Greatest Volleyers of All Time

[Dan Lobb]

The current crop of Big Three are not eligible for the greatest volley ranking, they are not comfortable at net. Sorry, gentlemen.

 

[bluetrain4]

I'd put Becker on tier 2 - at least. It wasn't always pretty, but it was very solid, and more varied than most people realize. Even some nice touch.

 

[toth]

The current crop of Big Three are not eligible for the greatest volley ranking, they are not comfortable at net. Sorry, gentlemen.

I think Federer could produce top net game, but he noticed early in his career that the conditions dont help the volleyers.

 

[NonP]

Hard no on including doubles specialists. I explain why (not) and more here:

Your Top 5 volleyers of all time?

Probably shouldn't get sucked into this cuz I've got a long weekend ahead, but most of these lists are such (unintentional) caricatures of recency bias I just had to chime in: Doubles specialists really shouldn't count. When we compare volleys we're really trying to compare overall net...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

TLDR version:

Of course you kids don't care about all that, so here are the correct top 5 of the last 35-ish years, men only:

1) McEnroe and Edberg (tie)
3) Cash
4) Sampras and Rafter (tie)

Moose once made a very compelling case for Stefan as the one and only GVOAT (and for once he does mean that "AT" part), but with all due respect (and, again, I for once do mean that) nobody before or since handled a tennis ball quite like Mac, almost with no backswing and yet able to make even the fastest ball seemingly drop dead upon contact. Hence the tie, even though Mac's ATG serve does make his net-hugging life rather easier.

I dig Rafter's exciting, muscular S&V as much as the next guy, but Cash had softer hands and, as @urban pointed out the other day, a sounder technique while Pat Jr.'s FH volley often failed him in the clutch due to his jerky wrist which gave him less control vs. high or hard balls. Pistol's own FHV was more textbook with a firm wrist, and while he couldn't quite murder the same high/hard balls with his BHV like Pat (except perhaps, again, in the clutch) his uncanny ability to counter those fastballs off his shoelaces makes him at least as good a volleyer.

One more thing:

I'd put Becker on tier 2 - at least. It wasn't always pretty, but it was very solid, and more varied than most people realize. Even some nice touch.

@hoodjem's tiers are highly suspect - I honestly don't know of any pro who would put King's volleys in 2nd whatever - but even as a fan I can't agree that Boris ranks above the likes of Borotra, Novotna and Sampras, again because of his lack of a superlative trump card. I'd separate men and women - looking at the shots only is hard to do for volleys that rely so much on net coverage, hence the proposal - get rid of tier 4 and reserve #3 for almost-theres like Ashe, Nastase and Henman, but that's just me.

 

[hoodjem]

Okay then. Thanks for the input. Let's adjust.
Trying to create a consensus list, (which is difficult given the disparity of opinions).

From what i have seen, King and Virginia Wade had very fine volleys, also Novotna.

I can just barely remember watching King (and her volleys).

 

[hoodjem]

Tier-one: McEnroe, Edberg, Rosewall, Sedgman, Roche, Laver, Emerson, Newcombe, Navratilova, Lenglen, Marble, Gibson, Bueno,

Tier-two: Richards, Borotra, Segura, Hoad, McMillan, Panatta, Rafter, Cash, Kramer, Gonzales, Goolagong.

Tier-three: Patty, Fraser, Lutz, Smith, Gerulaitis, Sampras, Pecci, Borotra, Cochet, Henman, Novotna, Becker, Wade.

Tier-four: Perry, Trabert, McGregor, Fraser, Stolle, King, Ashe, Nastase, Krajicek, Stich, Ramirez, Gottfried, McLaughlin, Amitraj, Pioline, Llodra.

 

[NonP]

Okay then. Thanks for the input. Let's adjust.
Trying to create a consensus list, (which is difficult given the disparity of opinions).

It's cool, most of us are amateurs pretending to have some special insight when we really don't.

Of course that doesn't mean all of our views are equally valid. One thing I'll add is that I do think some of us longtime regulars tend to romanticize the old(er) eras. And I'm not referring to the usual canard about how it's so much harder to (serve &) volley today, because it's bunk.

