You don't have to have an above-average serve unless you're not good at approaching. Similarly, you don't need above-aver speed and/or reach unless you suck at approaching. If you do an average topspin serve to the backhand (or whichever is the weaker side) or body, and you know how to approach with proper footwork and approach volley, you can be very successful at serve and volley tennis. You're right, it's not just about charging the net after every serve; you have to be smart about it. But you definitely don't need an above-average serve or above average speed and/or reach to do it successfully.
Serve and volley works better
- Thread starter atp2015
- Start date
dominikk1985
Legend
Really the biggest factor is being comfortable in hitting volleys and overheads.
Some people just aren't comfortable hitting balls out of the air because everything is a little quicker plus you have to decide wether it is in or out. Hitting a volley is a bit like hitting a good fastball, reaction time is short and you need to decide if it is a ball or strike.
Hitting a volley or smash isn't hard. A bit of technique is needed but it is mostly a matter of confidence and intent. If you are afraid to miss you won't hit it just like a guy scared facing 90 in baseball won't do much in the box.
So if you are insecure about hitting volleys with less than half a second of reaction time and you are afraid to miss overheads just stay back.
Now a good serve does make it easier but there have been plenty of successful serve and volley players without huge serves even more recently. henmans serve wasn't much better than the serve of nishikori or ferrer and he made some Wimbledon semis and I think even a FO semi.
Most important is to feel comfortable at the net and move well there.
Some people just aren't comfortable hitting balls out of the air because everything is a little quicker plus you have to decide wether it is in or out. Hitting a volley is a bit like hitting a good fastball, reaction time is short and you need to decide if it is a ball or strike.
Hitting a volley or smash isn't hard. A bit of technique is needed but it is mostly a matter of confidence and intent. If you are afraid to miss you won't hit it just like a guy scared facing 90 in baseball won't do much in the box.
So if you are insecure about hitting volleys with less than half a second of reaction time and you are afraid to miss overheads just stay back.
Now a good serve does make it easier but there have been plenty of successful serve and volley players without huge serves even more recently. henmans serve wasn't much better than the serve of nishikori or ferrer and he made some Wimbledon semis and I think even a FO semi.
Most important is to feel comfortable at the net and move well there.
kramer woodie
Professional
time_fly
I tend to agree with you. You must have a decent serve, something players can not tee-off on, but most important serve placement is
probably most important. You'll want to pull you opponent off the court which means hitting angles. Today you will not go to the net on
every serve because there is no surprise in hitting the same serve every time. Use the serve to pull opponents off wide and also jam the
body.
Yes, you must be fleet afoot. All players who use S&V have excellent footwork, are light on their feet, and relatively fast. There movement becomes ingrained, there is a feeling (a rhythm) to it.
As for reach, while not so important. I know a 5 foot 5 inch tall 40 plus year old ex-pro who excelled at doubles, which is not true S&V,
but doubles uses S&V technique. At 5' 5" his serve is/was just above average, however his serve accuracy is excellent. I have seen many
college players suffer in singles at his hands. This ex-pro is known for being a grinder, but he still mixes in S&V. He is short and his arms
are short, but you would be amazed how he comes to the net and knows when to come to the net. He knows how to use his tremendous
speed. Let's call him Flash. Speed makes up for short reach.
You will never be a serve and volleyer unless you practice it and find out what works and what doesn't. So, as the saying goes, "nothing ventured, nothing gained".
Aloha
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
"I didn't fail. I just discovered many ways NOT to make a light bulb." [paraphrasing Edison, on his many unsuccessful attempts]
D
Deleted member 23235
Guest
D
Deleted member 23235
Guest
for me, i don't see many rallies go past 6... occasionally a 10-15 ball rally, but less frequent
so explosive 2-3 ball s&v exchnage vs. 4-5 ball rally on avg.. for me s&v consumes more energy.
