Serving and volleying as amateurs

[SV10is]

Mischa zverev is retired bc he's helping coach his brother.

Cressy is benefitting from a few things:
- big 1st and 2nd serve (ala Sampras, he'll throw in first serves as seconds quite often);
- so few players serve/volley today, that players don't practice against this, so it's novel again;
- hard courts are starting to speed up again, confirmed by players at AO and USO.

Where did you read about hard courts speeding up? Didn't the US Open slow down its courts a few years ago so they play similar to the A Open?

One thing the ATP could do to to shake things up is undo the 2009 ban on carpets for big tournaments. There used to be a few big events, including the ATP Finals at one point, on carpet and that's about as fast as grass.

That would give more aggressive players and more dominant servers a chance to climb up the rankings. It would also force more defensive players to actually adjust their strategies... Currently, tournaments look a little too much alike and it's boring.

As for Cressy, there are some interesting statistics for his serving speeds at the AO2021. He was hitting on average a little over 200 kph on a first serve -- so, among the top ten men for average speed. He was also hitting his second serve at around 190 kph on average -- a whole 20 kph faster than huge servers. Yet, he didn't crack the top 10 in terms of maximum speed, so my guess is that what you see here is Cressy takes more risks than other players with his serve and he seems to be relying on pace and placement more than other players. From what I can tell, it's not as big a serve as Sampras, but it is a solid serve and he is as daring or more than Sampras on his second serve.

Most ATP players have surprisingly low average first serve speeds because they mix in slices and kicks fairly often. They're usually in the 170-180s kph range because of it.

 

[ey039524]

Where did you read about hard courts speeding up? Didn't the US Open slow down its courts a few years ago so they play similar to the A Open?

One thing the ATP could do to to shake things up is undo the 2009 ban on carpets for big tournaments. There used to be a few big events, including the ATP Finals at one point, on carpet and that's about as fast as grass.

That would give more aggressive players and more dominant servers a chance to climb up the rankings. It would also force more defensive players to actually adjust their strategies... Currently, tournaments look a little too much alike and it's boring.

I read players chiming in on how fast they think the courts are playing, and remember thinking "too bad Fed isn't playing."

 

[Shroud]

Where did you read about hard courts speeding up? Didn't the US Open slow down its courts a few years ago so they play similar to the A Open?

One thing the ATP could do to to shake things up is undo the 2009 ban on carpets for big tournaments. There used to be a few big events, including the ATP Finals at one point, on carpet and that's about as fast as grass.

That would give more aggressive players and more dominant servers a chance to climb up the rankings. It would also force more defensive players to actually adjust their strategies... Currently, tournaments look a little too much alike and it's boring.

As for Cressy, there are some interesting statistics for his serving speeds at the AO2021. He was hitting on average a little over 200 kph on a first serve -- so, among the top ten men for average speed. He was also hitting his second serve at around 190 kph on average -- a whole 20 kph faster than huge servers. Yet, he didn't crack the top 10 in terms of maximum speed, so my guess is that what you see here is Cressy takes more risks than other players with his serve and he seems to be relying on pace and placement more than other players. From what I can tell, it's not as big a serve as Sampras, but it is a solid serve and he is as daring or more than Sampras on his second serve.

Most ATP players have surprisingly low average first serve speeds because they mix in slices and kicks fairly often. They're usually in the 170-180s kph range because of it.

Last I checked, Fed is 4-0 against Rafa on carpet. Yeah banning carpet was not a good move and you are right things are homogenous and boring these days.

That some interesting serve analysis there. Good to see people taking risks in tennis again. Everything has been so conservative and lifeless, like a Murray/ Joker match

 

[SV10is]

Last I checked, Fed is 4-0 against Rafa on carpet. Yeah banning carpet was not a good move and you are right things are homogenous and boring these days.

The thing is that it's easy to adjust playing speed on hard courts. They could have some hard courts playing faster and they definitely should consider bringing back indoor carpet. Put at least one big 1000pts tournament on it.

