Interactive Stroke Analysis Roscoe Tanner's Serve

[stotty]

Whatever toss. Beautiful serve Pancho had, better than Tanner's. Must have been a pain in the neck having to keep your foot on the ground back then. Just think how good it would have been in he could have launched upwards.

I think Pancho's serve is one of the all time beautiful shots in tennis.

[gzhpcu]

Here is a side view of Pancho.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDJO_T0mwwM
Looks nothing like Roscoe Tanner's toss... Certainly not Steffi Graf's toss either..

[uspta990770809]

Actually, it's probably 30fps

We don't have modern video so we have to extrapolate a little but in the stroke archives, ServeFront1

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/golden_legends/panchogonzales/panchogonzales.html?PGServeFront1.mov

we see Pancho letting the ball drop 4 or 5 right arrow keystrokes from its apex. Video is 30 frames per second, but if we assume this is 22fps film, and call it 1/4 second drop, the ball has dropped less than a foot (32 x 1/4 sec x 1/2 =average speed of descent x 1/4 sec = 1 foot). I think that's on the low end of the findings for Doug Eng.

Certainly not like Tanner, but that's minimal by today's standards.

don

While the original film may have been 22fps celluloid, I expect the film was transferred to some digital media and QuickTime is running 30 fps. That would cut the drop to no more than 6 to 8 inches.

don

[uspta990770809]

Extrapolating

Don,
Just look at the great Pancho Gonzalez, a gifted, natural player who never had a lesson in his life, and had a devastating serve. He did not have a minimal toss..

We don't have modern video so we have to extrapolate a little but in the stroke archives, ServeFront1

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/strokearchive/golden_legends/panchogonzales/panchogonzales.html?PGServeFront1.mov

we see Pancho letting the ball drop 4 or 5 right arrow keystrokes from its apex. Video is 30 frames per second, but if we assume this is 22fps film, and call it 1/4 second drop, the ball has dropped less than a foot (32 x 1/4 sec x 1/2 =average speed of descent x 1/4 sec = 1 foot). I think that's on the low end of the findings for Doug Eng.

Certainly not like Tanner, but that's minimal by today's standards.

don

[gzhpcu]

Don,
Just look at the great Pancho Gonzalez, a gifted, natural player who never had a lesson in his life, and had a devastating serve. He did not have a minimal toss..

[uspta990770809]

Under what forces or influences

Because IMHO, there is more than one way to skin a cat. Players have had success and hit fast serves with both the high toss and the minimal toss, and the associated characteristics. A Darwinian-type evolution here has shown a preference for the higher toss...

Phil,
A "Darwinian-type" evolution is a function of the environment and forces acting on the evolving entity or species. In the last 30 years, there has been an overwhelming and, I think, inordinate emphasis on power coupled with a de-emphasis of consistency and accuracy. And in the case of the serve, that has meant a de-emphasis on the rhythm that produces a consistent toss and a higher percentage of first serves along with reduced double-faults.

As you know, it is more expensive to build a Swiss watch and a lot more difficult, but they run very accurately for a long time. Same with the serve, it takes a lot more to build a service motion with great rhythm and can be very difficult to get over the tighter tolerances as you are learning it, but once you get it, it works! In the extreme, we see the recreational player with the huge first serve...out of course, but followed by the tap second serve. Among better players, we see a lack of practice to develop a really good second serve. But among the top players, we see motions that were developed with one thing in mind: power. I contend you can get the power with the lower toss and also get a more reliable rhythm and toss, but it takes some work to get it right. I don't see many players wanting to do that and not even that many pros insisting upon it. So the kid gets started with a motion that he can generate more power with (initially) and never develops a more sophisticated, integrated rhythm. And we have world class players struggling to get 50% of their first serves in.

don

[gzhpcu]

Understood. To me, though, the the underlying question is, why don't more players use this kind of delivery? That is the real litmus test. They tend to figure out the best approach. Often times in spite of our theories and speculation.

