Serve toss question....

[tennis_chiro]

How far is Battistone in?

It is a matter of opinion how legal
is a serve of Brian Battistone.
He is allowed to play challengers so it has to be legal.
it is better to be rained out than have a snow storm

Just for fun I took a look at one of the youtube videos of Battistone and I was able to pause it within a couple of inches of contact and he is in the air at maybe even less than 45 degrees. He's at least a foot off the ground. At 45 degrees, the hypoteneuse is 1.41x times the distance he is into the court and that hypoteneuse is at least 11 feet. But the intersection with the court is probably a little behind the baseline, but he is still at least 7 feet into the court. And the contact point is pretty high as well. (11 x [1/1.41]) - 1 = 7.8 feet, which is probably close to the height of his contact point, although it could be as much as 8 1/2 feet. That's an amazing edge.

He actually only takes one step with the left foot, so it is not a running start and must be fully legal within the current rules. I don't know if Isner is a good enough athlete to pull that off, but what if you had Blake Griffin, the power forward/center for the LA Cliippers from a young age learning a motion like that. He could be at least 9 feet into the court and up more than that at contact.

check this out:

http://www.nba.com/clippers/video/2010/12/11/20101211_dotn.nba/index.html

I'm just sayin'
don

[uspta146749877]

Atp rules

Don,
I disagree 100% about being legal.
I refer you to atp rules ( for example in the atp manual)
An USTA comment for Rule 8 of Rules of tennis :
"....the Server's feet must be at rest immediately before beginning to serve"
Please note "feet" ( plural) in the sentence above

[tennis_chiro]

Moving the feet

Don,
I disagree 100% about being legal.
I refer you to atp rules ( for example in the atp manual)
An USTA comment for Rule 8 of Rules of tennis :
"....the Server's feet must be at rest immediately before beginning to serve"
Please note "feet" ( plural) in the sentence above

I think it would be really hard to enforce unless we start to go to the "I know it when I see it" kind of interpretation. He only takes one step with the left foot and that is after he has tossed the ball. So he definitely has his feet at rest when he releases the ball. And there are a lot of people who move their front foot before they hit the serve. It's definitely a jump serve, but the rules don't prohibit that anymore. I would love to see a "Blake Griffin" body (6' 10", 250 lbs. chiseled) learn to execute that motion. They would probably change the rules on him.

don

[uspta146749877]

For Dr Brosseau,

Dear Dr Brosseau,

there was a convesation on this subject inside TW Talk Forum

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=332641&page=3

One may start with post#58 to avoid waste of time.

A specific video is

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQYOW1DlydU

Thank you for flying with us.
Respectfully yours,
julian

[BrianGordon]

Happy holidays all!

I was summoned to this thread for comment – why I’m not sure – but…

JY stated:

“I think it's important not to put the emphasis on throwing the ball in front for it's own sake. It's more a matter of pairing the toss with the motion to achieve the right contact point.”

This sums up my view basically – mechanics dictate optimal toss location (contact point in 3D) for a given individual – mechanics are not dictated by the toss location but in the adverse case. In general, a toss more in front is beneficial for forward rotation (angular momentum) based mechanics evident today.

This must be weighed in the context of the size of an individual (and height off the court) and the speed of the serve in determining the projectile characteristics of the flight (Don’s math and not my gig). Individually, each server must consider how far in front (and left/right) the ball should be struck to facilitate THEIR mechanics while preserving the appropriate initial conditions (particularly height and velocity vector) to get the serve in.

I’ll leave it to you folks to determine the correlation matrices, consequences in time to return, and interpretation of the rules of tennis – way over my head.

[tennis_chiro]

The letter of the law

Dear Dr Brosseau,

there was a convesation on this subject inside TW Talk Forum

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=332641&page=3

One may start with post#58 to avoid waste of time.

A specific video is

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQYOW1DlydU

Thank you for flying with us.
Respectfully yours,
julian

OK. I checked the thread on TW, but that doesn't really offer much clarification.

I pulled up a copy of the rulebook from 2005. I will check for changes but I think these hold:

To me the key clauses from the ITF rules:

18.FOOT FAULT (OLD 7 & 8)

During the service motion, the server shall not:
a. Change position by walking or running, although slight movements of the feet are permitted;

USTA Comment 18.2: What does the rule mean when it says
that the server may “not change position by walking or running”?

One key to understanding this rule is to realize that the server’s feet
must be at rest immediately before beginning to serve. The delivery of
the service then begins with any arm or racket motion and ends when
the racket contacts the ball (or misses the ball in attempt to strike it).
To define walking or running with precision is difficult. This rule
is intended to prevent the server from taking advantage of the receiv-
er by serving while “on the move” and requiring the receiver to
guess the position from which the serve will be launched, and the rule
should be enforced with that intent in mind.

