Doubles scenario: who has the edge here?

[Thud and blunder]

Consider a common doubles scenario: two back to receive, server follows serve in, gets a hot return to deal with, blocks it back deep with backspin, so it bounces near the baseline and sits up. So two players at the net facing two back with a deep puffball ball on their racquets. The next ball is going to be hammered, either at one of the net players to try to force a weak defensive volley, or down the middle.

At the highest levels, who's favoured to win the point? And at lower levels, does your answer change?

Edit: here's the Bryan's doing a related drill with Cheung / Kosakowski (slightly different cos the feeder is hitting a more neutral ball)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=KkOqCFyrgYg#t=261s

 

[5263]

I think it is more about who is hitting what.
Even though Ryan and Daniel look stronger on the BL with their passes,
the Bros volleyed pretty good imo.
The Bros didn't look as strong at the BL as the others, but
Ryan and Daniel seemed to struggle more with their volleys anyway, imo.

Slight edge to volley team for a sitter at the BL all things being equal imo.

 

[Jack Romeo]

my guess is the baseline pair because they already hit a great return and forced a sitter.

but at the highest levels, if the net players have exceptional volleying skills (think mcenroe, edberg, woodbridge, bryan twins) they can neutralize the situation.

at lower levels, assuming the players are all better at the baseline (which is commonly the case), the baseliners have the edge.

 

[anchorage]

At the highest level, the guys at the net still have the advantage; it's not easy to hit an outright winner for the guys on the baseline. Very difficult to pass from that ball. Also, shouldn't be able to hit an outright winner down the middle. So, they can hammer a return & hope for an easier follow up or, top spin lob could work if the other guys are really hogging the net.

This balance of power shifts as you move down in standard. At, say, 3.5, I reckon the baseliners have the edge as there's a good chance of a volley error from a hard hit drive. Certainly, the ball down the middle has a much better chance of winning also. Add to that the chances of a lob being effective ..... & so on.

 

[BU-Tennis]

Just did a drill like this last night, and most often the baseline team won (at least when I was on the baseline team). Why? Well because even though around the 3.5-4.5 level (this was a 4.0 clinic) people are able to volley easier shots, once something comes at them with good pace or spin then their volley's get much weaker.

So I would just rip a forehand right at the net guy, trying to keep it rather low, or go right through the middle. Many times they were still able to volley the ball, but it would sit up making a passing shot down the line or through the middle very easy.

The Bryan Bros are obviously some of the best net players in the world, so its going to take something very good to get it past them. But notice, a lot of their volleys were not damaging, they were just floating them back nice and deep forcing their opponents to pass them again and they waited for a higher ball to attack with a sharp angle.

P.S. If you're ever in this situation, try and volley the ball towards the inside of the court. This will effectively eliminate any chance of a down the line shot ever going in and also can create some confusion for the other team. Plus, this pulls an opponent away from the sideline which opens up the alleys for a sharper angled volley.

 

[LeeD]

Totally depends on volleying skills of the players, and the ability to thread low passing shots into the open spot, and the level of coverage by the players involved. A team playing together well beats the team who hit's better, but haven't played together.

 

[LuckyR]

Totally depends on the groundie skills of the baseliner who hits the ball. A lot of doubles specialists are not baseline bashers (since they S&V a lot), so may not have the lob and passing skills that a singles player might have. OTOH, there are plenty of doubles players, especially Seniors players, who will take such a shot and either put a topspin angle into the alley (bouncing way in front of the service line) or put a lob, likely also topspin, within 3 feet of the baseline. Neither of these shots needs to be "hammered", yet they are likely to lead to winning the point. As a matter of fact, a flat hammered shot may sail long and would be the quickest win for the net team.

 

[user92626]

Consider a common doubles scenario: two back to receive, server follows serve in, gets a hot return to deal with, blocks it back deep with backspin, so it bounces near the baseline and sits up. So two players at the net facing two back with a deep puffball ball on their racquets. The next ball is going to be hammered, either at one of the net players to try to force a weak defensive volley, or down the middle.

At the highest levels, who's favoured to win the point? And at lower levels, does your answer change?

Funny, that's the exact scenerios of our games last night. By chance and preference, I got teamed up with a couple guys who were superior baseline hitters and runners. We strictly camped at the back, playing against a very good volleyor and a decent back player whose consistency was around 5-7 shots with the first strike kind of hit.

We slaughtered them with relative ease. The only points we lost were the ones where our back opponent surprisingly hit a screaming shot, getting us to yield a high ball for his partner to move in for a smash. It was virtually impossible for his partner to volley and win on his own on our balls that went low and a few steps away. He could still get those but they were mostly sitters and occasionally out of bound.

