Has Zverev "Fixed" His Second Serve?

[arturohernandez]

I remember Jack Kramer circa 1980 saying that tennis would be taken over by athletes like Michael Jordan ( ~6 ft 6 in).

Didn't happen then. Nor in the 90s. Nor in the Aughts.

Still waiting ....

Meanwhile, the NBA is getting shorter.

Whatever happened to centers or power forwards. Everyone just wants to shoot three pointers.

A friend of mine also pulled something out of a magazine that was stating that athletes keep getting taller. My friend was thinking of quarterbacks in American football. He thought tennis players will just keep getting taller.

Meanwhile, world football or futbol is not showing an increase in height. There are some tall players. But overall soccer requires being able to move and change directions near the ground.

I suspect that this aspect of tennis is still true. There is the advantage of height. But being able to move well for five sets across seven matches and then sustaining that for several years has to be very difficult.

I remember watching David Ferrer, maul John Isner at the Paris indoors. He was just attacking him and Isner managed to squeak out a set before collapsing in the third.

Both are exceptions at the extreme but you get my drift. If a player has to run for hours on end, it is better to have a somewhat smaller frame that is lower to the ground to do so.

Of course, in this equation, small is like Wawrinka or Federer.

The 6'1" player won last years US Open against Zverev. It was a tough match but again we could say it was mental on Zverev's part. But it is not exactly like Thiem was playing a stellar match. He was just able to play for five sets and eventually prevail.

All things being equal as they often will be in major finals, very small things will make a difference. 3 or 4 inches may seem like very little but who knows.

As I said earlier, either way it will be interesting...

[jimlosaltos]

Whatever happened to centers or power forwards. Everyone just wants to shoot three pointers.

A friend of mine also pulled something out of a magazine that was stating that athletes keep getting taller. My friend was thinking of quarterbacks in American football. He thought tennis players will just keep getting taller.

Meanwhile, world football or futbol is not showing an increase in height. There are some tall players. But overall soccer requires being able to move and change directions near the ground.

I suspect that this aspect of tennis is still true. There is the advantage of height. But being able to move well for five sets across seven matches and then sustaining that for several years has to be very difficult.

I remember watching David Ferrer, maul John Isner at the Paris indoors. He was just attacking him and Isner managed to squeak out a set before collapsing in the third.

Both are exceptions at the extreme but you get my drift. If a player has to run for hours on end, it is better to have a somewhat smaller frame that is lower to the ground to do so.

Of course, in this equation, small is like Wawrinka or Federer.

The 6'1" player won last years US Open against Zverev. It was a tough match but again we could say it was mental on Zverev's part. But it is not exactly like Thiem was playing a stellar match. He was just able to play for five sets and eventually prevail.

All things being equal as they often will be in major finals, very small things will make a difference. 3 or 4 inches may seem like very little but who knows.

As I said earlier, either way it will be interesting...

Two things: Analytics and rule changes.

The geeks did some simple math and said "You score more points per shot with 3s than with 2s", so now nobody but Kawhi shoots twos.

Second, you can't grab the guards' jerseys anymore, so they can drive by or if you back off, step back.

[arturohernandez]

Two things: Analytics and rule changes.

The geeks did some simple math and said "You score more points per shot with 3s than with 2s", so now nobody but Kawhi shoots twos.

Second, you can't grab the guards' jerseys anymore, so they can drive by or if you back off, step back.

There is a seen in the Netflix show Away where the American captain is talking to a Russian Cosmonaut on the mission. The Russian comments that he loves baseball. The American is surprised. "Really, you like baseball." Then the Cosmonaut says that he loved baseball as a game. But then Americans ruined it by making everything a statistic. He ends by just saying "Why can't you just enjoy the game for what it is." Well analytics will do that.

It all becomes about winning and metrics. Hence, the beauty of the center and the inside power game is gone. Why make 45% of 2 pointers when you can make 33% of three pointers?