• A server who takes more than one step with either foot after
the “feet at rest” position described above is at risk for
being called for a foot fault. The serve becomes a foot fault
when, in the judgment of an experienced official, the server
has materially changed position before or during any racket
or arm motion.

• A server whose footwork changes significantly from one
serve to the next is at risk for being called for a foot fault

• Serves that look like the running volleyball serve violate the
rule. Serves in which the server runs or walks from a point
well behind the baseline to the baseline are also illegal, as are
serves in which the server walks or runs along the baseline
before choosing a spot from which to deliver the serve.


If you read this rule without that last comment that volleyball like serves are footfaults, I think Battistone is within the rules because he is not trying to fool anybody and he is not materially changing his position (anymore than many other servers), until he leaves the ground. His feet are completely still before he tosses the ball. To be totally within the letter of the rule (without the comment) all he would have to do is reach out with his left foot without the weight transfer and come to a complete stop. That's how I might teach someone to do this if I were trying. He might lose a few inches of his leap, but he would maintain most of it. It would, of course, be difficult (but not impossible) for him to learn an entirely new rhythm and he might have a legitimate case if he were to litigate on the basis they were unfairly enforcing the no movement clause only on him (someone said he has already changed the motion). If it weren't for the comment about the volleyball serve (which seems a bit unfair...part of the effectiveness of McEnroe's serve was that he really was trying to fool the receiver in what he was doing...what if someone said a McEnroe-like serve [back to the receiver] was illegal). Furthermore, the comment says "running volleyball" serve and he is not running. The comment explicitly allows one step and that is all he takes.

They are not going to go back to one foot on the ground. At least not until that "Blake Griffin" type shows up and is meeting the ball 9 feet inside the baseline from above the level of the rim!

I think the serve is legal.
don

[uspta146749877]

A problem with a document

There is a problem with a document above.
If it allows a volleyball jump to have ONE STEP ONLY his serve is illegal.

As I have said somewhere before Brian B is allowed to use his serve playing challengers
in States.

The document above does NOT define a word running either.
I believe that a video above represents a running volleyball serve.
Wikipedia says:
"Battistone uses a volleyboll-styled jump serve where he jumps in on court"
(please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Battistone)

Switching gears:
Your quote
"They are not going to go back to one foot on the ground."
My response:
you are addressing completely different issue.

[tennis_chiro]

Contradictions

There is a problem with a document above.
If it allows a volleyball jump to have ONE STEP ONLY his serve is illegal.

As I have said above Brian B is allowed to use his serve playing challengers
in States.

The document above does NOT define a word running either.
I believe that a video above represents a running volleyball serve.
Wikipedia says:
"Battistone uses a volleyboll-styled jump serve where he jumps in on court"
(please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Battistone)

Switching gears:
Your quote
"They are not going to go back to one foot on the ground."
My response:
you are addressing completely different issue

The comment says if the serve "looks like" a running volleyball serve it is illegal. Brian's serve looks like a running volleyball serve. But it also says (by exception since if says if you take more than one step) that you can take one step and he only takes one step; he doesn't actually run up at all.

What I meant by the reference to the one foot on the ground was that without some more concrete restriction on movement, it becomes very difficult to differentiate which "movement" is legal or not. No one would say that Isner's serve is illegal, but when he hits the serve he is almost a good foot off the ground. What if he was a better leaper (like my example of Blake Griffin) and got 2 or 2.5 feet into the court and up to hit his serve?

Julian, why are you so convinced that Brian's serve is illegal outside of the fact that it looks like a running volleyball serve?
don

[uspta146749877]

Any thoughts?

Any thoughts about a post ABOVE by BG?
For example : in the case of a serve by Brian B is
a mechanics controlling a toss or a toss controlling mechanics or we do NOT
care?

[uspta146749877]

Sufficient and neceassary conditions in logic

The comment says if the serve "looks like" a running volleyball serve it is illegal. Brian's serve looks like a running volleyball serve. But it also says (by exception since if says if you take more than one step) that you can take one step and he only takes one step; he doesn't actually run up at all.

What I meant by the reference to the one foot on the ground was that without some more concrete restriction on movement, it becomes very difficult to differentiate which "movement" is legal or not. No one would say that Isner's serve is illegal, but when he hits the serve he is almost a good foot off the ground. What if he was a better leaper (like my example of Blake Griffin) and got 2 or 2.5 feet into the court and up to hit his serve?

Julian, why are you so convinced that Brian's serve is illegal outside of the fact that it looks like a running volleyball serve?
don

We are confusing sufficient and necessary conditions in logic and legal documents.
I have to go back to work.I apologize that I have to work.

