PDA

View Full Version : serving without jump like laver and rosewall is that ok?


NineEleven
12-19-2009, 09:40 AM
I was watching some classic matches and i noticed how they did not jump compared to today's players.

Is that due to the hefty wooden racket.

I do find personally that serving without jump gives much more accuracy but forego some power.

Anyway how fast do they serve those times?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8IJ0F01IiU

ayuname
12-19-2009, 09:46 AM
They look like second serves.

Geezer Guy
12-19-2009, 10:19 AM
I know that in the "olden days" it was illegal to jump when you served. Your feet (or maybe at least 1 foot) had to remain on the ground. I don't know when that rule was changed, but maybe that's why.

Bud
12-19-2009, 11:12 AM
I was watching some classic matches and i noticed how they did not jump compared to today's players.

Is that due to the hefty wooden racket.

I do find personally that serving without jump gives much more accuracy but forego some power.

Anyway how fast do they serve those times?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8IJ0F01IiU

That's some beautiful tennis!

As another poster stated... at one time... jump-serves weren't legal.

ronalditop
12-19-2009, 11:46 AM
Those players have some great slices and volleys. And they seem to hit pretty hard too. I thought tennis was way slower back then.

Bud
12-19-2009, 12:07 PM
Those players have some great slices and volleys. And the seem to hit pretty hard too. I thought tennis was way slower back then.

Nice deep penetrating shots along with slick grass makes for some nice tennis.

gzhpcu
12-19-2009, 01:58 PM
I know that in the "olden days" it was illegal to jump when you served. Your feet (or maybe at least 1 foot) had to remain on the ground. I don't know when that rule was changed, but maybe that's why.

The rule changed in 1960.

Bagumbawalla
12-19-2009, 02:31 PM
There were some wooden racket players back then that could serve in the mid 120s and sometimes better- 'Pancho' Gonzales, Borg, Nastase. Rosco Tanner, I believe, started with a wooden racket and served in the 150s.

Claudius
12-19-2009, 03:14 PM
There were some wooden racket players back then that could serve in the mid 120s and sometimes better- 'Pancho' Gonzales, Borg, Nastase. Rosco Tanner, I believe, started with a wooden racket and served in the 150s.

Rosco Tanner was a hard server but he didn't exceed 120. I believe Borg served around 100.


To the OP,

Is serving w/o jumping okay? Sure. Is it good technique. No

yemenmocha
12-19-2009, 05:02 PM
Depends on what you mean by jump. Becker and Roddick seem to satisfy the jump definition, but arguably Federer and others don't have that same sort of jump. They still go up and into the ball, perhaps with a very slight clearance, but it's far from a jump like Becker, Roddick, and others.

Blake0
12-19-2009, 08:50 PM
Those players have some great slices and volleys. And they seem to hit pretty hard too. I thought tennis was way slower back then.

They were slower, but not by a whole lot. I doubt anyone back then could rip 100mph+ forehands with a wooden racket, but the faster court speed made up for it.

KiNG
12-19-2009, 11:18 PM
If you can serve like Laver or Rosewall that is more than OK.

xFullCourtTenniSx
12-20-2009, 12:47 AM
Is it good technique. No

Are you kidding me? It's far better than those who purposely jump into the serve. As long as you bend your knees properly and reach up to hit the serve, it's good technique. Later on, as you get better and can accelerate the racket more quickly, you'll come off the ground more and more. I've tried to remove all jumping tendencies from my serve, and it's gotten much better as a result. I get more consistency and as a result can go for more and come out with higher percentages. I still come off the ground as a result of reaching up, but all I focus on is bending the knees a little, then reaching up and hitting up. I come off maybe a few inches off the ground, but when I go for a lot of pop and racket acceleration, I end up getting a few more inches of air.

NineEleven
12-20-2009, 08:42 AM
yep those tennis are beautiful. I really like to play this style of directional play and then approaching net and lobs, drop shots when i play against older players especially doubles. I find it more rewarding sometimes than just 'whacking' and going for power.

I guess my topic was not phrased properly. Anyway i think the more your jump, the more tired you get and also its more taxing on the body joints. Off course there are execeptions With my knee and shoulder state these days, just a slight knee bend suffice and i get a higher percentage of serve in.

Steady Eddy
12-20-2009, 09:19 AM
If you can serve like Laver or Rosewall that is more than OK.
Rosewall's serve would sure be good enough for me. Nice speed and he places it well. But for the pro game, it lacked power. When Connors destroyed Rosewall at Forest Hills a big part of that was the way Connors jumped on Rosewall's serves. Connors seemed to be demonstrating that in the new game, a serve at that speed just wouldn't cut it.

