Golden Retriever
Hall of Fame
Some people say that S&V works at lower levels because they don't have great passing shots and returns like the pros. Also S&V is the best counter-pusher strategy. Do you agree?
Does S&V really work at the 4.0 level?
- Thread starter Golden Retriever
- Start date
jasoncho92
Professional
It definitely works at the 4.0 level because it works at the national u16 level.
RoddickistheMan
Professional
Im a 4.0 and use serve and volley. I found it works really well against 3.5s and low 4.0s. Its a tad harder to execute against 4.5s who can rip passing shots. If you want it to work at 4.5 the serve needs to be pretty fast or well placed. I tried using it against a 5.0 and got creamed trying to do it.
________
DISABILITY INSURANCE FORUM
________
DISABILITY INSURANCE FORUM
Last edited:
Frank Silbermann
Professional
That's what the old guard complained about in the 1940s. You see, serve-and-volley tennis was big with McLaughlin (the California Comet) before WWI, but then after WWI there was Little Bill Johnston, Bill Tilden, Lacoste, Cochet, Jack Crawford, Ellsworth Vines, Fred Perry, Don Budge and Bobby Riggs all of whom played mainly from the baseline -- usually only rushing the net on serve as an occasional surprise, and usually stepping up only to finish off a point that they had all but won with their ground strokes.
But then Jack Kramer came along in the 1940s with his serve-and-volley game, which Bobby Riggs adopted, and soon all the young contenders were trying to win with serve-and-volley before perfecting their groundstrokes. They'd rush the net on anything, either to avoid a weak (slice-only) backhand groundstroke or to take advantage of the opponent's weak backhand (or both).
So, yeah, serve-and-volley _is_ an effective way to cover poor groundstroke fundamentals. It is, at least, until you get an opponent who can attack it from the net before _you_ get there -- and who has the groundstrokes to break serve occasionally when you get to the net first.
jmverdugo
Hall of Fame
I think it is effective but you cant use it all the time and you have to vary the kind of serve you use it. Other thing that i have realize is that, at least in my case, it is really better to use a slice serve with no so much speed but very well placed, than a flat high speed serve. Mainly becasuse im not that fast 
.
.Taylor Dent split with his coach because the coach wanted him to practise groundies and Dent disagreed. Though we are talking about a different level here obviously. Actually, Henman's groundies are not as bad as some people claim.
I think part of it is that the wrong people try to serve and volley. I see a lot of people with lousy serves that try and compensate for it by using S&V to get to the net as quickly as possible. But if the person on the other side can do what they want to with the ball (particularly on the forehand) then its going to be very difficult to S&V. If people pick their spots to S&V- come in behind good serves to the backhand or when the person is going to hit a weak return the absolutely S&V still works great.
A lot of it has to do with your serve, the volley part is just to finish the point, assuming you have a solid volley. Let the returner worry about your serve, not you worrying about their return. Some successful S & V players like Edberg and Rafter mostly use twist and kick serve to set up their volleys, plus it buys them more time to be at the net. The spin also makes it hard for the receiver to make good return.
Loco4Tennis
Hall of Fame
i agree, in order for this to be effective, their needs to be presure on the opponent in this case with the serve, other wise even a decent return will be out of reach, at a 4.0 level one should be able to aim the server into the body of the opponent putting the needed pressure IMO
To answer your question, what is your definition of S&V at the 4.0 or lower level? Classic S&Vers have pinpoint placement on their first and second serves. They are just as comfortable coming in on the second serve as the first. They are never off balance after the service motion, they close on the net with good foot speed, have good split steps and closing volleys. Overheads are not a liability as well as balls at your feet. Not many lower level players can accomplish all or most of that. So start with the serve, is it reliable and consistent, even on the second? If not, then don't be so quick to try serve and volley.
Basic strategy 101, play your strengths to your opponents weakness. I would try short angles or bring them to the net before I would try S&V against a pusher. Especially if you are not that good at S&V. But if all else fails, then yes, come to the net. And I would try serve and then approach before lumbering to the net after the serve.
Any point to this post besides telling everyone you're a 4.5-5.0?
Last edited:
burosky
Professional
Obviously, lower levels will not have passing shots and returns like the pros. Heck, even intermediate to advance level players can't claim the same. Until one plays satellites, challengers or futures, it will be quite a claim. To go back to the question, this is a tactic that will work at any level. I say any level because the skills are all relative. Actually, if anything, it may not work very well only at the pro level. This is because although they are all pros, they still have varying degrees of skills. I think a pro ranked outside the top 100 would have a tough time S&Ving against a top 10 opponent but may not be the same case the other way around.
