Volleying - Chalk and Cheese.

[stotty]

Players prior to the modern era made even difficult volleys look easy whereas players today can, at times, make easy volleys look downright difficult. The proof, as always, is in the footage. -- Stotty

It's been a while since I have posted a longer, more meaningful post on forum. There doesn't seem to much appetite for such discussion of late since the more technically minded posters aren't posting so much these days. But here goes...

I like this clip below. It's from the 1980s and features Cash and Edberg. I like this era most because rackets and strings offer a bit more power and versatility than wood without being too overwhelming or detrimental to all round tennis. The clip is tightly edited (could be better quality but watch it on a small screen for best viewing) so you get to see one exquisite volley after the other. You won't see much better volleying than this. Both players make it look easy and their volleys are firm and assured. It's a completely different class to today's volleying. Chalk and cheese.

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

It's important to look back at videos like these because they serve good purpose in bringing the modern game back down to earth. No one has greater admiration for the core parts of the modern game than me but it does tend to get a lot more credit than it has earned.

I have been coaching a long time and watched fads and trends come and go like there is no tomorrow. One minute coaches advocate tipping the racket head down to commence a forehand (Borg, Sampras, Lendl), the next minute everyone should keep the racket tip up (Roger and Rafa). Now it's the hybrid (Kygrios, Sock). All of this might be very good advice for a given player but, in essence, all three styles work, and all that really matters are the fundamentals. My predecessor always said: ''If you take care of the fundamentals then the bells and whistles will take care of themselves.'' Good advice? I'll let you decide. One thing is for sure, it's volleys, not forehands, that are out of fashion.

My advice to coaches is to teach volleys abundantly right from the start. Put volleying way up the pecking order. Give them kudos. Volleys mustn't be tagged on to the last 5 minutes of a lesson...something I see all the time these days. Put volleys at the beginning of a lesson, and work on all the nuances, of which there are many. Volleys are often more about absorbing and deflecting pace than punching, but if you want to get truly educated on the ins and outs of volleying then these two articles will really clue you up.

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...rehand_volley/

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...ckhand_volley/

Older coaches always preach that if junior players haven't developed good volleys and transitioning skills by the time they are 14 or 15, then it is unlikely they will ever feel at home at the net. This is almost certainly true and something I have witnessed first hand many times over. Leave volleys even later than than juniors and you get players who are positively phobic about the net. You simply cannot play catch-up once you have missed the boat with your student.

I have great admiration for Novak and the way he goes about the business of being a world-class tennis player. He is the best player the world, probably the best of his generation, and possibly the greatest player of all time. But just imagine how invincible he would be if he could volley, smash and transition to the net like a Cash or McEnroe, or even half as well. He's only got half a game and yet he is so incredibly good...Novak is the equivalent of a one-legged man winning the 100m at the Olympics, a bizarre analogy perhaps, but laced with some truth if you have the benefit of 40 years experience of watching tennis as I have. Nick Bollettieri once said Novak is the most complete player ever to play tennis. I take the opposite view. Novak is the most one dimensional and least complete player of all the greats. Though I must concede he is utterly brilliant at what he does do well. His balance, preparation, footwork, and technical ability off the ground are the finest you will ever see. He is the ultimate model for preparation when it comes to ground strokes.

Roger is the best volleyer in the modern game but then he is slightly older than the others and has bridged two generations. It's this transitioning that has made his game the most functional, complete, and interesting of all.

If you made it this far then thanks for listening. I know attention spans aren't great these days.

[glacierguy]

Hi Stotty, thanks for the wonderful video of Cash/Edberg. I was glued to the screen watching the ultra- reliable, step, step, split from both of them as they approached the net. It's something I'm working on, so was inspired to watch these two masters do it over and over again. I personally find that it's that slight pause and split which determines whether I arrive at the contact in control or not.

The Edberg serve also looks good in the light of what we know from this site - good shoulder rotation away during the toss, and open elbow angle (>90) during upswing.

[stotty]

Hi Stotty, thanks for the wonderful video of Cash/Edberg. I was glued to the screen watching the ultra- reliable, step, step, split from both of them as they approached the net. It's something I'm working on, so was inspired to watch these two masters do it over and over again. I personally find that it's that slight pause and split which determines whether I arrive at the contact in control or not.

The Edberg serve also looks good in the light of what we know from this site - good shoulder rotation away during the toss, and open elbow angle (>90) during upswing.

Thanks for reading. Yes, it's a great clip. Split stepping is something of an art when serve and volleying. In the clip both players have brilliant 'spring-loaded' split steps, something which is often missed or misinterpreted by club players. Club players typically run in and plonk both feet firmly on the ground then get passed. If you 'plonk' the feet down you've blown it.

I was never a fan of Edberg's serve, though it worked for him. He has to arch his back too much to get out of the way of the ball to hit it. It's a very awkward looking motion yet it seemed to come together at the contact. He had an extreme grip too. I much prefer Cash's motion. He 'leans' more than 'arches' and his weight transfer is real nice. I find his landing after the serve smoother than Edberg's too.