LeeD
12-21-2009, 10:03 AM
Seems to me.....
If I stand flat footed and reach up, I can reach about 7'4".
So I add a 27" racket and reach up about 9'1" flat footed. You understand, don't you?
So I hit a serve. If I hit hard and fast flat footed, chance are it'd go out or into the net, the sweetspot being maybe 2" over the net.
If I jump maybe 5" off the ground, toes 5" off the ground, I can get my contact point around mid 9's up to maybe 9'8", and the higher contact point equals better angle to get the same speed serve into the court with more margin for error.
Then, when I both jump AND move into the court about 18" at contact point, I increase my margin for error even more....:shock:
And still the 4.5's blast my first serve back at my feet when I serve into their strikezone!

Jagman
12-21-2009, 10:04 AM
xFullCourtTenniSx offered a very succinct and accurate description of an effective service motion where the feet may leave the ground. Here the jump is a by-product of a vigorous, yet mechanically correct technique on serve.

I would concur that purposefully jumping in hopes of adding energy to the serve is both physically taxing and ineffective, at least as compared to the effort applied.

The old footage, shot from a vantage above the players, does not afford a detailed view of their service motion or any of their technique, for that matter. It does demonstrate nicely the athletic grace and wide array of strokes exhibited by players of that era.

While unfamiliar with the tournament depicted in the OP's video, it does appear that the playing surface is clay. That would account for the impression that the players appeared to use placement rather than power as a weapon on serve. No one from that period would have attempted a power based game on clay.

Rosewall could serve pretty well in his day, despite his size. Remember that by the time he met Connors, Rosewall was in the twilight of his career and Connors was already establishing himself as one of the game's great returners.

The best tennis match I ever saw played, from any era, was the 1974 WCT Final in Dallas, between Laver and Rosewall. It was played on a hard court, best of five sets, with no tie-breaker in the fifth.

As I recall, Roscoe Tanner held the world's record for fastest serve for quite some time. IIRC, the record he set was either a 140 mph or 144 mph serve. His motion was very similar to Roddick's and Roscoe was just as big. I'm not sure whether he would have set his record with a wood racquet. As aluminum racquets were emerging, Roscoe was sponsored by PDP, a now defunct company. They made an aluminum racquet and also a fiberglass composite. I had the opportunity to hit with both and they were absolutely huge on serve.

Reportedly an even bigger server was Lew Hoad, another Aussie. Unfortunately, Hoad had to retire from tennis early with a bad back, around 1959, I think. All of the Aussies from the day spoke about Hoad with a bit of awe.

It was a different game back then, but the strokes could be just as huge. Just because modern techniques are a little better suited for today's style of play doesn't mean the more traditional strokes were any less solid or effective. It depends, then as now, on the player.

Cheers!

LeeD
12-21-2009, 10:12 AM
In the '78 fast serve contest I participated in, Roscoe did not, but most players thought he could have placed first 5 for sure, first being Dibley at 149.
Tanner was heavier than Roddick, much slower, but had forward momentum with that low toss in his favor. Keep him at the baseline, you stood a chance to beat him. He also didn't jump as high as most others, as the low toss seems to favor moving forwards as opposed to jumping high.
But as said, with the slower courts being played today, emphasis has shifted back towards longer rallies, more baseline work, and counterpunching.
You only have to see the vids of that volleyball player serving to know that it's a viable option, the jump serve.

gzhpcu
12-21-2009, 10:13 AM
The old footage, shot from a vantage above the players, does not afford a detailed view of their service motion or any of their technique, for that matter. It does demonstrate nicely the athletic grace and wide array of strokes exhibited by players of that era.


Here is good footage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI3jNIWMx0

Jagman
12-21-2009, 03:18 PM
OMG gzhpcu! Where did you find footage of Pancho? I so often despair about the lack of preserved film from matches of the 60's that I don't even stop to think about the 50's. That looked like a more mature Pancho, so I would guess that clip was from the late 50's or even 60 or 61?

Talk about grace and power in a big package, that would be Gonzales. Supposedly, he would regularly serve in the 120's, but I don't know if they had an accurate means of measurement back then. Judging from the comments of his opponents, and educated observers, there is little doubt that his serve was huge. Too bad about the overly large chip on his shoulder, but if anyone had earned the right to be surly, it would probably be him.

I think there most likely was some overlap between Gonzales, Laver, and Rosewall. Any meetings would have pitted an older but still dominant Gonzales against relative youngsters in the persons of Laver and Rosewall. I have no doubt that would have made an impression. I can't recall if Laver or Rosewall ever commented on Gonzales. As I understand it, you either loved or hated Gonzales ---- there was no in-between; however, everybody who played him respected his abilities.

Very, very, nice. Thank you!

Bungalo Bill
12-21-2009, 03:35 PM
I was watching some classic matches and i noticed how they did not jump compared to today's players.