At the rec levels, there are also varying degrees of skills within the NTRP levels. However, the variance isn't as big as the ones you will see at the pro level. Therefore, I would tend to think S&V will work more consistently at the NTRP levels. Of course, this is assuming the player is S&Ving the right way and not just blindly attacking the net.
In addition, against certain types of players, S&V could be a very effective counter-tactic.
nickb
Banned
Your very modest....im sure all the "lower level" players on here are learning from your posts full of useful knowledge..
burosky
Professional
I think it is effective but you cant use it all the time and you have to vary the kind of serve you use it. Other thing that i have realize is that, at least in my case, it is really better to use a slice serve with no so much speed but very well placed, than a flat high speed serve. Mainly becasuse im not that fast
The S&V can be effective even if used all the time. The true S&V'ers do this all the time. If you remember the S&Vers of the past most notably Stefan Edberg, he may get passed 20 straight times on his serve but guess what he does on his 21st serve. He would still serve and volley! I don't think anyone can argue with his success.
A flat serve doesn't really work very well. Remember, the closer you are to the net, the better your volleys will be. If you don't have time to get close to the net because you are not giving yourself time, you might want to consider hitting more spin serves than flat. The extra few steps you could gain could be the difference between getting the point or losing it.
Burt Turkoglu
Rookie
...totally agree....being able to mix up speeds, spins and locations of the serve is a biggie....for example....a hard slice into the body.....a hard, mostly flat serve up the T or right at the returner.....a heavily spun kicker out wide or into the body....etc.....work it like a pitcher to wreck the receiver's timing.....the returner will feel more pressure as he notices you coming in and may rush his shots and start pressing which is exactly what you want.....
Some great post and replies everyone, I am glad to know that S&V is not dead and/or mis-understood. If you grew up with Mac, Edberg and Rafter, you can appreciate the finesse required to execute S&V. No dis to Martina, she was fantastic as well. There will always be a place in pro tennis for S&V, but kids now a days just don't practice it enough. I think that will change.
I cringe every time I think about when I watched some DIV 1 women's schools hold a doubles event. Not a decent S&Ver amongst them, all one up and one back bashing. The talent was there, just not the required ability to serve and come in. Same goes for adults that are 3.0 to 4.5. They practice singles mostly, but predominantly play doubles. You would think that serving and coming in was taught to them.
The question of S&V at certain levels is dependant on the individual and his ability to execute it properly. So before that can be answered, there are other things try first. S&V against a pusher is difficult and here are my reasons why. They are split into two types of players, choppy slicers or high loopy mild top spin shots. Choppy slicers return everything at your feet, your half volley must be good. High bloopy returns give you a lot of high volleys (especially high backhand volleys, the toughest shot) and your over head shouldn't be a liablility. Pushers can expose flaws in S&Vers just as fast as anyone. S&Ving has little to do with passing shots and for the most part, easy volleys. It is about forcing your opponent to give your a weak or bad return, then volley accordingly. And it is all set up by the serve.
So in my view, if you are not a pure or practiced serve and volleyer, then using that as a first strategy against a pusher is not always the best option. Make the pusher do what they don't like, come to the net!
I cringe every time I think about when I watched some DIV 1 women's schools hold a doubles event. Not a decent S&Ver amongst them, all one up and one back bashing. The talent was there, just not the required ability to serve and come in. Same goes for adults that are 3.0 to 4.5. They practice singles mostly, but predominantly play doubles. You would think that serving and coming in was taught to them.
The question of S&V at certain levels is dependant on the individual and his ability to execute it properly. So before that can be answered, there are other things try first. S&V against a pusher is difficult and here are my reasons why. They are split into two types of players, choppy slicers or high loopy mild top spin shots. Choppy slicers return everything at your feet, your half volley must be good. High bloopy returns give you a lot of high volleys (especially high backhand volleys, the toughest shot) and your over head shouldn't be a liablility. Pushers can expose flaws in S&Vers just as fast as anyone. S&Ving has little to do with passing shots and for the most part, easy volleys. It is about forcing your opponent to give your a weak or bad return, then volley accordingly. And it is all set up by the serve.
