A New Year's Serve

[bottle]

Vijay Serve: Who Cares If It Works?

I mean, "What Does It Matter Whom It's Named After, If It Works?"

Applying my own simultaneity idea to my gimpy-legged serve, I remain tall as I sway forward on the toss and then use “threshing heels” as central structure of the stroke.

The first part of the thresh combines bowing out of the front hip with backward rotation of same and a raising of front heel on its toes. How about bending elbow (which is far back) to desired palm down pose at the same time?

The second part of the thresh combines forward hips rotation and forward belly rotation and triceptic extension and upper arm rotation—and everything else that comprises vigorous throw from beginning to end.

The simultaneity design supposes that player attains mystical kinetic chain benefit when firing everything at same time to let larger muscle groups naturally overpower (i.e., pre-load) the smaller groups for timed release.

The palm down machinations of Vic Braden thus come back into play with a vengeance to create a new recipe. Leg injury may be necessary for a stubbornly obtuse player to finally absorb the wisdom of coaches who have always told him that vertical leg thrust, educationally speaking, screws up a serve before it helps it.

Rotordedness, to my mind, is part of the equation too. One wants, ideally, upper arm to twist the racket straight down to counter leg thrust up.

But when leeway for this isn’t available in the rotor compartment, one must invent. One may ask, what vector is opposite to the force created by hips and gut in what is basically a whirligig serve?

And what is a whirligig anyway? It is, according to my favorite unreliable source for all information, Wikipedia, “a kinetic garden ornament” that can even be “designed to transmit sound and vibration into the ground to repel burrowing rodents...”

Of course it also might, as in the infinitely sad South American movie, “The Green Wall,” attract a 10-foot bushmaster.

Anyway, how successful can a player be in changing horizontal force of a whirligig into upward racket head path?

That’s difficult but not impossible.

As has recently been pointed out, I’ve changed my serve much too much throughout my tennis career. (But always for a reason, I would assert. A tall person with a weak serve makes no sense.)

Chuffed by huge success both in re-conceiving Rosewallian slice and in alternating ATP Forehands with McEnroe imitation forehands, I think that the people eager to steer everybody away from the intricacy of stroke mechanics are making a chronic mistake.

The players who fail to discover the best stroke mechanics for themselves, before or after professional instruction, usually haven’t given this effort enough of a chance.

As Rick Macci has suggested for people who might be “in the zip code” of The ATP Forehand, they may only need a judicious tweak or two to suddenly make everything work.

And how, I ask, does such a tweak occur? Through science, intuition, fooling around, informal conversation, professional instruction, self-feeding, bangboard, ball machine, simple hitting, recreational matches, tournament matches?...any and all.

If there weren’t rain outside today, I’d try a down together up together serve with upper arm parallel to court like a yardarm toward rear fence. With racket tip pointed down as if stirring a sauce in a look like Vijay Amritraj.

The simultaneity of horizontal whirligig throw will then, if I’m lucky, use up the looseness of upper arm twist I have instilled with just enough play left to send pre-loading tip somewhat down.

As in Beethoven: "Fate shall not drag me entirely down."

[bottle]

Philosophy of Inside Out

What is the role of roll? I think a lot of forum people were surprised when Don Brosseau started talking about inside out possibility in slice (or was it in volley or in both)?

Any shot in tennis can be crossed from the outside, thus imparting sidespin and bounce to the outside.

Harder (pun), but desirable, are very well hit inside out shots.

Racket head comes from the inside to travel a small distance with ball and then returns to the inside.

That's contrary to the belief of those who think that strings should cross to the outside.

If we can accept all that, we'd be justified in asking next whether ideal racket head trajectory is caused by arm trajectory or by roll of the arm which doesn't affect arm trajectory.

The ATP Forehand teaches us that hand can come from behind the ball and not from either side.

Inside out quality then is caused by racket head flipping to the inside and then rolling, or ("wiping") to the outside.

Today, I wish to apply this motion notion to Rosewallian slice, a tennis convention "well worth study" according to the narrator of the following film, one of the wisest tennis instructors ever and even more brilliant if he put this film together and chose the camera angles, too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WR7kvBGntW8

Ken Rosewall's slice, in these two sequences, starts with elbow down and racket head up.

