PDA

View Full Version : A new way of learning the serve


sureshs
12-20-2009, 07:01 AM
From USTA, a reader-coach conversation:

http://www.usta.com/USTA/Global/Improve_Your_Game/Player_to_Player/Feature/2009/0115_Tips_For_Improving_Serves.aspx

Last week's question from Malea:
(Please note: There's no need to send additional responses to this question)


I have been playing tennis for nearly three years now. I play a lot and am improving fast. I love the sport, and I love competing, but I'm really struggling with my serve, and it is really holding me back.

I have never had a good serve. I know how to serve the correct way and can copy all the movements without a ball, but as soon as I toss the ball up, my serve gets messed up again. I have videotaped my serve, tried to get help from a pro, but I am stuck. I practice my serve nearly every day, but nothing ever changes. It is my one main weakness, but I don't know how to get past this major roadblock. I would love any tips on how to serve the way I know how to.


From John, Glen Carbon, Ill.:


As a certified PTR Pro and MTM coach, I have seen your case hundreds of times. People take lots of lessons, work very hard, and yet can't serve until they are given the correct data. In fact, if you know how to simplify things using a learning gradient (per Oscar Wegner), I don't know anyone who can't learn a decent serve in a short time with just average athletic ability. I had an 18-year-old recently take his first-ever tennis lesson in July '08 because he heard from the varsity players tennis was an easy sport to learn. Because he had no bad habits and I gave him the correct data to start with, in five months, he now serves 120 mph at 70 percent first-serve rate, rarely double faults, and dropped baseball because he discovered tennis is simple to play well. He is a good athlete but never underestimates the power of simplicity.


In Modern Tennis Methodology, we teach the most important thing in any shot in tennis is to "find' the ball. You find the ball with your hand, the racquet simply being an extension of the hand. Given the facts you stated, I would recommend you start from scratch. I do it all the time with experienced players who can't execute the correct data because they have so much incorrect data. The fact you lose your form with the ball in the hand means your attention is dispersed elsewhere when the only thing that matters is your "finding" the ball with your hand. You are so worried about your mechanics you can't even get your hand (strings) to "find" the ball. If you find the ball per instructions below, your backswing and footwork will fall into place. You can't put the cart before the horse.


Try forgetting everything you've learned. It didn’t work, correct? So either the data was incorrect or you misunderstood how to apply it. Simply start over and place the ball in your left hand and lift it high, ready to toss. With a continental grip, simply point the butt of the racquet in your right hand directly at the ball from below. This will force a loose grip, essential to playing your best tennis. In your case, it might be best to start over from an "arm-already-cocked position." Agassi did it awhile when he had an injury. and he still beat top-ranked players. Roddick has the hardest serve in tennis yet the shortest backswing, so don't believe all that mumbo jumbo about needing a windup and such. Simplification is the key.


With the left arm held straight up and the hands fairly close together while the butt points at the ball, visualize hitting the ball up, feeling the strings brush up and the edge of the racquet moving up and to the right. The weight of the racquet will guide the ball, and experiment letting the head hit up and then descend downward and watch the ball propelled over the net. The most important arm muscle is the triceps, which propels the ball up and forward. Do that a few times slowly until you feel control and contraction of the triceps. Then start moving your hands apart. The back scratch by the racquet is a myth. As you move your hands further apart, the key is to point the butt at the ball before serving and hit up and to the right, as if you were literally extending your hand upward and through the ball. Start right here, and I suspect you will be more than satisfied with your feel and control, and then slowly start speeding up your acceleration of the racquet after contact, always moving the racquet slow to the ball, then fast after contact. Feel the strings brush across the ball to the right. You can add a backswing later, but shorten and simplify everything for now.

aphex
12-20-2009, 07:34 AM
I had an 18-year-old recently take his first-ever tennis lesson in July '08 because he heard from the varsity players tennis was an easy sport to learn. Because he had no bad habits and I gave him the correct data to start with, in five months, he now serves 120 mph at 70 percent first-serve rate, rarely double faults, [/I]

hahaha







hahahahaha

fruitytennis1
12-20-2009, 07:44 AM
hahaha







hahahahaha

Ditto hahaha

benasp
12-20-2009, 07:57 AM
The guy was a college baseball player !!! Same muscle group, very simmilar mechanic, why not.

If I can give you one simple advice for the serve: do everything humanly possible to get the ball the higher you can, if you do that, thing will be kept simple and effective.

J011yroger
12-20-2009, 07:58 AM
^^^ Said the kid was a baseball player, if you can throw a baseball 80, you can serve 120.

That is believable.

J

sureshs
12-20-2009, 07:59 AM
What do you guys think of:

"always moving the racquet slow to the ball, then fast after contact"

What does this even mean? Is it an advice to do a vigorous wrist snap into the ball at impact, after swinging slowly till before impact? Seems that the laws of physics will not allow a rapid change of speed (due to inertia), and only a weak delivery can be accomplished with something of this type.

What do pro videos show? I thought they always accelerate into the ball for the serve, then the racquet decelerates on its own due to impact? The advice here is the opposite. Quite revolutionary may I say.

Can someone who is familiar with the teaching methodology adopted by this coach please clarify?

aphex
12-20-2009, 08:31 AM
^^^ Said the kid was a baseball player, if you can throw a baseball 80, you can serve 120.

That is believable.

J

you do realize that the world no.2 can't serve 120mph 70% of the time--right?

benasp
12-20-2009, 08:33 AM
I think it's a way to tell people to accelerate throught the shot, push the ball rather than get pushed by it. Also it teach that it's more important to make good contact than swing fast. If you look at pro video that seem to be true


Of course people shouldn't take it first degree and stat still until contact then start to swing, that would be ugly

benasp
12-20-2009, 08:36 AM
you do realize that the world no.2 can't serve 120mph 70% of the time--right?
maybe the article should read "he can serve about 70% serve in and some of them are 120mph "

aphex
12-20-2009, 08:40 AM
maybe the article should read "he can serve about 70% serve in and some of them are 120mph "

yeah, that's completely different--it would be (barely) believable.

Fedace
12-20-2009, 08:42 AM
NOt sure about that. Man i am serving bigger and bigger everytime i use that NEW pure drive GT. I was serving around 102-103 or so yesterday in a match. USTA 4.5-5.0 guys couldn't get the ball back in the court even..... But on the sad note,,,, My shoulder were hurting a bit after the match.... Little worried about that..

julian
12-20-2009, 08:43 AM
What do you guys think of:

"always moving the racquet slow to the ball, then fast after contact"

What does this even mean? Is it an advice to do a vigorous wrist snap into the ball at impact, after swinging slowly till before impact? Seems that the laws of physics will not allow a rapid change of speed (due to inertia), and only a weak delivery can be accomplished with something of this type.

What do pro videos show? I thought they always accelerate into the ball for the serve, then the racquet decelerates on its own due to impact? The advice here is the opposite. Quite revolutionary may I say.

Can someone who is familiar with the teaching methodology adopted by this coach please clarify?
Articles by Brian Gordon ( some of them at www.tennisplayer.net
address some of those issues

aphex
12-20-2009, 08:46 AM
NOt sure about that. Man i am serving bigger and bigger everytime i use that NEW pure drive GT. I was serving around 102-103 or so yesterday in a match. USTA 4.5-5.0 guys couldn't get the ball back in the court even..... But on the sad note,,,, My shoulder were hurting a bit after the match.... Little worried about that..

you are lost between threads again doctor

Mahboob Khan
12-20-2009, 08:51 AM
hahaha







hahahahaha

Can you ever be productive?

Post 1 is quite informative. If you want to add to it, do so; or just read and try to learn and then apply it on-court if possible.

J011yroger
12-20-2009, 08:57 AM
you do realize that the world no.2 can't serve 120mph 70% of the time--right?

The world #2 can serve 125mph 100% of the time if he wants to. Just because he chooses to hit sliders and kickers has nothing to do with ability.

Verdasco and Gonzo are more than content to hit slice serves in the low 100s but can summon 135 just about at will when they want.

J

5263
12-20-2009, 09:04 AM
The world #2 can serve 125mph 100% of the time if he wants to. Just because he chooses to hit sliders and kickers has nothing to do with ability.

Verdasco and Gonzo are more than content to hit slice serves in the low 100s but can summon 135 just about at will when they want.

J

Jolly, you bring up a great point here. I currently believe that these guys who hit in the 100 range and going slower, use earlier elbow extension, then delay that extension when bumping it up into the 130s ( along with some other minor adjustments)

This may also align with the MTM idea of moving slow the accel into the contact, as the elbow delayed extension is really slowing things down while you find the ball. This could be a good example of how Oscar describes the accel into contact as more important than trying to get early racket speed and holding into contact.