[johnyandell]

God that was tennis!

[doctorhl]

Stotty, I always contended that the “ plonk” put the player in the saddle and on their heels and they couldn’t get out in time to volley without guessing on the opponent’s ball direction. The “spring loaders” could move quicker, which allowed them time to split second earlier to WATCH and then determine ball direction AFTER the ball left the opponent’s racket. Some juniors tried spring loading, but the difficulty is knowing when to load and have time to watch, then move. This incorrect timing made them default into becoming “ plonkers”. Plonking is not successful and many give up coming into net. Someone needs to capture “ when to load” on slow motion video.

[glacierguy]

Stotty, I always contended that the “ plonk” put the player in the saddle and on their heels and they couldn’t get out in time to volley without guessing on the opponent’s ball direction. The “spring loaders” could move quicker, which allowed them time to split second earlier to WATCH and then determine ball direction AFTER the ball left the opponent’s racket. Some juniors tried spring loading, but the difficulty is knowing when to load and have time to watch, then move. This incorrect timing made them default into becoming “ plonkers”. Plonking is not successful and many give up coming into net. Someone needs to capture “ when to load” on slow motion video.

Yes, completely agree. Look at the speed of the Cash/Edberg footwork as they approach. I think they're like stones skipping over water - if they were to slow down at the split, they'd sink!

[stotty]

I think they're like stones skipping over water - if they were to slow down at the split, they'd sink!

That's a great way to describe it. I always think of the spilt step as a momentary thing. As doctorhi suggests it's an essential part of approaching the net to gain momentary balance to go one way or the other.

Coaches often over emphasise the stopping part of the split step which leads to 'plonking down'. This is where watching good players can provide a better reference point than coaching instruction. Watch how Edberg and Cash split step and copy it...simple as that.

It's funny because as a self-taught player I always studied other players and used them as a point of reference. I learned almost entirely from watching others. This happens far less these days and young players tend to always look to the coach for everything.

[DavidLHagler]

This is really nice to watch. Paul Annacone makes a nice distinction between "serve and volleyers" and "servers who volley." These guys are the former and players like Sampras were the latter. I believe in teaching players to slice and volley very early on in their development, otherwise they will never really do it in matches. Re - Stotty's last point, I remember working with a 15 year old player several years ago. He was not someone I had taught previously although I knew him from a Competition Training Center I helped coach. He was a generally bright and inquisitive guy, and I asked if he ever tried to move his grip slightly one way or the other and he said, "No." I asked and he said - and I'm paraphrasing this was the grip he was taught to serve with and he was going to serve with that grip. I had him move his grip slightly and the first kick serve he hit landed in the box and bounced so high I could not get a racquet on it. I asked if this might work and he smiled and said, "Maybe." My point is this was a smart and very athletic person and in general someone who would not blindly follow. But so many good things happen as a result of experimentation. But many in this generation need to be encouraged to try ...

[stotty]

This is really nice to watch. Paul Annacone makes a nice distinction between "serve and volleyers" and "servers who volley." These guys are the former and players like Sampras were the latter. I believe in teaching players to slice and volley very early on in their development, otherwise they will never really do it in matches. Re - Stotty's last point, I remember working with a 15 year old player several years ago. He was not someone I had taught previously although I knew him from a Competition Training Center I helped coach. He was a generally bright and inquisitive guy, and I asked if he ever tried to move his grip slightly one way or the other and he said, "No." I asked and he said - and I'm paraphrasing this was the grip he was taught to serve with and he was going to serve with that grip. I had him move his grip slightly and the first kick serve he hit landed in the box and bounced so high I could not get a racquet on it. I asked if this might work and he smiled and said, "Maybe." My point is this was a smart and very athletic person and in general someone who would not blindly follow. But so many good things happen as a result of experimentation. But many in this generation need to be encouraged to try ...

Good point and great post.

Being inquisitive and willing to try things is an asset. Most kids are just willing (in fact want) to be told how to do things and then go out and do it. I am always amazed how many kids don't watch tennis matches on TV. They will watch sections of matches or snippets on YouTube and that's it. As John has said in the past, you can learn tennis by osmosis, soaking things up by watching others do it well. Pancho Gonzales learned from watching others and stole, as he put it, the best parts of others' game.

My big concern is how will players ever make their back to high level volleying after being entrenched in the baseline game for so long? The demographic of coaches over here suggests there are not too many coaches my age anymore; most are in the 30's or younger. Coaches in their thirties are adept at teaching ground strokes but are far less versed in the nuances of volleying. So who is going to teach the advanced volleying we see in the clip? Could it become a lost art? Or is it lost already?

The big take away from the clip is not just the volleying but the transitioning and the reading of the game. Above all it's the low volleys that are so good in the clip and which are completely extinct from the modern game. The majority of the tour are clueless at volleying below the heigh of the net. Roger is the exception, but even he doesn't get right under those low ones, or move in quite like Cash or Edberg, not really.

