Serve: starting from trophy pose

[tennis_chiro]

Wow. I'm up late. You must be up early.

don

[gzhpcu]

Actually it is 9:00, and I have been up for 2 hours....

[stroke]

Yes, I am emphasizing a similar point to what Rick was getting at. I think he puts a bigger emphasis on the leg drive causing the "pro drop/power position" to be deeper.

The difference that I am trying to emphasize is that even with "probation" serve, you can integrate the feeling of rhythm and the linkage to the rock/weight transfer as you toss the ball. When the ball leaves the tossing hand and that hand reaches up after the ball, the racket needs to still be in that "probation serve" position. In the old days (70's & 80's, maybe even early 90's), everyone had upwards of 90% of their weight on the front foot by the time that tossing hand was extended, but now with the greater emphasis on platform stances and the leg drive, a greater portion of the weight is maintained on the back foot by a lot of players. This makes for a much more complicated push up to the contact and I think it is a mistake to start doing this until a player has absolutely mastered hitting up at the ball with a good snap, contacting the ball at full extension; actually, I'm not convinced it actually adds that much velocity to the serve and, to me, it seems there has to be a price paid in reduced accuracy and consistency. Remember, almost everyone stores the energy from the leg drive in an increased load on the shoulder and by the time they are contacting the ball, they are already descending. Certainly, it is nice to have the additional height some of the players get, but at what cost. There is a big difference between driving up off the ground (and leaving the ground as a result) and jumping up to meet the serve. Simple physics tells me if I put that much energy into raising my body into the air, I don't get to use that energy a second time to add speed to the ball; it was spent lifting me off the ground. So I have some questions there.

But I am sure in at least half the kids I see with great leg drive that takes them off the ground to hit their serves, they haven't mastered the simple concept of hitting up at the ball with a good snap at their full extension. Do you really think it is that much harder to throw a 40 yard pass to a target in the NFL than it is to hit a 130 mph ace to a spot on the court; when I see those quarterbacks jumping, I'm going to have to reconsider.

In any case, I think rhythm and synchronization of the toss and the weight transfer are essential for consistency and accuracy. My "hiccup" is just a way to execute a "probationary serve" with that sense of rhythm built in.

don

Don, I don't know if you have ever seen any of Pat Dougherty's(the Serve Doc) teaching videos or thoughts on the serve, but you are right in line with what he teaches with your thoughts. I really liked how you were emphasizing to that young male student in you video to drop his racquet way out to the side and in doing so, keeping the racquet head behind the ball. Pat has out one video, Serve RPM's, that really details his teaching philosophy on the serve. He, like you, thimks most all students misuse their legs on the serve(particulary women server's, even at the pro level) to their detriment.

[stroke]

I don't really try to completely overhaul an advanced player's serve to what i would like to see had I started with that person much earlier; however, on a couple of occasions I have had players who said they wanted to make the change.

First of all, in the general, even though I may not be able to get someone to change their motion entirely, I insist that they do my drills in a manner somewhat incorporating the motion I am advocating, so that they can feel the benefits of those principles. Then we work together to try to help them integrate that feeling into their own service motion. The toss-and-catch-toss-and-hit drill forces them to feel rhythm. The figure 8 drill allows them to feel the benefit of having the racket drop from the trophy position and swing over to the line of the target; it usually helps an awful lot to get the sense of a correct snap. I usually introduce it to my students and to go off and do the dry drills for 5 minutes 10 times before the next lesson. I explain that they will call me some awful names as they are doing these things, but they are going to have to go through it. Of course, they don't all listen to me, but occasionally someone actually does what I ask. If they can't handle the full motion, I may employ the "hiccup" as a bridge. Sometimes, someone can't handle the backswing and I have them go to a "Gonzales" motion with an abbreviated backswing. Recently, I had a student who had to do the "hiccup" to a "Roddick/Gonzales" trophy position, where he had the racket paused with the racket a little lower and pointed off to the right side of the court (right hander). The girl in those videos in Connecticut was just learning and couldn't handle a full backswing, but she did much better with a Gonzales-like motion so I had her doing the figure 8's with that too. Takes a lot of reps and those reps have to be done with appropriate focus.

Second, for the advanced player who wants to change. I've had three college players going into their senior years who made big changes on their serves. I tell them that they are going to have to hit at least 10,000 practice serves in 2 to 3 months maximum and with a lot of attention to the drills as they hit those serves. And that will be just to get to where the serve is useable in competition. It will take probably another six months of work to develop confidence in that serve. And, in my opinion, it will take at least a year of practice to convert the new serve to a weapon that can be counted on in competition; so that is going to be a rough year.

So the three college seniors:
Bill was a decent college player with good snap and a terrible service motion; I'm talking about Div III (no scholarships). He came to work for me as an assistant pro the summer before his senior year and he had to teach with my drills all summer. He ended up with a great serve and was recently (30 years later) ranked number one in his age group in Southern California and top ten in the nation.

