Developing volley feel / fluidity / contact time

[GeoffWilliams]

All the current top doubles players use the snap back volley and only block when rushed. It's a way to derive more power and put the ball away quickly. It's just another tennis myth to say other wise.

[10splayer]

All the current top doubles players use the snap back volley and only block when rushed. It's a way to derive more power and put the ball away quickly. It's just another tennis myth to say other wise.

No disagree. Sure you'll add power by creating end point racquet head speed, but you'll also spray the ball all over the place. What your describing (i think) is akin to slapping at the ball. Absolutely the worse image one can promote.

Did you look at the video I posted? Almost ALL volleys are "receiving", in nature. That is where there's an absorbing nature to the contact. And the key in this, is keeping the hand WITH the tip of the racquet, so they're moving at the same speed.... Laying the shaft back and snapping it forward is the antithesis of this....

Besides, I thought the thread was about feel?

[GeoffWilliams]

Another case of someone ignoring reality. That is how the myths stay in place. Snap back volleys are all about fluidity. I often hit snap back volleys at great speed, up to 85mph with short snap back fluid snaps. But every time I go out I practice serve and volleying, and these can only be hit when you have time. Other wise, use your body and feet to block. There is not much time to decide on volleys, so it takes a great deal of real time practice against someone trying to beat you, not someone feeding you with easy shots.

The trouble with many players is that they are only practicing with easy feeds, from teachers, and not training with dangerous partners. You think it's easy learning how to ground stroke? Try the snap back volley and learn how to hit it. I dare you. It takes years of practice to time it right, but if you do learn it, you become a deadly volleyer who can put away even low shots. Or continue with the blocked volley, which often sits up for easy passes. No snap back volley sits up. It's fun to hit them against younger guys, who have never seen anyone beat them that way before I do. They are so used to being able to run down blocked volleys, that they often start cursing. I beat three of these guys in one day in a 4.5 tournament, and each one of them had the version: "I suck!" When you can't beat a 58 yr. old 230lb serve and volleyer, you do suck. The twist serve lets me get into the net, but the toss has to be over your rear shoulder, and your back has to arch over the base line, and you have to stay closed longer, and you have to hit the left part of the ball, upwards and to the left/right plane to be able to get the big kick/twist so many hate to return off their bh sides. I can hit the angle on the ad side five feet up from the net with my stringing techniques.

[gzhpcu]

Just look at Pat Rafter's volleys and decide for yourself....

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/...evelFront1.pct

[GeoffWilliams]

Rafter is not a modern doubles player. He lays the frame back and punches forwards, not just a static block.

[stotty]

I think the wrist plays mostly a relaxed, passive role in volleying. Many players lay the wrist back a little before moving the racket forward to meet the ball, but there is certainly no "snapping" amongst good volleyers. In my view the laying back of the wrist is passive.

Good volleyers are relaxed and smooth. It's all timing really. I've watched the very best volleyers from feet away at Wimbledon and I can tell you there is very little punching and snapping. It's all about technique, balance and weight transfer.

I think snapping the wrist will just serve to break the smooth chain of events required for a good finish to the volley.

Bob Lutz was the only semi wristy volleyer I can think of who got away with it.

[GeoffWilliams]

The same guys here telling you never to hit a snap back, are the guys who told you never to hit a swinging volley (a top spin ground stroke before the ball bounces.) The difference between a swinging volley and a snap back volley is this: vicious under cut flat out speed which keeps the ball low and away, versus a shot that kicks up high. No harder to learn. Same guys saying the same things, and will be proved wrong by the players in the end. The snap back uses the body too, and feet too, and is timed with the vicious head speed the wrist provides. These can be hit over 100mph.

[10splayer]

The same guys here telling you never to hit a snap back, are the guys who told you never to hit a swinging volley (a top spin ground stroke before the ball bounces.) The difference between a swinging volley and a snap back volley is this: vicious under cut flat out speed which keeps the ball low and away, versus a shot that kicks up high. No harder to learn. Same guys saying the same things, and will be proved wrong by the players in the end. The snap back uses the body too, and feet too, and is timed with the vicious head speed the wrist provides. These can be hit over 100mph.

Oh good, another dude revolutionizing/reinventing the the wheel...But seriously, very little of what you're saying has anything to do with how to volley well.

Oh, and you're right, Rafter sucks as a volleyer. Can't think of anything one could learn from him..

[10splayer]

Another case of someone ignoring reality. That is how the myths stay in place. Snap back volleys are all about fluidity. I often hit snap back volleys at great speed, up to 85mph with short snap back fluid snaps. But every time I go out I practice serve and volleying, and these can only be hit when you have time. Other wise, use your body and feet to block. There is not much time to decide on volleys, so it takes a great deal of real time practice against someone trying to beat you, not someone feeding you with easy shots.

