With the slowing of the surfaces and mega defense, should modern players volley more? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

With the slowing of the surfaces and mega defense, should modern players volley more?

Johnny Groove
09-11-2012, 01:24 AM
We have seen how these guys can get balls back and back and back all damn day. Many times in both the USO and AO finals of this year, I saw many chances for guys to come into net and close with a winning volley. But they don't, retreat, and play another 10 shots :facepalm:

Either they are afraid of the other fellow's passing shots, or they have no confidence in their own net game or both. I think these guys need to learn to volley better, and it will save their bodies instead of playing 25 shots every single rally :shrug:

TigerTim
09-11-2012, 01:26 AM
yes, volley is actually very useful, Edberg, McEnroe and even Henman showed it works on slow surfaces.

cmoss
09-11-2012, 01:28 AM
It's too dangerous,this is pusher era.:wavey:

sexybeast
09-11-2012, 01:29 AM
The volley won Federer the Wimbledon final, but I dont know if it works on midpaced courts like the current hardcourt in Usopen. AO is out of question, Federer got destroyed by Nadals passing shots in AO.

Johnny Groove
09-11-2012, 01:34 AM
The volley won Federer the Wimbledon final, but I dont know if it works on midpaced courts like the current hardcourt in Usopen. AO is out of question, Federer got destroyed by Nadals passing shots in AO.

Well, that's cause Federer stupidly approached the Nadal forehand over and over again :facepalm:

Approach the BH and see what happens. And this current match, my God. So much defensive slicing, those balls should have been volleyed away for easy winners.

TigerTim
09-11-2012, 01:35 AM
indeed, Murray should work on his volley for the next 6 months and at Wimbledon he would be very deadly

Slice also, Djokovic's form on the slice is average at best, Murray not much better

aussie_fan
09-11-2012, 01:37 AM
Once these players realise that this gamestyle is unsustainable for their body's health it might happen, give it a few years maybe.

selyoink
09-11-2012, 01:45 AM
What is this volleying you speak of? I've never heard of it.

Courts need to be sped up. They don't have to play like ice but they shouldn't play like they do. Not good for the viewers and especially the athletes themselves.

IOFH
09-11-2012, 01:45 AM
How many long rallies were there where the other guy was blasting away from the baseline and the othe is getting to everything bc of the surface and putting up floaty defensive slices? That crap makes me sick.

Johnny Groove
09-11-2012, 01:47 AM
What is this volleying you speak of? I've never heard of it.

Courts need to be sped up. They don't have to play like ice but they shouldn't play like they do. Not good for the viewers and especially the athletes themselves.

I agree, but not holding my breath for speeding up the courts. So, to counter, guys need to volley. It's tough seeing guys limp away after hard court slam finals :shrug:

How many long rallies were there where the other guy was blasting away from the baseline and the othe is getting to everything bc of the surface and putting up floaty defensive slices? That crap makes me sick.

Exactly. I saw this a lot w/ that Delpo-Nole semi as well. If Delpo had anything resembling a net game, he could have at least taken a set.

selyoink
09-11-2012, 01:53 AM
I agree, but not holding my breath for speeding up the courts. So, to counter, guys need to volley. It's tough seeing guys limp away after hard court slam finals :shrug:

If players had any sense they would demand speeding the courts up some. I can't imagine Murray, Djokovic and Nadal enjoy playing the types of matches they've had against each other at AO and USO. Nor could Ferrer and Tipsy have enjoyed their match too much either.

Garson007
09-11-2012, 01:53 AM
This reminds me, how shit is Novak lobbing this year? Last year he had miracle lobs. Now it's straight on the smashing face. Lost to Federer at Wimbledon partly due to how terrible they were.

philosophicalarf
09-11-2012, 01:53 AM
You can see why they don't on higher bounce surfaces, the ball decelerates so much in the air that top defenders have plenty time behind the baseline to get to it and rip a big hit.

Worth it against lesser lights though surely.

ApproachShot
09-11-2012, 01:58 AM
We have seen how these guys can get balls back and back and back all damn day. Many times in both the USO and AO finals of this year, I saw many chances for guys to come into net and close with a winning volley. But they don't, retreat, and play another 10 shots :facepalm:

Either they are afraid of the other fellow's passing shots, or they have no confidence in their own net game or both. I think these guys need to learn to volley better, and it will save their bodies instead of playing 25 shots every single rally :shrug:

It's a good point that you raise - especially in terms of adapting one's game to help ensure better longevity in their careers.