This instead is what I have in mind, courtesy of Moose (linked in my quoted post earlier, but well worth quoting in full):

Re Whether becker was a better S&V player than Edberg. How bout I use some stats to answer that? For example Edberg came to net twice as much as Becker in their 5 setter at Roland Garros(btw I highly recommend this to anyone who hasn't seen it, it's way more entertaining than any of their Wimbledon matches, you get to see all aspects of their games) and Becker served 20 more pts than Edberg, so who's the real serve and volleyer? The pattern continues in their indoor matches I have stats on as well - Edberg at net a lot more often than Becker. Becker was like Sampras, not a real serve and volleyer, just a world class server who happened to serve and volley on all serves on grass and a fair amount on other surfaces at times. While Edberg served and volleyed a ton on first and second serves, on all surfaces. Some of the net stats on Edberg are staggering, I've come across 4 matches where he came to net over 200 times, there are probably more. While I've never come across anything remotely close to that for Becker or Sampras or even mac(to be fair he played in a time when nets stats weren't commonly mentioned) Also Edberg was a serve and volleyer when hardcourts became a big part of the tour(yes I know the USO went to hardcourt in 78, but it wasn't until the mid 80s when the Lipton started that the real shift to a hardcourt kind of tour started. Compare macs surface schedule in 84 to say Edberg in 91 to see what I mean. Big difference. So we now have Edberg, a guy without a big serve like Becker or sampras(or groundies like they had) playing guys who have better racquets for returning than they had In the 70s, playing on surfaces that had truer bounces than grass or carpet in the 70s, and he serves and volleys on 1st and 2nd serves and manages to get to #1 in the world. The more I think about, he may be the best serve and volleyer of all time, considering what he had to deal with (calm down I'm not saying he's a better player than laver, Mac etc) let me explain.

When someone like Newcombe plays smith for 5 sets on grass, and both players are coming in on all serves, there aren't gaudy net numbers for either player, since for the most part there isn't the opportunity to get to net on your opponents serve. And also grass isn't a surface with as true a bounce as hardcourt so players will be missing a fair amount of returns as well, so they won't have to hit as many volleys as they would on a hardcourt. Let's compare that to Edberg going 5 sets vs Chang at the USO. I didn't do stats for this match, but I did see it a few times over the years, and it's safe to chang was making a lot of returns and Edberg was attacking on
Changs serve relentlessly. The official stats were a staggering 250 net approaches for Edberg but that probably doesn't tell the whole story. Points didnt just end with one volley like they so often did in 1971 on grass, but there would be 2 or 3 or 4(we are talking Michael Chang here) or there would be lobs to get Edberg to retreat, then restart the point. Then get to net again. And again. And again. Who knows how many actual volleys were hit in those 250 attempts, but I wouldn't be surprised if he hit more volleys in that one match than Newcombe hit in the 70 and 71 Wimbledon finals combined. I watched the 73 USO final recently, an incredibly high quality match. Newcombe served huge, probably bigger than I ever saw Edberg. He had to since his oponent was returning like Agassi. We all like to talk about raquets, when comparing players from different eras, but what about surfaces? While watching this match I thought, newcombe was lucky this wasn't played on a hardcourt

One other thing about Edberg - he really didn't get a lot of free points on serve. For example I mentioned the French open semi vs Becker. In the 5th set Becker didn't miss one return. That sort of stat is pretty rare, players usually miss at least a few returns when playing someone coming in on everything. And if they aren't getting free points on serve you would think they are in trouble, having to hit volleys on every point. Well look what Edberg did in this set when he had to do just that. And when you compare to Mac you see how much harder he had to work. Mac is rightfully considered one of the greatest serve and volleyers, maybe the best. But I think a lot of people forget just how great his serve was. In the 84 Wimbledon final almost 50% of his serves were unreturned. In the 84 USO final, 45% were unreturned, that is a lot of free points. And he had around 40% in several other matches I've tracked. While edbergs numbers are noticeably lower, even in some of his famous matches(91 USO final which I was lucky to see in person - came in 94 times in a very short match!) he was a true serve And volleyer.