Are there any general rules of thumb of when is a typically "good" time to serve and volley, if one were to significantly incorporate it into a game plan without exclusively committing to do it on every point? Or is that one of those infinite "depends on ____" scenario type of question? I'm thinking of someone like Pete Sampras who used it frequently enough but wasn't actually a "full time" S&Ver, and I'm wondering if there was a general pattern that he went by in using (or not using) the S&V.
atp2015
Hall of Fame
If you hit a good serve and If you expect that to be a weak reply, snv is the way to go.
Snv requires proper footwork, otherwise it's going to be tiring like nyta mentioned above.
If you want your opponent to go for shots and not just block back or redirect, throw in snv and you can expect an attempt to hit harder.
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
The problem is that by the time you've figured out it was a good serve, you've lost critical time and space. it's even worse if you wait for the weak reply. That's "serve and wait and then maybe volley". S&V is committing a priori that you're going to come in.
It also can be tiring even if one does have proper footwork!
+1: lesser opponents who are otherwise quite good at blocking it back deep will start making errors and handing over points because they know you are closing in. Better opponents welcome a target and you will get passed more.
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
If you can establish patterns [ie Deuce court high kicker DTM usually produces a weak return], then exploit them for all they're worth. A worthy opponent will adjust, though. Then you have to adjust. Then he'll adjust. Cat & Mouse. One of the aspects that makes S&V interesting.
I can't speak for Sampras. I keep up S&V until my opponent shows he can consistently beat me off of the return; I don't care if he knows I'm coming in every time [I lack subtlety that way]. If he can, I'll change things up and become more selective.
atp2015
Hall of Fame
I didn't mean to say wait until you see a weak reply. I said if you expect a weak reply. Even before starting the point, the server will know whether he is capable of hitting a good serve (as opposed to a dink or a weak serve with no pace or spin) and how the opponent replies most of the time.
All in the realm of expected serve and return.
rogerroger917
Hall of Fame
The majority of you are missing the gist of the stats for brain game. I have the courses and it is way more specific and nuanced than that. It is not really about serving and then volley.
coupergear
Professional
What is the gist?
rogerroger917
Hall of Fame
Never approach the net to the opponents fh. Never.
Build the point so you can approach into the backhand. And do not hit the approach too close to the side line unless you can get a clean winner. Set up the approach into volley with what he calls, "climbing the ladder". Not serve and volley.
He does not say the stats support using serve and volley. Just that the percentage play is going forward into the court with the Ground strokes and building if needed into an approach and volley. There is all these stats. And rules. For the most part it's pretty smart and works. For high level play. And the stats are skewed for volleys because the players he uses are only approaching on great approach shots and always gets an easy volley. They are building the point in a specific way he found out.
For rec guys like 4.0? Do not think it will work at all. 4.0 players do not own the shots to apply these methods. Most 4.0 players cannot even hit a clean volley. Never mind a proper approach shot.
atp2015
Hall of Fame
Agreed, nobody should go anywhere near water until they learn to swim first.
You can easily drown if you don't know how to swim.
golden chicken
Hall of Fame
I couldn't hit a clean groundstroke, so I figured I'd better get closer to the net and volley. You can shank a volley and still put it in the court for a winner at any level.
Sure, your point construction has to be simpler, but an equal opponent doesn't have the abilities to construct a complicated point either, so I think it all evens out in the end.
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
I don't see how I can practically apply that concept. I know I can hit a reasonably strong serve that will give the returner problems. But I don't KNOW that to be the case on that one particular serve until the point actually starts. I could hit the serve less well than I expected. My opponent could return better than expected. Both things I won't discover until it's too late to actually S&V.
My approach is much simpler: if I'm winning by S&V, I'll continue to S&V.
rogerroger917
Hall of Fame
Lol....
atp2015
Hall of Fame
I agree, my approach requires some intelligence and not applicable for people who like to follow a static/non thinking approach to the game.
Last edited:
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
Why?
I'd understand it if you were terrible at S&V and great on the BL but insisted on S&V every time. As your partner, I might advise you to stick with your strengths. OTOH, if you're trying to improve and you want to throw in some S&V, I'd be all for it.
