I played Mischa Zverev today

[Dolgopolov85]

...not really, but you get the point. Lefty and very eager to get to the net. Could hit a laser like DTL FH that kept low. Great slice BH and pretty sharp volleys too. Honestly, I have rarely ever felt the pressure of a net rusher before though I have played others who came to net. Because THEIR approach shots were different. They would overpower me from the baseline first and then come in, so I would be expecting it. This chap was sneaking in behind those DTL FHs that would not ordinarily be winners but made for a tough passing shot against somebody who knew what he was doing at net.

I did do a few things to counter him, namely:

a) Dipping passing shots to make him volley up
b) Lobs but didn't do much because we were not playing serious and both of us wanted the challenge of volleying v/s passing shots
c) Coming in myself to pre-empt him or just responding quickly to the short ball. Had some success with the DTL FH approach close to singles alley/baseline intersection myself though the one time he absolutely cut me in two with a superb cross court pass on the run.

But my question is not about how to counter him. Rather, how to hit those approach shots. That is the thing I still don't really get the hang of and if executed at his level, would be super duper effective. I have watched Brady's videos on approach shots but that sounds like basic stuff and that is not what the guy I played was doing. Even when I pushed him back, he was able to adjust and create a comfortable hitting height for his approach shots. He was able to sort of dictate play by making me anticipate/apprehend the moment when he would go for an approach shot and come in and the only way to counter that was to pre-empt him by taking the net away from him.

So, if you have a lot of success with net rushing against intermediate/advanced players

a) Where do you ideally like to place your approach shots (in terms of depth as well as angle)?
b) How high/low should they be?
c) Where do you position yourself at net?
and most importantly
d) What is a good rally hit point to give yourself the best opportunity to come in, say, even when the balls your opponent is hitting are deep?

I would love to have captured it on video as it would make it easier for anybody reading the thread to give pointers but I didn't expect to play him today, so was simply not prepared with the equipment.

Pl don't restrict your answers to the above questions and feel free to contribute tangential thoughts that might have valuable insights. I will see if I can get it on vid next time I get to play him (and hopefully apply the take aways from this thread) though it's as doubtful as courts are generally crowded here and today was a rare day when we got an entire singles court to ourselves for a good half hour.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

So, if you have a lot of success with net rushing against intermediate/advanced players

a) Where do you ideally like to place your approach shots (in terms of depth as well as angle)?
b) How high/low should they be?
c) Where do you position yourself at net?
and most importantly
d) What is a good rally hit point to give yourself the best opportunity to come in, say, even when the balls your opponent is hitting are deep?

In singles, my main avenue into the net is after my serve. My net game is significantly better than my BL game so I favor S&V.

In doubles, in addition to S&V, I also C&C. Usually a deep return is adequate.

I assume you're talking about singles.

When I can stay in the point long enough from the BL to get a chance to approach, my philosophy is to hit DTL because I have to move a shorter distance to reach a neutral position. I like slicing because it keeps the ball low; if I hit TS, the danger is that it will sit up too high in my opponent's strike zone. The better my opponent, the more I concentrate on keeping the ball low without cutting it too fine.

I also don't hit everything deep so as not to be too predictable; I'll sometimes deliberately hit a shorter approach to make my opponent hit while moving forward: many players can hit well moving laterally but not as well longitudinally.

I accept that I'm going to get passed a certain # of times, no matter how theoretically perfectly I play the point. The thought process flaw I see in a lot of players that discourages them from coming in more is that if they get cleanly passed, the strategy must be faulty. This allows me to be relaxed and, paradoxically, able to get to more balls than if I was tight.

Where I stand depends on the strengths, weaknesses, and tendencies of my opponent. Assuming they are all middle-of-the-road, I will shade towards the line and give them the extreme CC, which looks like from the net player's side that there is a lot of room but to actually hit that shot is not so easy.

For example, assuming both are righties and I slice a BH DTL to his FH right down the sideline, I'll try to get in front of the SL, preferably at least 5' in front, and maybe 2/3 away from the sideline and 1/3 away from the middle line; maybe 3/4 & 1/4. Definitely NOT on the middle line because that gives up too much line.

I don't position myself to favor either FH or BH volley unless I notice a tendency of my opponent to hit a certain way.

I also view my first volley as a potential setup shot so I don't feel pressured to have to put away everything.

