Mixed Doubles Poaching Riddle

[Dartagnan64]

I've played a lot of mixed doubles socially and in tournaments over the last few years and one thing I've grown curious about especially at the 3.5-4.0 level:
Why don't women poach to the FH volley but inevitably poach to the BH volley.

I've been paying attention to this and it seems a lot of my female partners have this issue, wife included. I'll hit a serve from the deuce side right down the T, I'll get a weak BH reply and unless its a true sitting duck, my partner will leave it for me. Then I'll hit an ad serve out wide to the BH the opponent will hit CC as I'm coming in with my FH volley and my partner will stick out her racquet for a BH volley and totally mess it up.

When I play my men's doubles, my male partners poach the T serve to deuce every time. When I'm at the net I'm very aggressive poaching my FH side and will only poach BH side on weaker returns.

I wondered if it was because women have stronger BH volleys but most of the time they just make a mess of this volley. If that's their good side then I'm really scared to see their FH side. Or is is possibly a footwork thing where a crossover step to reach with a BH volley is more natural?

Or possibly its confirmation bias since i've been burned so many times by my partner sticking her racquet out for an ineffectual volley when I'm standing there with a FH ready to finish the point. I've had to tell many a woman to avoid the stretch BH volley as I'll be coming in with a FH ready to go. I've never had to tell them to avoid the stretch FH volley or even recall the last time I've seen a partner stretch for a FH volley.

Anyways, its a curiosity in mixed I've yet to solve. And admittedly I did notice it the other night when i was playing with a low level 3.0 male partner, who did the same thing. Never poached a FH but would stick racquets out to the BH side with crappy results.

 

[GrassCourtFan]

When you serve our wide, the return had to cross in front of the net person, so it looks easier to get. When you serve down the T, the ball is never in front to the net person, it always looks far.

That is my guess.

 

[OnTheLine]

I wonder if they are actually poaching on serves to the ad side or it is something else.

Most mixed formations have female returning from the deuce court and male returning from the ad court. So very often that male is going to try to hit his return at the female at net ... so is she poaching or is she defending?

I for one poach heavily on serves to the deuce, especially if my partner hits to the T (god bless him) ... I go for it well over 50% of the time ... unless partner is hitting serve wide, then I need to defend that ally a little more.

Serves to the ad side ... I won't be poaching much but I will to mix things up ... I have a strong BH volley ... but I do end up defending a lot as the male will be targeting me ... sometimes that is a very good defense ... sometimes it is not.

I too hate it when a partner goes for a bh volley without good cause .... especially if they are dropping back to do so .... rarely ends well at this level.

 

[Matthew ATX]

My mixed partner doesn't really poach anything but sitters. She's tiny, which makes poaching more difficult. She will fearlessly defend her position at the net and will put away the sitters. That's all I really need her to do at the net.

 

[Dartagnan64]

When you serve our wide, the return had to cross in front of the net person, so it looks easier to get. When you serve down the T, the ball is never in front to the net person, it always looks far.

That might be part of it.

Most mixed formations have female returning from the deuce court and male returning from the ad court. So very often that male is going to try to hit his return at the female at net ... so is she poaching or is she defending?

I think that is true for second serves. I don't expect my partner to do anything but protect the alley on second serves. But on first serves, I can usually put the male returner at a disadvantage either stretching for a FH or hitting a weaker BH. They will usually try to take those CC and I'm ready for it with a inside FH groundstroke or I've come in for the FH volley. Then boom out sticks a racquet and stuffs the ball weakly into the net.

I do think another reason is that because I play ad on returns, that means when we are returning serve my partner is going to have more opportunites to play that BH volley during return games. So it may be opportunity bias to some degree.

 

[Dartagnan64]

My mixed partner doesn't really poach anything but sitters. She's tiny, which makes poaching more difficult. She will fearlessly defend her position at the net and will put away the sitters. That's all I really need her to do at the net.

Sometimes I wish that's all my wife did. You have to know when your game is off and dial it back.

