Who says Federer has good volleys?

[dh003i]

Jesus. How high Roger has set the bar is evidenced by this lame thread. Forget the 5 Wimbledon titles. Have one bad match where his volley sucks and all of a sudden he cant volley? Please. He is one of the best volleyers in the current era, if not the best.

Those who say Federer isn't a great volleyer don't know what they're talking about. He's among the best, if not the best, in the game today. He'd be even more consistent if they hadn't *******ized Wimbledon and made it slower.

But I don't know how you can look at his performance against Monfils and say it was a poor day at the net. 49 / 64 at net, a 77% success rate. That's freaking phenomenal considering how often he came in. Coming in 64 times -- in today's game, against a speedy guy like Monfils with some power on his shots, on clay -- even 60% would be a great success rate.

 

[TheTruth]

Of course if you say anything about Fed here, you'll be labeled, but go ahead.

Fed is not a great volleyer. He's average. He misses as many as he makes. The match with Sampras a hundred years ago is not an indicator of how he volleys today. For one, he would have gotten rusty since it is primarily a baseline game now. Just because Fed has won 12 grand slams does not mean he excels in every aspect of the game. Pete won 14 and there were holes in his game too. A few months ago a poster said Tsonga had better volleys and he/she was laughed off the board, but in reality, it was true. Tsonga does volley better. He just doesn't have 12 grand slams. I know the commentators spit that drivel out all day longs, but here's how you could tell. If Fed volleyed as well as they say he does, it would make no sense for him not to have confidence in it. Federer only takes the risk when his back is against the wall, as in a last resort.

Now, the other thing is that he volleys well, or volleys bad is a matter of opinion. To my knowledge there is no ATP stat regarding volleys attempted and volleys made.

You can get mad if you want to, but it's the truth anyhow.

Let the flaming begin!

 

[joeri888]

Of course if you say anything about Fed here, you'll be labeled, but go ahead.

Fed is not a great volleyer. He's average. He misses as many as he makes. The match with Sampras a hundred years ago is not an indicator of how he volleys today. For one, he would have gotten rusty since it is primarily a baseline game now. Just because Fed has won 12 grand slams does not mean he excels in every aspect of the game. Pete won 14 and there were holes in his game too. A few months ago a poster said Tsonga had better volleys and he/she was laughed off the board, but in reality, it was true. Tsonga does volley better. He just doesn't have 12 grand slams. I know the commentators spit that drivel out all day longs, but here's how you could tell. If Fed volleyed as well as they say he does, it would make no sense for him not to have confidence in it. Federer only takes the risk when his back is against the wall, as in a last resort.

Now, the other thing is that he volleys well, or volleys bad is a matter of opinion. To my knowledge there is no ATP stat regarding volleys attempted and volleys made.

You can get mad if you want to, but it's the truth anyhow.

Let the flaming begin!

Maybe Roger's volleys aren't quite as accurate these days, but in 2005 and 2006 they were sublime, and no there were NO holes in his game, except his backhand on clay against Nadal only.

 

[TheTruth]

Maybe Roger's volleys aren't quite as accurate these days, but in 2005 and 2006 they were sublime, and no there were NO holes in his game, except his backhand on clay against Nadal only.

No argument there. His volleys were a lot better in those years. 2007 and 2008 he has been missing a lot. The weird thing is he was doing very well, but then quit doing them. I guess he didn't need them for the rest of the field, but with the ascents of Nadal and Djokovic he needs them again. With him missing so many nowadays, he will be blown off the court.

 

[helloworld]

except for the glaring fact that roger beat sampras (arguably one of the best s/v players of all time), by serving and volleying.
why dont you look up stuff once in a while

George Bastl beat Sampras at Wimbledon the following year. Does that make George Bastl the GOAT on grass? Beating an old man doesn't prove anything, and Federer was not in his prime either. It's basically a match between a player way past his prime and a player about to reach his prime. Nothing can be conclude from the match unless they're both playing their best tennis.

 

[joeri888]

No argument there. His volleys were a lot better in those years. 2007 and 2008 he has been missing a lot. The weird thing is he was doing very well, but then quit doing them. I guess he didn't need them for the rest of the field, but with the ascents of Nadal and Djokovic he needs them again. With him missing so many nowadays, he will be blown off the court.

