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

D

don_nguyen11490

Rookie
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:
Clay lover

Clay lover

Legend
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.
 
J

jms007

Professional
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.
 
N

NickC

Professional
Clay lover said:
It 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.
Click to expand...

+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.
 
egn

egn

Hall of Fame
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.
 
Solat

Solat

Professional
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
 
slicefox

slicefox

Banned
Solat said:
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
Click to expand...

logical counter-argument.

wood and gut is still the best idea.
 
P

paulmaben

Rookie
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.
 
S

sh@de

Hall of Fame
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.
 
dataseviltwin

dataseviltwin

Rookie
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.
 
B

BorisBeckerFan

Professional
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.
 
B

Bobby Riggs

New User
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.
 
T

Tennis_Monk

Hall of Fame
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.
 
D

Deleted member 3771

Guest
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?
 
joe sch

joe sch

Legend
TheNatural said:
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?
Click to expand...

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.
 
D

don_nguyen11490

Rookie
Solat said:
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

Actually, you'd only have to repaint the lines.

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

Or you could hit a putaway volley/ combo that with an overhead smash. THe court reduction is not that much, only by like 1 foot off each side. That's less than half the doubles alley in width.
Click to expand...

Bobby Riggs said:
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.

Making rules about equipment is very tough and often singles out those who do use that kind of equipment so I'd prefer not to mess with that. Also, headsize has nearly doubled since the wooden era so I believe your argument is invald. A bigger size would not make anyone swing any slower, but a heavier mass would.

I think if we went to smaller dimensions we'd get a game like squash or badminton where the rallies are interminable.

That's the thing. The advantage of rallying from baseline is its safety. Now with the advancement of Luxilon and poly strings, pros can hit whatever angle they like with little risk as opposed to the pre-Federer era where aggressive baseliners often resulted in higher unforced errors.

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.

This is true and I've considered that. However, volleyers still have a greater angle than the baseliners and baseliners would also have a tougher time getting past volleyers so there's still an offensive advantage to volleying. Plus, a 2 feet reduction would be like taking less than half of the doubles alley off each side. Its not that much of a reduction and would still allow for sharp angles by either volleyer or baseliner. Its still enough to make a difference.

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.

Clay courts are by definition slow and I want to keep that. I'm more concerned about bring back the S&V to the faster courts such as the USO and AUS. Wimbledon doesn't count as fast anymore though.

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.
Click to expand...

I would like to reiterate that taking off 1 foot off each side is not an extremely large difference.
 
D

don_nguyen11490

Rookie
joe sch said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.

paulmaben said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
D

don_nguyen11490

Rookie
jms007 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Satch

Satch

Hall of Fame
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...
 
gj011

gj011

Banned
don_nguyen11490 said:
oh no i am powerless to resist your commands what will i do
.
Click to expand...

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:
D

don_nguyen11490

Rookie
Satch said:
why would anyone want to see S&V Back... so boring, the best game is a mix of 2.

Actually, I agree with you. Too much S&V IS boring, but too much baselining is also boring and that's what's going on. The problem is that no one can really use volleys in singles except to finish off an already won point. No one can use it dependably.

btw making courts smaller would produce only baseline game and nothing else...
Click to expand...

See my other posts addressing the notion that it would only produce baseline game.
 
D

don_nguyen11490

Rookie
gj011 said:
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.

Yes. I see that you clearly wrote that in your post.

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

Care to explain?

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.

Why in the world would anyone coach S&V when it produces such little results? Something needs to be changed so that it can.
Click to expand...

This is fun, I don't usually get to argue with children. Anyway can I ask you a question? How high is your horse?
 
aldeayeah

aldeayeah

G.O.A.T.
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.
 
Blade0324

Blade0324

Hall of Fame
Nadal_Freak said:
People are getting desperate. lol Tennis is much better without S&V. ;)
Click to expand...

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.
 
H

harr

Rookie
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.
 
CyBorg

CyBorg

Legend
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.
 
E

EtePras

Banned
Nadal_Freak said:
People are getting desperate. lol Tennis is much better without S&V. ;)
Click to expand...

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.
 
stormholloway

stormholloway

Legend
CyBorg said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
CyBorg

CyBorg

Legend
stormholloway said:
How can you separate S&V v. baseline from the issue of homogenization?
Click to expand...

I don't think I did.

By definition, everyone playing from the baseline is homogenization. It simply sounds like you favor certain homogenization over others.
Click to expand...

"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.
 
tacou

tacou

G.O.A.T.
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
 
A

arnz

Professional
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 :)
 
P

pmerk34

Legend
BorisBeckerFan said:
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.
Click to expand...

OK, you just mentioned all time great and near greats.
 
gj011

gj011

Banned
don_nguyen11490 said:
This is fun, I don't usually get to argue with children. Anyway can I ask you a question? How high is your horse?
Click to expand...

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.
 
Nadal_Freak

Nadal_Freak

Banned
gj011 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Yeah I know. He needs to get ahold of himself. Whining about no S&V will get you nowhere but in a sad state.
 
R

robby c

Semi-Pro
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
 
D

Deleted member 3771

Guest
don_nguyen11490 said:
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?
Click to expand...


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

doh.jpg




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.
 
D

Deleted member 3771

Guest
paulmaben said:
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.
Click to expand...


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

380pistol

Banned
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:
B

Bobby Riggs

New User
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
the myth: S&V can beat Nadal on clay
Replies
16
Views
1K
AAAA
AAAA
In D Zone
Madrid showcased S&V / All Court play
Replies
9
Views
926
fastdunn
F
H
This is why S&V specialists deserved to disappear
2
Replies
50
Views
4K
namui
N
B
Is it possible to have a low-bouncing medium speed court?
Replies
1
Views
707
crazylevity
crazylevity
P
Why isn't there more S+V in the WTA?
Replies
39
Views
5K
martini1
martini1
Top