If my opponent is hitting deep, the only time I'll come in is if I hit a high, heavier TS ball that makes him back up: I'll delay my approach until the ball has bounced up past his eye level and while he's waiting for the ball to crest and come back down, I'll rush the net and hope to take him by surprise.

Watch Zverev v Murray, AO 2017 [if you haven't already done so]:

 

[Dolgopolov85]

In singles, my main avenue into the net is after my serve. My net game is significantly better than my BL game so I favor S&V.

In doubles, in addition to S&V, I also C&C. Usually a deep return is adequate.

I assume you're talking about singles.

When I can stay in the point long enough from the BL to get a chance to approach, my philosophy is to hit DTL because I have to move a shorter distance to reach a neutral position. I like slicing because it keeps the ball low; if I hit TS, the danger is that it will sit up too high in my opponent's strike zone. The better my opponent, the more I concentrate on keeping the ball low without cutting it too fine.

I also don't hit everything deep so as not to be too predictable; I'll sometimes deliberately hit a shorter approach to make my opponent hit while moving forward: many players can hit well moving laterally but not as well longitudinally.

I accept that I'm going to get passed a certain # of times, no matter how theoretically perfectly I play the point. The thought process flaw I see in a lot of players that discourages them from coming in more is that if they get cleanly passed, the strategy must be faulty. This allows me to be relaxed and, paradoxically, able to get to more balls than if I was tight.

Where I stand depends on the strengths, weaknesses, and tendencies of my opponent. Assuming they are all middle-of-the-road, I will shade towards the line and give them the extreme CC, which looks like from the net player's side that there is a lot of room but to actually hit that shot is not so easy.

For example, assuming both are righties and I slice a BH DTL to his FH right down the sideline, I'll try to get in front of the SL, preferably at least 5' in front, and maybe 2/3 away from the sideline and 1/3 away from the middle line; maybe 3/4 & 1/4. Definitely NOT on the middle line because that gives up too much line.

I don't position myself to favor either FH or BH volley unless I notice a tendency of my opponent to hit a certain way.

I also view my first volley as a potential setup shot so I don't feel pressured to have to put away everything.

If my opponent is hitting deep, the only time I'll come in is if I hit a high, heavier TS ball that makes him back up: I'll delay my approach until the ball has bounced up past his eye level and while he's waiting for the ball to crest and come back down, I'll rush the net and hope to take him by surprise.

Watch Zverev v Murray, AO 2017 [if you haven't already done so]:

Thanks for this. Yes, I did watch and immensely enjoy the live telecast of Murray v/s MZ. The first bolded part was what I experienced from the baseline and I didn't even think of going for a low percentage CC pass. I was happy to hit low DTL passing shots which he might still volley but which would give me enough time to step in and hit a second (and usually easier) passing shot. Your point about where to stand for the first volley was very useful and exactly what I was looking for. I have a tendency to close the net too much for the first volley so if they don't get my approach shot back over, I am fine; else I am in trouble especially if he lobs. Come to think, he made me doubt the lob option irrespective of the fact that I wasn't going for it anyway simply by not crowding the net and daring me to pass.

Hmm, you say you will come in behind a high, heavier TS ball so your approach is a bit different from his. What he was doing was to back up on my deep balls and manufacture a comfortable contact point to hit through his DTL FH so he could keep it low and reasonably fast. Not so fast that I couldn't cover it but fast enough that I was under time pressure. That said, your pointer is useful and probably easier to implement for my style of shot. Yes, maybe that's the key to sneaking in, to wait until the ball has bounced up enough rather than coming right in as I am wont to do.

Related to that, you mention about waiting long enough for a 'chance' to come in. What as a net rusher is a chance to come in for you? It seems to be different from a baseliner's perception of when to come in (which is ahem more Nadal-like). I am trained to wait for the short ball to approach and I noticed he wasn't necessarily doing that. He was converting deep neutral balls into approach opportunities. So what is the trigger for you to approach? That is pretty much the crux of what I am looking for. Less about the style of approach shot and more about the moment you identify an opportunity to approach.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Related to that, you mention about waiting long enough for a 'chance' to come in. What as a net rusher is a chance to come in for you? It seems to be different from a baseliner's perception of when to come in (which is ahem more Nadal-like). I am trained to wait for the short ball to approach and I noticed he wasn't necessarily doing that. He was converting deep neutral balls into approach opportunities. So what is the trigger for you to approach? That is pretty much the crux of what I am looking for. Less about the style of approach shot and more about the moment you identify an opportunity to approach.

