Australian Doubles Tennis Instruction

Australian Doubles anyone? Most players think Australian Doubles is just a weird lineup that is supposed to somehow bother your opponents so that the receiver misses the return of serve. Though the chances of a missed or off-target return are a bit greater, the real purpose of Australian Doubles is to set up the opposition switched so that you can easily poach service return.

It is also an excellent serve-and-volley formation for teams that want to play serve-and-volley but are having little success from the normal Up-and-Back Formation.

Check out the four new lessons on Australian Doubles:

Australian Doubles Avenues to Victory
The Australian Doubles Play
Australian Doubles Net Play Tactics
Australian Doubles Serving Tactics

And then, for a review, see this animated tutorial on how to play, and how to defend against, Australian Doubles.

Technorati Tags: tennis tennis instruction tennis doubles

9 Steps to Dominating Tennis Doubles - Great for Coaches

This is the time of year tennis coaches in northern climes begin itching for spring in anticipation of the new season. You can give your doubles teams the edge through the simple program "9 Steps to Dominating Doubles," available at volume discount prices and now available in paperback as well as printable PDF ebook format.

Technorati Tags: tennis tennis instruction tennis doubles

Tennis Doubles Signals

Max Mirnyi and Jamie Murray show how they use signals in doubles play. Notice that the system works like that in baseball, where the pitcher (server) has the choice, but the signal comes from the player who can hide it. So, if the server wants a different play, he asks for a different signal.

Beware friends of your opponents stationed behind you though. They could learn your signals and relay them to your opponents.

Technorati Tags: tennis

Serve-and-Volley Tennis - Making It Work

Learn how to win with serve-and-volley play in this month's illustrated Wild Card article by me at The Tennis Server.

This lesson is presented in the context of doubles, but everything except the tips at the end applies to singles as well:

Serve-and-Volley Doubles - Making It Work.
Technorati Tags: tennis tennis instruction

When to Play the Both-Back Formation in Tennis Doubles

I usually advise to stay out of the Both-Back Formation unless you're forced into it. For example, if the opponents are blasting service returns at me when I'm at net, I won't go back to the baseline, I'll snarl at my partner for setting me up with his poopy service returns.

It's a psychological thing. That gives him something to be afraid of that's worse than whatever he's afraid of ;-)

He suddenly forgets whatever else it was that he feared and stops hitting poopy returns that get me blasted. Problem solved.

The reason I say to never fall back into the Both-Back Formation unnecessarily is because it has no vantage points or angles, and it covers less territory than either of the other two formations.

But Stan Smith has an article on the Tennis.com website that gives a good example of when you might try the Both-Back Formation. He explains the reasons for what he says, too.

Notice the situation he describes: It's a tight set with the score something like 5-5, and your opponents are delivering hard serves that you haven't had much success in returning.

If you set up to receive in the Both-Back Formation some of the time (at least on first serves), you change important aspects of the match in a way that just might win you that set.

Read the article here.

Technorati Tags: tennis

Tennis Strategy & Match Play Guides

As I've been promising, I have found a solution for a print edition of the Match Play Guide and the Strategy Guide.

Though purchasing a download is always the most economical solution, you can now get both guides on a custom CD-ROM. As of today, the Match Play Guide is also avaialble in paperback.

The Strategy Guide is next and should be finished this week.

Technorati Tags: tennis

More on Shifting as a Unit in Tennis Doubles

Over the past couple weeks I've been asking players what they think about the adage that doubles partners should shift left or right as unit, "as if roped together." I'm still not sure where this is coming from, but I'll take a stab at this misconception here and go into it a little deeper in the November-December newsletter.

First, like so many bits of bad advice, I think this one started out as good advice but was taken out of context, and the next thing you know, everyone is saying it's generally true.

But if you ask people how this is so, you'll find that none can give you one good reason. Typically, they cheat with the fallacious argument known as the "appeal to authority." It goes like this: "It's true because So-and-So [insert famous name here] says so."

I don't care who So-and-So is. Even if it's me ;-) So-and-So is fallible. And people who know what they're talking about can give give valid reasons for what they say.

Yes, there are times when you and your partner should both shift the same direction, leftward or rightward as a unit. These times usually occur when you are in a side-by-side formation, like the Both-Up Formation or the Both-Back Formation. But it can happen when you are in the Up-and-Back Formation too.

Nonetheless, more often than not, you and your partner should shift opposite directions, diverging or converging.

Here's the most common scenario. Both teams are in the Up-and-Back Formation. Before you say that isn't common at higher levels of play, think again. Many points, even at the top of the game are played in this situation. And almost every point at least begins this way.