100 shots = 45% two pointers = 45 shots made = 90 points
100 shots = 33% three pointers = 33 shots made = 99 points

The simple math that killed the power game in basketball.

I suppose that some changes have made tennis more of a tall man's game and basketball less so.

[don_budge]

Carlos Alcaraz and Novak Djokovic are the only two "point guards" left in the draw. Modern tennis, while not necessarily being a better product, is trending towards the taller player. There is one "point guard" left in either half of the draw.

[arturohernandez]

Carlos Alcaraz and Novak Djokovic are the only two "point guards" left in the draw. Modern tennis, while not necessarily being a better product, is trending towards the taller player. There is one "point guard" left in either half of the draw.

I always loved point guards. My favorite was Tim Hardaway. The UTEP, two-step.

A great player until his knee gave out.

A very interesting week ahead awaits us...

[jimlosaltos]

Per IBM stats on US Open site today, pre match:

• Zverev's second serve win percentage is 60%, versus 44% for Harris"

[don_budge]

Carlos Alcaraz and Novak Djokovic are the only two "point guards" left in the draw. Modern tennis, while not necessarily being a better product, is trending towards the taller player. There is one "point guard" left in either half of the draw.

And then there was one.

[jimlosaltos]

And then there was one.

Can we call Medvedev a point-forward? He's a guard in spirit. An honorary member <g>

[don_budge]

Carlos Alcaraz and Novak Djokovic are the only two "point guards" left in the draw. Modern tennis, while not necessarily being a better product, is trending towards the taller player. There is one "point guard" left in either half of the draw.

Still...that one remains.

[don_budge]

Statistics are one thing and the battle on the ground is quite another. But, for sure, the stats for Zverev should be improving with time. Otherwise what would be the point? The difference in Alexander Zverev of late is not going to show up in the stats and that is his mental and competitive attributes. He is gaining in experience and losing that "deer in the headlights" look. He came on quite quickly and it took some time for him to feel comfortable with his status. He took his lumps but hung in there and worked his way up the food chain again.

It has helped that attrition has taken its toll on the field. The field is considerably weaker than it was a few years ago. Many of the better players are no longer playing or are in decline. Surely every aspect of his game has improved. Surely his second serve has improved. But it is the cumulative effect of his game that has enabled him. His forehand is not longer the reputed weakness of his game. But I wonder what his impact will be in the long run. He is a bit tall to be running around the baseline grinding it out as a baseliner. So many of these big guys end up with injuries trying to play a game that doesn't suit them ergonomically speaking.

Speaking of the serve...if he really wanted to improve it he would be serving and volleying. But of course that is not an option these days. Afterall, the concept of the game is no longer what it once was. The biggest mitigating factor in Alexander Zverev has been experience. He has learned from his failures and his successes. He is maturing. But the jury is still out. It's a long run. It's a marathon...not a sprint. As he is finding out.

It's a long run. A very, very long run. The second serve? Kyle once said that you are only as good as your second serve. Alexander "Second Serve" Zverev has come along since that deer in the headlights look. But he fell a bit short at the U. S. Open against the still "Meteoric" Novak Djokovic. Is it the second serve or is it a question of mobility and balance? When you are so close and flirting with the finals of the U. S. Open...these are fine margins. Splitting hairs. He is searching for potential in his game. Where is there room for improvement? The game is so very mental and the fine hairs the top players are splitting are many times in the head. What was the difference between Alexander and Novak Djokovic last night? A wizened observer might come to the conclusion that it was in his head. It was in Novak's head. He conjured the dragon. He summoned the dragon once more. It's mental. He believed he would win. What is a man...what has he got?