And as a PS; I'm sure there are days my wife wishes I did the same

 

[Cindysphinx]

If OP serves on the ad side and serves wide, that is the opponent's BH. Many players cannot reliably pull that BH return DTL. So your net partner may feel more confident leaving her side for a poach.

Conversely, if OP serves on the deuce side and serves wide, the partner may well be worried about the returner going DTL with a FH. This is a shot many players can make, especially if the alley looks open.

I think that is a big part of it.

 

[MathGeek]

Lots of MxD partners are locked into the "my side-your side" thinking and tend to react based on how close to their side the ball seems in a split second. It takes practice and intentionality to get MxD partners thinking in terms of strengths and weaknesses and gaining advantage with each shot and avoiding UEs rather than just getting it back.

Rather than trying to tell partners at the net what to do based on their strengths and weaknesses, I appeal to my own strengths and weaknesses. "Please let more balls come through to my forehand, since I can gain some advantage with it." (This amounts to please don't reach so far with your backhand on difficult shots, but is much gentler.) "Please be more aggressive at the net with your FH, since I'm more likely to make a weak reply with my BH."

MxD partners are much more likely to listen when they see the needed actions as helping cover for my weaknesses than they are to listen when they think I'm asking them to make fewer mistakes.

 

[travlerajm]

When I play mixed, I almost always use Aussie formation when I serve to the deuce court, with my partner starting from a position very close to the center net strap. She will get many balls hit to her (since she is tight on net she can get many volley putaways), and there are few times when she needs to worry about poaching. This formation discourages lobbed returns, since I can more easily cover the lob hit to either side with a forehand overhead, taking away what would otherwise be the easiest and best percentage return option for the (usually) female opponent returning my serve.

 

[OnTheLine]

When I play mixed, I almost always use Aussie formation when I serve to the deuce court, with my partner starting from a position very close to the center net strap. She will get many balls hit to her (since she is tight on net she can get many volley putaways), and there are few times when she needs to worry about poaching. This formation discourages lobbed returns, since I can more easily cover the lob hit to either side with a forehand overhead, taking away what would otherwise be the easiest and best percentage return option for the (usually) female opponent returning my serve.

This. I. Have. To. Learn. How. To. Do.

 

[ShaunS]

When I play mixed, I almost always use Aussie formation when I serve to the deuce court, with my partner starting from a position very close to the center net strap...This formation discourages lobbed returns, since I can more easily cover the lob hit to either side with a forehand overhead, taking away what would otherwise be the easiest and best percentage return option for the (usually) female opponent returning my serve.

Ok, this threw me for a moment. I was thinking about how I prefer to use "Aussie" on the ad-side, because as a right-handed player that means any DTL returns go right to my forehand. I usually play with a right-handed partner as well, so they're covering more court with preferred side.

You're approaching this more from the standpoint that the deuce court returner is usually female with a little weaker return, so you can get away with exploiting that by using the more aggressive alignment?

 

[travlerajm]

Ok, this threw me for a moment. I was thinking about how I prefer to use "Aussie" on the ad-side, because as a right-handed player that means any DTL returns go right to my forehand. I usually play with a right-handed partner as well, so they're covering more court with preferred side.

You're approaching this more from the standpoint that the deuce court returner is usually female with a little weaker return, so you can get away with exploiting that by using the more aggressive alignment?

When I first started playing competitive mixed more than 15 years ago, it became obvious that the best way to win was for my 3.5F partner to ‘cheat’ closer to net to discourage the other team from picking on her. Tight net positioning gives a 3.5 lady 4.0 effectiveness. But the next obvious thing was that having my gal cheat closer to the net leaves our team really exposed to a down the line lob, because I would need to cover it with a high backhand volley (one of the hardest shots in tennis). Using the Aussie eliminates this “hole/weakness”, making it a much stronger base formation with no obvious exploitable weakness against most opponents.

