Interactive Stroke Analysis Roscoe Tanner's Serve

[uspta990770809]

A bit cramped

Hi Don,
Yes had pumpkin pie today! My wife is a great cook!

Very nice classical service Don. Like it. Classical cross over step like Becker and Noah.

Nice comments on Roscoe Tanner serve. Interesting about the hip rotation. In any case, he was certainly doing something right. I remember reading an article on his serve in Tennis magazine back then, saying that with his fast, concerted movement and low toss, at times he would not hit the ball at full height, but be a bit cramped.

Saw him playing in Wimbledon years back. He was one of the lesser courts. I was very close to him and tremendously impressed with his exposive delivery.

I think part of the problem is with the naked eye, this motion looks more cramped than it actually is. Remember the eye takes in the total picture including the amount the ball goes above contact in most serves. This would tend to make everything look less cramped. (Perhaps??)

don

[stroke]

Don, I thought your comments on the serve was one of the most thoughful posts I have read. Very good stuff.

[uspta990770809]

Staying on the ground

Thing is, in the video, Vic Braden tells Roscoe that he gets so much power, because he keeps his right foot on the ground at impact!

I've always argued that there is too much emphasis on the big knee bend. I've never gotten a satisfactory answer from the biomechanists for the question you are posing right here.

In Newton/Ariel's world of equal and opposite reactions, perhaps Tanner is using a lot more hip and leg action than he gets credit for because he is keeping one foot on the ground. Or is it just that Roddick creates so much energy pushing on the ground that it takes him up into the air and then he is able to release the energy into the ball?

If it were so beneficial to bend the knees so much and jump, wouldn't we see jump pitchers in MLB, jump passers in the NFL, and jump javelin throwers in the world of track and field. If you go to the Somax video analysis of Roddick

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLf_M...eature=related

and go in 3 minutes and 25 seconds, look very carefully at his rear end. I've always tried to get my students to be sure they weren't moving backward as they hit the serve instead of moving forward into the court (current conventional serving theory calls for the RH server to land a good 8 inches to a foot or more into the court with the left foot). But if Newton's Third Law applies, then something has to go backward to balance out the forward movement of the ball and there is no force being applied to the court at the moment of impact. Somewhere between 3:25 and 3:27 you can see Roddick's rear end moving slightly, but definitely rearward against the background as he makes the final move up to the ball. The angle of the camera is somewhat deceiving, but there is no question his butt is going backwards.

I don't have the answer here. Any biomechanists out there who can offer some elucidation here, please chime in. I just know I have to get my players to
1. be able to hit the ball first with no movement of their feet in complete balance. Then I want them to

2. be able to reach up to the toss so that they are forced to take one step with the rear foot into the court, and in the direction of the ball, not off to the side; and that is with balance as well. If they can get through those steps, then I want them to

3. start pushing up with so much force that the momentum of the motion takes them up into the air landing them well inside the baseline, but still with balance. However, in no case, do I want them to actually jump into the air to hit the serve like Brian Battistone (although it works great for him)

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

Some questions to ponder as you digest that meal today:

Would Roddick serve even bigger (according to Vic) if he kept at least one foot on the ground?

What if Brian Battistone had the groundstrokes of Andre Agassi to go with that serve; or what if Agassi had learned Battistone's serve? Better yet, what if John Isner had learned Battistone's serve? Now that's a scary picture!

And finally, shouldn't we be emphasizing better balance and cleaner service motions with deep "pro drop" positions and crisper contacts at full extension, before we spend so much energy trying to get more knee bend; something more like this

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/golden_legends/panchogonzales/panchogonzales.html?PGServeCourtlevelSide.mov

Happy Thanksgiving everyone,
time for me to go work on my golf swing,
don

[uspta990770809]

Simple service rhythm

Hi Don,
Very nice classical service Don. Like it. Classical cross over step like Becker and Noah.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tmoqsgiag3g

I was hoping you might be able to see that the rhythm is not rushed, or forced; the contact demonstrates pretty good extension; and the ball only drops a couple of inches. Admittedly, the old man had lost a lot of flexibility and the "pro drop" is pretty shallow. Also, there is a decent hip and shoulder turn (although nowhere near the shoulder-over-shoulder of a Sampras) and I am pushing up off the ground until the last few inches before I contact the ball.

Ahhhh! Memories.
don

[chuck62]

I think this has been a great thread that has answered alot of questions with regard to the old vs new school of serving. I would add two points possibly not mentioned: 1) The evidence that Roscoe used his legs extensively in his motion is shown by his physical development which was much more in the legs than in the upper body. His power came from his legs in the way Jack Nicklaus who had a similar build used his in the golf swing. A fast hip turn that started a kinetic chain of events. 2) The style does live on today in one of the best servers in professional doubles: Bob Bryan who has a low ball toss and a quick motion.

[gzhpcu]

Looking at the Tanner serve videos (careful, he is past his prime), in addition to the hip turn, I see very little shoulder rotation, and his chest does not point towards the ball. Because of his fast movement, his tossing arm does not go up much, much less stay up high. He seems to toss the ball well ahead and really lean into it. His trunk seems mostly upright, not much body snap.

