A Possible Way to Bring Back S&V Without Removing Anything

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by don_nguyen11490, May 14, 2009.

  1. don_nguyen11490

    don_nguyen11490 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Messages:
    368
    Ok so I don't know where to post this thread so I'm just going to do it here.

    I was thinking about the death of S&V and the homogenization of tennis strategy in today's game and an idea popped into my head but firstly let me show you the thought process I went through:

    P1) The death of S&V IN SINGLES is because of the greater risk involved.
    P2) The risk involved is because of the greater ease in passing shots.
    P3) If we can reduce the risk, S&V will become more viable.

    _________________________________________________________
    Conclusion: To revive the S&V style, we must make it tougher to make passing shots.

    Fairly obvious but I just want to make sure we're on the same page. Some more deductive logic:

    P1) To hit a passing shot, a baseliner must make a shot that is out of reach of the volleyer at a speed faster than the volleyer can get to.
    P2) Baseliners hit at relatively the same speed as the previous generation of tennis players (Look up Wilander and Lendl and I dare any of you to tell me they didn't hit just as fast)

    Therefore, (P3) Passing shots have become easier due to a greater ease in producing sharply angled shots.

    P4) We cannot make the baseliner hit any softer nor can we make the volleyer reach any farther.
    _________________________________________
    Conclusion: In order to reduce the risk of S&V, we must make it tougher to produce these sharply angled shots.

    So far the suggestions to do this have been either:
    A)Remove the rackets and replace them with wood
    or
    B)Remove the poly strings (which greatly facilitate in passing shots thanks to their spin).

    Now, I'll be damned if anyone out there is going to take away my AG100 or is going to tell me that I can't use my KProII strings and I'm sure many tennis players out there feel the same. Its not going to be an option to remove anything from the players, especially the very things that allow them to play at higher levels. But how about this, instead of reducing the abilities of baseliners, why don't we increase the difficulty of their goals by reducing the area of which they can hit a passing shot? How about we make the court smaller?

    Making the court smaller length-wise probably wouldn't have any discernible effect as hitting near the lines is as risky as is and most people hit it closer to the service, so I say we make it smaller width-wise. Just a 1 foot reduction off each side (think, a little bit less than half of the width of the doubles alley), so a 2feet reduction total to the width of the court.

    Such a change won't make an incredibly large impact as most baseliners hit near the middle of the court anyway. What it will impact are the down the line and cross court shots which usually make up the largest percentage of passing shots. And if you think about it, this will also make it easier on baseliners as it also gives them less court to cover so therefore, baseline rallies will be longer (and casual fans love that, but the baseliners will also be nudged to serve and volley to preserve stamina). It lets all of us keep our equipment, it makes things easier for the S&Ver, Baseliners get to baseline more (unless put down by an effective volley), everyone wins.

    The only downside I can think of is that there will definitely be less aces, but mostly on serves out wide. Serving down the T will be more attractive and returners will most likely sit closer to the middle of the court but hey, they were gonna baseline anyway.

    And if you were too lazy to read, I'm just suggesting to make the court smaller widthwise, by like 2 feet so imagine less than half of the doubles alley and lop off that much off each side. Its not a drastic change, but enough to make a difference.


    So, what do you think?
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2009
    #1
  2. Clay lover

    Clay lover Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2007
    Messages:
    1,910
    I won't agree with making the courts smaller, but this is nevertheless a more innovative and logical argument than the WHY DONT WE ALL GO BACK TO BEING CAVEMEN arguments of other S&V elitists. I appreciate your effort.
     
    #2
  3. jms007

    jms007 Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    832
    Well reducing the court affects the S&Volleyer too, less sharp angles. Also the smaller court will buy the baseliner slightly more time to set up.
     
    #3
  4. Dilettante

    Dilettante Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,108
    Location:
    Katy Perry's belly button
    +1

    Ten chars.
     
    #4
  5. NickC

    NickC Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,436
    Location:
    East Coast, USA. Formally Tucson, AZ
    +1.

