Serving and volleying as amateurs

[SV10is]

I think this strategy is underutilized by amateurs.

If you are playing quite a bit of doubles, you're likely developing exactly the kinds of skills you would need to implement a serve and volley strategy in singles. You're going to have to hit a lot more balls inside the court and, in particular, situations where you have to volley, half-volley and hit overheads are much more common. It's also a game where angles are well rewarded, so you learn to put away those balls pretty effectively. All you need on top of this is to perform serve and volley in singles is a good serve. Since I've managed to developed a pretty nasty kick serve and have played a lot of doubles this year which improved my net game, I started playing serve and volley off both first and second serves some 75% of the time. I've had some pretty decent success with that strategy.

A lot of the aversion to playing that kind of tennis from amateurs seem to stem from concerns that do not apply at their own level of play or neglects what many amateurs can do. Here's a few things I learned so far:

1. Movement kills returns of serve and all you want is to force a bad contact on their return. Take a clue from how Stefan Edberg used to play his game and privilege your best approximation of a kick serve over a flat serve (most of the time). It gives you a bit more time to come in and a slower serve that moves tends to give you more frequent bad contacts. If your swing isn't quite right and you open up too early, you're going to slice the ball a bit too much and you won't get that signature kick serve shape, but you can still get a decent bounce and it's going to be plenty annoying for players at your own level if that's all you can manage to do. Just keep in mind that your goal is to get a less than ideal contact so your first volley is doable;
2. No, they can't lob you to death. The best time to lob you would be off your first volley and not off the serve. The later means lobbing off a serve while you're almost dead center in the court, so they'll hit that lob too long or too short way more often than you think. It's a much easier play for them to do it later, but then it's just a question of what you practice. If you play a lot of doubles and S&V in singles, you'll eventually have an overhead to match the quality of lobs your level of play can offer reliably;
3. It's mentally challenging for your opponent too. S&V means you're forcing your opponent to play into your gamble and to face very unusual conditions. Most people who play singles spend time working on their baseline game. They probably like getting into a groove, enjoying a typical rhythm, playing longer points, and working with the opponents' pace, but playing S&V means you take all of that away from them. Your volleys will rarely have the punch of a good ground stroke, they're usually going to stay low and you reliably can play great angles or force your opponent forward with a shorter volley when you get close enough to the net. If they struggle with pushers, they're not going to do much better here.

Of course, how often you should use it depends on your skill set. It highlights some of the things I do better on a tennis court and I find it very fun to play, so I do it quite a lot. But even a baseline player can benefit from it, if only because it keeps opponents from just floating returns deep.

 

[Steady Eddy]

I think there is no reason for the net game to be dead at lower levels. At lower levels the passing shots are also lower.

I play lots of doubles and am used to volleying. But I'm not used to moving much. Sharing coverage of the net with a partner is a lot easier than covering it all alone. The ball just won't come to me when at the net in singles, I've got to move, and move soon. I need better anticipation; got to read my opponent's stance and racket to get a jump on where it's going. If it's inscrutable, guess. I see ATP players miss-guess all the time. When they guess right I probably cannot tell. I've got to quit standing there getting passed when I still had a 50-50 chance at the ball.

 

[SV10is]

I think there is no reason for the net game to be dead at lower levels. At lower levels the passing shots are also lower.

I play lots of doubles and am used to volleying. But I'm not used to moving much. Sharing coverage of the net with a partner is a lot easier than covering it all alone. The ball just won't come to me when at the net in singles, I've got to move, and move soon. I need better anticipation; got to read my opponent's stance and racket to get a jump on where it's going. If it's inscrutable, guess. I see ATP players miss-guess all the time. When they guess right I probably cannot tell. I've got to quit standing there getting passed when I still had a 50-50 chance at the ball.

You can usually read it, but it's true that you need to keep moving. Your goal is to get to the ball, even if you're already closer to it.

And you should be moving a bit even in doubles. No need to stand like a deer in the headlights if you see them about to lob, say.

 

[Steady Eddy]

You can usually read it, but it's true that you need to keep moving. Your goal is to get to the ball, even if you're already closer to it.

And you should be moving a bit even in doubles. No need to stand like a deer in the headlights if you see them about to lob, say.

I have so much trouble moving back for a lob. I waste about 2.2 seconds saying to myself, "Oh no! A lob. Well, maybe it will be short. Too late." I could get to balls like that playing infield, but not in tennis. I should have someone lob me while I catch them with a glove for practice. I'm serious.

 

[eah123]

I think your ideas on ways to use S&V to win matches are very good. I can tell you personally, as a self-taught player who never attended clinics, my skill level at serving far exceeded my ground strokes for the first few years of playing because I could just practice on my own with a basket of balls for hours. Even though my volley skills were not great, if I could get close to net it didn’t matter much. Even miss hit volleys close to net usually result in winners. So I won a lot of matches just playing S&V and chip and charge almost every point.

Now I try to be patient and build the point from the baseline as my ground strokes have improved a lot. Winning points using S&V feels like cheating!

 

[LuckyR]

Playing S&V on occasion, say game point or break point against, against a typical, Modern power baseliner is a great way to shift pressure to the other guy and get easy, free points. OTOH, playing S&V every single point against a Modern power baseliner is a great way to work on your half volleys or to put it another way not a great strategy, not dissimilar to the Pros.