Of course a lot of the reason behind the unwillingness for players to come forward to the net (and as a result practice more and improve in that area) can be attributed to the slower courts and higher bouncing courts where the opponent has more time to wind up and hit the passing shot. It's logical that the surfaces that seem to reward coming to the net are the faster and lower bouncing surfaces - yet these are becoming rarer on the tour. But there are other factors besides this also.

When you combine today's racquet technology, improvements in players' physical fitness and the homogenisation of court speeds then that begins to paint a fuller picture. These days you really have to hit a top quality approach shot to be confident in putting away the volley - if the approach shot isn't first class then the chances are that you will be passed at the net.

I'm not saying it can't be done. But spending time on the forecourt game at the expense of the baseline is a risk that players these days seem unwilling to take. You have to remember that the slower courts reward high percentage tennis it might be a safer strategy to be consistent in baseline rallies rather than play with finer margins in trying to hit the perfect approach shot to come to the net behind.

Henry Chinaski
09-11-2012, 02:03 AM
Djokovic threw in a sv after 4.5 hours and won the point.

If it had dawned on him to try and shorten points a bit earlier he might not have been dead in the fifth set.

The reluctance to get to the net was ridiculous at times tonight. That 20 shot rally that eventually ended with Djokovic falling over and Murray hitting a winner was a perfect example.

Djokovic hit 5 defensive slices in a row from 3 m behind baseline just to stay in the point but for reasons only known to himself, Murray stayed back.

In hindsight maybe he was cunningly trying to extend points as long as possible.

Speed of conditions was a joke overall though. There was probably 5 or 6 clean winners with both players at the baseline all night.

I don't care how well they defend, that's obscene on what is supposed to be the fast hardcourt slam

Smoke944
09-11-2012, 02:08 AM
Djokovic threw in a sv after 4.5 hours and won the point.

If it had dawned on him to try and shorten points a bit earlier he might not have been dead in the fifth set.

The reluctance to get to the net was ridiculous at times tonight. That 20 shot rally that eventually ended with Djokovic falling over and Murray hitting a winner was a perfect example.

Djokovic hit 5 defensive slices in a row from 3 m behind baseline just to stay in the point but for reasons only known to himself, Murray stayed back.

In hindsight maybe he was cunningly trying to extend points as long as possible.

Speed of conditions was a joke overall though. There was probably 5 or 6 clean winners with both players at the baseline all night.

I don't care how well they defend, that's obscene on what is supposed to be the fast hardcourt slam

+1 to everything.
Stepanek in particular could teach these guys sooooo much about the transition game. Both guys literally don't have one and it makes them have to do so much more than necessary point after point.

delpiero7
09-11-2012, 02:11 AM
You know the courts have been slowed down too much when you see 53 shot rallies at the US Open. Injecting a bit of speed back into the traditionally faster courts wouldn't hurt the game.

Preferably wait until the end of 2013 though, I want David Ferrer to win Wimbledon before Raonic takes over when they replant pre-millenium grass for Wimbledon 2014.

HKz
09-11-2012, 02:19 AM
First is people need to learn how to volley. Sure, many of them know how to volley, as in their techniques are fine, but they play really poor approach shots and make really volleying decisions. Someone like Rafa only comes in to cut a shot off and hit a short volley, but you see how often he fails to win the point when the point isn't necessarily in his favor. I mean watch past greats, or even someone like Federer now, they don't necessarily need to be on top of the point, but the play the right volley giving them control of the point.

So yes volleys have never lost their effectiveness but these players don't practice the plays enough for them to be confident with volleying during actual matches. They just need to practice working the point with approach shots/volleys more like they do with baseline rallies and they'll be able to take advantage.

+1 to everything.
Stepanek in particular could teach these guys sooooo much about the transition game. Both guys literally don't have one and it makes them have to do so much more than necessary point after point.

Stepanek is rather shit IMO... As several commentators have pointed out, he has a huge tendency to not put volleys away when he clearly can punch through the volley, he tries to guide the ball it seems. Then you have someone like Tsonga who IMO probably overplays too many of his volleys. Really in today's game, there isn't anyone that has the true sense of how and when to volley. There are plenty with great technique or great touch, but they construct the point and the eventual volley correctly, which is why they get passed.

ApproachShot
09-11-2012, 02:24 AM
+1 to everything.
Stepanek in particular could teach these guys sooooo much about the transition game. Both guys literally don't have one and it makes them have to do so much more than necessary point after point.