I think especially the last sentence reminds me of people saying 'Fed is done' 'Roger doesn't have slams left in him' etc. and while you say that, Roger is again in the final of the French, equaling his best performance there and bidding for a thirteenth title. Not blown off the court yet.

 

[TheTruth]

I think especially the last sentence reminds me of people saying 'Fed is done' 'Roger doesn't have slams left in him' etc. and while you say that, Roger is again in the final of the French, equaling his best performance there and bidding for a thirteenth title. Not blown off the court yet.

Joeri, a lot of people say a lot of things, unfounded and otherwise. I would never say Roger is done, Roger doesn't have any slams in him, or any other future predicting statements. The bottom line is, none of us know. At this point he only has two people to worry about, Nadal and Djokovic. The rest of the field is mentally weak in my opinion. Concievably he will win more, but either way we won't know until it happens!

 

[Rafael_Nadal_6257]

First of all, I would say that Federer has a better net game than just about anyone in the top ten including Nadal. Nadal has underrated touch at net, but Federer has a better overall net game.

That is hilarious. Nadal has a better net game than Roger. I'm going to explain to you why this is far from true. Roger actually "serves" and then "volleys". Nadal hits shots that are virtually winners and then volleys. Have Nadal actually serve and volley and compare to Federer and we'll see who has the better volleys.

However, in response to this, Nadal's serve is weaker than Federer's, which is part of the reason why he doesn't serve and volley that much (he actually does when he's up quite a bit in the match), just as Federer doesn't volley that much when he's playing Nadal and his ground game is worse than usual.

 

[superstition]

geez so much hate.. i mean, it's a forum, no one has to prove anything when it's just a personal opinion..

And some opinions are in need of proof more than others. Anyone who argues that Federer isn't a good volleyer is going to have to do more work than someone who states he's the best volleyer among the singles specialists on tour today. The latter is the general consensus. The former is not.

 

[crosscourt]

Fed has good but not great volleys. From time to time he plays an amazing volley.

cc

 

[TheTruth]

Fed has good but not great volleys. From time to time he plays an amazing volley.

cc

That's exactly right!

 

[nickb]

Federer has the best volleys on tour right now...

But I do think Tim Henman had/has better volleys...much better.

 

[akv89]

Mistakes on the tennis court from an accomplished player stand out more than winners. This is why when we see Federer net a few volleys in one game, some might say that he can't volley. As many have shown the stats show that Federer's net game wasn't that bad even in the Monfils match when people thought it was bad. His volleys are not only sharp, but they have also been very consistent.
I also don't think Federer gets enough recognition for his reaction time at the net. I don't think I've seen anyone move as fast to get what would have been a passing shot back for a winner.

 

[crazylevity]

Check out Federer's match against Gonzo at last year's TMC, AO 2007, etc. Those were tournaments where Federer came in a lot, and volleyed with great finesse and poise.

Even more impressive are his old Wimbledon matches, circa 2001-2003. Serving and volleying a lot.

Also check out his doubles matches. There's one on youtube with him and Wawrinka vs Nadal & Moya at Rome iirc. Some of the net play Federer did was jaw-droppingly good.

I've seen so many posts comparing Federer's volleying to other greats such as Edberg and Rafter. Though such comparisons may be valid, they are often difficult to substantiate. For those of you who doubt, please check out the matches above and see for yourself.

The truth, as they say, is out there.

 

[Bubba]

He's a very good volleyer, He's #1 in the world and has been for x00 weeks - I'd say he's good enough. Could he be better, perhaps, but if you watch him at the net he is still amazing.

 

[Defcon]

Against Monfils, Fed made all the hard volleys, some really tought ones, and missed sitters. I'd much rather have that than someone who can make only the easy volleys.

Nadal has good touch but saying he has better volleys is laughable - he only comes in on almost-winners.

 

[Andres]

You must be kidding me. Of those four, only Edberg has better volleys that Federer.Fed does everything, including volleys, better than Rafter, Sampras , and Becker.

Sorry, but no. Compared to Becker, Federer is a sub-par volleyer. Compared to Rafter, Federer looks like Sharapova at the net.