So it's unlikely that even the classic S&Vers came to the net as often as Edberg, and certainly not on a less forgiving surface (hard) to boot, and yet it's considered sacrosanct that they were just as good, if not even better. Which may well be true, but how many of us have actually seen the likes of Borotra, Segura, Kramer, Sedgman, Gonzales and Hoad (yes I'm going by DOB) in their prime? Hell, even more recent (and living!) legends like Rosewall, Emerson, Laver and Roche are question marks for most of us, but somehow we think we can rank them properly. And if there's one thing we statheads and hizztorians have noticed from our study of past eras/matches it's that players' memories are notoriously unreliable, no doubt increasingly so over time.

That's why I've given the old-timers honorary mentions in my GSOAT list, which I think is fair to both pre-OE and OE greats. I'm fine with including those living Aussies and their contemporaries - as I noted in my quoted post Mac himself admitted Edberg's BH volley was the best "since Roche" - but anyone/thing before that is probably best left to the honorary HoF.

I can just barely remember watching King (and her volleys).

It's just that BJK is spoken of in the same sentence as Navratilova so often I can't imagine her being anything less than tier 1. These two are the McEnroe and Edberg of the WTA, pretty much nobody would dispute their supremacy.

That said I do think it best to separate men and women. Not that the best women's volleys wouldn't be effective vs. men - in fact Moose noted earlier this year that Hoad in '85 seemed to be in awe of Navratilova, presumably because of her perfect volleys - but net coverage is such a big part of what makes a great volleyer that it's virtually impossible to rate volleys as stand-alone shots. That's also why I would exclude double specialists like McGregor and McMillan.

Which brings us to....

 

[NonP]

Tier-one: McEnroe, Edberg, Rosewall, Sedgman, Roche, Laver, Emerson, Newcombe, Navratilova, Lenglen, Marble, Gibson, Bueno,

Tier-two: Richards, Borotra, Segura, Hoad, McMillan, Panatta, Rafter, Cash, Kramer, Gonzales, Goolagong.

Tier-three: Patty, Fraser, Lutz, Smith, Gerulaitis, Sampras, Pecci, Borotra, Cochet, Henman, Novotna, Becker, Wade.

Tier-four: Perry, Trabert, McGregor, Fraser, Stolle, King, Ashe, Nastase, Krajicek, Stich, Ramirez, Gottfried, McLaughlin, Amitraj, Pioline, Llodra.

Like I said I'd personally get rid of tier 4, which means no Ashe (probably), Pioline (coming from a fan) or Llodra. I'm sure one could name dozens if not hundreds of comparable ability in the OE alone, which almost makes a mockery of any GOAT list worth its name. Stich and Krajicek (among others) are a notch above these guys.

And Sampras does belong in the same tier/class/whatever as Rafter. I (and @urban) have already explained why Pat's FH volley could fail him in the clutch, but just as important is Pete's oft-overlooked skill in dealing with those balls off his shoelaces. Here, from way back in this very thread:

Great list. I would add Leconte, in Tier 2 or Tier 3. He was erratic from the back of the court, but boy the guy could volley.

As for Sampras, I was having an interesting conversation with the head coach at my club the other day. I for one was not putting him in the same tier as Mac, Edberg, Rafter or Cash strictly as a net player. He pointed that there was a big difference in that he was serving so fast, that when the return would come back, he would generally have to play his first volley behind the serve line. Whereas the likes of Edberg or Rafter were using a lot more kick / spin, meaning that by the time they hit their first volley, they were well inside the service box. That, in his view, made him as good if not better than those other players, considering how difficult it is to volley effectively from that distance. I thought this was a very interesting point.

That's also why I'm hesitant to move Becker up to tier 2. You could point to at least one big plus for any of the usual candidates - no explanation necessary for Mac and Edberg, FHV for Cash, BHV for Rafter (especially off high balls), service-line mastery for Sampras - but Boris doesn't have any of that. Maybe more solid than most, but I prefer to have one singular skill that trumps all others. The same goes for Henman who given his lack of a Slam is decidedly a notch below these guys.

Also agree with @flanker2000fr that Leconte belongs in tier 3 at least. Much is (rightly) made of the guy's inconsistency but I don't think he was as unreliable at the net, perhaps because it was the best part of the court for the natural showman . Maybe Moose can confirm.

