Why I Prefer the Pinpoint Stance

[patdougherty]

Body type can make an impact on the location of the center of gravity. Look at how different the serve technique is with Serena and Venus....both taught by the same coaches but arrived at very different styles. The broader shoulders of Venus relative to narrower hips gives her that V shape build similar to most men. Higher C of G so she was able to develop a more male styled serve. Serena was more pear shaped with a lower C of G which can create limitations of style options. Both great servers yet very different. Serena was more leg driven where Venus was less and had more hip and shoulder separation coil.
I consider this when developing players style. The common element was weight shifting forward onto front foot for launch upward.I will optimize a platform stance if it's already well engrained in habit but for developing young players, the majority I will encourage pursuing pinpoint. The back foot can shift into a few different positions and not negatively affect the motion as long as the weight is predominantly or completely on front foot. Many players without well developed pitching mechanics/upper body kinetic chain will often shift to the back foot in the pinpoint because their front side of upper body mechanics are underdeveloped.

[stotty]

Body type can make an impact on the location of the center of gravity. Look at how different the serve technique is with Serena and Venus....both taught by the same coaches but arrived at very different styles. The broader shoulders of Venus relative to narrower hips gives her that V shape build similar to most men. Higher C of G so she was able to develop a more male styled serve. Serena was more pear shaped with a lower C of G which can create limitations of style options. Both great servers yet very different. Serena was more leg driven where Venus was less and had more hip and shoulder separation coil.
I consider this when developing players style. The common element was weight shifting forward onto front foot for launch upward.I will optimize a platform stance if it's already well engrained in habit but for developing young players, the majority I will encourage pursuing pinpoint. The back foot can shift into a few different positions and not negatively affect the motion as long as the weight is predominantly or completely on front foot. Many players without well developed pitching mechanics/upper body kinetic chain will often shift to the back foot in the pinpoint because their front side of upper body mechanics are underdeveloped.

Thanks for the considered reply. I hadn't really considered physique as a determining factor. In my experience, one of the determining factors on whether a player will emerge as a pinpoint server or a platform server is their ball toss. If a kids ball toss starts to err more forwards, then pinpoint seems to naturally (not always) start to develop as a result. A kid who tosses the ball more directly above stands a better chance of emerging as a platform server. Another determining factor is where kids start copying their favourite player.

[stotty]

I really like Pat's thought on the serve, the pinpoint, the limbo, winding the spring, and using the ball of the front foot as the base on the serve stance(toe of the foot pointing toward the netpost). He addresses all of this throughly in his outstanding Instructional Video "Serve MPH", which I bought years ago. I have one quick question for Pat. He points out how he likes sliding the back foot up to form the pinpoint. How about these players like Roddick and Monfils who basicly just start with a very narrow platform(pretty much a pinpoint) and just stay there? It seems to simplify the technique just taking out the back foot sliding up.

It takes out the need for the back foot to slide up, and abbreviates the wind-up. Narrow base + abbreviated wind-up work really well together as per Doug Eng's article on 'associated techniques'.

[stroke]

It takes out the need for the back foot to slide up, and abbreviates the wind-up. Narrow base + abbreviated wind-up work really well together as per Doug Eng's article on 'associated techniques'.

I agree completely.

[seano]

There are certainly plenty of examples of quality pinpoint and platform serves. What scares me about the pinpoint is 1) balance - if the feet are spread 6 - 8 inches apart, you will have better balance to then explode up. 2) making sure the weight starts behind the center of gravity (which is usually slightly below the belly button) so that you can have a forward rotation (shoulder over shoulder) in junction with the twisting of lower and upper torso. In a pinpoint, there's a greater chance of the weight being in front of the center of gravity. The platform stance has a better chance of weight starting behind the center of gravity.

[don_budge]

There are certainly plenty of examples of quality pinpoint and platform serves. What scares me about the pinpoint is 1) balance - if the feet are spread 6 - 8 inches apart, you will have better balance to then explode up. 2) making sure the weight starts behind the center of gravity (which is usually slightly below the belly button) so that you can have a forward rotation (shoulder over shoulder) in junction with the twisting of lower and upper torso. In a pinpoint, there's a greater chance of the weight being in front of the center of gravity. The platform stance has a better chance of weight starting behind the center of gravity.