    Well said to the OP; this is a hell of a much more logical statement than the older guys saying that only wooden racquets strung with natural gut should be allowed on tour (and to an extent, everyone wears all white polos and shorts and high socks during every match). Tradition is nice, but when guys think back to the good old days, they get a bit delusional, IMO.
     
    #5
  6. deltox

    deltox Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    Messages:
    2,639
    Location:
    NC, USA
    option C, a 6'10" player playing S&V cuts down on angles also
     
    #6
  7. egn

    egn Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    4,973
    How about coaches teach serve and volley. There are serve and volley players around and hell if Fed wanted to he could serve and volley all his points but it is not the best solution. However if you want to make more players use it the coaches need to teach some serve and volley and not focus on baseline bash festivals.
     
    #7
  8. Solat

    Solat Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Messages:
    1,242
    you will never ever ever ever ever convince the whole world and its billions of tennis courts to be redone / resurfaced / redesigned because a few people want s&v to comeback

    secondly by making the court thinner you also promote more counter punching and pushing as players can cover the width easier the game would be more about keeping the ball central until someone errs
     
    #8
  9. slicefox

    slicefox Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    1,275
    Location:
    the hood
    logical counter-argument.

    wood and gut is still the best idea.
     
    #9
  10. paulmaben

    paulmaben Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Messages:
    206
    I like this line of thinking...

    How about the width of the court only becomes smaller for the passer when the person at the net gets past the service line or a line that is even closer?

    The net person will not have a decreased width of court...he gets incentive for reaching the net.

    We could have new lines drawn in from the singles lines...maybe a different color? or dashes...?

    This could present more drama on tv. Did the net man get to the line or not? We could have instant replay and hawk eye challenges... the passer would be forced to go for the smaller target area all the time. By having the net person have to reach a prescribe line than it might open up the possibility of seeing more lobs in the game. How many topspin lobs over the net man do we see these days??

    tell me if you like this...I'll sell it to the powers that be.
     
    #10
  11. sh@de

    sh@de Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,979
    Good idea, but I think it's impractical. There's way too many people out there who'll oppose the idea, and many will like to stick to tradition. This is quite a drastic change, so I doubt there'll be a lot of support for it.

    That said, thanks for finally presenting a logical, clear cut argument. Makes life much simpler.
     
    #11
  12. dataseviltwin

    dataseviltwin Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    203
    Location:
    Assimilated
    We're just stuck with it...

    Couple of points:
    . They've also slowed down the "fast" surfaces. Lendl could've won the big W if the surface he was playing on is as slow as it is today. IMHO it'd be nice if they re-speed-up the courts at the big W, and Fed realized his best chance against Rafa is with his crybaby cheeks at the net. Also... what the heck happened to playing on carpet, anyway...? Serve and volley was a good choice there as well...
    . Racket technology has made it possible for dudes with homemade strokes to generate power from anywhere on the court. All court play is starting to make a comeback, and the occasional serve and volley is a valid tactic against the itenerant pusher, but pure serve & volley, outside of doubles, is like Elvis, man... ELVIS HAS LEFT THE BUILDING...
    . The pros are using rackets with more pop, and are in better shape as well. Did you see the graphic on average shot speed between Verdasco and Juan Carlos Ferrerro? It was like 134kph to 119kph... Between all the above... it's dang hard to throw up the "hey dude, I'm gonna serve it big and come in... over and over" sign and get away with it. Like I said... as a changeup, a valid play. Mardy's starting to do that, and getting good results. Unfortunately guys like Taylor Dent are nearly done though... true shame... I used to love watching Rafter... and Boris... and Stephan... and wood-racket-era Johnny Mac.
     
    #12
  13. BorisBeckerFan

    BorisBeckerFan Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,164
    They way to bring S&V back is to have players that are actually good at S&V.
    Guys like Meltzer, Dent, Stepanek, etc are far cry from the likes of Stich, Rafter, Becker, Edberg, McEnroe, Sampras, Laver and so on.
     