Looks like there is more than one way to skin a cat...

[GMann]

Who is the Serve Coach?

I know a coach who teaches all his students to hit the ball at the apex because he does. He teaches it with skill and many of his students master the low toss well. It cuts out a lot of the common errors by "sheer speed of execution" i.e. dropped elbow, kinks...problems like this are less likely to happen because there simply isn't time for them!

Hey Scotty. Is there any reason that you can't identify this coach? It would be free advertising for him/her. Who is it?

[GMann]

Similarities of Bob Bryan and Roscoe Tanner Serve

The style does live on today in one of the best servers in professional doubles: Bob Bryan who has a low ball toss and a quick motion.

Yes. I have noticed this also. What makes their motions even more similar is that they (Tanner and Bryan) are both left handed.

In fact, at the beginning of this thread years ago I had meant to point out that while the Bryan brothers are identical twins who have virtually the same DNA, one serves much harder than the other. If you will notice, Bob has the much bigger serve and uses the faster motion/lower toss motion. While Mike serves much slower and uses the higher toss slower motion model. This is a perfect opportunity to use something akin to the "twin studies" that scientists use to figure out environmental or situation impacts vs. genetic causes.

I believe that it is likely that Mike could probably serve a lot bigger if he worked on copying Bob's motion.

This situation also seems to confirm my general feeling that tennis strokes and power are mostly technique-based and not simply genetic or God given. I believe and have experienced that there is a "technique trick" to almost every great stroke. I know that John Y. has expressed his belief that pro level power is largely genetic, God given and mysterious "racket speed" but hopefully this fact about the Bryan brothers will allow him to reconsider this philosophy that I believe is incorrect and defeatest.

Let's all now brace ourselves for another round of this debate.

[johnyandell]

As a student of technique I never devalue it. I just don't agree with you about serve technique. As for the nature/training thing, again, the combination of the two is what leads to greatness.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one--there isn't much point in just restating the old issues any further. You think I am defeatist, and I say you are (at least partially) delusional... I can live with that dissonance.

Read Dan Coyle's book though, you'll find he's on your side of the fence--anything is possible for anyone if you just thicken the stuff that wraps around your nerves...

[stroke]

I'm very glad we have resurrected this old thread. It was a good one. First of all, I want to say I certainly understand and respect John's take on this quick motion Tanner type of serve. Gmann brings up a very good talking point about the Bryan brothers(DNA, different motions). I never have thought of that. As for thoughts on teaching the Tanner type of serve, Jim McLennan has always said his 1st coach used to teach him "start the serve motion and toss the ball into the motion". If you shadow swing your serve motion a few times and then toss the ball into the motion, you may get a feel for hitting the ball with this type of serve.

[EdWeiss]

Wayne Bryan comments on ball toss

From Wayne Bryan's tennis curriculum:

"Also, don't toss too high. So many recreational players fire the ball way up in the air and they have a "dead stick" waiting for the ball to come down. Really I think that the higher you toss the lower you actually strike the ball. For best results, hit the ball right where it "sits". Spank it right where it is not going up anymore and has yet to start down. Get that groove and you'll really increase your serving percentage. Rather than have a toss all over the place, your toss will be like an old friend --- always right there."

[uspta146749877]

A meaning of smiley?

From Wayne Bryan's tennis curriculum:

"Also, don't toss too high. So many recreational players fire the ball way up in the air and they have a "dead stick" waiting for the ball to come down. Really I think that the higher you toss the lower you actually strike the ball. For best results, hit the ball right where it "sits". Spank it right where it is not going up anymore and has yet to start down. Get that groove and you'll really increase your serving percentage. Rather than have a toss all over the place, your toss will be like an old friend --- always right there."

A meaning of smiley NOT very clear

[gzhpcu]

Seems to me we are talking about acceptance window for the serve and topspin.

Hitting the ball as high as possible at impact as physically possible, gets more balls in.

How to get more balls in? Topspin. However, lots of people have difficulty hitting consistently with topspin to increase the acceptance window.

Another way of getting topspin on serves - throw the ball higher on the toss. The faster the ball falls when struck, the more the resulting topspin. A simple toss of 6 inches above the impact point increases the number of serves going in by 12%. (Howard Brody, "The Physics and Technology of Tennis", page 197)

Disadvantages of minimal toss? If the ball toss is not quite high enough, the impact point will be too low, and the acceptance window will decrease, reducing the chance of the ball going in and the ball speed.

[johnyandell]

Uh, quoting Wayne on the lower toss I am not sure supports the argument...he's got a certain delivery style that's for sure, but if you examine many of the technical things he advocates, let's say they diverge from reality...

[stotty]

Still think the low-around-the-apex toss has one great advantage for those with the ability to do it. All those horrible things that can go wrong with a serve like a drop elbow or a kink in the action are much less likely to happen with an arm action that has to be rapid because of the nature of the serve. There simply isn't time to for the arm to deviate and develop a kink or dropped elbow when the arm has to move so fast to meet the ball.