PDA

View Full Version : How was Roddick such a horrible volleyer?


LittleTinGoddess
01-05-2013, 08:45 PM
Watch any match of Roddick v. Federer. Every time Roddick comes to the net, it's behind the worst approach shot possible, and so he gets passed 90% of the time. It's so funny because every time he wins a point on a volley (which is maybe 2 or 3 times in a match with 20 attempts) the commentators get all excited and say, "There we go! Expect to see more of that this match. Jimmy Connors has taught Roddick well." They were trying to hype Roddick up so much.

cluckcluck
01-05-2013, 09:40 PM
Crap approach. He would come in at the wrong time and get passed 99% of the time. Throw in a slow court and fluffed tennis balls and it's a recipe for disaster.

LittleTinGoddess
01-05-2013, 09:48 PM
Crap approach. He would come in at the wrong time and get passed 99% of the time.

I'm just perplexed at his crap approaches. Like he'd hit a cross-court forehand that lands in the service line and then stomp towards the net with with horrible hunchback moving form and act surprised when Federer rips one down the line.

cluckcluck
01-05-2013, 10:22 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwbnU4W3S4A

DownTheLineWith90
01-06-2013, 03:25 AM
Courts have slowed down, players are getting better, he was aging, etc.

West Coast Ace
01-06-2013, 02:55 PM
I'll go out on a limb and offer up: spent too much time in his juniors/formative days blasting serves and FHs. His BH wasn't very magical when he showed up on tour. Only because so-so (and that's probably overly nice) late in his career.

A lot of guys would be better volleyers if they came in on better approaches. I can't believe some of the shots they come in on.

FD3S
01-06-2013, 02:58 PM
The really odd thing is, when he DID hit a good approach and come in at the right time he actually volleyed pretty well. His approaches, on the other hand, were always hit or miss, and he never had the instinct at net that separates the competent from the good (the sheer amount of times he would slice cross-court off a sub-par chance and get passed bordered on ridiculous).

Rock Strongo
01-06-2013, 03:00 PM
I wouldn't call him a bad volleyer. It was just his approach shots that let him down. When he did get in on a good approach the results were often very good. Same went for when he was serving and volleying.

2ndServe
01-06-2013, 03:32 PM
his forehand approaches were really bad because he would stop, hit then come in vs guys who would hit while moving forward. The latter approach allows you to get 2 or 3 steps closer to the net. Watch sampras forehand approach, edberg on the backhand slice they move through it while hitting so the close so much better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlD1w6mu61o

The difference between closing on not closing is the difference between a good penetrating volley vs the Roddick block it into the court. His movement forward was just really bad, even off the serve.

hoosierbr
01-06-2013, 04:26 PM
Poor technique and lack of practice. You have to commit to doing it over and over again in order improve. Roddick would try it a few times a match and never do it again the rest of the tournament. It's a wonder he never got much better at it.

2ndServe
01-06-2013, 05:22 PM
really his serves are probably one of the better approaches in the game and he couldn't approach off of that. Plus his mentality was to get far to frustrated. You really need to forget the easy misses, the great passing shots going by you etc.

thecrusher956
01-06-2013, 06:00 PM
His approaches have almost no angle.

ductrung3993
01-06-2013, 06:02 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwbnU4W3S4A

rofl :lol:

Praetorian
01-06-2013, 06:37 PM
Technically Roddick had very sound technique. The same reason why people feels he was a bad volleyer, is the same reason whey people think Nadal has great volleys - it's all in their approach shots.

Larrysümmers
01-06-2013, 06:58 PM
Andy liked to do that CC approach shot which killed him A LOT.

TennisCJC
01-07-2013, 06:12 AM
I'll go out on a limb and offer up: spent too much time in his juniors/formative days blasting serves and FHs. His BH wasn't very magical when he showed up on tour. Only because so-so (and that's probably overly nice) late in his career.

A lot of guys would be better volleyers if they came in on better approaches. I can't believe some of the shots they come in on.

You got it. When Rodick first came on the tour, he had probably the worst FH volley I have even seen for an ATP pro. He was using a SW FH grip and it was a stinker of a shot. He had no idea how or when to approach and once he got their, his volley was horrible. To be fair, he got much better as he got older. He improved his slice BH approach and both his FH and BH volleys a great deal over his career. But, still not his A game to go to net.

2ndServe
01-07-2013, 06:55 AM
Technically Roddick had very sound technique. The same reason why people feels he was a bad volleyer, is the same reason whey people think Nadal has great volleys - it's all in their approach shots.

this is not the case between these two players. Watch the few doubles matches nadal plays at indian wells vs the few that roddick has played. Nadal is a very good good doubles player, he absolutely attacks the higher volleys, Roddick's volleys usually gives the other guy a 2nd chance at a pass. He is very passive at the net.