That some interesting serve analysis there. Good to see people taking risks in tennis again. Everything has been so conservative and lifeless, like a Murray/ Joker match

I was discussing it this morning with a guy from my doubles league. I showed him how you can hit more spin on a flat serve by bringing the toss a tad closer to a kick serve toss. It's still going way too fast to be a kick serve and you're still hitting through it, but you trade a tad of that pace for more safety. The idea is that no proper serve is hit with a racket straight up (you always brush at least a bit and that requires it to be a tad at an angle) and you can exaggerate a smidge to keep that ball in more often.

A lot of ATP pro will not simply hit faster kickers and slices as first serves. They'll also hit a safer flat serves like I'm describing. It probably vary depending on surfaces and whatevet strategy they prefer -- i.e., Nadal can hit 135 mph, but he usually hit in the 110s. He usually wants to just start the point, ideally with a forehand somewhere in the middle of court that he will most likely send to your backhand -- and he'll grind you down from there. He's also going to hit a lot more slices because that's your backhand against his forehand right off the bat since he's a lefty. Cressy has a different idea: he's okay with playing more second serves and making more double faults if it means it's almost impossible to pass him on the return. I don't know how good he is off a kick serve, but he seems to be playing off pace more so than the average player. Maybe he's just unusually good and regular at hitting that 120 mph on the spot -- I have no idea why pace is his specific weapon of choice considering he isn't hitting huge.

 

[LuckyR]

Same here.

What about singles?

What's that?

Seriously though, I look at singles as a way to improve my doubles (you know, REAL tennis). So I actually just do the Directionals slavishly. If I'm on, I'll win easily against my (usually younger) competition. If I am better than my competition, I'll S&V nonstop to keep it competitive.

 

[SV10is]

What's that?

Seriously though, I look at singles as a way to improve my doubles (you know, REAL tennis). So I actually just do the Directionals slavishly. If I'm on, I'll win easily against my (usually younger) competition. If I am better than my competition, I'll S&V nonstop to keep it competitive.

I tend to like S&V and C&C in singles in part because most matches I play are doubles matches and those are skills I can use in both environment.

The kind of ground strokes that are effective in singles and doubles tend to be fairly different. Height and spin to push your opponent away is great in singles, but there's an annoying net player in doubles that might like to see that kind of shot because it would give them easy volleys.

Doubles has short points where quick aggression pays off.

 

[tlm]

He has done next to nothing, although he did beat Rafa 61 64 at Queens, I think that was not long after. So he's won 5/6 sets v Rafa on grass.
Just checked it, it was Halle the year before.

Well that settles it then he is definitely better than Rafa. Lol

 

[HuusHould]

Well that settles it then he is definitely better than Rafa. Lol

Haha yeah, it's pretty solid evidence on grass of that! Obviously just the match up though as Brown hasnt won Wimbledon, far from it. If they played 6 sets on clay it'd be 0-6 the other way!
Just goes to show when someone has the wood on you, just claim it's a "bad matchup"

 

[McGradey]

Yeah but is the reason Cressy [or Zverev major] hasn't made it that far because he's playing S&V when he shouldn't be? I don't think he'd do better if he stayed back. I think S&V is his A game. the fact that he loses in later rounds just means the competition is better, not that S&V is inherently flawed.

After all, he made to #31 in the world: if S&V was completely dead at the pro level, he wouldn't have cracked the top 200.

If Cressy had a passable (for the Tour level) baseline game, he could mix things up a bit more and become a genuine threat to beat anyone on any given day, and push for the top 10. But his return game and baseline game are basically non-starters so he's got no way of winning points other than at the net. Which makes him predictable, and if the other guy is good enough to make the adjustment and has good passing shots, Cressy is toast.

He's essentially 100% reliant on S&V, which doesn't seem viable if you want to be top 10, but if he were to bring that down to say, 80% reliance, being realistic — ideally that number would be lower — I reckon he could win a fair bit more. Kyrgios for example, could easily be top 10 while still playing a good amount of serve and volley, because he has a lot more tools in his bag than Cressy.

At the club level S&V is totally viable as a primary strategy. I play with some guys who do so and they win plenty. It is one of the toughest styles to play against when well executed.