 

[BeHappy]

Sorry, but no. Compared to Becker, Federer is a sub-par volleyer. Compared to Rafter, Federer looks like Sharapova at the net.

Sampras is a better volleyer than Federer.

 

[dh003i]

Sorry, but no. Compared to Becker, Federer is a sub-par volleyer. Compared to Rafter, Federer looks like Sharapova at the net.

Honestly, I haven't seen them enough to remark on your comment, but from what I've seen, Federer is an exceptional volleyer. Sure, he misses some easy ones -- I think maybe goes too close to the line, or loses focus. But I mean, he doesn't volley a lot; the whole game today is rigged against coming in to volley. But it's total and complete crap to say he's volleyed poorly this tournament. I don't think there was a single match I saw where he had a low % of net-points; and the "horrible" game against Monfils volleying, he was 77% on over 60 volleys -- very impressive.

So, if Federer looks sub-par compared to Becker or Rafter in volleying, it must just because they had insane out-of-this world all-time great / best volleys.

That said, I think Federer would be even better volleying if he came in more. One thing I look forward to as he ages is he'll have to get away from that baseline game, and force the issue being more aggressive; use more of that all-around game. And that will be a beautiful thing to see, even if it means (by the nature of it), he won't be able to be as consistent.

 

[BreakPoint]

Im always very impartial in my analysis, you obviously did not read the thread to begin with and assumed because I did address your concerns

This is what you call "impartial"?

..... I don't think he has had a great net game, he nets, frames, or botches an overhead kind of a lot. ....... between him and Nadal I would say Nadal has the better net game, logic says know but in reality he does

 

[BreakPoint]

Titles don't mean everything; Nadal has a major doubles title and Federer doesn't if I'm not mistakened.

Huh? Titles don't mean everything? I wonder why the pros try so hard to win them? Perhaps Federer should just skip the final tomorrow since he doesn't really care about titles. :-?

McEnroe was a pretty good doubles player. How do people know that? Because he has 78 doubles titles!

Nadal has never won a doubles title at a major. He won one at Monte Carlo. Not a bid deal. Federer won one at Miami, also known as the "5th Major" - a much bigger deal.

 

[BreakPoint]

Of course if you say anything about Fed here, you'll be labeled, but go ahead.

Fed is not a great volleyer. He's average. He misses as many as he makes. The match with Sampras a hundred years ago is not an indicator of how he volleys today. For one, he would have gotten rusty since it is primarily a baseline game now. Just because Fed has won 12 grand slams does not mean he excels in every aspect of the game. Pete won 14 and there were holes in his game too. A few months ago a poster said Tsonga had better volleys and he/she was laughed off the board, but in reality, it was true. Tsonga does volley better. He just doesn't have 12 grand slams. I know the commentators spit that drivel out all day longs, but here's how you could tell. If Fed volleyed as well as they say he does, it would make no sense for him not to have confidence in it. Federer only takes the risk when his back is against the wall, as in a last resort.

Now, the other thing is that he volleys well, or volleys bad is a matter of opinion. To my knowledge there is no ATP stat regarding volleys attempted and volleys made.

You can get mad if you want to, but it's the truth anyhow.

Let the flaming begin!

I guess you missed the post right above yours. :-?

Those who say Federer isn't a great volleyer don't know what they're talking about. He's among the best, if not the best, in the game today. He'd be even more consistent if they hadn't *******ized Wimbledon and made it slower.

But I don't know how you can look at his performance against Monfils and say it was a poor day at the net. 49 / 64 at net, a 77% success rate. That's freaking phenomenal considering how often he came in. Coming in 64 times -- in today's game, against a speedy guy like Monfils with some power on his shots, on clay -- even 60% would be a great success rate.

Did even Sampras or Edberg ever have a 77% success rate volleying at Roland Garros? I highly doubt!

 

[TheTruth]

Against Monfils, Fed made all the hard volleys, some really tought ones, and missed sitters. I'd much rather have that than someone who can make only the easy volleys.

Nadal has good touch but saying he has better volleys is laughable - he only comes in on almost-winners.

And how many matches has Monfils played this year due to injury? Wasn't it five?