The trouble with many players is that they are only practicing with easy feeds, from teachers, and not training with dangerous partners. You think it's easy learning how to ground stroke? Try the snap back volley and learn how to hit it. I dare you. It takes years of practice to time it right, but if you do learn it, you become a deadly volleyer who can put away even low shots. Or continue with the blocked volley, which often sits up for easy passes. No snap back volley sits up. It's fun to hit them against younger guys, who have never seen anyone beat them that way before I do. They are so used to being able to run down blocked volleys, that they often start cursing. I beat three of these guys in one day in a 4.5 tournament, and each one of them had the version: "I suck!" When you can't beat a 58 yr. old 230lb serve and volleyer, you do suck. The twist serve lets me get into the net, but the toss has to be over your rear shoulder, and your back has to arch over the base line, and you have to stay closed longer, and you have to hit the left part of the ball, upwards and to the left/right plane to be able to get the big kick/twist so many hate to return off their bh sides. I can hit the angle on the ad side five feet up from the net with my stringing techniques.

Yes Geoff you're awesome. It that what you want to hear? But really, there are a lot here who play much, much better then you. High level players know, that the game up at the net (a predominant amount of the time) is about CONTROLLING a ball that's coming in at 70 miles an hour, NOT RHS...

[stotty]

High level players know, that the game up at the net (a predominant amount of the time) is about CONTROLLING a ball that's coming in at 70 miles an hour, NOT RHS...

Almost ALL volleys are "receiving", in nature. That is where there's an absorbing nature to the contact.

Yes and there is great skill in that...especially in the professional ranks where balls are moving so fast and with so much weight..."absorbing" is a good word to describe what a volleyer in the top ranks is actually having to do.

Just picked up on the clip you posted. I found it a good walk through...nice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lfk4wRP9gvI&feature=youtu.be&list=PLD0FE460FD37E5D04

[10splayer]

Yes and there is great skill in that...especially in the professional ranks where balls are moving so fast and with so much weight..."absorbing" is a good word to describe what a volleyer in the top ranks is actually having to do.

Yes Stotty, it is the ultimate skill set.You're right..
For all the talk about MPH and snapping and swatting,(I see that all the time) the real skill is absorbing because it's what allows a player to handle the real tests: first volleys, balls below the level of the net, lunge volleys, angle/drop volleys. You know, the ones that separate the men from the boys.

When people start talking about how hard they can hit a volley, i just shake my head.

[tennis_chiro]

Some reasons the point 10sPlayer is trying to make is valid

Some reasons the point 10sPlayer is trying to make is valid.

Once the ball gets above the net, the pros can do anything. Any ball at the net and above the level of the net, it is the equivalent of a slam dunk (assuming you had the hops!) for any professional player, even the groundstrokers. Once the ball gets a little further away from the net, it's not quite as easy. That's why we see so many players failing trying to transition forward with swinging volleys.

Even more than that, remember that the critical elements of volleying success are accuracy and consistency. You don't need to accelerate the return of a passing shot; just return it at the same speed and you have effectively doubled the speed of the shot as you cut your opponents' available recovery and reaction time almost in half; in fact, because you cut off the part of the ball's path (after the bounce) when it is traveling more than 40% slower, you have actually almost tripled the effective speed of the shot. You don't need any "snapback" technique to achieve that effect; you just need to meet the ball early and close to the net.

As correctly pointed out, the real challenge is when the ball is net height or below and traveling at good speed (and that could be anything over 50 mph), much less at pro passing speeds into the 70's and above. When you hit a ground stroke, you have an intended contact point and a margin of error within which you can hit and propel the ball effectively. No matter what you do, the ball is gone in 4 thousanths of a second. So we try to create a swing structure that has a "hitting zone" which is somewhat larger than the space that includes that distance covered during those 4 thousanths of a second because none of us is perfect. In fact, JY has shown repeatedly with his video work that one of the defining differences in Federer's forehand is the length of time he goes through the hitting zone on his forehand without "snapping back".

Now take that concept to the challenge presented trying to hit a volley on a 70 mph passing shot that is a just a couple of inches below the net, much less at ankle height. The timing challenge is not just a little more difficult: time is cut in half, the ball is going more than twice as fast as it is when you hit a groundstroke behind the baseline, and your target area is much shorter than the target area you have from the baseline. You must control the power you apply to the shot as you "absorb" the speed of the oncoming ball and reverse that ball with a good portion of the oncoming speed. There is no need to hit that ball at 100 mph. There is a great requirement to be consistent and accurate with that shot with a lot less time to set up and execute this shot. When the ball is going halfspeed back at the baseline, I have a lot simpler challenge of timing my shot and creating almost the exact contact point that I want. But when the ball is traveling so fast and I have so little time and the reward is so great for me being accurate and consistent, I need a little more margin for error. If the racket face is "snapping back", it is by definition not at the correct angle relative to the intended path of the ball either immediately before or immediately after the contact with the ball. I want a volley stroke that gives me a greater margin of error; in other words, I want to create a "wall" that is moving towards the intended contact point in such an alignment that if I hit the ball an inch or two either early or late, the shot still works.