Locky was another college player playing 2nd or 3rd singles for my alma mater. I gave him the task and just a few lessons, but he did the work. Of course, he was pretty motivated and got the 10,000 practice serves in over his Xmas break and before his season started and made the change in a couple of months to where he began winning matches he'd previously lost. The transformation was a success. Of course, his diligence in following through with the drills was key. And today, he is completing his residency in orthopedic surgery or has already completed it. He had that kind of diligence. He is the only advanced player who really committed to making that kind of change and got it done to where he could be effective in just 2 months. It wasn't until a couple of more months and a few matches under his belt that he started to have real confidence, but the transformation was very quick.

The third college player is still working at it 4 or 5 years later. He wanted to break into the starting line-up on his college team and he did, but he never quite got all the serving practice done and he never quite mastered the changes. I'm actually supposed to see him in a couple of weeks and he tells me he is finally beginning to hold on to the racket handle (not letting the heel of the hand off of the butt at any time - sorry Bottle). He started with no power drop, but great snap and athleticism. That's why he cheated by letting go of the racket to get it around and up to the ball. So I'm curious to see how he is doing.

Another advanced player I worked with was a nationally ranked 14 year-old, 6' tall young lady who had a scary snap with very little internal rotation. When I first saw the slow motion (and I had just begun using the 210 fps Casio camera or I might have missed it), I was genuinely concerned that she was going to break her arm or wrist. She was getting the racket head pointed down at the top of the swing as she should, but there was no internal rotation. Unfortunately, I didn't get to finish the job with her and only got to work with her about 9 months, but she really needed my drills to retrain herself with correct internal rotation; she couldn't get away from her habits if she just kept hitting serves. I wish I'd understood my "burp" and "bubble" drills a little more at that point and I think I would have had more success with her. She's a freshman in college now and still working at it.

So, yes, it is really hard to entirely change an established service motion. You certainly can get the advanced player to incorporate essential elements they may be missing into their own idiosyncratic motions. And it is possible, but very difficult, to make complete changes.

Hope that helps you out, Stotty. As for Fed's serve, obviously, it has been great for him. My point with the rhythm and gravity is that when it does go off, as his did last week, it is easy to get back on track. Clearly, he was right on track against Roddick (and Rafa) in those Wimbledon matches. But I don't think his essential rhythm is as reliable as Gonzales's was.

don

I think this concept of the "Roddick/Gonzales hiccup method" Don alludes to is very interesting. I think the reason it may work as a teaching tool is the racquet preparation in this position really emphasizes the pronation/supination/pronation aspect of the serve(very similar in a way to the Brian Gordon type 3 forehand). Particularly in Roddick, but also in Gonzales, one can really see the pronation/supination/pronation aspect of the motion. I think the proper grip, as Don alludes to, is even more important with this type of serve. I, like Don, think the heel of the hand, or the entire hand. has to be on the grip, no little finger off the grip stuff. It helps even more, grip wise, to lay the grip kind of more across the open hand knuckles and then close the hand, in other words, emphasize the L shape relation between hand the the shaft of the racquet in the service grip(heel of hand basicly on bevel 1) . It looks to me in the old clips of Pancho, you can really see this.

[gzhpcu]

Stroke, to the best of my knowledge, Pancho would often have his pinkie off the butt of the handle... or so he said...

[stotty]

In the old days (70's & 80's, maybe even early 90's), everyone had upwards of 90% of their weight on the front foot by the time that tossing hand was extended, but now with the greater emphasis on platform stances and the leg drive, a greater portion of the weight is maintained on the back foot by a lot of players. This makes for a much more complicated push up to the contact and I think it is a mistake to start doing this until a player has absolutely mastered hitting up at the ball with a good snap, contacting the ball at full extension; actually, I'm not convinced it actually adds that much velocity to the serve and, to me, it seems there has to be a price paid in reduced accuracy and consistency. Remember, almost everyone stores the energy from the leg drive in an increased load on the shoulder and by the time they are contacting the ball, they are already descending. Certainly, it is nice to have the additional height some of the players get, but at what cost. There is a big difference between driving up off the ground (and leaving the ground as a result) and jumping up to meet the serve. Simple physics tells me if I put that much energy into raising my body into the air, I don't get to use that energy a second time to add speed to the ball; it was spent lifting me off the ground. So I have some questions there.

don

Interesting points you've made here. I've often pondered the energy issue regarding pushing upwards versus weight and forward momentum. I wonder if Stich had had more knee-bend would he then have generated kick back...highly likely, but then he doesn't have that kind of serve. And that's key thing...recognising a given serve and coaching accordingly. Insisting on kick-back would likely have had a negative impact on Stich's serve.

[tennis_chiro]

Interesting points you've made here. I've often pondered the energy issue regarding pushing upwards versus weight and forward momentum. I wonder if Stich had had more knee-bend would he then have generated kick back...highly likely, but then he doesn't have that kind of serve. And that's key thing...recognising a given serve and coaching accordingly. Insisting on kick-back would likely have had a negative impact on Stich's serve.

Stich and Krajicek are my favorite service motions. Stich was tall but somewhat slight of build. He had no problem throwing in 130 mph serves in long 5 set matches with his motion.