Picture it: you have your deuce-side baseliners exchanging crosscourt drives. That's because they try to keep the ball away from the opposing net player. In this rally, some of those crosscourt shots fly at sharp angles.

Result? The Angle of Return gets nasty. When you hit a sharply angled shot, you give your opponent an even sharper Angle of Return. This means that, if you don't watch out, you are going to see a winner come back at a wicked crosscourt angle.

It's the most common error in doubles: a baseliner hits a sharply angled drive crosscourt (one that draws the opposing baseliner wide of the alley to play it) and then recovers THE WRONG WAY - toward center (leftward), instead of shifting out wider (rightward) to cover that nasty Angle of Return.

But now look what your net partner must do at the same time. He or she must shift the opposite direction (leftward) to cover the line down their alley the opposing baseliner has.

This is correct. Your team's shot has given the opponent a sharp and broad Angle of Return, and you two are spreading yourselves thinner to cover it.

This is the single most common scenario in doubles, and it blows right out of the water the adage that you and your partner should always shift the same direction as if roped together.

You can't dumb this down to any rote rule to memorize and follow. You have to learn to visualize the Angle of Return. Once you can do that, your instincts kick in, and you intuitively move the right direction.

I think many people are mislead by that adage because they're thinking in terms of words and instructions instead of visualizing what is going on. They probably are reacting to talk of the gap in the Up-and-Back Formation. Consequently, they probably think that you and your partner are far apart in it and that the opponent will be able to hit between you if you move opposite directions, spreading farther apart.

Wrong. Not in this case. Laterally, you and your partner are no farther apart than you are in the Both-Up or Both-Back Formations. So, from straight on, it's no easier to put a shot between you. And that opposing baseliner in the example above is NEVER going to get the ball between you from there. Your baseliner would have to be down on the next court to make the hole between you big enough!

The gap/hole in the Up-and-Back Formation is an ANGULAR gap. Only an opposing net player kitty-cornered from your net player has a line of fire through it. So long as you keep the ball away from that opposing net player, the gap is no problem.

Like I said, I'll have a little more on this in the newsletter. The website introduces the topic of positioning and the Angle of Return, and the Strategy Guide completely covers it.

Technorati Tags: tennis tennis instruction tennis doubles

Q&A: Should doubles players shift "as a unit?"

You often hear this advice given in terms of the analogy that doubles players should pretend they are tied together by a rope.

I think I recall where this Tennis Commandment came from. I recall reading it in a doubles book quite a few years ago. If I remember correctly though, the author was talking about playing Both-Up. Which makes more sense. At least it made sense to me then, and I don't recall what he said well enough to comment further.

But nowadays, you hear this going around and coming around as a general rule about how to play doubles. And it's just wrong. At least as often as not, if you shift laterally in the same direction as your partner, one of you is shifting the wrong direction.

Here is an example. Most points, even at the highest levels of the game, involve a rally with both teams in the Up-and-Back Formation. The baseliners are exchanging crosscourt drives.

Every angle you feed your opponent gives him a sharper angle of return, so what happens? The angle of the shots in this rally increases. You have some sharply angled crosscourt shots going back and forth.

If your baseliner hits a sharply angled crosscourt shot, your net player must shift toward his alley to guard against the alley-shot return. And the LAST thing your baseliner should do is recover in the same direction (toward center). That's the most common positioning error doubles players make.

Zap - there goes a crosscout a winner. But it shouldn't have been a winner, because instead of moving toward center, your baseliner should have moved out wide, into the alley, or perhaps even wide of it, to await that shot.

But, Clueless watches that crosscourt winner come back at a wicked angle and wonders how his opponent could hit such a sharply angled shot.

It was easy. Clueless FED him a sharply angled shot with that nasty angle of return. Then Clueless failed to position wide enough for that return. Instead of recovering TOWARD HIS ALLEY, he recovered toward center, leaving an opening as big as a barn door on his alley side.

The angle of return. The angle of return. The angle of return is what determines which direction you should move. No no-brainer rote rule will do.

Watch good singles players. When they hit a sharply angled crosscourt shot to their left, which direction do they recover? Toward their right. The closer they hit to the left alley, the closer to their right alley they position for that shot's return.

There's no arguing with the angle of return. It's geometry, Natural Law. Logic. Trumps any authority figure one might parrot.