J011yroger
12-20-2009, 09:20 AM
Tough for me to think of the difference in my own serve, since I serve with my shoulders, so try not to at all think of my elbow.

Basically I know my angle of attack, coil, and then I pull my left shoulder down and throw my right shoulder up at the ball. Everything else just follows behind.

J

5263
12-20-2009, 09:27 AM
Tough for me to think of the difference in my own serve, since I serve with my shoulders, so try not to at all think of my elbow.

Basically I know my angle of attack, coil, and then I pull my left shoulder down and throw my right shoulder up at the ball. Everything else just follows behind.

J

Probably a good way to think about it. We have to have our keys, which can be very different than the way things actually work. This probably leads to half the arguments on here. lol
you would not be expect to be able to see or maybe feel this, but it is revealed on high speed vid in many cases.

sureshs
12-20-2009, 12:50 PM
Played a singles match today and won 6-0, 6-2. Just posting about modern tennis has improved my game. Must be a subliminal effect.

sureshs
12-20-2009, 01:01 PM
NOt sure about that. Man i am serving bigger and bigger everytime i use that NEW pure drive GT. I was serving around 102-103 or so yesterday in a match. USTA 4.5-5.0 guys couldn't get the ball back in the court even..... But on the sad note,,,, My shoulder were hurting a bit after the match.... Little worried about that..

How do you know the speeds?

BTW, many USTA "4.5" guys are not really 4.5, from my experience.

sureshs
12-20-2009, 01:02 PM
Can you ever be productive?

Post 1 is quite informative. If you want to add to it, do so; or just read and try to learn and then apply it on-court if possible.

Mahboob, please look at my post #6 and answer it

sureshs
12-20-2009, 01:05 PM
you do realize that the world no.2 can't serve 120mph 70% of the time--right?

I think the original post had some "amplification" in its claims.

sureshs
12-20-2009, 01:11 PM
I think it's a way to tell people to accelerate throught the shot, push the ball rather than get pushed by it. Also it teach that it's more important to make good contact than swing fast. If you look at pro video that seem to be true


What seems to be true? Pros swing fast and make good contact. That doesn't seem to me to prove that one is more important than the other.

sureshs
12-20-2009, 01:14 PM
This could be a good example of how Oscar describes the accel into contact as more important than trying to get early racket speed and holding into contact.

The original post talks about acceleration after contact. Usually people talk about acceleration into contact. You have it reversed.

But then as I said in the other thread, I suspect you don't teach modern tennis at all. If you can take a sentence which says to accelerate after contact, and uses "after contact" twice, and you distort it to acceleration "into contact", you are capable of reading anything and teaching something just the opposite. I believe you teach the right thing, which is the opposite of what you are supposed to.

sureshs
12-20-2009, 02:05 PM
Jolly, you bring up a great point here. I currently believe that these guys who hit in the 100 range and going slower, use earlier elbow extension, then delay that extension when bumping it up into the 130s ( along with some other minor adjustments)

This may also align with the MTM idea of moving slow the accel into the contact, as the elbow delayed extension is really slowing things down while you find the ball. This could be a good example of how Oscar describes the accel into contact as more important than trying to get early racket speed and holding into contact.

Even Oscar doesn't agree:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=4210623&postcount=45

aphex
12-20-2009, 02:10 PM
The world #2 can serve 125mph 100% of the time if he wants to. Just because he chooses to hit sliders and kickers has nothing to do with ability.

Verdasco and Gonzo are more than content to hit slice serves in the low 100s but can summon 135 just about at will when they want.

J

is this in the same fantasy realm as your claims of serving in the 130s?

SirSweetSpot
12-20-2009, 02:53 PM
Ditto hahaha

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA















bwahahahahahahaha

SuperDuy
12-20-2009, 03:04 PM
Why does people always do the 'hahahha' if it is a non sensable post?

LeeD
12-20-2009, 03:35 PM
I'm fully behind Jolly on this one.....
Almost any normal sized pro tennis player, or even 5.5, should be able to serve into the higher 120's every time.
BUT, in match play, you don't hit your fastest all the time, as the opponent gets used to the speed, so you throw in a few 115's for variety. Then, when you slice wide, that speed drops to 100, throwing the whole AVERAGE speed thing askew. AVERAGE means nothing! Sometimes, you even throw in a topspin first serve, which can't possibly speed much over 110, unless you are named Sampras.
And Jolly's mention of wood racket into the 120's is backed up by my timed serves about 32 years ago. 3 out of 7 with a new WilsonProStaff strung with gut at 62 lbs. But when I switched to the YonnexOPSGreen, as super stiff aluminum racket and added another $30 (:):)), my speeds went up another 5mph.
Then, in 1978, at the age of 28, I could throw a football easily 75 yards, a baseball well over 320', but never pitched a baseball ever (me wild).

SFrazeur
12-20-2009, 04:36 PM
A new way of learning the serve



Absolutely nothing new here. Just more MTM grandstanding. Moving on. . .

-SF

J011yroger
12-20-2009, 04:41 PM
is this in the same fantasy realm as your claims of serving in the 130s?

Sorry, I misunderstood your intent, I thought you were trying to have a serious discussion.

My bad.

J

samster
12-20-2009, 04:55 PM
Played a singles match today and won 6-0, 6-2. Just posting about modern tennis has improved my game. Must be a subliminal effect.

Who did you beat? Somebody who learned tennis the traditional way?

samster
12-20-2009, 04:56 PM
What do you guys think of:

"always moving the racquet slow to the ball, then fast after contact"

What does this even mean? Is it an advice to do a vigorous wrist snap into the ball at impact, after swinging slowly till before impact? Seems that the laws of physics will not allow a rapid change of speed (due to inertia), and only a weak delivery can be accomplished with something of this type.

What do pro videos show? I thought they always accelerate into the ball for the serve, then the racquet decelerates on its own due to impact? The advice here is the opposite. Quite revolutionary may I say.

Can someone who is familiar with the teaching methodology adopted by this coach please clarify?

What's so tough with the concept of accelerating after contact?

Mahboob Khan
12-20-2009, 05:42 PM
What's so tough with the concept of accelerating after contact?

Those who have knowledge of tennis technique will tell you that if someone has accelerated "after" contact it actually occurred just before, during, and after contact!

Mahboob Khan
12-20-2009, 05:58 PM
What do you guys think of:

"always moving the racquet slow to the ball, then fast after contact"

What does this even mean? Is it an advice to do a vigorous wrist snap into the ball at impact, after swinging slowly till before impact? Seems that the laws of physics will not allow a rapid change of speed (due to inertia), and only a weak delivery can be accomplished with something of this type.

What do pro videos show? I thought they always accelerate into the ball for the serve, then the racquet decelerates on its own due to impact? The advice here is the opposite. Quite revolutionary may I say.

Can someone who is familiar with the teaching methodology adopted by this coach please clarify?

OK, now I see.

You have correctly resolved the problem.

It is of no use to accelerte after contact; it's not even possible/useful to accelerate after contact because the ball is already gone. If at the time of contact the racket was slow and the ball is gone, the racket head acceleration will not cause the ball to move faster!

The slow-fast saga can be explained as follows:

On serve, the take-back (component 1) is slow, as you come into comp 2 (the power point/trophy style) is bit fast; comp (3) the backscratch-upward lift is faster, and comp 4 (contact zone) is the fastest; comp 5 (follow-through) decelerates! But there is no pause. All the components are woven together in one continuous motion. Remember, if you like to drive your car at 150 kph, you start from 0 gear 1; you do not start with top gear unless you are this Aphex guy!

On FH ground stroke with Loop C: start (the upper part of the loop (take-back) is slow, the forward part (lower part of the loop) through contact is the fastest, and then leave the rest to the nature.

paulfreda
12-20-2009, 07:18 PM
Those who have knowledge of tennis technique will tell you that if someone has accelerated "after" contact it actually occurred just before, during, and after contact!

This is a fabulous idea !
Partly because it is reality and partly because it is counter-intuitive.
That is one is not likely to discover it for themselves without actually hitting some balls.
If you try to accelerate AFTER contact, you will inevitably accelerate just before contact and this will develop wrist/forearm snap.

Thanks Mahboob !

gzhpcu
12-20-2009, 09:34 PM
OK, now I see.

You have correctly resolved the problem.

It is of no use to accelerte after contact; it's not even possible/useful to accelerate after contact because the ball is already gone. If at the time of contact the racket was slow and the ball is gone, the racket head acceleration will not cause the ball to move faster!

