Dragging foot on serve

[larry10s]

Originally Posted by Manus Domini

loook here

has a FYB clip about it in it too

i read the article but did not see the videos
wil might be talking about more power UP with the legs
NOT more power in the serve
that would be more consistent with brian gordons view.
from my own reading pinpoint usually has the back foot moving.

[larry10s]

Originally Posted by papa

Well, we also have the crossover step which is used very much today. Great stance if you can learn to control the right foot from foot faulting. Lot of women use it now but even the men are using it because it gives them greater torque/rotation into the ball.

As most know, you start in a platform stance and then move the back foot along side the left on the baseline (right handed approach).

Another one gaining more popularity is moving both feet - start 6" (depends on the player) behind the baseline and more left foot first to baseline - more of a variation to a pin-point.

Both are good but remember you have to come to a complete stop prior to the toss - in other words you have to stay away from the volleyball type serve.

the problem when the back foot gets too along side and especially in fromt of the front foo is the way it causes an opening up of the hips you lose power .
SO not recommended

[papa]

Originally Posted by larry10s

the problem when the back foot gets too along side and especially in fromt of the front foo is the way it causes an opening up of the hips you lose power .
SO not recommended

Well, actually you might lose a little power but you certainly make up for it in the spin category Larry. This serve is used frequently now by many players.

For those that haven't tried it, hit a few balls that way - you might be pleasantly surprised and discovered a new serve. Make sure you keep the shoulders to the side as much as possible - just the hips open up as you move the right leg alongside the left on the baseline (right handed approach).

Watched some top college teams this weekend and not only saw this approach but several others that are interesting. One that I found most interesting is what appears a normal motion but after the toes are raised on the front foot, it is then rotated back so its more parallel to the baseline. Of course this is nothing new but maybe its making a comeback of sorts. I actually like it because it allows greater movement of the hips into the ball.

[GetBetterer]

Those players are transitioning into the pinpoint stance. It has it's ups and downs, just like the platform stance.

However, one significant, game-defying disadvantage is that it wears away your shoe. This just makes me go: "Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!"

[papa]

Originally Posted by GetBetterer

Those players are transitioning into the pinpoint stance. It has it's ups and downs, just like the platform stance.

Are you talking about players using the crossover? If you are, they aren't transitioning anywhere, let alone to a pinpoint serve. As a matter of interest, I watched a player from your State in a college final this past weekend. Although he lost in three sets, it was a great match and he uses one of the stances I mentioned in my previous post. These guys are Div 1 top players, probably at 6.0.

[Jeewalk]

Originally Posted by Manus Domini

Feet close together through whole stance: Pinpoint
more power
less control

feet apart through whole motion: platform
less power
more control

feet sliding forward: hybrid
best of both worlds, worst of none, but in between
weakness is that the toss is the hardest to control because of the movement (from my experience)

these are by and large the governing factors. Obviously, personal preference kicks in here as well as everything else

I prefer the platform, but can do pinpoint as well. hybrid is also option, but it's harder for me to get the right toss

i find it actually harder to control the toss in a platform stance. i tend to toss the ball more to the left so i screw up. but as always it comes to personal preference

[GetBetterer]

Tour_Pro:

Many players don't move their feet when serving, meaning they stay in the same spot. Some drag right before going up to get the ball and stop at their left foot (righties). Is there advantages and disadvantages or is it how you feel comfortable?

papa:

Are you talking about players using the crossover? If you are, they aren't transitioning anywhere, let alone to a pinpoint serve. As a matter of interest, I watched a player from your State in a college final this past weekend. Although he lost in three sets, it was a great match and he uses one of the stances I mentioned in my previous post. These guys are Div 1 top players, probably at 6.0.

I'm talking about what the OP is talking about. What are you talking about?

Interesting topic discussed between Papa and Larry, as they represent two very differing views on the role of the hips in the serve. In fact, I would submit they echo the opposing views (at least it would seem) of two of the foremost authorities on the serve, Brian Gordon and Pat Daugherty.

Papa (and correct me if I'm wrong here) is describing more of the "spring loaded theory" as prescribed by Pat. Where by the hips are rotated forward into a lateral pinpoint, even as the shoulders perform a counter-rotation backwards. This creates considerable separation angle between the hip and shoulder line, and thus the "load" at the end of the windup/point of maximum knee flexion.

Gordon, (based on his articles in tennisplayer) would prescribe a more conventional "optimal" position of the hips, at the end of windup. With a minimum of 10 degrees (and in some cases substantially more) of hip rotation AWAY from the court. As this angle is "an indicator of the overall range of motion available for hip rotation in later phases of the serve". "Less angle, or an angle skewed to the hitting side ( i.e open hips) point to a potential range of motion deficiency". Brian also notes that the closed hip position helps provide for "better working conditions"(force muscle production) in the forward swing, when the hips contribute more substantially to the forward rotational cycle.

Two very differing opinions, from two of the best tennis minds.

[papa]

Originally Posted by GetBetterer

Tour_Pro:


papa:


I'm talking about what the OP is talking about. What are you talking about?