The strength of the Aussie deuce formation on guy’s serve in mixed was reinforced to me when I was playing 9.0 sectionals back 2006.
My male opponent was an over-60 5.0 who was a former #1 ranked open player in my section. He was an extremely skilled lefty shot-maker (at least 2 levels better than me) but was allowed to play as 5.0 in usta due to age and loss of movement. The first point of the match, on my deuce serve from the standard formation, he smartly exploited our standard formation by hitting a perfect backhand down the line lob, and I had trouble dealing with the high backhand volley and we lost the point. I immediately switched us to Aussie in every deuce serve after that, and I never dropped serve and we won the match (admittedly his 4.0 partner was weak).

I’ve used that formation on 95% of my mixed deuce serve points in my serve ever since.

 

[Dartagnan64]

If OP serves on the ad side and serves wide, that is the opponent's BH. Many players cannot reliably pull that BH return DTL. So your net partner may feel more confident leaving her side for a poach.

Conversely, if OP serves on the deuce side and serves wide, the partner may well be worried about the returner going DTL with a FH. This is a shot many players can make, especially if the alley looks open.

I think that is a big part of it.

Well except the OP tends to serve down the middle to both courts and still runs into the problem.

Lots of MxD partners are locked into the "my side-your side" thinking and tend to react based on how close to their side the ball seems in a split second. It takes practice and intentionality to get MxD partners thinking in terms of strengths and weaknesses and gaining advantage with each shot and avoiding UEs rather than just getting it back.

Rather than trying to tell partners at the net what to do based on their strengths and weaknesses, I appeal to my own strengths and weaknesses. "Please let more balls come through to my forehand, since I can gain some advantage with it." (This amounts to please don't reach so far with your backhand on difficult shots, but is much gentler.) "Please be more aggressive at the net with your FH, since I'm more likely to make a weak reply with my BH."

MxD partners are much more likely to listen when they see the needed actions as helping cover for my weaknesses than they are to listen when they think I'm asking them to make fewer mistakes.

Probably a good way to put things especially with sensitive partners. Fortunately my wife and I don't tend to pull punches and just tell it like it is.

I almost always use Aussie formation when I serve to the deuce court,

A useful solution to the problem. Of course if the opponent does hit DTL I'm facing a BH reply unless its weak enough for me to run around to FH.

 

[travlerajm]

A useful solution to the problem. Of course if the opponent does hit DTL I'm facing a BH reply unless its weak enough for me to run around to FH.

I am always serving and volleying in mixed - as a strong 4.5 in 8.0 I personally find it much easier for me to apply pressure on the opponents when I take everything in the air. But I’m not a big forehand guy.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

I for one poach heavily on serves to the deuce, especially if my partner hits to the T (god bless him) ... I go for it well over 50% of the time ... unless partner is hitting serve wide, then I need to defend that ally a little more.

That attitude is worth a lot in MXD. Perhaps women don't poach because they guy is typically the stronger player and they don't want to take away "his" volley?

I tell my female partners the same thing I tell my male partners: if you can get your racquet on it when it's above the net, go for it. The distance between the two net people is so small that even a mediocre volley can cause the opposing net person to err.

And it's a lot easier to get an aggressive net player to back off then a passive net player to ramp it up.

 

[travlerajm]

I coach my 3.5 mixed partners to stay tight on the net and be aggressive side to side.

I also tell my 3 rules for 3.5 gals when playing the net in 8.0 mixed:
1. Don’t ever back up.
2. Always have fun!
3. Don’t ever back up.

 

[Dartagnan64]

I am always serving and volleying in mixed - as a strong 4.5 in 8.0 I personally find it much easier for me to apply pressure on the opponents when I take everything in the air. But I’m not a big forehand guy.

I’m old. it’s a long way to run to cover that DTL return if it’s coming with any sort of authority. Easier for me to take the return as a groundstroke and then get in.

 

[stapletonj]

I think, since most ladies have 2HBH volleys that part of it is that they feel more confident in their ability to handle a hard hit ball if they have 2 hands on the racket.

Now, I know that may sound sexist, but I'm just speculating.

 

[Dartagnan64]

I think, since most ladies have 2HBH volleys that part of it is that they feel more confident in their ability to handle a hard hit ball if they have 2 hands on the racket.

Now, I know that may sound sexist, but I'm just speculating.