 

[Permitlady]

I think this strategy is underutilized by amateurs.

If you are playing quite a bit of doubles, you're likely developing exactly the kinds of skills you would need to implement a serve and volley strategy in singles. You're going to have to hit a lot more balls inside the court and, in particular, situations where you have to volley, half-volley and hit overheads are much more common. It's also a game where angles are well rewarded, so you learn to put away those balls pretty effectively. All you need on top of this is to perform serve and volley in singles is a good serve. Since I've managed to developed a pretty nasty kick serve and have played a lot of doubles this year which improved my net game, I started playing serve and volley off both first and second serves some 75% of the time. I've had some pretty decent success with that strategy.

A lot of the aversion to playing that kind of tennis from amateurs seem to stem from concerns that do not apply at their own level of play or neglects what many amateurs can do. Here's a few things I learned so far:

1. Movement kills returns of serve and all you want is to force a bad contact on their return. Take a clue from how Stefan Edberg used to play his game and privilege your best approximation of a kick serve over a flat serve (most of the time). It gives you a bit more time to come in and a slower serve that moves tends to give you more frequent bad contacts. If your swing isn't quite right and you open up too early, you're going to slice the ball a bit too much and you won't get that signature kick serve shape, but you can still get a decent bounce and it's going to be plenty annoying for players at your own level if that's all you can manage to do. Just keep in mind that your goal is to get a less than ideal contact so your first volley is doable;
2. No, they can't lob you to death. The best time to lob you would be off your first volley and not off the serve. The later means lobbing off a serve while you're almost dead center in the court, so they'll hit that lob too long or too short way more often than you think. It's a much easier play for them to do it later, but then it's just a question of what you practice. If you play a lot of doubles and S&V in singles, you'll eventually have an overhead to match the quality of lobs your level of play can offer reliably;
3. It's mentally challenging for your opponent too. S&V means you're forcing your opponent to play into your gamble and to face very unusual conditions. Most people who play singles spend time working on their baseline game. They probably like getting into a groove, enjoying a typical rhythm, playing longer points, and working with the opponents' pace, but playing S&V means you take all of that away from them. Your volleys will rarely have the punch of a good ground stroke, they're usually going to stay low and you reliably can play great angles or force your opponent forward with a shorter volley when you get close enough to the net. If they struggle with pushers, they're not going to do much better here.

Of course, how often you should use it depends on your skill set. It highlights some of the things I do better on a tennis court and I find it very fun to play, so I do it quite a lot. But even a baseline player can benefit from it, if only because it keeps opponents from just floating returns deep.

never heard any of these. thanks for the gems

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Playing S&V on occasion, say game point or break point against, against a typical, Modern power baseliner is a great way to shift pressure to the other guy and get easy, free points. OTOH, playing S&V every single point against a Modern power baseliner is a great way to work on your half volleys or to put it another way not a great strategy, not dissimilar to the Pros.

When my opponent is returning even my first serves at my feet, I know I need to change something.

Look how Dimitrov handled Cressy:

I can feel for Cressy.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

I have so much trouble moving back for a lob. I waste about 2.2 seconds saying to myself, "Oh no! A lob. Well, maybe it will be short. Too late." I could get to balls like that playing infield, but not in tennis. I should have someone lob me while I catch them with a glove for practice. I'm serious.

There's a great 3-shot sequence drill: volley from the SL, move in, volley from halfway between SL and net, and then OH. In the beginning, the lobs can be shallow [around the SL]. As you progress, the lobs can go deeper. The key is not getting too dug in after the 2nd volley or lean too far forward. I have a tendency to dig in when I expect to get hammered and then I react slowly to the lob.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

The reason it's underutilized is because "no one does it anymore", which makes about as much sense as the Yogi Berra'ism "No one goes to that restaurant anymore; it's too crowded."

All of the standard reasons are trotted out: racquet and string technology, athleticism, TS, etc. To which my reply is "Fine: if my opponent has the ability to utilize all of these things consistently, then I'll back off of the S&V."

But how many rec players can? Certainly not 100% or even 90%. At my level [4.5], I've found it still works although I've been beaten plenty of times by opponents whose return game was better than my net game.

Still, it's fun to test them and see what their reaction is. My favorite comments are:

- "I couldn't get into a rhythm."
- "I've never seen anyone come to the net so much."
- "I just couldn't get it past you."

 

[Steady Eddy]

There's a great 3-shot sequence drill: volley from the SL, move in, volley from halfway between SL and net, and then OH. In the beginning, the lobs can be shallow [around the SL]. As you progress, the lobs can go deeper. The key is not getting too dug in after the 2nd volley or lean too far forward. I have a tendency to dig in when I expect to get hammered and then I react slowly to the lob.

That's what I need. Drills, playing sets all the time, with nothing riding on it, is getting boring. With a drill I get to hit more balls, which is fun, and (possibly) improve, which is satisfying.
Thank you!

 

[toth]

I usually play on clay.
I am 51 about 4 level.
However it is much more difficoult on clay to approach the net, i strive to approach more and more, becouse of fun and aging.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

I usually play on clay.
I am 51 about 4 level.
However it is much more difficoult on clay to approach the net, i strive to approach more and more, becouse of fun and aging.

