What are the key differences between a pro first and second serve?

[gsheiner]

First, a quick congratulatory comment. This is my first post. John, you've put together a great resource for tennis enthusiasts.
My questions have to do with breaking down the differences between pro first and second serves in the same way that you brilliantly broke down all aspects of the forehand . The only thing I can consistently see in video is that the hit action is more left to right on the second serve and it seems that a number of pros use a left to right wrist movement as you have described elsewhere.

For example:

1) is there any difference in the takeback? Is the racket taken back slightly lower for example for a second serve?

2) is there any difference in the setup of the hips and feet? I know for example that it's easier for me to hit a spin serve if I start off more closed?

3) Is there any difference in the hit setup position ( by this I refer to the classic left hand up,right elbow back, and knees bent)?

4) Is there any difference in the toss? I know you have described that Sampras's second serve toss is a little further to his left but it's very difficult to see big changes in toss location for me. Do pros bring the ball back further in addition to the left on the second or just to the left?

5) If there is a subtle difference in the tossing arc what are the biomechanics to create this different arc? Something must be different. Is it a slightly higher or lower release point or a different use of the body or just a function of a different setup?

I look forward to any insights you might have and maybe a leading edge article in the future.

Cheers,

Glenn

[johnyandell]

Glenn,

Some good questions and I'm not sure I have all the answers. I think the primary difference for most good servers is simply in the position of the ball toss. It's definitely further to the left--possibly also slightly closer in--but still in front of or at the edge of the body at contact. To me that left right difference is very clear in the Sampras articles.

The other factors? I think it's hard enough to have one good motion let alone two. I doubt very much if players are making the kind of adjustments you mention. I don't see it in the video. This may be a case of over analysis. Some players may make a slight or subtle adjustment in the grip to something slightly more eastern.

John

[vmiller]

I think the primary difference for most good servers is simply in the position of the ball toss.

John,

Given the use of one racket path for all serves, do you think that the most dominate method of producing spin is brushing the back of the ball or hitting through the ball with an angled racket face?

Conventional instruction seems to say brushing the back of the ball, but I've lost confidence in that. Sure you can generate a lot of spin, but how do you generate a heavy first serve with that same motion? Or even a penetrating second serve?

Pete's racket doesn't seem to rise much above the point of contact, even on a second serve, which I think suggests that he's not brushing up, but hitting through with a slightly closed racket face. This would result in brushing more towards the top or side of the ball rather than the back of it. Does that sound reasonable? That type of racket path, to me, correlates much better with your uniform swing theory.

And I certainly agree that using two swing paths sucks. That's what I've been doing until recently. It certainly doesn't help the confidence needed to hit a critical second serve.

[johnyandell]

This is a little too complex for me. I think that the left ball position probably does affect the swing path somewhat--but if so that happens automatically. All this talk about "heavy" "high velocity" "penetrating" etc is pretty arbitrary. As if technique alone can create them and we just must search for the correct technique and then voila we are Pete Sampras. It's the magic bullet theory.

At a certain point if your motions are good--well, those factors kind of are what they are. The ball toss can't be too far behind that's for sure. Think Pete's racket in the high speed is rising somewhat--don't think that downward tilt angle is something that you can control, sort of happens when you hit up. Of course he is hitting through but that's not inconsistent with hitting up. The racket is moving in three directions, right?

[vmiller]

This is a little too complex for me.

OK, forget what I said.

What are your methods for helping people develop a topspin component on their serve?

I'm thinking that 'toss to the left' would not be enough coaching for most people.

[johnyandell]

At the risk of making things sound too simple I just don't think it's that complex. It's a matter of bringing the ball over where you can actually hit up on it more--I like the image of the racket face and shaft vertical hitting up the back of the ball like a forehand. You simply get the feeling of increasing the amount of spin by varying slightly how much you hit up.

[gsheiner]

John,

If you compare hitting topspin serves to hitting topspin forehands then is it possible that that on a second serve the focus is a little bit more on the internal rotation action ( giving you a reverse windshield wiper). And on the first serve the forces of shoulder and elbow extension are accentuated to transmit power directly through the ball more.

This would seem to correlate with the modern forehand where the windshield wiper is used when you want to apply heavy spin and even heavy spinmeisters like Kuerten can hit with the classic finish ( less rotation of the forehand) when they want to flatten the ball out.

And although this wouldn't translate into a different swing for fist and second serves it would, like the forehand , translate into different finishes?


Glenn

[johnyandell]

Yeah you may have taken me too literally. It's just an image of the horizontal racket face going up the back of the ball. (Actually the image would be a left hitting a topspin forehand) It's an overcompensation obviously but I've found it very effective in helping people get the feeling of adding some topspin component.