In general, as the baseliner in up-and-back doubles, always position wider than you think you need to. Err to the crosscourt side. Watch out for that sharply angled crosscourt shot. Way too many of them go for clean winners in doubles, just because the baseliner thinks he should position inside the sidelines.

The opposite scenario is true too. If you center the ball in your opponents' court (as with a lob), both you and your partner shift toward center. Again, you're moving opposite directions, not as a unit. And this is true even when you're playing both-up or both-back.

I'm not saying that there aren't times you should shift the same direction, but more often not, that advice would be wrong.

Just another example of why you must use your own head and not just swallow whole everything you hear. If some tennis adage doesn't make sense to you, doubt it. Because there's a lot of junk going around out there.

Technorati Tags: tennis

More on the Up-and-Back Formation of Tennis Doubles

A bit more on the Up-and-Back Formation.

Poaching, of course, makes sense only if your team is in the Up-and-Back Formation. So, if you avoid the Up-and-Back Formation, remove poaching from your list of ways to score.

Poaching wins many points in doubles. You set up your team with but one net player. You put him or her on the right side or the left side of your court.

Any opposing back-player must keep the ball away from your net player.

Easy? Not when your net player can poach.

I could give more examples, like the Switch Trick Play. It's an Up-and-Back Formation play.

Yes, doubles becomes so simple you can be brain-dead while you play it if you never use the Up-and-Back Formation. That's because you're either both-up banging angle-volleys at the alleys all the time . . . or both-back scrambling to keep pushing the ball back into play.

You have no other options, no other things to try. Your banging/pushing either works or it doesn't.

Which is why it's ironic to hear people say that playing the Up-and-Back Formation marks you as ignorant. For, saying that is what marks a person as ignorant.

The strategically ideal formation is the Both-Up. Most teams have the weapons to play it at least occasionally and should. The last resort is the Both-Back Formation. Bt no formation (or any of its variations) is "bad." They all have their place in the game.

As I showed in two earlier posts on this subject, those who cry out against the Up-and-Back Formation are losing so many points because they don't know how to play it. (1) They look back to watch their partner hit the ball. (2) They switch for lobs over their net player. (3) They park in one spot instead of moving to give their baseline partner a wide enough hitting lane. Yes, anyone who makes these blunders is going to lose a ton of points to volleys through the gap between partners.

Just as you'll lose a ton of points if you play both-up without preventing good lobs.

Therefore, don't condemn a formation. Just learn how to play them all, and you will get satisfaction and fun out of your game. There's more to the Up-and-Back Formation than the other two, so you might have to exercise a brain cell or two to learn that one.

But if you're not too intellectually lazy to do that, so what?

A huge part of the fun in doubles comes through the mental battle of trying to outfox your opponents. It's a blast.

Technorati Tags: tennis

In social doubles shouldn't a net player volley away from the opposing net player?

Hmmm. First I must ask what is this innovation called "social doubles?" I don't see it mentioned as a special game in the rules. Even women's doubles, men's doubles, and mixed doubles get no special status in the rules. Doubles is just doubles.

OK, in social doubles there is no title at stake, so winning isn't important. But that doesn't mean that playing to win isn't important. Indeed, there is no other fair and honest way to play a game.

Ironically, however, the term "social doubles" is often just euphemism for "It's evil to try to win."

Now why would any TENNIS player think that? It makes no sense. If you don't like the idea of competition, of there being a winner and a loser, then tennis is not the game for you.

There are plenty of other things you can do that are not games. Games are about winning and losing. That's what makes them exciting.

This mental virus - that you can play "just for fun" and not want to win - forces much related thinking off logical track, too.

There is no rule about where you must stand. The rules say only that your shots must land with the opposition's lines. Indeed, the rules don't say that you must hit around an opponent who decides to stand right in the best spot for you to volley the ball (through the Hole). To the contrary, the rules rule out any means of hindering a player's shot. They also say that if you get hit, it's your fault, and YOU therefore are the one who loses the point.

You don't have to position at the net. So, if you don't like shots coming near you, go back to the baseline.

Or I should stand inside the service box to make it immoral for my opponent to hit a serve in, right?

Who needs a racket? Just go out there and stand in the way of your opponent's shots. Get real close to the net so they can hardly hit around you without blowing their shot.

How sporting.

Now, if you are at net and see the opposing net player about to slam the ball, and if you concede the point by doing the Move toward your alley ... and get hit, then you do have reason to gripe. That opponent was aiming at you, not the Hole, so he or she did something wrong.

But otherwise, they were within the rules and their moral rights.