Is that due to the hefty wooden racket.

I do find personally that serving without jump gives much more accuracy but forego some power.

Anyway how fast do they serve those times?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8IJ0F01IiU

Nine, that is some great footage of two classic players. Laver was my favorite player growing up.

You can serve without coming off the ground, it will just take more emphasis on upper body rotation, relaxation in the arm and shoulder, to help you serve quickly and with pace.

A heavier racquet helps with not using as much effort when you hit the ball. I think there are studies done that say it take a bit more effort to get the racquet going though. That is why you want to relax the arm as much as possible and allow your rotational forces to propel the arm.

Good form in your upper body will be important such as your hitting arm extending and your non-dominant arm folding back into the body.

What you can really learn here is ball placement. On many balls, notice where the ball is by the time it reaches the baseline. Some are deeper hit than others but they are really angled wide.

Obviously, the pace here isn't what we see today, but ball control and consistency is outstanding. You can learn a lot from that for your serve.

larry10s
12-22-2009, 04:24 AM
Here is good footage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI3jNIWMx0

what a gorgeous motion. look at how loose his arm is and how deep his racquet drop is . along with every other biomechanical reference point weve discussed.... body rotation, chest angle, pronation etc. who above said this ( not jumping)was poor technique should watch this clip several times.

Bagumbawalla
12-22-2009, 04:49 PM
This is kind of interesting- possibly posted before.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QL1sglyouU

LeeD
12-22-2009, 05:00 PM
Good stuff.
That first example could serve pretty darn good.
All the other's too, of course.

Ripper014
12-22-2009, 05:12 PM
This is kind of interesting- possibly posted before.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QL1sglyouU


Thanks.. that was amazing to watch... so things have not changed much over a century of tennis. I noticed that Gerald Patterson has a short toss... he hits his serve at the peak of his toss, nice knee bend... and his weight is transferring forward into the court.

Like I said thanks... it was enlightening.

dozu
12-22-2009, 06:30 PM
of course it's ok, you moron.... why would it not be ok if laver was doing it.

Fedace
12-22-2009, 06:44 PM
NO Not ok. this is how you serve with power... off the ground.

http://www.youtube.com/user/Maximagq#p/a/f/1/HGtBSuckrLY

darthpwner
12-22-2009, 07:50 PM
If you serve without the jump, you do lose power since your front foot cannot explode of the ground.

darthpwner
12-22-2009, 07:51 PM
NO Not ok. this is how you serve with power... off the ground.

http://www.youtube.com/user/Maximagq#p/a/f/1/HGtBSuckrLY

Yeah you should watch Alex Clayton. Model serve right there. BTW, their my dad's videos.

NineEleven
12-23-2009, 04:26 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyhFo3hvGPI&feature=related#

One more..

i noticed how he and sampras serves toss/ hitting zone are slightly to the left Ie just above the head. I tend to hit mine above right shoulder.. Is hitting more to the left generate more power?

larry10s
12-23-2009, 04:48 AM
hitting alittle more to the left helps to generate some more topspin not more pace.sampras had the greatest combo of pace and spin to his serves.

LeeD
12-23-2009, 08:47 AM
Reality check...
Monfils is not a good example for how to hit a fast big serve. He's like 6'7" and whippy as you can get. Most of us are not that tall.
Hewitt is probably the boring best example of a great service motion. At just under 5'10", he can still hit 125's in a tournament, during a match. I'd bet he could break into the mid 130's if he only tried to serve fast.
Me personally, I'm not sure how much speed the jump adds. I suspect it's more about angle into the court, and how jumping gets you higher up, so you can hit faster more often, since you have a better angle to get the ball in.
I never jumped upwards to throw anything far, have you?

Ripper014
12-23-2009, 02:14 PM
Reality check...
Monfils is not a good example for how to hit a fast big serve. He's like 6'7" and whippy as you can get. Most of us are not that tall.
Hewitt is probably the boring best example of a great service motion. At just under 5'10", he can still hit 125's in a tournament, during a match. I'd bet he could break into the mid 130's if he only tried to serve fast.
Me personally, I'm not sure how much speed the jump adds. I suspect it's more about angle into the court, and how jumping gets you higher up, so you can hit faster more often, since you have a better angle to get the ball in.
I never jumped upwards to throw anything far, have you?

I never understood the jumping thing... for me I believe the momentum of me hitting ball lifts me off the ground. It is not an active jumping motion. I like the feeling of being anchored to the ground when serving.

bhupaes
12-23-2009, 02:20 PM
I never understood the jumping thing... for me I believe the momentum of me hitting ball lifts me off the ground. It is not an active jumping motion. I like to feeling of being anchored to the ground when serving.