    #13
  14. JoshDragon

    JoshDragon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,235
    Agreed, well said.
     
    #14
  15. Bobby Riggs

    Bobby Riggs New User

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2009
    Messages:
    63
    Location:
    Boston
    For equipment, I think that if racket head size had an increased ( and enforced ) minimum area, we would see more volleyers and less baseliners. The bigger area would slow down racket head speed for baseliners and improve net games. OK, it may cut down on serve velocity, too, which would hurt the S&V game, but once the point was going the bigger head area would favor the net rusher I would think.

    I agree with an early poster who mentioned that players are getting bigger, with bigger wingspans, and the present dimensions of the court now are barely adequate. I think if we went to smaller dimensions we'd get a game like squash or badminton where the rallies are interminable. Tennis as a sport would only become even more faint on the radar screen.

    With a narrower court, volleyers would have less room to put shots away; the incentive to take the net would be much less. At least in today's game, when players do venture to the net it's because they've had enough space to establish an advantage to approach the net-- and to angle off a volley into open space.

    The only thing I would change for courts is to make clay courts faster. We would then see more serve and volley on that surface.

    I agree that serve and volley just isn't being taught enough these days, and the length of players' careers-- and fans' interest-- suffer as a result.
     
    #15
  16. Tennis_Monk

    Tennis_Monk Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2005
    Messages:
    3,477
    I disagree. As is i have enough issues keeping the ball in play with courts of current size. I cant cope up with them being smaller.

    So sorry. As a super power (any TW forum member is) i hereby VETO this proposal.
     
    #16
  17. TheNatural

    TheNatural Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,854
    how about those tennis academies restructure their programs to allocate an even amount of time to the development of the net game and SV compared to groundstroke development to produce more well rounded players?
     
    #17
  18. gj011

    gj011 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Messages:
    6,548
    Location:
    Back from prison
    No. Don't mess with the courts.
     
    #18
  19. Nadal_Freak

    Nadal_Freak Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Messages:
    10,625
    Location:
    Harker Heights, Texas
    People are getting desperate. lol Tennis is much better without S&V. ;)
     
    #19
  20. joe sch

    joe sch Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    4,721
    Location:
    Hotel CA
    Wont happen, the acadamies are factories to produce baseline blasting clones. Would take another maveric coach to get lucky with an outstanding athletic talent. Some old school coach like an new unknown Lansdorf that produces a champion S/V player. Then others will copy and the acadamies will also add S/V options. With big money in tennis now, most great young players end up with estlablishment coaches who then clone them to win from the baseline. Bottom line, it would take a long term coaching effort that is very unlikely to happen in todays junior tennis world.
     
    #20
  21. JoshDragon

    JoshDragon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,235
    I strongly agree. Although I have the feeling that S&V will return to tennis at some point.
     
    #21
  22. don_nguyen11490

    don_nguyen11490 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Messages:
    368
    I would like to reiterate that taking off 1 foot off each side is not an extremely large difference.
     
    #22
  23. don_nguyen11490

    don_nguyen11490 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Messages:
    368
    oh no i am powerless to resist your commands what will i do

    What was your name again?

    Ok, troll post over.
     
    #23
  24. don_nguyen11490

    don_nguyen11490 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Messages:
    368
    This is true to an extent but they are coaching baseline clones for a good reason. It simply produces good results. As much as I love S&V, considering the high risk and low return it has in today's game, I wouldn't be coaching S&V either.

    Having specific line for volleying is not only way too complicated but also could result in ambiguous situations where its not exactly clear what happened for example "no i meant to volley so i should get the point" or whatever.
     
    #24
  25. don_nguyen11490

    don_nguyen11490 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Messages:
    368
    With only a 2 foot reduction, it is still possible to create sharp angles volleying AND baselining. The idea is to reduce the amount of space in which the volleyer can be passed while still allowing enough (but small amount) room for him to be passed and for the baseliner to still have to chase down balls.

    I also apologize for the rapid fire posts because I am a forum noob.
     
