PDA

View Full Version : I'm now convinced - even I can volley better than Roddick!


BreakPoint
07-01-2006, 08:42 PM
My volleys suck, but after watching Roddick's match today against Murray, I'm now fully convinced that even I can volley better than Roddick. :eek: It was a joke.

Even Murray realized how bad Roddick was at the net and he just prayed that Roddick would come into the net as much as possible, so that he can hit a passing shot right past him, hit a lob over his head, or just hit it right to him and let him blow the easy volley. Murray was just tempting Roddick to come into the net by hitting short on purpose the whole match. It seemed like his strategy was just to let Roddick hit the volley, he didn't even need to make it tough for him.

I swear that most NTRP 4.0's that I know can volley better than Roddick! :eek:

What do you guys think?


(BTW, I love watching Murray play. He's such a smart player with so much variety and a plethora of skills that makes him so enjoyable to watch. I think he's right up there with Federer and Hingis for entertaining tennis.) :D

Viper
07-01-2006, 08:44 PM
I think I've even seen a 3.5 player get lucky and hit better volleys I must say.

serveitup911
07-01-2006, 08:46 PM
I think if Roddick was volleying against 4.0 or 4.5 level shots, he would look like a very good volleyer. He has bad volleys for a pro, but he definitely volleys better than any 4.0 or 4.5.

serveitup911
07-01-2006, 08:48 PM
I don't like Murray. I like the nickname one of the commentators gave him at the French Open - Mopey Murray. He is such a whiner and was extremely lucky that Roddick converted only 1 of 12 break points.

guernica1
07-01-2006, 08:54 PM
There is no way even a 5.0 volleys better than Roddick. The types of passing shots Roddick faces on a routine basis would knock the racket back of a typical amateur.

Roddick is not even close to being the worst volleyer on tour. There are plenty of others with bad ones including Monfils, Hrbaty, and the all time best (or worst!) Thomas 'Hands of Stone' Enqvist!

Dan007
07-01-2006, 08:56 PM
I don't like Murray. I like the nickname one of the commentators gave him at the French Open - Mopey Murray. He is such a whiner and was extremely lucky that Roddick converted only 1 of 12 break points.

I agree with you. I don't like Murray as well.

VamosRafa
07-01-2006, 08:57 PM
I think it's just because he has such a big serve -- everyone assumes he can back it up with a great volley. But he can't. He's Bambi on ice around the net. That's one part of his game that hasn't really improved -- in fact, it seems to have gotten worse.

TacoBellBorderBowl1946
07-01-2006, 09:33 PM
I hate Murray his freaking drop shots drive me insane!!!!!!. Bags will put him in his place though :mrgreen:

wyutani
07-01-2006, 09:38 PM
im proud to say that i can volley better than roddick...:mrgreen:

arosen
07-01-2006, 09:42 PM
I hate Murray his freaking drop shots drive me insane!!!!!!. Bags will put him in his place though :mrgreen:

I wouldnt be so sure. The crowd is a big factor on center court, plus Bags had very demanding early rounds with muscle strain and vomiting. Murray is the kind of guy that makes people put a lot of miles on their legs, Roddick was made to run all over the place.

Andres
07-02-2006, 12:24 AM
im proud to say that i can volley better than roddick...:mrgreen:
Nnnno you can't.

superman1
07-02-2006, 01:05 AM
I've seen Roddick make some good volleys. They have improved. He even said himself that probably the worst aspect of his game today were his volleys. And it's not like these balls are coming right at his racquet's sweetspot. These balls are coming FAST and you've got to leap and stretch to hit them.

It's his backhand that needs the improvement. It's pretty consistent but it's just a rally shot, he can't do anything with it except get it back.

brucie
07-02-2006, 01:17 AM
Roddick volleys like a 7.0, just one with poor volleys, hes not a natural volleyer really.

travlerajm
07-02-2006, 01:17 AM
I've seen Roddick make some good volleys. They have improved. He even said himself that probably the worst aspect of his game today were his volleys. And it's not like these balls are coming right at his racquet's sweetspot. These balls are coming FAST and you've got to leap and stretch to hit them.