Body shift including forward hips rotation then activates simultaneous arm straightening and roll or "flip" of the arm, but not so much that racket head sinks below the ball.

Racket head chimes in for level swing as forward arm roll adds acceleration.

We (I) have posited before that arm rolls to contact but doesn't roll from contact.

Combining everything said so far, we should now as right-hander be able to hit outside in or inside out from the same basic swing.

A greater margin of error will exist on the outside in version (making ball bounce usefully to the outside of opponent's deuce court). We could create such bounce either with roll happening, with roll just stopping, or with roll having already stopped and racket now returning to the right.

The successful inside out shot could mean that roll was just putting strings on back of ball when contact occurred or that non-roll just started.

Will ball break to inside? I doubt that. But it ought to carry huge backspin and sizzle and bounce extremely low.

This is what I want to try in self-feeding today.

[bottle]

Late Arm Bend for Gimpy-Legged Rotorded Servers?

Who is an example of a good server who bends his arm late? Stanislaus Wawrinka comes to mind.

Oh yeah, Stan the man. Roger Federer's gold medal doubles partner. The guy who snatched defeat from the jaws of victory over Novak Djokovic.

Forget all that. Which is at least what I like to do. When I pick a high profile player to discuss, I usually don't plan to suck up to his celebrity but rather to identify some useful convention in his technique.

I could pick one of the doubles players who narrowly beat us in the Crooked Run open club championship in Virginia and whom I subsequently beat in singles.

But who knows him? Everybody knows Stan Wawrinka.

So down together up together with racket inverted to stir a house pan of spicy sauce. How quickly do I want to reach this position, though? What's the hurry? Think I'll time to coincide with thrust out and backward rotation of hips simultaneous with backward rotation of shoulders from gut.

I love the idea of circular rotating clock pendulum on both forehands and serves. The circular pendulum never stops, just changes direction, like a crazed merry-go-round that doesn't know enough to keep going in the same direction.

This puts backward racket head momentum to work rather than discarding it by the wayside.

What could be wrong with starting a natural throw from so far back? I'll try this now.

[bottle]

Good if remembered to keep elbow back in first part of the throw.

[bottle]

Biggest Discovery of the Year

On a John McEnroe forehand convention, end delicacy at top of the backswing.

Then fire everything at once. In the case of your arm, that means it plunges vigorously down.

[bottle]

Blocking vs. Sticking a Volley

A stupid person does one or the other all of the time.

So what's the best ratio?

Nine to one? Five to one? Two to one?

The answer depends on the speed of the oncoming ball. In fast doubles one sticks less, and a less confident volleyer sometimes will hit the best volley of a whole match.

Because the ball will come to him or her very fast, and he or she will therefore try to do less.

This theory only works however if the blocking volleyer, confident or not, is as firm as a flying buttress in architecture.

So, can a scared volley be a great volley? Absolutely. A king cobra rises six feet from the long grass in East Africa.

Freeze (!) as the ball zings from your racket into the open court.

[bottle]

Blocking vs. Sticking a Volley (2)

To block a volley, one skates from below. The racket work? A slow glide of the racket head forward from body with pace to be created only from speed of the oncoming ball.

To stick a volley? Answer not so simple. But this ought to be done less often, so, at the end of some match one could be said to have volleyed well even if one never learned how to stick.

For sticking, I like the forehand volley of Lew Hoad exactly as shown and executed and commented upon in the following video. And the backhand volleys of him and Ken Rosewall.

For curiosity and perhaps subsequent prescription, it's fun to compare these backhand volleys with the full backhand sliced groundstroke of Ken Rosewall seen in the same video.

In his full slice, Rosewall raises his racket head, then loops it down to blend into a level but rolling swing.

In stick volley, backhand, the same double roll is apparent, miniaturized, but with racket head rolling UP to level (or slightly descending) phase.

Lew Hoad does the same thing as he hits the same shot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WR7kvBGntW8

Note: Admittedly, Hoad's racket head rolls more from directly behind the ball, Rosewall's more from under the ball. Many backhand volleyers though never use double roll at all so maybe that is the best contrast.

