Upward Swing on the Serve: Most Complex Motion in Sports?

[johnyandell]

Let's discuss Brian Gordon's latest article, "Upward Swing on the Serve: Most Complex Motion in Sports?"

[jeremy93]

Thanks Brian. Very interesting stuff and looking forward to the rest of it!!!

[doctorhl]

Brian, best explanation and visual of the upward swing motion ever! And the fact that duplicating that upward motion, which produces the majority of the ultimate swing speed, can never be achieved without proper emphasis and training on the correct sequencing of the prior phases.

[stotty]

A brilliant walk-thru of the four parts of the serve. I will be really interested to see how to best set the table for the mechanics leading up to the upward swing. One assumes if something goes awry with the wind-up and backswing then the critical rotations in the upward swing simply won't happen.

The visual explanation of the terminology is so very useful.

[BrianGordon]

Hello folks. Over the years I've worked to get better at explaining my understanding of stroke mechanics, such as it is. These comments encourage me that I'm finally improving a bit. Thanks so much jeremy, doctor and of course stotty for considering this presentation and the kind words. BG

[seano]

Brian -

Hope all is well and the Miami & Boca Raton teaching is successful. In this months Interactive forum it features Karen Khachanov Serve. In his racquet drop, it appears that he doesn't keep the racquet face on edge and have it disappear behind his head (as you recommended in a previous video) but rather almost has a waiters tray sort of look to it, a la Pete Sampras. He does bring the racquet back to edge at full racquet drop. I have 2 questions -

1) Is there a bio-mechanical explanation for this movement? Or is it just a very flexible shoulder?
2) What testing would you recommend to measure a students external to internal shoulder capability? Things to look for (scapula movement, as an example)?

Thanks,
Sean

[BrianGordon]

Hi Sean -

My biomechanical explanation is it is poor mechanics. At the least this pattern tends to cause: decreased ulnar deviation range of motion, decreased overall range of motion in the upward swing by decreasing drop depth, and complication of the adduction process in turn delaying elbow positioning and subsequent timing of elbow extension - all of which he displays. The good news is at his size (6'5") and strength he can bludgeon the ball in, but a work of mechanical efficiency it is not - in my option.

I guess the key to ISR-ESR coupling is dynamic flexibility in ESR and contractile speed in ISR. It is possible to measure these things but I don't mess with it. I work mostly with juniors so flexibility is generally not a problem - I do work on ISR speed. For older players I suppose the opposite is true - flexibility tends to wain but they generally have developed more speed in ISR in the school of hard knocks.

Hope you are well!

[seano]

Brian -

Is it safe to assume that the lack Khachanovs consistently reaching a full 180 of ISR, is in part because of your explanation, the decreased ulnar deviation range of motion, decreased overall range of motion in the upward swing by decreasing drop depth, and complication of the adduction process in turn delaying elbow positioning and subsequent timing of elbow extension?

I love geeking out to your explanations

Sean

[BrianGordon]

I think it is safe to say a flat entry can limit ESR exiting the backswing and that the potential upward swing consequences can limit the contribution of ISR to racquet speed around contact.

[tenniscoach1]

The thing that annoys me the most about the articles on the site is they are pre-cursor to sales, advertising based promoting a book/coach, anecdotal in nature and there are zero references, documentation and studies.

So Brian - clearly you are a high end coach - but, do you have published scientific papers?

Here is an example of the type of thing we are looking for here - Mark Kovacs - references are listed.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3445225/ ...

Is this site just not letting you post white papers with references and more in depth information just due to editorial reasons?

[glacierguy]

Hi tenniscoach1 - think you may be barking up the wrong tree. Brian Gordon is the real deal. He has many published scientific papers in the Journal of Biomechanics, the Journal of Sport Sciences and the American College of Sport Medicine, if that's what concerns you. I have learned much more from Dr Gordon's articles and video explanations on TennisPlayer than from reading the necessarily rather dry, technically dense and jargon-laden scientific papers.

I for one, believe Dr Gordon to be the foremost biomechanicist and communicator working in tennis today, and we're lucky to have him contribute on TennisPlayer.

[seano]

Dr. Mark Kovacs got his PhD in Exercise Physiology. I follow his work BUT
Dr. Brian Gordon got his PhD in Biomechanics
There's a big difference between the 2 disciplines and the specialization of research, especially when talking about stroke mechanics.

[tenniscoach1]

Citations, references etc ... this is a requirement in this business. I’d love to see the details of how these conclusions were reached which is why I asked for the white papers and references. I do not know this guy from a hole in the ground, don't understand yet how he reached his conclusions, have no understanding if he is the real deal or pouching good players and in this business these are the questions you have to ask very seriously as this is a sport that breeds con artists. Don’t take it personal guys. Can you send me the links/citations you are speaking of please Glacier Guy?

[tenniscoach1]

Dr. Mark Kovacs got his PhD in Exercise Physiology. I follow his work BUT
Dr. Brian Gordon got his PhD in Biomechanics
There's a big difference between the 2 disciplines and the specialization of research, especially when talking about stroke mechanics.

Why do you follow Mark Kovacs work? What does this guy know that Mark doesn’t? Tell me your thoughts on Mark’s work?

[doctorhl]

As a kinesiology professor of 40 years with years of reading and interpreting sports science research( not producing, however), seano is right on target about discipline specificity and glacierguy is right on target about BG’s academic publishing acumen and especially his ability(and willingness) to communicate the science to the application. BG is up there with the likes of Bruce Elliott and those who came before. In addition, John Yandell is right up there with the likes of Jack Groppel and Paul Roetert as U.S. applied tennis science communicators. The U.S., for whatever reason, does not do a good job of making tennis science research( or other sport science for that matter) from the rest of the world readily available for the public to access.