Placement of the return and first volley in doubles

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
I have heard two schools of thought concerning the placement of the return and first volley in doubles, so I am wondering what you all think.

One pro advocates hitting the return (and when S&V the approach volley) deep and crosscourt and following it in. The idea is that you want to keep the crosscourt opponent back. This cuts off his angles, gives you more time to move in to net, keeps him back on his heels. Hitting the return or approach volley short, this pro says, allows the opponent to run in and tee off on the ball if the ball sits up at all. Hitting deep jams the opponent and takes away time, which may cause a lob (read "overhead opportunity").

Another pro advocates hitting the return (and when S&V the approach volley) short and crosscourt and following it in. This forces the opponent to run forward, which will cause them to pop the ball up for a put-away for the net player. If the opponent has already decided to take the net, the short return will put the ball on their shoetops. The short return also makes it difficult for the opponent to lob, so you can feel comfortable taking the net without fear of being lobbed.

So who is right?
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
Neither and both.
If you have control on either extreme depth or short angle, you should just put the ball away, period.
Most volleys, you're between extreme offense and pure defense.
Volleys where you can't put the ball away, but have the offensive advantage, like waist high volleys, you hit hard low between the two players, aiming for just beyond the service line, backcourt player's side of the court.
Low volleys and half volleys, you can only safely go wide angle NML depth. If you go deeper, the netperson poaches your higher ball. When that get's killed, go lob volley DTL if netperson shows anxiety to poach or cover the center.
Any chest high volley should basically be a winner or forcing shot, so it can be between the players hard low, or NML deep wide, with enough pace to solicit a weak stabbing return or just a clean winner.
Very few players lesser than JonnyMac can angle low volleys or hit them deep CC past the netperson.
 

Noisy Ninja

Semi-Pro
I tend to lean towards your first pro's school of thought in that hitting deep allows you more time and opportunity to gain control of the net. At the advanced doubles level...hitting short is potentially disastrous unless you already have full control of the net and have the benefit of better angles and net clearance. If you intentionally hit a short approach, you're intentionally giving away the net advantage. That might work with lower skilled opponents but against advanced doubles players...it's usually a losing proposition.
Saying that though...I somewhat agree with LeeD in that your choice of return and/or volley will more often than not be dictated by the quality of your opponent's shot; on difficult shots, you're basically reacting to the shot and trying to direct it away from the opposing net person foremost.
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
Personally, I just try to bounce my shot off of the crosscourt player's shoes, wherever they happen to be.

If she stays back, hit deep. If she comes in, hit short.

Still, clinic pros have to give students a rule of thumb, so I am surprised that there is such a divergence of opinion among pros I think are very good.
 

Bud

Bionic Poster
I have heard two schools of thought concerning the placement of the return and first volley in doubles, so I am wondering what you all think.

One pro advocates hitting the return (and when S&V the approach volley) deep and crosscourt and following it in. The idea is that you want to keep the crosscourt opponent back. This cuts off his angles, gives you more time to move in to net, keeps him back on his heels. Hitting the return or approach volley short, this pro says, allows the opponent to run in and tee off on the ball if the ball sits up at all. Hitting deep jams the opponent and takes away time, which may cause a lob (read "overhead opportunity").

Another pro advocates hitting the return (and when S&V the approach volley) short and crosscourt and following it in. This forces the opponent to run forward, which will cause them to pop the ball up for a put-away for the net player. If the opponent has already decided to take the net, the short return will put the ball on their shoetops. The short return also makes it difficult for the opponent to lob, so you can feel comfortable taking the net without fear of being lobbed.

So who is right?

IMO, this works more effectively, overall. But good players can do both depending on the opponents.
 

user92626

G.O.A.T.
Personally, I just try to bounce my shot off of the crosscourt player's shoes, wherever they happen to be.

If she stays back, hit deep. If she comes in, hit short.

Still, clinic pros have to give students a rule of thumb, so I am surprised that there is such a divergence of opinion among pros I think are very good.

And if she stays behind the baseline, you hit out? hehe

But seriously, if you could accurately hit to opponent's shoes, you'd beat 99% of opponents out there.
 

Maui19

Hall of Fame
I'm not entirely sure I get all your scenarios, but in general I am going deep cross court with my return (or serve n volley). Short in these situations is a bad play because you give your opponent 1) better angles; 2) a good chance to tee off on your partner; 3) a lot of easy lob opportunities.

However there are a lot of good other places to go with your return other than just long/short cross court.
 

Bagumbawalla

Talk Tennis Guru
If you come in behind the ball, and can consistantly hit low to the feet of your opponent, and you volley well, then this is your prefered shot (of the two choices).

If you drive the ball deep and come in, and the opponent stays back, you may find the ball at your own feet.

If you hit the return short and low and the opponent comes in and you stay back, you may get a drop volley or angled placement and have to scramble.

Of course, you need to mix things up or the opponents will adapt.
 
I try to go short and cross court. The main idea is to force your opponent to move: this will hinder his ability to approach the net, and he may be off balance. The strength of this is that the sharp angle will force the opponent to either hit to your partner or try for a sharp angle. You mention that the opponent can easily attack if you hit a poor return, but that is true for whatever plan you try to implement.
 

Bergboy123

Semi-Pro
The way I see it, is that it could be either of the two, like Lee said. I hate when tennis becomes a mathematical sport, where "If opponent A hits particular shot X, then player B MUST hit shot Y." It seems that this detracts mostly from the fun of tennis, but also from being creative.

Obviously there are recommended shots and particular plays that are higher percentage, etc. But debating over short or long for the first volley seems a little extreme to me. Personally in a match it depends on the return I get before I decide whether or not to go deep. If I see somebody approaching the net I'll go ahead and hit it deep (sometimes just deep, sometimes at them, sometimes lob, depends on the day :) ) Then again sometimes I'll go for the angle or the dropshot, or maybe I just won't be able to hit a picture perfect shot that does exactly what I want it to do.

Think of Federer, and how people rave about his "creativity" and how highlight reels (I watch them by the hour, haha!) are filled with shots that are the opposite of what people are expecting. That's what makes tennis amazing, and fun, at least for me to try to imitate!
 

SystemicAnomaly

Bionic Poster
see which works best that day and which you do best.
some days one will be better and the other on some days.

Not a bad idea. Master both approaches. Cindy, you might also have more success with method A against some opponents while method B might be more effective against others. Mix it up and try both -- see what works best against a given opponent.
 

spaceman_spiff

Hall of Fame
As others have said, both work depending on the situation. If the opponent stays back on serve, deep returns work best. If he/she rushes the net, short returns dip at the feet.

A third option that works well for me is driving a hard return down the middle. I only use it when facing net players who are reluctant to poach, but it can be quite effective. If the server stays back, he/she has no angle to work with on the subsequent groundstroke. And, if he/she rushes the net, the return splits the two players.

Of course, you have to keep the net player honest with some DTL returns or else he/she will poach anything you hit DTM.
 
Top