True, but if like Stepanek you look to approach and volley at the earliest opportunity then the opponent will anticipate having to hit the passing shot and position won't position himself several feet behind the baseline. The examples from the US Open final that Henry Chinaski mentions are good examples of when it would be wise to come in to volley because the opponent wasn't in a good place in terms of court positioning to deal with it.

Ultimately it takes the ability to execute a varied game coupled with a degree of tactical nous to be able to pull it off successfully. I agree with HKz above that if the volleying isn't of a high standard then it's just too risky to come to the net that often. I'll just add to his post that the player's ability to execute a good approach shot is very important as well - not just the technique on the final volley.

brithater
09-11-2012, 02:27 AM
Congrats to Murray for getting the monkey off his back. I am sure all the fanboys and sponsers are happy. He is sure to inspire a new breed of tennis players.

BTW, this match was proof that mens tennis has been surface homginized to the point where its pretty much like watching the womens game now. Believe it or not people used to come into the net when they had someone stretch out hitting fluff slice forehands and backhands and put away volleys. Some of them even served and then came straight to the net to volley......:eek::eek::eek:

I think I will go back and watch the US Open semifinal Rafter VS Sampras tonight or maybe 1992 semi Edberg VS Chang to be reminded how great this sport used to be.

I watched almost all of this tourny and really cant recall a truely great and interesting match. Kohlschrieber VS Isner was kind of interesting but John's losing matches usually are.

I will say this....With these guys playing like they are its only a matter of time before a really good serve and volleyer makes his way up the rankings.

They have really screwed up this game with the whole "protect the top players" mentality. The US Open plays like a clay court now and they are seeding way too many players in the slams. It gives people a false impression of this modern era. Kind of reminds me of the laver era where 3 of 4 was on grass.

As it stands now the ATP is becomming the WTA very fast in terms of the way it is played.

Some may remember I once told people tennis was officially a girly sport once Federer walked on court with a purse. Todays final clinched it for me.

Serverer
09-11-2012, 02:30 AM
USO is oficially blue clay now. Just look at the winners/unforced errors ratio. Once Federer retires Tennis will be pretty much dead with just a bunch of pushers trying to see who can last longer before collapse.

azinna
09-11-2012, 02:40 AM
....BTW, this match was proof that mens tennis has been surface homginized to the point where its pretty much like watching the womens game now....

Say what you will about the WTA -- and today's final -- but no female contender playing like this is winning a slam.

To be fair to Nole and Andy, their mobility and defense are often super-human. And the conditions made being aggressive even more risky and less rewarding than it typically is in their contests.

....

GugaF1
09-11-2012, 02:40 AM
The courts in the US open are fast hard courts, as fast as it gets outdoors. It is because you have Djokovic and Murray that can play unbelievable defense that it makes the court seems slower. But there were plenty of matches, Berdych and Federer that were pretty fast. When you got players with the defensive skills and athleticism of Murray and Djokovic you can put them in a ice Cap and they will retrieve balls over and over.

This court slowing down, there is some true to it, but is not the main reason, even in fast courts the game doesn't change that much, grass is not slow nor is the US open, the courts are not that different from 10 years ago, the difference is the players keep on improving their court coverage skills and racquet technology helps it too.

DarkMarc
09-11-2012, 02:56 AM
Luckily tennis is going that direction. I cant understand why people want these "only serve" guys like Isner in the top.

Wait for a couple of raonic - isner 5-set matches and see if u still want these guys up at the top, when in 3 hours of tennis u see about 5 or 6 rallies :rolleyes:

Henry Chinaski
09-11-2012, 03:01 AM
Even Nadal would have finished 10 times more points at the net that either Murray or Djok did today. It was that bad.

brithater
09-11-2012, 03:01 AM
Of course its super human they are world class athletes silly.

Dont let the commentator hype mess with your head. They always say things like....best returner ever....best defense ever.....most powerful ever. Its all part of there job. Commentators are sports promoters now more than anything. Thats why we have bafoons in the booth instead of real analists.

There were players with just as good of defense 20 years ago as there are today. They were a lot smaller too. I will say that this era serioussly lack offensive players. Jim Courier would have won 10 majors in this era.

I am truely amazed at how the sponsors and corperate blah blah have fubared this game at the professional level. I honestly did not think tennis would get as wrecked as other professional sports but court surface tinkering and 30 something seeds the the breaking point. I really dont see how this sport can recover.