Hmm...difficult to quantify. Beyond the obvious one of a short ball, I look for:
- opponent position: if I pull him out wide, even if his return is deep, I still may try to approach to take time away from him. Because of the relative court positions, time is more important to him than me.

- opponent balance: overlooked is balance: he could be in a relatively good position statically but out of balance dynamically due to recovery from the previous shot. In this case, even an approach down the middle can throw him off.

- opponent rhythm: if I suspect he's getting a little tight, I want to do anything and everything I can to push that further. So I may be more aggressive than normal just to apply the pressure.

- match momentum: if I'm winning the majority of points at net [not just 51% but, say, 67%], I may just come in on any old shot and make him prove he can pass me. Maybe his passers just aren't on that day. Maybe he needs some breathing room to recover and by coming to the net relentlessly, I'm denying him that room.

- opponent ability/tendency to take the ball on-the-rise: if I note that he's uncomfortable with this, I'll come in on any shot that forces him a few feet behind the BL. The further away from the net he is, the tougher it is to pass because I have more time to react. It also opens up more drop volley chances [and they don't even have to be good DVs depending on how far away he is].

Finally, if everything is clicking, I might fake coming in just to see if he overhits.

Full disclosure: I've never beaten anyone higher level using this strategy. Heck, I sometimes can't beat people at my level with this strategy. But I think it's a blast so I keep doing it. I really ought to work more on my BL game but everyone else already plays that style so I don't see as much to be gained.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Hmm...difficult to quantify. Beyond the obvious one of a short ball, I look for:
- opponent position: if I pull him out wide, even if his return is deep, I still may try to approach to take time away from him. Because of the relative court positions, time is more important to him than me.

- opponent balance: overlooked is balance: he could be in a relatively good position statically but out of balance dynamically due to recovery from the previous shot. In this case, even an approach down the middle can throw him off.

- opponent rhythm: if I suspect he's getting a little tight, I want to do anything and everything I can to push that further. So I may be more aggressive than normal just to apply the pressure.

- match momentum: if I'm winning the majority of points at net [not just 51% but, say, 67%], I may just come in on any old shot and make him prove he can pass me. Maybe his passers just aren't on that day. Maybe he needs some breathing room to recover and by coming to the net relentlessly, I'm denying him that room.

- opponent ability/tendency to take the ball on-the-rise: if I note that he's uncomfortable with this, I'll come in on any shot that forces him a few feet behind the BL. The further away from the net he is, the tougher it is to pass because I have more time to react. It also opens up more drop volley chances [and they don't even have to be good DVs depending on how far away he is].

Finally, if everything is clicking, I might fake coming in just to see if he overhits.

Full disclosure: I've never beaten anyone higher level using this strategy. Heck, I sometimes can't beat people at my level with this strategy. But I think it's a blast so I keep doing it. I really ought to work more on my BL game but everyone else already plays that style so I don't see as much to be gained.

Thanks again. Will keep these pointers in mind. And don't worry about success or lack thereof. For me, I am just looking to add an additional tool to use rather being dependent on baseline grinding. I would like to add the net play dimension to confuse opponents but then it has to be executed well to be successful rather than gifting too many points for little or no return.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

it has to be executed well to be successful rather than gifting too many points for little or no return.

I should add that, even executed poorly, it can get into the head of your opponent. He may well pass you successfully...initially. But the pressure of you relentlessly attacking the net may pay dividends at some future point in the match. So even though I've temporarily abandoned net-rushing because I was getting hit off the court, I always kept open the possibility of resuming it.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

I should add that, even executed poorly, it can get into the head of your opponent. He may well pass you successfully...initially. But the pressure of you relentlessly attacking the net may pay dividends at some future point in the match. So even though I've temporarily abandoned net-rushing because I was getting hit off the court, I always kept open the possibility of resuming it.

Yes, I felt this happening to me due to the pressure of his approaches. It didn't help that I had already been playing a lot on a very humid day and was a little tired. So yeah, started missing shots I would have normally made just because I felt compelled to respond to him. Later on, I stopped looking at him and at the ball instead, trying to play my usual game. Even so, the pressure of keeping passing shots low made me net a few of them.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Yes, I felt this happening to me due to the pressure of his approaches. It didn't help that I had already been playing a lot on a very humid day and was a little tired. So yeah, started missing shots I would have normally made just because I felt compelled to respond to him. Later on, I stopped looking at him and at the ball instead, trying to play my usual game. Even so, the pressure of keeping passing shots low made me net a few of them.