It's his backhand that needs the improvement. It's pretty consistent but it's just a rally shot, he can't do anything with it except get it back.]

When he flopped toward that easy putaway volley on his first set point, it reminded me of the world cup players trying get the referee's call. It was almost like he thought "hey, this woiuld look cool if I close out the set with a diving volley! I want people to think I'm Boris Becker!"

I'll bet he wishes he could rewind and do that one over the safe and simple way.

Captain America
07-02-2006, 06:47 AM
Yes, it was totally painful to watch. Anything below waist-level and Roddick was toast, especially on the BH side. He just looks so unnatural and uncomfortable at the net - kind of like Shaq at the free throw line....

35ft6
07-02-2006, 06:49 AM
At even a 5.5 level, Roddick could hit nothing but his second serve at 85% percent and serve and volley on every point and win every 5.5 tournament in America. You would be telling everybody about this fantastic serve and volleyer.

Roddick is volleying poorly against the 44th ranked player in the world. For an amateur to say they can volley better based on their performance against Bob, the fat guy with the decent forehand who plays in the Wednesday night round robins is like a person saying they can hit a baseball better than a guy whiffing against a professional pitcher because earlier that day they were nailing line drives off their neighbors pitches.

Phil
07-02-2006, 07:11 AM
For an amateur to say they can volley better based on their performance against Bob, the fat guy with the decent forehand who plays in the Wednesday night round robins is like a person saying they can hit a baseball better than a guy whiffing against a professional pitcher because earlier that day they were nailing line drives off their neighbors pitches.

Just consider the source (OP) of this comment...nuff said.

sureshs
07-02-2006, 07:55 AM
Roddick is volleying poorly against the 44th ranked player in the world. For an amateur to say they can volley better based on their performance against Bob, the fat guy with the decent forehand who plays in the Wednesday night round robins is like a person saying they can hit a baseball better than a guy whiffing against a professional pitcher because earlier that day they were nailing line drives off their neighbors pitches.

Hey I know Bob. But he plays Tuesday nights :-)

tangerine
07-02-2006, 09:07 AM
im proud to say that i can volley better than roddick...:mrgreen:
Good for you. Where's your slam trophy?

HotCarl
07-02-2006, 09:25 AM
35ft6 is right. Roddicks volley is weak for a pro, and not very pretty, but still better than most any amatuer put in the same situation.

35ft6
07-02-2006, 09:47 AM
Hey I know Bob. But he plays Tuesday nights :-) I'm talking about Bob Dreyer, you're probably talking about Bob Weissman.

Captain America
07-02-2006, 10:14 AM
Roddick is volleying poorly against the 44th ranked player in the world. For an amateur to say they can volley better based on their performance against Bob, the fat guy with the decent forehand who plays in the Wednesday night round robins is like a person saying they can hit a baseball better than a guy whiffing against a professional pitcher because earlier that day they were nailing line drives off their neighbors pitches.


No argument there. It's playing against the top pros in the world that exposes Roddick's flaws and makes him look pretty bad at times at the net. Put him on a court with 5.5s and he'd toy with them.

Aykhan Mammadov
07-02-2006, 10:25 AM
The problem is not only in complete absense of volley's techniques of Roddick. For example, Safin also can't volley at all.

The problem is that it seems to me that he was teached how to serve and that is all, he dosen't have any tennis talent at all, any understanding what he does and what he must do on the court, there is not any plan, goal of his game. It seems to me as if he didn't have any tennis coach ever, only coach for physical conditioning.

It is when I call a player boxer, hard hitter without any tennis.

Andres
07-02-2006, 10:34 AM
The problem is not only in complete absense of volley's techniques of Roddick. For example, Safin also can't volley at all.

Safin can't volley?? Well, that's new.
He's certainly no Edberg, no Rafter, no JMac, no Sampras, but again, he's light years beyond Roddick.

