I have played with and against many different 3.5 guys in 7.0 mixed. I have never seen one who could S&V effectively, and most won't even try.
I think the problem is that some 3.5 guys have nice hard serves. Their serve elicits weak replies. Rather than come in, they just hit the next ball as a groundstroke (preferably FH) and win the point that way.
The other issue is that some 3.5 guys are horrid volleyers. Just horrid. They aren't coming in because approach volleys are too difficult.
There are a lot of 3.5 women who make a living coming to net. I think the reason is that the returner isn't likely to smoke the return so hard the server cannot reach it. Also, a lot of 3.5 women take instruction and have better hands for that first volley.
That's an interesting "reference." That's way more lobbing and overall net clearance...and whole lot less net pressure than what I'm used to seeing in my little corner of the world. In a recent scrimmage, at least two points of every game had at least 3 players inside the box...even though both our pairs have traditionally been more of a 1-up/1-back style. We've all come to learn that, like Cindy said, the 2-up teams tend to win more and so we're diligently trying to up-the-ante in our own collective games.
That's way more lobbing and overall net clearance...and whole lot less net pressure than what I'm used to seeing in my little corner of the world.
i wasn't sure if this video was indicative of most ladies dubs. in this video anyway the lob seems to be devastating and volleys while mostly consistent - lack pace and placement. lots of volleys hit but very few volley winners or volleys that forced errors.
That video looked a lot like the 3.5 and 4.0 women's doubles I see regularly at my club. I label it as passive doubles as it is rare that all four ladies are at or inside the service line during the point. Instead the entire point is often played one up and one back on each side and less than half of the points are ended with a volley and very few are ended with an overhead.
Yea, but you're also advocating being in "no man's land" which is the first thing you learn not to do in tennis. I recall being told by my coach to let them lob you. It's a low % shot and if they get it, good for them, but you'll win way more points going to the net than losing via a lob. So, if that's true, my problem is going in on the wrong shots, not being out of position to play the lob. I am saying if you do it right, they can not hit a deep lob. Like an easy shot to their forehand, don't go it. Massively topspin and deep to their back hand? Let them lob away.
Yea, but you're also advocating being in "no man's land" which is the first thing you learn not to do in tennis. I recall being told by my coach to let them lob you. It's a low % shot and if they get it, good for them, but you'll win way more points going to the net than losing via a lob. So, if that's true, my problem is going in on the wrong shots, not being out of position to play the lob. I am saying if you do it right, they can not hit a deep lob. Like an easy shot to their forehand, don't go it. Massively topspin and deep to their back hand? Let them lob away.
Yea, but you're also advocating being in "no man's land" which is the first thing you learn not to do in tennis. I recall being told by my coach to let them lob you. It's a low % shot and if they get it, good for them, but you'll win way more points going to the net than losing via a lob. So, if that's true, my problem is going in on the wrong shots, not being out of position to play the lob. I am saying if you do it right, they can not hit a deep lob. Like an easy shot to their forehand, don't go it. Massively topspin and deep to their back hand? Let them lob away.
A good approach shot is 3 things.
a. deep
b. near a sideline (esp in singles)
c. low
the approach shot (or return of serve in chip-n-charge) is the key. It is also dependent on what level you are playing at. How hard you hit the ball is not really nearly as important as where and how.
A good approach shot is 3 things.
a. deep
b. near a sideline (esp in singles)
c. low
at 3.0, you will win, if your approach shot has 1 of these three things. none? you will most likely lose the point.
at 3.5, you will win, if your approach shot has 2 of these things. One? you will most likely lose the point.
at 4.0, you will win if your approach shot has all 3 of these things. Two? you will most likely lose the point.
Probably an oversimplification, but a pretty good rule of thumb.
If you hit deep you are in good shape even at 4.0.
Yea ... anything near the baseline that does not sit up will put you in great shape. The biggest exception is when you approach cross court in singles.
But a deep, low skidding approach down the middle is murder on a baseliner trying to find an angle.
In my very limited experience ABSOLUTELY NO 3.5 players play serve and volley, or even effective chip and charge. All tennis up to and including low level 4.0 is essentially pushing tennis. Yes, we all have our moments of dazzling serve and volley and chip and charge points, but the games of players at and below the 4.0 level are simply not sound enough to do this consistently and effectively, point after point.How common is serve and volley in 3.5 men's league tennis, singles or doubles? Or chip and charge? I'm REALLY old school and it has always been on short balls, chip and charge and if you can hit a pretty good serve ( 1 & 2) come in behind it. Any thoughts?
I actually blogged about this recently, after Llodra won a few matches and re-ignited the s&v debate at the pro level.
I think it can be an extremely effective tactic at the 3.5 level because, as Drop Shot noted, many players aren't used to facing it and you can win a LOT of easy points. The problem as I see it though is the physical toll it takes. When you serve and volley you make a run to the net on every first serve - whether your serve is in, into the net, or into the back fence. It can be exhausting for 3.5 players because, frankly, they're going to miss a lot of first serves and therefore do a lot of extra running. And if they aren't missing a lot of first serves then their first serve probably isn't forceful and they'll get consistently passed by the better 3.5 players.
Still, as I noted in my blog post, I think it can be a terrific strategy at the club level - especially when applied against the right opponent.
In my very limited experience ABSOLUTELY NO 3.5 players play serve and volley, or even effective chip and charge. All tennis up to and including low level 4.0 is essentially pushing tennis. Yes, we all have our moments of dazzling serve and volley and chip and charge points, but the games of players at and below the 4.0 level are simply not sound enough to do this consistently and effectively, point after point.
This is just my current opinion based on only 52 matches against 3.0 to 4.0 level players this year. Corrections are welcome.
It's easy to prove someone wrong who talks in absolutes.
I have seen 3.5s who serve an volley regularly (but it's pretty darn rare). There are absolutely 4.0 doubles players who S&V, and basically live at the net.
I have definitely seen 3.5s who serve and volley at least every once in a while (I am one).
Also, show me a powder puff 2nd serve and I'm going to be giving it a ride (or slicing it) and coming in behind it almost every time.
Also, saying all 3.5 tennis is pushing tennis is inaccurate. There are plenty of 3.5 guys who can hit the ball plenty hard, they just can't keep it in 3 times in a row.
Old days, lots of 3.5's, or C players, used S/V exclusively, because that's what the pros did in the mid '70's.
How can you get good at something if you don't practice it during a match?
I did, as did almost every guy who got past 4.5. That was the accepted method to play any kind of competitive MEN's tennis.
Now we are all girls.