Finally, a voice of reason. I don't dare to even comment for fear of "the third strike". But suffice it to say, for a multitude of reasons, platform is the way to go. I have never taught one student a pin point motion. I have tried to talk every single student using pinpoint stance...out of it. It makes no sense. To add moving footwork to a motion that is complicated enough is not logical. The serve is much akin to an upside down golf swing...instead of teeing it down, you tee it up. With the toss. I've never seen a golfer using a pinpoint. Although ironically enough, the number one golfer in the world has created a lot of controversy with the "moving" footwork. Scottie Scheffler...current Master's Champion. But the golf swing analogy is a perfect comparison to the tennis serve.

Every single golf swing on the PGA and LIV tour for that matter are so similar. Very little wiggle room for deviation. It comes down to ergonomics. Biomechanics. Conservation of motion. You see little personal quirks and glitches in nearly all of the swings, yet they are all attempts at being fundamentally correct (FC). This used to be the case in most service motions although there have always been pinpoint servers.

The single best argument for the platform stance is the best servers in the last thirty years...or more realistically forever. Roger Federer, "The Living Proof" in the don_budge tennis teaching paradigm, and Pete Sampras. Federer in particular, in his later years, maintained his prestige as the best server in tennis on the basis of his serving motion. It enabled him to consistently win his serve in very quick and efficient manner. He did this with an uncanny ability to CONTROL his service games with the proper and perfect balance of the three elements of control. Speed, spin and placement.

Balance is a huge factor in the motion. The transfer of weight into the ball is no easy feat, even with still feet. Once the feet start to move, all bets are off. You have introduce more motion into a motion that is in dire need of repeatability. Add another factor and you have succeeded in making it even more complicated. Moving feet will only introduce other compensatory moves to the recipe. The service motions on the professional tennis tour when looked at in mass are a hodge podge of different ideas or lack of ideas. Very little continuity of motions these days which sort of reflects the state of coaching these days.

[patdougherty]

Finally, a voice of reason. I don't dare to even comment for fear of "the third strike". But suffice it to say, for a multitude of reasons, platform is the way to go. I have never taught one student a pin point motion. I have tried to talk every single student using pinpoint stance...out of it. It makes no sense. To add moving footwork to a motion that is complicated enough is not logical. The serve is much akin to an upside down golf swing...instead of teeing it down, you tee it up. With the toss. I've never seen a golfer using a pinpoint. Although ironically enough, the number one golfer in the world has created a lot of controversy with the "moving" footwork. Scottie Scheffler...current Master's Champion. But the golf swing analogy is a perfect comparison to the tennis serve.

Every single golf swing on the PGA and LIV tour for that matter are so similar. Very little wiggle room for deviation. It comes down to ergonomics. Biomechanics. Conservation of motion. You see little personal quirks and glitches in nearly all of the swings, yet they are all attempts at being fundamentally correct (FC). This used to be the case in most service motions although there have always been pinpoint servers.

The single best argument for the platform stance is the best servers in the last thirty years...or more realistically forever. Roger Federer, "The Living Proof" in the don_budge tennis teaching paradigm, and Pete Sampras. Federer in particular, in his later years, maintained his prestige as the best server in tennis on the basis of his serving motion. It enabled him to consistently win his serve in very quick and efficient manner. He did this with an uncanny ability to CONTROL his service games with the proper and perfect balance of the three elements of control. Speed, spin and placement.

Balance is a huge factor in the motion. The transfer of weight into the ball is no easy feat, even with still feet. Once the feet start to move, all bets are off. You have introduce more motion into a motion that is in dire need of repeatability. Add another factor and you have succeeded in making it even more complicated. Moving feet will only introduce other compensatory moves to the recipe. The service motions on the professional tennis tour when looked at in mass are a hodge podge of different ideas or lack of ideas. Very little continuity of motions these days which sort of reflects the state of coaching these days.