The slow-fast saga can be explained as follows:

On serve, the take-back (component 1) is slow, as you come into comp 2 (the power point/trophy style) is bit fast; comp (3) the backscratch-upward lift is faster, and comp 4 (contact zone) is the fastest; comp 5 (follow-through) decelerates! But there is no pause. All the components are woven together in one continuous motion. Remember, if you like to drive your car at 150 kph, you start from 0 gear 1; you do not start with top gear unless you are this Aphex guy!

On FH ground stroke with Loop C: start (the upper part of the loop (take-back) is slow, the forward part (lower part of the loop) through contact is the fastest, and then leave the rest to the nature.

Right. How many times has this picture been posted....

http://wings.avkids.com/Tennis/Images/Set_2060.jpg

source: http://wings.avkids.com/Tennis/Project/serve-01.html

Mahboob Khan
12-21-2009, 05:55 AM
Very good model of Pete Sampras.

I have printed it. All the five components are present.

Thanks.

sureshs
12-21-2009, 06:20 AM
OK, now I see.

You have correctly resolved the problem.

It is of no use to accelerte after contact; it's not even possible/useful to accelerate after contact because the ball is already gone. If at the time of contact the racket was slow and the ball is gone, the racket head acceleration will not cause the ball to move faster!

The slow-fast saga can be explained as follows:

On serve, the take-back (component 1) is slow, as you come into comp 2 (the power point/trophy style) is bit fast; comp (3) the backscratch-upward lift is faster, and comp 4 (contact zone) is the fastest; comp 5 (follow-through) decelerates! But there is no pause. All the components are woven together in one continuous motion. Remember, if you like to drive your car at 150 kph, you start from 0 gear 1; you do not start with top gear unless you are this Aphex guy!

On FH ground stroke with Loop C: start (the upper part of the loop (take-back) is slow, the forward part (lower part of the loop) through contact is the fastest, and then leave the rest to the nature.

So you are saying accelerate after contact is a visual aid for accelerating into contact, like advice of follow thru. But the way it was worded - slow before contact, and fast after contact, seems like a strange way to express it. It is also wrong. Follow thru advice is factually correct - the arm does make a follow thru. However, after impact, the racquet decelerates. So this way of expressing things (if indeed it was what was intended) is both confusing and wrong. The correct way to say it is to accelerate into impact.

drakulie
12-21-2009, 06:21 AM
Absolutely nothing new here. Just more MTM grandstanding. Moving on. . .

-SF


exactly my thoughts. These MTM coaches are in fantasy land. There isn't one thing provided by that instructor that is modern or revolutionary.

sureshs
12-21-2009, 06:28 AM
Who did you beat? Somebody who learned tennis the traditional way?

Yeah he was a leftie guy with hardly any topspin shots. Flat hitter. He could not handle my modern tennis with top spin.

samster
12-21-2009, 07:56 AM
Yeah he was a leftie guy with hardly any topspin shots. Flat hitter. He could not handle my modern tennis with top spin.

Attaboy! Traditional flat hitter is no match up for modern tennis with heavy topspin.

LeeD
12-21-2009, 07:59 AM
Yeah, all you heavy topspinners have no problems beating Federer, the #1.

raiden031
12-21-2009, 08:05 AM
I'm fully behind Jolly on this one.....
Almost any normal sized pro tennis player, or even 5.5, should be able to serve into the higher 120's every time.
BUT, in match play, you don't hit your fastest all the time, as the opponent gets used to the speed, so you throw in a few 115's for variety. Then, when you slice wide, that speed drops to 100, throwing the whole AVERAGE speed thing askew. AVERAGE means nothing! Sometimes, you even throw in a topspin first serve, which can't possibly speed much over 110, unless you are named Sampras.


I think you and jolly are right. Nadal purposely has a non-dominating serve.

gzhpcu
12-21-2009, 08:10 AM
exactly my thoughts. These MTM coaches are in fantasy land. There isn't one thing provided by that instructor that is modern or revolutionary.
IMHO, things are not so black and white. Picked up lots of good things from tennis books from different authors, and found some of Wegner's points helpful for topspin shots, which were not so clearly explained by other authors. A selection of the best from all authors was helpful.

Online sites like FuzzyYellowBalls have supplanted the need for books, for me at least. Videos are worth a thousand words...

MTM coaches certainly did not invent sliced bread and the marketing of the method is questionable, but this still does not mean that all of Wegner's points are not good.

LeeD
12-21-2009, 08:12 AM
IF Nadal hit some flat first serves, the points would end quickly, either in his favor or his opponents, and Nadal wouldn't be able to use his best strength in the match.
Nadal practices his serves, but his primary emphasis is groundies and movement. You only have so many hours a day to practice, or the body breaks down.
OTOH, someone like Karlovic or Celic, Q or I, can't move much, so NEED a big fast forcing first serve.
It'd be silly for a fast moving groundie player to hit fast first serves, as it would negate his best strength.

raiden031
12-21-2009, 08:17 AM
IF Nadal hit some flat first serves, the points would end quickly, either in his favor or his opponents, and Nadal wouldn't be able to use his best strength in the match.
Nadal practices his serves, but his primary emphasis is groundies and movement. You only have so many hours a day to practice, or the body breaks down.
OTOH, someone like Karlovic or Celic, Q or I, can't move much, so NEED a big fast forcing first serve.
It'd be silly for a fast moving groundie player to hit fast first serves, as it would negate his best strength.

Its silly to think that a guy with knee problems wants to drag out points and chooses not to hit his big serves that he's perfectly capable of hitting.

drakulie
12-21-2009, 08:22 AM
MTM coaches certainly did not invent sliced bread and the marketing of the method is questionable, but this still does not mean that all of Wegner's points are not good.

I think you need to read my post again.

I am simply saying there isn't one thing MTM is teaching that is "modern/revolutionary". Contrary to what this coach is leading the readers to believe, the instruction he is providing has been taught for many, MANY years, and MTM did not invent it.

sureshs
12-21-2009, 11:04 AM
exactly my thoughts. These MTM coaches are in fantasy land. There isn't one thing provided by that instructor that is modern or revolutionary.

Agreed. The tip about holding the left hand up, abbreviating the swing, and just focusing on getting the serve across the net is a staple among many coaches with beginning juniors or intermediate juniors who are struggling with their serve. A junior girl at my club tried this for a few weeks till her serve came back again. Some coaches go to extreme lengths by kneeling down and just showing how to get the ball in with the upper body alone, so as to not bring the feet into the equation. Standard stuff. Problem with adults like the one who posted the question is that they don't want to go back to the basics but just try to hit harder every time.

An MTM advice seems like a godsend to them, but what it is really doing is taking them back to the basics which they probably never learned properly.

LeeD
12-21-2009, 11:14 AM
Nadal certainly didn't start his tennis rising career with already injured knees, back, groin, and various other injuries. Those injuries are the result of his grinding style of tennis.
His brain isn't wired for first strike, take the initiative style of tennis, so he has to rehabilitate those injuries so he can resume grinding his opponents down, breaking them down physically.
Look at Nadal's serve. His path is all circular, nothing direct, a short stunted motion with no real body rotation or trunk work. That similar short motion might work for Roddick, but if you look at his long groundie swings, you'd know he's not built for short quick violent swings. He takes LONG violent swings.
He'd have to update his service motion to get short quick points, something his mind is not able to embrace, yet.

LightningZI
12-21-2009, 12:04 PM
Nadal certainly didn't start his tennis rising career with already injured knees, back, groin, and various other injuries. Those injuries are the result of his grinding style of tennis.
His brain isn't wired for first strike, take the initiative style of tennis, so he has to rehabilitate those injuries so he can resume grinding his opponents down, breaking them down physically.
Look at Nadal's serve. His path is all circular, nothing direct, a short stunted motion with no real body rotation or trunk work. That similar short motion might work for Roddick, but if you look at his long groundie swings, you'd know he's not built for short quick violent swings. He takes LONG violent swings.
He'd have to update his service motion to get short quick points, something his mind is not able to embrace, yet.

