There have been threads in the recent past about underhand serving, with debate about whether it's 'bush' or not. This is a bit different... I watched some ladies play at the local courts last night. Not sure their official level but they looked about 3.0 / 3.5. I watched maybe a set. One of the ladies served only underhand all the time. Not sure if she has an injury preventing her from serving 'normally' or what, but what was interesting is that her underhand serve was not a liability, at least compared to the serves of the other three ladies who had regular serves. She wasn't using it as a sneak tactic (obviously the other ladies knew it was coming since that's all she did) or drop-shot (she was hitting a topspinny sort of forehand drive). But it had as much pace and placement as the other ladies' serve and was probably more consistent. So: 1. Would some players (probably at lower levels) actually be better off with an underhand serve? (And don't take into account potential future improvement - let's assume an older player who isn't expecting to improve.) 2. Would it be considered 'bush' if you chose to use an underhand serve as your regular serve?