Another possibility is if you DF a lot more when S&V because you feel pressure to hit a better serve.
But other than that, making an error on your volley is the same point as making an error with a GS.
I feel the same guilt no matter how I messed up.
Again: why?
Most of my opponents S&V the majority of the time as do I. I fail to see how that's rude. Rude to whom? My partner? My opponents?
What does that have to do with how often you S&V, unless you are a weak S&Ver and your team is losing your serve mainly because of your tactic?
If we lose every time my partner serves, it could be because I'm not doing enough at the net, not because my partner is not serving or volleying well enough.
Curious
G.O.A.T.
I'm the only one in the club that serves and volleys and i want to do it on every point. So i thought i would be more likely to be blamed for losing although i would probably drop about the same number of games either way.
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
Well, is your team losing your serve because of errors you made or your partner?
If most of the errors are yours, would you have made them if you had stayed on the BL?
Remember, the net man has a large role in whether the server does well. It's a team effort. Too often less experienced doubles players think "my partner can't hold serve" when in fact they as the net man were alley camping and doing nothing to help out.
What level players are at this club? I can't think of any large group of doubles players that range up through 5.0 to have only 1 person that plays S&V.
Curious
G.O.A.T.
Not quite sure whose mistake it usually is. Will check it tonight.
Yeah it's a group of guys like 3.5 to 5.0 and yes none of them ever s&v!
coupergear
Professional
Thanks.
I do recall though several articles where it seemed that O'S was saying SnV and net forays were underutilized at the pro level--seemed to be advocating for more--didn't give all the context you provide, which basically is saying never approach until you are in firm control, get a short ball, and can rip to the BH. I think those early articles he either wasn't saying, or wasn't grasping the bias that you mention--that what look like good net percentages, which might indicate approaching more, actually are the result of a dominant baseline game--they don't stand alone. The point is won from the baseline, even if ultimately a volley is hit to finish the point.
rogerroger917
Hall of Fame
He makes you pay for the exact scenarios of working into the net and or moving into the court to finish. The practice patterns are very specific and gathered from ATP players based on points won and his analysis. Also he examines specific matches of different players on ATP. And the breakdowns are pretty illuminating. It was hard at first for my kid and other juniors to apply. But most of it easily fits into any type of player. You are really looking for that 2 or 3 points more per set that can turn the match in your favor. But this requires a very high skill set. Which is why I say for recreational players his methods do not make sense.
IowaGuy
Hall of Fame
Depends where the net person is and how tough of a volley you're facing.
When in doubt, "down the middle solves the riddle"...
Curious
G.O.A.T.
Suppose the net person is at the net.
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
Suppose the net person is at the net.
It depends on a lot of things:
- how far away from the net are you
- how in balance are you
- what kind of pressure are you under [is the volley offensive, neutral, or defensive]
- where is the returner [did he return and stay back or come in] and how is his balance
- is the net man poaching/leaning or do you strongly suspect he will poach
There are too many variables to give a certain answer. A *typical* first volley will be hit from somewhere around the SL in reasonable balance in which case I usually try to go back deep unless my drop volley is really working that day or I want to go at the net man.
Otherwise, all of the above factors [plus more] come into play that will alter my response.
Watch doubles on YouTube and take some stats on where the first volley goes.
Curious
G.O.A.T.
Is aiming at the feet of the returner a good idea, assuming he is not chipping and charging?
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
Not if he's standing behind the BL!
Even if he's C&C, aiming at the feet is good.
if he stays on the BL, sure aim deep, preferably low with some slice.
But don't ignore the short volley that stays low: it rips people out of their BL comfort zone and forces them to contact the ball from closer to the net than they're accustomed. This alone can cause errors [ie hitting long because they didn't adjust the trajectory]. And even if they make the shot, they're now in a compromised position.
It also reduces your chance of hitting long to close to zero.