Didn't you agree with Jolly that Nadal could serve 120 mph consistently if he wanted too.. Now your saying that his brain isn't wired to do that?.. Some of this stuff on the forum is just applauding. Since when did you know how Nadal's brain works...:confused:

sureshs
12-21-2009, 12:07 PM
Didn't you agree with Jolly that Nadal could serve 120 mph consistently if he wanted too.. Now your saying that his brain isn't wired to do that?.. Some of this stuff on the forum is just applauding. Since when did you know how Nadal's brain works...:confused:

It is also appalling

LeeD
12-21-2009, 12:22 PM
Of course, Nadal can serve 120+, maybe even up to lower 130's, based on his strength and his coaching, IF he should choose...
BUT, don't take a braindead dummy to know his game is not based on first strike, end the point tennis, but rather pushing and counterpunching, running his opponent ragged, then watch as his opponents lose by ATTRITION.
If you can't figure out a counterpuncher's strategy, you are the dummy.
Me, I CAN figure out his strategy. Just I can't do a thing about it.
Like Safin, you KNOW his strategy is to blow you off the court, right? I hope you can figure that one out. And even thos Safin can grind as well as the next top 40 pro, he'd rather just blast you off the court.

raiden031
12-21-2009, 12:25 PM
Of course, Nadal can serve 120+, maybe even up to lower 130's, based on his strength and his coaching, IF he should choose...
BUT, don't take a braindead dummy to know his game is not based on first strike, end the point tennis, but rather pushing and counterpunching, running his opponent ragged, then watch as his opponents lose by ATTRITION.
If you can't figure out a counterpuncher's strategy, you are the dummy.
Me, I CAN figure out his strategy. Just I can't do a thing about it.
Like Safin, you KNOW his strategy is to blow you off the court, right? I hope you can figure that one out. And even thos Safin can grind as well as the next top 40 pro, he'd rather just blast you off the court.

I'm pretty sure that Nadal could not be a big server even if he wanted to, because his serve simply isn't good enough. The only way for him to be a big server would be to spend alot of time reworking his serve and improving it.

I tend to think that Nadal relies so much on his grinding style of play because that is what worked for him during his early years and has always been his strength. Being a more all-court player has not been his strength and that is why he was never the same force on hardcourts as he is on clay. You seem to act like he can do whatever he wants but everything he does is a choice. I don't think he chooses to lose at the Us Open.

LightningZI
12-21-2009, 12:36 PM
Of course, Nadal can serve 120+, maybe even up to lower 130's, based on his strength and his coaching, IF he should choose...
BUT, don't take a braindead dummy to know his game is not based on first strike, end the point tennis, but rather pushing and counterpunching, running his opponent ragged, then watch as his opponents lose by ATTRITION.
If you can't figure out a counterpuncher's strategy, you are the dummy.
Me, I CAN figure out his strategy. Just I can't do a thing about it.
Like Safin, you KNOW his strategy is to blow you off the court, right? I hope you can figure that one out. And even thos Safin can grind as well as the next top 40 pro, he'd rather just blast you off the court.

Again, Can you pick a point.. It's either Nadal can serve 120+ or he's not wired to. Because you've got two contradictory posts going on.

We all do know his game is not service based, Rather it is counterpuncher. But how does that help in realizing his mind? There's many factors that contradict to Nadal's reasons to counterpunch. I'm pretty sure everyone on this forum can figure out his strategy too.. That's not something to brag about really. Maybe if he was an all-court player and a certain style of playing was more used slightly more than the others, That'd be something to brag about.. But that's not the case here.

Safin had some great power tennis, but as we all know, power is limited without consistency, which was definitely one of Safin's weaknesses..

LightningZI
12-21-2009, 12:38 PM
I'm pretty sure that Nadal could not be a big server even if he wanted to, because his serve simply isn't good enough. The only way for him to be a big server would be to spend alot of time reworking his serve and improving it.

I tend to think that Nadal relies so much on his grinding style of play because that is what worked for him during his early years and has always been his strength. Being a more all-court player has not been his strength and that is why he was never the same force on hardcourts as he is on clay. You seem to act like he can do whatever he wants but everything he does is a choice. I don't think he chooses to lose at the Us Open.

Totally agree with this.

Power Player
12-21-2009, 12:45 PM
LeeD I have seen college and pro football long throw competitions and the only people who "easily" throw a football 75 yards have a full ride and are blue chip recruits.

So yes, I am calling you out on the comment. I think you are older and look back on your youth a little too positively, to put it kindly.

LeeD
12-21-2009, 01:45 PM
PowerPlayer...
Less than 4 months ago, at the age of 60 and 6 months, I went onto the practice field at UCBerkeley and first toss, no warmups, no stretching, early morning, threw it 55 yards or slightly more.
My longest ever toss was just over 75 yards, as a sophmore in high school, shagging balls for our QB in high school. How did I know this? Pretty easy really. QB (MikeHolmgren) stood at the goal line, center at the 7, for a 5 step drop. I started my throws around the 20 yard line, and easily got to anyone within 5 yards of the goal line.
I was also the punter, but could only punt around 45 yards. As the extra point kicker, good up to the 30 yard line, but never more.
No scholarship, I graduated at 5'6" and 120 lbs.

Bungalo Bill
12-21-2009, 02:52 PM
MTM coaches certainly did not invent sliced bread and the marketing of the method is questionable, but this still does not mean that all of Wegner's points are not good.

That is true gzhpcu and I am glad you brought that up. As much as I try to get to the point with some of them and remove the vail so to speak, because it is instruction based on known prinicples, it can be useful to many.

MTM makes a few questionnable points concerning where to hit the ball on the strings, early preparation, and other areas. However, soe of the tips are useful.

For instance, the hitting the ball on the lower half from center can be very useful for those that have educated feel and swings to do different things with the ball.

I for one vary where I hit the ball on my strings when I serve. Sometimes I hit at the top of the strings and other times I just try to hit in the center or sweetspot area.

The open stance is also a useful stance to understand and learn and I agree that beginners can learn it right away. Where I go the other way is the questionable marketing tactics, the dogma of being the orginator, and that hidden agenda I keep bumping into.

As a coach, I do want to know that I am teaching tennis and the instruciton I am using doesn't have or was developed with an alternate motive.

I think Dave Smith in Tennis Mastery put it perfectily,

The myths, inaccuracies, and fallicies that have been perpetuated through inexperienced teaching pros, misinformed coaches, ego-centered "gurus", and players themselves are many of the reasons why inadequate tennis continues to be played by so many adequate players.

So, certain things I question and have my sources and "workpapers" to support my position. However, like you said, much of Oscar's stuff is useful and can help players. I don't see where it will hurt. I only differ in certain areas and for certain reasons. They are big areas to me but it doesn't emcompass Oscar's entire instruction.

J011yroger
12-21-2009, 04:29 PM
I think you and jolly are right. Nadal purposely has a non-dominating serve.

Raiden, perhaps you misunderstood my intention.

I said that if Nadal wanted he could fairly easily serve over 125 every time that he wanted. In practice at a lower percentage, he can hit into the 130's.

I said nothing about him being able to have a dominating serve and choosing not to, quite the contrary.

It takes a damn sight more than a 125mph flat serve to be dominating even at the elite DI college level, nevermind the pro tour where the dominating servers are bringing high 130's low 140's.

And because of this, Nadal elects to more often hit his sliders and kickers to keep his opponents off balance and start points in his favor.

If you watched the Verdasco match when he played Fed at the year end championships, he was serving slice serves at 100-109 for the most part, and Fed was struggling to return them even neutrally. And this is from a guy who is an absolute monster, that can go deep into the 130's when he wants to put a charge into one.

My comment was to illustrate that the poster was confusing can't with doesn't. It would be similar to me saying I can hit 10 groundstrokes straight up the middle of the court, and someone else saying "You realize the world #2 can't hit 10 groundstrokes straight up the middle of the court". Of course Rafa can hit 10 groundstrokes straight up the middle of the court, he just doesn't in matches because he is trying to win points.

Rafa's flat, as hard as he can serve, is not good enough to be dominating, which is why he doesn't choose to use it very much, it is however over 125mph.

J

Power Player
12-21-2009, 06:00 PM
PowerPlayer...
Less than 4 months ago, at the age of 60 and 6 months, I went onto the practice field at UCBerkeley and first toss, no warmups, no stretching, early morning, threw it 55 yards or slightly more.
My longest ever toss was just over 75 yards, as a sophmore in high school, shagging balls for our QB in high school. How did I know this? Pretty easy really. QB (MikeHolmgren) stood at the goal line, center at the 7, for a 5 step drop. I started my throws around the 20 yard line, and easily got to anyone within 5 yards of the goal line.
I was also the punter, but could only punt around 45 yards. As the extra point kicker, good up to the 30 yard line, but never more.
No scholarship, I graduated at 5'6" and 120 lbs.

You either have an amazing fantasy life or your athletic life was loaded with cool stories. Either way it's a good read.

J011yroger
12-21-2009, 06:11 PM
You either have an amazing fantasy life or your athletic life was loaded with cool stories. Either way it's a good read.

Wait till you get to the part where he swapped his motorcross bike straight up with the jolly green giant for a unicorn.