That's why I like this style, from both ends of the court: cat and mouse; attack, parry, riposte; adaptation and counter-tactics.

Welcome to the [very small] club! Hey, @SinjinCooper: there's at least one more net-rusher out there!

 

[Dolgopolov85]

That's why I like this style, from both ends of the court: cat and mouse; attack, parry, riposte; adaptation and counter-tactics.

Welcome to the [very small] club! Hey, @SinjinCooper: there's at least one more net-rusher out there!

No doubt enjoyed every bit of it. So responsive with a lot of quick decision making. Baseline tennis can be chess like in patiently working over the opponent on one side to open up the court too. But things happen much more quickly with a net rusher and so many more different shots come into play.

 

[bitcoinoperated]

For approach shots you want want to hit them where you are most likely to get the highest, flattest ball. This is why slice works so well (other than giving you time to come in) as they have to scoop the ball up from well below the net and can't get under it to get topspin.

The odd approach shot that drives me nuts are low paceless low balls the drop in the midcourt. I have to run forward and the height of the net so much closer and not being able to get the racquet below the ball means just scooping it up is the best I can do, lobbing from here is also impossible. Even if I get it back ok the net guy just easily lobs me as I'm still slowing down.

Coming in on weak second serves is also fun. Even if it isn't super successful the pressure it puts on their second serve is big.

 

[Moveforwardalways]

In singles, the problem with most rec players' net games is their approach and overhead. Almost everyone at good 4.0 and 4.5 levels can volley, but the quality of your approach shot and overhead dictates the success of your net game way more than the strength of your volley. Just ask Pete Sampras - not an elite vollier but an elite server and 100% overheads. This generates really easy vollies.

And the main problem I see with rec players' approach shots are that they are too easily lobbed (not passed necessarily). Slices sit up to knee-waiste level, topspin that bounces short and sit up in the opponent's strike zone, etc. Opponents will lob you to death, and be successful, with that junk. If you hit a slice it needs to stay low, real low. And as stated above mix up short and deep. Topspin approach shots better be deep and have bite.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

No doubt enjoyed every bit of it. So responsive with a lot of quick decision making. Baseline tennis can be chess like in patiently working over the opponent on one side to open up the court too. But things happen much more quickly with a net rusher and so many more different shots come into play.

If BL tennis is chess, it would be with a standard time limit [say, an hour before the first time control] whereas net rushing would be like speed [5 minutes per game] or blitz [10 seconds per move].

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

In singles, the problem with most rec players' net games is their approach and overhead. Almost everyone at good 4.0 and 4.5 levels can volley, but the quality of your approach shot and overhead dictates the success of your net game way more than the strength of your volley. Just ask Pete Sampras - not an elite vollier but an elite server and 100% overheads. This generates really easy vollies.

And the main problem I see with rec players' approach shots are that they are too easily lobbed (not passed necessarily). Slices sit up to knee-waiste level, topspin that bounces short and sit up in the opponent's strike zone, etc. Opponents will lob you to death, and be successful, with that junk. If you hit a slice it needs to stay low, real low. And as stated above mix up short and deep. Topspin approach shots better be deep and have bite.

I was more likely to see lobs at 4.0. At 4.5, most guys want to hit passing shots. Truth be told, I'd have a harder time of it if they did lob more because I'd actually have to hit another shot rather than being the beneficiary of an error. I like my OH but I'm certainly not going to win every point.

I see a lot of 4.0s and even 4.5s who are not comfortable coming into the net: not because any one component of their game was weak but because they just were out of their comfort zone. As this thread demonstrates, it's not an exact science when to approach. So to avoid the discomfort, they stay on the BL. I guess the pain of getting passed outweighs the pleasure of winning at net.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

For approach shots you want want to hit them where you are most likely to get the highest, flattest ball. This is why slice works so well (other than giving you time to come in) as they have to scoop the ball up from well below the net and can't get under it to get topspin.

The odd approach shot that drives me nuts are low paceless low balls the drop in the midcourt. I have to run forward and the height of the net so much closer and not being able to get the racquet below the ball means just scooping it up is the best I can do, lobbing from here is also impossible. Even if I get it back ok the net guy just easily lobs me as I'm still slowing down.

Coming in on weak second serves is also fun. Even if it isn't super successful the pressure it puts on their second serve is big.

Good point, will keep in mind.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

As this thread demonstrates, it's not an exact science when to approach. So to avoid the discomfort, they stay on the BL. I guess the pain of getting passed outweighs the pleasure of winning at net.