Curious
G.O.A.T.
Sorry to hijack the thread and make it a one on one lesson.
What's the best place to serve from with S&V?
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
Sorry to hijack the thread and make it a one on one lesson.
What's the best place to serve from with S&V?
What do you think I'm going to say? "It depends"!
- If your partner is signalling or in I formation, you should be a lot closer to the centerline than normal
- If you have a good wide serve and your partner isn't poaching, you'll probably want to stand wider
- If you're trying to hit a specific serve [say, body], perhaps you want to line up in a certain position [although better opponents will start picking up on those patterns]
Experiment! Start halfway between the centerline and the singles sideline and move around to try and find your sweet spot [where you get the best aggregate results over all of the different types of serves you like to hit]. What's optimal for me won't necessarily be optimal for you.
Curious
G.O.A.T.
Damn! No shortcuts.What do you think I'm going to say? "It depends"!
- If your partner is signalling or in I formation, you should be a lot closer to the centerline than normal
- If you have a good wide serve and your partner isn't poaching, you'll probably want to stand wider
- If you're trying to hit a specific serve [say, body], perhaps you want to line up in a certain position [although better opponents will start picking up on those patterns]
Experiment! Start halfway between the centerline and the singles sideline and move around to try and find your sweet spot [where you get the best aggregate results over all of the different types of serves you like to hit]. What's optimal for me won't necessarily be optimal for you.
IowaGuy
Hall of Fame
Suppose the net person is at the net.
At 4.0-ish, sometimes they are standing near/on the service line, sometimes their balls are hanging over the net...
coupergear
Professional
Interesting. I've always been skeptical of a lot of data crunching with regards to tennis, in fact calling tennis a "brain game" kind of annoys me, because I believe it's misleading marketing. IMO, tennis at the pro level doesn't take a lot of brainpower, rather, it takes a lot of technique. Years of it. Since childhood of it. Ultimately, the guy who has the biggest, most consistent strokes, best racket skills, wins. True, you can't be an idiot and keep trying losing patterns--but are there any pros who are underachieving because they don't play smart enough? (OK besides the Australians) No. They just can't hang with the better players--their strokes break down with errors or weaker balls, sooner. You don't see smart crafty guys with inferior strokes, armed with a bunch of IBM Watson analysis, winning on tour. If you shank the ball on shot #3, you never get to climb the ladder at shot #4, 5 and 6. You can't "build the point" if you're scrambling to stay alive in the point. You have to be able to execute. Even BG, I'm sorry, he could hit the ball a little. He underrates himself, that's his schtick--but he was a rock solid player and great athlete in his day.
Morch Us
Hall of Fame
I agree with our local TT S&V experts above. The correct answer is "depends". But I guess you have to start somewhere, and learn from mistakes. Try the below base scenario and see.
On deuce court serve to T, first volley take from around service lane area and hit cross court to service lane area. Second volley take from inside the service lane and finish with a short angle.
Expect something to go wrong, and analyze, make adjustments, rinse and repeat.
For many, the first two shots (serve and first volley) works better by not allowing the opponent to see open angles (jamming), and free swing (shots to weaker side, low balls or pace), plus having a good balance to yourself (balanced first step after serve, buying time with low-effort deep-kick serves). But you have to find your comfort zone.
On deuce court serve to T, first volley take from around service lane area and hit cross court to service lane area. Second volley take from inside the service lane and finish with a short angle.
Expect something to go wrong, and analyze, make adjustments, rinse and repeat.
For many, the first two shots (serve and first volley) works better by not allowing the opponent to see open angles (jamming), and free swing (shots to weaker side, low balls or pace), plus having a good balance to yourself (balanced first step after serve, buying time with low-effort deep-kick serves). But you have to find your comfort zone.
Last edited:
Curious
G.O.A.T.
Thank you. More questions while I have you here
.Is it a good idea to keep changing everything with serve like spin, speed, placement, even deliberately hitting a slower first serve at times?