J

LightningZI
12-21-2009, 06:14 PM
PowerPlayer...
Less than 4 months ago, at the age of 60 and 6 months, I went onto the practice field at UCBerkeley and first toss, no warmups, no stretching, early morning, threw it 55 yards or slightly more.
My longest ever toss was just over 75 yards, as a sophmore in high school, shagging balls for our QB in high school. How did I know this? Pretty easy really. QB (MikeHolmgren) stood at the goal line, center at the 7, for a 5 step drop. I started my throws around the 20 yard line, and easily got to anyone within 5 yards of the goal line.
I was also the punter, but could only punt around 45 yards. As the extra point kicker, good up to the 30 yard line, but never more.
No scholarship, I graduated at 5'6" and 120 lbs.

Oh and you woke up after that right? If your longest was "just" over 75, Then how do you figure it to be easy throw 75 yards, I'm pretty sure someone's best score is them trying 110%.. I'm sure that "just" over 75 would mean 76-80ish and 100% wouldn't be close to 75. 5'6" and 120, Also weren't you a tad bit short and underweight for football?

You don't get an amazing throw using the kinetic chain, and at 120 lbs, 5'6", A lot of people do weigh more than you. Which probably means you didn't have much muscle on you. So facts lead up to this, You didn't throw anywhere near 75, and you weren't even close to the 55 at 60 years old.

I think your exaggerating a bit too much. These kinds of stories are good to little kids who are almost 5 or 6... As Power Player said, It does make for an excellent read.

raiden031
12-21-2009, 07:37 PM
Oh and you woke up after that right? If your longest was "just" over 75, Then how do you figure it to be easy throw 75 yards, I'm pretty sure someone's best score is them trying 110%.. I'm sure that "just" over 75 would mean 76-80ish and 100% wouldn't be close to 75. 5'6" and 120, Also weren't you a tad bit short and underweight for football?

You don't get an amazing throw using the kinetic chain, and at 120 lbs, 5'6", A lot of people do weigh more than you. Which probably means you didn't have much muscle on you. So facts lead up to this, You didn't throw anywhere near 75, and you weren't even close to the 55 at 60 years old.

I think your exaggerating a bit too much. These kinds of stories are good to little kids who are almost 5 or 6... As Power Player said, It does make for an excellent read.

I read from multiple sources that NFL quarterbacks can throw the ball ranging from 60-75 yards. I read the average NFL punter goes about 45. So basically LeeD at 120 in high school coulda had an NFL career. I smell BS, and some of the stuff he writes reeks of a compulsive liar to me.

gzhpcu
12-21-2009, 11:29 PM
5263,
Wegner places emphasis on the points you mentioned in your last post from a teaching perspective. I, for one, never read anything similar in the tennis books I read and never saw a teaching pro teaching in this manner. I found these points very helpful for my tennis.

Revolutionary or modern style is irrelevant to me. I think of Tom Okker, Lew Hoad and Rod Laver. What is particular to Wegner is his not treating these techniques as belonging to specialty shots.

From the book "The Art of Tennis" 1964, Alan Trengrove, Andres Gimeno writes on page 40, concerning the forehand, that "Lew Hoad and Rod Laver have been successful with wrist action, but both are exceptional athletes of great ability. The average person will get into difficulty and become jerky in his action if he tries to use the same amount of wrist as this pair."

Also "Good forehands sometimes collapse overnight, one reason being late preparation for the stroke. Players run to the ball on their forehand side keeping the racket out in front, instead of moving it back as they run. Consequently, when they arrive at the ball, instead of the racket being in a hitting position, it still has to be brought back for a hurried swing. The stroke is bound to be inaccurate and possibly extemely wild". No teaching of stalking the ball here...

Looking at Nick Bollettieri's "Bollettieri's Tennis Handbook" 1999 on page 96, the ready position for the forehand is shown in a photo as having the racket way back: no stalking here either...

So, it seems to me that Wegner, while not inventing anything new, was the first to point out the techniques mentioned in your last post and recommend them to be used from the very start from a teaching perspective.

aphex
12-22-2009, 01:10 AM
Sorry, I misunderstood your intent, I thought you were trying to have a serious discussion.

My bad.

J

you're right...
my bad...

however, sometimes i've played in the court next to the world 1200 (5 atp points currently), as well as some other extremely good 17-18 year olds about to go pro. and i've seen them practice their serve...
not even they, can hit 120mph 70% of the time...
and these are guys who have been playing since 5-6 years old about 6 hours a day...
that's the reason i find this guy's claim that a guy who picked up a racket 5 months ago can serve in the 120s at 70% very hard to believe...

J011yroger
12-22-2009, 03:04 AM
you're right...
my bad...

however, sometimes i've played in the court next to the world 1200 (5 atp points currently), as well as some other extremely good 17-18 year olds about to go pro. and i've seen them practice their serve...
not even they, can hit 120mph 70% of the time...
and these are guys who have been playing since 5-6 years old about 6 hours a day...
that's the reason i find this guy's claim that a guy who picked up a racket 5 months ago can serve in the 120s at 70% very hard to believe...

Agreed, I also know some VERY good players who can't crack 120. However I am not convinced enough to call BS, just because the person in question was a baseball pitcher, which implies that while most quality tennis players were spending their youth learning all of the different aspects of playing tennis, this guy was singularly learning how to throw a ball.

So I think it is possible. Likely? No. Exaggerated? Probably. Impossible? No.

Just saying that if you have the ability to throw a baseball 80, you should be able to serve around 120, 90, should be able to muster 135. Without having to learn a serving progression from the ground up.

70% day in and day out, doubtful, 7 out of 10 once, possible.

Yes, it is cheating starting with a pitcher.

Somewhere along the line, I learned that if I am not absolutely sure someone is lying, to keep my mouth shut instead of calling BS on everyone. It helps avoid looking like a jackass when you get proven wrong. Sure I still look like a jackass now and again, but it helps cut down.

J

aphex
12-22-2009, 03:31 AM
Agreed, I also know some VERY good players who can't crack 120. However I am not convinced enough to call BS, just because the person in question was a baseball pitcher, which implies that while most quality tennis players were spending their youth learning all of the different aspects of playing tennis, this guy was singularly learning how to throw a ball.

So I think it is possible. Likely? No. Exaggerated? Probably. Impossible? No.

Just saying that if you have the ability to throw a baseball 80, you should be able to serve around 120, 90, should be able to muster 135. Without having to learn a serving progression from the ground up.

70% day in and day out, doubtful, 7 out of 10 once, possible.

Yes, it is cheating starting with a pitcher.

Somewhere along the line, I learned that if I am not absolutely sure someone is lying, to keep my mouth shut instead of calling BS on everyone. It helps avoid looking like a jackass when you get proven wrong. Sure I still look like a jackass now and again, but it helps cut down.

J

fair enough;-)
..and my apologies for jumping on you in my previous post...

LightningZI
12-22-2009, 06:25 AM
I read from multiple sources that NFL quarterbacks can throw the ball ranging from 60-75 yards. I read the average NFL punter goes about 45. So basically LeeD at 120 in high school coulda had an NFL career. I smell BS, and some of the stuff he writes reeks of a compulsive liar to me.

I didn't know the average NFL punter could kick 45, Wow.. This only proves Power Player's and your point even more... Yeah your right, some of his stuff is pretty fake.

Lee, All of your information matches what an NFL player would do, so the question now is, if it's real.. why didn't you go for it..

The next thing you know Lee's going to be saying his fastest soccer kick was only 110 MPH during his freshman year of High school and he can kick 100 MPH at 60 years old.

Ripper014
12-22-2009, 07:11 AM
There are a lot of topics floating in this thread... I agree the strength of Nadal's game is nto based around his serve (don't see how anyone could disagree with that). But I don't know any tennis player at any level that would not want to take advantage of a good serve for a few cheap points during a match. Any 125 mph close to a sideline or corner is going to cause anyone issues regardless at what level you play at, unless you can read the server and get a jump on the ball.

If Nadal can serve at these speeds he probably doesn't to maintain a higher first serve percentage, and thus limit second serve opportunities to his opponent. Afterall once a ball is in play... I am sure he feels everything shifts to his favor.

Though it seems that the men have figured something out about Nadal's game, either that or he is a half step slower than he was. Because they seem to be able to hang in there with him now in a firefight and win.