We'll agree to totally disagree on your perspective. You're entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make it right....sometimes we need to learn and not think like we have to teach our viewpoints to become better at our trade. The serve is one of the most poorly understood and taught skills in Tennis which is why I became the Serve Doctor to help with that

[stroke]

We'll agree to totally disagree on your perspective. You're entitled to your opinion but it doesn't make it right....sometimes we need to learn and not think like we have to teach our viewpoints to become better at our trade. The serve is one of the most poorly understood and taught skills in Tennis which is why I became the Serve Doctor to help with that

Yes, someone needs to tell Goran, Wayne Arthurs, Roscoe, Nick, Roddick, Ben Shelton, etc,
to adjust their technique.

[patdougherty]

To maximize extension height and reach, Pinpoint does that best even for taller players.

[patdougherty]

Yesterday's final in Barcelona was a perfect example of how volatile the platform can be under pressure. Tsitsipas serve was unreliable when he needed it most to back up his win against the same opponent a week ago in Monte Carlo Final. Ruud out served him being a smaller guy with a pinpoint and held much better on his serve. Just sayin....

[stroke]

Yesterday's final in Barcelona was a perfect example of how volatile the platform can be under pressure. Tsitsipas serve was unreliable when he needed it most to back up his win against the same opponent a week ago in Monte Carlo Final. Ruud out served him being a smaller guy with a pinpoint and held much better on his serve. Just sayin....

Munich also offered a contrast with pinpoint Struff vs platform Fritz. Both served great in that one. Stuff and Fritz are about same height as Stef. Fritz' serve motion looks much smoother/natural than Stef's to me. Stef has actually experimented with the moving the back foot up, but in his case, it did not seem to make a difference in the final product.

[seano]

Agree to disagree, I'll stick with platform. Not saying some people don't hit nice pinpoint serves but platform is my go-to stance.

[jimlosaltos]

Munich also offered a contrast with pinpoint Struff vs platform Fritz. Both served great in that one. Stuff and Fritz are about same height as Stef. Fritz' serve motion looks much smoother/natural than Stef's to me. Stef has actually experimented with the moving the back foot up, but in his case, it did not seem to make a difference in the final product.

II don't have a dog in this fight, BUT I'd be reluctant to blame Tsitsipas's technique for current inconsistencies, since he's been, as Stroke noted, switching back and forth. It appears that Stef was switching early this year to step-up to ease rotational stress on his injured back, particularly on his second serve kick. That's just speculation, mine and others. But if we go to Tsitsipas's serve pre-injury, there's no indication it was inconsistent. He was consistently top 8 overall serving, ranked far higher than Ruud, and had no unusual trouble with double faults or serves under pressure.

The criticism of Tsitsipas's service has been too few, free points. {Some pinpoint advocates site greater velocity as a purported advantage.} When a Tennis TV announcer brought that up recently, the player/ analyst (sorry I don't recall their names) said, "No, I don't see that as a problem. Tsitsipas is hitting a lot of kick because he's trying to set up his forehand."

I'll also call recency bias, one of my personal favs of the biases . Do the same analysis of their final 2 weeks ago and we'd have quite different conclusions.

Sidebar: This also applies to the newish ATP/ Tennis Insight stats. In this final, Tsitsipas' strokes all came out below ATP average. In particular his forehand went from one of the absolute best on clay to a 71 vs 76 ave for entire ATP. I don't think it got that much worse overnight. Ruud's went in on big points this time.

Now, if we want to criticize Tsitsipas' service return ... I'm all in

[seano]

I'm a big fan of the NFL and my favorite team in the upcoming draft has a chance to pick one of the top 2 quarterbacks. In hearing discussions, comparing which quarterback they should take, the knock on 1 of the 2 possible quarterbacks is that he often has his feet too close together, which can throw off his consistency. He does not have a strong base to start from. I think the same analogy can be used on the serve. I know the serve is more upward and out than a football throw but you still need a strong base to start from and that's the platform stance.

[stroke]

https://youtu.be/T_5osrG-fGI?si=s6s_usy91Yp0miKH

This is a serve lesson with Taylor Fritz. He addresses the stance.