A New Teaching System: The Serve: Technical Elements

[tennis_chiro]

More than a little grain of salt

TC,

Yes I have seen this. I have no doubt that Roddick has more backwards or external arm rotation than probably anybody--excpet maybe Pete. One of the problems though with the conclusions here is that the author is making angle measurements down to the degree from 2D video. You really need the three dimensional perspective of Brian G. to do this if you want to claim more than an estimate or "about."
Second I think this analysis is wrong about the angles of the hips and shoulders at contact. Our high speed video shows that like Sampras or Fed, Roddick is closed at contact partially.

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/high_speed_archive/pro_men/andy_roddick/andy_roddick_v1/andy_roddick_v1.html?AR1stSDeuceRear-0264427-0001.mov

And Sharapova and the other women are open. He's clearly wrong about that.
Sharapova is more closed at times than other women which is probably one of the things that makes her serve better, but still you don't see the men in this position at contact:

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/pro_woman/maria_sharapova/ms_serve/ms_1st_serve/ms_1st_serve.html?MS1stSAdFront3.mov

No doubt Fed and Pete also turn further off the ball than Roddick. If Roddick did he would be more closed at contact as well in my view. So although he gets incredble leg drive and his arm action is supernatural, not sure he is using his torso as well as the other two. But that reduced turn also goes with his lower toss and faster motion--and obviously it was very effective--to say the least.

It's all subject to opinion but my take is that Roddick makes use of that flexible shoulder and abbreviated motion to develop incredible racket speed--but for just those reasons he is not a good model for other players.

Here's something about the hips and shoulders and the angles that is quantitative:
http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/...lder_rotation/

As I pointed out in my comment, take Pritchard's analysis with a grain of salt and a little skepticism. I've always felt he was playing a little fast and loose with his numbers derived from just 2-D analysis. It's still great fun to watch the video. It would be nice to have the same 3-D analysis Brian did on more of those elite servers. My experience tells me that the hip turn is, however, very important. I think it enables the server to get into the proper "power position". I haven't got any data to back it up, but I feel like the power derived from that turn is much more important than the power derived from bending the knees for a deep leg thrust. In reality, you need both, but I see too many kids struggling with inefficient kinetic chains when they are trying so hard to get huge thrust from their legs. I feel they need to master the rest of the chain before they start applying leg thrust that propels them a foot off the ground. You can serve over 100mph with almost no leg thrust (Schlaken!), but it's murder generating anything significant without a good sequenced release of the chain from hips to shoulders to etc.

BTW Doug, I bought one of Pritchard's Power Hip Trainers, but for my golf swing. I think his concept has some validity, but the machine is very difficult to get to work. I couldn't get the damn thing to stay connected to my hips. Never got around to modifying the rigging enough to give it a good try. Still hope to. I need some distance on my shots these days! I also do my own version of "microfibre reduction" when I do Graston Therapy (GrastonTechnique.com). But I charge about $40 per treatment instead of $400 that it looks like Pritchard charges (without any kind of state license as far as I can tell either).

In any case, the more articles you can put up like that last one about Pete's serves with all the numbers, the better. It would be nice to see some more of those with comparisons of more top ten players.

don

don

[DougEng]

John, you must have seen your Northern Cal neighbor's video analysis of Roddick's serve. Whatever else anyone might think of Bob Pritchard's analysis, it is pretty good fodder for the argument that, on the contrary, Roddick used the elements of the kinetic chain much more completely than Federer. The numbers for external rotation of the arm and rotation of the hips say Roddick was actually getting much more out of the kinetic chain. And he did top out at about 20 mph faster than Federer. Whether or not he was as efficient and accurate may be another question.

For those of you that haven't seen it, just remember to take the analysis with a grain of salt or skepticism. In any case, there is some great video of Roddick's motion:

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

don

Just saw this. See John's comments. I agree with John. Mr Pritchard's numbers are inaccurate (and at least one top sport scientist also concurs).
He is correct on explaining kinetic chain but the numbers are incorrect. In addition, it is questionable if hip speed will be responsible for greater speeds on the serve as research tends to contradict his suggestion that hips are a major contributor. This doesn't mean they are not essential since they act as an important link from the ground forces to the last links for racquet head speed (shoulder and arm). He has to sell his hip trainer so this might help some people, especially golfers and some tennis players who don't know how to use the body correctly.

[johnyandell]

TC,

Yes I have seen this. I have no doubt that Roddick has more backwards or external arm rotation than probably anybody--excpet maybe Pete. One of the problems though with the conclusions here is that the author is making angle measurements down to the degree from 2D video. You really need the three dimensional perspective of Brian G. to do this if you want to claim more than an estimate or "about."
Second I think this analysis is wrong about the angles of the hips and shoulders at contact. Our high speed video shows that like Sampras or Fed, Roddick is closed at contact partially.

