Talk Tennis

Talk Tennis (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php)
-   Former Pro Player Talk (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/forumdisplay.php?f=37)
-   -   Greatest Volleyers of All Time (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=302909)

hoodjem 12-19-2009 05:16 PM

Greatest Volleyers of All Time
 
Here's tier-one among the greatest volleyers in the history of the game: Laver, McEnroe, Edberg, Rosewall, Sedgman, Newcombe, Roche, Kramer.

Here's tier-two: Borotra, Gonzales, Hoad, Emerson, Henman, Nastase, Panatta, Rafter, Sampras, Cash.

I'd like to start a tier-three.
Tier-three: Ashe, Perry, Krajicek, Stich, Becker, Gerulaitis.

urban 12-19-2009 10:04 PM

I think, Kramer, who was the first to volley constantly, Sedg, Emmo, Hoadie and Roche were first tier. I would add Borotra, who stormed the net after a weak serve. He came from pelota, a Basque ball game. Ashe had a weak forehand volley.

thalivest 12-19-2009 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoodjem (Post 4208874)
Here's tier-one among the greatest volleyers in the history of the game: McEnroe, Edberg, Laver, Rosewall, Rafter, Gonzales, Newcombe.

Here's tier-two: Borotra, Kramer, Sedgman, Emerson, Roche, Henman, Nastase, Panatta, Becker, Cash.

I'd like to start a tier-three.
Tier-three: Hoad, Ashe, Perry, Sampras, Krajicek, Stich.

If Rafter really that much better than Sampras at volleying? For that matter is Becker really a better volleyer than Sampras, Stich, or even Krajicek.

ChrisCrocker 12-20-2009 12:32 AM

I Agree with above that sampras belongs in Tier-Two, and also federer and hewitt deserve to be in tier-three.

Datacipher 12-20-2009 03:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thalivest (Post 4209328)
If Rafter really that much better than Sampras at volleying? For that matter is Becker really a better volleyer than Sampras, Stich, or even Krajicek.

That's exactly what stood out to me. Rafter DEFINITELY tier 2....I'd put him roughly equal to Cash and Henman, and I'd drop Becker to tier 3.

NonP 12-20-2009 03:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoodjem (Post 4208874)
Here's tier-one among the greatest volleyers in the history of the game: McEnroe, Edberg, Laver, Rosewall, Rafter, Gonzales, Newcombe.

Here's tier-two: Borotra, Kramer, Sedgman, Emerson, Roche, Henman, Nastase, Panatta, Becker, Cash.

I'd like to start a tier-three.
Tier-three: Hoad, Ashe, Perry, Sampras, Krajicek, Stich.

I'm surprised that a knowledgeable poster like hoodjem would rank Henman and Becker above Sampras. Of all the '90s volleyers only Rafter's got a good case of being superior to Sampras, and even here I'd give the edge to Pete as he clearly had a more solid forehand volley and a little more touch. In any case Mac and Edberg are definitely a notch above Rafter.

pc1 12-20-2009 04:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoodjem (Post 4208874)
Here's tier-one among the greatest volleyers in the history of the game: McEnroe, Edberg, Laver, Rosewall, Rafter, Gonzales, Newcombe.

Here's tier-two: Borotra, Kramer, Sedgman, Emerson, Roche, Henman, Nastase, Panatta, Becker, Cash.

I'd like to start a tier-three.
Tier-three: Hoad, Ashe, Perry, Sampras, Krajicek, Stich.

Excellent list and with all lists subject to debate. I may actually move Gonzalez down to tier 2 but I can see him also at tier 1. The reason is that people have said that Gonzalez had a catchy type volley and it wasn't as penetrating as for example a Laver or a Rosewall.

Hoad is as usual, hard to rank since I've read that his volley was fantastic but I've also read he could make volley errors often. His forehand crosscourt volley was the reason Gonzalez changed his backhand grip to learn to hit crosscourt for the backhand pass. The volley was hit so hard even someone with the mobility of Gonzalez couldn't touch it.

Superman1272 12-20-2009 06:18 AM

#1 Martina
she was amazing off both sides. Powerful and had incredible touch... depending on what was needed. She had great hands. She was fast (foot speed, set-up, hands, reaction) in every regard. Had a presence at the net that was intimidating to any opponent who had ever played her (or saw her play). Her S&V game rarely let her down despite what surface she played on. I also think her doubles efforts only solidified her as the best, or at the VERY least, top teir.

hoodjem 12-20-2009 06:38 AM

Thank you everyone. I appreciate your comments and input. IMO many minds are better than one. Many edits made.
Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisCrocker (Post 4209390)
I Agree with above that sampras belongs in Tier-Two, and also federer and hewitt deserve to be in tier-three.