Sorry about that. You guys have a great team (University of Arizona) - saw a couple of the matches, one kid was in the finals --- think his name was Alan but apparently also known as "Macho" or "Nacho". Great kid, heck of a fighter and I liked his style of play.

[papa]

Chico9166,

Yes, good summary of at least what I was presenting. When done right, which isn't very difficult, its an effective service motion.

I like and respect both Pat and Gordon.

Was just trying to present "other" service motion styles than the platform or pinpoint. I guess we could debate that these are just variations of the two but I see them quite different. The crossover, was made popular by the Williams sisters but it has been around for some time now.

As for rotating the toes back on the right foot, its probably been around also but I just haven't noticed it to be honest.

Anyways, as you mentioned, two very different approaches but equally effective.

Originally Posted by papa

Chico9166,

Yes, good summary of at least what I was presenting. When done right, which isn't very difficult, its an effective service motion.

I like and respect both Pat and Gordon.

Was just trying to present "other" service motion styles than the platform or pinpoint. I guess we could debate that these are just variations of the two but I see them quite different. The crossover, was made popular by the Williams sisters but it has been around for some time now.

As for rotating the toes back on the right foot, its probably been around also but I just haven't noticed it to be honest.

Anyways, as you mentioned, two very different approaches but equally effective.

There are so many examples, in fact, of just what you are describing. No doubt about it. It is certainly a viable option, and worth noting. I always enjoy your observations, which are always well informed. There is definately more than one way to skin a cat.

[larry10s]

agree there is more than one way to skin a cat.
im not sure pat and brian are that different . i need to read gordons articles more closely but heres my take
from your quote above brian found a certain hip angle was ideal. not necessarily the stance that got you there.you could get into that angle with either a platform or pinpoint stance.
pat advocates the spring loading concept which obviously having more open hips accentuates but is there a point where better in one aspect does not translate into good???
i think thats what brian tries to quantify.
icbw

Originally Posted by larry10s

agree there is more than one way to skin a cat.
im not sure pat and brian are that different . i need to read gordons articles more closely but heres my take
from your quote above brian found a certain hip angle was ideal. not necessarily the stance that got you there.you could get into that angle with either a platform or pinpoint stance.
pat advocates the spring loading concept which obviously having more open hips accentuates but is there a point where better in one aspect does not translate into good???
i think thats what brian tries to quantify.
icbw

Hate to misrepresent their positions, but my take is that they are diametrically opposed views. Yes, you can find proper hip rotation away from the ball in the windup from both a platform or traditional pinpoint. But what Pat is advocating (i think) in his spring loaded video, is based on a rotation/counter rotation principle. The hips and shoulders are working in different directions. As the right leg and hips rotate forward into a lateral pinpoint (into more of an open position relative to the baseline), the shoulders are going the other way.(rotating away) The net result, is a large separation angle between the hip and shoulder lines, at the end of the windup. This is the "loading" mechanism.


For the reasons mentioned in my previous post, Gordon takes a more traditional approach. In that the hips lead the backward rotation (not forward), and attain at least a 10 degree "closed position" at the end of the windup/point of maximum knee flexion. A very different "look" at this stage in the motion, than what Pat advocates.


Then again, my perspective comes from that of a layman tennis instructor, and not of a biomechanics expert. I may be wrong.

[larry10s]

at trophy position both are sayingthe shoulders are more closed than the hips.

yes?

Originally Posted by larry10s

at trophy position both are sayingthe shoulders are more closed than the hips.

yes?

Yes, there is separation angle in both. That is, that the shoulders are rotated further than the hips. Is that your question/comment?

[larry10s]

yes.that was my question.
so in a way there is "spring loading" in a platform, pinpoint or narrow pinpoint.
yes?

Originally Posted by larry10s

yes.that was my question.
so in a way there is "spring loading" in a platform, pinpoint or narrow pinpoint.
yes?

Yes, I think that is true. In fact in almost all strokes this is true. You generally want the shoulder coil to be greater than hip coil.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by r2473

I always buy the 6-month durability shoes. TW used to allow me to return shoes in perpetuity. Now they are careful to check and see if the shoes I am returning were purchased with the 6-month durability credit (in which case, no credit).

But, at least I always get what amounts to a "buy one get one free" deal.

They realized you were up to no good

[larry10s]

Originally Posted by chico9166

Yes, I think that is true. In fact in almost all strokes this is true. You generally want the shoulder coil to be greater than hip coil.

i need to go and read brians articles some more.
what i am trying to say is that pat may advocate a pinpoint stance to accentuate the spring loading but brian may have shown that past a certain point its counterproductive.
just sayin

[GetBetterer]

papa:

Sorry about that. You guys have a great team (University of Arizona) - saw a couple of the matches, one kid was in the finals --- think his name was Alan but apparently also known as "Macho" or "Nacho". Great kid, heck of a fighter and I liked his style of play.

I go to ASU...don't you mention U of A in my face...ever...again.