To be a real and committed student of S&V, should I do it on 2nd serves as well?
2good4U
Professional
Serve & volley works against players that go ******** when someone attacks the net.
[just check out Nishikori's latest loss]
There are some very effective strategies one can employ against Paul Annacone clones,
like lobbing or blasting the ball low and right at the desperately pathetic net-rusher.
One reason attacking the net might work nowadays is it's not done a lot, so the very
effective strategies against aren't used much either. [would change, if used more]
Hell, most pros, even the top ones forget the cardinal rule of lobbing, always go for the
opposite corner, which gains a few feet of extra space, for margin of error.
And on a personal note, would there be any more unwatchable match than one between
Paul Annacone and Taylor Dent? Not for me at least, might as well be doubles.
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
Thank you. More questions while I have you here
Is it a good idea to keep changing everything with serve like spin, speed, placement, even deliberately hitting a slower first serve at times?
If it's a match and what I'm currently doing is working, why change? I could wear a shirt that says "I'm serving to your BH" and it might not make a difference: even if he knows what's coming, that's not the same as being able to counter it. So why take risk and change things up?
OTOH, if it's practice, sure, change things up to get comfortable doing things you're not as good at.
I do. But against better opponents, I adjust because they may be teeing off on my 2nd serve and making life difficult for me.
Think of it this way: how much more practice of S&V will you get if you do it on every serve?
In doubles, the chances of getting passed are much reduced so S&V on the 2nd isn't as high risk. But there are always returners who put everything at your shoelaces.
All that being said, the asymmetry of S&V is a blast; it might even be more exciting for my opponent [regardless of who wins].
Morch Us
Hall of Fame
@Curious I think you should try it only on first serves for now, especially if you are playing sets. In fact do your first serve as second serve (so that the second serve question becomes irrelevant, since you are never missing first serve). Your partner may not be too happy if you loose too many points too fast. In fact practice it in some drills/restricted games with your partner. There is a lot of "what to do instinct" that need to be there for good S&V, and it does not come via theory.
I would actually try to stick to the basics of S&V first, and make it work a few times, before complicating it with variations. Obviously you need variations eventually. But if you have too many variables to think about, you wont even know how/what happened when it goes bad/good. Keep it simple for now. The basics are not allowing the returner to swing free, or having angles open for first return. And making them hit the ball up on second shot, and working your way to correct position by then. You can repeat the same by sticking to the same things over and over.
Variations are a bit overrated at rec-level. You will obviously know clearly when the opponent learn your stuff, and change it only when forced to. Another time to go for a variation is when clearly the opponent is not paying attention (flatfooted to one side).
I would actually try to stick to the basics of S&V first, and make it work a few times, before complicating it with variations. Obviously you need variations eventually. But if you have too many variables to think about, you wont even know how/what happened when it goes bad/good. Keep it simple for now. The basics are not allowing the returner to swing free, or having angles open for first return. And making them hit the ball up on second shot, and working your way to correct position by then. You can repeat the same by sticking to the same things over and over.
Variations are a bit overrated at rec-level. You will obviously know clearly when the opponent learn your stuff, and change it only when forced to. Another time to go for a variation is when clearly the opponent is not paying attention (flatfooted to one side).
Thank you. More questions while I have you here
Is it a good idea to keep changing everything with serve like spin, speed, placement, even deliberately hitting a slower first serve at times?
To be a real and committed student of S&V, should I do it on 2nd serves as well?
Last edited:
IowaGuy
Hall of Fame
I would love to watch that!
EDIT: As long as I'm not on the receiving end of this of course.
LocNetMonster
Professional
duplicate post
Dartagnan64
G.O.A.T.
I think my rallies are generally no more than 4-5 shots on most occasions. I'm looking to end points quickly and not stay in points endlessly. If you are pushing I'm hitting to your BH and coming in and the point will end right there one way or another. If you are hitting out, then first one to hit a winner gets the point (first one to error loses). Either way short points.
Similar threads