LeeD
12-22-2009, 07:13 AM
Raiden, this is for you, because the other guys don't know football at all.
A punter's average, listed in the newspaper, is from the line of scrimmage. The center hikes the ball back another 17 yards, and the kick is made between 15-13 yard behind the line of scrimmage. When an NFL punter kicks a "45" yard average, his ball goes thru the air over 60 yards, with a pass rusher, after catching the ball, with 70,000 people yelling and screaming.
Much easier to stand there and kick the ball with no pass rush. I didn't state my game kicking average, just that I could kick it 45 yards in the air, which is actually very poor.
Fieldgoals.... once again, it's not as it seems. NFL kickers who place the ball at the 30 yard line, the line of scrimmage at the 23, get credit for a 40 yard kick! Yes, really! Watch a game sometimes, and you'll see I'm correct.
Now for the 75 yard throw of mine. Younger, in juniorhigh 8th grade, I could walk out in front of my house and toss the ball 8 houses, easy to count.The best biggest neighbor kid at 6' could toss it around just under 6 houses. Easy count there, each house was 25' wide, and butted against one another. Even easier, my house was 9 houses from the intersection. And I was closer to 5'1" and 80lbs.
Stories you guys don't find plausable just might be true.
Now think about this.... If I were going to lie, wouldn't I say I could serve faster than 129.4? NOPE, because it's recorded for real.
And wouldn't I say I was a little bigger than I am? NOPE, because Focus42 on this forum site played me a couple sets last year, and knows exactly how I serve and my size. And at 6'2 and maybe 210 lbs, he stood 5' behind the baseline to return my first serves.

Ripper014
12-22-2009, 07:19 AM
Agreed, I also know some VERY good players who can't crack 120. However I am not convinced enough to call BS, just because the person in question was a baseball pitcher, which implies that while most quality tennis players were spending their youth learning all of the different aspects of playing tennis, this guy was singularly learning how to throw a ball.

So I think it is possible. Likely? No. Exaggerated? Probably. Impossible? No.

Just saying that if you have the ability to throw a baseball 80, you should be able to serve around 120, 90, should be able to muster 135. Without having to learn a serving progression from the ground up.

70% day in and day out, doubtful, 7 out of 10 once, possible.

Yes, it is cheating starting with a pitcher.

Somewhere along the line, I learned that if I am not absolutely sure someone is lying, to keep my mouth shut instead of calling BS on everyone. It helps avoid looking like a jackass when you get proven wrong. Sure I still look like a jackass now and again, but it helps cut down.

J



It would not surprise me to find out a pitcher could serve 120 mph and have a high percentage in. Good pitchers are exceptional at controlling their deliveries... for them to repeat something over and over does not surprise me.

However... there is more to tennis than just serving, so for him to change sports would surprise me. A big part of tennis is movement... and if you grew up playing predominently baseball as a pitcher... I don't see it. Basketball maybe... tennis is all about sprinting and change of direction.

Tennis is a unique sport... where you need good movement, be able to see objects moving over 100 mph and being able to react to them.

LeeD
12-22-2009, 07:24 AM
Baseball pitchers in junior high and high school were the best atheletes on the team. Once they get to college, or turn pro, they only pitch, and they lose their ability to run, change direction, or bat. That and everyone else just got better.
Just go to a high school baseball game. The pitcher is usually also the best batter!
And if you were to pick a position player to switch to tennis, why not the shortstop? He's the quickest, has the best hand/eye, can throw OK too.
I was the centerfielder with the strong arm.

LightningZI
12-22-2009, 08:15 AM
Raiden, this is for you, because the other guys don't know football at all.
A punter's average, listed in the newspaper, is from the line of scrimmage. The center hikes the ball back another 17 yards, and the kick is made between 15-13 yard behind the line of scrimmage. When an NFL punter kicks a "45" yard average, his ball goes thru the air over 60 yards, with a pass rusher, after catching the ball, with 70,000 people yelling and screaming.
Much easier to stand there and kick the ball with no pass rush. I didn't state my game kicking average, just that I could kick it 45 yards in the air, which is actually very poor.
Fieldgoals.... once again, it's not as it seems. NFL kickers who place the ball at the 30 yard line, the line of scrimmage at the 23, get credit for a 40 yard kick! Yes, really! Watch a game sometimes, and you'll see I'm correct.
Now for the 75 yard throw of mine. Younger, in juniorhigh 8th grade, I could walk out in front of my house and toss the ball 8 houses, easy to count.The best biggest neighbor kid at 6' could toss it around just under 6 houses. Easy count there, each house was 25' wide, and butted against one another. Even easier, my house was 9 houses from the intersection. And I was closer to 5'1" and 80lbs.
Stories you guys don't find plausable just might be true.
Now think about this.... If I were going to lie, wouldn't I say I could serve faster than 129.4? NOPE, because it's recorded for real.
And wouldn't I say I was a little bigger than I am? NOPE, because Focus42 on this forum site played me a couple sets last year, and knows exactly how I serve and my size. And at 6'2 and maybe 210 lbs, he stood 5' behind the baseline to return my first serves.


First off, I don't think anyone finds your stories plausible. Especially at that height and weight. You didn't answer my question, If this was true, why didn't you play in the NFL. I'm sure you would have made it. Do you know what an average is? It's a series of numbers which you add up and divide by how many numbers there are. In NFL punting, They measure from where it is snapped to where it lands, Now your logic doesn't make sense, How can a 45 yard kick fly in the air for 60 yards.. It can't. A 45 yard kick flies down to 45. 45 yards in the air is actually a NFL kick. How do you get a 75 yard throw at 80 Lbs.. Just explain that part to me, Please. NFL players average 70-80 with momentum and they weigh 200+...

"In most football games, the distance of a punt is measured from where the ball is snapped to where it lands, not from where the punter kicks the ball from."

Also serving almost 130 at 60? Bit of some exaggeration going on. With that, You should have been serving quite a bit more in your 50's. That's better than McEnroe and he's 50 with 125 MPH serves. Why weren't you on the ATP tour?

To give you a heads up, Most liars make things sound easy or make stories with tons of things that "just were there" such as your house just being 9 houses away from the intersection and coincidentally, That's how far you could throw.. See how many things coincide? That's one way to prove someone is lying. Also the fact that someone whose telling the truth wouldn't care if someone said he's lying over the internet.. There's really no reason to prove anything if you know it's true(Over the internet). If you are as athletic as you say you are, Why be on the forums so much. I mean, If I had a almost 130 MPH serve and 75 Yard kick, I'd be getting my friends together and playing some sports tennis and football. You said you went to Berkley's field so you must live near there, They've got some nice high 50 low 60 weather there now. Not much you can do in 5 inches of snow and 20 degree weather other than go to the indoor courts for a fee.

Mahboob Khan
12-22-2009, 08:29 AM
So you are saying accelerate after contact is a visual aid for accelerating into contact, like advice of follow thru. But the way it was worded - slow before contact, and fast after contact, seems like a strange way to express it. It is also wrong. Follow thru advice is factually correct - the arm does make a follow thru. However, after impact, the racquet decelerates. So this way of expressing things (if indeed it was what was intended) is both confusing and wrong. The correct way to say it is to accelerate into impact.

This world is full of people who use difficult words to explain simple things.

Suresh, I get your point.

Mahboob Khan

LeeD
12-22-2009, 08:43 AM
You really should understand what you read a little better.
I said I served 129.4 in 1978, not today. My current claims are 105.
I threw a football over 75 yards in 1964, as a high schooler. Kinda hard to repeat that nowadays, ya dink?
In junior high, I could throw a football 8 houses, or close to 68 yards. That would correlate to just around 1963, like when JFK was shot.
READ THE DATES!
And AndyLee can punt easily over 70 yards in summer camp. Everyone who's a 49'ers fan knows this. But in a game in Dec., most of his kicks went barely 55 yards in the air. Why? I know, maybe you don't.
Why didn't I make the 49'ers? Got a 3 pin rebreak early summer '65 racing my 250 Yamaha at CotatiRaceway. Obviously I crashed. Healed in time to play varsity as a OLB at 5'5" and 110 lbs that fall.
They didn't let me kick until my senior year, when I kicked off, tried field goals, and punted all 12 games.
Making a field goal from the 30 yard line, considered a 40 yard field goal, is barely good enough for high school, no chance the pros.
There are no points to be had for a guy who could throw a football 75 yards, but was under 5'11" and less than 135 lbs.
Javelin throwing was my dream. I threw one just over 200' as a 8th grader, my last ever PE class. In 1964, AAA stopped fielding the javelin throws.