No matter what, the server still has to push up. But once you leave the ground, you can't do any more pushing!

I wonder: would a world class player rather jump or stay on the ground to hit a bounce overhead from deep in the court! I think he'd rather stay on the ground, although his followthrough might take him up.

don

[tennis_chiro]

Bounce overheads

When players struggle getting their legs under them on the serve for proper drive, I sometimes tap the ball straight up in the air and have them hit bounce overheads from behind the service line at first and then all the way back to the baseline and beyond, although I usually settle for just inside the baseline to get the point across. They usually do a better job of using their legs and I try to get them to then use that drive in their service motions.

don

[stotty]

I wonder: would a world class player rather jump or stay on the ground to hit a bounce overhead from deep in the court! I think he'd rather stay on the ground, although his followthrough might take him up.

don

Another interesting one...because I think if you are forced to jump, be it on a bounce smash or a regular smash, you end up getting more power with no lack of control either.

But given the choice...yeah...I take your point.

[gzhpcu]

This makes for a much more complicated push up to the contact and I think it is a mistake to start doing this until a player has absolutely mastered hitting up at the ball with a good snap, contacting the ball at full extension; actually, I'm not convinced it actually adds that much velocity to the serve and, to me, it seems there has to be a price paid in reduced accuracy and consistency. Remember, almost everyone stores the energy from the leg drive in an increased load on the shoulder and by the time they are contacting the ball, they are already descending. Certainly, it is nice to have the additional height some of the players get, but at what cost. There is a big difference between driving up off the ground (and leaving the ground as a result) and jumping up to meet the serve. Simple physics tells me if I put that much energy into raising my body into the air, I don't get to use that energy a second time to add speed to the ball; it was spent lifting me off the ground. So I have some questions there.

don

Don, if we are looking at the complex kinetic chain of the tennis motion, the chain starts from the ground up, and needs to contribute to maximum (controllable) racket head speed. The legs cause the initial (ground) force, then the rotational forces of hip shoulders arms follow.

Seems like we have two different type of forces here: the upward (leg) force and the rotational forces (hip, shoulders, upper arm, lower arm).

The leg force does not seem to me to directly contribute to racket head speed. Its role is to provide a stable base to increase the rotational forces. The more you push down, the more you can rotate. So its contribution is indirect. Whether you jump up in the air, like today's players, or just lift up keeping contact with the front foot, at this point does not seem relevant to me anymore from the standpoint of speed, because in both cases the upward acceleration (not speed), and, therefore, the force applied by the legs has stopped.

Leaning into the ball (from the old serve and volley days) might add a little bit of additional power, since the leg force is directed not only up but forward, however most of the power comes from the generated racket speed, so that leaning into the ball is just a small contribution.

From the point of the vertical window of acceptance, jumping up it, but so does keeping contact with one foot and leaning way into the court.

Call me old-fashioned, but I prefer the Gonzales model to today's upward jumping serve.

I think the discussion is akin to whether or not to get your weight forward when hitting a forehand, square stance vs open stance. I prefer square stance...

[tennis_chiro]

How is the leg drive converted to racket head speed?

Don, if we are looking at the complex kinetic chain of the tennis motion, the chain starts from the ground up, and needs to contribute to maximum (controllable) racket head speed. The legs cause the initial (ground) force, then the rotational forces of hip shoulders arms follow.

Seems like we have two different type of forces here: the upward (leg) force and the rotational forces (hip, shoulders, upper arm, lower arm).

The leg force does not seem to me to directly contribute to racket head speed. Its role is to provide a stable base to increase the rotational forces. The more you push down, the more you can rotate. So its contribution is indirect. Whether you jump up in the air, like today's players, or just lift up keeping contact with the front foot, at this point does not seem relevant to me anymore from the standpoint of speed, because in both cases the upward acceleration (not speed), and, therefore, the force applied by the legs has stopped.

Leaning into the ball (from the old serve and volley days) might add a little bit of additional power, since the leg force is directed not only up but forward, however most of the power comes from the generated racket speed, so that leaning into the ball is just a small contribution.

From the point of the vertical window of acceptance, jumping up it, but so does keeping contact with one foot and leaning way into the court.

Call me old-fashioned, but I prefer the Gonzales model to today's upward jumping serve.

I think the discussion is akin to whether or not to get your weight forward when hitting a forehand, square stance vs open stance. I prefer square stance...

One of the points Macci was trying to make in his video about the serve and the drop from the trophy position was that you are using the leg drive to get the arm to load greater as the inertia of the racket head loads the muscles of the shoulder to a greater degree. You can't get the racket head that low or the shoulders loaded to such a degree just by swinging your arm around. This is essentially the SSC of the service motion. Phil, you especially are missing this element to your racket drop, or at least a good part of it.

don

[gzhpcu]

You are right don, the legs contribute not only to the rotational capability of the hips and shoulders but also to the elastic stretching downward thrust of the arm, resulting in a better racket drop. Forgot that point, thanks...


Still up late I see...

[GeoffWilliams]

I would try a snap back, down wards into the drop from trophy.