    #25
  26. Satch

    Satch Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,860
    why would anyone want to see S&V Back... so boring, the best game is a mix of 2.

    btw making courts smaller would produce only baseline game and nothing else...
     
    #26
  27. gj011

    gj011 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Messages:
    6,548
    Location:
    Back from prison
    What a tool. :roll:

    I didn't order you anything. I just said that court dimensions is not something that should be messed with IMO.

    Anyway, your thread and your idea failed since no one in their right mind would agree to court dimension change. The idea is just ridiculous.

    Also making court smaller will do little to promote S&V.

    What is rather reasonable to do, like someone above said, is to get coaches to devote more time to the net game and S&V.
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2009
    #27
  28. don_nguyen11490

    don_nguyen11490 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Messages:
    368
    See my other posts addressing the notion that it would only produce baseline game.
     
    #28
  29. don_nguyen11490

    don_nguyen11490 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Messages:
    368
    This is fun, I don't usually get to argue with children. Anyway can I ask you a question? How high is your horse?
     
    #29
  30. aldeayeah

    aldeayeah Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Messages:
    3,985
    Almost all of today's top 10 players are guys who can do it all, including S&V. I think that's terrific. I don't want things to go back.
     
    #30
  31. Blade0324

    Blade0324 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    3,569
    Well said. Like many sports tennis has evolved. Blame it on equipment, blame it on players being in better shape, blame it on court speed. I don't really care what you want to blame it on. Bottom line is that the game has changed. Like with anything else, you can lead the way with the change, follow suite to get up to speed or get the hell out of the way. If you don't want to play baseline tennis, don't, but if it's not effective don't ***** about it.
     
    #31
  32. harr

    harr Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2008
    Messages:
    152
    In addition to causing huge inconvenience to the owners of tennis courts, making the courts narrower would make it more difficult to hit volley winners, so the baseliner would get more attempts to pass the netman. And play from the baseline would become more defensive because it would be more difficult to hit angled winners.
     
    #32
  33. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,544
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    I would be happy if the S&V was around - it could mean more styles, more personalities. That said, I'm not a S&V fan. I like baseliners.

    I'm more concerned about the homogenization of the baseline game. I'd prefer to see more guys play like Nadal. Unique individual styles. Unorthodox strokes. Unusual habits. Or at least more guys like Gaudio. How many players have a cool backhand like that?

    The whole homogenization issue is far deeper than S&V versus baseline. It is all about the way guys are taught to play. Guys are discouraged from developing their own game.

    If the S&V is incorporated and everyone plays the attacking game the same way, this would likewise be boring and fix nothing.
     
    #33
  34. EtePras

    EtePras Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2008
    Messages:
    733
    Forget S&V, tennis is better without volleying, period. Cheap, no-skill tricks like touching the ball before it bounces it something I would expect from the desperate 2.5 who can't win points any other way, not a professional who is expected to play with integrity.
     
    #34
  35. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,834
    Location:
    New York City
    How can you separate S&V v. baseline from the issue of homogenization? By definition, everyone playing from the baseline is homogenization. It simply sounds like you favor certain homogenization over others.
     
    #35
  36. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,544
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    I don't think I did.

    "Favour certain homogenization" - I don't know what this means.

    I do prefer the baseline game, but as I've said I think it would be nice if a certain population of tennis players served and volleyed consistently.
     
    #36
  37. tacou

    tacou Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    6,999
    As much as I think S&V is missing from the game and as hard as you tried to put this together well, making the out line a foot in would completely change the game. no way
     
    #37
  38. arnz

    arnz Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,228
    How about if you take the ball out of the air you are allowed to hit the volley all the way to the doubles alley, but the passer will be allowed to pass only on the singles line? Then the volleyer can definitely create a steeper angle....Anyway, just thinking out loud, havent really given it too much thought. I'm OK with the way tennis is played right now

    PS just realized that my way doesnt require repainting the courts :)
     
    #38
  39. pmerk34

    pmerk34 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2007
    Messages:
    5,192
    Location:
    L. Island, NY
    OK, you just mentioned all time great and near greats.
     