Tag
09-11-2012, 03:04 AM
volleying and attacking tennis should be rewarded at the us open, and wimbledon

australian open should favour everything

the grindfests should be saved for the french

this is why the career grand slam and reaching all slam finals has been cheapened

4 players (laver, agassi, courier, edberg) in 30 years. then 3 in 6 years. disgusting stuff

no doubt that djokovic is the wimbldeon champion with the worst, volleys, overhead and approach shots in the open era

that's not his fault of course, his body destroying retrieving game has gotten him 4 more slams in this slow court era

Sham Kay
09-11-2012, 03:10 AM
Andy and Nole are the best players out there on hard courts currently. Today's match was a great one, and the rallies were a cause of the conditions aligned with their superior movement and defence.

Don't get the complaints. If I hadn't kept falling off the edge of my seat and having chest pains during the forth set, I'd have been severely entertained.

Smoke944
09-11-2012, 03:12 AM
Stepanek is rather shit IMO... As several commentators have pointed out, he has a huge tendency to not put volleys away when he clearly can punch through the volley, he tries to guide the ball it seems. Then you have someone like Tsonga who IMO probably overplays too many of his volleys. Really in today's game, there isn't anyone that has the true sense of how and when to volley. There are plenty with great technique or great touch, but they construct the point and the eventual volley correctly, which is why they get passed.

Stepanek might not be the best volleyer in terms of putting away volleys and overheads but he's certainly not shit and TBH he understands the game better than anyone else I see out there. He has nothing in his game approaching a weapon, doesn't have consistent strokes off both wings (forehand is really poor), and he's not strong nor fast. So please tell me how he got to 8 in the world and has had such a successful career if not for superior understanding of the game.

brithater
09-11-2012, 03:15 AM
Luckily tennis is going that direction. I cant understand why people want these "only serve" guys like Isner in the top.

Wait for a couple of raonic - isner 5-set matches and see if u still want these guys up at the top, when in 3 hours of tennis u see about 5 or 6 rallies :rolleyes:

Hope not. Isner is kind of a joke. Its really not tennis. It is fun though when people find tactics to give him a taste of his own medicine and make him uncomfortable.

There is more to tennis than serves and groundstrokes though. The way the game is tilted right now half of the game is missing. Serve and volley and all court tactics opens a whole new world up. I dont want to see one style favored over the other I want to see all styles...battle it out useing different styles of play etc. etc.

Serioussly.... it was like watching a girls match today. Slices landing short...player running forward to hit a nueral ball and then retreating back to the baseline to hit a defensive floating slice ?!?! I bet Lendle has had a few chuckles with Murray about what players can get away with in this era. He probably tells Murray at how Edberg would never let you get away with that garbage.

It was really quite comical watching these two play today. I was LOL quite a bit. My wife even said they were playing kind of girly.

brithater
09-11-2012, 03:25 AM
Luckily tennis is going that direction. I cant understand why people want these "only serve" guys like Isner in the top.

Wait for a couple of raonic - isner 5-set matches and see if u still want these guys up at the top, when in 3 hours of tennis u see about 5 or 6 rallies :rolleyes:

Andy and Nole are the best players out there on hard courts currently. Today's match was a great one, and the rallies were a cause of the conditions aligned with their superior movement and defence.

Don't get the complaints. If I hadn't kept falling off the edge of my seat and having chest pains during the forth set, I'd have been severely entertained.

So whats your point? They are the two greatest Hardcourt players? I guess your right but doesnt that kind of support my view on this. If these two are the greatest hardcourt players then what does that show?

As far as the conditions......thats a really lousy arguement...wind is wind. It doesnt change anything. Accually if its windy they should be moving forward more to take court away. Rafter won the open in 98 and it was way more windy then today and he was still coming in all the time. I remember he played Bjorkman in the early rounds and was serving around 70mph while serve and volleying. My point is wind is wind.