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/high_speed_archive/pro_men/andy_roddick/andy_roddick_v1/andy_roddick_v1.html?AR1stSDeuceRear-0264427-0001.mov

And Sharapova and the other women are open. He's clearly wrong about that.
Sharapova is more closed at times than other women which is probably one of the things that makes her serve better, but still you don't see the men in this position at contact:

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/pro_woman/maria_sharapova/ms_serve/ms_1st_serve/ms_1st_serve.html?MS1stSAdFront3.mov

No doubt Fed and Pete also turn further off the ball than Roddick. If Roddick did he would be more closed at contact as well in my view. So although he gets incredble leg drive and his arm action is supernatural, not sure he is using his torso as well as the other two. But that reduced turn also goes with his lower toss and faster motion--and obviously it was very effective--to say the least.

It's all subject to opinion but my take is that Roddick makes use of that flexible shoulder and abbreviated motion to develop incredible racket speed--but for just those reasons he is not a good model for other players.

Here's something about the hips and shoulders and the angles that is quantitative:

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/avancedtennis/john_yandell/sampras_serve/sampras_serve_hip_and_shoulder_rotation/

[tennis_chiro]

Hey John, Roddick's Kinetic Chain was pretty efficient.

Raul,

Good question. I think it's the opposite. If you look at Sampras and Fed they are both partially closed. This is related to the stance and the turn away from the ball in the windup. In my opinion the role of the torso rotation is maximized when still moving at contact. Most all the women are wide open at contact. Roddick has a great serve obviously but it is based more on his arm action and legs in my opinion. Fed and Pete have more complete use of kinetic chain.

John, you must have seen your Northern Cal neighbor's video analysis of Roddick's serve. Whatever else anyone might think of Bob Pritchard's analysis, it is pretty good fodder for the argument that, on the contrary, Roddick used the elements of the kinetic chain much more completely than Federer. The numbers for external rotation of the arm and rotation of the hips say Roddick was actually getting much more out of the kinetic chain. And he did top out at about 20 mph faster than Federer. Whether or not he was as efficient and accurate may be another question.

For those of you that haven't seen it, just remember to take the analysis with a grain of salt or skepticism. In any case, there is some great video of Roddick's motion:

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

don

[teamstrager]

The Truth of the Pitch!

I regret that I’m joining this thread late. It made me laugh out loud when I saw that someone had raised “The Myth of the Pitch,” because just two weeks ago I sent John a three-page email rant about tennis coaches that talk baseball and don’t know what they’re talking about. Whoever said that “The Myth of the Pitch” is dead wrong falls into that category.

The only fault with “The Myth of the Pitch” is that it barely scratches the surface. Here’s a description of a tennis player serving (and please keep in mind that this applies to the way virtually EVERY tennis player serves, whether it's in the U.S., Japan, Cuba, or the Dominican Republic): The sever stands completely sideways to his opponent, not three-quarters, not nine-tenths, not at a 45 degree angle, totally sideways to the baseline and the net, and they ALL do it that way, there’s not one exception, every single tennis player puts his feet totally parallel to the baseline and his body completely sideways to his opponent. Every single tennis player in the entire world then lifts his front leg up so that his knee goes above his waist, then drops that leg back down and out, leading with the heel and thrusting it forward into the court, while also pushing off with his back foot, until his front foot hits the court about four feet (or more) inside the baseline, at which time, the braking action of that plant foot on the court’s surface triggers his whole upper body to come forward as it rotates into a completely open position with the arm (and the racket) still dragging behind. And then when all of that linear and rotational kinetic energy has traveled up the arm, he finally strikes the ball with his racket, extending his arm straight out in front of him toward his opponent, causing his torso to become completely parallel with the court as his back gets as level as a table, at which point the server's rear leg automatically swings up as a counterbalance, with his back foot going up over the level of where his head is now--keeping in mind that the server's head is now at or below the level of where his waist was when he started. And, as I said, 99.9999% of servers around the world serve that way!

Oh wait. That’s not a description of a server! It’s a description of a pitcher—but the two motions are sooooo “biometrically similar” I just got them completely confused. COME ON!!!!

[GeoffWilliams]

None of the women coil like Pete, or stay coiled as long as he did, or snap back on the serve inwards like he did with that high elbow and arched back. The lagged frame also forced him to catch up to the snap back. No woman shoves her center of gravity out over the baseline, in such a coiled manner.