 

[tlm]

Haha yeah, it's pretty solid evidence on grass of that! Obviously just the match up though as Brown hasnt won Wimbledon, far from it. If they played 6 sets on clay it'd be 0-6 the other way!
Just goes to show when someone has the wood on you, just claim it's a "bad matchup"

I wonder why he’s never done anything at Wimbledon. Rafa has won two majors on grass so I don’t think Brown is even close to as good on grass as Rafa is. Those warm up tournaments are nothing more than just that warm ups and the top guys don’t really care they hope to play a couple matches and get ready for the real tournament. He did beat a weak Rafa at Wimbledon in 2015 but Rafa was injured off and on and it was a terrible year for him, one of the 2 times that he lost FO was that year.

 

[socallefty]

Before the 2010s, I remember playing S/Vrs in singles at 4.0 and 4.5 levels more often - maybe 5-10% of matches. I think that is when more rec players started playing with soft polys and since then in about 1,400 singles matches, I‘ve played only one player regularly who S/Vs all the time in 4.5 singles and another who does it about half the time. There are others who try it it in stretches in matches if they are not winning from the baseline, but it is not their main strategy.

In contrast, more than 50% of players (4.5 with some 5.0s) that I play doubles with usually S/V and maybe 80% of them come to the net after one or two shots off both serves and returns. Most of them are baseliners who opportunistically approach the net in singles while being primarily net players in doubles - I play like that also. However, only about 10-15% of the guys I play doubles with play any singles at all - most are just rec doubles players.

So, I would say that many 4.5 singles players slowly stopped doing S/V around the time poly took over as it became a more risky strategy. Also, it requires more explosive movement to S/V all the time in singles compared to coming in later in the point off good approach shots and so, many older players slowly switch to this style also.

 

[tlm]

Before the 2010s, I remember playing S/Vrs in singles at 4.0 and 4.5 levels more often - maybe 5-10% of matches. I think that is when more rec players started playing with soft polys and since then in about 1,400 singles matches, I‘ve played only one player regularly who S/Vs all the time in 4.5 singles and another who does it about half the time. There are others who try it it in stretches in matches if they are not winning from the baseline, but it is not their main strategy.

In contrast, more than 50% of players (4.5 with some 5.0s) that I play doubles with usually S/V and maybe 80% of them come to the net after one or two shots off both serves and returns. Most of them are baseliners who opportunistically approach the net in singles while being primarily net players in doubles - I play like that also. However, only about 10-15% of the guys I play doubles with play any singles at all - most are just rec doubles players.

So, I would say that many 4.5 singles players slowly stopped doing S/V around the time poly took over as it became a more risky strategy. Also, it requires more explosive movement to S/V all the time in singles compared to coming in later in the point off good approach shots and so, many older players slowly switch to this style also.

This is accurate from my experience also, doubles at the higher level SnV is used often. But it can still be used effectively in singles at the 4.5-5.0 level, as long as the player is very good at reading shots and volleying.

 

[HuusHould]

I wonder why he’s never done anything at Wimbledon. Rafa has won two majors on grass so I don’t think Brown is even close to as good on grass as Rafa is. Those warm up tournaments are nothing more than just that warm ups and the top guys don’t really care they hope to play a couple matches and get ready for the real tournament. He did beat a weak Rafa at Wimbledon in 2015 but Rafa was injured off and on and it was a terrible year for him, one of the 2 times that he lost FO was that year.

Netplay done really well can give Rafa trouble though, the 2008 AO semi final v Tsonga is another example. Its just very rarely done that well. It proves it can be done though. I mean he only serve and volleyed occasionally, but he got to the net a lot.

 

[user92626]

Speaking of volley, what do you guys do to give yourself ample time to volley the ball? What techniques or strategies to use? Eg. track the ball before it's hit?

(Notice for most of us average volleyers, we would kill the ball if it comes directly at us and is slow enough. So, I figure the most common issue is speed and timing.)

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Speaking of volley, what do you guys do to give yourself ample time to volley the ball? What techniques or strategies to use? Eg. track the ball before it's hit?

(Notice for most of us average volleyers, we would kill the ball if it comes directly at us and is slow enough. So, I figure the most common issue is speed and timing.)