    #39
  40. bizarre_opinion

    bizarre_opinion Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Messages:
    316
    Location:
    UK
    i personally think the racket head size limit should be reduced. I think this would help.
     
    #40
  41. Gugafan

    Gugafan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    Messages:
    3,949
    Location:
    Birmingham, England
    The only way your going to bring back S&V is by speeding up the courts like the 90's grass at Wimbledon.
     
    #41
  42. gj011

    gj011 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Messages:
    6,548
    Location:
    Back from prison
    You should lose the attitude. Especially when proposing something preposterous as changing the court dimensions.

    All I said was that I do not like your idea and you are behaving like a spoiled brat. Just silly.
     
    #42
  43. Nadal_Freak

    Nadal_Freak Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Messages:
    10,625
    Location:
    Harker Heights, Texas
    Yeah I know. He needs to get ahold of himself. Whining about no S&V will get you nowhere but in a sad state.
     
    #43
  44. robby c

    robby c Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2007
    Messages:
    682
    The 1st step to restore balance to the pro game is to limit the width of the racquets to 19 mm.
    In the early 90's(pre-widebody racquets), you had Agassi and Chang playing oversize racquets. Courier, Krickstein, Sampras, and Edberg with the Prostaff. It was pretty evenly balanced between baseliners and serve and volleyers.
    The player who won on any given day simply executed his style of play better than his opponent.
    I don't see it happening any time soon. Just too logical.
    Robby C
     
    #44
  45. TheNatural

    TheNatural Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,854

    you said "without removing anything" but you want to remove half the court.

    [​IMG]



    How about they just make some extra side lines between the singles and doubles sidelines. That can be the volleyer's court, so anyone that volleys the ball can win the point by hitting the ball into the wide sidelines.:lol:

    Then every 5 or 10 years they can re asses the rule. For example if they make that rule now, in 5 of 10 years time maybe the volleyers would have developed enough that they can get rid of the extra sideline, then we'll have a bunch of top players who have been practicing their volleys for years and a bunch of extra tennis academies that have developed better serve volleyers to take advantage of the wider sidelines. Or if no one ever takes advantage of the volleyer's court they can just leave the extra wide volley sidelines permanently.

    Everyone will start using more classical grips to take advantage of serve volleying, and they'll; develop more all around games. It will even give serve volleyers a chance to beat Nadal at Roland Garros.

    Can you imagine some of the points, it will be like a race to the net.
     
    #45
  46. TheNatural

    TheNatural Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,854

    That's similar to my idea. I didn't read yours. The bit about getting past the service line is too complicated. ;)
     
    #46
  47. 380pistol

    380pistol Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,903
    And now I see why people call you out of your name.
     
    #47
  48. 380pistol

    380pistol Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,903
    You wanna see serve and volley being part of the game then it's simple....

    1) NOT speed up the courts, have them returned to their regular speed. The courts have been slowed down. So it's "speeding them up" if we're returning them to their original form?!?

    2) Have players actuall develop volleying skills and the understand the nuance of playing serve and volley. What did Sampras mean by "take their time away". Why were guys like McEnroe, Edberg and Rafter difficult to pass???
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2009
    #48
  49. Bobby Riggs

    Bobby Riggs New User

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2009
    Messages:
    63
    Location:
    Boston
    Well, the original proposal has been summarily dismissed. The proposal makes absolutely no sense right from the beginning: Anything reducing the width of the court would actually hinder the serve and volley game by reducing the service box area even more, of course.

    Tennis is already a game on millimeters;a proposal to take away a foot width in each service box is absolutely absurd, and would make hugely impair and discourage S &V. It would make it even harder for the server to pull the receiver out wide with the serve, which is how the whole S&V game is initiated.
     
    #49
  50. 380pistol

    380pistol Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,903
    You wanna know how.... see post #48.
     
    #50

Share This Page