The perceived risk is lower from the baseline, hence the temptation to stay in the comfort zone as you called it. But on the other hand, the rec player's shot tolerance isn't that great and I think we (as in rec baseliners) overrate our ability to play out a long rally without making errors. If you might mishit and either net the ball or shank it wide/long, might be better to look for a good opportunity to come in. And as I learnt today, there is a right way to do net rushing. But there just don't seem to be that many rec players who can do it right.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

The perceived risk is lower from the baseline, hence the temptation to stay in the comfort zone as you called it. But on the other hand, the rec player's shot tolerance isn't that great and I think we (as in rec baseliners) overrate our ability to play out a long rally without making errors. If you might mishit and either net the ball or shank it wide/long, might be better to look for a good opportunity to come in. And as I learnt today, there is a right way to do net rushing. But there just don't seem to be that many rec players who can do it right.

Agreed. I think one area players err is in only thinking of their own strengths and weaknesses and failing to account for the opponent: yes, coming to the net makes you uncomfortable. But that's not the key question. The key question is "does my coming to the net make my opponent more uncomfortable than me?". If the answer is "yes", you should come to the net more, despite your discomfort. Many people can't make that leap, though.

 

[zalive]

In this case, even an approach down the middle can throw him off.

Why 'even'?
I've read an opinion from another s&v'er that deep approach shots in the middle are good because they leave lower angle of options to the opponent and it's easier to cover the court. Basically, with the ball in the middle you can put your racquet to any ball except some really good inside out angles (which are even more difficult to execute than CC angles from the corner), and a good lob.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Why 'even'?
I've read an opinion from another s&v'er that deep approach shots in the middle are good because they leave lower angle of options to the opponent and it's easier to cover the court. Basically, with the ball in the middle you can put your racquet to any ball except some really good inside out angles (which are even more difficult to execute than CC angles from the corner), and a good lob.

In theory, yes, but an approach down the middle would need to be fast else you are giving the baseliner enough time to set up a hard passing shot. He need not try to create angle. If he goes hard and straight at you, you may find it difficult to volley off. I think forcing the baseliner to run across to the DTL approach and luring him to go CC by covering DTL is the best option because unless he is able to get into position well in time, CC is going to be a low percentage option. That said, mixing DTL, CC and middle is a good way to keep him guessing. One too many DTL approaches may get predictable. Throwing in fake approaches is also good as it may rush him and induce errors.

 

[zalive]

In theory, yes, but an approach down the middle would need to be fast else you are giving the baseliner enough time to set up a hard passing shot. He need not try to create angle. If he goes hard and straight at you, you may find it difficult to volley off. I think forcing the baseliner to run across to the DTL approach and luring him to go CC by covering DTL is the best option because unless he is able to get into position well in time, CC is going to be a low percentage option. That said, mixing DTL, CC and middle is a good way to keep him guessing. One too many DTL approaches may get predictable. Throwing in fake approaches is also good as it may rush him and induce errors.

That guy was talking practice, not theory.
Now if I was executing that shot I have few ideas how:
- if someone is not in ideal position for some reason, like @S&V-not_dead_yet described - then deep in his feet
- if he's a baseline hugger, deep straight at him with some pace, or sliced deep with some pace
- if he's behind the baseline then soft and low so he has to run forward (plus wait for him step back than usual...or not?)

What I don't like in down the middle is that it's calling for lob when the opponent realises his options are not that great, and in most situation lob will not be too difficult from there.

 

[zalive]

In theory, yes, but an approach down the middle would need to be fast else you are giving the baseliner enough time to set up a hard passing shot. He need not try to create angle. If he goes hard and straight at you, you may find it difficult to volley off. I think forcing the baseliner to run across to the DTL approach and luring him to go CC by covering DTL is the best option because unless he is able to get into position well in time, CC is going to be a low percentage option. That said, mixing DTL, CC and middle is a good way to keep him guessing. One too many DTL approaches may get predictable. Throwing in fake approaches is also good as it may rush him and induce errors.