LightningZI
12-22-2009, 09:12 AM
You really should understand what you read a little better.
I said I served 129.4 in 1978, not today. My current claims are 105.
I threw a football over 75 yards in 1964, as a high schooler. Kinda hard to repeat that nowadays, ya dink?
In junior high, I could throw a football 8 houses, or close to 68 yards. That would correlate to just around 1963, like when JFK was shot.
READ THE DATES!
And AndyLee can punt easily over 70 yards in summer camp. Everyone who's a 49'ers fan knows this. But in a game in Dec., most of his kicks went barely 55 yards in the air. Why? I know, maybe you don't.
Why didn't I make the 49'ers? Got a 3 pin rebreak early summer '65 racing my 250 Yamaha at CotatiRaceway. Obviously I crashed. Healed in time to play varsity as a OLB at 5'5" and 110 lbs that fall.
They didn't let me kick until my senior year, when I kicked off, tried field goals, and punted all 12 games.
Making a field goal from the 30 yard line, considered a 40 yard field goal, is barely good enough for high school, no chance the pros.
There are no points to be had for a guy who could throw a football 75 yards, but was under 5'11" and less than 135 lbs.
Javelin throwing was my dream. I threw one just over 200' as a 8th grader, my last ever PE class. In 1964, AAA stopped fielding the javelin throws.

Obviously if you posted the dates I would have known, But you didn't post the date saying you served 129 at (insert date here) you just said you served 129.

Now if you could throw a football 75 yards at that age, Why not become an NFL player. Are you dink?

Now with the info you gave after that, Saying you played someone on this forum who had to stand 5 feet away from the baseline to return your first serve makes it seem like you still have that serve at 129. Who stands 5 feet away from the baseline to return a 100 MPH serve... You just changed your whole standpoint, Either that or you really word your responses poorly.

Isn't it ironic that something you were a bit above average at was your dream yet it didn't happen yet something you say you were amazing at could have actually happened.

LeeD
12-22-2009, 09:35 AM
First of all, a 100 mph serve is not all that slow, especially if it comes from a guy who's played multiple rounds in ProQ's, albeit 32 years ago. I didn't get dummer with age. Since I haven't practiced any tennis stroke in that time span, I normally hit my first serves into your hitting side hip pocket. Easiest target, you are standing there, net is moderately low, court is moderately long.
As for turning pro. By my senior year in high school, I was fully involved with road racing, mostly 250 Production, but also had a ride on Honda's 125 3 cylinder GP bikes. MitshiroItoh road the 5 cylinder's only, so I got to race the 3's. I was fast enough, but crashed as often as Mits. Turning pro in motorcycle racing was more a reality for someone 5'6" and 115lbs.
Football... by my senior year, even VicRowen was ahead of me on the chart of wide recievers. His Dad was coach of CCSF's team. He was blind and slow, and I got discouraged, being the fastest guy on the team, just kicking the ball. Life's tough, but you gotta roll with it.

LightningZI
12-22-2009, 09:55 AM
First of all, a 100 mph serve is not all that slow, especially if it comes from a guy who's played multiple rounds in ProQ's, albeit 32 years ago. I didn't get dummer with age. Since I haven't practiced any tennis stroke in that time span, I normally hit my first serves into your hitting side hip pocket. Easiest target, you are standing there, net is moderately low, court is moderately long.
As for turning pro. By my senior year in high school, I was fully involved with road racing, mostly 250 Production, but also had a ride on Honda's 125 3 cylinder GP bikes. MitshiroItoh road the 5 cylinder's only, so I got to race the 3's. I was fast enough, but crashed as often as Mits. Turning pro in motorcycle racing was more a reality for someone 5'6" and 115lbs.
Football... by my senior year, even VicRowen was ahead of me on the chart of wide recievers. His Dad was coach of CCSF's team. He was blind and slow, and I got discouraged, being the fastest guy on the team, just kicking the ball. Life's tough, but you gotta roll with it.

A 100 MPH serve is 100 MPH, The only thing that makes them different is placement and spin. Since we're talking about Flat serves, spin is almost out of the picture. Placement is all that matters. I hope you know Tennis isn't a static game.. Hitting to that one side every time won't give you a winner everytime. 95% of the time people will realize what your doing and move over a bit during your trophy pose.

I find it appalling how many opportunities you had to become a professional at something and you didn't take any one of them from what it seems.

You say in 8th grade you were throwing 75, Conditioning for the NFL would take 2-3 years, That'd be Junior year of Highschool. Plenty of time to get in the NFL. Life's tough? So what.. Carpe Diem. Seems like you had more than a handful of opportunities to do something.

I mean really, You could have been something in Tennis, Football, Racing, Javelin? That's four right there (If your not lying of course) also you said you played baseball, and I suppose you were amazing at that too correct?

It's exactly what Power Player said, "You either have an amazing fantasy life or your athletic life was loaded with cool stories" I don't think it's the latter.

Power Player
12-22-2009, 10:30 AM
LeeD, to say I don't know anything about football is an insult. Unlike, you I actually played the game. I was a running back throughout highschool. I could say right now that I ran a 4.3 40 and averaged 1,000 yards a season, but that would be over the top lol. I was a great runnginback, and at 5'9 and 165#s, I never let size scare me at all, I enjoyed the contact. My QB got a full ride to UF and was coached under Spurrier. He had a hand cannon and did not throw the ball further then 65 yards..ever.

Now back on topic, I have been doing this abbreviated serve and it has helped my game. My biggest issue before was timing out the racquet drop properly. Took me forever to really figure that out. I would hit an absolute perfect serve then miss one by 5 feet and not know what to fix.

So now I am lifting my hand, and dropping the racquet to aim the buttend, then tossing and hitting. Pretty basic, but I still serve aces due to placement and spin. I would like to take this serve to the next level and get it right. Is there a good place to focus on the toss placement? I am putting it a little in front of my head currently.

How much more motion do I need to add to this to get my serves back to ideal speed? I was serving 115 as a junior, but it was inconsistent. I want to serve 105 and consistently instead.

LeeD
12-22-2009, 12:11 PM
First flat, toss slightly out to hitting side, allow it to land about 18" to slightly more INTO the court. That forces you to move your body into the court, getting more mph.
Archer's bow trunk at trophy.
Slightly more than closed stance for twisting torso action.
At impact, you want your heels to rise maybe 6" or more, to give yourself a better angle into the court. More is better, but I can't do more at 60.
Followthru to opposite side on most flat serves. Fully and all the way to almost touching the ground.
Keep oft hand bent at contact thru followthru, for a sort of pivot like a skater doing spins.
The reason I said you didn't understand football was your distance numbers on punts and kicks. EVERY NFL punter can hit 65 yards in the air in summer practice. I said I hit 45. Not quite good enough.
I had to explain how they rated field goals. I'd hope a football player would know. NFL adds 10 yards to the spot of the kick to account for placement of the goal.
And I played one year JV as a sophmore, two Varsity at my high school, Lincoln of SanFrancisco, and my two varsity years, we made the AAA finals, so our team was no slouch.

J011yroger
12-22-2009, 01:53 PM
fair enough;-)
..and my apologies for jumping on you in my previous post...

No worries, we all have our days. I know what I can and can't do, so if someone doesn't believe me, it isn't going to bother me one way or the other.

J

J011yroger
12-22-2009, 01:57 PM
It would not surprise me to find out a pitcher could serve 120 mph and have with a high percentage in. Good pitchers are exceptional at controlling their deliveries... for them to repeat something over and over does not surprise me.

However... there is more to tennis than just serving, so for him to change sports would surprise me. A big part of tennis is movement... and if you grew up playing predominently baseball as a pitcher... I don't see it. Basketball maybe... tennis is all about sprinting and change of direction.

Tennis is a unique sport... where you need good movement, be able to see objects moving over 100 mph and being able to react to them.

I know a bunch of guys who were baseball players in HS/College, and then switched to tennis once they graduated, or got older. Tennis is so much easier to play whenever/wherever, with no team, just need a buddy, and the local high school or park courts. My neck of the woods is bigtime baseball country, and still adult leagues and such are hit and miss. Plus they are guys looking for exercise and competition, that fits into their now real life work/family schedule.

J

J011yroger
12-22-2009, 02:01 PM
Now back on topic, I have been doing this abbreviated serve and it has helped my game. My biggest issue before was timing out the racquet drop properly. Took me forever to really figure that out. I would hit an absolute perfect serve then miss one by 5 feet and not know what to fix.

So now I am lifting my hand, and dropping the racquet to aim the buttend, then tossing and hitting. Pretty basic, but I still serve aces due to placement and spin. I would like to take this serve to the next level and get it right. Is there a good place to focus on the toss placement? I am putting it a little in front of my head currently.

How much more motion do I need to add to this to get my serves back to ideal speed? I was serving 115 as a junior, but it was inconsistent. I want to serve 105 and consistently instead.

I can hit off of a very abbreviated motion just as big as I can with my full motion. So while you are going to lose some, dropping the racquet and pointing the butt first, you don't need much more than that. The easiest thing is take it back, palm down until you feel the pec just start to stretch, toss the ball with the tip of the racquet still pointing skyward, and serve. The racquet drop should take care of itself.