That doesn't happen with a "snapback" volley. The fact pros may hit "snapback" volleys on high volleys and sitters has nothing to do with an appropiate model for someone trying to develop effective volleying technique. Watch how the Bryans hit the volleys when they are hitting tough volleys at the level of their knees 10' from the net, especially approach volleys coming behind a serve or a return of serve when they are on the move and they need to hit a sharp volley deep and low into the court. Their level of difficulty on that shot is approximately equivalent to the degree of difficulty for an open player on a medium pace volley on a ball a couple of inches above the net; and for someone trying to learn the game, well that is a whole other ballgame.

The point is, to deal with 70 mph passing shots, you need to have a volley stroke which allows you to deal with one very basic reality, our humanity. And the last time I checked, that humanity includes the fact that we do not have perfect timing.

don

[GeoffWilliams]

Only pros deal with 90mph passes, and even then, if the ball is above the level of the net, they use the snap back on poaches, ie. Returns have half as many rps as passing shots do, due to the abbreviated strokes used by pro returners off pro paced serves. Even then, if the shot is high, the snap back is used to put the poach away! Players who only receive and block the volley are incomplete. Lower level play gives us more chance to use the snap back, as the passes are higher/slower/lower rpms. Volleying is so difficult as is, that it's fun to learn a new technique, although blocked volleys are easier to learn and it's a far more likely technique to be used by most. Same was true for the extreme top spin when Borg arrived. Now look at the land scape of top fh. Borg would be considered to have a weak fh now a days. Progress always will include more coil, more head speed and new technique scoffed at. If I were to stay on the base line against 170lb 25 yr. olds, I would be the one losing and looking bad and cursing.

It's always the same guys who preach older technique as if the new is flawed and worthless. One day we will see someone use a uni grip top spin instead of the continental. Imagine what these guys will say then. Only a few of the guys here can beat 4.5+ players serving and volleying. Klacr. Me. A few others. I am the only one doing it with snap backs. Nothing like the feeling of hitting a short extreme snap back at 85mph that stays about 12" off the ground, whereas everyone else is blocking or using the swing volley. Look at old video, and you will see the fastest shots hit, were volleys, faster than their serves were. Due to long follow throughs and solid body and yes, snap backs.

[tennis_chiro]

No one advocating blocking the ball

Only pros deal with 90mph passes, and even then, if the ball is above the level of the net, they use the snap back on poaches, ie. Returns have half as many rps as passing shots do, due to the abbreviated strokes used by pro returners off pro paced serves. Even then, if the shot is high, the snap back is used to put the poach away! Players who only receive and block the volley are incomplete. Lower level play gives us more chance to use the snap back, as the passes are higher/slower/lower rpms. Volleying is so difficult as is, that it's fun to learn a new technique, although blocked volleys are easier to learn and it's a far more likely technique to be used by most. Same was true for the extreme top spin when Borg arrived. Now look at the land scape of top fh. Borg would be considered to have a weak fh now a days. Progress always will include more coil, more head speed and new technique scoffed at. If I were to stay on the base line against 170lb 25 yr. olds, I would be the one losing and looking bad and cursing.

It's always the same guys who preach older technique as if the new is flawed and worthless. One day we will see someone use a uni grip top spin instead of the continental. Imagine what these guys will say then. Only a few of the guys here can beat 4.5+ players serving and volleying. Klacr. Me. A few others. I am the only one doing it with snap backs. Nothing like the feeling of hitting a short extreme snap back at 85mph that stays about 12" off the ground, whereas everyone else is blocking or using the swing volley. Look at old video, and you will see the fastest shots hit, were volleys, faster than their serves were. Due to long follow throughs and solid body and yes, snap backs.

I guess we agree to disagree. But no one here is advocating blocking the volley, just using a stroke that has enough of a backswing to reverse the ball and be completely accurate and consistent. One of the three keys I was taught 40 years ago to always examine in the warmup was the nature of the opponent's volley; not as important anymore because players volley so little, but it still holds.

1) If they only block the volley, don't give them speed; slow the ball down and pass them with the second ball

2) If they have a sharply descending stroke, get the ball down low to them; they won't be able to do anything with the ball

3) If they have a big backswing, fire right at them; they won't be able to keep the ball in the court consistently. (I think your "snapback" volley will fall into this category.)

Frankly, today's "volleyers" (it's not really fair to call them that) mostly fall into one of the above categories and can't really be considered a major threat at the net.

