One serve for mens tennis?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by desilvam, Sep 21, 2007.

  1. desilvam

    desilvam Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2007
    Messages:
    147
    Location:
    on the beach
    The mens davis cup match between Roddick and Johannson was so boring (all serves and nothing else).. It is only gonna get worse as bigger athletes come into tennis..

    Has there been any talk of having only 1 serve for men? or limit the 2nd serves to 2-3 per game etc..?

    They could move the service line back 2-3 feet and have 1 serve...

    This would make the game faster, more rallies and more watchable, and also allow shorter players to compete better..
     
    #1
  2. HellBunni

    HellBunni Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    291
    a lot of breaks.

    But it would definitely not allow shorter players to compete better, it'll only make it harder for them.
     
    #2
  3. DaMiBru

    DaMiBru New User

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    70
    Location:
    I live in the lone star state.
    My advice---> don't wacht it. Watch Federer. Classic game in todays tennis.
     
    #3
  4. DashaandSafin

    DashaandSafin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Messages:
    2,037
    What a stupid thread. The serve is a huge part of the mens game, thats why holding serve is so important and it involves tactics. This isnt a great first post btw...or your just using a troll account.

    BTW DaMiBru (yet another troll), Federer relys heavily on his serve (watch Wimby final v Nadal). Idiot.
     
    #4
  5. DaMiBru

    DaMiBru New User

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    70
    Location:
    I live in the lone star state.
    Quote me where I said Federer didn't rely on his serve. Learn how to read idiot!
     
    #5
  6. djsiva

    djsiva Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Messages:
    533
    Better to raise net then to serve two feet back.
     
    #6
  7. DashaandSafin

    DashaandSafin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Messages:
    2,037
    I never did say that you didnt say that Fed didn't rely on his serve dumbass. You said to watch Fed's game because its so classic in a thread that talks about one serve. Im pointing out that whats the point of adding that comment into a thread for the advocation of one serve?
     
    #7
  8. DaMiBru

    DaMiBru New User

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    70
    Location:
    I live in the lone star state.
    Ferderer relying heavily on his serve, what crock! He was serving very poorly, for his doing, during the last USO. And he still won it.
     
    #8
  9. ewcrider

    ewcrider New User

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2007
    Messages:
    87
    Location:
    Western MA/Eastern NY
    I could be wrong about this, but didnt some tournaments change the rules so that only one serve was allowed during pancho gonzalez's time?
     
    #9
  10. superman1

    superman1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    5,243
    How many times has Federer been down break point, and then served an ace to get out of it? The guy does make his share of errors off the ground. He wouldn't be as dominant without that top 5 serve.
     
    #10
  11. woody88

    woody88 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2006
    Messages:
    286
    you need to go back and watch more USO tennis, closely.......
     
    #11
  12. Aonex

    Aonex Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    662
    Location:
    NYC
    Just Men's tennis? Imagine how many threads that'll start complaining about the women not doing the same.
     
    #12
  13. DaMiBru

    DaMiBru New User

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    70
    Location:
    I live in the lone star state.
    Sure he does. He's got a great serve, mainly his placement is superb. But to say that he relies heavily on his serve isn't representative of this great player who has the ability to raise his level at any given point in the match. He's the most complete player I've ever seen. He has many weapons not just his serve. He can rely on so much more.
     
    #13
  14. coloskier

    coloskier Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    5,538
    From now on everyone should get just one serve, one forehand, one backhand, and if you don't win the point by then, you lose it.

    Ridiculous.
     
    #14
  15. VikingSamurai

    VikingSamurai Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2006
    Messages:
    3,498
    Location:
    F ukuoka Japan, via Atlanta GA, originally Brisban
    When Laver played and before. Players had to have atleast one foot on the ground when they served.. Maybe they should go back to that..
     
    #15
  16. Pathy01

    Pathy01 New User

    Joined:
    May 1, 2005
    Messages:
    58
    Location:
    Long Island, NY
    The great thing about the game of tennis is how the rules remain the same through different generations of player. It would be a different game with one serve.
     
    #16
  17. Grimjack

    Grimjack Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,439
    They have already rendered the serve all but impotent, by slowing virtually the entire tour down to clay-courtish speeds. You complaint may have been valid 15 years ago, but today, if anything, we need to speed the game up. We see virtually nothing but one-dimensional baseline bashing throughout most of the ATP.

