At this time many people, including most tennis coaches and specialists, say that serve-and-volleying is dead. They tell us that racket and string technology gives returners the advantage. But the same technology helps the serve and the approach to the net. Are the present players better than Bjorn Borg or Jimmy Connors at defending against the serve-and-volley game? Are the todays service returners better than Andre Agassi or Michael Chang? Of course not.
Chris Evert wrote about serve-and-volley in Tennis Magazine: "Still, given how well players serve, its a strategy that could be a bigger part of a lot of players arsenals. Yes, returns are formidable,but serving to spots out wide or into the body can yield opportunities for successful forays to the net".
In my opinion, there is a problem that many modern tennis coaches do not know how to teach their players this style. They prefer to use the simplest approach while coaching their players to the aggressive baseline game.
-- Edited by Valery on Sunday 13th of May 2012 10:54:36 PM
I try to understand why do so few players add the serve-and-volley to their game, virtually none of the top players? This style definitely seems be the easiest, surest way to win a point at the net. http://wp.me/p2iyrR-6M
If serve-&-volley was an effective strategy, top players would use it. They don't. So it isn't.
Many modern coaches do not know how to teach serve and volley for their players . If juniors players have not added serve and volley to their game, what do you expect from pros?
The great serve and volley players of the past forty years or so were, in general, great tennis players who added serve and volley to their game. If Pete Sampras or Boris Becker were to play right now, would they be able to beat a top 10 player? My answer is yes.
I'll develop this "behavioural economics" approach, if you'll allow me.
For an ambitious youngster to develop his net skills will inevitably be at the expense of his baseline skills. And since the modern game is based around effective ground strokes from the baseline, this looks like a pretty stupid thing to do.
Yes, of course it is POSSIBLE that the net skills strategy might work out. But why would anyone take the risk?
__________________
"Where Ratty leads - the rest soon follow" (Professor Henry Brubaker - The Institute of Studies)
If serve-&-volley was an effective strategy, top players would use it. They don't. So it isn't.
THIS.
One thing of course is that so many courts are slower now, not that many fast hard courts and indeed Wimby is slower too. I believe ball changes have also contributed here.
Unless there are changes the other way that make S & V likely to be more successful I see no likelihood at all of any great change in the foreseeable future.
-- Edited by indiana on Tuesday 15th of May 2012 04:03:26 PM