I’ve seen plenty of female pros with 2hbh volleys. Wrist strength is what it is. Don’t think it’s particularly sexist.

But this is why the woman sticking out a racquet on a BH stretch volley rarely works out. You’d need wrists of titanium to put anything on the ball.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

But this is why the woman sticking out a racquet on a BH stretch volley rarely works out. You’d need wrists of titanium to put anything on the ball.

In *theory*, one would not have to put much on the ball if it was directed at the other net person: the lack of time more than the excess of speed is what wins the point. But if they lack control because they are so stretched out and simply cough up a sitter, not a good idea.

 

[Cindysphinx]

I’ve seen plenty of female pros with 2hbh volleys. Wrist strength is what it is. Don’t think it’s particularly sexist.

But this is why the woman sticking out a racquet on a BH stretch volley rarely works out. You’d need wrists of titanium to put anything on the ball.

"Wrist strength" is a myth. I have wrists like a baby bird, and I have no problem hitting a 1HBH volley that is as hard as a peer's 2HBH volley.

We need to debunk this wrist myth, as it is deceiving a lot of women into thinking they must play with a 2HBH volley. Puh.

 

[OnTheLine]

"Wrist strength" is a myth. I have wrists like a baby bird, and I have no problem hitting a 1HBH volley that is as hard as a peer's 2HBH volley.

We need to debunk this wrist myth, as it is deceiving a lot of women into thinking they must play with a 2HBH volley. Puh.

Amen ... I also volley 1H on the BH ... it is nothing but a timing issue and are you hitting it out front moving forward and stepping with the correct foot, even on a reach ... or are hitting it behind you while moving backward and wrong-footed while pointing your racquet down

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Amen ... I also volley 1H on the BH ... it is nothing but a timing issue and are you hitting it out front moving forward and stepping with the correct foot, even on a reach ... or are hitting it behind you while moving backward and wrong-footed while pointing your racquet down

Most coaches/pros/instructors are men so if they think women have weak wrists which would mean problems with a 1HBH volley, that's what they will teach.

 

[stapletonj]

I agree with you Cindysphinx. It is not an ability issue. It is a confidence and mindset issue.

 

[Cindysphinx]

And while I am on an anti-2HBH volley tirade . . .

I'm sorry, but that stroke should be illegal. It is terrible. It has so so many disadvantages that I am tempted to count them:

1. Less reach on BH smash and stab volleys.

2. Player is more likely to take a backswing because they are used to hitting a backswing on a 2HBH groundstroke.

3. For any ball lower than net level, player is more likely to bunt rather than slice.

4. Player is helpless against balls aimed at the body.

5. Player at net must have two hands on the grip, so player cannot put one hand on the throat, for discipline to control the racket head avoid swinging and reaching.

6. Player starts thinking the only good volley is a hard volley, forgetting the importance of touch.

7. Player is terrified at volleying from the service line and tends to crowd the net too much, and player charges too hard from baseline to net out of fear of having to hit a BH volley from NML.

8. Player makes a complete mess of high BH volleys, either being unable to reach them or yanking them down into the net.

I swear, it is criminal. Here you have female players -- who are on average are shorter than male players -- being taught a volley technique that makes them that much easier to lob. What the heck?

No joke, I have been biting my tongue for years. Players with 2HBH volleys are always marvelling at some of the things that can be done with a 1HBH volley, and I want to say: "Look, take three lessons on 1HBH volley from a decent pro, practice with a ball machine. That is all you would need to do to stop blasting your volleys into the net or long."

But that would be rude. TT is the only place where I can rant, so you guys have to indulge me.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

And while I am on an anti-2HBH volley tirade . . .

I'm sorry, but that stroke should be illegal. It is terrible. It has so so many disadvantages that I am tempted to count them:

1. Less reach on BH smash and stab volleys.

2. Player is more likely to take a backswing because they are used to hitting a backswing on a 2HBH groundstroke.

3. For any ball lower than net level, player is more likely to bunt rather than slice.

4. Player is helpless against balls aimed at the body.

5. Player at net must have two hands on the grip, so player cannot put one hand on the throat, for discipline to control the racket head avoid swinging and reaching.