[bottle]

In a good clinic held in Michigan, I heard Luke Jensen advise people to volley up. Perhaps Ken Rosewall's backhand volley-- as seen in the video-- qualifies as that.

[bottle]

Ray Guns

Re Wawrinka's serve (# 1548). Don't know why I thought his arm was straight at top of backswing (it's bent):

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/pro_men/stanislas_wawrinka/sw_serve/sw_1st_serve/sw_1st_serve.html?SW1stSDeuceCourtLevelRear.mov

But he does come up with palm severely down.

Re McEnroe slice and volleys vs. Rosewall convention slice and volleys. In these sequences of full slice John McEnroe clearly rolls his arm forward but didn't roll it backward first like Ken Rosewall.

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/modern_legends/johnmcenroe/mac_backhand/mac_backhand.html?MacBHSliceCenterSide2.mov

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/modern_legends/johnmcenroe/mac_backhand/mac_backhand.html?MacBHSliceWideCourtLevelRear1.mov

Note, in this second sequence, just how square the shot gets right after contact, i.e., the racket corners, sharp. But not during or before!

On backhand volleys McEnroe might include a little forward roll or not. No doubt he's fully adjustable. But one thing is sure: There's no looping below and then up to business part as in Rosewall in the 1954 Davis Cup clip.

Is McEnroe's method more simple? Yes. Better? Maybe.

Re usual long secret of seniors tennis: "Shorten thy strokes."

[bottle]

When Rosewall Convention Slice Goes Sour

6-0, 6-0, 6-2, 5-6 . We quit because our last set opponents, including a member of the Wayne State varsity women, thought they'd won it and time for dinner.

Here's what may be important, personally speaking of course, from Friday night's tennis social.

First, "convention" is not just a bunch of politicians trying but failing to look good.

A convention is an established technique, practice or device. Tennis teaching pros have been saying for more than half a century that if you want to develop really good backhand slice you ought to study the one that Ken Rosewall uses.

But as Stotty has pointed out, one can look almost exactly like Ken Rosewall but not get his result.

I'm trying to figure this out. And I'm most interested in applying tennis_chiro's inside out principle (since when I remember to use it I get my absolute best sliced results ever).

So you're tired and stiff and the shot goes sour. What happened? Did you try to take the ball too much out front? That could mean you were crossing the ball outside-in. But if you still were determined to hit the ball out in front you could roll forward more slowly. You could make the strings look as if they were going to hit the inside of the ball just before they hit the outside with an inside out swing.

When any kind of roll is involved in a tennis shot, I'm thinking, inside out or outside in is determined more by that roll than by trajectory of the whole arm, which can come from directly behind the ball.

The time to think about these matters is now and not during competition.

[stotty]

Rosewall v McEnroe

Re Wawrinka's serve (# 1548). Don't know why I thought his arm was straight at top of backswing (it's bent):

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/pro_men/stanislas_wawrinka/sw_serve/sw_1st_serve/sw_1st_serve.html?SW1stSDeuceCourtLevelRear.mov

But he does come up with palm severely down.

Re McEnroe slice and volleys vs. Rosewall convention slice and volleys. In these sequences of full slice John McEnroe clearly rolls his arm forward but didn't roll it backward first like Ken Rosewall.

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/modern_legends/johnmcenroe/mac_backhand/mac_backhand.html?MacBHSliceCenterSide2.mov

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/modern_legends/johnmcenroe/mac_backhand/mac_backhand.html?MacBHSliceWideCourtLevelRear1.mov

Note, in this second sequence, just how square the shot gets right after contact, i.e., the racket corners, sharp. But not during or before!

On backhand volleys McEnroe might include a little forward roll or not. No doubt he's fully adjustable. But one thing is sure: There's no looping below and then up to business part as in Rosewall in the 1954 Davis Cup clip.

Is McEnroe's method more simple? Yes. Better? Maybe.

Re usual long secret of seniors tennis: "Shorten thy strokes."