I agree with Jack. The volleyors, both of them, have to be exceptional , head and shoulder above in skills, kinda like 5.0 against 3.5, to win as a good strategy, and generally the volleyors have to win right off the first strike.

 

[Cindysphinx]

I will give you the 3.5-4.0 ladies answer. Point to baseliners.

The baseline player will almost certainly lob, probably over someone's BH. The net players will either miss the overhead or will bounce it and try to run it down. If the net players make the overhead, they probably will not put it away unless the lob was very short. Many net players close the net too much, further encouraging the lob.

The baseliners will not hit a drive unless the volleyers have proven themselves inept. Hitting a killer drive off of a placeless ball from a deep position is hard. Chances are very good that the net players will hit a short volley that cannot be reached.

 

[5263]

I will give you the 3.5-4.0 ladies answer. Point to baseliners.

The baseline player will almost certainly lob, probably over someone's BH. The net players will either miss the overhead or will bounce it and try to run it down. If the net players make the overhead, they probably will not put it away unless the lob was very short. Many net players close the net too much, further encouraging the lob.

The baseliners will not hit a drive unless the volleyers have proven themselves inept. Hitting a killer drive off of a placeless ball from a deep position is hard. Chances are very good that the net players will hit a short volley that cannot be reached.

Do you say the same thing if you stick with the OP scenario?-

"The next ball is going to be hammered, either at one of the net players to try to force a weak defensive volley, or down the middle."

 

[bhupaes]

Well, if the ball drops near a corner, and/or forces the baseliner to run to it and hit a backhand or a hard forehand without too many choices, and/or the ball stays really low, I would give the edge to the volleyers. On the other hand, if it is a sitter that just floats into one of the baseliners' optimal power zone, I would give the edge to the baseliners.

 

[TennisCJC]

It is interesting how things have changed. Old school logic was you could hold it in your hand at the baseline and hit it where ever you wanted and the 2 net guys still have the advantage. Seems most above give advantage to the baseliners.

I think the net players have the advantage if they hit a deep but slow volley. The baseline player still feels pressure from 2 players of equal ability at the net and could just flat out miss. If the baseliner makes an average shot, the net guys should be able to handle it at a fairly high rate of success. If the baseliner makes an above average shot, then the baseliners have a slight advantage.

Remember there are several advantages that automatically go to the volleying team. You have more angle from the net position. You can literally hit down into more court. You can even shank it and have a better chance of it going in. You don't have to hit it hard to pressure opponents as any well placed volley pressures opponents and opponent have less time to react.

So, my opinion is if everything is equal from a technical perspective, the net team has the advantage. "Everything is equal" means the net team volleys equally as well as the baseline team hits passing shots.

 

[LeeD]

Modern players tend to hit OK groundies with horrid volleys. Advantage baseliner.
Old farts hit good volleys, weaker groundstrokes, advantage volleyers.
And who can cover the overheads?

 

[goran_ace]

Tactically the advantage goes to the net players because the baseliners have smaller/fewer targets and the team at the net has angles and more court to work with, but in a live match situation it really just comes down to which team executes better.

 

[user92626]

Well, if the ball drops near a corner, and/or forces the baseliner to run to it and hit a backhand or a hard forehand without too many choices, and/or the ball stays really low, I would give the edge to the volleyers.


On the other hand, if it is a sitter that just floats into one of the baseliners' optimal power zone, I would give the edge to the baseliners.

Do you think which is easier to make? Volleying low and sharp to a corner or bashing a ball hard to almost anywhere, ie the body, slight away from the volleyor's wings? And if I remember correct, volleyors only move to intercept the ball after the other guy hits, so your groundstroke really has to be slow for them to catch up.

 

[user92626]

Modern players tend to hit OK groundies with horrid volleys. Advantage baseliner.
Old farts hit good volleys, weaker groundstrokes, advantage volleyers.
And who can cover the overheads?

LeeD is correct (once again) with this observation. If I may add, volleyers also have the edge in an old farts game because hitters can't run fast for follow up shots.

 

[LeeD]

Most of us old farts don't have groundstrokes that match our volleying levels of skill.

 

[bhupaes]

Do you think which is easier to make? Volleying low and sharp to a corner or bashing a ball hard to almost anywhere, ie the body, slight away from the volleyor's wings? And if I remember correct, volleyors only move to intercept the ball after the other guy hits, so your groundstroke really has to be slow for them to catch up.

For me, bashing the ball towards a target from the baseline, flat or with TS, comes much easier than volleying low and sharp to a corner - for sure. A good volleyer (yes, there is such an entity!) may sometimes anticipate and react even before the ball is actually struck, but even they can only do so much if the baseliner has too many options, IMO.