BreakPoint
07-02-2006, 10:56 AM
35ft6 is right. Roddicks volley is weak for a pro, and not very pretty, but still better than most any amatuer put in the same situation.

I'm not so sure about that. I go and watch plenty of Open tournaments and college matches and most of those guys volley WAY better than Roddick does, and the balls are coming pretty fast at them, too.

BreakPoint
07-02-2006, 11:01 AM
At even a 5.5 level, Roddick could hit nothing but his second serve at 85% percent and serve and volley on every point and win every 5.5 tournament in America. You would be telling everybody about this fantastic serve and volleyer.
But I said nothing about Roddick's serve, just that his volleys suck. Give him a 4.0 serve, and let's see how well he serves and volleys.

Roddick is volleying poorly against the 44th ranked player in the world. For an amateur to say they can volley better based on their performance against Bob, the fat guy with the decent forehand who plays in the Wednesday night round robins is like a person saying they can hit a baseball better than a guy whiffing against a professional pitcher because earlier that day they were nailing line drives off their neighbors pitches.
I'm referring to the balls that Murray hit right to Roddick at the net without a lot of pace. Roddick didn't even have to move. Easy putaway volleys for most decent net players above the 4.0 level I would think. However, Roddick somehow managed to net them or hit them out.

35ft6
07-02-2006, 11:44 AM
I'm referring to the balls that Murray hit right to Roddick at the net without a lot of pace. Roddick didn't even have to move. Easy putaway volleys for most decent net players above the 4.0 level I would think. However, Roddick somehow managed to net them or hit them out. You have to put it into context. Players at all levels miss shots that they can make 100 times in a row in practice. When I watch basketball games and see a pro miss a free throw in the fourth quarter, there might be some truth to me saying "I could have made that shot!" But like that free throw, could I make a volley on centre court at Wimbledon when I'm slumping, when I have no confidence, and my opponent is ripping winners left and right before a hometown crowd? I've missed easier shots with way less at stake.

And I'm not saying that Roddick is a good volleyer at the top ATP level. I'm saying for a recreational player to sit there and think they can volley better than him is absurd. Yeah, I've seen pro quarterbacks flop passes into the dirt... and short stops let a routine grounder dribble by them... and basketball players miss giveme layups with nobody guarding them... they're all still better than me.

35ft6
07-02-2006, 11:49 AM
I'm not so sure about that. I go and watch plenty of Open tournaments and college matches and most of those guys volley WAY better than Roddick does, and the balls are coming pretty fast at them, too. I've seen Roddick volley pretty good in other matches. His technique is not ideal (he slices his forehand volley too much and, worst of all, his movement up there is unnatural) but to judge his volleying skills based on his match against Murray isn't being accurate. Even the guys who have "poor" volleys in the ATP top 100 would be considered great volleyers at the 5.5 level.

shawn1122
07-02-2006, 07:28 PM
The man slices all his volleys. And all the slicing really does is make the ball float and give the other guy more time. It doesn't really look like he can "punch" one into the open court.

35ft6
07-02-2006, 09:14 PM
The man slices all his volleys. And all the slicing really does is make the ball float and give the other guy more time. And it greatly reduces his margin for error. This is an adjustment that has no downside unlike fundamentally changing a groundstroke. I'm surprised none of his coaches has forced him to hit more compact, flush volleys.

Raistlin
07-02-2006, 09:57 PM
Am I the only one to notice that Roddick doesn't split step when he's coming to net?:confused:

127mph
07-02-2006, 11:06 PM
roddick can hit effective volleys only when the ball is above his shoulder, if he has to bend down or do a half volley forget about it

travlerajm
07-02-2006, 11:22 PM
roddick can hit effective volleys only when the ball is above his shoulder, if he has to bend down or do a half volley forget about it

Making your racquet more powerful comes with the tradeoff of decreased depth control. Low volleys are where you really need depth control, as opposed to high ones where you can hit down on them.