6. Player starts thinking the only good volley is a hard volley, forgetting the importance of touch.

7. Player is terrified at volleying from the service line and tends to crowd the net too much, and player charges too hard from baseline to net out of fear of having to hit a BH volley from NML.

8. Player makes a complete mess of high BH volleys, either being unable to reach them or yanking them down into the net.

I swear, it is criminal. Here you have female players -- who are on average are shorter than male players -- being taught a volley technique that makes them that much easier to lob. What the heck?

No joke, I have been biting my tongue for years. Players with 2HBH volleys are always marvelling at some of the things that can be done with a 1HBH volley, and I want to say: "Look, take three lessons on 1HBH volley from a decent pro, practice with a ball machine. That is all you would need to do to stop blasting your volleys into the net or long."

But that would be rude. TT is the only place where I can rant, so you guys have to indulge me.

Hingis made it work. Yes, I'm cherry picking but if all of the above were true, that means Hingis was one of the best in spite of her 2HBH volley, not because of it. I find that hard to believe.

So are you observing that, on average, the women with 1HBH volleys have better volleys than those with 2HBHs? If so, by a large margin?

I've seen women do fine with a 2HBH volley at the 4.5 MXD level, certainly no worse than if they used 1H. I didn't notice them suffering from any of the weaknesses you mentioned, at least, not any more so than any volleyer would.

And, depending on how you phrase it, I don't think it would be rude to suggest. You just have to know your audience: if she's open-minded and eager to improve, go for it. If she's close-minded and doesn't think she can make such a big change, avoid bringing it up.

 

[travlerajm]

I learned to play tennis in high school as a serve-and-volleyer with a 2hb volley.
I did ok with it. Placed third in state tournament in doubles.

I didn’t start making the switch to a 1hb volley until after high school.

Now I have predominately a 1hb volley, but sometimes use 2hb in certain situations.

There are pros and cons to each.
2hb volley pros:
1. More stable for defensive volleys.
2. Much better at controlling launch angle against spinny passing shots.
3. Better directional control poaches when on top of the net.

2hb volley weaknesses:
1. Hard to generate power on weak sitters.
2. Less reach.
3. Awkward on really low volley digs.

 

[Dartagnan64]

In *theory*, one would not have to put much on the ball if it was directed at the other net person: the lack of time more than the excess of speed is what wins the point. But if they lack control because they are so stretched out and simply cough up a sitter, not a good idea.

If you can get your weight into it, yes. As my pro says, "You volley with your legs". When you re lunging sideways not a lot of momentum going into the volley. And if you lose the "strong L" angle with your racquet and forearm, even less stability.

Amen ... I also volley 1H on the BH ... it is nothing but a timing issue and are you hitting it out front moving forward and stepping with the correct foot, even on a reach ... or are hitting it behind you while moving backward and wrong-footed while pointing your racquet down

Yes you volley with your legs. I have no problem with my mixed partner hitting one or 2HBH volleys with proper form. It's that reaching stretched out crap thing they try when I'm moving in to hit a strong FH. The ball is almost behind them sometimes.

1. Less reach on BH smash and stab volleys.

It's that darn BH stab volley that gets most of them into trouble. And a BH smash? From a 3.0-3.5 player (male of female)? Next time I see a good BH smash volley from that level player, it'll be a first. I've hit one in my life. And everyone on the court applauded because it was the first time they'd seen a good BH volley smash too.

 

[Cindysphinx]

Dartagnan64, I have a 1HBH overhead smash.

But ya gotta ask the right question: What do I mean by "smash"?

I promise you that I am not going Full Sampras and crushing BH overheads with such power that it bounces into the stands over the heads of my discouraged opponents.

It means that I can play those balls. Sometimes aggressively, sometimes defensively, usually crosscourt, sometimes DTL if the starts align.

Now, regarding the reaching, stab volley that you hate so much . . .

Yeah, that's not good. It is better than an untouched winner that she lets go by, but it is definitely not great. For me, it happens because I am more used to the slower pace of the ladies game and I think I can get to things that I cannot. I've already committed, and then we have the stab volley.