 

[TheTruth]

[QUOTE=dh003i;2404774]Honestly, I haven't seen them enough to remark on your comment, but from what I've seen, Federer is an exceptional volleyer. Sure, he misses some easy ones -- I think maybe goes too close to the line, or loses focus. But I mean, he doesn't volley a lot; the whole game today is rigged against coming in to volley. But it's total and complete crap to say he's volleyed poorly this tournament. I don't think there was a single match I saw where he had a low % of net-points; and the "horrible" game against Monfils volleying, he was 77% on over 60 volleys -- very impressive.

So, if Federer looks sub-par compared to Becker or Rafter in volleying, it must just because they had insane out-of-this world all-time great / best volleys.

That said, I think Federer would be even better volleying if he came in more. One thing I look forward to as he ages is he'll have to get away from that baseline game, and force the issue being more aggressive; use more of that all-around game. And that will be a beautiful thing to see, even if it means (by the nature of it), he won't be able to be as consistent.[/QUOTE]

This explains why you think Federer is such an exceptional volleyer. Obviously, you just don't know. But to sit and argue with people who were there and saw these players year in and year out is insane. What you've just admitted here is that you have very limited knowledge about the subject at hand. Thanks a lot! You have lost all credibility. I would never speak on players I didn't see "enough" and try to determine their skill level. Shame on you!

 

[TheTruth]

I guess you missed the post right above yours. :-?


Did even Sampras or Edberg ever have a 77% success rate volleying at Roland Garros? I highly doubt!

Against an opponent like Monfils who has only played 5 matches this year and all the posters on this board was calling a waste of talent? Yep, that's pretty impressive. LOL! You guys kill me!

 

[BreakPoint]

Against an opponent like Monfils who has only played 5 matches this year and all the posters on this board was calling a waste of talent? Yep, that's pretty impressive. LOL! You guys kill me!

Gonzales has pretty big passing shots, wouldn't you say? Well, against Gonzales in the quarters, Federer had an even better 83% success rate at the net.

 

[dh003i]

This explains why you think Federer is such an exceptional volleyer. Obviously, you just don't know. But to sit and argue with people who were there and saw these players year in and year out is insane. What you've just admitted here is that you have very limited knowledge about the subject at hand. Thanks a lot! You have lost all credibility. I would never speak on players I didn't see "enough" and try to determine their skill level. Shame on you!

No, you imbecile...I don't need to see a lot of Rafter, Edberg, Becker, etc to say that Federer is a great volleyer. He is quite natural up there, has amazing quickness, and makes some very difficult volleys, plus has a good percentage.

What the hell do you know about volleys anyways? You only come here to bash Federer. I doubt you bothered to watch that awesome Youtube of Laver vs. Ashe at Wimbledon, which had some really great net play and volleys. If it were up to your and your ilk, there'd be no volleys or net-play, because the whole season would be on amazingly slow high-bouncing clay. You just come here to bash Federer.

 

[TheTruth]

Gonzales has pretty big passing shots, wouldn't you say? Well, against Gonzales in the quarters, Federer had an even better 83% success rate at the net.

Now, that is impressive!

 

[TheTruth]

No, you imbecile...I don't need to see a lot of Rafter, Edberg, Becker, etc to say that Federer is a great volleyer. He is quite natural up there, has amazing quickness, and makes some very difficult volleys, plus has a good percentage.

What the hell do you know about volleys anyways? You only come here to bash Federer. I doubt you bothered to watch that awesome Youtube of Laver vs. Ashe at Wimbledon, which had some really great net play and volleys. If it were up to your and your ilk, there'd be no volleys or net-play, because the whole season would be on amazingly slow high-bouncing clay. You just come here to bash Federer.

You need to go and get your blood pressure down. You're young, but stress kills. You do need to see those who excelled at it rather than your blind love of Federer. And you call me an imbecile? Not only that, anyone who doesn't agree with your irrational rants immediately gets called names. The mods should ban you for life. A public tennis board is not the place for you. You can't handle a difference of opinion!