J

Power Player
12-23-2009, 07:23 AM
^^^^

Makes a lot of sense. I think the power will come from repetition and good weight transfer like every other stroke.

sureshs
12-23-2009, 07:31 AM
I can hit off of a very abbreviated motion just as big as I can with my full motion. So while you are going to lose some, dropping the racquet and pointing the butt first, you don't need much more than that. The easiest thing is take it back, palm down until you feel the pec just start to stretch, toss the ball with the tip of the racquet still pointing skyward, and serve. The racquet drop should take care of itself.

J

Not addressed above at all is consistency of the toss. Without that, other "simplifications" are of no use.

LeeD
12-23-2009, 07:35 AM
I'd think Jolly can hit ALMOST as big with an abbreviated motion.
Otherwise, why use the full motion?
I too, can hit ALMOST 100 mph serves nowadays with a short motion. But I can hit maybe a hair faster with the full motion, and it's easier on my body.
You don't see many players trying to shorten their service motions. Since they toss the ball, they can use as long a motion as they want.

zapvor
12-23-2009, 09:18 AM
i think too many people make the serve too complicated. it is a complicated process overall, but learning it is just like anything else. i dont agree with the mtm method stated here, but now after learning hwo to serve finally, i realize its a lot easier than you think. of course i am not talking about 100mph bombs. just every ball in the box consistentl with a good motion. when i try to crank it i start to miss. also i see too many people practicing the wrong motion over and over. thats a big problem

LeeD
12-23-2009, 09:24 AM
I figure, when I rate my serves, it's against an equal or better player, during a match.
Don't matter against a lesser opponent, there's no real pressure.
Don't matter in practice, sometimes I can hit 4 in a row within a 12" square, all first flats.
Try serving first flats in a match against a good player, and my first serve percentage drops to a liveable 25%.
Lucky I have a big lefty second serve with good placement and huge spin, varied from slices, tops, top/slices, and twists.

zapvor
12-23-2009, 09:26 AM
Lee wanna share a video? thats impressive. the biggest lefty serve i have seen is from MrHan but he doesnt post on here anymore

LeeD
12-23-2009, 09:37 AM
Love to...
I'm a homeless person. Don't have email. Don't have cell phone. Don't have a camera of any kind since the '60's.
I"m sure my first serve has dropped over 30% since I was in my mid 20's.
However, when I play against current and former 5.5's, they say I can still hit a second serve OK.
I suspect, with the spin serve swing leading with the edge, it's possible to keep good swingspeed even thos physical skills have elapsed.
I also barely jump off the ground to serve nowadaze, what with old age, sprained left ankle, right knee wariness, and wrist problems, but I still manage to get my heels up around 4-6" on both serves, according to the gallery where I play.
I play in BerkeleyCA., only in the late fall and winter, and the only guy on this forum to play me is Focus42. He's a big strong 3.5 tournament player and we played mid summer, me not having touched a racket in easy 2 months. Score was me, 4 and 4, not using a forehand grip (if you don't play for 2 months, it's hard to find my forehand).

zapvor
12-23-2009, 09:46 AM
homeless? no email and phone? you joined last year and already have 4500 posts. so despite no phone and no email you do have enough internet to make 4500 posts in one year. interesting.

anyways one of these days i will post up my serve video for more crtique

LeeD
12-23-2009, 09:54 AM
When you're homeless, you have LOTS OF TIME to kill.
I use the CalSailingClub computer. I'm one of the water safety officers here and next door, at the CalAdventures. Their computer is a laptop that I can't figure out.
You DO know why I have lots of time, right? I don't work!
And like most of my sports, from motocross to surfing, tennis to windsurfing, kiteboarding, snowboarding, waterski jumping, skiing and road racing, when I get into something, I go ALL OUT take no prisoners.
Kind of shows in the # of posts, eh?

zapvor
12-23-2009, 09:58 AM
yea thats interesting. usually people who are homeless are more concerned about finding shelter you know. not posting 4500times in one year on a tennis board, not to mention the ski and what else you post on.

what about this then-since you have so much time, i am sure you can find someone with a cell phone to take a video of you just for 60seconds, and post it up on youtube for us to see.

Mick
12-23-2009, 09:59 AM
imo, 100 mph is too fast for most people. the returners are going to call the serve out when it is close to the line, not only at the amateur level but at the pro level (wta) as well :)

LeeD
12-23-2009, 10:01 AM
I think most players I play with are not my best friends, and have better things to do in life than vid me and figure out how to post.
Seems pretty complicated to me, to post a vid. No, I've never owned a computer, so booting and rebooting is my most complicated manuever.
I can type because I learned in 1962.
Anyone around the Berkeley area of SanFranciscoBay? Wanna hit?

LeeD
12-23-2009, 10:03 AM
Mick, funny ding dere.......
Everyone who also serves big flat first serves can call it normal.
The pushers who serve 80 mph firsts call it out.
Same as it ever was, same as it ever been......

zapvor
12-23-2009, 10:27 AM
so basically you just dont want to do it. cool

sureshs
12-23-2009, 10:45 AM
Love to...
I'm a homeless person. Don't have email. Don't have cell phone. Don't have a camera of any kind since the '60's.
I"m sure my first serve has dropped over 30% since I was in my mid 20's.
However, when I play against current and former 5.5's, they say I can still hit a second serve OK.
I suspect, with the spin serve swing leading with the edge, it's possible to keep good swingspeed even thos physical skills have elapsed.
I also barely jump off the ground to serve nowadaze, what with old age, sprained left ankle, right knee wariness, and wrist problems, but I still manage to get my heels up around 4-6" on both serves, according to the gallery where I play.
I play in BerkeleyCA., only in the late fall and winter, and the only guy on this forum to play me is Focus42. He's a big strong 3.5 tournament player and we played mid summer, me not having touched a racket in easy 2 months. Score was me, 4 and 4, not using a forehand grip (if you don't play for 2 months, it's hard to find my forehand).

Who needs a home when you have an email account?

J011yroger
12-23-2009, 02:09 PM
Not addressed above at all is consistency of the toss. Without that, other "simplifications" are of no use.

He didn't ask about making his toss more consistent.

He asked about how much more would he have to add to a half motion to get a good level of power.

I answered the question he asked, I didn't write the J011yroger guide to serving.

I've put up video of me serving, multiple times. People can read what I write, watch me serve, figure out if they give a crap about what I have to say, and either listen to, or ignore me.

J

sureshs
12-23-2009, 03:25 PM
He didn't ask about making his toss more consistent.

He asked about how much more would he have to add to a half motion to get a good level of power.

I answered the question he asked, I didn't write the J011yroger guide to serving.

I've put up video of me serving, multiple times. People can read what I write, watch me serve, figure out if they give a crap about what I have to say, and either listen to, or ignore me.

J

I was talking about the first post, not what you said, though it was the nearest thing to quote :-)

LeeD
12-23-2009, 03:31 PM
To me, amazing the number of people who have trouble with tosses. Even on my worst days with wind, sun in the eyes, and general lackdaisical play (which happens surprisingly often), I never have toss problems. I can go several years without catching my toss or having to compensate for it.
I can vary my swing beyond my physical capabilities, I can lose my swing entirely, but I know it's not my toss that's the problem.
And I need different tosses for flats, tops, slices, top/slices, and twists.

J011yroger
12-23-2009, 04:29 PM
I was talking about the first post, not what you said, though it was the nearest thing to quote :-)

Oh...sorry I didn't know that you were not talking about what you quoted.

J

LeeD
12-23-2009, 04:55 PM
Suresh's...
"NO e-mail account "either.

Ken Honecker
12-24-2009, 12:46 AM
To me, amazing the number of people who have trouble with tosses. Even on my worst days with wind, sun in the eyes, and general lackdaisical play (which happens surprisingly often), I never have toss problems. I can go several years without catching my toss or having to compensate for it.



This is me as well. In total honesty I've never caught a toss. Although I'll have to admit that this is more a factor of my having an improper self taught service motion where I toss and swing and simply expect the ball to be there when my racquet reaches the impact point. I must be doing fair since I can't recall ever not making contact.

sureshs
12-24-2009, 02:26 PM
Suresh's...
"NO e-mail account "either.

If you have access to the internet, you can get a free email account, so how come? Unless you don't want one, that is different.

LeeD
12-24-2009, 03:07 PM
Seems to me...
Just because something is free, you don't have to want it and don't need to apply for it.
They give away free food everywhere in Berkeley, but I don't go there, I just pay for my food.

Mick
12-24-2009, 03:11 PM
i have a friend who wants to have nothing so that his ex-wife can take half of nothing :)