"For what is a man, what has he got?
If not himself, then he has naught
To say the words he truly feels
And not the words of one who kneels"

[jimlosaltos]

It's a long run. A very, very long run. The second serve? Kyle once said that you are only as good as your second serve. Alexander "Second Serve" Zverev has come along since that deer in the headlights look. But he fell a bit short at the U. S. Open against the still "Meteoric" Novak Djokovic. Is it the second serve or is it a question of mobility and balance? When you are so close and flirting with the finals of the U. S. Open...these are fine margins. Splitting hairs. He is searching for potential in his game. Where is there room for improvement? The game is so very mental and the fine hairs the top players are splitting are many times in the head. What was the difference between Alexander and Novak Djokovic last night? A wizened observer might come to the conclusion that it was in his head. It was in Novak's head. He conjured the dragon. He summoned the dragon once more. It's mental. He believed he would win. What is a man...what has he got?

"For what is a man, what has he got?
If not himself, then he has naught
To say the words he truly feels
And not the words of one who kneels"

I don't know don_budge. But Zverev won more of his second-serve points than Djokovic last night, even with 8 doubles -- 49% vs 43%, 23 of 47 vs 22 of 51. If Zverev had gotten those 8 doubles in he might have won 3 more points, but would they have been the right ones?

For the event through the semifinals, Djokovic is fourth in double faults with 26 to Zverev's 23.

I found myself talking to the TV screen, asking Zverev to keep serving wide to Novak's forehand (given that he was returning from near Rafa-land) and hitting wide there in rallies.

Maybe he just needed a few more of those at the right time Always easier from the couch than the baseline.

[stotty]

For the event through the semifinals, Djokovic is fourth in double faults with 26 to Zverev's 23.

Interesting.

I don't always read too much into double fault stats. It's not the doubles you do but where you do them and in what manner. Novak tends to throw them in when it doesn't count all that much; Zverev throws them in when it really, really counts. To me that is a colossal difference. The manner in which Zverez conceded a double to drop the opening service game of the fifth set was also troubling, basically going for a second serve ace, which suggests he lost confidence in his second serve. Worrying.

I think Zverez is more dependent on his serve than Novak. As McEnroe recently put it, "Novak was winning slams before he even had a serve".

Everyone goes on about Novak's underrated serve, which I guess suggests it's widely accepted it is no longer underrated. It's a good serve. He has this Borg-like ability to deliver a pinpoint first serve when it counts most all in a match.

My favourite serving stat/record is that of Roger's, winning 35 points in a row on his serve against Lopez.

[jimlosaltos]

Mark Petchey announcing Laver Cup just said that the problem with Zverev's second serve is that "his racket face is too open", presumably on take back. and that this could be fixed.

Don't shoot the messenger, just sharing another perspective.

[don_budge]

Mark Pesky announcing Laver Cup just said that the problem with Zverev's second serve is that "his racket face is too open", presumably on take back. and that this could be fixed.

Don't shoot the messenger, just sharing another perspective.

Alexander Zverev's problems with his serve...first and second...originate in a less than optimal/perfect setup position from where to begin his swing. If you setup incorrectly the motion becomes a series of compensatory moves. Ideally you scrap the whole train wreck and go back to the drawing board. Realistically what will happen is there will be micro interventions that will create another problem in the motion. It will work for a time but in the long run if it isn't "Fundamentally Correct" (FC)...it is designed to fail. The service motion is somewhat of an upside down golf swing. You don't see any professional golfers that have some obtuse movements in their delivery of the club head to the ball. No...they all look basically the same. Backswing...transition to forwards swing...swing and follow through.

You don't many Fundamentally Correct motions are virtually nonexistent in professional tennis any longer. The last one I remember was none other than...Roger Federer. The Living Proof no less.

[doctorhl]

Mark Petchey announcing Laver Cup just said that the problem with Zverev's second serve is that "his racket face is too open", presumably on take back. and that this could be fixed.

Don't shoot the messenger, just sharing another perspective.

Although some might say a poor comparison, try beginning the forward motion of an American football throw with open palm position( open face) versus a more closed palm position. See if those hand positional differences, exaggerated by the different object, give a SIMILAR DIFFERENCE in feel of acceleration of arm rotation and position of hand at contact as that of the open face and closed face forward motion of the tennis serve.