...we saw the best of everything in our lifetime. These days are so watered down and so dumbed down. Techno music...techno tennis. It's all one and the same. Check out the Sampras and Agassi video I posted on the other thread. Some pretty good volleys...and remarkable passing shots.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bvis7gAArVk