Panatta's lack of success outside RG means his net game was a specialized one for dirtballing - that is, no pure S&V but biding one's time for attacks - so he's at best tier 3 where Pecci sits. Perhaps Noah should be in there, too?

 

[travlerajm]

Tier-one: McEnroe, Edberg, Rosewall, Sedgman, Roche, Laver, Emerson, Newcombe, Navratilova, Lenglen, Marble, Gibson, Bueno,

Tier-two: Richards, Borotra, Segura, Hoad, McMillan, Panatta, Rafter, Cash, Kramer, Gonzales, Goolagong.

Tier-three: Patty, Fraser, Lutz, Smith, Gerulaitis, Sampras, Pecci, Borotra, Cochet, Henman, Novotna, Becker, Wade.

Tier-four: Perry, Trabert, McGregor, Fraser, Stolle, King, Ashe, Nastase, Krajicek, Stich, Ramirez, Gottfried, McLaughlin, Amitraj, Pioline, Llodra.

What about Noah?

 

[Olli Jokinen]

Tier-one: McEnroe, Edberg, Rosewall, Sedgman, Roche, Laver, Emerson, Newcombe, Navratilova, Lenglen, Marble, Gibson, Bueno,

Tier-two: Richards, Borotra, Segura, Hoad, McMillan, Panatta, Rafter, Cash, Kramer, Gonzales, Goolagong.

Tier-three: Patty, Fraser, Lutz, Smith, Gerulaitis, Sampras, Pecci, Borotra, Cochet, Henman, Novotna, Becker, Wade.

Tier-four: Perry, Trabert, McGregor, Fraser, Stolle, King, Ashe, Nastase, Krajicek, Stich, Ramirez, Gottfried, McLaughlin, Amitraj, Pioline, Llodra.

I think Leconte was a better volleyer than Krajicek, Pioline and Llorda at least.

 

[NonP]

Speaking of old-timers here are Kramer's picks from his oft-cited list of GOAT shots (as of '79, from Wiki):

Forehand volley: Wilmer Allison, followed by Budge Patty, then Newcombe.
Backhand volley: Close among Frank Sedgman, Don Budge and Ken Rosewall, with Sedgman having the edge.

So we're missing a couple names, Don being the more (not-so-)obvious. Still think pre-Aussie Invasion greats should be given honorary mentions, but I'll leave that up to @hoodjem and others.

On to the replies:

What about Noah?

Yannick is definitely before my time, hence my ? earlier. But he's another one that shouldn't rank too high, again considering his lackluster records outside RG.

Which gives moi another chance to dig up this old beauty from encylo... I mean Datacipher:

Basically, he took that tourney by storm and emotion. Later, his VERY VERY technically weak game was uncovered.

His grounstrokes and returns may be the weakest ever seen in pro tennis. He literally could only hit returns in certain directions, for example, he couldnt' hit a good, consistent crosscourt return from the deuce court on his forehand! On his backhand, he could return down the line from the deuce court on his backhand! His volleys were pushed (though he could hit a nice drop volley), and his groundstrokes lacked power and sometimes consistency.

As noted, his flat and slice serve were among the fastest and widest breaking, in the history of tennis. There was a rumour in the late 80's that he once recorded a 140mph serve on radar. I wouldn't doubt if for a second. His motion was second to none, absolutely beautiful. Arthur Ashe, though that it was flawless when he changed his toss in the late 80's.

He also was one of the most athletic men, he was the only person I've ever seen who could flat out dive for volleys, like Becker, but unlike Becker, look like he floated down easily without the slightest impact. Again, it was Ashe who called him "Michael Jordon with a racquet", and many agreed with that assesment. Having said that, he was often not in great shape, due to his party lifestyle. Once, the players voted him, "fittest looking unfit player"!

Some other experts even suggested that he won many matches BECAUSE he was black, (not to mention very tall and athletic) and that it intimidated many of the other players.

In any case, he did poorly on grass, quite simply because:

1.he didn't like the low bounces
2.even though he had soft hands at the net, he wasn't very good with his hands off the ground, and thus could not compensate for funny bounces or skidding. He was VERY mechanical on his groundstrokes, especially considering what a graceful athlete he naturally was.
3.MOST IMPORTANTLY, HIS AWFUL AWFUL return.