If you're still moving forward when you split step, do you slide a bit before recovering for a lob? Do you have to be more deliberate when approaching on clay? I tend to be a bit heavy-footed on hard court.

 

[Shroud]

I think this strategy is underutilized by amateurs.

If you are playing quite a bit of doubles, you're likely developing exactly the kinds of skills you would need to implement a serve and volley strategy in singles. You're going to have to hit a lot more balls inside the court and, in particular, situations where you have to volley, half-volley and hit overheads are much more common. It's also a game where angles are well rewarded, so you learn to put away those balls pretty effectively. All you need on top of this is to perform serve and volley in singles is a good serve. Since I've managed to developed a pretty nasty kick serve and have played a lot of doubles this year which improved my net game, I started playing serve and volley off both first and second serves some 75% of the time. I've had some pretty decent success with that strategy.

A lot of the aversion to playing that kind of tennis from amateurs seem to stem from concerns that do not apply at their own level of play or neglects what many amateurs can do. Here's a few things I learned so far:

1. Movement kills returns of serve and all you want is to force a bad contact on their return. Take a clue from how Stefan Edberg used to play his game and privilege your best approximation of a kick serve over a flat serve (most of the time). It gives you a bit more time to come in and a slower serve that moves tends to give you more frequent bad contacts. If your swing isn't quite right and you open up too early, you're going to slice the ball a bit too much and you won't get that signature kick serve shape, but you can still get a decent bounce and it's going to be plenty annoying for players at your own level if that's all you can manage to do. Just keep in mind that your goal is to get a less than ideal contact so your first volley is doable;
2. No, they can't lob you to death. The best time to lob you would be off your first volley and not off the serve. The later means lobbing off a serve while you're almost dead center in the court, so they'll hit that lob too long or too short way more often than you think. It's a much easier play for them to do it later, but then it's just a question of what you practice. If you play a lot of doubles and S&V in singles, you'll eventually have an overhead to match the quality of lobs your level of play can offer reliably;
3. It's mentally challenging for your opponent too. S&V means you're forcing your opponent to play into your gamble and to face very unusual conditions. Most people who play singles spend time working on their baseline game. They probably like getting into a groove, enjoying a typical rhythm, playing longer points, and working with the opponents' pace, but playing S&V means you take all of that away from them. Your volleys will rarely have the punch of a good ground stroke, they're usually going to stay low and you reliably can play great angles or force your opponent forward with a shorter volley when you get close enough to the net. If they struggle with pushers, they're not going to do much better here.

Of course, how often you should use it depends on your skill set. It highlights some of the things I do better on a tennis court and I find it very fun to play, so I do it quite a lot. But even a baseline player can benefit from it, if only because it keeps opponents from just floating returns deep.

I love serve and volley and chip and charge myself. I just am a bit slow to actually do it and serve has to be good. For some reason I have service games when the ball just sits up and its a tough day at the office. But yeah lots of opponents seem to be challenged by someone at the net.

 

[toth]

If you're still moving forward when you split step, do you slide a bit before recovering for a lob? Do you have to be more deliberate when approaching on clay? I tend to be a bit heavy-footed on hard court.

As i know averige tennis shoes are suitable for sliding even on clay.
At 4 level we dont have schoes for sliding.

My experience is on hardourt i can approach the net much easier and more (i play rarely on hardcourt)

 

[toth]

I mean averages tennis shoes are NOT suitable for sliding..

 

[SV10is]

When my opponent is returning even my first serves at my feet, I know I need to change something.

Look how Dimitrov handled Cressy:

I can feel for Cressy.

The reason it's underutilized is because "no one does it anymore", which makes about as much sense as the Yogi Berra'ism "No one goes to that restaurant anymore; it's too crowded."

All of the standard reasons are trotted out: racquet and string technology, athleticism, TS, etc. To which my reply is "Fine: if my opponent has the ability to utilize all of these things consistently, then I'll back off of the S&V."

But how many rec players can? Certainly not 100% or even 90%. At my level [4.5], I've found it still works although I've been beaten plenty of times by opponents whose return game was better than my net game.

Still, it's fun to test them and see what their reaction is. My favorite comments are:

- "I couldn't get into a rhythm."
- "I've never seen anyone come to the net so much."
- "I just couldn't get it past you."

Many people wildly overestimate what an amateur can do with a decent serve relative to their level. What applies to professional tennis and makes S&V a variation rather than a main strategy just doesn't apply below 5.0.

The advantage of slower court and more powerful and forgiving equipment means nothing on its own: you have to hit really solid lobs and passing shots for the entire match to take advantage of it. Most people below 5.0 won't be able to do it, especially since they just never see a S&V player and their habit is to almost exclusively play baseline to baseline ground strokes. And the rhythm comment is probably the worst killer of them all for amateurs: they have to perform tough shots on the spot without getting any feel for it through rallies.

 

[SV10is]

There's a great 3-shot sequence drill: volley from the SL, move in, volley from halfway between SL and net, and then OH. In the beginning, the lobs can be shallow [around the SL]. As you progress, the lobs can go deeper. The key is not getting too dug in after the 2nd volley or lean too far forward. I have a tendency to dig in when I expect to get hammered and then I react slowly to the lob.