Having seen both shots live in action at a distance of just yards away, I feel qualified to chip in here.

Rosewall’s sliced backhand is better than Mac’s. It’s simpler - just - and I don’t mean by path of the swing, more by Rosewall’s better, more efficient use of his body. Mac’s sliced backhand floats smoothly and beautifully along but has more underspin; Rosewall’s is flatter and travels better, travels harder. Mac’s grip leans slightly more to the forehand side of continental; Rosewall’s is slightly to the backhand side of continental. Better.

Mac’s slice is good. It’s the one shot of his where we get a significant break at the elbow during the backswing. On all other shots the break at the elbow is fixed. He doesn’t vary the break in the elbow to accommodate different incoming balls. I feel this is a weakness with balls struck at the body. Lendl exploited it well. A break at the elbow is essential with slice. It delivers power, a slingshot effect...as is clearly seen in the Rosewall clip where he is hitting with such velocity that his body is propels his body backwards. Now that is how to make a post to hit off with your body when being forced backwards, terrific.

Similar comparisons can be said of their backhand volleys. Rosewall wins here too. Mac can punch but he’s mostly a feeler when given the option; Rosewall is a puncher, a pulverizer, and so smooth with it. Rosewall’s backhand volley is a stunner. I watched him hit with Fred Stolle many years ago on an outside court a Wimbledon. Only a handful of people stood around watching. I was one of the fascinated and watched from merely a few yards away. He missed not one backhand volley during that hit. And, boy, does the shot repeat, repeat, repeat...same motion on every ball. It’s probably one of the most beautiful shots the game has ever seen.

But McEnroe is the more gifted of the two players, which means a lot. McEnroe’s feel and dexterity is a big compensating factor for his shortcomings compared to Rosewall. I use the word “shortcomings” with the deepest respect in separating the shots of two players of such lofty standard.

[bottle]

Incredible. And experiential. Thanks so much.

[bottle]

Tall, Rotorded and Leg-Impaired: Helicopter Serve?

And throw way out front, I may add.

Anything goes to establish a long runway.

Design features: Down together up together past release with the two arms bending toward each other as winding hips thrust forward and front leg bends to go up on toes.

The place or time where power starts is right then, with closed racket face over head and hand behind.

Unitary power thrust establishes natural sequence between (hips and knees) and (shoulders from gut). Such desired sequence will continue if you gave arm enough to do.

That would be a single throw in which the two halves of your arm needle together behind you and to your left and then start opening up as upper arm pre-loads while still behind you but to the right.

The feel or look of this is of a shallow dip of helicopter blades toward the rear fence.

Adding forward force but mostly position are your "threshing" heels, another way of saying that front foot flattens as rear foot goes up on its toes from your pushing with that leg.

The idea (a design idea again) is not to thrust hard with gimpy front leg but to pry with it so that the whole body flies over. This move is to get rear hip higher than front hip so that hitting shoulder can get extra high, too.

Less rotation from the gut (translation: "Stay more closed") may be in order for wide slice and kick, both. Less gut should create more whip of arm around the body.

My idea of both arms bending toward each other almost as if to form a vertical hoop may be too mannered and fancy, or could on the other hand prove functional to keep left side up.

The racket tip shouldn't touch the tossing hand but might graze it-- just an idea.

[don_budge]

Pulver and Dice...Any way you slice it

Having seen both shots live in action at a distance of just yards away, I feel qualified to chip in here.

Rosewall’s sliced backhand is better than Mac’s. It’s simpler - just - and I don’t mean by path of the swing, more by Rosewall’s better, more efficient use of his body. Mac’s sliced backhand floats smoothly and beautifully along but has more underspin; Rosewall’s is flatter and travels better, travels harder. Mac’s grip leans slightly more to the forehand side of continental; Rosewall’s is slightly to the backhand side of continental. Better.

Mac’s slice is good. It’s the one shot of his where we get a significant break at the elbow during the backswing. On all other shots the break at the elbow is fixed. He doesn’t vary the break in the elbow to accommodate different incoming balls. I feel this is a weakness with balls struck at the body. Lendl exploited it well. A break at the elbow is essential with slice. It delivers power, a slingshot effect...as is clearly seen in the Rosewall clip where he is hitting with such velocity that his body is propels his body backwards. Now that is how to make a post to hit off with your body when being forced backwards, terrific.