Sorry, I cannot put Fed or Hewitt in tier-two or even tier-three.

See here: http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=302002
Quote:

Originally Posted by Datacipher (Post 4207000)
He [Fed] is, now, a strict baseliner WITH a good volley....but, like all baseliners, he isn't terribly consistent up there and can be scared off the net.


jaggy 12-20-2009 08:49 AM

I always thought Frew McMillan had a great volley

Azzurri 12-20-2009 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thalivest (Post 4209328)
If Rafter really that much better than Sampras at volleying? For that matter is Becker really a better volleyer than Sampras, Stich, or even Krajicek.

I also think Pete belongs in tier two. I think Pete has the edge over rafter anyway. but no way is Pete tier 3.

hoodjem 12-20-2009 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaggy (Post 4209988)
I always thought Frew McMillan had a great volley

You are correct. And the Woodies were both excellent volleyers. I have ignored many great doubles players on here. (I cannot decide if I should include them.)

heathcliff 12-20-2009 10:06 AM

vitas gerulaitis - touch, reflexes and movement were great

pc1 12-20-2009 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoodjem (Post 4210051)
You are correct. And the Woodies were both excellent volleyers. I have ignored many great doubles players on here. (I cannot decide if I should include them.)

Yes but you have to remember they are good doubles volleyers. They don't have nearly as much net to cover.

I used to play doubles with a woman who played on her college doubles team. She was an excellent volleyer when she played doubles ande she never missed a volley but in singles she didn't cover the net nearly as well and could be passed much more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azzurri (Post 4210050)
I also think Pete belongs in tier two. I think Pete has the edge over rafter anyway. but no way is Pete tier 3.

Hoodjem, I may agree with Azzurri that Sampras may belong in tier two and I think Sedgman is tier one. Many think he may be the greatest volleyer of them all. Kramer said that if Sedgman got his hands on a volley, it was nearly always a putaway.

Datacipher 12-20-2009 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pc1 (Post 4210286)
Yes but you have to remember they are good doubles volleyers. They don't have nearly as much net to cover.

I used to play doubles with a woman who played on her college doubles team. She was an excellent volleyer when she played doubles ande she never missed a volley but in singles she didn't cover the net nearly as well and could be passed much more.



Hoodjem, I may agree with Azzurri that Sampras may belong in tier two and I think Sedgman is tier one. Many think he may be the greatest volleyer of them all. Kramer said that if Sedgman got his hands on a volley, it was nearly always a putaway.

Looking at the current list, I would also put Sampras, as well as Cash in tier 2.

papatenis 12-20-2009 03:53 PM

Winning 14 GS with a serve and volley game should put Sampras in the top tier.
What was your reasoning for placing Sampras in tier 3?

Datacipher 12-20-2009 04:02 PM

repost..........................

hoodjem 12-20-2009 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by papatenis (Post 4210879)
Winning 14 GS with a serve and volley game should put Sampras in the top tier.
What was your reasoning for placing Sampras in tier 3?

Was it his volley that won 14 GS? This thread is not about his serve-and-volley game, it is about the quality of his volleys exclusively.

Also, many here dispute that Sampras was a S&V player, some call him an all-court player.

papatenis 12-20-2009 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoodjem (Post 4210911)
Was it his volley that won 14 GS? This thread is not about his serve-and-vlley game, it is about the quality of his volleys exclusively.

Also, many here dispute that Sampras was a S&V player, some call him an all-court player.

How do you measure a great volley? If you think Sampras was an all court player, then how did he win Wimbledon so many times when grass was "real grass"

Datacipher 12-20-2009 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by papatenis (Post 4210921)
How do you measure a great volley? If you think Sampras was an all court player, then how did he win Wimbledon so many times when grass was "real grass"

You're backing up a questionable stretch of reasoning with another! Well, for one thing, when grass was "real" (it still is....that's another modern day myth in my opinion), you didn't HAVE to be a SV'er to win. However, in Sampras case, he did SV a lot at Wimbledon, in fact, earliy in his career, it was the one place he seemed to be a completely dedicated SV'er. Though he would sometimes do quite a bit on fast indoor courts....though early on...he'd often stay back indoors as well.

But there are other confounds to your original premise besides this...to equate volley to slams...well, SO many other variables and interactions. To give an easy example, Cash had a significantly better volley than Becker...(so does say....Leander Paes for that matter), but of course, it's not reflected in their singles slam count.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:18 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2006 - Tennis Warehouse