That's a good one assuming you can get someone to feed you balls. I sometimes practice overheads by myself: just hit the ball down hard enough and you have an overhead to chase around and it's easy enough to force it back to make it harder to hit.

If you even have a half decent overhead, you're going to force a lot of people to be too greedy when they lob. Since almost no amateurs actually practice lobbing, it's usually a catastrophe for them.

 

[AlexSV]

I watched someone serve and volley the other day, and it was a mess. Very few of the serves were near the edge of the box, or hit with much spin. They ran to the net as fast as possible without getting set for the volley, and missed a lot of volleys.

I think the most difficult aspect of serve and volley is developing a feel for the opponent's return, and being comfortable taking the first volley from the behind the service line and hitting a lot of half volleys on some days.

 

[basil J]

I play S&V about 40% of the time in a match. My main strategy at 61 is to keep most rally points below 6 shots, and to do this, I have to set up good approach shots and learn to set up 2 volley sequences. the first volley is to set up the put away volley. Many players try to end the point on one volley and that can be frustrating an ineffective against solid baseliners. I have a pro that I work on this with every week, and It has given my game new life. I constantly work on Chip & charge returning and it can drive players nuts if they don't see a lot of net rushers. It also makes me move which gets my heart rate up and I feel much more energetic playing this style vs pure baseline grinding, which I used to love to do when I was younger.

 

[AlexSV]

I play S&V about 40% of the time in a match. My main strategy at 61 is to keep most rally points below 6 shots, and to do this, I have to set up good approach shots and learn to set up 2 volley sequences. the first volley is to set up the put away volley. Many players try to end the point on one volley and that can be frustrating an ineffective against solid baseliners. I have a pro that I work on this with every week, and It has given my game new life. I constantly work on Chip & charge returning and it can drive players nuts if they don't see a lot of net rushers. It also makes me move which gets my heart rate up and I feel much more energetic playing this style vs pure baseline grinding, which I used to love to do when I was younger.

Good point, the person I watched the other day looked like they were trying to end the point on the first volley. It makes the first volley so much more difficult, and you put a lot of unnecessary pressure on yourself to hit a winner every shot.

 

[SV10is]

I watched someone serve and volley the other day, and it was a mess. Very few of the serves were near the edge of the box, or hit with much spin. They ran to the net as fast as possible without getting set for the volley, and missed a lot of volleys.

I think the most difficult aspect of serve and volley is developing a feel for the opponent's return, and being comfortable taking the first volley from the behind the service line and hitting a lot of half volleys on some days.

You can get away with far more than many people would think in terms of serve quality at lower levels, even if it seems like the person you saw didn't do quite enough in their case. I have seen a couple of 4.5s serving and volleying very effectively off fairly unexceptional serves. Most of their serve were somewhere in between a slice and a flat serve. It was well placed, very consistent and just fast enough to make passing hard. They could also hit a fairly surprising slice on the deuce side (they were both right handed). Most of the volleys they played against other 4.5s were not impossible to play at all: even 4.5s will leave balls floating a little too high fairly often in that scenario. You have to clear the net and have it dig short enough to force a contact around my knees or lower at the service line right off the return... They're not professionals: they're going to spray quite a bit when trying to do that.

That said, you do hit the nail on the head with the comment regarding footwork. Running straight for the net will only work if they send the ball at you all the time, but it makes it very difficult to change direction to either side or even backwards if they hit a decent lob. Just as it would on the baseline, that leaves your opponent really big targets to put you in trouble. So, you'll need proper footwork to serve and volley regardless of your level. Depending on how fast you serve and how hard they hit the return, you can usually get either one or two steps after your landing step from your serve before you have to split step. That puts you somewhere in no man's land and you're probably not going to make your first volley from inside the service box most of the time. You usually have to slice that volley or half volley hopefully low and deep.

But that's all a matter of practice. If that guy who made a mess keeps it up, he'll eventually get a feel for where to go, how to better read his opponent and how to scoop those lower balls without getting slaughtered. It would go faster if someone pointed out to him that the serves landed a bit too short, that he should split step when his opponent makes contact and that he needs to accept taking approach volleys and half-volleys from mid court more often.

 

[AlexSV]

It was well placed, very consistent and just fast enough to make passing hard.

I think placement and consistency is key for the serve. You don't have to hit it like Cressy.

 

[SV10is]

I play S&V about 40% of the time in a match. My main strategy at 61 is to keep most rally points below 6 shots, and to do this, I have to set up good approach shots and learn to set up 2 volley sequences. the first volley is to set up the put away volley. Many players try to end the point on one volley and that can be frustrating an ineffective against solid baseliners. I have a pro that I work on this with every week, and It has given my game new life. I constantly work on Chip & charge returning and it can drive players nuts if they don't see a lot of net rushers. It also makes me move which gets my heart rate up and I feel much more energetic playing this style vs pure baseline grinding, which I used to love to do when I was younger.

It takes quite a bit of practice to get all of this right, but it's certainly a good idea to build the experience with a local pro if you can do it. The tempo is very high when playing S&V, so it's even more important than at the baseline to really build a feel for what you need to be doing and that's a matter of playing that game a lot. There's no way around it.

It's a great thread to share some tips and tactics for S&V and/or chip and charge on the return.