 

[OnTheLine]

Dartagnan64,

Now, regarding the reaching, stab volley that you hate so much . . .

Yeah, that's not good. It is better than an untouched winner that she lets go by, but it is definitely not great. For me, it happens because I am more used to the slower pace of the ladies game and I think I can get to things that I cannot. I've already committed, and then we have the stab volley.

He is talking about the one going through the middle .... that one is not going to be an untouched winner ... it is an easy neutral ball for the baseline player .... don't touch it with the stupid lunging stabbing thing .... or go find another partner in mixed or ladies .... if you can't hit it in front of you leave it be.

 

[Cindysphinx]

Hingis made it work. Yes, I'm cherry picking but if all of the above were true, that means Hingis was one of the best in spite of her 2HBH volley, not because of it. I find that hard to believe.

So are you observing that, on average, the women with 1HBH volleys have better volleys than those with 2HBHs? If so, by a large margin?

Yes. My sample size is mostly the women I see in my private clinic. After all, if I see a strange woman with a 1HBH or 2HBH volley in a match, I cannot know what she is capable of, can I? This is especially so if her volley is bad, so she never volleys in matches against me.

But in my clinic, we have a women who volley with 2HBH and some who hit 1HBH. We all came to clinic as 3.0s and rose together to 4.0, so I would say we are pretty typical as a group.

And it is no contest: The 2HBH volley players are considerably weaker with that particular shot. See, the clinic spends a lot of time in volley drills, especially challenging transition volleys and volleys while in a staggered formation at net. No one is allowed to park herself on the net and hit whack-a-mole volleys. And the success rate for the 2HBH players on low, transition volleys in NML (and high ones) is pathetic. They simply cannot dig those BH balls out, and they cannot handle high transition volleys either. They look like pros when they can swat down on a shoulder-high ball at the net, but us 1HBH players can look like champs with those also.

I've seen women do fine with a 2HBH volley at the 4.5 MXD level, certainly no worse than if they used 1H. I didn't notice them suffering from any of the weaknesses you mentioned, at least, not any more so than any volleyer would.

I have seen 4.0 women with 2HBH who play a great net game. They are fast and agile with their hands. Heck, the strongest player in our private clinic hits 2HBH volley, and in the four-up drills she does well. Transition volleys? Yikes. They just don't have that penetrating slice that you need. They are bunts. And in matches she does not come in much.

Now I have predominately a 1hb volley, but sometimes use 2hb in certain situations.

Same here. I hit a 2HBH swing volley, and sometimes I don't get my left hand off the throat fast enough. I would not advise that, however.

There are pros and cons to each.
2hb volley pros:
1. More stable for defensive volleys.
2. Much better at controlling launch angle against spinny passing shots.
3. Better directional control poaches when on top of the net.

2hb volley weaknesses:
1. Hard to generate power on weak sitters.
2. Less reach.
3. Awkward on really low volley digs.

I would quarrel with some of those "pros" for the 2HBH volley.

Like, I don't think there is better directional control when on top of the net. If anything, there is less. The reason, I think, is that you cannot get away with atrocious footwork with a 1HBH volley. Many players my level, however, have zero footwork with a 2HBH volley. They are in the habit of swinging, spreadeagle to the net. So if I see a 2HBH volley during warm-up, I know the odds are that their volley will be crosscourt and hard.

Regarding launch angle against spinny passing shots . . . I'm not sure what that means. I would say the passing shots that give me the most trouble is the dipper to my feet. Still, I think I would be much worse off trying to hit that with 2H.

I don't think we give nearly as much weight to one of the huge advantages of the 1HBH: Balance. If you are dealing with a tricky ball, having that 1H off the racket allows you to keep your balance better. That's crucial for low transition volleys.

 

[Cindysphinx]

He is talking about the one going through the middle .... that one is not going to be an untouched winner ... it is an easy neutral ball for the baseline player .... don't touch it with the stupid lunging stabbing thing .... or go find another partner in mixed or ladies .... if you can't hit it in front of you leave it be.