I don't think of it in terms of how to give myself more time but rather how to best use the time I'm given. Volleys have both a reactive and proactive component but for me, the majority is reactive: I try to put myself in a good position [ie deep and low approach] and then wait to see how he responds. That's the % play. The only time I'd try to anticipate the shot is when I've hit a poor approach and he's lining up a winner.

Sure, I can give myself more time by deliberately not moving as far forward but that cedes the advantage of being close to the net. If I fear that much that I won't have enough time, I might as well stay on the BL.

I try to anticipate my opponent's shot but if I think he's going to drive the ball, I know roughly how hard he typically hits so I can't manufacture more time. Perhaps the best strategy is to be as loose as possible so I can react as quickly as possible.

 

[user92626]

I don't think of it in terms of how to give myself more time but rather how to best use the time I'm given. Volleys have both a reactive and proactive component but for me, the majority is reactive: I try to put myself in a good position [ie deep and low approach] and then wait to see how he responds. That's the % play. The only time I'd try to anticipate the shot is when I've hit a poor approach and he's lining up a winner.

Sure, I can give myself more time by deliberately not moving as far forward but that cedes the advantage of being close to the net. If I fear that much that I won't have enough time, I might as well stay on the BL.

I try to anticipate my opponent's shot but if I think he's going to drive the ball, I know roughly how hard he typically hits so I can't manufacture more time. Perhaps the best strategy is to be as loose as possible so I can react as quickly as possible.

Let me ask this another way.

Given one same situation, what makes player A volley much better than Player B?

Player B appears rush and over extending/reaching for the ball (the volley shot would be weak if he could manage to make contact).

If there's a back and forth volleys between two players, eg 6 shots, Player B inevitably loses, eg being late, hitting off center, that kind of things.

Is the answer like: must clearly see the ball 10, 15 feet away? grip the handle harder? I dunno.

There's this older guy in our group, 55-60 years old. His volleying is superior to everyone! He doesn't camp inside the service box. He tracks the ball very well, moves very well to it and always cut it hard with excellent placement.

In 3v3s I specifically arranged for him to be with 2 pretty bad teammates (twice) while my teams were clearly superior but we still lost. Basically he covered the entire doubles court by himself. The other two simply put up their racket blocking a portion and squash the ball if it came at them.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Let me ask this another way.

Given one same situation, what makes player A volley much better than Player B?

Player B appears rush and over extending/reaching for the ball (the volley shot would be weak if he could manage to make contact).

If there's a back and forth volleys between two players, eg 6 shots, Player B inevitably loses, eg being late, hitting off center, that kind of things.

Is the answer like: must clearly see the ball 10, 15 feet away? grip the handle harder? I dunno.

That's a much broader question than your original one about giving myself ample time.

Good volleyers:
- Don't overcook the approach: they're confident that a decent approach puts them in a reasonable position. If they get passed, c'est la vie. Poor volleyers overcook the approach because they lack the confidence in their net game and want to tilt the odds in their favor as much as possible even at the risk of more errors.

- Are balanced as the opponent hits the ball. Whether it's a split step or a gravity step or a stutter step, they find a way to be in optimal balance at the crucial time. Poor volleyers believe that the closer to the net they get, the easier the volley will be and thus aren't balanced and ready. They're also more vulnerable to the lob.

- Don't try to put away or even punch every volley. They recognize that "to everything, there is a season": there are times to punch, times to guide, times to feather, and times to defend. Sometimes, the first volley is the setup shot. Poor volleyers use every volley opportunity as a putaway opportunity, no matter what the circumstances.

- Don't have a massive takeback or use lots of wrist to snap at the ball [yes, there are exceptions; I'm talking about the typical volley]. Poor volleyers usually are poor because they try to do too much; it's rare to find a volleyer who is poor because he does too little.

- Recognize that sometimes, a neutral, deep volley is the best choice. Reset and wait to see what happens. Poor volleyers view this as too passive and avoid it.

- Are ready for the lob. Poor volleyers...need I say more?

- Are opportunistic and optimistic: if I lose the point but feel it was the high % play, I'll do it again until my opponent can prove that he owns that shot. Only then will I try something else. Poor volleyers give up way too soon. They can't take the pain of getting passed and losing the point so soon in the rally because they're comparing rally length to a BL rally, which is a bad comparison, IMO.