 

[Nostradamus]

this is how you serve and volley

 

[SV10is]

Good point, the person I watched the other day looked like they were trying to end the point on the first volley. It makes the first volley so much more difficult, and you put a lot of unnecessary pressure on yourself to hit a winner every shot.

It's not just on the TT forum that people exaggerate what amateurs can reliably do: amateurs on the court also overestimate the abilities of their opponent. If you're looking at someone who struggles with pushers, just pushing the ball in no man's land off your first volley is going to create a lot of easy second volleys (and UEs from them trying to do too much). Looking in here and on YT, it seems that means a lot of amateurs. Same when going for deep first volleys. You're not trying to prevent a 25 year old Agassi from passing you!

I think placement and consistency is key for the serve. You don't have to hit it like Cressy.

It's definitely important to not hit the ball right into someone's strike zone. That usually becomes a problem once you start hitting decent flat serves. If you miss the other player's forehand side line a little too much, a flat serve will usually give them a very convenient waist high bounce right into their string bed to their strongest ground stroke. Even without trying, they can just murder that ball. It's less of a concern if you're hitting more of a top spin serve or a kick serve since they have to generate their own pace -- and the ball moves which makes bad contacts more frequent.

 

[Cashman]

I watched someone serve and volley the other day, and it was a mess. Very few of the serves were near the edge of the box, or hit with much spin. They ran to the net as fast as possible without getting set for the volley, and missed a lot of volleys.

I think the most difficult aspect of serve and volley is developing a feel for the opponent's return, and being comfortable taking the first volley from the behind the service line and hitting a lot of half volleys on some days.

The most difficult aspect I have noticed is trying to get people to shift towards moving with their own rhythm

Most recreational players conform to the rhythm of the game and the behaviour of their opponent, especially at the baseline. You hit a shot, recover to the middle of the court, then your next movement/shot is based on what your opponent is doing up the other end. No two points are alike - you run here, you run there, that ball comes fast, this one comes slow. It's all very stimulating.

Playing the net means militantly imposing your own rhythm on the game. Win or lose, I decide exactly how a point is going to play out before I step up to the baseline. With a couple of very small variations I have been hitting the same serves, running the same path through no-man's land, split-stepping and first volleying from roughly the same couple of positions, closing to the net in roughly the same couple of positions, for 80% of my service points for the last 20 years. Doesn't matter if my opponent is a 16 year old girl, a fat 60 year old man, a seasoned club pro - it's same, same, same. So boring I could do it with my eyes shut. The strength comes from the repetition, and forcing my opponent to play the game on my terms. They essentially have no say in my service points - I make them hit the shots I want them to hit, whether they win depends merely on how well they execute.

It is a big shift in mindset.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Many people wildly overestimate what an amateur can do with a decent serve relative to their level. What applies to professional tennis and makes S&V a variation rather than a main strategy just doesn't apply below 5.0.

The advantage of slower court and more powerful and forgiving equipment means nothing on its own: you have to hit really solid lobs and passing shots for the entire match to take advantage of it. Most people below 5.0 won't be able to do it, especially since they just never see a S&V player and their habit is to almost exclusively play baseline to baseline ground strokes. And the rhythm comment is probably the worst killer of them all for amateurs: they have to perform tough shots on the spot without getting any feel for it through rallies.

Of the people below 5.0, I'm only concerned about those at 4.5 [or, on the rare occasion when I play MXDs 9.0 and run into a 5.0 guy or a sandbagger 4.5].

I find that many of them can adjust and then it becomes a test of my net game vs their ground game.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

I watched someone serve and volley the other day, and it was a mess. Very few of the serves were near the edge of the box, or hit with much spin. They ran to the net as fast as possible without getting set for the volley, and missed a lot of volleys.

This guy obviously was taught to "get to the net as quickly as possible" without receiving part 2: "...as long as you're balanced with a split step."

Really good S&Vers don't have to get set before the 1st volley but we're not that good.

I think the most difficult aspect of serve and volley is developing a feel for the opponent's return, and being comfortable taking the first volley from the behind the service line and hitting a lot of half volleys on some days.

Even before that, I think what stops many from even trying is the fear of getting passed. Once you get over that fear [trust me, I get passed a LOT], you're free to start learning the ropes.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

The most difficult aspect I have noticed is trying to get people to shift towards moving with their own rhythm

Most recreational players conform to the rhythm of the game and the behaviour of their opponent, especially at the baseline. You hit a shot, recover to the middle of the court, then your next movement/shot is based on what your opponent is doing up the other end. No two points are alike - you run here, you run there, that ball comes fast, this one comes slow. It's all very stimulating.

Playing the net means militantly imposing your own rhythm on the game. Win or lose, I decide exactly how a point is going to play out before I step up to the baseline. With a couple of very small variations I have been hitting the same serves, running the same path through no-man's land, split-stepping and first volleying from roughly the same couple of positions, closing to the net in roughly the same couple of positions, for 80% of my service points for the last 20 years. Doesn't matter if my opponent is a 16 year old girl, a fat 60 year old man, a seasoned club pro - it's same, same, same. So boring I could do it with my eyes shut. The strength comes from the repetition, and forcing my opponent to play the game on my terms. They essentially have no say in my service points - I make them hit the shots I want them to hit, whether they win depends merely on how well they execute.