Just don't look back to watch your partner hit the ball: watch that opposing net player instead so that you're facing the right direction when the ball comes. And learn the Move to concede the point. Then you won't have any problems.

Technorati Tags: tennis

The Up-and-Formation of Tennis Doubles

In answer to some questions I've received showing that I failed to make a point clear in my earlier post about the Up-and-Back Formation. So I'll try to make the point more clear.

Via the Web and forums, it is fast becoming a cliche that the Up-and-Back Formation is "bad." The parrots saying that those who play whole points in the Up-and-Back Formation are ignorant are themselves the ignorant ones.

How can you tell?

Because they are bemoaning many volleys through the gap between partners in the Up-and-Back Formation, which shows that they don't know how to play it properly.

Presumably, they are getting beat by many volleys through the gap because:

• At net they are looking back to watch their partner hit the ball and don't see those volleys to the gap coming in time to back off and defend the gap.
• They are switching for lobs and getting their returns of lobs switch-poached.
• Their net player parks in one spot instead of manuevering to widen their baseline partner's hitting lane, so that their partner has a hard time keeping the ball away from the opposing net player.

Yes, if you make these errors, your opponents will have a heyday volleying shots through the gap on you.

So, don't blame the Up-and-Back Formation, when the real problem is that many players just don't know how to play it.

Every formation has a vulnerable area, and you need to know how to play that formation so as to minimize the risk of a shot to that vulnerable area.

The gap in the Up-and-Back Formation is targetble only by an opposing net player kitty-cornered from your net player. But how often does an opposing net player kitty-cornered from your net player get a whack at the ball? Compare with the rear in the Both-Up Formation. It is targetable by either opponent from anywhere on every shot.

So, which formation is really more vulnerable?

Just as you need to play both-up so as to prevent good lobs, you need to play up-and-back so as to prevent volleys through the gap.

What you CAN say about the Up-and-Back Formation is that is more complex than the other formations and requires more knowledge to play properly, but that doesn't make it a "bad" formation.

Unfortunately, everyone needs to learn how to play Up-and-Back properly, because it's unavoidable. It's the formation beginners use. It's the formation virtually every point, at every level, begins in - with both teams in the Up-and-Back Formation.

So, learn how to play it properly or suffer.

Do NOT avoid the Up-and-Back Formation. When it's called for, it's necessary. For example, wnd what if you're both-up and one of you goes back to chase a lob? What? Must both of you retreat to avoid the Up-and-Back Formation? Similarly, what if you're both-back and one of you can advance while the other hits? What? Must you wait till you both can advance on an approach shot, just to avoid the Up-and-Back Formation?

Ridiculous. The good thing about the Up-and-Back Formation is its versatility. It has an offensive mode and a defensive mode, and it enables you transition smoothly into either of the other formations.

Avoiding the Up-and-Back Formation makes no more sense than avoiding either of the other two would. They all have their use in the game.

Technorati Tags: tennis

Tennis Doubles Q & A: The Weakest Doubles Formation

Believe it or not, there is life outside of tennis, and I enjoyed a little of it last week :)

But it's getting interesting now, so I promise to pay attention.

For now though, I thought I'd answer here a question about doubles that I hear a lot.

It goes something like this: Isn't the Up-and-Back Formation bad to be in?

I never quite know where to grab hold of that thing. "Bad?" As in, "Don't do that or the guys will think you're not a real tennis player."

The Plague (tennis ego) strikes again. Of all the reasons not to do something, that has got to be the silliest. It isn't a moral issue.

The weakness in the Up-and-Back Formation has been exaggerated, as if there's no way to keep your opponents from volleying through the angular gap between partners in the Up-and-Back Formation.

And the weaknesses in the other two formations are never even mentioned, let alone compared. Indeed, some will gasp "Heresy!" if you point out the weakness in the Both-Up Formation.

The rear in the Both-Up Formation is targetable by either opponent on every shot. The wings in the Both-Back Formation are targetable by any opposing net player on every shot. The angular gap in the Up-and-Back Formation is targetable only by an opposing volleyer kitty-cornered from your net player and only when he or she gets a whack at the ball, which should be seldom.

The leading candidate for "weakest" formation is the Both-Back Formation. No vantage points or angles. And it covers less territory than either of the other formations.

But even the Both-Back Formation isn't "bad." Sometimes it's the "right" formation to be in. Nonetheless, this is the one formation you should try to avoid having to get into.

NEVER get into it unless you have to.