[tennis_chiro]

Toss controlling mechanics

Any thoughts about a post ABOVE by BG?
For example : in the case of a serve by Brian B is
a mechanics controlling a toss or a toss controlling mechanics or we do NOT
care?

I think BB's serve is the unusual case where the toss dictated the mechanics. BB's mechanics are pretty good from the point of view of getting a deep prodrop. However, I'm not at all sure how good the hip rotation is in generating power up in the air like that. But he has very good velocity.

But I think he made a conscious decision to serve with the volleyball style jump and then adapted the mechanics to fit that toss. He may have also adopted the running volleyball jump to a one step and jump motion to comply with the foot fault rule. I think he could definitely serve bigger if he was more on the ground and could use his hips and shoulders a little more, but he gains a lot from the angles he gets as well as the reduced "action time" that he allows the receiver (even if it is only about 25 milliseconds).

But trying to emulate that motion would be a big mistake. As far as I am concerned most of the kids that try to use their legs in the extreme before they have mastered the mechanics of the basic motion and they end up sacrificing at least twice what they gain with the huge leg drive and even the 4 foot extension into the court. However, now I am beginning to believe that once they do master the basic mechanics because of that 25 milliseconds that you take off the "action time" it is worthwhile to get way into the court if you can handle the physical demands. I must say, I prefer the way Hoad did it with one foot on the ground to the extreme contortions that Sampras goes through. I just don't think you can hit a jump serve as effectively as one from a solid platform, although properly hitting up would take you up off the ground for impact and followthrough. If I tune into Sunday Night Football right now, I am not likely to see a jump pass! Outfielders don't jump to try to get a little more on a throw to home plate.

I think Brian Gordon is making a little bit of a mistake; I think his objective or at least one of them is to find the best mechanics to produce the most effective strokes or at least to analyze the effectiveness of the strokes. To look at the efficiency of the serve and the position of the toss in that serve without considering the gain or loss created by the choice of that spot for the contact point is to miss an important variable in considering the effectiveness of the motion in question; not very convenient, in fact painfully complicating, but nevertheless, part of the problem. Brian B's motion is way too complicated for me to teach anyone and I don't think we will see many imitators, but as difficult as it may be, there are some advantages once he developed the skill to execute it consistently. Maybe he was a volleyballer before, I don't know. I still would come out on the side of don't do it, but it seems to work for him.

don

[uspta146749877]

Trajectory of a serve and a forward toss

ABSTRACT
I have tried to analyze a possible impact of a forward toss on a trajectory of
a serve.

A basic question is:
will more forward toss/more forward contact point produce MORE DOWNWARD serve?
We can confine ourselves to flat serves only.

INTRODUCTION
Let me me describe first what I know about a subject of trajectory of a ball.
It will show MY limited knowledge on this particular subject.
Three quotes below are from "Biomechanical Principles of Tennis Technique"
by Duane Knudson.

"Very skilled servers that can hit flat serves 120 mph may be successful
with initial trajectories 8 to 10 degrees below horizontal".

"Only at more advanced level the ball be hit initially downward on a flat serve,
and even then NOT sharply"( my capitalization).

"The substantial increase in serve speed might indicate the the optimal
windows for ball projection in the modern serve have changed.It appears
that the successful inititial angles of flat serves has shifted downward,but only slightly"

QUESTIONS
Will a contact point 4 feet inside produce MORE DOWNWARD FLAT serve
that a contact point a half of a foot inside?
A current conjecture is that an answer is yes.
Let us confined ourselves to advanced players only.

An example of a comparison could be :
Soderling vs Sampras

or we can analyze a same player producing two different tosses.
Some calculations a DOWNWARD slope possible from

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/pro_men/richardkrajicek/richardkrajicek_serve/rk_1st_serve/rk_1st_serve.html?RK1stSDeuceCourtLevelSide2.mov

Another open issue is whether MORE DOWNWARD serve would translate
into a faster ball.

I was unsuccessful in finding an answer to the last question.


julian mielniczuk Ph.D. uspta certified pro juliantennis@comcast.net
www.julianmielniczuk.usptapro.com Courtside Tennis Club,Bedford,MA

[uspta146749877]

Please provide a definition of "the the acceptance window"

I agree with all of the above, but why decreased percentage of serve? You are close to the net, seems the acceptance window increases....

Please provide a definition of "the the acceptance window"

[gzhpcu]

Please provide a definition of "the the acceptance window"

The height the ball passes over the net, but still goes in on a serve.

[uspta146749877]

An increased acceptance window?

The height the ball passes over the net, but still goes in on a serve.

Is it obvious that a MORE FORWARD toss would increase an acceptance
window?
Do you assume that a MORE FORWARD toss will be combined with a higher amount
of topspin?