Roscoe Tanner Redux...

[gzhpcu]

Something else too:



Here he seems to have his racket in line with his arm, whereas it is usually recommended to have an angle between the racket and the arm for better leverage. But not for his flat serve apparently...

[klacr]

Something else too:



Here he seems to have his racket in line with his arm, whereas it is usually recommended to have an angle between the racket and the arm for better leverage. But not for his flat serve apparently...

Good pics Phil. Looking at a few of those pics, you may be right. Although in some you could say his foot is technically behind his right foot but far enough opened just enough to remain on his left side. Difficult to say as it happens so quick. Tough to be certain unless we get a straight on shot like the video. It's really a minor issue relative to all the other components of his serve.

But just for s*its and giggles look at this Krajicek serve, notice where his backfoot goes. It remains behind his left. Tanner does not seem to to be that far back and behind. I prefer this model. Technical relevance may be minimal but for aesthetics, I'll gladly take this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buCDR_LvqRw

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[gzhpcu]

Matter of taste Kyle, I personally prefer Tanner's serve because it is so compact and he doesn't kick so much... (I know that John is no fan of Tanner's serve, but I always found it cool.

[klacr]

Matter of taste Kyle, I personally prefer Tanner's serve because it is so compact and he doesn't kick so much... (I know that John is no fan of Tanner's serve, but I always found it cool.

Matter of taste indeed Phil. I like Tanner's serve as well, upper body portion of it anyways, But I'm just splitting hairs here. All good Phil.


Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[johnyandell]

It's cool and it was effective. It's just a certain technical style. It was fast but relatively flat and relied on his incredible shoulder and right arm. The low toss is something that very few people can copy, and if they do they have to decide to limit spin, the role of the legs, and the body rotation. But that's one thing about tennis--there is no one technique. Just think this one has seen it's day.

[stroke]

I was just watching Nadal play Dustin Brown(and lose to)in the Gerry Weber Open. Brown really has a Tanner type motion, hitting the ball at its apex a la Tanner. His pinpoint stance looks almost identical also, more beside the front foot than behind it, it looks to me.

[klacr]

It's cool and it was effective. It's just a certain technical style. It was fast but relatively flat and relied on his incredible shoulder and right arm. The low toss is something that very few people can copy, and if they do they have to decide to limit spin, the role of the legs, and the body rotation. But that's one thing about tennis--there is no one technique. Just think this one has seen it's day.

I agree on all points except the last sentence. For that point, only time will tell.

I also believed we'd never see a player with Nadal's strokes win Wimbledon. He has 2 titles at AELTCC.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[stotty]

I also believed we'd never see a player with Nadal's strokes win Wimbledon. He has 2 titles at AELTCC.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Courtesy of Wimbledon raising the bounce and slowing the grass down.

[gzhpcu]

I was just watching Nadal play Dustin Brown(and lose to)in the Gerry Weber Open. Brown really has a Tanner type motion, hitting the ball at its apex a la Tanner. His pinpoint stance looks almost identical also, more beside the front foot than behind it, it looks to me.

Yes, I just watched it carefully on "catching up" and really is very similar to Tanner's delivery: low toss, lots of body lean, fast concerted action and his pinpoint stance does seem identical. Great! Makes you think what Tanner in his prime would have done against Nadal!

[stroke]

Yes, I just watched it carefully on "catching up" and really is very similar to Tanner's delivery: low toss, lots of body lean, fast concerted action and his pinpoint stance does seem identical. Great! Makes you think what Tanner in his prime would have done against Nadal!

It was really impressive by Brown. Once again, it just shows the depth in mens tennis, as if we need a reminder. Brown's serving and volleying was just oppressive. He was coming in on Nadal's service games also and really showing off some very good volley skills the entire match.

[gzhpcu]

These things really only seem to happen on grass. The grass in Halle is probably faster than the one in Wimbledon. Great to see serve and volley players have a good chance to win.

[klacr]

These things really only seem to happen on grass. The grass in Halle is probably faster than the one in Wimbledon. Great to see serve and volley players have a good chance to win.

Halle and Queen's Club have been described by players as true grass courts and of a better quality than Wimbledon. The bounce is more of a true grass court bounce at these events and plays much faster.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[don_budge]

Depth of Men's Tennis:::

It was really impressive by Brown. Once again, it just shows the depth in mens tennis, as if we need a reminder. Brown's serving and volleying was just oppressive. He was coming in on Nadal's service games also and really showing off some very good volley skills the entire match.

Actually it demonstrates how weak it is...even those at the very top are not "complete players".

[gzhpcu]

Actually it demonstrates how weak it is...even those at the very top are not "complete players".

Well, it's no wonder is it? If only Halle and Queens remain of the old style courts where serve and volley is an advantage. In the old days even Borg had to resort to serve and volley to win. Why acquire skills you don't need to win on 98% of the tournaments? And serve and volley is tougher than baseline bashing to learn...

[don_budge]

Even Borg?

Well, it's no wonder is it? If only Halle and Queens remain of the old style courts where serve and volley is an advantage. In the old days even Borg had to resort to serve and volley to win. Why acquire skills you don't need to win on 98% of the tournaments? And serve and volley is tougher than baseline bashing to learn...

What does that mean? Borg was a great tennis player. He knew where "all" of the lines of the tennis court were. But to be fair most do not understand the simple fact...that while he may not have been the best net player he was truly playing great classic tennis. He sought to take advantage of his opponent at every given opportunity. His reputation may have been as a baseliner but those of us in the know realize the truth...he was playing tennis at the very end of the classic era and he was in fact a great net player. Any arguments? I'm ready to shoot them down if there are any.

The sad fact of the matter is that today's tennis has hit an abysmal low and no amount of wishful thinking or nostalgic series of articles is going to revive an art that is dead and gone more than wishful thinking might resurrect Vincent Van Gogh. The game is a real stinker now and there isn't much to talk about...except for how much it sucks.

Anyone that knows anything about tennis understands this. Fafa Nadal's inability to truly be an all court player at the present is a sure fire sign. Not that he couldn't have been...any more unlikely than Borg was as a matter of fact. But I was at the French Open just a week ago and guess what...I was propped up on sed's...spectator enhancing drugs. Namely caffeine. I couldn't stay awake for either Sharapova or Djokovic. Boring displays of one dimensional tennis.

Why acquire skills? I don't know...how about just for the hell of it.