I will say this for you players out there though. When its windy get your tail to the net as much as possible. The last thing you want to do is hit 20 ball rallies in the wind. The next to last thing you want to do in the wind is hit passing shots. Little tip for you young guys :wavey:

Tag
09-11-2012, 03:30 AM
djokovic is a lost cause when it comes to volleying. he should continue to dictate with the forehand

murray, however, he can benefit a lot more from coming in.

if he upped his first serve% by taking a few miles off (go for 120-125mph with spin rather than 130~mph flat) and came in more often, he'd save himself a lot of silly bother

if he fine tunes his game, it'll adapt perfectly to grass

cmoss
09-11-2012, 03:54 AM
They should speed up the courts in Wimbledon and US open a lot more,AO and RG are ok.Two slow and two fast tournaments.:wavey:

Tag
09-11-2012, 03:56 AM
They should speed up the courts in Wimbledon and US open a lot more,AO and RG are ok.Two slow and two fast tournaments.:wavey:

RG needs slowed down mate

they sped the wrong slams up, and slowed the wrong ones down

Pirata.
09-11-2012, 03:56 AM
How many long rallies were there where the other guy was blasting away from the baseline and the othe is getting to everything bc of the surface and putting up floaty defensive slices? That crap makes me sick.

Seriously :facepalm:

Zenjo
09-11-2012, 04:18 AM
Let's go back to the golden era of Ivaniservic vs Krajicek - Longest rally 7 shots.

Topspindoctor
09-11-2012, 04:22 AM
I believe so. Since Johnny Groove is "top 100 material" according to his coach, I can't wait till gets there and unleashes volley hell upon unsuspecting mugs like Olderer, Nadal and Djokovic, winning at least 10 slams in process. Who knows, maybe in 10 years or so MTF will be having discussions such as "Peak Johnny Groove vs No2e, 2008 Nadal and 2006 Olderer" :shrug:

NameNumber
09-11-2012, 04:23 AM
I really don't understand people who judge the quality of the rally by the number of shots played. I'd always rather watch winning tennis than endless cross court topspin endurance runs.

brithater
09-11-2012, 04:25 AM
Let's go back to the golden era of Ivaniservic vs Krajicek - Longest rally 7 shots.

This is what I am talking about. Krajicek serve and volleyed you dope. What do you expect? Serve and volley then run back to the baseline and fit forehand slices until the opponent misses?

OOOOOOHHHHHHHH look....they play just as good as the ladies!!!

Just having some fun with you mate. :)

Tag
09-11-2012, 04:29 AM
Let's go back to the golden era of Ivaniservic vs Krajicek - Longest rally 7 shots.

obviously never watched krajicek play

man could serve, volley and rally when necessary

only man to beat sampras at wimbledon in 8 years, says it all. would've won a 2nd slam if he hadn't been so injury prone

you're missing the point anyway; you put ivanisevic and sampras on this slowed down, high bouncing grass, you'd still get an ace fest

the point is that serving, volleying and attacking all-court tennis is not rewarded by the surfaces that should rightly favour it

Pirata.
09-11-2012, 04:41 AM
Let's go back to the golden era of Ivaniservic vs Krajicek - Longest rally 7 shots.

You don't have to go back to one extreme, a happy medium would suffice :shrug:

Tenn1sAdd1ct
09-11-2012, 10:04 AM
No need to volley more. Only Djokovic has to improve his pathetic fitness. I want to see 7 hr rematch at AO. :lol:

Sophocles
09-11-2012, 10:15 AM
I agree with the OP. Developing a net game to cut off rallies before getting exhausted is the logical next step in the evolution of the modern player.

Looner
09-11-2012, 10:16 AM
Groove, you forgot to mention Federer's brilliant net play in that Wimbledon final. It made all the difference in the world. Murray was not much better (if not worse) at the passing shots yesterday, so Djokovic could have taken advantage if he knew how to volley.

Tag
09-11-2012, 04:18 PM
I agree with the OP. Developing a net game to cut off rallies before getting exhausted is the logical next step in the evolution of the modern player.

rallies over 30 shots on a non-clay court should result in the game being instantly abandoned, with both players being fined and forced to attend a volley camp with edberg and sampras

this would certainly force players to volley and learn all court craft

AnotherGameFor
09-11-2012, 05:21 PM
I think that volleying is dead because of the racquets. The Murray-Raonic match, especially in the 3rd set where Raonic was coming to the net all the time was a perfect example of the problem. Raonic would hit a good approach with Murray 5+ feet off the back of the court and in the double alley on the full run and stretch and then hit a perfect cross court passing shot that bounced halfway between the net and service line. When players can hit the ball with pace and that short from any position on the court, it makes volleying almost impossible. Combining that with a slow court and a high bounce, these guys can get to almost any drop volley and good deep volleys without difficulty as well.

So, if you want to bring back volleying (which I think would be good), you need to reduce topspin.....