    Thank God for Federer, or the tour would be utterly unwatchable.
     
    #17
  18. Rodditha

    Rodditha Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2006
    Messages:
    1,030
    Location:
    In West-Siiiiiiiiiiiiide
    Stupid dumbass thread.
     
    #18
  19. coloskier

    coloskier Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    5,538
    What?? He had more aces than Roddick during his match with him.
     
    #19
  20. OrangeOne

    OrangeOne Legend

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Messages:
    6,297
    Then why post? Seriously!

    I don't think it's a stupid-dumbass-thread, for the record, although there have been some people behaving like stupid dumbasses in here. But i never get why people post, criticise the thread, and add NOTHING. Not like there isn't other threads to post in....
     
    #20
  21. Eviscerator

    Eviscerator Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,709
    Location:
    S. Florida
    :roll: :roll:
     
    #21
  22. AAAA

    AAAA Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,389
    Courts were slowed down from about the very late 90s partly to avoid tennis like this.
     
    #22
  23. Trinity TC

    Trinity TC Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2006
    Messages:
    556
    You remember correctly. It was meant to decrease the advantage that Gonzales had with his first serve but it in fact gave him a bigger advantage because his second serve was so much better than his opponents.

    They also tried moving the service line back 18 inches...but that was scrapped because once again, it worked to Gonzales advantage.
     
    #23
  24. Slazenger

    Slazenger Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,074
    I like the idea.
     
    #24
  25. laurie

    laurie Guest

    I think a lot of people will agree with me, I think the serve is a great part of the game. It's part of the game I actually enjoy doing the most. I love serving into the corners and seeing if my opponent can come up with something great.

    Federer's serve was absolutely magnificent throughout the Wimbledon final. Without that shot he would have been in even more diffculties that day, the amount of break points he saved with great serving into the corners.

    A lot of people do not seem to appreciate or understand the importance of the serve whether a player is a baseliner or serve and volleyer. How the serve sets up the rest of the point. A great example is how Agassi, as he got older and wiser throughout the 1990s, used his serve to open up the court.

    This also applies in the womens game - the very best players have the best serves, again - look at Venus' serve throughout Wimbledon, it was the best she had served for some time. Bartoli said her serve was too strong in the final. When Serena is at her best her serve is fantastic. Graf had one of the best serves during the 1990s. Technically Kuznetsova has an excellent serve and second serve. And my goodness! This young Szavay from Hungary - technically she has the best serve I've seen from a young woman for some time. Please note, she will become a great player within 5 years. Let's not forget Davenport who has a great serve as well.

    Then look at Dementieva and Jankovic, both have tried to have as good as movement and groundstrokes as humanly possible and break serve as often as possible. And yet, because their serves are so poor, and second serves in particular, it's unlikely that either will ever win a slam title. Jankovic has the challenge of improving that second serve otherwise she will suffer in the long run like Dementieva. Hingis will be the last woman player to win a slam with such a non descript serve - and she last won a slam title in 1999.

    So when I see people complain about the serve and stuff and too many aces and unreturnables, I'm not sure they really study the game. Especially if they think Federer would have 12 slams if he only had an average serve because the other parts of his game are good - then I am convinced they don't study the game to make those sort of blase comments. Blase comments doesn't take much thought process.
     
    #25
  26. OrangeOne

    OrangeOne Legend

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Messages:
    6,297
    Anyone actually complaining about serve dominance now needs to go back to the early 90s, as another poster pointed out. Ivanisevic, Sampras, a few others.... they used to rule the world with serves.

    Agassi then taught people how to return again....
    Luxilon made Poly Popular (not Poly Polar ;))....
    Babolat taught the racquet companies how to make large-headed spinny powerful 'baseline' frames

    ....and then suddenly we're back where we are now - roughly even....
     
    #26
  27. AAAA

    AAAA Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,389
    You are commenting on how interesting a spectacle a match is when it is dominated by big serves. As spectators when need to find the match interesting to watch so I understand your comments. However some people failed to see the perspective you were coming from so go off on a tangent and start talking about how important the serve is and how much fun big serves are to hit. Doing that is missing the point of your post which I get.
    Personally I love hitting the few aces I manage to hit but watching ace after ace after unreturnable after unreturnable gets monotonous. Doing is one thing watching is another.
     
    #27

Share This Page