Percentage Tennis - how to approach a receiving game

by barrystar Fri 24 Feb 2012, 4:26 pm

This is Jack Kramer - great player (winner of Wimbledon and US Championships in the 1940's) and tennis promoter - on the subject of how to approach your opponent's serve. It's very interesting, I think that Pete Sampras probably did this a lot of the time, but I don't think it's how the super-fit guys approach a receiving game these days, and it's fair to point out that Kramer was known for having a big serve.

[Cliff] Roche's first rule of percentage tennis was to hold your serve... It didn't make any sense to go running all over the court trying to break the other guy's serve, if this left you too tired to hold your own serve. Priorities. Percentages.
So what Roche taught me was to play it easy against the other player's serve until he fell behind love-30... Statistics show that on a fast court, a good server will hold serve more than 50 percent of the time even after he is down love-40. So early in a set I let a guy have his serve unless he got behind love-30 or love-40 off his own mistakes. I would just try and keep him honest--go for winners off his serve, try something different--whatever I could do with the least loss of energy. Then when it got to 4-all, I played every point all out (except possibly if he got ahead 30-love or 40-love on his serve.
...Roche taught me to play it even safer if you were serving the odd games. The guy who serves the even games serves after the break when he is rested and has had a chance to dry his hands.
When I won my first Forest Hills [US National Championships] against Tom Brown in 1946, Roche was in the marquee. The first set was a toughie. I won 9-7. Then I went up 5-2 in the next set. Here was a perfect time for a kid to lose his head and go for the break. You're so close to 6-2, two sets to love, you can taste it. But for what purpose: you fail to break him; he's 5-3, you're tired, your hands are sweaty, he's got a good chance to break you, and then he's got a rest and dry hands before his serve. Boom, like that: 5-5.
I let Brown have the game for 5-3 without a struggle. Then I looked up and saluted Roche, and he nodded back. It was as if I were saying: "I lost that one for you." And my energy spared, I served out the set at 6-3 and then closed out the match at love.

by socal1976 Fri 24 Feb 2012, 5:20 pm

Well, this is a good strategy for a big server and power player like Sampras or Kramer in his day. Oddly enough most big servers are not traditionally good returners. Fed in his prime was a very good returner but I would not rate him a great returner. He was never in the top 2 or 3 on tour for breaking although he was maybe the best at blunting big power servers with his deep or angled chip returns.

Today, a returner doesn't need to be as negative and as accepting of defeat. Novak, Nadal, Murray all break nearly 40 percent of the time. Novak in particular seems to get into almost every single service game of his opponent and constantly put him under pressure. Eventually, this type of constant pressure on the serve is in my opinion a more effective return strategy for a guy who has a big return and isn't overwhelming on serve.

A big server can afford to conserve energy and play short points on his opponents serve. A guy with an average or decent serve can't really play that way. This strategy is great for Sampras and Kramer playing in the S and V days. Not so great a strategy for most of the players on tour today.

by barrystar Fri 24 Feb 2012, 5:28 pm

Quite so - the serve is less of a weapon than it used to be for a lot of reasons, but any player will still have a better chance of holding his own service than breaking his opponent.

Also, with all that towelling they don't have sweaty hands any more...

by socal1976 Fri 24 Feb 2012, 6:06 pm

Yes, barry in today's tennis the return seems to be more important than having a big serve. Most top pros are going to hold 80 plus percent of the time even in today's game. But you look at the top of the rankings and outside of Federer its the top 4 returners in the world that dominate the rankings. Novak 1 returner and ranked #1. Nadal #2 in the world always top 3 or or 4 in returning. Murray #4 in the world always top 3 in returning. David Ferrer #5 and always in the top 3 or 4 in return percentage.

It seems that in the modern game the great returner is the boss, the opposite of the history of the game up until lets say the early 2000s.

by break_in_the_fifth Tue 28 Feb 2012, 9:49 am

Interesting approach from a bygone time. I think a lot of players still use this approach though. I think I remember in the Tomic Dolgo match one or both of them giving up at 0 30 or 40 at some stage on the return game. The commentators also noticed this and questioned whether it was the best strategy. I think if you're planning to save energy then it's fair enough to play that way as not everyone can chase after everything all day.

by barrystar Tue 28 Feb 2012, 11:37 am

socal1976 wrote: Fed in his prime was a very good returner but I would not rate him a great returner. He was never in the top 2 or 3 on tour for breaking although he was maybe the best at blunting big power servers with his deep or angled chip returns.

Today, a returner doesn't need to be as negative and as accepting of defeat. Novak, Nadal, Murray all break nearly 40 percent of the time. Novak in particular seems to get into almost every single service game of his opponent and constantly put him under pressure. Eventually, this type of constant pressure on the serve is in my opinion a more effective return strategy for a guy who has a big return and isn't overwhelming on serve.

There is a gap between what you are describing, but it's not as big as all that.

As Kramer said, even if you are not consciously trying to break from the first point of the game because you are conserving energy, you nonetheless try to keep your opponent honest on serve. That means you go for it on the immediate return shot, which can have two effects. If you get fizzing returns back you clearly put the pressure on, if you miss you still communicate to your opponent that he's got to keep his serving up because he's going to get nailed if he does not.

It's not the same as Nadal, who aims to get into every point on his opponent's serve because it is an essential part of his game plan that he will wear out his opponent (something he's beginning to appreciate does not phase Djoko). However, Kramer's approach is still wearing on the server who knows that one break will probabyl decide the set but never quite knows when his opponent might seek to pounce and is kept constantly reminded that his service game needs to be tip-top.

by socal1976 Tue 28 Feb 2012, 8:51 pm

Well Nadal and Fed, I think both have different strategies on the return that suit their game. Nadal against most players just wants a deep return that gets him back to 50-50 in the rallies. He has such confidence in his groundstrokes and the speed that he thinks once he gets to that position this will allow him more than enough opportunities to break. Federer actually oddly enough has a very similar strategy most of his career (he has changed this up recently with Annacone) of also just trying to get back to 50-50 on the return and get into the point and let the rest of his weapons take over. In the AO 2010 and WTF Roger showed more of proclivity to attack the second serve especially off the backhand, he also did it alot in FO 2011 against Nole. In the past he was more content to just block back pace and get into the rally.

Where as Nole and Andy are both in my opinion more aggressive on the second point and in this aspect of their game are more aggressive at going after a killer shot on the first ball. In this respect, Nole and Andy do a little bit more of what Kramer suggested as opposed to Nadal/and Fed who looked to get to even in the point on return and then win it from there on out with the rest of their game.

by Sponsored content

Percentage Tennis - how to approach a receiving game

Percentage Tennis - how to approach a receiving game

Re: Percentage Tennis - how to approach a receiving game

Re: Percentage Tennis - how to approach a receiving game

Re: Percentage Tennis - how to approach a receiving game

Re: Percentage Tennis - how to approach a receiving game

Re: Percentage Tennis - how to approach a receiving game

Re: Percentage Tennis - how to approach a receiving game

Re: Percentage Tennis - how to approach a receiving game