Oh, I see.

Yeah, I cannot advocate flying over to the middle to hit a wounded duck volley or miss it outright.

But . . . we have to recognize that we're giving mixed messages: "Don't take a middle ball unless you are sure you can hit a really good shot, but be active at the net and be a threat at all times."

When we scold people for their botched middle ball attempts, all we are doing is slowly turning them into statues. I know I also grit my teeth when a partner tries to poach something she should leave and makes a mess. But I hate playing with potted plants more than with the player who sometimes tries to do too much.

I played recently with a woman who would not touch a middle volley if it was low, or hard, or anything but an easy putaway for her. That left me covering a lot of court, including some diving 1HBH volleys that I kind of felt I shouldn't have to hit.

I suspect she had been scolded too much and decided to just, you know, leave everything for her partner.

 

[MathGeek]

Yes you volley with your legs. I have no problem with my mixed partner hitting one or 2HBH volleys with proper form. It's that reaching stretched out crap thing they try when I'm moving in to hit a strong FH. The ball is almost behind them sometimes.

The key is getting everyone on the court thinking about the percentages - to be pre-programmed to go for that shot when on the ad side and the net person is defending the alley side, but to let it go down the middle because the baseliner has a better FH than the net player has a stab BH volley. But as the baseliner, you have to be in position and start moving even if they usually are moving toward the ball also. They need to be able to pull off it and know you'll have it every time. Because if you don't get to it or make a poor FH because you didn't move soon enough, they'll think they should have had it.

I discuss strategy for the whole team, meaning me too. Having one set of guidance when you're at the net and another when your partner at the net is harder to get buy in for. If you want your partner to let a lot more balls go through in the middle, then you need to do the same when you're at the net. Skip the stab volleys and the low percentage BH smash overheads and let those balls through. I try and convince my partners that BH volleys on the inside of the court need to be offensive, high percentage, and gain some advantage compared to letting the ball through to the baseliner's FH. Most players have a good sense for their high percentage strike zone when it comes to their BH volleys and will start letting stuff through that is outside their strike zone if they learn to trust the baseliner is backing them up. Reserving low percentage BH volleys for the outside of the court (in or toward the alley) can be learned with discipline, but it is less likely if you don't discipline yourself also.

It's also not an approach that is easy to turn on and off. If your MxD partner often partners with others (in MxD or ladies') where players stick to a more strict my side-your side approach, it's harder for them to build and maintain good habits of letting inside BH volleys through if they are low percentage. Everything is happening so fast, they react instinctively, and if they can't trust other partners to "Have their back" they may not even remember who is behind them in that instant. Lots of baseline partners won't expend the energy and start moving toward the middle reliably, so letting those balls through is giving up lots of winners.

 

[Dartagnan64]

It's also not an approach that is easy to turn on and off. If your MxD partner often partners with others (in MxD or ladies') where players stick to a more strict my side-your side approach, it's harder for them to build and maintain good habits of letting inside BH volleys through if they are low percentage. Everything is happening so fast, they react instinctively, and if they can't trust other partners to "Have their back" they may not even remember who is behind them in that instant. Lots of baseline partners won't expend the energy and start moving toward the middle reliably, so letting those balls through is giving up lots of winners.

And yet they seem to have no problem letting those FH volleys down the middle go to my BH when I'm taking my first step to the alley to cover the CC return.

 

[Cawlin]

I can't say I've noticed this tendency for my female partners to go for the less "intuitive" BH poach vs. FH poach pwhen I played mixed...

To be completely honest, I'd just have been happy to have a female partner who actually poached or even tried to hit a volley that wasn't exactly right to her, whether it was BH or FH, I wouldn't care, I'd have been too busy jumping for joy that I wouldn't have noticed FH or BH...

 

[MathGeek]

And yet they seem to have no problem letting those FH volleys down the middle go to my BH when I'm taking my first step to the alley to cover the CC return.