That antipathy to low bounces doesn't exactly scream ATG volley (yes I understand the guy was 6'4"), so yeah, tier 3 sounds about right.

I think Leconte was a better volleyer than Krajicek, Pioline and Llorda at least.

Henry was flashier, but Rick was just so textbook. I'd rank them about the same.

Stich was probably a hair better, but not quite enough to merit a separate tier. Still I wouldn't object if you put him above those two or even Boris, for that matter. Just can't buy him being as good as Pete, Rafter and Cash who's probably closer to tier 1.

 

[travlerajm]

Speaking of old-timers here are Kramer's picks from his oft-cited list of GOAT shots (as of '79, from Wiki):



So we're missing a couple names, Don being the more (not-so-)obvious. Still think pre-Aussie Invasion greats should be given honorary mentions, but I'll leave that up to @hoodjem and others.

On to the replies:



Yannick is definitely before my time, hence my ? earlier. But he's another one that shouldn't rank too high, again considering his lackluster records outside RG.

Which gives moi another chance to dig up this old beauty from encylo... I mean Datacipher:



That antipathy to low bounces doesn't exactly scream ATG volley (yes I understand the guy was 6'4"), so yeah, tier 3 sounds about right.



Henry was flashier, but Rick was just so textbook. I'd rank them about the same.

Stich was probably a hair better, but not quite enough to merit a separate tier. Still I wouldn't object if you put him above those two or even Boris, for that matter. Just can't buy him being as good as Pete, Rafter and Cash who's probably closer to tier 1.

Fair points on Noah. But I do think that he deserves a spot on the GOAT overhead list. I’ve never seen anyone else able to pressure the net with his shear athleticism quite like Noah. He seemed to like to close really tight to cut off angles and bait players into daring to lob so that he could finish with the smash.

 

[hoodjem]

Okay. I shall try to make these various adjustments.

What did you mean by "service-line mastery for Sampras"?

Do you think it is, necessarily, easier to volley with mid-size (85+ sq. in.) racquets versus traditional headsize racquets?

 

[hoodjem]

MEN
Tier-one: McEnroe, Edberg, Rosewall, Sedgman, Roche, Laver, Emerson, Newcombe

Tier-two: Richards, Borotra, Lacoste, Segura, Kramer, Gonzales, Hoad, McMillan, Cash, Sampras, Rafter

Tier-three: Cochet, Patty, Fraser, Lutz, Smith, Gerulaitis, Panatta, Pecci, Leconte, Stich, Krajicek, Becker, Henman

WOMEN
Tier-one: Lenglen, Marble, Gibson, King, Navratilova

Tier-two: Brough, Bueno, Court, Goolagong, Novotna

Tier-three: Wade, Shriver

 

[hoodjem]

It's cool, most of us are amateurs pretending to have some special insight when we really don't.

Of course that doesn't mean all of our views are equally valid. One thing I'll add is that I do think some of us longtime regulars tend to romanticize the old(er) eras.

Our only super-power is our long-term (but fallible) memory. Can we say that we have simply seen more (tennis matches and tennis styles) than the average TT poster?

Are we too often guilty of anti-recency bias? Probably.

 

[NonP]

Fair points on Noah. But I do think that he deserves a spot on the GOAT overhead list. I’ve never seen anyone else able to pressure the net with his shear athleticism quite like Noah. He seemed to like to close really tight to cut off angles and bait players into daring to lob so that he could finish with the smash.

For the record I totally agree that Noah belongs up there with Pistol among the GOAT smashers. When I watch old clips of Yannick that shot along with his silky smooth serve really stands out, which is why I said in my infallible list of GOOE shots that Noah's overhead is the best for defense (moving backward) and Pistol's for offense (forward).

Okay. I shall try to make these various adjustments.

What did you mean by "service-line mastery for Sampras"?

Looking much better now. Still think including doubles specialists is rather dubious, but you can't please everyone.

And I meant Pete's uncanny ability to handle difficult volleys from the service line, often for outright winners to boot. If we were talking strictly after that 1st volley I wouldn't object to his tier 3 status, but such an ace in the hole places him just below a McEnroe/Edberg, I say. For me tier 3 should be reserved for the likes of Leconte, Stich and Krajicek who despite their excellence don't have that personal calling card.