It is a big shift in mindset.

Good point: since so many opponents of S&Vers complain about lack of rhythm [there is a rhythm; just not the one you're accustomed to], it makes sense that imposing a different, quicker rhythm would disrupt their game, at least temporarily. Some opponents never recover; most do. If so, I can try and throw another spanner in the works by NOT coming in but waiting until the next shot.

 

[SV10is]

Of the people below 5.0, I'm only concerned about those at 4.5 [or, on the rare occasion when I play MXDs 9.0 and run into a 5.0 guy or a sandbagger 4.5].

I find that many of them can adjust and then it becomes a test of my net game vs their ground game.

That's when it becomes interesting.

 

[SV10is]

With a couple of very small variations I have been hitting the same serves, running the same path through no-man's land, split-stepping and first volleying from roughly the same couple of positions, closing to the net in roughly the same couple of positions, for 80% of my service points for the last 20 years.

There are considerably few possible sequences of shots when rallies are shorter. When you serve and volley, you're looking to hit 3 shots (serve, approach volley and winning volley) leaving your opponent with 2 shots to play (return and passing/lob off the approach volley). There's only a few shot sequences on both sides of the court that are likely to be played.

I'm curious, though, what would be your go-to sequences? And, since you've played this for 20 years as an amateur, what are people usually trying to do in response?

 

[Cashman]

I'm curious, though, what would be your go-to sequences? And, since you've played this for 20 years as an amateur, what are people usually trying to do in response?

Generally speaking I am trying not to hit my first volleys off my laces, or my second volleys below the tape

Against most rec players not hitting my first volley off my laces usually means making them hit a cramped forehand or stretched backhand return, so as a lefty I hit a lot of sliders and body serves and follow it in

Then I try and put the first volley nice and deep, depriving them of angles, and again close to net following the other of the ball. I really want them hitting this next shot on the move if possible - the worst second volley for me is where they whip a dipper across my body, and it’s hard to really rip that topspin if you’re not hitting off a stable base. More often than not I try and tempt them to pass down the line (ideally with a backhand, which is low percentage for most rec players).

If I can do all that, unless they’re significantly better than me I will win most of my service points

 

[SV10is]

Against most rec players not hitting my first volley off my laces usually means making them hit a cramped forehand or stretched backhand return, so as a lefty I hit a lot of sliders and body serves and follow it in.

It's true that most amateurs are going to give you substantially more trouble with their forehands. Another option, if that doesn't work well, is to limit out wide serves: when they can reach the out wide ball, they have a slightly better angle. But, as a lefty, you do have the advantage of hitting that slice to most people's backhand. It really takes an exceptional player to hit that aggressively and all you need is an acceptable first volley to play.

Thinking about it, I may be hitting too many serves to my opponent's forehand. It may be more effective to hit fewer out wide serves on the deuce side.

Then I try and put the first volley nice and deep, depriving them of angles, and again close to net following the other of the ball. I really want them hitting this next shot on the move if possible - the worst second volley for me is where they whip a dipper across my body, and it’s hard to really rip that topspin if you’re not hitting off a stable base.

Getting people to move does make hitting a solid passing shot harder for them. Depending on the player, though, it may also be desirable to force them to hit more backhands. It's not uncommon for recreational players to have a substantially weaker backhand. It may be playable at their level, but not everyone can just rip a passing shot off both sides.

More often than not I try and tempt them to pass down the line (ideally with a backhand, which is low percentage for most rec players).

If you're hitting a good first volley, that's going to be a pretty difficult shot.

If I can do all that, unless they’re significantly better than me I will win most of my service points.

What do you do on the return of serve? Do you try to chip and charge fairly often? Or do you prefer to stay back and wait for something easier to use as an approach shot?

 

[SV10is]

I think your ideas on ways to use S&V to win matches are very good. I can tell you personally, as a self-taught player who never attended clinics, my skill level at serving far exceeded my ground strokes for the first few years of playing because I could just practice on my own with a basket of balls for hours. Even though my volley skills were not great, if I could get close to net it didn’t matter much. Even miss hit volleys close to net usually result in winners. So I won a lot of matches just playing S&V and chip and charge almost every point.

Now I try to be patient and build the point from the baseline as my ground strokes have improved a lot. Winning points using S&V feels like cheating!

I'm also a self-taught player, although I did get some help from someone who used to coach tennis players last summer. My kick serve was getting decent and he gave me about an hour of his time to improve it. My kick serve has gotten much better over time following his advice. So, I technically got the one lesson -- and, lucky me, it was free! And I have started playing more S&V points in singles because I play doubles once or twice a week now (say, like between 3 and 7 sets every week). The kinds of skills you need in doubles and for playing S&V in singles are very similar as you spend much less time hitting those big cross-court ground strokes in doubles. That just means I get to focus on a subset of skills I'll be using almost everywhere and it feels like it's helping.

Another reason is that while I do have pretty decent ground strokes, the top 2-3 guys in my doubles league are just way too consistent and solid in that area. If we play singles and I stay back, I'm going to get slaughtered. On the other hand, my serve is my best weapon: it's enough to get free points and cheap first volleys fairly often and my net game improved to a point where I will put away that ball if you aren't making my life hard. I prefer my chances playing that kind of tennis. It's still hard, though, since they are very experienced doubles players and my tempo doesn't bother them as much as it would bother people who spend their time rallying from the baseline.