Similar comparisons can be said of their backhand volleys. Rosewall wins here too. Mac can punch but he’s mostly a feeler when given the option; Rosewall is a puncher, a pulverizer, and so smooth with it. Rosewall’s backhand volley is a stunner. I watched him hit with Fred Stolle many years ago on an outside court a Wimbledon. Only a handful of people stood around watching. I was one of the fascinated and watched from merely a few yards away. He missed not one backhand volley during that hit. And, boy, does the shot repeat, repeat, repeat...same motion on every ball. It’s probably one of the most beautiful shots the game has ever seen.

But McEnroe is the more gifted of the two players, which means a lot. McEnroe’s feel and dexterity is a big compensating factor for his shortcomings compared to Rosewall. I use the word “shortcomings” with the deepest respect in separating the shots of two players of such lofty standard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fH-A3AeyukI

Good one licensedcoach...which is better? How could one possibly be better than the other...they both were THAT good...weren't they? McEnroe also came over his backhand...Rosewall NEVER did.

Experiential...up close and personal. Being there. It's half the trick. But to understand what you are seeing...now that is being in the moment. One with the universe.

Rosewall...slice and pulverize. McEnroe...slice and dice. Too sweet for words...out on the lawn tennis courts of Wimbledon. Birds chirping in the background.

But either can accomplish the other as Rosewall can dice and McEnroe can pulverize...see that McEnroe backhand volley in the Artist and Engineer thread (Magician and Mechanic). You posted this too...in another thread. Mac crushes that one...by just making himself into a wall at the moment of impact...ball on gut. No backswing at all...racquet an extension of the hand and body leaning on the ball. He never got his other hand on the racquet and the racquet propels backwards with the momentum of the Connors return. His volley was on top of Connors so quick that Connors' only option was defensive lob even though the entire down the line side of the court was wide open.

[stotty]

The passing shot is the clincher

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fH-A3AeyukI

Good one licensedcoach...which is better? How could one possibly be better than the other...they both were THAT good...weren't they? McEnroe also came over his backhand...Rosewall NEVER did.

Experiential...up close and personal. Being there. It's half the trick. But to understand what you are seeing...now that is being in the moment. One with the universe.

Rosewall...slice and pulverize. McEnroe...slice and dice. Too sweet for words...out on the lawn tennis courts of Wimbledon. Birds chirping in the background.

But either can accomplish the other as Rosewall can dice and McEnroe can pulverize...see that McEnroe backhand volley in the Artist and Engineer thread (Magician and Mechanic). You posted this too...in another thread. Mac crushes that one...by just making himself into a wall at the moment of impact...ball on gut. No backswing at all...racquet an extension of the hand and body leaning on the ball. He never got his other hand on the racquet and the racquet propels backwards with the momentum of the Connors return. His volley was on top of Connors so quick that Connors' only option was defensive lob even though the entire down the line side of the court was wide open.

For me, it's Rosewall's backhand passing shot that clinches it. Okay Mac could hit over his backhand where Rosewall couldn't, but Rosewall hit sliced backhand passing shots...repeatedly...successfully. A sliced backhand must be exceptionally good to do that. I say "sliced"...many say Rosewall sliced his backhand...and he did...but when I saw him play he hit only with a tad of slice, not much...more flat if you ask me. Like I said, it travelled better, travelled harder than Mac's...perhaps because it was flatter.

If you want to see a great volleyer then trawl the British Pathe website for clips of Frank Sedgman. He was great off both wings, probably the best ever...pulverised both his backhand and forehand volley, technically superb...even with a wooden racket and aging celluloid that ball is really moving in those clips. He was also a tremendous mover with quite brilliant footwork. Sedgman and Hoad were quite wonderful players and uniquely brilliant. The tragedy is they are lost forever in terms of quality footage...utterly breaks my heart...snaps it in two. You see, I love tennis and its history as much as you, don_budge...