MEN
Tier-one: McEnroe, Edberg, Rosewall, Sedgman, Roche, Laver, Emerson, Newcombe

Tier-two: Richards, Borotra, Segura, Kramer, Gonzales, Hoad, McMillan, Cash

Tier-three: Cochet, Patty, Fraser, Lutz, Smith, Gerulaitis, Panatta, Pecci, Rafter, Sampras, Stich, Krajicek, Henman

WOMEN
Tier-one: Navratilova, Lenglen, Marble, Gibson, Bueno

Tier-two: Goolagong, King.

Tier-three: Novotna, Wade

Still think King should be in tier 1. Again I seriously doubt you'd find many pros who would dispute her GVOAT status. Take a gander at this list from Steve Flink, a guy who I think most of us would agree does know his tennis:

Who Has The Best Volley In Tennis History? - World Tennis Magazine

Sergiy Stakhovsky’s upset win over Roger Federer on Centre Court at Wimbledon showcased some of the best serve-and-volley displays seen at the All England Club in years. His volleying prowess against the 17-time major champion – and seven-time Wimbledon champion – stirred up a debate as to who...

www.worldtennismagazine.com

Navratilova and BJK are the only women who make both the FH/BHV top 5. (Incidentally the same can't be said of any man.) You're welcome to take issue with his reasoning, but he's hardly alone here.

He also ranks Novotna's FHV 1st, Brough's 2nd and Court's 4th. Maybe Jana is rated too low and Louise should be added? Pretty sure Margaret deserves a spot somewhere.

Our only super-power is our long-term (but fallible) memory. Can we say that we have simply seen more (tennis matches and tennis styles) than the average TT poster?

Are we too often guilty of anti-recency bias? Probably.

Of course, but for the living Aussies we've got enough footage to compare our (or your, in this case) memories against. For true oldies like Borotra, Segura and Kramer, though? I doubt any of us have seen 'em in their heyday and all we've got are brief films in often subpar condition. That's what makes solely relying on contemporary accounts from their peers and observers a fundamentally incomplete endeavor.

Hence my proposal for honorary mentions. But I really don't feel too strongly either way. If you think we can honor them better with a place on the list proper that's fine by me.

 

[hoodjem]

I honestly don't know of any pro who would put King's volleys in 2nd whatever

Okay. I misintepreted your statement above, as meaning you didn't know of any pro who would put King's volley as HIGH as tier two. But, it appears in fact, you meant as LOW as tier two.

 

[BTURNER]

One thing I do with these champions, is ask myself how dependent they were on those volleys throughout their career to win those points, games and matches. For example I subtract all those service winners/aces and those easy set up volleys those big serves provided, and all those ground stroke points/passing shots that they would have used on their way to greatness and what I am left with is those volleys. Sooo I don't understand this big disparity between Margaret and Martina. Both won their share of points from the backcourt -sufficient to rally on slower surfaces like red and green clay venues where they both got to multiple finals ( Evert of course was the difference in the actual wins in those clay titles), and hit those passing shots, lobs and returns on grass. Both hit really big serves, that required no volley at all, or some real grapefruit sized floaters right at crunch level. That actually leaves me with King as top banana in the volley dept and those other two at tier two except that they proved that their first volley was good enough, firm enough, deep enough to gain real advantage on clay when they got up there throughout their career. So back all three go into tier 1.

 

[Olli Jokinen]

MEN
Tier-one: McEnroe, Edberg, Rosewall, Sedgman, Roche, Laver, Emerson, Newcombe

Tier-two: Richards, Borotra, Segura, Kramer, Gonzales, Hoad, McMillan, Cash, Sampras

Tier-three: Cochet, Patty, Fraser, Lutz, Smith, Gerulaitis, Panatta, Pecci, Rafter, Leconte, Stich, Krajicek, Henman

WOMEN
Tier-one: Lenglen, Marble, Gibson, King, Navratilova

Tier-two: Brough, Bueno, Court, Goolagong, Novotna

Tier-three: Wade

Did you somehow forget Becker? It's an insult not to have him in at least least tier 3. Can you honestly say that Krajicek had better volleys than Becker?