 

[Cashman]

What do you do on the return of serve? Do you try to chip and charge fairly often? Or do you prefer to stay back and wait for something easier to use as an approach shot?

I usually wait for an opportunity to come in behind a strong approach shot

honesty its not worth overthinking too much - at the end of the day most tennis comes down to hitting your strong shots against their weak shots as often as possible

for me vs most rec players that usually means lots of serves and volleys for me, and lots of backhands and on-the-move shots for them

 

[FiddlerDog]

I can feel for Cressy.

That video shows what a joke S&V is at the ATP level.
And should be marched out every time someone asks why pros don't S&V anymore.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

That video shows what a joke S&V is at the ATP level.
And should be marched out every time someone asks why pros don't S&V anymore.

Not at all; it shows what a great return game Dimitrov had.

And Cressy made it to the TB in the 2nd set; if his S&V was a joke, Dimitrov would have beaten him by a much larger margin.

The highlight shots were heavily biased towards Dimi.

Cressy is currently #32 in the world with a 27-24 career record. One doesn't achieve those kinds of stats by playing a "joke" strategy.

Will it win against the top 20? Maybe not. Then again, what will win against the top 20 if you're #32? He's playing his strength; more power to him.

 

[SV10is]

Not at all; it shows what a great return game Dimitrov had.

And Cressy made it to the TB in the 2nd set; if his S&V was a joke, Dimitrov would have beaten him by a much larger margin.

The highlight shots were heavily biased towards Dimi.

Cressy is currently #32 in the world with a 27-24 career record. One doesn't achieve those kinds of stats by playing a "joke" strategy.

Will it win against the top 20? Maybe not. Then again, what will win against the top 20 if you're #32? He's playing his strength; more power to him.

Some people seem to believe ATP means Federer, Nadal or Djokovic. The top 100 players are all absurdly good... If a tactic works up to the top 200-300 players in the world, it's viable. If it makes it to the top 40, it's more than just viable. At 32, you have only 31 people who play better tennis than you on the whole planet and that's insane.

 

[LuckyR]

Not at all; it shows what a great return game Dimitrov had.

And Cressy made it to the TB in the 2nd set; if his S&V was a joke, Dimitrov would have beaten him by a much larger margin.

The highlight shots were heavily biased towards Dimi.

Cressy is currently #32 in the world with a 27-24 career record. One doesn't achieve those kinds of stats by playing a "joke" strategy.

Will it win against the top 20? Maybe not. Then again, what will win against the top 20 if you're #32? He's playing his strength; more power to him.

Anyone with a passing knowledge of the history of tennis knows S&V is a legit style of play. Obviously it is a style that has vulnerabilities, that in the Modern power baseliner era (due to equipment advances) are generally exploitable. Hence it's lack of popularity and success on the Tour. But if you are a talented server and volleyer with middling groundies, what other style is going to take you farther?

 

[SV10is]

Anyone with a passing knowledge of the history of tennis knows S&V is a legit style of play. Obviously it is a style that has vulnerabilities, that in the Modern power baseliner era (due to equipment advances) are generally exploitable. Hence it's lack of popularity and success on the Tour. But if you are a talented server and volleyer with middling groundies, what other style is going to take you farther?

It's a playing style that put the emphasis on your serve and your ability to hit volleys for sure. If those are the things that set you apart from your peers, it stands to reason that S&V is a great option for you.

And, even if you don't plan on venturing forward >50% of the time, it's often a good way to force some "honesty" in your opponent. They can't exactly hit a weak floating ball to the back court if you can move forward to volley. And the mere threat can also earn you a few short balls as they try to avoid leaving the ball too highoff the ground.

Many amateurs, however, never even bother doing it.

 

[SV10is]

Not at all; it shows what a great return game Dimitrov had.

And Cressy made it to the TB in the 2nd set; if his S&V was a joke, Dimitrov would have beaten him by a much larger margin.

The highlight shots were heavily biased towards Dimi.

Cressy is currently #32 in the world with a 27-24 career record. One doesn't achieve those kinds of stats by playing a "joke" strategy.

Will it win against the top 20? Maybe not. Then again, what will win against the top 20 if you're #32? He's playing his strength; more power to him.

Some people might want to pause and consider what it means to be no32 on the ATP tour: there's only 31 people on Earth who regularly can play better tennis. I'd say that's not a joke.

I'd love to see the ATP add more variety to their courts so we get a little more tournaments with fast surfaces. It would make aggressive tennis a lot more advantageous.

 

[Cashman]

I don’t want to throw shade at guys like Cressy, but the last really top-shelf S&V player was Michel Llodra

I grew up watching Cash, Edberg and Rafter but as a lefty I really enjoyed Llodra’s style… he was such a classic player

 

[SV10is]

I don’t want to throw shade at guys like Cressy, but the last really top-shelf S&V player was Michel Llodra

I grew up watching Cash, Edberg and Rafter but as a lefty I really enjoyed Llodra’s style… he was such a classic player

I loved watching that guy play. He was from a rare breed that would have been very dominant had he come in 10 years earlier.

Surfaces have slowed down and faster surfaces are scarce these days on the tour so more aggressive playing styles doesn't have that niche to make it as viable as it used to be.