 

[user92626]

For me, bashing the ball towards a target from the baseline, flat or with TS, comes much easier than volleying low and sharp to a corner - for sure. A good volleyer (yes, there is such an entity!) may sometimes anticipate and react even before the ball is actually struck, but even they can only do so much if the baseliner has too many options, IMO.

There you go. YOu're a good anecdote that supports my point. You, me and probably 8 out of 10 guys out there could bash the ball better than we could volley with equivalent competency. This is natural because the bulk of tennis is still the groundstrokes so majority learn and apply them far more and better than anything else.

 

[papa]

In my opinion, net playrers have the advantage especially when the baseline player has no pace to work with. I do a lot of dead ball feeding from just behind the baseline to good players. Although you can beat them on certain balls when your able to thread it perfectly, if they get a racquet on the ball, its their point. Sure, they might miss a few but I'd give them the odds.

 

[bhupaes]

There you go. YOu're a good anecdote that supports my point. You, me and probably 8 out of 10 guys out there could bash the ball better than we could volley with equivalent competency. This is natural because the bulk of tennis is still the groundstrokes so majority learn and apply them far more and better than anything else.

Keep in mind though that I am talking about people at approximately the same level in this baseline/net duel. Even if I had all possible options from the baseline, and if the guy at net were, say, Sampras or Edberg or Mac - I wouldn't be able to hit the ball hard enough to pass him, or lob him - even in singles, let alone doubles. These guys are like cyborgs at net, with bionic quads. But a Lendl in my place would be able to pass them, if he got a puff ball he could do anything with (most of the time IMO, of course, since chance also plays a significant part in tennis).

 

[Bagumbawalla]

We used to play a drill like that- baseliners, however, could not lob until their side hit 3 groundstrokes. Volleyers almost always won. Allowing the lob anytime would probably equalize the situation.

Of course much depends on the players.

 

[LeeD]

Level means a bit, but volleying skills don't translate directly to overall level.
You can have great baseliner 4.0's hitting right thru 5.0 volleyers who are also baseliners, and haven't accepted volleying as part of their game.
Conversely, you can have great weak groundy 5.0's who spent all their time with volleying, but now stuck at the baseline, getting angled off the court by two 4.0's who only volley, having no groundstrokes.

 

[sphinx780]

Granted, every pairing and match up will have exploitable options in this scenario but assuming the team at net closed out net due to comfort and gamestyle as well as the baseliners doing the same based on their strengths then:

Vollyer's...the baseliners need to take more risk to win this point and the vollyers just need to block back into play until they get something attackable. imo, this position leads the baseliner to make a perfect or near perfect shot off each stroke where as the volley just needs to be servicable and give the net man time to reset.

 

[Maui19]

Tactically the advantage goes to the net players because the baseliners have smaller/fewer targets and the team at the net has angles and more court to work with, but in a live match situation it really just comes down to which team executes better.

Yep. Two up at the net is a huge advantage IMO if you have a couple decent volleyers. If you have sucky volleyers and good baseliners, then the advantage goes the other way.

 

[Cindysphinx]

Do you say the same thing if you stick with the OP scenario?-

"The next ball is going to be hammered, either at one of the net players to try to force a weak defensive volley, or down the middle."

I don't think the next ball will be hammered.

But if it is, the net players will win the point. The players at 3.5/4.0 cannot drive a ball hard enough from the baseline to defeat two decent volleyers at net.

The baseliners know this. Which is why they will lob.

 

[Thud and blunder]

Thanks for all the interesting thoughts. So the consensus would seem to be that it's pretty balanced, with maybe the net players shading it a touch, but not by much?

I initially would have guessed that the net players would be at a fairly significant advantage, but the more top doubles I watch, the less sure I am of this. Perhaps ten years ago, this would have been the case, but the trend seems to be moving towards the baseliners. How much of this is due to players hitting groundies with more pace and spin, and how much due to the lost art of volleying, is an open question.

Bear in mind,while the lob is rarely employed in such a situation at a high level, the threat of it keeps the net players from crowding the net, resulting in them having to hit up on a lot of volleys. So as long as the baseliners can execute their groundies (big if...), the net players will have little scope to turn it around until the baseliners slip up.

 

[user92626]

Thud


If playing the net is such an easy meal, you'd never see the Bryan brothers back down to the baseline. But you see they do that very often.

 

[Thud and blunder]

User, I wasn't suggesting anything of the sort. I think the scenario is fairly balanced, although I would say the responses in the thread lean slightly towards the net players.

In the situation you describe where the Bryans are playing back, its cos their opponents have first strike via a first serve. The scenario I've described is where the baseliners have (slightly more than) neutralised the serve, and have first strike themselves.