There's this older guy in our group, 55-60 years old. His volleying is superior to everyone! He doesn't camp inside the service box. He tracks the ball very well, moves very well to it and always cut it hard with excellent placement.

In 3v3s I specifically arranged for him to be with 2 pretty bad teammates (twice) while my teams were clearly superior but we still lost. Basically he covered the entire doubles court by himself. The other two simply put up their racket blocking a portion and squash the ball if it came at them.

Video him, video a prototypical poor volleyer, and compare.

 

[LuckyR]

Speaking of volley, what do you guys do to give yourself ample time to volley the ball? What techniques or strategies to use? Eg. track the ball before it's hit?

(Notice for most of us average volleyers, we would kill the ball if it comes directly at us and is slow enough. So, I figure the most common issue is speed and timing.)

If you are continuously late to the ball when at net, you're taking too much of a swing at the ball, ie you're not using a classical volley punch stroke.

In other words it's not about seeing, you're going to be prone to be late if you're swinging too much.

 

[Dragy]

I've been playing full SnV in some matches against some players, who loves to return soft and deep. With good success. But generally I don't prefer the rhythm of SnV - although I'm decent at the net and in doubles particularly. That moment you fight at the net (opposed to putting away easier ball after good approach) is when you move and lunge twice as frequent compared to baseline - and being good at it, I still prefer the ground game to play. Net game is to finish points.

But again, in certain circumstances it's best strategy for me. Just not the beloved one. Need to play return games doesn't help to tune in as well - more baseline, or weaker approaches if charging... disturbs me quite a bit

Funny enough, I'm 100% ok with scrambling - wide or short. I'm not particularly a rhythm, rally player. But too much "playing" the net - stitching together multiple volleys and overheads - just not very found of

 

[SV10is]

I've been playing full SnV in some matches against some players, who loves to return soft and deep. With good success. But generally I don't prefer the rhythm of SnV - although I'm decent at the net and in doubles particularly. That moment you fight at the net (opposed to putting away easier ball after good approach) is when you move and lunge twice as frequent compared to baseline - and being good at it, I still prefer the ground game to play. Net game is to finish points.

But again, in certain circumstances it's best strategy for me. Just not the beloved one. Need to play return games doesn't help to tune in as well - more baseline, or weaker approaches if charging... disturbs me quite a bit

Funny enough, I'm 100% ok with scrambling - wide or short. I'm not particularly a rhythm, rally player. But too much "playing" the net - stitching together multiple volleys and overheads - just not very found of

If you can get a decent approach volley, you're going to win most of those points and it's especially doable when you face someone who doesn't like to do much with their return or if your serve is hard to return for people around your level.

I played a guy yesterday who's clearly better than me and he couldn't hit passing shots. He gave me a lot of feasible volleys, but I wasted a bit too many a tad wide or a tad long. I had to borrow a racket that was about 30g lighter than my usual frames and flat serves and touch shots were really hard to make all night. It's unfortunate because he's a great player and it was fun, so I would have liked to stretch the match a little longer. I guess that some more experience playing S&V might make this kind of situation more feasible in the future.

And you make a good point at the end: we play for fun. I love the S&V combination, but it's important to have fun playing tennis!

 

[user92626]

Thanks, guys, particularly @S&V-not_dead_yet and @LuckyR

It's a lot for me to digest, even maybe on a different plane that I'm not ready for.



Let's go back to the basic. I'm thinking to practice this:

1) Ball reading & watching. This needs to be very early for detection and sufficient data. Right?
Watching needs to be like eyes gluing to the ball that you absolutely cannot miss contacting it properly. Right?

2) Speed. Gotta be very fast to set up and intercept the ball. Right?

 

[AlexSV]

Thanks, guys, particularly @S&V-not_dead_yet and @LuckyR

It's a lot for me to digest, even maybe on a different plane that I'm not ready for.



Let's go back to the basic. I'm thinking to practice this:

1) Ball reading & watching. This needs to be very early for detection and sufficient data. Right?
Watching needs to be like eyes gluing to the ball that you absolutely cannot miss contacting it properly. Right?