[arturohernandez]

Good point and great post.

Being inquisitive and willing to try things is an asset. Most kids are just willing (in fact want) to be told how to do things and then go out and do it. I am always amazed how many kids don't watch tennis matches on TV. They will watch sections of matches or snippets on YouTube and that's it. As John has said in the past, you can learn tennis by osmosis, soaking things up by watching others do it well. Pancho Gonzales learned from watching others and stole, as he put it, the best parts of others' game.

My big concern is how will players ever make their back to high level volleying after being entrenched in the baseline game for so long? The demographic of coaches over here suggests there are not too many coaches my age anymore; most are in the 30's or younger. Coaches in their thirties are adept at teaching ground strokes but are far less versed in the nuances of volleying. So who is going to teach the advanced volleying we see in the clip? Could it become a lost art? Or is it lost already?

The big take away from the clip is not just the volleying but the transitioning and the reading of the game. Above all it's the low volleys that are so good in the clip and which are completely extinct from the modern game. The majority of the tour are clueless at volleying below the heigh of the net. Roger is the exception, but even he doesn't get right under those low ones, or move in quite like Cash or Edberg, not really.

Great post!!!

I wonder if the more extreme grips and spin that people use on their groundstrokes may take away from the volley. The almost exclusive use of two hands on the backhand does not help.

Every so often I imitate McEnroe while warming up with my daughter. I show her that he would use a single grip for forehands and backhands. Or at least that is how I think of it.

She can play with a single grip as well She uses a one handed backhand which has always led to a lot of slice when she was younger and not as strong. We work on her volleys at every practice. She often comes in to the net for part of the practice. I will use the skipping idea to see if it helps.

It is almost like two different games. The heavy game with two hands and playing from the backcourt gets people a long ways. I mean Djokovic made it to number one with a relatively weak forecourt game. Why should anyone else try and do it any other way?

Stotty, please give us the next unusual player. I only work with my kids and none of them will make a splash in tennis. But maybe those of you who coach will be able to show players that you can make an impact playing and old school game.

[stotty]

Great post!!!

I wonder if the more extreme grips and spin that people use on their groundstrokes may take away from the volley. The almost exclusive use of two hands on the backhand does not help.

Every so often I imitate McEnroe while warming up with my daughter. I show her that he would use a single grip for forehands and backhands. Or at least that is how I think of it.

She can play with a single grip as well She uses a one handed backhand which has always led to a lot of slice when she was younger and not as strong. We work on her volleys at every practice. She often comes in to the net for part of the practice. I will use the skipping idea to see if it helps.

It is almost like two different games. The heavy game with two hands and playing from the backcourt gets people a long ways. I mean Djokovic made it to number one with a relatively weak forecourt game. Why should anyone else try and do it any other way?

Stotty, please give us the next unusual player. I only work with my kids and none of them will make a splash in tennis. But maybe those of you who coach will be able to show players that you can make an impact playing and old school game.

Classic tennis (that's wooden rackets if we are talking in the purest sense) and Modern tennis have zero in common anymore. Back then the balls were different, the rackets were different, the courts were different, the era and values were different, the style of play was different...probably they wore different underpants too. But one thing they did better then, despite vastly inferior equipment, was volley. Frank Sedgman, in my book, volleyed better than Cash and Edberg put together...and Cash and Edberg were pretty darn good.

My advice: teach your daughters to volley with wooden rackets. You cannot get away with poor technique with wood. In the development stages using wood is a really good idea. It's a potty idea to many, but guaranteed to work in terms of leading to good technique..

[DavidLHagler]

Wood racquets? YES - they help players learn volleys, slices and all kinds of things. You will see some of this in my next series on developing touch. Stotty is spot on. dlh

[glacierguy]

Is it possible to temporarily modify a modern racquet to simulate a wooden racquet? I only ask because all of my wooden racquets are in the bin.The last ones I used were Dunlop Maxply Fort, but with an exciting black layer of graphite (about 1mm) in amongst the wooden layers.

[stotty]

Is it possible to temporarily modify a modern racquet to simulate a wooden racquet? I only ask because all of my wooden racquets are in the bin.The last ones I used were Dunlop Maxply Fort, but with an exciting black layer of graphite (about 1mm) in amongst the wooden layers.

You can usually pick up old Maxplys in second hand charity shops or on eBay. I have around 12 wooden rackets I have picked up here and there over the years.

[stotty]

Wood racquets? YES - they help players learn volleys, slices and all kinds of things. You will see some of this in my next series on developing touch. Stotty is spot on. dlh

Using wooden rackets during given development stages of juniors is such a good thing to do. You simply cannot get away with being lazy with wood. You have to watch the ball much better and get down to low shots in a way people sometimes opt not to with modern rackets because they can get away with it. I once played for a month with a wooden racket and when I reverted back to my Babolat Aero I hit the ball so well it was amazing. This is because I had to work so much harder with wood in every aspect and it really honed parts of my game and my timing became vastly improved.

I will look forward to your article...