Has Hitting First Serves as Seconds Become a Legit Strategy?

[jimlosaltos]

For several years now, some have argued that it made sense for some players to hit first serves on their seconds.

The math is simple: What's your first serve in rate and win rate. Multiply and if it is better than what you're getting on a second go for it. If not, don't.

One argument against that is the psychological pressure of hitting a second. To paraphrase the EPA, your heart rate may vary.

Another argument for, is that hitting big all the time keeps a grinder from getting a rhythm.

Now, with Nick Kyrgios, Sasha Zverev and this Sunday with Daniil Medvedev winning a major, and ending Djokovic's Grand Slam run by doing just that -- going for firsts as seconds, is it a legit strategy for more to consider?

Nick is a unique case (in so many ways ). When he beat Djokovic twice in a row, he varied from hitting slow seconds on his first serve, with bombs on his second. It drove Novak into a screaming frenzy <g>. Sasha is covering a weakness.

But, Daniil is a legit, reliable server so his reliance on firsts-as-seconds could change the discussion.

Double faults used to be considered a near-sin.

Has "whatever you do, get your second serve in, don't give your opponent a free point" been replaced with "Go big on second to win points"?

Medvedev hit 9 double faults in only 3 sets yet won 58% of his second serves against an opponent many call the greatest returner of all time.

Overall, Djokovic won only 29% of his receiving points. That's staggeringly bad.

Daniil hit one second serve at 126 MPH, which was faster than any of Novak's first serves.

In fairness, he didn't go big all the time. He mixed it up. Also, several of what I'd call firsts-on-seconds were heavy slice serves wide to exploit Novak deep return position. One might call some of those 1.5 serves.

Does this make sense? Should serious players start practicing hitting firsts-as-seconds? What would that entail?

filedata/fetch?id=95401&d=1631642744&type=thumb

[don_budge]

Should serious player start practicing hitting firsts-as-seconds?

My tennis coach, the great Sherm Collins told me that you have to be a bit fatalistic about hitting the second. Let's face it...any hesitation or doubt about getting the second one in faced with the threat of a dreadful double fault trying to pussy foot a patsy really sucks. But the problem is jimlosaltos...most of the motions on the tour do not lend themselves to this sort of "recklessness". The motion cannot be counted on in pressure situations to bang the second one in as if it is a first serve.

Taking my coaches words to heart and plus the fact that I had a perfect service motion, as Don Budge put the finishing touches on it, I could and did hit the second as a first much of the time. My reasoning was that I served a very high percentage of first serves anyways...usually...that if I so much as happened to miss the first one there was very little chance of me missing a second. No chance. That doesn't mean that I hit massive flat serves on the second one. I simply used the same motion and tactics as I did on the first one. Perhaps a modicum of extra spin for a better margin of error. But if a player has a very good service motion...such as jthb1021. A fellow with his size and his motion should have the green light to punish the second one. But that doesn't mean a thoughtless bomb...no, second serve as a first using the notion that real power is control and we all know what control is. Control is made up of the elements of speed, spin and placement.

I firmly believe that a true tennis player with a sound service motion should be aggressive with the second ball as well. Not stupid aggressive...tactically aggressive. Situational aggressive. Intelligent even.

[jimlosaltos]

Interesting, don_budge. Meddy's first serve in percent is about 60% typically, 58% on Sunday. Standard ATP fare.
Not in Isner territory.

[don_budge]

Interesting, don_budge. Meddy's first serve in percent is about 60% typically, 58% on Sunday. Standard ATP fare.
Not in Isner territory.

I think that fact that I was playing a lot of serve and volley helped to motivate me and countless others to be aggressive with the second. You had to be somewhat fatalistic. Typical ATP fare is not going to the net...not in this century yet. Service tactics have basically devolved to what they are. So have the motions...cue Stefanos Tsitsipas who disappeared in a venue where he could be a real contender. If he had the serve...and the aggressive second to boot.

[stotty]

In fairness, he didn't go big all the time. He mixed it up. Also, several of what I'd call firsts-on-seconds were heavy slice serves wide to exploit Novak deep return position. One might call some of those 1.5 serves.

I think at times he felt he couldn't go for two bombs. His tactic was clearly to serve big on both first and second serves. But on some of the really critical points he went for more conservative second serves because psychologically he couldn't bring himself, I felt, to take the risk. That's intelligent. Daniil is intelligent after all. It was a terrific tactic overall and it played a significant part in suffocating Novak throughout the match, especially as Novak's own first serve percentage was so low in sets one and two, although his first serve was often excellent when he got it in.