Rackets may be lighter than 40 years ago (significantly) and strings and frames may be more responsive, but I think these principles still hold true. True, a 4.5 player may not be able to exploit these weaknesses, but if you are building a player to play at a higher level, they better be able to hold up at the net against someone who can. In this case, I am definitely one of the old guys advocating the techniques of the past. On the other hand, I would also tell you that those old guys could "bludgeon" their volleys with a very short, crisp, accurate and consistent stroke. That short stroke could take a 60 mph ball and hit it back, under control, at 70 mph. That was old school.

PS: the other two parts of that initial warmup analysis:

1) do they hit with rhythm or timing (see my article in Classic lessons). Most players hit with rhythm and can be easily exploited with subtle changes in depth, speed and spin

2) figure out whether or not the player has any real rhythm to their toss that is repeatable under pressure and fatigue; a lot don't. If not, you must really press forward on the second serve to make them feel that pressure. You'll be rewarded with extra free points on double faults as well as opportunities to take advantage of weak second serves.

And if none of the three easy areas of weakness was obvious after my initial analysis, I knew enough to bring lunch - I would be in for a long day at the office.

don

[10splayer]

Some reasons the point 10sPlayer is trying to make is valid.

Once the ball gets above the net, the pros can do anything. Any ball at the net and above the level of the net, it is the equivalent of a slam dunk (assuming you had the hops!) for any professional player, even the groundstrokers. Once the ball gets a little further away from the net, it's not quite as easy. That's why we see so many players failing trying to transition forward with swinging volleys.

Even more than that, remember that the critical elements of volleying success are accuracy and consistency. You don't need to accelerate the return of a passing shot; just return it at the same speed and you have effectively doubled the speed of the shot as you cut your opponents' available recovery and reaction time almost in half; in fact, because you cut off the part of the ball's path (after the bounce) when it is traveling more than 40% slower, you have actually almost tripled the effective speed of the shot. You don't need any "snapback" technique to achieve that effect; you just need to meet the ball early and close to the net.

As correctly pointed out, the real challenge is when the ball is net height or below and traveling at good speed (and that could be anything over 50 mph), much less at pro passing speeds into the 70's and above. When you hit a ground stroke, you have an intended contact point and a margin of error within which you can hit and propel the ball effectively. No matter what you do, the ball is gone in 4 thousanths of a second. So we try to create a swing structure that has a "hitting zone" which is somewhat larger than the space that includes that distance covered during those 4 thousanths of a second because none of us is perfect. In fact, JY has shown repeatedly with his video work that one of the defining differences in Federer's forehand is the length of time he goes through the hitting zone on his forehand without "snapping back".

Now take that concept to the challenge presented trying to hit a volley on a 70 mph passing shot that is a just a couple of inches below the net, much less at ankle height. The timing challenge is not just a little more difficult: time is cut in half, the ball is going more than twice as fast as it is when you hit a groundstroke behind the baseline, and your target area is much shorter than the target area you have from the baseline. You must control the power you apply to the shot as you "absorb" the speed of the oncoming ball and reverse that ball with a good portion of the oncoming speed. There is no need to hit that ball at 100 mph. There is a great requirement to be consistent and accurate with that shot with a lot less time to set up and execute this shot. When the ball is going halfspeed back at the baseline, I have a lot simpler challenge of timing my shot and creating almost the exact contact point that I want. But when the ball is traveling so fast and I have so little time and the reward is so great for me being accurate and consistent, I need a little more margin for error. If the racket face is "snapping back", it is by definition not at the correct angle relative to the intended path of the ball either immediately before or immediately after the contact with the ball. I want a volley stroke that gives me a greater margin of error; in other words, I want to create a "wall" that is moving towards the intended contact point in such an alignment that if I hit the ball an inch or two either early or late, the shot still works.

That doesn't happen with a "snapback" volley. The fact pros may hit "snapback" volleys on high volleys and sitters has nothing to do with an appropiate model for someone trying to develop effective volleying technique. Watch how the Bryans hit the volleys when they are hitting tough volleys at the level of their knees 10' from the net, especially approach volleys coming behind a serve or a return of serve when they are on the move and they need to hit a sharp volley deep and low into the court. Their level of difficulty on that shot is approximately equivalent to the degree of difficulty for an open player on a medium pace volley on a ball a couple of inches above the net; and for someone trying to learn the game, well that is a whole other ballgame.

The point is, to deal with 70 mph passing shots, you need to have a volley stroke which allows you to deal with one very basic reality, our humanity. And the last time I checked, that humanity includes the fact that we do not have perfect timing.

don

Exactly Don!! Maybe the Thomas Edison's of tennis instruction will be open to the opinion of a guy who played pro level back in the day when guys could actually volley. I'm not getting my hopes up though.