So in my view, if you are not a pure or practiced serve and volleyer, then using that as a first strategy against a pusher is not always the best option. Make the pusher do what they don't like, come to the net!
LuckyR
Legend
At 4.0 a S&V'er is going to be a bit of a bluff. Meaning if your serve is truly good enough to come in on on both first and second serves, then you are probably a 4.5 sandbagging as a 4.0. On the other hand if you only really come in on your first serve and play from the baseline on your second (which is completely reasonable and a lot of my own personal strategy) then you are not a "pure" S&V'er, more of an opportunistic net-rusher, which is essentially an all-court game.
If you mix in an occasional S&V for the suprise factor, then you are an out and out bluffer who is seeking to force the other guy to go for too good of a shot on a good serve, you aren't actually seeking to hit volleys. Works most of the time...
If you mix in an occasional S&V for the suprise factor, then you are an out and out bluffer who is seeking to force the other guy to go for too good of a shot on a good serve, you aren't actually seeking to hit volleys. Works most of the time...
onehandbh
G.O.A.T.
I think it is difficult to S&V period. The first volley is really the key.
Can you handle all returns within reach and do something with the
volley? Not necessarily put it away, but firmly place it wherever you
want? Can you put away overheads with ease? If you have
great court coverage for overheads then it will allow you to be just
a bit closer to the net - which allows you to hit easier volleys.
If your coverage of overheads suck relative to the quaility of your
opponents' lobs, then you're in trouble b/c it
doesn't matter how good your volleys are b/c people can just lob
it past you. I think being a good S&V is the one strategy that really
requires some athleticism to be effective at. If you aren't much
more athletic relative to your competitive then S&V in doubles
will still be effective. But if you court coverage is only okay and
your serve is only okay you still want to S&V, have at it if it is
fun for you. I used to do this 2 on 1 drill where the volleyer was
at the net and the other two were at the baseline. The two
baseliners were fed sitters and had to try and peg the net guy.
The net guy's tries to hit efficient/firm volleys (and not get nailed).
Pretty fun and helps develop reflexes and also clean up sloppy
technique.
S&V also works as an occasional surprise attack against loopy
topspin baseliners who play far behind the baseline b/c they get used
to hitting high net clearance returns that land deep - the perfect returns to volley off of.
Can you handle all returns within reach and do something with the
volley? Not necessarily put it away, but firmly place it wherever you
want? Can you put away overheads with ease? If you have
great court coverage for overheads then it will allow you to be just
a bit closer to the net - which allows you to hit easier volleys.
If your coverage of overheads suck relative to the quaility of your
opponents' lobs, then you're in trouble b/c it
doesn't matter how good your volleys are b/c people can just lob
it past you. I think being a good S&V is the one strategy that really
requires some athleticism to be effective at. If you aren't much
more athletic relative to your competitive then S&V in doubles
will still be effective. But if you court coverage is only okay and
your serve is only okay you still want to S&V, have at it if it is
fun for you. I used to do this 2 on 1 drill where the volleyer was
at the net and the other two were at the baseline. The two
baseliners were fed sitters and had to try and peg the net guy.
The net guy's tries to hit efficient/firm volleys (and not get nailed).
Pretty fun and helps develop reflexes and also clean up sloppy
technique.
S&V also works as an occasional surprise attack against loopy
topspin baseliners who play far behind the baseline b/c they get used
to hitting high net clearance returns that land deep - the perfect returns to volley off of.
Burt Turkoglu
Rookie
I had a friend who was rated 4.0 but had a serve as good as many a 5.0....he was tall and could volley well but had terrible groundies.....he pushed and lobbed alot on defense but was very hard to break when he served and volleyed. He had a heavily spun kick which he mixed well with a hard flat one.
serve & volley can work at any level. of course it won't work as well when you are up against a better opponent, just like your serve won't win as many points, and every other shot you have generally does not work as well as it normally would. i like to use the s&v every once in a while to keep my opponent on his toes, or if they have a bad return of serve. i also play a kid who loves to chip and charge, and by s&v i can beat him to the net and take away any advantage he is trying to get.
Frank Silbermann
Professional
I read a story in a tennis magazine thirty or thirty-five years ago (it may have been World Tennis magazine), about a guy who was frustrated at being regularly beaten by his friend, who was a pusher.
He went to the local pro for advice and lessons. The pro said he should concentrate on improving his serve, mastering the volley, and learning a serve-and-volley game.