 

[jorjipy]

Being taught by Tony Roche as a teenager is a huge advantage and I am going to say that even better than Cash and Edberg in their era was Todd Woodbridge…..perhaps the last player whose game style was straight out of the 1950s and so he had the cleanest, most consistent and yet lethal volleys in tennis……I mean 9 Wimbledons with basically a woman’s serve….?

 

[hoodjem]

That's also why I'm hesitant to move Becker up to tier 2. You could point to at least one big plus for any of the usual candidates--no explanation necessary for Mac and Edberg, FHV for Cash, BHV for Rafter (especially off high balls), service-line mastery for Sampras--but Boris doesn't have any of that.

Stich was probably a hair better, but not quite enough to merit a separate tier. Still I wouldn't object if you put him above those two or even Boris, for that matter. Just can't buy him being as good as Pete, Rafter and Cash who's probably closer to tier 1.

Did you somehow forget Becker? It's an insult not to have him in at least least tier 3. Can you honestly say that Krajicek had better volleys than Becker?

Disparity. Makes me wish for Tier-four again: a place to put the arguables.

 

[BillKid]

Did you somehow forget Becker? It's an insult not to have him in at least least tier 3. Can you honestly say that Krajicek had better volleys than Becker?

The same goes for Federer IMO
But establishing such a tier list is largely about ranking oranges and apples

 

[lefty10spro]

I believe Mac and Martina both rank Lisa Raymond as the GOAT volleyer. She could do it all!

 

[urban]

Of the modern women i forgot Pam Shriver. was a bit slow on her feet in singles, but at the net she was a force on both sides, coming in behind slice forehands. I am a bit reluctant, because i recently read, that she had as a young girl a problematic affair with her much older coach Don Candy.

 

[Olli Jokinen]

Of the modern women i forgot Pam Shriver. was a bit slow on her feet in singles, but at the net she was a force on both sides, coming in behind slice forehands. I am a bit reluctant, because i recently read, that she had as a young girl a problematic affair with her much older coach Don Candy.

I think Novotna was even better than Shriver.

 

[NonP]

Disparity. Makes me wish for Tier-four again: a place to put the arguables.

No disparity, I fully agree that Becker belongs in tier 3 at least. Just find it hard to argue for his spot alongside the likes of Cash, Sampras and Rafter who were truly special at least in one area. Again even as a fan (Boris was my very 1st tennis idol) I can't think of anything in Becker's arsenal that could rival Cash's FHV, Pete's 1st volley or the other Pat's katana BHV especially off high balls.

Of the modern women i forgot Pam Shriver. was a bit slow on her feet in singles, but at the net she was a force on both sides, coming in behind slice forehands. I am a bit reluctant, because i recently read, that she had as a young girl a problematic affair with her much older coach Don Candy.

How does that reflect poorly on Pam rather than her coach? Also not sure what that has to do with her volleys.

 

[skaj]

True. Alright, let's add them.
Navratilova to Tier-one. King there also?
Do you have suggestions on the others?

I wouldn't rank King that high, I don't know. Haven't seen that many of her matches though.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Being taught by Tony Roche as a teenager is a huge advantage and I am going to say that even better than Cash and Edberg in their era was Todd Woodbridge…..perhaps the last player whose game style was straight out of the 1950s and so he had the cleanest, most consistent and yet lethal volleys in tennis……I mean 9 Wimbledons with basically a woman’s serve….?

Yes,, all the top players of the fifties had great volley skills.

 

[Dan Lobb]

MEN
Tier-one: McEnroe, Edberg, Rosewall, Sedgman, Roche, Laver, Emerson, Newcombe

Tier-two: Richards, Borotra, Segura, Kramer, Gonzales, Hoad, McMillan, Cash, Sampras, Rafter

Tier-three: Cochet, Patty, Fraser, Lutz, Smith, Gerulaitis, Panatta, Pecci, Leconte, Stich, Krajicek, Becker, Henman

WOMEN
Tier-one: Lenglen, Marble, Gibson, King, Navratilova

Tier-two: Brough, Bueno, Court, Goolagong, Novotna

Tier-three: Wade, Shriver

Lacoste was regarded as one of the greatest volleyers of his era.