 

[dh003i]

You need to go and get your blood pressure down. You're young, but stress kills. You do need to see those who excelled at it rather than your blind love of Federer. And you call me an imbecile? Not only that, anyone who doesn't agree with your irrational rants immediately gets called names. The mods should ban you for life. A public tennis board is not the place for you. You can't handle a difference of opinion!

No, people who have idiotic paranoid "opinion" get called out for that. I'm sorry if you don't understand statistics, but I've explained quite clearly why you can't make first-hand comparisons between players if you've seen many games full games from one, and only several from the other (especially if they aren't randomly selected). I would trust McEnroe's opinion on the matter, for example (but hardly yours, given your hatred of Federer, and irrationality). McEnroe hasn't criticized Federer for being a poor volleyer; in fact, he went nuts over Federer winning Wimbledon S&V'ing in '03.

But I need say little more than point to your name and behavior; "TheTruth" obviously refers to what you think every word out of your mouth is, with absolute certainty. I, on the other hand, am honest enough to admit when I don't know something from first-hand experience. I'm sure that someone like Moose Malloy, who's probably been watching tennis for 50 years, can make direct comparisons.

 

[superstition]

Gonzales has pretty big passing shots, wouldn't you say? Well, against Gonzales in the quarters, Federer had an even better 83% success rate at the net.

One thing to consider, though, is that players of the past played more doubles so they were used to dealing with players at the net. Players of the past also dealt with more net rushers and all court players so they were more used to dealing with players at the net.

 

[Swissv2]

The mods should ban you for life. A public tennis board is not the place for you. You can't handle a difference of opinion!

This can easily be said about you.

 

[TheTruth]

No, people who have idiotic paranoid "opinion" get called out for that. I'm sorry if you don't understand statistics, but I've explained quite clearly why you can't make first-hand comparisons between players if you've seen many games full games from one, and only several from the other (especially if they aren't randomly selected). I would trust McEnroe's opinion on the matter, for example (but hardly yours, given your hatred of Federer, and irrationality). McEnroe hasn't criticized Federer for being a poor volleyer; in fact, he went nuts over Federer winning Wimbledon S&V'ing in '03.

But I need say little more than point to your name and behavior; "TheTruth" obviously refers to what you think every word out of your mouth is, with absolute certainty. I, on the other hand, am honest enough to admit when I don't know something from first-hand experience. I'm sure that someone like Moose Malloy, who's probably been watching tennis for 50 years, can make direct comparisons.

Ahhh, always looking for someone else to do your thinking for you. First Johnny Mac, now Moose Malloy. Sigh. Well, it is what it is. Good night. You have a pleasant rest. It's been real interesting talking to you!

 

[dh003i]

Ahhh, always looking for someone else to do your thinking for you. First Johnny Mac, now Moose Malloy. Sigh. Well, it is what it is. Good night. You have a pleasant rest. It's been real interesting talking to you!

LOL, again, more distortion. And you expect to get away with this on a forum where anyone can look back. I'm not having anyone "do my thinking for me"; I'm deferring to what I consider expert opinion, when I haven't seen something enough for myself to make a judgment. I have a (correct) criteria for determining when I can or cannot make a valid comparison from my first-hand experience. It is based off of knowledge of statistics, as well as just common sense.

I am not interested in watching average or sub-par matches by Edberg, Rafter, Becker, etc. Yet, I would need to do such to make a valid comparison, for myself, of their volleys to Federer's. I would need to watch a random selection of hundreds of their matches -- as many matches from them as I've watched from Federer -- and that would undoubtedly include not particularly great matches. Why the hell would I do that? To be able to make a first-hand comparison? No, it isn't worth that much. I'll defer to experts who've been watching far longer than I have. It's just common sense.

I'm not even interested in going back and watching a random selection of Federer matches I haven't seen.

 

[fednad]

I really don't think he has anything better than maybe slightly above average, and Im not only talking about today against Monfils (although nis net game was nothing short of atrocious today), over the last year I don't think he has had a great net game, she nets, frames, or botches an overhead kind of a lot. How did he get this reputation of having such a great volley, between him and Nadal I would say Nadal has the better net game, logic says know but in reality he does

Ok buddy..I say he has great volleys.