You may also be correct about the finishes, but I haven't studied that in enough detail to have a real opinion. I'd be careful there, however, as ball location--wide or down the T--may be as big or a bigger factor.

Unlike the the forehand where you can use the followthrough or finish more easily to guide the trajectory of the shot, I feel the serve finishes tend more to just happen. If the ball is in the right place, the swing up to the ball is correct, the arm is really relaxed, then the pronation and the exact line on which the racket comes across and down tend to happen. It's more about just keeping everything relaxed and moving.

I've worked with a couple of players in the top hundred who experimented with this--and when they tried to force the finish to a certain place for a certain serve, it always tended to look artificial. Could have limited value in developing a feel, but the motion should be explosive and relaxed.

[forehand]

Good thread. I've spent quite some time reading the article on Sampras' serve as I think it's one of the best articles on this site. Sampras' second serve particularly intrigues me, especially taking into account the ridiculous combination of spin and speed.

When comparing clips of Sampras' first and second serves, it seems to me that the contact is slightly delayed for a second serve. Combining this with the right-to left arc that his toss travels would mean that the contact point for his second serve is further to the left and slightly lower. Mind you, the delay I mention is merely based on subjective interpretation of the video clips. I guess counting frames could provide an answer, but I have a day-job to mind too...

Observing other players with less of an arced toss, Hrbaty comes to mind, there seems to be more of an effort to place the toss differently for first and second serves. Hrbatys serve also looks much more mechanical, conscious and forced. I mean, the guy is practically using up his 20 seconds waiting for the toss to drop (Wouldn't mind serving as well as he does, though).

Anyway, I have an arced toss myself and try to use more or less the same toss-path for first and second serves. I just move the toss slightly closer to the baseline for second serves, plus have the contact happen a little lower. If I'm feeling it on my serves and generally having a good day, I try to keep the toss for a second serve as far into the court as for a first serve, and move more underneath the ball. On the rare occasion that everything clicks into place, I have produced serves that have more speed than my normal first serves and more spin than my normal second serves. It does require a big shoulder turn, though, and launching the body sideways into the court. I guess this is what John dubbed "the left launch" in the Sampras article.

Now on to a few thoughts on racket path. I had the great pleasure of spending a week at a tennis camp in Spain last summer. From the work we did on the second serve, one thing stayed with me. The phrase was "you've got to shape it more" for a topspin serve. By this, the coach was implying that you should feel the racquet arc over the ball. Kind of like making the racquet head mimic the shape of the ball path over the net. Using this approach yielded some results, my second serve became more consistent and I felt a better connection between the motion and the result. Whether or not the "shape it more"-mantra makes you contact the ball with a slightly more closed raquet face or alters the raquet path, I simply don't know.

Now for the great unification theory... When I successfully make one of the (for me) big serves I mention above, I also feel that I am shaping it more. It's not through concious effort, it just happens and I recognise the feeling. Just the racquet head floating through contact and wrapping nicely around the ball. And BOOM!

[freelans]

Pronation on the second serve for me was the key to pace. I used to merely brush up on the ball as advocated by most coaches because it was relatively easy to master. My serves aren't anywhere near pro levels but one element of the pro serve that I've implemented was pronating on the slice and kick serves which gave considerably more pace (at the expense of consistency until I learned to stabilize my wrist).

At this point I could use a few more refinements like arching my back more, but I'm pretty happy with how my serves are progressing.


Let's see if this works....

http://www.waves95.net/bbs/data/freegallery1/slice1.gif

Please feel free to critique.

I'm at the point where my second serve is heavy enough to be my first serve if I really whack it, and the consistency does not suffer. Not many aces unless I place it perfectly but a lot of service points and weak returns.

[johnyandell]

Wow that looks nice! Don't fix what's not broken! My only suggestion as an experiment would be the toss slightly more to the left--but still in front--and see what that does to speed versus spin for your opponents.

Thanks for posting that.

[freelans]

Thanks John. Best tennis site ever BTW

I'll be sure and experiment with the toss to the left
and maybe it will prove to be a breakthrough. Haven't tried it
yet because I wanted to keep my tosses consistent for flat and spin
serves, but perhaps I might reap more benefits than the deceptiveness aspect.

[Fingers]

your left shoulder seems to travel unnecessarily down and to the left as if you are getting your upper body out of the way so that the racquet can hit the ball. Place your cursor over your left shoulder on the video and follow its path with your mouse.

I would like to see your entire body accelerate upward into the ball without what appears to me to be a pull to your left side and downward which decreases your power. More leg acceleration upward may be the remedy, you will get more arm acceleration without expending more energy in your upper body but uncoiling it upward into the ball.