He said that he worked on those skills for six months and gradually began experimenting with them in his matches. A few times, when it was clicking really well, he beat his friend very badly -- but not always, as the skill took time to solidify.
As he began to beat his friend more regularly, his friend began hitting his return of serve harder and lower to prevent him from coming in all the time, even though his friend now found himself netting the ball occasionally. Also, his friend began hitting deeper to keep him from hitting approach shots, even though it meant that his friend occasionally erred over the baseline.
These changes by his opponent prevented the author from completely dominating his friend on the court, but he felt he had achieved his purpose, in that he had forced his friend to stop pushing the ball and to accept his rightful share of the unforced errors.
He went to the local pro for advice and lessons. The pro said he should concentrate on improving his serve, mastering the volley, and learning a serve-and-volley game.
He said that he worked on those skills for six months and gradually began experimenting with them in his matches. A few times, when it was clicking really well, he beat his friend very badly -- but not always, as the skill took time to solidify.
As he began to beat his friend more regularly, his friend began hitting his return of serve harder and lower to prevent him from coming in all the time, even though his friend now found himself netting the ball occasionally. Also, his friend began hitting deeper to keep him from hitting approach shots, even though it meant that his friend occasionally erred over the baseline.
These changes by his opponent prevented the author from completely dominating his friend on the court, but he felt he had achieved his purpose, in that he had forced his friend to stop pushing the ball and to accept his rightful share of the unforced errors.
proxemo666
New User
I was a S&V at that level and one thing I noticed was that a lot of the 4.0 lob the return a ton. Those who didn't lob everything seemed to go for the hit or miss method on returns and every other shot. I got sick of it and moved up and had a blast.
LuckyR
Legend
Those groundies were either extremely terrible or he was a run of the mill sandbagger.
Of course it can work. Haven't you seen one decent S&V player before? It's not a popular style though for alot of reasons..
1) It's really physically tiring, IMHO. That rushing the net when you shank your serve really tires you out.
2) Racquet technology is such that even some 3.0 can rip some pretty decent groundies now and then.
3) Chasing down lobs will drain you - and many players can lob very well.
4) It's hard to groove and practice this style. When people practice they mostly rally from the baseline. So it's not suprising that's how people play.
1) It's really physically tiring, IMHO. That rushing the net when you shank your serve really tires you out.
2) Racquet technology is such that even some 3.0 can rip some pretty decent groundies now and then.
3) Chasing down lobs will drain you - and many players can lob very well.
4) It's hard to groove and practice this style. When people practice they mostly rally from the baseline. So it's not suprising that's how people play.
WhiteSox05CA
Hall of Fame
I think it works fine at the lower levels. The lower level players can't control the ball enough to pass you. Also, it's easier to hit volley winners than from the baseline. A not-so-great volley can still be effective, but a not-so-great groundstroke won't.
Burt Turkoglu
Rookie
....yeah, probably a little bit of both.....
Phil
Hall of Fame
Yes, provided your serve and vollies (but especially your serve) are decent.
Frank Silbermann
Professional
(1) Yes, it's physically tiring, but so is being patient with a retriever. But some people are better with the anaerobic stress than with aerobic stress, and you can always mix it up.
(2) A good passing shot now and then doesn't matter. It's the percentages that count.
(3) Yes, good lobbing is a defense. If an opponent can repeatedly send up well-placed lobs beyond your reach, then he's more than a run-of-the-mill pusher, and there's no shame in losing to him. (The pushers you want to throttle are the one's whose strokes are so bad that the _cannot_ hit with much power or accuracy -- but they can run all day, hit conservatively, and never fail to watch the ball. But they _look_ awful, so it's humiliating for people to hear that you were beaten by someone who hits such poor shots.)
(4) Yes, you need a practice partner, say, someone who is interested in improving his return-of-serve and passing shots. It's hard to learn for someone who just wants to play matches.
(Note to LuckyR: Yes, we're _all_ sandbaggers now. Just take a look at the NTRP Guidelines. That's why, no matter how much benefit we get from improved teaching technologies, the typical frequent player -- no matter how high a level that becomes -- will continue to be rated a 3.5)
LuckyR
Legend
I guess I am not getting your message. In my post #22 Burt described a guy rated at 4.0 with the serve of a 5.0 and who "could volley well". This guy played S&V style (naturally). What legitimate 4.0 could break this guy? I am not familiar with a better example of the term...