 

[fednad]

You need to go and get your blood pressure down. You're young, but stress kills. You do need to see those who excelled at it rather than your blind love of Federer. And you call me an imbecile? Not only that, anyone who doesn't agree with your irrational rants immediately gets called names. The mods should ban you for life. A public tennis board is not the place for you. You can't handle a difference of opinion!

I think you are a Fed hater

 

[joeri888]

To say Roger doesn't have good volleys is ridiculous imo, but so is comparing them to Sampras'. Sampras made a living of volleying, Roger won most of his slams being the best baseline-player in the world. Roger's got good volleys and if he'd been playing serve and volley for the rest of his life, he'd be talented enough to have awesome volleys, because in his prime roger could do absolutely everything.

Calling Roger's volleys weak because he makes some errors against Monfils is ridiculous though. After one set and a half he'd 13 out of 13 won at the net, and against Gonzalez he won 31 out of 36 overall. THose are good stat. Roger's best volleying is well above almost any other player on tour's best, and especially far above Nadal (who's volleys aren't bad), even Nadal acknowledges that.

 

[(FEDERER)vs(NADAL)]

I really don't think he has anything better than maybe slightly above average, and Im not only talking about today against Monfils (although nis net game was nothing short of atrocious today), over the last year I don't think he has had a great net game, she nets, frames, or botches an overhead kind of a lot. How did he get this reputation of having such a great volley, between him and Nadal I would say Nadal has the better net game, logic says know but in reality he does

flyer you're just a fed hater. look at shanghai last year! volleying is how he can beat nadal

 

[Andres]

So, if Federer looks sub-par compared to Becker or Rafter in volleying, it must just because they had insane out-of-this world all-time great / best volleys.

Rafter, yeah. Becker, not to much
I'd rate Rafter in a Top5 of all-time volleyers, after McEnroe and Edberg. I don't know wether to rate Cash over Rafter or viceversa. Federer doesn't even make the Top10.

 

[NamRanger]

To say Roger doesn't have good volleys is ridiculous imo, but so is comparing them to Sampras'. Sampras made a living of volleying, Roger won most of his slams being the best baseline-player in the world. Roger's got good volleys and if he'd been playing serve and volley for the rest of his life, he'd be talented enough to have awesome volleys, because in his prime roger could do absolutely everything.

Calling Roger's volleys weak because he makes some errors against Monfils is ridiculous though. After one set and a half he'd 13 out of 13 won at the net, and against Gonzalez he won 31 out of 36 overall. THose are good stat. Roger's best volleying is well above almost any other player on tour's best, and especially far above Nadal (who's volleys aren't bad), even Nadal acknowledges that.

Sampras had good volleys, but he also had the luxury of the best serve in tennis to help him get to net. On his return games, his net game flaws were exposed greatly; especially when he was older. Sampras was not a natural net player like Mac or Edberg. He was a converted baseliner. That is partially why he was so good. He got pretty good at the net, but also had a really good baseline game (predominantly his forehand) to boot also.

 

[TheKingOfClay]

who cares... he lost as usual... he will NEVER beat King Nadal on clay... just face it...

 

[xtremerunnerars]

Do you watch tennis outside of the French? Fed has beaten him on clay, you fist pumping bozo.


Fed's really good at volleys; nobody ripped passing shots like nadal until, well, nadal.

 

[moonbat]

Rafter, yeah. Becker, not to much
I'd rate Rafter in a Top5 of all-time volleyers, after McEnroe and Edberg. I don't know wether to rate Cash over Rafter or viceversa. Federer doesn't even make the Top10.

Rafter was amazing, especially his backhand volley. Sweeeet.

 

[brc444]

I think Fed has good volleys but he needs to be more consisitent. He has a tendency to miss some easy ones especially on his forehand side.

 

[Tshooter]

Not good, exceptional.

 

[NamRanger]

Not good, exceptional.

Federer has above average volleys; Henman has exceptional volleys. The man S&Ved his way to a French Open Semi-Final with really no weapons other then his netgame.

 

[federerGOAT]

Federer has above average volleys; Henman has exceptional volleys. The man S&Ved his way to a French Open Semi-Final with really no weapons other then his netgame.

Federer has better volleys than Henman, Sampras, Becker, and Rafter. Only Edberg and Mcenroe can volley better than Federer.