[johnyandell]

Raul,

Good question. I think it's the opposite. If you look at Sampras and Fed they are both partially closed. This is related to the stance and the turn away from the ball in the windup. In my opinion the role of the torso rotation is maximized when still moving at contact. Most all the women are wide open at contact. Roddick has a great serve obviously but it is based more on his arm action and legs in my opinion. Fed and Pete have more complete use of kinetic chain.

[raulf]

I agree that Federer is a good model to emulate.

But I am curious regarding one difference I notice between Federer and Roddick.

Roddick is practically facing the net at contact, while Federer is semi-open at contact (as mentioned in the Introductory Lesson).

What is the reason for this different position at contact? Is it because Roddick's toss is more out in front than Federer's?

Why wouldn't Federer want to face the net at contact like Roddick does? Perhaps it would give him more power.

[johnyandell]

This link pretty much shows it all:

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/high_speed_archive/phantom/Roger_Federer_HD_HS/index.html?dir=Serve/RF_Arm_Action&stroke=RF_1stS_Ad_ArmAction_Front3_250fps.mp4

The release is with the tossing arm at about shoulder level or a little higher. The upper arm is just below parallel to the court. But I wouldn't necessarily pick those instants as keys. Rather keeping the tossing arm straight and then trying to get to the trophy position or something close when the tossing arm is fully extended. That plus the path of the ball on a curve to the contact point!

[lobndropshot]

John,

What are your thoughts pertaining to the toss?

All the best,

L and D

[johnyandell]

l and d,

A bit busy at IW but will respond in detail later on.

[lobndropshot]

Toss

We tend to look at what the racket is doing but I think that the toss is the portion of the serve that is the most often neglected. I was very happy with how John approached the toss and explained the check points. However, I would like to know more about what happens before the ball leaves the hand. My two main concerns are:
1) the timing of the release point of the toss. 2) The timing of when the toss actually starts.

So, John if you are still watching this thread When does the release point of the toss occur? How does the timing of the toss work with the rest of the motion?

Thank you,

P.S. great work!

[arturohernandez]

Abbreviated vs. semi-circular

I agree entirely with the higher elbow issue. I have struggled a lot with it and used some of the techniques on tennisplayer.net to address it. Basically, in the past my arm tended to move back but it remained too low and then I end up shot putting my serve into the box.

I worked on my serve a lot and eventually came to realize that I had to imagine that my arm was going straight up from my back foot. So I abbreviated my windup. When I do that then I get a much better result. I can time it better and I can hit both second and first serves with the same motion.

The problem I see with the semi-circular windup is that it is very easy to associate with pushing or patty-caking the ball into the box. It is a very long windup and many things can go wrong with the process.

The way I was able to work on it was to serve from the drop. Once I could feel the short powerful finish then I started to add on a new windup. I have a copy at this website in case it is not entirely clear. I don't think it quite where I want it to be but it is much better. But the key for me was to actually serve from the drop. Then I could feel my arm moving up. I still do this in practice when things go off.

Arturo

The video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zM81vaq0pg&feature=youtu.be

The longer story

http://www.servevolution.net

[stroke]

Love the analysis. It's top drawer, as usual for Yandell. I wonder, though, how much of the analysis John would recommend teachers and coaches convey to students. For instance, with respect to the pro racquet drop, this doesn't even seem like a feature of the serve that should be consciously practiced. It results from the inertia of the racquet and the arm, the latter which externally rotates at the shoulder much as the arm externally rotates in pitchers as they move up the kinetic chain from a stride through pelvic rotation through upper torso rotation. Just as a pitcher's arm naturally externally rotates back relative to the shoulder at it moves forward, the server's arm bends and externally rotates -- naturally. Personally, I don't think this should ever be taught or consciously incorporated into a serve. Rather, I think it should be a consequence of learning to relax the arm and thus to allow it to flex and externally rotate as the pivot progresses. The drop is simply a natural consequence.

I think would be informative to track the racquet head in Federer's serve. Yandell could do this well with his high speed analysis. If from that analysis it did not appear to move backwards relative to the ground, but only relative to the moving shoulder, we might infer that what is happening with the racquet is not so much an active drop as a passive "letting it drop."

I think this "relax and let the drop happen" is what is missing in a lot of the pro women's serve. Also, I thought the portion of John's instructional video when he demonstrated where the average person may need to lift their arm higher in the back swing in order to achieve a fuller racquet drop was very good stuff. I know lower elbow(I suppose about a 90 degree angle from torso to upper arm, as a baseball pitcher would have) is ideal, but I think John is entirely correct that most folks just don't have the shoulder flexibility to achieve the full racquet drop from this position.

[bottle]

Please keep talking, cms56-- you are a perhaps indispensable voice, both in main subject and in your asides.