Still happy to see at least a handful of S&V players keeping the art alive. Maybe some day the tour will value a diversity of courts again and you won't have a dry clay in Paris play faster than hard courts in New York.

 

[MyFearHand]

I think one big reason people don't like to serve and volley is because you will lose a bunch of points immediately. You're going to get passed for winners occasionally even when you hit your spot on your serve. People don't feel like they're in control when this happens. They're far happier losing a 5 ball rally with their opponent hitting a winner, because they feel like they got a few balls in play so psychologically this feels better. But ultimately, who cares about the psychology of it? If you're winning more than 50% of the points serving and volleying then you're probably going to win the match even if they're occasionally passing you for clean winners. Rally length has nothing to do with rally outcome.

 

[SV10is]

I think one big reason people don't like to serve and volley is because you will lose a bunch of points immediately. You're going to get passed for winners occasionally even when you hit your spot on your serve. People don't feel like they're in control when this happens. They're far happier losing a 5 ball rally with their opponent hitting a winner, because they feel like they got a few balls in play so psychologically this feels better. But ultimately, who cares about the psychology of it? If you're winning more than 50% of the points serving and volleying then you're probably going to win the match even if they're occasionally passing you for clean winners.

That's fairly possible. Although all tennis requires some commitment to work well, S&V makes that commitment very salient. You will get passed. You will miss some low volleys. And the odd near perfect lob is going to cost you a rally sometimes.

That said, you need the gamble to pay at least 60% of the time. Too close to 50% is trouble area for holding serve!

Rally length has nothing to do with rally outcome.

It depends on who's the most consistent player. For most amateurs, longer rallies is actually a loosing propositions -- that's part of how pushers frustrate them.

 

[MyFearHand]

That's fairly possible. Although all tennis requires some commitment to work well, S&V makes that commitment very salient. You will get passed. You will miss some low volleys. And the odd near perfect lob is going to cost you a rally sometimes.

That said, you need the gamble to pay at least 60% of the time. Too close to 50% is trouble area for holding serve!



It depends on who's the most consistent player. For most amateurs, longer rallies is actually a loosing propositions -- that's part of how pushers frustrate them.

Sorry, on the second thing I just meant if you have two players of equal fitness then losing a point after 2 shots is the same as 10. It just feels better because you hit more shots.

 

[LuckyR]

It's a playing style that put the emphasis on your serve and your ability to hit volleys for sure. If those are the things that set you apart from your peers, it stands to reason that S&V is a great option for you.

And, even if you don't plan on venturing forward >50% of the time, it's often a good way to force some "honesty" in your opponent. They can't exactly hit a weak floating ball to the back court if you can move forward to volley. And the mere threat can also earn you a few short balls as they try to avoid leaving the ball too highoff the ground.

Many amateurs, however, never even bother doing it.

Those who learned tennis in the Golden age (70s to early 80s) are usually all court familiar, but those who learned in the poly string era didn't really have a reason to learn it (outside of playing doubles).

 

[SV10is]

Those who learned tennis in the Golden age (70s to early 80s) are usually all court familiar, but those who learned in the poly string era didn't really have a reason to learn it (outside of playing doubles).

Necessity is the mother of invention. However, I believe we may be slowly bouncing back from a low point of S&V on the tour. Many youngsters seem to play doubles and singles to own those skills and I recall seeing a statistic suggesting S&V had been used twice as frequently in the 2010s as it has been in the 2000s. For Federer at Wimbledon, it went from almost 50% in the early 00s down to something like 4 or 5% those two years he lost to Nadal and back up to 15% in the mid 2010s. Except for oddballs, there might not be pure S&V players rising to the top unless the ATP changes something, but it's likely that it will not remain as marginal as it was just a few years ago.

It can still be very effective at the top of the game as a variation on usual patterns, it's way less straining on one's body which can allow players to spare energy for latter rounds and extend their careers for a few more years.

For amateurs, though, I think it's partly cultural. They do not see the professionals doing it all too often, so they don't do it unless as you suggest they're older players who grew up in the 80s or 90s hacking their own version of Edberg or Sampras at the local court. There may also be an element of discomfort with giving up a few points right away because the other player hits a great shot as @MyFearHand suggests. If you can get even a semblance of a good serve relative to your level of play, you have a decent shot at facing subpar returns and being able to play manageable first volleys and it's just immeasurably easier to kill a ball near the net than it is trying to hit a winner off a low short ball, but most amateurs simply never even play the pattern once in a blue moon.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

I think one big reason people don't like to serve and volley is because you will lose a bunch of points immediately. You're going to get passed for winners occasionally even when you hit your spot on your serve. People don't feel like they're in control when this happens. They're far happier losing a 5 ball rally with their opponent hitting a winner, because they feel like they got a few balls in play so psychologically this feels better. But ultimately, who cares about the psychology of it? If you're winning more than 50% of the points serving and volleying then you're probably going to win the match even if they're occasionally passing you for clean winners. Rally length has nothing to do with rally outcome.

I think you nailed it. Certainly, as the S&Ver, I've come to terms with getting passed. I fully expect it to happen, even against a lower-level opponent.

What counts is the big picture: am I winning enough points to keep pursuing this strategy?