Same here. On hard serves, one is literally launching one's body upwards and forwards, and so one leaves the ground as a side effect. I have no idea how anyone can actively jump and still have a decent serve motion.

LeeD
12-23-2009, 04:35 PM
I barely leave the ground on my serves.
But did you guys see the vids of the jumpserve guy? Dude was maybe 6'4" or so, jumped a foot and a half off the ground and into the court before striking the ball, and his leverage allowed some pretty awesome angles and bounces.
It's here in the tip/instruction doodad. Do a search and get your mind adjusted.
The peanut gallery says I jump about 6' heels off the ground, toes barely lightened.

Ken Honecker
12-24-2009, 01:28 AM
I also feel that my racquet arm pulls me up and into the court rather than me purposely jumping. For me the serve is pretty much the same motion I use playing volleyball and in that sport it is really an advantage to hit from a higher point as the net is at arms reach to begin with.

xFullCourtTenniSx
12-24-2009, 01:57 AM
I would concur that purposefully jumping in hopes of adding energy to the serve is both physically taxing and ineffective, at least as compared to the effort applied.

The main problem with a forced jump is lack of consistency. You're not going to jump the same height each time, and your contact will be based on your height off the ground, not the height of the toss, which leads to inconsistent contact as well. You might not get up high enough and send the ball flying, or you might get too much air and either catch the ball on your way down or end up smacking the ball down into your side of the court or the bottom of the net. You gain nothing unless you're like that guy who does the volleyball style serve, which I suspect is illegal anyways. Then again, it might be legal just because he isn't RUNNING and jumping, he's just straight up jumping like crazy. I think he's got more hops than Pete! Even so, he lacks consistency, though the way he hits it he can get away with it. He gets so far into the court and is so high up into the air, it's unbelievable. He might actually be able to hit down on the ball each time.

NO Not ok. this is how you serve with power... off the ground.

http://www.youtube.com/user/Maximagq#p/a/f/1/HGtBSuckrLY

Failed example. He comes up what? 3 inches off the ground MAX? Probably only 2 inches. Do you see him forcefully jumping? His coming off the ground is a result of bent knees and reaching up for the toss.

Is hitting more to the left generate more power?

It generates more topspin, which Pete was known for generating insane amounts of for first serves. Second serves might've been well above par as well, but his first serve RPM count is on par with most people's second serves, but with an extra 40 mph of pace.

I never understood the jumping thing... for me I believe the momentum of me hitting ball lifts me off the ground. It is not an active jumping motion. I like the feeling of being anchored to the ground when serving.

You should be on your way up when you hit the ball, so it's actually better if you're anchored to the ground since it's easiest to do it that way. Though as you get better, you can consistently hit the ball on the way up while in the air as your rythm improves.

I have no idea how anyone can actively jump and still have a decent serve motion.

They can, it's just extremely rare. The only one I know of is the guy who does the volleyball style serve, but without the running. If he ran, then it should be illegal. I still feel it should be an illegal serve, but other than an insane amount of hops that he has, I guess it seems pretty legal. But I still feel he lacks consistency, otherwise we'd be seeing him already as the next Karlovic.

I suspect it's more about angle into the court, and how jumping gets you higher up, so you can hit faster more often, since you have a better angle to get the ball in.

It's about generating topspin and upward arc over the net. That's why you're supposed to make contact on your way up into the ball, so you can generate topspin and an upward arc over the net, which adds consistency and control, which allow you to hit harder and still retain previous service percentages because you're serving with more spin and arc.

Ripper014
12-24-2009, 12:31 PM
You should be on your way up when you hit the ball, so it's actually better if you're anchored to the ground since it's easiest to do it that way. Though as you get better, you can consistently hit the ball on the way up while in the air as your rythm improves.

Thanks... but I am quite happy with my serve and doubt I would am going to get any better... I am not sure if I am physically off the ground but I know it looks like I am on my toes (people have commented)... but being grounded as I start to hit my serve gives me a stable platform to work off. Jumping would not give that to me.

Geezer Guy
12-24-2009, 03:37 PM
... But did you guys see the vids of the jumpserve guy? Dude was maybe 6'4" or so, jumped a foot and a half off the ground and into the court before striking the ball, and his leverage allowed some pretty awesome angles and bounces.
It's here in the tip/instruction doodad. Do a search and get your mind adjusted. ...

If it's the video I'm thinking of, the guys righthanded. He tosses the ball into the court with his right hand, jumps up and into the court quite a bit (complete with mid-air kneebend as I recall), and then hits a great righthanded serve. When I first saw it, I thought it must have been photoshopped or something. It really is pretty awesome.

LeeD
12-24-2009, 04:11 PM
Yup, pretty cool, and impressive.
Wave of the future? Or just being 7' tall?
Your knees take a beating with every serve, on concrete courts.