Johnny Groove
09-11-2012, 06:30 PM
I think that volleying is dead because of the racquets. The Murray-Raonic match, especially in the 3rd set where Raonic was coming to the net all the time was a perfect example of the problem. Raonic would hit a good approach with Murray 5+ feet off the back of the court and in the double alley on the full run and stretch and then hit a perfect cross court passing shot that bounced halfway between the net and service line. When players can hit the ball with pace and that short from any position on the court, it makes volleying almost impossible. Combining that with a slow court and a high bounce, these guys can get to almost any drop volley and good deep volleys without difficulty as well.

So, if you want to bring back volleying (which I think would be good), you need to reduce topspin.....

Raonic's net positioning and agility at the net were the bigger issues, I thought, he's no Pat Rafter. Murray hits a cross court pass 99% of the time off the forehand and Raonic gave him that pass all night. Gotta close at a more imposing angle and cut off Muzza's best shot. Make him go down the line and then hit the winning volley.

brithater
09-11-2012, 07:06 PM
This era has the worst volleyers of all time IMO. They dont cover well, they dont approach well, they are indecisive etc. etc. In all..they play net like the WTA. There seems to be this view that volleying is more difficult now....LOL. Pssst...little secret....it was difficult back in the 90s as well. Thats why only the truely great explosive athletes with guts could pull off true serve and volley tennis. The Edbergs, Cash, Rafter type athletes. Of the current crop only Nadal has that type of explosive athleticism and balance. Maybe Gasquet as well.

Todays volleyers seem to concede the point when they have to hit a tough volley. Watch some of the Rafter matches from the latter part of his career. He was serve and volleying against some monster players who passed as well if not better than any of the current players.

AnotherGameFor
09-11-2012, 07:37 PM
Raonic's net positioning and agility at the net were the bigger issues, I thought, he's no Pat Rafter. Murray hits a cross court pass 99% of the time off the forehand and Raonic gave him that pass all night. Gotta close at a more imposing angle and cut off Muzza's best shot. Make him go down the line and then hit the winning volley.

I agree that Raonic needs to improve his anticipation at the net, but even the best volleyers would be in trouble vs alot of those shots. The top spin also makes it easier to lob so players can't stand right on top of the net either.

jacoblewis2008
01-03-2013, 10:06 AM
I agree that it would be dangerous to play more volley with the modern era players. The varying sport court surfaces (http://www.decoturf.com) make the game more interesting and provide enough of a debate between the players of the era.

Li Ching Yuen
01-03-2013, 10:43 AM
You can see why they don't on higher bounce surfaces, the ball decelerates so much in the air that top defenders have plenty time behind the baseline to get to it and rip a big hit.

Worth it against lesser lights though surely.

This is the truth of all. The courts are incredibly bouncy, there are numerous instances where volleys simply just sit up no matter what. I see sometimes Ferrer having time to make 3 kids and take a nap before crushing a pass CC. A lower bounce is critical for any type of volley, with that taken away you're left with pretty much making the perfect approach and the perfect volley on every single net rush, which is impossible and something that neither Rafter, nor Edberg or McEnroe ever managed to do, not even close.

That's the reason why no one comes in anymore. Djokovic, who's actually one of the few top players that makes sense when talking about tennis on a whole, alongside Murray, pointed out this last year that the biggest factor in today's game is the bounce of the courts.

He is goddamn right.

Wing Man Frank
01-03-2013, 11:07 AM
If Djokovic could volley he would win everything.

latso
01-03-2013, 11:44 AM
He never lost a match Because of bad volleying, so it doesn't change anything.

Volleying nowadays is for finishing sharp approaches and mix the tempo. Beside these it's not efficient.

Maccie
01-03-2013, 11:54 AM
The reason people are not coming to the net anymore seems obvious to me. The ball/courts are too slow, the passings are too good and the returns are too good. Last two are impossible to control, that's just a matter of evolution. The first one however you can control.

Maybe it's an idea to introduce different types of balls like in squash. In squash you have balls that bounce less for the pro's especially to prevent the neverending rallies. Maybe we should introduce a pro ball that bounces less. It will make the rallies shorter and coming to the net more interesting.

Wing Man Frank
01-03-2013, 12:01 PM
He never lost a match Because of bad volleying, so it doesn't change anything.



No, he's lost matches because he doesn't know how to properly approach the net and volley.

latso
01-03-2013, 12:25 PM
No, he's lost matches because he doesn't know how to properly approach the net and volley.
no, he hasn't

not in the last 3 years