2) Speed. Gotta be very fast to set up and intercept the ball. Right?

2. Balance more than speed. Most of the SV players here probably take most of their first volleys behind the service line. Sprinting to get as close as possible is a good recipe for missing a lot of volleys due to being rushed.

People who start sprinting usually end up taking tons of short steps making it hard to be balanced when the ball arrives. One or two large powerful steps and a split step with a solid base is much better.

 

[SV10is]

Thanks, guys, particularly @S&V-not_dead_yet and @LuckyR

It's a lot for me to digest, even maybe on a different plane that I'm not ready for.



Let's go back to the basic. I'm thinking to practice this:

1) Ball reading & watching. This needs to be very early for detection and sufficient data. Right?
Watching needs to be like eyes gluing to the ball that you absolutely cannot miss contacting it properly. Right?

2) Speed. Gotta be very fast to set up and intercept the ball. Right?

(1) Yes. You need to watch the ball, although it ahould be noted that you can't "see" contact (balls come in an out of strings too fast).

(2) It is useful to be fast, but it's usually more important to be in a good position and posture to react early in tennis. Most players take 2 to 3 steps from serve and hit a split step in NML when they S&V and you'll keep moving forward, hopefully for a volley and not a half-volley, unless they lob.

As a rule of thumb, if you're in trouble, you have to recover on the same side as the ball when you're at the net, so it's easier to keep it in front of you and go for depth when the volley is hard to make. Then, you're looking to hit 1 or 2 volleys at the net.

 

[Shroud]

2. Balance more than speed. Most of the SV players here probably take most of their first volleys behind the service line. Sprinting to get as close as possible is a good recipe for missing a lot of volleys due to being rushed.

People who start sprinting usually end up taking tons of short steps making it hard to be balanced when the ball arrives. One or two large powerful steps and a split step with a solid base is much better.

Its true. I had a coach point out that the ball is coming at you and you at it, so the faster you go the less time you have. Its best to just split when they hit the return and not worry where that is on the court. He pointed out that the big serves like Sampras didn't always make it at the service line and would volley in no mans land on occassion.

 

[TennisLogic]

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.

Lol overheads are literally the easiest shot in tennis
You just don’t practice them lol

 

[SV10is]

Overheads are literally the easiest shot in tennis. You just don’t practice them.

It's not the easiest shot in the game and that kind of attitude is how you end up with people dumping overheads in the net or long.

It's also a shot that you definitely need to practice if you want to come forward effectively or else you're going to get junk balled to death.

 

[SV10is]

He pointed out that the big serves like Sampras didn't always make it at the service line and would volley in no mans land on occassion.

I'm pretty sure Sampras hit the large majority of first volleys from outside the service box, but he was hitting big for a S&V player. Someone like Edberg might have been a tad closer to the net at contact since he was mostly hitting kick serves.

Generally speaking, that coach did give a good advice though: move and split when they hit. A subtlety is that you can usually see what they're doing before you land, so you can often split and land on the opposite foot to push off in the right direction earlier.

Then, you adjust your first volley depending on how they return and close in.

 

[Steady Eddy]

Lol overheads are literally the easiest shot in tennis
You just don’t practice them lol

I'm usually alone for practice, so I practice serves and overheads. The way I practice overheads is by using my racket to hit a ball straight up, I let it bounce and then smash it.

I'm not very tall, and quick lobs go over my head a lot in matches. I don't have trouble with the stroke, I have trouble getting to the spot.

 

[Shroud]

Well that settles it then he is definitely better than Rafa. Lol

He is 2-0 against rafa. Rafa has never ever beaten Brown. Brown is better based on his undefeated record against Rafa.

 

[tlm]

He is 2-0 against rafa. Rafa has never ever beaten Brown. Brown is better based on his undefeated record against Rafa.

Okay a nobody who has won nothing is better than the guy with 22 majors. Lol

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

Okay a nobody who has won nothing is better than the guy with 22 majors. Lol

Also "BROWN" scores more in Scrabble than "RAFA"; further evidence. [Removes tongue from cheek.]