One more thing.
The best of my hitting partners hits hard against whatever approach shot I set up. I usually place approach shot to the corner but this is not working against him. In most situation I cannot get the racquet on the ball against him. I tried even surprising him by picking a side I will close down, and usually he sees this (or my intention?) and hits to the other side. Against him, hitting the approach the middle actually gives me a better chance

At the same time, he's incredible to play against (those passing shots are his biggest strength) and practice approach shots and volleying because what works against him must be good, on the other side he's incredibly frustrating to come to the net against him

 

[Dolgopolov85]

That guy was talking practice, not theory.
Now if I was executing that shot I have few ideas how:
- if someone is not in ideal position for some reason, like @S&V-not_dead_yet described - then deep in his feet
- if he's a baseline hugger, deep straight at him with some pace, or sliced deep with some pace
- if he's behind the baseline then soft and low so he has to run forward (plus wait for him step back than usual...or not?)

What I don't like in down the middle is that it's calling for lob when the opponent realises his options are not that great, and in most situation lob will not be too difficult from there.

This exactly. But also, I have got passed many times with the down the middle approach. It would have to be a real lightning bolt for the opponent to not have enough time to set up their passing shot. If it's a little less than really fast, they will load up and whack it past me. Whatever works for him, but I would not make the down the middle approach my standard one. It's a good change up, however, from the one DTL pulling him wide.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

One more thing.
The best of my hitting partners hits hard against whatever approach shot I set up. I usually place approach shot to the corner but this is not working against him. In most situation I cannot get the racquet on the ball against him. I tried even surprising him by picking a side I will close down, and usually he sees this (or my intention?) and hits to the other side. Against him, hitting the approach the middle actually gives me a better chance

At the same time, he's incredible to play against (those passing shots are his biggest strength) and practice approach shots and volleying because what works against him must be good, on the other side he's incredibly frustrating to come to the net against him

Not just to the corner, it has to be deep, low and reasonably fast. And you should ideally work him over to one side first so that when you open up the court, he has to cover a lot of ground (which as @S&V-not_dead_yet said, gives you time to get in). I used to always hit DTL to the corner anyway but while playing the person I mentioned in the OP, I realised the importance of getting it deep and low. I would hazard a guess that this kind of shot is easier to execute with a relatively conservative grip. Mine is somewhere between eastern and SW, hence easier for me to hit like that. Go through the ball and try not to worry too much about spin. Because he has to hit it up after getting there, it will reduce his percentages. If after all that he still gets to the approach every time and passes you so well that you can't make a volley, he is just too good. Remember how MZ threw the kitchen sink at Fed but to no avail because Fed was just responding to all of his tricks really well. In trying the DTL approach against that guy I mentioned, I hit a winner once (sometimes targeting an area to approach will yield a winner which is what happened to MZ against Murray too). 2-3 times, his passing shot didn't get over the net. Finally, once he produced a great CC pass that I was nowhere near to as I was covering DTL. But those are incredible percentages to work with. I could approach on every other point if I was winning that often with it so I will take the odd successful passing shot. And this was just in response to seeing him succeed with approaches. If I keep at it, I could get better at it.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Another mistake I used to make was I would wait for a short ball, say bouncing around or only slightly past the service line and then approach deep. Bad idea. Because I am now closer to the net and hitting on the rise, I have to put more spin to get it over so there is enough hit for the baseliner to work with to pass me and that's what happened again and again. I would now say try to use slice approaches to keep it low or use short slice/drops and take advantage of court position. If you must go for a full topspin groundie, go for an outright winner. Don't cut down on power in trying to approach. In any event, always wait till you have struck the ball before making the approach move. Thinking too much about approaching as you hit it will mess up the approach shot so even though you get to net, you will get burnt by the passing shot.

 

[zalive]

This exactly. But also, I have got passed many times with the down the middle approach. It would have to be a real lightning bolt for the opponent to not have enough time to set up their passing shot. If it's a little less than really fast, they will load up and whack it past me. Whatever works for him, but I would not make the down the middle approach my standard one. It's a good change up, however, from the one DTL pulling him wide.

Something's not right here, they can't whack the ball past you just like that from the middle, this has to be the inside out angle. If you're behind the ball you should be covering from corner to corner, everything accept the angles. But ideal approach to the middle is one that goes to the body of opponent with depth and pace so he has to step to the side to avoid it and to set up, which takes some time from him.

