Greatest Volleyers of All Time

hoodjem · 12-19-2009, 05:16 PM

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

12-20-2009, 06:18 AM	#8
Superman1272 Rookie Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Crosby, TX (East of Houston) Posts: 188	#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. __________________ I have some things for sale... I will update this signature later and post in the "for sale" forums, too. :-)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode