Technical Question on The Serve

[stotty]

The leg drive or upward drive of a player through to contact....

Are top players still rising when they contact the ball on their serve? Or do they plateau? Which reference points shall we use to judge that?

If we take Roger's feet as a reference point, then it seems, in his case, he is still rising as he strikes the ball. However, if we use his head as a reference point, then he seems to reach some kind of apex.

Roger seems to fold up his knees and lower half more than others on contact, as does Novak. Is this a byproduct of what Ben Kibler talks about when he says some players drive up with the rear foot more?

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...evelFront1.mov

Novak seems to be still rising up at contact...both feet and head.

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...LevelFront.mov

With Sampras the feet seem to reach an apex on contact while the head seems to lower slightly.

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...LevelFront.mov

And what about the non hitting flank in general?

Here are some others servers to study.

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...iddleFront.mov

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...evelFront1.mov

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...tLevelRear.mov

So are players reaching an apex at contact, still going up slightly, or are they starting to descend?

And it's interesting when how you're looking for one thing that sometimes you notice another separately related issue. See how McEnroe doesn't look at his opponent for as long as most as he embarks on the wind-up. Maybe that's a slight weakness of the side-saddle method.

https://www.tennisplayer.net/members...iddleFront.mov

[johnyandell]

Good questions and I wonder what the differences are and if the differences change outcomes???

[klacr]

Fascinating stuff Stotty. There are so many questions that the serve can produce. But the ones you have brought up are really well put and you have video examples also! Unless we have a chance to ask them what it is they do, and even then they may be incorrect on their own shots. Another variable to add to your queries is how is this affected or associated with the different serving rhythms. Someone with an abbreviated and quick motion rise up to and through the ball, do staggered rhythm players plateau or is it the reverse?

Your post has been up for days and it's intrigued me. You have not gotten the myriad of comments and answers I thought you would or that you deserve. So here you go.

I don't really know how to answer your question but I can only hypothesize. So I will give it a shot..
Perhaps the players sensation or desire is to drive up then reach an apex yet the speed and force of the upward swing/arm/racquet drive counters this and results in a deceleration of the upward phase, keeping the players on a level with the ball, thus allowing the ball to stay on racquet face a fraction of a second longer. Players like Federer and Sampras have this in sync with their natural motions, whereas a player like Djokovic whose service troubles have been well documented seem to be slightly out of sync, as he still may still be utilizing the majority of his power upwards and past the ball, not upwards and with the ball.

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/high_speed_archive/phantom/Roger_Federer_HD_HS/index.html?dir=Serve/1st_Serve&stroke=RF_1stS_Deuce_Side4_500fps.mp4

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/high_speed/High_Speed.html?PeteSampras1stServe.mov

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/high_speed_archive/phantom/Novak_Djokovic_HD_HS/index.html?dir=Serve/1st_Serve&stroke=ND_1stS_Ad_Court_Level_Side_1.mp4

But then again, what the hell do I know? Anyone's guess is as good as mine.

Hope that pacifies you somewhat stotty. Thanks for making me think.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[stotty]

Fascinating stuff Stotty. There are so many questions that the serve can produce. But the ones you have brought up are really well put and you have video examples also! Unless we have a chance to ask them what it is they do, and even then they may be incorrect on their own shots. Another variable to add to your queries is how is this affected or associated with the different serving rhythms. Someone with an abbreviated and quick motion rise up to and through the ball, do staggered rhythm players plateau or is it the reverse?

Your post has been up for days and it's intrigued me. You have not gotten the myriad of comments and answers I thought you would or that you deserve. So here you go.

I don't really know how to answer your question but I can only hypothesize. So I will give it a shot..
Perhaps the players sensation or desire is to drive up then reach an apex yet the speed and force of the upward swing/arm/racquet drive counters this and results in a deceleration of the upward phase, keeping the players on a level with the ball, thus allowing the ball to stay on racquet face a fraction of a second longer. Players like Federer and Sampras have this in sync with their natural motions, whereas a player like Djokovic whose service troubles have been well documented seem to be slightly out of sync, as he still may still be utilizing the majority of his power upwards and past the ball, not upwards and with the ball.

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/...de4_500fps.mp4

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/...as1stServe.mov

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/...vel_Side_1.mp4

But then again, what the hell do I know? Anyone's guess is as good as mine.

Hope that pacifies you somewhat stotty. Thanks for making me think.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Thanks for the considered reply.

It's complex. I wasn't expecting a myriad of replies or answers. The forum has steered away from this kind of thread in favour of following ATP tournaments and grand slam events and has for sometime. Technical threads bite the dust quick. I knew this only too well.

My reason for posting the thread was based on a study of my own....filming the "drive up and contact point" of serves from a handful of juniors. Some kids seem to be ever so slightly out with their drive up to the ball with power dramatically effected as a result. This is particularly the case with kids who drive up too early and end up descending before they actually strike the ball. Driving up at exactly the right time would seem critical.

As always Roger is the most fascinating. It's his head that hits an apex and seems to hang in that spot longer than anyone else. I think it may be because he looks at the ball longer than anyone else. Rosewall and Borg also had the same quality....perfect ball-watching. The slow motion clip you posted illustrates perfectly my point. The camera doesn't lie. Watch his head at contact with the ball. It holds in exactly the same place. His feet and lower half are still rising up however.

Here we see Dolgopolov's head - whose serve I hate - rising up and up after the contact.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlwvDvy-8LA

I haven't studied the descending left flank of players yet, but I figure it might hold some answers. It has to fold down as the right side reaches up, and the timing of that with the players I have selected might be interesting.

The more I watch Roger's serve the more I feel he has it right...his head just holding in that exact same position like that. I wish I could reach for perfection through someone else because it's always seems to be Roger that is the gold standard. It's a shame there is so little slow motion footage available from the classic era as it would be interesting to study some of those guys.

I just have to go with the theory that a server's drive up to the ball should reach an apex at the point of contact...seems incredibly logical. Driving up through contact would seem to involve even greater split second timing. I couldn't find your serve, klacr, from that previous thread you started, but it would be interesting to take a look at where you stand in the equation, as, from memory, you had a low toss and quick motion?

Once again, thanks for your involvement. It's the sort of conundrum tennis_chiro likes to wade into should he pop in and take a look.

[klacr]

I could not dig deep enough to find my serve thread videos either. I have a few serve vids on my computer but file is too big to attach. Was able to upload to vimeo so here you go stotty. Enjoy and tell me your thoughts. Sorry for quality and mess of a post. Tech is not my thing.

https://vimeo.com/173408500

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[bottle]

It's complex. I wasn't expecting a myriad of replies or answers. The forum has steered away from this kind of thread in favour of following ATP tournaments and grand slam events and has for sometime. Technical threads bite the dust quick. I knew this only too well.

I'm sure you're right, but on the other hand, this is crazy. Tennis is one of the technique sports, and messing with technique can bring dramatic change to anyone's game for better or worse.

I go for better, and see the emphasis on tennis celebrity in most posts here as distraction and detriment to individual progress. We all should want to improve our game, and ought to want that over improving Roger Federer's game. (His game may already be improved enough.)

So why is it that people get turned off when the conversation goes the least bit technical? Mistaken image of oneself as world's greatest athlete and pure natural, a person who only ever asks one question: "Which way to the beach?"

The other day hockeyplayer noticed lack of response to serious questions about Agi-Rad's forehand technique or was it Jo Konta's. Don't other tennis players at Tennis Player ever suspect that some considered observation might apply to one's own game?

I even distrust the huge emphasis on footwork now being promulgated. Of course great footwork is essential to hitting great groundstrokes. But racket technique itself is a more complex subject, deserving of all the fine attention that anyone can give it.

[gzhpcu]

I could not dig deep enough to find my serve thread videos either. I have a few serve vids on my computer but file is too big to attach. Was able to upload to vimeo so here you go stotty. Enjoy and tell me your thoughts. Sorry for quality and mess of a post. Tech is not my thing.

https://vimeo.com/173408500

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

One scary serve. I have experienced it first hand....

[stotty]

I could not dig deep enough to find my serve thread videos either. I have a few serve vids on my computer but file is too big to attach. Was able to upload to vimeo so here you go stotty. Enjoy and tell me your thoughts. Sorry for quality and mess of a post. Tech is not my thing.

https://vimeo.com/173408500

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Thanks for digging your serve out for me.

You definitely have a lowering of the head and your left foot may just be starting to descend on contact....tough to tell but I will download the clip to Analyzr to get a definite verdict on that one. But each motion is different. You don't stand your left arm up vertical after releasing the ball like Roger. You seem to lower the tossing arm a tad too early which in itself may explain things. Roger stands the arm right up after the toss and seems to keep it up a teeny weeny bit longer than Sampras.

Roscoe Tanner was similar to you. I have a clip of him which I don't have the tech skills to upload. His tossing arm never reaches anything like vertical and his head lowers quite a bit. He was always on a trip to the net of course which may explain things. That said, Roscoe's contact point was inline with the bridge of his nose, so no different to most players today.

Players today do drive up much more and leave the ground by what seems like around two feet in some cases. Benoit Paiire seems to be the exception. He leaves the ground very little and sometimes not at all.

I'm sure you're right, but on the other hand, this is crazy. Tennis is one of the technique sports, and messing with technique can bring dramatic change to anyone's game for better or worse.

I go for better, and see the emphasis on tennis celebrity in most posts here as distraction and detriment to individual progress. We all should want to improve our game, and ought to want that over improving Roger Federer's game. (His game may already be improved enough.)

So why is it that people get turned off when the conversation goes the least bit technical? Mistaken image of oneself as world's greatest athlete and pure natural, a person who only ever asks one question: "Which way to the beach?"

The other day hockeyplayer noticed lack of response to serious questions about Agi-Rad's forehand technique. Don't other tennis players at Tennis Player ever suspect that some considered observation might apply to one's own game?

I even distrust the huge emphasis on footwork now being promulgated. Of course great footwork is essential to hitting great groundstrokes. But racket technique itself is a more complex subject, deserving of all the fine attention that anyone can give it.

You're right when you say tennis is much about technique. When I first came across the forum some years ago many of the threads were based on technique...observations of. Over the years that has changed and the forum has become more about having a conversation. There is nothing wrong with that of course. All forms of tennis communication are fine with me.

I went on course delivered by the RPT, a Spanish outfit who teach the Spanish methods over here in Blighty. The Spanish put far less emphasis on technique than the Yanks or the Brits. For them tennis is game of movement, and if players train and play enough they will overcome most technical obstacles all by themselves. Of course, if a player is having real difficulty with a stroke, then technical analysis and correction will take place. But on the whole the Spanish are less freaked out by odd looking technique than we are and have learnt to see how effective a shot is before diving in with video analysis and text books.

But, yes, I'm with you in that sometimes a tiny alteration can make all the difference.

I have long since toyed with the idea of starting workshop threads whereby I post clips my students so coaches and observers can showcase their skills and knowledge, and maybe have a chance to make all the difference. It would add another dimension to the forum. I work in a densely populated hub where many fine players, young and old, pass through. Posting students however would rely on posters being 100% responsible when they comment.

[johnyandell]

Stotty, Good idea!

[klacr]

Good stuff Stotty. Thank you.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[gzhpcu]

As far as the serve is concerned, it seems there is more than one way to skin a cat. Roddick, Sampras, Tanner, Federer - lots of differences. But good serves conform to what John calls the core fundamentals. The rest is personal style and also dictated by the players body/biomechanics.

[don_budge]

As far as the serve is concerned, it seems there is more than one way to skin a cat. Roddick, Sampras, Tanner, Federer - lots of differences. But good serves conform to what John calls the core fundamentals. The rest is personal style and also dictated by the players body/biomechanics.

Well of course there is more than one way to skin a cat. But there is only one "best" way.

In this case it is the Roger Federer service motion that holds up even at 37 years of age to be the best server in the world. He may not serve the fastest but that is of no consequence when evaluating what is best.

As far as the apex of the motion your head should be very steady and it sort of makes sense that Roger's head is where it should be when it should be. The shoulders are turning around the head delivering the payload.

Interesting comment from gzhpcu...perhaps not the technical thoughts that Stotty is seeking. But with regards to serving technique and tennis technique in general...technique are not the end in and of itself. Tactics are the end...the goal. To be able to outplay your opponent more often than he outplays you. In the case of service motions though it is a question of what is the best motion to play out one's tactics...and once again it is Roger Federer that is "The Living Proof". He is a dying breed because as Stotty notes that if we had access to the serves in the past we might just find a whole lot of motions that sort of conform to the Federer standard. Serving was quite a different element of the game in the past...the serve served to get the player to the net. This is no longer the case. At one point in Federer's early years it was his objective.

Look no further than Roger for the gold standard. His is the only motion on the tour today that was rooted in Classic Tennis. His tactical approach to serving is head and shoulders over the rest of the lot. This has a lot to do with a perfect motion that just gets better as the pressure on it increases. Look at how methodical he has become in serving out matches. Once he is up a break he rarely relinquishes it. His efficiency at the end of matches is unparalleled in the modern game. Nobody is mixing up the speed, spin and placement like he is. He is like a great baseball pitcher who has a book on all of his opponents...he knows where the weaknesses are and he can exploit them with his surgical precision.

I know this isn't a technical observation...but sometimes I don't go along with the train of thought of the group. I usually am looking for another avenue. Fundamentally Federer's service motion is perfect...except perhaps his balky beginning. If his head is in a certain position at the apex of the event...I would damn well like for my head or my students head to be in the very same position.

[stotty]

The bottom line is how much more power does excessive leg drive give a player...

As far as the serve is concerned, it seems there is more than one way to skin a cat. Roddick, Sampras, Tanner, Federer - lots of differences. But good serves conform to what John calls the core fundamentals. The rest is personal style and also dictated by the players body/biomechanics.

I doubt anyone would disagree with what you say here. It's just there are subtle differences and although we are looking at world class serves here, some of them clearly serve a bit better than others.

My personal feeling is that you can overdo the "driving up to the ball" concept.

There is no argument that Michael Stich, who barely left the ground and landed on his right foot rather than his left, could serve as well if not far better than most players today. His method worked and his motion remains an excellent serving model. Probably a player's own natural ability in the service motion department has as much to do with it as anything, but you cannot help but ponder, especially if you are a tennis coach.

It's just when you see Dolgopolov rising up and up beyond contact you then begin to wonder about the technical implications. Does overdoing "driving up" sacrifice rhythm? Does driving up give a player any more in terms of a decent serve than someone like Michael Stich or Pancho Gonzales? I would suggest it doesn't. I would suggest Roger times his leg drive up to the ball to perfection while some don't?

You can study all the players in the archive but no one seems to linger at the apex on contact quite the same as Roger...the perfect leg drive to coincide with contact.

In this case it is the Roger Federer service motion that holds up even at 37 years of age to be the best server in the world. He may not serve the fastest but that is of no consequence when evaluating what is best.

As far as the apex of the motion your head should be very steady and it sort of makes sense that Roger's head is where it should be when it should be. The shoulders are turning around the head delivering the payload.

It's interesting to compare Roger with Sampras. Both are superb servers and have very similar qualities. Roger's motion is less extreme and maybe his first serve percentage benefits from that. I have watched both serve at Wimbledon and there is very little in it. I think Sampras was forced into going for more because of the serve volley element. When you are staying back you can ease off a fraction here and there, which Roger does.