Not just to the corner, it has to be deep, low and reasonably fast. And you should ideally work him over to one side first so that when you open up the court, he has to cover a lot of ground (which as @S&V-not_dead_yet said, gives you time to get in). I used to always hit DTL to the corner anyway but while playing the person I mentioned in the OP, I realised the importance of getting it deep and low. I would hazard a guess that this kind of shot is easier to execute with a relatively conservative grip. Mine is somewhere between eastern and SW, hence easier for me to hit like that. Go through the ball and try not to worry too much about spin. Because he has to hit it up after getting there, it will reduce his percentages. If after all that he still gets to the approach every time and passes you so well that you can't make a volley, he is just too good. Remember how MZ threw the kitchen sink at Fed but to no avail because Fed was just responding to all of his tricks really well. In trying the DTL approach against that guy I mentioned, I hit a winner once (sometimes targeting an area to approach will yield a winner which is what happened to MZ against Murray too). 2-3 times, his passing shot didn't get over the net. Finally, once he produced a great CC pass that I was nowhere near to as I was covering DTL. But those are incredible percentages to work with. I could approach on every other point if I was winning that often with it so I will take the odd successful passing shot. And this was just in response to seeing him succeed with approaches. If I keep at it, I could get better at it.

Depending on a quality of opponent, but unless he's late on the ball and when he knows what he's doing, you're scr*wed when approaching to the corner. The whole idea beneath the corners is to hit it hard+deep enough so the opponent gets actually late to the ball, anyhow. If he gets to the ball on time you're fried if he's capable, unless it's a HQ slice which bounces really low.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Why 'even'?
I've read an opinion from another s&v'er that deep approach shots in the middle are good because they leave lower angle of options to the opponent and it's easier to cover the court. Basically, with the ball in the middle you can put your racquet to any ball except some really good inside out angles (which are even more difficult to execute than CC angles from the corner), and a good lob.

Perhaps I didn't word my statement very well. I agree with you that DTM approaches also have good aspects; one doesn't need to always aim for corners/lines when hitting an approach.

What I meant to say was that if my opponent is off-balance, going for a corner/line can be excessively high-risk and a DTM is low-risk so why not take the low-risk approach?

DTM approaches work especially well vs flat ball hitters because generating angles is more difficult.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Something's not right here, they can't whack the ball past you just like that from the middle, this has to be the inside out angle. If you're behind the ball you should be covering from corner to corner, everything accept the angles. But ideal approach to the middle is one that goes to the body of opponent with depth and pace so he has to step to the side to avoid it and to set up, which takes some time from him.

Not necessarily. If he has a double hander, he can simply go for the backhand passing shot. I have seen players make very accurate cross court BH passes. Landing within inches of singles alley but it's good enough that I can't cut it off. Not unless I really close the net and then I am leaving myself open to a lob. It also depends how experienced the player is, but a seasoned player will anticipate me and step away quickly or alternatively set up the backhand pass. The one I played had a one hander but I am thinking about how approach shots will work against hardcore baseliner, not a netrusher like him.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

In theory, yes, but an approach down the middle would need to be fast else you are giving the baseliner enough time to set up a hard passing shot. He need not try to create angle. If he goes hard and straight at you, you may find it difficult to volley off. I think forcing the baseliner to run across to the DTL approach and luring him to go CC by covering DTL is the best option because unless he is able to get into position well in time, CC is going to be a low percentage option. That said, mixing DTL, CC and middle is a good way to keep him guessing. One too many DTL approaches may get predictable. Throwing in fake approaches is also good as it may rush him and induce errors.

I agree. All 3 have pros and cons. If I find one is working well, I'll stick with it until he counters it. At that point, I don't care if I'm predictable if I'm winning the majority of the points.

I don't usually approach CC unless I can really stretch him and put him in an uncomfortable position; too much ground to cover for me. Then again, you could argue that me serving wide and then coming to the net is essentially a CC approach. So there are exceptions.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Depending on a quality of opponent, but unless he's late on the ball and when he knows what he's doing, you're scr*wed when approaching to the corner. The whole idea beneath the corners is to hit it hard+deep enough so the opponent gets actually late to the ball, anyhow. If he gets to the ball on time you're fried if he's capable, unless it's a HQ slice which bounces really low.

We're essentially in agreement. Got to get him on one side of the court, then approach DTL when he turns to run across the baseline.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

What I don't like in down the middle is that it's calling for lob when the opponent realises his options are not that great, and in most situation lob will not be too difficult from there.

I'm not too concerned about the lob because many guys don't have great lobs and I'm comfortable with my OH. Now, if he can consistently lob and bounce it within 5' of the BL, I will re-think my strategy. The reason I welcome the lob is that my opponent has chosen to hit the most defensive shot [assuming it's not a wicked TS lob meant to be a winner] which means I'm in control of the point [as opposed to if he went for passing shots].

