ANDY RODDICK’S TRANSITION GAME HELPS HIM WIN

Posted at April 6, 2010

Andy Roddick worked his way to an excellent win over Rafael Nadal in the semi-final at the Sony Ericcson Open in Miami (and ultimately won the tournament) using a very effective mixture of big serves, effective ground-strokes, and volleys. Roddick has matured as a player. A few years ago he won solely by hitting big serves and big forehands. Under Gilbert he began working to add a volley to his arsenal, but at first it probably did him as much harm as good. It took awhile for him to become adept at when and how to use it, and now he finally has.

In particular, Roddick would have almost certainly lost the Nadal match without his volley. If Roddick had allowed Nadal to hit his serve return back anywhere in the court and then tried to beat him in strictly baseline to baseline rallies he would have been hugely disadvantaged. Nadal is faster than Roddick (even with Roddick’s new, slimmed-down physique), steadier than Roddick, and has better ground-strokes off of both sides. Roddick would have had to hit an awful lot of aces to win. But his volley has now changed the equation.

Nadal’s serve return has not been known as his best shot, but by following his serve to net from time to time Roddick made Nadal’s job of returning vastly more difficult. When returning against a player on the baseline, the objective is to hit it as deep as possible. In contrast, against a serve and volley player the objective is to hit the return short and low. If you hit the return short and low against the good baseliner you get hurt, and if you hit the high and deep one against the volleyer, you also get hurt. The problem for the receiver is that he must choose one or the other in advance since there isn’t time to change his mind once the serve is in play. It forces the receiver to make decisions (which is always an added difficulty) and keep him from getting any true rhythm or consistency on his return. And the server gets easy points whenever the receiver chooses the wrong return.

The volley has been reemerging in recent years.

Over the years the game has evolved many times into many different forms. And it seems to be evolving yet again. The volley is beginning to reappear and assume, at the highest levels of the game, increasing importance. But it is not the volley of yesteryear, that of McEnroe, Edberg, Rafter, or even Henman. Their volleys were of the constant chip and charge, serve and volley variety, usually requiring a maneuvering volley or two before finishing the point. By contrast, the new volley is a transition volley, hit after a severe groundstroke or serve has forced the opponent off balance and onto the defense. It is opportunistic rather than continual. The volleyer darts forward when he or she senses that the reply from a surprised or out-of-position opponent will be hit softly, high, or inaccurately. Instead of multiple volleys, the point is usually ended with the first volley or, at most, the second.

Roger Federer is good at the transition volley.

These days, Roger Federer is the most obvious practitioner of this type of transition volley. Although adept at the net and quite capable of mounting an old-style serve and volley attack, he rarely does it. Instead, he serves and volleys sporadically, just enough to keep his opponent guessing and insecure about hitting low-risk, deep, floating returns. The rest of the time he tries to get control of the point with his ground-strokes and looks to pick off high replies from opponents chased into the distant corners of the court. His tremendous speed of foot and flexible hands allow him to make his moves suddenly and with deadly efficiency, deftly controlling the occasional difficult volley forced by an opponent who hits a better shot than anticipated.

The other players who make constant use of this type of volley are Justine Henin, David Nalbandian, Fabrice Santoro, and now, on occasion, even Rafael Nadal. The best of them are always on the lookout to jump an unwary opponent with a sudden net attack. Santoro, in fact, virtually makes his living this way. If you took away his transition volley and forced him to stay back and simply slug it out with the horde of heavy-hitting baseliners populating the ATP top 100, he would have been driven off the pro circuit early rather than being able to play into his dotage. It is, I believe, the volley that will separate more and more of the strong baseliners from the pack. Every top player hits the ground-strokes pretty well. At the very top of the game, particularly on the faster surfaces, the players need something extra. And they are starting to recognize this.

The transition volley is effective on the opponent’s reaching backhand.

This play works particularly well on an opponent’s backhand side – especially if the shot is a two-hander. When stretched wide and off balance, a player will often be forced to hit with one hand, a physically weaker shot, and one that generally necessitates a defensive, sliced return. But even players with strong, one-handed backhands will resort to the defensive slice if forced severely. And with the ball moving slower and higher over the net (in an attempt to maintain depth), the best percentage play for hitting a winner is to take the ball in the air. This reduces the opponent’s recovery time and puts one in position for an easy kill, even if the first volley is not conclusive. The alternative is to allow the ball to sail back to the baseline, giving the opponent more time to get back into the court, and to go for a winner with a groundstroke. Because of time and distance considerations, this shot must be hit very hard and close to the lines, imposing greater risk of error.

The threat of the volley produces errors.

A secondary benefit of the transition volley is that it will cause one’s opponent to make more errors. Opponents get jumpy when surprise volleys preclude them from hitting low-risk, defensive returns and regaining proper court position. They are now forced to hit more severe and perilous shots from awkward positions. This factor also operates as a result of the occasional serve and volley. They no longer dare to hit the soft, deep, chip return off the big serve lest it be intercepted in the air. Now they have to hit with less margin against a fast-moving ball that is difficult to control in the best of circumstances. The result – more serve return errors.

Today’s players don’t chip and charge.

One might question why Federer and the others have opted to give up on the old serve and volley, chip and charge type of volley and replace it with the new transition volley? The answer, of course, lies with today’s more powerful and accurate ground-strokes, heavier balls, and slower courts. In order to profitably attack at the net these days, one must come forward behind heavier artillery than in days of yore. (In fact, in the old days of sliced backhands, fast courts, and light balls, one almost had an engraved invitation to come to net.) Now the serve returns and passing shots are hit too hard and too accurately for players to venture forward other than behind substantial heat. If today’s top players are allowed to remain on balance and given time to set up and hit passing shots, the odds appear to be against even the most proficient volleyers, with the possible exception of matches played on grass.

Tennis evolution:

Tennis is constantly evolving as players come up with bright ideas of ways to in response Tennis, in its early years, was a game played primarily from the baseline with relatively flat or sliced groundstrokes. In the 1940’s Jack Kramer discovered that the persistent volleyer had the advantage on fast courts against this type of player. Hence the serve and volleyers dominated the game for the next 25 years. To counter the volleyers, players developed topspin ground-strokes while, at the same time, the courts were slowed down and the balls made heavier. By the mid-1970’s, Borg, Connors, Vilas, Solomon, Dibbs, and the rest killed off most of the volleyers. The game was dominated then by baseliners who won largely by attrition, with the exception of Connors, who actually provided a preview of today’s transition volley strategy. The next major development, led by Ivan Lendl, was the aggressive baseliner, who won by attacking from the baseline. And that has been the trend up until today, with most players winning as aggressive baseliners.

Of course there were plenty of exceptions to these trends. John McEnroe and Stephan Edberg were serve and volleyers during the aggressive baseliner phase, Dick Savitt won Wimbledon in 1951 as an aggressive baseliner in the days of the serve and volleyers, and Maurice McLoughlin won by serving and volleying in the 1920’s when the early baseliners ruled. But these people were exceptional in their times, and we are discussing general trends. And the newest general trend appears to be that of the aggressive baseliner additionally armed with the transition volley.