It takes intentional communication for most MxD players to expand their FH volley zone and shrink their BH volley zone. My approach is admitting my BH is weak, complimenting their FH volley skills, and asking them explicitly to be more aggressive on their FH side to help cover my BH weaknesses. Players tend to respond better when emphasizing your own weaknesses and their strengths, even if the implications are obviously the same when the roles are reversed.

Most players see their zones of effectiveness as roughly equal on their BH and FH sides when at the net. The transition to seeing one's FH zone of effectiveness as a lot bigger takes time, practice, and intentional communication. If you have not provided intentional communication and gentle encouragement, then you should not be surprised or disappointed when net players continue to see their FH and BH volley effectiveness zones as roughly equal.

 

[Dartagnan64]

It takes intentional communication for most MxD players to expand their FH volley zone and shrink their BH volley zone.

It does indeed. I just find it interesting that I seem to have to remind my mixed partner almost every match to be less aggressive on the BH volley side and more aggressive on the FH volley side.

Most players see their zones of effectiveness as roughly equal on their BH and FH sides when at the net. The transition to seeing one's FH zone of effectiveness as a lot bigger takes time, practice, and intentional communication

It's not even about their zone of effectiveness, it's also about my zone of effectiveness. I'm going to have a far weaker answer to a ball hit down the middle when I'm at the baseline in deuce court. I'm going to have a far stronger answer when a ball comes down the middle when I'm at the ad side deep. I do have to keep reminding my partners of that fact.

To be completely honest, I'd just have been happy to have a female partner who actually poached or even tried to hit a volley that wasn't exactly right to her, whether it was BH or FH, I wouldn't care, I'd have been too busy jumping for joy that I wouldn't have noticed FH or BH...

TBH I've had a fair amount of partners, male and female, that are pretty hopeless poaching. I tell my partner I'm sending my first four "first" serves down the T. I hit my spot. Opponent is stretching out for the weak reply. My partner is glued a step away from the alley hoping the ball might come their way rather than getting ready to track it down like a hungry wolf. I feel like screaming "go get it!"

 

[Dartagnan64]

When we scold people for their botched middle ball attempts, all we are doing is slowly turning them into statues. I know I also grit my teeth when a partner tries to poach something she should leave and makes a mess. But I hate playing with potted plants more than with the player who sometimes tries to do too much.

My scolding goes both ways. If you leave a middle ball to your FH side I'll tell you that was your ball and be aggressive on it. If you take a stab at a middle ball to your BH side that will do nothing but neutralize the point, I'll let you know that I've got a FH coming in to take that ball and it might be best to leave it.

In fact, I might tell you that I don't want you there anyways because you left a hug gap DTL to cover something that was already covered. My general strategy from ad side is hit a return wide CC and move in. Since I'm coming in and the opponent is out wide, anything the opponent hits DTL will be a winner if the net guy decides middle balls are his.

I prefer that first and foremost, we position to cover the court and give the opponents a wall to hit against with no wide open gaps. The people I play with are generally too good to not take advantage of uncovered court.

 

[MathGeek]

It does indeed. I just find it interesting that I seem to have to remind my mixed partner almost every match to be less aggressive on the BH volley side and more aggressive on the FH volley side.

I need to remind myself often that I'm asking for a lot of players at my level. Most of the time, one is lucky to find a partner who is even capable of making fine adjustments to their level of aggression, say turning it up or down 10% at a time rather than 50-100%. But what we're asking partners to do at the net is even more complicated, because it is a conditional level of aggression based on four conditions: inside BH, alley BH, inside FH, outside FH. Further adding to the challenge is that the decision gets made in a split second.

My wife does better in stretches when I'm her only doubles partner. Playing doubles with other partners tends to have her reverting to the mean approach for doubles at the level of a 3.5 female which tends toward my side-your side and equal FH-BH aggressiveness. She simply cannot trust other doubles partners to already be moving when she lets BH volleys through on her side and to leg out everything game after game on the baseline. Nor can she trust most partners to overlook the occasional FH volley error or common FH volley encroachments onto their side. She feels like a ball hog on the FH side and like a slacker on the BH side to play the same way with others as she does with me, so she reverts to her high school training and common doubles expectations.