Tweet
-
-
Last edited by gzhpcu; 04-28-2011, 09:12 AM. -
Comment
-
Any other points I missed?Comment
-
This is what I call "added value" when we get this lessons from tennis history.Comment
-
Down the Road of Silliness...
JohnY...
Yes...it's nice to get something of value, these days. As opposed to being forced to go down the Road of Silliness. In case you have noticed...I withdrew all of my posts from your site and I will not be making any more contributions in the future. I have had a number of posters asking me what happened to my posts. I had my reasons.
Basically there were two posters that I felt were antagonistic and any more discussion with them would of ended up in name calling...after all, eventually you must call a spade...a spade. When I encounter people such as these in my real life I choose the path of least resistance and go the other way. I don't have time...and there are too many of them. Some souls are not to be reasoned with.
After withdrawing from your forum I have continued to browse through now and then and I am rather appalled with the conversations that are taking place here and I feel that I made the correct decision in withdrawing...like a gentleman.
There seems to be a lot of reinventing of the wheel here. Teaching tennis is not that complicated and anyone that thinks that these modern techniques are making any revolutionary breakthroughs has only to look at the current state of tennis...specifically American tennis. Perhaps you might be interested in my scathing analysis as an article.
At any rate...it's nice to get something of value. I wish you the best of luck, JohnY. You sort of have your hands full here.
In loving memory of Don Budge, Richard Gonzales and classic tennis.
Johnny Tango
PS...Phil, I CAN teach an old dog this motion. No doubt about it. It is what I do...well, at least one of the things.Comment
-
Don,
I have always appreciated your posts and insights. Always make me sorry when a respected contributor decides to leave a forum.
All the best and hope you make it someday to Lugano...Comment
-
Can we get him to bend his knees slightly more, Phil? Well, even the best could do with a little instruction
StottyComment
-
But did he really need it? In those days you were not allowed to jump. He dominated with his serve, so I would say he didn't need it back then. Don't think it would have mattered much. Don't think anybody was doing it in those days... What he would have done if the rule had been different is another matter...Comment
-
To jump or not
I don't know if he could have served much bigger with a jump. Perhaps 5 or 10 mph more, but not more than that. The equipment would have changed the speed a little. But if he were jumping like today's players, I don't think he could have maintained as high a percentage of first serves. That was part of the key to his dominance of his service games.
donComment
-
I heard Pancho's career average for his 1st serve was 72%: A stat derived from TennisOne who when I emailed them, cited Vic Braden as their source for this extraordinary fact. Seems very high when you consider Sampras was (I think, don't quote me) around 64%.
I'm not sure how reliable this stat for Pancho's service can be - did they keep meticulous records for every match back then? I emailed Braden to enquire where he got this 72% statistic from, but received no reply.
Don, you're a fountain of knowledge, can you shed some light? Did keeping the foot on the ground result in more reliability? Or was Pancho's motion so technically good that it produced the most reliable serve in history?StottyComment
-
He must have been still serving well at age 44 to beat a 19 year old Connors...
Comment
-
Missing one out of three was not particularly good!
Sorry, Stotty, I don't have any hard statistics or evidence. But I do think good servers made a higher percentage of first serves. Richard's serve was more consistent and accurate because of his more stable base as well as the fact it was such an exquisite motion. The story I heard was that he often served a greater percentage of first serves in than 72%. 60% would definitely have been considered a bad night. I don't think I would have felt particularly good about missing one out of three first serves; not terrible, but not something to feel good about. It would definitely have been an off night for Gonzales.Originally posted by licensedcoach View Post
I was working with one of my players tonight trying to explain why I wanted him to "bow" his legs instead of bending his knees. It might not get you off the ground as much, but it will give you a more whip-like upward acceleration into the pro drop. After all, if the only available energy is what you use pushing into the ground and you jump up to the ball, isn't a lot of energy used to lift the body into the air; thereby, reducing the available energy to be used to power the serve? Brian, are you out there anywhere?
donComment
-
Vic Braden says the foot must stay in contact with ground on the serve...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42STJ...eature=relatedComment
-
Don,
I recently saw a discussion on why women players don't serve as well as the men. Bottom line was that they think more or jumping up to achieve a high impact point, and have disregarded the coil and shoulder turn which was much move evident during the old days.
Pushing the non-dominant side forward (archer's bow) creates tension and enables a "body snap", adding more power to the serve.
Last edited by gzhpcu; 04-30-2011, 01:54 AM.Comment
Comment