Also, if he can lob well from a DTM approach, he might also be able to lob while on the move.

 

[joe sch]

...not really, but you get the point. Lefty and very eager to get to the net. Could hit a laser like DTL FH that kept low. Great slice BH and pretty sharp volleys too. Honestly, I have rarely ever felt the pressure of a net rusher before though I have played others who came to net. Because THEIR approach shots were different. They would overpower me from the baseline first and then come in, so I would be expecting it. This chap was sneaking in behind those DTL FHs that would not ordinarily be winners but made for a tough passing shot against somebody who knew what he was doing at net.

I did do a few things to counter him, namely:

a) Dipping passing shots to make him volley up
b) Lobs but didn't do much because we were not playing serious and both of us wanted the challenge of volleying v/s passing shots
c) Coming in myself to pre-empt him or just responding quickly to the short ball. Had some success with the DTL FH approach close to singles alley/baseline intersection myself though the one time he absolutely cut me in two with a superb cross court pass on the run.

But my question is not about how to counter him. Rather, how to hit those approach shots. That is the thing I still don't really get the hang of and if executed at his level, would be super duper effective. I have watched Brady's videos on approach shots but that sounds like basic stuff and that is not what the guy I played was doing. Even when I pushed him back, he was able to adjust and create a comfortable hitting height for his approach shots. He was able to sort of dictate play by making me anticipate/apprehend the moment when he would go for an approach shot and come in and the only way to counter that was to pre-empt him by taking the net away from him.

So, if you have a lot of success with net rushing against intermediate/advanced players

a) Where do you ideally like to place your approach shots (in terms of depth as well as angle)?
b) How high/low should they be?
c) Where do you position yourself at net?
and most importantly
d) What is a good rally hit point to give yourself the best opportunity to come in, say, even when the balls your opponent is hitting are deep?

I would love to have captured it on video as it would make it easier for anybody reading the thread to give pointers but I didn't expect to play him today, so was simply not prepared with the equipment.

Pl don't restrict your answers to the above questions and feel free to contribute tangential thoughts that might have valuable insights. I will see if I can get it on vid next time I get to play him (and hopefully apply the take aways from this thread) though it's as doubtful as courts are generally crowded here and today was a rare day when we got an entire singles court to ourselves for a good half hour.

Not easy to beat a *good* SV player like Mischa !
This style is still effective in todays game as he continues to prove.
Here is some good advice, watch the Round of 16 at this years USO where Querrey played pretty well to knock out Mischa.
So bottom line, just play like a "Samurai" ... good luck !

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Not easy to beat a *good* SV player like Mischa !
This style is still effective in todays game as he continues to prove.
Here is some good advice, watch the Round of 16 at this years USO where Querrey played pretty well to knock out Mischa.
So bottom line, just play like a "Samurai" ... good luck !

Will do that. Missed many of the USO matches due to time zone.

EDIT: Oh wait, I HAVE seen this one. Querrey was on fire here. Incredible passing shots.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

This exactly. But also, I have got passed many times with the down the middle approach. It would have to be a real lightning bolt for the opponent to not have enough time to set up their passing shot. If it's a little less than really fast, they will load up and whack it past me. Whatever works for him, but I would not make the down the middle approach my standard one. It's a good change up, however, from the one DTL pulling him wide.

Depending on the level, some guys actually do worse trying to hit passers off of a DTM approach because they have TOO much time and they overthink/overhit. Obviously, this happens less and less the higher up one goes but I've used it successfully at 4.5.

My approach [no pun intended] is to be flexible and pragmatic.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Not just to the corner, it has to be deep, low and reasonably fast.

I can think of scenarios where short and low also works well, especially if he has a W FH and isn't good at scooping up low balls AND if he's like most people and doesn't hit as well when moving diagonally forward.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Also, from the passer's viewpoint, don't underestimate the value of hitting it hard right at the net man. Speaking from a volleyer's perspective, these can be very difficult because there's a bit of a panic factor and you have to move out of the way just to hit the ball [as opposed to moving towards it].

 

[Dolgopolov85]

I can think of scenarios where short and low also works well, especially if he has a W FH and isn't good at scooping up low balls AND if he's like most people and doesn't hit as well when moving diagonally forward.

Right, esp a slice approach. I did use that one too, a short CC slice. Slice is particularly useful because the shot looks the same to the opponent and we can disguise the intent better. With the forehand, the moment I run around and set up for an inside out, he is going to anticipate my next one.