Because IMHO, there is more than one way to skin a cat. Players have had success and hit fast serves with both the high toss and the minimal toss, and the associated characteristics. A Darwinian-type evolution here has shown a preference for the higher toss...

[johnyandell]

10s Player et al,

Yep, great point. No one since Kevin Curren (if he did) has hit the ball at the top after Roscoe, and few if any before. But the freedom point remains. Some people just love this delivery or at least the idea of it. Sort of like people in love with extreme western grips.

[10splayer]

Still think the low-around-the-apex toss has one great advantage for those with the ability to do it. All those horrible things that can go wrong with a serve like a drop elbow or a kink in the action are much less likely to happen with an arm action that has to be rapid because of the nature of the serve. There simply isn't time to for the arm to deviate and develop a kink or dropped elbow when the arm has to move so fast to meet the ball.

Understood. To me, though, the the underlying question is, why don't more players use this kind of delivery? That is the real litmus test. They tend to figure out the best approach. Often times in spite of our theories and speculation.

[stotty]

Still think the low-around-the-apex toss has one great advantage for those with the ability to do it. All those horrible things that can go wrong with a serve like a drop elbow or a kink in the action are much less likely to happen with an arm action that has to be rapid because of the nature of the serve. There simply isn't time to for the arm to deviate and develop a kink or dropped elbow when the arm has to move so fast to meet the ball.

[johnyandell]

Uh, quoting Wayne on the lower toss I am not sure supports the argument...he's got a certain delivery style that's for sure, but if you examine many of the technical things he advocates, let's say they diverge from reality...

[gzhpcu]

Seems to me we are talking about acceptance window for the serve and topspin.

Hitting the ball as high as possible at impact as physically possible, gets more balls in.

How to get more balls in? Topspin. However, lots of people have difficulty hitting consistently with topspin to increase the acceptance window.

Another way of getting topspin on serves - throw the ball higher on the toss. The faster the ball falls when struck, the more the resulting topspin. A simple toss of 6 inches above the impact point increases the number of serves going in by 12%. (Howard Brody, "The Physics and Technology of Tennis", page 197)

Disadvantages of minimal toss? If the ball toss is not quite high enough, the impact point will be too low, and the acceptance window will decrease, reducing the chance of the ball going in and the ball speed.

[uspta146749877]

A meaning of smiley?

From Wayne Bryan's tennis curriculum:

"Also, don't toss too high. So many recreational players fire the ball way up in the air and they have a "dead stick" waiting for the ball to come down. Really I think that the higher you toss the lower you actually strike the ball. For best results, hit the ball right where it "sits". Spank it right where it is not going up anymore and has yet to start down. Get that groove and you'll really increase your serving percentage. Rather than have a toss all over the place, your toss will be like an old friend --- always right there."

A meaning of smiley NOT very clear

[EdWeiss]

Wayne Bryan comments on ball toss

From Wayne Bryan's tennis curriculum:

"Also, don't toss too high. So many recreational players fire the ball way up in the air and they have a "dead stick" waiting for the ball to come down. Really I think that the higher you toss the lower you actually strike the ball. For best results, hit the ball right where it "sits". Spank it right where it is not going up anymore and has yet to start down. Get that groove and you'll really increase your serving percentage. Rather than have a toss all over the place, your toss will be like an old friend --- always right there."

[stroke]

I'm very glad we have resurrected this old thread. It was a good one. First of all, I want to say I certainly understand and respect John's take on this quick motion Tanner type of serve. Gmann brings up a very good talking point about the Bryan brothers(DNA, different motions). I never have thought of that. As for thoughts on teaching the Tanner type of serve, Jim McLennan has always said his 1st coach used to teach him "start the serve motion and toss the ball into the motion". If you shadow swing your serve motion a few times and then toss the ball into the motion, you may get a feel for hitting the ball with this type of serve.