 

[tlm]

He is 2-0 against rafa. Rafa has never ever beaten Brown. Brown is better based on his undefeated record against Rafa.

I do understand why you like Brown he is an exciting player and plays your kind of game. He is a good athlete and when he is on playing on grass surface he can be a tough opponent. Plus he strings at super high tension and proves a high tension string bed can be very beneficial.

 

[Shroud]

I do understand why you like Brown he is an exciting player and plays your kind of game. He is a good athlete and when he is on playing on grass surface he can be a tough opponent. Plus he strings at super high tension and proves a high tension string bed can be very beneficial.

He doesnt exactly play my game. He hits lots of drop volleys and has amazing touch. Its sad he didnt get the financial support and had whole years plagued by injuries. Mostly he is a breath of fresh air from the baseline bots the game has today. Check him out playing against monfils. Iirc it was on clay and the highlight film was out of this world.

 

[AlexSV]

As for Cressy, there are some interesting statistics for his serving speeds at the AO2021. He was hitting on average a little over 200 kph on a first serve -- so, among the top ten men for average speed. He was also hitting his second serve at around 190 kph on average -- a whole 20 kph faster than huge servers. Yet, he didn't crack the top 10 in terms of maximum speed, so my guess is that what you see here is Cressy takes more risks than other players with his serve and he seems to be relying on pace and placement more than other players. From what I can tell, it's not as big a serve as Sampras, but it is a solid serve and he is as daring or more than Sampras on his second serve.

Most ATP players have surprisingly low average first serve speeds because they mix in slices and kicks fairly often. They're usually in the 170-180s kph range because of it.

Yesterday, the commentators were wondering how much analysis has gone into the Cressy second serve. There's a 5mph difference between his first (around 128) and second (around 123). He was in his third or fourth service game, and the only points Duckworth took off his serve were double faults.

Does he do it because statistically he wins more points? Does it just work for him?

Will anyone else take this approach? If it's winning points, someone else is surely going to try.

 

[SV10is]

Yesterday, the commentators were wondering how much analysis has gone into the Cressy second serve. There's a 5mph difference between his first (around 128) and second (around 123). He was in his third or fourth service game, and the only points Duckworth took off his serve were double faults.

Does he do it because statistically he wins more points? Does it just work for him?

Will anyone else take this approach? If it's winning points, someone else is surely going to try.

He has a very particular kind of game that is built around giving himself a feasible first volley and it's possible his kick serve isn't good enough to do the job, except as an occasional change of pace.

In his case, a slightly poorer average return may well be worth the risk, but the calculus seems different from the baseline. The slightly less deep average return is probably not giving you enough improvement in rally control to justify double faulting more often.

He seems to be pretty unique in going for so much, but that wasn't uncommon for players like Sampras to take risks on second serves. Actually, even most big servers were taking more risks on first serves back then -- it wasn't uncommon to see first serves only getting in around 50% of the time. So, it's possible Cressy is playing to his advantage given how he builds points without being a good idea for the average ATP pro.

 

[Dragy]

Interesting enough, Cressy wasn’t rushing to the net too much in return games. Ok playing from the baseline

Kyrgios did SnV against Medvedev with big success as well

 

[SV10is]

Interesting enough, Cressy wasn’t rushing to the net too much in return games. Ok playing from the baseline

Kyrgios did SnV against Medvedev with big success as well

Kyrgios has a great serve and can bring it up in the 130-135 mph range sometimes. If you can't just hold your ground at the baseline and you have the serve to do some damage, it's not a crazy idea to do some S&V some of the time -- even at that level.

 

[LuckyR]

Interesting enough, Cressy wasn’t rushing to the net too much in return games. Ok playing from the baseline Kyrgios did SnV against Medvedev with big success as well So did Tsitsipas.

 

[SV10is]

So did Tsitsipas.

I've heard someone mention in passing that younger players have been playing more doubles since the mid 2010s relative to the mid 2000s. S&V may have been neglected a little too much during the 2000s, but it seems to be a fairly effective variation even today. It's not impossible that even ATP players may have underestimated the value of S&V and that the latest rise may be players figuring out a way to use it effectively.