If your partner is getting you blasted at the net because of his wimpy shots, don't go back to the baseline: threaten your wimpy partner with worse than whatever he's afraid of if he doesn't quit hitting those wimpy shots. Works like a charm ;-)

All three of these basic formations are good for what they're good for. Not one of them is "bad." In fact, it takes much more knowledge to play Up-and-Back correctly than to play the other formations, which are simple by comparison.

When two teams face each other in the Up-and-Back Formation, all kinds of variations can occur. You need to know what you're doing out there.

And virtually every point, at every level, starts just that way - with two teams facing each other in the Up-and-Back Formation.

When your net player takes root, thus remaining in their baseline partner's way - WHACK - a volley through the gap. But whose fault is that? The Up-and-Back Formation's? Or the rooted net player on your team?

When your net player doesn't watch the opposing net player during your baseline player's shot - WHACK - again, because your net player never saw the cut-off volley coming and was out of position to close and defend the gap. Again, whose fault is that? The Up-and-Back Formation's? Or a net player with a head-turning habit on your team?

And then there's the switching - WHACK - again. But whose fault is that? The Up-and-Back Formation's? Or the doubles players who don't know the Switch Trick and how to handle switching situations?

These situations just don't arise in the other formations. So, it would be fair to say that the Up-and-Back Formation is the hardest to play. You need to know a lot more to play it well. Playing Both-Up or Both-Back is simple by comparison.

Technorati Tags: tennis

The First Thing to Know about Playing Tennis Doubles

The August issue of Tennis Life Magazine features an instructional article by me entitled on "The First thing to Know About Playing Doubles." If you can't find it at your local newsstand, you can purchase a copy or a subscription online.

Not that it's the most important thing in this issue :)

Don't miss the tribute to Pete Sampras on his induction into the Hall of Fame, with an exclusive interview and articles by Bud Collins and Tom Gullickson.

Technorati Tags: tennis

Up-and-Back Doubles: 1-up 1-back doubles

Ironically, the most basic tennis doubles formation is also the hardest to play. There is much more to playing 1-up/1-back than there is to playing both-up or both-back. By that I mean that you need to know more to play up-and-back.

This is because the weakness of the Up-and-Back Formation is an angular gap in it that makes it targetable only by an opponent in a certain position. It's also because two up-and-back teams can face each other in different ways.

This introductory lesson on doubles strategy will help familiarize you with the differences so that when they arise during play, you see the risks and opportunities in them.

Technorati Tags: tennis tennis instruction tennis doubles

Tennis Doubles Strategy Roundup

For a quick, illustrated overview of how to play winning tennis doubles - one that hits the high points of doubles strategy - check out Winning Tennis Doubles Strategy. Learn about the offensive and defensive modes of the Up-and-Back Formation, the Switched Position, the Doubles Angle of Return (angle of possibilities), and more. This tennis lesson includes a video animation and court diagrams.

Technorati Tags: tennis tennis instruction tennis doubles

Teaching Australian Doubles

This issue of TennisPro Magazine (the magazine of the Professional Tennis Registry) will feature an article by me entitled "Teaching Australian Doubles."

(Photo by Myles Williams)

You'll see how it serves as a games based introduction to poaching, among other things.

Technorati Tags: tennis tennis instruction tennis doubles

Poaching: The Perfect Way to Intimidate in Doubles

The current issue of TennisLife Magazine features an article by me entitled "Poaching: The Perfect Way to Intimidate in Doubles."

It also features articles by Nick Bollettieri, Tom Veneziano, Ron Cioffi, Joe Dinoffer, and others. Not to mention articles on Serena Williams, Roger Federer, and Rafael Nadal.

If you can't find a copy at your local newsstand, you can order one online or subscribe.

Technorati Tags: tennis tennis instruction tennis doubles roger federer serena williams rafael nadal

How to Play Australian Doubles

Here's an animated tutorial on how to play Australian Doubles. It will open in a new window, which you can resize so it doesn't take up extra space on your screen.

How to Play Australian Doubles (416 KB)

The Perils of Switching

Switching in doubles -- it sounds like such a good idea, doesn't it? But beware the perils of switching, because it can set your team up for the Switch Trick Play.

Here's an animated tutorial that explains. Click the link below. The lesson will open in a new window, which you can resize so it doesn't take up extra room on your screen.

Switching

Lob Plays

Switching for lobs in doubles sounds like such a good idea -- till you realize how easily the opposing net player can poach the return of a lob your team switches for. See this animated tutorial on two lob plays you can use to avoid the risk.

Lob Plays for the Up-and-Back Formation
399 KB
The animation will open in a new window. You can resize

it so it doesn't take up extra room on your screen.