If someone from this forum gets his hands on one of Roddick's sticks and dissects it, I would expect to find a ton of lead wrapped around the top of the handle, which would make it really easy to hit 150 mph serves.

chess9
07-02-2006, 11:24 PM
Roddick volleys like a 7.0, just one with poor volleys, hes not a natural volleyer really.

I'm sorry, but I must disagree. Have you seen Roddick's forehand volley? Maybe 5-6 range. Yes, he's having to field some occasional hot shots, but often he's just bungling routine volleys. The problem he has had is his dominance with the serve. He didn't need to volley! Slam, bam, thank you, ma'am. But, apparently, and based upon AAAA's post in another thread, service return percentages are up (bigger racquets?) so now he's in trouble.

My view on this is that it is very hard for a pro once he gets past about age 18-20 to pick up better skills. Most kids have separated themselves by the quality of one or two of their weapons. Few have a complete all court game, like, say, Santoro. (Santoro has many weapons, but no thermonuclear weapon.) One notable exception seems to be Nadal's serving, which he's kicked up a big notch for Wimbledon. And, he seems to still be a quick learner. I will not be surprised if he wins Wimbledon one day. I just don't think it will happen this year.

By the way, I've played against some of the great volley specialists and Roddick is really way behind in that department. Breakpoint is right. At almost any NCAA, Division I tournament you will find 20 guys volleying better than Roddick.

-Robert

Matthew
07-02-2006, 11:28 PM
Yes, it was totally painful to watch. Anything below waist-level and Roddick was toast, especially on the BH side. He just looks so unnatural and uncomfortable at the net - kind of like Shaq at the free throw line....

Nice analogy there Brad Gilbert :p

Its true though that Roddick's volleys are ridiculously bad, no matter what kind of shot he has to deal with. However, this shouldn't be an issue. Lots of players have a weakness. The problem is that Roddick seems to enjoy going out there and letting people exploit his weakness.

Young Pete
07-02-2006, 11:46 PM
My volleys suck, but after watching Roddick's match today against Murray, I'm now fully convinced that even I can volley better than Roddick. :eek: It was a joke.

Even Murray realized how bad Roddick was at the net and he just prayed that Roddick would come into the net as much as possible, so that he can hit a passing shot right past him, hit a lob over his head, or just hit it right to him and let him blow the easy volley. Murray was just tempting Roddick to come into the net by hitting short on purpose the whole match. It seemed like his strategy was just to let Roddick hit the volley, he didn't even need to make it tough for him.

I swear that most NTRP 4.0's that I know can volley better than Roddick! :eek:

What do you guys think?


(BTW, I love watching Murray play. He's such a smart player with so much variety and a plethora of skills that makes him so enjoyable to watch. I think he's right up there with Federer and Hingis for entertaining tennis.) :D

come on give roddick a break. at least he tried his best.

BreakPoint
07-02-2006, 11:53 PM
come on give roddick a break. at least he tried his best.

Yes, he did. But if we all made tens of millions of dollars just for "trying our best", most of us would also be multi-millionaires, wouldn't we?

Professional sports is a tough business, and unfortunately, "trying your best" just doesn't cut it. Results are all that matters. Yes, it's tough medicine to swallow but the payoff can be tremendous and quite rewarding. :D

35ft6
07-03-2006, 12:11 AM
My view on this is that it is very hard for a pro once he gets past about age 18-20 to pick up better skills. I'm not sure what you mean by "very hard" but if there's anything a pro can improve without endangering his ranking and career, it's volley technique. I remember when I first saw Safin at age 18 I thought to myself "this guy has about the worst volleys I've ever seen on a pro." But now his technique is pretty sound. Roddick will never have great instincts at the net but I don't see why his forehand volley couldn't be made dramatically better in just a few months. It's really a matter of him making it EASIER on himself.

equinox
07-03-2006, 12:12 AM
I volleyed better than roddick on the weekend. I was on fire. Finished it off with a beautiful scissor kick smash.

johnkidd
07-03-2006, 05:22 AM
There is no way even a 5.0 volleys better than Roddick. The types of passing shots Roddick faces on a routine basis would knock the racket back of a typical amateur.