I think there is a psychological barrier to overcome when going for two first serves (if you really mean two first serves at the same speed) that is hard to overcome when the points really mean something or become critical. There will nearly always comes a point in the match where it's smart to hold back a bit.

I often served two first serves when I was young. It boiled down to confidence. I was always a quick starter and why not go for more if you slip into a 3-1 lead and are serving well and full of confidence. On other days I simply couldn't do it because it just didn't feel like I could.

I do see your point in the case of huge servers where percentage-wise going for two first serves might win them the match over someone they have little luck with on their traditional second serve.

The interesting think about serves is that a handful of players have had close to what many coaches would call a perfect motion. Yet those players never got 100% of their first serves in, or even close. That shows you how significant the psychological part of serving is.

[jimlosaltos]

Take out Medy's 9 doubles and he won 22 of the 29 second serves he got in play, about 76% ( doing in my head) against Djokovic. A byproduct is to not let Djoko get going.

[jimlosaltos]

Daniil's coach says that was discussed and grew out of early success:

What about serving a second serve as hard as the first?


Gilles Cervara: It was a possible strategy, mentioned before the match. He started early in the game, with an ace on his first second. Even I didn’t think he was going to start so soon. We were very flexible in using different strategies to prepare for the complexity of Djokovic.

https://www.tennismajors.com/atp/cervara-winning-the-us-open-yes-it-was-huge-but-its-a-step-494151.html

[arturohernandez]

I remember when Daniil started this whole thing at Cincinnati a few years ago. He basically figured out that hitting a second serve meant losing every point. So he just decided to hit a first serve on the second serve. At least this way he had a chance of winning the point.

Obviously, on game point we want to make the second. If we are down, we probably want to make the second. But at what point does getting the ball in matter.

As I would tell my daughter. You can get every serve in if you serve really slow. You can also get every ball in the court. But a good player will make you pay. So even when you get every ball in, you can still lose the point.

Very astute on his part. He is bright and makes adjustments. He will do whatever works. It will be interesting to see the effect of the first US Open on him. My guess is that it will make him supremely confident. And that confidence is worth a lot.

[jimlosaltos]

I remember when Daniil started this whole thing at Cincinnati a few years ago. He basically figured out that hitting a second serve meant losing every point. So he just decided to hit a first serve on the second serve. At least this way he had a chance of winning the point.

Obviously, on game point we want to make the second. If we are down, we probably want to make the second. But at what point does getting the ball in matter.

As I would tell my daughter. You can get every serve in if you serve really slow. You can also get every ball in the court. But a good player will make you pay. So even when you get every ball in, you can still lose the point.

Very astute on his part. He is bright and makes adjustments. He will do whatever works. It will be interesting to see the effect of the first US Open on him. My guess is that it will make him supremely confident. And that confidence is worth a lot.

Daniil must be supremely confident or simply more relaxed than the average player to try so many things.

I recall a few years back his serve was letting him down in a match. So, he moved over to the extreme edge of the court and hit severe slice serves wide and short. Even though his opponent knew exactly what was coming, there was enough on it that the returns all came back cross-court. Can't recall who it was.

Secondary corollary to his serving is the resurgent importance of offensive, slice serves. Their use seemed to have ebbed (beyond Fed) to flat and kick serves but after players started joining Rafa at the back wall, returning wide is the key counter-weapon. Many of the firsts-as-seconds were aggressive slice serves (per my memory, anyways).

[arturohernandez]

Daniil must be supremely confident or simply more relaxed than the average player to try so many things.

I recall a few years back his serve was letting him down in a match. So, he moved over to the extreme edge of the court and hit severe slice serves wide and short. Even though his opponent knew exactly what was coming, there was enough on it that the returns all came back cross-court. Can't recall who it was.

Secondary corollary to his serving is the resurgent importance of offensive, slice serves. Their use seemed to have ebbed (beyond Fed) to flat and kick serves but after players started joining Rafa at the back wall, returning wide is the key counter-weapon. Many of the firsts-as-seconds were aggressive slice serves (per my memory, anyways).

Funny you mention the slice serve. My daughter's coach wanted her to learn the hard slice as an alternative to the flatter serve. He felt this was more valuable than a kick serve. It is hard to read and it goes away from the player making it a good one to mix in.

Maybe it is time to rethink the second serve as purely kick. And the first as purely flat. Interesting how tennis evolves...