Roddick is not even close to being the worst volleyer on tour. There are plenty of others with bad ones including Monfils, Hrbaty, and the all time best (or worst!) Thomas 'Hands of Stone' Enqvist!

I play with a guy who I think probably volleys better then Roddick. He's in his early 40's, played #1 all four years for a DI school, played all the SEC guys in the early 80's (played against Annacone & Mike DePalmer in Doubs and DePalmer in singles). This guy can hit some of the sickest volleys you have ever seen. And the kicker is he just started playing again about a year and a half ago after not playing for over ten years.

I think Roddicks problem is not his form it's his feel. Seems like he feels hit has to hit a winner off every first volleys and he overhits. Most people who volley a lot know sometimes the first volley is the set up and the second one is the put away. Andy doesn't seem to understand that.

eric draven
07-03-2006, 05:58 AM
Am I the only one to notice that Roddick doesn't split step when he's coming to net?:confused:

No, I noticed that too and John McEnroe commented on that as well during the Murray match. I used to root against Roddick but now it's almost as if he's pitied by most people now. His game has obvious holes in his game and no amount of conditioning is going to fix the fact that he's lost confidence as well as not improved his weaknesses.

chess9
07-03-2006, 06:07 AM
I'm not sure what you mean by "very hard" but if there's anything a pro can improve without endangering his ranking and career, it's volley technique. I remember when I first saw Safin at age 18 I thought to myself "this guy has about the worst volleys I've ever seen on a pro." But now his technique is pretty sound. Roddick will never have great instincts at the net but I don't see why his forehand volley couldn't be made dramatically better in just a few months. It's really a matter of him making it EASIER on himself.

Learning to volley starts very early with ball feel. If you are smashing serves at 16 and can't drop shot from 30 feet and have the ball land softer than a rain drop on velvet then you are never going to have the hands of Rios or Santoro or Connors or McEnroe. Drop shots and volleys are pretty much in the same category, you must have exquisite hand-eye coordination and timing.

Just my humble opinion. I'm probably wrong, and usually am. :)

-Robert

35ft6
07-03-2006, 08:00 AM
Learning to volley starts very early with ball feel.IMO what can't be developed later in life is the ability to move properly at the net, to "read" where the ball is going correctly, to cut off angles, etc.If you are smashing serves at 16 and can't drop shot from 30 feet and have the ball land softer than a rain drop on velvet then you are never going to have the hands of Rios or Santoro or Connors or McEnroe. True that, but not having the hands of a Rios or McEnroe is a problem that 99.9999% of the pros share, Roddick's problem isn't not having sublime natural feel, but poor technique. Technique is something that can actually be taught unlike talent.

The thing is hitting proper volleys is much "easier" than hitting bad, slicey volleys. Somebody just has to teach him. Once he gets it, he'll realize how dumb he was for slicing the crap out of all is forehand volleys, how much easier it is to make short, compact contact out in front of the body. If you think about it, it's hard to slice that much out front of the body, you have to hit the ball later, at your side to apply that much slice.Drop shots and volleys are pretty much in the same category, you must have exquisite hand-eye coordination and timing. I think you're right about drop shots. But I've noticed that clay courters, who aren't known for being great volleyers, often hit nothing but drop volleys, or tend to hit them more. It seems like the really good volleyers are the ones who tend to hit the firm volleys deep into the corner to set up the putaway. So one might almost tend to believe that the better volleyer can hit the sweet drop volleys, but on the tour, that doesn't seem to be the case, it seems that the weak volleyers go for more drop volleys, while the good volleyers hit the textbook, deep, firm volleys. I actually think it's the movement, understanding the geometry of net play that requires "exquisite" natural ability, but I think the actual mechanics of hitting the volley can be taught. Not to say that everybody will be equal in terms of being an apt pupil.

Not sure what my point is...

Golden Retriever
07-03-2006, 11:37 AM
I think it is not so much the technique. I think Roddick just doesn't have the kind of reaction and anticipation required to volley at the pro level.